 | New Department of Transportation Commissioner Rides Tour de Brooklyn | The Oil Drum: Local | Bloomberg Hails Green Taxis |  |
User login
Personnel
Classic posts
Archives
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
PONYC Archives
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
GAIA Host Collective
While I love the idea of congestion pricing, I wonder if it will be that successful in New York given that it literally has millions of millionaires. Millions will not blink at $8 per day pricing.
Pricing is just a seemingly kinder and gentler form of coercion, than well, coercion. We shall see, I guess, how this all works out, if it can get through the New York legislature. Which, by the way, what's up with that? Sucks that New York City has so little autonomy.
The rich, the Trumps of the world, will continue to dart about in their limos. In fact, with congestion pricing, driving will be even more appealing to the rich or the wannabe rich because it will have status. "See, I'm rich enough to pay the tax, look at me".
I would prefer out and out coercion. Decide what level of traffic you want and issue medallions, as they do for taxis, in a lottery. Make the medallions tradeable. That way, even though the rich will continue to do what they want, they will have to pay the less rich or those who can't or don't want to drive.
What if the congestion charge is not high enough? Will they have to go back to the damn legislature to raise it. And every time they try to raise it, there will be political hell to pay. And Mayors after Bloomberg probably will not have the cohones, if history is any guide.
Ideally, there should be no driving except emergency driving in New York. But as long as a lot of people will still get to drive because they can affor the tax, I think this plan is discriminatory and unfair. Driving will be seen as a privilege, which is a very bad message.
I started this post by saying I love the idea of congestion pricing. Now that I think about it, perhaps I don't.
Hmmm...what else should driving be considered if not a privelege? An unalienable right?
If only the rich can drive for a while, then we might see the masses begin to use their voting power to level the playing field by pushing in the other direction...maybe by mandated driving-free zones in congested cities.
I thought that would be misinterpreted. I meant that driving would be seen as something only the privileged can do.
The congestion charge works very well in London, as a relatively 'poor' person I pay it occassionaly when I need to travel across town on the way to visit somewhere out of town. Otherwise I use public transport. Those occasional trips now take half to a third of the time they used to, which is worth paying the money for.
We do however have a significant problem with a small number of rogue countries whose diplomats steadfastly refuse to pay the charges, the main culprits being Angola, Nigeria, Sudan and the USA.
Pricing is not coercion, which is why you conclude for yourself that you would prefer coercion. You are probably thinking that it's more fair to treat rich and everyone else the same. Of course, then the rich will bribe/reward/salary the gatekeepers. As they do now. Or buy taxi medallions, taxi companies or all the ways to make and sell taxis.
That dilemma doesn't change until the disparities of wealth are addressed. The archdruid's column discussing a recent article by Astyk addresses that: one can *think* it's going to happen - doesn't mean it will.
It does seem to me, however, that unless we address inequality and fairness, energy decline will not be graceful. Once again, that doesn't mean we will address inequality and fairness. Personally, I think that will only get worse until people start picking up rifles. And that won't make it better either, except that people will know who their friends are.
cfm in Gray, ME