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

New York City will charge drivers going downtown

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 700 posts

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#571

Post by ztrww »

wldcordeiro wrote: post #405
steveBK123 wrote: post #282

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 tran…

> 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. I don't think this is a good point to make when we've literally had several disastrous derailments thanks to poor regulations and rules around safety and train companies attacking unions. The transit unions are absolute…

> thanks to poor regulation

Comparing different systems overseen by different agencies with different regulations, rules and conditions without an objective data doesn’t seem that productive.

also comparing subways with intercity freight trains is a bit of an apples to oranges comparison in the first place.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#572

Post by rafram »

cyberax wrote: post #390
ryukafalz wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Drivers simply pay for their road use through various taxes, and not directly. Taxes that are also paid by those who don't drive, yes?

> Taxes that are also paid by those who don't drive, yes? If you want to be strictly true then yes. In practice, if you are using transit in the US, then you are likely not paying much in taxes. There are exceptions (NYC, SF, DC), of course.

> There are exceptions (NYC, SF, DC), of course.

The metro areas of those three cities contain almost 10 percent of the US population.

(Edit: And the vast majority of transit users!)

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#573

Post by rafram »

cyberax wrote: post #493
nimbleplum40 wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s what a subsidy is my dude. The money obviously has to come from _somewhere_. Are you saying that if taxes pay for transit then transit isn’t subsidized?

> That’s what a subsidy is my dude. Dictionary definition: "a sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business so that the price of a commodity or service may remain low or competitive." What I have is NOT a subsidy. I use the resources, and I pay for them. I don't have people from New York paying for my fire department in Seattle. > Are you saying that if taxes pay for transi…

> I don't have people from New York paying for my fire department in Seattle.

Fire departments receive federal funding through federal taxes that everyone pays, so yes, you do: https://www.fireandemsfund.com/fire-department-funding-where...

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#574

Post by rafram »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #186
jupp0r wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure how familiar you are with the realities of driving a car in Lower Manhattan, but as somebody who has visited the place a few times, I can assure you that poor people cannot afford parking there on a regular basis already.

Midtown when I was there had free street parking (maybe it still does?), and it made more sense financially for my girlfriend at the time to drive rather than grab a train from Harlem to Hawthorne (north of white plains, the office wasn’t near the train station so that last link wasn’t really covered). I was honestly surprised driving was…so convenient in that part of NYC at least, but midtown is definitely not Manha…

> I was honestly surprised driving was…so convenient in that part of NYC at least, but midtown is definitely not Manhattan, and also a reverse commute.

Midtown Manhattan isn’t Manhattan?

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#575

Post by steveBK123 »

jahewson wrote: post #495
bradleyjg wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Moses didn’t want black people going to Jones Beach (his pride and joy). To prevent them from visiting he built the overpasses on the highways that go to the beach lower so that buses from the city couldn’t fit. This is a true and interesting factoid, but I don’t see how it ties back to any transit issues. Unless you think buses having access to the northern and southern state would meaningfully improve regional tran…

It's actually not even true. It's become something of a popular myth. The original quote claimed "poor and lower-middle-class families" who in 1929 New York would have been predominantly white. That quote itself is disputed too, though it may well be accurate. Funnily enough a factoid is something that is false but sounds plausibly fact-like.

Right If anything there are quotes and evidence of him exhibiting racism directly against Puerto Ricans, which no one in this thread mentions..

At the time most of his projects were built, African Americans were only about 5% of NYC population rather than the 20-30% peak thru today. So it’s kind of backwards looking to assume they were top of mind in his decision making either way.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#576

Post by osigurdson »

elihu wrote: post #503
osigurdson wrote: post #471

Forcing people to drive to an office just to type on a computer and take phone calls is the thing that should be disincentivized.

I suppose governments could mandate that businesses provide their employees with a stipend to cover tolls in addition to their regular wages if they require the employees to be in the office.

I suspect governments want it both ways: property tax and road tax. Naturally all in the name of doing something good for the citizens.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#577

Post by vel0city »

winternett wrote: post #425
returningfory2 wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with your points, but I don’t think they undermine congestion pricing. Even if you take all the congestion tolls and, like, toss them in the Hudson River, the program is still worthwhile. Just getting people to pay to drive into Manhattan is good in-and-of-itself.

The last time I drove into downtown Manhattan, just inches form the bridge, I was immediately pulled over by NYPD and given an excessive $150 ticket for the window tints on my car. I demonstrated to the officer that Range Rover made them that way from the factory *limo tint" and that it was legal in my home state, but they had shown that they apparently have always had the inclination to pull people over for bogus mi…

I live in a state which has extremely lax gun ownership and open carry laws. I guess I should just be able to ignore all other state firearm laws when I travel based on your logic.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#578

Post by steveBK123 »

timeon wrote: post #525
steveBK123 wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm well aware of his history, and it's always interesting to me how few bad things people can point to that he actually did.. when weighed against all the transit/bridges/tunnels/highways build under his watch. I mean the first thing is a crime of omission, made in basically every other city of the country - where have we seen land be purchased along highways to build transit done anywhere in this country? Even new…

So what do you think about Jane Jacobs?

I think she was a moderating force against Moses, and you need that tension for you to have progress.

Unfortunately the Jacobs camp has won completely, and the idea of an inertia-less city frozen in amber is somehow the defacto good standard now. The city has insufficient development for its rate of population growth, and anemic transit infrastructure building.

So Manhattan becomes a playground for the rich only.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#579

Post by ironmagma »

Jcowell wrote: post #558
ironmagma wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're poor, you probably aren't eating anyway. And in all honesty, if you are eating, you probably should stop doing that. If you're poor, you probably aren't getting your cancer cured anyway. And in all honesty, if you are getting chemotherapy, you probably should stop doing that. See how none of this makes sense?

in the context of the area it does make sense. the Poor are majority in the outer boroughs and uptown manhattan with the only poor community I can think of near the area is in Chinatown and you would have to question: What is someone from chinatown doing with a car in FIDI? they’re not going to brooklyn since they would’ve taken the Williamsburg bridge or even the Queens Midtown tunnel. No way they’re looking to just…

You seem to be making the argument there is no one like this. But if there is no one like this, what good will banning it do?

I think we all know people find it, for one reason or another, more appropriate to take a car despite the already large cost of doing so in Manhattan. People aren’t just behaving completely illogically. If someone is driving, it’s not because they just didn’t even consider taking public transit.

Re: New York City will charge drivers going downtown

#580

Post by LeanderK »

Spooky23 wrote: post #231
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.

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.

I think it's the other way around. The death of the city is when you see it as dependent on the suburbs, it places transportation and ease of access over quality of life. To see big cities thrive means increasing quality of live so that working remotely and other changes will not mean abandonment, but just an easier life inside the city because it results less traffic and more spaces for people, restaurants, cultural institutions and parks.

A conglomeration of office-towers surrounded by suburbs with major arteries leading traffic in and out is not a real city.

Post reply on HN