6 ms·

> is usually ~€16/h Holy HELL that is crazy. I thought £5/hr in London was crazy.

ww520 1y ago
I paid over $50 USD for parking a bit over two hours in Cambridge Massachusetts when visiting MIT. Parking in the Boston area is atrocious.
- Zambyte 1y ago
  Luckily the Boston area is relatively (very, by US standards) easy to get around without a car :)
- throwaway2037 1y ago
  Why should parking be easy or cheap in urban Cambridge? (For those unaware, MIT is just a short bridge across a river from Boston.) You should take the subway (metro) or bus. There are many non-driving options for the able-bodied.
  - ww520 1y ago
    I was driving from outside of Boston. Parking near subway was atrocious as well.
    - inciampati 1y ago
      Alewife parking and the T in?
- motorest 1y ago
  > I paid over $50 USD for parking a bit over two hours in Cambridge Massachusetts when visiting MIT. Parking in the Boston area is atrocious. The two are related. The whole point of charging for parking is to leverage scarcity to convince people to not make the problem worse and just find alternatives to driving to the doorstop that work well for them.
  - b112 1y ago
    No, the pojnt of charging for parking, is for a company somewhere to make a fat, juicy profit. The company would prefer more people drive, and therefore, need to park.
    - b112 1y ago
      Wow. Look at the downvotes. Yet almost every parking lot is privately owned, and many cities have even sold management of street parking to private companies. Do people seriously think that these companies want to charge more, for environmental reasons? Of course not. They care only for profit. https://news.wttw.com/2025/05/21/final-tally-chicago-taxpayers-pay-252m-parking-meter-firm-resolve-claim-city-violated https://news.wttw.com/2025/05/21/final-tally-chicago-taxpaye... The parent says that the reason the price is high, is because someone is trying to up the price for environmental reasons. What proof have they for this? I'd really like a citation, because instead I see almost all parking being profit based. If someone is saying it's for environmental reasons, likely they're lying to make more profit.
      - unyttigfjelltol 1y ago
        It’s expensive to provide parking and in a place like Cambridge. They’ve already stuffed cars in every available nook and cranny. Did you think they should just let you park in Cambridge Common, Harvard Yard or the Charles River park? Why park at all— just stop your car in the middle of the street. The T is atrocious. Parking is simply expensive.
      - arccy 1y ago
        the city decides things like street parking, minimum parking space requirements, or if you can put up a parking lot, thus deciding the total amount of available space. actual operation of the parking spaces can be offloaded to private entities. if less space is allocated, it becomes more expensive (scarcity), driving down car use. this is an easy case of pricing in environment and external impacts.
        1y ago
Reason077 1y ago
£5/hr sounds pretty cheap for London. You can pay an awful lot more than that for parking in some areas!
maccard 1y ago
Where are you parking for £5/hr in London? It’s more than that in Edinburgh these days
- octo888 1y ago
  Ah yeah it's been a few years. Seems more like £9/HR in Mayfair etc Out of zone 1 it can be done though I believe
ChrisMarshallNY 1y ago
Try downtown Manhattan. As to the GP, it’s refreshing to hear about a reliable VW. Most folks I know, that own VWs, complain about reliability. But they still love their cars. I’ve never driven a VW, but, apparently, they handle quite well.
- Thlom 1y ago
  I had the VW e-golf a while, and it was a super car. Never had any problems with it. Sold it to buy a VW Multivan (I think it's marketed as California in the US?) which also was a great car, but it was over 10 years old so obviously had a few relatively minor issues, but all in all happy with it.
  - merb 1y ago
    California is basically the Camping variant of the earlier t3 and nowadays multivan (t7). It has a big history and used different frames (t4-t5) in the past. But it’s not a us thing. The first version was really close to a us only Model tough.
epolanski 1y ago
It's more of an incentive to walk, take public transport, and free cities as much as possible of cars.
- j1elo 1y ago
  Isn't it also a way to keep outsiders out? If 30 mins by car becomes 1h30 by train+bus combinations, lots of people are effectively pushed out of even wanting to go to the city centre for meeting friends or having a family walk around.
  - andrepd 1y ago
    There's no way "30 min by car" is a thing unless you bulldoze the entirety of Central London and replace it with freeways and parking lots. It's always a red herring. Cars are simply not viable past a certain density. It's silly (misleading at worst) to take a distance (say 40km) and a speed (say 80kph) and just claim the journey by car takes 30mins, ignoring everything else! Trains + metro + bikes are the only way to make the journey you describe viable (and comfortable and fast).
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    - j1elo 1y ago
      That's based on real world times in the european capital I live in. Also the original point was for a city like Oslo.
      - LadyCailin 1y ago
        I can confirm. I live on the outskirts of Oslo, and it is substantially faster for me to drive in the city center, Rather than take public transit. Cheaper too! Although parking is paid for by my job, if it wasn’t, public transit would be cheaper, depending on how long I parked.
  - jeromegv 1y ago

I paid over $50 USD for parking a bit over two hours in Cambridge Massachusetts when visiting MIT. Parking in the Boston area is atrocious.

Zambyte 1y ago
Luckily the Boston area is relatively (very, by US standards) easy to get around without a car :)
throwaway2037 1y ago
Why should parking be easy or cheap in urban Cambridge? (For those unaware, MIT is just a short bridge across a river from Boston.) You should take the subway (metro) or bus. There are many non-driving options for the able-bodied.
- ww520 1y ago
  I was driving from outside of Boston. Parking near subway was atrocious as well.
  - inciampati 1y ago
    Alewife parking and the T in?
motorest 1y ago
> I paid over $50 USD for parking a bit over two hours in Cambridge Massachusetts when visiting MIT. Parking in the Boston area is atrocious. The two are related. The whole point of charging for parking is to leverage scarcity to convince people to not make the problem worse and just find alternatives to driving to the doorstop that work well for them.
- b112 1y ago
  No, the pojnt of charging for parking, is for a company somewhere to make a fat, juicy profit. The company would prefer more people drive, and therefore, need to park.
  - b112 1y ago
    Wow. Look at the downvotes. Yet almost every parking lot is privately owned, and many cities have even sold management of street parking to private companies. Do people seriously think that these companies want to charge more, for environmental reasons? Of course not. They care only for profit. https://news.wttw.com/2025/05/21/final-tally-chicago-taxpayers-pay-252m-parking-meter-firm-resolve-claim-city-violated https://news.wttw.com/2025/05/21/final-tally-chicago-taxpaye... The parent says that the reason the price is high, is because someone is trying to up the price for environmental reasons. What proof have they for this? I'd really like a citation, because instead I see almost all parking being profit based. If someone is saying it's for environmental reasons, likely they're lying to make more profit.
    - unyttigfjelltol 1y ago
      It’s expensive to provide parking and in a place like Cambridge. They’ve already stuffed cars in every available nook and cranny. Did you think they should just let you park in Cambridge Common, Harvard Yard or the Charles River park? Why park at all— just stop your car in the middle of the street. The T is atrocious. Parking is simply expensive.
    - arccy 1y ago
      the city decides things like street parking, minimum parking space requirements, or if you can put up a parking lot, thus deciding the total amount of available space. actual operation of the parking spaces can be offloaded to private entities. if less space is allocated, it becomes more expensive (scarcity), driving down car use. this is an easy case of pricing in environment and external impacts.
      - 1y ago

Reason077 1y ago

£5/hr sounds pretty cheap for London. You can pay an awful lot more than that for parking in some areas!

maccard 1y ago

Where are you parking for £5/hr in London? It’s more than that in Edinburgh these days

octo888 1y ago
Ah yeah it's been a few years. Seems more like £9/HR in Mayfair etc Out of zone 1 it can be done though I believe

ChrisMarshallNY 1y ago

Try downtown Manhattan. As to the GP, it’s refreshing to hear about a reliable VW. Most folks I know, that own VWs, complain about reliability. But they still love their cars. I’ve never driven a VW, but, apparently, they handle quite well.

Thlom 1y ago
I had the VW e-golf a while, and it was a super car. Never had any problems with it. Sold it to buy a VW Multivan (I think it's marketed as California in the US?) which also was a great car, but it was over 10 years old so obviously had a few relatively minor issues, but all in all happy with it.
- merb 1y ago
  California is basically the Camping variant of the earlier t3 and nowadays multivan (t7). It has a big history and used different frames (t4-t5) in the past. But it’s not a us thing. The first version was really close to a us only Model tough.

epolanski 1y ago

It's more of an incentive to walk, take public transport, and free cities as much as possible of cars.

j1elo 1y ago
Isn't it also a way to keep outsiders out? If 30 mins by car becomes 1h30 by train+bus combinations, lots of people are effectively pushed out of even wanting to go to the city centre for meeting friends or having a family walk around.
- andrepd 1y ago
  There's no way "30 min by car" is a thing unless you bulldoze the entirety of Central London and replace it with freeways and parking lots. It's always a red herring. Cars are simply not viable past a certain density. It's silly (misleading at worst) to take a distance (say 40km) and a speed (say 80kph) and just claim the journey by car takes 30mins, ignoring everything else! Trains + metro + bikes are the only way to make the journey you describe viable (and comfortable and fast).
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - j1elo 1y ago
    That's based on real world times in the european capital I live in. Also the original point was for a city like Oslo.
    - LadyCailin 1y ago
      I can confirm. I live on the outskirts of Oslo, and it is substantially faster for me to drive in the city center, Rather than take public transit. Cheaper too! Although parking is paid for by my job, if it wasn’t, public transit would be cheaper, depending on how long I parked.
- jeromegv 1y ago