31–40 of 270 posts
As much as I think the taxi system needed replaced, I'm not sure how I feel about companies breaking laws to innovate. If we go down that path are the south american drug cartels just ahead of their time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Whether it's for the better or worse simply doesn't matter Yikes- I have only a little sympathy for the taxi industry, but it is very scary that you do not believe we should be concerned with whether market forces improve society or not. I think it is extremely important to the vast majority of people that any enormous change in transportation occurs for the benefit of society - the ideology that capitalism is an en…
We'll see what you think of the cab industry when uber raises their prices by 3 times in order to become profitable, after the cabbies all gone.
Anectodal evidence from my trip to Chicago last week. The same trip cost me twice as much when I took a taxi vs Lyft. So guess what I'm going to take the next time...
In a taxi your ride was insured if the driver got in an accident. Your cabbie is certified, and less likely to be crazy. Also half your lyft/uber ride is paid by a VC.
Having taken many cabs and many rides via Uber, Lyft, and Juno, I'm not sure why you'd claim this. The drivers for ride-sharing services are far safer, saner, and more careful than cab drivers. The reason is not hard to ascertain: at the end of almost every trip drivers and riders rate each other.
I probably won't ever take a taxi again, but have some sympathy for the cab drivers who put their life savings in medallions. The city effectively promised them the exclusive right to give taxi rides, but didn't do anything about a non-medallion entity doing that same thing. They put hundreds of thousands of dollars into something meaningless.
Had taxi company owners not used those medallions as an excuse to provide absolutely horrendous customer service, they wouldn't have ever had to worry about uber/lyft/whatever in the first place. I've never taken uber or lyft because it's cheaper, I've taken it because I get a clean, comfortable ride, with a driver who isn't a complete jerk. I've mentioned it here before, but also why I won't take uber anymore unless it's my last option - their CEO has the same attitude I saw in those taxi drivers and I'm not about to give monetary support to "that guy".
NOTHING the government did has EVER prevented cab companies from providing the same service these startups provide.
Anectodal evidence from my trip to Chicago last week. The same trip cost me twice as much when I took a taxi vs Lyft. So guess what I'm going to take the next time...
In a taxi your ride was insured if the driver got in an accident. Your cabbie is certified, and less likely to be crazy. Also half your lyft/uber ride is paid by a VC.
As much as I think the taxi system needed replaced, I'm not sure how I feel about companies breaking laws to innovate. If we go down that path are the south american drug cartels just ahead of their time.
Is Lyft breaking the law? They operate in Chicago, so in theory would be a viable alternative to Uber.
I probably won't ever take a taxi again, but have some sympathy for the cab drivers who put their life savings in medallions. The city effectively promised them the exclusive right to give taxi rides, but didn't do anything about a non-medallion entity doing that same thing. They put hundreds of thousands of dollars into something meaningless.
Good, it's about time we let some crappy things die. Bailing out the banks and GM got me furious many years ago. Imagine if the government stepped in and saved Altavisa / Pets.com, and all the other dot-com boom companies? What good would that have done? Nothing. Let 'em burn and innovation will rise from the ashes.
+ 10000, the taxi system in chicago was _SO_BAD_ Can remember one case where I got a 5am ride to the airport. I suspect the guy was driving a friends cab, as his face did not match the registration. He blew through all stop signs we came across. There were no working seatbelts in the cab. I was literally afraid for my life. Oh and of course his credit card machine was broke, and he had no change, so I have to pay wit…
In both NYC and Chicago, you can call the cops over this, and they're very responsive (perhaps more so in NYC).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't use Uber over taxis simply because I can get the exact same service from a taxi That's just not true. Just off the top of my head: * 3-4 clicks and I have an Uber on its way vs. Having to talk to a dispatcher. Time saved. * I know ahead of time how much the fair will be vs. at the end of the ride. * I simply get out of the car once I reach my destination. I don't have to deal with paying, calculating tip, etc…
I'm talking about where I get a cab where there is app dispatch+ (pre) payment. And no medallions. Obviously taxi companies that still operate like it's 1990 are going to go extinct - my question was why are they operating like it's 1990?
Uber/Lyft is eating their lunch. Now they need to innovate or die. Very likely they die at this point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Whether it's for the better or worse simply doesn't matter Yikes- I have only a little sympathy for the taxi industry, but it is very scary that you do not believe we should be concerned with whether market forces improve society or not. I think it is extremely important to the vast majority of people that any enormous change in transportation occurs for the benefit of society - the ideology that capitalism is an en…
We'll see what you think of the cab industry when uber raises their prices by 3 times in order to become profitable, after the cabbies all gone.
Also public transit, car rentals, etc.