Critics Seek Regs for Ride-Sharing Services
Uber and Lyft are just the latest companies that could pay a price for challenging entrenched business interests through innovation.
Uber and Lyft are filling a demand taxis have not satisfied, and taxi owners don't like it.
The U.S. Supreme Court has the opportunity to limit private parties’ exploitation of licensing laws to advance their own interests at the expense of the public interest.
Past experience and common sense argue against governments leaping into areas best left for competitive markets and private enterprises to sort out.
Don’t like the price or quality of the services available from the state-approved hospital or hospitals in your area? That’s too bad.
Just because governments enjoy monopoly power to tax or regulate within a given jurisdiction doesn’t mean competition must be excluded from the provision of services.
Competition has the power to broaden educational horizons for children, but you'll have no luck getting North Carolina's education establishment to embrace it.
The education establishment should learn lessons from other aspects of daily life.
Those tied to traditional district-run public schools go out of their way to oppose innovations outside their control.
With competing private companies delivering good service at an affordable price, the situation is intolerable for the usual suspects on the Left.
Google holds no monopoly on search engine activity. It has succeeded by innovating and outperforming its competitors.
Federal regulators are tossing consumers' clearly demonstrated preferences aside and pursuing policies based on their own whims.