2 ms·
>A more fair approach would be rationing, not just for driving but for every naturally scarce resource. How would that even work? If there's only enough road f
by gruez 1y ago
>A more fair approach would be rationing, not just for driving but for every naturally scarce resource.
How would that even work? If there's only enough road for 10% of the cars in Manhattan, does everyone just get "hall passes" for driving 36 days a year? Ironically that'd make driving even more "a hobby for the rich", because nobody but the rich are going to spend $30k+ on a car, for the privilege of driving it for 36 days a year. Even if the ratio was closer to 50% (which is doubtful, given how congested Manhattan is), only the well off can afford a car that's sitting idle half the year. If you make the passes tradable, you basically reinvented congestion pricing.
- rainsford 1y agoIt's even worse than that, because rationing makes driving an unreliable solution at any price point. Sure, a rich person can afford a car they only use part of the time. But if they regularly have a need to go into the city, they still need an alternative solution the rest of the time when they can't drive into the city for any amount of money. And having the ability to drive only some of the time is even more unhelpful for non-rich folks for exactly the reason you outlined. The idea of rich people commuting by driving into Manhattan from their mansions in Connecticut while average people live closer and take public transit might bother some egalitarian sensibilities, but it's probably a better outcome than driving being so unavailable to everyone that the only people who really benefit from it are tourists or those who otherwise don't really need to drive into the city at all.