4 ms·

>offer a low-income plan This one is odd to me. BMW doesn't have to offer low income cars. AFAIK Uber doesnt have to cut fares for low-income folks. Walking an

>offer a low-income plan This one is odd to me. BMW doesn't have to offer low income cars. AFAIK Uber doesnt have to cut fares for low-income folks. Walking and the bus/train is the low income plan.

bdcravens 8y ago
Perhaps some of the scooter companies are arguing that they provide a solution to overcrowded mass transit; SFMTA provides options like the Lifeline Pass (https://www.sfmta.com/fares/lifeline-pass https://www.sfmta.com/fares/lifeline-pass). Additionally, they are relying upon public streets and areas to sell their services (as I understand it, you don't go to a private depot to pick up a scooter you wish to rent), whereas BMW dealerships conduct their business on private property.
- wbl 8y ago
  Ever look at where cars end up parked?
  - maerF0x0 8y ago
    I agree with your point, but also fuel is taxed... I dont know how maths workout though.
  - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
    Registering a car in CA isn't exactly cheap.
  - bdcravens 8y ago
    Generally those are privately owned, ostensibly by those paying taxes. A better analogy would be if Enterprise left rental cars parked on public streets for customers to pick up as part of the transaction.
hprotagonist 8y ago
This makes sense if you group scooters and docking bicycle share programs into the same category. Most US city bikeshare programs include deeply discounted (like $5/mo) access for the poor.
jdavis703 8y ago
Scooters are an urban mobility solution, one that if successful will reduce the need to utilize last mile public transportation. This potentially means transit routes will be shut down. If you want to make it easy for everyone to navigate a city, you need to make sure that they have access to meaningful transportation options. As for automobiles I understand there are practical reasons why subsidizing them isn't cost effective, but for a while in the 20th century automobile dependency was used to make sure the poor masses couldn't make it out to the suburbs -- places rich in jobs, education and investment opportunities that entire generations missed out on.
- ng12 8y ago
  > This potentially means transit routes will be shut down. If you want to make it easy for everyone to navigate a city Why is this a private industry problem? Isn't that SFMTA's charter?
  - maerF0x0 8y ago
    In some regards I think this is the real story... "After billions spent, Government public transit fails to innovate effective solutions to their mission"
  - eridius 8y ago
    And the SFMTA is the one regulating this type of transport.

>offer a low-income plan This one is odd to me. BMW doesn't have to offer low income cars. AFAIK Uber doesnt have to cut fares for low-income folks. Walking and the bus/train is the low income plan.

bdcravens 8y ago

Perhaps some of the scooter companies are arguing that they provide a solution to overcrowded mass transit; SFMTA provides options like the Lifeline Pass (https://www.sfmta.com/fares/lifeline-pass https://www.sfmta.com/fares/lifeline-pass). Additionally, they are relying upon public streets and areas to sell their services (as I understand it, you don't go to a private depot to pick up a scooter you wish to rent), whereas BMW dealerships conduct their business on private property.

wbl 8y ago
Ever look at where cars end up parked?
- maerF0x0 8y ago
  I agree with your point, but also fuel is taxed... I dont know how maths workout though.
- dsfyu404ed 8y ago
  Registering a car in CA isn't exactly cheap.
- bdcravens 8y ago
  Generally those are privately owned, ostensibly by those paying taxes. A better analogy would be if Enterprise left rental cars parked on public streets for customers to pick up as part of the transaction.

hprotagonist 8y ago

This makes sense if you group scooters and docking bicycle share programs into the same category. Most US city bikeshare programs include deeply discounted (like $5/mo) access for the poor.

jdavis703 8y ago

Scooters are an urban mobility solution, one that if successful will reduce the need to utilize last mile public transportation. This potentially means transit routes will be shut down. If you want to make it easy for everyone to navigate a city, you need to make sure that they have access to meaningful transportation options. As for automobiles I understand there are practical reasons why subsidizing them isn't cost effective, but for a while in the 20th century automobile dependency was used to make sure the poor masses couldn't make it out to the suburbs -- places rich in jobs, education and investment opportunities that entire generations missed out on.

ng12 8y ago
> This potentially means transit routes will be shut down. If you want to make it easy for everyone to navigate a city Why is this a private industry problem? Isn't that SFMTA's charter?
- maerF0x0 8y ago
  In some regards I think this is the real story... "After billions spent, Government public transit fails to innovate effective solutions to their mission"
- eridius 8y ago
  And the SFMTA is the one regulating this type of transport.