Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

You are completely discounting the positive externalities that arise from "ride-sharing" (a ridiculous term) services such as Uber and Lyft. This is the opposite of misguided central planning in my opinion for a number of reasons.

According to the California DMV, after a record high number 215000 DUI arrests in 2008, the number of DUI arrests has decreased year after year. Uber and a lot of the other ride sharing apps started in about 2009. In 2013, the latest year for which I could find data on, the number of arrests had plummeted to 160000. While this information may not be all that pertinent to VC investors, it certainly has benefits for the general public. Here is a link to the data (pg5):

https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/wcm/connect/77b8b0e3-c20b-42b0...

With the options provided by the sudden ubiquity of ride-sharing apps paired with a surge of investment in public transportation has led to some residents of Los Angeles forgoing car ownership. This is a massive shift in consciousness for a city derided for and held up as the model of urban sprawl. I've even started using a combination of biking, ride-sharing, and public transportation for commuting to work/play.

From a more personal standpoint, I can not be happier to see the death of the taxi industry. Taxi drivers would routinely give me one look and pass me by even after calling ahead because of the color of my skin. The taxi industry in Los Angeles is largely dominated by recent Armenian immigrants who most likely are not that familiar with the different cultures here in SoCal. One driver who was a bit more enlightened told me that in their taxi training class they explicitly are told to avoid picking up black passengers if possible. In fact, it got so bad, that police launched a sting and the LA city council passed new laws to target discrimination: http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-lax-taxis-race...

Uber's bust this year is so spectacular because they pulled out in China because they went up against and lost to a consortium that included Alibaba, George Soros, GM, and a number of other interests who were scared shitless that if Uber won, they would dominate not only ride-sharing, but transportation in general...globally. That is Uber's ultimate aim. Yes, they lost a couple billion. But it was worth doing because if they were successful, they'd be the dominant global player. In the end, they lost to a more innovative company in Didi Xiang (I believe they were mixing dating with ridesharing among other features).

The dot-com bust was only a bust if you take a personal, myopic, short-term view. While a lot of people may have lost their shirts, that money didn't vanish into a black hole. The investment in infrastructure is responsible for the Internet as we know it today. It's not perfect, but it's pretty much at the level of a William Gibson novel. Honestly, I am hoping they turn car ownership into an expensive luxury option. I can finally enjoy driving in the California sunshine without any ill-suited and undertrained drivers on the road.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: