Not really, no. Walking is not as damaging to people and infrastructure and thus doesn't cost the city and the taxpayer as much. So, a rather bad comparison. Traffic is a problem, that needs fixing. The old solutions didn't work out, so we should try to experiment. I still have to look into it a bit more, but Singapore seems to have had success with it. So why not try it out here as well?
it's just another money grab. it's a nother toll .another bill to pay to the city. we already have city and state taxes taken out of our paychecks to pay for road maintenance ,garbage pick up,fire ,police ect. ...all the city services. then we all pay to renew our driver's license,we all pay to register our vehicle and pass inspection and we pay all the maintenance on our vehicles ,oil changes,brakes,ect. when we go over a bridge or go through a tunnel we pay that toll. ........ like i said earlier just another money grab............
You've missed the whole point congestion pricing which is to send a price signal to the market in order to maximize the productive use of the road. When roads are congested, capacity can easily be cut in half which reduces opportunity for people to use the road. Therefore, if you want to use the road, you should pay a price based on the aggregate demand and more people will be able to use the road in a given period of time. If the demand is below the capacity of the road, the toll would be zero because the existing capacity isn't causing congestion. This increases opportunity, increases productivity of street bus networks, speeds up deliveries, reduces time for emergency vehicles, enables more infill development because the number one complaint of new development is congestion. It's a slam dunk policy and should be implemented everywhere.
Anyone wanting to charge you for the “freedom” to travel in an area after you’ve paid for the car, the gas, the registration, the insurance and the road can burn in hell.
Roads are a public space. When a city is clogging up from car usage, despite there being good alternatives, as there are in NYC or London, the city needs to find other solutions to lower driving. One solution is to price the driving to the congested city center, so less people use the car to drive there.
@@succerberg84 NYC transit is rising in crime ppl have no choice but to use their cars and MTA has a long history of corruption and stealing money from hard working people. They aren't going to fix those decrepit looking stations
@@vladimirlamousnery6418 As a non car owner you don’t buy gas. So you don’t (at least in most US states) subsidize my freedom to drive. The real question is why am I paying gas taxes which contributes to the maintaining of roads that you, a non gas purchaser, use for the delivery of your food and (presumptively) public transportation?
The Singapore example is a disgusting example of tyrannical government power, $50,000 just for the right to operate a vehicle? The author is a firm believer in government controlling citizens freedoms, regardless of the cost. Also Manhattan and Singapore are very different. While there is Manhattan congestion most New Yorkers realize the true reason for congestion pricing, The MTA will be the beneficiary. The MTA has wasted billions of taxpayer money on new construction and repair projects. Studies have shown that the cost of constructing 1 new mile of Subway track in NY is more than anywhere else in the world. I am positive there are better engineering ideas to control congestion than this MTA money grab and restriction on freedom of movement.
Their are better ways to get people to stop driving all of which include increased funding to mass transit and as you stated previously the mta "mismanages" its money so we got keep pumping it with more until their issues are resolved
@@vladimirlamousnery6418 That goes on in almost every part of the world within government and private industry. People that work and pay taxes pay for others who don't or can't. Health Insurance etc. Home owners property insurance subsidize schools, pays for police and fire protection, maintains roads, and funds other municipal services enjoyed by all residents. A home owner may not have children, They still fund education.
Your statement is very funny, considering the current dominance of cars as the dominant means of transportation is due to government control and infringement of peoples freedoms. Looking at historical pictures of cities before and after they received more car infrastructure really puts this into perspective. Entire City blocks leveled and people unwillingly displaced to make room for roads... So it's rather ironic, that car owners are the first to cry about their personal freedoms being taken away, when their privileges were built on top of exactly that.
@@adh615 Your statement is hilarious. Want to drive, Drive in a free society with individual liberties. Do not want to, You do not. Government is not charging you for being a pedestrian however drivers are charged.
Those cities shown look awful. Large steerts, small sidewalks
Keeps certain skin colors off the road. Got it.
Basically it’s a tax that only the wealthier class can afford to drive .
No it’s not, in Sweden, the tolls only get up to a few dollars at peak demand.
Soon they’ll charge you a congestion charge for just walking down the street. This is plain stupid
Not really, no. Walking is not as damaging to people and infrastructure and thus doesn't cost the city and the taxpayer as much. So, a rather bad comparison.
Traffic is a problem, that needs fixing. The old solutions didn't work out, so we should try to experiment. I still have to look into it a bit more, but Singapore seems to have had success with it. So why not try it out here as well?
it's just another money grab. it's a nother toll .another bill to pay to the city. we already have city and state taxes taken out of our paychecks to pay for road maintenance ,garbage pick up,fire ,police ect. ...all the city services. then we all pay to renew our driver's license,we all pay to register our vehicle and pass inspection and we pay all the maintenance on our vehicles ,oil changes,brakes,ect. when we go over a bridge or go through a tunnel we pay that toll. ........ like i said earlier just another money grab............
You've missed the whole point congestion pricing which is to send a price signal to the market in order to maximize the productive use of the road. When roads are congested, capacity can easily be cut in half which reduces opportunity for people to use the road. Therefore, if you want to use the road, you should pay a price based on the aggregate demand and more people will be able to use the road in a given period of time. If the demand is below the capacity of the road, the toll would be zero because the existing capacity isn't causing congestion. This increases opportunity, increases productivity of street bus networks, speeds up deliveries, reduces time for emergency vehicles, enables more infill development because the number one complaint of new development is congestion. It's a slam dunk policy and should be implemented everywhere.
Anyone wanting to charge you for the “freedom” to travel in an area after you’ve paid for the car, the gas, the registration, the insurance and the road can burn in hell.
Roads are a public space. When a city is clogging up from car usage, despite there being good alternatives, as there are in NYC or London, the city needs to find other solutions to lower driving. One solution is to price the driving to the congested city center, so less people use the car to drive there.
At the moment I pay for your freedom. It cost's the city every time you drive.
@@succerberg84 NYC transit is rising in crime ppl have no choice but to use their cars and MTA has a long history of corruption and stealing money from hard working people. They aren't going to fix those decrepit looking stations
Why should me a non car owner subsidize your "freedom"
@@vladimirlamousnery6418 As a non car owner you don’t buy gas. So you don’t (at least in most US states) subsidize my freedom to drive. The real question is why am I paying gas taxes which contributes to the maintaining of roads that you, a non gas purchaser, use for the delivery of your food and (presumptively) public transportation?
Not needed in NYC
It's definitely needed in New York City.
@@cliffpadilla5871 why give money to the most wasteful agency in NYS history.
The Singapore example is a disgusting example of tyrannical government power, $50,000 just for the right to operate a vehicle?
The author is a firm believer in government controlling citizens freedoms, regardless of the cost.
Also Manhattan and Singapore are very different.
While there is Manhattan congestion most New Yorkers realize the true reason for congestion pricing, The MTA will be the beneficiary.
The MTA has wasted billions of taxpayer money on new construction and repair projects. Studies have shown that the cost of constructing 1 new mile of Subway track in NY is more than anywhere else in the world.
I am positive there are better engineering ideas to control congestion than this MTA money grab and restriction on freedom of movement.
Their are better ways to get people to stop driving all of which include increased funding to mass transit and as you stated previously the mta "mismanages" its money so we got keep pumping it with more until their issues are resolved
Secondly why should the non car owners be forced to subsidizes your car use
@@vladimirlamousnery6418 That goes on in almost every part of the world within government and private industry. People that work and pay taxes pay for others who don't or can't. Health Insurance etc. Home owners property insurance subsidize schools, pays for police and fire protection, maintains roads, and funds other municipal services enjoyed by all residents.
A home owner may not have children, They still fund education.
Your statement is very funny, considering the current dominance of cars as the dominant means of transportation is due to government control and infringement of peoples freedoms. Looking at historical pictures of cities before and after they received more car infrastructure really puts this into perspective. Entire City blocks leveled and people unwillingly displaced to make room for roads...
So it's rather ironic, that car owners are the first to cry about their personal freedoms being taken away, when their privileges were built on top of exactly that.
@@adh615 Your statement is hilarious.
Want to drive, Drive in a free society with individual liberties.
Do not want to, You do not.
Government is not charging you for being a pedestrian however drivers are charged.