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

#81

Post by cannonedhamster » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:01 PM UTC

sgift wrote: post #18

donatj wrote: post #2

I mean infrastructure is what everyone points to when one asks “what am I even paying taxes for?” Often even the short hand of “roads”.

Police, fire departments, emergency services, public transportation, ..

While I agree these are services people pay taxes for, Police mostly target the poor, fire departments are stationed closest to the wealthier neighborhoods, emergency services are generally better in wealthier areas, and public transportation in most of the US is generally poor, airline travel being the only thing worse. It's hard to convince someone who isn't of means that raising taxes on them is somehow of benefit to them. We'd be far better forcing companies to pay and freeing up the market for more people to work from home. That would actually solve the congestion issues without punishing the people who can't afford it.

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

#82

Post by nickles » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:01 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.

> It’s well established that Uber and lyft INCREASE the amount of cars

>> Our findings provide evidence that after entering an urban area, ride-sharing services such as Uber significantly decrease traffic congestion time, congestion costs, and excessive fuel consumption. To further assess the robustness of the main results, we perform additional analyses including the use of alternative measures, instrumental variables, placebo tests, heterogeneous effects, and a relative time model with more granular data. We discuss a few plausible mechanisms to explain our findings as well as their implications for the platform-based sharing economy.

[0] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2838043

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

#83

Post by the_gastropod » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:02 PM UTC

dcosson wrote: post #72

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.

If you ever order something online or get food delivery or take a taxi or uber you do use the roads, and the number of people who do those things somewhat regularly is a lot closer to 100%. But you might still be using the roads a lot less than someone who drives to and from work every day. So some combination of tax money and tolls/congestion pricing seems to make the most sense from this usage based angle.

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

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

#84

Post by zelon88 » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:02 PM UTC

> Local laws require off-street parking from businesses and housing developers, who pass on the construction cost of it to tenants and customers who may not drive at all.

I'd love to see the tenents stay in business with a dirt road out front. Or a pasture that no cars can pass through.

They're not doing us any favors. They're keeping themselves in business.

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

#85

Post by dondawest » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:02 PM UTC

kaiju0 wrote: post #46

i_am_proteus wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, there wouldn't be many lunch options because delivery services wouldn't be able to use cars and trucks.

Excellent. This would contribute to health. You want something. Walk to get it.

Senior citizens love this plan.

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

#86

Post by CountSessine » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:02 PM UTC

dcosson wrote: post #72

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.

If you ever order something online or get food delivery or take a taxi or uber you do use the roads, and the number of people who do those things somewhat regularly is a lot closer to 100%. But you might still be using the roads a lot less than someone who drives to and from work every day. So some combination of tax money and tolls/congestion pricing seems to make the most sense from this usage based angle.

So some combination of tax money and tolls/congestion pricing seems to make the most sense from this usage based angle.

No, it doesn't. Paying through general revenue doesn't make any sense at all. Congestion pricing is beautiful because only the people who use it will pay it, and that includes your examples. People who take Ubers or order something online or get food delivery will still pay congestion pricing, but they'll pay through increased prices.

We will end up paying some combination of tax money and tolls/congestion pricing, but it most certainly doesn't make the most sense.

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

#87

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:03 PM UTC

ramraj07 wrote: post #45

jiggliemon wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any new money for public spending is typically used to pay down the ballooning public pension liabilities. And if it doesn’t go towards pensions, it’s diverted away to other welfare projects, or education. Point is these new funds won’t make transportation better in any significant way.

The proposed budget explicitly says this money will go towards the MTA.

[deleted]

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

#88

Post by DINKDINK » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:06 PM UTC

All markets have congestion controls, they're called prices. The only reason roads and traffic don't function well is because they don't have prices. Traffic on roads* is the 21st equivalent of Soviet breadlines.

*(particularly in the US where they are cross subsidized the most)

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

#89

Post by bjourne » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:08 PM UTC

nathanvanfleet wrote: post #30

bjourne wrote: post #17

I wonder if we (as a society) in the not too distant future can make driving embarrassing? My hope is that if someone sits alone in their big SUV stuck in traffic, pedestrians, cyclists and others will look at that person disparagingly. Like how people look at dog owners not picking up their dogs feces, cigarette smokers or how they look at obese people buying ice cream... Or how hypochondriacs who go to the doctor w…

> Or how hypochondriacs who go to the doctor when they don't need to are shamed in countries with socialized health care. I am from Canada and I have no idea what you're talking about.

That's odd. I'm from Sweden and it costs 30€ to go to the doctor (of course the fee doesn't cover the full cost of the service) but the shame is still very common. For example, if you go to an emergency waiting room, people will stare at the patients without visible ailments. It is also a major part of the Anti-immigration people's rhetoric: "Those damn immigrant families overuse health services so we regular Swedes have to wait!" Among older people the embarrassment of visiting the doctor is even more prevalent. They often wait far to long with having their problems checked so it ends up costing society more than if they had gone to the doctor in a timely fashion.

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

#90

Post by scottie_m » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:09 PM UTC

CalRobert wrote: post #54

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…

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.