221–230 of 524 posts
It may have dropped pollution in Manhattan but I guess more pollution added up to the surrounding borroughs in addition to more traffic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This doesn't change my argument at all. The more money you have, more you benefit from this ruling. Now you can buy a service which was not possible before.
The rich were driving before, and are still driving. The difference is that now they are paying for that service they were already using, and those funds are going to public transit which serves the majority of New Yorkers especially those with lower incomes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The rich were driving before, and are still driving. The difference is that now they are paying for that service they were already using, and those funds are going to public transit which serves the majority of New Yorkers especially those with lower incomes.
The problem is that no one in NYC, rich or poor, has any confidence in the MTA's ability to properly and efficiently use these funds. This stems from a long history of incompetence and wastefulness by the MTA
They're already using them, and the results show. They could have done it cheaper. But the LIRR is operating at Swiss rail efficiecies since the recent electrification and signalling improvements.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I won't change my mind about emissions in NYC . NYC is full of modern, western cars. Two-stroke engines are terrible , classic automobiles are terrible, cars with no emission regulations will tend to be terrible. Cars in NYC will have catalytic converters and other technologies to reduce tailpipe emissions.
western? what is this less polluting non-western car you are advocating?
The good news is that I believe Ho Chi Minh City is about to start, so hopefully they'll have much cleaner air in a couple years.
I'm curious how congestion pricing became a national issue. The strength of conviction people have about this policy–almost either way, but certainly among those against–seems to scale with distance from the city. Nobody in Idaho gets uppity about New Jersey's tolls. But they have strong, knowledge-free, almost identity-defining opinions about congestion charges. Is it because it's a policy that's worked in Europe an…
I get that no one likes highways running through their communities, but when you decommission historical arteries while aggressively adopting anti-car transportation policies throughout the rest of the hub, it's somewhat inevitable that the network get snarled.
Maybe congestion pricing is the way to go -- it can certainly work for major European cities built inland, and surrounded by ring roads. For NYC / SF (surrounded by water), I'm less convinced. Sure, I'll 'just take public transport' to go downtown, but the options significantly diminish if I want to travel from North Bay to South Bay to see my parents, or Jersey to South Brooklyn to visit my inlaws.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And yes let’s think of the poor people who have no choice but to drive into Midtown and downtown for work. Have you ever talked to poor people in NYC?
"poor" is relative. Ever thought about this? Should i said poorer people who still need a car to drive in NYC to make it more understandable to the hn crowed Oo?!
This does not exist. Parking in the congestion zone starts at $25 for an hour and regularly goes above $100 for an evening.