The average person's response to being told they'd have to take another driver's test isn't to replace driving with Uber/Lyft. You're in a unique position to be able to afford to replace all driving with ridesharing, since gas+insurance+maintenance costs are much lower than say, a month of commuting to an office via rideshare.
There are tons of people who could have replaced their car with rideshare and maybe some public transit, and still come out cheaper.
Insurance, parking, fuel, depreciation, maintenance, and random events add up. If you don't need it for commuting, most of the recurring rideshare costs vanish.
If you need to make an extra long occasional trip, car rental for a day or two outweighs ownership.
Edit: To be clear, anything other than a car is cheaper for many (not all) people. (e)Bike, shared scooter, walking, trolley, Uber/Lyft, taxi, carpooling, etc. Cities are expensive and small towns are small.
On average, ~50% of car trips are under 2 miles. A car is not required for most of those in most locations.
For my commute, the cost of ridesharing breaks even with the cost of buying a parking space in the city (Boston) if you go to work an average of 4 days per week or fewer. (at least pre-covid, I'm not sure if parking is cheaper these days). Once you factor in insurance and maintenance, for some cars you would get to 5 days.
An unlimited use trolley/bus pass is $150/month in my city. Suppose I spend $200/month on gas/insurance/maintenance. The marginal cost of having commutes that take half as much time, to me, is worth it. Otherwise, you could be spending 30 more hours a month commuting to save $50.
Now add $300/month for a parking space in an apartment building, $10/day for parking in a garage downtown near your office, plus your car payment/depreciation of the car you're driving.
Also not all public transit trips take twice as long as a car. In many urban places (which is where any of this scenario makes sense) at rush hour a trip on public transit is often about equivalent to driving if not shorter.
That equation doesn't work out in every city obviously. In SF a trip to the Mountain View (GOOG HQ) by car is an hour and change regardless if you drive or take CalTrain. If you live and work downtown, walking is a perfectly valid option as well.
This is not true for everyone. I track my ride share spending and it’s significantly lower than owning a car. I spend less that $200 a month on average (2019 avg was $196).
I’m in a unique position to do this, because i put myself in that position. i moved near my work and live in an urban area.
even if it cost $400 a month, i would still do it this way. i read when i’m in the car, i wouldn’t trade that for staring at the road.
If you’re in the Bay, or really any other major tech hub in the US, you should also factor the increased cost of rent or mortgage payments into that calculation. I’m lucky to be remote, but if I moved close enough to SF or the Valley to spend only $200/month on ride shares to the office, my mortgage would at least triple. This would far offset any savings in gas/insurance/maintenance.
I’m happy that you’ve found a good situation for yourself and I don’t mean to disparage it. I just don’t think the comparison you’ve made is quite complete.
The reason rents and mortgages in transportation and commute friendly areas of the country are high is because those locations are desirable.
If one enjoys the lifestyle, spending less on transportation and shifting that spending to housing is a net win. That's how I did it, and for about eight of my eleven years in the Bay, I wouldn't have had it any other way.
I left the Bay in 2018 because I got a remote job and didn't feel like I was getting my money's worth from the city life. Pretty clearly, in 2020, much of what makes city living good is gone, but it will come back; whether that's a matter of years or decades is very much an open question.
The problem in SF is that Uber/Lyft has become some convenient that its been diverting people from transit and putting them into single occupant cars (the driver doens't count). Much of the traffic congestion is coming from Uber/Lyft
Counting rideshare cars as "single occupant vehicles" is not "double counting" -- whether I drive in to work and park my car myself, or I take Uber and get dropped off, that's still one trip so it's the same congestion. If he picks up another fare immediately, then that's a new single occupant vehicle trip.
But I think it's rare during commute hours that a ride share driver will drop someone off downtown and immediately find another fare, he's going to have to leave downtown to get his next passenger. So that Uber driver is worse than a single occupant vehicle, he's made 2 trips for one passenger (once to drop me off, once to leave downtown to pick up his next fare).
In off hours, sure, the driver brings someone in, then doesn't have to search far to find someone else looking for a ride, but during commute hours I don't think that's true.
When I was living in Dallas in 2014 I was using Uber full time and it was less than half the total cost of ownership of owning a used car at the time. And paying $10 to park downtown each day. It was about $3.15 one way which was even cheaper than the bus. I'm not sure what uber prices are in Dallas these days but it'd have to be close to $9 one way for it to be cheaper than owning a car in that situation. Uber was a major lifeline for me here in the Bay Area when I first arrived as I didn't have a car for the first three years. Parking in my area starts at around $250/mo. My uber bill was usually around $300/mo. Car insurance alone is at least $50/mo.
$3 sounds like an extremely short ride. Either that, or they were subsidizing a lot more back then. In Austin, over the past few years I've used use lyft occasionally to get to or from work and it was typically $6-$9 for a 1.6 mile trip that typically lasted 6-8 minutes.
I mainly used Uber/Lyft for "last mile" transportation. I replaced "all driving" with largely public transportation. I probably spent an average of ~$300/mo on Uber/Lyft which would account of my parking premium + insurance.
That said, I will concede I'm in a unique position. This legislation isn't completely onerous on me.
The irony in this comment is amazing. You're in a unique, privileged position to not even consider public transit for some trips an option.
Public transit for everyday commute to work, plus Uber/Lyft for trips outside of common commute hours or off the beaten path where public transit is less reliable, can definitely be cheaper than car ownership.
Well, OP was considering driving vs rideshare, so that's what I compared/contrasted. They never considered public transit, and continuing with their train of thought, neither did I. Seems like a reasonable perspective to take.
Public transit isn't an option for all people, particularly in low income communities, that have to get from home to work in rural and suburban areas. They aren't dense enough for public transit.
Public transit in SF works well in some areas, not so well in others -- even making a single connection can add 30 - 45 minutes to your commute If you're going to the financial district or north SOMA, transit is usually viable, if you're going anywhere else, it's likely not so viable.
And this is a city that's only 7 miles wide -- I used to be able to bike downtown in less than than I spent waiting on the bus on most days (since I didn't just have to wait for one bus, I had to wait for a bus that wasn't already full to take on passengers)
I think you're vastly underestimating how many people can do so, especially in urban centers with walking, biking, and public transit. Even more now with the changes brought by covid.
This is no joke, getting parking for an apartment (pretty much required unless you live in the sunset or have deeded parking) is like $250/mo+ and your car will probably be broken into depending on how often you park it on the street
