Driving into NYC is already a massively expensive pain in the ass and nobody does it for shits and giggles. The only people deterred from driving by this will be the working poor (think doorman who needs to be at work 5 am and lives in outer queens. Might be a 20 minute drive or an hour bus+train ride - that's the kind of people that might hesitate at $15 a day extra)
Everybody else either HAS to drive for whatever reason and will suck up the extra $15 or is too rich to care. It's a pretty naked money grab by the city precisely because demand is kind of inelastic.
You can imagine anything else being taxed in the same way. If the government decided to raise money by making your cell plan cost 3X, you'd grumble but pay (it's not like you're gonna give up your phone) It's not a great reason to tax.
> Driving into NYC is already a massively expensive pain in the ass and nobody does it for shits and giggles.
Plenty of rich people drive into the city because they don’t want to take public transit. I know some!
> think doorman who needs to be at work 5 am and lives in outer queens
I don’t doubt there will be people like this but the data shows that car owners are notably richer than the average NYC resident. The working poor of NYC by and large do not own cars. And among those that do own cars the number that drive into Manhattan daily for work is already small (because how could they afford to park? How does this doorman?)
And to take your example specifically, I have to imagine there are alternatives. Like driving to parking near Manhattan then jumping on the subway for the last part. If they aren’t doing it already parking garages will be even more incentivised by congestion charging.
You are making the same point I am without realizing.
For the rich, it's a negligible expense. For the poor, it's a major inconvenience (scenario you described) or cost.
So mainly the city expects it'll get free money out of the people who will still drive in. The only folks who will contribute to decreased congestion are the ones for whom $15/d is meaningful.
I think there’s much more of a sliding scale than that. Yes, there are very rich people who will drive no matter what. And there are a very small number of poor people who won’t drive no matter what. But in the middle sit a large number of people who are much more likely to use park and ride schemes and the like.
Good news is the city wins either way: if people still drive, city gets money. If people don’t drive, city has reduced congestion.
I live less than 40 miles from the city, my commute via public transit is 20 minutes in a car, a 15 minute ferry across the river, an hour train ride to
grand central, 15 minute subway downtown. It is 2 hours on good day door to door to go 40 miles. Thank god for work from home but it is not surprising that people choose to drive when a lot of peoples commutes look like this. And yeah like you say driving sucks too, bumper to bumper traffic most days people would happily avoid given a better option.
The $15 charge will push people in your position to optimize their lifestyle for less driving in Manhattan, either by finding a new job, or moving closer to work, or more likely driving to a park and ride and using transit for the last bit.
How about the radical idea of train service on both sides of the river if we don’t want people to drive. There are a massive amount of commuters, rent is outrageously expensive and park and rides are far away and have all the fun unpredictability of regular old driving. And as the parent poster says it is already expensive to go into the city, $18 to cross the GWB, if anyone wants to do the quick math on how many people cross that a day and then come back and tell me why we can’t have better infrastructure.
Before I read this comment, I thought the tax was a good idea, but honestly this changed my mind. NYC is a rich man's city; $15 isn't going to dissuade anyone but the poorest folks. Rip out parking spaces instead
-1. Speaking as a local, friends from Long Island and New Jersey and other boroughs do drive in casually. They didn't live near subway stops and way too far for busses.
LGA and JFK are an hour+ by train with transfers, much now reasonable to ta ke a car. Fortunately, congestion pricing is just a small surcharge for taxis.
Please see Google maps: there's lots of places in Brooklyn, Queens, Nassau and of course NJ, Westchester, Connecticut, Staten Island
This is particularly true off-hours. One friend from Nassau reports 20-30 mins drive off peak but mass transit would be crazy: long walk to a bus to LIRR to subway. 3 transfers and hours of BS. Perhaps with an electric scooter? But then what about crappy weather or hauling stuff?
Something isn't right. First your comment makes no sense, since I was talking about long Island, why bring up Connecticut and Staten island. 2nd no one calls queens and Brooklyn long Island.
The western most towns of Nassau are barely under a half hour drive into the city and they all have LIRR stops.
East meadow, Levittown, North Merrick, Brookville, Manhasset Hills, ...
Just look at Google maps, turn on transit to see the stations, then count all the towns that ain't walking distance...
I do actually know what I'm talking about, having spent way too many hours in the freezing wind/rain/snow on LIRR platforms, chiseling ice off the car in the parking lot, and questioning my life choices. Try an expensive 2+ hour with multiple transfers for a month.
Everybody else either HAS to drive for whatever reason and will suck up the extra $15 or is too rich to care. It's a pretty naked money grab by the city precisely because demand is kind of inelastic.
You can imagine anything else being taxed in the same way. If the government decided to raise money by making your cell plan cost 3X, you'd grumble but pay (it's not like you're gonna give up your phone) It's not a great reason to tax.