lyft

Like many cities, Troy is trying to figure out how Airbnb rentals fit into the existing legal and regulatory environment. 

The first driverless car pedestrian fatality occurred recently in Arizona, almost two years after the first fatal crash.  These tragic fatalities signal the ongoing development of this technology. 

More subsidies from exhausted California taxpayers cannot compensate for hard realities

Austin voters have approved a ballot referendum to regulate peer-to-peer transportation network companies such as Lyft and Uber, forcing the companies to suspend service in a city otherwise known for its forward thinking and friendliness toward innovation.

A new kind of business model connecting customers and providers is cutting out inefficient middlemen and reducing costs. Unfortunately, some governments are trying to undercut these new services at the request of the old-economy companies that are displacing them with their greater efficiency.

Over the past few years, innovative new services such as Airbnb and Uber have sprung up across the nation, creating what’s been termed the “sharing” economy or “peer-to-peer” economy. These services have endured varying levels of resistance from local and state governments, as lawmakers have applied 19th- or 20th-century modes of regulatory theory to 21st-century technologies.

Pick up and read anything you can find by Gordon Tullock. Remember that public choice theory and “rent-seeking” are important parts of our intellectual approach to the world.

In a classic case of regulatory overreach, the California Public Utilities Commission has notified three ride-sharing companies — Lyft, Sidecar and Uber — that their respective experimental new features violate state laws regarding chartered transportation.

The state of Virginia has stepped up its attack on ride-sharing services Uber and Lyft. It’s just the latest example of crony capitalism and government favoritism toward the wealthy and powerful.