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

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#281

Post by griffinkelly » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 10:17 PM UTC

bobthepanda wrote: post #86

jmclnx wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

London has it relatively easy; the only layer of government above it is the national one. Cities in the US are creatures of their respective states, and the swing votes in states are usually the suburban voters who would be most impacted by a charge like this. —- It also helps that TfL has a track record of delivering many miles of projects and a future expansion plan. MTA is planning on using this to keep the lights…

Does the revenue go to the state of NY, NYC or the federal government? I imagine a split between all if it needed federal approval?

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#282

Post by steveBK123 » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 10:17 PM UTC

My main concern as NYer is the governments inability to build transit, and not for lack of money.

NY will find it relatively easy to institute a new tax on drivers, but will the billions collected actually make transit better in any tangible way?

NYC is also hamstrung by having its streets controlled locally by our DOT, but our transit & bridges controlled by a state agency.

We just caved (again) entirely to the transit unions in the last contract negotiation. We have subway lines & trains wired up for 1 man operation but run them staffed with 2 due to union work rules.

We have for years instead of building elevators, paid 3rd party access-a-ride minibus/van drivers to provide Uber-like service to anyone in need.

We are planning to spend something like $3B/mile to expand a single train line a few stops further north.

The MTA estimates they can put in platform doors like other developed world cities in only 1/3 of stations, at an average cost of $50M/station.

We spent something close to $10B building an entire new terminal for LIRR underneath an existing Metro North terminal when there was enough capacity to serve both out of the existing station. Bureaucratic squabbles between divisions of MTA serving LI & NY/CT were mitigated by spending $10B. Oh and for the average LIRR rider, despite having 2 Manhattan terminals they can get a train to, the net service has actually been reduced in terms of trains per day.

We basically need a modern era Robert Moses to consolidate NYC DOT/MTA/Port Authority and whatever other agencies and bring us into the modern era.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#283

Post by cogman10 » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 10:21 PM UTC

ericmay wrote: post #224

comte7092 wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regressive if you ignore all of the other costs associated with driving. Drivers always love to make this argument, but it presupposes that everyone already owns and insures a car. At the end of the day it’s car dependence that is regressive.

Yea it also ignores that if everybody stopped riding the $100 train then you’d never actually be able to drive into the city, let alone park anywhere for under $100. Also, this is a deliberate choice. They can improve train services and lower costs. Idk why people who ostensibly are market oriented are so fixated on current prices and assuming they can’t change or be improved upon. Germany is an example $49 for a tic…

Yeah, everyone also ignores that public transport can be supported through taxes and operated at a loss.

In the US, we have a weird obsession with all public goods/services paying for themselves. We should ditch that, operate at a loss, and pull the difference out of progressive taxes.

There's no reason your CEO or office shouldn't foot part of the bill to transport you into work.

Heck, were I king I'd fund public transport 100% from taxes and do away with ticketing. Imagine how much less money we'd pay on road maintenance, police doing traffic duty, running ticket stands/etc. Not to mention the air quality improvements and environmental impacts.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#284

Post by Eisenstein » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 10:25 PM UTC

cyberax wrote: post #103

creato wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, as long as you consider externalities like congestion. That would suggest charging for passage through congested areas (the subject of this thread), and subsidizing mass transit in congested areas.

[flagged]

You logic is completely backwards.

Dense housing doesn't result in traffic congestion. If more people live closer together there is more population density, but as long as they can access commercial areas easily then they can do their shopping and work and recreational tasks without cars. When you remove cars then you suddenly have much more living space because a car takes up a large amount of room to store and there must be extra space for commuters and visitors.

Are you seriously arguing that adding more space for cars makes cities less congested? For every one parking space you add you remove a large amount of useful space for other things.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#285

Post by nonethewiser » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 10:26 PM UTC

tlogan wrote: post #110

So rich people (who really do not care about few dollars) will be able to drive to downtown just for fun. while poor people who truly need to come to downtown by car will struggle. This is an unfortunate reality of life: wealth equates to more available time.

It is literally this. Decongesting the streets for rich people.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#286

Post by Reason077 » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 10:26 PM UTC

Good move. London has done this for many years with its congestion charge zone (and, more recently, the T-charge for high-emissions vehicles). Helps cut down on traffic congestion, reduces air pollution, and helps raise funds for transport projects.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#287

Post by nonethewiser » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 10:28 PM UTC

lotsofpulp wrote: post #119

tlogan wrote: post #110

So rich people (who really do not care about few dollars) will be able to drive to downtown just for fun. while poor people who truly need to come to downtown by car will struggle. This is an unfortunate reality of life: wealth equates to more available time.

This “poor people will be affected more” is a tired refrain. That is always obviously true, given the consequences of being poor. Not every solution can or has to solve the wealth/income gap. Solve congestion with one solution, solve wealth redistribution with another.

It’s obviously true though, isnt it? Poor people cant afford the ~$20 toll like a rich person can.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#288

Post by nonethewiser » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 10:29 PM UTC

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #152

lotsofpulp wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This “poor people will be affected more” is a tired refrain. That is always obviously true, given the consequences of being poor. Not every solution can or has to solve the wealth/income gap. Solve congestion with one solution, solve wealth redistribution with another.

Also, at least with congestion pricing, those wealthy drivers will be funding the public transit system for the rest of society.

Trickle down?

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#289

Post by nonethewiser » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 10:30 PM UTC

lotsofpulp wrote: post #197

rileymat2 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rationing by payment is only one strategy though. Choosing that strategy brings in wealth disparities. So it is fair to bring it up when that is the chosen strategy.

Everything brings in wealth disparities, except for redistributing wealth. That’s an inherent part of one person having more wealth than another, it allows them to buy more. It is a waste of time to bring it up every single time. We know being poor sucks, but that is its own issue with its own solution separate from solving too many vehicles in certain parts of Manhattan at certain times.

How does increasing free parking bring in a wealth disparity? Or increasing capacity or lowering the price of public transit?

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#290

Post by comte7092 » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 10:31 PM UTC

speakfreely wrote: post #255

comte7092 wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regressive if you ignore all of the other costs associated with driving. Drivers always love to make this argument, but it presupposes that everyone already owns and insures a car. At the end of the day it’s car dependence that is regressive.

> Drivers always love to make this argument, but it presupposes that everyone already owns and insures a car. Have you ever been to New Jersey? The entire state is set up to make it as difficult as possible to live without a car.

That’s the point.

Why does New York have to accommodate New Jersey and not the other way around?