Hacker News Reader

Comment by monksy | Hacker News Reader

As much as I love this idea, my concern about this is that it may encourage individuals to rely on this as a way home.

I think that this should be an indication that safe transport back home is needed during drinking hours. (Big cities have this convered via public transport)

View on HN

I'd prefer to see chronic drunk drivers stop doing so and rely on something like this instead. I suspect the cost of paying for taxis will be less than the cost of all the emergency services, post crash analysis, and road modifications when someone is killed on the road. ( The average cost is 4.3 million per fatality according to the National Safety Council http://blog.safeauto.com/how-much-do-car-accidents-cost-the-... )

[edit for typo fix]

I wonder how much of a bar tax would be required to cover the bill. If it encourages more people to go out drinking more often it might be a net financial benefit. You could even pitch it as a jobs program.

It would need to be sufficient that the average noggt's drinking is made more expensive by the cost of the average Uber ride.

So those who choose to drink within walking distance will massively subsidise those who choose to come in from out of town.

Isn't it still beneficial to the folks walking home that there are fewer drunks on the road? May not justify the full subsidy but certainly would cover part.

And it benefits everyone by keeping the roads safer.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com