Re: Cars make more economic sense than transit: fact

[arenn@urbanophile.com (Aaron M. Renn)]

On Fri, 30 Jul 1999 13:26:23 +1000, ant <dont-look@evil.spam> wrote:
>so if you are injured in an accident and are unable to seek compensation
>because the driver was not licensed would you still oppose licensing?

Why would this preclude you from suing for damages?

>if you are in a bus or taxi and it is involved in an accident causing you
>personal injury or loss you are entitled to compensation, its called public
>liability insurance, and insurance companies will not provide that if
>certain levels of driver and vehicle safety are not assured through some
>sort of certification or licensing system. the costs are there for a reason,
>to protect public safety. abolish the licensing system and you will have
>every bad driver and his unroadworthy car offering private taxi and
>minibuses with no protection for the public.
>sometimes governments or other central registrys can perform a valuable
>public service.

No, that's what we have today because taxi and public transport systems
are a monopoly and thus have no incentive to provide great service to
the public.

-- 
Aaron M. Renn (arenn@urbanophile.com) http://www.urbanophile.com/arenn/