Congestion toll in Boston?

[Equilibria]

Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

What "working class" people drive to jobs in Back Bay, Seaport, Longwood, and Downtown?

Parking is $20 ~ $30 /day in these places.

Workers in the 495 burbs definitely do drive to jobs within 128, but not to the pricey white collar hubs in the central core.

Service workers and sub-$100k workers in the core get there by transit.

(Talked to my peeps at BIDMC: only doctors and top nurses drive alone. For others it is carpool, bike, or transit to Longwood)

(Talked to my PWC peeps in Seaport: only partners and Sr Mgrs drive.)

I know you understand that not only rich people work in the urban core...

Not just nurses. Janitors. Low/mid-level hotel employees. Hosts/waiters/chefs. Physicians' assistants. Pharmacists. Dental hygenists. Teachers.

London data shows (1) everyone is better off and (2) high income people mostly pay it (3) moderate income people benefit from improved bus & train on most days and are glad to pay the fee to solve the occasional crisis.

Umm... how? By what metric? Traffic went down, probably, but are people cancelling useful trips or using worse methods of transportation (by their value system not yours)? Also, London's public transit system is about 100x what Boston's is, especially from the suburbs.

 

[JumboBuc]

Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

I would hazard a guess that a large percentage of relatively lower pay auto commuters into the city (e.g., construction workers, hotel workers, restaurant workers, building management staff, lower pay hospital workers, etc.) travel outside of peak commuting hours. A well-designed congestion charge -- that is, a charge that actually targets congestion -- shouldn't affect people commuting pre-dawn or late in the evenings or working nights.

 

[ant8904]

Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

I'm not going to go super deep into this on congestion charges and people again like the I-90 again. But I want to chime that if you are imagining the congestion charge will be affecting "fatcats commuting by car from Weston" and no one else, you're mistaken. Just taking my co-workers, I currently work in an office in Boston, a bunch of my co-workers do drive in and while I haven't talked to everyone about their salaries, I discussed with enough people that I know they are sub-100k workers. Sure my CEO also drives in too with this Mercedes. But my point is it's gonna impact plenty of people that I do think you shouldn't dismiss as rich fatcats of Weston.

 

[Arlington]

Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

LONDON ECONOMICS (AND BENEFITS OF FASTER MOBILITY)

On February 17, 2003, the London Congestion Charging Scheme came into effect. Preliminary results show a significant response to the £5 (U.S. $8) charge. Congestion over the first year decreased by 30%. Overall traffic levels within the charging zone fell by 16%. Speeds for car travel increased by more than 20%, and bus travel became more reliable. Elasticities of demand for trips by car with respect to generalized costs are estimated to be between –1.32 and –2.10. The average marginal congestion cost within the central zone is estimated at £1.65/vehicle-km (approximatelyU.S. $2.58/vehicle-km). The net economic benefits of the Scheme for the first year were £50 million (U.S. $78 million) and the net revenues, £68 million (U.S. $106 million). Net revenues are mainly being used to improve public transport.

(bolding mine)
https://www.researchgate.net/public...ults_of_the_London_Congestion_Charging_Scheme


There's more detail out there about how motorists like it because their trips are faster (those who keep driving consider it "worth it") , and transit people like it because their trips are faster (and London had a surge in bus ridership)

LONDON PERCEPTIONS OF SUCCESS:

After three years of congestion pricing, Transport for London surveys showed that more than 70 per cent of Londoners said the system was effective and
twice as many supported the charge as opposed it. Shortly after the program’s implementation, First London, a business association ..., found that 49 percent of Central London businesses believed congestion charging was working. Only 2 percent of companies say they would consider relocating to a site outside the zone because of it.

https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2007/01/18/new-congestion-charging-survey-in-line-with-london-stockholm/

SIMILAR "ITS WORKING" IN STOCKHOLM:

Before its implementation in Stockholm, Sweden, a survey showed that 80 percent of Stockholm residents were opposed to the idea of congestion pricing. Yet, after a seven month trial from January to July 2006, 53 percent of Stockholm residents voted to keep the city’s congestion charging system in place.

 

[TheRifleman]

Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

If you prefer to think in class struggle terms, a $5 congestion tax will mostly be paid by fatcats commuting by car from Weston to their tall building office, and will fund the bus and rail that actual poor and moderate income people use.

We will tax those blood suckers in their Teslas and underground garages, and return the money to the masses on the bus.

How's that, comrade?

All you doing is creating another tax and in the end it will only affect the middle class worker that actually drives in and out of Boston.
Most workers driving in and out of the city are not fat cats.
Here is my data
How many fat cats are there commuting to Boston daily? 500-1000?
How many everyday workers commuting to Boston to the city? 50,000?

Once you start creating these stupid taxes you just start to price out the common family from going to the city. INCOME INEQUALITY at its best.

We should pull the data on how many Bostonians vs shell corporations actually own real estate in the Seaport after investing hundreds of millions even Billions of taxpayer dollars in the area.

We need solutions, visionaries not the creation of more taxes. The local, state and federal govts are bankrupt. That is why they are destroying the value of the dollar to continue to promote their spending agendas. Unlimited Pensions, free Healthcare they are not provided in the private sector they should not be provided at the govt levels. They just legalized drugs and gambling that's how desperate its gotten. They are the new MOB in town.

 

[Arlington]

Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

Actually,some useful numbers here:
https://www.boston.gov/sites/defaul...7/go_boston_2030_-_3_boston_today_spreads.pdf

Top-level way of saying "the poor" are not in cars

"Drive alone" is 38.9% of trips.

vs

Zero-vehicle households are disproportionately poor and non-white
Many households in Boston already own one car, but white Bostonians are more likely to live in a household with one or more vehicles than those of other races. Among households with no vehicles, more than half have annual incomes less than $25,000. Only 7% of zero-vehicle households make over $100,000


PARTICULARLY BOSTON RESIDENTS

Only 29k Bostonians drive to their job in the city (another 37k drive "out)
but 60k ride transit within the city.

So within Boston, riders outnumber SOV drivers by 2 to 1.

During the peak hour of the morning commute, 395,000 people head to destinations in Boston. Of these trips, 229,600 (60%) originate outside of Boston while the remainder start within the city. Of the workers entering Boston, 95,000 drive alone, 83,000 take transit, and 36,000 carpool. It should be noted that those transit trips represent a 36% mode share for trips entering Boston—higher then Bostonian’s own transit mode share for commute trips of 33%.

 

[Arlington]

Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

All you doing is creating another tax and in the end it will only affect the middle class worker that actually drives in and out of Boston.

Everyone will pay the charge. The rich can pay it as a rounding error, and the middle class can pay it as a luxury (it is a free country).

And stop saying "Boston" as if the whole city is one homogeneous place where middle class people live and work evenly distributed.

Back Bay, Longwood, Seaport, Downtown.

Basically ZERO middle class people LIVE IN these places. Even fewer middle class people drive to work FROM these places. To the extent that recent grads and moderate income people LIVE IN these places, they probably pay the crazy rent so they can walk, bike, or transit to work. Not because they live in Longwood and drive to Seaport.

Absolutely middle class people WORK IN these places, but they, like 70% of Londoners, will be better served by more transit and less traffic, partly because these are likely the people who are transit users now (or are on the edge and for whom better buses will beat costly driving)

Within Boston, a congestion scheme would be a huge political win once people saw how it worked, just as it was in London, Stockholm, and every other Western democracy that's tried them.

Across the metro area, it'd be a little less popular because, yes there are pockets of people--maybe 10%-- who have, for some reason, chosen to spend their lives in their car from 495 to a job downtown. They've probably made a lot of bad choices (car too fancy, house to McMansiony). Sorry, it is these hyper-drivers that are congesting the roads, imposing unfair costs on the rest of us.

 

[Equilibria]

Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

LONDON ECONOMICS (AND BENEFITS OF FASTER MOBILITY)


(bolding mine)
https://www.researchgate.net/public...ults_of_the_London_Congestion_Charging_Scheme


There's more detail out there about how motorists like it because their trips are faster (those who keep driving consider it "worth it") , and transit people like it because their trips are faster (and London had a surge in bus ridership)

If I banned all but one person from driving, that person would be able to go really fast. Lowering demand while keeping capacity constant doesn't have faster travel as a benefit - it's a consequence. It's inevitable. That doesn't mean it's good.

Essentially, the people who like the tax are the people who don't care about it (the rich who are further privileged than they already were) and the people who don't have to pay it or change their behavior (the transit riders). The people who are negatively affected are by definition a relative minority, which makes it easy for the majority to drown them out.

I agree with you that it would be a political win. It would also be a moral loss.

Absolutely middle class people work in these places, but they, like 70% of Londoners, will be better served by more transit and less traffic, partly because these are likely the people who are transit users now (or are on the edge and for whom better buses will beat costly driving)

I see, and how are they getting there now? Do you know that the middle class aren't driving to their jobs in those neighborhoods? Is there a plan on the table to provide a transit alternative that can be funded by the surcharge? Will such an alternative serve the range of relatively less-dense places those people live?

 

[Arlington]

Yes, a minority of the people are driving too much and paying too little and scheduling their trips for rush hour because they don't mind sitting in traffic, are happy to "be traffic" that congests our metro area for the entire distance of their supercommute.

They are the straws that break the camel's back, congestion-wise, and it is they--a marginal 10%--whom the congestion charge "targets" and says "you gotta change"

As JumboBuc noted, though, a good congestion charge can be made to target congestion-makers. It should also be time-of-day ($6 all day if we see your car 7am - 10am or 3pm - 7pm, but only $4 if you avoid these times)

As with the fictional "Casino Trips at Rush Hour" that Rifelman wrongly feared, the reality is that the "Newbury Street Art-Buying and Salon Trips" don't happen at rush hour either. They should only pay $4.

 

[Equilibria]

Yes, a minority of the people are driving too much and paying too little and because they don't mind sitting in traffic, are happy to "be traffic" that congests our metro area for the entire distance of their supercommute.

They are the straws that break the camel's back, congestion-wise, and it is they--a marginal 10%--whom the congestion charge "targets" and says "you gotta change"

What "supercommute" are we talking about here? The adjunct professor in the Fenway who got priced out of the city and had to move to Billerica? That's a "supercommute" in your mind? After screwing them once on the housing, we should intentionally punish them as well?

 

[Arlington]

What "supercommute" are we talking about here? The adjunct professor in the Fenway who got priced out of the city and had to move to Billerica? That's a "supercommute" in your mind? After screwing them once on the housing, we should intentionally punish them as well?

"Had to" how does that subpoena to move to Billerica read?

Answer: it was actually an economic choice based on tradeoffs, which included underpricing "I am willing to sit in traffic...and be other people's congestion...at rush hour" We gotta price that higher.

 

[bigpicture7]

Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

If I banned all but one person from driving, that person would be able to go really fast. Lowering demand while keeping capacity constant doesn't have faster travel as a benefit - it's a consequence. It's inevitable. That doesn't mean it's good.

Lots of history and social science illustrates that we can never count on people to self-regulate for the greater good. It's a system archetype.

So this really becomes a question of: if we have to coerce the operation of the system into a certain state, what do we agree best coincides with our (society's) overall values of how it should operate? This does require democratic reconciliation of diverse interests/preferences.

Given an over-constrained system that can never be "perfect" for any one type of actor, what is the most optimal reconciliation that is at least satisfactory for everyone?

 

[TheRifleman]

As with the fictional "Casino Trips at Rush Hour" that Rifelman wrongly feared, the reality is that the "Newbury Street Art-Buying and Salon Trips" don't happen at rush hour either. They should only pay $4.

The casino hasn't even opened. 99, Assembly Square is a goddam nightmare on the weekends. I don't even dare drive in those areas.

So what the hell are you talking about.

The city & state, MBTA, Mass highway should have been working on plans 10 years ago concerning Transit. They should be ashamed of themselves at this point.

Honestly create a riders tax for $20.00 a day. I could care less. The state is going down the path of Comifornia. It only makes the workers of Mass never get ahead you serve nothing more than the corporations like slaves.

Maybe they should ask Liberty Mutual to pay some taxes instead of issuing tax incentives to an insurance company based in the backbay. Maybe more taxes paid by the corporations could be invested in the MBTA to help commuters and with affordable housing. Nah. The CEO walked away with 50 Million of the tax dollars that should have been generated to the taxpayers along with Liberty Mutual investing money the democratic platform for Deval Patrick at the time. Its a JOKE.

 

[Equilibria]

"Had to" how does that subpoena to move to Billerica read?

Answer: it was actually an economic choice based on tradeoffs, which included underpricing "I am willing to sit in traffic...and be other people's congestion...at rush hour" We gotta price that higher.

When you say "we gotta price that higher", there's no balance on the other side of the equation. What are you lowering to keep people closer to work (hint: the only acceptable answer is "rent"). Otherwise, what you're saying is "we've gotta tax people higher for having the audacity to choose careers that don't pay a living wage".

Lots of history and social science illustrates that we can never count on people to self-regulate for the greater good. It's a system archetype.

So this really becomes a question of: if we have to coerce the operation of the system into a certain state, what do we agree best coincides with our (society's) overall values of how it should operate? This does require democratic reconciliation of diverse interests/preferences.

Given an over-constrained system that can never be "perfect" for any one type of actor, what is the most optimal reconciliation that is at least satisfactory for everyone?

Generally, I think people are okay with how things are right now. They like to complain about congestion, and everyone likes to blame other people for "ruining the city" and wants to price the things those other people do, then claim the money for their own good.

Just as no one will self-regulate, no one will ever be satisfied. It's why every attempt at true socialism inevitably turns into kleptocracy.

 

[SeamusMcFly]

Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

I used to work at BIDMC and almost all the nurses drove to work, and they drove alone, in my department. I doubt that’s changed much, especially since a lot of them lived quite far away... but Beth Israel has increased their parking rates, I do know that. I wouldn’t be so quick to assume people aren’t paying more than they can afford to drive alone.

The amount of nurses I see on the CR and subway doesn't agree with "almost all". When I have no headphones, it's clear that most of them are heading to Longwood and not MGH.
Probably a bit much of anecdotal generalization.

Then again, if someone is paying more than they can afford to drive alone, they are the problem. Stop paying more than you can afford for a commute you don't need to drive.

 

[Arlington]

When you say "we gotta price that higher", there's no balance on the other side of the equation. What are you lowering to keep people closer to work.

I'm lowering the cost of frequent, useful regional rail and bus, that shortens the *time* to work (and cost to work) even though it does not lessen the distance.

 

[Equilibria]

I'm lowering the cost of frequent, useful regional rail and bus, that shortens the *time* to work (and cost to work) even though it does not lessen the distance.

After how many decades of taxes? The T is just starting to study it today, and that doesn't imply that it even happens.

The amount of nurses I see on the CR and subway doesn't agree with "almost all". When I have no headphones, it's clear that most of them are heading to Longwood and not MGH.
Probably a bit much of anecdotal generalization.

Then again, if someone is paying more than they can afford to drive alone, they are the problem. Stop paying more than you can afford for a commute you don't need to drive.

I'm curious how you know that they have the option to live on transit. I'm also curious what the distribution of children is among those nurses.

Lots of people on this thread that know how to run other peoples' lives.

 

[Arlington]

Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

The amount of nurses I see on the CR and subway doesn't agree with "almost all". When I have no headphones, it's clear that most of them are heading to Longwood and not MGH.
Probably a bit much of anecdotal generalization.

Then again, if someone is paying more than they can afford to drive alone, they are the problem. Stop paying more than you can afford for a commute you don't need to drive.

I will concede (to FK4) that what you are seeing are probably nursing aides of various sorts. But to my point, the ones you see on the T are *definitely* working class, and make up about half of employment at a hospital. RNs make more.

In Longwood, I'd still be confident that driving and higher pay are highly correlated, and that Economic Justice favors better transit, not cheaper driving.

And if you're a BIDMC employee that supercommutes by car but doesn't want to pay the new $5 congestion charge, you can ask to move to BIDMC facilities that are dotted all around 128 (and probably much closer to home). Frankly all the bigger downtown employers have long been asking "who needs to be downtown?" --whether Fidelity or BIDMC--and have an entire set of tradeoffs they work.

"Don't screw up rush hour" (or be willing to pay $5/day if you must) should be part of everyone's location-choice tradeoff.

 

[kmp1284]

Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

All you doing is creating another tax and in the end it will only affect the middle class worker that actually drives in and out of Boston.
Most workers driving in and out of the city are not fat cats.
Here is my data
How many fat cats are there commuting to Boston daily? 500-1000?
How many everyday workers commuting to Boston to the city? 50,000?

How much does one have to earn to be considered a fat cat?

 

[odurandina]

impose a *$5 dollar fine on every Uber/Lyft fare.

tough medicine I KNOW. i'm gladly forking it over.


*except after the T stops running.