The Times editorial “City Council rideshare plan hurts innovation” [Opinion, Dec. 23] ignores a very important piece of the relevant policy considerations. The folks who use these new systems have smartphones; others cannot utilize any advantages rideshares might offer over taxis.
Even in tech-savvy Seattle, a substantial portion of the population does not have a smartphone. This is largely a function of economics, although personal choice may play a role for some who are affluent enough but chose to forego such a device.
Topic: City Council
You are viewing the most recent posts on this topic.
Getting the homeless inside is a priority Patience with Nicklesville has proved useless. [“Editorial: Seattle Council presses on against homelessness,” Opinion, June 17.] But the first priority of the Seattle City Council and the Legislature is the construction or securing of buildings to house the homeless.The Times is right to urge more mental health and chemical…More
Give taxpayers a choice The proposal to finance Seattle City Council campaigns with a property-tax levy is a bad measure and seems like yet another grab for money — $1.5 million — by politicians to benefit what group? Ah yes, the politicians. No surprise there [“Seattle considers tax levy to fund council campaigns,” NWMonday, June…More
The Space Needle is a Seattle icon Drive the southbound I-5 corridor anytime in the evening, rain or shine, and what stands out? The most amazing view of the Space Needle surrounded by the lights of the city. It is iconic. It is beautiful and it is Seattle. When we first read about impending decisions regarding the…More