Live data from Hacker News

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

latimes.com

471–480 of 689 posts

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

#471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I completely disagree about the reusability of time. I live in Boston and my commute on the train is only about 20 minutes, but that's plenty of time to read a few pages or catch up on the news. I see plenty of commuters reading books as well, so I'm definitely not a special case. Reading a book while standing on a crowded train is not that hard...

It certainly depends. In LA's metro system, they play a constant stream of announcements (often at ear-splitting volume). Even reading is difficult unless you get lucky and the system's broken.

[deleted]

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

#472
post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They set a max price on those lanes because otherwise poor people would get stuck in even worse traffic while rich people would be able to move quickly. That's already true but they are trying to minimize the disparity between rich and poor.

They can redirect the toll money to things that benefit the poor while allowing rich people to save their time which is objectively worth more.

You could also make the argument that a rich persons time is worth less because they can afford to hire people to do what poor people have to do themselves, like clean the house or go shopping or drive their kids around. They are also more likely to have a job that can be done from home.

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

#473

"To fix traffic, we need tolls" Tolls are just a form of paying people to go away (if you don't take the toll road, you're paid by getting to keep a few dollars in your pocket). It only reduces traffic for you if you are one of the ones that didn't go away. If the toll discouraged you, then the traffic problem isn't solved for you; you're taking a bunch of non-toll roads riddled with detours and intersections. We can…

The cost of vehicle ownership is a sizable toll people already pay. Even a beater is $300/mo. for insurance and maintenance, not counting the fuel. We've dumped our second car (2010) to shed about $900/mo. in insurance, maintenance and loan payments. And then you've got this double-edged sword that Lyft is cheap enough to be competitive with vehicle ownership + parking (for commutes up to about 8 miles), and the Ride…

I drive a beater, it cost me $4k 6 years ago. I spend $40/month on insurance in a big city - liability only, about $150 a year on maintenance (2-3 oil changes, plus misc.), and generally have 1 big repair a year that runs me $300-500. All-in-all that's $75-95 a month plus gas. It's really not a huge toll, even for poor people.

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

#474

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…

Taken the bus occasionally in Melbourne and Brisbane. Brisbane went hard core for buses even giving them separate roads/overpasses to take in some sections and it was very efficient and also heavily used. Melbourne is more mixed and the trains and trams are definitely used more than buses. The bus system wasn't scary, but it is underutilized in the suburbs and just as crowded in the inner city as other options. But w…

I agree and dissagree. I lived in Kirkland(outside of Seattle) and spent time in LA. LA would really benefit from a real tram system. It is not too spread out for it, and it is a great candidate, because so much of it is just shitty strip mall and parking lot, that simply bulldozing half the city and building something decent along with a tram line would be a good idea. Kirkland, not so much. Too much suburb, you are right. But despite the spread of many american cities, there is still a hole lot of urban core, which is desparately lacking any sort of real mass transport infrastructure, and too often I hear eletist sentiments as being the reason not to build real infrastructure.

Ironically, a kind of anticapitalism, unionism, plays a big role in this. Unions in the construction industry have played a big role in making prices in the US higher than they should be, though even this cannot be the entire explanation. Prague has its corruption, I like to think of it as being a %20 tax on all government projects, but still we manage to do things for prices that are reasonable, even within the context of our economy. And the price of concrete aint any cheeper here than it is anywhere else, and the Czech Republic is far less wealthy than America. Somehow, America has learned to oscify itself to the point where it is less capable of building real infrastructure than the average eastern european deap state protodemocracy, it is really strange.

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

#475

> 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…

> it isn't as if driving has been anything close to free

That's true, but completely misses the point. Road access is free, which is what causing congestion on some roads during rush hours.

Any solution to that has to target those specific roads during those specific hours.

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

#476

One time I was crossing the street, and I almost got hit by some white asshole in his car, going way too fast. Actually, that happens all the time. That's why I always start shooting my machine gun at anything within 50 meters that moves.

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13815933 and marked it off-topic.

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

#477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An hour reading, sleeping or just zoned out on a train is a lot less fatigue than an hour operating a car in stop-and-go traffic.

20 minutes standing on a violently accelerating and decelerating train while strangers' bodies are touching you is much more fatiguing than 2 hours at a standstill in a car (BART is far and away the worst part of every workday, while even the slowest trips to Monterey or Tahoe are a blast, but maybe that's just me).

Comparing the mental fatigue of your work commute versus vacation travel is like comparing apples and oranges.

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

#478

LA doesn't have a traffic problem. People just have overly high expectations. As someone who has also lived and commuted in lots of cities around the world, LA just doesn't have that much of a problem. What other major city in the world would you expect to be able to drive 15 miles through the centre at rush hour and get to your destination in under an hour (I'm using as reference Downtown LA to Santa Monica at 9am,…

I've lived in LA my whole life, its only been in the last 4 years or so I haven't had to have a car. I live by the redline and just use the train system. With the expo line the reach of the train system is really amazing if you remember what it was like to drive through brutal traffic to get from say hollywood to santa monica.

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

#479
post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Have you seen the central line at rush hour in London? It's horrendous[1]. We are talking >7people per sqm, plus significant waits to even get on the trains. But yet, 100k+s use it every day of all socioeconomic backgrounds. I'd imagine mostly middle class/upper middle class professionals. Why? 1) Traffic is terrible. It will take 1hr+ to do a journey the central line does in 15-20m. 2) Even if you want to drive, par…

Yes I've seen it as a tourist several years ago. Nice place to visit but I wouldn't want to live there: too crowded.

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

#480
post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why? All the office buildings are in one central place. No! The defining feature of the LA megapolis is that the offices and workplaces are not all in one central place. Just within LA County, there are major business districts in Hollywood, Santa Monica, Culver City, Burbank, Pasadena, Warner Center, Playa Vista, downtown, Westwood, Century City, … it goes on and on. As Human Transit says, Los Angeles is a "vast c…

There is significant reverse commute and congestion from Chicago into the suburbs The travel times are typically longer than the conventional flow. Suburb to Suburb mass transit is bus but challenging for long transits. There are only two major ring type highways. Attempts to get a suburban ring "STAR" train or outer Chicago "Circle" Loop line never get past the study stage.

I'm one such commuter. I go from western Chicago burbs to north. There is no legit public trans option. It's 3 hours one way for what takes me 30 mins in no traffic.

What i really hate is the variability. Good days its 30 min. Bad days, may be over 2 hours. And, you cant always tell before you get on the road.

Post reply on HN