When proponents of government intervention try to tell you that the laundry list of laws, rules and regulations are on the books to keep monopolies at bay, show them the case of Uber, the ride-sharing company under fire for the crime of providing taxi services at too low of a cost.
Uber, along with its competitor Lyft, uses a smart phone app that allows you to find drivers and get rides in a very convenient, user-friendly manner. People can learn to use these applications on https://www.ondemandly.com and even get discount coupons to make the ride cheaper. On these applications drivers use their own personal vehicles to chauffeur customers around, and the prices are often much cheaper than their taxi competitors. But because of shabbily-written and antiquated regulations, these ride-sharing services are coming under attack. Many states, such as Nevada, are banning these handy services. A NY Post report elaborates on this troubling phenomenon:
Uber, the taxi-hailing app, continued its recent string of bad news this week when it a Nevada judge ordered it to stop doing business in Sin City — and the rest of the state.
So apparently prostitution, legal in the Silver State, is OK, but Uber is way too risky…
Uber said it will fight the ban and has already collected more than 18,000 signatures on a petition to demand its re-entry into the Silver State.
The Nevada ruling comes 48 hours after Uber — and rival Lyft — were banned from picking up passengers at the Louisville (Ky.) Airport.
This is a classic case of government intervention working on behalf of big business to stifle innovation and harm the consumer. When individuals and technology come together to create services that satisfy market demands, all too often, the heavy hands of government bureaucrats intervene to crush it. It almost seems as if the political class doesn’t want people to solve problems on their own. Wouldn’t want the hoi polloi getting too self sufficient.
If Americans start utilizing technology in a way that solves problems effectively, there will be no need for government. Thus, the hammer must be dropped on the Uber’s and Lyft’s of the world. As unfair as this may seem, it is government modus operandi.
That is why the Tenther approach is designed to keep the government at bay. Rather than enacting some new rule or regulation that will ultimately have the same pitfalls as the old ones, we work to nullify existing laws. By washing our hands of the feds and their abusive behavior, we can prevent the size and scope of their operation from becoming too massive. We can create impediments to keep Fedzilla at bay. By doing this, we can make sure that the marketplace functions as it should. When technology gives consumers better options, there will not be a monolithic institution standing in its way. If the federal agenda is successful, they will be able to operate free from the confines of the Constitution. This does not bode well for entrepreneurs, inventors, innovators, consumers, taxpayers or anyone except for bureaucrats and the monied interests that can pay to influence them.
Two pieces of model legislation that we offer, the P.E.A.C.E. Act and the Hemp Freedom Act, are analogous to the aforementioned situation. They remove onerous government restrictions preventing markets from working correctly and prosperity from booming. The P.E.A.C.E. Act stops state-level enforcement of federal marijuana prohibition. This allows the marijuana market to more easily flourish and saves millions in enforcement costs for non-violent offenses. Industrial hemp is a potential billion dollar industry that has been incomprehensibly suppressed for decades. Our Hemp Freedom Act unleashes this cash crop that can revitalize your state’s economy and put food on the table for thousands of needy families.
These are just two examples demonstrating how the principles of nullification can work to open up markets and stop government’s unjust restrictions upon them. Armed with the right approach, we can turn the tide against the collusion of big business and big government. We must realize that only through repealing government edicts can we truly create solutions that stand the test of time. A new rule or regulation could theoretically be effective in the short-term, but it will inevitably be perverted as time passes and used to protect obsolescent, monolithic industries. Repealing these regulations or denying compliance with federal policies is how we can ensure that the market, aided by advancements in technology and interconnectivity, can create wondrous miracles that a government bureaucrat could never fathom.