Live data from Hacker News

New York City will charge drivers going downtown

cnn.com

341–350 of 700 posts

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#341
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m sorry what? Cars are the most subsidized thing in America today, you can’t speak of success when they get billions of blank checks handed to them in many different ways. See here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092180092... Meanwhile public transit: https://www.apta.com/research-technical-resources/research-r...

From your first link: > The true scale of social costs is rarely considered… Yep, that is pretty much what I was expecting. Some hand waving and lecturing about qualitative, subjective externalities. This is social commentary and opinion pretending to be science.

Are you arguing that when a car parks on the street, there's no actual value to that parking spot? The article is just arguing that there are externalities related to car use, and I'm confused how you conclude these externalities do not exist. Is it the use of the word social that makes you uncomfortable?

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#342
post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Car owners are already hugely subsidized. Toll roads cover only a tiny fraction of road maintenance. The rest is paid by taxpayers, even those who do not drive.

> Car owners are already hugely subsidized Around 80% of all commutes in the US are by car. You can't subsidize 80% of the population. Drivers simply pay for their road use through various taxes, and not directly.

You certainly can subsidize large populations because taxes cover all income but are being used specifically to encourage just one more of transportation. If driving wasn’t so heavily subsidized, people would use other options because the true cost is much higher than what people see directly – it’s not just roads but also things like below market rate storage, zoning rules requiring owners to build more car storage than they necessarily want, and especially not requiring drivers to carry insurance sufficient to cover the full cost of their mistakes and decisions.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, he was a terrible guy and all. But stuff got built. The current inability to build anything is almost a direct result. They delegated decision making to an alphabet soup of agencies at different levels of jurisdiction so it's impossible to get anything done. Because there are so many agencies, you can't for example easily put in a busway because you need NYC DOT, MTA, NYS DOT, city council and mayor to all be o…

Another great example is the fact that the BQE cantilever is probably going to collapse before anyone can agree on how to replace it and do so. So far we have reduced a lane to minimize wear & tear, reduced max tonnage for trucks going over it, and are installing advanced automated ticketing to ticket big trucks attempting to go over it. That's well and good, but salt water corrosion and bureaucratic inertia are goin…

[dead]

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#344
post #314
post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Motorcycles don't cause congestion. Motorcycles can travel through congestion when permitted to lanesplit.

They’re not as bad as cars but they still take up a fair amount of space and pollute (noise, fumes) heavily. A modest discount seems appropriate but they definitely should still cost more than transit.

When moving, they take up the space of about 2 bicycles riding safely. When parked, about 4 bicycles.

It's a congestion tax not a fumes tax.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ther…

> Dense housing doesn't result in traffic congestion. Yes, it does. And the relationship is causal. > 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. What a bunch of bullshit. > Are you seriously arguing that adding more space for cars makes cities less congested?…

> What a bunch of bullshit.

How so? I live in lower Manhattan. I go to work, the gym, parks, restaurants, bars, movie theaters, etc. all without a car.

> Nothing can help hellscapes like Manhattan.

Lol. Don’t move to Manhattan then. Some of us enjoy it. Some of us prefer it over the suburbs. You don’t have to. No one is forcing you.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#346
post #314
post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Motorcycles don't cause congestion. Motorcycles can travel through congestion when permitted to lanesplit.

They’re not as bad as cars but they still take up a fair amount of space and pollute (noise, fumes) heavily. A modest discount seems appropriate but they definitely should still cost more than transit.

I'd be keen to charge vehicles based on noise pollution, but I'm not sure how feasible it is. Does anyone know if it's ever been trialed anywhere?

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#347
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…

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.

A substantial majority of outer borough households own a car compared to much wealthier median income non car owning Manhattanites. It is regressive.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#348
post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m suspicious of that. LA is famous for low use of transit (relative to population) and is also famous for having bad congestion.

You can screw up everything if you try hard enough. LA is an example of that. On the other hand, the Greater Houston Area has a similar population to NYC, yet it has 26-minute commutes versus 36 minutes for NYC.

Huh? The Houston metro area has 7.5 million people. The New York City metro area has 20 million.

If you want to look at the city proper (not a great comparison since city boundaries are somewhat arbitrary) then it’s 2 million for Houston versus 8 million for NYC.

It’s not even close.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#349
post #328

For those unfamiliar with NYC, street parking is free basically everywhere so the space cars take up is already heavily subsidized.

NYC is remarkably car friendly for a place so unsuited for it. The most expensive waterfront property in the world is cannibalized by 2 coastal roads in West St & FDR drive. Unlike Europe, the roads are littered with massive SUVs, clearly out of proportion from the roads and built environment around them. When alternate means of transport and cars interact, cars get precedence. There are no BRT lanes, especially on t…

yeah this fact alone is so mind-bending. imagine if that waterfront on both sides of Manhattan you could just easily walk to with out the freeways! very sad.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

It needs federal approval because it covers interstate crossings.
Post reply on HN