Hacker News Reader

Comment by bogota | Hacker News Reader

Like most things it will push poorer people out, middle income will be annoyed and slightly more poor, and people with money won’t even notice

View on HN

Another way you can phrase that is that the lion share of the tax will be on wealthy people, so it's a progressive tax.

I've seen conflicting studies - but in general I don't think poor people living around Manhattan have cars or are parking in Manhattan. Less than half of all people in NYC have cars.

I suppose in that sense consumption taxes are progressive. It’s not usually how we use that word…

Luxury goods taxes are a textbook example of a progressive tax.

I think this example isn't super clean, but it's closer to that than a tax on the poor or even middle class.

It’s definitely a toll on the middle class. They’re also the ones more likely to be driving in to Manhattan on a daily basis rather than living there compared to the über wealthy.

The vast majority of commuters in NYC use public transit to get around. This idea that only the poor are forced to drive has no basis in reality.

I didn’t mention poor at all. Only middle class vs wealthy.

Middle class folks that work in the city don't drive from NJ into NY, and for the few that do, they should get on a train because it will save them money today and after this goes into effect.

If you're a firefighter or most kinds of laborers that bring tools to work, you're usually dealing with equipment and/or chemicals that are not safe or even permitted on the NYC subway.

You do know that firefighters don't bring their kit home with them, right?

Not true at all. There's literally videos from FDNY chiefs circulating on the NYC news shows complaining about this problem and how it affects them because they're mad about not being exempted.

https://nypost.com/2022/06/07/off-duty-firefighter-saves-chi...

https://www.reddit.com/r/Firefighting/comments/w008we/do_you...

Firefighter gear is covered in PFAS and is highly carcinogenic. I don't want them bringing that shit on the subway, no way.

If Firefighter gear is covered in PFAS, and highly carcinogenic, and you don't want them bringing it on the subway, why would you want them to bring it to their homes? The easy, obvious solution is to install safe storage at the fire departments so that the children of firefighters don't have to inhale carcinogens.

That's completely tangential to the discussion. I don't really want them having to bring it home either but that's what happens.

I'm sure they keep it in the trunk of their car or in their garage, etc.

So a progressive tax that disproportionally hurts poor people?

VAT/GST is by definition regressive due to being flat

"Another way" only if you're being disingenuous.

Pricing lower-income folks people out of an activity entirely doesn't make it a "tax on the rich".

I am skeptical there is a sizable amount of low-income people that were driving into lower Manhattan on a daily basis. You cannot find daily parking in this area of Manhattan for less than $30 either way.

There are also exemptions for people who make less than $50,000 a year

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/27/nyregion/nyc-congestion-p...

It's not as progressive of a tax as a progressive income tax, but it is definitely a tax which will help coordinate behavior and will disproportionately be levied on the wealthy. If any policy that wasn't perfectly progressive could not be implemented, we couldn't have car registration fees, subway tolls, or sales taxes either.

> I am skeptical there is a sizable amount of low-income people that were driving into lower Manhattan on a daily basis.

The low income were already hurt and now its middle income.

I live in Brooklyn and there are times I want or need to leave the city to Jersey or PA. I'm not trying to park or even be in Manhattan but adding an extra hour or two to a trip to avoid Manhattan is costly. It already costs me close to $30 to leave and come back if I head west.

Also, I live in a low-income neighborhood 1 mile from Manhattan. Many people have cars and use them for work and family. Transit can really suck the further out you are.

I'm pro-transit and am not a giant fan of cars. I use mine for transporting my work as well as some trips. Using Uber would maybe save me money if it was only me travelling short distances and the driver doesn't mind me loading paintings or sculptures in their car or SUV.

I don't even know if I disagree with the law but it's not going to stop the less wealthy from bearing the brunt of this. To act as if driving into Manhattan is purely an act of entertainment or easy choice is missing a million elements. What if your older disabled relative lives in Manhattan and can't take transit? Uber will cost more than the $15 even one way. What if you're unable to take transit and just want to visit someone in Manhattan? This is not a tax on the rich as the rich are maybe 1 in 10.

> Another way you can phrase that is that the lion share of the tax will be on wealthy people, so it's a progressive tax.

Thats not what a progressive tax means. I understand that you mean poor and middle income will drive less therefor pay less tax. But consider this: would it be a progressive tax if we had a 100% income tax rate on 0-$30,000? Same scenario - poor people would stop making anything therefore not pay taxes yet clearly this is a regressive, not progressive tax, right?

That is not plainly not a progressive tax. The average rich person and the average poor person each seeing their taxes go up the same dollar amount is the definition of a regressive tax.

That comparison doesn't apply here. The average rich person will pay more taxes due to congestion taxes than the average poor person.

I realize the concerns about poor people if they have a car and continue to drive but poor people with a car in southern Manhattan are the exception. Parking already costs $15+ an hour there so it's really just commercial vehicles, tourists, cabs, and wealthy people. Not to mention the policy already has exceptions (admittedly, maybe annoying to file for) for those making under 50k

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/27/nyregion/nyc-congestion-p...

People pay attention to explicit costs. Sometimes irrationally so. e.g. Sales of Tesla Model S cars were predicted to decrease with gas prices. Even though a $500/year swing in fuel cost does not meaningfully change total cost of ownership on a $70,000 car.

Does it though? The congestion is a "tragedy of the commons" problem. Being stuck in traffic sucks for everybody regardless of income.

If rich people pay enough to keep driving on the roads frequently, funds (and maybe even space for buses/rail) can be reclaimed to make transit that much better. The rich people pay for the privilege of driving and transit riders get better service, a win/win.

NYC can't solve income inequality in the US. It's pretty much globally true that everything is better for rich people, everywhere.

Just take public transportation like everybody else

Poorer people are taking the PATH.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com