[ch4s3]

That isn't how traffic works in theory or practice.

Driving, or taking car trips has a high price elasticity. Lowering the cost of a car trip even a litte increases demand a lot. So Uber's subsidy of trips should increase demand a lot, which it does. Additionally the convenience of the app, and not having to find parking, or maintain a car also increase demand. If all of that outweighs the individuals cost of sitting in increased traffic, demand will continue to rise.

Because the costs are socialized, they affect people who don't drive or take car trips, i.e. bus trips take longer, transportation spending gets soaked up by road repairs due to extra maintenance costs incurred by increased traffic, etc.

[icebraining]

Right, but Uber is not cheaper than owning and using one's own car, so they haven't actually lowered the cost of a car trip, only of a taxi trip. Own cars are not only still much cheaper, as the cost per trip actually goes down as you use it more, making Uber even less attractive as the number of trips increases.

It's exactly for people who take very few car trips, like me, since they use mostly public transport, that Uber is actually more attractive than car ownership, since it avoids the fixed costs.

As for road repair costs, that's usually paid off from gas taxes, which Uber pays linearly according to their used miles, so it's not "socialized" in any meaningful way.

[ch4s3]

You're missing my point, I'm not talking about Uber vs owning a car. My point is that for people like you who might take public transit, walk, bike, or otherwise not take a taxi Uber lowers the total cost of a car trip, thereby increasing your demand for car trips. Also, while taking 2+ trips per day will eventually cost more, it's cheaper in the short run where people actually make decisions.

Furthermore, Ubers like cabs drive around waiting for fares so they create traffic while not providing rides. Similarly with recent cases of Uber driver brigading to drive up surge prices, they also create surges of traffic.

Gas taxes only pay for up to 40% of road maintenance and that's in states with the highest gas taxes. The rest of the cost is made up from general funds and transportation budgets. There was a high profile case recently in Maryland where the governor redirected light rail funds to highway maintenance and construction. In fact gas taxes have never fully covered road construction and maintenance costs anywhere in the US, ever.

[icebraining]

My point is that for people like you who might take public transit, walk, bike, or otherwise not take a taxi Uber lowers the total cost of a car trip, thereby increasing your demand for car trips

No, because, like I said at the beginning, if I didn't have Uber I'd get my own car, and so my marginal cost per car trip would be much lower, and so I'd use it more than the couple of quarterly rides I take nowadays.

Furthermore, Ubers like cabs drive around waiting for fares so they create traffic while not providing rides.

On the other hand, if I need to go some place after work, I'd need to take my car to work during the morning commute, creating extra traffic. Also, there's driving around looking for parking. Finally, there's UberPOOL.

Gas taxes only pay for up to 40% of road maintenance and that's in states with the highest gas taxes.

Fair enough. Sounds like states need to raise their gas taxes. But at least here Uber also pays 23% VAT. Don't they pay sales tax over there?

[ch4s3]

Yeah, they pay sales tax here. And we do need to raise our gas tax, but its sadly politically infeasible.

What I'm getting at is there are costs other than just gas, car payments, maintenance when taking car trips. Things like needing to be alert to drive, parking, and navigating that Uber lowers and creates demand for trips where people otherwise wouldn't drive/take a car and may have foregone altogether.