this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2025
76 points (97.5% liked)

politics

20567 readers
5292 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 10 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

Congestion pricing is a tax levied against the poor? The poor are less likely to be driving wtf. That's like saying extra taxes on private jets is a tax for preventing the poor from getting private jets: that wasn't ~~not~~ an issue and is in fact a way of redistributing wealth to lower classes. You don't need to drive to Manhattan to experience Manhattan in the same way that you don't need to own a private jet to travel.

If you have a better way to reduce congestion in Manhattan AND provide additional funds to public transit, feel free to suggest that idea.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

The poor are less likely to be driving wtf.

You're conflating a colloquial expression "poor" with indigent or destitution which in 2024 was defined as any single person making less than $16,320 annually:

One person (unrelated individual):
Under 65 years............................ 16,320
65 years and over......................... 15,045
Two people:
Householder under 65 years.......... 21,006 21,621
Householder 65 years and over...... 18,961 21,540
Three people................................... 24,537 25,249 25,273
Four people.................................... 32,355 32,884 31,812 31,922
Five people..................................... 39,019 39,586 38,374 37,436 36,863
Six people...................................... 44,879 45,057 44,128 43,238 41,915 41,131
Seven people.................................. 51,638 51,961 50,849 50,075 48,631 46,948 45,100
Eight people................................... 57,753 58,263 57,215 56,296 54,992 53,337 51,614 51,177
Nine people or more........................ 69,473 69,810 68,882 68,102 66,822 65,062 63,469 63,075 60,645

The median salary in NYC is $73,950, with 80% of salaries falling between $34,451 and $169,650. The lowest 10th percentile in NYC is $34,451 which is 211% higher than the federal poverty level and the cost basis for NYC is 238% higher than the federal average making New Yorker's 27% better off than the rest of the country.

Your brain would have to be smoother than marble to believe that the only people who drive are those who are financially solvent. I was in the lowest 10th percentile back then and drove........ It was consistently the cheapest option. A fucking metro-pass is $350+ per month. Cut rate liability insurance and the cost of fuel is nothing in comparison if you have a place to park (which I did).

If you have a better way to reduce congestion in Manhattan AND provide additional funds to public transit, feel free to suggest that idea.

"MAKE THERE BE LESS PEOPLE IN NEW YORK CITY!" That's not how living in a city works, which is my major gripe with this shit. It's New Yorker's being pissed that there are 9 million people in a city where 9 million people live.

You can easily provide additional funds to public transit by actually charging a reasonable corporate tax in NYC--which is still one of the highest in the nation and corporations still find ways to evade paying the taxes. But that's not going to solve any problems because the NYC transit system is over a hundred years old. The way it was designed, and the city around it, isn't conducive to vertical scaling. Everyone wants to scream "expand the subway!" but there's only so much it can be expanded and only so many residents it can accommodate without literally moving buildings, bridges and tunnels...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 hours ago

I feel your conflating things with your first point. Yeah a person living in NY is going to make more money than the average american (as you point out with that data you posted), but that doesn't mean you can't be poor as in struggling to pay bills, to save for retirement, or to pay for living expenses. By your definition, there's no poor people in the US, because compared the to world our poor people are very wealthy. My point is, the financially struggling people in New York are more likely to take public transit than the people that are wealthy in New York. Emphasis on more likely because you assumed i meant all lower income people only take public transit (the confusion maybe stemming from my private jet analogy).

You're right about large cities will have large populations, but that doesn't mean that cities want everybody concentrating in certain areas. Providing incentives or disincentives so manage movement is helpful, especially when you have solid alternatives in the form of public transit. The fees aren't crazy high, and it encourage cost efficient decision making (in terms of better for the city as vehicles are extremely detrimental).

I would definitely support higher corporate tax rates. A big issue is that congestion pricing is already something a majority of voters are liking and is being implemented. Increased taxes can still be done later.