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

#51

Post by pavel_lishin » Wed, Aug 08, 2018, 9:24 PM UTC

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #41

pavel_lishin wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Given the fact that congestion is an admitted issue, it's possible that it's not enough; plus, many people use street parking, which costs time instead of money.

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

#52

Post by discodave » Wed, Aug 08, 2018, 9:24 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?

DC

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

#53

Post by tribune » Wed, Aug 08, 2018, 9:24 PM UTC

djsumdog wrote: post #19

pmart123 wrote: post #3

NYC is closing down the L train next year for a year at the very least. So far, the city has proposed more water taxis as the primary solution to handle rerouting the 300k daily riders. Right now, the water taxi ridership is 1370 people per day. Secondarily, the city has indicated it might make some of the bridges carpool or ride-share only. Either way, all signs point to the shutdown heading towards a painful if not…

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…

I don't disagree with you but the reason for this shutdown is a much-needed reconstruction of the tunnel under the East River (it was damaged during Hurricane Sandy) along with station upgrades at all the Manhattan stops. This is investment in the city's rail infrastructure. Sure, it will suck for 2019-2020 but come 2025 New Yorkers will be glad it happened.

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

#54

Post by dahdum » Wed, Aug 08, 2018, 9:25 PM UTC

dionidium wrote: post #18

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.…

This is the most common objection, but it's not a very strong one, for at least two reasons: 1. There's no reason we couldn't provide exceptions for the kinds of vans and trucks that blue-collar workers need to drive into the city to make their livings. 2. There's no reason we couldn't offer income-based exceptions to people who absolutely cannot ride transit for this or that reason. As in all proposals to ration som…

I'd argue it's still a strong objection, your solutions require a lot more bureaucracy and would still be filled with loopholes.

A couple quick ones:

1. Registering the car in your grandparents name, who have no income, to avoid tolls. Or perhaps your stay at home spouse (assuming you file separately).

2. Make your next vehicle a light truck or van to avoid potentially hundreds in monthly congestion tolls. Luxury trucks are very much a thing.

I agree your plan would technically work, but it would be filled with exceptions, loopholes, and political handouts. That is rather fitting for NYC though.

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

#55

Post by kevin_thibedeau » Wed, Aug 08, 2018, 9:26 PM UTC

uptown wrote: post #10

pavel_lishin wrote: post #2

I wonder what percentage of cars on the streets of Manhattan are Uber/Lyft, vs. taxi cabs, vs. private vehicles vs. other commercial ones. Claiming to limit Uber license to alleviate congestion is a bullshit argument unless you can show that they make up a significant percentage of traffic. Also, to be clear, I'm not an Uber apologist; they can go fuck themselves as quickly as they move and break things.

This article from January 2017 has some statistics: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/15/nyregion/yellow-cab-long-... https://ny.curbed.com/2017/1/17/14296892/yellow-taxi-nyc-ube... "...there are 13,587 yellow cabs on New York City streets. The total number of black cars: 60,000, more than 46,000 of which are connected with Uber, though they may be hooked up to other services as well." "To the credit of taxis, that’s s…

That data is old. There are now over 100k black cars. The growth is going exponential which is why this is a problem that needs to be addressed soon.

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

#56

Post by weeksie » Wed, Aug 08, 2018, 9:26 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…

Unfortch Bloomberg tried congestion pricing and it got strangled in the cot. That would be my preference too. Simple, market-based, fair, etc. . . .

With the ranks of uber cars in the city growing as much as they have the downtown traffic has become insane and I'm for anything that would relieve that congestion. I've been living along the Prince/Spring corridor for ~10 years now and the change in bumper-to-bumper traffic, particularly on summer Fridays is outrageous.

However it's sliced, though there's a problem with the city being full of too many idling/circling cars. ~10 yellow cabs at 330k rides per day vs Uber's 60k cars at ~200k rides per day, as per the article. That means Yellow cabs are actually driving people somewhere most of the time they are on the road whereas Uber drivers are spending a lot of time idling and/or driving to or from a pickup/dropoff.

All of that said I've been looking everywhere for good supportable numbers on how Uber has been affecting Manhattan traffic and it has been impossible to get anything other than the total number of Ubers on the road which isn't very helpful.

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

#57

Post by romwell » Wed, Aug 08, 2018, 9:27 PM UTC

sbuttgereit wrote: post #35

Is this title really fair? "The City Council approved a package of bills that will halt new licenses for Uber and other ride-hail vehicles for a year while the city studies the booming industry." While yes, this does impact Uber, it also impacts Lyft, etc.

Other comments in the thread quote numbers indicating that Uber has 8X ridership of Lyft. I'd say the title is fair.

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

#58

Post by drawersheet » Wed, Aug 08, 2018, 9:28 PM UTC

You know, it would be one thing if this ruling was motivated by serious labor concerns but it really has to do with a bunch of crybabies that bought medallions as financial instrument and are upset that customers are choosing a service that's cheaper, better, and more hip.

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

#59

Post by TuringNYC » Wed, Aug 08, 2018, 9:29 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…

What if the problem is that you are mayor and got lots of campaign funding from the taxi lobby and now they want their pound of flesh?

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/don-big-bill-article-1.14... FROM ARTICLE "A review of all contributions to de Blasio raised by or made by taxi lawyers, owners and other associates in the 2013 campaign tallies $254,451, making them de Blasio’s biggest backers by far. Fleet owner Ron Sherman is the most powerful taxi leader, just as his father Donald was in the 1980s before he was convicted in a federal felony case, and he orchestrated the de Blasio deluge of support."

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

#60

Post by dsfyu404ed » Wed, Aug 08, 2018, 9:30 PM UTC

tribune wrote: post #53

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…

I don't disagree with you but the reason for this shutdown is a much-needed reconstruction of the tunnel under the East River (it was damaged during Hurricane Sandy) along with station upgrades at all the Manhattan stops. This is investment in the city's rail infrastructure. Sure, it will suck for 2019-2020 but come 2025 New Yorkers will be glad it happened.

That's what they said about the big dig. Now that it's all said and done it's still the go to example of a boondoggle public works project that turned into a money fountain for anyone who knew a guy who knew a guy who knew a guy in government. (In the project's defense, it did increase throughput and alleviate some traffic problems on surface streets which was the goal.) The north/south station rail connector that was supposed to be thrown in never even happened which the city has been kicking itself over for years.

Don't count your chickens before they hatch. Of course when they do hatch you'll wish you had twice as many eggs to start with. Boston sure wishes it has the inner belt along with all the various rail projects it's forgone over the years.