7 ms·

Honestly, I would much prefer everything get regulated at state level. I live in NJ. There are 565 municipalities here. Every single one has different regulati

Honestly, I would much prefer everything get regulated at state level. I live in NJ. There are 565 municipalities here. Every single one has different regulations. For example, if one were to pick up a prearranged regular fare from Terminal A at EWR (Newark Liberty International), they might not know that this terminal is in the City of Elizabeth. The city sometimes has plainclothes detectives write $783 tickets. For prearranged pickups by non-airport taxi, not solicitation. Uber and Lyft got regulated under a statewide 'rideshare' law here. Townships and cities can't ticket them for doing pickups. Taxis have to know all the regulation of every municipality they operate in. In the above example, Elizabeth wrote a ton of tickets for rideshare drivers before the statewide framework into effect. I'm aware large cities provide unique challenges and can understand why NYC for instance should be allowed to regulate their own taxi/livery situation, but for the rest of the state it doesn't make sense to have every little town have different regulations. Edit: Seems someone did write a petition that even covers the nuance of allowing some larger municipalities a little oversight https://www.change.org/p/new-jersey-governor-help-the-taxi-industry-taxicab-crisis-in-new-jersey-legislation-needs-to-be-changed https://www.change.org/p/new-jersey-governor-help-the-taxi-i...

woodpanel 8y ago
Echoing you concern and somehow related: in Germany it is almost impossible to get state of the art software infrastructure on the road for customers of public transit because of the fragmentation of transportation providers. Municipalities run their own systems and while not all of them are actively sabotaging attempts at increased coherence, none of them has any incentive to increase coherence either. If it weren't for the state-run federal railway system, that runs also commuter railways in all German cities (and thus can enforce pressure) I reckon there would even be no software to calculate a ride from one end of the country to the other. And there would certainly be no product like the BahnCard, were you can use all of Germany's public transit for ~4.200 € / year.
- adrianN 8y ago
  Japan has bunch of different rail providers that run parts of the network. I wonder how the interoperability problems are solved over there.
  - woodpanel 8y ago
    That's true and as interesting it is, that it seems to be working is, that most, if not all providers are private companies. I don't have an answer to that...
  - klodolph 8y ago
    Well, sure. But long distances are usually covered by Shinkansen, and shorter distances are often covered by one of the regional JRs. All of these are supported by JRS (https://www.jrs.co.jp/english/ https://www.jrs.co.jp/english/) which run IT and the railway information services. You only need to buy one ticket for a JR trip even though several companies may be operating the trains you use. For more local service, there are also private railways and various metro systems. They sometimes have agreements to allow transfers between them, like the two Tokyo subways. So if you are going to use two different subway systems in Tokyo, you buy a transfer ticket and have to pass through a gate in the middle of your trip to transfer to the other system.
    - CaptainZapp 8y ago
      They sometimes have agreements to allow transfers between them, like the two Tokyo subways. That's a pretty gross understatement. There are more than a dozen companies operating public transport systems in Tokyo alone and it's all interconnected. They don't only seemlessly interconnect (via PASMO or SWICA smart cards), but they also share common designators for their station labellings. So if you are going to use two different subway systems in Tokyo, you buy a transfer ticket and have to pass through a gate in the middle of your trip to transfer to the other system. I remeber exactly that. But that was around the year 2000, where it was really difficult to use public transport without a guide as a foreigner. Today, with a smart card, consistent and unique labelling of every station, regardless who operates it, and all ticket machines talking perfect English it's a breeze.
- TulliusCicero 8y ago
  Yeah this is a really frustrating. A lot of the transit agencies don't have their schedules on third-party apps, and even the ones that do don't seem to usually release real-time data. For example I'm in Munich, Google Maps shows schedules but not real-time departures, and the data definitely exists somewhere since their own apps show it. Of course, since this is a random one-off transit agency app, the UX is absolutely atrocious compared to Google Maps.
- Xylakant 8y ago
  > were you can use all of Germany's public transit for ~4.200 € / year. Well, you can't. You can use Railway and S-Bahn because S-Bahn is traditionally owned by the DB. You can also use other public transport in the specific regions that the DB negotiated for, the ones that are included as "city" on a long distance railway ticket. These regions do not even always align with the regions for public transport, for example "City" in Berlin is not aligned with the A,B or C regions for local tickets, it's mostly A plus some. The full list is here https://www.bahn.de/p/view/angebot/cityticket.shtml https://www.bahn.de/p/view/angebot/cityticket.shtml
  - woodpanel 8y ago
    Yes there are some exceptions, but you're just proving my point: Even the Bahn can't negotiate full alignment across Germany although its only the largest of cities that don't accept the BC100 completely. Then again, almost all of those cities have an extensive S-Bahn system, so we're really just talking about some subways across Germany where you still have to pay extra. Case in point is Berlin: What edge case does it have to be for a typical BC100 owner to travel across Germany and have to visit Zone B or C with a subway but not with a S-Bahn? https://www.bahn.de/wmedia/view/mdb/media/intern/cityticket_c9.pdf https://www.bahn.de/wmedia/view/mdb/media/intern/cityticket_...
    - Xylakant 8y ago
      It’s not an edge case. Zone B begins at the inner S-Bahn-Ring. There’s a lot of destinations that are reachable via U-Bahn and Bus/Tram outside the inner ring. It’s so common to travel outside zone A that you can’t even buy a zone A ticket, it’s always A+B Keep in mind that “city” is only available for 120 cities in germany in the first place.
klodolph 8y ago
Keep in mind that New Jersey has the highest average population density in the country, and it’s 34x more dense than Oregon, on average! New Jersey’s population density is an almost an order of magnitude closer to Portland’s population density. Then when you take a look at the municipalities in Oregon and New Jersey, even bigger differences appear. Oregon’s population is overwhelmingly concentrated in Portland and the greater Portland metropolitan area (which includes Beaverton, Hillsboro, Gresham). Something like 50% of the state population lives in the metro area as of 2010 census, and it’s a small part of the state, geographically. Over 500k in Portland alone. Look at New Jersey and you get a radically different picture, at least if you look at municipalities. The distribution between municipalities is much more even. Also note that the airport, Portland International Airport, is within Portland city limits, proper. I would say that lessons learned in New Jersey do not translate well to Oregon. Speaking as someone who lived years in Oregon and years in New York, it’s easy to underestimate the differences. It took me a while to understand (as little as I do) the political and geographical divisions in New Jersey, and let me tell you, they are not like the political and geographical divisions of Oregon. Here’s a population density map of New Jersey: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:New_Jersey_Population_Map.png https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:New_Jersey_Populatio... List of municipalities in New Jersey: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_municipalities_in_New_Jersey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_municipalities_in_New_... Population density map of Oregon: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Oregon_population_map_2000.png https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Oregon_population_ma... List of cities in Oregon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_Oregon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_Oregon Just to paint more of a picture, Salem and Eugene are ranked #2 and #3. From my personal experience as a driver, these cities are NOT like Portland and it would be absurd to regulate them in the same way. Even “downtown” Salem and Eugene, such as they are, do not suffer from traffic in remotely the same way that Portland and the surrounding metro area does. What makes this worse is that Portland has been experiencing high growth rates for many years now, and the traffic infrastructure has not been able to keep up with the number of cars on the road. Traffic is shockingly worse compared to ten or twenty years ago, and Portland needs to be able to make the policy and infrastructure changes to fix that.
blahblahthrow 8y ago
Conversely, what if every single person in a small town agrees on a regulation that they feel is in their best interest? Why shouldn't transport providers be bound by that? These are mostly local services, it's only the behemoth tech companies coming in to offer "ride sharing" that really benefit from uniform laws across the state in 99% of cases.
- ineedasername 8y ago
  They may be local, but they aren't bound to a single township. I live in a suburb, and there's no way a rideshare operator in my ares could function without consistently operating in at least 30 different local municipalities. Each small town deciding what is in their own best interest may conflict with what is in broader interest of people outside that town. If municipalities start passing their own rules that in some way limit rideshare & cab rides, all of a sudden you have drivers saying "sorry, I don't go to towns x, y and z". Or "I have to drive through town x & y to get you to z, and they have $5 surcharges on each ride, so that will be $10 extra for the ride." Then every town catches on to this revenue source and all pass similar rules, and a 20 minute trip costs an extra $20. I live 10 minutes away from where I work and still touch 3 towns on my way. The narrow self interest of a small group isn't always compatible with the larger group, or even the small group's own longer term interest.
  - tzs 8y ago
    > Or "I have to drive through town x & y to get you to z, and they have $5 surcharges on each ride, so that will be $10 extra for the ride." If the ride does not terminate in x or y, and is using an ordinary passenger car, I doubt that such a regulation would be enforceable specifically against ride services unless the town could show a specific danger from them. I think they would have to charge $5 for every non-resident vehicle passing through, not just ride service vehicles, to get away with it.
    - ineedasername 8y ago
      They can do it by making operators register with the town and provide accounting of their ride fares quarterly regardless of whether or not they had any fares within the town (Just like businesses in my state must file quarterly sales tax returns regardless of whether they had taxable sales in that quarter). It could be enforced the same way any other traffic-related law gets enforced: police can pull you over, and impound your car if you aren't registered. Sure, not everyone would get caught, but it would be a stiff enough penalty that drivers would either comply or avoid the town. I'm not saying it would be practical, but this is the sort of law you'd get if every town is allowed to make their own rules about such things.
TuringNYC 8y ago
>> I'm aware large cities provide unique challenges and can understand why NYC for instance should be allowed to regulate their own taxi/livery situation, Firstly -- NYC's regulation of Uber/Lyft probably had much to do with the mayor's massive campaighn donations received from the TLC: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/18/nyregion/de-blasio-reaps-big-donations-from-taxi-industry-he-aided.html https://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/18/nyregion/de-blasio-reaps-... NYTIMES: Taxi Industry Opens Wallet for de Blasio, a Chief Ally by MICHAEL M. GRYNBAUMJULY 17, 2012 I wish Uber/Lyft had lobbied more heavily in NYC...it isnt as if the other side was not lobbying. The cap on Uber/Lyft in NYC is regressive and particularly cruel to the poor. NYC transit has been in a death spiral for several years now and often becomes unusable in weekends/off-hours and in outer-boroughs (you know...when working class individuals commute.) A let-them-eat-cake approach to suggesting that Yellow Cabs (~40$+/ride from Brooklyn) are a solution is absurd when pooled Uber/Lyft offer far better prices and a more sophisticated product (shared rides for 3-4 people.)
- bobthepanda 8y ago
  Medallions have always been regulated and restricted, not to benefit an asset owning class of rent seekers (that was a side effect), but to prevent the narrow, constricted island of Manhattan from choking on gridlock. Lyft and Uber essentially abused a loophole and caused traffic speeds to decline in the core. Congestion pricing with a fee on all yellow & black car rides for origin and destination within CBD would be the best way other than a cap to regulate this, but that is still quite the political lift due to the windshield perspective of the city’s and state’s politicians.
  - jakob223 8y ago
    Why is the fee only on yellow and black car rides, rather than on all cars? Shouldn't we prefer non-private vehicles on the street instead of ones that will do parking?
    - bobthepanda 8y ago
      Congestion pricing is a toll around Manhattan south of 60th St. Private cars would pay only on entering or exiting, since you can't use a private car to pick up strangers in New York (even Uber and Lyft use black cabs, which have a different license from yellow cabs that only covers pre-arranged rides and not street hails). Since cabs may not necessarily enter or exit the CBD while doing the trip within it, a fee equivalent to the toll should be charged for an origin in the CBD or a destination in the CBD, with a double fee charged if the trip stays wholly within it. The purpose of such a fee and toll would be to keep vehicles flowing. Cabs are actually worse than private cars for this, since private cars spend most of their time parked while cabs spend their time between fares driving in circles. Parking externality is handled separately; there is a tax on parking fees, and the total number of off-street spots has been capped for a while.
LifeLiverTransp 8y ago
State of the Union: european

woodpanel 8y ago

Echoing you concern and somehow related: in Germany it is almost impossible to get state of the art software infrastructure on the road for customers of public transit because of the fragmentation of transportation providers. Municipalities run their own systems and while not all of them are actively sabotaging attempts at increased coherence, none of them has any incentive to increase coherence either. If it weren't for the state-run federal railway system, that runs also commuter railways in all German cities (and thus can enforce pressure) I reckon there would even be no software to calculate a ride from one end of the country to the other. And there would certainly be no product like the BahnCard, were you can use all of Germany's public transit for ~4.200 € / year.

adrianN 8y ago
Japan has bunch of different rail providers that run parts of the network. I wonder how the interoperability problems are solved over there.
- woodpanel 8y ago
  That's true and as interesting it is, that it seems to be working is, that most, if not all providers are private companies. I don't have an answer to that...
- klodolph 8y ago
  Well, sure. But long distances are usually covered by Shinkansen, and shorter distances are often covered by one of the regional JRs. All of these are supported by JRS (https://www.jrs.co.jp/english/ https://www.jrs.co.jp/english/) which run IT and the railway information services. You only need to buy one ticket for a JR trip even though several companies may be operating the trains you use. For more local service, there are also private railways and various metro systems. They sometimes have agreements to allow transfers between them, like the two Tokyo subways. So if you are going to use two different subway systems in Tokyo, you buy a transfer ticket and have to pass through a gate in the middle of your trip to transfer to the other system.
  - CaptainZapp 8y ago
    They sometimes have agreements to allow transfers between them, like the two Tokyo subways. That's a pretty gross understatement. There are more than a dozen companies operating public transport systems in Tokyo alone and it's all interconnected. They don't only seemlessly interconnect (via PASMO or SWICA smart cards), but they also share common designators for their station labellings. So if you are going to use two different subway systems in Tokyo, you buy a transfer ticket and have to pass through a gate in the middle of your trip to transfer to the other system. I remeber exactly that. But that was around the year 2000, where it was really difficult to use public transport without a guide as a foreigner. Today, with a smart card, consistent and unique labelling of every station, regardless who operates it, and all ticket machines talking perfect English it's a breeze.
TulliusCicero 8y ago
Yeah this is a really frustrating. A lot of the transit agencies don't have their schedules on third-party apps, and even the ones that do don't seem to usually release real-time data. For example I'm in Munich, Google Maps shows schedules but not real-time departures, and the data definitely exists somewhere since their own apps show it. Of course, since this is a random one-off transit agency app, the UX is absolutely atrocious compared to Google Maps.
Xylakant 8y ago
> were you can use all of Germany's public transit for ~4.200 € / year. Well, you can't. You can use Railway and S-Bahn because S-Bahn is traditionally owned by the DB. You can also use other public transport in the specific regions that the DB negotiated for, the ones that are included as "city" on a long distance railway ticket. These regions do not even always align with the regions for public transport, for example "City" in Berlin is not aligned with the A,B or C regions for local tickets, it's mostly A plus some. The full list is here https://www.bahn.de/p/view/angebot/cityticket.shtml https://www.bahn.de/p/view/angebot/cityticket.shtml
- woodpanel 8y ago
  Yes there are some exceptions, but you're just proving my point: Even the Bahn can't negotiate full alignment across Germany although its only the largest of cities that don't accept the BC100 completely. Then again, almost all of those cities have an extensive S-Bahn system, so we're really just talking about some subways across Germany where you still have to pay extra. Case in point is Berlin: What edge case does it have to be for a typical BC100 owner to travel across Germany and have to visit Zone B or C with a subway but not with a S-Bahn? https://www.bahn.de/wmedia/view/mdb/media/intern/cityticket_c9.pdf https://www.bahn.de/wmedia/view/mdb/media/intern/cityticket_...
  - Xylakant 8y ago
    It’s not an edge case. Zone B begins at the inner S-Bahn-Ring. There’s a lot of destinations that are reachable via U-Bahn and Bus/Tram outside the inner ring. It’s so common to travel outside zone A that you can’t even buy a zone A ticket, it’s always A+B Keep in mind that “city” is only available for 120 cities in germany in the first place.

klodolph 8y ago

Keep in mind that New Jersey has the highest average population density in the country, and it’s 34x more dense than Oregon, on average! New Jersey’s population density is an almost an order of magnitude closer to Portland’s population density. Then when you take a look at the municipalities in Oregon and New Jersey, even bigger differences appear. Oregon’s population is overwhelmingly concentrated in Portland and the greater Portland metropolitan area (which includes Beaverton, Hillsboro, Gresham). Something like 50% of the state population lives in the metro area as of 2010 census, and it’s a small part of the state, geographically. Over 500k in Portland alone. Look at New Jersey and you get a radically different picture, at least if you look at municipalities. The distribution between municipalities is much more even. Also note that the airport, Portland International Airport, is within Portland city limits, proper. I would say that lessons learned in New Jersey do not translate well to Oregon. Speaking as someone who lived years in Oregon and years in New York, it’s easy to underestimate the differences. It took me a while to understand (as little as I do) the political and geographical divisions in New Jersey, and let me tell you, they are not like the political and geographical divisions of Oregon. Here’s a population density map of New Jersey: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:New_Jersey_Population_Map.png https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:New_Jersey_Populatio... List of municipalities in New Jersey: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_municipalities_in_New_Jersey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_municipalities_in_New_... Population density map of Oregon: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Oregon_population_map_2000.png https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Oregon_population_ma... List of cities in Oregon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_Oregon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_Oregon Just to paint more of a picture, Salem and Eugene are ranked #2 and #3. From my personal experience as a driver, these cities are NOT like Portland and it would be absurd to regulate them in the same way. Even “downtown” Salem and Eugene, such as they are, do not suffer from traffic in remotely the same way that Portland and the surrounding metro area does. What makes this worse is that Portland has been experiencing high growth rates for many years now, and the traffic infrastructure has not been able to keep up with the number of cars on the road. Traffic is shockingly worse compared to ten or twenty years ago, and Portland needs to be able to make the policy and infrastructure changes to fix that.

blahblahthrow 8y ago

Conversely, what if every single person in a small town agrees on a regulation that they feel is in their best interest? Why shouldn't transport providers be bound by that? These are mostly local services, it's only the behemoth tech companies coming in to offer "ride sharing" that really benefit from uniform laws across the state in 99% of cases.

ineedasername 8y ago
They may be local, but they aren't bound to a single township. I live in a suburb, and there's no way a rideshare operator in my ares could function without consistently operating in at least 30 different local municipalities. Each small town deciding what is in their own best interest may conflict with what is in broader interest of people outside that town. If municipalities start passing their own rules that in some way limit rideshare & cab rides, all of a sudden you have drivers saying "sorry, I don't go to towns x, y and z". Or "I have to drive through town x & y to get you to z, and they have $5 surcharges on each ride, so that will be $10 extra for the ride." Then every town catches on to this revenue source and all pass similar rules, and a 20 minute trip costs an extra $20. I live 10 minutes away from where I work and still touch 3 towns on my way. The narrow self interest of a small group isn't always compatible with the larger group, or even the small group's own longer term interest.
- tzs 8y ago
  > Or "I have to drive through town x & y to get you to z, and they have $5 surcharges on each ride, so that will be $10 extra for the ride." If the ride does not terminate in x or y, and is using an ordinary passenger car, I doubt that such a regulation would be enforceable specifically against ride services unless the town could show a specific danger from them. I think they would have to charge $5 for every non-resident vehicle passing through, not just ride service vehicles, to get away with it.
  - ineedasername 8y ago
    They can do it by making operators register with the town and provide accounting of their ride fares quarterly regardless of whether or not they had any fares within the town (Just like businesses in my state must file quarterly sales tax returns regardless of whether they had taxable sales in that quarter). It could be enforced the same way any other traffic-related law gets enforced: police can pull you over, and impound your car if you aren't registered. Sure, not everyone would get caught, but it would be a stiff enough penalty that drivers would either comply or avoid the town. I'm not saying it would be practical, but this is the sort of law you'd get if every town is allowed to make their own rules about such things.

TuringNYC 8y ago

>> I'm aware large cities provide unique challenges and can understand why NYC for instance should be allowed to regulate their own taxi/livery situation, Firstly -- NYC's regulation of Uber/Lyft probably had much to do with the mayor's massive campaighn donations received from the TLC: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/18/nyregion/de-blasio-reaps-big-donations-from-taxi-industry-he-aided.html https://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/18/nyregion/de-blasio-reaps-... NYTIMES: Taxi Industry Opens Wallet for de Blasio, a Chief Ally by MICHAEL M. GRYNBAUMJULY 17, 2012 I wish Uber/Lyft had lobbied more heavily in NYC...it isnt as if the other side was not lobbying. The cap on Uber/Lyft in NYC is regressive and particularly cruel to the poor. NYC transit has been in a death spiral for several years now and often becomes unusable in weekends/off-hours and in outer-boroughs (you know...when working class individuals commute.) A let-them-eat-cake approach to suggesting that Yellow Cabs (~40$+/ride from Brooklyn) are a solution is absurd when pooled Uber/Lyft offer far better prices and a more sophisticated product (shared rides for 3-4 people.)

bobthepanda 8y ago
Medallions have always been regulated and restricted, not to benefit an asset owning class of rent seekers (that was a side effect), but to prevent the narrow, constricted island of Manhattan from choking on gridlock. Lyft and Uber essentially abused a loophole and caused traffic speeds to decline in the core. Congestion pricing with a fee on all yellow & black car rides for origin and destination within CBD would be the best way other than a cap to regulate this, but that is still quite the political lift due to the windshield perspective of the city’s and state’s politicians.
- jakob223 8y ago
  Why is the fee only on yellow and black car rides, rather than on all cars? Shouldn't we prefer non-private vehicles on the street instead of ones that will do parking?
  - bobthepanda 8y ago
    Congestion pricing is a toll around Manhattan south of 60th St. Private cars would pay only on entering or exiting, since you can't use a private car to pick up strangers in New York (even Uber and Lyft use black cabs, which have a different license from yellow cabs that only covers pre-arranged rides and not street hails). Since cabs may not necessarily enter or exit the CBD while doing the trip within it, a fee equivalent to the toll should be charged for an origin in the CBD or a destination in the CBD, with a double fee charged if the trip stays wholly within it. The purpose of such a fee and toll would be to keep vehicles flowing. Cabs are actually worse than private cars for this, since private cars spend most of their time parked while cabs spend their time between fares driving in circles. Parking externality is handled separately; there is a tax on parking fees, and the total number of off-street spots has been capped for a while.

LifeLiverTransp 8y ago

State of the Union: european