5 ms·

I got to the " Uber’s re-direction of the political will of its base was its total victory over Mayor Bill De Blasio’s hapless and deeply stupid campaign to li

by omonra 11y ago

I got to the " Uber’s re-direction of the political will of its base was its total victory over Mayor Bill De Blasio’s hapless and deeply stupid campaign to limit the company’s growth in New York City—some of the final blows coming from celebrities (and even some business journalists!) tweeting messages written by Uber on its behalf. Would it be crazy to wonder what would happen if those same people mounted a similarly forceful campaign to get Governor Cuomo to clean out and fully fund the MTA to, say, make the L train less terrible?" Did the writer think for 5 seconds about this? Is the political will (or rather actual monies required) to spend 15 billion [1] on the MTA shortfall the same as not prohibiting a company from operating a tax service? [1] http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/23/us-usa-newyork-mta-idUSKCN0HI29720140923 http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/23/us-usa-newyork-mta...

orblivion 11y ago
Well, just to throw in this consideration, how much is Uber going to cost the MTA?
- icebraining 11y ago
  Aren't tickets subsidized? At least around here, every time the workers strike the company's balance sheet gets a boost.
  - fredkbloggs 11y ago
    Farebox recovery is somewhere in the 30% range, maybe a little less. That means somewhere between 2/3 and 3/4 of the cost of operating Muni is a direct subsidy from the taxpayers, or that in order to eliminate the subsidy, tickets would have to cost about $8 (without loss of ridership). Most of that cost is due to the extremely labor-friendly CBA that's in place, but equipment maintenance and the negative effects of past deferred maintenance are significant contributors as well. It's likely that NYC's MTA is similar.
bradleyjg 11y ago
It would be far, far more useful for the current group of politicians to fix the conditions that cause the MTA to be the single least efficient entity on the planet when it comes to rail construction[1], than it would be for them to rustle up another 15 billion dollars for today's project de jure. [1] https://pedestrianobservations.wordpress.com/2011/05/16/us-rail-construction-costs/ https://pedestrianobservations.wordpress.com/2011/05/16/us-r...
6d0debc071 11y ago
>Is the political will (or rather actual monies required) to spend 15 billion [1] on the MTA shortfall the same as not prohibiting a company from operating a tax service? It's not required that the two costs be identical for the writer's question to make sense. It's known that the Uber investment >||= the necessary criteria, but it's not known by how much. Maybe it was just about enough, or maybe it exceeded it by miles.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- omonra 11y ago
  The supposition that Uber spent 15bio to lobby NYC to let it operate in the city is nonsensical. Nevermind the alternative that it's not Uber's business to spend money on fixing the L train.
  - 6d0debc071 11y ago
    > The supposition that Uber spent 15bio to lobby NYC to let it operate in the city is nonsensical. The question was what the effect of directing that sort of campaign towards urging improvements to the rail infrastructure would be, not what the cost of the rail infrastructure would be. They're related because the more expensive something is the less progress you're likely to make on it if you choose to approach it without looking at things like efficiency and labour improvements, but they're a long way away from being anywhere near the same thing.
    - omonra 11y ago
      Yes - and the answer to the question "what would happen if those same people mounted a similarly forceful campaign to get Governor Cuomo to clean out and fully fund the MTA" is no effect. That's why his point is stupid - because that energy directed at funding the MTA would be a waste. It's like saying "instead of using your a/c to cool your apartment, did you consider putting it outside so that we could cool down the whole city block instead of just your private little space?"

by omonra 11y ago

orblivion 11y ago

Well, just to throw in this consideration, how much is Uber going to cost the MTA?

icebraining 11y ago
Aren't tickets subsidized? At least around here, every time the workers strike the company's balance sheet gets a boost.
- fredkbloggs 11y ago
  Farebox recovery is somewhere in the 30% range, maybe a little less. That means somewhere between 2/3 and 3/4 of the cost of operating Muni is a direct subsidy from the taxpayers, or that in order to eliminate the subsidy, tickets would have to cost about $8 (without loss of ridership). Most of that cost is due to the extremely labor-friendly CBA that's in place, but equipment maintenance and the negative effects of past deferred maintenance are significant contributors as well. It's likely that NYC's MTA is similar.

bradleyjg 11y ago

It would be far, far more useful for the current group of politicians to fix the conditions that cause the MTA to be the single least efficient entity on the planet when it comes to rail construction[1], than it would be for them to rustle up another 15 billion dollars for today's project de jure. [1] https://pedestrianobservations.wordpress.com/2011/05/16/us-rail-construction-costs/ https://pedestrianobservations.wordpress.com/2011/05/16/us-r...

6d0debc071 11y ago

>Is the political will (or rather actual monies required) to spend 15 billion [1] on the MTA shortfall the same as not prohibiting a company from operating a tax service? It's not required that the two costs be identical for the writer's question to make sense. It's known that the Uber investment >||= the necessary criteria, but it's not known by how much. Maybe it was just about enough, or maybe it exceeded it by miles.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
omonra 11y ago
The supposition that Uber spent 15bio to lobby NYC to let it operate in the city is nonsensical. Nevermind the alternative that it's not Uber's business to spend money on fixing the L train.
- 6d0debc071 11y ago
  > The supposition that Uber spent 15bio to lobby NYC to let it operate in the city is nonsensical. The question was what the effect of directing that sort of campaign towards urging improvements to the rail infrastructure would be, not what the cost of the rail infrastructure would be. They're related because the more expensive something is the less progress you're likely to make on it if you choose to approach it without looking at things like efficiency and labour improvements, but they're a long way away from being anywhere near the same thing.
  - omonra 11y ago
    Yes - and the answer to the question "what would happen if those same people mounted a similarly forceful campaign to get Governor Cuomo to clean out and fully fund the MTA" is no effect. That's why his point is stupid - because that energy directed at funding the MTA would be a waste. It's like saying "instead of using your a/c to cool your apartment, did you consider putting it outside so that we could cool down the whole city block instead of just your private little space?"