I understand what you're saying, and I'm not being deliberately obtuse. The "context of the article, the headline, the HN comments, et al", in case you missed it, is a policy discussion on whether surge pricing should be permitted. You narrowed that context down to the moment of getting a taxi; I deliberately broadened it back out. It was not intended as an insult, only as a reminder. And I never suggested that "voting could take the place of pricing", only that it was another way of expressing need or desire in the long term.

You took for granted that "of course" those people also had the power to express their desire politically, you just didn't think it was relevant for the point you were trying to make. I get that. In these discussions, I see a lot of comments along the lines of "give the consumer choices" and "let the market decide", putting the focus just as you did on the point of transaction. But in a democracy the consumer can also exercise choice by voting to limit the market. I'm making the point that those choices shouldn't be discounted simply because they weren't made at the time the immediate need presented itself.