4 ms·

That's not really a win-win for all. The low paid cafeteria worker who has to be at work at 5am before transit runs can't afford to outbid the executive that ca

That's not really a win-win for all. The low paid cafeteria worker who has to be at work at 5am before transit runs can't afford to outbid the executive that can pay $500/month for a space.... and he doesn't even get a share of the profit from the auction. So he ends up paying $200/month at a nearby garage out of his own pocket... at least if the profits were shared, it would help offset some of his parking costs.

xapata 9y ago
Either the company will need to increase that person's wage or they will find other employment. Don't make parking a special case vs other aspects of inequality. If you want to alleviate wage disparity, target it directly, not just one tiny symptom.
- anindha 9y ago
  He/she was giving a counter example to show it wasn't win-win, not commenting on equality in general.
  - xapata 9y ago
    The example of the cafeteria employee is saying that poor people are disproportionately harmed by increased prices. That's true. I argue that despite the regressive nature of consumption fees, they're important for a well-functioning market. The problems of poverty are important as well, but should not prevent us from using market-based solutions for allocating resources.
    - anindha 9y ago
      If the funds went back to all employees equally then it’s a market-based solution. This example is conflating the market for charity donations with parking. If I was going to donate $10k/month to charity anyway, I’d bid $5k a month on the parking (not sure how tax would work).
      - xapata 9y ago
        One of is misreading the other. I'm not sure why you responded with those statements. It could be that I'm just confused -- I've had a long day.
AlfeG 9y ago
No no no. In Voronez(Russia) there is not even nearly around those sums. Public transport per month cost around $10, highest bet for parking lot around $40-50. So there is no reason to split those money for non-driving workers. Every 3 month there is a report from company on what have been done for money from parking.
- Johnny555 9y ago
  Public transit must be better there than it is in most of the SF Bay Area -- the biggest cost of transit for most workers is the time. When I worked in SF, it took 45 minutes to drive there, and an hour and 15 minutes to get their by train+bus. Assuming I got on the express train. On a bad day (missed the express train, had to wait up to an hour for a slow all-stops local train), transit could take over 2 hours.

xapata 9y ago

Either the company will need to increase that person's wage or they will find other employment. Don't make parking a special case vs other aspects of inequality. If you want to alleviate wage disparity, target it directly, not just one tiny symptom.

anindha 9y ago
He/she was giving a counter example to show it wasn't win-win, not commenting on equality in general.
- xapata 9y ago
  The example of the cafeteria employee is saying that poor people are disproportionately harmed by increased prices. That's true. I argue that despite the regressive nature of consumption fees, they're important for a well-functioning market. The problems of poverty are important as well, but should not prevent us from using market-based solutions for allocating resources.
  - anindha 9y ago
    If the funds went back to all employees equally then it’s a market-based solution. This example is conflating the market for charity donations with parking. If I was going to donate $10k/month to charity anyway, I’d bid $5k a month on the parking (not sure how tax would work).
    - xapata 9y ago
      One of is misreading the other. I'm not sure why you responded with those statements. It could be that I'm just confused -- I've had a long day.

AlfeG 9y ago

No no no. In Voronez(Russia) there is not even nearly around those sums. Public transport per month cost around $10, highest bet for parking lot around $40-50. So there is no reason to split those money for non-driving workers. Every 3 month there is a report from company on what have been done for money from parking.

Johnny555 9y ago
Public transit must be better there than it is in most of the SF Bay Area -- the biggest cost of transit for most workers is the time. When I worked in SF, it took 45 minutes to drive there, and an hour and 15 minutes to get their by train+bus. Assuming I got on the express train. On a bad day (missed the express train, had to wait up to an hour for a slow all-stops local train), transit could take over 2 hours.