I was referring to the existing taxi services. With Uber offering poor service for wheelchairs and similar, individuals needing those services remain using tra

I was referring to the existing taxi services. With Uber offering poor service for wheelchairs and similar, individuals needing those services remain using traditional taxis. Meanwhile, the regular riders (the bulk of the profits for a company) switch to Uber for whatever reason. This results in that the additional costs for handling riders that need the extra assistance are not borne by the unlicensed companies that are not providing the ADA services that the licensed companies are required to. If one was to go with a "{A} should subsidize {B} for ADA rides" this would be "Uber should subsidize taxi companies" for the increased proportion of wheelchair accessible vans and similar that the taxi companies are required to maintain. As it is, Uber isn't spreading any of the cost of ADA rides amongst their customers or drivers because (A) Uber doesn't have a sufficient set of vehicles available to address ADA and (B) Uber drivers are discriminating and not picking up passengers that have needs covered under the ADA.