The reason bus operators don't do that (and Lyft is unlikely to do that) is that ridership patterns are much more stable than laymen think
-
-
"Not because people don't want to ride" Are you sure about that? Especially since routes have been cut and modernization hasn't happened?pic.twitter.com/R5yIHpB2e6
-
Clearly the *absence* of pressure from Lyft et al hasn't allowed bus transit to thrive or even keep up. Lack of alternatives...
-
...hasn't been enough to keep people from avoiding the bus if at all possible.
-
Why AREN'T transit systems adapting? Why SHOULDN'T someone, anyone, try to provide better transit than the present mess?pic.twitter.com/6pyMV8OfGn
-
The threat of governments cutting service due to hypothetical but not actual alternatives from Lyft is real, but if you know those types...
-
...of local government, you also know that they will use any excuse in the book. "More people biking now? Great, let's cut transit." etc
-
The author's premise here seems a lot closer to "I would rather transit be miserable to ride and constantly losing money..."
-
"...than for it to be in the hands of the evil, wicked, private sector." Well, as a guy who commutes 2 hours a day by bus, I disagree.
-
I don't expect Lyft is interested in, or even capable of, replacing MUNI or other transit providers. It's not going for the same market.
-
But if they did, and if their transit was more pleasant to ride and less expensive to operate--how, exactly, would that be a bad thing?
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.