19 ms·

People in Los Angeles Are Getting Rid Of Their Cars

234 points by andrewfromx 10y ago

danso 10y ago
I did this (avoided buying a car in lieu of Uber/Lyft) my first year in Palo Alto/Menlo Park. I lived in Hew York before coming out West so I was strongly inclined not to own a car, I didn't even bother replacing my drivers license after being pickpocketed 5 years ago. Using Uber frequently was actually pretty enjoyable. My ride was only about 15 min/$12. each way (sometimes I'd bike), and the drivers were usually interesting to talk to. Last year I did end up buying a car. With payments, insurance, parking, and gas thrown in (and the fact that I take Caltrain to get into SF or other cities), the economics really didn't make sense for me to buy a car, but it did improve quality of life in terms of just having more impulse to go out and drive to places, whereas with relying on Uber/Lyft, the thought of the money transaction for every ride discourages me from using it except for pragmatic reasons (yes, even though owning a car is more expensive in the long run).
- majewsky 10y ago
  I can relate. I'm seriously considering getting a "BahnCard 100", the flatrate offer of the German railway service (all trains and public transit in 100 cities included). It would set me back about 4000 euros a year, which is much more than I would usually pay for mobility. But once the money is spent, it will likely push me into more frequent weekend trips to cool places.
  - allendoerfer 10y ago
    There are people living inside the train with a Bahncard 100 similar to the van people in the US. For example her: http://www.tyatravel.com/en/about/ http://www.tyatravel.com/en/about/ A Bahncard 100 is a really nice perk you often get when working for a bigger German company. The company saves taxes and gets a discount, the employee gets unlimited free transportation. For private use, it is hard to justify. You have to travel quite a lot to beat the price of a Bahncard 25/50 using special offers combined with local public transit flatrate ticket. Depends on where you live of course, but I think I would have to visit about 2 cities every week using special offer tickets, to reach the Bahncad 100 costs. It gets much more expensive, though, when you decide to travel very spontaneously and don't like to take trains at unusual times, which I prefer. Different story of course if you live in the South/North and want to visit the North/South regularly.
  - TillE 10y ago
    I understand the psychological aspect, but I mean if you live near a major airport, 4000 Euro buys a whole lot of weekend trips via budget airlines all over Europe, not just within Germany.
    - lorenzhs 10y ago
      But the friction is even higher with air travel. The beauty of BC100 is the spontaneity of just getting on a train and not having to think about tickets (or queue for security). There used to be a "Deutschlandpass", pretty much a one-month version of BC100 during summer, that cost some 300€ for young people. I did that with friends a few years back and it was great. We'd do tons of spontaneous things. You know that thing where most exchange students have been to more places in your own country than you've been? That ticket was the best (and cheapest) way to fix that :)
      - majewsky 10y ago
        The Deutschlandpass doesn't exist anymore? I remember a friend using the hell out of one in 2013.
        lorenzhs 10y ago
        They didn't offer it this year. Instead there was a "Sommer-Ticket", 4 rides for 96€ for ≤ 26 yr olds, which doesn't even come close. Compared to the 269€ (349€ for >26yrs) that the Deutschlandpass cost, and considering how much I used mine in 2013 (26 out of the 30 days, about half of which more than one ride), that's not even funny.
- Decade 10y ago
  Yes, this sheer human irrationality is an impediment to sensible progress. I know, and you know, that a car just does not make sense mathematically. You can Uber/Lyft whenever it’s too difficult to walk. But emotionally, and I feel it too, turning the ride into a transaction makes it something you have to consider carefully. With a car, the payments, the insurance, the gas, are all disconnected from the idea of taking a specific trip. As a result, since I don’t have a car, I very rarely go anywhere that I can’t bike. Now, combine this with so many people who can’t look at this mathematically, and say that life without a car is impossible, and we get very poor housing and transportation policies being supported all over the Bay Area.
  - superuser2 10y ago
    I assume you are referring to parking requirements. Even if you can go without a car 99% of the time (like by using ZipCar), the one day you want to bring home a large appliance or piece of furniture, monthly Costo haul, etc. what are you going to do if there is no place to safely/legally stop within several blocks?
    - revelation 10y ago
      You only have a "monthly Costco haul" because you are stuck in a car-dominated mindset where you drive however many miles to get to that Costco. I buy fresh weekly...
      - burger_moon 10y ago
        One thing I noticed about the references to costco throughout this thread, is that people only go there to buy a full overs-zed shopping cart full of supplies. Maybe I'm just weird, but I walk there weekly and it's the only grocery store I use. Going early in the morning on weekends or an hour before closing weeknights means I can get from my apt and back with groceries in an hour.
    - Symbiote 10y ago
      In Denmark, Ikea has "furniture taxis" so you can take what you've bought home with you. I've not seen the same service arranged by other stores, but the taxi companies can be called. (Ikea doesn't run the taxis, it's a local company.) Or you can ask for a normal delivery, but of course you'd need to be at home. Furniture and many large appliances don't fit in typical cars anyway.
- waleedka 10y ago
  I wonder if an Uber subscription might get around that transaction barrier. For example, a $100/month plan gives you up to a 100 Uber travel miles per month. Similar to how phone plans give you a certain amount of talk time minutes.
  - mjevans 10y ago
    It would probably end up being far more about a min/dollars rate, since the time operating the vehicle and human (presently) driving it are both costs in time and not inherently in distance. Approximating some numbers... 60 miles / hour (2 gallons and lets call that 10 USD for ease of accounting) 5 USD mis overhead (and profit) 15 USD driver wage (while working) 30 dollars an hour is about 0.50 USD / Min. That's probably the absolute floor: I've not left much room in there for profit, insurance, vehicle costs... idle time of work units, travel to/from endpoints. I suspect that 1 dollar / min is a reasonable fee, if quite aggravating for cities like Seattle / Bellevue.
jpetitto 10y ago
I moved to Los Angeles about four months ago and was surprised how little I drive. Uber and Lyft are insanely cheap here when using the pool/line options. I've taken 10 mile trips for $4! The metro is great too if you live near a line. Certain parts of the city are easier without a car than others. A lot of it comes down to how far you live from work too. I walk to work everyday (10 minutes) and there's a plethora of stores in my area to walk to and shop at. I'm about to sell my car and I'm not sure if I'll be getting another anytime soon.
- d4mi3n 10y ago
  This was very different from my own experiences living and working in LA in the late 90s and early 2000s. The buses were a joke, the Metro had terrible coverage, and the traffic was consistently terrible. FWIW I was living near Arcadia/Covina and commuting to Santa Monica. What area of LA did you live and work in to have such a nice commute?
  - mturmon 10y ago
    Of course, that commute is about 40 miles straight through downtown. Somewhat like commuting from Stamford, CT to Brooklyn. Or across the whole of London (say, Beaconsfield to Romford).
    - d4mi3n 10y ago
      While this is true, there are a lot of people who commute to LA from as far as San Bernadino by car. As another commenter mentions, there's a ton of work to be had in LA with very little in the way of nearby housing in the price range of someone who's often driven (pardon the pun) to commuting by car. At the end of the day I gave up on the job that required that commute--it was very stressful and not worth my health. It makes me wonder how many other people are effectively locked out of job markets in LA because they don't have cost and time effective ways of commuting there.
  - jpetitto 10y ago
    I live and work in Pasadena with a metro stop across the street from my apartment. Your commute was definitely a tough one! A big issue I've noticed is that a lot of people work in west LA, but the housing prices are so high that most can't afford to live there. This also leads to much higher traffic for commuting in that direction.
jpetitto 10y ago
I moved to Los Angeles about four months ago and was surprised how little I drive. Uber and Lyft are insanely cheap here when using the pool/line options. I've taken 10 mile trips for $4! The metro is great too if you live near a line. Certain parts of the city are easier without a car than others. A lot of it comes down to how far you live from work too. I walk to work everyday (10 minutes) and there's a plethora of stores in my area to walk to and shop at. I'm about to sell my car and I'm not sure if I'll be getting another anytime soon.
cpprototypes 10y ago
FTA: LA Metro opened up the Expo Line, a light rail between downtown LA and Santa Monica, in May as part of its effort to wean people off car ownership. When it began running, Uber ran a promotion for $5 off Pool rides to or from Expo line stations. For ride-hail companies, partnering with public transportation agencies to market themselves as companion services can increase mutual ridership. Kan, Lyft’s LA general manager, said three of the top 10 destinations for Lyft rides are metro stations. If this trend continues and becomes more common, it has potential to really change transportation in LA. LA Metro is working on expanding the rail lines but there's always the "last mile" problem (not literally 1 mile, but usually last few miles to get/from rail station to destination). UberPool/Lyft Line can be the solution for this and the more people use it, the better solution it becomes.
- honkhonkpants 10y ago
  Once that last mile has more than about 50 people per hour on it, it makes way more sense to just have bus service. UberPool is just about the least efficient last mile solution, except for driving and parking your own car.
  - aninhumer 10y ago
    Makes more sense in what way? Sure a bus is more efficient, but it's less convenient. Getting people to take a train for the majority of their journey is far more efficient than having them drive because the bus doesn't stop outside their door exactly when they want it. Although I can't help wondering if it would eventually become worthwhile to run a full size bus as a carpool taxi vehicle.
    - honkhonkpants 10y ago
      Uber doesn't stop outside your door exactly when you want it, either. Especially not Uber Pool.
  - woodandsteel 10y ago
    But it is not as if those 50 people with a last-mile problem live all within a few blocks of a single street going in one direction from the transit terminal. The people with last-mile problems, really two or three miles, are scattered all over the place, and for that a ride service works a lot better.
greggman 10y ago
LA is a different place because of Uber. LA lost it's amazing public transit system over 40 or so years from like ~1935 to ~1975. Now they are slowly building it back, probably just in time for it to be obsoleted by automated cars given how long it's taking them. Uber certainly helps deal with the lack of public transportation but the other big issue is LA is HUGE! My sister lives in Glendora (far east side of LA) I was staying in Venice Beach. It's about 45 miles. And that's not even one side of the LA metro area to the other, that's just LA itself. On Uber that would be ~$55 or so. A similar distance on the train system in Tokyo would be $10-$20 depending on how many different companies' trains you have to use. Of course it might still be cheaper than a owning a car if you're not making the long trips often.
- WWLink 10y ago
  LA is enormous, and depending on your wage and housing preferences, it isn't unusual for someone to live and work on completely opposite sides!
- untog 10y ago
  > probably just in time for it to be obsoleted by automated cars given how long it's taking them. Uber/Lyft are still very much premium products. People earning minimum wage cannot afford to Uber to and from work every day, so they will be relying on public transport for a long time yet.
  - skafjvhs 10y ago
    There are people who take multiple busses with a travel time of over an hour to commute less than ten miles. Peole who can't afford a car and/or don't have a valid license. If an uberpool costs five dollars, it can be a viable option for these workers and significantly raise their quality of life.
- erispoe 10y ago
  Given enough density, transit will never be "obsoleted by automated cars". It might be true in the suburbs where transit is highly inefficient and road space abundant relative to the population. But automated or not, cars are still an order of magnitude or two less space efficient than mass transit for moving people around. A rail line can move as much as 20 car lanes today. Even if you double the space efficiency of cars with automation (a long shot considering you still need to accommodate for pedestrians, cycles...), transit will keep being vastly more efficient. Automated cars will optimize parking and make on demand transit more affordable in the suburbs, but it will not solve transportation in dense cities. LA is a dense place on average. The greater LA is more dense than the greater NY.
breck 10y ago
Title should be: "People in Los Angeles Are Getting Rid Of Their Cars"
- sctb 10y ago
  Thanks, we updated the title from “Los Angeles is a very different city for Uber stats”.
mturmon 10y ago
Reading the comments to the story (on the Buzzfeed site), one sees the dichotomy between younger residents and longtime residents. (I've been here about 20 years.) The latter tend to give all kinds of arguments about why owning a car is necessary, including safety, convenience, and cost. And they may be right -- for them. They live in the hills of a relatively remote area, like La Crescenta or Burbank or Chatsworth, and have Sunday brunch at some place in the Valley, and drive to Costco to fill up a freezer and a garage with goods, and drive to their dentist, doctor, and gym across town as well. It's a whole series of decisions, and it locks down tighter and tighter. But newer residents are showing that a different way of life is possible, by making all these decisions differently. It's fantastic. It has changed the streetscape a lot, as various local enclaves spring up to offer services within walking or cycling distance, or near to transit. But the gap between these two lifestyles really makes for some major disconnects around subjects like housing development along thoroughfares, density of development, parking, and bike lanes.
- api 10y ago
  What's really insane to me is that all the walkable cities are out East and get run over by a glacier for half the year. If there's anywhere where walking and biking and taking transit should be preferred it's LA. It's beautiful almost year round.
  - throwawayawaya 10y ago
    San fran is a supremely walkable city.
    - thaumasiotes 10y ago
      ...except for the hills and, depending on your point of view, lurking vagrants/robbers/poopers. Some of us prefer our walks without the aroma of fresh human feces.
      - arjie 10y ago
        None of that in Portola and the Excelsior. Ingleside, too. I've also found Bernal Heights quite pleasant.
jboggan 10y ago
Santa Monica resident here. Last year my commuting motorcycle was stolen. During the insurance and replacement process I rented a car for 3 months. About 6 months later my new bike was damaged and out for repairs for almost as long, but that time I chose to not rent a car and just Uber everywhere, including to and from work in Playa Vista every day. The two periods came out to about equivalent costs, with greatly increased convenience and less hassle due to never caring about parking or having a few drinks after work. I didn't take any long trips out of town, but for getting around it was great. I haven't owned a car since I moved to LA 4 years ago, it's pretty great.
- flatfilefan 10y ago
  I wonder why not more people own motorcycle or a scooter there. Is this the summer heat or just a cultural thing? Because otherwise it would be very convenient with that traffic and parking situation.
paulsutter 10y ago
In the article, are those actual wait times or initially estimated wait times?
tbarbugli 10y ago
Based on half dozen people telling that to buzzfeed...
- gjtorikian 10y ago
  Right? I burst out laughing when I read that line. So it's gotta to be about seven or eight people, since it's "More than a half-dozen". Can't be be close to twelve, or else it'd read "Nearly a dozen".
hackuser 10y ago
I'd like articles on this subject to at least mention two other significant costs: Impact on jobs: Unless and until Uber starts treating their workers fairly (treating them like employees and allowing them some negotiating power over their own livelihoods) not only is it bad for those workers and working people in general, but it's also bad for the country, which has to cover health care and other needs for those workers. Does anyone know how Lyft does in that regard? Climate impact: * Buying a new car creates the impact of mining raw materials, processing them, manufacturing, shipping, etc. I have no idea what that impact is. * For purposes of the trip itself, I think using standard taxi/Uber/Lyft services probably increases climate impact over a personal car: The ride-hailing cars drive around empty part of the time, waiting for rides; your personal car is parked when you don't use it. Otherwise, whether you are in someone else's car or your own for the trip, the impact is the same (unless your car is more/less efficient than the ride-hailing car) * Sharing rides, such as in trains, buses, carpool, UberPool, etc., obviously is much more efficient. I suspect the more people in the vehicle, the more efficient it is: Trains beat buses beat carpools, but I really don't know that.
- philwelch 10y ago
  > * For purposes of the trip itself, I think using standard taxi/Uber/Lyft services probably increases climate impact over a personal car: The ride-hailing cars drive around empty part of the time, waiting for rides; your personal car is parked when you don't use it. Otherwise, whether you are in someone else's car or your own for the trip, the impact is the same (unless your car is more/less efficient than the ride-hailing car) When demand is low, the driver will take the car home and park it anyway. I think for climate impact, ride sharing more efficiently amortizes the fixed cost of manufacturing the car over the trips taken, since a single Uber driver and car can more than one owner-operated car. Also, the profit motive of the Uber driver incentivizes fuel efficient cars.
- woodandsteel 10y ago
  As far as climate impact goes, I think the long-term idea is on-demand, self-driving electric cars that get their energy from wind and solar. Remember, the present system, which is destroying the climate, has many parts, so you have to change most or all of them to really fix things. But the parts will not be changed all at once. So for each component you need something new that will sell on its own, but also fit into the new overall pattern you want to get to eventually. What the transportation-on-demand companies are doing is a good example of this.
creyes 10y ago
LA resident here. Got rid of my car 2 years ago and haven't looked back. A big difference for me is that I hate driving - especially here. The stress of it really got to me. Financially, I'm not sure that I actually 'save' money. I live within 100yds of a ton of bars and restaurants, and a 5 minute walk to Trader Joes/Metro. I Uber most places but also take the Metro to DTLA and Santa Monica pretty often. The whole car payment/insurance/gas/maintenance costs for sure are more than what I pay to Uber/Metro but what I'm not sure how to value the 'cost of walking.' I definitely pay a premium for my location and I often wonder, if I lived in a less convenient area (had to drive to groceries, far from Metro) if I'd be able to not have a car. Because as it stands, car costs < uber/metro/rent premium
- kchoudhu 10y ago
  I'd value the cost of walking as negative: it's good for your health.
  - wrigby 10y ago
    I agree, but I think GP is also considering the premium paid to live in a "walkable" area.
    - kchoudhu 10y ago
      Yeah, the math doesn't always work out. In our case, it did: we spent six weeks in LA, and we paid a good $500 extra to live in a townhouse that had a grocery store, mall and park within walking distance. What we spent extra on the location (I think) we made up in not having to pay for a long term car rental. If we were doing this long term and had to weigh against buying a car, I think the math would have worked out differently.
    - creyes 10y ago
      Fact. Just google'd average 1 bedroom rent in LA and I pay a good ~$1k more... mostly for walkability
      - 10y ago
yodsanklai 10y ago
> People in Los Angeles Are Getting Rid Of Their Cars Instead, they’re riding Uber and Lyft to work. Commuting is one thing, but cars are often necessary for other things (for instance, going hiking/skiing on weekends) where public transportation/uber isn't an option. I wonder what is the recommended solution for this. In my case for instance, rental wouldn't be cheaper than owning a car. There's a car sharing service in my city but again, not significantly cheaper than owning the car.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- derwiki 10y ago
  Not sure why you're getting downvoted. I recently bought a car, mainly to make weekend hikes easier to do. I rent it out on GetAround the other 80% of the time when I'm not using it.
- smileysteve 10y ago
  Last year in LA (lived in mdr for 3 months), I rented cars for the trips. Did Zipcar one weekend to Reagan and Enterprise 19.99 weekend for a climbing trip. If you're overnighting a couple times a month, maybe it's less cost effective. A person might also might have 1 of 3 buddies that has a car for these trips (I used this for surfing)
- toomanybeersies 10y ago
  I'm in the same boat. I need a car for going on hunting and hiking trips in the weekend, and will soon be upgrading to a 4wd. Buses just don't offer the same time convenience, and don't go to the right places, they're also a lot slower than a car. Rental cars are more expensive than maintaining my own car, and I just park my car out of town at my brother's place to save on parking.
nickthemagicman 10y ago
Its one of the major ways people are rent seeked. Gas, insurance, maintenance, loan, loan interest, etc. Exploitation overdrive. And most people dont have a choice. Cars, housing, education and medicine are massive rent seeking areas sucking people dry and I cant wait until all of these are subverted by new systems.
nradov 10y ago
Overall new car sales are higher than ever. Someone is buying them.
- ams6110 10y ago
  There are more people than ever.
seizethecheese 10y ago
This article does not back up it's claim. The article includes some anecdotes, and some data of Uber/Lyft becoming more popular, but does not include anything to indicate that car ownership is declining in significant amounts.
- thaw13579 10y ago
  Yes, the only data they report is: * current number of cars * current percentage of people commuting by car * percentage drop in taxi use * uber commute cost breakdown for one person There's no evidence here, just speculation and anecdotes.
vasilipupkin 10y ago
seriously? people giving up their cars in LA? Oh, sure, I believe that buzzfeed was able to find 3 people who gave up their cars. But what do the statistics say about LA car ownership?
tehwebguy 10y ago
My car mostly sits in front of our house in LA. Last month I rented it out to an Uber driver for 2 weeks, which paid for the most recent engine work it required.
rocky1138 10y ago
> "They’ve decimated the taxi industry. The number of LA taxi trips dropped 30% from 2012." Decimate means to reduce by 10%, hence deci.
- nercht12 10y ago
  That definition is listed as "obsolete" with regards to that term: http://www.dictionary.com/browse/decimate http://www.dictionary.com/browse/decimate
  - rocky1138 10y ago
    From your own link: "Because the etymological sense of one-tenth remains to some extent, decimate is not ordinarily used with exact fractions or percentages: Drought has destroyed (not decimated) nearly 80 percent of the cattle."
    - aninhumer 10y ago
      Yes, because "decimate" means greatly reduced rather than eliminated, so the example would be like saying "Drought has greatly reduced 80 of cattle" which doesn't make much sense.
- potatolicious 10y ago
  http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2012/09/does-decimate-mean-destroy-one-tenth/ http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2012/09/does-decimate-mea... Decimate may have had an archaic definition like that (even then, the jury's still out), but the modern definition of "destruction of a substantial portion of" has been well accepted even in academia. Unless we want to start using words only in their original, millenia-old definitions can we drop this thing every time someone uses decimation in the "wrong" way?
  - rocky1138 10y ago
    I think the issue I have is one of measurements. We use things like deci, mega, kilo, etc. In this case, decimetre means 10 centimetres.
misingnoglic 10y ago
I was an intern at Google Venice for the summer, and it was definitely cheaper for me to take Uber pool to work every day (especially since I lived with my parents). It would have been ~35 a day to rent a car, or ~20 a day for Uber pool, without the added stress of driving.
Zafira 10y ago
It looks like a lot of people here are arguing that this is happening or possible, with the rather limiting constraint that you're in or around West LA. It being an older neighborhood, has more density which doesn't exist in many of the post-World War II neighborhoods with Irvine being a good example of this. The Uber map for better wait times seems unsurprisingly biased to being around tourist areas like Santa Monica, Disneyland or Huntington Beach. I suppose it depends on what you're definition of Los Angeles is, but if you argue that Thousand Oaks or Chino Hills is considered "Los Angeles", then this argument doesn't really hold water. The urban sprawl was built on the assumption of commuting and 2-3 hour commutes are not unusual around here. I realize LA might be a bit of an anomaly, but you can drive from Santa Monica to San Bernardino before you've really "left" the city and trying to argue that a carless life is really going to happen using this definition is a bit suspect.
incogitomode 10y ago
Having recently moved to LA from the east coast, and hoping to stay put for awhile, I've really appreciated the interest in finding new ways of dealing with transportation in the city. It may be a generational issue, as some have said, but that doesn't need to be the case. Perhaps the current enthusiasm can find its way into housing and zoning policy and make a lasting change in a city that seems to have reached the limits of what sort of population and density can actually be sustained in an everybody-owns-a-car scenario.
unabst 10y ago
There are a lot of car haters voicing their hate but if you already hate cars, don't drive. That's not why people in LA are getting rid of their cars (if they are). There is an introvert/extrovert angle here also. A car is completely private. You can go anywhere in your pajamas in total asocial mode with a car, and I wonder if that's why so many people are in their Pajamas at Ralphs. A car service requires contact with strangers. I am in LA and I tried getting a bike once, but it was impossible. Road conditions are horrible, and I had nowhere to park my new mango colored bike comfortably. People would yell "nice bike" from their cars, and it was uncomfortable. And everyone I knew who rode a bike had multiple accident stories. If some idiot is going to hit me or suddenly open their door, I want to be in a car. For me, Tokyo is the perfect train city. Fukuoka is the perfect bicycle city. And LA is still the perfect car city. But if you hate to drive, now you have options. It used to be you had none!
bogomipz 10y ago
A couple of points come to mind: From the article: "If there’s anything as frustrating as driving in LA, it’s parking there: The city issues more than 2.5 million parking citations each year, raking in $165 million." So in a way the city relies on people owning cars and statistical probability that its residents will periodically lose in the "great parking game." Parking tickets are a form of soft tax and not having to pay this tax is not insignificant. From the following article: http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-parking-tickets-reform-20140630-story.html http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-parking-tick... "The price of a ticket for overstaying a meter steadily rose from $40 in 2006 to $63 in 2012, and officials have repeatedly acknowledged that the purpose was to bring in cash. This year, the city expects parking tickets to generate about $161 million in revenue." That was 4 years ago. I wasn't able to find a current figure but generally those number only increase over time. And it's not just meters. There are also street cleaning violation tickets that are $75 each. For those not familiar with LA. Street cleaning happens in residential areas. Twice a week( day for each side of the street)the available parking capacity is effectively cut in half. Even though the cleaning only takes place during a two hour window. Many residents will park in the early evening and then won't use their car again so they don't lose their spot for the following day. Time spent trying to find a spot to park the night before street cleaning is a quality of life issue. Sadly anyone who has watched a street sweeping machine in LA could attest to their dubious effectivity for actual cleaning purposes. So an addition to the soft taxes applied in the form of parking tickets, theres a cognitive load and stress I suppose you could add to the calculations outlined in the article. The question is what happens if(when?) ride sharing and car services are so successful that they begin to erode hundreds of millions of dollars the city obviously depends on. Then what?
donretag 10y ago
Here are some more anecdotes from a recent article: http://laist.com/2016/08/29/so_just_how_do_las_legions_of_car-f.php http://laist.com/2016/08/29/so_just_how_do_las_legions_of_ca... I also live car-free in Los Angeles. It is not that I don't want a car, I have just been too lazy to buy one. Money is not an issue and I have a dedicated parking spot that sits empty. I live by the Metro, so I can get to DTLA/Hollywood pretty easy. Live in walkable neighborhood, so I can walk to get groceries, with Amazon providing the rest. Even when I had a car in other locales, I would still use Amazon for various things. I am an avid cyclist, yet I never commute anywhere by bicycle. I should look into getting a commuter bike. My current bike is too expensive to be used for commuting.
gcb0 10y ago
this is buzzfeed. my guess is that this is a paid puff piece for uber and nothing else.

234 points by andrewfromx 10y ago

danso 10y ago

I did this (avoided buying a car in lieu of Uber/Lyft) my first year in Palo Alto/Menlo Park. I lived in Hew York before coming out West so I was strongly inclined not to own a car, I didn't even bother replacing my drivers license after being pickpocketed 5 years ago. Using Uber frequently was actually pretty enjoyable. My ride was only about 15 min/$12. each way (sometimes I'd bike), and the drivers were usually interesting to talk to. Last year I did end up buying a car. With payments, insurance, parking, and gas thrown in (and the fact that I take Caltrain to get into SF or other cities), the economics really didn't make sense for me to buy a car, but it did improve quality of life in terms of just having more impulse to go out and drive to places, whereas with relying on Uber/Lyft, the thought of the money transaction for every ride discourages me from using it except for pragmatic reasons (yes, even though owning a car is more expensive in the long run).

majewsky 10y ago
I can relate. I'm seriously considering getting a "BahnCard 100", the flatrate offer of the German railway service (all trains and public transit in 100 cities included). It would set me back about 4000 euros a year, which is much more than I would usually pay for mobility. But once the money is spent, it will likely push me into more frequent weekend trips to cool places.
- allendoerfer 10y ago
  There are people living inside the train with a Bahncard 100 similar to the van people in the US. For example her: http://www.tyatravel.com/en/about/ http://www.tyatravel.com/en/about/ A Bahncard 100 is a really nice perk you often get when working for a bigger German company. The company saves taxes and gets a discount, the employee gets unlimited free transportation. For private use, it is hard to justify. You have to travel quite a lot to beat the price of a Bahncard 25/50 using special offers combined with local public transit flatrate ticket. Depends on where you live of course, but I think I would have to visit about 2 cities every week using special offer tickets, to reach the Bahncad 100 costs. It gets much more expensive, though, when you decide to travel very spontaneously and don't like to take trains at unusual times, which I prefer. Different story of course if you live in the South/North and want to visit the North/South regularly.
- TillE 10y ago
  I understand the psychological aspect, but I mean if you live near a major airport, 4000 Euro buys a whole lot of weekend trips via budget airlines all over Europe, not just within Germany.
  - lorenzhs 10y ago
    But the friction is even higher with air travel. The beauty of BC100 is the spontaneity of just getting on a train and not having to think about tickets (or queue for security). There used to be a "Deutschlandpass", pretty much a one-month version of BC100 during summer, that cost some 300€ for young people. I did that with friends a few years back and it was great. We'd do tons of spontaneous things. You know that thing where most exchange students have been to more places in your own country than you've been? That ticket was the best (and cheapest) way to fix that :)
    - majewsky 10y ago
      The Deutschlandpass doesn't exist anymore? I remember a friend using the hell out of one in 2013.
      - lorenzhs 10y ago
        They didn't offer it this year. Instead there was a "Sommer-Ticket", 4 rides for 96€ for ≤ 26 yr olds, which doesn't even come close. Compared to the 269€ (349€ for >26yrs) that the Deutschlandpass cost, and considering how much I used mine in 2013 (26 out of the 30 days, about half of which more than one ride), that's not even funny.
Decade 10y ago
Yes, this sheer human irrationality is an impediment to sensible progress. I know, and you know, that a car just does not make sense mathematically. You can Uber/Lyft whenever it’s too difficult to walk. But emotionally, and I feel it too, turning the ride into a transaction makes it something you have to consider carefully. With a car, the payments, the insurance, the gas, are all disconnected from the idea of taking a specific trip. As a result, since I don’t have a car, I very rarely go anywhere that I can’t bike. Now, combine this with so many people who can’t look at this mathematically, and say that life without a car is impossible, and we get very poor housing and transportation policies being supported all over the Bay Area.
- superuser2 10y ago
  I assume you are referring to parking requirements. Even if you can go without a car 99% of the time (like by using ZipCar), the one day you want to bring home a large appliance or piece of furniture, monthly Costo haul, etc. what are you going to do if there is no place to safely/legally stop within several blocks?
  - revelation 10y ago
    You only have a "monthly Costco haul" because you are stuck in a car-dominated mindset where you drive however many miles to get to that Costco. I buy fresh weekly...
    - burger_moon 10y ago
      One thing I noticed about the references to costco throughout this thread, is that people only go there to buy a full overs-zed shopping cart full of supplies. Maybe I'm just weird, but I walk there weekly and it's the only grocery store I use. Going early in the morning on weekends or an hour before closing weeknights means I can get from my apt and back with groceries in an hour.
  - Symbiote 10y ago
    In Denmark, Ikea has "furniture taxis" so you can take what you've bought home with you. I've not seen the same service arranged by other stores, but the taxi companies can be called. (Ikea doesn't run the taxis, it's a local company.) Or you can ask for a normal delivery, but of course you'd need to be at home. Furniture and many large appliances don't fit in typical cars anyway.
waleedka 10y ago
I wonder if an Uber subscription might get around that transaction barrier. For example, a $100/month plan gives you up to a 100 Uber travel miles per month. Similar to how phone plans give you a certain amount of talk time minutes.
- mjevans 10y ago
  It would probably end up being far more about a min/dollars rate, since the time operating the vehicle and human (presently) driving it are both costs in time and not inherently in distance. Approximating some numbers... 60 miles / hour (2 gallons and lets call that 10 USD for ease of accounting) 5 USD mis overhead (and profit) 15 USD driver wage (while working) 30 dollars an hour is about 0.50 USD / Min. That's probably the absolute floor: I've not left much room in there for profit, insurance, vehicle costs... idle time of work units, travel to/from endpoints. I suspect that 1 dollar / min is a reasonable fee, if quite aggravating for cities like Seattle / Bellevue.

jpetitto 10y ago

I moved to Los Angeles about four months ago and was surprised how little I drive. Uber and Lyft are insanely cheap here when using the pool/line options. I've taken 10 mile trips for $4! The metro is great too if you live near a line. Certain parts of the city are easier without a car than others. A lot of it comes down to how far you live from work too. I walk to work everyday (10 minutes) and there's a plethora of stores in my area to walk to and shop at. I'm about to sell my car and I'm not sure if I'll be getting another anytime soon.

d4mi3n 10y ago
This was very different from my own experiences living and working in LA in the late 90s and early 2000s. The buses were a joke, the Metro had terrible coverage, and the traffic was consistently terrible. FWIW I was living near Arcadia/Covina and commuting to Santa Monica. What area of LA did you live and work in to have such a nice commute?
- mturmon 10y ago
  Of course, that commute is about 40 miles straight through downtown. Somewhat like commuting from Stamford, CT to Brooklyn. Or across the whole of London (say, Beaconsfield to Romford).
  - d4mi3n 10y ago
    While this is true, there are a lot of people who commute to LA from as far as San Bernadino by car. As another commenter mentions, there's a ton of work to be had in LA with very little in the way of nearby housing in the price range of someone who's often driven (pardon the pun) to commuting by car. At the end of the day I gave up on the job that required that commute--it was very stressful and not worth my health. It makes me wonder how many other people are effectively locked out of job markets in LA because they don't have cost and time effective ways of commuting there.
- jpetitto 10y ago
  I live and work in Pasadena with a metro stop across the street from my apartment. Your commute was definitely a tough one! A big issue I've noticed is that a lot of people work in west LA, but the housing prices are so high that most can't afford to live there. This also leads to much higher traffic for commuting in that direction.

jpetitto 10y ago

cpprototypes 10y ago

FTA: LA Metro opened up the Expo Line, a light rail between downtown LA and Santa Monica, in May as part of its effort to wean people off car ownership. When it began running, Uber ran a promotion for $5 off Pool rides to or from Expo line stations. For ride-hail companies, partnering with public transportation agencies to market themselves as companion services can increase mutual ridership. Kan, Lyft’s LA general manager, said three of the top 10 destinations for Lyft rides are metro stations. If this trend continues and becomes more common, it has potential to really change transportation in LA. LA Metro is working on expanding the rail lines but there's always the "last mile" problem (not literally 1 mile, but usually last few miles to get/from rail station to destination). UberPool/Lyft Line can be the solution for this and the more people use it, the better solution it becomes.

honkhonkpants 10y ago
Once that last mile has more than about 50 people per hour on it, it makes way more sense to just have bus service. UberPool is just about the least efficient last mile solution, except for driving and parking your own car.
- aninhumer 10y ago
  Makes more sense in what way? Sure a bus is more efficient, but it's less convenient. Getting people to take a train for the majority of their journey is far more efficient than having them drive because the bus doesn't stop outside their door exactly when they want it. Although I can't help wondering if it would eventually become worthwhile to run a full size bus as a carpool taxi vehicle.
  - honkhonkpants 10y ago
    Uber doesn't stop outside your door exactly when you want it, either. Especially not Uber Pool.
- woodandsteel 10y ago
  But it is not as if those 50 people with a last-mile problem live all within a few blocks of a single street going in one direction from the transit terminal. The people with last-mile problems, really two or three miles, are scattered all over the place, and for that a ride service works a lot better.

greggman 10y ago

LA is a different place because of Uber. LA lost it's amazing public transit system over 40 or so years from like ~1935 to ~1975. Now they are slowly building it back, probably just in time for it to be obsoleted by automated cars given how long it's taking them. Uber certainly helps deal with the lack of public transportation but the other big issue is LA is HUGE! My sister lives in Glendora (far east side of LA) I was staying in Venice Beach. It's about 45 miles. And that's not even one side of the LA metro area to the other, that's just LA itself. On Uber that would be ~$55 or so. A similar distance on the train system in Tokyo would be $10-$20 depending on how many different companies' trains you have to use. Of course it might still be cheaper than a owning a car if you're not making the long trips often.

WWLink 10y ago
LA is enormous, and depending on your wage and housing preferences, it isn't unusual for someone to live and work on completely opposite sides!
untog 10y ago
> probably just in time for it to be obsoleted by automated cars given how long it's taking them. Uber/Lyft are still very much premium products. People earning minimum wage cannot afford to Uber to and from work every day, so they will be relying on public transport for a long time yet.
- skafjvhs 10y ago
  There are people who take multiple busses with a travel time of over an hour to commute less than ten miles. Peole who can't afford a car and/or don't have a valid license. If an uberpool costs five dollars, it can be a viable option for these workers and significantly raise their quality of life.
erispoe 10y ago
Given enough density, transit will never be "obsoleted by automated cars". It might be true in the suburbs where transit is highly inefficient and road space abundant relative to the population. But automated or not, cars are still an order of magnitude or two less space efficient than mass transit for moving people around. A rail line can move as much as 20 car lanes today. Even if you double the space efficiency of cars with automation (a long shot considering you still need to accommodate for pedestrians, cycles...), transit will keep being vastly more efficient. Automated cars will optimize parking and make on demand transit more affordable in the suburbs, but it will not solve transportation in dense cities. LA is a dense place on average. The greater LA is more dense than the greater NY.

breck 10y ago

Title should be: "People in Los Angeles Are Getting Rid Of Their Cars"

sctb 10y ago
Thanks, we updated the title from “Los Angeles is a very different city for Uber stats”.

mturmon 10y ago

Reading the comments to the story (on the Buzzfeed site), one sees the dichotomy between younger residents and longtime residents. (I've been here about 20 years.) The latter tend to give all kinds of arguments about why owning a car is necessary, including safety, convenience, and cost. And they may be right -- for them. They live in the hills of a relatively remote area, like La Crescenta or Burbank or Chatsworth, and have Sunday brunch at some place in the Valley, and drive to Costco to fill up a freezer and a garage with goods, and drive to their dentist, doctor, and gym across town as well. It's a whole series of decisions, and it locks down tighter and tighter. But newer residents are showing that a different way of life is possible, by making all these decisions differently. It's fantastic. It has changed the streetscape a lot, as various local enclaves spring up to offer services within walking or cycling distance, or near to transit. But the gap between these two lifestyles really makes for some major disconnects around subjects like housing development along thoroughfares, density of development, parking, and bike lanes.

api 10y ago
What's really insane to me is that all the walkable cities are out East and get run over by a glacier for half the year. If there's anywhere where walking and biking and taking transit should be preferred it's LA. It's beautiful almost year round.
- throwawayawaya 10y ago
  San fran is a supremely walkable city.
  - thaumasiotes 10y ago
    ...except for the hills and, depending on your point of view, lurking vagrants/robbers/poopers. Some of us prefer our walks without the aroma of fresh human feces.
    - arjie 10y ago
      None of that in Portola and the Excelsior. Ingleside, too. I've also found Bernal Heights quite pleasant.

jboggan 10y ago

Santa Monica resident here. Last year my commuting motorcycle was stolen. During the insurance and replacement process I rented a car for 3 months. About 6 months later my new bike was damaged and out for repairs for almost as long, but that time I chose to not rent a car and just Uber everywhere, including to and from work in Playa Vista every day. The two periods came out to about equivalent costs, with greatly increased convenience and less hassle due to never caring about parking or having a few drinks after work. I didn't take any long trips out of town, but for getting around it was great. I haven't owned a car since I moved to LA 4 years ago, it's pretty great.

flatfilefan 10y ago
I wonder why not more people own motorcycle or a scooter there. Is this the summer heat or just a cultural thing? Because otherwise it would be very convenient with that traffic and parking situation.

paulsutter 10y ago

In the article, are those actual wait times or initially estimated wait times?

tbarbugli 10y ago

Based on half dozen people telling that to buzzfeed...

gjtorikian 10y ago
Right? I burst out laughing when I read that line. So it's gotta to be about seven or eight people, since it's "More than a half-dozen". Can't be be close to twelve, or else it'd read "Nearly a dozen".

hackuser 10y ago

I'd like articles on this subject to at least mention two other significant costs: Impact on jobs: Unless and until Uber starts treating their workers fairly (treating them like employees and allowing them some negotiating power over their own livelihoods) not only is it bad for those workers and working people in general, but it's also bad for the country, which has to cover health care and other needs for those workers. Does anyone know how Lyft does in that regard? Climate impact: * Buying a new car creates the impact of mining raw materials, processing them, manufacturing, shipping, etc. I have no idea what that impact is. * For purposes of the trip itself, I think using standard taxi/Uber/Lyft services probably increases climate impact over a personal car: The ride-hailing cars drive around empty part of the time, waiting for rides; your personal car is parked when you don't use it. Otherwise, whether you are in someone else's car or your own for the trip, the impact is the same (unless your car is more/less efficient than the ride-hailing car) * Sharing rides, such as in trains, buses, carpool, UberPool, etc., obviously is much more efficient. I suspect the more people in the vehicle, the more efficient it is: Trains beat buses beat carpools, but I really don't know that.

philwelch 10y ago
> * For purposes of the trip itself, I think using standard taxi/Uber/Lyft services probably increases climate impact over a personal car: The ride-hailing cars drive around empty part of the time, waiting for rides; your personal car is parked when you don't use it. Otherwise, whether you are in someone else's car or your own for the trip, the impact is the same (unless your car is more/less efficient than the ride-hailing car) When demand is low, the driver will take the car home and park it anyway. I think for climate impact, ride sharing more efficiently amortizes the fixed cost of manufacturing the car over the trips taken, since a single Uber driver and car can more than one owner-operated car. Also, the profit motive of the Uber driver incentivizes fuel efficient cars.
woodandsteel 10y ago
As far as climate impact goes, I think the long-term idea is on-demand, self-driving electric cars that get their energy from wind and solar. Remember, the present system, which is destroying the climate, has many parts, so you have to change most or all of them to really fix things. But the parts will not be changed all at once. So for each component you need something new that will sell on its own, but also fit into the new overall pattern you want to get to eventually. What the transportation-on-demand companies are doing is a good example of this.

creyes 10y ago

LA resident here. Got rid of my car 2 years ago and haven't looked back. A big difference for me is that I hate driving - especially here. The stress of it really got to me. Financially, I'm not sure that I actually 'save' money. I live within 100yds of a ton of bars and restaurants, and a 5 minute walk to Trader Joes/Metro. I Uber most places but also take the Metro to DTLA and Santa Monica pretty often. The whole car payment/insurance/gas/maintenance costs for sure are more than what I pay to Uber/Metro but what I'm not sure how to value the 'cost of walking.' I definitely pay a premium for my location and I often wonder, if I lived in a less convenient area (had to drive to groceries, far from Metro) if I'd be able to not have a car. Because as it stands, car costs < uber/metro/rent premium

kchoudhu 10y ago
I'd value the cost of walking as negative: it's good for your health.
- wrigby 10y ago
  I agree, but I think GP is also considering the premium paid to live in a "walkable" area.
  - kchoudhu 10y ago
    Yeah, the math doesn't always work out. In our case, it did: we spent six weeks in LA, and we paid a good $500 extra to live in a townhouse that had a grocery store, mall and park within walking distance. What we spent extra on the location (I think) we made up in not having to pay for a long term car rental. If we were doing this long term and had to weigh against buying a car, I think the math would have worked out differently.
  - creyes 10y ago
    Fact. Just google'd average 1 bedroom rent in LA and I pay a good ~$1k more... mostly for walkability
    - 10y ago

yodsanklai 10y ago

> People in Los Angeles Are Getting Rid Of Their Cars Instead, they’re riding Uber and Lyft to work. Commuting is one thing, but cars are often necessary for other things (for instance, going hiking/skiing on weekends) where public transportation/uber isn't an option. I wonder what is the recommended solution for this. In my case for instance, rental wouldn't be cheaper than owning a car. There's a car sharing service in my city but again, not significantly cheaper than owning the car.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
derwiki 10y ago
Not sure why you're getting downvoted. I recently bought a car, mainly to make weekend hikes easier to do. I rent it out on GetAround the other 80% of the time when I'm not using it.
smileysteve 10y ago
Last year in LA (lived in mdr for 3 months), I rented cars for the trips. Did Zipcar one weekend to Reagan and Enterprise 19.99 weekend for a climbing trip. If you're overnighting a couple times a month, maybe it's less cost effective. A person might also might have 1 of 3 buddies that has a car for these trips (I used this for surfing)
toomanybeersies 10y ago
I'm in the same boat. I need a car for going on hunting and hiking trips in the weekend, and will soon be upgrading to a 4wd. Buses just don't offer the same time convenience, and don't go to the right places, they're also a lot slower than a car. Rental cars are more expensive than maintaining my own car, and I just park my car out of town at my brother's place to save on parking.

nickthemagicman 10y ago

Its one of the major ways people are rent seeked. Gas, insurance, maintenance, loan, loan interest, etc. Exploitation overdrive. And most people dont have a choice. Cars, housing, education and medicine are massive rent seeking areas sucking people dry and I cant wait until all of these are subverted by new systems.

nradov 10y ago

Overall new car sales are higher than ever. Someone is buying them.

ams6110 10y ago
There are more people than ever.

seizethecheese 10y ago

This article does not back up it's claim. The article includes some anecdotes, and some data of Uber/Lyft becoming more popular, but does not include anything to indicate that car ownership is declining in significant amounts.

thaw13579 10y ago
Yes, the only data they report is: * current number of cars * current percentage of people commuting by car * percentage drop in taxi use * uber commute cost breakdown for one person There's no evidence here, just speculation and anecdotes.

vasilipupkin 10y ago

seriously? people giving up their cars in LA? Oh, sure, I believe that buzzfeed was able to find 3 people who gave up their cars. But what do the statistics say about LA car ownership?

tehwebguy 10y ago

My car mostly sits in front of our house in LA. Last month I rented it out to an Uber driver for 2 weeks, which paid for the most recent engine work it required.

rocky1138 10y ago

> "They’ve decimated the taxi industry. The number of LA taxi trips dropped 30% from 2012." Decimate means to reduce by 10%, hence deci.

nercht12 10y ago
That definition is listed as "obsolete" with regards to that term: http://www.dictionary.com/browse/decimate http://www.dictionary.com/browse/decimate
- rocky1138 10y ago
  From your own link: "Because the etymological sense of one-tenth remains to some extent, decimate is not ordinarily used with exact fractions or percentages: Drought has destroyed (not decimated) nearly 80 percent of the cattle."
  - aninhumer 10y ago
    Yes, because "decimate" means greatly reduced rather than eliminated, so the example would be like saying "Drought has greatly reduced 80 of cattle" which doesn't make much sense.
potatolicious 10y ago
http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2012/09/does-decimate-mean-destroy-one-tenth/ http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2012/09/does-decimate-mea... Decimate may have had an archaic definition like that (even then, the jury's still out), but the modern definition of "destruction of a substantial portion of" has been well accepted even in academia. Unless we want to start using words only in their original, millenia-old definitions can we drop this thing every time someone uses decimation in the "wrong" way?
- rocky1138 10y ago
  I think the issue I have is one of measurements. We use things like deci, mega, kilo, etc. In this case, decimetre means 10 centimetres.

misingnoglic 10y ago

I was an intern at Google Venice for the summer, and it was definitely cheaper for me to take Uber pool to work every day (especially since I lived with my parents). It would have been ~35 a day to rent a car, or ~20 a day for Uber pool, without the added stress of driving.

Zafira 10y ago

It looks like a lot of people here are arguing that this is happening or possible, with the rather limiting constraint that you're in or around West LA. It being an older neighborhood, has more density which doesn't exist in many of the post-World War II neighborhoods with Irvine being a good example of this. The Uber map for better wait times seems unsurprisingly biased to being around tourist areas like Santa Monica, Disneyland or Huntington Beach. I suppose it depends on what you're definition of Los Angeles is, but if you argue that Thousand Oaks or Chino Hills is considered "Los Angeles", then this argument doesn't really hold water. The urban sprawl was built on the assumption of commuting and 2-3 hour commutes are not unusual around here. I realize LA might be a bit of an anomaly, but you can drive from Santa Monica to San Bernardino before you've really "left" the city and trying to argue that a carless life is really going to happen using this definition is a bit suspect.

incogitomode 10y ago

Having recently moved to LA from the east coast, and hoping to stay put for awhile, I've really appreciated the interest in finding new ways of dealing with transportation in the city. It may be a generational issue, as some have said, but that doesn't need to be the case. Perhaps the current enthusiasm can find its way into housing and zoning policy and make a lasting change in a city that seems to have reached the limits of what sort of population and density can actually be sustained in an everybody-owns-a-car scenario.

unabst 10y ago

There are a lot of car haters voicing their hate but if you already hate cars, don't drive. That's not why people in LA are getting rid of their cars (if they are). There is an introvert/extrovert angle here also. A car is completely private. You can go anywhere in your pajamas in total asocial mode with a car, and I wonder if that's why so many people are in their Pajamas at Ralphs. A car service requires contact with strangers. I am in LA and I tried getting a bike once, but it was impossible. Road conditions are horrible, and I had nowhere to park my new mango colored bike comfortably. People would yell "nice bike" from their cars, and it was uncomfortable. And everyone I knew who rode a bike had multiple accident stories. If some idiot is going to hit me or suddenly open their door, I want to be in a car. For me, Tokyo is the perfect train city. Fukuoka is the perfect bicycle city. And LA is still the perfect car city. But if you hate to drive, now you have options. It used to be you had none!

bogomipz 10y ago

A couple of points come to mind: From the article: "If there’s anything as frustrating as driving in LA, it’s parking there: The city issues more than 2.5 million parking citations each year, raking in $165 million." So in a way the city relies on people owning cars and statistical probability that its residents will periodically lose in the "great parking game." Parking tickets are a form of soft tax and not having to pay this tax is not insignificant. From the following article: http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-parking-tickets-reform-20140630-story.html http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-parking-tick... "The price of a ticket for overstaying a meter steadily rose from $40 in 2006 to $63 in 2012, and officials have repeatedly acknowledged that the purpose was to bring in cash. This year, the city expects parking tickets to generate about $161 million in revenue." That was 4 years ago. I wasn't able to find a current figure but generally those number only increase over time. And it's not just meters. There are also street cleaning violation tickets that are $75 each. For those not familiar with LA. Street cleaning happens in residential areas. Twice a week( day for each side of the street)the available parking capacity is effectively cut in half. Even though the cleaning only takes place during a two hour window. Many residents will park in the early evening and then won't use their car again so they don't lose their spot for the following day. Time spent trying to find a spot to park the night before street cleaning is a quality of life issue. Sadly anyone who has watched a street sweeping machine in LA could attest to their dubious effectivity for actual cleaning purposes. So an addition to the soft taxes applied in the form of parking tickets, theres a cognitive load and stress I suppose you could add to the calculations outlined in the article. The question is what happens if(when?) ride sharing and car services are so successful that they begin to erode hundreds of millions of dollars the city obviously depends on. Then what?

donretag 10y ago

Here are some more anecdotes from a recent article: http://laist.com/2016/08/29/so_just_how_do_las_legions_of_car-f.php http://laist.com/2016/08/29/so_just_how_do_las_legions_of_ca... I also live car-free in Los Angeles. It is not that I don't want a car, I have just been too lazy to buy one. Money is not an issue and I have a dedicated parking spot that sits empty. I live by the Metro, so I can get to DTLA/Hollywood pretty easy. Live in walkable neighborhood, so I can walk to get groceries, with Amazon providing the rest. Even when I had a car in other locales, I would still use Amazon for various things. I am an avid cyclist, yet I never commute anywhere by bicycle. I should look into getting a commuter bike. My current bike is too expensive to be used for commuting.

gcb0 10y ago

this is buzzfeed. my guess is that this is a paid puff piece for uber and nothing else.