From the first post in this blog series (<a href="https://sparelabs.com/blog/income-and-microtransit-diversity-data-gap" rel="nofollow">https://sparelabs.com/blog/income-and-microtransit-diversity...</a>), I thought this was pretty interesting:<p>> Strikingly, the bulk of high-income riders have much longer total journey times than the other income groups. Given that the majority of high-income riders use Spare-powered services to commute, these longer journey times likely result from wealthier riders living in suburban areas that are further from job centres, which in turn means the distances they travel are greater than for urban-dwelling, low-income riders.<p>> Arguably, high-income riders benefitting from longer trips and paying the same as low-income riders do for shorter trips is a form of transportation inequity. Means-tested pricing, or distance-based pricing, could also allow operators to recoup fare revenue from high-income riders to subsidize shorter trips by low-income riders.<p>The explanation makes sense, but it's the opposite of what I expected. Would have guessed higher income riders would take public transit for quick trips, but their own car for long rides/commuting, while lower income riders would take public transit for all trips.<p>Disclaimer: I work at Spare, the company that published this blog post