Uber Hit with Cap as New York City Takes Lead in Crackdown • Hacker News Board

Re: Uber Hit with Cap as New York City Takes Lead in Crackdown

#41

Post by dsfyu404ed » Wed, Aug 08, 2018, 9:19 PM UTC

pavel_lishin wrote: post #21

ddtaylor wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's wrong with a vast majority of the vehicles on the road not being owned by the people who use them for transportation? It seems that a large amount of people don't want to purchase and maintain a vehicle they might not always be using and instead pay on-demand like they do for many other services where someone specializes to reduce the cost for others?

Nothing's wrong with that; in fact, that seems like the ideal scenario. I think there should be a financial disincentive to owning a car in the city, especially if most of the congestion is due to private car ownership. If Uber+Taxi make up a small percentage of traffic, then limiting them to fix congestion seems like a stupid idea.

>I think there should be a financial disincentive to owning a car in the city,

Expensive parking on top of all the other costs is enough for most people who aren't pretty well off.

Re: Uber Hit with Cap as New York City Takes Lead in Crackdown

#42

Post by pradn » Wed, Aug 08, 2018, 9:20 PM UTC

colinbartlett wrote: post #29

If the problem they are trying to solve is "too many vehicles" then we need a congestion tax. They should certainly not be limiting vehicles that are more likely to take multiple people with a Pool option. If the problem they are trying to solve is "drivers aren't making enough" then they should impose a minimum wage on drivers or force an actual employee relationship. If the problem they are trying to solve is a bai…

The real issue is that cab drivers are committing suicide because of their debts. Simple market analysis ignores the real human toll these technological changes are making. Yes, better service should be rewarded. But those hurting should get some relief. (I personally don't care too much about medallion-owning companies/groups.)

Re: Uber Hit with Cap as New York City Takes Lead in Crackdown

#43

Post by djstein » Wed, Aug 08, 2018, 9:21 PM UTC

moorhosj wrote: post #38

djsumdog wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is sad. NYC is one of the few (like 2, maybe 3) America cities with an actual usable rail system and it's rotted into disrepair. I'm all for limiting rid share vehicles and better wages for drivers, but they need to dump a shit ton of time and money into the rail system, both the subway and intercity. Fix Penn Station, and get the tracks up to spec! That should be the #1 priority for city transport infrastructur…

==NYC is one of the few (like 2, maybe 3) America cities with an actual usable rail system== Interested to hear what the other cities are. Chicago? San Fran?

Chicago and DC

Re: Uber Hit with Cap as New York City Takes Lead in Crackdown

#44

Post by tomtheelder » Wed, Aug 08, 2018, 9:22 PM UTC

asah wrote: post #34

colinbartlett wrote: post #29

If the problem they are trying to solve is "too many vehicles" then we need a congestion tax. They should certainly not be limiting vehicles that are more likely to take multiple people with a Pool option. If the problem they are trying to solve is "drivers aren't making enough" then they should impose a minimum wage on drivers or force an actual employee relationship. If the problem they are trying to solve is a bai…

In NYC a tax would be wildly regressive and favor wealthy wall st users over all others. EDIT: congestion tax = more expensive mobility (incl taxis and ride sharing) = less affordability It's similar to local sales taxes: the 1% aren't affected by the cost of basic items, but the 99% are.

A congestion tax? That seems very unlikely to me, I would be shocked if car owners/users were not wealthier almost across the board.

Re: Uber Hit with Cap as New York City Takes Lead in Crackdown

#45

Post by vkou » Wed, Aug 08, 2018, 9:22 PM UTC

TuringNYC wrote: post #11

pavel_lishin wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have the green cabs helped in that regard?

Not sure, but green cabs do address the bias against the non-Manhattan crowd. It is very common for yellow cabs in NYC to refuse rides to Brooklyn/etc. Destination discrimination "isnt allowed" but there isn't really a way to enforce the rule.

It's pretty easy. Undecover bylaw enforcement can hail a cab, ask to be driven to Brooklyn, when the driver refuses, cite them, and pull their medallion for a month.

I guarantee you, after a few medallions get pulled, this problem will evaporate.

What you have is lack of will in enforcement.

Re: Uber Hit with Cap as New York City Takes Lead in Crackdown

#46

Post by lotsofpulp » Wed, Aug 08, 2018, 9:22 PM UTC

pradn wrote: post #42

colinbartlett wrote: post #29

If the problem they are trying to solve is "too many vehicles" then we need a congestion tax. They should certainly not be limiting vehicles that are more likely to take multiple people with a Pool option. If the problem they are trying to solve is "drivers aren't making enough" then they should impose a minimum wage on drivers or force an actual employee relationship. If the problem they are trying to solve is a bai…

The real issue is that cab drivers are committing suicide because of their debts. Simple market analysis ignores the real human toll these technological changes are making. Yes, better service should be rewarded. But those hurting should get some relief. (I personally don't care too much about medallion-owning companies/groups.)

That issue is present with everyone else also, not just cab drivers. I don't see why they should be singled out for relief. If we want to provide a safety net for people obviated by technology, that has nothing to do with Uber or Lyft.

Re: Uber Hit with Cap as New York City Takes Lead in Crackdown

#47

Post by bumholio » Wed, Aug 08, 2018, 9:22 PM UTC

gojomo wrote: post #28

CPLX wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it's regressive. It takes money away from people who drive, who are often people who are blue collar, spread out in the outer boroughs, or who need to bring tools to do their jobs, those who are forced to cross the city to get anywhere west of town, etc. Sure, that's not the only effect it will have, it will also cost money for bankers that drive in from Westchester and park underneath their midtown offices.…

[citation needed] that congestion-pricing is regressive. I'd expect the exact opposite: those in NYC who take private cars, rather than public transit, are higher-income. Everyone gets a benefit from the public roads even if they don't use them directly: they feed the high-value trips that make the businesses there possible. But there's still not enough road-capacity for everyone without value-destroying congestion:…

It's regressive amongst those who drive, that's the point. By definition, that category is more oriented towards middle class, upper middle class; the poor don't pay the tax because they can't afford city driving in general.

Re: Uber Hit with Cap as New York City Takes Lead in Crackdown

#48

Post by pavel_lishin » Wed, Aug 08, 2018, 9:23 PM UTC

simonbarker87 wrote: post #17

TuringNYC wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure, but green cabs do address the bias against the non-Manhattan crowd. It is very common for yellow cabs in NYC to refuse rides to Brooklyn/etc. Destination discrimination "isnt allowed" but there isn't really a way to enforce the rule.

Could you lie when hailing the cab and once inside say they misheard you and say the genuine destination? Not allowed I imagine but pretty hard to enforce that rule? (Genuine question, as a UK reaident I’ve little experience of the US taxi system and have always had excellent service from taxi firms in the UK - as a result I’ve never really understood the problem Uber is solving in the UK)

By law, they have to take you to where you want to go in the five boroughs, plus... Westchester and somewhere else. So the trick is to get into the cab before they figure out that they can speed off before you can grab their number and file a 311 complaint.

Re: Uber Hit with Cap as New York City Takes Lead in Crackdown

#49

Post by kevin_thibedeau » Wed, Aug 08, 2018, 9:23 PM UTC

romwell wrote: post #22

Alternative title: "NYC Taxi mafia strikes back, gives Uber 12 months to come up with a large enough bribe". Really, the life of nearly everyone (who's not a taxi driver, perhaps) improved a bit since Uber entered the city. Even the fabled subway in its theoretical best has been dysfunctional in Brooklyn since the takedown of streetcars a hundred years ago (see how all the tracks are running towards Manhattan and ver…

100k Uber cars is fantastic. Let's boost that to 1M and get 10x the benefit.

There is a limit where all these cars become a true public nuisance. It might be less than 100k.

Re: Uber Hit with Cap as New York City Takes Lead in Crackdown

#50

Post by gamegoblin » Wed, Aug 08, 2018, 9:23 PM UTC

moorhosj wrote: post #38

djsumdog wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is sad. NYC is one of the few (like 2, maybe 3) America cities with an actual usable rail system and it's rotted into disrepair. I'm all for limiting rid share vehicles and better wages for drivers, but they need to dump a shit ton of time and money into the rail system, both the subway and intercity. Fix Penn Station, and get the tracks up to spec! That should be the #1 priority for city transport infrastructur…

==NYC is one of the few (like 2, maybe 3) America cities with an actual usable rail system== Interested to hear what the other cities are. Chicago? San Fran?

Boston's system is pretty good: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBTA_Subway