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

Driving a Car in Manhattan Could Cost $11 Under Congestion Plan

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 267 posts

Re: Driving a Car in Manhattan Could Cost $11 Under Congestion Plan

#51

Post by lotsofpulp »

jimmaswell wrote: post #48
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The “fair” answer is get on a train. There are plenty of affordable communities on the Metro North, LIRR and NJ Transit.

Tax funded roads being gated off to those without higher incomes doesn't sound fair to me in any case, even if there are alternatives.

Sometimes, the world doesn't present us with a solution that is "fair", especially when demand is greater than supply. Assuming you were tasked with reducing the congestion of the road network in NYC and its surrounding areas, do you any ideas of a solution that is "fair"?

Edit: Elsewhere in this thread, someone posted a link to Beijing's solution to congestion, which seem interesting:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_space_rationing_in_Beij...

Unfortunately, I don't know if I would trust the politics of NY to allow for that.

Re: Driving a Car in Manhattan Could Cost $11 Under Congestion Plan

#52

Post by cseelus »

I find concepts of road space rationing like in Beijing to be more fair.[1]

This plan for Manhattan will obviously only stop people with low financial power from driving, although they might already have paid for these roads via taxes and duties.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_space_rationing_in_Beij...

Re: Driving a Car in Manhattan Could Cost $11 Under Congestion Plan

#54

Post by lmm »

saas_co_de wrote: post #2

It seems like it would be fairer to privatize the roads entirely and force the people who can actually use them to pay the entire cost. Otherwise poor people are subsidizing roads reserved for the rich that they can't even use.

A lot of things are partly public-funded and partly user-funded - museums come immediately to mind. That doesn't seem wrong - the public funding is justified in terms of the public benefit (even a road that's only used by "the rich" can increase productivity enough that the generated tax revenue outweighs the cost), and the user funding is justified because those who use it get the benefit.

Re: Driving a Car in Manhattan Could Cost $11 Under Congestion Plan

#55

Post by beisner »

jimmaswell wrote: post #13
liveoneggs wrote: post #8

a friend was once visiting me in manhattan and decided to drive. He came over on the george washington bridge ($15 toll), missed his turn to my block and ended up getting turned around and going over to brooklyn (tunnel, of course: $8.50 toll), realized he was in the wrong place and turned around ($8.50 back through the tunnel). This, of course, was after driving up from Virginia via I-95, which has its own $20+ wort…

I just recently learned about this. It's unbelievable. How can anyone defend a $15 toll? I'm glad I don't have any business in NYC.

Because cars in Manhattan are a blight on livability and safety. There are only a handful of reasons to legitimately have a car in Manhattan; off the top of my head: moving large items, transporting those with mobility issues, getting from specific subway dead zones to other parts, and leaving manhattan altogether. There is an enormous (albeit overloaded and dilapidated) public transit infrastructure allowing people to both move throughout the city and come into the city from basically anywhere in the tri state area. And even if direct transit options into the city aren’t spectacular, you can drive to any of the thousands of park-and-ride locations on the cheap and take public transit from there.

There are legitimate life circumstances that necessitate driving around manhattan, and I would be more than happy to exempt those from congestion pricing. And I have no problem with Taxis and buses and delivery vans operating, as they have high utilization. But private cars cause so many problems in manhattan, including danger to pedestrians (which make up the bulk of people in the city at any given time), noise pollution, air pollution, and inefficiency for legitimate ground transport/logistics, that I have no problem disincentivizing the use of them in Manhattan with large tolls. There’s a certain hubris required to be the only occupant in a vehicle in manhattan when the public transit infrastructure is so expansive and affordable.

And don’t even get me started on all the wasted space dedicated to parking that could be used for public space, business, bicycle lanes, etc...

Re: Driving a Car in Manhattan Could Cost $11 Under Congestion Plan

#56

Post by turc1656 »

nwah1 wrote: post #7

Congestion pricing is one of the most economically literate ways to improve traffic, and those funds can be used to improve infrastructure. It isn't so different from surge pricing in ridesharing apps. There is a narrowmindedness on the part of opponents of both congestion pricing and surge pricing, because they are ignoring the obvious point that if they weren't paying the fees they'd be paying in terms of time. Not…

Yes, it's not unlike surge pricing or any sort of increased pricing found for any product/service in the face of increased demand and constant supply. However, I find these types of situation to be different. These are supposed to be public roads, usable by anyone with a license as long as they obey the state laws governing the operation of a motor vehicle.

Now NYC wants to add an additional charge to each and every ride through it's most populated region? Seems unfair, especially to those who make less. Some might argue that those in the lower incomes probably don't have cars in a city like NYC or even live in Manhattan at all due to it's cost. And they may be right. But it's also a matter of principle. Seems immoral to me to charge people to use what they are already taxed for multiple times (direct gas tax and some form if income/property tax is used to pay for road maintenance). It also seems especially unfair to tax them to use what is essentially a public good that is already paid for. The tax is simply to incentivize a specific activity (i.e. not driving in Manhattan).

Should we also tax everyone who walks through the streets of Mid-town? Those streets are insanely crowded and I hate being there. Maybe we should tax anyone walking on sidewalks?

Yes, they would be paying with time instead of fees. But many people have time and not so much money and they would probably much rather give up their time instead because it's what they have in a relatively larger amount.

Re: Driving a Car in Manhattan Could Cost $11 Under Congestion Plan

#57

Post by maxerickson »

turc1656 wrote: post #56
nwah1 wrote: post #7

Congestion pricing is one of the most economically literate ways to improve traffic, and those funds can be used to improve infrastructure. It isn't so different from surge pricing in ridesharing apps. There is a narrowmindedness on the part of opponents of both congestion pricing and surge pricing, because they are ignoring the obvious point that if they weren't paying the fees they'd be paying in terms of time. Not…

Yes, it's not unlike surge pricing or any sort of increased pricing found for any product/service in the face of increased demand and constant supply. However, I find these types of situation to be different. These are supposed to be public roads, usable by anyone with a license as long as they obey the state laws governing the operation of a motor vehicle. Now NYC wants to add an additional charge to each and every…

The space a vehicle takes up is also essentially a public good.

Your argument can probably be fairly recast as "everyone should have to pay equal costs in time if they want to use the road". And then never mind that a congestion charge is more predictable than sitting in congestion.

Re: Driving a Car in Manhattan Could Cost $11 Under Congestion Plan

#58

Post by lazerpants »

nwah1 wrote: post #7

Congestion pricing is one of the most economically literate ways to improve traffic, and those funds can be used to improve infrastructure. It isn't so different from surge pricing in ridesharing apps. There is a narrowmindedness on the part of opponents of both congestion pricing and surge pricing, because they are ignoring the obvious point that if they weren't paying the fees they'd be paying in terms of time. Not…

I'm always surprised by the only-in-this-circumstance libertarian philosophy of people who support congestion pricing. I think if you took the exact same logic and applied it to say, schools, supporters would feel completely differently about it.

Example: It's really hard to get your child into certain public schools in NYC. Why not start charging $3k a year per child (much less than private schools) at high demand schools in order to lessen the overcrowding of those schools? There are viable alternatives to paying (less in-demand schools), most lower income people are already not able to send their kids to in-demand schools for reasons of geography, and after all, parents choose to have children, they should pay for the services and infrastructure to support them.

That example seems to essentially be the same as what is proposed for congestion pricing, with many parallel arguments. Why is congestion pricing okay when applying the same philosophy to other matters of public good isn't?

(by the way, I'm a reluctant supporter of congestion pricing, and not of what I proposed for schools, but I struggle with why I believe one is okay and the other is not)

Re: Driving a Car in Manhattan Could Cost $11 Under Congestion Plan

#59

Post by yipbub »

lazerpants wrote: post #58
nwah1 wrote: post #7

Congestion pricing is one of the most economically literate ways to improve traffic, and those funds can be used to improve infrastructure. It isn't so different from surge pricing in ridesharing apps. There is a narrowmindedness on the part of opponents of both congestion pricing and surge pricing, because they are ignoring the obvious point that if they weren't paying the fees they'd be paying in terms of time. Not…

I'm always surprised by the only-in-this-circumstance libertarian philosophy of people who support congestion pricing. I think if you took the exact same logic and applied it to say, schools, supporters would feel completely differently about it. Example: It's really hard to get your child into certain public schools in NYC. Why not start charging $3k a year per child (much less than private schools) at high demand s…

The report says "None of those fees should be charged, the task force said, until repairs are made to the public transit system." so it wouldn't be like they'd be "surge charging" a necessity like schools.
Post reply on HN