10 ms·
Congestion Pricing in Manhattan Close to Approval
- hourislate 8y agoI'm indifferent and glad I don't live there but why not just charge what it should cost to use Public Transportation/Subways? Why look for ways to subsidize it by taxing everything else but the people who use it?
- mc32 8y agoIt suffers from systemic issues. This is a fiscal patch over a corrupt system. The feds should go in there and clean it up, kick out all the unnecessary fat and install an efficient management anc restructure all their deals with everyone who abuses the system to line their pockets.
- jchanimal 8y agoGenerally you want to tax things you want less of and subsidize what you want more of. Hence taxing car traffic and subsidizing transit.
- baddox 8y agoI don’t know if I like your model. I would say tax things in order to remove negative externalities, then people will decide what they want more of.
- dymk 8y agoPeople elect leaders to pass laws to incentivize things they want more of, and disincentivize things they want less of.
- baddox 8y agoThat might be true, but what people actually want may not be the same as the most proximate cause of what they want. For instance, if all carbon emissions were required to be carbon-neutral, then carbon emission on its own isn’t so bad. If the cost of every gallon of gas includes the cost of sequestering the same amount of carbon that the gas will emit, then who really cares how much gas is burned?
- dymk 8y agoI don't think we're disagreeing on anything quite yet - if gas included the cost to offset all externalities from burning (not just carbon cost), but nox, ecological damage from drilling, transportation impact, sequestering airborne carbon near where it's burned, we'd probably be fine. But gas isn't priced that way, because we don't do all of the above to offset its effect on our cities and the environment. So we're continuing to impose more disincentives to burn gas.
- baddox 8y agoI’m in agreement. I just also approve of moving the externality adjustment closer and closer to its direct source as technology and processes make it efficient to do so.
- fabianhjr 8y agoGood thing incentivizing walking, biking, and transit line up with removing negative externalities: https://www.thediscourse.ca/scarborough/full-cost-commute https://www.thediscourse.ca/scarborough/full-cost-commute
- baddox 8y agoAbsolutely. I have no trouble with indirectly charging for negative externalities. As technology and processes improve that enable charging more directly for negative externalities, I approve of that.
- ip26 8y agoAccurately & precisely pricing the externalities of driving vs public transit vs walking vs biking is currently impossibly difficult, so you could say this is just a really crude swing at exactly what you're asking.
- CydeWeys 8y agoThese models are pretty much the same, just phrased a little bit differently. The reason you tax things you want less of is usually because of their negative externalities (and definitely is so in this circumstance).
- baddox 8y agoI mean, the difference is that you don't actually want less of the thing, or even less of the externality, you just want the person buying the thing to pay for the entire cost of the thing.
- CydeWeys 8y agoYou often do want less of a thing, in addition to the person buying the thing paying the cost for the entire thing. As one example, we do actually want less CO2 being released into the atmosphere, full stop. Or alternatively phrased, it's impossible to pay the true cost of the thing, as the true cost of everyone doing unrestricted emissions is that the human species goes extinct (which has effectively infinite cost). Or, similarly, imagine an industrial plant releasing waste that spreads through groundwater and poisons adjacent properties. We don't just want the industrial plant to pay the entire cost of the thing; we actually want them to not do that at all, because it infringes upon the properties of others, who do not want it to occur. So there's room for multiple times of frameworks that operate simultaneously -- Pay for the entire costs of some things, but also have less of or do not allow at all some things.
- ses1984 8y agoIsn't congestion pricing taxing people who use the roads? An Uber driver uses the roads a lot more than your average New Yorker, what taxes exist to cover that imbalance? (asking in earnest) Earmarking tax dollars for projects is kind of meaningless. Subsidizing public transportation is a good idea anyway. High costs of transportation disproportionately hurt poorer people. If you're not for public transportation then I'm not sure we'd see eye to eye on much of anything.
- acton10 8y agoGasoline/Petrol taxes are probably your best analog if you want people to pay in proportion to how much they're driving.
- ceejayoz 8y agoNot with the strides we've been making in fuel efficiency. An EV pays no gasoline taxes, but has similar impact on the roads to any other car. Now, EVs are a good thing... but they do expose issues with paying for transport via gas taxes.
- ams6110 8y agoElectric usage taxes or separate metering and rates for EV charging will be coming. That or much higher registration fees to offset the lost fuel tax revenue, which has already started happening.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- acton10 8y agoThat's fair I didn't think about EVs. For now their adoption rate is low enough that Gas Taxes are still a decent stand in (~2-4% it sounds like with quick googling). https://bnef.turtl.co/story/evo2018?teaser=true https://bnef.turtl.co/story/evo2018?teaser=true In the future though it probably will be a bigger problem. I suppose you could add similar sales taxes to public paid charging stations, but without separately metering home charging you'll probably still miss the bulk of EV users. Either the separate metering or a mileage reporting/road tax seem like they could fairly account for EV usage though.
- CydeWeys 8y agoThe primary purpose of the congestion tax is to dissuade people from driving into the busiest part of the city. The transportation funding earmark is just sugar to help get it passed.
- viscanti 8y agoThis is a good point. People don't drive in Manhattan because it's cheaper (or less tax) than Public Transportation. There's a reason people aren't taking the Subway and the best way to fix the problem is to make that better instead of trying to make the currently better options less appealing.
- roywiggins 8y agoPart of the problem is the NYC transit is frantically doggy paddling to keep its head above water. Decades of underfunding tunnel maintenance is coming due.
- ams6110 8y agoMore like decades of incompetence and corruption.
- roywiggins 8y agoVery likely, but you can chart the actual funding over time, whereas a sudden spike in incompetence and corruption seems somewhat unlikely. There has to be some causal reason why everything is hitting the fan now, not ten years ago or ten years from now.
- viscanti 8y ago> Very likely, but you can chart the actual funding over time, whereas a sudden spike in incompetence and corruption seems somewhat unlikely. Sure. There are likely many reasons why it's so bad. But the solution is to fix it, not penalize people because they use the obvious alternatives that are much better.
- crazygringo 8y agoWhy not tax people directly per meter of sidewalk they walk on? Why not tax them for each call they make to 911, or charge them each time they walk into a public park? Because certain things are considered to be public goods, to greater or lesser extent, and therefore to follow the principle behind progressive taxation: that people aren't taxed by how much they use them, but that the rich pay far more in absolute terms than the poor. The subway is the primary means of transportation that makes so much of the rest of the city possible, that it's certainly a public good to some extent. But it's also still so expensive to run, and people with cars have their own separate costs on top of it, that people don't generally feel it's fair for it to be 100% subsidized either.
- baddox 8y agoIf there’s an efficient and reliable way to tax usage directly, I think that’s always the better alternative. Social benefits like police, firefighting, 911 service, etc. are intended to be paid for with wealth distribution, at least to cover the least fortunate members of society (whether ones agrees with that policy is another matter). But roads don’t really work like that. There’s no “social benefit” that wouldn’t already be priced into everything that derived benefit from the roads. If government road subsidies make road freight cheaper, charging those freight companies for their own usage would make prices reflect actual costs. We could still have redistributive social benefits for things like the road wear caused by police cars, but again, that’s a separate issue.
- Nasrudith 8y agoBecause not doing so is more expensive and effectively subsidized in itself because road costs aren't factored into transit but track costs are. While tolls offer scalability (more users = more funding) shifting from cars to transit still saves money and reduces traffic.
- tracker1 8y agoDoes this mean @AOC is going to have to start paying more for Uber?
- eternalban 8y agoWhy not charge tourists a special subway rate (++) and finance the repairs that way, instead of creating 'exclu$ive zones' of movement.
- Alex3917 8y agoThe point of congestion pricing is to reduce car traffic, air pollution illnesses/deaths, pedestrian injuries/deaths, etc. The fact that it can also pay for the subways is just an ancillary benefit.
- brownbat 8y ago> pedestrian injuries/deaths The Dodgers actually got their name from the high rate of pedestrian fatalities in NYC, albeit from trolleys. Traffic has been causing problems in NYC for over a century.
- CydeWeys 8y agoBecause that won't achieve the goal of easing congestion in downtown Manhattan by reducing the number of vehicles entering it.
- eternalban 8y agoWe don't mind the congestion in "downtown" Manhattan. The article also clearly stated the justification was raising funds to fix our daily encounter with 3rd world in subterranean Manhattan -- and I believe I can speak for the entire city of New York here -- we mind very much indeed.
- CydeWeys 8y agoWhich "we" are you speaking for here? I live and work in Manhattan and I definitely am negatively affected by all the vehicle congestion, along with everyone I know. The vast majority of us here don't own or drive cars, and having fewer of them around will be much better for walking, biking, and taking the bus. You can't possibly deny that the intent of congestion charges is to reduce congestion. That's been the intent (and effect) in every other major city it's been implemented in across the world. The simple fact of the matter is that single occupancy vehicles can't possibly scale to meet all the transit demands of an urban area as dense as Manhattan, so they need to be deprioritized in favor of more scalable modes of transport. Reclaiming car lanes for dedicated bus lanes and cycle lanes would be a great first start. Frankly, this doesn't go nearly far enough. All of the free on-street parking in this zone needs to be removed as well, with people paying the true cost of storing a vehicle on the most valuable property in the US. That'll get rid of a lot of the vehicles on the streets and we can reclaim that space for much more productive uses. Many of these vehicles only move on alternate side parking days anyway, so there's really no reason they should be here at all. Charge the $500+/month that space is actually worth and they'll be gone.
- elektor 8y agoI'm glad to see NYC catch up to its European counterparts. This could do wonders for the air pollution inequities that exist in the city.
- jseliger 8y agoSeriously. This is long overdue. The city should also charge market pricing for street parking and eliminate large swaths of street parking: https://www.city-journal.org/html/high-cost-free-parking-14665.html https://www.city-journal.org/html/high-cost-free-parking-146..., but this is a good, if tardy, start.
- red_hare 8y agoAs a vehical owner who parks on the street in NYC, hell yes! Charge me money for parking! It’s insane that it’s free in this city. Get cars out from parking on the streets and do something useful with that space like wider sidewalks or bike lanes!
- kfarr 8y agoStreet Parking is Theft! :) https://www.etsy.com/listing/646896312/street-parking-is-theft-shirt-for-the https://www.etsy.com/listing/646896312/street-parking-is-the...
- kevin_thibedeau 8y agoThe European counterparts give substantial discounts to motorcycles. Probably won't happen here. Port authority only gives $1 off (< 10% discount) now. Why do people between say 96th and 60th not count as congestion generators? Seems like they're "gerrymandering" the neighborhoods hit by the surcharge.
- DanBC 8y agoLondon did it, and it had the effect of pushing people onto buses, taxis, and private hrie vehicles. The vast majority of those use diesel. London has terrible air quality as a result. You need to give incentives for electric vehicles (especially if that's electric buses) and disincentives to diesel for it to really work.
- jrcii 8y agoAmbient temperature in the Herald Square station (one of the biggest) in the summer is often well over 100 degrees, humid, and stagnant, while the platforms and tracks are filthy and smell like mold and pee everywhere. During rush times, there are half the number of necessary cars so you're crammed up against strangers. There's no way to tell when the trains are coming. 5 will get you 10 this tax does nothing to improve the subway.
- d3ad1ysp0rk 8y agoHuh? "Though state leaders have not ironed out details, they had reached consensus on Monday that the plan was necessary to help pay for much-needed repairs to the city’s beleaguered subway system."
- kevin_thibedeau 8y agoThat's the sales pitch. The reality is that much of the money will disappear down the bureaucratic black hole with nothing to show for in the end. Byford isn't going to fix the entrenched corruption.
- frosted-flakes 8y agoAndy Byford did a lot of good in Toronto before was grabbed by the MTA.
- teslaberry 8y agoi've lived in manhattan since 1993. never underestimate the stupidity of people in large groups with guaranteed income , i.e. bureaucracy. having been a cyclist my wholelife, since childhood. i have no faith in the government to implement sensible policy. i have faith in them to tax more. and more , and more. uber and lyft have been DISASTERS for new york, but they were inevitable because of the disaster that was the method by which the tlc was creating artificial scarcity in the yellow tax licensing system. and congestion pricing? no. it won't work. it wont' make the city more liveable or better. it's just a cash grab plain and simple.
- Daishiman 8y agoIt works in literally every other large city I. The world so there's no reason to think NY is special in some way such that it won't. This ridiculous cynism is counterproductive and defeatist. We know a fair bit about effective urban policy.
- ARandomerDude 8y agoUnintended consequence: driving in Manhattan will be de facto off-limits to the poor.
- Simple_Guy 8y agoyes. when there is a competition for limited resources, the poorer you are the less likely you will have access to the resources. That's how it works. No matter what you do you could never change this. You will simply create an alternative (and/or parallel) system with its own poors.
- londons_explore 8y agoYou could go full socialist and divide the parking/road space exactly equally amongst everyone.
- Simple_Guy 8y agoYou could try, but then you will end up with north korea.
- paulcole 8y agoWill they turn to Lyft, Uber, or perhaps some sort of “sub-way”?
- randyrand 8y agoThere are many nice things that are off limits to the poor. I'm not sure if driving in manhattan should have a special exemption. Driving in manahatten is far from a necessity.
- jhall1468 8y ago> nice things > driving in manhattan I think you may be confused.
- 8y ago
- snissn 8y agoI literally don't understand what this is and how it will work. It's like ez pass for certain zones of nyc? Will it only be for certain hours? Will they bill from traffic cameras? "Congestion pricing" is a brand new term to me and I don't see a clean definition.. Sorry if I missed it in the article
- cylinder 8y agoYou put cashless toll points above the roads. Cameras capture the license plates for those without toll passes. They can go online and pay within a few days or get fined. Not a new concept.
- CydeWeys 8y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congestion_pricing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congestion_pricing This kind of system is already implemented in many major cities, including London, Singapore, Paris, Stockholm, and Milan.
- londons_explore 8y agoThey need to make the toll dynamic. Eg. "New York's streets can optimally handle 1 million journeys per day. If the number of journeys is above/below that for 3 straight months, we increase/decrease the toll by 10%. That way the roads stay near peak efficiency without needing the politicians to get involved every time the streets get too busy or too empty.
- NullPrefix 8y agoSomething like Bitcoin mining difficulty?
- londons_explore 8y agoLondon made the mistake of excluding Taxis from their congestion toll scheme. Now nearly all roads are jam packed with Taxis and Ubers, and no regular people drive at all anymore.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- johnnycab 8y ago>London made the mistake of excluding Taxis from their congestion toll scheme. It is a very simplistic view to call it a mistake, as the the issues and policies related to the Congestion Charge have changed and evolved over the last 16 years. For example, the PHV (Private Hire Vehicle) will not be exempt from the charge from 8th April 2019. However, licensed Taxi's (Black cabs) were still deemed to be exempt from the charge, following a public consultation last year[1]. Amongst various other considerations, some of these decisions were made on the basis that the number of PHV's entering the zone has nearly doubled in the last decade, whilst some traffic has been constant.[2] Manhattan will have to deal with similar issues, which will generally coalesce around the central tenets of easing traffic flow, improving air quality and reducing accidents. [1]https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/taxis-and-private-hire/phvs-and-the-congestion-charge https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/taxis-and-private-hire/phvs-and-... [2]http://content.tfl.gov.uk/report-to-mayor-on-congestion-charge-changes.pdf http://content.tfl.gov.uk/report-to-mayor-on-congestion-char...
- CydeWeys 8y agoIn NYC we have a huge problem of placard abuse, and placarded people would presumably be excluded from the congestion charges, a huge mistake. A pointer to more information: https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2019/02/21/why-mayor-de-blasios-placard-abuse-plan-will-likely-fall-short/ https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2019/02/21/why-mayor-de-blasios-...
- johnnycab 8y agoThanks for the link. The only parallel I can draw with London proper in this case would be the 'Blue Badge' abuse. Although, it seems trivial in comparison to the Placard abuse. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-46715503 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-46715503
- KangLi 8y agoAgain the poor MTA needs funds to fix the subway? What an easy excuse as always..