Summary

New York City has become the first U.S. city to implement a congestion charge, with car drivers paying up to $9 daily to enter areas south of Central Park.

The scheme aims to reduce traffic and fund public transport but has faced opposition, including from Donald Trump, who has vowed to overturn it.

Fees vary by vehicle type, with trucks and buses paying higher rates.

Despite legal challenges, the initiative moves forward as New York remains the world’s most congested urban area, with peak traffic speeds averaging just 11 mph.

  • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    108
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    This is great. People complaining on social media aren’t New Yorkers. We have the best mass transit in the nation. Fuck cars. What we want are more bike and footpaths and less time at the crosswalk.

        • chilicheeselies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          46 minutes ago

          But not all parts of nyc are covered by a subway (outer queens, parts of eastern brooklyn, most of staten island [arguably all of it]). NJ isnt covered at all except for PATH, which is limited. If you live in nyc and work in new jersey, this is a new tax (either in time or money). If you live in parts of nyc that are a two fare zone, this is a new burden as well.

          All subway upgrades this century so far have been centered in new stations in manhattan, which is already densely covered; train lines need to be added and extended to all parts of the city that dont have coverage whatsoever.

    • Tiefling IRL
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      48
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      The amount of crying and screaming around this has been insane. On IG, you’d think from the comments that downtown Manhattan is a mecca of families and small businesses, and not the Financial District.

  • jagged_circle@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    2 days ago

    Personally I dont understand why they dont just remove all the street parking spots.

    That and establish maximum parking spots per building. Building has legal occupancy for 2000 people? Max 1% parking spots means theyre not allowed to have more than 20 car parking spots for the entire building.

    The point is to make cars the slowest, most expense, and most difficult mode of transport. Make it hell so that nobody would want to drive a car there because its miserable.

    • chilicheeselies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 days ago

      There are a lot of two fare zones in the city limits. I understand the desire some people have to turn nyc into big amsterdam, but nyc is substantially larger than that city with substanitally less interconectedness. Hell, Holland is a country barely bigger than the NYC metropolitan area.

      If people had good reliable transit available, they would use it. The reality is that they do not. People who think nyc does either are not from there, or live in the privilged part that has tons of transit options.

      You cant force people, you have to offer better options. I agree, if cars were the slowest option people wouldnt use them. Guess what? They arent. Three bus transfers are. This is ignoring anyone who needs to travel outaide of the city limits as well.

      • BozeKnoflook@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        23 hours ago

        I have to nitpick slightly; Holland is not a country. Amsterdam is in the North Holland province of the Netherlands.

        Source: I’m on the train from Amsterdam to my home in Nijmegen, Netherlands, which is not a part of either Holland.

    • IngeniousRocks@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      You’ve described the opposite of how the US likes to do things

      Last year I lived in an apartment who had about 40 parking spaces, 2 for each of 20 units. This complex was in a highrise which had around 80 vacant units, but due to minimum parking availability laws in my area they had to leave most units vacant.

      My city is (obviously) plagued with an unhousing epidemic as the artificial restrictions like this (the landlord problem too 🙄) continue to drive property prices up (my unit was a 400sqft studio for $1.2k after fees, that’s $3 a square foot in a nation where $1/sqft is standard).

    • mlg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      That would invovle upgrading the subway to actually handle capacity along with a circular route, but that is currently beyond the capability of any American public transport development lol.

    • BROMETHIUS@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Yes. Leave the big old parking lots outside of the key areas. Even when you drive into these areas you are either extremely lucky to find a spot or you drive around forever before you get one.

  • Chef@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    3 days ago

    There is one downside that I don’t think people consider enough when discussing congestion pricing:

    Trucks will now find alternate routes that will hurt poorer neighborhoods.

    Example: In order to go between New Jersey and Long Island, some trucks traditionally take routes through Manhattan as it is geographically faster to go crosstown than to detour north or south.

    In order to drive from New Jersey to Long Island, to avoid the new congestion pricing trucks will most likely take the George Washington Bridge, drive through the South Bronx, and come down into Queens via the Throggs Neck, Whitestone, or RFK Bridges.

    The South Bronx is about to absorb a LOT more of that traffic. Anyone taking the Major Deegan or Bruckner during rush hour knows it’s already beyond fucked with traffic.

    Now, the traditionally poorer residents of the South Bronx are about to experience more air pollution, more noise, more road repairs, and majorly slower travel time anywhere.

    Congestion pricing doesn’t remove the traffic, it just re-routes it into poorer neighborhoods.

    (NOTE: I am a NYC car owner and still for congestion pricing. NYC should be way more pedestrian and bike friendly and while this program has downsides, it is a step in the right direction.)

    • Pulptastic@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      Apply it to areas you want fewer people driving. Don’t exclude poorer neighborhoods.

      Economically, this is not an either or. It will both reduce AND divert traffic. Some will choose to pay, some will choose an alternate route, some will choose alternate forms of transport.

      • Chef@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Agreed. The next phases should keep expanding the zone until there is an equilibrium across all the travel routes.

    • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Counter point. If the congestion pricing extended all the way through The Bronx, Queens, and The Mt. Vernon or Mt. Hebron (I honestly forgot which one is just north of The Bronx, and which one is upstate. Didn’t live there for very long.) area, this wouldn’t be an issue for any of the boroughs.

      • Chef@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 days ago

        Definitely agree. It needs to be implemented in a way that won’t punish the adjacent communities unfairly.

        • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          Unfortunately, I live in SD, CA. You’ll have to organize to get this common sense legislation passed through all of The Boroughs

          • Chef@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 days ago

            There are a few community organizations that are bringing attention to it. Everyone is waiting to see if the reality matches the predictions. It just went into effect today.

    • rarbg@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      If other areas of NYC have too much congestion, maybe they should have congestion pricing too…

      • Chef@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Definitely agree. It’s just something that will always push traffic to the adjacent area. Eventually it could be all NYC then Westchester county will become the traffic inheritor.

    • pixeltree
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Lmao no way it’s faster for more trucks to go over the GW bridge than go around NYC entirely they’ll hit an equilibrium damn quick

  • azimir@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    80
    ·
    3 days ago

    This is great work by the city leadership. It’s taken decades to get this system in place and the city sorely needs it.

    Congestion charges work. It’s not a new thing nor an untried approach to mitigating extreme congestion from unfettered use of the city streets.

    The weird part about all of this, to me anyway, is that tools and congestion charges are very much an economic and Libertarian style solution, but strangely conservatives often fight them tooth and nail. Isn’t their whole schtick that the market driven solutions are best? The city owns the streets. The use of the streets are in high demand. So, the city puts a price on a resource. That’s just econ basics.

      • otp@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        3 days ago

        100%. Knew a Libertarian. Conversations about anything rooted in reality or logic were like pulling teeth.

        They thought people and businesses would pay to be connected to roads, and each one would pay for the upkeep of their own segment. They wouldn’t charge anyone to use their roads, because they’d recoup the costs from businesses.

        Highways would be built through…uh, charity? Or maybe it was big businesses that’d need to ship goods across them. Every highway would be a toll highway, and it’d be beautiful. It’d be cheaper than paying taxes…

        /majorEyeRoll

        • ploot
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          They don’t have any idea how cost-effective taxes are, compared to paying private companies individually for every single shared resource. It’s the same for healthcare, education, etc.: to pay the government for a decent nonprofit service is always better value.

          • otp@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 days ago

            “But governments waste so much money!”

            And so do private organizations.

            But in addition to wasting money, they also pay CEOs 10x as much, pay the middle class workers 1/2 as much (meaning worse jobs in your communities), and charge people at least 2x as much. Because they have shareholders to feed!

    • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      3 days ago

      Perhaps my memory is bad, but as far as I can recall, they jettisoned all ideology after the Tea Party (funded by Libertarian billionaires) fizzled. So, pretty much about the time Obama took office. It’s mostly racism and tribal identity now.

      • Zombiepirate@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        I think they just whittled down their ideology into the most privileged and selfish extreme. They do believe the insane things they spout like “tax is theft.”

        I think you’re right that the rank-and-file libertarians don’t really think their ideology through or educate themselves on its flaws or alternatives, because it really is about identity. I’m pretty convinced that it always has been though. Conservative ideology is based on hierarchy, and they think the right outcomes result from having the proper social stratification— this is usually wealth-based.

        • azimir@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          3 days ago

          The hierarchy concept is exactly the framework the conservative mindset is based upon. The original idea was for it to be about fighting (war, duels, etc), but as civilization progressed they had to settle for money as a scoreboard.

          There’s a great video series on this from Innuendo Studios: https://youtu.be/agzNANfNlTs

          • Zombiepirate@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            3 days ago

            There’s also a fantastic book called The Reactionary Mind that’s the best thing I’ve read on conservative ideology. The newest edition has updated chapters through the Trump administration. It’s essential reading, in my opinion, for understanding what drives them.

            He also has a great chapter shredding Ayn Rand to bits.

    • Chef@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Just a slight correction to your post - it isn’t NYC leadership per se. The final call is made by the NY State governor as the MTA is regulated on the state level.

    • rumba@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      They see it as a tax. They don’t really like taxes.

      And honestly there’s a fair amount of stuff in lower Manhattan that can’t be adequately serviced by public transportation. Large conventions, cruise traffic, hotels. People bring their cars to those things because they want to have more than just what they can carry with them, and when they return they don’t want to have to stand around for two to three hours to get enough trains through to disperse them back to Secaucus where they parked. (And God forbid there be a breakdown in the line right there)

      If it doesn’t adequately reduce the congestion it’s just a tax. If it does adequately reduce the congestion, You’re going to put a hell of a lot of parking, hotels and convention out of business.

      Congestion charges make sense when it’s congestion just for the sake of people wanting to drive, But it doesn’t solve the reasons people are driving. New York City public transportation doesn’t have the capacity to handle these big events.

      I hate to be on Trump’s side with anything, but this issue needs some infrastructure changes along with the congestion tax where it’s going to be just a massive tax with no actual solution.

      • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        Skeptical hippo is skeptical. If people are going on a freakin’ cruise, staying at a Manhattan hotel, or attending a convention, I very much doubt another $9 is going to be a deciding factor.

        ETA: Out of curiosity, I consulted Google Maps about driving to Manhattan. It helpfully alerts me that my route would pass through a congestion zone, but does not calculate that price for me, nor add it to the $54.28 of other tolls that I would have to pay along the way.

      • niucllos@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        3 days ago

        Doesn’t the congestion revenue explicitly help fund public transportation? Which would help mitigate a lot of the issues you bring up, there will for sure be growing pains but with smart decisions should adapt to the needs of traffic

        • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 days ago

          Eh. Money’s perfectly fungible, except for restrictions the government puts on itself through the budget process. Theoretically, they could have simply decided to pay for the MTA with existing funds, and tie the future of street maintenance to the implementation of the congestion toll. Instead, they tied the MTA funding increase to the implementation of a congestion toll, for political reasons.

        • rumba@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 days ago

          How much congestion tax would it take to add a new line to New Jersey to handle the offloading of big traffic?

          Looking at the numbers to fix the infrastructure, the tax is a drop in the bucket.

          Yet to the businesses in the area, it’ll severely lower their income.

          I’d hate to see Comic-Con leave the Javits center to move to New Jersey.

      • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        3 days ago

        It’s not going to stop people driving in entirely. It’s just going to add a cost. So that people who deem the cost “worth it” can still drive in. Like those taking a cruise.

        • rumba@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          So it’s just a tax on those people for no reason. I can’t really say that I love it.

          • Tiefling IRL
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            It’s a tax on the people who cause congestion during peak hours and make downtown miserable, yes

            • HowAbt2morrow@futurology.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              3 days ago

              It’s like paying for an extra topping on your NY style pizza. Only those that want that topping will pay for it, not everyone else.

              In countries where a having a car is considered a luxury, only those with one pay a “permission to circulate” (tax on driving) which goes to paying for road maintenance and the like. And how much you pay every year is prorated to the cost of your car. Sucks, but seems fair if you don’t have a car.

              I think this congestion tax is similar, but it the same. You pay for what you use.

      • ploot
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        The difference between taxes and fees is really just that the first is cheaper and goes to people who aren’t incentivized to pocket the money while providing the worst service they can get away with. If you push a libertarian to explain their story in detail, there always comes a point where they introduce government and taxes but try to call it something else.

        • rumba@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          It’s like they try to slow roll putting themselves in charge and expect you not to notice :)

          I’m pretty sure a lot of them don’t even notice.

        • rumba@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 days ago

          Could you imagine trying to drive in from someplace serviceable in New Jersey to have lunch and drive back out during peak? Lake Jersey can’t field reasonable restaurants ;)

        • BakerBagel@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 days ago

          How long are their lunch breaks? I work in a small rural town and driving somewhere for lunch still eats up about a quarter of my lunch break.

  • greenshirtdenimjeans@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    3 days ago

    I will never understand why someone would rather drive into nyc vs a bus or train. The morning rush hour drive through the tunnel is one of the most insane things to waste your time doing.

    • aceshigh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      Some people don’t have permanent job sites, some people have to bring with them heavy equipment, some work odd hours. Public transportation is great if you have a 9-5 desk job.

    • Chef@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      I don’t do it a lot but there are times when I just cannot take public transit - like when I need to bring packages to my relatives. Or like this week when I need to bring my cat to the animal hospital in Manhattan. It’s very difficult to bring my cat to her appointment by public transit or Uber/Lyft/Taxi.

      My rare driving into the zone is negligible but every car on the road contributes to the traffic.

    • aceshigh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      Sit in traffic and then pay money to park their car. I suspect those who drive into the city won’t change their habits. Another $50 an week isn’t a big deal for them.

    • shplane@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’ve met people who said they enjoy traffic because it’s time they get to be alone and in silence/away from their kids. I’ve also met people who have a superiority complex and look down on us common folk who take public transit.

      • Apytele@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’ve had people ask how I make nurse money (not a lot, but more than nursing assistant money) and still take the bus. Like saving money and not wanting to deal with other drivers are things only people in poverty do.

    • chilicheeselies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      How many are driving into, or driving tbrough? To get from long island to nj, one needs to either go all the wya to the gwb (already worst traffic in the entire nation), go through staten island (two tolls, one of them being > $20), or go theough residential streets in manhattan to get from the bridges to the tunnels. Cross town highway options are non existant. Its a geographic, and poor planning issue.

    • jagged_circle@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Some people live in cars. It cuts your expenses significantly, especially in NYC.

      But other than that, I can’t think of a good reason.

  • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    3 days ago

    Fees vary by vehicle type, with trucks and buses paying higher rates.

    I would have thought that single occupant cars should be paying the higher fees, and mass transportation like busses should pay lower fees.

    • BakerBagel@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      3 days ago

      School and commuter buses are exempt. But if your local church is trying to drive a shuttle bus into Manhattan, it is going to face a charge

        • Revan343@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Also, assuming the charge is roughly proportional to the size of the vehicle, a bus would still have a lower charge per person than a car, unless you’re just driving around an empty bus

      • Belgdore@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        3 days ago

        Ok, but that’s still better than each of them coming in, in their own cars.

        • BakerBagel@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 days ago

          How is the city supposed to know how many people are in the vehicle? A bus with 3 people takes up as much space as 3 sedans woth one person each. A bigger vehicle is just gonna have to pay a bigger fee

    • Fandangalo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      3 days ago

      I would bet per head/weight/size, they likely do. Like a single car $9 / 4 people vs. bus charge / bus population, I would wager the bus rate is better for them, but it’s just a guess.

      • Tiefling IRL
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 days ago

        Does the bus rate apply to MTA busses? Or do they get an exception?

        • Chef@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          MTA buses are exempt but they are raising fares anyway.

          There are a LOT of private commuter buses though (Academy Bus Lines come to mind) - also NJ Transit or the private lines from north and east of the city. I don’t know if they are exempt.

  • Zahille7@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    3 days ago

    I would not want to drive in New York.

    Kansas City is nowhere near as dense as NYC, but I still get frustrated driving downtown around there, especially if there’s construction.

    • BakerBagel@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      Suburban cities like KC, Houston, Dallas, and Columbus were designed from the ground up to make driving as feasible as possible and it’s still a nightmare to drive in them. I drove through the Bronx once on my way to Long Island and it was a nightmare between all the bridges, tolls, and traffic. And i didn’t even try to find somewhere to park. We just took the LIRR into the city from for doing tourist stuff.

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    3 days ago

    If you live in an RV or truck, you’re screwed. But then if you drive a huge truck to deliver stuff, your company benefits more and destroys more than my driving my 1980 civic.

  • tacosanonymous@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    PSA: Remember, everyone, not to be poor in those areas.

    Edit: thanks everyone for the clarification.

    • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Poor people can’t afford a car in Manhattan. This is a tax on middle to high income people. It’s good for NYC.

    • DJDarren@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      3 days ago

      I’m not from NYC, or even the US, but unless I’m mistaken, if you can afford to store a car there in order to be able to drive around, then you can almost certainly afford to pay a congestion charge.

      London has had a CC for a number of years now, and it isn’t a problem at all. The overwhelming majority of people who travel into the areas affected by it just take public transport. Hell, I lived up there for several years and despite owning a car I never once had to pay to drive in the charge zone.

    • macarthur_park@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      3 days ago

      If you are poor, there are discounts for those with low income who live in the area. There’s also exemptions for people with medical conditions that prevent them from using public transit source.

      Street parking in NYC is $9 an hour, and long term parking garages typically charge like $400 per month. $9 per day is nothing in comparison.

    • BakerBagel@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 days ago

      It costs about $50 to park a car downtown all day. Drive to a commuter train station and just take the train train in to save your self $40 a day.

  • Gointhefridge@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    Congestion pricing only makes sense if they do something to mitigate the lack of public transit availability, punctuality, and affordability. If public transit were cheap and ubiquitous, then go right ahead.

    Instead, busses and subways cost more and still smell like piss and now you get congestions pricing if you drive in.

    • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      I would agree with all your points, if the year was 1975. Since it’s not, maybe start trying to have some empathy.

      Oh, just an FYI, I’m not one of the people who downvoted you.

      Edit: you can literally check the modlog

      • Gointhefridge@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Curious how many people who downvoted my initial comment have ever worked in NYC and had to deal with either driving or taking public transit.

        I know the point is to raise funds to improve it, but based on my city’s track record , they don’t ever divest it into things that make a difference in the public transit. Instead they do things like: embezzle (Adam’s is indicted btw) or add more cops, or change the turnstiles, but they don’t fix the issues with our systems.

        They’re still filthy and run like ass and they JUST raised priced for the 3rd time in 5 years.

        I actually support the idea of people driving less in cities and getting the cars out of manhattan for the most part, I just know how poorly this city is run currently and how badly this will go.

        • Chef@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          As much as Eric Adams is a POS, the MTA is a state “agency” so most of the corruption occurs at the state level.

          But hard agree with you. The funds will never actually help the people who need the help.

    • bassad@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      The aim is to raise money to fund public transport, so it will become better and cheaper than cars

  • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Counter point. If the congestion pricing extended all the way through The Bronx, Queens, and The Mt. Vernon or Mt. Hebron area, this wouldn’t be an issue for any of the boroughs.

    Replied to the wrong comment.