Thanks a lot for all these comments. My point in writing this article was not to discuss how best to regulate taxi services and how Uber should be accommodated, if at all. All I wanted to say is that very often in Europe, as opposed to the US, regulatory restrictions protect incumbents without even an indirect reference to the general interest objectives these restrictions are meant to achieve. As a result, any entry that is perceived to eliminate some rents is prohibited, completely stopping innovation in many sectors of the economy. Innovative entrepreneurs exist in Europe as well. Let them start an activity when entry does not immediately affect any general interest. Adapt regulation to new technologies instead of blocking any technological development.
The US may have a trade deficit with the rest of the world, but its multinational companies have a major surplus when it comes to sales in foreign markets – especially China. If the US-China trade war continues to escalate, these firms will be, as US President Donald Trump might put it, the biggest losers.
Policy blunders of epic proportions have become the rule, not the exception, for the US administration. The toxic combination of ill-timed fiscal stimulus, aggressive imposition of tariffs, and unprecedented attacks on the Federal Reserve demands a far more critical assessment of Trumponomics.