Lyft says nearly 250K of its passengers ditched a personal car in 2017 • Hacker News Board

Re: Lyft says nearly 250K of its passengers ditched a personal car in 2017

#311

Post by usaphp » Wed, Jan 17, 2018, 2:21 AM UTC

panda888888 wrote: post #103

It's part of the reason I haven't bought a car. I'm in my mid 20s and didn't get my license in high school because insurance would have been too expensive (my parents wanted me to pay for it). I think driving is a good life skill so I got my license in my early 20s, but I still have zero desire to own a car. That said, I live in Seattle, where there is good public transportation. Here are my numbers: Parking (I work…

> With a 5 mile commute, public transit 3 days a week plus Uber/Lyft 4 days a week is cheaper, hands down. Uber/Lyft 7 days a week cuts it closer but is still cheaper.

But you also have to go to grocery store, go out with friends, do errands which most of the time are scattered across the city, it can take multiple rides per day as well. Also if you have kids you should add dropping them to school and other stuff. So you end up spending lots of time waiting for uber and paying for this little trips.

Re: Lyft says nearly 250K of its passengers ditched a personal car in 2017

#312

Post by romwell » Wed, Jan 17, 2018, 2:35 AM UTC

verylittlemeat wrote: post #264

romwell wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>All the things I want to do that I value more than driving. This paints you as a very limited person if you are living in the US, because the "things that you want to do" exclude: -pretty much all the great outdoor activities and nature that the US has to offer (National/State Parks); -getting to know your own country and traveling within it -going to any place or event outside the city (for most people, shelling ou…

- nyc has a huge park right in the middle of it and many large ones like prospect and forest park in brooklyn. Upstate new york has some of the greatest hiking in the country. Any number of stops 2 hours or less north of the city will take you to breathtaking natural sights - I have been to nearly every state in the US. Amtrak and public transit. - living in a major city means most of the events are here, not in surr…

> nyc has a huge park

Right, I keep forgetting that New Yorkers think that Central Park is nature. I still say it is to make my wife rage, though.

>Any number of stops 2 hours or less north of the city will take you to breathtaking natural sights

Two hours north will take you to a dismal lack of public transportation. Again, how often do you explore these natural sights?

>I think you should step back for a minute and think about how much you REALLY know about public transit

I've lived in NYC for 2 years, then in Suffolk County for 5 years, and then in a Texas college town for a year without a car, relying on cycling and public transportation. I've also spent a summer in Seattle riding its buses, and can say that that system really works.

But when I say that there's not practical public transportation in this country, I do mean it, and not for a lack of trying. NYC has it, Seattle has it, most cities do not. And even in NYC, not having a car meant that I would rarely visit anyone in Queens when I was living in Brooklyn.

Here in South Bay Area, it takes 2+ hours to get to SFO or OAK by public transit vs. 45 minutes by car; this ratio is not uncommon in places where public transit exists. This is what I call by "no practical public transportation".

It is certainly possible to reach places using Amtrak/Greyhound/local bus shuttles, but often it is outright unpleasant to do so, and takes way too much time.

I apologize for underestimating the efforts you took to explore the country. Nevertheless, there really is a huge chunk of it that one misses unless they drive. You can say that what you can't reach is not "interesting". I say - that's where the "color" is. A lot of my most vivid memories of traveling (including talking to random people) come from places not accessible by public transport.

>If you're more of a "the trip is the experience" type of person, you lose a lot of local color

I heavily disagree. I'd drive to places and then walk/bike/explore - and one would miss out on this "color" because buses don't go there.

Anyhow, when I was living in NYC, I was saying a lot of the same things, and it was very stressful to try to learn how to drive in NYC (I haven't). Nevertheless, given your interest in exploring, I believe that getting a driver's license will be a worthwhile investment of your time and money.

Finally, regarding:

>It takes a serious lack of imagination to believe you need a license to go places.

So, how would I go from College Station, TX to Bastrop State Park? How about Sam Houston National Forest? Enlighten the unimaginative one, and I'll acknowledge my utter ignorance.

Yes, you don't need a license to "go places", but you certainly do to go to specific places, and in general, it makes going places much more pleasant, and with far less advance planning.

To make an analogy, wheelchair users are still able to "go places", but the places they can go to, and the places they will go to (and how often) are going to be affected by this mode of transportation.

Re: Lyft says nearly 250K of its passengers ditched a personal car in 2017

#313

Post by rootusrootus » Wed, Jan 17, 2018, 2:35 AM UTC

phil21 wrote: post #283

rootusrootus wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have noticed this very strongly just in the last few weeks alone. Anytime a conversation begins that has to do with cars, a whole bunch of people immediately jump in to point how owning a car is immoral, how it destroys the environment, how it kills innocent children, how you should feel ashamed for owning one, etc. Maybe I've missed it before but with the recent spate of self-driving car stories it has become real…

And I'd say your viewpoint is extremely narrow. The entire US is effectively "car culture" - and in my (and others) opinions, that car culture has effectively killed our society. Maybe permanently. You cannot have a functional society when the majority of productive people sequester themselves off from "the others" into little boxes set apart from each other, never interacting with anyone unless it's a planned social…

It is arguable that the United States would not be in the position it is today -- good or bad -- without the car. Absolutely true. But you have only made an argument, not backed up with anything like data, that it has been bad.

Also, if you take a step back and do some research you find that the 'nuclear family' construction dates back well before we became any sort of car culture, and it did not originate in the U.S. So killing cars is unlikely to save our society.

Re: Lyft says nearly 250K of its passengers ditched a personal car in 2017

#314

Post by rootusrootus » Wed, Jan 17, 2018, 2:37 AM UTC

phil21 wrote: post #308

King-Aaron wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the activity of driving cars is as socially segregating as you feel it is. I have no metrics to base this on, of course. However your comment seems slightly hyperbolic to me.

> However your comment seems slightly hyperbolic to me. Perhaps, and I will say I have no hard data either so it's simply anecdote. However the older I get and the more I travel and witness other cultures - I continue to come back to this conclusion. After being a hardcore car+suburban lifestyle sort of guy in my youth. It takes a village to raise a child and also have a functional community, and the US has very few…

I actually agree with you that the construct of a nuclear family seems counterproductive. But I don't agree that the car has anything to do with it. Industrialization and the corresponding reduction in scarcity seem like bigger drivers.

Re: Lyft says nearly 250K of its passengers ditched a personal car in 2017

#315

Post by cannonedhamster » Wed, Jan 17, 2018, 2:41 AM UTC

usaphp wrote: post #311

panda888888 wrote: post #103

It's part of the reason I haven't bought a car. I'm in my mid 20s and didn't get my license in high school because insurance would have been too expensive (my parents wanted me to pay for it). I think driving is a good life skill so I got my license in my early 20s, but I still have zero desire to own a car. That said, I live in Seattle, where there is good public transportation. Here are my numbers: Parking (I work…

> With a 5 mile commute, public transit 3 days a week plus Uber/Lyft 4 days a week is cheaper, hands down. Uber/Lyft 7 days a week cuts it closer but is still cheaper. But you also have to go to grocery store, go out with friends, do errands which most of the time are scattered across the city, it can take multiple rides per day as well. Also if you have kids you should add dropping them to school and other stuff. So…

I walked 5 miles or more when I lived in the city (Boston). If Seattle has any of the amenities of Boston there's a grocery store within walking distance. I always took the T (subway) everywhere. I can't imagine paying for someone to drive me places in the city, it was just never needed even for things like you're talking about.

Re: Lyft says nearly 250K of its passengers ditched a personal car in 2017

#316

Post by phil21 » Wed, Jan 17, 2018, 2:42 AM UTC

rootusrootus wrote: post #314

phil21 wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However your comment seems slightly hyperbolic to me. Perhaps, and I will say I have no hard data either so it's simply anecdote. However the older I get and the more I travel and witness other cultures - I continue to come back to this conclusion. After being a hardcore car+suburban lifestyle sort of guy in my youth. It takes a village to raise a child and also have a functional community, and the US has very few…

I actually agree with you that the construct of a nuclear family seems counterproductive. But I don't agree that the car has anything to do with it. Industrialization and the corresponding reduction in scarcity seem like bigger drivers.

Fair enough. I don't think the car was the only driver, but I (obviously) believe it was one of the primary enablers if nothing else.

I also agree with your earlier comment that perhaps the US would not be in the dominant economic position it is today without the car. It enabled extremely rapid economic growth, and that should not be discounted.

I simply feel what it enabled in terms of society and lifestyle will be our undoing. I also agree it's only one factor of many however, and I'm not entirely sure what importance to put on it.

Talk to me in 10 years after I get through a lot more reading and thought on the subject :)

Re: Lyft says nearly 250K of its passengers ditched a personal car in 2017

#317

Post by rootusrootus » Wed, Jan 17, 2018, 2:46 AM UTC

fullshark wrote: post #288

kinkrtyavimoodh wrote: post #150

Not sure why so many people here are almost virtue signaling the act of not owning a drivers license. I agree—It's perfectly okay to not own a car if it doesn't make sense to your life situation. That being said, the ability to drive is nevertheless a useful skill and asset and at least in the United States, does not have a very high barrier to entry (for better or worse). There is so much in the United States that a…

It's not a virtue signal so much as a status signal. Having enough money to afford to live in densely populated urban areas where you don't need a car to live is a status symbol.

Except that the people who are making the argument for living in the city without a car constantly cite costs as justification.

And besides, isn't it the other way around? Unless you're living in one of a few extremely narrow areas of very specific cities, the really wealthy people live outside the urban core.

Re: Lyft says nearly 250K of its passengers ditched a personal car in 2017

#318

Post by GhostVII » Wed, Jan 17, 2018, 2:54 AM UTC

astura wrote: post #95

vlozko wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the bubble mentality of someone who lives in the city and/or doesn't have a family. How about you try hauling a baby in a stroller, diaper bag, and two other kids to a metro train (if you're so lucky to have one close) and then onto a bus. Ride sharing doesn't solve those problems, either, especially since you'd be in need of carseats. So no, automobile ownership is not dumb. There's plenty of use cases where…

What? Talk about "bubble mentality," this is the very definition of "white people problems." Kids take the bus all the time with their parents. My brother, sister,and I took the bus all the time with my mom or grandma or occasionally both when we were very young. Sometimes when we'd add in a few cousins too, then we'd be rolling 8+ deep. My parents car was always breaking down and my grandma never learned to drive so…

What does it have to do with white people? And I don't think they were saying that it is impossible to ride the bus with a family, but it is certainly not as nice, especially in places with poor public transit. Try taking public transit when you live a 10 minute drive out of the city, its just not going to work. Ride sharing isn't great because if you have a large family you have to split up, and it's not available everywhere.

Re: Lyft says nearly 250K of its passengers ditched a personal car in 2017

#319

Post by GhostVII » Wed, Jan 17, 2018, 2:59 AM UTC

bob_theslob646 wrote: post #142

fyfy18 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it’s only a kilometre why not walk? That’s 15 minutes for the average person.

Would you want to walk in below freezing weather?

I walked like 2 kilometres to work everyday in Toronto in winter, it was fine. Just get a coat.

Re: Lyft says nearly 250K of its passengers ditched a personal car in 2017

#320

Post by dzhiurgis » Wed, Jan 17, 2018, 3:07 AM UTC

semi-extrinsic wrote: post #222

milesokeefe wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You pay $700/year for insurance as a 25 year old?

Depends on your car, they said it's a beater. Of course an insurance company will give you significant price reduction if you have, say, a late 90s Toyota Corolla or Honda Civic with a 80 hp engine, as compared to something more modern and fun with twice the power.

Something modern with collision detection/auto braking, ABS/ESP and multiple airbags and shock absorbers that WORK is also way safer than older clunk.