Then any law/regulations would be futile.

If telling them to stop won't make them stop, then how would passing a law make them stop? I'm guessing the same way drug laws keep people from using drugs... This only (sort of) makes sense if your primary concern is punishment, but I would hazard a guess that there are already laws which could be used to justify punishment if an actual incident were to occur.

Nevermind. http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/02/ubuntu-for-tablets-arriving-on-nexus-7-nexus-10-this-week/ I guess it is real.

Ubuntu has been showing a lot of pretty darn cool looking stuff the last few years, Ubuntu for Phones, Ubuntu for Android, Ubuntu TV. It all seems to be vaporware though. Am I missing something? AFAIK I can't install any of these things on existing devices and there isn't any hardware available for purchase which runs these versions of the Ubuntu OS. So what exactly are they "announcing", that this may be available someday?

Cuba has the best healthcare??? I'm guessing you got that tidbit from the Gospel of Michael Moore....

I guess you haven't figured out the correlation between:

and:

HINT: Raising the latter will also increase the former. Frak Taxes...SMASH THE STATE!

Haha, What a name. My guess is that the Sakshat will indeed be a Sak of Shat.

You have it backwards. The "Cheaters" are the ones who asked for the "rules" in the first place.

The "rules" aren't laws of nature. They didn't exist before the legislators created them.

If you ask why the rules are there in the first place you'll realize it is in fact to prevent competition.

WHY?

Democracy is nothing but a tyranny of the majority. Mob rule.

The difference is that the higher capacity vans are competition for the bus services. That's the only difference.

It has nothing to do with risk. Its only about the bus service using political means (force) to prevent anyone from competing with them.

That is what the actual motive is behind every Government regulation / license. There is always a portrayal of some "risk" or "danger" that needs to be eliminated, but it always boils down to one group using political means against another.

You assume that everyone would be stupid enough to get into any piece of crap taxi.

Even without government licensing I think most people would still prefer a nice clean well maintained taxi from a reputable provider over any random worn out vehicle with a bum behind the wheel.

In a truly free market (i.e. NO Government at all) there would be plenty of well run businesses trying to beat out the competition by offering superior services.

OH NO! Not an "unlicensed" service! Imagine that, people offering a service to other people without the governments permission. What a nightmare. I mean, clearly nothing good could ever come of people voluntarily interacting without checking with the almighty omnipotent omniscient State. /SARCASM