Ride-sharing services, like Uber and Lyft, provide transportation options that can be subsidized to make them more affordable for low-income individuals. Proponents argue that it increases mobility for low-income individuals, reduces reliance on personal vehicles, and can reduce traffic congestion. Opponents argue that it is a misuse of public funds, may benefit ride-sharing companies more than individuals, and could discourage public transportation use.
@ISIDEWITH2yrs2Y
@B9FFS3MNew Zealand First 4mos4MO
@BDJDMLS1wk1W
@BD8HRMS2wks2W
@BD8KCSPOpportunity3wks3W
@BD4SDTD4wks4W
@BD4RPLY4wks4W
@BD2GT8N4wks4W
@BCYQKMW1mo1MO
@BCT8YLR1mo1MO
@BCT7S9P1mo1MO
@BCPNCVL1mo1MO
@BCMSWRD2mos2MO
@BCKRV6Q2mos2MO
@BCJYCSL2mos2MO
@BC72VBD2mos2MO
@B7SZ9MC7mos7MO
Look at the europeans and learn how to do public transport. Stop subsidising roads at the expense of rail. If we had decent PT, then we wouldn't need all these so called "ride sharing" services to the extent we have now. Anyway these are just unregulated taxis with an app, there is no sharing of rides.
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.