This is a greater good argument and I don’t really disagree with it. However it does also fall into the category of protecting the public from the consequences of it’s own choices. I see the real problem with Uber as it’s complete dominance in this domain which is partly a function of the public’s desire to go with the “winner”. Apple benefits from the same behavior but no one wants to ban iPhones. Dominance by a single company means less choice for the consumer and perhaps heavy handed tactics. If Uber owns the market , they end up having coercive power even though they did not start out that way.
It is true that this application of the “gig” economy may be destroying Taxi driving as a living occupation but that seems to be the trend in more areas than just transportation. Advancing machine intelligence may allow for the “Uberization” of fields such as software programming. Imagine an intelligent machine doling out problems to subscribed programmers that require some judgement or thinking that it can not perform without human help. No need for full-timers, just enough brain resource to get over some parts. The world of work is changing fast and society will need to grapple with these issues at an ever increasing frequency.