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

Fundamental rule of traffic: building new roads makes people drive more (2015)

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 302 posts

Re: Fundamental rule of traffic: building new roads makes people drive more (2015)

#11

Post by msbarnett »

JimboOmega wrote: post #4

Is this even a problem? People are given an opportunity to do something and then they do it. That's way better than new roads going unused, isn't it? I like congestion charging alright, which the article advocates at the very end, but it has a habit of being regressive - it's easy for me, as a software engineer, to show up at work at 11AM, but that might not be the case for those who can less afford to pay those char…

> Is this even a problem?

It’s a problem if your assumption was that demand was closer to fixed and building more roads would “spread drivers out”, reducing congestion.

This was for decades, and still to some extent is, a very wide-spread assumption in local politics, leading to incredibly questionable urban planning decisions.

Re: Fundamental rule of traffic: building new roads makes people drive more (2015)

#12

Post by netcan »

In practical terms, we can consume as much transport as we get. If it was cheap and fast I could have ramen lunch in Tokyo. Pick up the kids from crèche in Portugal on my way home to New Zealand.

So, unless we get teleport watches... congestion is the "price," the thing that limits consumption. Economists would prefer the price to be price, being economists.

One thing this article leaves out is what the value of all this transport is. Maybe more roads don't solve congestion but they do produce more "goods," more Kms travelled. Presumably this has value.

Re: Fundamental rule of traffic: building new roads makes people drive more (2015)

#13

Post by barney54 »

TuringNYC wrote: post #8

The more intelligent approach to building roads is one i've seen in Washington DC. While the metro system isnt perfect, they allocated a portion of the highway to rail (middle track between both directions on the highway.) This way, the community expanded outwards via longer and longer highways and there was an obvious way to eventually simultaneously also expand the metro system outwards. They did this with the Oran…

DC has increasing traffic congestion, but decreasing Metro ridership. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/...

Re: Fundamental rule of traffic: building new roads makes people drive more (2015)

#14

Post by JaRail »

komali2 wrote: post #7

I'm visiting my hometown of Houston after now having lived in SF for just under 3 years, and my partner and mine most common debate thread as we sit in Houston traffic is - what did Houston do differently, to get these uniquely Houston traffic problems? Is it "Houston's" fault, or the fact that it has an extra 2 million people? Does it actually have 2 million more people, or did it just octopus across the entire regi…

On the questions of funding, in the US, interstates are federally funded while local roads are state/city-funded. That's why the interstate system has been so successful compared to highway systems that are more locally-funded, eg Canada.

Re: Fundamental rule of traffic: building new roads makes people drive more (2015)

#15

Post by Spooky23 »

komali2 wrote: post #7

I'm visiting my hometown of Houston after now having lived in SF for just under 3 years, and my partner and mine most common debate thread as we sit in Houston traffic is - what did Houston do differently, to get these uniquely Houston traffic problems? Is it "Houston's" fault, or the fact that it has an extra 2 million people? Does it actually have 2 million more people, or did it just octopus across the entire regi…

People from places like New York and California export tax money to red states right now for these projects.

Re: Fundamental rule of traffic: building new roads makes people drive more (2015)

#16

Post by paulcole »

paulsutter wrote: post #2

It's called "elastic demand" and it just means that roads are useful. The Boring Company has a twofold solution (a) charge for usage, and (b) build to 30 levels or more to meet demand

Currently, traffic jams only prevent you from moving forward. In the future they’ll keep you from going down, too.

Progress!

Re: Fundamental rule of traffic: building new roads makes people drive more (2015)

#17

Post by lmm »

fgheorghe wrote: post #9
fabioborellini wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the Old World we have public mass transit. One vehicle can transport a thousand commuters, and it does not need to be stored in the most desired area of the city for the duration of a working day. Sometimes it looks like the Silicon Valley is trying to solve transit problems either against the laws of physics and economics or, alternatively, ignoring solutions that were there already in the 1800s.

In the “old world” cities like London, Paris, Berlin and others are facing the eact same problems, with or without those overcrowded, overpriced buses you mentioned.

I live in London. Many people don't own cars. Many who moved here with a car give up their cars. Working public transport systems leave everyone better off.

Re: Fundamental rule of traffic: building new roads makes people drive more (2015)

#18

Post by Simon_says »

JimboOmega wrote: post #4

Is this even a problem? People are given an opportunity to do something and then they do it. That's way better than new roads going unused, isn't it? I like congestion charging alright, which the article advocates at the very end, but it has a habit of being regressive - it's easy for me, as a software engineer, to show up at work at 11AM, but that might not be the case for those who can less afford to pay those char…

> it's easy for me, as a software engineer, to show up at work at 11AM

That's the point -- we should incentivize people who can time shift to do so thereby alleviating traffic for those who can't.

Re: Fundamental rule of traffic: building new roads makes people drive more (2015)

#19

Post by dbldogdareudang »

Simon_says wrote: post #18
JimboOmega wrote: post #4

Is this even a problem? People are given an opportunity to do something and then they do it. That's way better than new roads going unused, isn't it? I like congestion charging alright, which the article advocates at the very end, but it has a habit of being regressive - it's easy for me, as a software engineer, to show up at work at 11AM, but that might not be the case for those who can less afford to pay those char…

> it's easy for me, as a software engineer, to show up at work at 11AM That's the point -- we should incentivize people who can time shift to do so thereby alleviating traffic for those who can't.

We should incentivize not driving as much.

What’s the point in me commuting to work to write code on a couch in an office that feels like my living room anyway?

Re: Fundamental rule of traffic: building new roads makes people drive more (2015)

#20

Post by reaperducer »

netcan wrote: post #12

In practical terms, we can consume as much transport as we get. If it was cheap and fast I could have ramen lunch in Tokyo. Pick up the kids from crèche in Portugal on my way home to New Zealand. So, unless we get teleport watches... congestion is the "price," the thing that limits consumption. Economists would prefer the price to be price, being economists. One thing this article leaves out is what the value of all…

Maybe more roads don't solve congestion but they do produce more "goods," more Kms travelled. Presumably this has value.

It does, which is one reason why (in the United States, anyway), highways are paid for by the governments — to spur commerce.

In contrast, railroads (at least in the United States) still mostly have to pay for their infrastructure, which is one reason why passenger rail is in the shape it's in.

Post reply on HN