Here's the solution for cabbies. Go on social security and let...

Here's the solution for cabbies.
Go on social security and let those pay who destroyed your livelihood.
Looks like this:
Government pays $700.00 per week = $35000.00 a year = $500000.00 in 15 years.
That’s the official unemployed benefit for married taxi drivers.
Include all 4000 cabbies and this pro-Uber government pays up to 4000 x half a million dollars.
Good so?
No reason to set Uber vehicles on fire like in Paris and other locations.



From:
http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/opi...t/news-story/4ac62629614533d703788cbfa8c07349



Tom Percy: Open slather for Uber while taxi drivers suffer under WA Government
October 12, 2015 12:00am
TOM PERCYPerthNow

Taxi drivers with the Transport Workers Union stage a protest in Perth earlier this year.

THE State Government’s continued tolerance of the blatantly illegal Uber taxi service never ceases to amaze me. I have seen some curious things in terms of law enforcement (and non-enforcement) over the years, but the present situation with Uber is up there with the best of them.
For generations we lived under the official fallacy there was no prostitution in WA. The world’s oldest trade was officially forbidden and didn’t exist. Except if you happened to live in Roe St, Northbridge or Hay St, Kalgoorlie, and a number of places in between.
As a very young lawyer I would marvel at the monthly raids on the Hay St bordellos in Kalgoorlie. The “girls” would all politely attend Kalgoorlie Magistrates Court, plead guilty to assisting in keeping premises for the purpose of prostitution and be fined $5. The madams would also be there and would usually be fined $10.
Fast-forward to 2015 and in any given edition of the daily or weekend press there are numerous pages advertising the services of prostitutes. None of them actually use that word, but there is little doubt that what’s being offered is substantially more than a massage. And what do the authorities do about it? In a word, nothing.
The callgirl industry seems to enjoy the same sort of immunity from regulation as the pirate taxi service Uber. You can call it a “ride-sharing” service, or whatever you will, but at the end of the day it is nothing more or less than an unlicensed taxi business.
Like the unregulated prostitution business, it doesn’t pay fees to the Government, doesn’t labour under any health or safety restrictions, doesn’t require specific surveillance or insurance measures and is generally unanswerable to any form of authority.

When anyone producing anything from potatoes or eggs to iron ore is subject to a specific regulatory authority, why is it that Uber and the Personal Columns are seen as requiring no official scrutiny?
Bona fide taxis, of course, don’t escape regulation. We have been regulating and taxing them obsessively for the best part of a century. The red tape involved in becoming a taxi driver and having a vehicle licensed to operate as a taxi, not to mention the cost of buying a set of plates, has always been prohibitive.
Not so for the would-be Uber driver. Just sign up, and off you go.
Taxi drivers John Golawski and Allan Sabouri, who are unhappy with the tolerance of Uber and have threatened legal action.
The process of becoming (and remaining) a licensed taxi driver is almost as difficult as obtaining (and retaining) a liquor license. One wonders how long an unlicensed organisation set up to brew and sell beer on the streets of Perth without a license might last? Probably about 10 minutes.
So why is it that an illegal taxi organisation can survive with what appears to be the latent approval of the government?
Back in July this year the Premier said Uber was “here to stay” and that he would “have no hesitation” in using the service — his justification being that it was “popular”.
There are many services and substances that are extremely popular but which, I would suggest, would not incline the Premier to use them or justify them on that basis alone.
The prosecution of a few Uber drivers, begun earlier this year and yet to be finalised, was a tokenistic response to the enormity of the problem.
There are an estimated 1000 Uber drivers operating in Perth at the moment. If the Government was fair dinkum about enforcing and upholding the rule of law it should be bringing blanket proceedings to close down the Uber operation per se. In itself that would not be a particularly difficult legal exercise.
Alternatively, it should deregulate the taxi industry as a whole. If prostitution, with all its attendant problems, doesn’t require any form of legalisation, why should taxis?
— Tom Percy is a Perth QC. Follow him on twitter on @Percyqc