The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain • Hacker News Board

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#131

Post by bparsons » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:58 PM UTC

Jorge1o1 wrote: post #31

The streets were never free. We paid for it with our tax money. (Not to mention our 22 trillion dollar public debt) I don’t think people expect streets to be free in the same way you don’t expect the police department to be free, the fire department to be free, public schools, etc. In any case, my point is, we paid for the streets with our tax money and our debt, so don’t masquerade this as some kind of “economic rec…

Some people use the roads a lot more than others. Those people should pay their fair share.

Someone who commutes in an SUV from Fairfield to Manhattan every day should have to pay much, much higher fees than someone who rides their bike from Greenpoint to Brooklyn heights.

Once (particularly wealthy) people are made to incur the true cost of their lifestyle choices, the hope is that better choices are made.

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#132

Post by asark » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:58 PM UTC

Xylakant wrote: post #9

dannyw wrote: post #3

It's sad to see congestion pricing in America. I had hoped that the long-lived cultural freedom of driving would keep it at bay for longer, but I guess not anymore. I live in Sydney. It takes a 45 minute drive to visit a family member, who is sick and homebound. To do so in the shortest and least congested route, I must pay 3 tolls: $14.85 total, one way; $30 dollars a trip. Public transport is not a suitable option.…

Your freedom to drive where ever you choose on the fastest route infringes on freedoms of others, for example: * their freedom to drive on the fastest route possible * their freedom not to have a large road in front of their home * their freedom not to have their taxes invested in a road infrastructure ballooned to a level that they might not need * their freedom to live in a world that is not inflicted by global war…

I'd encourage everyone to guesstimate how much distance could be taken out of their commute or drive to the city by removing parking lots, huge highways and tens-of-foodball-fields interchanges, large set-backs and front lawns to keep people away from unpleasant roads, and so on, then check whether they could bike that distance in what it takes to drive.

When I encountered the idea that cars being common causes them to lose all benefit for most people while also causing them to become necessary, I initially thought it overblown. Then I ran the numbers. Well. Crap.

[EDIT] and don't forget to factor in minutes or hours per day spent working to pay for car+maintenance+gas.

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#133

Post by kevin_thibedeau » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 4:00 PM UTC

nickles wrote: post #71

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> don’t masquerade this as some kind of “economic reckoning” In New York, low-income New Yorkers who own a car (or live in the zone) will be eligible for a waiver [1]. People with disabilities, too, will probably be eligible for a waiver. (Some carve-outs are still being pinned down.) Taxis, Ubers, trucks and cars owned by people who opt to pay hundreds of dollars a month in parking are who will be taxed. Given the u…

> Taxis, Ubers, trucks and cars owned by people who opt to pay hundreds of dollars a month in parking are who will be taxed. Given the unusability of our streets, this seems closer to an economic reckoning than a political money grab. Taxis and Ubers are forms of public transportation, and likely reduce the overall number of cars on the road. Simultaneously, they reduce the incidences of drunk driving, providing posi…

Ubers were growing like a cancer. With no limit in place they would just continue growing until nobody else could use the roads. They are a big factor in the current levels of congestion.

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#134

Post by clairity » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 4:01 PM UTC

wallacoloo wrote: post #104

We already have a kind of congestion pricing, in some sense. If you plan a trip during peak hours, it costs you more time. It’s pretty typical, then, to plan leisure trips into or out of the city based around when traffic will be light. It’s just that this cost in time isn’t distributed nearly as ideally as it could be. It costs an individual the same amount whether they take a bus or a car with four people or four c…

> "We already have a kind of congestion pricing, in some sense. If you plan a trip during peak hours, it costs you more time."

this is an underappreciated point, as it underlies the popularity of congestion pricing among wealthier folks, whatever their politics (left-leaners ostensibly would otherwise support more egalitarian/progressive policies).

currently everyone pays with their time, whether rich or poor. you can't buy your way out of the problem just for yourself. irksomely, money is of no advantage. but with congestion pricing, you could, and that's really appealing to wealthy folks.

i'm not arguing against congestion pricing, just noting a less-visible motivation. a progressive pricing scheme (pay more if you have higher income/net worth), for example, would still reduce congestion while providing more egalitarian access.

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#135

Post by ropeilin » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 4:01 PM UTC

dec0dedab0de wrote: post #12

When I worked in a major city I would go on a half-joke rant anytime someone brought up traffic, parking,or obesity. If I were somehow the king of a major city, I would have a giant parking lot on the outside, and ban all cars. You could buy day passes if you need access to the roads to move or something, but it would be discouraged. People would walk more, and be healthier, The air would be higher quality, and most…

Are you talking about Venice?

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#136

Post by ghaff » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 4:03 PM UTC

mattigames wrote: post #108

lloydde wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a novel idea, but introduces worse problems of discrimination. You should not use candidates address or commute as criteria in hiring. I do see companies set up satellite or second offices. I do wonder if an companies of scale use proximities and travel time to influence renewing leases or moving office buildings. What do these formulas look like? What data do they use?

>You should not use candidates address or commute as criteria in hiring. Why not? You claim it like a truth without justifying it: A person living near a restaurant that want a job there should get it over someone just as qualified in the opposite end of the city.

Maybe they should just build company dorms and make living and eating in them a condition of employment.

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#137

Post by mattigames » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 4:05 PM UTC

ghaff wrote: post #136

mattigames wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You should not use candidates address or commute as criteria in hiring. Why not? You claim it like a truth without justifying it: A person living near a restaurant that want a job there should get it over someone just as qualified in the opposite end of the city.

Maybe they should just build company dorms and make living and eating in them a condition of employment.

Yeah, living near where you work is totally the same as living there; they will miss losing 2 hours of every day of their lives due commuting so much.

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#138

Post by kevin_thibedeau » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 4:05 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #59

hourislate wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do people feel on a congestion fee for sidewalks. Too many people on sidewalks in NYC making them almost unusable. If you want to walk on a sidewalk during the busiest times you should pay a congestion fee. Why would we stop at just roads?

> Too many people on sidewalks in NYC making them almost unusable One, pedestrian congestion doesn't exhibit traffic congestion's negative externalities. (You have to get to trampling-risk densities before that occurs.) Two, "sidewalk passes" have no precedent. Congestion pricing has lots of precedent [1]. Three, this is a problem getting attention [2]. America has spent decades throwing lanes at traffic. Not all of…

The area around Penn station reaches trampling risk densities five days a week.

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#139

Post by C1sc0cat » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 4:07 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #41

Jorge1o1 wrote: post #31

The streets were never free. We paid for it with our tax money. (Not to mention our 22 trillion dollar public debt) I don’t think people expect streets to be free in the same way you don’t expect the police department to be free, the fire department to be free, public schools, etc. In any case, my point is, we paid for the streets with our tax money and our debt, so don’t masquerade this as some kind of “economic rec…

> don’t masquerade this as some kind of “economic reckoning” In New York, low-income New Yorkers who own a car (or live in the zone) will be eligible for a waiver [1]. People with disabilities, too, will probably be eligible for a waiver. (Some carve-outs are still being pinned down.) Taxis, Ubers, trucks and cars owned by people who opt to pay hundreds of dollars a month in parking are who will be taxed. Given the u…

So why are you penalising those with off street parking ?

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#140

Post by pokeymcsnatch » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 4:08 PM UTC

bparsons wrote: post #131

Jorge1o1 wrote: post #31

The streets were never free. We paid for it with our tax money. (Not to mention our 22 trillion dollar public debt) I don’t think people expect streets to be free in the same way you don’t expect the police department to be free, the fire department to be free, public schools, etc. In any case, my point is, we paid for the streets with our tax money and our debt, so don’t masquerade this as some kind of “economic rec…

Some people use the roads a lot more than others. Those people should pay their fair share. Someone who commutes in an SUV from Fairfield to Manhattan every day should have to pay much, much higher fees than someone who rides their bike from Greenpoint to Brooklyn heights. Once (particularly wealthy) people are made to incur the true cost of their lifestyle choices, the hope is that better choices are made.

That's the cost of having a functioning society. I don't have kids, yet I still pay school taxes because even though I'm not participating in that particular aspect of society, I still benefit from it.

Public biking infrastructure wouldn't be possible without the roads and right-aways we already have for cars and pedestrians; someone only using a mile of roadway on their daily commute is benefiting from the entirety of the transportation infrastructure that everyone has been paying into equally despite their level of use.

The guy biking or even walking to work every day I'm sure orders food occasionally, buy groceries, pays for utilities, or otherwise participates in commerce, all of which require roads and vehicles. He's getting a massive benefit from something he doesn't directly use.