As long as the employees are not forcibly coerced to work there, I fail to be outraged.

Is it April 1st already somewhere on the planet? Crap.

All he did was facilitate transactions among consenting adults.
Something is wrong with our country.

Not sure how your conclusion could've been inferred from anything I written.
It's exactly the opposite, the taxi companies are being anti-competitive. Uber and its clients do not affect you or the taxi industry at all.

Robberies and rapes are examples of coerced (lacking free will) interactions.
Why are you being obtuse?

Free society.

3d party is somebody not involved in the transaction.

Government has important and legitimate functions such as defense, border control, minting currency, punishing *real* crimes (homicide, rape, larceny etc) and others. All those functions are listed in the constitution.

Unlike the nanny-state folks, I feel that adults should have the freedom to decide for themselves. With freedom comes responsibility. There are risks. You cannot eliminate all risks without removing freedoms.
Regulations serve a purpose when they protect 3rd parties from harm. But not when the laws interfere with activities of consenting adults.

> the market can only support one or the other.
No
If one entity provides added value for added price it can compete with other, cheaper "budget" entities. That's why Taxis co-existed with more expensive limo service since forever.
>complete lack of regulation
B.S. and you know it. Uber drivers follow the same rules of the road as every other driver on the road. To level the playing field, the outdated and irrelevant rules applicable to the taxi companies should be repealed, not enforced.
> I don't believe the entertainment industry should offer their products for free because there is illegal downloading, do you?
Good example. The entertainment industry is like most industries where I don't need anybody's permission to enter. I can buy a video camera, shoot a movie and try to sell it just like anybody else. 20CenturyFox will not whine and cry that I am stepping on their "industry". Taxis think they are special and get to corner the market. Well, not anymore.

Regarding the first paragraph - overcharging is charging more than the competition. The stuff about respect for drivers is B.S.
Regarding the second: There's no evidence that taxi service is safer than Uber. Even if it was, I want a freedom to choose. Pay more for supposedly safer service or save money and take alleged risk.
The greedy taxi industry wants to take away that choice. Because they know they have nothing to offer to justify the higher price.

And why can't the taxi drivers use Uber to help them "make a living"? Because they want to overcharge us, the customers. So them protecting their industry is a code for robbing the customers.

My condolences. Did you try paying for it?

It's not ON the air, genius. Unlike NBC and such.

Patent is a property right.
If you are suing somebody for violating that right, you have to "make your case" so to speak.

It's too bad we don't have the consumers of the drives informing other consumers.
we need the greasy, grabby hand of the Big Brother to make things right.
/sarc