I'm not here to give alternative solutions, I'm here to tell you the current solution is slightly worse than nothing.
You would have to make the solution fairly complex for it to be beneficial. But I'd start with quantifying why people are in the city, rather than treating them all the same.
If it were my job, I'd have a better solution than congestion charges, that's for damn sure.
>"convert an urban highway into a beautiful linear park and waterway"
They converted an inner urban highway and other highways in the sky (in the immediate city centre) to walking paths while adding extra highways to the pool further out from the city centre. Removing the inner highways added to congestion, adding the outer highways reduced congestion.
They did not add congestion charges and the city handles it fine. They are not stupid like a lot of people here are.
You may or may not be stupid. I don't know.
Do you have anything to reply? I think you're running afoul of guidelines too.
Externalities are one of the thornier issues and making those prices clear to people is how we get people to decide whether they actually want to pay the full price of a good or service.
Artificial, organic, lab grown or otherwise - does the price of a good or service capture the cost of its production.
It's really nice to be able to pay for better facilities _when you need them_. The person who is late for a flight or a job interview, or who just found out their kid got hurt at school and is heading to the hospital, benefits massively from congestion pricing. They have the ability to access faster transportation when they need it, and to choose the slower alternative when they don't.
Where it fails is an Uber/taxi drivers add a lot more congestion than an average person and the fees don’t get adjusted for this issue.
You can create bus and emergency lanes you know, with less detriment.
No, it's a good solution to negative externalities. In the status quo, drivers do not bear the full cost of driving (noise, pollution, opportunity cost of time lost in traffic). Congestion pricing address that by imposting a fee equal to the societal cost of those externalities.
It's not a good solution in any sense of the word. There are reasons we don't charge for some things. Do you charge people extra who use their entire bin on bin day?
It's weird how many people here are not smart enough to realise how backwards this solution is.
It has played out in other cities, there is only one way for it to play out.
It's okay if you disagree with the facts, but it's fairly easy to understand how pricing people out is a poor attempt at a solution, but solves the problem by brute force anyway.
>where the (reasonable) argument is that the transportation system is more than sufficient and the traffic, noise, and tailpipe emissions of your car do more harm to local residents than they fairly benefit you.
Yes. I never said that less cars is not beneficial. I understand this, that's why I said what I said.
There's no such thing as "fairly benefiting from other residents"...
You're still not solving the problem by slapping a $ figure to the entrance of cars. It's just a lazy and bad solution.