New York City will charge drivers going downtown • Hacker News Board

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#231

Post by Spooky23 » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 9:00 PM UTC

jmclnx wrote: post #25

cj wrote: post #12

See also: London congestion charge: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_congestion_charge Singapore Electronic Road Pricing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Road_Pricing Stockholm congestion tax: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_congestion_tax

When I saw London doing that, I expected cities in the US to start that. I am surprised it took so long. I expected this because of the push of toll roads to make people use EZPASS. Depending upon the City, I think this makes sense. But, in the US, I wonder if this will cause another mass migration of people out to the suburbs ? In the US, people are more addicted to their SUVs than heron addicts are to their drug.

It’s going to kill the city. It’s just going to push businesses out at a bad time.

This doesn’t have anything to do with traffic - it’s a way to try to extract more money for the MTA. Money won’t fix the MTA’s money woes; the unions will just slurp any available cash.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#232

Post by np- » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 9:01 PM UTC

bilalq wrote: post #200

superseeplus wrote: post #172

A big proportion of the opposition is coming from New Jersey where former Governor Chris Christie systematically diverted public transit funding to constructing more roads leaving NJ Transit with a maintenance backlog, inadequate infrastructure and unhappy workers who were poached by the MTA. This resulted in a mismatch where the infrastructure is designed to favor driving on one side of the river and a fee designed…

There's more reason for NJ residents to take issue with this. In central jersey, it costs at least $20/person for a round trip ticket. If you go with your family or a group of friends filling a 5 seat car, the train costs $100 just to get into the city and then get hit with whatever additional costs you have for the next few subway rides. Gas, parking, and carpool bridge/tunnel toll prices don't add up to anywhere ne…

You really think traffic is filled with 5 people in a car? Try looking around in a traffic jam, it’s like 95% 1-2 people occupancy. At 5 people, just paying the congestion charge starts to make sense. Also you could always split the difference, driving some of the way and parking along the PATH line, ie at Harrison parking is $10-15 per day and PATH fare is $2.75 per person, it’s still possible to get in cheaper and faster by public transit even in contrived situations like this.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#233

Post by hnboredhn » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 9:03 PM UTC

satvikpendem wrote: post #161

We should just ban private vehicles in the city as well, bringing back more cyclists, walkers, and generally increasing metro usage.

I sorta hope they find some streets or avenues to convert to bike lanes. I do sorta feel like having a congestion fee without much added ways to get around for pedestrians leaves the typical person unchanged from this.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#234

Post by alphanullmeric » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 9:07 PM UTC

zip1234 wrote: post #124

cyberax wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm all for it! It would suck for transit, though: 1. It has a higher CO2 footprint than small/medium EVs. 2. Transit forces people into smaller and denser housing, resulting in suboptimal living conditions. 3. Buses in particular result in excessive road wear&tear. It's really amazing that people say things like "car owners should not get subsidized" (by whom?), while talking about transit that is literally infeasib…

> It's really amazing that people say things like "car owners should not get subsidized" (by whom?), while talking about transit that is literally infeasible without massive subsidies. If road usage fees cover less than half the cost of roads then clearly someone is subsidizing roads.

Sounds like roads should be paid for only by their users, and proportionally to their use. Then it would be irrelevant whether it’s a sedan or bus since everyone pays their fair share. But of course, such solutions are not acceptable to those that do not intend to pay their fair share.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#235

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 9:09 PM UTC

Tinyyy wrote: post #11

I’m a fan of charging market efficient rates for shared goods. The congestion situation in the Holland Tunnel is awful and bleeds out into various streets of Manhattan as well. The cost of sitting in crawling traffic with aggressive drivers cutting around is probably much more than an extra $20.

[deleted]

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#236

Post by wcarron » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 9:09 PM UTC

BoorishBears wrote: post #206

wcarron wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's one I like actually, maybe something like the blue book value of the car? Suppose two people make the same amount of money. One chooses to buy a cheaper car and pays higher rent for a nicer apt. The other, the opposite. Under your pricing scheme, you're unjustifiably charging two persons of equal means different rates. You can adjust this many ways. One person gets a cheaper car but spends more on luxury vac…

You'll always be able to imagine cases where a broad toll doesn't perfectly align with a narrow goal, why even waste energy listing them out? Instead consider how you get the toll to actually do something: in the case of a congestion charge it's by making driving in Manhattan expensive enough to reduce how much it happens for as many people as possible. Regardless of the corner cases you can imagine, there are more p…

One could also just make the base rate $150/day and then you'll definitely make it untenable for as many people as possible, which is apparently the goal. This leads to an outcome which is you think is an unfair distribution. But luxuries are necessarily for those who can afford them.

The 'cost' of the action is the same. A vehicle in the city is a vehicle is a vehicle and therefore the toll should be flat, unless that type of vehicle in particular causes more damage to roads or empirically worsens outcomes like traffic or pollution relative to other types of vehicle. Charging people more because they are wealthier is unfairly discriminatory.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#237

Post by Spooky23 » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 9:10 PM UTC

SllX wrote: post #201

cronix wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also the county government layer that cities must adhere to in addition to state/national.

Hmm, depends a lot on the State. You can generally make two generalizations about local governments in the United States: they are local governments and you can’t make any other generalizations about them because everything depends on the State and sometimes a locality’s specific circumstances. In California, municipalities do not adhere to the counties they are in, the county is a legal subdivision of the State whic…

NYC can only do it if granted the home rule authority by the state legislature - which it has.

In general, counties are pretty weak in New York.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#238

Post by Waterluvian » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 9:12 PM UTC

np- wrote: post #232

bilalq wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's more reason for NJ residents to take issue with this. In central jersey, it costs at least $20/person for a round trip ticket. If you go with your family or a group of friends filling a 5 seat car, the train costs $100 just to get into the city and then get hit with whatever additional costs you have for the next few subway rides. Gas, parking, and carpool bridge/tunnel toll prices don't add up to anywhere ne…

You really think traffic is filled with 5 people in a car? Try looking around in a traffic jam, it’s like 95% 1-2 people occupancy. At 5 people, just paying the congestion charge starts to make sense. Also you could always split the difference, driving some of the way and parking along the PATH line, ie at Harrison parking is $10-15 per day and PATH fare is $2.75 per person, it’s still possible to get in cheaper and…

Heyyyyyy!… It should be $100 minus $20 per extra person in the car.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#239

Post by rightbyte » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 9:13 PM UTC

RobinL wrote: post #205

satvikpendem wrote: post #161

We should just ban private vehicles in the city as well, bringing back more cyclists, walkers, and generally increasing metro usage.

Banning is equivalent to an infinite price. Better off setting a very high price, such that the revenue is far higher than the negative externality

For practical reasons I guess you want to be able to move furniture etc. That is about the only time you need a motor transport in dense cities?

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#240

Post by estebank » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 9:14 PM UTC

renewiltord wrote: post #181

lotsofpulp wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean how the richer you are, the bigger (and safer) the vehicle you can afford? I drive by many parents taking their kids wherever in old corollas or kias or other small car, and I see many parents at my kids’ daycare dropping their kids off in large suburbans/F150/Sequoia/etc.

Certainly. That's one way, but also poorer people own older cars. An argument that rests on equality should support the idea that all people deserve the same car irrespective of how much money they have.

Equality would be to be able to go where you need to go, in reasonable time, cost and accomodation, regardless of class, race, gender or disability. Focusing on cars is over-indexing on one potential solution.

People want to move around. Cars are only one way of doing so.