Last post on Nov 17, 2012 at 7:14 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views-Archives
What is this discussion about?
#40 of 79 Re: here in San Francisco [fezo]
Apr 08, 2008 (7:44 pm)
Yes, but at least they defined an area. The SF proposal only defines a road that will carry the charge.
Even if they manage to get the idea to fly in its current form, which is highly unlikely, they won't succeed in their goal because people will just cross two bridges to reach the City, thereby bypassing the surcharge (and still saving money, even though they have to pay two bridge tolls). They need to delineate an area which represents the toll zone, regardless of which direction you enter it from.
And they are chasing those same federal funds here with this cockamamey plan that it sounds like they are in NY.
And of course, the folks that would be impacted by the fee in its current form are the only ones NOT living in a part of the bay with train access to downtown. Brilliant. There is ferry service, so maybe they see that as an acceptable substitute.
And folks who actually live in SF will never have to pay the fee. I believe with the London plan even city residents that live outside the zone pay the fee if they enter the zone.
One final note: in SF we have already made the parking so limited and so expensive that most workday commuters ALREADY use the trains and buses. That might be a better approach to reducing congestion than this charge, which makes things difficult for tourists and the like. Tourism is an important component of the economy in San Francisco.
#41 of 79 Re: Congestion Pricing: DOA [michaell]
Apr 09, 2008 (2:41 pm)
"...And New York's loss is (possibly) Colorado's gain..."
Wrong! If the whole congestion pricing scam was just chasing federal dollars we all lose. Where does federal funding come from? Our pockets! It's just a different pocket they are stealing it from. I am just amazed that people still think that there is free government money.
#42 of 79 Re: here in San Francisco [nippononly]
Apr 10, 2008 (7:41 am)
One final note: in SF we have already made the parking so limited and so expensive that most workday commuters ALREADY use the trains and buses. That might be a better approach to reducing congestion than this charge, which makes things difficult for tourists and the like.
Agree. When there is enough congestion, the price of gas is high-enough, and the private sector prices parking based on congestion factors, you have sufficient factors to deter more people from entering an area in cars.
Government and its added costs are not needed. I think congestion is just another issue that government thinks they need to intervene in, and a method to increase their revenues and find jobs for their cronies.
Personally I already avoid going into Boston due to the traffic and expenses. Why would we want the government in our wallets again? That is masochistic.
#43 of 79 free bus rides are back
by Stever@Edmunds HOST
May 28, 2010 (9:07 pm)
“Any balanced analysis will surely prove that the taxpayer actually pays, for every person who chooses to drive to and from work in his own car, an indirect subsidy at least 10 times as great as the indirect subsidy now paid the mass-transit rider.”
The Man Who Could Unsnarl Manhattan Traffic (Wired)
#44 of 79 Re: free bus rides are back [steve_]
by MrShift@Edmunds HOST
May 29, 2010 (6:10 am)
That is *very* interesting but also a bit chilling in that we have all seen what sometimes happens when you take an Excel spreadsheet and apply it to real life.
There is a kind of "emergent intelligence" to big city life that I don't think can be captured by statistical analysis. "it" works out its best solutions.
#45 of 79 Re: free bus rides are back [steve_]
May 29, 2010 (2:10 pm)
How many people does the NYC mass transit system move each day? How many people personally drive within or thru NYC? One more question - what would it could cost today to build and staff the NYC mass-transit system?
OK take those numbers now and figure out how much it would cost to provide everyone in NYC public transportation. Would that number be $100B, to get mass transit up to the task in NYC? Plus $10B/year to run it?
What happens to the NYC transit system when the 1st terrorist bomb goes off in it? It seems just a matter of time. The system is crippled, and the added security would make the screening of that many additional people impossible.
#46 of 79 Re: free bus rides are back [kernick]
by MrShift@Edmunds HOST
May 29, 2010 (3:04 pm)
There is no sure defense against terrorism. That's why they call it "terrorism".
#47 of 79 Re: free bus rides are back [Mr_Shiftright]
May 30, 2010 (4:27 am)
Right. My point there is mass transit is a centralized system, and as such is susceptible to terrorist attack - all your eggs in 1-basket analogies ... Privately owned and controlled vehicles do not have that issue.
I believe the government should separate the funding for roads, highways and bridges from mass transit, and allow each system to pay for itself. Then each system can pay its true costs to operate. I know here in NH we are paying quite a bit in gas-taxes, some of which goes for mass transit, and we may have a handful of buses operating in a few towns. So our gas tax money is going to support mass transit users in cities like Boston and NYC. But then again the state of Mass. should be reimbursing the fed. government for most of the cost overruns of the Big Dig.
#48 of 79 Re: free bus rides are back [kernick]
by MrShift@Edmunds HOST
May 30, 2010 (6:03 am)
Ah but then the oil companies should be made to pay for all the environmental costs associated with the selling of their product. That would probably drive up the price of gas to its true value in the USA, and by doing so, encourage mass transit development. This certainly seems to have happened in Europe, where mass transit is superb.
#49 of 79 Re: free bus rides are back [Mr_Shiftright]
May 30, 2010 (9:08 am)
Do European fuel prices really have to do with the "costs" of oil, or simply as a way to subsidize the fantastic public transit network?
That thought being said, gas would have to cost 4x as much here as in Europe to get anything like the transit networks they have, as residential development has been so thoughtlessly distant from commerce for so many decades.