Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

sutisuc t1_j42x6ay wrote

Reply to comment by Unusual-Solid3435 in Tolls increase $1 this weekend for Port Authority crossings between New York and New Jersey by elizabeth-cooper

Hell there’s tolls even across the five boroughs which is even worse. I get charging a toll crossing between different cities or states but charging a toll just to cross from queens to the Bronx is absurd.

25

Unusual-Solid3435 t1_j430ugu wrote

Yeah that one sucks.. if it was up to me, no tolls, anywhere.

4

VanillaSkittlez t1_j433kjo wrote

And you’d pay for other key city and transportation services… how?

2

Unusual-Solid3435 t1_j434c81 wrote

It's like you have to re-discover the basis of government with you people, TAXES DUH

6

VanillaSkittlez t1_j438r2u wrote

Taxes on who? In what form?

My general opposition to this is that taxes get collected and dispersed through a government agency to whatever they feel is most important: maybe it’s 30% operating expenses, 2% for parks and recreation, 15% for transit, etc.

With tolls, that money is kept within the transit funding. Riding over an MTA bridge and paying an MTA toll means that money goes directly into the NYC subway.

My other opposition to this is that car owners skew wealthy in NYC. If you drive, you should be paying into the system. Taking that burden and imposing it on everyone in the form of taxes just hurts the working class more.

The bridge costs money no matter what. Why should I have to pay for your toll if I don’t drive?

−2

Unusual-Solid3435 t1_j43gdqo wrote

I think these are petty, vague, reactionary concerns that could be raised about any government program

Obviously it should be a progressive tax that affects the rich more.

4

VanillaSkittlez t1_j43r2wn wrote

You almost certainly couldn’t do away with tolls without also raising taxes on the middle class. There simply isn’t enough tax revenue among the top earners to cover that. And if you tried to make it super progressive like 1950s era taxation with top earners getting taxed at 90% of income they would just… Yknow, leave. Or simply find ways to skirt it by avoiding making income and instead put it into assets.

All besides the point that eliminating tolls would simply incentivize car dependency. What better way to entice people to buy cars and use their existing cars more than to literally make everything free? The last thing this city needs is more motor vehicles on the roadways, and the bridge tolls serve as critical funding for public transit projects.

−1

Unusual-Solid3435 t1_j444hp9 wrote

There is plenty of tax revenue to draw from on the upper band, voters are just cheap reactionaries that act like it's all coming from our personal bank accounts.

2

PostPostMinimalist t1_j43u3tu wrote

Taxes don’t also discourage cars.

−3

Unusual-Solid3435 t1_j444moj wrote

I couldn't care less. Not trying to "discourage" regular middle class people from existing. It's America alright? There's going to be cars

7

theshruj t1_j46yb9k wrote

discourage leaving home too then, discourage trains, work from home for all, unemployment for all

−1

PostPostMinimalist t1_j46z1w5 wrote

That doesn’t make any sense. More cars are bad for the city. They should be disincentivized. Those other things are good for the city.

1

theshruj t1_j46zgac wrote

for you and your life maybe.

Half the city owns a car or lives in a household that uses one. Stop pretending like Manhattan and Brooklyn are the only aspects of NYC.

​

Edit: like cars aren't disincentivized by having a good public transport system. Trains, trams, rail, buses, etc. I haven't seen undeserved parts of the city get a train line or even discussion of that

3