1101
Well well well (slrpnk.net)
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Dogiedog64@lemmy.world 184 points 3 weeks ago

Outstanding move on NYC's part.

[-] lazynooblet@lazysoci.al 52 points 3 weeks ago

Prior to this going live there was a lot of talk about how congestion will simply move from one place to another. I don't know new york so can't name places but it was regarding commuters using a street or bridge that is now under congestion charge so they will flow an alternative route through roads that aren't designed for the additional traffic.

Is that now the case?

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 58 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Some people may be inclined to go up and over Central Park to get to the other side without paying the $9. That likely only affects uptown residents. I can’t imagine anyone driving around the park from midtown to avoid the fee.

The only legitimate concerns I’ve read are from contractors with tools and small businesses who deliver. They should be offered exceptions if walking or mass transit are unrealistic options. You’re not riding the subway with acetylene tanks or delivering fresh meat on Metro North. Other than that, I love it.

[-] vulture_god@lemmy.dbzer0.com 29 points 3 weeks ago

The other concern I've heard, and has not been brought up in this thread yet, is the lobbying influence from rideshare companies to pass the congestion laws.

It's arguable that ride share vehicles are a better traffic density alternative to single rider personal vehicles, but there are pretty clear downsides to consider as well.

Source:

https://nypost.com/2025/01/04/us-news/uber-lyft-spent-millions-pushing-for-nyc-congestion-pricing-and-stand-to-make-killing/

[-] conditional_soup@lemm.ee 39 points 3 weeks ago

You can be self interested and still accidentally be on the right side of an issue. It doesn't spark joy, but I'm not going to throw the baby out with the bathwater on this. It's still a win, imo.

[-] Hawke@lemmy.world 27 points 3 weeks ago

They should be offered exceptions if walking or mass transit are unrealistic options.

No they shouldn’t. That’s how you let rich people skirt the law.

Tradespeople should just treat it like any other business expense. Eat it or raise your rates a little bit.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] billiam0202@lemmy.world 16 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

The only legitimate concerns I’ve read are from contractors with tools and small businesses who deliver.

Maybe, but anecdotally the lighter traffic allows contractors to accomplish more jobs per day because they spend less time in traffic, which more than offsets the congestion charge.

Going from three hours per day in traffic down to even just two means there's an extra hour a contractor has available to make money each day.

[-] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 13 points 3 weeks ago

sure, but you can also deliver those with lighter vehicles that don't cause traffic. Congestion is congestion.

[-] lewdian69@lemmy.world 18 points 3 weeks ago

I'm confused. How will I deliver 15 pounds of Trump skirt Steaks if I can't drive my lifted Ram 3500 Heavy Duty with the high-output Cummins Turbo Diesel engine in downtown Manhattan?

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Gullible@sh.itjust.works 22 points 3 weeks ago

Of all the things on Reddit, I miss remindmebot the most. They tried to kill it numerous times but it survived like a roach in radiation. On lemmy, I find an interesting question and have to set a timer for myself. This is the most first-world of problems, but I’m still moderately upset every time

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] thr0w4w4y2@sh.itjust.works 169 points 3 weeks ago

inb4 the supreme court rules that congestion charging is unconstitutional and furthermore that public transport, too, is unconstitutional.

[-] piecat@lemmy.world 65 points 3 weeks ago

Congestion pricing bad, private tolls good

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world 57 points 3 weeks ago

If the founding fathers didn’t explicitly mention it in the Constitution then clearly it’s unconstitutional.

[-] GraniteM@lemmy.world 15 points 3 weeks ago

Pooping is unconstitutional.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Hackworth@lemmy.world 23 points 3 weeks ago

Exhaust Now Vents Directly Into Cab: EPA says, "For your health!"

[-] MadBob@feddit.nl 15 points 3 weeks ago

"Ladies and gentleman of the committee, I put it to you: thousands, perhaps millions, of American songwriters have written about missing their truck. How many have written about missing the bus? I rest my case."

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] irotsoma@lemmy.world 147 points 3 weeks ago

As long as that money is spent on public transit improvements, I think it's a great idea for many large cities.

[-] Alenalda@lemmy.world 23 points 3 weeks ago

Sorry best we can do is 80% to the police department.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 56 points 3 weeks ago

Nice. Now cars are only for the rich like they should be.

Real solution: Ban cars in parts of NYC.

[-] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 112 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Right because everyone needing a car means everyone who can't afford one just automatically gets one.

Step one of reducing car-dependency is to reduce their number on the road. Then you can start bulding shit that accommodates the poor through actually nice-to-use public transit, bicycle paths, and walking routes.

Charge the rich. Build for the poor. Better yet, charge the rich, build for everyone. Not just cars. Because not everyone has cars.

Like FFS "good job now the poor can't drive" is hardly a comeback when it's like the most expensive mode of transit, massively subsidized with taxpayer money, just to kind of make it work. It wasn't something that could be made affordable or even efficient enough for everyone to use on a daily basis to begin with.

[-] anarchrist@lemmy.dbzer0.com 59 points 3 weeks ago

Zippity zoppity let's redistribute some property

[-] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 14 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Cut to me dramatically removing my "fuck cars" jacket like a Yakuza character to reveal a "fuck private property" t-shirt

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] scytale@lemm.ee 50 points 3 weeks ago

What was that saying again, something along the lines of: A great city is not where the poor own and drive cars, but the rich take public transportation.

[-] regul@lemm.ee 21 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

A developed country is not a place where the poor have cars. It's where the rich use public transportation.

- Gustavo Petro, current president of Colombia, former mayor of Bogota

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 17 points 3 weeks ago

Now cars are only for the rich

More that roads are for high occupancy or professional vehicles - buses, ambulances, construction vehicles, commercial trucks - that still need access to Manhattan but can't be placed on a train.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] vividspecter@lemm.ee 40 points 3 weeks ago

See the Congestion Pricing Tracker for day by day measurements of the impact on congestion.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] nifty@lemmy.world 39 points 3 weeks ago

This is great, should be implemented in all cities. Most people who can use public transport should.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] trufiassociation@lemmy.ml 33 points 3 weeks ago

We've been seeing a lot of anecdotal posting on Xitter of people who were skeptics or in opposition to this suddenly realizing that they just gained an hour or more per day because the traffic has been significantly reduced. So even some regular people (i.e. not the wealthy) who have to drive in NYC because of their job are realizing that there's a cost benefit even if they do pay for the congestion pricing.

[-] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 27 points 3 weeks ago

Less cars is the answer! And in what transit is concerned I would say that convenience is very important. Like in Netherlands they got bike locking stations. Not simply a tube that you lock your bike into which is screwed to the front door of a building and fits 3 bikes. I'm talking massive building with an automated system that keeps your bike secure for when you get out of work after the train ride. And restrooms... With cleaning.

[-] danc4498@lemmy.world 24 points 3 weeks ago

Can anybody tell me how much a drive through the congestion priced road would cost? Like a straight line?

[-] nandeEbisu@lemmy.world 40 points 3 weeks ago

It's not so much a congestion prices road, it's a zone. So anytime you enter that zone you pay $9 unless you make less than like $60 k then it's like $4-5, and emergency vehicles are free.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Periodicchair@lemmy.world 23 points 3 weeks ago

$9 for cars, no matter if you go one block in or all the way through. And no daily charge for staying there multiple days, only charged when you enter.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] BakedCatboy@lemmy.ml 22 points 3 weeks ago

Does anyone have a good before screenshot of the same map view / area? I want to stitch together a before shot before I share so that people not from the area can get an idea of the change and not just immediately think "oh well my small town has traffic and it looks like that so what's the big deal"

[-] morgunkorn@discuss.tchncs.de 14 points 3 weeks ago

not exactly but with Google Maps you can setup a route with a start time set in the past and look at the congestion at that moment:

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ddash@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 3 weeks ago

...if it isn't the bridge I said I'd cross... Wait, not going to pay that congestion charge.

[-] kreskin@lemmy.world 20 points 3 weeks ago

Regressive tax. Yet another kick in the face of the lower class. Why not a progressive tax based on personal income? It works pretty well for speeding tickets in northern Europe.

[-] weLookAbove@lemm.ee 13 points 3 weeks ago

I'm all for reducing traffic, but yeah, how is this not at least partially regressive? Folks who can only afford to live in New Jersey but then have to work in NYC now have yet another new expense.

But maybe I'm not aware of just how ubiquitous subway stations are in New Jersey that go into NYC. Would it be an easy transition?

[-] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 24 points 3 weeks ago

It's my understanding that poor people in NYC already take public transit. It's just the rich people who drive.

Besides, less traffic in NYC probably means cheaper parking, so people who have to drive will probably see their cost unchanged.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] dx1@lemmy.world 17 points 3 weeks ago

Fixing traffic by... discouraging people from driving, lol. Well I'm not complaining.

[-] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 16 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Now do the Van Wyck. Disincentivizing cabs, livery, rideshare, car service, whatever else constantly clogs that that few miles of road that takes 25-30 minutes could be done in five.

[-] Ulrich@feddit.org 14 points 3 weeks ago

I mean you're just making efficient transportation something that wealthy people can just buy...

[-] TrueStoryBob@lemmy.world 39 points 3 weeks ago

Private vehicles aren't efficient, they're convenient.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] OmegaLemmy@discuss.online 14 points 3 weeks ago

Hilarious, a move that was proven to work in Istanbul was avoided... Because..?

[-] Olgratin_Magmatoe@slrpnk.net 13 points 3 weeks ago
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2025
1101 points (100.0% liked)

Fuck Cars

10097 readers
257 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS