Cab drivers will pass it on to passengers as part of the fare, and those passengers probably tend to be wealthier. Those who can't afford cabs, and many who can, will be more likely to take public transit (which is the point).

If it actually makes more money for better public transit I would consider it a success. And whether or not that happens, it'll reduce traffic in Manhattan which I think most people would also agree is welcome.

You think the money collected will fix one pothole in NY, one MTA track, one subway signal? You think traffic signals will be replaced? Or street marks will be repainted? The money collected will be spent on more bureaucracy.

60% of people commuting to Manhattan use public transport.

And the percentage driving into this slice of Manhattan, which is probably among the most transit dense in the world, is likely even tinier.

For context, the highest congestion pricing toll is equivalent to 2 hrs of subsidized metered on street parking in this area.

The idea that the $9 congestion price is regressive needs to eliminate the 60% of people who don’t drive into the area at all.

It is regressive in the sense that car owners will now need to take public transportation. Said public transportation also gets more funding. This is perfect for a city with 5 min subways from NJ to Manhattan. More people should be taking this.

I would argue that this is the perfect kind of tax - if the city already has a robust public transportation system.

… Wait, how many blue collar workers are commuting to Manhattan by car? Where on earth are they parking?

> every single cab driver […] will have to deal with this

>riders in taxis will pay a 75-cent fee

It may end up easing traffic for billionaires :).