Changes since congestion pricing started in New York
1–10 of 735 posts
Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York
#2Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York
#3Climate Town has an entertaining and informative video on this topic from last month: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEFBn0r53uQ
Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York
#4Wouldn't it be nice if policy changes were accompanied by an A/B testing plan to evaluate their impact? I have always thought so.
I have also seen a major pitfall of A/B testing that real humans can hand-pick and slice data to make it sound as positive or negative as wanted. Nonetheless, the more data the better.
Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York
#5Wouldn't it be nice if policy changes were accompanied by an A/B testing plan to evaluate their impact? I have always thought so. I have also seen a major pitfall of A/B testing that real humans can hand-pick and slice data to make it sound as positive or negative as wanted. Nonetheless, the more data the better.
[deleted]
Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York
#6Wouldn't it be nice if policy changes were accompanied by an A/B testing plan to evaluate their impact? I have always thought so. I have also seen a major pitfall of A/B testing that real humans can hand-pick and slice data to make it sound as positive or negative as wanted. Nonetheless, the more data the better.
Unfortunately, the possibility exists that the moment of introducing the A/B test requirement will be strategically chosen to freeze the status quo in the way the chooser prefers.
Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York
#7Not to settle on "It's bad" but their so called "results" seems completely obvious.
The congestion policy is disincentivizing/suppressing people's preferred method by making it unaffordable to some, and unappealing to some. We already know that we can use policy to push people away from their preferred to a less preferred method. The items listed in green are mostly obvious as people seek alternatives. It's like highlighting how many fewer chicken deaths would occur if we created an omnivore or meat tax.
IMO what they should be keeping a careful eye on and tracking is how many fewer trips happen to businesses in those areas. How much fewer social interaction is happening across the distances that those car based trips used to occur. And how much harder is it to get goods into the areas. Is less economic activity happening.
In the long run, yes, maybe things will be net better for all, when the $45M per year has had a chance to make alternative transportation methods to be not just policy enforced, but truly _preferred_ option.
Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York
#8Seems to be working fine, I know the large city about 60 miles from me looked at this, and I am all for it. But its mass transit is a awful mess, at times walking is faster that taking a subway.
I wish they would start this, but its politics is such a mess nothing really gets done there. New Ideas there gets implemented far slower than then ideas in Roman Catholic Church.
Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York
#9The increased speeds are excellent for those who can afford the toll. This is a universal benefit of toll roads for those people.
Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York
#10Not to settle on "It's bad" but their so called "results" seems completely obvious. The congestion policy is disincentivizing/suppressing people's preferred method by making it unaffordable to some, and unappealing to some. We already know that we can use policy to push people away from their preferred to a less preferred method. The items listed in green are mostly obvious as people seek alternatives. It's like high…
there should be a meat tax, btw. I eat a ton of steak but it's costing the ecosystem dearly