Hacker News Reader

I love this idea. With one problem. It doesn’t capture the externalities of living in the sub/ex urbs correctly. Precisely where it’s hard to park is where people are living most environmentally friendly (density).

Paired with a dramatic energy tax I’m good with it.

View on HN

It captures the spatial externalities, as opposed to the US system of minimum parking requirements and on-street parking, which sets aside valuable urban space that could be used for more housing (or stores or whatever) and wastes considerable amounts of capital (underground garages are very expensive) on making it easier to drive and not actually produce the environmental benefits of living in a city.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com