3 ms·
Sorry I meant in terms of requiring only eTrucks in business districts of major cities, not congestion pricing. Just saying that NYC tried to have congestion p
by vermontdevil 10y ago
Sorry I meant in terms of requiring only eTrucks in business districts of major cities, not congestion pricing.
Just saying that NYC tried to have congestion pricing only to be overruled. And I'm sure they'll aim for eTrucks only requirement but will be overruled by Albany because that's what Albany does.
And that other cities (Stockholm I'm sure) will be at the forefront of the new eTruck revolution as soon as it's commercially viable.
- dsfyu404ed 10y agoYou say that like you're unaware that NYC basically runs NY from the perspective of anyone living anywhere but the NYC are in NY. Same for CA and SV, MA and Boston, IL and Chicago. In states with one dominant city that city runs the show for the most part. If the dominant city can't get something done it's either because it's BS and shouldn't get done in the first place, would screw most of the rest of the state or because they need to wait to politically recharge after ramming something that fell into one of the former two categories down everyone's throat.
- oh_sigh 10y agoWhy are Albany and NYC in constant tension then, if NYC runs NY? You speak like someone who doesn't follow NY politics.
- alexburton 10y ago[0]NYC: The 51st State! [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City:_the_51st_State https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City:_the_51st_State