3 ms·

Living in big cities is becoming more and more the case of boiling frogs. If all these things came up at once, none of it would fly. But because year after year

by keyle 3y ago

Living in big cities is becoming more and more the case of boiling frogs. If all these things came up at once, none of it would fly. But because year after year, it slowly gets worse, people just go along with it pretending it's fine. It wouldn't be surprising in a few years that they'll charge by the streets you entered, or the calculated emissions produced by your vehicle. (Note I have never visited NYC, on the bucket list)

mholm 3y ago
Every category of living has these sorts of changes over time. The suburbs might complain about rising infrastructure taxes, the time to commute anywhere, road work. Rural areas might complain about lack of services and maintenance from the municipality. The transit access/walkability of NYC gives it a LOT of leeway to squeeze some money out, especially with how expensive everything has gotten.
apsurd 3y ago
appreciate you being transparent with your disclaimer. Living in the big city is not a frog boiling operation. These rules are pretty simple: cars are silly in dense environments. It's in the first paragraph. "... charge private vehicles..."
- keyle 3y ago
  If the public transport systems were that good, why would anyone need to drive in? Note: I am not a car freak. I'm a solarpunk guy, I'd rather have Futurama style tubes, or VTOL vehicles anytime! But paying for horrendous traffic jams clearly shows to me that public transport isn't up to snuff.
  - ceejayoz 3y ago
    Congestion pricing helps people determine if they need to or just want to take private transportation.
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > If the public transport systems were that good, why would anyone need to drive in? Edge cases and laziness. For two thirds of my trips, I can and do take public transportation. For the remaining third, I'm some combination of lazy, needing to maintain a phone call or going between points inadequately served by public transit.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - barry-cotter 3y ago
    > If the public transport systems were that good, why would anyone need to drive in? If they need to drive in that badly to the only city in the US with a world class public transport system then they can pay for it.
  - jackvalentine 3y ago
    > If the public transport systems were that good, why would anyone need to drive in? There is a question there about should the people already there have to accomodate people who want to live elsewhere and still enjoy the ammenity of the big city. I personally err on the side of the people who live in the suburbs shouldn't dictate the built form to the people who live in the city.
    - DangitBobby 3y ago
      That seems fair to me as long as people who live in the city don't get to visit suburbs or rural areas either.
      - jackvalentine 3y ago
        I don't think anyone is saying the people from the suburbs can't visit. Just that they should visit the built form that makes cities great for people that live there. This also benefits the people that visit - because it makes cities great once you step out of the car! Nobody from NYC visits rural Idaho expecting a 24/7 subway system to be provided for them.
    - Nasrudith 3y ago
      If they want the visitors (and they do as you can hear from the pained howling about work-from-home, and before then about suburban malls) the answer is a big yes, you need to accommodate visitors. (Notably different than outright dictating the built form but ignore at your own peril.) It is admittedly an awkward to do a proper 'transition' from cars in less dense areas to transit stations. in ways that parking lots and garages alone leave some problems.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
  - lmm 3y ago
    It's a tragedy of the commons. If everyone took the bus, it would be a lot faster for everyone, but any individual gets there faster by using a car, so they do.
  - marcinzm 3y ago
    >If the public transport systems were that good, why would anyone need to drive in? People take transit method A if it's better than transit method B no matter how shitty A is in absolute terms. And the US has invested 50 years into car infrastructure so it's pretty good actually. For example, Tokyo has a famously good public transit system and 70 minute one way commute time on average. NYC is half that.
  - wiseleo 3y ago
    Accessibility. I was in NYC yesterday. I had a somewhat heavy carryon and had to deal with a few too many staircases. I could not determine where the elevators and escalators were easily. I am sure that information exists, but countless subway stations are inaccessible. Buses are far more accessible.
lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago
> they’ll charge by ... the calculated emissions produced by your vehicle We all have dreams. If only.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> wouldn't be surprising in a few years that they'll charge by the streets you entered The point is we don't want nor need private cars in central Manhattan. A simpler solution would be eliminating street-side parking, but that's a political hot potato.
- WUMBOWUMBO 3y ago
  Who’s “we”?
  - landoftheice 3y ago
    [dead]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
bradleyjg 3y ago
This is not a big deal for most people that live in nyc. We don’t own cars. What’s getting worse and worse is rent …

by keyle 3y ago

mholm 3y ago

Every category of living has these sorts of changes over time. The suburbs might complain about rising infrastructure taxes, the time to commute anywhere, road work. Rural areas might complain about lack of services and maintenance from the municipality. The transit access/walkability of NYC gives it a LOT of leeway to squeeze some money out, especially with how expensive everything has gotten.

apsurd 3y ago

appreciate you being transparent with your disclaimer. Living in the big city is not a frog boiling operation. These rules are pretty simple: cars are silly in dense environments. It's in the first paragraph. "... charge private vehicles..."

keyle 3y ago
If the public transport systems were that good, why would anyone need to drive in? Note: I am not a car freak. I'm a solarpunk guy, I'd rather have Futurama style tubes, or VTOL vehicles anytime! But paying for horrendous traffic jams clearly shows to me that public transport isn't up to snuff.
- ceejayoz 3y ago
  Congestion pricing helps people determine if they need to or just want to take private transportation.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > If the public transport systems were that good, why would anyone need to drive in? Edge cases and laziness. For two thirds of my trips, I can and do take public transportation. For the remaining third, I'm some combination of lazy, needing to maintain a phone call or going between points inadequately served by public transit.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- barry-cotter 3y ago
  > If the public transport systems were that good, why would anyone need to drive in? If they need to drive in that badly to the only city in the US with a world class public transport system then they can pay for it.
- jackvalentine 3y ago
  > If the public transport systems were that good, why would anyone need to drive in? There is a question there about should the people already there have to accomodate people who want to live elsewhere and still enjoy the ammenity of the big city. I personally err on the side of the people who live in the suburbs shouldn't dictate the built form to the people who live in the city.
  - DangitBobby 3y ago
    That seems fair to me as long as people who live in the city don't get to visit suburbs or rural areas either.
    - jackvalentine 3y ago
      I don't think anyone is saying the people from the suburbs can't visit. Just that they should visit the built form that makes cities great for people that live there. This also benefits the people that visit - because it makes cities great once you step out of the car! Nobody from NYC visits rural Idaho expecting a 24/7 subway system to be provided for them.
  - Nasrudith 3y ago
    If they want the visitors (and they do as you can hear from the pained howling about work-from-home, and before then about suburban malls) the answer is a big yes, you need to accommodate visitors. (Notably different than outright dictating the built form but ignore at your own peril.) It is admittedly an awkward to do a proper 'transition' from cars in less dense areas to transit stations. in ways that parking lots and garages alone leave some problems.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
- lmm 3y ago
  It's a tragedy of the commons. If everyone took the bus, it would be a lot faster for everyone, but any individual gets there faster by using a car, so they do.
- marcinzm 3y ago
  >If the public transport systems were that good, why would anyone need to drive in? People take transit method A if it's better than transit method B no matter how shitty A is in absolute terms. And the US has invested 50 years into car infrastructure so it's pretty good actually. For example, Tokyo has a famously good public transit system and 70 minute one way commute time on average. NYC is half that.
- wiseleo 3y ago
  Accessibility. I was in NYC yesterday. I had a somewhat heavy carryon and had to deal with a few too many staircases. I could not determine where the elevators and escalators were easily. I am sure that information exists, but countless subway stations are inaccessible. Buses are far more accessible.

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago

> they’ll charge by ... the calculated emissions produced by your vehicle We all have dreams. If only.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> wouldn't be surprising in a few years that they'll charge by the streets you entered The point is we don't want nor need private cars in central Manhattan. A simpler solution would be eliminating street-side parking, but that's a political hot potato.

WUMBOWUMBO 3y ago
Who’s “we”?
- landoftheice 3y ago
  [dead]

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

bradleyjg 3y ago

This is not a big deal for most people that live in nyc. We don’t own cars. What’s getting worse and worse is rent …