clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

The City of Seattle vs. UberX and Other Ride-Sharing Options

New, comments

Seattle is an entertainment capital with various shows, concerts, places to partake in adult beverages and sports, so why would the city limit the ride-sharing options for patrons to get around and spend money to boost the local economy?

Edited by Tiffany Villigan

blog.uber.com

In a city that is already strapped for public transportation options, the Seattle City Council is trying to cap the number of ride-sharing vehicles that are on the streets of Seattle. Companies such as UberX are the biggest potential losers on this issue in a motion that Sally Clark, Bruce Harrell and Mike O'Brien are trying to push to the council this week for a full vote.

Uber already has over 1,000 cars in the Seattle area; the potential ruling would limit Uber, Lyft and Sidecar to 300 vehicles between them. This would severely limit the options of consumers of the entertainment culture who enjoy going to concerts and--when the arena is built--NHL hockey and NBA basketball.

A few guys who you may know are also in opposition to this stance by the city:

What are your thoughts? Should we continue to support the taxi monopoly or help grow these booming businesses in Seattle?