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

Lyft says nearly 250K of its passengers ditched a personal car in 2017

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 438 posts

Re: Lyft says nearly 250K of its passengers ditched a personal car in 2017

#401

Post by pricetag »

fiftyacorn wrote: post #395
pricetag wrote: post #310

Hah, sorry to self plug[0] but I feel it’s relevant. I just wrote about this the other day, except I was using Uber instead. It turns out that for my personal situation it’s not worth it to go with a ridesharing service. Right now I’m spending $4,560 a year on Uber. Does anyone have bicycle recommendations for under $400? [0] https://pricetaganalysis.com/2018/01/15/how-much-money-i-spe...

Id probably get secondhand How far are you cycling? It might be worth upping the price too and going electric

Yeah used is probably my best bet. It’s only 7 miles a day roundtrip.

Re: Lyft says nearly 250K of its passengers ditched a personal car in 2017

#402

Post by jimmaswell »

ttul wrote: post #357
jimmaswell wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could've gotten a cheaper car, maybe even one you could pay for entirely upfront.

But it would suck compared to the old option. So not comparable.

Mine is from 1998 and it's perfectly comfortable. I definitely prefer it to transit.

Re: Lyft says nearly 250K of its passengers ditched a personal car in 2017

#403

Post by crzwdjk »

carlmr wrote: post #390
kasey_junk wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a fairly normal and commonly solved problem all over the United States. Lots and lots of people who can't afford to own cars deal with this and worst as a matter of course. Making life easier for people who choose to not own cars, has positive impact for those who can't own cars (and not to even begin on reducing the negative externalities). For the record, I own a car but also frequently hauled a baby stroll…

>Making life easier for people who choose to not own cars, has positive impact for those who can't own cars (and not to even begin on reducing the negative externalities). And people who drive cars. Because less congestion if there are half as many cars on the road.

Unfortunately, it doesn't always work out that way, because congestion tends to be the limiting factor for demand for car trips thanks to a very low perceived marginal cost. So as soon as congestion reduces somewhat, that extra capacity suddenly makes it more attractive for the marginal driver to take a marginal trip, and traffic increases (but not quite all the way back up to its original level).

Re: Lyft says nearly 250K of its passengers ditched a personal car in 2017

#404

Post by jimmaswell »

usrusr wrote: post #382
jimmaswell wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My car sat for a year before I got it and it was fine. It depends on the car and conditions.

Much depends on what you do with the battery. Physically disconnecting goes a long way, trickle charge even further. But street parking and serious mothballing don't go well together, particularly when you never know ahead of time wether your next drive will be tomorrow or next year. There are cheap solar trickle chargers that supposedly solve the problem for street parking, but modern car electronics often require s…

The battery was fine in mine too, and not disconnected. I had to jump it but it still had enough charge for the radio etc. and I've been using the same battery since.

Re: Lyft says nearly 250K of its passengers ditched a personal car in 2017

#405

Post by carlmr »

crzwdjk wrote: post #403
carlmr wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Making life easier for people who choose to not own cars, has positive impact for those who can't own cars (and not to even begin on reducing the negative externalities). And people who drive cars. Because less congestion if there are half as many cars on the road.

Unfortunately, it doesn't always work out that way, because congestion tends to be the limiting factor for demand for car trips thanks to a very low perceived marginal cost. So as soon as congestion reduces somewhat, that extra capacity suddenly makes it more attractive for the marginal driver to take a marginal trip, and traffic increases (but not quite all the way back up to its original level).

Not if more people forego the car entirely. The marginal trip costs are high if you don't have a car. Even if you could rent one cheaply over the weekend, it's more marginal cost than if you have it in your garage.

A lot of European cities with good public transport and narrow medieval roads still have less traffic than American cities with 4 lane roads.

Re: Lyft says nearly 250K of its passengers ditched a personal car in 2017

#406

Post by unethical_ban »

trebeling wrote: post #156
batbomb wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could get a passport card too, it's only $55.

I was told by a bouncer that this is not technically a valid ID for bars in WA, though was let in.

How is a federal ID with photo and DOB not a valid ID?? Holy heck.

Re: Lyft says nearly 250K of its passengers ditched a personal car in 2017

#407

Post by ebragg09 »

xapata wrote: post #399
gaius wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A zipcar’s not really for the use case of a weekend away tho’. It would be a traditional rental like Hertz or Avis, then you have to pick it up the night before, load it, then when you get back late unload it, drop it off, then get back home by some other means...

Why not? I use ZipCar for long weekends frequently.

well, because it has a max 180 mile per day limit with per-mile costs above that. So if you're staying overnight, that's one thing, but doing a 2 hour, go kayaking, 2 hours back type drive doesn't work.

Re: Lyft says nearly 250K of its passengers ditched a personal car in 2017

#408

Post by vidarh »

robocat wrote: post #213
vidarh wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm 42 and don't have a drivers license. My dad tried to nudge me into learning to drive, but I had no interest - it seemed to me to be a waste of time. Of course, I lived in Norway, and public transport was good. I now live in London, and transport is still good. I've never really felt limited, though certainly there are places that would be expensive for me to get to thanks to the need of long taxi rides etc., but…

Without having had a car it would be hard for you to compare. In the periods I haven't had a car, I visited some friends much less (friends that other forms of transport were much less convenient than a car). Without a car certain activities were not available either. Likewise, after many overseas trips, I then hired a car, which made a massive difference to the holiday.

It's not that hard to compare, as I certainly are aware there were things we did when I was a child that would be hard for me to do without a car. But the point is that you simply make other choices. Not better or worse choices. Just different ones.

Re: Lyft says nearly 250K of its passengers ditched a personal car in 2017

#409

Post by ebragg09 »

Symbiote wrote: post #363
wil421 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed my company is currently moving close to the center of Atlanta. It’s going to cost $15 a week to commute by train for the minimum 3 days to the office. Employee will match half so it only costs $7.50 a week out of pocket. I own a car bet it much more feasible to ride the train and walk briefly. Parking is free and only a mile to the closest train stop. My employers building has a free parking deck. Does Seattle…

When I visited Atlanta a few years ago, I was the only white guy on the train, and possibly also the only person with a professional job. A couple of people asked me what I was doing! If that's changed, that's a great improvement for Atlanta. Although I would walk or cycle the mile to the station.

I've never had the experience of being the only white person on the trains (though I still often am the only white person on a lot of the bus routes I take), and they're generally pretty crowded with all walks at this point. The CEO who took over in 2012 has had it revenue-positive every year and in 2016 ATL voters passed a tax increase to build out more, so it's got the public support now as well.

Re: Lyft says nearly 250K of its passengers ditched a personal car in 2017

#410

Post by lhorie »

lmm wrote: post #374
lhorie wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That really depends on location True. Where I grew up, the closest beach was an hour and a half drive away. Closest ski station was in a different country. Wasn't exactly safe to step out of the house to begin with though, being close to slums and all. I consider myself lucky to be able to share different kinds of experiences with my kids now even though the public transport system in north america doesn't help me.…

> You're right, I should just throw my car in the sea. If I also throw out my computer, my grandchildren will be proud that I tried to help bankrupt the ecology-destroying companies that mine rare metals for these gadgets you and I use to waste time online. OR I could just be honest with myself and acknowledge that I'm selfish despite knowing that merely existing is a huge burden on the planet. You can have a sense o…

> you can have sense of proportion

Driving three towns over isn't actually that long of a drive, compared to, say, driving downtown from uptown. The sense of proportion comes from the length of the drive. Sure the carousel was nice, but going to the library or the swimming pool is muuuch more appealing on any given weekend.

In any case, how far does one take the fun-vs-impact dilemma? Is using a couple of dollars worth of gas worse than killing a 7 yr old top-of-food-chain wild predator so we can have a fresh tuna sushi roll? Does it make sense to keep thousands of buses running at 10% capacity 7 days a week when we could all just stay home watching youtube and eating delivered food? One can draw an arbitrary line anywhere but unless they're either an ecological saint or admittedly selfish, there's going to be some amount of hypocrisy in that line.

Wrt taxes, taxing suburb living costs seems totally arbitrary. Even the current income/sales tax system makes more sense imho: spend less == less ecological impact

Post reply on HN