Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

planetizen.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 458 posts

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#251

Post by akgerber »

bdcravens wrote: post #129
colechristensen wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm regularly bothered by the fact that mass transit is more expensive than driving. Alone it is definitely cheaper disregarding sunk costs (price of car, etc.), it's still cheaper as long as I don't have to have a new car every few years, and if I have passengers mass transit is many times as expensive as driving. Shouldn't it be the opposite? I figure I can take 4 people from Mountain View to San Francisco and back…

Isn't mass transit generally planned for those without vehicles?

Those who own automobiles generally prefer to take them to places where parking is easy. Car-owning suburbanites who commute to dense urban neighborhoods where parking is expensive or difficult often take mass transit.

Parking is usually very cheap and easy in most of the US due to public policy that mandates it in sufficient quantity to satisfy any possible demand at no cost to the driver, and that makes it illegal to construct new neighborhoods where parking is not cheap and easy.

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#252

Post by holydude »

romanovcode wrote: post #118
holydude wrote: post #74

Sorry i get less sick when i commute by car hence i refuse to spend time with other people using buses/trams/subway.

Maybe you should stop touching your face often and wash your hands properly.

I do. I exercise a lot and try to live a healthy lifestyle. I make a personal statistics on what affects my health and I firmly believe public transport is a big no no for me.

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#253

Post by [deleted] »

smsm42 wrote: post #169
untog wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are all important aspects, but it's also important to factor in accessibility (in the monetary sense, not physical - although that as well!), because that's one of the main reasons for public transit to exist. Yes, Uber and Lyft will provide better opportunities for transporting two large suitcases across town. But at what cost to the person who needs an affordable journey to work? Neither can come close to rep…

> And if they're contributing towards traffic that is actively harming performance of public transit, it's worth discussing. It's worth discussing, but not in terms of "evil rideshares are up to their evil evils again" but in terms of "why public transit fails to satisfy the needs of the people that choose to use rideshares instead, and how it can be improved so that it starts to satisfy more people". The goal should…

[deleted]

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#254

Post by [deleted] »

jdavis703 wrote: post #109
smsm42 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even though Uber has been saying that they are improving urban transportation Note here that there are other dimensions of improving, not expressed in VMT. Such as convenience, availability, time to get to certain point, ability to perform certain tasks (e.g. compare traveling with two huge suitcases to/from an airport in public transport with two transfers and in a ride service car), etc. So when talking about imp…

Personal convenience isn't the only definition of what makes transportation better. There's all kinds of negative externalities automobiles generate, from traffic backups, to gaseous emissions, to taking up space that could be used by transportation modes with lighter footprints such as bikes. Not increasing VMT is very important to making cities perform more efficiently, with a lighter footprint.

[deleted]

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#255

Post by c3534l »

ringaroundthetx wrote: post #204
c3534l wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The one fifth of trips that wouldn't exist seems like a positive to society in that it is providing a service that is actively making a difference the choices people are making, providing them with value and choice. Additionally, restaurants are happy because they're getting more customers and selling more drinks. The reduction in drunk driving is also good. I'm not sure that justifies the rest of the traffic increas…

if you imagine that they'll transition to all electric self driving cars, it would only be a net benefit right? the transactions are still happening, in increasing volume, and the environment won't be more adversely affected just because there might be congestion isn't a negative

Congestion is certainly a negative externality. At the extreme, traffic can increase to the point where roads can no longer function to facilitate the movement of cars - constant traffic jams and decreased speed relative to walking or biking. Additionally, driving in traffic is unpleasant, increases accidents, reduces the desirability of living in the surrounding area, is smelly and noisy to be around, and increases wear and tear on the road. Increased use of public transportation is one of those weird things that probably benefits drivers as much if not more than the people who actually take it.

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#256

Post by leroy_masochist »

HillaryBriss wrote: post #245
ibejoeb wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That all seems like a net positive to me, especially in major urban areas that a very car dependent like Los Angles, Atlanta, Houston... In LA, driving drunk was just the way of life, and it was a real problem. Now, I don't know anyone who prefers driving over ridesharing given the option. Uber Pool makes getting from the east side to the west side faster that public transit for about $10-15, which is less than 1 dri…

> driving drunk was just the way of life, and it was a real problem. Now, I don't know anyone who prefers driving over ridesharing given the option. drunk driving in LA is still a real problem. law enforcement continues to conduct DUI checkpoints on a regular basis. and they catch drunk drivers. maybe you don't know the people who continue to drink and drive?

This strikes me as a deliberate misunderstanding in service of a snappy counter-comment.

Do you honestly believe that the parent meant that nobody drives drunk anymore? In my reading, parent comment is saying that there has been a major shift in default going-out behavior in LA, from driving one's own vehicle home while intoxicated to taking Ubers to/from nightlife locations. Does that sound untrue to you? Sounds true to me.

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#257

Post by ForHackernews »

isostatic wrote: post #199
bluedino wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> because they don't want to deal with parking or drive drunk. That's what my friends use it for. It's a shame, because in the smaller midwestern towns, we don't really have Uber yet so it can't be used. Drunk driving here isn't even given a second thought.

In the UK drunk driving is a big social no-no, however this has led to country pubs really struggling and many going out of business. If uber or some similar easy to use taxi was available where I lived I'd be quite happy to pay to go to them Instead it means more and more people drink at home, rather than out, actually leading to increased alcohol consumption! Automated taxis will make such a change to the fabric of…

In Ireland, country pubs will sometimes have an hourly shuttle van that gives patrons a ride home. Then Sunday morning, they have to hitchhike back to the pub to pick up their car.

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#258

Post by solidsnack9000 »

c3534l wrote: post #196
abalone wrote: post #107

tl;dr People use ridesharing mostly to go out to eat and drink (62% of trips). Riders are actually more likely to own cars. They don't want to drive when they're going out because they don't want to deal with parking or drive drunk. They don't ride the bus because it's too slow, unreliable or unavailable. If ridesharing didn't exist, two fifths of the time they'd walk, bike or use public transit instead, and a fifth…

The one fifth of trips that wouldn't exist seems like a positive to society in that it is providing a service that is actively making a difference the choices people are making, providing them with value and choice. Additionally, restaurants are happy because they're getting more customers and selling more drinks. The reduction in drunk driving is also good. I'm not sure that justifies the rest of the traffic increas…

> The one fifth of trips that wouldn't exist seems like a positive to society...

But it does still mean more traffic.

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#260

Post by hkmurakami »

isostatic wrote: post #199
bluedino wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> because they don't want to deal with parking or drive drunk. That's what my friends use it for. It's a shame, because in the smaller midwestern towns, we don't really have Uber yet so it can't be used. Drunk driving here isn't even given a second thought.

In the UK drunk driving is a big social no-no, however this has led to country pubs really struggling and many going out of business. If uber or some similar easy to use taxi was available where I lived I'd be quite happy to pay to go to them Instead it means more and more people drink at home, rather than out, actually leading to increased alcohol consumption! Automated taxis will make such a change to the fabric of…

I was reading about the history of Paris cafes, and apparently this has contributed to the demise of many cafes there as well (in particular the ones that relied on alcohol sales and didn't adjust to serve good coffee, among other more modern clientele tastes)
Post reply on HN