Slashdot Mirror
Studies Are Increasingly Clear: Uber, Lyft Congest Cities (apnews.com)
One promise of ride-hailing companies like Uber and Lyft was fewer cars clogging city streets. But studies suggest the opposite: that ride-hailing companies are pulling riders off buses, subways, bicycles and their own feet and putting them in cars instead . From a report: And in what could be a new wrinkle, a service by Uber called Express Pool now is seen as directly competing with mass transit. Uber and Lyft argue that in Boston, for instance, they complement public transit by connecting riders to hubs like Logan Airport and South Station. But they have not released their own specific data about rides, leaving studies up to outside researchers. And the impact of all those cars is becoming clear, said Christo Wilson, a professor of computer science at Boston's Northeastern University, who has looked at Uber's practice of surge pricing during heavy volume. "The emerging consensus is that ride-sharing (is) increasing congestion," Wilson said. One study included surveys of 944 ride-hailing users over four weeks in late 2017 in the Boston area. Nearly six in 10 said they would have used public transportation, walked, biked or skipped the trip if the ride-hailing apps weren't available. The report also found many riders aren't using hailed rides to connect to a subway or bus line, but instead as a separate mode of transit, said Alison Felix, one of the report's authors.
Maybe if cities did a better job of keeping mass transit free of ... and I know this sounds bad, and I feel bad saying it.... but bums, people wouldn't be so reluctant to use it. I mean real bums, like a dude who's got 3 coats on but you can someone still smell the vomit and feces. I know that's horrible, I'm not proud to say that, and maybe I have an over-sensitive nose, but it is what it is. Until then, I'll keep taking an Uber when I'm unable to take my own vehicle for whatever reason.
These companies aren't actually "sharing" rides, they are taxiing people about.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
I think buses congest traffic more than regular cars. They stop practically every 10 feet.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
There are two kinds of congestion in cities - cars just going somewhere, and cars looking to park/parked.
Uber/Lyft reduce the second kind, which means traffic flows more smoothly even with more cars. A car just dropping people off does not impact traffic the way cars circling a block looking for parking will, and also will not fill up valuable parking spots that might have otherwise been filled.
That's if you assume an Uber/Lyft car is constantly picking up and dropping off passengers. While this may be the case in certain very busy periods (or places), I'm guessing that it's usually not the case. So what does an Uber driver do when he has a significant "gap" between customers?
1) Drive around in circles aimlessly waiting to be hailed? Or
2) Try to find a convenient parking spot (preferably, free and not time-limited) where next call can be waited for?
Both options seem to increase congestion. Note that traditional licensed taxis have, in most cities, dedicated "taxi stations" - usually curbside parking spot reserved for taxis only. There is no time limit, and they are "free" (the taxi drivers pay for them to the city indirectly, via the licensing fees). Uber/Lyft doesn't have that, they have to use the regular parking.
Also, in many cities, traditional taxis are allowed to use bus lanes - allowing them to both get around quicker and not contribute (as much) to general congestion. Uber vehicles generally are not allowed in bus lanes, but must use the regular lanes, impeding the "normal" traffic. An Uber car can use HOV lanes when transporting a passenger, but not when empty. Taxis are often allowed to use HOV lanes even when empty.
The title implies, actual congestion — the number of traffic jams and the average amount of time we spent waiting them — has gone up.
But the actual study finds only that people use Uber to get places because it is more convenient than the alternatives:
In other words, Uber/Lyft are guilty of offering a good and convenient service.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
.. or another thought, maybe tax those companies enough so that the city has enough money to build a state of the art transit system.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Ironically, you're polluting the world more than they are, which we all have to live with.
This is a wake up call to Public Transportation. Public Transportation needs to improve its service. If given a choice people will choose the cheapest/easiest/most convenient option. So public transportation needs to provide better service if it wants to out compete Uber/Ride Sharing. When I visit a city, I usually usually use public transportation. Many times, I found it counter intuitive. There is little to no convenience. Last time I was in NY the subway credit card machines were broken and you had to purchase your fares with cash. You were only allowed to buy in certain denominations. The trains arrived on different platforms than marked, because it was after 10pm. Fix those issues, before there is any talk of banning Uber/Ride Sharing.
Public transport is designed by the city to be a sustainable solution for a city. By extension taxi regulations are for the same purpose. If you use a service that you find is 'better' but is not beholden to some sort of overall city planning then you are likely contributing to something that is a bigger problem for someone in your city. Previous generations understood this and were willing to play along for the sake of everyone. Apparently millenials just want it cheap and clean and easy and don't care about the problems, so history is doomed to repeat itself.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
This is literally physically impossible. At some point those cars in those 1000 lanes have to go to 1000 different places, and those places have to exist where the highway isn't. The issue is not large enough roads. If all we needed to do was move one 100,000 car parking lot from A to B, then you might have a point. But that's not what the challenge is. The issue is density, pure and simple, something you can achieve with trains and buses and not with cars.
And public transport isn't "the government". Good lord.
"Old man yells at systemd"
They're not ripping you off. Uber is dumping the service on customers below cost. When you take an Uber, half your ride is being paid for by some billionaire venture capitalist.
Uber's business model only works without drivers.
Mass transit apparently is of limited use where you live. Try Europe for a change. I live in Amsterdam, which, like other Dutch cities, has a dense public transport network, and the country's railway system is one of the densest in the world. In many cases I find it far more convenient to use public transport than to go by car.
It is possible to have good public transport. It does take a willingness to spend resources on the public interest. Perhaps that willingness is stronger in Europe than in the US.
Germany tried the stupidity you are suggesting in the 1960ies. It sucked and resulted in quite the expenses to rebuild everything back for public transportation. The cities are for the people, not for their cars.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
Now that sounds a lot like a bus.
A bus that is available at any time, takes you exactly where you want to go, will help you move cargo (like, say, a new refrigerator), is willing to do on-the-spot negotiations for special circumstances, such as groups traveling together, or odd destinations, and can be pre-scheduled.
... so nothing like a bus.
often late at night. Smelly Bums are fewer and farther between than that. People call Uber because the buses are massively underfunded. I used to sometimes ride my bike the 40 miles there/back because it was faster than waiting for the next bus (1 hour, 2 if you didn't want to wait at the bus for the 20 minute window that the bus might happen by during).
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
How is a bus (or train) driven by a government employee along a route chosen by the government on a schedule chosen by the government and subsidized by taxes not "the government"?
And, yes, you need wider surface streets as well as bigger highways.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
And the other half by the driver who is accepting chump change and failing to factor in their vehicle costs.
Nobody who has worked out the depreciation and maintenance costs relative to what you'll get paid for driving Uber would be driving for Uber.
Uber's business model involves screwing over drivers, and somehow conning them into thinking they're not getting totally screwed in the deal.