[gwb2OO4]

Why should the government meddle in this business?

If you owned a cab, would you want the state telling you who you must provide service to? What if you don't want bums, or sodomites, or terrorists, or other dregs of society riding in your vehicle?

The government's responsibility ends at ensuring that cab companies can legally and without repercussion require their drivers to transport alcohol, service animals, etc. The state should NOT micromanage business activities.

[ButThreeLeftsDo]

I believe, as licensed common-carriers, they are already regulated by the government.

I could be wrong.

[lesser_satan]

Because you need a license to operate a cab in the Twin Cities. Maybe you shouldn't, but as long as you do the government is controlling the number of cabs available, creating a de-facto monopoly in the cab business. If all the muzzy cabbies get together and decide they're all going to disallow alcohol in their cabs, there is no market mechanism to correct it, whereas in a truly free market, somebody else would realize there's a market for cabs that do carry alcohol and start his own cab company, driving the muzzies out of business.

[Figment]

"Why should the government meddle in this business?"

Because the airport is government property for one. Second, they are a licensed business, there are dress codes, hygiene requirements and all manner of other rules. Service dogs are allowed in restaurants, on buses and most anywhere else these days. Why not in a muzzie cab?

[tickles]

the problem is the muslims refusing fares at the airport for 'religious' reasons feel they shouldn't have to go to the back of the line. evidently the back of the line isn't the cabs we actually see by a parking lot where the wait is quite long. They want the rules changed so they don't have to go back and wait.