5 ms·

Exactly. ”A tax on drivers” as the parent put it is actually a failure scenario here. Everybody gets low-grade immiserated by the tax but congestion is not redu

Exactly. ”A tax on drivers” as the parent put it is actually a failure scenario here. Everybody gets low-grade immiserated by the tax but congestion is not reduced enough to improve quality of life.

steveBK123 3y ago
My general concern with the whole thing is it's basically not thinking BIG enough. We're gonna raise the cost of driving into the city so that we have less people drive into the city and then.... ?! and then.. !? Presumably that will put more load on transit infrastructure that is under built and 10x reasonable cost to build. We can fund transit but we can't build it. The MTA has already borrowed 15 years of projected congestion pricing revenue with the revenue as collateral. Great, so what does $15B get us? If we want less drivers why don't we go HARD - announce one of the Hudson tunnels will now be 100% bus. Or we are going to retrofit it for a new train line. Or a new Brooklyn/Queens North/South line for less Manhattan oriented transit? Even our most ambitious 20 year plans are like "maybe we can finally finish more of the 2nd ave line / prevent the Hudson tubes from flooding / add one more Hudson tube" and that's basically it for the entire city. If you don't live in NJ or the east side of Manhattan, too bad, no new transit for you. The scale of transit investment you see in say London or Tokyo should make every NYer embarrassed and radicalize you on permitting/environmental study shenanigans/cost management/everyone having a veto on building anything.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > MTA has already borrowed 15 years of projected congestion pricing revenue with the revenue as collateral. Great, so what does $15B get us Signal modernization, station accessibility, new subway cars (last 2x longer), escalator and elevator repairs, new tracks and the 2nd Avenue Subway's Phase II (taking it to 125th street) [1]. [1] https://new.mta.info/document/10641 https://new.mta.info/document/10641
  - steveBK123 3y ago
    I think slide 7 also paints an interesting picture - +50% ridership in last 20 years, -8% capital capital investment years MTA-wide over 20 years in constant dollars. I can't put an exact date on it, but somewhere around 2010/2012 it started feeling like the transit system was getting consistently worse, year over year. Mostly in terms of delays, headways, etc. I have some cousins in the industry, and one of the problems they point to aside from work rules is that city/state agencies have basically no expertise in house for infrastructure. This is despite the fact that there has been a steady stream of some amount of work for decades. That means everything from project design, planning, management, accounting... literally everything is outsourced. All the MTA does is essentially ask for designs & bids, picks one, and then bleeds money to contractors.
bjourne 3y ago
Evidence from cities around the world shows that congestion taxes actually do reduce traffic massively. Drivers always say "we have no choice, we have to drive!" Then they get charged a small amount for driving and suddenly many more are able to use public transport.
- tekknik 3y ago
  It’s interesting to me in a free country that you also pay vehicle registration (this is supposed to cover your taxes on road use) that taxes like this are a thing.
  - bjourne 3y ago
    Don't think it is stranger than publicly funded museums charging entrance fees.
    - tekknik 3y ago
      That’s a bit different, but still a head scratcher. You can never go to a museum and still be capable of going to work. You need a car for work most of the time.
      - Cogito 3y ago
        > You need a car for work most of the time. This is an interesting perspective. Here in Sydney Australia most households will have a car or two, but most of the people I've ever worked with do not drive to or for work. Another large chunk of people will drive to get to a train station or bus stop, and then get public transport the rest of the way. There are a lot of people who do drive for work, especially as you get to the edges of the city sprawl, but even then there are often viable public transport options. Those people tend to not work in the city centre or business parks I've worked in. With working from home even less people are driving due to work.
        tekknik 3y ago

steveBK123 3y ago

My general concern with the whole thing is it's basically not thinking BIG enough. We're gonna raise the cost of driving into the city so that we have less people drive into the city and then.... ?! and then.. !? Presumably that will put more load on transit infrastructure that is under built and 10x reasonable cost to build. We can fund transit but we can't build it. The MTA has already borrowed 15 years of projected congestion pricing revenue with the revenue as collateral. Great, so what does $15B get us? If we want less drivers why don't we go HARD - announce one of the Hudson tunnels will now be 100% bus. Or we are going to retrofit it for a new train line. Or a new Brooklyn/Queens North/South line for less Manhattan oriented transit? Even our most ambitious 20 year plans are like "maybe we can finally finish more of the 2nd ave line / prevent the Hudson tubes from flooding / add one more Hudson tube" and that's basically it for the entire city. If you don't live in NJ or the east side of Manhattan, too bad, no new transit for you. The scale of transit investment you see in say London or Tokyo should make every NYer embarrassed and radicalize you on permitting/environmental study shenanigans/cost management/everyone having a veto on building anything.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> MTA has already borrowed 15 years of projected congestion pricing revenue with the revenue as collateral. Great, so what does $15B get us Signal modernization, station accessibility, new subway cars (last 2x longer), escalator and elevator repairs, new tracks and the 2nd Avenue Subway's Phase II (taking it to 125th street) [1]. [1] https://new.mta.info/document/10641 https://new.mta.info/document/10641
- steveBK123 3y ago
  I think slide 7 also paints an interesting picture - +50% ridership in last 20 years, -8% capital capital investment years MTA-wide over 20 years in constant dollars. I can't put an exact date on it, but somewhere around 2010/2012 it started feeling like the transit system was getting consistently worse, year over year. Mostly in terms of delays, headways, etc. I have some cousins in the industry, and one of the problems they point to aside from work rules is that city/state agencies have basically no expertise in house for infrastructure. This is despite the fact that there has been a steady stream of some amount of work for decades. That means everything from project design, planning, management, accounting... literally everything is outsourced. All the MTA does is essentially ask for designs & bids, picks one, and then bleeds money to contractors.

bjourne 3y ago

Evidence from cities around the world shows that congestion taxes actually do reduce traffic massively. Drivers always say "we have no choice, we have to drive!" Then they get charged a small amount for driving and suddenly many more are able to use public transport.

tekknik 3y ago
It’s interesting to me in a free country that you also pay vehicle registration (this is supposed to cover your taxes on road use) that taxes like this are a thing.
- bjourne 3y ago
  Don't think it is stranger than publicly funded museums charging entrance fees.
  - tekknik 3y ago
    That’s a bit different, but still a head scratcher. You can never go to a museum and still be capable of going to work. You need a car for work most of the time.
    - Cogito 3y ago
      > You need a car for work most of the time. This is an interesting perspective. Here in Sydney Australia most households will have a car or two, but most of the people I've ever worked with do not drive to or for work. Another large chunk of people will drive to get to a train station or bus stop, and then get public transport the rest of the way. There are a lot of people who do drive for work, especially as you get to the edges of the city sprawl, but even then there are often viable public transport options. Those people tend to not work in the city centre or business parks I've worked in. With working from home even less people are driving due to work.
      - tekknik 3y ago