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

Changes since congestion pricing started in New York

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 735 posts

Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York

#121

Post by Demiurge »

fundaThree wrote: post #117
Demiurge wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps it's a social sign for being one of the NYC local. They also referred to a person by a single name, further emphasizing they were speaking to the select few who would know what they were talking about. If only they could also write with a heavy NYC accent, their comment would be even cooler. Forget about it.

I live in DC

That's interesting. It must be that I associate rats with NYC. You used some terms that not everyone is familair with, I jump to the wrong conclusion, taking some guesses as to what you're talking about, and here we are.

Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York

#122

Post by epistasis »

KennyBlanken wrote: post #118
epistasis wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She delayed it by many months and lowered the fee, but eventually it went through. There was a theory that she wanted to delay it to win some contested seats in the November election, but that did not bear fruit. Now those voters still hate her, as do all the people that wanted congestion pricing. She was not well liked at the Democratic National Convention.

The reason she's not well liked is because she did absolutely nothing about probably one of the most corrupt mayors in the history of NYC. The congestion charge is nowhere on the DNC's radar nationally. The mayor of the largest city in the country engaging in blatant quid pro quo with a president from another party, certainly is.

I'm not quite following here. What is Hochul supposed to do about Adams? The DoJ suit against Adams didn't happen until a month after the DNC. Blatant quid pro quo with a president from another party couldn't have happened until long after the DNC.

Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York

#123

Post by vidarh »

aziaziazi wrote: post #73
vidarh wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a committed meat-eater: I have no idea what vegan food costs, as the label almost immediate makes me skip over them. To make me look at them, you'd have to make the non-vegan options prohibitively expensive.

Well most raw vegan food is already way cheaper that raw meat: Quality organic dry chickpeas, lentils, beans, soy etc… already are around 2€/kg where I live and when you add water they double/triple in weight so you end up at 1€/kg. You’ll probably eat a bit more weight than meat but still the price is nowhere comparable. Add some whole cereals instead of white bread for nutrition and better satiety: they’re more exp…

Missing the point, which was that you're not going to convince people like me who ignore the vegan options just by having them be cheaper than meat, because I won't look.

The only thing that would make me look at the vegan options would be if I felt I couldn't afford the meat options.

Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York

#124

Post by ars »

neves wrote: post #36

Impressive how cars are harmful to society. This is just a small example. We should be more radical in preventing the use of individual automobiles. If it works in a country where the auto is so ingrained in the culture and lifestyle, it can work anywhere.

Cars are only harmful in dense cities. They work just fine everywhere else. For example in small cities kids can play in the road without fear of cars. It's only in dense cities where they can not.

Dense cities are also the only places where public transit works, so it kind of balances out.

> This is just a small example.

New York city is a small example? New York city is the largest city in the US, and pretty much the ONLY city where you can do this. And the mediocre results (10% is very little) from even NYC show that this will not even come close to working anywhere else.

Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York

#125

Post by gjsman-1000 »

listenallyall wrote: post #101
jmyeet wrote: post #33

I was living in London when congestion pricing was introduced and went into the West End the day before and the first day of and the difference was night and day. The difference along Oxford Street, Regent's Street, Green Street, etc was astounding. And in the 20+ years the evidence seems to back up how much of a net positive it has been. NYC congestion pricing took way too long because the New York Democratic Party…

Why does the slippery slope concept surprise you? It actually happens often - banning smoking indoors, for example - started in just one city, once they tweaked the model and overcame the legal challenges, it spread rather quickly. Legalized casinos, same thing. Uber, drinking age, pot legalization, more. Why would toll roads or congestion pricing be different? (Idaho's Sun Valley probably already implements somethin…

> Why would toll roads or congestion pricing be different?

The answer is actually quite simple: It won't be different. Prove to me it won't spread, because almost every new tax spreads.

When is the last time a tax has existed in one state, and not spread to other states within 5 years?

Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York

#126

Post by listenallyall »

woodruffw wrote: post #109
listenallyall wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does the slippery slope concept surprise you? It actually happens often - banning smoking indoors, for example - started in just one city, once they tweaked the model and overcame the legal challenges, it spread rather quickly. Legalized casinos, same thing. Uber, drinking age, pot legalization, more. Why would toll roads or congestion pricing be different? (Idaho's Sun Valley probably already implements somethin…

These would be examples of normalization, not a slippery slope. The OP's example makes this clear (from "congestion pricing in NYC" to "they're going to take my car," not "congestion pricing in NYC" to "congestion pricing elsewhere"). (Regardless, I think the answer is simple: congestion pricing is only economically viable when an area is simultaneously congested and has alternative transportation methods that would…

Numerous politicians and advocates have suggested exempting electric vehicles from the NYC congestion pricing. Such vehicles are exempt in London. It isnt unusual for governments to start a program with one goal or purpose, then expand it (or use as a launching point) to achieve further goals, such as banning ICE vehicles.

This is currently happening with cigarettes. Banning them at workplaces and other public places is one thing. But we live in a capitalist country that celebrates individual freedom. Or do we? Beverly Hills CA and Manhattan Beach CA have both banned the sale of cigarettes entirely. Massachusetts banned all flavored cigarettes and is trying to permanently ban the sale of cigarettes to anyone a born after a certain date.

These go beyond "normalization", it is exactly slippery slope... get a small foothold then keep expanding the position.

Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York

#127

Post by codedokode »

In my opinion, a democratic way to make such changes would be:

1) make a dedicated lane for public transport on every street so that traffic jams do not affect it

2) let car owners vote if they want to pay for entering the city or would rather spend some more time in traffic jams but save the money

Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York

#128

Post by listenallyall »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #125
listenallyall wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does the slippery slope concept surprise you? It actually happens often - banning smoking indoors, for example - started in just one city, once they tweaked the model and overcame the legal challenges, it spread rather quickly. Legalized casinos, same thing. Uber, drinking age, pot legalization, more. Why would toll roads or congestion pricing be different? (Idaho's Sun Valley probably already implements somethin…

> Why would toll roads or congestion pricing be different? The answer is actually quite simple: It won't be different. Prove to me it won't spread, because almost every new tax spreads. When is the last time a tax has existed in one state, and not spread to other states within 5 years?

You and I are in agreement

Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York

#129

Post by trial3 »

codedokode wrote: post #127

In my opinion, a democratic way to make such changes would be: 1) make a dedicated lane for public transport on every street so that traffic jams do not affect it 2) let car owners vote if they want to pay for entering the city or would rather spend some more time in traffic jams but save the money

surely you see the problem with only letting the car owners vote, right? right??

Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York

#130

Post by sleepydog »

codedokode wrote: post #127

In my opinion, a democratic way to make such changes would be: 1) make a dedicated lane for public transport on every street so that traffic jams do not affect it 2) let car owners vote if they want to pay for entering the city or would rather spend some more time in traffic jams but save the money

The traffic has a negative effect on more than just car owners--smog, noise, accidents, slower taxis, to name a few. Why should only car owners, who are a minority in Manhattan, vote on a problem that affects everyone?
Post reply on HN