Despite the obvious need to insure whatever plan is adopted against our political/business class from stealing this money, there are two other priorities. There needs to be a comprehensive security system put in place with immediate response teams of transit police to any assault on any platform or train at any time of the day or night. The other need is for the TA to get into the business of providing care and treatment for the homeless and mentally damaged who disrupt the lives of straphangers.
Watch how this scam will attain historic notoriety as it grows into an avaricious entity enjoying unbridled power to overcharge and overtax it’s domain.
Just imagine for a moment how many deals and players are lining up licking their chops at the promise of such extravagant largesse that the MTA will bestow on them.
Sources are saying all the MTA agencies are angling to not follow the Alix Partner report recommendations for various reasons ( e.g. congestion pricing needs etc). It looks like the status quo will remain for the foreseeable future. So much for a New MTA.
Let’s not forget the MTA already has a tax on all cabs. Now the government wants more tax revenue? $1,000 light bulbs in Housing, $1M for a Hurricane Sandy house that’s worth $250k, the city spends $50k for every homeless person annually, and don’t get me started on the schools! When will there be accountability?!
2
Congestion pricing will amount to taking money out of our pockets, and handing it over to the MTA for them to mis-spend or to spend carelessly, and with ZERO accountability.
I say 'no' to congestion pricing, b/c it's just feeding the MTA's addiction to easy money. But earning that money isn't so easy for those of us who have to pay up.
7
You certainly can't count on money from congestion pricing. That is sure to get struck down in court. A fifteen-minute wait for a subway is annoying, but hardly tragic.
2
I LOVE the City of Women subway map!
I want to call attention to one of the MTA's latest so-called 'accomplishments' - they have replaced ALL the bus information placards on the bus-stop poles. The OLD placards showed (a) a diagram of the bus route, and (b) a unique 6-digit stopcode which you could text to the MTA and get an instant response telling you where the bus was and how long until it would reach where you were waiting.
The MTA - ever ready to spend our $$$ - has CHANGED every single one of those bus stop placards. The NEW placards (a) do NOT show the bus route at all, and (b) tell you to text the stopcode to the MTA - BUT the MTA has REMOVED EVERY STOPCODE from all the placards!
So, now you're supposed to text the MTA with the bus route AND the details of what intersection you're waiting at. Then, in my experience, the MTA tells you there is no such location, or it asks you to re-enter the route you just texted to them. Sometimes it sends me a LIST of a dozen *possible* bus routes that they'd like me to choose from - except I already TOLD them what route I was asking about.
This new system is a complete shambles, and an excellent example of how the MTA wastes public money. Clearly NOBODY at the MTA's brain-trust thought that showing us a route map AND giving us the stopcode mattered, even though it's critical to have that info.
The new placards tell me that I can also download and use the MTA's app - but WHY should I have to use an app, when a super-fast text worked just fine for many years??
10
@L, this really brought to mind one of my all-time favorite Johnny Carson moments, a metaphor for what government does way too often - which was the movie star Dyan Cannon being asked a question that Carson sincerely asked, she clearly knows the answer but knows nothing good can come from answering it - so she just breaks into a charming laugh until the question just goes away.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6zJH9TfFoc
The MTA seems to react in just the way to every perfectly reasonable question posed to it, like aren't you just changing for change's sake, and they effectively pretend the question was silly, and somehow we are made to feel silly for asking and we let them not have to address it - and then the question passes. (Note that on the Federal level, Corey Lewandowski did a version of this for almost the whole first part of the hearing the other day.)
4
Of course the taxpayers will pay for it, hike in getting around especially for Hudson Valley commuters. Yet you know what never changes, Chambers St. station, the hub of where Federal & State Courts are at still look the same since I was a child riding with my mom to Bklyn to visit my mom. Guess what that was 40 years ago. Never been, seriously the 6, J, Z will take you there. It has the same layer of dirt since the 70's, dirty walls and peeling ceilings. I'm sure filled with asbestos. Where does all the money go that's supposed to fix stations in need of an upgrade? It's definitely not going towards that.
8
The M.T.A. Has a $54 Billion Capital Plan for the Subway.
Now what?
That's easy.
We pay for it.
8
@N. Smith; And then the MTA wastes our hard-earned money, while never being quite able to explain to anyone where all the money went.
Which is why congestion pricing needs to be DOA - congestion pricing is big scam that's just another trough from which the piggy MTA will insist it MUST feed.
What the MTA needs is someone to actually look at its books and actually make it perform as it claims to perform. Which will never happen!
3
@L
And while we're on the subject, I'm not exactly convinced about this new M.T.A. OMNY metro card -- talk about a money grab...
I can think of nothing more dangerous than giving them ANY kind of information or access to one's bank private account.
Piggy bank, indeed!
3
@L regarding "just another trough from which the piggy MTA will insist it MUST feed."
I love this metaphor, and just read it in the context about how no one ever has time or funds to go to serious plays, but if you put a "hottie movie star" onstage doing Harold Pinter or Eugene O'Neill, like Tom Hiddleston in "Betrayal" or Denzel Washington in "Iceman Cometh", suddenly they have money and they take to high culture like hogs to a trough.
1
The idea for congestion pricing really needs to end now. Knowing how the MTA functions with their current revenue sources, this will just end up being misused or seen another black hole of spending. More importantly, this isn't just seen as a regressive tax for those who can't afford it regularly, but also as a punishment for those who have very little viable options for getting around without driving. I wouldn't be surprised if those who support this either doesn't drive on a regular basis or can easily afford it on their income. BTW, why aren't there more public hearings or other events on this? My guess is the fear the opposition will come out in full force in shouting it down. I feel the same way it will never be considered for a ballot initiative is also due to the fear that once the opposition hears about it, they will vote against it to end it once and for all. As of now, I suggest those who don't support congestion pricing to mention this at any of the upcoming MTA hearings that will be later this year to show how much it's despised. One other trick would be the claim that it can always be stopped if it fails, because I feel that the supporters will make claims to keep it just by fudging data to make it look like it was working or even trying to use good faith in saying that it will work if it was given more time that originally planned for. Overall, it's really about revenue, not to reduce traffic or have better air quality, which will just be secondary.
7
I don’t know anybody who drives to work in Manhattan (within regular business hours) who isn’t rich, and I’ve worked here for 12 years. I’ve never bought the idea that congestion pricing is regressive.
3
@TP
I suggest you try looking for those who don't have a regular work schedule like you do. For them, it will be hard to take a commuter train or bus into the city let alone one of those special express buses and still be on time for their job due such sporadic schedules of them. Unfortunately, transit deserts do exist even within city lines, so as long as there aren't viable alternatives for getting around, they end up driving as a result. Seriously, I suggest you try looking at the causes to why people end up driving rather than the effects. The reason why I feel that the revenue is the primary reason for congestion pricing is mainly because if it gets people to stop driving, then no money can be made off of it and that will make it feel like a net money loser. There was even a recent report from ABC Eyewitness News saying that even to this day motorists in London are avoiding the congestion zone by whatever costs if they can't afford it and are only using the free roads to avoid paying the tax, which shows there it's stills seen as a regressive tax. Now, just picture that on both the West Side Highway and FDR Drive when it gets passed, which will make the traffic on there go from bad to worse. Since you claim that it's not a regressive tax, I would like to see the proof backing your claim otherwise mine will uphold as true even though there have been studies saying that the rich won't be deterred and will see the tax as just a drop in the bucket for them.
1
@TP: I know an equipment repair man (whose services I've used over the past 10 years) who lives on Long Island and needs to bring into Manhattan 3 huge & heavy bags of tools and parts, plus any oversize parts.
He works Monday-Friday from 9-5, and his company does NOT provide a van or truck for his use. So he uses his personal car - and he is certainly not 'rich' by anyone's standards.
Would you prefer he drive a van or truck? He is doing his job (which *does* require a car) using a regular sedan that can carry his tools and fit replacement parts in the trunk of the car.
There are plenty of people who have jobs like his. You must never encounter any of them, given that you say you only know rich people who drive to work in Manhattan.
2