Things that are more inequitable than road pricing • Hacker News Board

Re: Things that are more inequitable than road pricing

#201

Post by mnutt » Sun, Feb 03, 2019, 10:53 PM UTC

pseudonom- wrote: post #163

gpm wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument against here that I find most compelling is that the externalities of you driving your car are so insanely huge that it should be priced into the range of ridiculousness. Things that you have to consider (The numbers attached are completely made up and probably off by multiple orders of magnitude in most cases, but are to make the point that you should be assigning costs to these things. Then you should…

There are serious attempts to estimate the externalities that arise from automobile use in general: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.661... Adjusting those estimates (only) for inflation, they work out to about $2.14 per gallon in driving externalities.

While it looks like a reasonable attempt, it’s only looking at directly related effects. For instance, it notes that pedestrian fatalities have decreased since 1960 due to, among other things, discouraging people from walking. The effect of cars on population health would be much harder to quantify but might end up dwarfing many of the other factors.

Re: Things that are more inequitable than road pricing

#202

Post by Spooky23 » Sun, Feb 03, 2019, 11:01 PM UTC

bradleyjg wrote: post #34

I don't know about other cities, but to understand the strong political push back against congestion pricing in NYC requires a bunch of local context. Neither the rich+, nor the poor, nor the vast majority of the middle class regularly commute into Manhattan by car. The poor and the lower/middle middle class because parking is prohibitively expensive. The upper middle class and the rich because they either live in Ma…

There are also people who want to visit or do business in a particular part of Manhattan where the cost or other constraints of the train are a deterrent.

NYC traffic really isn’t that bad anyway. Congestion pricing is all about revenue.

Re: Things that are more inequitable than road pricing

#203

Post by noobermin » Sun, Feb 03, 2019, 11:07 PM UTC

chroma wrote: post #169

jacobolus wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Riding the train, subway, trolley, or bus and walking a couple blocks at each end is a heck of a lot “better” than sitting in traffic or driving 20 times around the block hunting for a parking space. Even moderately dense urban areas are inherently poor places for personal automobiles, whose infrastructure wastes tremendous amounts of space. The more neighborhoods are optimized for human-scale activity and pedestrian…

> Life in a place where all or nearly all trips can be made without needing to drive a car is very pleasant, especially for anyone who isn’t an able-bodied high-income adult. I've found the exact opposite to be true. Cars are great because they mean you'll never come in contact with crazy vagrants. For a few years I tried taking public transportation in the bay area, but I gave up because I had too many encounters wi…

Part of the reason there are "crazy vagrants" is the government has systematically shifted access and policy in society towards the already wealthy, while the poor and disadvantaged have no alternatives and end up in bad circumstances.

I sympathize with your experience, but if I had to count the number of times I've had bad encounters with bad drivers vs. the times with bad commuters on public transit, it doesn't come close. I submit it's very possible that you're underestimating the negativity with cars because you've normalized it. For example, the statistics bare out that cars are amongst the most deadly thing in America but people ignore it as a problem compared to say gun violence which is a political hot topic.

Re: Things that are more inequitable than road pricing

#204

Post by cryptonector » Sun, Feb 03, 2019, 11:25 PM UTC

nihonde wrote: post #95

bradleyjg wrote: post #34

I don't know about other cities, but to understand the strong political push back against congestion pricing in NYC requires a bunch of local context. Neither the rich+, nor the poor, nor the vast majority of the middle class regularly commute into Manhattan by car. The poor and the lower/middle middle class because parking is prohibitively expensive. The upper middle class and the rich because they either live in Ma…

I live in lower Manhattan. My feeling is that every vehicle other than delivery trucks should be banned from the city. There is no compelling reason for anyone to drive in Manhattan. If people are commuting into Manhattan, they should take public transit to and from parking lots in Brooklyn/Queens/New Jersey. You will never convince me that there are low income workers who need to drive in the city as an essential pa…

Imagine no parking on streets. That would triple the bandwidth of many streets. You could remove parking on every four streets today and greatly improve congestion. Some parking would be needed for ride sharing cars, naturally, but much less than is needed for private cars not used for ride sharing.

Re: Things that are more inequitable than road pricing

#205

Post by Tade0 » Sun, Feb 03, 2019, 11:34 PM UTC

paganel wrote: post #84

Tade0 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it make financial sense comparing to taxis, or do they just buy some kind of barely-allowed shitbox as a substitute?

I’d guess that from a certain point on you don’t look at the financial incentives only, but that you want to maintain your “status” (for different definitions of that word depending on different social environments). For example I know of people close to my age (late 30s) and from my social circles (middle-class people) who pride themselves for almost never using the metro, even though in the city where I’m living (E…

Doing otherwise would be seen as a diminishing of those people’s social standing.

That's what I'm getting at. Say they already drive the best car they can(or even cannot at times) afford. Do they switch to two 3 years older cars(assuming that's how long it takes for a car to lose half of its value)?

Re: Things that are more inequitable than road pricing

#206

Post by zwayhowder » Sun, Feb 03, 2019, 11:42 PM UTC

jefftk wrote: post #188

nihonde wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in lower Manhattan. My feeling is that every vehicle other than delivery trucks should be banned from the city. There is no compelling reason for anyone to drive in Manhattan. If people are commuting into Manhattan, they should take public transit to and from parking lots in Brooklyn/Queens/New Jersey. You will never convince me that there are low income workers who need to drive in the city as an essential pa…

> My feeling is that every vehicle other than delivery trucks should be banned from the city. There is no compelling reason for anyone to drive in Manhattan. I recently played for a contra dance in Manhattan. My band members and I drove in a small car, with a sound system, keyboard, and other instruments. I would have been happy to pay some sort of toll/charge/fee/tax but any other way of getting our equipment to and…

Try getting a Ceili band to a gig :D

I think the article is trying to get to this train of thought.

We want X that requires a vehicle, instead of assuming that this is a zero cost activity lets factor in the cost of parking, mileage etc.

Assuming for a moment that the total cost was an extra $200 any self respecting contra dance should be able to spread that out at $1-$2 per person.

I grew up in a musical family and spent many a weekend covering vast distances in the back of an old car so my dad could play a gig that barely broke even. Reminds me of the definition of a musician: "A musician is someone who will load $5,000 worth of gear into a $500 car to drive 100 miles to a $50 gig."

But seriously, people need to value things correctly. I spent some time on a local council and the shopkeepers would be up in arms whenever they thought they'd lose a parking spot, despite every census showing most of their customers walked to their stores. The shopkeepers viewed the parking as "their parking" and not "our parking" (As in the community). Yet for some reason the footpaths were most definitely "ours footpaths" (The council's) so repairing or even cleaning them was the Council's job, and heaven forbid we suggest the shops pay towards that cost.

Re: Things that are more inequitable than road pricing

#207

Post by DFHippie » Sun, Feb 03, 2019, 11:43 PM UTC

casefields wrote: post #200

hatchnyc wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People were living in cities for many years before cars were invented, presumably at least some of them had children and were not young. Hell, people still live in modern cities around the world outside of the United States where car ownership rates are extremely low.

And people used to die from infection before antibiotics. What's your point?

I think you get the point. We have an existence proof that people don't need cars to live in cities. We don't need everything in the past to have been better than everything in the present for the logic to work. (People aren't driving cars to avoid infection.)

Re: Things that are more inequitable than road pricing

#208

Post by nihonde » Sun, Feb 03, 2019, 11:50 PM UTC

tokyodude wrote: post #145

electric_muse wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My compelling reason is that I live in Manhattan and frequently make trips to visit family that are not well served by public transportation. And when I'm there, I prefer using a vehicle to get around. I often return to New York with a carful of groceries, luggage, etc. I've tried this via public transit -- it's a miserable affair. The utility of a personal vehicle for me is very high -- perhaps substantially higher…

You could ship the stuff home... Yes I know that's probably not realistic but here in Japan for example it's extremely common to ship your luggage to the airport the day before and/or ship it home from the airport on the way back. I've done it a few times. It's also common to buy things at a store like a PC or printer or microwave and have them delivered instead of carrying them home. Japan's shipping services are re…

I also live in Japan about half time. The near-complete lack of on-street parking and high tolls (which are effectively congestion taxes) plus amazing public transportation are all good objectives for NYC. Also, things like luggage delivery, which I’ve used to ship bags from Tokyo to Kyoto and back.

Re: Things that are more inequitable than road pricing

#209

Post by bradleyjg » Sun, Feb 03, 2019, 11:53 PM UTC

michaelcampbell wrote: post #196

nihonde wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in lower Manhattan. My feeling is that every vehicle other than delivery trucks should be banned from the city. There is no compelling reason for anyone to drive in Manhattan. If people are commuting into Manhattan, they should take public transit to and from parking lots in Brooklyn/Queens/New Jersey. You will never convince me that there are low income workers who need to drive in the city as an essential pa…

Because everyone in Manhattan is like you; a young, perhaps single, with no kids; especially not many, and none with special needs, who doesn't need to routinely carry or cart anything around.

Where are you parking and how are you getting from wherever you park to where you live or a shopping or whatever?

It seems to me some of these arguments prove too much. If you are rich enough to pay for convenient parking garages everywhere you want to go, you are rich enough to pay a congestion charge. And if you aren’t then how does a private car solve the problems you are pointing out?

Re: Things that are more inequitable than road pricing

#210

Post by jacobolus » Sun, Feb 03, 2019, 11:54 PM UTC

chroma wrote: post #192

jacobolus wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In practice, cars are dramatically more dangerous (both for their occupants and for bystanders) than transit. But the widespread use of transit by the poor which you note here is great evidence for my claim that cars are not an effective means of transportation for low-income people. If people are screaming at you or smoking meth on the bus, that’s indicative of broader social problems which aren’t really solved by c…

> If people are screaming at you or smoking meth on the bus, that’s indicative of broader social problems which aren’t really solved by changing the transportation system. Knowing the proximate cause doesn't help me avoid crazy people on public transportation. The problem of crazy people in the bay area won't be fixed any time soon, so it's still in my best interests to avoid public transportation. Also, it's not cle…

> I don't believe you

You don’t believe that I travel by bus/subway/etc. and don’t feel unsafe?

There are people of all ages, ethnic groups, social classes, occupations, etc. riding transit throughout the Bay Area every day: foreign tourists; nannies with strollers; pensioners buying groceries; businesspeople commuting; high school students; sports fans; families taking luggage to the airport; .....

There are certainly occasional violent incidents on transit. Out of the 400k BART trips every day, I wouldn’t be surprised if there were a dozen pick-pocketed wallets/phones every day, and the occasional mugging. If I were a small 12 year old girl, there are some BART stations I probably wouldn’t want to be alone in at midnight.

But crime on transit is not common (in general mugging and other violent crime in cities are down dramatically from the peak a few decades ago), and I have never personally felt threatened.

My wife commutes to work in SF by bike, and that is unfortunately far more dangerous (especially with all of the crazy Uber/Lyft drivers these days) than riding the bus.

> Every single one of my coworkers has a horror story

How many of your co-workers grew up in a not-rich family in a city?