The reason we are in this mess with ridesharing is because the current taxi system was and is undependable, and there are not enough taxis [“Vote delayed on driver caps for Lyft, uberX, Sidecar,” The Today File, March 6]. Even though Uber is more expensive, it arrives when they say it will, often only 5 minutes…More
You are viewing the most recent posts on this topic.
The decision by the taxi committee of the Seattle City Council to restrict the number of uberX and other ridesharing providers makes little sense [“Seattle City Council members approve driver cap on rideshare services,” The Today File, Feb. 27]. Beside promoting free enterprise, ridesharing contributes to public safety by reducing drunken driving, safeguarding women…More
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.