The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain • Hacker News Board

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#121

Post by leetcrew » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:50 PM UTC

behringer wrote: post #116

ip26 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best reason for a ceiling IMO is to avoid tainting public perception. If the signboards are showing a price of $65 when it's usually $2, people might feel like they are being gouged and sour on the toll (& vote it out). Like what happened with Uber's surge pricing.

The prices need to be set in advance. Just getting on the road and not knowing what it will cost sucks

if the prices are set in advance, it hamstrings the effectiveness of the fee though. you would prevent it from working during the usage spikes where it is most needed. I think a fair solution would be to lock in the price when you get in your car. this way you can make an informed decision about whether to travel at that time, but also allow the pricing to be as responsive as possible.

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#122

Post by Zarath » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:51 PM UTC

dec0dedab0de wrote: post #16

Xylakant wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your freedom to drive where ever you choose on the fastest route infringes on freedoms of others, for example: * their freedom to drive on the fastest route possible * their freedom not to have a large road in front of their home * their freedom not to have their taxes invested in a road infrastructure ballooned to a level that they might not need * their freedom to live in a world that is not inflicted by global war…

I don't think your examples really count as freedoms. I agree with your point, but I don't think you need to stretch the definition of a word to make it.

Positive freedom: Freedom to do something

Negative freedom: Freedom from something

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#123

Post by ghaff » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:52 PM UTC

sek wrote: post #43

This will be absolutely necessary when cars are self-driving. Instead of parking they will just drift around the block when you buy something for example. Also there will be empty Uber cars drifting around to be close if somebody needs it. On top you won't worry so much about traffic if you can sleep in you car or do something else. Driving was always limited by the costs of somebody sitting behind the wheel. Look ho…

>low labor costs for cab drivers

It's not just cab drivers in particular. Having a driver is quite common for even middle class people or a sales person making the rounds during the day.

I personally believe that self-driving in congested cities is a long way off. But it will absolutely be the case that if driving around empty is cheaper than parking that's what will happen.

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#124

Post by ch4s3 » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:52 PM UTC

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #36

ch4s3 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Congestion pricing is essentially a usage fee, and is highly efficient from an economic perspective. Without charging drivers for roads they get paid for out of general funds. There’s nothing free about non-drivers subsidizing private transportation. Furthermore, at artificially low prices, more people drive until congestion is unmanageable. Without that pricing your 45 minute drive might balloon to twice that amount…

Everything has to be paid for at the end of the day. Personally I think all transit (regardless of who owns the rolling stock and whether the tires are rubber or steel) should come out of the general fund because everyone benefits from a robust transit network . Congestion is not a big deal. People willing to put up with it will put up with it. People not willing to will use the resource at different times. You will…

Congestion is not a big deal to drivers willing to spend their time in traffic.

It is a big deal to people waiting on services like fire trucks and ambulances. It is a big deal to people breathing air near roads. It is a big deal to public transit users whose needs often get de prioritized in favor of private cars.

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#125

Post by jak92 » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:54 PM UTC

dondawest wrote: post #74

nickles wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Taxis, Ubers, trucks and cars owned by people who opt to pay hundreds of dollars a month in parking are who will be taxed. Given the unusability of our streets, this seems closer to an economic reckoning than a political money grab. Taxis and Ubers are forms of public transportation, and likely reduce the overall number of cars on the road. Simultaneously, they reduce the incidences of drunk driving, providing posi…

It’s well established that Uber and lyft INCREASE the amount of cars on the road (and thus congestion) because they incentivize non-car-owners to take car trips they wouldn’t normally take. Uber and Lyft lead to a net INCREASE in cars on the road, not a decrease.

I've personally switched bus trips to uber trips, depending on a bunch of criteria.

The major one being cost. IME uber most definitely increases the number of vehicles on the road.

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#126

Post by enraged_camel » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:54 PM UTC

the_gastropod wrote: post #51

Jorge1o1 wrote: post #31

The streets were never free. We paid for it with our tax money. (Not to mention our 22 trillion dollar public debt) I don’t think people expect streets to be free in the same way you don’t expect the police department to be free, the fire department to be free, public schools, etc. In any case, my point is, we paid for the streets with our tax money and our debt, so don’t masquerade this as some kind of “economic rec…

Bear in mind only ~45% of NYC residents own cars. Yet, we all pay taxes to pay for maintaining their infrastructure. Everyone paying taxes to support some is fine when that thing is beneficial to society at large (e.g., public education, fire departments, welfare, etc.) I don't think driving counts as an activity that should be subsidized by the taxpayer.

Sorry, but are you suggesting you don't benefit from roads if you don't personally drive on them? I haven't had my morning coffee yet but that's how I read your post.

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#127

Post by p_roz » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:56 PM UTC

scottie_m wrote: post #90

CalRobert wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, how about "it's a way to make sure people who need the road most are the ones who get to use it" Kind of how parking meters are FANTASTIC because they mean I can finally get a damn space for the rare occasion when I rent a van or car and need to park in front of my flat. I just wish they'd raise prices on my street because it's still tough sometimes.

If I’m wealthy and want my SUV motorcade to drive through NYC all day I can trivially afford it, even if my need asymptotically approaches zero. If I’m a desperate person working three jobs to support my family, I have a great need, and yet the tax is a hardship.

I think that the cost to the wealthy person is understated because of the opportunity cost of their time/resources. The fact that wealthy people don’t do this now without congestion pricing makes it unlikely that they would do so with an additional cost applied.

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#128

Post by ellard » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:56 PM UTC

I'm disappointed that motorcycles/scooters and lane splitting aren't brought into the conversation more when discussions about traffic congestion come up. It feels like a win/win for nearly everyone to promote two wheeled transportation and allow them to split lanes or filter through traffic. Those who do not want to ever ride on two wheels still get the benefit of others doing so and essentially taking themselves out of the traffic queue. There's also been studies about how allowing lane splitting/filtering are ultimately safer for the riders too.

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#129

Post by jdhn » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:58 PM UTC

WillPostForFood wrote: post #73

the_gastropod wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bear in mind only ~45% of NYC residents own cars. Yet, we all pay taxes to pay for maintaining their infrastructure. Everyone paying taxes to support some is fine when that thing is beneficial to society at large (e.g., public education, fire departments, welfare, etc.) I don't think driving counts as an activity that should be subsidized by the taxpayer.

On the other hand, drivers pay ~$.45 a gallon in gas tax, and at least 30% of that goes to the MTA.

For those wondering where this number came from, here's[0] an article with more details.

[0] https://www.empirecenter.org/publications/nys-leaky-gas-taxe...

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#130

Post by v_lisivka » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:58 PM UTC

leetcrew wrote: post #119

the_gastropod wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely! And as long as those delivery trucks, taxis, etc. pay the congestion pricing, it'll get priced into their services too.

while we're at it, let's make the congestion pricing proportional to some power of vehicle weight so that it also reflects the cost of road maintenance.

Drivers pay fuel taxes already. Fuel taxes are proportional to vehicle weight and power.

IMHO, it better to tax normalized_areanormalized_weightnormalized_congestion . For example, if vehicle is 30% spacer than average, has 50% more weight per space than average, and uses road at peak hour when road usage is 50% more than average, then it should pay 1.3 x 1.5 x 1.5 = ~3x tax. If owner want to reduce tax, then it should use smaller, lighter car, and use it at off-peak hours, e.g. 0.9 x 0.9 x 0.5 = 0.4.