SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
After years of debate, New York state has adopted congestion pricing to deal with traffic problems in New York City. Starting in 2021, fees will be imposed on all vehicles entering a pricing zone that covers lower Manhattan, from 60th Street at the southern edge of Central Park to the southernmost tip of the island.
This approach has succeeded in cities including London, Singapore and Stockholm. For scholars like me who focus on urban issues, New York's decision is welcome news. Properly used, congestion pricing can make crowded cities safer, cleaner and easier for drivers, cyclists and pedestrians to navigate.
The details matter, including the size and timing of charges and the area that they cover. Congestion charges also raises equity issues, since rich people are best able to move closer to work or change their schedules to avoid the steepest costs.
Are congestion pricing plans the wave of the future in American cities?
(Score: 3, Troll) by Captival on Tuesday April 02 2019, @09:42PM (7 children)
"This approach has succeeded in cities including London, Singapore and Stockholm" as long as your definition of 'success' is 'more money and more power for corrupt, bloated governments'.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Nuke on Wednesday April 03 2019, @08:55AM (3 children)
I don't care what happens to the money. As long as it reduces the level of traffic in cities, which has become insane, they can toss the money on a bonfire as far as I'm concerned.
BTW, I'm guessing you are seeing the "corrupt" angle from a USA (or possible Third World) perspective, where people seem to be paranoid about government.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 03 2019, @02:17PM
you seem like the kind of people who can't put off phone's alarm but whines about how's not possible that phone is spying on you
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 03 2019, @04:10PM
I'd be more concerned with Freedom of Movement [wikipedia.org], lest you find yourself someday unable to go past the area you live in without paying for a privilege which should be a right.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 03 2019, @06:32PM
paranoid? you're a brainwashed slave. why don't you wake up?
(Score: 3, Informative) by Unixnut on Wednesday April 03 2019, @10:59AM (2 children)
> 'more money and more power for corrupt, bloated governments'.
I would also add reduction in economic activity in in the area. Problems with congestion charging are as follows:
1. It reduces the number of people who visit. Not everyone can or wants to use public transport, plus if you are buying a lot (e.g. monthly shop) it is completely impractical to lug that over buses. So businesses end up losing customers, or going bust.
2. It pushes up prices for everything. Companies who deliver goods, or services just accept the increased charges and forward them to the customer, making living costs within the area more expensive
3. There is a direct charge on those who live there, and they have to pay the charge every day because they are within the system, in addition to increased costs of all goods and services.
4. It forces more people to use public transport. Then the public transport companies can increase fares knowing they have a captive audience that cannot go elsewhere for their transport. Transportation becomes an effective monopoly, so they don't bother to invest in more capacity and better service, so the public transport experience becomes even worse.
5. The above all come together to decrease the desire to live there, so people start moving out, resulting in a housing market that slows down or goes negative.
I can't talk about Stockholm and Singapore, but the above is my experience of London, especially for those inside the zone.
The only people who seem to like it are politicians, because it makes it look like they are "doing something green", and because I never met a government unhappy with more tax income, and rich people, for whom the extra costs don't even register on their wealth, but they can now enjoy emptier streets when cruising around.
The fact London's centre still isn't dead is because of the high concentration of filthy rich people, plus tourists (who don't come by car usually), and good rail links (meaning people from the countryside can get an express to the centre for the occasional "night on the town"), keeping places like Oxford street alive. However outside the core tourist/city centre, things are pretty dire.
There are a lot of examples of towns and villages in the UK that attempted the same thing (trying to force cars out of the city centre with charges and parking restrictions), only to find their high streets start dying off as business go bust, because people instead visit malls and complexes out in the countryside.
Needless to say, the London Mayor thinks the whole congestion charging thing was a success, so is both increasing the charges, and widening the zone, so that by 2021 it will cover where I live. The general mood in the area is negative, businesses and people are already making plans to relocate. Two of my neighbours have already sold up and left to places outside the zone, and I will most likely follow them in the next few months too.
(Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 03 2019, @05:53PM
That's the point. You're thinking that this is some sort of suburban strip mall. It's not. You're talking about an area that during a work day is one of the most densely populated areas on the planet (~3 million people stuffed into ~6sq miles).
What's more, while there are food markets in that area, no one in their right mind would come from outside NYC to Midtown Manhattan to do their grocery shopping. And even if you live in that area *and* need to drive to get your groceries, as long as you stay in the area, there's no charge.
Even more, there are no *houses* there. Only apartment buildings. Not gated communities, apartment buildings. As such, most people couldn't store a month's worth of groceries in their 500sq. ft. apartments.
So, no. No businesses are going to go bust. You clearly have no idea about the area you're talking about and your ignorance is showing.
First off, most of that area isn't residential. Secondly, an extra ten dollars or so for a lorry full of *whatever* isn't going to raise prices all that much. Thirdly, the areas that are residential are *already* some of the most expensive in the US and the world. A few dollars here or there won't make a difference.
You ignorance is understandable if you aren't from the area, yet you insist on going on about something you have zero knowledge about. Good show!
No. It's a direct charge on those who choose to drive their cars into that area. Those who live in that area would be bonkers to drive around that area, but even if they did, as long as they stay within the boundaries, they wouldn't be charged at all.
What's more, the area in question contains several zip codes with per-capita incomes in the top ten in the entire US.
This is like shooting fish in a barrel.
You mean the public transportation authorities ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Transportation_Authority [wikipedia.org] , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NJ_Transit [wikipedia.org] ) in the region? In fact, the major selling point of the plan is to use the revenue to improve public transportation service and keep prices down.
Man, you have no idea what you're talking about and spent quite a bit of time spouting bullshit. I bet you're lots of fun at parties!
This will have the opposite effect. Since there will be fewer cars and less congestion, *more* people will want to live in that area.
What's more, we could use some negative housing market movement, given that Manhattan real estate is the most expensive in the US [cnbc.com]. And the area covered by the congestion pricing plan contains the most expensive real estate in Manhattan. Don't believe me? check it out for yourself. [realtor.com]
That's exactly the situation in the area covered by congestion pricing. The big difference is that in NYC, the *only* area that's covered by this (~6sq miles vs. 302sq miles for the whole city) is largely commercial (office buildings mostly), and the residential sections are among the most expensive in the US.
Your experience with London (a wonderful place, BTW -- I really had a blast when I was there a few years back) is *not* applicable to the tiny area of NYC covered by this plan.
Come visit us. You'll find that this is a wonderful place and the congestion pricing plan will make it even better.
(Score: 2) by Nuke on Thursday April 04 2019, @12:15PM
As you are talking about the congestion charge zone of London - only a small proportion of people enter it by car, but still enough to clog the streets. So even if you halve that number by imposing a charge, the overall effect on numbers of people entering is small. The beneficial effect on reducing traffic and pollution is significant though.
I once worked in the City of London, before the charge, and out of about 30 people in my branch only one did not come in by public transport, and he came on a motorbike - only because he could weave through the traffic jams. There would have been no-where to park a car anyway except at a price which makes the congestion charge pale into insignificance. These 30 people spent a great deal of money in the shops, pubs and cafes in the city - for example I bought more than one camera there and ate in a pub every lunch time. No way is the centre of London going broke because of the congestion charge,
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 02 2019, @09:46PM (3 children)
Because sanctimonious pricks shouldn't have to pay taxes.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Tuesday April 02 2019, @10:22PM (2 children)
Well, at least, while they're stuck, they are not emitting engine noise nor pollution.
Therefore, they shall be exempted from congestion tax if they fix the last of the three NY jam problems: They must change their horns to some innocuous elevator or chamber music.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 02 2019, @10:26PM (1 child)
They still emit *smug*
(Score: 4, Interesting) by bob_super on Tuesday April 02 2019, @10:49PM
Maybe in NY or in Europe, where they are rare.
Around SoCal, Tesla is just another car maker that you see essentially every time you get on the road.
Compared to the jacked pick-ups, giant SUV blaring music, lowered rice burners who can't go over speed bumps, and the screaming V8/V10s, I'd say that Teslas do a better job keeping the driver's opinions contained inside the car.
The asshole who tailgated me for a mile on city streets last week was still a BMW.
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 02 2019, @09:48PM (9 children)
New York is boring. And redundant.
(Score: 4, Funny) by takyon on Tuesday April 02 2019, @09:56PM (7 children)
Can you elaborate on why you find one of the most populous and economically important cities on Earth "boring"?
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by FatPhil on Tuesday April 02 2019, @11:10PM (1 child)
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by takyon on Tuesday April 02 2019, @11:45PM
Internet sales tax is a different topic and this comment [soylentnews.org] only leads me to repeat my question.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 5, Interesting) by schad on Tuesday April 02 2019, @11:37PM
I'm not the AC, but cities just aren't to my taste. The things they have to offer aren't the things that I care about in life. I can appreciate them and enjoy them for a while, but after a few days they grow boring to me. But drop me in a forest and I'll be happy as a clam. Never bored in a forest. I'm happy to sit on a rock (or in a tree) for hours at a time without moving. If it's snowing too, well, that's pretty much how I picture heaven.
But I bet that most people would find my "happy place" intolerably dull. Send them to a place like Sequoia National Park and they'll come away amazed by the experience and talk about how great it was. But they won't feel any desire to go back ever again. And even if they do go to see some other national parks or forests, after a while they won't want to go to any more. "I've seen enough trees and lakes and mountains," they'll say. "I don't need to see any more." That's... not something I would ever say. But it is exactly how I feel about cities.
Different strokes, etc. Mainly I wish that people who love cities so much would stop trying to make me love them, too. I've been to probably every great city in the East. I promise that I know what I'm missing (and I don't miss it).
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 02 2019, @11:55PM
You have pigeons, squirrels, mice, skunks, and rats. That is boring, except for the skunks, but that is the wrong kind of non-boring.
(Score: 3, Informative) by AthanasiusKircher on Wednesday April 03 2019, @01:55AM (2 children)
Wait -- I'm confused. This is a site devoted to nerdiness and geekiness and many people here are more than a bit anti-pop culture. We don't care about what the average person likes or pays attention to and we're proud of it.
And somehow you think the fact the NYC is populous (and also implicitly popular) is supposed to be impressive? Lemmings don't impress me either.
Economically important, I'll grant you. But you couldn't pay me enough to live in NYC. Smelly, overcrowded, overly expensive, people who act like jerks. I mean no offense -- to each his own. And I have lived in other large cities. But there's very little interesting to me in New York. If I had to choose a weekend (or week) in any city, I'd literally list hundreds before NYC. I have a very good friend who lives there (and loves it), and every time I visit him, I can't wait to leave. Oh, did I mention the insufferable cheerleaders who just LOVE New York? My friend seems to love texting me about how he's on some random train going to who-cares-where. No, I don't live in NYC, so I don't know how the blah-blah train runs, nor do I give a crap, and I find the fact that you act as if every person on the planet should know the NYC subway schedule to be annoying.
Again, more power to people who live there. Let them be happy. But it's perfectly valid to think NY is boring... Lots of people who don't live there find it to be so. Sorry to burst your bubble. (And no, I'm not trolling. This is really how I feel. Yes, you can get just about anything in NYC, which is what makes it boring. It's just not as distinctive as most places...)
(Score: 3, Insightful) by takyon on Wednesday April 03 2019, @02:18AM
"New York is boring. And redundant." is a dumb troll opinion without any elaboration. At least you gave some reasons.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday April 03 2019, @03:08AM
the secret sauce of new york is its fractal quality. a given place or time might seem mundane or merely crowded, but if you look closer you discern whole new levels of complexity. in the two block walk to our subway stop we can move through 70 countries worth of languages, customs, cuisines, and languages and all of them moving along in their own little bubbles. if you ever saw that movie "valerian and the city of ten thousand planets", that's sort of the effect.
i do also agree with schad upthread, though. nature is fractal also, and endlessly complex for those who care to look.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 03 2019, @03:35AM
Your fellow Soylentils disagree.
This is the most commented story currently on the front page.
Hmmm...I guess everyone (except you) is boring and redundant too.
Okay everybody! We're redundant. Let's go and leave AC to the site all by himself.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 02 2019, @09:51PM (22 children)
This won't stop 1%ers from driving their SUVs to Saks to pick up another Gucci bag, but it will be a heavy burden on poor African American busboys and Puerto Rican housekeepers driving to work.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 02 2019, @09:55PM
American cities have no future.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by c0lo on Tuesday April 02 2019, @09:58PM (2 children)
Cool. Let just trade/utility vehicles and public transport inside the city. Problem solved. Or not?
How would you deal with it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 4, Interesting) by MostCynical on Tuesday April 02 2019, @10:25PM (1 child)
Delivery vehicles only after 7pm and before 7pm, any bypass roads or tunnels under the city should be free (don't penalise the people who are not going into the congested area)
Provide decent, secure, minimal cost/free parking outside the congested area, with good/regular/cheap public transport
Provide decent, secure, minimal cost/free parking near transport hubs, again with good/regular/cheap public transport
Make public transport free (stop pretending it should be "cost neutral" within itself -factor in effiiency, improved qualit of life, environmental improvements, etc etc.)
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 3, Interesting) by FatPhil on Tuesday April 02 2019, @11:31PM
Tick - I forget the exact hours, but it's early and late
Tick - There exists such parking, but at the moment it's the free market providing that, not "provided" /per se/.
Most of a Tick - Not too many hubs to consider - but air and rail are covered by the above. Not so sure about the busses and arterial roads (I don't use them, I'm already in the centre), but given that there's space closer to the centre, there's probably space further from the centre.
Tick - it's a trick to divert national taxes into the regional economy, but it works for me!
OK, we're small, at nearly 500000 people (we have loads of non-residents in town at all times of year), but none of the above happened by chance, it was a clear "this makes sense in the long run, let's do it even if there's a one-time hit" attitude. Those who say "the rich will not be affected, the poor will be punished" have missed the fact that transport policy is a wider subject with the factors you list and more, and then if correctly implemented, the non-rich will measurably benefit (as measured in person-miles-per-hour, and many other metrics). The rich might even be persuaded to adopt healthier means of transport. I still don't have a car, this system works so well for me. Ditto the majority of my educated and professional close friends.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 02 2019, @10:00PM (15 children)
While I understand your sentiment it just so happens to be pure stupidity. You have to be decently well off to afford a car in NY, no bussers or housekeepers will be driving to work. Is this tax good or bad? I'm not sure, but it sure won't hurt the lower paid workers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 02 2019, @10:16PM (3 children)
So you're saying poor people should never aspire to driving out to the country on the weekend? Robert Moses is spinning in his grave.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 02 2019, @10:37PM
Why should they? Only dirt, trees and Runaways. You can always fly over them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 02 2019, @11:10PM
When they are well off enough to have a car in NY they probably won't mind the tax. Well, unless they're Free Thinkers(TM).
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 03 2019, @02:57AM
Robert Moses *caused* many of the congestion problems in New York.
He was a piece of shit who should be exhumed, shat upon and tossed unceremoniously into the nearest landfill.
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Wednesday April 03 2019, @12:21AM (8 children)
...what about someone from outside the city, who has reason to come into the city? Medical, shopping, visiting friends or family, etc.?
Just because one drives in a city does not mean that one lives there.
--
Had a seriously bad moment at the store today...
When the cashier said "strip down, facing me",
apparently, she meant my credit card.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 03 2019, @03:10AM (4 children)
Depending on where you live, there are commuter rail/bus lines ( https://mta.info [mta.info] , https://njtransit.com [njtransit.com] ) that will take you right into the heart of Manhattan. Once there, there are local trains and buses (as well as for-hire bicycles [citibikenyc.com]) that can get you pretty much anywhere you want within the 4-6 square mile area covered by congestion pricing. Given that NYC is ~302 square miles in area [wikipedia.org], this is not a huge deal.
During a normal work day, the area of Manhattan below 60th Street (which is the *only* area covered by congestion pricing) more than doubles in population. If you look it up, the population of Manhattan *doubles* from 1.6 million to more than three million with all the commuters. However, a good chunk (more than half, IIRC) of that 1.6 million lives above 60th street.
As such, that area is incredibly crowded. And getting as many cars out of the area as possible would be a blessing for just about everyone. Those who live in areas not served by the NYC subway can drive their cars to commuter rail, express bus and subway stations outside the *tiny* area covered by congestion pricing and use public transportation.
What's more, the folks who will drive anyway will help to maintain and improve the public transportation infrastructure.
It's a good plan that is supported by the vast majority of NYers. Don't like it? Don't come to NYC. You won't be missed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 03 2019, @04:17PM (1 child)
Today it is proposed as 4-6 square miles. Tomorrow?
I don't know if the proposal has provisions for disabled persons? If it does, cool. Otherwise try maneuvering 2 miles in an unpowered wheelchair or on crutches, then reevaluate how huge a deal it is.
Never planned to before. Don't plan to now. Don't want the area I live in to be contaminated with stupid ideas from elsewhere in the US, either. (And it's differences like this which will stoke the fires of the civil war to come....)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 03 2019, @04:38PM
Good. We don't need or want you in NYC anyway. We already have enough morons and don't need any more.
Go ahead and cower like a frightened child in your bunker/cave waiting for the civil war. Assuming you're still alive, someone will let you know when it's safe to come out. The rest of won't miss you.
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Wednesday April 03 2019, @11:47PM (1 child)
I'm well aware. I spent a number of my formative years growing up in Manhattan. I used the heck out of the subway, too, as did my sister.
However, I also spent a number of those years living in eastern PA, where driving the 70 or so (don't recall exactly) miles into NYC meant "car" no matter how much you wanted it otherwise. So we drove. We spent our money at the museums, the shops, down on "electronics row" and in the district where you can buy fabric. We did take advantage of the subway, but we had a place to go — we parked at my sister's apartment on 171st street and took the subway (168th street station A or AA, or sometimes the 1 IRT) from there. Most people won't have a place like that to anchor them.
Every penny mattered. Everything that made it more expensive would have made it less often.
Later, having moved a bit, we had bus access into port authority, however driving into the city a car took 45 minutes, and going by bus took several hours as the Shortline bus (apparently) followed an algorithm to find the absolute longest distance between just a few points. It was an awful ride.
From Port Jervis NY, my father commuted on Erie-Lackawanna (long defunct now) passenger trains into Manhattan to work. Which was good, because that's the only place you could get on that train in the region. I still model the Erie-Lackawanna in n gauge. And I have an engineer's hat, a stock certificate, and some patches, too. 😊
So while I'm certainly with you on the (very high) general value of mass transport, it can be done well (NY subway FTW) but it can also be done poorly, and any presumption that it reaches very far out of NYC in a comprehensive manner is simply wrong. It would be great if it did, of course.
However, I don't see turning Manhattan into a place where you have to have more spare money to drive as a reasonable solution. There are all kinds of people out there; some of them will find this a negligible load, some won't. Public spaces, IMHO, should be aimed at the public. Not the wealthy.
--
Calculus... the agony and dx/dc.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 04 2019, @01:07AM
It's not, and never has been, about advantaging wealthier people. It's about the smog, the traffic and the incredibly overcrowded streets filled with cars that has a negative effect on the quality of life for people who *live* there. Shall we prioritize visitors to your town over the residents too?
NYC, as you obviously know, is not some sort of theme park for suburbanites to come and play. That said, many do, and that's just fine. And there exists an enormous infrastructure (trains and buses) to bring those folks in and out of NYC.
It's an actual city where people live and work. Are you suggesting that the people who live in NYC should be made to suffer through insane traffic congestion for the benefit of the bridge and tunnel crowd [wikipedia.org]?
What's more, the *50 mile* radius around NYC has a full 10% (~30,000,000) of the US population living within it. Within that 50 mile radius, there is, as I mentioned, a *huge* infrastructure for moving folks in and out of NYC.
Out where you were in Eastern PA, you could always (and still can), drive to a NJ Transit station and park (for free, no less) and get into NYC without clogging up the streets. Or you could go to Philadelphia and clog up *their* streets.
Just to make sure I understand, your argument is that since there are folks who can't *conveniently* get mass transit into NYC near their homes nearly 100 miles away, the residents of NYC should have to deal with traffic congestion that essentially makes much of midtown and downtown Manhattan a parking lot for a good portion of each day.
Is that about the size of it?
Thankfully, most NYers disagree with you, and I will be much happier once the congestion pricing plan goes into effect.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 03 2019, @10:12PM (2 children)
What about them? Should we prioritize people who drive cars from out of town over those who live in the city?
By your logic, if bulldozing *your* house makes it easier for folks from out of town to come to where you live, you'd be okay with that right?
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Wednesday April 03 2019, @11:07PM (1 child)
No. Nor should you prioritize people with money.
--
Say it with flowers - Send a Triffid.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 04 2019, @12:45AM
That's quite a non-sequitur you've got there. Good show!
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday April 03 2019, @02:42AM (1 child)
not so. many regular people have cars. more in staten island, brooklyn, queens, and the bronx than manhattan, but even there you don't have to be rich to own a car. in manhattan, though, you need a designated parking spot in a garage (well, from the upper east and west sides down). north of central park and in the other boroughs you can get by moving your car once or twice a week for alternate side parking; it's just really annoying.
even lower income people can afford cars. they often don't have student loans and live in rent-controlled apartments, so they can swing a car payment.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 03 2019, @03:13AM
in manhattan, though, you need a designated parking spot in a garage (well, from the upper east and west sides down).
At rates that range from $800-2500/month. That's rent money (and not car parking space rent) most places.
And anyone who owns a car in NYC knows that taking the car to the area in question (unless you're disabled) is a far inferior solution to using public transportation.
Stay in Brooklyn, Phoenix. Nobody wants you in Manhattan anyway. In fact, you're the reason I moved out of Carroll Gardens.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 03 2019, @12:25AM
SJW's are the most racist assholes on the planet and can't go 5 minutes of their day without bringing up race. Apparently all busboys and housekeepers are poor, noble minorities just trying to get along while every rich person is evil and thoughtless. No wonder they're so wretched and miserable all the time, they believe their own bullshit.
(Score: 2) by Nuke on Thursday April 04 2019, @12:29PM
I take it this was meant to be funny. Poor people cannot afford cars, it is part of the definition of being poor.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 02 2019, @10:01PM (12 children)
The NY Metropolitan area [wikipedia.org] is one of the few areas in the US where mass transit is actually pretty good.
The traffic congestion in the area addressed by the new pricing plan is famously awful, as is evidenced by Don't block the box [trafficlawyer.com] and Don't even *think* about parking here [alamy.com] signs.
The smart part is that revenue from this plan will be used to repair and enhance public transportation. This will enable more people to use it. Those who have more money than sense will continue to drive their automobiles into Manhattan. To those people, I say "thank you!" They are doing their part to improve public transportation.
But that's not enough. The other issue is with *double-parked cars/trucks*. The current fine for this is the same (US$115.00) as for blocking a fire hydrant. Increase that by a factor of ten or so and that will relieve congestion even more.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Tuesday April 02 2019, @10:04PM (2 children)
That's a great sign.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 02 2019, @10:40PM
Rapture's coming or what?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 03 2019, @09:43PM
If you like that one, you'll *love* this one [pics.me.me]. I know I do. :)
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Tuesday April 02 2019, @10:27PM
Definitely about time [nydailynews.com], assuming it's not actually a race against time before the subways flood.
(Score: 2) by legont on Wednesday April 03 2019, @01:15AM (5 children)
Meantime some NJ folks are proposing to charge NY drivers for entering our Green State and use the proceeds to improve NJ public transportation and stimulate businesses moving from NY.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 03 2019, @02:49AM (1 child)
You mean in addition to charging NY residents who work in your "green state" (have you ever been to Carlstadt? Yuck!) income tax?
(Score: 2) by legont on Wednesday April 03 2019, @11:14PM
NY has the most aggressive tax law for nonresidents. Even if an employee does not spend a second on the island, she has to pay taxes if she stays out for "convenience". https://www.hodgsonruss.com/newsroom-publications-NewYork_srevisedconvenienceruleprovidessomeclarity.html [hodgsonruss.com]
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday April 03 2019, @02:54AM (2 children)
hmm, i see the flaw in your plan: new yorkers already avoid jersey like the plague.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by legont on Wednesday April 03 2019, @11:07PM (1 child)
First of all, it is not my plan. Having said that, any plan that would keep New Yorkers confined to their island is fine with me. I trust Pennsylvania will provide the second line of defense against both.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Thursday April 04 2019, @12:53AM
yeah, man, ok. but i am chortling at the suggestion that new yorkers want to go to jersey. they don't. the only reason they step foot there is because it is in the way of getting to everything else. as it is, we make it a rule to never get off the highway until we hit the Pennsylvania border.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday April 03 2019, @02:52AM (1 child)
they can't run many more trains and buses through lower manhattan than they already do. during rush hour those are packed. there's not much more capacity to be found in mass transit. bike commuting can absorb some more, especially if people use folding bikes (so theft and parking won't become an issue). however, soon they'll have to do something more drastic like people movers at ground level or elevated trains/monorails in addition to subways, bikes and buses.
you are right about double parking and delivery vehicles. fines are a cheap way to go. designated delivery zones every block might help. but maybe delivery drones or conveyor belts are the long-term answer.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 03 2019, @03:19AM
Actually, if the MTA ever gets its act together and installs a modern signaling (you know, more recent than 1904 [wikipedia.org]) system, they could run *lots* more trains and increase capacity significantly.
As it stands now (as you know, or should -- stand at the front of the first car sometime), trains must keep *two* green lights (generally ~1000 feet) between each other.
(Score: 0, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 02 2019, @10:59PM (4 children)
If you want socialism, just come out and say it. I'm really getting sick of this damn dancing around the issue.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 03 2019, @01:32AM (1 child)
Aw come on AoC chasing off Amazon isn't THAT bad. /s
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 03 2019, @02:50AM
Wow. PT Barnum was right about you!
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-amazon/ [snopes.com]
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 03 2019, @03:26AM
WTF are you blathering on about?
This is about the absolutely horrendous traffic congestion in Midtown and Downtown Manhattan.
And guess who works [wikipedia.org]/lives [trulia.com] in those areas? Is it those noble savages, the poor? Not so much [incomebyzipcode.com].
If you're going to spout off, perhaps you might actually have some clue as to what you're going on about, rather than making yourself look ignorant.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 03 2019, @04:04PM
Yeah if we say socialism then you can have a temper tantrum. Viewing the transit system as roads for the rich and public for the poor is the problem.
"Awl dis bike lanes and deez fees you shove down my throat and make me pay for when I drive a caah across the riva every morning"
Yeah and the dude's sedan takes up enough room to move 10 people around the city plus he's in the way of people making more responsible decisions.
If someone is too lazy to figure out how to reclaim hours of their day spent driving and paying for their trip to work then we're going to expect they don't like change.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 03 2019, @03:29AM (2 children)
Congestion charges: a sign the city is literally full.
Relocate your business, employment, or entertainment options if possible.
NYC is not the center of the universe, although NYCers may think it is. Seek greener pastures; the city doesn't want you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 03 2019, @03:41AM
Actually, it's ~4-6 square miles of the ~302 square miles which constitutes NYC. And in those 4-6 square miles, you'll find the headquarters of most of the Fortune 50.
So yes, that area is pretty crowded. What about the other 296 square miles? Is that full too?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 03 2019, @04:36PM
No, it's a sign the city is too full for cars. This isn't surprising. Cars are a very space-inefficient method of transportation. They work for rural areas or less dense suburbs, but they are a major waste of space in a city.