The Case for Uber Surge Pricing After a Mass Shooting

It is a shame that the media doesn’t understand basic economics.

Politicians should expect this. It is what I want from politicians. The New York Times. However, it is sad to observe in the New York Post– The rare alternative to Democrat media in my community.

The tabloid was shocked recently by the higher ride-share prices. New Yorkers have had enough of paying exorbitant amounts for Uber or Lyft ride.

Excessive? What is excessive? Who decides?

Already, prices were rising because of higher gasoline prices. New York City continues to impose new taxes and regulations and so does the federal government. It is notTo work, there is a shortage in drivers.

A terrible subway shooting resulted in unusually high “surge prices” that were put into effect on this day. Fearful that there would be another shooting on the subway, commuters turned to ride-share.

Uber: How can a company such as Uber handle this situation? Uber has noticed that there’s more demand for their services than supplies. Are customers supposed to wait? The majority of people won’t ride for more than a few days.

Ride-share providers do what is sensible: temporarily increase prices. When there is no car available, they lower the prices again. This solution is best for most people.

People who are in dire need of rides may be able to pay an extra fee. If you have the time, take a bus or walk. You can call your friend, talk to someone, or wait for the prices to drop.

Drivers who earn more are also paid higher prices. This encourages drivers working part-time to give rides and quit what they do.

This congestion pricing would also be a good way to reduce traffic jams, if elected officials had the guts to enforce it.

However, this solution may not be enough for economic ignorant reporters. This is the PostCritics say sticker shock can’t be sustained.”

You are likely reading laziness in your reporting when you see “Critics says”. Reporters who don’t spend the time searching for reliable sources and gathering actual data are simply writing “critics say”. Their family and friends could be the critics, but so might a couple Uber riders at the airport.

These critics don’t know how to recognize that the price is “unsustainable”. They aren’t. With their own money, ride share investors know more about sustainability. A company that was unable to sustain its prices would be forced out.

He added: “critics say” [the fares are]…sometimes downright unethical.”

Unethical? Drivers of Uber don’t make people get in their vehicles. Even advertising doesn’t fool them.

Actually, it’s the reverse. The message I receive before I can reserve a ride is that it will cost more because of increased demand.

Don Boudreaux was an economist who wrote “The Observer”. PostThis is a good idea for PostFor publishing his letter: “Prices reflect the underlying realities demand and supply. New York City is experiencing rising crime. Uber’s demand is rising at the same time as the Uber supply. This reality cannot be ignored and will drive fares up.


Uber and Lyft represent great innovation. These companies forced taxi monopolies out of business and allowed customers to be treated better.

However, businesses are often blamed by the media for any aberration. On that day, social media exploded with comments like, “Fare surge after a mass shooting….Shame on you @Uber.”

The businesses quickly began to take steps towards damage control. Uber Support said, “Our heart goes out to the victim,” We have disabled the surge pricing for this area.”

It’s bad PR. However, it is terrible. When hand sanitizer and toilet paper were in short supply, politicians advised people to report merchants that raise their prices. That was called “illegal price gouging.”

However, it was still a great thing to “gouging” back then. This disincentivized hoarding, and allowed suppliers to produce more of what we needed most.

It is illegal to “gouge” today.

However, this is only because most reporters and politicians don’t know what markets do.