3 ms·

This would almost certainly cause extreme congestion on the exit lanes and as a result a huge speed differential between lanes. Moving to the faster lanes woul

This would almost certainly cause extreme congestion on the exit lanes and as a result a huge speed differential between lanes. Moving to the faster lanes would be dangerous. Cars merging back into the slower lanes to exit would cause permanent jams in the second lane at every turn-off. Nobody would benefit in the end and the road would be horribly unsafe.

badrabbit 8y ago
That's why I suggested dynamic pricing and charging based on time spent. The right most lanes would congest but they would also have exiting cars. Second from right could cost a bit more than free (1cent per mile for example). It would be an incentive to use it for passing but also to avoid right lane congestion for a negligible fee. Third and fourth from right can cost $0.20 and $0.40 per mile which discourages long term use but also allows those in a hurry who can afford the fees to leave the highway faster and allow for cars in right lanes to use less congested left most lanes to pass slow drivers and lane exit/entrance in their lanes. Think of it from a network traffic CoS and QoS point of view (also,sorry for the late response,hope you see this)
- sjwright 8y ago
  Again, a nice idea in theory but it will just concentrate congestion towards the right, which would exacerbate the speed differential between lanes and make the road much less safe. It would exacerbate economic disparities, forcing poorer people—who are already chronically time-poor as well as money-poor—to spend more time in their car for the convenience of rich people. Rich people already have innumerable advantages in our society, we don't need to go around looking for more to give them. (As a comparatively rich person, I appreciate living in a society surrounded by people that are—in the main—well educated, healthy and not overly stressed, and I happily pay a lot in taxes to help maintain that. Which is why the USA holds zero appeal to me; you couldn't pay me to live there.)
  - badrabbit 8y ago
    Overall,there would be less lane changing and cars would leave the freeway faster. The pricing can be adjustes or subsidized for low income drivers. If you pay a toll anyways,this is an opportunity to save money and use the tollway,where as you would normally take the slow and long unpaid route. This would actually make toll roads accessible to the poor. No matter how I look at it,if you add lanes,they should be paid for so that it would be more affordable abd practical and actually incentivize drivers to cause less jams. Also,traffic jams are not exclusive to the USA. Maybe it should be modeled in a more politically convenient way? How about fuel tax deductions? You get n deductions where you lose more deduction points by using left lanes? That way there is no added cost to the driver,the tax payers as a whole pay for it.

badrabbit 8y ago

That's why I suggested dynamic pricing and charging based on time spent. The right most lanes would congest but they would also have exiting cars. Second from right could cost a bit more than free (1cent per mile for example). It would be an incentive to use it for passing but also to avoid right lane congestion for a negligible fee. Third and fourth from right can cost $0.20 and $0.40 per mile which discourages long term use but also allows those in a hurry who can afford the fees to leave the highway faster and allow for cars in right lanes to use less congested left most lanes to pass slow drivers and lane exit/entrance in their lanes. Think of it from a network traffic CoS and QoS point of view (also,sorry for the late response,hope you see this)

sjwright 8y ago
Again, a nice idea in theory but it will just concentrate congestion towards the right, which would exacerbate the speed differential between lanes and make the road much less safe. It would exacerbate economic disparities, forcing poorer people—who are already chronically time-poor as well as money-poor—to spend more time in their car for the convenience of rich people. Rich people already have innumerable advantages in our society, we don't need to go around looking for more to give them. (As a comparatively rich person, I appreciate living in a society surrounded by people that are—in the main—well educated, healthy and not overly stressed, and I happily pay a lot in taxes to help maintain that. Which is why the USA holds zero appeal to me; you couldn't pay me to live there.)
- badrabbit 8y ago
  Overall,there would be less lane changing and cars would leave the freeway faster. The pricing can be adjustes or subsidized for low income drivers. If you pay a toll anyways,this is an opportunity to save money and use the tollway,where as you would normally take the slow and long unpaid route. This would actually make toll roads accessible to the poor. No matter how I look at it,if you add lanes,they should be paid for so that it would be more affordable abd practical and actually incentivize drivers to cause less jams. Also,traffic jams are not exclusive to the USA. Maybe it should be modeled in a more politically convenient way? How about fuel tax deductions? You get n deductions where you lose more deduction points by using left lanes? That way there is no added cost to the driver,the tax payers as a whole pay for it.