3 ms·

Isn't the purpose of Uber/Lyft exactly about increasing the number of "cabs"? I don't see a distinction here, your explanation is coincident with the causal fac

by robg 12y ago

Isn't the purpose of Uber/Lyft exactly about increasing the number of "cabs"? I don't see a distinction here, your explanation is coincident with the causal factors driving the effect.

YokoZar 12y ago
The implication of this reasoning is that local government policies designed to protect incumbent cab drivers have been doing more than creating tension when Uber wants to enter the market -- they've been literally killing people for years.
- robg 12y ago
  It wouldn't be the first time governments are biased toward entrenched interests that kill (e.g., tobacco and alcohol). If I were Uber facing regulation, I'd drive hard after these studies. Let governments explain why they favor more risks, higher costs, and worse service.
  - robg 12y ago
    Shows my bias as a researcher. Seems even better to market in this direction and against cabs. Give discounts for Ubers called from bars/clubs during nightlife hours. Team up with MADD. Give friends/bartenders a way to enter an address on an Uber they call for someone else. Even a way to "make Uber your designated driver" before the night begins.
- TeMPOraL 12y ago
  > they've been literally killing people for years Nothing strange about this implication. Many laws have similar effects. If you regulate a drug, you balance the amount of people who die because of drug toxicity vs. number of people who die because the drug wasn't available when it could fix them. If you as much as even touch employment laws, you're gambling with people's lives, changing the number of those who will die in poverty. Hell, the laws that even allow mass population to drive cars are themselves responsible for hundreds of milions of deaths to date.
  - jeffdavis 12y ago
    "Hundreds of millions" sounds like an exaggeration. Where did that come from?
    - TeMPOraL 12y ago
      I miscalculated; let me revise that to tens of milions deaths, extrapolating from [0] - "Approximately 1.24 million deaths occurred on the world’s roads in 2010". http://www.who.int/gho/road_safety/mortality/en/ http://www.who.int/gho/road_safety/mortality/en/ (I couldn't find a source for a total deaths from car accidents estimate and I need to go to sleep now; any link welcome)
- rhizome 12y ago
  To be fair, it's more complicated than that. Try to get from SF to anywhere in the East Bay at or after 2am on public transportation and you might wonder why BART stops running at 1am.
  - YokoZar 12y ago
    I'm nearly certain that running BART for longer hours would reduce drunk driving, and therefore save lives. The trouble is that BART's ticket prices don't capture enough of the value created by not being killed in a drunk driving accident, so they don't do it. The obvious solution is policy providing more public funding but requiring them to be open longer.
- baddox 12y ago
  There's no contradiction there. Cab regulations cause an increase in DUIs. Uber and Lyft cause a reduction in DUIs.

by robg 12y ago

Isn't the purpose of Uber/Lyft exactly about increasing the number of "cabs"? I don't see a distinction here, your explanation is coincident with the causal factors driving the effect.

YokoZar 12y ago

The implication of this reasoning is that local government policies designed to protect incumbent cab drivers have been doing more than creating tension when Uber wants to enter the market -- they've been literally killing people for years.

robg 12y ago
It wouldn't be the first time governments are biased toward entrenched interests that kill (e.g., tobacco and alcohol). If I were Uber facing regulation, I'd drive hard after these studies. Let governments explain why they favor more risks, higher costs, and worse service.
- robg 12y ago
  Shows my bias as a researcher. Seems even better to market in this direction and against cabs. Give discounts for Ubers called from bars/clubs during nightlife hours. Team up with MADD. Give friends/bartenders a way to enter an address on an Uber they call for someone else. Even a way to "make Uber your designated driver" before the night begins.
TeMPOraL 12y ago
> they've been literally killing people for years Nothing strange about this implication. Many laws have similar effects. If you regulate a drug, you balance the amount of people who die because of drug toxicity vs. number of people who die because the drug wasn't available when it could fix them. If you as much as even touch employment laws, you're gambling with people's lives, changing the number of those who will die in poverty. Hell, the laws that even allow mass population to drive cars are themselves responsible for hundreds of milions of deaths to date.
- jeffdavis 12y ago
  "Hundreds of millions" sounds like an exaggeration. Where did that come from?
  - TeMPOraL 12y ago
    I miscalculated; let me revise that to tens of milions deaths, extrapolating from [0] - "Approximately 1.24 million deaths occurred on the world’s roads in 2010". http://www.who.int/gho/road_safety/mortality/en/ http://www.who.int/gho/road_safety/mortality/en/ (I couldn't find a source for a total deaths from car accidents estimate and I need to go to sleep now; any link welcome)
rhizome 12y ago
To be fair, it's more complicated than that. Try to get from SF to anywhere in the East Bay at or after 2am on public transportation and you might wonder why BART stops running at 1am.
- YokoZar 12y ago
  I'm nearly certain that running BART for longer hours would reduce drunk driving, and therefore save lives. The trouble is that BART's ticket prices don't capture enough of the value created by not being killed in a drunk driving accident, so they don't do it. The obvious solution is policy providing more public funding but requiring them to be open longer.
baddox 12y ago
There's no contradiction there. Cab regulations cause an increase in DUIs. Uber and Lyft cause a reduction in DUIs.