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

New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 141 posts

Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles

#21

Post by CPLX »

Why is everyone treating this news like it's all or nothing ("oh noes they want us to go back to medallion cabs!") rather than assessing it at face value.

The number of TLC cars has skyrocketed recently. Which, in many important ways, is a good thing. But this is a crowded city, literally everything that is at risk of runaway growth in this city is regulated, and for good reason, all the way down to hot dog carts.

This city could rapidly be unlivable otherwise. The growth of TLC cars has created obvious problems, they are often oblivious to their surroundings, blocking streets while they stare at the screen trying to find a pickup, creating localized congestion, etc.

I'm not sure if a numerical limit is the answer, or geographic restrictions, or who knows, but what it sounds like is the city is starting to think about it. Good.

Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles

#22

Post by bluedevil2k »

robrenaud wrote: post #16
bluedevil2k wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should the city buy them back? They sold the assets, they have no obligation to re-purchase them. Investment risk is in the hands of those people (usually companies) who purchase them. Besides, at what price would they even buy them back at? They're certainly not worth the price that some people pay for them (last I checked, about $1M each).

> Why should the city buy them back So otherwise hopeless drivers/single medallion owners who are severely in debt don't end up committing mass suicide.

People who bought million dollar homes and then saw them plunge in value to $300k didn't commit mass suicide, so why would you assume it would happen in this case?

Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles

#23

Post by bluedevil2k »

jdlyga wrote: post #19
bluedevil2k wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should the city buy them back? They sold the assets, they have no obligation to re-purchase them. Investment risk is in the hands of those people (usually companies) who purchase them. Besides, at what price would they even buy them back at? They're certainly not worth the price that some people pay for them (last I checked, about $1M each).

Because Taxi drivers depend on them to make a living and to eventually retire on. It's a big investment.

They don't buy them in cash, they take out a loan to purchase the medallions. They have the option to declare bankruptcy, default on their loan, or if they're from another country, move out of the United States. In any case, it wouldn't make sense to bail out all these medallion owners, because essentially the owners are banks.

Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles

#24

Post by jamiequint »

Daishiman wrote: post #15

I'm sorry but everyone here is completely ignoring the congestion arguments, which like it or not, are actually very valid, just as much as the race to the bottom and long-term unsustainably low prices. I dislike yellow cabs as much as the next guy but street space is definitely a limited resource and not being regulated in a healthy manner.

They should charge a congestion fee then and let the market sort it out, as opposed to artificially regulating one small source of cars (100k for hire vehicles vs 2.7m vehicles entering the city per day). Why would the thought even be to regulate 3% of cars vs. attacking the actual core problem (2.7m cars/day). It makes absolutely no sense (aside from protectionism of the taxi industry)

Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles

#25

Post by JumpCrisscross »

CoolGuySteve wrote: post #5

Before 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?

> he’s so interested in preserving because getting one to go to Brooklyn from Manhattan is fucking impossible

De Blasio is also significantly backed by the taxi industry [1].

[1] https://nypost.com/2014/05/17/taxi-industry-gave-de-blasio-o...

Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles

#27

Post by JumpCrisscross »

gammateam wrote: post #20
derekp7 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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).

the limitation is the capacity of the roads, which this is addressing, for New York City.

> the limitation is the capacity of the roads, which this is addressing, for New York City

I live on 26th Street. It used to be two lanes of traffic and two lanes of parking. They redid this to have one lane of bike lanes, one lane of traffic, and kept the two lanes of parking. (You see a similar issue of self-inflicted policymaking at the MTA [1].)

This decision is a handout to medallion owners, who are prolific political donors in this city [2].

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/05/09/nyregion/subw...

[2] https://nypost.com/2014/05/17/taxi-industry-gave-de-blasio-o...

Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles

#28

Post by nradov »

CPLX wrote: post #21

Why is everyone treating this news like it's all or nothing ("oh noes they want us to go back to medallion cabs!") rather than assessing it at face value. The number of TLC cars has skyrocketed recently. Which, in many important ways, is a good thing. But this is a crowded city, literally everything that is at risk of runaway growth in this city is regulated, and for good reason, all the way down to hot dog carts. Th…

A market based mechanism such as a variable congestion charge would probably be a better way to restrict traffic.

Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles

#29

Post by snissn »

TuringNYC wrote: post #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 w…

Would you mind sharing what stops you were trying to travel between?

Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles

#30

Post by dsr_ »

nradov wrote: post #28
CPLX wrote: post #21

Why is everyone treating this news like it's all or nothing ("oh noes they want us to go back to medallion cabs!") rather than assessing it at face value. The number of TLC cars has skyrocketed recently. Which, in many important ways, is a good thing. But this is a crowded city, literally everything that is at risk of runaway growth in this city is regulated, and for good reason, all the way down to hot dog carts. Th…

A market based mechanism such as a variable congestion charge would probably be a better way to restrict traffic.

A market based mechanism such as a strong labor union of drivers would probably be a better way to ensure livable wages.
Post reply on HN