Philadelphia’s taxi fleet is shrinking. This app is helping keep cabs alive in Boston and beyond. 43%

By Thomas Fitzgerald58% Frank Kummer61%

7/23/2026, 9:01:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 19 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal, Hasty Generalization, and Optimism Bias, with Attempt to Sell a Product or Service as the most egregious example at 15.2% saturation with 98 hits. Analysis detected 631 faulty-reasoning hits from 643 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 46.7% and a BS Rank of 43% (12,151 of 21,169 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 57.40% of the article peer group.

Uber and Lyft helped flatten the taxicab industry. 
Now they are joining forces. 
Last month, Boston became the latest city where drivers of licensed taxicabs can respond to rideshare trip requests, using apps that are integrated with the Uber and Lyft platforms. 
But don’t expect to see this change in Philadelphia, even as the city’s taxi business continues its free fall. 
Curb, the leading app company for cabs, and Uber petitioned the Philadelphia Parking Authority, which regulates taxis in the city, to allow coordination of rides on a pilot basis but eventually withdrew the proposal. 
Pennsylvania law strictly separates licensed cabs and transportation network companies like Uber, said Christine Kirlin, deputy general counsel for the PPA and former head of its Taxi and Limo Division. 
“It was a handful of regulations that just couldn’t be integrated,” Kirlin said, adding that state law would need changes for it to work. 
For instance, she said, taxi fares in the city are set by the PPA and cab operators are not allowed to flex prices, as rideshare companies do during periods of high demand. 
Drivers also need a commercial license, and taxi vehicles are subject to safety inspections  and regulatory fees  that rideshare is not. 
In other cities, referrals from rideshare companies account for 30% to 60% of total taxi trips, said Dorel Tamam, vice president for mobile business at Curb. 
He is in charge of Curb Flow, an open-source app that aggregates available rides for from multiple sources, including Uber and Lyft, direct hails from taxi apps, fleet dispatches, and taxi ranks. 
“This program is helping actually reduce idle time, increase the overall trips, giving drivers the add-on opportunity to earn more,” Tamam said. 
Curb Flow is being used in 17 U.S. cities, including Newark, N.J.; Seattle; Los Angeles; New York; Reno, Nev.; and Charlotte, N.C. 
Philly’s taxi nosedive 
The taxi business has been declining in Philadelphia for more than a decade, coinciding with the arrival of Uber and Lyft in the city. 
Pandemic restrictions also hurt. 
Taxi rides dropped 88% from 2015 to 2025, PPA data show. 
Fewer cabs are available. 
In 2010, a monthly average of 1,600 taxis were on the road. 
In 2025, there were 674, reflecting a 58% drop. 
As of June, 633 taxis were active in the city, suggesting a continued decline. 
“Things have not really improved. 
There’s less people out there driving,” said Ron Blount, president of the Taxi Workers Alliance, who believes the number could be even smaller. 
“A lot of drivers do both taxis and [rideshare] switching back and forth, trying to make it work,” Blount said. 
He said that Curb Flow would lead to more trips for drivers here, but that it was unclear how much their net incomes would improve. 
And the average sales price for a taxi medallion, a license required for each cab to operate in the city, fell to an average of $12,857 last year. 
The average price was just over $500,000 during several months of 2014, according to PPA numbers. 
“We really hope one day to bring it to Philadelphia,” said Tamam, the company vice president in charge of Curb Flow. 
”We’re open to further collaboration with the regulators." 
How it works 
A passenger will request an UberX or Lyft Standard ride and then the rideshare company’s app would decide whether to route the job to a taxi or one of its own drivers. 
“Usually the decision is based on what vehicle has a better ETA,” Tamem said. 
“The concept is to service the passenger as fast as possible.” 
Because they are integrated with the taxi elements of Curb Flow, the rideshare platforms know when a cab is available and not already carrying a passenger hailed on the street, for example, he said. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 2.0%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 3.9%Thomas Fitzgerald: 2.1%Inquirer.com: 1.0%Anchoring Bias3.9%This article: 4.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 2.7%Inquirer.com: 2.4%Availability Heuristic4.0%This article: 3.4%Thomas Fitzgerald: 1.1%Inquirer.com: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic3.4%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 3.4%Thomas Fitzgerald: 2.1%Inquirer.com: 5.2%Framing Effect3.4%This article: 4.4%Thomas Fitzgerald: 1.5%Inquirer.com: 0.4%Loss Aversion4.4%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 8.4%Thomas Fitzgerald: 5.8%Inquirer.com: 2.6%Optimism Bias8.4%This article: 5.9%Thomas Fitzgerald: 5.3%Inquirer.com: 0.8%Pessimism Bias5.9%This article: 5.6%Thomas Fitzgerald: 6.5%Inquirer.com: 5.6%Negativity Bias5.6%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 4.0%Inquirer.com: 1.4%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 3.6%Thomas Fitzgerald: 1.2%Inquirer.com: 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error3.6%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 1.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 4.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.8%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.3%Inquirer.com: 1.4%Recency Bias0.8%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 3.9%Thomas Fitzgerald: 1.3%Inquirer.com: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias3.9%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 8.4%Thomas Fitzgerald: 2.8%Inquirer.com: 2.2%Appeal to Authority8.4%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 1.1%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.2%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 9.2%Thomas Fitzgerald: 3.9%Inquirer.com: 3.1%Hasty Generalization9.2%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.8%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.3%Inquirer.com: 0.4%Bandwagon0.8%This article: 0.5%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.2%Inquirer.com: 3.2%Appeal to Emotion0.5%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 5.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 4.6%Inquirer.com: 1.8%Post Hoc (False Cause)5.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 10.1%Thomas Fitzgerald: 4.4%Inquirer.com: 2.0%Anecdotal10.1%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 1.7%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.6%Inquirer.com: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)1.7%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 1.2%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 2.5%Inquirer.com: 4.4%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 1.5%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Thomas Fitzgerald: 0.0%Inquirer.com: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 15.2%Thomas Fitzgerald: 8.3%Inquirer.com: 1.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…15.2%

643 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers54%attributed speech293writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageChristine Kirlin • 30 words • 0.0% coverageChristine Kirlin • 24 words • 0.0% coverageChristine Kirlin • 32 words • 0.0% coverageChristine Kirlin • 23 words • 0.0% coverageDorel Tamam • 26 words • 0.0% coverageDorel Tamam • 32 words • 100.0% coverageDorel Tamam • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageRon Blount • 5 words • 0.0% coverageRon Blount • 23 words • 0.0% coverageRon Blount • 20 words • 0.0% coverageRon Blount • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageDorel Tamam • 21 words • 100.0% coverageDorel Tamam • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageDorel Tamam • 14 words • 0.0% coverageDorel Tamam • 11 words • 0.0% coverageDorel Tamam • 34 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Ron Blount

100%flagged-word coverage
73 attributed words21% of attributed speech57% writer coverage
0%2.5%5.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -3.8 ptsWriter: 3.8%Ron Blount: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.