<div class="bbWrapper"><blockquote data-attributes="member: 257099" data-quote="Soulfresh_ACV" data-source="post: 10839660"
class="bbCodeBlock bbCodeBlock--expandable bbCodeBlock--quote js-expandWatch">
<div class="bbCodeBlock-title">
<a href="/forum/goto/post?id=10839660"
class="bbCodeBlock-sourceJump"
rel="nofollow"
data-xf-click="attribution"
data-content-selector="#post-10839660">Soulfresh_ACV</a>
</div>
<div class="bbCodeBlock-content">
<div class="bbCodeBlock-expandContent js-expandContent ">
Anyway, like I'd said in another response that I think Uber won't last long as a result. Legislations will be implemented every government to protect their revenue stream from the taxi/ public transport industry.
</div>
<div class="bbCodeBlock-expandLink js-expandLink"><a role="button" tabindex="0">Click to expand...</a></div>
</div>
</blockquote>Many cities have already figure out what regulations to create and they are now fully accepted. Smaller cities are running into problems where they can't appear to be trying to grow while restricting the things that larger cities are doing. <br />
<br />
In the US I have observed that once LA and New York do something (big bonus if Chicago does too) it is only a matter of time before it spreads around. This goes for regulations, , fashion trends, and businesses. It isn't 100%. New York gun laws will never happen in Texas, for example, but if you look at Keef talking about the bike rental services and other things and these were all ideas that started in the larger coastal cities. <br />
<br />
And if Uber can't get a good footing in Europe or Australia? It isn't like the US is a small market. They'll spread faster in the US and regulators will struggle to keep up, allowing consumers to grow to love them and politicians having to publicly choose between guys that likely fund their campaign and the voters themselves. They will also face off against groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), because someone who doesn't like a taxi or can't afford one might drive home if alternatives like Uber don't exist. <a href="http://www.madd.org/media-center/press-releases/2015/new-report-from-madd-uber.html" target="_blank" class="link link--external" rel="nofollow ugc noopener">MADD even worked with Uber</a> to test the theory. So, a politician would have to anger the people that actually vote for them, risk being accused of endangering lives, and face a large non-profit lobbying group all in order to appease one industry in their city. <br />
<br />
We already have multiple companies like Uber operating in the US. It is already successful and popular enough to support more than one business in this field. <br />
<br />
<br />
I think the one thing that the US has going for Uber is that public transportation here is not like it is in other areas of the world. You either have places where cars are everywhere and public transportation is mostly only used by people who are poor or you have so many people that no amount of public transportation eases congestion. Taking the bus locally to me means possibly sitting next to someone who is smelly, getting an evil look from that rough looking guy with his group of friends, getting something sticky on you, and many other undesirable things. And there are so few taxis that you must call in advance because waving one down as it drives past could mean a long wait before seeing one.</div>