11–20 of 211 posts
The fact that tolls are now directly useful to the entire public must not be underappreciated. This is good news for everyone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The run up to their implementation was so deeply frustrating. The sheer number of disingenuous objections. And they’ve all been proven false.
> sheer number of disingenuous objections This is unfair. Nobody wants to pay more for anything. And many of the objections resulted in policy adjustments that made the programme better.
What did it do to GDP? (Sincerely asking)
What we can quantify is the economic impact the San Antonio River Walk has or the impact the Atlanta Beltline has which is billions of dollars in added economic activity. Based on those examples, likely it will increase the NYC GDP by millions if not hundreds of millions. We can prove with dollar amounts getting rid of cars in these cases increase the GDP by billions but in NYC they are only decreasing them so probably won't have the positive impact completely getting rid of cars does.
The fact that tolls are now directly useful to the entire public must not be underappreciated. This is good news for everyone.
[flagged]
> everyone paying the tolls who now needs to engage in additional pollution-causing economic activity merely to offset the costs of government-mandated congestion pricing
I don't think that's how economics work. People are already doing their best to generate money. Also even if that did happen, the thing you're describing as "pollution-causing" is GDP growth, which is overall desirable.
> tariffs
Whether a tariff is good depends on what the goal is (and whether it works toward that goal).
The fact that tolls are now directly useful to the entire public must not be underappreciated. This is good news for everyone.
They better be. No one’s rooting for the smog, but a congestion tax is pretty regressive (hurts poorer people more)