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

A new study says services like Uber and Lyft are causing urban traffic woes

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 253 posts

Re: A new study says services like Uber and Lyft are causing urban traffic woes

#181

Post by seandougall »

macspoofing wrote: post #128
gammateam wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does it have to be an anti-car narrative, or something insidious Why do you think limited-supply medallion systems existed in the first place? Come on this is just classic "I forgot why these regulations existed and now a 100 year old problem is being recreated" A form of limited licensing for ride-hailing companies can exist without any of the inputs from the taxicab lobby and work out really well.

>Why does it have to be an anti-car narrative, or something insidious Because there is an ideological (i.e. irrational) component to some objections. It's true. >Why do you think limited-supply medallion systems existed in the first place Taxi lobby pressuring municipal governments? I cannot imagine you using the past system as an example of a well-run program. There was never a good reason to limit the number of tax…

> Your argument went away when EVERYONE could afford a car and clogged the streets anyway.

I'm not sure I agree. If I drive a car to work, it sits in a parking garage all the rest of the day. If I take a Lyft, it continues to roam the streets waiting for the next fare. Any rideshare (or taxi, for that matter) that is not actively hired is a car that would not otherwise have been out on the road. I don't think they're currently numerous enough to make a huge difference, at least where I live (outside L.A.), but the difference definitely isn't on the side of less traffic.

I'm all for transportation options (and don't forget housing options!) that incentivize people not to own cars, but replacing my car with another car that has to drive a bit farther doesn't get cars off the road.

Re: A new study says services like Uber and Lyft are causing urban traffic woes

#182

Post by aeternus »

lewis500 wrote: post #15

I don’t understand why this study is receiving so much attention. It’s not peer reviewed. It doesn’t contain actual data collection (the estimates are all extrapolated in a way the author considers reasonable, not measured data from traffic detectors or surveys). Schaller is not a researcher or engineer, but a consultant mainly working for taxi regulation. That doesn’t mean it’s wrong. But I’m surprised the study get…

There have been a few studies that searching for parking causes a significant amount of congestion. According to this theory, Uber/Lyft may actually be reducing traffic by encouraging fewer people to drive across the city & search for parking.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/46212892_On-street_...

Re: A new study says services like Uber and Lyft are causing urban traffic woes

#183

Post by komali2 »

colemannugent wrote: post #151
komali2 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you make healthcare and education free-or-nearly-so and set up fantastic social welfare safety nets. Look at swaths of Europe, Taiwan, etc. Kind of hard to fine someone that doesn't have the money to pay for it. Kind of hard to put a person in jail when the jail is already full of kids with marijuana sentences. I don't think this "Singapore Solution" would work in the USA.

> ...make healthcare and education free-or-nearly-so... Free for who?

Literally everyone.

Imagine the tax income down the line if every citizen that wanted a high-training-required career could get that career. Imagine the burden reduction on welfare.

Re: A new study says services like Uber and Lyft are causing urban traffic woes

#184

Post by bobthepanda »

macspoofing wrote: post #128
gammateam wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does it have to be an anti-car narrative, or something insidious Why do you think limited-supply medallion systems existed in the first place? Come on this is just classic "I forgot why these regulations existed and now a 100 year old problem is being recreated" A form of limited licensing for ride-hailing companies can exist without any of the inputs from the taxicab lobby and work out really well.

>Why does it have to be an anti-car narrative, or something insidious Because there is an ideological (i.e. irrational) component to some objections. It's true. >Why do you think limited-supply medallion systems existed in the first place Taxi lobby pressuring municipal governments? I cannot imagine you using the past system as an example of a well-run program. There was never a good reason to limit the number of tax…

> Taxi lobby pressuring municipal governments? I cannot imagine you using the past system as an example of a well-run program. There was never a good reason to limit the number of taxicabs on the streets. There were good reasons for some regulations, such as driver registration, transparent pricing, vehicle standards, but not regulations around limiting number of vehicles.

New York implemented a medallion system because Manhattan is a long, narrow island with high travel demand. Commuters, shoppers etc. do own cars and clog streets during the peak hours, but commuters and shoppers also park their cars while they're off doing their jobs and errands; taxis are constantly driving for fares.

Were medallion prices high? Sure. But that doesn't mean a race to the bottom to provide a cornucopia of taxi services doesn't have negative externalities.

Re: A new study says services like Uber and Lyft are causing urban traffic woes

#185

Post by nradov »

rhizome wrote: post #93
nradov wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Several people (mainly women) have told me that they're afraid to take public transit in the SF Bay Area due to the other riders. I'm not sure how we fix that problem without restricting civil rights in ways that would be unconstitutional and politically unacceptable. It's a real dilemma.

While police and transit should deal with incidents that do inevitably happen, but I don't think fear of potential incidents is something they can fix. It may be that the person with the fear simply doesn't like to live in a large city.

I'm not just referring to large cities. The same fear of public transportation impacts small and medium cities throughout the Bay Area. Many people will continue to live in those cities, but choose to drive their own cars or use ride sharing services. It's a significant obstacle to increasing public transit usage and we'll have to find a solution if we want to reduce traffic congestion.

Re: A new study says services like Uber and Lyft are causing urban traffic woes

#186

Post by bobthepanda »

quxbar wrote: post #92
lewis500 wrote: post #15

I don’t understand why this study is receiving so much attention. It’s not peer reviewed. It doesn’t contain actual data collection (the estimates are all extrapolated in a way the author considers reasonable, not measured data from traffic detectors or surveys). Schaller is not a researcher or engineer, but a consultant mainly working for taxi regulation. That doesn’t mean it’s wrong. But I’m surprised the study get…

Wow, that's gross. Braess's Paradox says adding more capacity to roads can cause more congestion, I guess the narrative would be 'rip up roads to solve traffic' then? It really makes me sick to my stomach how often 'authorities' lack any background in formal reasoning, and see no need to apply it to decisions for the public welfare.

This actually happened:

The Embarcadero in SF was turned into a surface road after the Loma Prieta earthquake permanently damaged it: http://www.preservenet.com/freeways/FreewaysEmbarcadero.html

Chonggyecheon, Seoul was restored as a stream after the highway capping it was demolished: https://blogs.cornell.edu/info2040/2017/09/14/braess-paradox...

Re: A new study says services like Uber and Lyft are causing urban traffic woes

#187

Post by GirlsCanCode »

nradov wrote: post #55
lotsofpulp wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the major benefits in some cities of Uber/Lyft over public transportation is not risking interaction with thementally ill, inebriated, panhandlers, or otherwise dangerous people (like the dancers on the NYC subway).

Several people (mainly women) have told me that they're afraid to take public transit in the SF Bay Area due to the other riders. I'm not sure how we fix that problem without restricting civil rights in ways that would be unconstitutional and politically unacceptable. It's a real dilemma.

I'm a 55 year old man. I will not ride the bus in San Francisco after being mugged (with a weapon, a knife) on a Muni bus.

Re: A new study says services like Uber and Lyft are causing urban traffic woes

#188

Post by gascan »

macspoofing wrote: post #128
gammateam wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does it have to be an anti-car narrative, or something insidious Why do you think limited-supply medallion systems existed in the first place? Come on this is just classic "I forgot why these regulations existed and now a 100 year old problem is being recreated" A form of limited licensing for ride-hailing companies can exist without any of the inputs from the taxicab lobby and work out really well.

>Why does it have to be an anti-car narrative, or something insidious Because there is an ideological (i.e. irrational) component to some objections. It's true. >Why do you think limited-supply medallion systems existed in the first place Taxi lobby pressuring municipal governments? I cannot imagine you using the past system as an example of a well-run program. There was never a good reason to limit the number of tax…

There was never a good reason to limit the number of taxicabs on the streets.

Without some kind of limit/pricing on the public good that is city streets, what in particular is to stop Cab Company X from saturating the roads with cabs in a brute force attempt to capture a higher proportion of the ridership (and incidentally ballooning road wear & travel times to the detriment of everyone else)?

Same kind of problem as people anticipate with driverless cars (e.g. while I go in to shop at this store, my car circles the block for the next hour waiting for me). City streets are a "common good" that is largely unpriced.

It's a brute force solution with obvious shortcomings, to be sure.

Re: A new study says services like Uber and Lyft are causing urban traffic woes

#189

Post by nkurz »

sharkmerry wrote: post #154
logfromblammo wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the proper way to argue with such a person is to write the fourth-power rule on a large sheet of paper, roll it up into a small, tight cone, and stab them in the eye with it. Road wear is proportional to axle weight to the fourth power. Gas tax is proportional to total weight to the first power. In collisions, the more massive vehicle sustains proportionally less damage. A large truck could completely pulverize a…

>> And the proper way to argue with such a person is to write the fourth-power rule on a large sheet of paper, roll it up into a small, tight cone, and stab them in the eye with it. What a nice reasonable start to a discussion. >> Road wear is proportional to axle weight to the fourth power. Gas tax is proportional to total weight to the first power. Great, I didnt argue for a gas tax. You are arguing about road capa…

When 'logfromblammo' says "such a person", he is referring to a person who complains that cyclists aren't paying their fair share of road taxes. He was not attacking you, although he may have been attacking 'kazinator', the author of the comment he responded to. Personally, I enjoyed both the creative phrasing that 'kazinator' chose and the imagery of the response from 'logfromblammo', and think both of them were having good fun with language while making reasonable points.

Re: A new study says services like Uber and Lyft are causing urban traffic woes

#190

Post by Simulacra »

I'm confused. Taking Uber or a Lyft, that's like taking a taxi, right? Like someone driving their own car. People who use ride sharing apps are going to be in a car either way, why single out Uber and Lyft? That's like saying people going to work contribute to congestion.
Post reply on HN