5 ms·

The issues with this argument is that pedestrians, transit-users, and cyclists also pay the same sales tax. So if the goal is to have drivers take ownership ove

The issues with this argument is that pedestrians, transit-users, and cyclists also pay the same sales tax. So if the goal is to have drivers take ownership over the costs they produce, we could also consider only levying the sales tax on people who arrived by car - but that's silly since there's no good way to implement that (how do you know if someone arrived in the city by private vehicle?). The straightforward answer is to add tolls. Another solution I could see working is adding special sales taxes on parking garages in the congestion pricing zone, but then this wouldn't capture tolls on trucks, and make it harder to implement exceptions for low-income drivers or drivers with disabilities.

timr 2y ago
It's not a straightforward answer to the issues you're presenting -- they're exempting the West Side Highway and JFK, and of course, the line at 60th is basically arbitrary. I predict that parking garages on the upper east and upper west are about to get a lot more expensive. This is social engineering in tax form, intended to redirect traffic (or really...just to raise money for the MTA), without a great deal of thought about how it will impact the people actually living here (beyond "cars are bad", or, "New Jersey sucks", in any case). It is not "having drivers take ownership of the costs the produce" -- that would be, I dunno...raising the gas tax or tag fees or something. And don't forget that drivers already pay a toll to use the bridges or tunnels into Manhattan. I'm generally in favor of making externalities real and specific, but this plan sucks. One nice thing about congestion is that it is inherently self-limiting, so the stated problem was already captured in existing economic incentives.
- stetrain 2y ago
  > It is not "having drivers take ownership of the costs the produce" -- that would be, I dunno...raising the gas tax or tag fees or something. Gas taxes or registration fees don't reimburse Manhattan for the space and infrastructure costs of cars driving into and parking in Manhattan for cars that are registered and buy fuel outside of Manhattan. You can toll drivers for driving on those specific roads, or add a significant parking tax. Or reduce parking in general and let prices naturally rise, but then you'll also probably have more people driving in and then violating parking rules and need more parking enforcement. Parking fees/taxes also wouldn't capture the costs of traffic that doesn't necessarily park in Manhattan, such as ride share drivers.
  - timr 2y ago
    > Gas tax or registration fees doesn't reimburse Manhattan for the space and infrastructure costs of cars driving into and parking in Manhattan for cars that are registered and buy fuel outside of Manhattan. The tolls on every bridge and tunnel into Manhattan do. Raise those. But now you're tipping your hand: this isn't about "having drivers take ownership of the costs they produce", it's about punishing people who drive in Manhattan (below 60th, excepting FDR and West Side Highway, because those don't have externalities, I guess.) > You can toll drivers for driving on those specific roads, or add a significant parking tax. I don't have a problem with charging for parking. But the toll roads thing, again...that has little to do with "having drivers take ownership of the costs they produce". It's just social engineering via taxes, because people will avoid those roads, and drive on other ones instead.
    - stetrain 2y ago
      Not sure what I'm 'tipping my hand' about. This is just another tier of toll in another congested subsection. If your argument is that all vehicles driving and parking in all places should appropriately pay for their externalities (infrastructure cost, driving and parking space, noise, and emissions) then we agree. Gas taxes or registrations fees paid in another state as you suggested don't really accomplish that though.
      - timr 2y ago
        > Not sure what I'm 'tipping my hand' about. You don't want the general recapture of externalities. You want specific things to be punished. > This is just another tier of toll in another congested subsection. Yes, exactly. And unless you have some practical alternative for the thing you're taxing, this is just another tax. Those of us who live here don't have an alternative to buying groceries or getting deliveries, so this is just one more tax on life. I don't own a car, and I take the subway most of the time, but this will make my life more expensive. That's wrong.
        stetrain 2y ago
gscott 2y ago
If you are buying things you can fit more purchases in a car then taking public transit. You are also less likely to be robbed of your new purchase. California wants to put in a per mile road charge. Why should I drive to go buy something and pay a mile tax when I can buy it cheaper online, get it delivered, and probably after factoring in higher pricing due to the road tax it will still be cheaper. These sort of things ruin businesses.
willmadden 2y ago
The government isn't just offsetting "cost" to drivers and away from hipsters on skateboards. It's creating an economic disincentive to drive to Manhattan. This will create a net-reduction in the borough's economy. Also, "the costs they produce" is way, way too flimsy of a definition. Are you talking about damage to roads? That's heavy trucks, not passenger vehicles.

timr 2y ago

It's not a straightforward answer to the issues you're presenting -- they're exempting the West Side Highway and JFK, and of course, the line at 60th is basically arbitrary. I predict that parking garages on the upper east and upper west are about to get a lot more expensive. This is social engineering in tax form, intended to redirect traffic (or really...just to raise money for the MTA), without a great deal of thought about how it will impact the people actually living here (beyond "cars are bad", or, "New Jersey sucks", in any case). It is not "having drivers take ownership of the costs the produce" -- that would be, I dunno...raising the gas tax or tag fees or something. And don't forget that drivers already pay a toll to use the bridges or tunnels into Manhattan. I'm generally in favor of making externalities real and specific, but this plan sucks. One nice thing about congestion is that it is inherently self-limiting, so the stated problem was already captured in existing economic incentives.

stetrain 2y ago
> It is not "having drivers take ownership of the costs the produce" -- that would be, I dunno...raising the gas tax or tag fees or something. Gas taxes or registration fees don't reimburse Manhattan for the space and infrastructure costs of cars driving into and parking in Manhattan for cars that are registered and buy fuel outside of Manhattan. You can toll drivers for driving on those specific roads, or add a significant parking tax. Or reduce parking in general and let prices naturally rise, but then you'll also probably have more people driving in and then violating parking rules and need more parking enforcement. Parking fees/taxes also wouldn't capture the costs of traffic that doesn't necessarily park in Manhattan, such as ride share drivers.
- timr 2y ago
  > Gas tax or registration fees doesn't reimburse Manhattan for the space and infrastructure costs of cars driving into and parking in Manhattan for cars that are registered and buy fuel outside of Manhattan. The tolls on every bridge and tunnel into Manhattan do. Raise those. But now you're tipping your hand: this isn't about "having drivers take ownership of the costs they produce", it's about punishing people who drive in Manhattan (below 60th, excepting FDR and West Side Highway, because those don't have externalities, I guess.) > You can toll drivers for driving on those specific roads, or add a significant parking tax. I don't have a problem with charging for parking. But the toll roads thing, again...that has little to do with "having drivers take ownership of the costs they produce". It's just social engineering via taxes, because people will avoid those roads, and drive on other ones instead.
  - stetrain 2y ago
    Not sure what I'm 'tipping my hand' about. This is just another tier of toll in another congested subsection. If your argument is that all vehicles driving and parking in all places should appropriately pay for their externalities (infrastructure cost, driving and parking space, noise, and emissions) then we agree. Gas taxes or registrations fees paid in another state as you suggested don't really accomplish that though.
    - timr 2y ago
      > Not sure what I'm 'tipping my hand' about. You don't want the general recapture of externalities. You want specific things to be punished. > This is just another tier of toll in another congested subsection. Yes, exactly. And unless you have some practical alternative for the thing you're taxing, this is just another tax. Those of us who live here don't have an alternative to buying groceries or getting deliveries, so this is just one more tax on life. I don't own a car, and I take the subway most of the time, but this will make my life more expensive. That's wrong.
      - stetrain 2y ago

gscott 2y ago

If you are buying things you can fit more purchases in a car then taking public transit. You are also less likely to be robbed of your new purchase. California wants to put in a per mile road charge. Why should I drive to go buy something and pay a mile tax when I can buy it cheaper online, get it delivered, and probably after factoring in higher pricing due to the road tax it will still be cheaper. These sort of things ruin businesses.

willmadden 2y ago

The government isn't just offsetting "cost" to drivers and away from hipsters on skateboards. It's creating an economic disincentive to drive to Manhattan. This will create a net-reduction in the borough's economy. Also, "the costs they produce" is way, way too flimsy of a definition. Are you talking about damage to roads? That's heavy trucks, not passenger vehicles.