Skip to Content
Streetsblog USA home
Streetsblog USA home
Log In

Two of the nation's leading lefty commentators weighed in on transportation incentives last Friday, when both economist Paul Krugman at the New York Times and Matt Yglesias at Slate went on a congestion pricing kick.

Krugman kicked things off by remarking that the surest way to reduce the costs imposed on society by drivers is to "get the incentives right, and charge large fees for driving in congestion."

Yglesias took it one step further, pointing out how a variable fee on roads could lead to a virtuous cycle of better transit service and higher ridership:

Congestion fees are a kind of force multiplier for transit. After all, in some big American cities the peak congestion charge would have to get quite hefty at some times of the day. Some folks will respond to that by paying the fee, some by time-shifting their driving to a less-crowded hour, and some by riding transit. A bus, after all, is a great mechanism for spreading the cost of road access across a large number of people. And while with highways the quality of the service provided declines with the number of users (traffic jams), with well-designed transit it goes the other way. The more people who want to travel on a particular transit route, the more financially viable it is to provide high-frequency service. And high-frequency service is the key to real-world transit useability.

As Krugman noted, congestion pricing is an important mechanism to account for the cost imposed by drivers on society in the form of lost time. Anything that brings the actual price of our transportation decisions in line with the cost to society will be a boon for transit, biking, and walking relative to the status quo.

The flipside of congestion pricing would be to account for the social benefits of non-automotive modes by subsidizing them. The European Cyclists Federation currently has an interesting proposal on this front. With the European Union examining the "internalisation of external costs for all modes of transport," the ECF is advocating for a policy that would function as a kind of carrot, rewarding cyclists through tax rebates and incentives. Meanwhile, in America, we actually have a "symbolic" bike tax gaining traction in Washington state.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog USA

Friday’s Headlines Quit the Space Race

Money for Acela, the D.C. Metro and other transit systems could have been spent on a moon base instead.

January 24, 2025

Does Daylighting Work? NYC DOT Questions The Accepted Wisdom

An agency committed to Vision Zero now says that cars blocking a driver's view is safe. Huh?

January 24, 2025

Friday Video: Why Bad Drivers Are Everywhere

U.S. roads all but guarantee that U.S. drivers will do dangerous things. But how did we get here — and how do we fix it?

January 24, 2025

Talking Headways Podcast: From Intern to CEO

What does it take to run a big (or small) engineering firm? Find out in this week's episode!

January 23, 2025

Streetsblog on the Road: Bike Share in Shanghai

The Chinese mega-city provides an example of great urban mobility, albeit with a side of authoritarianism.

January 23, 2025
See all posts