A new study from Boston has been heralded as “proof” that ride-hailing systems such as Uber and Lyft are making congestion worse. Indeed, the survey of 944 people using these services found that “over 15 percent of ride-hailing trips are adding cars to the region’s roadways during the morning or afternoon rush hours.” However, the study doesn’t estimate exactly how many cars are added, and it might be fairly small compared to the total that are already there.
In fact, the study’s other conclusions are far more interesting, some of them unintentionally. About 42 percent of the 944 people surveyed said that, if ride-hailing were not available, they would have taken transit. Since a previous survey in California found that only a third of ride-hailers would have taken transit, this latest survey suggests that ride hailing is having an even bigger impact on transit that previously thought.
The study also found that only 12 percent out of that 42 percent of people who otherwise would have taken transit were traveling during rush hours. Thus, more than two-thirds of ride-hailing takes place during non-rush hours and isn’t contributing to congestion.
The study also questioned the notion that ride-hailing companies would be a transit “partner” providing service for the “last mile.” Only “about 9% of home-based ride-hailing trips were used to reach a transit connection,” the survey found.
Particularly devastating for transit is the finding that about 35 percent of ride-hailing users who answered the survey have a transit pass, so the cost of riding transit instead of Uber or Lyft for them is effectively zero. But transit is clearly not providing the service they need.
The study further estimated that “the average ride-hailing trip represents 35 cents of lost fare revenue for the MBTA,” Boston’s transit agency. The state charges the ride-hailing companies 20 cents a ride, and the authors of the study seemed to take it for granted that, since “a reliable and effective transit system” is “essential,” ride hailing should be penalized even more for taking money from transit.
This is a peculiar attitude. Someone recently announced that Apple is now selling more watches than all of the watchmakers in Switzerland. Should Apple pay a fee to compensate the Swiss watchmakers for their lost revenue? Of course not. So why do people take it for granted that the transit industry deserves compensation when someone develops a superior service?
You can choose the best one by looking at the customer and website reviews to get the best results it’s advised that you viagra 20mg cipla have an inside/outside approach; eat only the most healthful food and supplements while using organic lotions ,soaps, shampoos and make-up of the highest quality only. This medication comes in two structures, tablets and Kamagra Oral Jelly. supplementprofessors.com viagra ordering Improper rest and increased stressful environment are proven to be safe to generic viagra order be used as a solution for women. The antioxidant activities of Glycyrrhiza glabra, Eugenia jambolana, Curcuma longa, Casearia esculenta, Asparagus racemosus, Tinospora cordifolia, Berberis aristata, Phyllanthus amarus, Swertia chirata, Aloe vera and henna are used to tadalafil pills nourish the hair and mustard oil when applied warm on the scalp has the ability to stimulate circulation and promote hair growth.
Unlike most public transit systems, ride-hailing drivers pay the same gas taxes, tolls, and vehicle registration fees as private drivers, and there is no need to increase those fees any more than they should be increased for other users. Rather than Uber and Lyft compensating transit, it is more reasonable to think that ride-hailing drivers deserve compensation for the revenues they lose due to heavy subsidies to the transit industry.
The conventional wisdom is that ride-hailing companies are taking the cream of transit’s customers, leaving transit with just low-income riders. Even if true, it shouldn’t matter, but this survey found that the incomes of ride-hailing users “are similar to the region overall, and a substantial number of trips are made by people from households earning less than $38,000 per year,” mostly people in the workforce, not students. This suggests that transit is so inferior that many low-income people are willing to pay considerably more than the cost of transit to get better service.
Of course, it isn’t hard to find MBTA to be inferior. As the Boston Herald revealed yesterday, Boston’s transit system is “plagued by near-constant service issues.” These include an average of almost one train derailment a month, five train delays per day, and below-average bus frequencies in low-income neighborhoods relative to higher-income neighborhoods. The paper noted that the state Public Utilities Department recently warned that the city’s light-rail system is “stretched to the limit” and in danger of more serious problems unless MBTA spends more money on maintenance. Of course, it doesn’t have that money because it is spending $2.3 billion building a 3.7-mile light-rail extension.
This kind of insfrastructure neglect wouldn’t happen among ride-hailing services. If an Uber or Lyft driver used a worn-out car that was prone to breakdowns and delays, they would get negative reviews from users and be dumped by the ride-hailing companies. People can’t do the same for transit systems as they are mostly monopolies, so they quit riding transit and start hailing rides.
At the same time, it is almost guaranteed that the cities whose transit systems are hurt the most by ride-hailing are also the cities whose transit systems are declining due to lack of maintenance. That’s because the cities with older rail systems are also the cities with the population densities that make ride hailing work best. Ride hailing also works in low-density cities, but these don’t have big, expensive transit systems that are falling apart (yet).
In the end, ride hailing shouldn’t be seen as parasite imposing congestion on cities and stealing from transit systems. Instead, it is a great advance in mobility that benefits its users as well as the providers at little or no cost to taxpayers. If transit is hurt by it, then — like Radio Shack, Blockbuster, and other obsolete commercial companies — the transit industry should quietly roll up its rails and go away.
Transits View point: Ridesharing leads to greater traffic and inmobility and and inequity
Antiplanners viewpoint: This suggests that transit is so inferior that many low-income people are willing to pay considerably more than the cost of transit to get better service.
The real point: People look at shit differently……. one man sees it and says ewwww.
another looks at it as a money making opportunity…..especially if he’s in the septic or fertilizer business.
Transit agencies will never admit their “panacea” is a dying model.
Infrastructure plans should have a golden rule. NO spending on any new infrastructure until whatever current systems they have are repaired. Since DC’s Redline will never be repaired, we’ll never have to worry about DC ever spending money on rail ever again. Silicon Valley has already rendered rail transit obsolete not with anything high tech ironically, a simple solution they shuttle their employees for free.
Every other industry has become demand oriented service or at least highly diversified, entertainment (Netflix, redbox) / food (fast,restaraunt, home cooked) / energy (oil,gas, wind, solar, electric or gas cars) why hasn’t the transit industry. Because they make money regardless of efficiency or efficacy of service
Do we have anything out there where people are measuring actions, not words? People tend to tell other people what they think they should hear. Over the years I’ve worked in all sorts of downtowns with co-workers that spoke like a good lefty. Yet when push came to shove, you’d eventually learn – and some of them genuinely tried to hide it – that they drove to work every day instead of taking the bus or train.
I’d be willing to bet a large portion of this small sample set in Boston had stopped actually using transit for years before Uber and Lyft ever came to town.
The Antiplanner wrote:
Unlike most public transit systems, ride-hailing drivers pay the same gas taxes, tolls, and vehicle registration fees as private drivers, and there is no need to increase those fees any more than they should be increased for other users. Rather than Uber and Lyft compensating transit, it is more reasonable to think that ride-hailing drivers deserve compensation for the revenues they lose due to heavy subsidies to the transit industry.
Isn’t this the same sort of reasoning used in states like New York, Pennsylvania and Virginia? Formerly Maryland too. There are plenty of people (included elected officials) that assert that it is “fair” to divert toll road and toll crossing revenue to transit subsidies. Sometimes these diversions are rationalized as “leveling the playing field.”
So if such reasoning is acceptable, then it seems that taxing the ride-hailing companies to subsidize old-line transit providers would also be considered “fair.”
The claims that Uber/Lyft etal are hurting poor people are pure lies, exploiting poor people to keep their high-paying jobs and their monopoly on transportation.
Poor people use these services for shopping, medical appointments etc all the time.
A poor person who can’t afford a car now has one at his/her beck and call. Even if they used these services every single day, it would be less than the cost of maintaining/insuring/parking a car in a place like Boston (not even counting the capital costs of buying a car).
Poor people’s lives are improved by these services but the agencies that “care” for the poor people don’t like it – and will use all of their taxpayer funded powers to stop this from succeeding.
I currently have a job just outside downtown Boston. My options are
1 Drive to Train Station. ( 10 min) Pay for parking . take Train to Boston (60 min.) change to the T ( subway ) change to the T ( bus ) to stop near work – 45 min . walk to work ( 15 min) daily cost ~ $ 21 RT
2 Drive to direct to T subway station pay for parking ( 45 min ) subway change subway lines to bus to stop near work – walk ( 40 min ) daily cost ( $ 15 )
3 Drive directly to office and secure free parking ( 65 min ) daily cost ( ~ $8 )
……… so not really a hard choice. Even if I still lived in the city a car is faster and cheaper and MUCH more reliable than the T .