Comments on: More taxis mean more traffic http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/01/20/more-taxis-mean-more-traffic/ Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: AndrewKurzweil http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/01/20/more-taxis-mean-more-traffic/#comment-41187 Mon, 23 Jan 2012 14:48:19 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=11634#comment-41187 If all of the taxis were wheelchair accessible, there wouldn’t be a need for a separatte fleet!

]]>
By: OneOfTheSheep http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/01/20/more-taxis-mean-more-traffic/#comment-41179 Mon, 23 Jan 2012 02:07:52 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=11634#comment-41179 This commentary is not well thought out. You’re worried about additional traffic for all those new cabs? Well if they were all in open competition, you might be right…more people would ride in cabs if the cost were lower because of competition.

But, knowing the “Eastern Mentality” I’m sure fares will be scrupulously and totally regulated. That means that the number of riders will not increase, but simply find it easier to hail a cab. The number of “hired trips” is determined by the number of riders, not cabs; so there should be NO effect on traffic from the same number of “fares”.

Congestion pricing? There is already congestion. The powers that be will enact every additional charge they can envision that doesn’t cause an immediate taxpayer revolt. 2000 extra cabs on the street doesn’t change this frustrating reality that has long existed without remedy.

]]>