3 ms·
In San Francisco, the story goes that before the ride-sharing days, if you lived in Potrero Hill or in the Richmond, Taxi Drivers would refuse to pick you up ev
by askafriend 9y ago
In San Francisco, the story goes that before the ride-sharing days, if you lived in Potrero Hill or in the Richmond, Taxi Drivers would refuse to pick you up even if you called their dispatch center (they would just no-show). So the end result was that people who lived in those districts were not served equally.
Yes it's technically illegal, no there is no one enforcing that.
Uber/Lyft come along and create an incentive structure where the driver can't discriminate even if they want to, and everybody wins.
There are real benefits to what ride-sharing companies have been able to accomplish.
- goseeastarwar 9y agoPeople don't understand how miserable getting a cab in SF was prior to Uber. It speaks to the original commenter's point that it really was, and still is, providing an exceptional service compared to what existed previously.
- gav 9y agoIt wasn't just SF, in LA it was miserable unless you were staying at a hotel that had waiting taxis... and then you were screwed for the return trip. You had to call and wait 20-40 minutes and it was far from guaranteed that they'd show. I don't think I would I have moved to LA without Uber and Lyft.
- pfarnsworth 9y agoIt's not just Portero Hill or Richmond. It was everywhere in SF. We lived in Castro, Noe and Twin Peaks, and taxis would never come to pick us up. Also, one time I had to wait 1.5 hrs in SOMA before a taxi would come pick me up. A dozen taxis passed me, empty, because they wanted the more expensive rides to the airport, etc. I watch eagerly to see the complete demise of taxis in SF, I hate them with a passion.
- leadBelly 9y agoThe "No Thanks" button says otherwise. It's easy to avoid places you don't feel comfortable driving to.