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

Steal This Idea: The Larger the Car, the More You Pay to Park

usa.streetsblog.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 85 posts

Re: Steal This Idea: The Larger the Car, the More You Pay to Park

#71

Post by atoav »

cypress66 wrote: post #59
atoav wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I agree with the sentiment I think weight is the better lever here. Size for the most part will also affect weight, but weight is the thing that causes the bigger cost in energy use, road maintenance, road noise, consequences of collisions etc. A car that is too big to use in regular lanes or parking lots should be banned from street use or come with it's own hefty share of fees, bureaucracy and paperwork.

Crash worthiness actually increases weight. If you want safe cars, they'll be heavy.

Do you take into account that other cars are also getting heavier?

Re: Steal This Idea: The Larger the Car, the More You Pay to Park

#72

Post by Fradow »

latchkey wrote: post #8

In the US, we literally don't have a choice. The only small (2-door) cars that are on the market are the Mini, Mazda MX5, Toyota GR, Subaru BRZ. The last three being sports cars. Everything else has pulled out of the country or has more doors (and is larger). It is really sad. I really wish Smart cars would come back as an option.

Friendly advice: if you go for a Mini, take a 3rd gen (2014+ roughly) or be prepared to wrench on it (because otherwise your mechanic bill will soon be more than buying a newer one in the first place).

They are awesome little cars that are plenty practical for the city and still fun to drive (even the naturally aspirated ones).

Re: Steal This Idea: The Larger the Car, the More You Pay to Park

#73

Post by TylerE »

latchkey wrote: post #48
aidenn0 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yeah 2-door is a weird place to draw the line. I had a 2003 Ford Focus 4-door, and while it wasn't tiny, it was fairly compact. Meanwhile Plymouth used to make a 2-door midsized station wagon (the Suburban, not to be confused with the Chevy SUV of the same name, came in both 2- and 4-door versions).

I don't need or want more than 2 doors. I want a small car. A big reason for this is that I also have a very small garage. My condo is also very small, so having a bit of extra storage space in there that isn't taken up by a car, is very useful. Also note that Ford no longer sells Focus in the US.

Against the 4 door is the exact same size of except it has longer doors that make it more difficult in tight spaces, or easier.

Re: Steal This Idea: The Larger the Car, the More You Pay to Park

#74

Post by somedude895 »

prennert wrote: post #70
somedude895 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Families and tradesmen, likely physically disabled people as well. You could make exemptions for people who actually need bigger vehicles, but that just means yet more bloated bureaucracy. I think I'll skip on stealing this idea.

It does not need to be that complicated. Just give families, special needs groups etc tax credits or direct payments and have them decide how to use it. Then families that do not _need_ a large car wont buy one, because they can still save taxes if they do not do it.

Good luck figuring out who needs a truck to transport generators, materials and tools and who doesn't. Just more bloat to chase some low-impact goals of activists who found a new group of people to pick on.

Re: Steal This Idea: The Larger the Car, the More You Pay to Park

#75

Post by throw0101b »

Cerium wrote: post #42
photonbeam wrote: post #7

Just make vehicles taxes directly proportional to gross vehicle weight. You drive a 200kg motorcyle, pay $X, you have a 2ton car, pay the 10x

A linear rate seems high but is actually a steal for heavy vehicles, road damage follows the fourth power of axle weight. https://www.insidescience.org/news/how-much-damage-do-heavy-...

See also:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_power_law

Re: Steal This Idea: The Larger the Car, the More You Pay to Park

#76

Post by throw0101b »

ARandomerDude wrote: post #2

A minivan can very comfortably seat 6 adults. In a busy area, higher fees for larger vehicles may discourage carpooling and increase traffic.

> […] higher fees for larger vehicles may discourage carpooling and increase traffic.

The average occupancy is 1.5 people per vehicle:

* https://css.umich.edu/publications/factsheets/mobility/perso...

Everybody is already not-carpooling; more not-carpooling is just more of the status quo.

Re: Steal This Idea: The Larger the Car, the More You Pay to Park

#77

Post by MichaelZuo »

Cerium wrote: post #42
photonbeam wrote: post #7

Just make vehicles taxes directly proportional to gross vehicle weight. You drive a 200kg motorcyle, pay $X, you have a 2ton car, pay the 10x

A linear rate seems high but is actually a steal for heavy vehicles, road damage follows the fourth power of axle weight. https://www.insidescience.org/news/how-much-damage-do-heavy-...

Now that I think about it, there doesn't seem to be a precedent for an exponential tax anywhere.

Re: Steal This Idea: The Larger the Car, the More You Pay to Park

#78

Post by nobodyandproud »

Timon3 wrote: post #63
tourmalinetaco wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While it’s true the vast majority are not buying minivans, the vast majority of US citizens also live outside of cities. Thus making minivans and other, similar cars uneconomical outside of large family units. Additionally, if the majority of Americans are buying “comically large cars”, then most are equally protected and fewer are at risk. And in my lower income neck of the woods large cars are hardly the status quo…

> While it’s true the vast majority are not buying minivans, the vast majority of US citizens also live outside of cities. Nope: > This statistic illustrates the size of the urban and rural population of the United States from 1960 to 2020. In 2020, there were approximately 57.47 million people living in rural areas in the United States, compared to about 274.03 million people living in urban areas. https://www.stati…

Would you consider the suburbs “outside of cities”?

Re: Steal This Idea: The Larger the Car, the More You Pay to Park

#79

Post by prmoustache »

tourmalinetaco wrote: post #46
laserbeam wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, the average vehicle ocupancy is around 1.6. Vans are a bit better at 2.4, but these numbers are puny compared to the 20-80 prople who fit in a single bus (which takes as much space as 3-4 cars). Cars are a luxury in cities. The cities themselves pay for cars with noise, air quality and congestion. People should be encouraged to use them less in general.

I’m glad you point out that this is specifically a problem in cities. Most people I’ve seen on HN advocating for reducing cars make the astronomically out-of-touch arguments about how buses will come get us countryfolk and that “private transport is a luxury”, as if we’d be able to do what we need to productively without it. Sure, with the anti-consumer construction of modern cars, and the unfortunate difficulties of…

There are countries with well developped buses lines in the countryside.

Re: Steal This Idea: The Larger the Car, the More You Pay to Park

#80

Post by savingsPossible »

somedude895 wrote: post #74
prennert wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does not need to be that complicated. Just give families, special needs groups etc tax credits or direct payments and have them decide how to use it. Then families that do not _need_ a large car wont buy one, because they can still save taxes if they do not do it.

Good luck figuring out who needs a truck to transport generators, materials and tools and who doesn't. Just more bloat to chase some low-impact goals of activists who found a new group of people to pick on.

The idea was: give all (relevant class) people a bonus that compensates the tax. If they can forgo the car, they get more money. If not, they break even.

relevant class: big families, construction workers, whatever

Post reply on HN