If that was strictly true then the toll wouldn't make any difference. I don't have a better solution for Manhattan, but I can recognize that fixed-fee tolls select for traffic with the "most disposable income" rather than the "most economically beneficial" traffic.

Arguments can be made in places like Denver that high tolls means that those who have control over politics (who tend to be rich) won't feel much need to invest in additional road infrastructure, because their experience is that "the travel times are fine!". But they're using an up-to-$15-each-way toll road (E-470).

Similar to how the TSA procedures would get reformed if everyone flying had to go through the same process (most importantly, including anyone taking private planes). But almost no one who has power to force changes actually goes through the TSA lines because they mostly take private chartered planes which don't have any TSA process.

You have to align incentives with these things, and that can be tricky.

For TSA something like "if you're in line an hour before your flight and you miss your flight, the TSA pays for your ticket unless they can prove you got through in less than 15 minutes" might do the trick. You'd have to work out the details.

If you're wealthy enough to not notice this toll, then how would the toll even accomplish its goal of reducing traffic?

By definition it's going to make people that notice +-$15 stop driving.

Who do you think does all of the jobs that require driving in Manhattan? Do you really believe it's wealthy people doing that by choice?

if you're referring to rideshare and taxi drivers

yes, these rates might rise. but it's the wealthy who are consuming these services. costs will obviously pass through to the rider (not be borne by driver)

If you're referring to the number of folks who work in the central business district of Manhattan but have no choice but to drive (given the enormous catchment area of MTA services), that number is vanishingly small, and congestion pricing does have low income discounts.

If you're referring to those who drive taxis or cars-for-hire in Manhattan, yes, the idea is the cost should be borne by riders who choose those services instead of transit.

There is no "CBD" in Manhattan. It's a made up term created for this program to make the pill less bitter. Let's be real, it's half the fucking island and where mostly everyone in the city works and shops. That's no small number.

It's everyone making deliveries to those businesses. It's every one doing manual labor jobs requiring tools. It's city workers on low salaries who have to live so far out in the boroughs where the MTA isn't even a good option to get to work anymore. The whole FDNY is losing their shit over this congestion pricing in particular because it hits them fairly hard.

> There is no "CBD" in Manhattan. It's a made up term created for this program to make the pill less bitter. Let's be real, it's half the fucking island and where mostly everyone in the city works and shops. That's no small number.

But it's not half of the city. NYC is more than Manhattan.

I didn't say half the city, I said half the island. Nearly 2 million people commute into Manhattan to work.

I'm sure all the plumblers, electricians, etc (the people who actually do the hard work of making the city actually function) are taking all their tools and materials around town on the buses and subways.

maybe they can make up for it with the revenue from being able to fit in another client instead of sitting in traffic for 2 hours

Dubious.