• thethirdgracchi [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    27 days ago

    At least as far as New York City goes this is wrong. Car ownership in the city is correlated with income; the poorer you are the more likely you are to not own a car and instead take public transit to work. https://wellango.github.io/posts/2021/06/who-owns-cars-in-nyc/

    There have been repeated studies (see https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2007/11/02/fact-check-congestion-pricing-is-not-a-regressive-tax or https://citylimits.org/2017/09/07/debate-fact-check-is-congestion-pricing-regressive/) that in NYC congestion pricing would not be a regressive tax, and in fact would be progressive given the composition of car ownership in the city. Couple this with the fact that less cars means a more pleasant experience for those walking and taking transit (the vast majority of New Yorkers, especially amongst the poor) it’s clear that congestion pricing would be a good thing.

    • OgdenTO [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      27 days ago

      Oops, I replied before actually looking at the studies you put in there. That is good info.

      I would still say that overall, opposing flat fuel taxes, tolls, and congestion taxes is a good stance, because in nearly all areas it is the workers who are tied to car ownership for their employment. We should be making it easier for workers to save time and money and have more time for organizing!

      However, it appears in this case there is at least an argument in support of the tax. Although diverting existing gas and driving tolls and taxes instead of adding new ones might be better.

      It is good that the money is going to fund transit.

      I feel like a crazy person though being the only one to suggest that carbrained america has tied it’s workers to the expense of driving and then ratchets up the cost in the name of fighting climate change or congestion if peace of mind and that that hurts workers. It’s true.

      • thethirdgracchi [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        27 days ago

        Yeah your last point is correct, which is why having a congestion price that just makes it harder to drive with no increase in transit is stupid. Luckily that’s not the case here, the congestion pricing is directly tied to expanding transit options for workers to get into the city.

        • Rojo27 [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          27 days ago

          Yeah, there’s the IBX rail project which should help a lot with transit in the outer boroughs. Also the Q line expansion, which should help add more transit capacity to East Harlem. And there’s a lot more that could be done.

    • OgdenTO [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      27 days ago

      I don’t think the people who this is going to negatively affect can afford to live in Manhattan. They live outside and commute in.

      The environmental and peace push is fine but it’s really a NIMBY argument and separate from the extra cost on the workers.