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

New York approves the first congestion toll in the US: $15 to enter Manhattan

english.elpais.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 165 posts

Re: New York approves the first congestion toll in the US: $15 to enter Manhattan

#71

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

throw__away7391 wrote: post #48
gafage wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Low emission zones should be called instead "no poor people zones" which is what in practice they are.

You seem oblivious to the irony here—owning a car already puts you in the upper tier of wealth in the world. Talking about Manhattan specifically, this is already about the most expensive place in the world and the only place in the US with this scheme in place, adding more traffic isn’t going to change that so no point in using it as an example of anything. Plenty of countries that are not so car dependent have pede…

Everything is relative. In the US there are homeless people who own cars.

Re: New York approves the first congestion toll in the US: $15 to enter Manhattan

#72

Post by shipscode »

gafage wrote: post #19
alexchamberlain wrote: post #9

In London, we have a inner congestion zone, which is surrounded by a ultra low emission zone. The low emission zone only requires your car to be a few years old, though it has a bigger impact on vans and lorries.

Low emission zones should be called instead "no poor people zones" which is what in practice they are.

Yes, this is literally what they’re achieving. It’s incredible that so many people on here don’t see it, but my guess is cause they’ve never actually looked into the people they’re displacing and negatively affecting.

Re: New York approves the first congestion toll in the US: $15 to enter Manhattan

#73

Post by LargeTomato »

Ekaros wrote: post #55
refulgentis wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

we can either "just" have ppl pay $15, a nice simple free market solution that doesn't limit anyone. or we can run a daily lottery and create a port of call just outside NYC for people to wait until they win the daily lottery. and administer the daily lottery. and somehow communicate daily to the winners. and really set a hard cap on entrants. "just" does seem to apply to one of those options to me, but not the secon…

Because 15 is clearly unfair price for the poor people. This only benefit the rich who already are cause for majority of emissions. Lottery is absolutely fair for everyone. OCR at borders would be easy to implement. Just have a gate and diversion lines back to where car entering came from. And simple online sing-up system and rng run every night is extremely simple software project. Or if car without daily lottery ti…

Yeah, no. Your solution is significantly more complicated. A $15 surcharge to enter the richest and most congested area of NYC is hardly an unfair tax on the poor. By your logic, charging for any parking in any city is an unfair tax on the poor.

Re: New York approves the first congestion toll in the US: $15 to enter Manhattan

#74

Post by LargeTomato »

DiggyJohnson wrote: post #41
Ekaros wrote: post #30

Why not just run daily lottery in previous day? With non-transferable licenses to enter. Win one and you get in, don't win one and you are barred from entering?

Is this a serious proposal or am I missing how this is a joke?

This person has never seriously considered a public policy solution and they are still learning what is and isn't going to scale.

Re: New York approves the first congestion toll in the US: $15 to enter Manhattan

#75

Post by thisgoesnowhere »

shipscode wrote: post #69
thisgoesnowhere wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is progressively less per person even though it's not less per vehicle.

More people can fit in a truck than in a car?

Trucks are more expensive because they take up more space. The comment I responded to was asking why higher passenger vehicles cost more.

Re: New York approves the first congestion toll in the US: $15 to enter Manhattan

#76

Post by Ekaros »

LargeTomato wrote: post #73
Ekaros wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because 15 is clearly unfair price for the poor people. This only benefit the rich who already are cause for majority of emissions. Lottery is absolutely fair for everyone. OCR at borders would be easy to implement. Just have a gate and diversion lines back to where car entering came from. And simple online sing-up system and rng run every night is extremely simple software project. Or if car without daily lottery ti…

Yeah, no. Your solution is significantly more complicated. A $15 surcharge to enter the richest and most congested area of NYC is hardly an unfair tax on the poor. By your logic, charging for any parking in any city is an unfair tax on the poor.

It is. Hmm, not actually bad idea to set price of parking by income or wealth.

Re: New York approves the first congestion toll in the US: $15 to enter Manhattan

#77

Post by refulgentis »

Ekaros wrote: post #55
refulgentis wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

we can either "just" have ppl pay $15, a nice simple free market solution that doesn't limit anyone. or we can run a daily lottery and create a port of call just outside NYC for people to wait until they win the daily lottery. and administer the daily lottery. and somehow communicate daily to the winners. and really set a hard cap on entrants. "just" does seem to apply to one of those options to me, but not the secon…

Because 15 is clearly unfair price for the poor people. This only benefit the rich who already are cause for majority of emissions. Lottery is absolutely fair for everyone. OCR at borders would be easy to implement. Just have a gate and diversion lines back to where car entering came from. And simple online sing-up system and rng run every night is extremely simple software project. Or if car without daily lottery ti…

Is this set of people greater than 0?

A) can't afford $15

B) have a car

C) need the car in Manhattan

D) can afford to wait N days to enter Manhattan

I grew up poor -- thank you FAANG, am not anymore -- but sometimes I still feel the same icky anger I used to feel when people would make abstract arguments that presumed being poor is pure destitution, just to keep things interesting for some argument.

Re: New York approves the first congestion toll in the US: $15 to enter Manhattan

#78

Post by peruvian »

philip1209 wrote: post #24

As a Manhattan resident, I’m excited. There should be at least one city in the USA built for people instead of cars. I understand it’s not for everybody, but 75% of the residential space in the county is only zoned for insipid, paved single-family home suburban hellscapes. Leave one city for people who want a European-style walkable city.

NYC is very car centric. Just because you don't need a car to go see your friends or run errands doesn't change that. The streets are lined with cars, sometimes double parked, and collisions with pedestrians are plentiful.

Re: New York approves the first congestion toll in the US: $15 to enter Manhattan

#79

Post by thisgoesnowhere »

ok_dad wrote: post #54
cgriswald wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want to maximize passengers per 'vehicle space' this is the pricing you use. While the van costs more, the per-passenger price is less at capacity. The only other option is to charge based on actual passenger count (with the price being lower per-passenger as you have more passengers). If they were to charge less for larger vehicles, people would buy larger vehicles just for carting themselves around regardles…

They should charge like $100 / number of passengers, with cheaper exceptions for very small cars and motorbikes. Then if you fill a four passenger car, it’s only $25 for the car, but a dude in a sports car by himself pays the full charge. Busses and bigger vans are pretty much free. Delivery vehicles can afford to pay the full cost of doing business. Even better if you charge by car class, so larger vehicles are more…

The infrastructure to count passengers would be either a security nightmare because of the surveillance requirements or a inefficient mess where you have to stop for some person to manually see how many people are in the car.

The system they are describing is better.

Post reply on HN