Please don't cross into personal attack. Your comment would be fine without the first sentence.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

>have a car mental model.

I suspect buying a reasonable used compact car is much more financially prudent than using Uber as you means of transportation. Maybe the calculus flips in a dense city like NYC but there's no way people who commute every day with Uber are doing so for cheaper than actually owning a car.

When I lived in SF parking was $400 per month, plus as a young male my insurance was $200+ per month.

Most of the time I could take a bus or public transit, but when I couldn’t (like buying groceries) then I’d use an Uber. It was significantly cheaper versus owning a car, and it was absolutely an “essential” service at that point in my life.

> there's no way people who commute every day are doing so for cheaper than actually owning a car.

Yes there is: Public transportation (bus, metro, train). Millions of people get to work using it every day. Just having a car sit on the street would cost me at least 100$ per month in taxes, insurance, parking and other misc costs. I spend much less on public transportation.

Most people live in dense cities so these services exist. I almost only use Uber/taxis when I need to go to places that are hard to reach or at night.

I should have specified, my point was that Uber is not the same as public transportation and is essentially a luxury good.

I bet Uber/Lyft enable single car ownership for lots of couples, and is nothing like a luxury good. Things like people who carpool, but need a backup when that falls through. Or the ability to get to a doctor (or any location) poorly served by public transit.

I mean, it's not a luxury good in the sense that you can buy a car, but I suspect many folks have made difficult or expensive to unwind decisions that make car ownership expensive. Classifying transportation where an alternative may well cost more than $1k/mo as a "luxury good" is a real stretch of the word luxury.

So a luxury that you can normally get by without? You seem to be strengthening my argument that it's not essential.

I think my point is being missed though and that is that using Uber as your daily commute is certainly not cheaper than owning a car. I think that's perfectly reasonable to say.

Also I don't mean to imply that Uber is a luxury in the same way Lois Vuitton is a luxury.

In my examples in other comments using Uber as a daily commute option almost certainly costs nearly 1000 or more per month.

Using Uber alone for all transportation may be a luxury, but if you're in a situation where you rely heavily public transportation, Uber is a nearly essential addition to it.

Transporting large items, or groceries for an entire family are extremely difficult if not impossible over public transportation. Transporting a group of people (3+) can be approximately the same price on public transportation and Uber without potentially sacrificing comfort, safety, time and effort, many of which can be essential depending on your circumstances.

The cost of using Uber and Public transportation also requires a lot less upfront cost which is necessary for people living paycheck to paycheck and can't afford to spend around $2k on a car, as well as deal with it's maintenance time and cost.

Then car is essentially a luxury good, since it's the same - just someone else is driving it.

Yes. That's my point. Uber is not essential, it is a luxury.

That's not your call to make.

Literally folks with cars are telling folks without cars (but who use uber when needed) that uber is not necessary (ie, partial access to a car is not needed) while they have 24/7 access.

Anyone who has NOT owned a car will tell you - uber is essential - full stop.

30% of the population has HOUSEHOLD income from all sources of $30K or less. The cost of parking alone can be a major issue (many cheaper apts do not have dedicated parking).

Perhaps you should speak only for yourself and not others?

I don't have a car and hopefully never will. I never used an Uber or any similar service. I used taxi maybe 2 or 3 times in the past few years.

It is extremely easy to live without a car if the city / country accommodates for it.

Buying a reasonable used compact car probably costs around 2000$ minimum. And a 2000$ car, no matter how nice, has the potential to require much more $$$ in maintenance when things start breaking.

Believe it or not, there are people out there who don't have $2000 and these people are also the same ones who can't get anyone to lend them money.

I live in Paris, and I could easily afford a new car (or two) with my income as an SRE.

But then I'd have to park it, and just that would double the monthly cost. And then I'd probably use it once a month on average.

So use the taxi for once a month? Uber doesn't have to exist for you to address your problem.

Okay, yes, Uber can be replaced by a taxi service with a good app because Uber's a taxi service with a good app. Gold star.

A taxi service is an essential complement to mass transit, and Uber provides that service in areas with poor taxi service (essentially everywhere).

I use my bicycle every day, but some people don't have that option. Also I normally use Uber more than once a month. The thing is, a car is way too much of hassle to use most of the time in the city. You need to park it, there's traffic, and then you can't drive drunk or so I've been told.

This is not some let them eat cake thing, frankly I think people with your pov are actually the ones saying that.

How much would it actually cost to commute 20-30 minutes to and from work in an Uber? $40 a day? More? Let's just say its 40 and you strictly commute during the week so that's $200 a week or 800 a month. Even with bad credit or no credit you would be able to save for a car rapidly. The $2000 car would only take 10 weeks to pay for fully in cash and the savings of 800$ per month could easily cover maintenance.

My point is if you can afford to use Uber as your sole means of transportation you can surely afford your own car and the people who can't are using subways or Buses. It's pretty simple, people who are struggling aren't using Uber very often.

Why are you so focused on the "sole means of transportation"? Before COVID I've used Uber and the likes around twice a month - when using public transportation was unfeasible, like going to the airport with heavy luggage. Using public transportation and supplementing it with Uber was definitely most reasonable solution.

Because the Grandfather comment was about classifying Uber as an essential service when it's clearly not as demonstrated by yours and other comments. Using Uber a few times a month for extenuating circumstances is really not Essential.

The "essentialness" of an service it a pretty bad concept. Uber is definitely non essential as sole means, but it starts to be pretty essential when you feel sick and want to go to hospital (not on ambulance level tho).

This discounts the difficulties in buying a car when credit is bad or nonexistent. I was in this situation, the only people who will give you a vehicle are loan sharks and scammers. Partially this was my own ignorance (see: awful credit). Partially it was my own bad credit itself.

It also discounts the horrible stress that adding a known monthly bill can cause, when Uber is more flexible, pay-what-you-need. And I was never as bad as many others, so I can see how the least-prepared and least-financially-secure could see Uber as a viable use, either once-in-a-while (e.g., missed the bus), or for regular use (paying $12 for a two-way, 1 mile trip through a crappy part of town can pay for itself if you avoid an hour of walking and get an hour of working).

So you're saying Uber is a luxury. So it's not essential.

If you can use public transportation, then relying on it with supplementary transportation from Uber is cheaper in most cities.

>A lot of folks on HN seems to be approaching this whole situation from the I have a ton of money, can work from home, have a car mental model.

You think poor people are using Uber to get around?

No, they are the ones driving it. And now they will be out of their job.

> Ahh - the comment from the person with the multi-car garage, the tesla and the range rover.

I think you have me mistaken for someone else. I don't have any of those things. Not even close.

> ation from the I have a ton of money, can work fr

is uber cheaper than cabs/public transpo w/o the VC subsidy? 15 years ago there was no uber and people were able to get by using public transpo.

the idea that uber loses money on rides because of "VC" needs to die. uber is not VC funded anymore and hasn't been for a long time now.

uber loses money on every ride because uber loses money overall because it spends a lot of money on other projects, not because the marginal cost/benefit of each ride is negative.

If they spin off the ride sharing part of the company how much are they earning? do you know?

The ridesharing line of business has been profitable for at least a year from what I can tell. The plan was for it to cover all the other costs by EoY 2020, incl. HQ expenses and other bets like Eats.

Centuries ago, people got by with horses. Does that mean that cars aren't essential?

Ridesharing services allow for an unprecedented level of mobility for those who don't already own cars.

You could say the same for taxis. If uber cost 100$/ride you wouldn't be claiming it is unprecedented. It will die because no one wants to pay for it with the real cost: livable wage + proper car insurance.