While I have a vested self interest as a daily bike commuter in reducing the number of cars in Manhattan (as well as other boros), a toll such a the one proposed is essentially a regressive form of taxation that will disproportionately affect middle- and lower-income people who need to drive into Manhattan. There are already so many economic factors that are creating real hardships for non-wealthy New Yorkers, and this would simply add to the problems of economic inequality that plague our city.
The reason I oppose this plan is that it's a form of regressive taxation for middle- and lower-income New Yorkers, who are often underserved by public transportation. The tolls as proposed do not create a disincentive for the portion of the population that can easily afford $35/week to commute via personal car, uber, or other car service.
This also does not address the number of rides originating within the affected area which presents a significant volume of traffic. Maybe limiting the number of cabs/uber cars operating within the areas with the highest congestion? Of course, this would involve the necessity of improving subway service that is already at capacity on certain lines at times.
The one thing that comes to mind is reducing the number of rides originating within the affected area. I don't have figures to cite in this regard, but based on 30+ years of observation, taxi and car service rides (now with uber) represent a very significant volume of traffic that is, in my opinion, the least necessary (barring age/disability) as these areas are the best served by public transportation and are largely very walkable and have access to CitiBike.
One can see the necessity of driving into Manhattan for deliveries or to perform services that require some amount of equipment that can't reasonably be carried on the subway, etc. I would be more likely to favor the banning of all traffic that doesn't fall into one of these categories. The need to commute by car simply to avoid taking public transport is practically nil (again, barring age/disability and taking into account areas that are underserved by the MTA).
The current proposals present no actual disincentive to those individuals who may already fall into the category of commuting via car service/uber in order to avoid the subway; the highest priced neighborhoods in Brooklyn and Queens are very well served by public transport, but those who can afford to live in these areas would be the least affected by paying tolls.
While I have a vested self interest as a daily bike commuter in reducing the number of cars in Manhattan (as well as other boros), a toll such a the one proposed is essentially a regressive form of taxation that will disproportionately affect middle- and lower-income people who need to drive into Manhattan. There are already so many economic factors that are creating real hardships for non-wealthy New Yorkers, and this would simply add to the problems of economic inequality that plague our city.
View this comment in the discussion thread
The reason I oppose this plan is that it's a form of regressive taxation for middle- and lower-income New Yorkers, who are often underserved by public transportation. The tolls as proposed do not create a disincentive for the portion of the population that can easily afford $35/week to commute via personal car, uber, or other car service.
This also does not address the number of rides originating within the affected area which presents a significant volume of traffic. Maybe limiting the number of cabs/uber cars operating within the areas with the highest congestion? Of course, this would involve the necessity of improving subway service that is already at capacity on certain lines at times.
View this comment in the discussion thread
The one thing that comes to mind is reducing the number of rides originating within the affected area. I don't have figures to cite in this regard, but based on 30+ years of observation, taxi and car service rides (now with uber) represent a very significant volume of traffic that is, in my opinion, the least necessary (barring age/disability) as these areas are the best served by public transportation and are largely very walkable and have access to CitiBike.
One can see the necessity of driving into Manhattan for deliveries or to perform services that require some amount of equipment that can't reasonably be carried on the subway, etc. I would be more likely to favor the banning of all traffic that doesn't fall into one of these categories. The need to commute by car simply to avoid taking public transport is practically nil (again, barring age/disability and taking into account areas that are underserved by the MTA).
The current proposals present no actual disincentive to those individuals who may already fall into the category of commuting via car service/uber in order to avoid the subway; the highest priced neighborhoods in Brooklyn and Queens are very well served by public transport, but those who can afford to live in these areas would be the least affected by paying tolls.
View this comment in the discussion thread