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

New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 141 posts

Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles

#71

Post by dunpeal »

Waterluvian wrote: post #52
dunpeal wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had so many similar issues with NYC cabbies. Off the top of my head: 1. Cabbie turning off his meter right before my stop, then quoting me a price that was x3 times the meter when I last caught glimpse of it. 2. Cabbies flat out refusing to accept credit cards. Forcing me to withdraw cash on an ATM to pay them. 3. Cabbies rudely demanding tip after being rude and inconsiderate the whole ride. There's a reason why U…

Cab driving is a low skill job, which is why it's so important that proper competition can exist. My first ever Uber driver had water bottles and gum and even throw pillows and a blanket in the back. He was in a suit. He was really polite and all that. Because he's looking for 5 star rankings. Dump all taxi drivers into the same market as this guy and they'll have to improve or be pushed out of business when they get…

Yeah, I think discussions like this one tend to focus on price, which is certainly one of the benefits Uber and Lyft bring to the table, but certainly not the only one.

I typically travel for business, so I don't care about the price so much. Uber/Lyft are great because they provide a much better experience.

I hate cabs because of all the friction: rude drivers imposing their personal preferences upon me, often illegally.

The biggest improvement Uber introduced is accountability for drivers. Efficiency improved too, and reduced the price. But if you look at the comments here and in TFA, a lot of them are about service quality. Most of the worst offenses, like refusing to accept credit cards, are illegal. But the city has done a terrible job of enforcing it, so cab service has been terrible for decades.

Then came Uber and Lyft and finally brought service that people love. So the city tries to take them down. Just like SF is harassing successful companies with bizarre new rules and regulations, such as banning cafeterias.

Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles

#72

Post by ng12 »

Daishiman wrote: post #15

I'm sorry but everyone here is completely ignoring the congestion arguments, which like it or not, are actually very valid, just as much as the race to the bottom and long-term unsustainably low prices. I dislike yellow cabs as much as the next guy but street space is definitely a limited resource and not being regulated in a healthy manner.

> I'm sorry but everyone here is completely ignoring the congestion arguments

What is the congestion argument? How about all these people that make SoHo a living nightmare trying to get through the Holland Tunnel at 5pm? I don't think any of those are Ubers.

Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles

#73

Post by CPLX »

rconti wrote: post #63
CPLX wrote: post #21

Why is everyone treating this news like it's all or nothing ("oh noes they want us to go back to medallion cabs!") rather than assessing it at face value. The number of TLC cars has skyrocketed recently. Which, in many important ways, is a good thing. But this is a crowded city, literally everything that is at risk of runaway growth in this city is regulated, and for good reason, all the way down to hot dog carts. Th…

Because this is literally exactly why Uber came to be. It wasn't because people didn't like the color of the medallion taxis. It was because the death by a thousand cuts of incremental regulation left such a gaping hole between the crappy service being provided and the end users' needs that people were open to the idea of using a completely unregulated, clearly illegal service instead.

Not really. This isn't San Francisco or Miami. We don't have unregulated cars here and Uber hasn't changed that at all.

We've had TLC cars for decades, aka black cars, car service cars, livery cars, etc. Taxis were never the only game in town, livery cars have been an integral part of the city's transportation network for a lot longer than Uber. I have pretty clear memories of the line outside Northside in Williamsburg every weekend night 15 years ago when I lived there.

What happened was we all got little GPS enabled devices in our pocket so instead of having to call or wait at a storefront car service spot we could arrange it all in seconds. Way better, to be sure. But in NYC Uber hasn't really changed the legal framework like it's tried to do elsewhere, it's mostly just a better way to hail and track them. And the pool thing changes the dynamics somewhat as well.

Which is great and all. But we don't have an unregulated illegal car service thing here, or to the extent we do it's unrelated to Uber. New York's TLC has regulated for-hire cars for a long long time and still do.

Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles

#76

Post by InitialLastName »

bluedevil2k wrote: post #12
CoolGuySteve wrote: post #5

Before becoming mayor, de Blasio lived here in Park Slope. I guess he never used these yellow cabs he’s so interested in preserving because getting one to go to Brooklyn from Manhattan is fucking impossible. Seriously, everything about yellow cab service is worse. Why don’t they buy back the medallions instead?

Why should the city buy them back? They sold the assets, they have no obligation to re-purchase them. Investment risk is in the hands of those people (usually companies) who purchase them. Besides, at what price would they even buy them back at? They're certainly not worth the price that some people pay for them (last I checked, about $1M each).

They sold the medallions based on a guarantee that they would enforce a monopoly around those medallions. Then they didn't enforce that monopoly. Sounds like the city is in the wrong.

Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles

#77

Post by InitialLastName »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #56
Retric wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those 2.7m cars don't spend 10+ hours driving each day. So, those 100k for higher vehicles make up a large fraction of total vehicles on the streets. Further, congestion charges would need to be per hour on the road not just in the city to adjust for this issue.

> Those 2.7m cars don't spend 10+ hours driving each day No, they spend 10+ hours parked on two sides of my narrow street.

So they should charge more (read: any price > $0) for parking.

It baffles me how much of the most expensive real estate on earth is dedicated to free car storage.

Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles

#78

Post by TuringNYC »

closeparen wrote: post #74

Number of drivers is a nonsensical metric; there are huge variations in activity between drivers and over time. Trips is better, but it should really be something like hours or miles.

True. Also, with the Uber economy, numerous drivers are not full time drivers, they are fractional time only. Also, in some cases, more drivers are good -- ever try to catch a yellow cab at 2am? What are the chances one will happen to pass by?...but with Uber I can find one at almost any time of night. I spoke to some Uber drivers who only drive at night. Before, it wasnt worth it because the thin supply couldnt meet the thin demand over a vast region. Beaconing solved the problem.

Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles

#79

Post by JumpCrisscross »

InitialLastName wrote: post #77
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Those 2.7m cars don't spend 10+ hours driving each day No, they spend 10+ hours parked on two sides of my narrow street.

So they should charge more (read: any price > $0) for parking. It baffles me how much of the most expensive real estate on earth is dedicated to free car storage.

> they should charge more (read: any price > $0) for parking

People who park their cars go to town halls. They turn out to vote. They call their representatives.

I called my City Councilman, who is also the Speaker proposing this bill, and was apparently the first person to call in opposition. Everyone else focussed on how Uber is a den of sexual harassment and it's about time we did something about them. If that is the balance, this bill is good politics. Even if it's counterproductive.

Re: New York Could Become First Major U.S. City to Cap Uber and Similar Vehicles

#80

Post by j88439h84 »

JTbane wrote: post #9
CoolGuySteve wrote: post #5

Before becoming mayor, de Blasio lived here in Park Slope. I guess he never used these yellow cabs he’s so interested in preserving because getting one to go to Brooklyn from Manhattan is fucking impossible. Seriously, everything about yellow cab service is worse. Why don’t they buy back the medallions instead?

The city would never buy the medallions back, because the price was based on an assumption of monopoly- they are worth much less now with the ubiquity of Uber and Lyft. The cabbies have gotten the short end of the stick though.

The cabbies or the cab companies?
Post reply on HN