The Future is Now...1984 anyone...Big brother's bigger brother to take control...A brave new world...society is ignorant as sheep...Sheep have 2 speeds graze and stampede... oneoneelvelentyone11!!!!!1111!1one

8F PQ 1T BI GT IT S1

This is the code to crack the Gatsos.

Fidel Castro's Colstomy Bag
1984, yes.
Brave New World, no.

Unfortunately they will implement this and it won't help traffic problems at all. Rather they will use it to reap more funding for the govt at the taxpayers' expense while everyone still has to sit in traffic during rush hours.

I never did understand how congestion fees are expected to reduce congestion. Doesn't it just mean you're paying more to sit in traffic?
Personally, the only time I sit in traffic (and Las Vegas is a trafficy city) is when I'm either going to work, going to lunch, going back from lunch, or going home.
What this means is that if someone implemented a congestion fee on the congested roads I use I would HAVE to pay it. This would not cause me to use other roads or drive at other times, jut to pay more money to get to and from work.

Is there any evidence whatsoever that charging people to use certain roads at certain times reduces the number of vehicles using those roads at those times?
Because I can't see it...
I think that 99% of the people who sit in traffic with me are also going to and from work.

What about motorcycles?

/oop! my bad...motorbikes.

England prevails... using as little logic as possible.

1984 blah blah blah

I thought the Voice of Fate was from V for Vendetta.

/I could use some Soma right not though

man, people biatch about loosing freedom here in the US.. all the shiat about Bush, etc..

but Jesus! of course this will happen in the UK....absofarkinglutely ridiculous!

While his master in the dark nearby
Inspects the hands with brutal eye
That have never brushed a lover's thigh
But have squeezed a nation's throat...

And he hungers in his secret dreams
For the harsh embrace of cruel machines
But his lover is not what she seems
And she will not leave a note...

They say that life's a game and then
They take the board away
They give you masks and costumes and an outline of the story
Then leave you all to improvise their vicious cabaret

Why doesn't the British government just RFID-tag the population, and get it over with?

I can't picture this in a US city. I recognize tolls on bridges in NYC, San Fran... etc. but just a tax to get to a certain part of the city?? Some nut bag stuck in traffic and the DJ on the radio mentions how much they are paying for the privilege of being stuck there... things will get ugly.

dittybopper

Usually, I use an M-1 to clear traffic off the highway.

*PING*!

I was thinking more along the lines of a 120mm M1.

SABOT, UP!!! *BOOM* On the way!!!

England prevails.

"Blythe said the government had to explain clearly to people what was at stake in terms of personal benefits from faster journeys and global gains from reduced greenhouse gas emissions due to fewer traffic jams."

"I'm from the government and I'm here to help you." Don't worry that no one wants it. Explain that 'IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD!' and just farkin' do it to the suckers.

1-2-3....NANNY STATE!!!!!

andrew131 ok maybe not brave new world... then how about (insert Greek pholsophers definition of Utopian society here)?

This is the U.S. in a few years if the PC crowd continues to pound away. You SHEEP!

"You will need 10 years at a minimum for a national rollout," Phil Blyth, professor of Intelligent Transport Systems at Newcastle University, told reporters. "I do not see many other options available to us to manage our transport system."



Mmm...Newcastle Brown Ale....*slobber*

RadThad: I can't picture this in a US city. I recognize tolls on bridges in NYC, San Fran... etc. but just a tax to get to a certain part of the city?? Some nut bag stuck in traffic and the DJ on the radio mentions how much they are paying for the privilege of being stuck there... things will get ugly.

You must have missed the article the other week where Bloomberg was proposing just that.

Wait a second, that isn't the right name! What's up with FarkIt?

Dark OverlordThis is the U.S. in a few years if the PC crowd continues to pound away. You SHEEP!


Got the sheep comments already covered as well as the grammar/spelling errors for the grammar nazis.

tbell83, you are putting words in my mouth, but I'll get over it.

You know, I work for SkyNet, so I am really getting a kick out of some of these responses...

Aevum
Personally, the only time I sit in traffic (and Las Vegas is a trafficy city) is when I'm either going to work, going to lunch, going back from lunch, or going home.

I think the theory is that if it's too expensive, maybe you'll start packing a lunch from home, or walking to lunch, or essentially finding some way to reduce your trips. Or if not you, someone, until lunchtime congestion drops. Just to pick the low-hanging fruit...never mind the morning and evening commutes.

tbell83 Wait a second, that isn't the right name! What's up with FarkIt?

Thanks to the sight redesign, FarkIt is broken to all hell. You'll get over it.

TFA:
Panel member and transport consultant Jack Opiola said the thorny issue of personal data privacy could easily be dealt with by appropriate laws.

Stop me if you've heard this one before...

The British Empire screwing over it's serfs citizens, what else is new.

Tea party anyone?

PullItOut

I suppose. But the lunch rush is nowhere near as bad as the morning and evening rushes.
I think that this is the same argument as "if we raise gas prices enough people will stop driving so much!". These extra taxes to drive in certain areas based on time might decrease the congestion a tiny fraction, but all they're really going to do is harm the people who have no choice when and where to drive (short of quitting their job and getting one in a different part of the city).

The concept of making a certain action more expensive until that action is no longer profitable to the people in question is a good one. Unless you tie it to the primary (or only) income of that group of people. There is almost no expense that is high enough to make it "not worth it" for these people, it just causes them/us pain.

I can see raising prices to get into the park at the lake, for example, because I don't really need to go to the lake and neither does anyone else. So if you make it more expensive, I might do something else, and congestion goes down.

But we kinda HAVE to drive to work. For me, it's either that or a 2 hour walk each way in 100+ heat. And I'm lucky because I live close to work.

I still don't see how anyone thinks this will help.

Some US rental car companies already track their cars with GPS. Not just for theft recovery, either. I rented a car once and the fine print said they'd nail me with fees if they caught me taking the car too far from the rental office or exceeding a speed limit. Think I'm making that up? Read the fine print the next time you rent a car. I wouldn't have believed it, except that they buried those comments on the back of the rental agreement, in the tiny gray printing that nobody reads (except people like me).

I love V for Vendetta. I got the graphic novel in my Easter basket a few years ago. And then The Watchmen next year.

/Thanks, Dad!
//Mmm, years old Easter candy.

Rather they will use it to reap more funding for the govt at the taxpayers' expense while everyone still has to sit in traffic during rush hours.

Isn't all funding for the government done at taxpayer expense?

Bernard Cribbins, actually. Famous for being the voice of the Wombles, no less.

I have an idea... whenever someone calls a large group "sheep", the person doing the name-calling should be required to post a demonstrable list of what they are doing to resolve the issue at hand. The list must be composed of substantial (ideally, effective) efforts calculated to solve the perceived problem. This must somehow be an externally verifiable list, which is, I admit, a difficult point. The person doing the name-calling should have only two legs to stand on rather than four-- otherwise, STFU. Or, at least, admit your own sheep status as well.

Just popped in to say...

Nice Subby. +1

In Minneapolis they opened up the 394 expressway to subscribers (used to be HOV only). When I lived on that side of the Twin Cities I used it a lot thanks to my motorcycle. It's helped a lot to reduce traffic in the western suburbs. In places without what I'd call adequate mass transit (which means most of North America), I don't think something like a congestion fee or expensive gas by itself would be very effective -it would indeed just sap more income from people. Maybe a combination of the two would work, but there really needs to be some alternative to driving.

Which makes me a big proponent of improved transit. I ride my motorcycle 2/3-3/4 of the year in MN and take the bus during the winter (which sucks, but I can deal). I get really pissed seeing all those WI plates on my westbound 10-mile commute into Minneapolis, so I hope the proposed eastern line goes ahead and those people who insist on driving 50 miles one way from WI will use it.

I still don't understand what possesses people to spend 3+ hrs/day in their car commuting and as population grows, that's just not sustainable.

deathbot 2007-05-02 02:34:31 PM
I still don't understand what possesses people to spend 3+ hrs/day in their car commuting and as population grows, that's just not sustainable.

Teh Monay!
Currently I live about 5 miles from my job. But at one point I lived 60 miles from it.
Problem was, my job (at that time) was paying three times what I could make in my own town. So it was totally worth it for me to drive 120 miles a day, even if it took me 3 hours (sometimes it didn't).

This is related to the way we build cities and the things that we value in homes. Most people want more space in their home and more space around their home (yards etc) as well as desiring a single-family dwelling. They also would really like for there to be less noise and less traffic where they live.
All this adds up to "housing communities" that are nowhere near the workplaces, schools, and shopping centers of the people who live in them. It's just not economically viable to have large quantities of large single-family homes in the middle of the city where all the jobs (especially the good paying ones) are.
Until we find a way to get people to live near their work, or move the work to where the people live, we're going to have a commute problem.

Personally speaking... my job COULD be done 100% telecommute, but my boss likes me to sit in the cubicle. So I have a small apartment in a highrise 5 miles from my office and that's the best I can do.

Oh yeah, forgot to mention. At my previous job, it was cheaper to drive the 60 miles each way to work than it was to get an apartment near the job. Alot cheaper.

Aevum
Oh yeah, forgot to mention. At my previous job, it was cheaper to drive the 60 miles each way to work than it was to get an apartment near the job. Alot cheaper.

Well, that's precisely the problem ;)

Land is cheaper in rural WI and they get to live in quiet, pretty spaces. So at present it makes economic sense to pull down the big salary and live far, far away (my time is more intrinsically valuable to me than that, but to each his own). That's also the reason behind 'congestion fees' and the like: Make it more expensive to drive huge distances during rush hours. Some people decry it as 'social engineering,' others call it 'urban planning.' I prefer to think of it as common sense. If you endgame the everybody-in-cars scenario you get urban sprawl, congestion, and more pollution, which in turn drags down the quality of life in an area as well as the overall economy.

Dark Overlord: Explain please. I'm not sure how anyone would draw the link from someone trying to tackle "labelling" issues like african-american to satellite monitoring, so I'm curious to hear a little more about your thought process.

deathbot 2007-05-02 03:11:04 PM
Well, that's precisely the problem ;)

Yes but "Make it more expensive to drive than live near the job by raising the cost of driving" is a very poor answer.
If the proposed solution was to lower the cost of living near the job, well then I'd be all for it.

Some people (80% of the population) are just barely holding on. In fact the average citizen is taking on more and more debt (at a fast rate) every year. They do this for many reasons, but one of them is that living is a high-speed treadmill.
You have to spend more money just to make enough money to get by so that you can spend more money to make more money so that you can.. etc.

If you somehow raised the cost of going to work by $5 a day for me ($2.50 each way for congestion tax?) it would amount to over $1500 a year ($30 a week). So unless you can make it $1500 a year cheaper to do something else (without ruining my day 6 days a week)... I'm just going to have to drive anyway (just like always) and eat the fees. Which helps... well it helps whoever is spending these fees, but nobody that matters.

Now $1500 a year to me is a frustrating but tolerable loss. However many of my friends have about $5 left over at the end of the month and charging them another $130 a month to go to work would literally break them.

This congestion fee idea just makes the same problem worse without providing even a hint of relief.

Aevum 2007-05-02 02:56:52 PM
Oh yeah, forgot to mention. At my previous job, it was cheaper to drive the 60 miles each way to work than it was to get an apartment near the job. Alot cheaper.

Circa 1991-92 ish

Purchase price of 2br/2ba, 1020 square foot condo, 13.4 miles from work.

$150,000

Purchase price of 2br/2ba, 1005 square foot condo, 3.4 miles from work.

$195,000

Being 10 miles closer to work wasn't worth an extra $45k. Especially not when I was only planning to stay in the condo for a few years, then upgrade to a house.

Well, that was before the price of real estate doubled.

Even if I stayed there 10 years, that's still a $4.5k difference per year. (not to mention the extra 495 per year that would go to property taxes, and don't even talk about the loan interest).

/at least it's better than the 20 miles I was driving before (the first 5 miles were on surface streets back then).

And before someone mentions "public transportation", I would take a bus/train those 13.4 miles if it were feasable.

But the busses take a roundabout route so that it takes 2 - 2 & 1/2 hours on average to get to work. (I rode the bus for a few years when I had no other option). VS the 20-30 minutes it takes to get to work in a day.

Substituting a maximum 1 hour commute for a maximum 5 hour commute. Isn't good, especially considering that my commute to work costs me $120 in gas each month, but a bus pass is $60 for a month. Ask yourself, would you pay $60 a month for an extra four hours per day?