With some states now registering Uber and, given these same states have issue taxi licences, should these taxi owners and licensees be compensated for their license costs, their cabs and their loss of incomes.

I say this because when fishermen have their fishing grounds closed, this often results in compensation, even in some cases where they have not been fishing them.

for what its worth, I certainly think they should be compensated.

For once I find myself in agreement rechtub.

Taxis can't compete against Uber; it's a better service built on better technology... taxis are stuck in the land that time forgot. Their industry is going to go the way of the Australian car industry.

As the car industry has been wound down, the workers made redundant have received compensation and retraining to help them find new jobs. It seems only fair and reasonable that cabbies be given the same help.

"taxis are stuck in the land that time forgot"

And so am I (as I will never have or use those despicable little gadgets that are required by Uber and I always pay with cash), so on those rare occasions when I cannot use my own car, I will still require the services of taxis.

I'm not sure what side to take on this one.
In the first instance, Uber shouldn't be illegal.

Lets say I have no transport and I ask a friend or family member to give me a lift down the shops, and I offer then some incentive say $20 for helping me out.

Should this be illegal?
No, and if anyone says yes, then I would argue the government is overstepping the mark.

So Uber shouldn't be illegal in the first place.
It's fair and reasonable competition against Taxi's.

So should the government be responsible for a changing world?

Is it not reasonable that with the increase in technology, specifically smartphones, GPS and Apps that situation would not have been inevitable?

Should taxis license owners not take some of the blame for their own bad investment?

Point 1. In comparison to fishing grounds, the government is not closing the roads to taxis.
Point 2. Is there not a tender or auction process on the sale of taxi licenses?
If so, operators need to be responsible for their own bad investments in a changing world too, just my two cents.

Point 1. In comparison to fishing grounds, the government is not closing the roads to taxis.
Point 2. Is there not a tender or auction process on the sale of taxi licenses?
If so, operators need to be responsible for their own bad investments in a changing world too, just my two cents.

Arm Chair
Point 1. No, but they are knowingly limiting the earning capacities after issuing licences that are heavily regulated. They are regulated so as to not allow too many operators in one area.

Point 2. Yes, but there are strict regulations in place and licences are limited. They are also very expensive and have very strict licencing conditions that need to be met. The governments do this in an effort to keep dodgy operators out of the industry.

As for your last point, where is the bad business decision made?

I think this one will find its self in court. More wasted tax payers dollars.