Ask the Car People.SM


Congestion Pricing - Are you for or against it? - READ ONLY

79 messages,  Last post on Nov 17, 2012 at 8:14 AM

You are in the Automotive News & Views-Archives Forum.

What is this discussion about? Automotive News

Messages Page 1 of 8

#1 of 79 Congestion Pricing: Are you for or against it? by Mr_Shiftright HOST

Jul 16, 2007 (7:43 am)

It seems that New York City's mayor is very keen on the idea of using "congestion pricing" to alleviate traffic snarls and pollution in the Big Apple.
 
READ IT HERE
 
Would such a plan in your city change your habits or would you just grit your teeth and fork over the $$$? Do you resent such interference and taxation or do you find it "fair enough" and a reasonable solution to a growing problem?
 
MrShiftright
Visiting Host

#2 of 79 Re: Congestion Pricing: Are you for or against it? [Mr_Shiftright] by steve_ HOST

Jul 16, 2007 (7:49 am)

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Jul 16, 2007 7:43 am)
It seems to be working in parts of London where, like NY, there's a good public transportation system in place. Driving in Manhattan is fun, once.

#3 of 79 Love it by john_324

Jul 16, 2007 (9:52 am)

From an economist's pov, it's a perfect solution to the all too-frequent problem known as "the tradegy of the commons", as well as a great example of the Coase theorem in action.
 
It's not appropriate for all areas obviously (those w/o decent public transportation esp.), but for major urban zones, it's a great idea.

#4 of 79 Re: Love it [john_324] by Mr_Shiftright HOST

Jul 16, 2007 (9:56 am)

Replying to: john_324 (Jul 16, 2007 9:52 am)
Yes it might serve to penalize those who can't afford it IF they live in an area with poor public transportation. In San Francisco for instance, the BART system is very efficient but "doesn't go where you need to be"....it is designed strictly to transport workers into the financial district. The MUNI bus system is pretty bad in San Fran. So for someone commuting to a job in San Francisco other than in the narrow BART corridor, you're screwed.
 
Of course, Los Angeles public transportation is pathetic.
 
In New York City however, I could see where the lower income driver would find public transportation a reasonable alternative and very workable.

#5 of 79 Re: Love it [Mr_Shiftright] by john_324

Jul 16, 2007 (10:30 am)

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Jul 16, 2007 9:56 am)
And add to the complexity that if it *does* work, governments need to take the impact of the subsitution toward public transportation into account...otherwise, the congestion on the buses, rails, etc. gets as bad as it was on the roads.
 
We're nearing that where I live, in Washington, D.C.

#6 of 79 Re: Congestion Pricing: Are you for or against it? [Mr_Shiftright] by tpe

Jul 16, 2007 (11:00 am)

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Jul 16, 2007 7:43 am)
I think it's a great idea, primarily because it's been proven to be effective. However I will be very surprised if it gets implemented. It will face the same objections that higher fuel taxes face. The claim will be that it represents a regressive tax on the poor and now only the rich can afford to drive in Manhattan. So we're left with this paralysis when it comes to addressing problems. The solution must be completely fair, which is impossible.

#7 of 79 Re: Congestion Pricing: Are you for or against it? [tpe] by Mr_Shiftright HOST

Jul 16, 2007 (11:10 am)

Replying to: tpe (Jul 16, 2007 11:00 am)
You could look at it as a way to torture the rich. I'm not sure driving in Manhattan is a privilege...it's just a bad habit IMO.
 
It strikes me as similar to the premium you pay to fly First Class on American Airlines...you are still screwed but you have a nicer seat and real knives and forks. Whoopie.
 
It's not like the well to do are being chauffered to Manhattan in limos or anything.

#8 of 79 Re: Congestion Pricing: Are you for or against it? [Mr_Shiftright] by john_324

Jul 16, 2007 (11:23 am)

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Jul 16, 2007 11:10 am)
And the detractors have to remember that the goal here is lessening congestion overall, not changing who's causing it.
 
If lower-income drivers don't have to pay for instance, that'll mean the streets will still be gridlocked, just with second-hand Toyotas instead of new BMWs. Is that really any better for anyone?
 
There's likely a way to give poorer drivers who genuinely need to drive (like those under a certain income level commuting from Manhattan to a job in a 'burb) a break w/o screwing unduly with the incentives of the system.

#9 of 79 Re: Congestion Pricing: Are you for or against it? [Mr_Shiftright] by tpe

Jul 16, 2007 (11:30 am)

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Jul 16, 2007 11:10 am)
The perception will be that this $8 or $21 fee will be inconsequential to the rich. They have now effectively eliminated the riff-raff from their streets so it is more convenient for them to get around.
 
That's not the way I see it. If it's effective then the people removed from the streets will be the less affluent, meaning they aren't being taxed at all. If in return they are provided with better public transportation then this will have been paid for by the more affluent. Hard to call that regressive.
 
I do believe that driving will soon be perceived as more of a luxury than it is today. That's the way it started out. In fact I believe that the high fuel taxes paid in Europe were original considered a luxury tax because only rich people could afford cars.

#10 of 79 Re: Congestion Pricing: Are you for or against it? [john_324] by steve_ HOST

Jul 16, 2007 (11:35 am)

Replying to: john_324 (Jul 16, 2007 11:23 am)
Residents could be given an exemption or charged a partial fee.
 
Seems like the streets around Central Park are jammed with taxis and a few limos. I suppose you can get some work done in a limo, and you'll certainly have ample opportunity to bill some hours with the gridlock that you see there.

Messages Page 1 of 8

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement