4 ms·

> ’The city will charge $15 to passenger cars that enter the central strip of Manhattan, $24 to vans and $36 to buses and large trucks.’ Shouldn’t they charge

> ’The city will charge $15 to passenger cars that enter the central strip of Manhattan, $24 to vans and $36 to buses and large trucks.’ Shouldn’t they charge progressive less the higher the occupancy is of the vehicle. This pricing seems backwards to me.

thisgoesnowhere 3y ago
That is progressively less per person even though it's not less per vehicle.
- shipscode 3y ago
  More people can fit in a truck than in a car?
  - thisgoesnowhere 3y ago
    Trucks are more expensive because they take up more space. The comment I responded to was asking why higher passenger vehicles cost more.
haswell 3y ago
That depends on what they’re trying to address. If the issue is primarily the presence of the vehicles themselves, it makes sense that larger vehicles take more space and cause more congestion. If “congestion” also factors in pedestrians, then those larger vehicles are increasing congestion at a higher rate than smaller vehicles, both in terms of space taken by the vehicle, and number of humans entering the area. I get what you’re saying, but I think there are a number of ways to make it make sense depending on what behavior they’re trying to alter.
- junofan 3y ago
  The problem they are addressing is the MTA not having enough money. The solution is finding a politically acceptable way to address that. They’ve already raised subway fares.
cgriswald 3y ago
If you want to maximize passengers per 'vehicle space' this is the pricing you use. While the van costs more, the per-passenger price is less at capacity. The only other option is to charge based on actual passenger count (with the price being lower per-passenger as you have more passengers). If they were to charge less for larger vehicles, people would buy larger vehicles just for carting themselves around regardless of number of passengers, which would increase overall congestion.
- ok_dad 3y ago
  They should charge like $100 / number of passengers, with cheaper exceptions for very small cars and motorbikes. Then if you fill a four passenger car, it’s only $25 for the car, but a dude in a sports car by himself pays the full charge. Busses and bigger vans are pretty much free. Delivery vehicles can afford to pay the full cost of doing business. Even better if you charge by car class, so larger vehicles are more expensive.
  - thisgoesnowhere 3y ago
    The infrastructure to count passengers would be either a security nightmare because of the surveillance requirements or a inefficient mess where you have to stop for some person to manually see how many people are in the car. The system they are describing is better.
    - fragmede 3y ago
      Fwiw, California's new toll expressways do this - counts people in the car at speed, and charges different rates based on that - so the technology already exists.
      - thisgoesnowhere 3y ago
        Oh for sure, I don't think the tech is hard or impossible to implement. But you are describing a pretty invasive surveillance system.
      - 3y ago

thisgoesnowhere 3y ago

That is progressively less per person even though it's not less per vehicle.

shipscode 3y ago
More people can fit in a truck than in a car?
- thisgoesnowhere 3y ago
  Trucks are more expensive because they take up more space. The comment I responded to was asking why higher passenger vehicles cost more.

haswell 3y ago

That depends on what they’re trying to address. If the issue is primarily the presence of the vehicles themselves, it makes sense that larger vehicles take more space and cause more congestion. If “congestion” also factors in pedestrians, then those larger vehicles are increasing congestion at a higher rate than smaller vehicles, both in terms of space taken by the vehicle, and number of humans entering the area. I get what you’re saying, but I think there are a number of ways to make it make sense depending on what behavior they’re trying to alter.

junofan 3y ago
The problem they are addressing is the MTA not having enough money. The solution is finding a politically acceptable way to address that. They’ve already raised subway fares.

cgriswald 3y ago

If you want to maximize passengers per 'vehicle space' this is the pricing you use. While the van costs more, the per-passenger price is less at capacity. The only other option is to charge based on actual passenger count (with the price being lower per-passenger as you have more passengers). If they were to charge less for larger vehicles, people would buy larger vehicles just for carting themselves around regardless of number of passengers, which would increase overall congestion.

ok_dad 3y ago
They should charge like $100 / number of passengers, with cheaper exceptions for very small cars and motorbikes. Then if you fill a four passenger car, it’s only $25 for the car, but a dude in a sports car by himself pays the full charge. Busses and bigger vans are pretty much free. Delivery vehicles can afford to pay the full cost of doing business. Even better if you charge by car class, so larger vehicles are more expensive.
- thisgoesnowhere 3y ago
  The infrastructure to count passengers would be either a security nightmare because of the surveillance requirements or a inefficient mess where you have to stop for some person to manually see how many people are in the car. The system they are describing is better.
  - fragmede 3y ago
    Fwiw, California's new toll expressways do this - counts people in the car at speed, and charges different rates based on that - so the technology already exists.
    - thisgoesnowhere 3y ago
      Oh for sure, I don't think the tech is hard or impossible to implement. But you are describing a pretty invasive surveillance system.
    - 3y ago