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

381–390 of 735 posts

Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York

#381

Post by jampekka »

vladvasiliu wrote: post #350
mmooss wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of places in the world run public bus systems - it seems by far the most common to me. It's hardly a thing of 'socialism' (always a bad word on HN).

I don't know about Chile, but I think the issue isn't so much the system being public , as in run by some form of government. Rather, the issue is in how "socialists" tend to run systems: everything is great until they run out of other people's money. Now, I'm not in the "free market will solve all our woes" camp, either, especially when it comes to what we call "public service" in France. Over here, transit systems…

EU does allow states to subsidize transit (including trains) but the subsidies are subject to all sorts of regulations. They have to be of "public interest" and to not generate (excess) profits for the companies. At least in theory.

Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York

#382

Post by pjc50 »

choeger wrote: post #345

I wonder if this will eventually lead to increased density and if that then leads to congested bike lanes. Will the cities of tomorrow regulate traffic between individual buildings? Make no mistake, bikes are much, much, better for urban centers than cars. But the overall problem isn't cars, it's individual traffic in densely populated areas. Certain policy here in Europe simply assumes that people stay in their surr…

"15 minute city" is the most misinterpreted policy of our times. The idea is to try to make sure that there are enough services near enough to residential areas that short trips are possible, not to enforce this. It's just the oppposite of "simcity mode" where a huge area is zoned as only housing.

That combined with some anti-rat-run measures in Oxford (and any anti car measure ever) into outraged paranoia.

Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York

#383

Post by porjo »

lazide wrote: post #363
walthamstow wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

London has changed for the better for sure but black snot on the tube hasn't changed at all. I get it from 20 minutes on any deep line like the Victoria. It's from train brake dust, nothing to do with vehicle emissions.

The Tube has a real ventilation issue - not just the brake dust, but also temps and staleness. Some of those lines, it’s like a 24/7 sauna!

Ha, I happened upon an interesting video earlier today on this topic! https://youtu.be/4MzHt_YLnjw

Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York

#384

Post by jampekka »

stuaxo wrote: post #359

Hi from London: The centre is much more pleasant to walk in, as are most places in the zone. Pollution is much, much better: if you came to London and travelled on the underground you would have black snot when you blew your nose, this hasn't been the case for a few years now. I hope NY gets the sake improvements.

Travel of low-income people also declined significantly while high-income travel did not. So quite literally the London congestion pricing got the poor off the zones.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/03611981221138801

Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York

#385

Post by devnullbrain »

neither_color wrote: post #223
neves wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best decision would be to completely forbid individual transport. Now the common space dedicated to streets is for who can pay extra. Forbid individual transport and create some parks and pedestrian streets.

These threads tend to devolve into, "Americans are so unsophisticated everyone else in the world is banning cars and turning downtown into walkable utopia" but what they really mean by rest of the world is a few crowded European cities. If you look at all the new rich mega cities built in the Middle East and East Asia cars continue to exist alongside good public transit as aspirational status icons and the preferred…

Tokyo?

Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York

#386

Post by pjc50 »

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…

Well, yes. Once you demonstrate that a good idea works and the doom doesn't come to pass, it gets copied. It's easy to claim that something doesn't work when nobody's doing it. Making the same claims when someone nearby is doing it and it works requires a higher level of reality-denial. Now, there's a lot of reality-denial to go round in politics these days, but occasionally a good policy slips through.

The EU ICE phaseout is set for 2035.

Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York

#387

Post by pjc50 »

potato3732842 wrote: post #141
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…

I'm fundamentally against any measure that intentionally increases the cost at use of any form of transportation service whatsoever. Public transit? Free. Gas tax? Kill it. I grew up on a goddamn island, I've seen what an inability for people to travel easily or when the cost of doing so has to be seriously weighed does to an economy and it's not good for anyone or anything except a very select lucky few who are well…

> I grew up on a goddamn island

Growing up on a remote island is basically the opposite of New York in all regards except that Manhattan is technically also an island.

Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York

#388

Post by pirate787 »

jampekka wrote: post #384
stuaxo wrote: post #359

Hi from London: The centre is much more pleasant to walk in, as are most places in the zone. Pollution is much, much better: if you came to London and travelled on the underground you would have black snot when you blew your nose, this hasn't been the case for a few years now. I hope NY gets the sake improvements.

Travel of low-income people also declined significantly while high-income travel did not. So quite literally the London congestion pricing got the poor off the zones. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/03611981221138801

From the report: "the highest income earners contributed to more of the revenue than the lowest income earners, making the scheme progressive in the scale of its equity impact"

It is quite likely that the lower income users are mostly retired people, and students, and they shouldn't be crowding the system at peak times unless willing to pay.

Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York

#389

Post by HPsquared »

choeger wrote: post #345

I wonder if this will eventually lead to increased density and if that then leads to congested bike lanes. Will the cities of tomorrow regulate traffic between individual buildings? Make no mistake, bikes are much, much, better for urban centers than cars. But the overall problem isn't cars, it's individual traffic in densely populated areas. Certain policy here in Europe simply assumes that people stay in their surr…

The other problem with public transport is anyone wanting to go from, say, the northeast to the southeast outskirts of a city. Public transport will tend to take everyone via the centre whereas a direct route would be much shorter.

Re: Changes since congestion pricing started in New York

#390

Post by pirate787 »

Lammy wrote: post #305
mcswell wrote: post #241

There was a time when there were no automobiles in New York City, but there was lots of public transportation. (Ok, there were horses and the consequent manure, and the population was way smaller then. But still...)

> there was lots of public transportation There could have been a lot more. The 1929 IND Second System expansion plan is depressing, especially the parts where provisions are already built: - https://www.vanshnookenraggen.com/_index/2021/01/ind-second-... - https://www.nycsubway.org/wiki/IND_Second_System_-_1929_Plan - https://www.awakennyc.com/second-system-gems

The city's price control on the cost of a subway ride was a spectacular policy failure that crushed the system into decline and operators into bankruptcy.
Post reply on HN