Taxi Ranks in the middle of a main road...

Qwerty86

Taxi Ranks outside Masons running all the way back up Manor Street. Just wondering how is it even legal for a taxi rank to take up part of an actual lane off a main road and am I the only one this seriously annoys?😂😂😂
It's crazy, If you come to the traffic lights at Masons heading towards the quays you have to stop halfway between 2 lanes. Another part of the silly traffic management in the city....

JohnC.

As you say, there's 2 lanes. Use the other to get around it.

Qwerty86

JohnC. wrote: »

As you say, there's 2 lanes. Use the other to get around it.

You're missing the point. It blocks up the lane to go straight ahead meaning everyone has to go into the lane for drivers turning right which causes traffic to back up when the car that actually wants to turn right gets to the top.
The lights at the end of the sequence then allow cars to turn right only but the first car that wants to do that is probably number 5 or 6 in the queue.... Terrible planning

davetherave

It does seem to have been removed in the draft Taxi Stand By-laws 2019 by the council.


http://www.waterfordcouncil.ie/media/plans-strategies/bye-laws/MetropolitanDistrictWaterfordAppointedStands(AmendNo2)Bye-Laws2017.pdf

Formerly appearing as Manor Street, Waterford. North side of the road from a point 12m from the junction with Johns Lane to a point 36m southwest of said point. With a maximum of 6 taxis facing northeast adjacent and parallel to the kerb between 1830 and 0500.


http://www.waterfordcouncil.ie/media/plans-strategies/bye-laws/Draft%20Appointed%20Stands%20Bye-Laws%202019%20-%20Metro.docx

Explanatory Notes: These bye-laws provide for the removal of taxi ranks from The Manor and Merchants Quay to improve traffic flow and reduce risk to road users.

Qwerty86

Whoever came up with that idea needs to be given a good chat to be fair.
Its 10 times worse then when a taxi gets a fare for the opposite direction and decides to do a u-turn on the street - nightmare!

I used to leave on Manor Street just opposite Harveys and on Friday/Saturday night the taxis rank would get so backed up there would queue as far back as the traffic lights by Bunkers hill. The taxis were parking on double yellow lines and blocking up the bike lane on Manor Street. When I asked the taxi men to move, they'd say "I am allowed park here", I rang the guards on them multiple times, but they were never moved on.

After using Uber abroad, a lot recently I have to say I find them a much superior service than the taxi drivers we have around this town. We should just let Uber operate in Ireland and let the Taxi companies go bust if they can’t keep up.

Wanderer78

Deleted User wrote:

After using Uber abroad, a lot recently I have to say I find them a much superior service than the taxi drivers we have around this town. We should just let Uber operate in Ireland and let the Taxi companies go bust if they can’t keep up.

Well it depends if you believe in protectionism for workers or rentiers, but I will admit, some of those ranks are not suitable

greenspurs

JohnC. wrote: »

As you say, there's 2 lanes. Use the other to get around it.

Taxi driver

mooseknunkle

You'd think that Parnell St would be a better place for a taxi rank people leaving the Reg and Tower etc could walk the short distance too,but taxi drivers are a law onto themselves and they do whatever they want really.

friendlyfun

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I used to leave on Manor Street just opposite Harveys and on Friday/Saturday night the taxis rank would get so backed up there would queue as far back as the traffic lights by Bunkers hill. The taxis were parking on double yellow lines and blocking up the bike lane on Manor Street. When I asked the taxi men to move, they'd say "I am allowed park here", I rang the guards on them multiple times, but they were never moved on.

After using Uber abroad, a lot recently I have to say I find them a much superior service than the taxi drivers we have around this town. We should just let Uber operate in Ireland and let the Taxi companies go bust if they can’t keep up.

Taxis are the first to cause disruption if anything threatens them. If the government even countenanced bringing in Uber (proper uber) then I'd say the be blocking rice bridge

Wanderer78

friendlyfun wrote:

Taxis are the first to cause disruption if anything threatens them. If the government even countenanced bringing in Uber (proper uber) then I'd say the be blocking rice bridge

With the fairly obvious negative effects of liberalisation and deregulation of other sectors of our economy, it's understandable why some take radical measures

mooseknunkle

Probably a discussion for another forum but why isn't Uber in Ireland?

Wanderer78

mooseknunkle wrote:

Probably a discussion for another forum but why isn't Uber in Ireland?

Probably partially due to taxi unions etc, but there's probably many reasons why, I'm surprised it's not already here, since we seem to favour these type of business models, or elements of

JohnC.

greenspurs wrote: »

Taxi driver

It must be nearly 20 years since I’ve even been in a taxi, but thanks for making stupid assumptions anyway.

Wanderer78

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Well it depends if you believe in protectionism for workers or rentiers, but I will admit, some of those ranks are not suitable

Don't give a sh1t about protectionism for workers. Bring in Uber and let the taxi drivers compete and if they can't compete then tough, they can find work doing something else.

Wanderer78

Deleted User wrote:

Don't give a sh1t about protectionism for workers. Bring in Uber and let the taxi drivers compete and if they can't compete then tough, they can find work doing something else.

If your own job was on the line, you d be saying otherwise, 'markets don't occur in a vacuum', we don't live in an idealistic world whereby skills are transferable, we cannot keep undermining the workforce, and expect things to remain somewhat stable enough for people to live in some sort of security, uber is a perfect example of a rentier business model, I.e. undermining the security of the workforce in that sector, while extracting wealth, we reap what we sow

Odyssey 2005

greenspurs wrote: »

Taxi driver

That was my first thought also.

Iompair

Deleted User wrote: »

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Well it depends if you believe in protectionism for workers or rentiers, but I will admit, some of those ranks are not suitable

Don't give a sh1t about protectionism for workers. Bring in Uber and let the taxi drivers compete and if they can't compete then tough, they can find work doing something else.

Uber run their business at a massive loss to undercut and drive out competition, it's a bigger scam then taxi's themselves which is saying something.

What will happen if they ever run out of investor funding and actually have to try and turn a profit is anybodys guess, but hiking up their prices will probably be high up the list.

Squidvicious

Deleted User wrote: »

Don't give a sh1t about protectionism for workers. Bring in Uber and let the taxi drivers compete and if they can't compete then tough, they can find work doing something else.

Now, I don't think that workers should have unlimited protections. Indeed, there are some situations/industries where workers are perhaps over protected. But your first statement:rolleyes: . Thankfully not everyone has your attitude. If they did, most of us would end up working in modern day sweatshops.
You don't care about protection for workers? All so your taxi ride might be a little cheaper or perhaps faster to pick you up? I wonder what industry you work in yourself.

For the record, I am very sceptical about bringing Uber to Ireland. Iompair has good post above. Inevitably, if Uber comes to Ireland, this will involve some of our taxi fares being sent to Uber HQ overseas instead of staying in the local economy. I really don't see what's in it for us in Ireland.

In case anyone suspects, No, I'm not a taxi driver and never have been.

Gardner

UBER should be introduced in rural ireland as a trial and banned from urban areas just like they do around airports in several european cities.

lassykk

Gardner wrote: »

UBER should be introduced in rural ireland as a trial and banned from urban areas just like they do around airports in several european cities.

This is a fantastic idea. It is so hard to get taxis in the countryside and if a local was willing to do it via uber it would be a fantastic service. I'm sure it happens under the radar as it is but that's only good if you know who's offering the service!

Squidvicious

Squidvicious wrote: »

Now, I don't think that workers should have unlimited protections. Indeed, there are some situations/industries where workers are perhaps over protected. But your first statement:rolleyes: . Thankfully not everyone has your attitude. If they did, most of us would end up working in modern day sweatshops.
You don't care about protection for workers? All so your taxi ride might be a little cheaper or perhaps faster to pick you up? I wonder what industry you work in yourself.

For the record, I am very sceptical about bringing Uber to Ireland. Iompair has good post above. Inevitably, if Uber comes to Ireland, this will involve some of our taxi fares being sent to Uber HQ overseas instead of staying in the local economy. I really don't see what's in it for us in Ireland.

In case anyone suspects, No, I'm not a taxi driver and never have been.

Actually, I haven't got a taxi in years, so I am not particularly invested in this subject. The only point I am making is that if Uber can provide a good service for cheaper than the taxi companies then Uber should be allowed do that and if this drives taxi companies out of business.... well that’s capitalism in action.

Should we just ban Uber just to keep taxi companies in business?

JohnC.

JohnC. wrote: »

As you say, there's 2 lanes. Use the other to get around it.

What do you mean use the other lane? The taxi drivers are parking in a f**king cycle lane on Manor Street. Their cars should be towed away or they should be fined for blocking access to a cycle lane.

We are trying to encourage people to cycle to help the environment yet you have taxi drivers with their big cars blocking up bike lanes :rolleyes:

Squidvicious

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Actually, I haven't got a taxi in years, so I am not particularly invested in this subject. The only point I am making is that if Uber can provide a good service for cheaper than the taxi companies then Uber should be allowed do that and if this drives taxi companies out of business.... well that’s capitalism in action.

Should we just ban Uber just to keep taxi companies in business?

That's a far more nuanced way of putting it than saying you don't care about protectionism for workers though. There's always a balance to be struck between reducing prices, providing a good service and protecting workers. After all, if our only interest was lower prices, then why not abolish the minimum wage? Wouldn't that reduce prices? You can reasonably argue for the introduction of uber to Ireland. However, I don't think it's reasonable to say that worker's welfare should be totally ignored either.

Odyssey 2005

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Actually, I haven't got a taxi in years, so I am not particularly invested in this subject. The only point I am making is that if Uber can provide a good service for cheaper than the taxi companies then Uber should be allowed do that and if this drives taxi companies out of business.... well that’s capitalism in action.

Should we just ban Uber just to keep taxi companies in business?

I was In Portugal a few weeks ago. Mrs O had the Uber app as she uses it around the wurld. We never spent more than €5 on any journey.. there was one trip that in Ireland would have been in excess of €90and it cost us €24.. I dont give a fuk about the self employed taxi men I'm spending MY money.

debok

Odyssey 2005 wrote: »

I was In Portugal a few weeks ago. Mrs O had the Uber app as she uses it around the wurld. We never spent more than €5 on any journey.. there was one trip that in Ireland would have been in excess of €90and it cost us €24.. I dont give a fuk about the self employed taxi men I'm spending MY money.

Never spent more than five euro next line spends 24

Wanderer78

Again, 'markets don't occur in a vacuum', if you're comfortable with removing protectionism in one market, be prepared for similar measures to occur in the sector you work in, or related sectors. Protectionism is a fundamental and critical component of capatalism, from protection of workers and employers, without which, only a highly dysfunctional and potentially dangerous form of it exists

Qwerty86

Thread is gone totally off the original subject. Can a mod close it please?

greenspurs

Qwerty86 wrote: »

Thread is gone totally off the original subject. Can a mod close it please?

Why ?
have you nothing else to contribute to it ?
Threads evolve ……

Junior

Deleted User wrote: »

Actually, I haven't got a taxi in years, so I am not particularly invested in this subject. The only point I am making is that if Uber can provide a good service for cheaper than the taxi companies then Uber should be allowed do that and if this drives taxi companies out of business.... well that’s capitalism in action.

Should we just ban Uber just to keep taxi companies in business?

And what happens when the Uber model collapses (because it's a huge loss making industry) and neither a Taxi Service or Uber exist ?

Squidvicious

Odyssey 2005 wrote: »

I was In Portugal a few weeks ago. Mrs O had the Uber app as she uses it around the wurld. We never spent more than €5 on any journey.. there was one trip that in Ireland would have been in excess of €90and it cost us €24.. I dont give a fuk about the self employed taxi men I'm spending MY money.

I don't really see what Portugal's got to do with anything. Or do you think that the only reason why taxis are cheaper in Portugal is because they've got uber?
https://checkinprice.com/average-and-minimum-salary-in-dublin-ireland/
https://checkinprice.com/average-and-minimum-salary-in-lisbon-portugal/

Average monthly salary in Lisbon is €860 as against €2200 in Dublin. So obviously taxis are cheaper there. Nor do we know how much their car insurance is, licence fees etc. You may as well compare taxi fares in Timbuctoo. The only question is how much might uber reduce fares in Ireland.

You don't give a "fuk" about taxi men. Fine. I have no idea what you work at or whether you work and as I've said before, I accept that protections for workers have to be balanced against what's good for everyone else. However, if you beggar your neighbour, remember that it might be your turn next to be beggared.

Junior

Junior wrote: »

And what happens when the Uber model collapses (because it's a huge loss making industry) and neither a Taxi Service or Uber exist ?

If the Uber model collapsed someone else would fill the void overnight, If there is money to be made someone will be there to make it.

edit: Just to clarify I am not hoping any taxi drivers lose their jobs. All I am saying is that if one business model (Uber) puts another business model (Taxi Firms) out of business thats just capitalism in motion. I am seriously not wishing job losses on anyone.

mooseknunkle

Uber Eats is in Waterford now has this put all the delivery drivers out of the job yet?

mooseknunkle

mooseknunkle wrote: »

Uber Eats is in Waterford now has this put all the delivery drivers out of the job yet?

Im assuming a lot of the delivery drivers will just start working for Uber eats.

Wanderer78

Deleted User wrote:

edit: Just to clarify I am not hoping any taxi drivers lose their jobs. All I am saying is that if one business model (Uber) puts another business model (Taxi Firms) out of business thats just capitalism in motion. I am seriously not wishing job losses on anyone.

Again a fundamental part of capitalism is protectionism, the uber model is ultimately about monopolisation of a pre-existing market, to drive competitors out of the market, which in turn increases overall worker insecurity in that market, including the reduction of wages etc, the ultimate goal being overall wealth extraction from an economy, it's also a part of typical libertarian utopic ideology

Squidvicious

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Again a fundamental part of capitalism is protectionism, the uber model is ultimately about monopolisation of a pre-existing market, to drive competitors out of the market, which in turn increases overall worker insecurity in that market, including the reduction of wages etc, the ultimate goal being overall wealth extraction from an economy, it's also a part of typical libertarian utopic ideology

Good post. Of course, it may not turn out as badly as all that and uber might be good for the consumer. However, I think that we'd be foolish to ignore the risks. Obviously, uber on its own isn't going to transform the economy but it's part of a trend. The way I see it with the current model is that the income earned from the taxi industry stays local currently. With uber, you will inevitably have a large chunk of income leaving the local economy and the country.

Wanderer78

Squidvicious wrote:

Good post. Of course, it may not turn out as badly as all that and uber might be good for the consumer. However, I think that we'd be foolish to ignore the risks. Obviously, uber on its own isn't going to transform the economy but it's part of a trend. The way I see it with the current model is that the income earned from the taxi industry stays local currently. With uber, you will inevitably have a large chunk of income leaving the local economy and the country.

Oh there's no question, companies such as uber do bring great benefits to a society, but this needs to be introduced very carefully, protective measures are critical for both parties, in order for its overall success, this currently isn't the case, the labour force is being seriously undermined, to the point of it being dangerous

Flow Motion

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Oh there's no question, companies such as uber do bring great benefits to a society, but this needs to be introduced very carefully, protective measures are critical for both parties, in order for its overall success, this currently isn't the case, the labour force is being seriously undermined, to the point of it being dangerous

:pac: "Under communism, every man has what he needs. That's why the butcher puts a sign up that says "nobody needs meat today."

debok

mooseknunkle wrote: »

Uber Eats is in Waterford now has this put all the delivery drivers out of the job yet?

There probably just not hired by individual takeaways anymore so I'd say some did lose jobs.

Wanderer78

Flow Motion wrote: »

:pac: "Under communism, every man has what he needs. That's why the butcher puts a sign up that says "nobody needs meat today."

thank god thats what we dont have, what a disaster that would be

Gardner

the one decent thing about Uber is the quality of cars that are used. most of the taxi in the city are an utter disgrace.

robtri

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Again a fundamental part of capitalism is protectionism, the uber model is ultimately about monopolisation of a pre-existing market, to drive competitors out of the market, which in turn increases overall worker insecurity in that market, including the reduction of wages etc, the ultimate goal being overall wealth extraction from an economy, it's also a part of typical libertarian utopic ideology

Protection is not part of capitalism.

Why should Taxi drivers be given protection at the expense of the consumer?

most other business do not get this protection.
How many small grocery retail units have been lost to the Lidl's, Aldi's and tescos of the world.




All jobs (excluding civil service) are at risk of a competitor coming in and being better and cheaper for the end user.

Wanderer78

robtri wrote: »

Protection is not part of capitalism.

Why should Taxi drivers be given protection at the expense of the consumer?

most other business do not get this protection.
How many small grocery retail units have been lost to the Lidl's, Aldi's and tescos of the world.




All jobs (excluding civil service) are at risk of a competitor coming in and being better and cheaper for the end user.

again, protectionism is a critical and fundamental part of having a functioning capitalist society, so called free trade agreements have their basis firmly set in protectionism. as mentioned by yourself, major corporations have their protectionist needs met in these trade deals, this comes in many forms, including questionable tax arrangements, questionable practices that increase overall worker insecurities, including zero hour contracts, intellectual property etc etc i.e. protectionism, protectionism, protectionism. oh and id disagree with economists such as alan greenspan, increasing worker insecurity isnt good for the economy of the majority, particularly workers, but is good for the economy if the minority, particularly the plutocratic classes

friendlyfun

We should dismantle capitalism in Johns Street!

barraseaclaid

Seen guys with cameras down there the other day. And they're drafting in Leo Di Caprio to play the leading role in a new movie about this whole debacle...The Wolf of John Street