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

UberCab to disrupt the Taxi/Limo business

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 109 posts

Re: UberCab to disrupt the Taxi/Limo business

#81

Post by yummyfajitas »

jfager wrote: post #72
yummyfajitas wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, my proposal is to reduce the wages of current cabbies, increase the wages of future cabbies (the people currently making $25k/year, or perhaps who are unemployed, who would take jobs as cabbies at $35k/year) and lower the cost of taxis to consumers. As for the number of vehicles, that's an issue not primarily caused by cabbies. A congestion charge (levied on cabbies and drivers alike) and eliminating free parkin…

Yes, my proposal is to reduce the wages of current cabbies, increase the wages of future cabbies (the people currently making $25k/year, or perhaps who are unemployed, who would take jobs as cabbies at $35k/year) and lower the cost of taxis to consumers. Which in NYC, with its existing low cost subway and bus alternatives, basically translates to "helping rich people by eliminating the lower-middle-class jobs their f…

You previously criticized me for wanting to "increas[e...] the number of vehicles". Now you are criticizing me for wanting to "eliminat[e...] lower-middle-class jobs". How can a proposed policy simultaneously increase the number of taxis and decrease the number of jobs? Will the new taxis drive themselves?

As for doing the math, scroll up. I gave you numbers, and showed that even making fairly generous assumptions, there is a LOT of rent being extracted from the current system.

Perhaps because the current medallion system restricts the number of operating cabs?...London, where cab drivers are probably the best paid, most skilled, and most stringently regulated in the world?

Fun fact: there are about 250 million cars in the US, and about 250 thousand taxis. But I'm sure all congestion problems are caused by the taxis - thank god for limited numbers of medallions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_vehicles_in_the_Unite... http://www.schallerconsult.com/taxi/taxidriverreport.htm

Re: UberCab to disrupt the Taxi/Limo business

#82

Post by maukdaddy »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #67
jfager wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, just so I follow, your proposal is to impoverish cabbies and drive the skill level of the average driver down as low as it can go while increasing the number of vehicles on the streets in a city where it already takes an hour to go a mile? May that you never be in charge of taxi service.

Yes, my proposal is to reduce the wages of current cabbies, increase the wages of future cabbies (the people currently making $25k/year, or perhaps who are unemployed, who would take jobs as cabbies at $35k/year) and lower the cost of taxis to consumers. As for the number of vehicles, that's an issue not primarily caused by cabbies. A congestion charge (levied on cabbies and drivers alike) and eliminating free parkin…

Um, sorry, but I want my taxi driving making a living wage. Why? Because [s]he has more to lose by fucking me over. If he is on the edge of poverty, making only 35k/year, he is MUCH more likely to screw me over with shady tactics because he needs to feed his family.

Re: UberCab to disrupt the Taxi/Limo business

#83

Post by maukdaddy »

tptacek wrote: post #53
jfager wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You missed the part where the cabbie gets together with his friends to pad his stats and/or only screws 1 in 10 fares, and the part where people aren't going to perceive the same social incentive to review a cab as, say, a trendy restaurant.

People will absolutely provide negative reviews when they get screwed by a cab; they'll be sputtering and looking for anything they can do to equalize the situation. But that doesn't matter, because this is the eBay problem; a reputation adequate to do business in the system is too cheap to establish from scratch to make losing one a major deterrent.

I don't think the average, I'm from east bumfuck, tourist will provide a negative review after being screwed by the cab. They aren't going to know! Yet they are precisely the ones protected most by the [broken] medallion system.

Re: UberCab to disrupt the Taxi/Limo business

#84

Post by jfager »

tptacek wrote: post #74
jfager wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose I don't understand how reducing congestion can be seen as a "side-effect" of the medallion system. That's one of the explicit reasons it exists: to cap the supply of cabs on the streets.

The problem isn't the number of cabs on the street; it's the number of cars on the street. So charge a congestion tax. Even if there are 10,000,000 cabs, if the congestion tax is set appropriately, they won't all be clogging the streets, since they won't be able to make a buck doing it.

You don't have to solve a problem in one fell swoop with one technique. Medallions aren't the only way to reduce congestion, and they aren't a complete solution, but they certainly do at least partly address the issue as an explicit goal, not a side-effect.

I would welcome a separate congestion tax levied on certain other kinds of traffic to complete the solution. You want cabs in the city, and you want them running all the time - they're doing the useful work of moving people around, and should certainly be preferred to traffic that congests the city during rush hour just to cram into a parking lot for eight hours.

Even if there are 10,000,000 cabs, if the congestion tax is set appropriately, they won't all be clogging the streets, since they won't be able to make a buck doing it.

I'm deeply suspicious of this kind of reasoning when it's unaccompanied by an explanation of how the tragedy of the commons would be avoided. You're a cab driver with rent and your kid's tuition to pay, are you the one staying home today?

Re: UberCab to disrupt the Taxi/Limo business

#85

Post by yummyfajitas »

maukdaddy wrote: post #82
yummyfajitas wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, my proposal is to reduce the wages of current cabbies, increase the wages of future cabbies (the people currently making $25k/year, or perhaps who are unemployed, who would take jobs as cabbies at $35k/year) and lower the cost of taxis to consumers. As for the number of vehicles, that's an issue not primarily caused by cabbies. A congestion charge (levied on cabbies and drivers alike) and eliminating free parkin…

Um, sorry, but I want my taxi driving making a living wage. Why? Because [s]he has more to lose by fucking me over. If he is on the edge of poverty, making only 35k/year, he is MUCH more likely to screw me over with shady tactics because he needs to feed his family.

Even after cutting the medallion fee in half, NYC would have $9000/cab to devote to policing taxis. Assuming the 4x yearly safety inspection costs $1000/inspection (at a rate of, say, $333/hour for the mechanic), that leaves $5000/year/taxi for police work.

So for every 15 cabs, the city could spend $75,000 on a dedicated undercover taxi inspector. Lets say this undercover inspector works 250 days/year, and rides 3x/day. Thus, every taxi is subjected to an undercover inspection every single day (on average, assuing 250 working days/year). Assuming an average fare of $12 and taking revenues of $90,000/year (see my previous link), a taxi driver has 30 fares/day, one of which is an undercover inspector.

Each time he uses shady tactics, his odds of being caught are 1/30. 50% of cheating cabbies will be caught before they manage to cheat even 20 customers.

Also, if you don't feel that $35k/year (higher household earnings than 37% of the US) is a living wage, then what is?

Re: UberCab to disrupt the Taxi/Limo business

#86

Post by yummyfajitas »

jfager wrote: post #84
tptacek wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn't the number of cabs on the street; it's the number of cars on the street. So charge a congestion tax. Even if there are 10,000,000 cabs, if the congestion tax is set appropriately, they won't all be clogging the streets, since they won't be able to make a buck doing it.

You don't have to solve a problem in one fell swoop with one technique. Medallions aren't the only way to reduce congestion, and they aren't a complete solution, but they certainly do at least partly address the issue as an explicit goal, not a side-effect. I would welcome a separate congestion tax levied on certain other kinds of traffic to complete the solution. You want cabs in the city, and you want them running…

You're a cab driver with rent and your kid's tuition to pay, are you the one staying home today?

If congestion charge + other expenses > expected revenues, yes. Actually, things should equilibrate roughly at expected revenues - congestion charge - other expenses = average low skill wage.

The real trick is to set the congestion charge somewhat higher for taxis than for regular vehicles, since taxis spend more time on the road. The proper ratio would be (taxi charge/regular charge) = (taxi time on road / regular time on road), presumably this could be estimated using sat photos.

Re: UberCab to disrupt the Taxi/Limo business

#87

Post by jfager »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #81
jfager wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, my proposal is to reduce the wages of current cabbies, increase the wages of future cabbies (the people currently making $25k/year, or perhaps who are unemployed, who would take jobs as cabbies at $35k/year) and lower the cost of taxis to consumers. Which in NYC, with its existing low cost subway and bus alternatives, basically translates to "helping rich people by eliminating the lower-middle-class jobs their f…

You previously criticized me for wanting to "increas[e...] the number of vehicles". Now you are criticizing me for wanting to "eliminat[e...] lower-middle-class jobs". How can a proposed policy simultaneously increase the number of taxis and decrease the number of jobs? Will the new taxis drive themselves? As for doing the math, scroll up. I gave you numbers, and showed that even making fairly generous assumptions, t…

I specifically said "lower-middle-class jobs", and you're pretending I just said "jobs". Of course I meant that you were replacing fewer higher paying jobs with more lower paying ones.

I see nothing in your previous numbers showing how you do or don't keep the benefit to the consumer after throwing in a congestion tax, which is what I said we needed to do the math for.

Fun fact: there are about 250 million cars in the US, and about 250 thousand taxis. But I'm sure all congestion problems are caused by the taxis - thank god for limited numbers of medallions.

How many of those 250m cars are in NYC, and how many of those 250k taxis are? And at what point did I suggest that all congestion problems were caused by taxis? I even explicitly said I would support a congestion tax for other kinds of traffic as an orthogonal solution.

Re: UberCab to disrupt the Taxi/Limo business

#88

Post by jfager »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #85
maukdaddy wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Um, sorry, but I want my taxi driving making a living wage. Why? Because [s]he has more to lose by fucking me over. If he is on the edge of poverty, making only 35k/year, he is MUCH more likely to screw me over with shady tactics because he needs to feed his family.

Even after cutting the medallion fee in half, NYC would have $9000/cab to devote to policing taxis. Assuming the 4x yearly safety inspection costs $1000/inspection (at a rate of, say, $333/hour for the mechanic), that leaves $5000/year/taxi for police work. So for every 15 cabs, the city could spend $75,000 on a dedicated undercover taxi inspector. Lets say this undercover inspector works 250 days/year, and rides 3x/…

Also, if you don't feel that $35k/year (higher household earnings than 37% of the US) is a living wage, then what is?

Come on, 35k in NYC is barely a living wage and you know it.

Re: UberCab to disrupt the Taxi/Limo business

#89

Post by [deleted] »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #86
jfager wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't have to solve a problem in one fell swoop with one technique. Medallions aren't the only way to reduce congestion, and they aren't a complete solution, but they certainly do at least partly address the issue as an explicit goal, not a side-effect. I would welcome a separate congestion tax levied on certain other kinds of traffic to complete the solution. You want cabs in the city, and you want them running…

You're a cab driver with rent and your kid's tuition to pay, are you the one staying home today? If congestion charge + other expenses > expected revenues, yes. Actually, things should equilibrate roughly at expected revenues - congestion charge - other expenses = average low skill wage. The real trick is to set the congestion charge somewhat higher for taxis than for regular vehicles, since taxis spend more time on…

[deleted]

Re: UberCab to disrupt the Taxi/Limo business

#90

Post by yummyfajitas »

jfager wrote: post #87
yummyfajitas wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You previously criticized me for wanting to "increas[e...] the number of vehicles". Now you are criticizing me for wanting to "eliminat[e...] lower-middle-class jobs". How can a proposed policy simultaneously increase the number of taxis and decrease the number of jobs? Will the new taxis drive themselves? As for doing the math, scroll up. I gave you numbers, and showed that even making fairly generous assumptions, t…

I specifically said "lower-middle-class jobs", and you're pretending I just said "jobs". Of course I meant that you were replacing fewer higher paying jobs with more lower paying ones. I see nothing in your previous numbers showing how you do or don't keep the benefit to the consumer after throwing in a congestion tax, which is what I said we needed to do the math for. Fun fact: there are about 250 million cars in th…

There are about 13,000 yellow cabs in all of NYC. The GWB and Lincoln tunnels have traffic of 320,000 and 120,000 vehicles (respectively). I'm too lazy to look up the number of people driving from non-NJ locales.

Also, I didn't realize that the 37'th percentile of income (36'th percentile in NY [1]) did not count as lower middle class (or just plain middle class). My mistake.

If the congestion tax costs less than $24,000/year/cab, consumers still pay less for a taxi.

[1] http://www.city-data.com/income/income-New-York-New-York.htm...

Post reply on HN