9 ms·

I'm not sure it's possible for ridesharing to be adopted en masse by consumers at a price point that would provide healthy wages to drivers. E.g. if a rider wor

by ummonk 8y ago

I'm not sure it's possible for ridesharing to be adopted en masse by consumers at a price point that would provide healthy wages to drivers. E.g. if a rider works 40 hours a week and uses ridesharing for 2 hours a week, for the driver to earn as much as them, they'd need to be spending 5% of their pretax income on the ridesharing, in addition to gas and car value, with a multiplier on top for ridesharing inefficiencies since drivers don't magically pick up new riders in the same time and spot that they drop off. Pool / line can help lower this cost but in my experience I've ended up just riding alone more often than not anyway. Of course, that doesn't mean Uber and Lyft aren't taking an unfairly large cut of the revenue, further reducing drivers' earnings.

shereadsthenews 8y ago
I wish more people would do this math, and apply it to other topics like how to pay teachers. For services to operate in a steady state over a long term, there is some fraction of the economy they must capture. This is why fundamentally a bus or train has to beat taxi services: the amount of service provided per labor hour is potentially a lot higher.
- trhway 8y ago
  >This is why fundamentally a bus or train has to beat taxi services: the amount of service provided per labor hour is potentially a lot higher. that is looking only at one small piece of the issue. The inconvenience of the bus/train saps the time and drains mental resources from the riders which also has cost. Somewhat similar to why the A380 lost against the 787.
jacobolus 8y ago
Is anyone expecting ride-sharing to be adopted by a majority of the population for everyday trips? My impression is that taxi rides are inherently transportation for the upper middle class or occasional necessities for anyone else, not an everyday mode of transportation for the masses.
- paxys 8y ago
  Sadly with the deterioration of public transportation in major cities there is really no other option for a lot of urban commuters.
- electricslpnsld 8y ago
  When I was living in Oakland Uber Pool rides would often be cheaper than taking BART...
  - metildaa 8y ago
    Uber & Lyft are trying their hardest to sap riders from mass transit, SoCal has seen ridership fall year after year. Short of fining employers for each employee that doesn't get a transit pass through the employer, there isn't much cities can do to curb this. Seattle does this, to the tune of a $800 to $500 per employee fine if they aren't provided a transit pass depending on where the employer is located in the city. Employees can self-certify as biking or walking to work once a quarter, but a year long transit pass is less than the fine.
    - viscanti 8y ago
      > Short of fining employers for each employee that doesn't get a transit pass through the employer, there isn't much cities can do to curb this. Maybe they could make mass transit better so more people would want to use it?
      - metildaa 8y ago
        You have to create a virtuous cycle of transit ridership improving somehow, adding more busses when the riders aren't there generally doesn't cause a surge in ridership. Dedicated lanes, singal priority, off-bus payment and fining employers that don't provide transit passes is a proven way to start the cycle toward high transit ridership.
    - dragonwriter 8y ago
      > Short of fining employers for each employee that doesn't get a transit pass through the employer, there isn't much cities can do to curb this. Rather than fining employers for failure to get a transit pass for each employee, they could tax them per employee and just issue the transit passes.
anigbrowl 8y ago
for the driver to earn as much as them That seems like a weird metric.
- zinckiwi 8y ago
  1. Why should it be? 2. Even if you're a famous neurosurgeon, it's a good an index as any.
  - anigbrowl 8y ago
    Because it's uncoupled from anything. 'We can't pay drivers more because 5% of your time would be like 5% of your income.' It's meaningless.
bogomipz 8y ago
>"E.g. if a rider works 40 hours a week and uses ridesharing for 2 hours a week, for the driver to earn as much as them, they'd need to be spending 5% of their pretax income on the ridesharing, in addition to gas and car value, with a multiplier on top for ridesharing inefficiencies since drivers don't magically pick up new riders in the same time and spot that they drop off." Could you elaborate on the math? How do the 40 hours vs 2 hours relate? Where does the 5% pretax income number come from? Genuinely curious.
- duck 8y ago
  Not sure if I agree with the math, but 2 hours is 5% of 40 and it is pretax as they would have to pay taxes on top of that amount.
  - bogomipz 8y ago
    I see, that's the piece that wasn't clear this presume that both the rider and the driver make the same hourly wage. That makes sense. But like you pointed out this is pre-tax and also you have to factor in insurance, car maintenance etc so it would probably work out to much much higher.
ralph84 8y ago
5% of pretax income on transportation isn't unreasonable if it could truly replace car ownership. Most car owners in the US are likely spending more than 5% of their income on depreciation, interest, insurance, maintenance, taxes, and fuel for their cars.
- pmoriarty 8y ago
  There's also the danger of car accidents, which is much greater than that of mass transit.

by ummonk 8y ago

shereadsthenews 8y ago

I wish more people would do this math, and apply it to other topics like how to pay teachers. For services to operate in a steady state over a long term, there is some fraction of the economy they must capture. This is why fundamentally a bus or train has to beat taxi services: the amount of service provided per labor hour is potentially a lot higher.

trhway 8y ago
>This is why fundamentally a bus or train has to beat taxi services: the amount of service provided per labor hour is potentially a lot higher. that is looking only at one small piece of the issue. The inconvenience of the bus/train saps the time and drains mental resources from the riders which also has cost. Somewhat similar to why the A380 lost against the 787.

jacobolus 8y ago

Is anyone expecting ride-sharing to be adopted by a majority of the population for everyday trips? My impression is that taxi rides are inherently transportation for the upper middle class or occasional necessities for anyone else, not an everyday mode of transportation for the masses.

paxys 8y ago
Sadly with the deterioration of public transportation in major cities there is really no other option for a lot of urban commuters.
electricslpnsld 8y ago
When I was living in Oakland Uber Pool rides would often be cheaper than taking BART...
- metildaa 8y ago
  Uber & Lyft are trying their hardest to sap riders from mass transit, SoCal has seen ridership fall year after year. Short of fining employers for each employee that doesn't get a transit pass through the employer, there isn't much cities can do to curb this. Seattle does this, to the tune of a $800 to $500 per employee fine if they aren't provided a transit pass depending on where the employer is located in the city. Employees can self-certify as biking or walking to work once a quarter, but a year long transit pass is less than the fine.
  - viscanti 8y ago
    > Short of fining employers for each employee that doesn't get a transit pass through the employer, there isn't much cities can do to curb this. Maybe they could make mass transit better so more people would want to use it?
    - metildaa 8y ago
      You have to create a virtuous cycle of transit ridership improving somehow, adding more busses when the riders aren't there generally doesn't cause a surge in ridership. Dedicated lanes, singal priority, off-bus payment and fining employers that don't provide transit passes is a proven way to start the cycle toward high transit ridership.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    > Short of fining employers for each employee that doesn't get a transit pass through the employer, there isn't much cities can do to curb this. Rather than fining employers for failure to get a transit pass for each employee, they could tax them per employee and just issue the transit passes.

anigbrowl 8y ago

for the driver to earn as much as them That seems like a weird metric.

zinckiwi 8y ago
1. Why should it be? 2. Even if you're a famous neurosurgeon, it's a good an index as any.
- anigbrowl 8y ago
  Because it's uncoupled from anything. 'We can't pay drivers more because 5% of your time would be like 5% of your income.' It's meaningless.

bogomipz 8y ago

>"E.g. if a rider works 40 hours a week and uses ridesharing for 2 hours a week, for the driver to earn as much as them, they'd need to be spending 5% of their pretax income on the ridesharing, in addition to gas and car value, with a multiplier on top for ridesharing inefficiencies since drivers don't magically pick up new riders in the same time and spot that they drop off." Could you elaborate on the math? How do the 40 hours vs 2 hours relate? Where does the 5% pretax income number come from? Genuinely curious.

duck 8y ago
Not sure if I agree with the math, but 2 hours is 5% of 40 and it is pretax as they would have to pay taxes on top of that amount.
- bogomipz 8y ago
  I see, that's the piece that wasn't clear this presume that both the rider and the driver make the same hourly wage. That makes sense. But like you pointed out this is pre-tax and also you have to factor in insurance, car maintenance etc so it would probably work out to much much higher.

ralph84 8y ago

5% of pretax income on transportation isn't unreasonable if it could truly replace car ownership. Most car owners in the US are likely spending more than 5% of their income on depreciation, interest, insurance, maintenance, taxes, and fuel for their cars.

pmoriarty 8y ago
There's also the danger of car accidents, which is much greater than that of mass transit.