SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Uber, Lyft worsen city traffic, studies show: report
Despite promises of reducing traffic congestion, ride-hailing companies like Uber and Lyft are doing the opposite as their apps pluck passengers off public transportation and put pedestrians in cars, the Associated Press reported.
According to an AP review of research, studies show the ride-hailing apps are directly competing with mass transit and the increased number of taxis and Uber and Lyft cars on the road contribute to slower traffic. A New York-based study cited "vacant vehicles occupied only by drivers waiting for their next trip request," as a contributing factor for high-volume traffic in Manhattan's central business district, the AP reported.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Studies Show That Ride-Hailing Companies Increase Traffic Congestion
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 62 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Cum tacent, clamant. When they are silent, they shout. -Cicero
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bob_super on Tuesday February 27 2018, @08:40PM (22 children)
In many countries, cabs are restricted to getting customers in specific spots, to prevent the traffic problems caused by cabs slowly looking for customers, then swerving across three lanes and doing U-turns to be the first there.
It might be wise to enforce this with Lyft/Uber types, especially given their use of cell phones while driving to find the customer.
The other easy solution is to do like London and add a congestion charge. Change the math for many casual Lyft drivers.
The third solution is to work to democratize the acceptance of motorcycles as cabs/Lyft. They exist in many congested places, offering guaranteed travel times despite congestion, and not contributing to it.
Public transport? In the US? Let's not be too silly. That's for the poor.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 27 2018, @08:45PM (5 children)
I doubt that either the drivers or the drivees would go for that. People would just fall off and die. Or they would be more likely to die in any crash.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 27 2018, @08:50PM
What, you think they should put their cell phone away and hold on with both hands?!
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday February 27 2018, @11:10PM (3 children)
I can see the future and it's bright: selfdriving tuktuks.
(grin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Funny) by bob_super on Wednesday February 28 2018, @01:37AM (2 children)
I can see the future and it's bright: rent-a-horse.
With proper GPS-driven automated blinders and reins, a horse will safely get you anywhere, lane-splitting faster than Manhattan or 405 traffic.
Collision-avoidance lane-keeping auto-braking neural network has long been thoroughly debugged, and tips are cheap.
(Score: 3, Funny) by c0lo on Wednesday February 28 2018, @01:57AM
Interesting, but the maintenance is high - PETA and their ilk will impose skyrocketing costs.
Improvement suggestion: use humans for propulsion - aka rickshaws - especially in at-will employment states (are there any other, still anachronistic, ones?). Will be a bit slower, but you can pay them peanuts and no organization can legally object (we'll take care of it, one-off cost, by lobbying and electoral campaign contributions).
That's how we'll get efficient allocation of resources and create jobs and, in the same time, stay green and progressive!!
(grin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday February 28 2018, @02:19PM
NYC did use horses back in the day, but then they had to employ about 10,000 street sweepers to try and keep the city from getting buried in the tons of manure that produced.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Thexalon on Tuesday February 27 2018, @09:01PM (8 children)
Where I am, the public perception isn't that it's for poor people as much as it is for black people. As in, the people expressing that viewpoint don't say it that way in public, they instead say "We don't want a bus line to this area because it will bring crime and drugs." But what they mean is "because black people will use it", and they make that abundantly clear to fellow honkeys like me when they don't think any black people are around. And that's also why they don't want to pay for public transit systems.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday February 28 2018, @03:38AM (5 children)
We get that out here even in Milwaukee, though it seems a little late for that, so instead the wypipo just bitch about what's already there. I'm from NYC originally and was very nearly born on the #7 subway, and am just white enough to sometimes be mistaken for Latina in low light, so these people just make me roll my eyes.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 28 2018, @05:59AM (4 children)
A Queens girl, huh? Nope, my mother never warned me about you. Then again, I'm the youngest of a bunch of kids (all boys) so by the time I was around she likely just assumed we raise ourselves.
But I've had my own experiences and my mileage has varied. :)
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday February 28 2018, @09:47PM (3 children)
Not just Queens. Harlem, the Bronx, a few other unsavory places...I moved a lot. Suffice it to say I was not from the good parts of any of these places.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 01 2018, @12:29AM (2 children)
I'm not sure why that makes you someone to be "warned" about. Are you dishonest? Otherwise untrustworthy?
It's not really my business, but I'm nosy. :)
I do understand that many people (especially men) are intimidated by strong/outspoken women, but that's more a reflection on those people than the strong/outspoken women, IMHO.
I've lived in every borough except Stagnant Island myself, and have lived in some pretty unsavory places, especially in the 80s -- I could tell you some stories!
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday March 01 2018, @03:25AM (1 child)
Oh gods, Staten Island...that's the place people from the Jersey Shore make fun of. I have a few relatives out there and with one exception they are, well, they deserve to live in Staten Island.
The warning thing is mostly an ironic jab at the very people you're talking about, though :) In particular, we have a few people (well,"people...") on here who seem to think any woman who isn't a compliant slab of meat with a wet hole and a compulsion for sandwich-making is...what did Uzzard say again...oh, yes, "blue-haired intersectional feminist" (as if that's a bad thing! blue hair is hot!). Odd how the big tough manly alpha men are so threatened by women, isn't it?
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 01 2018, @05:07AM
They're not *all* bad. In fact, I almost married a woman from SI many years ago.
I also looked at an apartment in St. George once, even before that. And I never had the urge to do so again. :)
You're referring to attitudes (sadly all too common) where men see others (usually women) as simply objects and not inherently equal humans deserving of agency, respect and equal consideration,
IMNSHO, men with such attitudes are despicable, untrustworthy scum who reflect poorly on men who don't share those attitudes. There are certainly women who fit that description as well, but in far fewer numbers.
What's worse and even more disgusting is that when one challenges those attitudes, it often makes the holders of same quite uncomfortable and they see it as a threat to their masculinity, often with ugly, violent consequences.
That said,
The truth is that many people (both men and women) fit that description. And as long as there is consent, respect on both sides, real caring, affection and a desire by both partners to please each other, coupled with a strong bond of connection and trust, that's not necessarily a bad thing. Blue hair and all! :)
That, of course, is predicated on such a relationship being much more than just a one-way street, where one party is the [ab]user and the other is the [ab]used. All relationships have power dynamics and, if those dynamics are unequal, that doesn't automatically make it an unhealthy or abusive relationship.
Sadly, too many relationships don't include the important (respect, trust, caring and consent) stuff.
As I implied above, I'd argue that being uncomfortable with strong women is a sign of insecurity and a *lack* of self-confidence, not alpha manliness. As such, they are not, as you put it, "tough manly alpha men" at all.
That's why bullies need to "prove" their strength and power, because they are weak, insecure, frightened cowards.
Those who really are tough, strong and self-respecting (man or woman) don't need to "prove" their strength and toughness to anyone. They just are who they are and that's good enough for them.
Robert Redford and Faye Dunaway discuss this briefly in relation to Faye Dunaway's boyfriend [youtube.com] in "Three Days of The Condor."
If you haven't seen that movie, I highly recommend it.
I went on about this a lot longer than I'd intended, but it's something I feel strongly about. I hope I didn't veer too far off-topic.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 28 2018, @04:31AM (1 child)
My town is fairly upscale and wealthy but there is a WalMart on the outskirts. We fought the bus line extension from the next county over as long as we could. They finally threatened to file a Federal lawsuit and we relented and they built a stop at WalMart. Guess what? It DID bring crime. The WalMart went ghetto almost immediately. They cut back on employees. Shelves go empty. Shoplifting jumped. Car break-ins in the parking lot. Beggars/Con-Artists stop you with their 20 minute bullshit sob story asking for money or wanting you to take them to your ATM. And now, I drive ten miles to the next city in the opposite direction on the rare occasion I want to visit WalMart when I could stop on the way home from work, three miles down the road from my house.
It's no mans land.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 28 2018, @06:11AM
Come move to my 'hood. We'll straighten you right out. 20+ years on this block and almost never that stuff. And when there is, we know how to deal with it/them. I bet you lock your car doors at red lights after 4PM too
Oh, and I'm sure that a 2BR apartment on my block costs more than your *house* too [zillow.com]. Upscale my ass.
You've got a yellow streak a foot wide. Grow a pair.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by frojack on Wednesday February 28 2018, @01:35AM (4 children)
You can also call Lyft/Uber to go get your lunch.
You wouldn't dream of going to your car and driving to the restaurant, fight for parking, and then driving back. But for a few bucks you can have some other guy driving around, getting angry enough to shoot somebody. [soylentnews.org]
B,b,b,b,babe You aint seen nothing yet. Wait till driverless cars arrive, and everybody sends them for a sixpack and a pizza, and the putz along obeying to every speed limit, turning every street into a parking lot.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by anubi on Wednesday February 28 2018, @05:28AM (3 children)
Yup... Uber/Lyft does nothing to solve traffic congestion... two trips ( coming and going ) to get YOU where you want to go, but at no time was the car actually parked.
So we move the congestion from the parking lot to the street. Just like you mention.
Wait 'till the self-driving cars become accepted... I'll betcha many people will just send their car on fool's errands instead of paying parking fees. Four dollars will buy a gallon of diesel, which will take an hour or so to burn through in congested city streets - especially if you set it to drive for maximum fuel conservation. That same four dollars would buy maybe 30 minutes in the parking lot.
I will bet even more that every advertiser in town will see a golden opportunity to festoon the car up with all sorts of billboardery just for the opportunity to put themselves out in the public view, while offering jitney services to businesses as an excuse for aimlessly flitting back and forth on the roads - again with the engine controls set for maximum fuel conservation. Its actually in an advertiser's best interest to congest the traffic as much as possible to maximize your advertising exposure. When you have an ad to deliver, who gives a damm if you piss people off? If a business has enough money to do it, pissing people off hasn't stopped advertisers yet. Be as obnoxious and irritating as they can - so they will be remembered.
I already see trucks outfitted with billboards, on the road, just to be seen. Some of the townsfolk around here are already up-in-arms about the proliferation of billboards in our city, and have our city councils pen ordinances forbidding it, but we can't do much about them simply putting the billboard on a big truck and hauling it all over the city. They pay for diesel and a driver instead of paying space rent for the billboard. With new technology, they can eliminate paying a driver. The savings drop straight to the bottom line, making vehicular advertising even more cost effective for those who like the idea of forcing their corporate message onto the public. Nice big truck... slow acceleration .. use the absolute minimum amount of fuel and congest the traffic as much as as one can in order to maximize viewtime for the ad.
Every time one buys something from one of these heavily advertised companies, all they do is use that money to buy yet more advertising.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Nuke on Wednesday February 28 2018, @09:53AM (1 child)
This ^^^
I don't know how anyone could ever have believed that ride-hailing companies would reduce congestion, although the companies would obviously want to spin it that way.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 28 2018, @09:20PM
Exactly. But they may help with the parking problem.
I had a guy tell me driverless cars would solve all these problems. Like so many cars in the lot. He didn't grasp that the driverless cars would have to park somewhere all day.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by TheRaven on Wednesday February 28 2018, @02:11PM
sudo mod me up
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday February 28 2018, @02:24PM
"Public transport? In the US? Let's not be too silly. That's for the poor."
That seems an antediluvian perception to me. NYC, Chicago, the Bay Area, New Orleans have transit that everyone uses, professionals and poor alike.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday February 28 2018, @03:20PM
So for an every increasing proportion of the population, then? And when the 2019/2020 crash hits, which it will, there will be a lot of car loans that can't be sustained.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves