VC is funding Uber. Clean the wax out of your ears... (ok I don't know the proper expression to be used over thread)
Please take a deep breath and get a hold of your emotions. I will explain this for the third time.
Uber is not, let me repeat, is NOT inventing driverless cars. Yes it is funded by VCs but that funding is not for inventing driverless cars. They are a service company. Driverless cars are being developed by all major car companies. Their market is the entire world population of drivers than just taxis. Once there, taxi companies will deploy them as well as Uber would. Jobs will be lost in that manner no matter which way you look at it which invalidates the argument you are making that when driverless cars come, only uber drivers will be in trouble.
And if they don't do it, ton of other companies would. Tesla for example has already put in the terms of use for their autopilot that their cars cannot be used for taxi service as they plan to potentially roll out that service themselves. Other car companies plan to do the same. After all, they make the cars. Why not use some of their production to have a taxi/shuttle service?
Driverless transport service also means being recorded. People may not actually like driverless experiences, we don't know yet.
You are recorded today with the driver. There is no difference here. But sure, some may not like the idea and there will be a percentage of taxis still managed by drivers that can help you with luggage, provide good conversation, etc.
At what point did I suggest any part of "You seem to be wanting to stand in the way of progress and increasing convenience for consumers. That is protectionism and it has never worked in a free society. " ? Saying I don't like something isn't a proposal. Further I didn't suggest we don't move towards it, but have pointed out the flaws in how we're doing it.
Let me replay your argument since you have forgotten it yourself.
You said that we should not support uber despite the fact that they provide far superior service to consumers, charge far less than taxi and provide cleaner, better cars. Why? Because jobs will be lost at Taxi companies. That is textbook protectionism where you attempt to keep an industry alive despite market forces otherwise. Worse yet, you are doing that because the enabler is technology: always connected computers in our pockets and in the future, driverless cars. In that regard, you are also anti-advancement in technology.
As with the Internet vloggers in the OP video, you are running with a headline of "don't we feel sorry for taxi drivers." Well, I feel sorry for many other people whom I fund through charity contributions. I am not going to sign up to pay 3X more for a rid, be in a dirty falling apart taxi that is being run into the ground, wait forever in lines to get one out of goodness of my heart.
If you are a taxi driver and plan to retire well after 5 to 10 years, then I suggest using the time now to educate yourself in another profession. Change is coming and there is nothing that is going to stop it I am afraid. The same Internet that may take away your job, provides infinite opportunity to learn some other profession. Use the time while waiting to pick up the next customer to stream some podcast on a new line of work. We didn't protect horse and buggies, and I am afraid the population at large won't try to protect taxi drivers either.