Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Alex Derbes's avatar

Thanks for your detailed analysis! Don’t forget to include the time saved by drivers and riders. I got from my office to EWR during rush hour yesterday in 32min and my Uber cost less because it required less driver time. Also, my coworkers who live in New Jersey report their bus commute to Port Authority has been 15-30min shorter than before the holiday. Since time spent increases exponentially as you pass the natural carrying capacity of the tunnels and bridges, raising pricing to keep usage just below capacity is a huge benefit to everyone.

Expand full comment
Sol Hando's avatar

I think these are all fair considerations, but at some point it becomes extremely complicated to actually assess the impact of such a policy on all these factors at once, risking failure in light of special interests politicking.

Consider if we had to account for (according to multiple different models as to the estimating decrease in traffic) the actual expected decrease in parking revenues, the increase in cost for Taxi/Rideshare, the increase in public transportation crowding (a difficult to measure but definitely real cost), increase in traffic in other areas (a lawsuit alleging this from somewhere near the GW bridge was threatening to hold up the new congestion pricing), the actual welfare improvement of where the tax revenue is being spent and the predicted transaction costs. Not only would such a model have multiple feedback mechanisms (lower parking lot revenues means lower taxes for example), each individual prediction would be incredibly difficult to justify. The result would be a political football that endlessly gets passed around in a circle.

Sometimes it's easier just to make basic assumptions based on the knowledge that a negative externality is not currently being accounted for; Transaction costs are whatever the lowest bidder quoted us to build and operate the tracking system, tax revenue is being spent as well as all other NYC tax revenue, and ignore the rest of the concerns if it isn't particularly obvious the cost will be high.

I think unless the pricing is especially high, the only way to actually know the effect will be having case studies like Singapore and see how the areas of the economy that would be effected are doing. My intuition tells me that $9 is safely in the welfare-increasing range, and this could be increased until the choke-points in and out of Manhattan are being used to their designed speed and capacity, which is perhaps much higher than $9.

An ideal might be a sort of dynamic congestion pricing that used historical data to estimate exactly when there would be the most traffic for what parts of Manhattan, and charged a variable fee (that was communicated to drivers in an impossible to miss and explicit way) based on the expected traffic. Using the Lincoln Tunnel might cost $50 at 5:00 on a Friday afternoon, and $0.05 at 4:00 AM on Christmas Eve, depending on that congestion.

Expand full comment
18 more comments...

No posts