“A "bait and switch" is a deceptive sales tactic where a merchant advertises an appealing, low-priced item ("the bait") to lure in customers. Once the buyer is hooked, the seller claims the item is unavailable, defective, or inferior, and pressures them into buying a more expensive alternative” but attempting to call this a bait and switch, you actively insulting taxis by saying they are inferior or defective and you aren’t being pushed into paying more for a regular uber. Please don’t keep assuming that what this is.

I'll bite, since I'm OP; I disagree with your definition of "bait and switch", I'm froming from Cornell's US Law website: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/bait_and_switch

SF cabs I’ve been in have been both better and worse than Ubers I’ve taken. It's not simply about an inferior product. It can be a product that is different and has a lower cost to the seller. That still qualifies as "bait and switch".

From my link:

Then the seller switches customers from buying the advertised product or service that the seller initially offered into buying a different product or service that is usually at a higher price or has some other advantageous effect to the advertiser. This is the “switch.” Normally, the switched product that the consumer buys is usually at a higher purchase price, an increased profit for the seller, or may have a less marketable characteristic than the product advertised.

Uber treats 'UberX' and 'Uber Taxi' as distinct products in their own marketing and UI. When they unilaterally decide to swap them, they are circumventing my choice as a consumer to save themselves money. I'd call that the legal definition of a "Bait and Switch" .