ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 ก.ย. 2024
- Congestion pricing works - just look at London.
Become a Video Lab member! bit.ly/video-lab
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo recently announced a plan to bring congestion pricing to New York City. The goal is to raise money for the city’s crumbling public transit system and reclaim the dangerously busy city streets. But what is congestion pricing, and can it actually solve all our transit woes?
We took a look at London, a city that enacted a congestion charge in 2003, to see some of the benefits. Check out the video above to learn more.
For further reading look to our sister site, Curbed: www.curbed.com/
www.curbed.com...
For information on New York’s potential earnings and benefits:
www.hntb.com/HN...
And a closer look at how much money is wasted sitting in traffic:
pfnyc.org/wp-co...
Finally - Check out this article by Nicole Badstuber on how London congestion pricing has started to level out and the plans the city has in place to bring revenue back up:
www.citylab.co...
Note: The headline for this video has been updated since publishing.
Previous headline: How London is fighting its nightmare traffic
Vox.com is a news website that helps you cut through the noise and understand what's really driving the events in the headlines. Check out www.vox.com.
Watch our full video catalog: goo.gl/IZONyE
Follow Vox on Facebook: goo.gl/U2g06o
Or Twitter: goo.gl/XFrZ5H
The traffic solution that American cities are not investing in:
Public transport
@Ulyanoff Lennon Aiming for GDP growth exclusively is exactly why everything is such a mess. GDP is only a measure of how much you produce. If you bought new furniture every 2 years you wouldn't be much better of than if you inherited it from your parents 30 years ago, but it would contribute to increasing GDP.
Nobody is looking into how things actually are, instead they wanna compare single numbers and claim success. Developed countries don't need to grow GDP by at least 7% every year to guarantee prosperity. Japan had a
@Ulyanoff Lennon is this satire?
So, instead of congesting cars, people are gonna get congested into buses that are still creating traffic. Most people wouldn't accept giving up their autonomy and waiting for buses.
@@FM-tn5pk Sure
Cause 1 bus = 1 car, oh right, buses can carry 27 times more people.
You can almost forget that you need 20 times less vehicles when it all depends on public transport
Install ziplines between skyscrapers = problem solved
This needs a GoFundMe account.
SKYBRIDGES!!
@@DutchTDK Singapore has some of these. Skybridges that connect separate buildings to each other.
It may sound good, but imagine actually building it... getting the approvals from the city, from the owners of the buildings, managing the construction, creating the stations etc - and still, traffic on the ground would be stuck.
We have something that sounds similar here in canada, called a +15. A total of 18 km and 62 bridges in my city alone.
Most of the problem is that many of the vehicles only have ONE person in it....and thats the driver.
Annnnnnd....also the problem the is that too many ppl are uncooperative and lazy to choose a different mode of transport..thus they must be forced lol. Bring on the tariffs! 🤣
Most cars are only used one hour per day and for 90% of the trips taken carry only one person, the driver. (Research from Susan Shaheen from 2002)
Yes, but unless we build subways into areas with no service it’s going to punish those who have no other choices.
I’m against congestion pricing because it allows the rich a carefree and comfortable drive into the heart of the city. Make the charge dependent on income. The more you make the more you pay.
One person might pay $2.00 while another pays a maximum of $10.00.
Isaac Guandique
Maybe because I want to go from point a to b and go home very FAST and time saving. Based on google maps, it takes 15 minutes of driving and 1 hr+ of bus.
Yeah. I’m taking a car.
Craig F. Thompson
Yeah. In my area, from Home to work, it takes 15 minutes of car, 1hr+ of bus, switching bus.
Yeah I don’t see how slapping a train in MY area is a faster route.
Plus, I see you in every video in most videos like this. You’re a troll
"It wont happen until 2020"
Corona: I heard theres a traffic problem?
In Seattle, traffic dropped a lot in March 2020, but was back up to previous levels by May or June 2020. And this isn't exceptional in America; our pandemic response was basically just half of us staying home and wearing masks while the other half screamed like defiant children and mashed their faces all over everything because our worst president in history refused to give up his games. And without support from the government, everyone had to just go back to work. In 12 months, from March 2020 to February 2021, we each received about 2 months worth of individual support from the government. And this is an economy where half of middle-class households couldn't meet a 1-month income shortfall even if they sold everything they could (TV, furniture, jewelry, loans, etc).
So yeah, traffic had a slight drop, but it's back to usual.
@@googiegress Also, besides that, less traffic means higher car speeds and more pedestrian and cyclist injuries and deaths.
@@newsaxonyproductions7871 I've noticed actual highway speeds went from 65 mph (5 over the limit) to more like 75-80 mph on the same roads. I suspect we're getting more crashes and more severe ones.
As for pedestrians and cyclists, it's a deathtrap. We need to totally restructure our roads, zoning, and transit priorities before it's safe to ride, much less enjoyable.
@@googiegress The guidelines for streets in America say that if there is too much speeding on a street, then the speed limit should be raised. It's in the "Green Book".
This was still implemented, and it didn't improve traffic at all.
When I moved to Stockholm I thought it was crazy that you gotta pay to enter the city area with a car, but after living here and taking public transport 99% of the time, I can tell you it's awesome! Every major city should implement it!
It literally looks like it's quicker to walk during NYC's rush hour than drive..
Now you know why Casey Neistat uses his boosted board
bruh when it rains...
Or perhaps use a bike?
@@zaidakbaralmuharram2984 wear a coat?
Worse in LA
Vox: *talking about traffic*
Me: i should try this at *cities skylines*
How though?
@@akshatprakash871 mods!
Toll gates at border downtown?
@@BlackEagle352 let me try
YES EXACTLY
I live inside London's congestion charge area - it really does work. There is fewer traffic making the roads safer and every single person I know uses public transport or bikes to get around more efficiently.
because London has a perfect public transport system. only the congestion charge wouldn't change much.
should they also charge bikes?
@@HSstudio.Ytchnnl no, because cycling is a sustainable mode that doesn't cause traffic jams whereas cars are unsustainable and cause traffic in the first place
@@michaelz.7140 The point of the congestion charge was to help pay for our now improved public transport. It’s still far from perfect though
charge the bike riders also why just the cars
Sitting in traffic is quite dangerous.
You'll get run over.
I slightly snorted with one nostril.
I'm going to use this joke on my GF and watch her eyes roll out of her head.
Thanks.
@@Ortorin its a pleasure
@@balmain-i3e You're my hero.
@@notnilc2107 just looking out for y'all
haha 😂😂😂
Thanks for that!
Public transport, cycling and walking are much more efficient use of space, that's what any large city should be focussing on right now.
But they can't just suddenly change. That's why their doing these small changes, it's a start.
@@puglord6349 Exactly! its a great start. A next step can be banning polluting vehicles
But I'm a fatty and I resist change because my identity is tied up with cars!
I always have found it odd, how we use 2000 lb/1000kg vehicle to move a 150 lb/75kg person
Too Curmudgeon You can’t walk in places like the Bay Area and LA where everyone is situated in the suburbs and their workplaces are usually 30-40 miles away. Hell, I go to school 22 miles away I’m not walking 16 hours a day to go to school!
Cars in a city environment are pretty awful. More walkable places and public transit is best for denser cities.
Bulk public transit is ideal, as it reduces the amount of vehicles on the road, and therefore also the emmisions.
MarktheSpark It only works if there’s existing public transport though. Fortunately I can take public transport often, but I have friends that either have to walk around 20-30 minutes to get home on top of spending up to 30-40 minutes waiting for each transfer.
@markthespark yes i can 100 precent agree america is behind in public transport
MarktheSpark Dude I don’t even live in America. Anyways just looking at America from the outside there’s no way this’ll work, American cities just aren’t designed around public transport in their current state. This is going the screw over people who need to get into the city but can’t pay. Honestly a new car tax or something like that is what I think would be more effective in America.
Ziyan Li Cities like Manhattan were completely designed and built before the private automobile so that is not true. This is true for the downtown core areas of most North American cities too. Most of our cities ran on tram cars in the first quarter of the 20th century and slowly cars crept in to dominate transportation, which took about 20 years. After WW2 the automobilization of America was undertaken with complete enthusiasm and its understandable that such a thing was done as they didn’t know about the future problems cars would create- the pollution, the gridlock, the obesity, the stress, the global warming, the social isolation, etc. General Motors Futurama exhibit from the 50s is a great example of the way people saw the future back then. The reality has been a *bit* different. The tough thing to overcome is the challenge of adapting the infrastructure that has been built from 1950 to today into a system that accommodates multiple transit modes. This is easier in city centers which were built pre-1950. It is however possible. Check out the book Transist for Suburbia by Paul Mees for an well reasoned and enlightening discussion on the topic.
How shall we stop people abusing something?
Let's charge them
- literally every problem ever
I was thinking the same. It’s basically saying “you can abuse X if you have enough money”
Or ban them, in the case of e-bikes (in my country, from pedestrian walkways)
I wonder why
Sin taxes work to dissuade people
@@kennedyblevins2174 the money goes to fund the opposite
Vox : London has a nightmare traffic
Jakarta : Am I joke to you?
MRT is just one line and only available at business district. Transjakarta is a joke when you need to make a transit. Walking is a sauna and nightmare for your lungs. Motorcycles are dangerous even if you pratice safe driving. Cars are too slow but comfortable. Grab or Gojek might be a solution but their fares will skyrocket.
Manila: Amateurs
(honestly tho how bad it is there?)
Manila - EXCUSE ME!?!?
Im indonesian and i lived at jakarta for 7 years. And you right
And KL is laughing with all of its mighty lines of LRTs...
A technique we haven't tried yet:
Drive like youre playing GTA
thats me
Why do you think there's no traffic in Russia.
Who needs to worry about road congestion? I drive on the sidewalks. And on the pedestrians.
So you haven't been to Italy?
Agnaye Ochani lanes in gta are extra wide to let you squeeze through. Otherwise the game would be boring as life itself.
*Vox* : London has a nightmare traffic
[ *Insert your city name* ] : Hold my [ _Insert your national symbol_ ]
@CHONG YAO GUANG - glad to meet a Malaysian
Vox: London has nightmare traffic
Buenos Aires: Hold my mate
Vox: London has nightmare traffic
Jakarta: Hold my Es Cendol
Vox: London has nightmare traffic
Jakarta: Hold my Es Cendol
CHONG YAO GUANG - more like: hold my teh tarik
The traffic solution most cities haven’t tried: Covid 19
Is that a joke?
obviously
I loved it! Now its back to normal pretty much where i live . I liked the pandemic ngl..
😂
This is a joke. NY tried covid19 n people want to go out more than ever to catch it.
*Vox:* London has nightmare traffic
*Barcelona:* *[bans traffic]*
"Modern problems require *outstanding moves*
This needs something more than a like. Transit time down and average travel speed up during the extinction rebellion.
There's nothing good about cars, and restricting cars to rich people is obscene.
@@gasdive Cars are incredibly useful, especially in non-coastal US. Even if you do live in area with good public transit, or are lucky enough to live close enough to work you can walk/bike when you leave the area to say go hiking/fishing/hunting a car is a must. If you work in construction, lawn care, farming, oil, etc... there are a lot of tools you need with you as you move around across large areas and again a vehicle is a must. You may not need a car, and that's great for you, but for a lot of people they are required, and it is good they are available.
@@ithraldharzul6887 if you're going hunting on a city, there's something wrong with you.
@@ithraldharzul6887 you go to a car park outside the city.
they are banning highly polluting cars some days in barcelona and madrid days where the air quality goes down. thats not banning traffic
This should be proportional to income. Otherwise it's more of an elitist policy to get low- and middle-class citizens off the road.
Low and middle class citizens probably don't have cars.
@@lancewang4923
Weird how 84% of american households have cars then
Is the upper class the majority?
@@dustinjames1268 we are talking about NYC. Most people don't drive to Manhattan anyway.
@@lancewang4923
45% of NYC households have a car
Still too much to be considered as something the lower and middle classes cant do
Until that number hits 1%, your point is invalid
@@dustinjames1268 Ok, let's say the middle class does commute by car. Well, I still believe congestion prices should still be fixed. Driving is a luxury anyway. The point of congestion pricing is to discourage people from driving, so traffic reduces. So where the middle class people going to depend on for transport? Like the video said, public transport. And this policy provides funding for improving public transport infrastructure, so it's a win-win.
Exemptions for cars with more than 9 seats: everyone buy a bus!
...and give your neighbors a ride to the city center!
Eusunt Dac Just Buy a 15 passenger van oh wait that burns more fuel
Or just ride the bus?!
Have fun finding parking.
That exemption makes no sense. Busses would already pay less per the amount of congestion they're creating since they're slower and occupy more space. Since they can carry more people, the cost per passenger is lower than a car. And, most buses are commercial and operate throughout the day rather than for a single trip. So, a single daily charge of $15 is almost nothing for a bus vs. a non-trivial charge for a private car.
"Traffic in cities like LA is so bad, drivers could be locked in gridlock for hours."
*laughs and cries in Manila*
*Laughs and cries in India*
Laughs in Lagos
*laughs and cries in EDSA avenue*
hey, manila isn't that bad.
And despite the worsening traffic, Angelenos continue to buy cars and drive which is mind boggling for me.
Someone from London here - congestion pricing has definitely worked to bring down traffic in the centre of town, making the city a little more pleasant and less crowded at times. Only issue is that the tube (subway) has born the brunt of the issue, and while there are new trains on some of the main surface lines, the key underground lines (Piccadilly, Central, Victoria, Northern) are really struggling with overcrowding, with no plans to bring in any new trains until 2030 or so.
That is a problem. Sounds like they need to increase busing and make biking safer by having lanes separate from traffic like Amsterdam.
@@sandal_thong8631 Agreed. The mayor keeps trying to do these things but there's a lot of backlash by drivers so it's hard to implement. People don't understand the benefits until we actually do it and reap the benefits
Average speed in New York during congestion: 7 mph
Increase speed of weight ~9%...
So, it bumps up the speed to a whopping 7.49 mph...
Yim yum
The idea as a whole sound very sensible and effective but 8-13% less congestion and a 9% higher speed don't exactly sound spectacular...
Improvements are usually always small at first. Need to start somewhere.
@@sjwimmel Increases take time, London didn't have their 40% reduction in congestion overnight
Nine percent, but on a huge scale. Nine percent of 10 bucks is 90 cents but nine percent of a million is $90,000
(edit: which is reportedly what the Ontario government is said to have recently spent on a license plate rebranding and design overhaul, leaving many on both sides scratching their heads. Some see it as pushing a politcal agenda; others see it as reminiscent of a previous opposition government's 200k+ rebranding yet opinions on political agenda were mixed).
edit: math. thanks for the correction, S. P.
Traffic in London has seen a big improvement since this rule has been applied
The Islamic jizyah tax by Sadiq Khan
But they have subway
@@captainghostlyranger Right. Public transit is super important. Honestly, all city centers should ban personal cars; delivery vehicles, public transit, and construction vehicles only.
I’ve lived in both London and New York and they’re so very similar in almost every way, so this new charge will fix the awful system of trevalling in New York. If the train system was made more appealing and people actually wanted to go on trains instead of being forced to, organically, traffic will decrease. Here in London, tube is the main way to travel in the city and is by far the most reliable, and the underground is very clean looking and ergonomic, and makes travelling on it appealing, unlike the NY system, where it is just an old soot collecting bunch of weak carriages with dirty stations. Places like LA can also use a better train system, as it’s also a mega city and any city with lots of visitors or residents should really have efficient public transport.
2000guineas Ken Livingston was mayor in 2003, and Boris Johnson didn’t change it either. It has nothing to do with the racist bullshit you’ve been fed.
The subway is already jam packed w/o this. NYC better improve public transit to god tier if they’re gonna be charging people for driving.
The whole point is to increase funding to public transit.
Cj W I have to disagree. The whole point is to help the environment. The money raised to pay for infrastructure repairs will not be as much as they say mainly because people will just change their behavior. So congestion pricing will actually just stop people from coming into midtown and lower Manhattan by car. Once people adjust, the money earned by cars coming in will be far less but quality of life would have increased greatly.
Bus service will see a great improvement for sure. Subway infrastructure including signals will also see improvement of which will help with train movement.
@@justSTUMBLEDupon great point - I think we are saying the same basic thing, that increased funding of public transit will help more people use it, cut down on individual vehicle use, and subsequently help the environment.
@@justSTUMBLEDupon so you "help" the environment, by getting rid of people coming into the largest city in the country huh? And people wonder why environmentalists are accused of being misanthropic. You don't love the environment (whatever that means), you hate people.
@@terrencedayton2788 That's not at all what they said. You help the environment by having people come into the city by efficient mass transit as opposed to inefficient private vehicles. This clears up space on the road which makes alternative modes of travel (like walking or biking) safer and overall cuts down on traffic and pollution, resulting in an overall improved quality of life for the people in those districts.
"Increase speeds by up to 9%." On top of 6.80mph, that's 7.41mph. yay?
Blatant propaganda. All this does is drive out the poorer people from coming into and clogging up these rich people's streets
I noticed that too! I was like wait, that's just 0,7 mph faster...
YAY
@@briano9397 Poorer people don't have cars
Propaganda or not this policy is actually worth to add in some urban areas. Look at italian ZTL.
We have some of the most narrow streets in the entire europe and we do quite well with the many cities that introduced it.
Milan is the italian london/nyc. They are making it bigger as it improved the city.
You are sticking to the past, it isn't worth.
If you're going to London, don't use the roads. Do what everyone else does and use the tube.
I see visitors in central asking around for cabs and I’m like 😬. Not only is tube way cheaper (one way to other side of London is a couple of dollars- cab is minimum £25 out of central), it’s also way faster. In general, the more populated a city is, the more its people should be inclined to use public transport.
Now compare this to New York. "Take a tube to Staten Island. Oh wait..."
I just did this afternoon!
Wait a second, you guys call the metro a tube?
@@kadengolda2373 yes but the official name is The London Underground
Copenhagen is a great city to move around, unless you are in a car. And that's the way it should be. Bikes, public transport and walking. Be more green.
Same for Amsterdam.
@@archknight7278 Amsterdam is better for cycling than Copenhagen imo
@@emiliofernandez7117 ik, the government basically made bicycling a patriotic duty. Love that for them.
Just improve your Public Transportation system!
Yeah, that's what some of us are trying to do. But try expanding public transportation with political polarization, a tax-skeptical populace, special interests eager to defeat such proposals, low (at the moment) gas prices, and embedded car culture.
Public transportation is good inside NYC. But some dickheads don't wanna use
@@kkk2.077 As a New Yorker I agree lol
@@eblostique
Subway not, long distance trains yes
@Craig F. Thompson
Yes ,but your point is ?
Is New York going to make all of their subway stations wheelchair accessible/more disability friendly in response? Actually they should do that before they implement this to ensure disabled people aren’t paying more than the average New Yorker because they can’t access the subway station closest to where they need to go.
It looks like folks with disabilities can apply for up to a 100% discount on the London congestion charge. Hopefully NY will do the same with the tax, but also use the money it generates to make their public transportation more accessible a well, it desperately needs it.
No, they won’t. Short-sighted interest in making more money is their aim. Seems like the MTA is in the red every year and for the billions they make in revenue, no one seems to know where the money goes. So please believe that not a thing will be done for making the subway more accessible for those with disabilities.
C-light
most of the money made by the subway is going to the state government not the city. So effectively the state make money off the subway but never puts money in to fix. This is a big reason why other cities in new are becomes nicer.
Not sure about New York but individuals with disabilities in London do not pay the Congestion Charge
Well, you can solve this issue by exempting disabled people from congestion fee. Similar to how the residents of that area get exempted from the fee.
"Why wouldn't we pay for a city road?"
Because we do...
Most of the funding for public transit is through taxes as well. The fares are usually less than half of the funding.
You pay for transit through taxes too and are still expected to pay to use it. And it is much more cost efficient than roads.
Exactly.
Actually you dont "pay", all funds generated from taxes, gas tax and public transit goes into the government general fund. so no you dont pay to use roads. And the amount of taxes collect from the gas tax is not enough to pay for roads, same with public transportation taxes. regardless, both roads and public transport are subsidies by taxes but public transport you have to pay again to use it!!!
@@SofaSpy that's not true gas tax in most states are supposed to go to repairing the roass and was sold to to the resident in that way but governments move money and it goes to other projects. Something that can happen with this idea to charge for traffic congestion
This actually works, but it has to be done swiftly without caring how the public feels about it, or else they will raise every objection imaginable and mobilise opponents.
Seems like an argument against democracy then. If how the public feels is so against rational thinking they need to be disregarded. How can they be asked to vote rationally?
It was tried here in Norway and exactly what you said happened. They even started a "no tollroads"-party. Ridiculous
@@user-uy1rg8td1v well yeah generally people don't care about anything other than themselves, especially in a world that's all about individualism. People also hate change.
@@user-uy1rg8td1v it's an illustration of democracy failing within capitalism--public opinion is bought and shaped by the private entities whose bottom lines will be affected, even if the change makes city life better for citizens.
@@SpektrikMusic yes especially when that change you're talking about is reaching into your pocket and squeezing your nuts real hard right before they take your money out of your wallet.
"Why wouldn't we pay for a city road?"
Because we do...
Litterally with tazes, tolls, gas...
Right - it's just another form of toll, except it's tied to a set of roads instead of a bridge. Nothing wrong with that.
Right, she sounds so silly to me. $15/ way is much more expensive than the toll in Chicago of just $1.50. We pay for the roads with tolls, taxes, gas, and with the Illinois lottery. (The revenue helps fund schools and infrastructure)
Unfortunately the revenue generated by the gas tax and other forms of infrastructure taxes is almost never enough to cover the huge cost of maintaining as many roads as exist in most US cities. Voters also almost never approve of increasing taxes to fund more infrastructure, and income streams earmarked for infrastructure (like lotteries etc) are often instead spent on funding tax breaks for businesses. If the impact of cars was properly calculated, much higher taxes and congestion pricing would need to be the norm in most American cities.
@@cheyenneharmon1022 The intent of the congestion toll is not to raise revenue. It is to reduce congestion. Basics of supply and demand dictate that.
I work in SF and have to pay $5 for toll and $30-60 for parking.
Charging the other fees seems not so helpful, since most of my colleagues don't drive; our traffic is still terrible.
Yeah but overall london has a much better subway system than nyc lol
(edit) thxxx for the likes, its only a useless comment tho 😂😂
True but the subway has AC, riding the tube even in winter is a travelling hotbox
They would use the money to improve public transport
@@AirQuotes the new Elizabeth Line trains are so comfy with the AC, hopefully it will become the norm
@@AirQuotes most tube trains have AC. Only the oldest stock doesn't
@@OlanKenny I've lived in London for years, that's simply not true
London: Our traffic is nightmarish!
Manila: Hold my bagoong
Clorox Bleach iP here’s your goddamn reply fellow countryman
Yo London are you gonna pass that bagong?
I spent 4 hours from Manila Ninoy Aquino Airport to Angeles, Pampanga, when it wasn’t rush hour
Manila traffic is horrible. I see the main problem as a lack of public transport. The need subways like in New York or London.
Hold my bayog
Just make that, more pedestrian safe zones, and a good bike lane
Abbieq11 where? The traffic is bad as is, if you built a bike lane it would take road space away from the cars and make the traffic worse, not to mention with traffic that heavy it’s dangerous to cycle, no one would have any incentive to do it. Bike lanes are only possible if you reduce the traffic, which is partly what the congestion charge is for. So do both
In London they’ve implemented both strategies, putting in place a congestion charge zone and building cycle superhighways, which has caused the number of people commuting by bike to massively increased and taken traffic off the road. It took about 15 years to get it right but it’s worked and probably prevented many cyclist deaths on roads that were previously dangerous to commute on
Sounds like Europe! Hey haha 😂
A 8-13% reduction in vehicle traffic within the congestion zone would really allow all that to happen?
They did that in Portland, Oregon and I don't think it's helped at all. In fact, I believe it made things worse because lanes of traffic have been removed in some cases.
I’m from London, we do ‘pay for the roads’, it’s called road tax. We pay the congestion charge to go into the inner city and soon we’ll also have to pay an extra Emissions Charge for cars which give off certain levels of emissions.
There is no road tax in the UK. You might be thinking of Vehicle Excise Duty. Funding for road construction and maintenance comes from general taxation.
@@Lunariant you’re correct VED aka car tax, my bad
All of which are points that the video literally explains.
This only works when public transit in the city is in good shape. (Looking at Italy's ZTL)
@@marcello_martini beh credo tutte le città italiane ormai
@@marcello_martini Rome is a good example. They only have 2.5 metro lines and it's super congested.
And public transport may be better, when it will have more space on roads.
Aaand we've made circle
@@chawnce1 When I was in Rome, I noticed that the Metro was in Rush hour, some of the trains was filled beyond the brim, but the next train arriving on the station was near empty on the same line. It was more behaviourial of anything. I assume a better distruption of depatures of busses in other end would help. I think Rome need a circular trainline. Most cities have one, Copenhagen have two of them, and is only half of the population of in Rome, but population density is similar. If not a circular metroline, they can just connect the tram system together, it is almost a ring connection.
This ends up costing those that need to travel into the city by car in London. Those who are already rich live there and are exempt from paying. So as usual it ends up costing those who can’t really afford it and let’s those who can off
Taxes for housing are high in center areas as there is less competition. What I mean? A town can't set an high tax on housing otherwise people won't move in. A city can, as expensive houses and apartments are found there, not in rural areas.
Plus, if you want to move with your vehicle and create congestion you should pay. You may live in the restricted area and don't need to move with a vehicle because you bought your flat near your office.
Italian cities improved after ztl
I agree, this kind of approach is a tax on the poor. Why is it that millionaires and billionaires get to live in large metropolitan centers with cars and no penalty, but the working class that have to commute to those centers have to pay for those rich people to bike with no traffic? Rich people don`t drive Uber and Lyft for money, they don`t stuggle with the balance between rent and commute times, and they never take public transit. The mechanism for funding public needs to punish those that don`t participate in everyday economic activities and not the people working in those cities.
Ryan Green My thoughts, thank you.
You're acting like London doesn't have park & ride stations for car commuters. Try again.
@@FordFlatSix Which is why Uber raised rates in the congestion zone to compensate. Riders pay the toll, not the drivers.
Let the City Skyline Gurus to fix the problem lol
You called?
Hahahaha
We need bullet trains on the East and West Coasts.
It’s far too expensive, the California high speed railway will cost over 100 billion dollars.
They already tried on the West. It was a 77 billion dollar financial disaster that went nowhere.
It would cost to much, but let's think about this. If government will actually work efficiently, it could totally pay off if people actually use it. Plus we could probably reroute taxes from multiple places and it might be possible. Another possibility is to "hire companies to do it, or otherwise give them like 5% of their payments and get 10% of their profit. It can be done efficiently, but we need to do it well, and itd probably be better for private companies
The Liamster That’s because of horrible management of the project. In literally every other country it would cost less than 50 billion.
@@TheLiamster This isn't a good excuse anymore when China has high speed rail throughout the entire eastern half of the country connecting all its major cities and did this with a GDP a 1/4th the size of the USA. Highspeed rail connecting the whole of the USA would return several times that of the investment itself, no matter the price tag.
As a high income earner, I love congestion charging! Forcing all the poor people into busses and more space for me!!
But how will you afford the $15 service fee?
Problem with London traffic is, everyone is driving on the wrong side of the road.
They definitely don't drive on the right side ;)
🤣
It’s the proper side sooooo
Unless you're left handed how else are you able to defend yourself side against approaching knights?
The problem with traffic is that everyone is driving
In the Netherlands, we approached this problem through cycling paths and stuff like that.
I loved Amsterdam! It is a wonderful city and a joy to bike in.
@@kuryamtl come to Almere, it is terrible to drive in, but a joy to cycle
@@kuryamtl most Dutch people, like me, hate Amsterdam. Try to visit other provinces next time you visit the Netherlands. We have amazing cities like Apeldoorn, Zwolle, Utrecht, Rotterdam and more. If you like drug tourism, please stay in Amsterdam. If you like real tourism, visit other cities.
Americans are lazy, they would rather take out their cars rather than pedalling for a few hours.
@@LuchoCastle_11 that is a task for the (next) president. This president is too fat himself to encourage exercise.
Aren't there many approaches thinkable?
- Public transport
- Support more (E-)Bikes - Stockholm and Netherlands are very impressive for their bike-infrastructure.
- Support Homeoffice and flexible work-times
- Support carpooling
- Adapt/reduce speed-limits
- Reduce number of lanes of trafic (Germany tested it in some cites successfully like Bielefeld
Bielefeld doesn't exist
Was ist Bielefeld?
London - Traffic crisis
India - *Hold my cow*
Traffic moves and we don't need traffic lights
@@s4494r I assume they move into eachother then
Best comment, everyone can go home.
so what?
No no no
Hold my Poop
This is just a way to get poor people off the road.
This segment totally overlooks the incredibly detrimental effect that ride-sharing apps like Uber and Lyft have had on Cities like New York. The current plan calls for giving their tens of thousands of drivers an exemption! Thereby negating the effectiveness of this program. Most drivers for these apps live outside of the city center.
Great, so the ride-sharing lobby is throwing a wrench into things.
Uber was never a ride-sharing app. They tried to tag that on in 2013 onwards, following a $58 infusion from Google - then a record. Now a mere 2 weeks' burn for Uber. With the amount of money they threw at PR, they could have called themselves a Space Agency and it would have been closer to the truth. The ***** media never challenged Uber and it is history's biggest lossmaking boondoggle. $25bn in for nothing at all. Not even $0.01 in profit ever.
Honestly, they have to pay for other things like gas and insurance, why should they be exempt on this?
this will either force drivers to pay it or force the rideshare companies to subsidize the congestion fee. Its not that difficult. the rideshare companies have the money to do that, this is honestly a great idea.
I think if taxi services in NYC went with phone apps they would do better. Also, I heard years ago that shift-change occurs during evening rush when you want the maximum number of cabs on the street as possible.
Automobile drivers should be paying for not only the space they hog in the city, but also the fumes and noise they emit directly into populated neighborhoods, and the safety hazards they create on every street.
I used to cycle to work and back every day in London for years. I saved a fortune in Bus and Tube fares. I was super fit and it was a great time during the Spring/Summer months especially when cyclists outnumbered cars by 2-1 on the road.
Pay taxes to build roads, so the rich can enjoy them!
You think poor people have a car in NYC or London? LOL
@@jackblack704 almost 50% of people have cars in New York. You think they are all rich?
I live in a small town that recently got a massive influx of people and my God the traffic turned beyond awful. Our infrastructure is clearly not design to carry so much cars. I would use any mode of transportation if it got me to my destination faster. The rich can keep their roads if it means that I'll have to spend less time in traffic.
Last time I checked, the rich paid more taxes than the poor.
It's 15 dollars. That's not just rich people. Everyone can pay 15 dollars.
Everybody: We need better public transportation.
Capitalists: What if we made it so only rich people are allowed to drive?
In other places that's already the reality. Countries where gas isn't as cheap as in the US many poor people don't drive, they use public transportations. Things like this can actually improve life of those who depend on public transportation that can't afford a car.
Duke capitalist built the NYC subway system before the government took it over.
@@majurbludd We're not even talking about the same things. People are demanding better public transportation, and the typical neoliberal response is to make driving more expensive for people already strapped for cash instead of investing the taxes we're already paying into the public transport networks most of us want.
@@euroger123 That's true, but in many US cities public transportation is gestural or nonexistent. Adding congestion charges without an already usable public transport network to take up the people who cannot afford the fees but can afford public transport would just be putting the screws to an already cash-strapped poor and working class public.
EDIT: Reading through some of the other responses I've seen, many existing public transport networks are also inaccessible or barely usable for Disabled people, who on average also have less spare cash to throw around because of things like job discrimination, draconian disability compensation rules, and for-profit healthcare costs.
"you pay for parking, pay to take a bus, why wouldn't you pay to take a city road?"
Umm taxes?
Those who do not use cars also pay the same taxes, so...
And the bridge tolls
But public transport is supported by BOTH taxes and fees for use. Public roads are supported only by taxes. Why not fees for use? Many states already have tollways; this just applies that concept to congested city streets
@@mariontinio8667 There's also a tax on gasoline for road infrastructure.
Dude if you ride the metro you don't stop paying taxes. Invalid argument.
London is going a step further: ULEZ (ultra-low emission zones) started in April 2019.
What about ultra low stabbing zones?
@@user-uy1rg8td1v you're funny 😐
It is just adding on the fact that in the future everything is going to be accessable only to wealthy people to which it is almost nothing to pay 15 usd to sit in their cars, while mid class and lower are not going to have anything else left but to walk/bike or use the public transport. Reforms as such just make for a greater difference between wealthy and those who are not
And forcing people onto the bus means all the BS of using public transit which makes people late, and if you're late enough times you get fired. Awesome.
$15 per person for a 9% speed increase...jeez. That's not much when it goes from 7 mph to 8 mph
True.
But that seems to be the free market of supply and demand at work. If they charged more, then fewer would use the roads and one would then probably go faster. The key factor here is how the city will use that revenue and will they use it to make it easier to use other forms of transportation thus shifting the supply and demand equation so that one can get more increase in speed per dollar charged.
@@RonLWilson "get those poor savages off the road. let the rich through"
Over these short city distances, I think it's more helpful to think of the change as a time decrease instead. 7mph becomes 8mph, but a 40 minute drive becomes 35 minutes. An extra 5 minutes everyday can add up to a lot of saved time
Malachi McLean so for $15 you save 5 mins. So to break even you would need to make $300 an hour to make that 5 min saving worth it?
@@vhp310 I'm assuming that you're taking a taxi, the point of the tax is to discourage people from driving, unless their minutes are literally worth that.
Congestion pricing only makes sense if there is an extensive rail system available. Los Angeles is not ready yet.
Is Chicago ready?
@@Blaqjaqshellaq I don't know. Most of the Loop is well served by rail transit. I think the area along Michigan Avenue and the Lakefront need improvement. Speaking of the Lakefront, congestion pricing would help reduce congestion on Lakeshore Drive, since most traffic on Lakeshore is either going into or out of the Loop and Near North, or is through traffic bypassing the freeways to the west.
Meanwhile Singapore introduced congestion pricing 12 years before it's 1st rail system
@@lzh4950 So what did that do besides tax the poor?
And bike lanes, transit, HOV
The nyc subway is crowded and filthy. Will they improve the subways?
new York subway ridership is 5.5 million per day and the system is 80 years old what else do you expect? nyc has enough money to gold plate every subway track but that would literally require to freeze the city for few months.
@@bruh-fn5dh London have fairly modern underground systems (note London is the only place in the UK that has good train system everywhere else is a disgrace)
@@bruh-fn5dh "freeze the city for a few months" Man you need to ride BART in San Francisco it shuts down all the time and that's not even to upgrade anything XD.
@@CannabisTechLife this is NEW YORK not san Francisco or London. it has 472 stations and I've never seen one subway station being completely shutdown for maintenance (expect for the one under WTC damaged on 911). only 45% new yorkers own a vehicle, they would literary start a riot. even painting the pillars cause human gridlock.
The state and the city governments have been redirecting money meant for the maintenance and upgrades of the subway for decades, and this was only exacerbated by the lingering damage caused by Hurricane Sandy.
The MTA, how it gets money, and the powers it have need to change to be more alike TFL if it's going to emerge out of this death spiral. The subway is the greatest piece of infrastructure NY has, and is the main reason it has continued to be one of -the- cities in the US for business, culture, etc.
How could you not talk about the precursor to London, Singapore's Electronic Road Pricing.
Because it doesn't work in Singapore lol
The ERP doesn’t even work here, people just pay. The only thing that’s ever worked here is something called the Certificate of Entitlement. A certificate needed to own a car, which usually costs more than the car itself. People can’t afford cars here.
Sounds horrible. Being charged to use public roads? I thought our taxes already paid for these things.
That isn't why they wanted to charge. They want to charge in order to discourage people from using the roads so traffic decreases. Those that pay will put money towards public transportation to fund USA's growing problem of directing funds elsewhere instead of on public services we expect from them.
The best traffic system is better public transport system
No the best traffic system is having roads that support all users and having public transport options. Not just prioritize cars or only fix public transport. Been tried already and did not help much. As cars were deadlocked in traffic more space was given to cars leading to more deadlocks as less space existed for pedestrains and cyclists.
This needs to be corrected.
Visit the Netherlands and you can see how it is done.
Next: *How London is fighting its nightmare rains*
We don't fight rains? We like them. We are all basically vampires here and despise the sun.
It rains less in London than in New York
Napoleon I Bonaparte *LAUGHS IN FLORIDA*
Bangkok has entered the chat
Kuala Lumpur : Pfftt.
So it will increase speed of traffic by 9%. So instead of 7mph it will be 7.7mph. Not much help.
And think of all the extra tax they make...... The government say that's a win!
The higher the congestion price, the more the traffic speed can increase. But, it's not about speed, it's about throughput. Doesn't matter if a couple people get through at breakneck speed if many others are slowed down to compensate.
Space is restricted in cities, that's why we have to prefer the use of space for denser and higher-throughput methods like subways and buses and bikes. If you insist on using up so much space as you do in a car, you'll have to pay for the privilege.
BritainRitten
Excuse me? Transportation in my definition is “How FAST can I go from point a to b.”
Based on Google maps,
From my home to work, it takes 15+ minutes by car, 1hr, 30+ minutes by bus.
Yeah which is faster?
Unless Nevada wants to slap a metro, assuming the cost and their route, assuming I get off and walk or take the bus to my work, I’m still not convince it’s faster than a 15 min car.
And if Nevada wants to charge me for driving because it’s the FASTEST option of transportation based on google maps? Yeah expect a lawsuit.
@nazmi nazmi yes, like dubai
In Iran people stick a piece of paper on their plate and it's all done, there's no charge.
So tolls, but in the city...
Vox: London has nightmare traffic
Manila: Am I a joke to you?
Lmao true
Duterte: excuse me putangina
Manila is really bad! Gone thru that 2 months ago!
You mean Hanoi or Saigon ?
Ok ok we get it. All big cities have bad traffic.
*And in 3 centuries, they will finally decide to try it in Belgium*
After 167 years of discussions in the government.
They should do other things first,if you know what i mean
And Brexit still wouldn't have taken place
Wtf doet een belg hier haha yes!!!!
@@karel2249 klagen over de Walen 😉
@@BrainsApplied haha juist! Kzal u maar ne vlaming noemen hahaha!
LOL Your London example is too new. Singapore has that kind of system since the mid 70's
Glenn B....yeah, but Singaporean peoples faces look foreign. No westerner wants to admit they were beaten to the punch by a bunch of people from a country they can’t even find on a map.
@@gaffrayjeff actually, the London example is already dated.
The focus here was still on the old congestion charge even though the new ULEZ (ultra-low emission zone) initiative has already started in London: it's no longer 07am to 6pm, it's now a 24h charge applied in Central London for all vehicles. It's taken them years to approve this, and by October 2021 ULEZ will extend to outer boroughs as well. This is a major improvement.
Glenn B This is AMERICAN journalism, don’t expect too much.
Glenn - London has nearly double the population of the entire country of Singapore 😅
@@gaffrayjeff ...foreign faces?? Not had the pleasure of visiting London recently, have you? London is a mosaic of humanity..
I’ll be surprised this gets passed. Greedy auto and oil industries who conspired and removed several cities rail systems and have successfully kept vehicles fueled by alternative energies at bay. Good luck tho👍🏾
small business owners who use their car for delivery will be hurt the most. Chances are good they won't be exempt.
@@kei2142 they can find a way or be left behind. Fact of the matter is these places are massively congested and it causes many terrible problems from pollution to deaths, if a business can only operate under dangerous conditions then it shouldn't exist.
@@FunnieApple they can't always afford to
@@biruss Yeah, I think you should read my comment again. If you can't afford to then you shouldn't be in business, especially if your business decisions lead to dangerous out outcomes.
@@FunnieApple and the big corporation wins, or the neighborhood suffers
Happy Friday everyone! Thanks for watching our videos💛
For more on this story and the ongoing evolution of urban environments around the world, check out our sister site Curbed: www.curbed.com/search?q=congestion+pricing. Curbed covers homes, neighborhoods, cities, and everywhere else that people live.
How's your day?
@@bonyuri5211 good thanks
Could you please add metric system measures ? It would b much easier for everyone outside of the USA
@@dennismair5872 good point usa should have done this 30 years ago stupid politicians
What about those with disabilities?
You already of to pay a toll to enter the island of Manhattan. So this is an extra fee that lower class people on the north end of Manhattan won't be able to afford. I guess driving is a privilege reserved for our betters and not us plebs.
There are plenty of other cities.
@@GUITARTIME2024Are you suggesting that the unwashed masses leave your emerald city?
@tnttimes1000 You could say that, but this fee will relegate driving to an even smaller privileged elite. But I'm sure New York's elites don't want the filthy plebs dirtying up their emerald city.
We thought we'd get flying cars. We get congestion pricing.
Welcome to real life.
And that's a good thing.
This would probably work to reduce congestion by 13% by convincing 20% of New Yorkers to move to Texas.
NYC already has their stupid congestion tax, it's called the GW, Lincoln Tunnel, Holland Tunnel, or Verrazano Narrows bridge. All of which you must pay $15 to get into NYC
Singapore uses this tho. It's called ERP (electronic road pricing)
My problem with the system in Singapore is that it requires an in-vehicle unit. We almost managed to implement congestion pricing in my city, then the minister of communications tried to instead implement a system where every car in the country would have an in-vehicle unit that would register where and how much the car was used.
Naturally people did not like this idea, and congestion pricing was scrapped along with the in-vehicle unit.
@@emmamemma4162 That's because every 10 years vehicle owners are required to scrap their vehicles. Hence installing the in vehicle unit is easy for us. It actually works pretty well.
@@Set123 Another issue for us was that the in vehicle unit would have tracked where the car had been used. Imagine that data getting into the wrong hands, or being used in a corrupt fashion.
Isn't buying a car expensive there? Subway is awesome there. Pay by distance to a max of looks like $2.50 by paying by card. They come every 3-5 minutes.
@@alisonyakel6246 Car price is the same. You just need to have a COE ( certificate of entitlement) to own cars in Singapore. COE costs like 50k SGD, the car prices should be the same
they actually have a functioning public transport system cough cough sydney
Isaac Situ Melbourne can be worse. I’ve lived in both, but I’m from Sydney.
I guess it’s all relative. I thought Sydney had a great public transport system, but I’m from the Midwest US where public transport is basically non-existent
The tories are trying their hardest to change that in the UK
The subway, taxi, and bus system in New York is horrific now. This congestion plan is designed to allow the rich (who will all get exemptions) to drive briskly through the city and then back to their gated mansions.
M Groh catching public transport there’s a 50% chance the entire system is late, no trains running and you miss ur connecting train and need to wait 15 minutes. Catching a bus is equally bad, they’re almost always late
As a Londoner I can say the congestion charge doesn't really work. It just makes people do a strange round the houses route to avoid the zone and makes the traffic worse around the whole city and hurts businesses in the zone.
So the people this policy would Unproportionaly hurt is those who MUST go there using a car i.e handicap people, old people,families with small kids and some groceries and any person who for some reason cannot take public transport. WTF?
You dont just implement a policy without caring about people being affected.
It's going to work by discouraging people from driving if they have other options like biking, walking, being poor... :D
The poor just aren't the ones driving around in cities, it's the middle class and wealthy.
Have you seen parking prices in NYC? Poor people have never been the people driving.
Is your solution to tax everything?
Turns out that fiscal responsibility is actually about matching your expenses with incomes, and not about signing on to enormous tax cuts to the super rich which leaves massive holes in the budget to be covered with borrowing.
Cities skyline players: bibbity bobbity your money is part of my monopoly
Well yes but actually... yes.
When there are costly externalities like polluting, space-occupying car traffic, yes. Free markets don't work if externalized costs on society like pollution are not internalized, and a tax is the best way to do exactly that.
It works but it. Also doesn't. Its treating the symptoms not the cause.
A technique we haven’t tried:
The PURGE 😈
Corona Virus is taking care of that now! hahaha
I have an idea. What about free public transport in gridlocked cities?
Congestion pricing is way better because by making it free it will only discourage middle income people from using it cause it will be filled by homeless and sketchy people. Also without much funding the public transit won’t be improved much
@@AS898-h3u I have to agree with this. I live in Toronto and ever since the TTC introduced all door loading on the streetcars (which not surprisingly means there's less oversight over who's paying to get on the system) there's been a noticeable increase in the number of homeless, beggars and mentally ill people on our subways.
I’ve heard some ridiculous arguments against this policy. The worst one is that it will increases the cost for the poor and middle to access these congested areas. While I can’t speak for other cities, mass transit is how those demographics mostly get around. As a NYC native, subways and busses were a travel essential for me growing up. Unless part of this new policy involves increasing mass transit fares, it will have little effect on those who’ve always been using it.
The people who seriously make that argument are out of touch and probably should be taxed the most.
Lmao this is amazing. If this was in NY traffic would probably just go from being a bunch of cars to a bunch of bikes.
“Why wouldn’t we pay for a city road?” Do you live in America? Do you have a job and pay taxes? Have you ever bought gasoline and seen how much tax is charged that is used to build and maintain roads? By the time you have a job and vehicle and drive that vehicle you’ve already probably paid 20x what you would ever have paid for public transit tickets or a parking meter.
This may work, as long as the money is used properly and invested in public transportation. Wouldn't be surprised if it went to the people running the government instead.
Are public budgets not yknow, made public?
They have to build the public transportation first or this will just put the screws to the poor and middle class.
Companies in NY should offer commuting pay to workers. It would encourage more public transportation use and the extra money could be spent and put back into the economy.
Joseph Meets Travel Some companies do give a commuting allowance to workers but not enough of them are doing it.
Hmm GWB and Lincoln Tunnel went up to 15 dollars a pop and nobody has noticed less traffic. Sounds like a cash grab.
"Why wouldn't we pay for a city road?"
Umm, we do in the form of taxes, maybe you missed that memo.
build mixed use condominiums so people have everything they in need in the building.
"why wouldn't we pay for a city road"
say hello to taxes👋🏻
We already pay for city roads when we pump gas; there's a gas tax.
andrepoiy111999 in the U.K. we also pay road tax for the roads lol.
I'm also assuming there's an annual license plate fee... also a tax
Lol gas tax.. Is for gas.. Not roads
*misses the whole point *
@@mrskate7771 Typically a "gas tax" is to pay for road maintenance and transportation infrastructure.
Psssst, why did nobody mentioned that London's average traffic speed is still 7.4mph?
It's not about improving anything, it's only to punish drivers.
Vox: London has nightmare traffic
North Sentinel Island: hold my spear
It may also help if the cost of parking was representative of the true opportunity cost to the city
I think we are already paying money for roads through government taxes
Sure, but what do you suggest for reducing congestion then?
@@blakebuthod9382 there was this technique used by government of delhi, which in theory should work well.
And its people with odd number(odd number at the end of number plate) cars on one day and even number(even number at the end of number plate) cars on the other day. Thus theoretically reducing traffic by half and forcing public transport.
Thanks for government's negligence and failing to implement properly it didn't work in real world. But if it was implemented properly then might of bought a change.
We are also paying for public transport via taxes, and we still pay extra to actually use those.
@@emmamemma4162 We pay for a lot of things and the issue is that taxes aren't scaling with inflation as others mentioned and the fact that government cares less for us and more for businesses. It is after all, far more important to keep taxes low in order to encourage consumption in fear of businesses revolting and leaving en masse.
I love how other countries think they know what's best for U.S. transportation. It's always "just get public transport," but it's not that simple. The U.S. is a very, very large country that, geographically, is 97% rural. Not only is it not feasible to have public transit in rural areas, but it makes no sense. You would have buses with 1-2 people riding in them on average. How is this better than 1-2 people in a car? I live in a semi-rural area and there is a bus that runs from one city to the next. It averages about 3 riders at a time. A bus. And, without state funding, it would not exist.
No ones saying to have public transport in rural areas. Obviously, public transport isn't going to work in rural areas. What they mean is in more dense areas like cities and some suburbs (namely the ones that are not ridiculously spread out). It's rather disingenuous to talk about rural areas when the video was clearly talking about NYC, which is very NOT rural.
So make an entire section of a city a toll road?
You should do a collab with Jay Foreman regarding this subject! He has made great videoes about London's roads and infrastructure
johnkennethhaarr hell yeah i love his channel
Same
Utah just legalized lane filtering for motorcycles. Meaning, if you ride a motorcycle, you can go between cars in traffic. Most of Europe has it already. It works.
where in Europe?
@@VS-mt3hr I think most countries. Germany is the only country that is against it. I think.
It’s called lane splitting. It is allowed in California but dosnt help with traffic that much.
@@SKYxNINE in California its splitting. In Utah its filtering. You can only do it in the city, while vehicles had stopped. Not the same rules.
Every state used to allow lane splitting but one by one it was banned except in CA.
…because our taxes we pay is there for the city roads. This is just anything for the government to get more money.