Uber, Lyft, and other ride-sharing companies have long argued that they help people get around in cities by eliminating car rental and driving problems.
But a new study from the University of Toronto finds that the companies have a limited amount of evidence that they actually help people save money.
The study, published Thursday in the journal Applied Economics Letters, found that, overall, the study found, the companies do little to improve the lives of consumers who use them.
“We found no evidence that Uber or Lyft has increased the likelihood of self-employment among individuals using these services,” the study concludes.
The authors also found that Uber and Lyft did not find a meaningful effect on homeownership rates.
The researchers looked at data from the U.S. Census Bureau, which measures how many people were living in the same zip code.
The data is a measure of mobility, or how quickly people can move across state lines and across cities.
That’s not to say Uber and other companies have not improved the lives and finances of their drivers.
The companies have been trying to make money off the services, too, by charging a flat fee for certain trips.
But Uber and others have argued that the fees are actually a form of discrimination, and that drivers should be treated equally.
The research in this case was based on data from more than 30 million rides, from a survey of drivers by the firm ZipCar, and about 1.7 million responses from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey, which tracks housing.
The results of the study were consistent with ZipCar and other rideshare companies’ claims.
“The results do not support ZipCar’s claims that drivers are discriminated against in the ride-hailing industry,” the authors write.
“It’s clear that the ride services operate fairly fairly in most circumstances.”
The study also found a clear benefit to consumers in the U!
S., where the companies’ data was used.
Overall, drivers who used the services saw their overall household income rise by about $50.
But for drivers who did not, the overall increase in household income was $14.
“Our study finds no significant impact of the ride service industry on the overall income of drivers,” the researchers write.
Lyft, meanwhile, found no significant benefit to drivers, although the company does have a number of policies in place to help drivers make money.
Lyft and Uber, however, have argued in court that they have saved money because they are offering drivers a way to work for a company that can offer them lower rates and a better safety net.
And the study’s authors note that these companies have also had success in getting some states to change their rules to allow them to collect revenue from drivers who choose not to accept rides from the ride companies.
But even if these companies are providing drivers with a better income, the researchers found that their results were not as meaningful as ZipCar or Lyft’s.
The difference between the two services is not as large as the difference between ZipCar drivers and Lyft drivers, but it’s still a significant difference, the authors say.
The drivers who didn’t take Lyft or Uber’s rides also got more money overall, but their income rose by just $17 a month.
That could be because Lyft drivers are more likely to live in cities with more affordable housing.
But the authors of the new study caution that it’s difficult to know if these drivers were making money at all.
“This study suggests that the impact of ride-share services on household income can be limited by the types of drivers they serve,” they write.
Uber and its rivals have argued, for example, that it can improve their business models by offering rides in areas that Uber doesn’t.
“They argue that they are not providing drivers a competitive marketplace, but rather a way for Uber and/or Lyft to charge more to customers,” the University at Buffalo researchers write in their paper.
“That argument fails because ride-service providers, in this study, had no evidence to support that claim.”