4 ms·

> and littering the kerb when unused I think that we have different standards here. Street parking for cars is the norm now, but it isn't altogether different

by rlpb 4y ago

> and littering the kerb when unused I think that we have different standards here. Street parking for cars is the norm now, but it isn't altogether different in principle from people leaving e-scooters "in the way" on public roads and pavements either. I accept it's a bit different as others have pointed out, but given that we generally permit street parking for cars (subject to some rules), it seems reasonable that we should also permit e-scooters to be parked and it's on society to figure out what the rules for that should be.

ilyt 4y ago
Looking at amount of e-scooters kicked over I'd say society decided they do not have a place directly on the pedestrian/cycling path. Here they eventually forbid it altoghether and now companies have to use dedicated space, not just random patch of ground they find > Street parking for cars is the norm now, but it isn't altogether different in principle from people leaving e-scooters "in the way" on public roads and pavements either. The difference is that for the most cars it's someone's personal vehicle parked near where they live, while majority of the scooters are taxi-equivalent, with personal ones just being taken home. So in first case it's public space serving public, in second it's public space serving company's margins
- rlpb 4y ago
  > The difference is that for the most cars it's someone's personal vehicle parked near where they live, while majority of the scooters are taxi-equivalent... I don't see why this distinction matters. In both cases, it's for the direct benefit of some individual, at a direct cost to others - especially those who do not benefit from and have no interest in subsidizing that particular mode of transport. In both cases, some companies profit from that (whether it's car sales and leases or e-scooter hire fees).
  - ilyt 4y ago
    The difference is taxes going into stuff the locals use vs some corporation gets for free. If they want to use public space to run their business they should pay.

by rlpb 4y ago

ilyt 4y ago

Looking at amount of e-scooters kicked over I'd say society decided they do not have a place directly on the pedestrian/cycling path. Here they eventually forbid it altoghether and now companies have to use dedicated space, not just random patch of ground they find > Street parking for cars is the norm now, but it isn't altogether different in principle from people leaving e-scooters "in the way" on public roads and pavements either. The difference is that for the most cars it's someone's personal vehicle parked near where they live, while majority of the scooters are taxi-equivalent, with personal ones just being taken home. So in first case it's public space serving public, in second it's public space serving company's margins

rlpb 4y ago
> The difference is that for the most cars it's someone's personal vehicle parked near where they live, while majority of the scooters are taxi-equivalent... I don't see why this distinction matters. In both cases, it's for the direct benefit of some individual, at a direct cost to others - especially those who do not benefit from and have no interest in subsidizing that particular mode of transport. In both cases, some companies profit from that (whether it's car sales and leases or e-scooter hire fees).
- ilyt 4y ago
  The difference is taxes going into stuff the locals use vs some corporation gets for free. If they want to use public space to run their business they should pay.