Readers Write: Uber and Lyft, 2024 election, Israel/Hamas, Park Point in Duluth

Opinion editor’s note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

I’m 73 years old. I live in Ward 3 in downtown Minneapolis. Over this New Year’s weekend, I totaled my car. (Not to worry, I’m fine — but my car, sadly, never will be.)

After careful consideration, I have decided not to buy another car. Because I live in a reasonably walkable, bikeable city I can get almost everywhere I need to go without a car. Also, I’m mindful of the negative impact a car can have on the environment.

But there are places I need to go that do not lend themselves well to walking, biking or busing. My plan is to use the money from the insurance company for the dead car to pay for trips by Uber or Lyft. I spent $250 in February on Lyft. At that rate, I can take Uber or Lyft every month for 12 years before I run out of the insurance money. That’s not considering the costs of parking, gas, license plates, insurance and car upkeep.

I’m aware that I am very lucky. I can afford to pay rideshare drivers a fair rate for transportation. I feel bad for people who aren’t as lucky as I am.

That said, I’m very disappointed to learn that Uber and Lyft are threatening to abandon the city and perhaps Minnesota (”Uber, Lyft say they will leave metro,” March 15). If that happens I will be forced to buy a car I do not want.

Judy Borger, Minneapolis

•••

I have tried to understand the issue of Uber and Lyft leaving the Twin Cities and am confused by the decisions made. Sadly, my imminent retirement was dependent on getting rid of my car and using the services of these providers when necessary. Guess I need to rethink my plans.

Linda Duncan Cohen, St. Louis Park

•••

Robert Wetherille, Eden Prairie

•••

Maybe the City Council should spend more of its efforts trying to solve international problems. It would keep members busy and prevent them from making shortsighted decisions that will put a lot of rideshare drivers out of a job.

Bruce Lemke, Orono

•••

To begin, if these companies do move out of Minneapolis, that will be a major inconvenience when getting around. For places like downtown, Uptown and the surrounding metro like the West End, the natural impact of this exodus, at least in my eyes, is that there will be an uptick in driving under the influence, which benefits no one, and a decline in business for restaurants and bars in the area. The significance of those impacts is yet to be seen. Hopefully, they are minimal.

But let’s say that rideshare companies are bluffing and do not leave. On principle, I disagree with the City Council’s decision to assume that rideshare jobs have to be some form of full-time employment. Technological innovations change the scope of labor in all industries. Industrial machines and robotics in manufacturing, combines and GPS in farming, and now AI which will probably touch just about every industry in some way. In all these cases, jobs were lost, production processes refined, and there were major benefits to the consumer — convenience and reduced cost. In the instance of ridesharing, these companies built a platform that allowed everyday individuals to make extra money with relatively simple part-time work. That made it possible to afford a higher volume of ride providers, which necessarily, to the benefit of literally every consumer, allowed for a more affordable and convenient way to get access to a “taxi.”

The one group it did not help were the formerly employed full-time drivers. And just like industries that have changed before them (take your pick throughout the entire history of industrialization), these drivers will have to find additional employment elsewhere. This principle of innovation, inherent to the wealth of Western societies, is why we are able to purchase goods and conveniences for a reasonable cost that were once so expensive that only the elite could afford them.

Matthew Fritz, Minneapolis

Regarding Rep. Tom Emmer’s threat to President Joe Biden (”No more State of the Union invitations for President Biden, Rep. Tom Emmer says,” StarTribune.com, March 18): Emmer charges that Biden’s State of the Union address to Congress was “divisive.” Let us hope that Emmer will, in accordance with his objection, respond to the truly divisive remarks we continue to hear from Donald Trump.

In contrast, Biden’s State of the Union delineated what a second Biden-Harris administration would seek to do: bolster democracy by attending to the equality of all people, strengthening health care, increasing jobs, making sure taxation is fair, and caring for our Earth and those Jesus referred to as “the least of these,” among whom are migrants fleeing authoritarian and violent homelands. Biden did not call people “animals” or encourage violence by promising a “bloodbath.”

The choice is stark. It cannot be erased by Emmer or anyone else.

Melinda Quivik, St. Paul

Regarding “What we saw in Israel” (Opinion Exchange, March 15): Of course Hamas is genocidal, the Oct. 7 massacre was evil and unconscionable, and the despair of Israeli hostage families is palpable and heart-wrenching. But, as a Jew who has visited Israel, I ask: Is it enough to visit Israel proper? What about Gaza? The settlements within Israel? Sadly, Israel is squandering the higher ground and making itself a pariah in the world, rendering itself less safe, not more. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and President Joe Biden recognize this, as do many Jews. Emotion and outrage will not help Israel to survive when it stands isolated in the world. Yes, Hamas is evil. Yes, Hamas hides among civilians and beneath hospitals. Does that justify the slaughter of innocent Gazans? The authors argue that it is better to be hated and alive than pitied and dead, but this is a false comparison. Does vigorous self-defense leave no room for reason and a more extended form of compassion? What comes next when the war is over?

Richard Lentz, Minneapolis