5 ms·

I remember reading years ago (pre Uber) that there should be more taxis in the New York City to help people get around. They quoted a professor who had, accord

I remember reading years ago (pre Uber) that there should be more taxis in the New York City to help people get around. They quoted a professor who had, according to the article, the most accurate model of NYC traffic given a large number of variables e.g. number of commuters, taxis, buses, subway frequency etc. A key take away was the a taxi (or Uber/Lyft etc) is much WORSE for traffic than a commuter car. Commuters drive in, park, leave their car all day then leave. Taxis are constantly circling and looking for fares. IIRC the impact of a taxi was several multiples of the impact of a commuter on daily gridlock. Now, I love Uber/Lyft for all of the regular reasons e.g. allows people in under-served areas get transportation, senior citizens and the disabled with more access etc. The traffic impact, however, seems pretty substantial.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
fragmede 5y ago
However, taxi/Uber/Lyfts are, y'know, moving people around while they circle the city. Commuters clog up the roads with that whole commuting thing, and those car parks are valuable real estate that could be used for anything else.
seanmcdirmid 5y ago
Why would Uber/Lyft cars be driving around looking for fares like taxis? They are going strictly by the app, so it’s not like they can’t park when the app isn’t giving them any rides, and usually they are just going from one ride to the next as they are scheduled back to back.
- andrewxdiamond 5y ago
  There is still some time in-between rides where there are no passengers in the car. If riders had a car, that dead-weight car would not be on the road.
  - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
    When it’s busy, Ubers at least will get their next ride about five minutes before completing their current ride.
    - andrewxdiamond 5y ago
      True, sometimes it will be equivalent to car travel in that way. But it will never be _always_ true. So overall, Ride share decreases car ownership, but increases traffic.
      - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
        I'm not sure. The fact that Uber drivers aren't cruising for fares is at least a huge improvement to the way taxis worked. Having spent 9 years in Beijing, it seemed like an even bigger improvement when ride sharing and even just being able to schedule a taxi with an app meant that cars and people looking for rides were connected much more easily and didn't have to go looking for each other (as I often did before). There are actually places in Beijing to wait for assignments outside of major clogged ring roads and arterials. But it really depends on the design of your city.
- analog31 5y ago
  Nowhere to park. Also, they want to be close to the "good" places so they get picked when a rider shows up.
  - oh_sigh 5y ago
    You're not going to get a ticket for waiting in a non parking spot in NYC. You'll just get asked to move if someone needs it
  - tshaddox 5y ago
    If one Uber car can take 2 people to and from work each day then that should free up 1 parking spot for the Uber and 1 more parking spot can be reclaimed for other use. :)
    - Schroedingersat 5y ago
      Not if they were the two people catching a bus that made running the bus every 15 mins rather than every 30mins viable, so now 40 people stopped using transit and 20 of them drive and take a park each. Then this slowed two other bus routes, and so on. Induced demand and congestion are complex. A taxi is probably better than a car, but neither cars or taxis have enough capacity to viably challenge congestion. You need mass transit that runs frequently and isn't stuck behind cars.
      - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
        Taxis and ubers are great if you take mass transit but need a back up. Otherwise, you might always be stuck with your car because you lack confidence that you will always be able to take the bus or metro.
        Schroedingersat 5y ago
        Huh, I think this is actually a case where uber's model is a net good rather than just extractive. There's still congestion to deal with, but a bunch of people whose main work has no set hours who can go 'it's raining, time to taxi some people who don't want to walk or cycle today' synergises well with active transport and transit.
- alasdair_ 5y ago
  There isn’t anywhere to park in downtown SF (for example) that doesn’t cost money.
np- 5y ago
I don’t know if it’s that straightforward of a comparison—while it may be true that taxis are bad for traffic, you have to take into account what the use of them is: transporting people around. If you consider the alternative where taxis don’t exist, at least some percentage of taxi passengers would probably just bring their own personal cars into the city, thus making traffic much worse. Thus, though it’s true that the impact of taxis on traffic is significant, the alternative is much worse. People still need to get around.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

fragmede 5y ago

However, taxi/Uber/Lyfts are, y'know, moving people around while they circle the city. Commuters clog up the roads with that whole commuting thing, and those car parks are valuable real estate that could be used for anything else.

seanmcdirmid 5y ago

Why would Uber/Lyft cars be driving around looking for fares like taxis? They are going strictly by the app, so it’s not like they can’t park when the app isn’t giving them any rides, and usually they are just going from one ride to the next as they are scheduled back to back.

andrewxdiamond 5y ago
There is still some time in-between rides where there are no passengers in the car. If riders had a car, that dead-weight car would not be on the road.
- seanmcdirmid 5y ago
  When it’s busy, Ubers at least will get their next ride about five minutes before completing their current ride.
  - andrewxdiamond 5y ago
    True, sometimes it will be equivalent to car travel in that way. But it will never be _always_ true. So overall, Ride share decreases car ownership, but increases traffic.
    - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
      I'm not sure. The fact that Uber drivers aren't cruising for fares is at least a huge improvement to the way taxis worked. Having spent 9 years in Beijing, it seemed like an even bigger improvement when ride sharing and even just being able to schedule a taxi with an app meant that cars and people looking for rides were connected much more easily and didn't have to go looking for each other (as I often did before). There are actually places in Beijing to wait for assignments outside of major clogged ring roads and arterials. But it really depends on the design of your city.
analog31 5y ago
Nowhere to park. Also, they want to be close to the "good" places so they get picked when a rider shows up.
- oh_sigh 5y ago
  You're not going to get a ticket for waiting in a non parking spot in NYC. You'll just get asked to move if someone needs it
- tshaddox 5y ago
  If one Uber car can take 2 people to and from work each day then that should free up 1 parking spot for the Uber and 1 more parking spot can be reclaimed for other use. :)
  - Schroedingersat 5y ago
    Not if they were the two people catching a bus that made running the bus every 15 mins rather than every 30mins viable, so now 40 people stopped using transit and 20 of them drive and take a park each. Then this slowed two other bus routes, and so on. Induced demand and congestion are complex. A taxi is probably better than a car, but neither cars or taxis have enough capacity to viably challenge congestion. You need mass transit that runs frequently and isn't stuck behind cars.
    - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
      Taxis and ubers are great if you take mass transit but need a back up. Otherwise, you might always be stuck with your car because you lack confidence that you will always be able to take the bus or metro.
      - Schroedingersat 5y ago
        Huh, I think this is actually a case where uber's model is a net good rather than just extractive. There's still congestion to deal with, but a bunch of people whose main work has no set hours who can go 'it's raining, time to taxi some people who don't want to walk or cycle today' synergises well with active transport and transit.
alasdair_ 5y ago
There isn’t anywhere to park in downtown SF (for example) that doesn’t cost money.

np- 5y ago

I don’t know if it’s that straightforward of a comparison—while it may be true that taxis are bad for traffic, you have to take into account what the use of them is: transporting people around. If you consider the alternative where taxis don’t exist, at least some percentage of taxi passengers would probably just bring their own personal cars into the city, thus making traffic much worse. Thus, though it’s true that the impact of taxis on traffic is significant, the alternative is much worse. People still need to get around.