[jampekka]

There are many quite obvious alternatives to congestion pricing. E.g. banning (private) vehicles from roads, or having fewer parking spaces or decreasing speed limits. These would also affect people quite equally regardless of how much money they have.

With congestion pricing you actually incentivize driving for the wealthy enough.

[jakelazaroff]

The same constituencies that oppose congestion pricing also oppose the things you're describing. When the Adams administration effectively ended curbside dining, they were the people telling us that it was an improvement to replace tables for a dozen people with a parking spot for one SUV. The only way we were even able to get congestion pricing passed was by tying it to MTA funding.

[jampekka]

You can oppose congestion pricing but still support restricting driving. Funding MTA more in no way requires congestion pricing. The earmark is mostly a sharade.

[jakelazaroff]

Of course it's possible to hold both of those views. I'm just telling you what happens in practice.

[7speter]

Have you paid for dining in Manhattan lately? The people who can afford dining in Manhattan and the people who want street parking for their 100k SUV are different sides of the same cohort, generally.

[jakelazaroff]

My wife and I recently went to Hamburger America for less than $20 each, including tip. We had rice rolls at this hole in the wall in Chinatown for probably $15 between us.

Obviously the average meal is on the pricier side but there are tons of great options that don’t break the bank.

[foxyv]

> With congestion pricing you actually incentivize driving for the wealthy enough.

Driving in New York is for the wealthy. Who has money to pay for parking in New York?

[Jcowell]

This is not true. Not all neighborhoods in the city (Basically harlem and up) have wealthy residents, and street parking is free. Anyone who lives in New York knows this.

[jampekka]

Now it's for even wealthier. And with less congestion.