They don't. Which is why Ubers cost only slightly less than normal taxis in markets like Sweden where Uber has to follow the same regulations as their competitors. The low prices they have in markets like the US are not sustainable.

Prop 22 voters think otherwise... but yeah they're delusional.

Absent self-driving--which was always a pipe dream--the overall price will not be materially lower than a taxi. Perhaps people will prefer the service for other reasons. Perhaps they'll go back to transporting themselves however they were pre-Uber.

Taxi medallions used to cost hundreds of thousands (SF) to more than half a million (NYC). Nowadays they still cost tens of thousands in SF and hundreds of thousands in some areas like NYC.

Also, more efficient use of time from app-based routing.

I'm not convinced. Do you have evidence that "more efficient use of time from app-based routing" actually results in drivers making more money?

"app-based routing" is a mirage anyway. When you request an Uber ride, your request is advertised to drivers in the area, who can choose to accept it. There is no routing happening.

Sure, the driver then drives a route given to them to by the app, but so does everybody else, just in that case, the app is Google Maps.

AFAIK, the only routing cleverness is that the end of a shift, drivers can request to only take passengers who are heading in the direction of their own home. That's useful.

Medallions alone should be enough to make a difference. The efficient use of time probably has much less of an effect on earnings, if true.

I'm also not terribly convinced of this. Medallions are a one-time fixed cost. This should have little to nothing to do with long term prices, especially given that the prices of medallions have gone down significantly.