I agree with Ryan Avent that this WSJ piece makes a bizarre argument against congestion pricing:
By requiring car drivers to pay a fee to drive in a city at peak hours, congestion pricing reduces traffic and raises money that can be used to support public transit—both worthy goals.
Yet congestion pricing has dubious environmental value. Traffic jams, if they're managed well, can actually be good for the environment.
They maintain...
SH 130 vs I-35: early returns
Ben Wear and a colleague have run another experiment comparing SH 130 to I-35. The trip around Austin on SH 130 was 22 minutes faster than the trip straight through town on I-35. This...
SH 130 vs I-35: early returns
Ben Wear and a colleague have run another experiment comparing SH 130 to I-35. The trip around Austin on SH 130 was 22 minutes faster than the trip straight through town on I-35. This...
Hutchison misses the point
Frequent commenter trza pointed me to this op-ed by Kay Bailey Hutchison in Thursday's San Antonio Express-News. Tolls are unpopular, I know, and she's running for governor, but this is...
Hutchison misses the point
Frequent commenter trza pointed me to this op-ed by Kay Bailey Hutchison in Thursday's San Antonio Express-News. Tolls are unpopular, I know, and she's running for governor, but...
Market Urbanism on congestion pricing
Market Urbanism has posted a fairly technical explanation why the congestion price that maximizes throughput also maximizes total revenue. I'm not sure his explanation is correct because he...
Post new comment