←back to thread

437 points Vinnl | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.62s | source
Show context
jmyeet ◴[] No.43985407[source]
I was living in London when congestion pricing was introduced and went into the West End the day before and the first day of and the difference was night and day. The difference along Oxford Street, Regent's Street, Green Street, etc was astounding.

And in the 20+ years the evidence seems to back up how much of a net positive it has been.

NYC congestion pricing took way too long because the New York Democratic Party sucks and, as usual, legal efforts were made to block it, much as how well-intentioned laws like CEQA (designed to protect the environment) are actually just weaponized to block development of any kind.

What's so bizarre to me is how many people have strong opinions on NYC congestion pricing who have never been and will never go to NYC. Americans love the slippery slope argument. It's like "well, if they make driving cars slightly more expensive in Lower Manhattan then next the government is going to take away my gas-guzzling truck in Idaho".

What's also surprising is how many people who live in outer Queens and Brooklyn chose to drive into Manhattan and were complaining how this changed their behavior. Um, that was the point. I honestly didn't know how many people like that there were.

What really needs to happen but probably never will is to get rid of free street parking below about 96th street or 110th.

Also, either ban or simply charge more for combustion vehicles. Go and look at how quiet Chinese cities are where the vehicles are predominantly electric now.

replies(5): >>43989536 #>>43989989 #>>43992030 #>>43993619 #>>43996044 #
listenallyall ◴[] No.43989536[source]
Why does the slippery slope concept surprise you? It actually happens often - banning smoking indoors, for example - started in just one city, once they tweaked the model and overcame the legal challenges, it spread rather quickly. Legalized casinos, same thing. Uber, drinking age, pot legalization, more. Why would toll roads or congestion pricing be different? (Idaho's Sun Valley probably already implements something similar). And ICE vehicles are definitely in many politicians' crosshairs, if you don't already see that coming in the next decade, you aren't really looking.
replies(5): >>43989675 #>>43989747 #>>43989788 #>>43989850 #>>43993238 #
gjsman-1000 ◴[] No.43989788[source]
> Why would toll roads or congestion pricing be different?

The answer is actually quite simple: It won't be different. Prove to me it won't spread, because almost every new tax spreads.

When is the last time a tax has existed in one state, and not spread to other states within 5 years?

replies(3): >>43989819 #>>43989978 #>>43997744 #
ackfoobar ◴[] No.43989978[source]
I'm generally sympathetic to arguments that are "we will fall down the slippery slope." But as someone who has spent too much time stuck in traffic, I WANT congestion pricing to spread. It's just basic economics that people end up paying for a "free" resource with time - grossly inefficient.
replies(1): >>43990250 #
gjsman-1000[dead post] ◴[] No.43990250[source]
[flagged]
tomhow ◴[] No.43991602[source]
> Right, because you’re an elitist

Please stop this style of commenting. You've been here long enough to know it's against the guidelines.

replies(1): >>43995032 #
1. gjsman-1000 ◴[] No.43995032[source]
[flagged]
replies(1): >>44003152 #
2. tomhow ◴[] No.44003152[source]
This is all plainly false. Community members who are sincere about wanting to make HN better or just holding the moderators to account can easily do so. They can email us with URLs, or include URLs in their accusatory comments. Plenty of community members do that and we always take action or explain our thoughts on the matter.

Accusations like this one, without any evidence that would enable other community members to check for themselves, serve only to deflect from the accuser's own conduct, and achieve nothing but make the site worse.

If you're sincere in being concerned about the patterns you claim are so pervasive here, please cite the evidence so we can all understand what you're talking about and enable the moderators to take the appropriate action.

replies(1): >>44018392 #
3. gjsman-1000 ◴[] No.44018392[source]
I maintain that the claim inflammatory content is equally treated is plainly false. I would even say that your post above serves only to deflect from your own conduct.

Case in point, just today, of what I have seen hundreds of times in just the last year:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44018355

This does not pass guidelines, this does not satisfy curiosity, I have rarely seen a warning for content like this. Sometimes it gets flagged, more often it doesn’t.