Lyft lobbying to prevent Portland from regulating impact of ride-sharing • Hacker News Board

Re: Lyft lobbying to prevent Portland from regulating impact of ride-sharing

#101

Post by kodablah » Wed, Feb 06, 2019, 5:30 PM UTC

ppseafield wrote: post #100

kodablah wrote: post #6

Color me naive, but I'm always confused why those troubled by the lobbying criticize the influencers instead of the influenced. The influenced aren't some innocent party here. Surely it is more reasonable to act in the best interest of your company as a lobbyist than it is to act against your constituents as a politician. Where is the scathing letter directed towards the writers/signatories/supporters of the bill in…

> Lyft doesn't pass laws. That's really just a semantic argument. When someone proposes a bill to a governing body, it's implied that they are trying to get it passed, even if they aren't congressfolks and don't have a vote. If not, why would they propose it? Certainly convincing legislators that a bill is a good idea is part of getting a bill passed, whether or not you are a congressperson, right? Maybe the sentence…

> The letter to me reads like an expression of deep disappointment

While it may read as such, the fact that it's public and promoted says more than the content.

Re: Lyft lobbying to prevent Portland from regulating impact of ride-sharing

#102

Post by delfinom » Wed, Feb 06, 2019, 5:32 PM UTC

CaptainZapp wrote: post #68

klodolph wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, sure. But long distances are usually covered by Shinkansen, and shorter distances are often covered by one of the regional JRs. All of these are supported by JRS ( https://www.jrs.co.jp/english/ ) which run IT and the railway information services. You only need to buy one ticket for a JR trip even though several companies may be operating the trains you use. For more local service, there are also private railwa…

They sometimes have agreements to allow transfers between them, like the two Tokyo subways. That's a pretty gross understatement. There are more than a dozen companies operating public transport systems in Tokyo alone and it's all interconnected. They don't only seemlessly interconnect (via PASMO or SWICA smart cards), but they also share common designators for their station labellings. So if you are going to use two…

>There are more than a dozen companies operating public transport systems in Tokyo alone and it's all interconnected. They don't only seemlessly interconnect (via PASMO or SWICA smart cards), but they also share common designators for their station labellings.

Perhaps they are more culturally motivated to present customers with the best experience unlike trying to fleece customers for every dime in America. Just saying.

There's a chance if you don't integrate your transit with the other guy, they may pay more to use yours and spend 2 hours traveling. Win!

Re: Lyft lobbying to prevent Portland from regulating impact of ride-sharing

#103

Post by TuringNYC » Wed, Feb 06, 2019, 5:34 PM UTC

bobthepanda wrote: post #89

TuringNYC wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> I'm aware large cities provide unique challenges and can understand why NYC for instance should be allowed to regulate their own taxi/livery situation, Firstly -- NYC's regulation of Uber/Lyft probably had much to do with the mayor's massive campaighn donations received from the TLC: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/18/nyregion/de-blasio-reaps-... NYTIMES: Taxi Industry Opens Wallet for de Blasio, a Chief Ally by M…

Medallions have always been regulated and restricted, not to benefit an asset owning class of rent seekers (that was a side effect), but to prevent the narrow, constricted island of Manhattan from choking on gridlock. Lyft and Uber essentially abused a loophole and caused traffic speeds to decline in the core. Congestion pricing with a fee on all yellow & black car rides for origin and destination within CBD would be…

>> Congestion pricing with a fee on all yellow & black car rides for origin and destination within CBD

If the goal was to reduce congestion in CBD, I'd support that goal...and zone-based pricing fixes that. CBD has extensive and frequent subway service, so that makes sense, esp since congestion pricing can be turned off on non-peak hours when subways dont seem to work.

However, what the city actually did was put a blanket cap on all Uber/Lyft across all boroughs at all times of the day/week -- seems like a move to intentionally hurt Uber/Lyft while not directly solving the above goal (reducing congestion) ...and plus...applying a regressive cost on poorer people.

Further, yellow cabs are much worse than Uber/Lyft pool services w/r/t congestion.

Re: Lyft lobbying to prevent Portland from regulating impact of ride-sharing

#104

Post by stale2002 » Wed, Feb 06, 2019, 5:35 PM UTC

dvtrn wrote: post #92

stale2002 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why shouldn't anyone else be speaking up about legislative issues? Doesn't everyone else have the same rights as a mayor to do so?

They absolutely do have that right, and should be encouraged to write their state legislators if they are motivated to. but since the letter in the article was written by a mayor, from the perspective of a mayor, my response here is directly about the perspective of said mayor. I was attempting to keep my comment congruent with the context of the post.

Ok, and the context of this post is that the mayor in question is complaining about other people exercising the same exact right that he is exercising.

That's the point. The mayor's opinion on the matter is ridiculous. Both the mayor, and other people, have the same right to express their opinion on legislative matters.

Re: Lyft lobbying to prevent Portland from regulating impact of ride-sharing

#105

Post by NoblePublius » Wed, Feb 06, 2019, 5:38 PM UTC

TuringNYC wrote: post #103

bobthepanda wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Medallions have always been regulated and restricted, not to benefit an asset owning class of rent seekers (that was a side effect), but to prevent the narrow, constricted island of Manhattan from choking on gridlock. Lyft and Uber essentially abused a loophole and caused traffic speeds to decline in the core. Congestion pricing with a fee on all yellow & black car rides for origin and destination within CBD would be…

>> Congestion pricing with a fee on all yellow & black car rides for origin and destination within CBD If the goal was to reduce congestion in CBD, I'd support that goal...and zone-based pricing fixes that. CBD has extensive and frequent subway service, so that makes sense, esp since congestion pricing can be turned off on non-peak hours when subways dont seem to work. However, what the city actually did was put a bl…

DeBlasio loves regressive taxes. His entire Vision Zero policy is nothing more than an excuse for the NYPD to issue more tickets to poor and middle class drivers.

Re: Lyft lobbying to prevent Portland from regulating impact of ride-sharing

#106

Post by jerrysievert » Wed, Feb 06, 2019, 5:42 PM UTC

ineedasername wrote: post #72

It seems like the tldr of Portland's objections is that rideshare services result in a net increase of cars on the road-- the rideshare cars-- because it makes taking a cab more convenient than mass transit. But it seems like an inverse effect might offset this issue: fewer people choosing to own & drive their personal vehicles because it's now more convenient to use rideshare services an not have to worry about find…

burst traffic vs constant traffic, where burst can be defined as commute times.

you can see the affect in downtown Portland, where car traffic was mostly concentrated to burst hours with the rest of traffic being a relative trickle of vehicles that weren't delivery or transit vehicles. now, it's a constant stream of lyft/uber labeled cars at all hours, in addition the the burst hours. anecdotally, no passengers most of the time (around 70%), seeming to be between fares.

Re: Lyft lobbying to prevent Portland from regulating impact of ride-sharing

#107

Post by anth_anm » Wed, Feb 06, 2019, 6:15 PM UTC

TuringNYC wrote: post #79

joecool1029 wrote: post #37

Honestly, I would much prefer everything get regulated at state level. I live in NJ. There are 565 municipalities here. Every single one has different regulations. For example, if one were to pick up a prearranged regular fare from Terminal A at EWR (Newark Liberty International), they might not know that this terminal is in the City of Elizabeth. The city sometimes has plainclothes detectives write $783 tickets. For…

>> I'm aware large cities provide unique challenges and can understand why NYC for instance should be allowed to regulate their own taxi/livery situation, Firstly -- NYC's regulation of Uber/Lyft probably had much to do with the mayor's massive campaighn donations received from the TLC: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/18/nyregion/de-blasio-reaps-... NYTIMES: Taxi Industry Opens Wallet for de Blasio, a Chief Ally by M…

Uber/Lyft as a solution is just about as regressive and ignorant of the working class. The solution is fixing transit.

Re: Lyft lobbying to prevent Portland from regulating impact of ride-sharing

#108

Post by orblivion » Wed, Feb 06, 2019, 6:16 PM UTC

pdx_flyer wrote: post #65

Calling Portland "dense" is hysterical. As a Portlander, I can say we are a terrible example of what NIMBYism does to efforts to lower housing costs by adding density. Our city has a decent public transit setup and if the focus was on adding usable density with improved transit options, rather than people trying to protect neighborhoods, we'd be much better off. I am fine with Lyft wanting this regulated at the state…

> Calling Portland "dense" is hysterical.

I remember taking a Lyft (merely coincidental to this story) on a visit during Halloween. There were like two bars on the street we were on, each with maybe 10 or 15 people outside.

"Crazy night tonight!"

...

Re: Lyft lobbying to prevent Portland from regulating impact of ride-sharing

#109

Post by anth_anm » Wed, Feb 06, 2019, 6:20 PM UTC

kodablah wrote: post #6

Color me naive, but I'm always confused why those troubled by the lobbying criticize the influencers instead of the influenced. The influenced aren't some innocent party here. Surely it is more reasonable to act in the best interest of your company as a lobbyist than it is to act against your constituents as a politician. Where is the scathing letter directed towards the writers/signatories/supporters of the bill in…

> Surely it is more reasonable to act in the best interest of your company as a lobbyist than it is to act against your constituents as a politician

No. Both parties of a bride are equally guilty.

Re: Lyft lobbying to prevent Portland from regulating impact of ride-sharing

#110

Post by anth_anm » Wed, Feb 06, 2019, 6:21 PM UTC

pbreit wrote: post #19

darawk wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bribery tends to be a crime because we haven't found a way to short circuit en masse the human tendency to submit to influence Contrary to popular belief, lobbying and bribery are in fact not the same thing.

What's the difference?

We have laws setup around allowing lobbying.

When you just make the rampant corruption legal, it ceases to be corruption. Flawless system.