Despite serious and ongoing questions about the wisdom of London's Congestion Charge, and popular opposition to importing the scheme to the Big Apple, The New York Times will not let the damn thing go. Not with the deadline for $350m in federal funds (i.e. your tax money) about to expire. At least this time the Op Ed folk aren't claiming that the congestion charge is anything more than a cash grab. Well, at least not initially… "Mass Transit Needs Congestion Pricing" begins by revealing that The Metropolitan Transportation Authority says it will need– yes need– $29.5b over the next five years for "improvements." The paper then argues that "New York [mass transit] riders pay a considerably higher share of the cost of mass transit than riders in other cities. Fares for buses, subways and commuter rails increased again this week to help pay the M.T.A.’s operating costs. It is time for New York drivers to help carry the burden. Congestion pricing fees can produce significant and recurring new money for mass transit’s capital expenses." Oh and "Congestion pricing, of course, has many other virtues. New Yorkers would enjoy the health and economic benefits of less gridlock and tailpipe emissions — and faster commutes." Riiiiiight. Just like they do in London.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
I guess times are tough for Road Warrior Animal after his illustrious wrestling career winded down. He’s been reduced to riding the subway! People say he never recovered from the death of Hawk.
The picture is funny, but I know some who believe those are the only type of people that ride mass transit.
I hate their assertion that drivers should be forced into paying a tax to pay for something they obviously won’t use, and then salve the wound by saying “but good things might happen.”
But wait. If more people do decide to use mass transit and drive less, doesn’t that mean NYC collects less tax? Shouldn’t they be telling people to drive more? What’s wrong with people donating money if they want to help MT?
A major cause of the shortfall in funds for mass transit is politicians simultaneously holding down fares to please riders (who vote) while at the same time signing rather generous contracts with the labor unions whose workers operate the system (the workers vote and the unions provide cash and support around election time).
The congestion charge may work for New York City (although I would suggest that most other urban areas not get any ideas, as their downtowns could not survive this). But it should probably be considered more for its ability to reduce congestion than anything else. It’s not going to make a long-term dent in any mass transit funding shortfall.
Congestion pricing is such a bad idea. First of all, the congestion alone is enough to make driving in the city during the week so bad that you would only do it if you absolutely had to. It may reduce a bit of congestion at first, but only temporarily until richer people just fill in the gap. Just like how rental prices in Manhattan have risen to ridiculous amounts, so now mostly the rich live here. But the worst part of the plan is that our mass transit is already over capacity. There’s no room right now for any additional people on the subways. If this plan gets passed I think it will be a disaster. To do it right they really need to increase MTA capacity FIRST, then add some more discouragement to driving. I still think there are better ways to discourage driving than an extra price as you already pay $20-$40 per day to park your car in the business districts.
Where are all of the bleating bleeding-heart class warfare populists? Don’t they know that a congestion charge is a regressive form of taxation that disproportionately burdensome to lower-income families and makes it so that only rich people can afford to drive cars in the city?
At some point, even some of the die hards will wake up and move their companies out. Good thing too. The country’s financial industry is WAAAYYYY to centralised in NY.
The editorial board is like my brother in New York, rich liberal and perfectly willing to to impose higher taxes that will in no way whatsover inconvienance them. Many years ago he told me he paid 400 dollars a month to park his his car. Don’t know what it is now but this tax is nothing to the rich.
Can we just put up an FAQ that debunks all of the bogus arguments against congestion taxes in NYC? It’s getting tiresome having to post them. The “popular” opposition is from a handful of well-to-do non-New Yorkers who refuse to rub elbows with the unwashed masses on the train, and (most importantly) from politically connected city workers used to getting away with illegal – and free – parking courtesy of their official badges (whether or not their job actually requires access to a vehicle during the business day).
Oh right, I forgot that this site just opposes all taxes on driving whether or not they make sense.
brownie: Oh right, I forgot that this site just opposes all taxes on driving whether or not they make sense. TTAC is not a monolithic enterprise. Short of our anti-flaming posting policy, writers and commentators are free to express their opinions as they see fit. As you seem unwilling to take the time to express your point of view in detail here, I would be delighted to publish a pro-congestion charge editorial written at your convenience. Please contact me at robert.farago@thetruthaboutcars.com for the writer's guidelines.
As a NYC resident I can tell you that the NYC transit system is ALREADY operating at or above its total capacity.
There is NO room to add additonal serivce to cover additonal riders that congestion pricing would create.
NYC and NYS are run by a bunch of fools. I get the impression that they are desperate to get this congestion pricing passed before the next Census confirms just how many more residents have been added to NYC during our latest real estate boom and influx of immigrants.
Anyone that is familiar with the geographics of NYC and Manhattan know that this is “pie in the shy scheme” that will NOT work. What they are attempting to do is improve the quality of life for relativily few at the expense of the many communties that surround lower and mid-town Manhattan. THis scheme will not stop folks from driving into NYC for business or pleasure. For far too many communities around the NYC metro area public transportation is non-existant or extremely unreliable. What this scheme will do is create seroius traffic problem is other areas of teh city that do NOT have problems today. It will hurt property values for many and will pollute many residential area.
I grew up in southeast Queens serveral miles from Manhattan and even back in the 1970s we had many problems with people from outside of Queens and NYC using our neighborhood as a commuter parking lot.
What we will see is the price of service(messanger, deliverys, equipment repair, etc.) will all increase by about $10 to $20 dollars per job in Manhattan. An increase that will be passed on to the consumer.
brownie:
Are you from NYC?
whatdoiknow1: yes.
RF: Point taken. I will email you.
Samir,
That’s Shannon Moore. He’s much smaller than Animal.
I’d like to add that the following toll increases were put into effectas of March 2nd.
Verazanno Bridge – $9 (up $1)
Triboro, Throgs Neck, & Whitestone Bridges, Brooklyn Battery & Queens Midtown Tunnels – $5 (up from $4.50)
George Washington Bridge, Holland & Lincoln Tunnels – $8 (Up from $6)
MTA fare hikes:
7-day Metro Cards increased by $1 to $25
30-day Metro Cards increased by $5 to $81
So what we have here, in effect is the city getting you if you drive, and the city getting you if you ride.
Anyone that is familiar with the geographics of NYC and Manhattan know that this is “pie in the shy scheme” that will NOT work. What they are attempting to do is improve the quality of life for relativily few at the expense of the many communties that surround lower and mid-town Manhattan. THis scheme will not stop folks from driving into NYC for business or pleasure.
I’ve been trying to preach this from day one. Funny that people are all concerned about congestion in Manhattan, but could care less for people who live uptown, or in the Bronx or Staten Island where this traffic will be diverted if it works the way they wanted it to.
quasimondo:
Solution: add a lower price congestion zone around all of the boroughs.
What will that do besides pull additional money out of everybody’s pockets?
I’m joking, of course.
I just don’t buy your argument. Is the suggestion that people who drive into Manhattan from Long Island and Westchester because they don’t want to lower themselves to ride the LIRR or Metro North will instead drive 90% of the way to Manhattan, get off the highway, park their car in some neighborhood they don’t know in The Bronx or Queens, and then take the subway for a trip just as long as the train ride they were trying to avoid in the first place?
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/12/nyregion/12traffic.html?pagewanted=print
I don’t buy the argument that all of this commuter traffic is from people living out in Long Island and Westchester. Not when you have nearly twice as many drivers coming in from Queens than you have coming in from Nassau County. Interesting to note that the highest concentrations of commuter traffic originate in places where there is no subway service.
Ah, but New York City has about 550,000 government employees. According to that article, roughly 192,000 of them drive to work every day (citing their free parking as a reason). The article says that ~140,000 people drive in from the boroughs – how many of them do you think are city workers? I would guess the majority. I don’t think we’re supposed to craft policy to favor such a small special interest group. Besides, one of the benefits of reduced congestion will be the ability to improve and expand express bus service from the boroughs – this will address the problem with subway access.
As an aside, this means that over 70% of the total number of Manhattan workers driving in every day are city workers. Now you know where the “popular opposition” is coming from. Maybe congestion wouldn’t be an issue at all if they didn’t have their abominable “park anywhere, anytime” passes.
The paper then argues that “New York [mass transit] riders pay a considerably higher share of the cost of mass transit than riders in other cities. Fares for buses, subways and commuter rails increased again this week to help pay the M.T.A.’s operating costs. It is time for New York drivers to help carry the burden. Congestion pricing fees can produce significant and recurring new money for mass transit’s capital expenses.”
Yes, it would be wrong for the people who actually use it to pay for it. If mass transit is the only wise means of getting around, how come it isn’t self-supporting? Oh yeah, we’re all mind numbed robots who don’t know what’s good for us. Good thing people like the editors of the NY Times are around to tell us what we want/need.