Ride-sharing services, like Uber and Lyft, provide transportation options that can be subsidized to make them more affordable for low-income individuals. Proponents argue that it increases mobility for low-income individuals, reduces reliance on personal vehicles, and can reduce traffic congestion. Opponents argue that it is a misuse of public funds, may benefit ride-sharing companies more than individuals, and could discourage public transportation use.
59% Yes |
41% No |
59% Yes |
41% No |
See how support for each position on “Ride-Sharing Subsidies” has changed over time for 6.1k UK voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
See how importance of “Ride-Sharing Subsidies” has changed over time for 6.1k UK voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from UK users whose views extended beyond the provided choices.
@9PB4QF57 days7D
No, public transport needs to be made cheaper and needs to serve many more people and communities than it currently does
@9P7MM3H1wk1W
No, but it should renationalise and invest in public transport and infrastructure so people can get around on it efficiently and affordably.
@9P6B5NR1wk1W
The government should apply pressure on the big companies and in turn companies can come up with ways of encouraging car sharing, use of Apps or notice boards etc. As most people travel within the same area.
@9P37PNL2wks2W
No, unless it is ringfenced to be exclusively available for those who have an accessibility need that makes it difficult for them to take public transport.
@9NZ8C9P2wks2W
No, funding should instead be focused on improving public transport. However, I would be supportive of funding for this if it is ringfenced to help disabled people or those with accesibility needs that may prevent them from taking public transport.
@9MSNR3D1mo1MO
Only for low income individuals working jobs with anti social hours
Explore other questions that UK voters are discussing.
