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

Taxing Uber and Lyft rides is L.A's latest plan to free up congested roads

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 327 posts

Re: Taxing Uber and Lyft rides is L.A's latest plan to free up congested roads

#191

Post by clairity »

jayd16 wrote: post #62
SilasX wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How so? There was this reddit comment where someone listed all the ridiculous parking requirements they impose that torpedos apartment projects, regardless of how close to downtown or transit they are. [1] https://np.reddit.com/r/LosAngeles/comments/6lvwh4/im_an_arc...

Every bit of new construction seems to be mixed use commercial, retail, and housing with large underground parking structures. He's right that its "luxury" condos but its still a lot denser than the traditional two story apartment buildings.

i wish all the ugly parking went underground. a lot of new construction in LA is mixed use but most of the parking is above ground in podium style structures because it’s cheaper.

but once you dig the hole, it’s like building the same building but starting 30 feet (or whatever) lower in elevation (yes, that requires reinforcing the ground, more environmental review, etc., but still...)

Re: Taxing Uber and Lyft rides is L.A's latest plan to free up congested roads

#192

Post by RegicidalManiac »

nickles wrote: post #3

> Uber and Lyft “are using public roads, and the profit is going to their companies,” Phil Washington, Metro’s chief executive, said at a recent meeting. Public roads are supposed to be paid for through fuel taxes, which every Uber and Lyft driver pays. California has gasoline taxes of: * 55.22c per gallon (second only to Pennsylvania) * 18.4c per gallon (federal) * 2.25% sales tax Additionally, taxing only rideshari…

California's only solution to all problems is tax people more. The original problem does not get solved but the tax money is used to create more problems (like the high-speed train) that make the original problem look good.

As if 4x rents were not good enough to harass poor folks these anti-poor moves by fat rich politicians is the bane of california

Re: Taxing Uber and Lyft rides is L.A's latest plan to free up congested roads

#193

Post by jedberg »

wjossey wrote: post #166
gamblor956 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LA is building a rail parallel to the 405, and the Silver Express (bus) has run down the 110 for more than a decade. LA is also building 2 more rail lines in the SFV. The reason they're not already built is that the SFV opposed these lines 3 decades ago when they were originally proposed and only recently dropped its opposition. Also, Buses run from downtown to Beverly Hills, and getting from Long Beach to Brentwood…

-- Edit -- Sorry, I see now the above comments are more a refutation than a statement of, "Look how good the transportation system is." I'll leave these though just to make my general point about how horrible the options are. -- END EDIT -- Just pulled up google maps for Long Beach to Brentwood: Public Transit Option: 3 hours Car: 39 minutes (29.9 miles) Just pulled up Downtown to Beverly Hills Public Transit Option:…

To be fair, that was at 7:30pm, the tail end of traffic and after the busses switch to a reduced schedule. I'd be curious to see those results at 5:30pm.

I suspect the car would still be faster though.

Re: Taxing Uber and Lyft rides is L.A's latest plan to free up congested roads

#194

Post by itslennysfault »

liability wrote: post #185

.Bring back street cars! Forget hyperloops and similar gadgetbahn bullshit. The solution isn't exotic, it's mundane. Street cars work damn well if you treat them as legitimate transit, not a tourist attraction. You can even bury them using cut-and-cover if the situation really calls for it. Forget microtunnel bullshit, that have ultra-expensive stations never mentioned by the advocates

Honest question. How are street cars better than busses?

They put one in near me recently, and all I could think is that compared to a bus it cost a ton more money, took forever to build, and can't be rerouted in case of an issue. Additionally, it doesn't even bypass traffic so it's not any faster.

Why not just buy a few busses to run the exact route they built the street car on instead ?

Re: Taxing Uber and Lyft rides is L.A's latest plan to free up congested roads

#195

Post by jmpman »

manigandham wrote: post #168
reaperducer wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the damage is virtually all from large trucks, with sedans and SUVs as a rounding error. Which is why the California tax on gasoline is 48.7¢/gallon and the California tax on diesel fuel is 67¢/gallon.[1] Federal tax on gasoline is 18.4¢/gallon, and diesel fuel is 24.4¢/gallon.[2] I'm not defending the trucking industry. I think more stuff should go by train instead. But truck fuel is taxed more heavily than car f…

Those taxes should be proportional to the wear, otherwise it remains unbalanced.

If we are talking about maintenance costs, sure trucks should pay their share, but congestion (the reason to build additional roads) is caused primarily by passenger cars.

Re: Taxing Uber and Lyft rides is L.A's latest plan to free up congested roads

#196

Post by l1ambda »

orasis wrote: post #41

Implement congestion pricing for all drivers.

This. We have this in Minneapolis / St Paul. It just _works_. We're rolling it out on most of the highways. I wish we had it on _all_ lanes on all highways already, because what is the point of having a 60mph road if most of the time you are barely going 20mph, or trip lengths are otherwise completely unpredictable?

There is a concept in economics called spontaneous order. Once the cost of congestion becomes apparent through the price mechanism, then society can reconfigure itself to adapt to it. But you have to have the price mechanism first. People will say, what about this, what about that. It doesn't matter. People will figure it out and adapt, but you need to implement congestion pricing right now, because practically every medium size or larger city in America has terrible traffic congestion problems. Importantly, you cannot set a price ceiling (like Houston did at $8), as it will not work effectively because it will not allow the price mechanism to work and will cause a shortage of road capacity and you end up with no material change.

Changes in laws and zoning and public transit will occur. Given a little bit of time, the emergence of various kinds of social order from a combination of self-interested individuals will occur.

Re: Taxing Uber and Lyft rides is L.A's latest plan to free up congested roads

#197

Post by liability »

itslennysfault wrote: post #194
liability wrote: post #185

.Bring back street cars! Forget hyperloops and similar gadgetbahn bullshit. The solution isn't exotic, it's mundane. Street cars work damn well if you treat them as legitimate transit, not a tourist attraction. You can even bury them using cut-and-cover if the situation really calls for it. Forget microtunnel bullshit, that have ultra-expensive stations never mentioned by the advocates

Honest question. How are street cars better than busses? They put one in near me recently, and all I could think is that compared to a bus it cost a ton more money, took forever to build, and can't be rerouted in case of an issue. Additionally, it doesn't even bypass traffic so it's not any faster. Why not just buy a few busses to run the exact route they built the street car on instead ?

Better rolling resistance and electric powered without battery nonsense. However they are in close competition with trolley-buses (rubber wheeled electric vehicles powered from overhead lines, as seen in Seattle.)

(And unlike buses they don't have a "low class" reputation that prevents middle class snobs from using them!)

Re: Taxing Uber and Lyft rides is L.A's latest plan to free up congested roads

#198

Post by jedberg »

wjossey wrote: post #148
floatrock wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and adding additional arteries Time and time again cities learn this does nothing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand

Induced demand doesn’t say that nothing happened. It says that demand just fills up the new supply. There are no alternatives to a road system in LA for most residents. If the roads were choked and there was an underutilized subway that I could use, I’d totally get the argument of taxing the road system or capping capacity, so as to push people toward more efficient methods. But, it’s not feesible to build out a subw…

> Let’s build tunnels under the mountain passes to add more connections into Hollywood so people have better access than winding canyon roads.

This is an interesting idea. I just measured it out, and assuming you could build a straight tunnel to bypass the canyon at the 405, it would be 5.3 miles.

To bypass Laurel Canyon would be a 3.0 mile tunnel.

Coldwater bypass would be 4.1 miles.

So the question is, do we the technology to build tunnels that long and deep (all of those are about 1000 feet). And is it a good idea to build a 1000 foot deep tunnel in an area known for earthquakes?

Re: Taxing Uber and Lyft rides is L.A's latest plan to free up congested roads

#199

Post by alkibiades »

integrate-this wrote: post #88

I'm a LA resident. People in this city like to talk about congestion as though they see it as a problem, but they don't actually see it as a problem. Only people in the valley see it as a problem because there are limited choke points into and out of LA proper which keep people from getting to work. LA's limited transportation infrastructure prevents DTLA's homeless from getting to Beverly Hills, Long Beach's gang-re…

if those rails were built, those ghettos would be gentrified so quick.

Re: Taxing Uber and Lyft rides is L.A's latest plan to free up congested roads

#200

Post by danjayh »

nickles wrote: post #3

> Uber and Lyft “are using public roads, and the profit is going to their companies,” Phil Washington, Metro’s chief executive, said at a recent meeting. Public roads are supposed to be paid for through fuel taxes, which every Uber and Lyft driver pays. California has gasoline taxes of: * 55.22c per gallon (second only to Pennsylvania) * 18.4c per gallon (federal) * 2.25% sales tax Additionally, taxing only rideshari…

Also, they plan to tax ride sharing (which people have shown demand for) and use the money to improve public transit infrastructure (which people have shown distaste for). Why, why, aren't taxes like this directed to improve the infrastructure for the services that are being taxed? Elon Musk is on the right track - build out more roads, under the city, to improve capacity and reduce congestion. Don't burn the money on a service with ridership numbers that are in freefall.

Imagine if a private company substantially raised the price of its premier product (streaming movies, for example) to build tons of infrastructure for the product that nobody wants (DVD distribution hubs, for example) and neglected to build out the infrastructure required for the product in demand. It'd be gone overnight. This is absolute insanity.

The real solution:

- Tax all road users - most easily accomplished through license/registration taxes (IE, you pay an annual fee for a sticker that gives you permission to drive your car/bus/truck in the taxed area) and fuel taxes - By statute, require the money to be spent to improve/expand the road infrastructure - Where pollution is a problem, (optionally) spend a portion of the tax to build out EV infrastructure, and encourage EV use by charging reduced fees to EV users - Subsidize use of ride-sharing type services for people who would normally use public transit services

This would provide efficient, clean, point-to-point transit services for ALL users. Economically disadvantaged folks could finally stop paying the hidden 'poor people transit tax' (increased transit times).

Post reply on HN