|
| ▲ | stetrain 3 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| The rich were driving before, and are still driving. The difference is that now they are paying for that service they were already using, and those funds are going to public transit which serves the majority of New Yorkers especially those with lower incomes. |
| |
| ▲ | CryptoBanker 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | The problem is that no one in NYC, rich or poor, has any confidence in the MTA's ability to properly and efficiently use these funds. This stems from a long history of incompetence and wastefulness by the MTA | | |
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | > no one in NYC, rich or poor, has any confidence in the MTA's ability to properly and efficiently use these funds They're already using them, and the results show. They could have done it cheaper. But the LIRR is operating at Swiss rail efficiecies since the recent electrification and signalling improvements. | | |
| ▲ | CryptoBanker 3 days ago | parent [-] | | What electrification and signal improvements are you talking about? Signal upgrades are a constant thing in the MTA, both for the LIRR and the subways. They are not something that just started with congestion pricing funds. Also, efficiency was already on the upswing for the LIRR long before congestion pricing funds[1]. [1] https://www.mta.info/press-release/icymi-governor-hochul-cel... | | |
| ▲ | ceejayoz 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Congestion pricing was agreed to in 2019. Expected revenue was used to budget quite a few projects; this caused a bit of a scare when Hochul put it on hold for a while. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/16/nyregion/congestion-prici... | | | |
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | > They are not something that just started with congestion pricing funds Correct. But they’re being expanded. Early signs are there. And we have precedent to show that funding this work, and funding it sooner, works. > efficiency was already on the upswing for the LIRR long before congestion pricing funds Correct. Congestion funds accelerate that process. I spoke an inarticulately, but the point was trying to make is that we have precedence for quality and efficiency improving capital spending by the MTA. The bonds the MTA issued earlier this year double down on that. The early signs of that spending show those capital deployments are helping in the way the preceding spending did. |
|
| |
| ▲ | stetrain 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Sounds like a great area to advocate for improvement. |
| |
| ▲ | SoftTalker 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Are the funds actually going to public transit, or are they being used to pay off all the people whose support was needed to implement the congestion charges? | | |
|
|
| ▲ | ceejayoz 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > Now you can buy a service which was not possible before. It wasn't possible to drive a car in NYC before congestion pricing? I find that… unlikely. |
| |
|
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > more money you have, more you benefit from this ruling This is nonsense. The poor of New York benefit from congestion pricing. It means more funding for the public transit they predominantly take. And for the minority who drive for a living it increases their revenues. The opposition to congestion charges comes from principally outside New York, often from folks who have little to no familiarity with it. |
| |
| ▲ | MLgulabio 2 days ago | parent [-] | | As long as this system is a fixed price and is independent of the salary you earn, its benefits the rich more. Its the same principle with kindergarden and late fee; Without a late fee, people sometimes were late getting their kids, with late fees more people were late getting their kids. Now they were able to 'pay' for this. You now can pay for having less traffic for you. Who can afford this? The rich/richer person. This increases inequality. |
|
