Toronto never adopted a shared e-scooter program. And as far as I know, e-scooters in general are technically illegal to use on our public roads, though this illegality seems to be minimally enforced. But today, more cities around the world seem to be following suit.

Paris — which had become the leading scooter market in Europe — voted to ban them in 2023 (albeit with an extremely low voter turnout). Shared e-scooters are now also banned in Madrid, Malta, and in all of the Netherlands.

But I continue to think that this is a shame. I first tried a shared e-scooter in Lisbon in 2019. And at the time, I wrote "I now know what all the fuss is about!" It was a lot of fun. I used it to ride out to the Museum of Art, Architecture, and Technology. I also said that they would be arriving in Toronto imminently. Nope.

The main concerns seem to be around urban clutter and riders using them irresponsibly. But I think you could say the exact same thing about cars, and we're not going to ban those anytime soon.

So I agree with what Karen Vancluysen says in this recent CityLab interview: Keep e-scooters on the menu and give people as many transportation alternatives as possible. They're not going to work for everyone, but that's okay. They're one option in a broader mobility network.

Cover photo by Kseniia PENKOVA on Unsplash

The autonomous vehicle narrative has historically gone something like this: remove the labor component of rides (i.e. drivers) and rides will become significantly cheaper. Then, people won't need or want to own a car anymore. They'll just Uber or Waymo or whatever around.

But as Waymo provides in and around 250,000 paid trips per week in the 4 cities in which it operates, the opposite has proven to be true — at least so far. A recent report by Obi (an app that aggregates real-time ride pricing) has just revealed the following for San Francisco during the period of March 25 to April 25, 2025:

In other words, Waymo is more expensive than Uber and Lyft, especially for shorter distances. Is this right? Well, Waymo may not have to pay drivers, but they do own and operate their own cars. Uber and Lyft do not. This represents a very different cost structure.

They also have a more inelastic supply base, meaning they have cars whether demand is high or not. Whereas in the case of Uber and Lyft, supply can be variable. That's the idea behind "surge pricing" — to induce more drivers onto the road when it's needed the most.

Fewer Waymos also means that wait times are going to be longer and that their cars are probably spending more time driving around without paying passengers. That's a cost.

Whatever the reasons, lots of people seem to be willing to pay the premium. Part of this almost certainly has to do with the novelty of riding in an autonomous vehicle. I'd pay more if they were in Toronto today. But another reason seems to be that people really appreciate being in the car alone. I guess it's akin to driving your own car.

It, of course, remains to be seen how Waymo's cost structure and pricing model will evolve over time, but I have no doubt that privacy will remain a feature people are willing to pay something for. In the modern world, we are all going to have at least two places of solitude: bathrooms and Waymos.

Cover photo by gibblesmash asdf on Unsplash

According to the Financial Times, Cape Town's population (metropolitan area) grew by 27.6% from 2011 to 2022, landing at approximately 4.77 million. Last year it was estimated at 4.97 million. At the same time, residential property prices increased by about 160% during the period from 2010 to 2024, outpacing all other cities in South Africa. Last year the average price of a home increased by 8.5% in Cape Town versus the national average of 4.5%. And as is the case in most desirable cities around the world, this has some people worried.

But who and what is to blame?

Is it because of tourism? It is estimated that there are some 25,800 active short-term rental listings in the city. Is it digital nomads? South Africa recently launched a Digital Nomad Visa program allowing foreign nationals to live and work in the country provided they can demonstrate an annual income of at least 650,976 ZAR (US$37,500). However, this is a recent thing. Is it foreigners coming with US dollars, euros, and/or pounds? Or is it because of internal migration, which South Africans refer to as "semigration?"

As always, it's a debate. But I think the outcome we are seeing makes intuitive sense for at least three reasons. One, Cape Town is an objectively beautiful and amenity-rich city sandwiched between mountains and the ocean. See above cover photo. It also has a warm and temperate climate. The average high in January (their summer) is 29 degrees and the average high in July (their winter) is 19 degrees. This is a huge competitive advantage — albeit a natural one.

Two, it's a relatively safe place. The above FT article quotes a transplant from Johannesburg saying, "You can't ride your bike in Joburg unless you are in a walled-off estate." If you have the means, that's a strong motivator to move somewhere else. And it's understandably easy to assign a lot of value to safety and security. "Sure, this home may be more expensive, but I can walk to places and ride my bike without fear." That's something worth spending money on.

Lastly, we are all becoming less tethered to specific locations. Digital nomadism and remote work are here to stay. But I don't think this means that people are going to just decentralize and move to the middle of nowhere. I think it means that people are going to increasingly vote with their feet and choose exactly where they want to live their life. What this means is that the need to create better places is only going to become more important. Because more than ever, every place is now in a global competition for talent and investment dollars.

Cover photo by Tobias Reich on Unsplash