Banning Private Taxi Services


Student Soluprob by Grace Grammello

Embry Riddle Aeronautical University

Presumed Problem

Using private taxi services (e.g., Uber, Lyft) is believed to be less safe than using public taxi services, as the drivers and organizational regulations of private taxi services result in crime and harm of clients more often than public taxi services, and therefore should not be trusted. There is allegedly a bigger risk to personal and financial safety when using private taxi services over public taxi services, along with the risk of personal information theft due to taxi privatization often being based through online applications.


Proposed Solution

The proposed solution is to ban private taxi services, and return to carpooling with known individuals or using publicly-regulated taxi services. Discouraging the use of private taxi services and restricting the connected applications that go along with the services would also curb the private taxi industry. If nothing else, the private taxi services should be regulated under national or state law to ensure the safety of the clients.


Evidence the Problem Doesn’t Exist

Uber claims to screen their drivers through “county, federal, and multi-state criminal background checks—and these checks typically go back seven years” (Hyde, 2015). Their background checks may exceed local taxi companies, and drivers are vetted through three private background-check firms (Hyde, 2015). Beyond this, most safety issues relating to taxis are homicides—and these are often results of cash transactions, which private companies often avoid and public companies employ. Also, private drivers have application access to passenger information, which may reduce passenger-to-driver attacks (Sobczak, 2016). In 2012, ridesharing policies began to correlate with installed government-regulated policies. For example, the California Public Utilities Commission required services such as Lyft and Uber to attain licensure from them and conduct criminal background checks, along with having a driver training program and a zero-tolerance policy on alcohol. They also must “maintain at least a $1 million per incident insurance coverage” (Rayle et. Al, 2014). The private taxi industry is adhering to the same guidelines that the public industry is, so if safety of private taxis is a concern, so should the safety of all taxi companies. For the most part, people are afraid that their private taxi drivers aren’t trustworthy or properly supervised, resulting in a lack of safety. Yet private taxi companies “use customer reviews to reflect a driver’s quality”, which works as a customer input and accountability method—and if the drivers don’t meet outlined conditions, they can be “deactivated” (Ross, 2015). A study commissioned by the City of Seattle resulted in public taxi services receiving 102 out of 105 negative comments in an industry-wide taxi poll (Ross, 2015). Perhaps public taxis are the less reliable, less safe option.


Background Narrative

The taxi industry was first subjected to regulation back in the Great Depression, when there was a call for regulation of taxi amounts and a concern of cash-based rides which “encouraged inexperienced operators to neglect good maintenance” (Posen, 2015). Recently, Private taxi services have undergone similar criticism from their public counterparts and government since their appearance around 2010, including lawsuits and arguments against their “lesser” regulations (Dong et al, 2014). Taxi lobbyists also argue that private services increase unfair competition (Posen, 2015). Though public drivers’ services undergo regulatory checks, lobbyists nitpick on the smallest background check details like “fingerprinting” in an attempt to strengthen the public taxi industry’s position (Ansari et al, 2015). Specific cases such as three rape cases in India, Chicago, and Boston, along with a San Francisco case in which a distracted Uber driver hit and killed a 6-year-old girl have been illuminated to harm private services’ reputations and raise concerns about the safety of private taxi services. In response, companies like Uber have established stronger regulations and checklists to ensure driver and rider safety. Also, insurance coverage discrepancies have been a large criticism of ridesharing; however, companies like Geico have been offering private ridesharing packages recently (Ansari et al, 2015). Furthermore, most of the proposed changes in regulation for private taxi companies center more around dispatch licensing and minimum fee charges than safety concerns, which are raised less (Posen, 2015).


Negative Consequences of the Solution

With rides being limited to public taxi services, there will be a decrease in the availability of transportation services and thus a longer wait time in large cities. Also, the healthy competition private services bring to public transportation increases the progress towards stronger safety regulations for both industries, decreases ride rates, and boosts awareness of public safety. Banning private taxi services may also increase client fear and dissatisfaction—a majority of private rideshare users report fear of alcohol use and physical harm in public taxi rides (Rayle et al, 2014). Conclusively, banning ridesharing could cost the general population time, money, and safety.



Ansari, N., Weber, L., Hood, S., Otto, C. and Sawayda, J. (2015). Uber Technologies Inc.:

Managing Opportunities and Challenges. [ebook] New Mexico: Daniels Fund Ethics Initiative, pp.1-12. Available at:

Dong, J., Filipovic, C., Leis, J., Petersen, E., Shrikhande, A. and Sudarshan, R. (2014). Uber:

Driving Change in Transportation. [ebook] Tufts University, pp.1-14. Available at:

Hyde, R. (2015, October 28). Uber – Safer Than a Regular Taxi? Retrieved October 25, 2017,


Posen, H.A. (2015). Ridesharing in the sharing eocnomy: Should regulators impose uber

regulations on uber? Iowa Law Review, 101(1), 405-433. Retrieved from

Rayle, L., Shaheen, S., Chan, N., Dai, D. and Cervero, R. (2014). App-Based, On-Demand Ride

Services: Comparing Taxi and Ridesourcing Trips and User Characteristics in San Francisco. [ebook] Berkeley, CA: University of California Transportation Center, pp.1-21. Available at:


TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND THE VIABILITY OF UBER’S LABOR MODEL IN WASHINGTON. Washington Law Review, 90(3), 1431-1469. Retrieved from

Sobczak, D. (2016). Taxis versus Uber: The Regulations, the People, the Money and the Future.

[ebook] Dallas, TX: National Center for Policy Analysis, pp.1-8. Available at:

The Beauty Industry: Makeup

Srivastava, S. (2015, September 02). Hitting Back At Makeup Shamers With Half-Face Makeup Selfies. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from

Student submission by Jamie Berends

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University.

Presumed Problem

There is a widespread belief in American society that a woman cannot be beautiful unless she possesses certain features, such as longer and fuller eyelashes, prominent cheek bones, rosy cheeks, full lips, blemish free skin, and fuller well-maintained eyebrows. Women who do not meet these standards can be defined as ‘unconventional’ and be looked at as less beautiful as compared to their fellow counterparts.


Create makeup brands to help accentuate certain features and hide blemishes. Promote makeup on media through the use of models with makeup done by professionals paired with photoshop.


Makeup can be dated back to the times of the Egyptians. During that period, Egyptian women dolled themselves up to impress the Gods as their appearance was directly related to their spiritual worth. However, in modern society makeup is used to impress others and hide certain features, which in turn can accentuate others. Now, makeup application is a daily ritual that many women cannot leave the house without first ‘performing’. This application of makeup goes beyond just special occasions, it has gotten to the point where some women put a whole face on before even going to the gym, or just apply it to take photos while they have a ‘lazy day’ at home.

Today beauty revolves around make-up, skin care, and hair care. On average, the entirety of the cosmetic industry generates about 62.46 billion dollars (as of 2016) in the US alone.

Backlash at the cosmetics industry is becoming more widespread as society begins to realize that true beauty is what lies inside and is not completely based upon looks. As media continues to create more unrealistic notions of beauty that make it hard for the average person to recreate, psychological problems begin to rise in the psyche of the public.

Was the Problem Real?

Beauty standards are defined by the media, such as television, as well as peers, such as coworkers. While some may view makeup as a necessity to look more professional or groomed, in all realities makeup should not be an everyday standard. When applying for jobs and positions, those of whom who wear makeup are deemed as higher in the social anarchy because they attract more admiration from those around them. Thus, making appearances go a long way. Whereas those who do not wear makeup, to an interview for example, are viewed as less ‘put together’ than those who do, and tend to attract less positive attention.

In short, appearances in the modern world are what many base their first opinions from. Therefore, the way someone looks has become more meaningful than personality; makeup is no longer used for self-satisfaction but instead is used to seek the approval of those around them.

It is clear that in today’s society we need less makeup because the appreciation of true beauty is beginning to go less noticed. Beauty is without parameters, and allowing it to be contained to one’s outward appearance is a step in the wrong direction that society needs to go in.

Negative Consequences

Overall, there are many negative consequences associated with makeup use and the standards that society enforces unto women. By creating unrealistic standards and images of what beauty should be, women have developed psychological problems as well as unhappiness with their natural appearances.

Women now have issues with anxiety, low self-esteem, and low self-confidence. Those of whom who wear more makeup are shown to have higher levels of anxiety and low self-esteems and confidence. This is because they perceive themselves as less beautiful than others, and so they try to hide their insecurities with makeup. However, there are correlations between people and what they perceive as beauty; this is because everyone’s standard of beauty differs. Women tend to feel less valuable when they are not wearing makeup; instead of focusing on what is going on around them they are more focused on if the person next to them notices that their face might have large pores or is flushed.

Today makeup is viewed as a temporary fix to image issues resulting from societal beauty ‘norms’ that are placed upon women. A temporary fix never truly works because only more anxiety results in order to meet the beauty standards that have gotten out of hand with numerous products being sold to only further women’s insecurities.


Britton, Ann Marie, The Beauty Industry’s Influence on Women in Society (2012) Honors Theses and Capstones. 86. Received from:

Scott, Sarah, Influence of Cosmetics on the Confidence of College Women: An Exploratory Study (n.d.) Hanover College. Received from:

Silverio, Lauren, Makeup’s Effects on Self-Perception (2010).OTS Master’s Level Projects & Papers. 49. Received from:

Brinegar, K. & Weddle, E., The Correlation Between Makeup Useage and Self-Esteem. (2014) Hanover College. Received from:

Jones, AL. Facial Cosmetics and Attractiveness: Comparing the Effect Sizes of Professionally-Applied Cosmetics and Identity. (2016) Kramer RSS. Received from:

Narang, Devina, The Psychological Factors that Affect Makeup Usage and the Perception of Makeup in Different Situations (2013) Virginia Commonwealth University. Received from: file:///C:/Users/jamie/AppData/Local/Packages/Microsoft.MicrosoftEdge_8wekyb3d8bbwe/TempState/Downloads/666-3495-1-PB.pdf

Korichi, R., Pelle-de-Queral, D., Gazona, G., Aubert, A. Why women use makeup: implication of psychological traits in makeup functions. (2008) PubMed. Received from: