Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

To fix L.A.'s traffic, we need tolls

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 689 posts

Re: To fix L.A.'s traffic, we need tolls

#241

Post by timthelion »

jisaacstone wrote: post #227
timthelion wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any experience with busses? Was that experience "great"? For example, have you lived in Hong Kong, which I understand is a Bus city? I live in Prague, and the trams are great. It is a 100% better experience than driving. Smooth, quiet, usually plenty of leg room. Doesn't smell. The busses, however, are hell. That low key vibration of the motor, the smell of the gass, the cramped spaces, the steps, all add…

I've had some good bus experiences, in Mexico City and KunMing I've ridden in nice clean busses with dedicated lanes and raised platforms for easy entry/exit[1]. It's near as nice as rail and from what I understand quite a bit cheaper to build [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Estaci%C3%B3n_SetDomingue...

It may be cheeper to build, though that is questionable. It is cheeper only because it takes advantage of existing roadway, but if you factor in the root cost of all of the existing infrastructure it uses than there's not much of a difference in cost between steel+gravel and concrete is there?

In any case, over time the price of the busses goes up steeply. You need to replace a bus after 20 years, where-as trams last 50-60 years. Prague is replacing their Tatra T3 [1] trams from the 60s, not because they are worn out (they still run like new) but because they are more dangerous in accidents for the driver (they have no crumple zone and worse brakes) and because they don't have wheel chair access. Other, poorer cities have even older trams that still run fine. When they upgrade, those old machines aren't scrapped, but are sold to more eastern ex-soviet contries as working vehicles and actually put into service there. When was the last time you road in a 50 year old bus?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatra_T3

Re: To fix L.A.'s traffic, we need tolls

#242

Post by danesparza »

myowncrapulence wrote: post #29
vesinisa wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point of tolls is not to make roads exclusive for the wealthy. A sensible toll would be something anyone who can afford to own a car can be expected pay.

The point of tolls is not to make roads exclusive for the wealthy But that's exactly what it accomplishes. Further pushing the poor into poverty punishing the commute to a minimum wage job in a part of town they can't afford.

Hmmm ... so you can afford the car, the gas and the insurance -- but you can't afford to pay for the road? Perhaps you should share a car.

Re: To fix L.A.'s traffic, we need tolls

#243

Post by Balgair »

Lukeas14 wrote: post #179
bit_logic wrote: post #109

The true solution to LA traffic will never happen. And that solution is buses. But not the current underfunded system that barely limps along. A massive number of buses, like 5x the current number. And combined with tolls for cars to get cars off the road. The large number of buses is critical because it greatly reduces wait time between transfers. It also allows adding express bus lines between major areas. But buse…

I disagree that the reputation of buses is the reason why more people don't take them in LA. Driving in traffic might be bad, but taking a bus in that same traffic is usually even more inconvenient, efficient and less economically viable. Taking a bus within the same city has never been a problem and these routes are typically pretty full. However, once you're going from one city to another, within LA county, the add…

How often do you take the Big Blue Bus? People really do drive so they do not have to deal with the bums. Those guys can be really violent and smelly some days.

Re: To fix L.A.'s traffic, we need tolls

#244

Post by jessriedel »

Nav_Panel wrote: post #169
jessriedel wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any data to back up that theory? The alternative theory that busses are undependable and low-status is more plausible to me.

This article[1] has some info and citations and makes my point a bit more clearly. > Several scholars have described Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) as an attractive modal transit option (R. B. Diaz and Schneck 2000; Levinson et al. 2002; Polzin and Baltes 2002; Vuchic 2002). The attributes favoring BRT are its lower capital cost relative to other modes (such as fixed rail) (US GAO 2001) as well as its implementation and ope…

That land values don't increase as much near impermanent infrastructure isn't surprising; this still doesn't explain why people would use it less while it's there. And in any case, this data doesn't distinguish between your theory and the theory that buses are less desirable for other reasons.

Re: To fix L.A.'s traffic, we need tolls

#245

Post by [deleted] »

Nav_Panel wrote: post #169
jessriedel wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any data to back up that theory? The alternative theory that busses are undependable and low-status is more plausible to me.

This article[1] has some info and citations and makes my point a bit more clearly. > Several scholars have described Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) as an attractive modal transit option (R. B. Diaz and Schneck 2000; Levinson et al. 2002; Polzin and Baltes 2002; Vuchic 2002). The attributes favoring BRT are its lower capital cost relative to other modes (such as fixed rail) (US GAO 2001) as well as its implementation and ope…

[deleted]

Re: To fix L.A.'s traffic, we need tolls

#246

Post by Balgair »

alkonaut wrote: post #199
bit_logic wrote: post #109

The true solution to LA traffic will never happen. And that solution is buses. But not the current underfunded system that barely limps along. A massive number of buses, like 5x the current number. And combined with tolls for cars to get cars off the road. The large number of buses is critical because it greatly reduces wait time between transfers. It also allows adding express bus lines between major areas. But buse…

> And that solution is buses. But not the current underfunded system that barely limps along That's why a good toll system should fund the public transit. The higher you set the tolls, the more buses you can offer to those who find it too expensive.

If you think that money from tolls is actually going to go to buses and improved public transit and not just into some Bel-Air businessman's brother's pocket, I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.

Re: To fix L.A.'s traffic, we need tolls

#247

Post by codedokode »

nradov wrote: post #142
bit_logic wrote: post #109

The true solution to LA traffic will never happen. And that solution is buses. But not the current underfunded system that barely limps along. A massive number of buses, like 5x the current number. And combined with tolls for cars to get cars off the road. The large number of buses is critical because it greatly reduces wait time between transfers. It also allows adding express bus lines between major areas. But buse…

Buses in the LA region have a bad reputation because of other bus passengers. If you ride the bus you might have to sit next to someone who smells bad or plays loud music or acts out in inappropriate ways. That's why everyone who can afford it drives their own car: to be alone. The reputation would improve if they could get more "regular" people riding, but it's kind of a chicken-or-the-egg problem.

Then it is the problem with the society that such people are allowed to ride on a bus and disturb other people.

Re: To fix L.A.'s traffic, we need tolls

#248

Post by skybrian »

cnnsucks wrote: post #61
skybrian wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article covers that.

Here is the article covering that: "Tolls may disproportionately burden the poor, but so do sales taxes, gas taxes and every other way we pay for roads." It then goes on to sort-of suggest that despite this new pain the net benefit will be better for "working-class" people......somehow. No thoughts were offered on how to keep the toll revenue from just padding out civil servant pensions and benefits while the traffic…

As I understand it, the idea is that if you're already collecting sales and gasoline taxes to pay for roads, collecting the same amount of money through tolls instead isn't any more regressive (it replaces one regressive tax with another), plus it cuts down on traffic.

On the other hand, replacing income tax with tolls really would be regressive.

(But I don't know enough about taxes to say if that's really true.)

Re: To fix L.A.'s traffic, we need tolls

#249

Post by xienze »

timthelion wrote: post #218
bit_logic wrote: post #109

The true solution to LA traffic will never happen. And that solution is buses. But not the current underfunded system that barely limps along. A massive number of buses, like 5x the current number. And combined with tolls for cars to get cars off the road. The large number of buses is critical because it greatly reduces wait time between transfers. It also allows adding express bus lines between major areas. But buse…

Do you have any experience with busses? Was that experience "great"? For example, have you lived in Hong Kong, which I understand is a Bus city? I live in Prague, and the trams are great. It is a 100% better experience than driving. Smooth, quiet, usually plenty of leg room. Doesn't smell. The busses, however, are hell. That low key vibration of the motor, the smell of the gass, the cramped spaces, the steps, all add…

> I think a lot of people in the US associate mass transit with sociallism and associate soccialism with "everyone should live like the dirt poor live".

No, it's because busses in the US are actually full of dirt poor people. I know it sounds cruel, but given the choice, most Americans would rather drive than sit next to dirty, smelly homeless people and also have to listen to shouting matches, sit in close proximity to fist fights, etc. Oh, and did I mention that they're rarely on time? Busses in the US are legitimately not a pleasant experience, it's really that simple.

Re: To fix L.A.'s traffic, we need tolls

#250

Post by logfromblammo »

yequalsx wrote: post #85
wwweston wrote: post #45

> The reason that electrical power and air travel don’t fail every time they get crowded is that we raise prices to manage demand. Air travel and electrical power: (1) Are easier to add capacity for during times of peak demand (2) Actually do fail (even though tolled!) when demand exceeds capacity (brown/blackouts for electrical power, cascading delays easily exceeding those for ground traffic when weather knocks dow…

People do know that it costs to drive a car but the cost is hidden in some sense. I think few people actually calculate how much driving really costs. When I drive 10 miles I don't think to myself that it's going to cost me $5.40 (using IRS mileage rate). Gasoline taxes do not come close to paying for the road system. I remember when gas hit around $5 a gallon in the U.S. some years ago people did think about driving…

When dreaming up new ways to tax cars, please bear in mind that wear on roadways from vehicles is proportional to miles driven times per-axle weight to the fourth power.

A gas tax is already proportional to miles driven times vehicle weight times a fuel efficiency factor.

Congestion, on the other hand, is a more difficult thing. Vehicle length certainly plays a factor, as well as width, acceleration, and braking distance. Number of passengers is an obvious factor. Trip routing efficiency has a role. I really don't expect local legislators to understand the mathematics of traffic. If they don't commission a study by traffic experts, and do exactly what those experts recommend, they might just end up making things worse.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braess'_paradox#Traffic

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_wave

Post reply on HN