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

First analysis of how Uber and Lyft have affected roadway congestion in SF

sfcta.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 105 posts

Re: First analysis of how Uber and Lyft have affected roadway congestion in SF

#61

Post by bovine3dom »

dirkgently wrote: post #23
Hansenq wrote: post #5

The issue with conclusions of reports like these is that yes, Uber/Lyft contributed to a congestion increase, but what would that increase have looked like without Uber/Lyft? How much would congestion have increased by without Uber/Lyft (due to the strong economy, jobs, etc)? Would people instead have purchased cars and driven them around instead? Would we actually have had higher congestion? Publishing reports like…

Typical HN reaction - smug intelligent-sounding question to doubt the validity of a hypothesis backed by data and detailed analysis, by completely ignoring the details in a given linked article. Your question is answered on page 15 (How Do We Determine the Causes of Changes in Congestion?) of the report you are happy to debunk so eagerly. Link (PDF): https://www.sfcta.org/sites/default/files/content/Planning/T...

It's hardly rocket science - the cost of driving/being driven has gone down, so usage has gone up.

I think real issue here is that road usage is mispriced. Singapore does it well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Road_Pricing.

A tax on just ride hailing is mad. They are cheaper than owning your own vehicle, in part, due to real efficiencies in terms of maintenance and depreciation. Why on earth would anyone want to incentivise individual car ownership?

Re: First analysis of how Uber and Lyft have affected roadway congestion in SF

#62

Post by user3359 »

product50 wrote: post #56
superfrank wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, it depends on how you look at it. If you are comparing Lyft/Uber to public transit, yeah they lose out by a lot, but I don't think a lot of people are doing that. I think a lot of people are comparing Lyft/Uber against the cost of owning a semi-new car in a major city and that's much more comparable. Here's a super ball park monthly cost breakdown: - Car payment: $250 - Parking: $200 - Insurance: $85 (~$500 every…

No - you are wrong. Dropping off kids has a lot of convenience if you take an Uber. You don't have to worry about parking and can actually spend time with your kid, like read them a story, when you drop off via Ubers vs. yourself. In my estimate, I save at least 15-20min per dropoff when I take Uber vs. when I do with my car. In the morning that 15-20min extra matter a lot.

I don't see how your point makes him wrong. If anything, it seems to reinforce his point.

Re: First analysis of how Uber and Lyft have affected roadway congestion in SF

#63

Post by user3359 »

dgoldstein0 wrote: post #45
superfrank wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, it depends on how you look at it. If you are comparing Lyft/Uber to public transit, yeah they lose out by a lot, but I don't think a lot of people are doing that. I think a lot of people are comparing Lyft/Uber against the cost of owning a semi-new car in a major city and that's much more comparable. Here's a super ball park monthly cost breakdown: - Car payment: $250 - Parking: $200 - Insurance: $85 (~$500 every…

Your parking number seems low. May depend on where in the city you are parking. But driving to work means parking in two places regularly which could be more like 500/month. Depends where you live and where you work.

Also, insurance. $200/month is a normal rate where I live (with a clean driving record).

Re: First analysis of how Uber and Lyft have affected roadway congestion in SF

#64

Post by nasalgoat »

product50 wrote: post #54
newnewpdro wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ever heard the phrase "has more money than sense"?

Do you have kids? Do you know how expensive it is to raise them? The preschool costs around $3k/mo at least. Compared to that $300/mo is pretty minor and the convenience it offers is totally worth it.

Pretty sure most people aren't spending $3,000/month on private school. My kid goes to public Kindergarten which is free.

Even in Toronto, which has some of the highest daycare costs in Canada, it was only $1,500/month. Aftercare at the school is $800/month. I'm very fortunate to make a good living so I can afford such things but even I balk at the idea of taking a daily Uber to drop my kid off.

You should really read your post from the perspective of the working poor and think about what you're saying from a position of privilege.

Re: First analysis of how Uber and Lyft have affected roadway congestion in SF

#65

Post by Retric »

dahdum wrote: post #36
almost_usual wrote: post #30

A MUNI bus ride is 1/10 the cost of an Uber or Lyft and people would rather spend the extra money to not deal with the SF public. Ride share to work, your favorite restaurant, bar, and then home. It’s like living in the suburbs in the city. I wonder how many people who can’t afford a vehicle but don’t want to deal with public transit would leave SF if ride sharing was banned outright.

TNCs creating congestion makes sense to me for the same reason, so many of my trips simply wouldn’t happen if I had to take public transport.

Worse they add an extra leg to all trips, not just more trips. At best it’s last drop off location > pickup location > drop off location. On top of that many drivers will go to a fourth location to wait for their next passenger.

Re: First analysis of how Uber and Lyft have affected roadway congestion in SF

#66

Post by [deleted] »

product50 wrote: post #54
newnewpdro wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ever heard the phrase "has more money than sense"?

Do you have kids? Do you know how expensive it is to raise them? The preschool costs around $3k/mo at least. Compared to that $300/mo is pretty minor and the convenience it offers is totally worth it.

[deleted]

Re: First analysis of how Uber and Lyft have affected roadway congestion in SF

#68

Post by jaclaz »

dgoldstein0 wrote: post #43
liotier wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We have to pick up and drop off our daughter at her day care on a daily basis and without Uber I'm amazed that Uber is considered an affordable commute device. Is that a SV phenomenon ?

In SF, Uber pool rides are cheap ($20 can usually get you anywhere in the City, and shorter distances at off peak times are often under 10). Compared with just cost of parking which is easily 300+ a month at many apartment buildings and only a piece of the cost of car ownership, commuting via Uber/Lyft actually makes economic sense.

If the average is actually $20, two rides a day (working day) are $800 i.e. more of the $700 calculated above.

If both rides are around $15 on average, than you get an afvantage.

Re: First analysis of how Uber and Lyft have affected roadway congestion in SF

#69

Post by oblio »

godzillabrennus wrote: post #58
httpz wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure how credible this is but someone who work at one of the ride sharing company told me most of the cash burn happens in new markets for rapid growth and established markets like SF are profitable.

I’ve heard the same. Though reaching “profitability” is not really a focus for them until automated vehicles are ready to replace the humans on the road.

The question that nobody at these companies wants to answer publicly: what if fully automated vehicles are still decades away?

Re: First analysis of how Uber and Lyft have affected roadway congestion in SF

#70

Post by dsfyu404ed »

liotier wrote: post #18
product50 wrote: post #15

Uber is really a heaven sent product for me and my family. We have to pick up and drop off our daughter at her day care on a daily basis and without Uber, I am not sure how would we have done it. I hope we can expand studies like this with the quality of life improvement which services like Uber have been responsible. Also, there are other things which have improved too. Such as less drunk driving, improved safety es…

> We have to pick up and drop off our daughter at her day care on a daily basis and without Uber I'm amazed that Uber is considered an affordable commute device. Is that a SV phenomenon ?

>I'm amazed that Uber is considered an affordable commute device. Is that a SV phenomenon ?

Just the cost of registering a car in CA buys you a lot of Uber rides. Then there's parking and maintenance (the HN demographic is taking their cars to the dealer, not down the street to the neighbor who fixes cars as a side gig) and the fact most people rich enough to afford to use Uber every day are comparing to the payments on a Tesla, not a one time purchase of an old Civic.

It's an upper-class phenomenon that's exacerbated by some SV and CA specific economic circumstances.

Post reply on HN