New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles
1–10 of 141 posts
Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles
#2Sounds like they want a return of the absurd medallions status quo. If anything non for general hire (as opposed to chauffeurs and such) vehicles having a limited count in an area at a time would make far more sense in a dense city like New York. The one good thing Uber did was destroying that stupid racket and proving that the world would not in fact end - despite the preexisting oligarchs' insistence.
Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles
#3(Former NYC resident here.) For those who don't know, the state of the NYC Subway System is abysmal and plummeted several years ago due to neglect and underinvestment.
I went to NYC last weekend and, just like the previous 7 times i went there, subways weren't running normally after-hours (growing up, it functioned well 24-7). This time (last weekend) no subways were running to where I needed to go. The only option was Uber/Lyft. It took me ~$17 instead of the $2.75 for the subway, but I was just glad to have some means of transportation.
Removing Uber/Lyft is a bad idea. But removing Uber/Lyft without first fixing the mass transit system is insane.
Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles
#4(Former NYC resident here.) For those who don't know, the state of the NYC Subway System is abysmal and plummeted several years ago due to neglect and underinvestment. I went to NYC last weekend and, just like the previous 7 times i went there, subways weren't running normally after-hours (growing up, it functioned well 24-7). This time (last weekend) no subways were running to where I needed to go. The only option w…
> The only option was Uber/Lyft
New Yorkers have relied on cabs for generations before Uber and Lyft.
> Removing Uber/Lyft is a bad idea
They aren't removing them, just regulating the number of cars, of which there is an oversupply: the number of for-hire vehicles in the city has surged, rising to more than 100,000 vehicles, from about 63,000 in 2015, according to the city.
Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles
#5Before becoming mayor, de Blasio lived here in Park Slope. I guess he never used these yellow cabs he’s so interested in preserving because getting one to go to Brooklyn from Manhattan is fucking impossible.
Seriously, everything about yellow cab service is worse. Why don’t they buy back the medallions instead?
Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles
#6Government quotas! That'll solve the problem.
Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles
#7(Former NYC resident here.) For those who don't know, the state of the NYC Subway System is abysmal and plummeted several years ago due to neglect and underinvestment. I went to NYC last weekend and, just like the previous 7 times i went there, subways weren't running normally after-hours (growing up, it functioned well 24-7). This time (last weekend) no subways were running to where I needed to go. The only option w…
> The only option was Uber/Lyft New Yorkers have relied on cabs for generations before Uber and Lyft. > Removing Uber/Lyft is a bad idea They aren't removing them, just regulating the number of cars, of which there is an oversupply: the number of for-hire vehicles in the city has surged, rising to more than 100,000 vehicles, from about 63,000 in 2015, according to the city.
An oversupply according to whom, the taxi drivers? Given how much eager so many riders were to pick them over cabs, they were obviously supplying something that was missing.
Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles
#8(Former NYC resident here.) For those who don't know, the state of the NYC Subway System is abysmal and plummeted several years ago due to neglect and underinvestment. I went to NYC last weekend and, just like the previous 7 times i went there, subways weren't running normally after-hours (growing up, it functioned well 24-7). This time (last weekend) no subways were running to where I needed to go. The only option w…
> The only option was Uber/Lyft New Yorkers have relied on cabs for generations before Uber and Lyft. > Removing Uber/Lyft is a bad idea They aren't removing them, just regulating the number of cars, of which there is an oversupply: the number of for-hire vehicles in the city has surged, rising to more than 100,000 vehicles, from about 63,000 in 2015, according to the city.
Isn't that a good thing? Supply goes up due to demand at a specific price point. So either the supply is increasing to meet demand (which is good), or the price is falling so more quantity is demanded (which is also good).
Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles
#9Before becoming mayor, de Blasio lived here in Park Slope. I guess he never used these yellow cabs he’s so interested in preserving because getting one to go to Brooklyn from Manhattan is fucking impossible. Seriously, everything about yellow cab service is worse. Why don’t they buy back the medallions instead?
The city would never buy the medallions back, because the price was based on an assumption of monopoly- they are worth much less now with the ubiquity of Uber and Lyft.
The cabbies have gotten the short end of the stick though.
Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles
#10Right now space on NYC streets is free, leading to a 'tragedy of the commons': Businesses are each incentivized to overuse the resource because the costs, congestion and greenhouse gas emissions, are externalities for them - Uber and Lyft don't pay for them. With no cost to supply, it also leads to an oversupply of drivers, which depresses their incomes (another reason I don't like the 'contractor' model - the drivers take on all the risk and cost).
The obvious, market-based approach is that businesses bid for street capacity (and greenhouse gas emission capacity, but that's a different political issue), to shift the costs from an externality born by the public to the people consuming the resource, the businesses. If I understand correctly, that is how medallions work (it's funny how ideas suddenly make sense when you come to them on your own). But maybe there are more modern solutions: Remember Bloomberg proposed congestion pricing; I oppose that because it distributes a public good, the public streets and transportation, to citizens unequally based on ability to pay. However, if we think of congestion pricing as dynamically priced medallions, that seems like a more efficient solution for businesses who are consuming public goods. It also would seem to make the market more open; rather than long term reservations of capacity (medallions), anyone can buy in at any time; on the other hand, that might discourage long-term investment.