21–30 of 81 posts
I remember when Uber was “supposed” to be a ride sharing service where you could make extra money along your intended destination. It wasn’t touted as a taxi service.
Obviously. They are making it worse by exactly the number of trips that would otherwise have been done by transit, bike, walking or not at all. edit: or now scooters
Actually, you take that number, PLUS the number of empty Uber cars, PLUS the number of empty taxis that would not have been empty if there wasn't Uber...
> Uber and Lyft have long said their services may relieve urban congestion by facilitating access to public transit This was always questionable for a place like SF or any high density city. Few people take a ride share to get to a bus or a MUNI light rail stop in SF. If you are paying for the Uber/Lyft, why would you pay again for a bus ticket, especially given the inconvenience of then waiting for the bus. You'll j…
I use it this way all the time. Bart into the city from a suburb and then if it's not in walking distance and there's no convenient bus, I take a Lyft to my destination.
I said few journeys go from ride share to bus/Muni, excluding BART, which goes a much longer distance than bus/Muni and therefore serves different types of journeys.
And journeys originating from within SF probably still account for the majority of ride shares in the city, not journeys from outside SF.
Obviously. They are making it worse by exactly the number of trips that would otherwise have been done by transit, bike, walking or not at all. edit: or now scooters
And there's an impact from out-of-town weekend drivers that don't know where they're going and take a dumb route because of that unfamiliarity.
Obviously. They are making it worse by exactly the number of trips that would otherwise have been done by transit, bike, walking or not at all. edit: or now scooters
Although it is more complicated than that, as I often take a shared ride home because Bart shuts down too early on weekends to be useful on the way back.
Additionally the math gets complicated when I have multiple people with me, as often times it's cheaper to uber/lyft somewhere to our destination than it is for all of us to individually pay for a Bart ticket.
Not sure if that's actually what's going on, but if it is, it's a ridiculous conclusion. Let me rephrase: "Japanese cars are making traffic in the USA worse, based on a computer model that simulated the speed of traffic with Japanese vehicles removed."
It's not just the number of cars causing issues; the number of roads with ad hoc lane closures due to ride sharing pick-ups and dropoffs makes a huge difference. Many three lane streets get choked down to one lane if a delivery truck blocks a right lane and a ride share blocks the left. It's very visible every rush hour in SF.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually, you take that number, PLUS the number of empty Uber cars, PLUS the number of empty taxis that would not have been empty if there wasn't Uber...
Empty taxis drive around looking for a fare. Empty ubers park and wait.
Uber/Lyft may make it unnecessary for some folks to own a car, but a reduction in car ownership does not mean a reduction in car usage.