Hacker News Reader

Comment by objektif | Hacker News Reader

I was very skeptical of the congestion pricing policy but I have to confess that it frigging worked. Based on my observations it significantly reduced traffic not only in lower Manhattan but also in NJ coming into Holland Tunnel. It does not change the fact though that this was done more so as a money grab by the MTA.

View on HN

It charges people for the privilege of driving their car into the densest part of the largest city in the country. They could take all the money and burn it, and it still would have been worth doing.

As far as I can tell, no money goes to improving transit between New Jersey and New York

Perhaps that will change when the price goes up in a few years, assuming Phil Murphy gives up on frivolous lawsuits and asking the president to stick his nose in.

The price is going up this year to sprint back to $20 which is what it should cost if not for all the whining from non-residents of Manhattan.

I think that was because NJ rejected the revenue deal as they pushed back against congestion pricing.

For example: https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2024/12/18/nj-refusing-generous-...

My hope is this will change as NJ accepts the outcome and benefits from it too.

> It does not change the fact though that this was done more so as a money grab by the MTA.

Even if that were true, I have absolutely no problem with MTA grabbing some well deserved money.

I think this “it’s a money grab by the MTA” mentality is ignorant of the fact that no one thinks it was ever not a money grab. There is money to be grabbed by charging the drivers who put wear and tear on the streets. Manhattanites said “yes do this we don’t want the health effects from constant traffic, incentivize them not too drive in”. Drivers said “you can’t grab my money”. Manhattanites said “fine then don’t drive in”.

A money grab isn’t a bad thing, it’s a smart move for a highly romanticized city where space is precious.

It is a bad thing if you are simply going to waste it. I am happy to be proven wrong again but MTA has a consistent track record of doing that.

I agree it isn't a bad thing per se, but it should drive higher productivity and not be a net decrease in revenue.

If fewer people from New Jersey come to Manhattan, that's less revenue for restaurants and less sales tax collected. Taking that a step further, if those same workers work from their office in NJ or remotely, that's less income tax collected by the City, too.

Moreover, if you have a person living in Manhattan generating high revenue that is being taxed proportionally, having that person slogging through the bus / subway system an extra 30 - 60 minutes one way vs. taking a car is going to decrease the value they're creating. That means less revenue to tax from that person's business, and less taxes to collect from uber / taxi use. But hey, the City got that $2.90.

It's a complex relationship, and I'm not convinced this is going to be a net revenue generator on any level.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com