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.
Statistics are shown for this demographic
Voting for candidate
Response rates from 315 Finglas North B voters.
72% Yes |
28% No |
72% Yes |
28% No |
Trend of support over time for each answer from 315 Finglas North B voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Trend of how important this issue is for 315 Finglas North B voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from Finglas North B voters whose views went beyond the provided options.
@9ZLQVZH6 days6D
No, but the Government should subsidise public-trandport services for low-income individuals instead.
@9ZKGZPR1wk1W
The government should be taxing massive corporations who do the most polluting instead of transferring the cost of climate change to ordinary working people
@9ZK46BJ1wk1W
I believe this is a good idea but I don’t think it is worth the risk as it opens the door to many crimes such as theft, murder or kidnapping
@9ZJTRVR1wk1W
No, invest in public transport infrastructure instead
@9ZJJPPJ1wk1W
what is classed as low income how is it going to be monitored
@9ZJ6W6D1wk1W
No, the government should focus on expanding public transport options to facilitate travel
@9ZJ6GGF1wk1W
no, increase funding for public transportation instead, and reform public transport in general
@9ZJ4RLC1wk1W
No, public transport systems should be revamped instead
Join in on the most popular conversations.
