4 ms·

This kind of ignores the fact that the quality of public transit has been rapidly declining, and had been before Uber/Lyft came into being. Take the DC metro f

This kind of ignores the fact that the quality of public transit has been rapidly declining, and had been before Uber/Lyft came into being. Take the DC metro for example - it used to be arguably the best public rail system in the country. Now, through mismanagement and neglect, it's pretty awful. IMO dirty, unreliable public transport created a massive void that Lyft/Uber have filled.

dontreact 8y ago
Won't systems always generally decline a bit until they need a refresh? But now that refresh won't come because there will be no political pressure to do so.
- mikejulietbravo 8y ago
  Sure, but there are degrees of difference. Even 10-20 years ago, taking the tube in London vs. the Subway in NYC was a vastly different experience.
baddox 8y ago
I'll go a bit further and say that, while Uber/Lyft probably contribute to decline in public transit, those companies exist precisely because of how bad public transit was in those service areas.
- mikejulietbravo 8y ago
  100% agree. If you look at SF, there's to get from SOMA to the Marina, you can either take multiple buses plus walk (~50 minutes of travel), or take a lyft/uber which will bring you door to door in less than half the time.
  - baddox 8y ago
    I took a Lyft from Soma to the Marina last night at 5:30pm, which is pretty close to peak weeknight traffic. It cost $14 and took 17 minutes. The Muni bus would have taken 31 minutes according to Google Maps (with much higher expected variance, based on my personal experience) and would have cost $2.50 (or $2.75 if I didn’t have a preloaded Clipper card). Because of that expected duration variance; the probability of sharing a bus or bus stop with a profoundly troubled, violent, or dirty person; and the fact that the difference between $2.50 and $14 is not very significant to me; taking a Lyft was an extremely easy decision for me.

dontreact 8y ago

Won't systems always generally decline a bit until they need a refresh? But now that refresh won't come because there will be no political pressure to do so.

mikejulietbravo 8y ago
Sure, but there are degrees of difference. Even 10-20 years ago, taking the tube in London vs. the Subway in NYC was a vastly different experience.

baddox 8y ago

I'll go a bit further and say that, while Uber/Lyft probably contribute to decline in public transit, those companies exist precisely because of how bad public transit was in those service areas.

mikejulietbravo 8y ago
100% agree. If you look at SF, there's to get from SOMA to the Marina, you can either take multiple buses plus walk (~50 minutes of travel), or take a lyft/uber which will bring you door to door in less than half the time.
- baddox 8y ago
  I took a Lyft from Soma to the Marina last night at 5:30pm, which is pretty close to peak weeknight traffic. It cost $14 and took 17 minutes. The Muni bus would have taken 31 minutes according to Google Maps (with much higher expected variance, based on my personal experience) and would have cost $2.50 (or $2.75 if I didn’t have a preloaded Clipper card). Because of that expected duration variance; the probability of sharing a bus or bus stop with a profoundly troubled, violent, or dirty person; and the fact that the difference between $2.50 and $14 is not very significant to me; taking a Lyft was an extremely easy decision for me.