RSS Feeds
Diamond lanes for the rich
1.
Y'all forget one of the key bonuses of congestion prices...the MTA has money to buy 60 additional buses to travel these routes. So, if you complain and complain about this policy, then we get nowhere. Now, I can take a bus down the 210 / 10, which can be more efficient than driving. Without this congestion charge, more people will drive solo cars, less buses can be purchased, and gridlock continues. If you don't like the toll, take the bus (and now public transportation becomes more efficient!, wow who would have thought of that?)
2. Welcome to the neofascist states of America. V for Vendetta
3. One thing almost every story fails to mention is that the MTA and other bus companies would like to see this happen in order to open the carpool lanes for faster bus service. So not just the rich will benefit from this, but bus passengers will be able to have faster bus service for a change. With service, many people may finally consider taking the bus. I support the idea and think there should be be more toll/bus lanes if this works. It's a very cheap alternative to rail and it hurts the rich more than the poor. Isn't that what most of us want?
4. In addition, middle class folks who are in a hurry for some important reason can pay the toll and speed up their journey. For this and the reasons stated before I think this is a wonderful idea. Make one of the other remaining lanes a carpool lane if you so desperately desire one. That way, unless you're paying more or instead being efficient by carpooling, you get to enjoy the gridlock. Alternatively, you could let people who are carpooling still use the "diamond lane".
5. If you believe simple economics, the wealthy person's time is more valuable because of opportunity cost. If we can allow wealthy people to make better use of their time this (at least in economic theory) leads to a more efficient outcome for all society. If on top of that, we can also increase tax revenues, then what exactly is the problem sir?
6. It seems to to that since taxpayer money is, has been, and will be used to finance the building and maintenance of these highways, then these highways are owned--collectively--by the tax payers. Remember the ownership society? Therefore, all of the taxpayers should be allowed to use what they--collectively--already own, namely the roads, without paying an additional toll. If it didn't involve public financing, then it would be a different matter; but it does involve public financing. If MTA insists on this policy, then all revenues should be rebated to the taxpayers by lower tax bills.
7. Life is good for LA politicians when they can charge commuters $5 for something that was previously free. And get $213 million from the Feds, too. Too bad someone didn't bite the bullet in the '70's and build a BART style system in LA. Bridge tolls in the Bay Area jumped quickly to $4 and $5 and they won't charge pedestrians even a buck to cross the Golden Gate. We all have to cut back when our expenses go up. Governments don't understand the concept. They just want to make sure they get their salaries and pensions.
8. the riots of the sixties will be small in comparison to what is coming. if i were a rich person i would get out of dodge today. you will be a target tomorrow.
9. I was looking for some outcry against the MTA decision, and was relieved to read Rutten's brilliant column. Los Angeles is for sale to the highest bidder; in this case, the Bush administration with its perverse scheme to replace a system that encourages carpooling with one that rewards wealth by giving them their own freeway lanes. I am outraged. Where is the LA Times editorial board on this?
10. Re: Congestion Pricing and HOT lanes In 17th-century England there was a term for the scurrilous characters who practiced such a crime: highwaymen. They hid along roadways to ambush unwary travelers, demanding whatever extortion they could get before allowing the travelers to pass by. In fairy tales, such villains were called trolls. These modern-day trolls and highwaymen (Bonner, Villaraigosa, Schwarzenegger and Peters), hide under banners of euphemism (“infrastructure”, transit “upgrades”, “congestion reduction”); all the while plotting to pillage us hapless travelers.
Submitted by: laofanaheim
2. Welcome to the neofascist states of America. V for Vendetta
Submitted by: Dirk
3. One thing almost every story fails to mention is that the MTA and other bus companies would like to see this happen in order to open the carpool lanes for faster bus service. So not just the rich will benefit from this, but bus passengers will be able to have faster bus service for a change. With service, many people may finally consider taking the bus. I support the idea and think there should be be more toll/bus lanes if this works. It's a very cheap alternative to rail and it hurts the rich more than the poor. Isn't that what most of us want?
Submitted by: Roberto
4. In addition, middle class folks who are in a hurry for some important reason can pay the toll and speed up their journey. For this and the reasons stated before I think this is a wonderful idea. Make one of the other remaining lanes a carpool lane if you so desperately desire one. That way, unless you're paying more or instead being efficient by carpooling, you get to enjoy the gridlock. Alternatively, you could let people who are carpooling still use the "diamond lane".
Submitted by: Alejandro Paschalides
5. If you believe simple economics, the wealthy person's time is more valuable because of opportunity cost. If we can allow wealthy people to make better use of their time this (at least in economic theory) leads to a more efficient outcome for all society. If on top of that, we can also increase tax revenues, then what exactly is the problem sir?
Submitted by: Alejandro Paschalides
6. It seems to to that since taxpayer money is, has been, and will be used to finance the building and maintenance of these highways, then these highways are owned--collectively--by the tax payers. Remember the ownership society? Therefore, all of the taxpayers should be allowed to use what they--collectively--already own, namely the roads, without paying an additional toll. If it didn't involve public financing, then it would be a different matter; but it does involve public financing. If MTA insists on this policy, then all revenues should be rebated to the taxpayers by lower tax bills.
Submitted by: Mickle
7. Life is good for LA politicians when they can charge commuters $5 for something that was previously free. And get $213 million from the Feds, too. Too bad someone didn't bite the bullet in the '70's and build a BART style system in LA. Bridge tolls in the Bay Area jumped quickly to $4 and $5 and they won't charge pedestrians even a buck to cross the Golden Gate. We all have to cut back when our expenses go up. Governments don't understand the concept. They just want to make sure they get their salaries and pensions.
Submitted by: Mike Mancuso, San Jose
8. the riots of the sixties will be small in comparison to what is coming. if i were a rich person i would get out of dodge today. you will be a target tomorrow.
Submitted by: grog
9. I was looking for some outcry against the MTA decision, and was relieved to read Rutten's brilliant column. Los Angeles is for sale to the highest bidder; in this case, the Bush administration with its perverse scheme to replace a system that encourages carpooling with one that rewards wealth by giving them their own freeway lanes. I am outraged. Where is the LA Times editorial board on this?
Submitted by: Barham Turner
10. Re: Congestion Pricing and HOT lanes In 17th-century England there was a term for the scurrilous characters who practiced such a crime: highwaymen. They hid along roadways to ambush unwary travelers, demanding whatever extortion they could get before allowing the travelers to pass by. In fairy tales, such villains were called trolls. These modern-day trolls and highwaymen (Bonner, Villaraigosa, Schwarzenegger and Peters), hide under banners of euphemism (“infrastructure”, transit “upgrades”, “congestion reduction”); all the while plotting to pillage us hapless travelers.
Submitted by: Brian Hitchcock