Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-19-2019, 12:19 PM
 
Location: West Los Angeles and Rancho Palos Verdes
13,583 posts, read 15,672,061 times
Reputation: 14049

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Astral_Weeks View Post
Yes, you failed. Charging a user fee for something is not banning it.
The article states they want to get people out of their cars. How does taking away the option of driving conform to libertarian principles?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-19-2019, 12:31 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles
4,627 posts, read 3,398,811 times
Reputation: 6148
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuvSouthOC View Post
Why do regressives think that conservatives are swayed by a Libertarian article? I think they are confused. These are two distinct ways of thinking.
Why must you assume somebody with a different point of you from yours is somehow far to the left? I don't fit in a neat little box like progressive or far left or right. Capiche?

While the conservative tent has included a wide range of people with varying beliefs, the OP has a long history of touting the benefits of the free market. And let's face it Milton Friedman's ghost still echoes powerfully in conservative circles. Yes, Milton wasn't a libertarian but he was certainly for the infusion of more free market policies in public policy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LuvSouthOC View Post
I tend strongly Libertarian and did find it persuasive.
In that case, they are merely preaching to the choir.....

Last edited by Astral_Weeks; 01-19-2019 at 01:00 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2019, 12:40 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles
4,627 posts, read 3,398,811 times
Reputation: 6148
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exitus Acta Probat View Post
The article states they want to get people out of their cars. How does taking away the option of driving conform to libertarian principles?
The rationale behind congestion pricing is absolutely drawn from free market economics.

By placing a price on a resource, in this case roads/freeways, it makes the consumer conscious of the costs they impose when consuming a resource during peak demand. The theory posits that consumers will use and waste more of a resource which is free or negligible in price. By increasing the price of a resource, the users’ willingness to pay for that resource will decline as the price increases.

Just because you buy beef at the grocery store and your neighbor buys chicken doesn't mean the option for beef is forbidden. We all must make choices with the limited resources we have.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2019, 01:48 PM
 
Location: Laguna Niguel, Orange County CA
9,807 posts, read 11,150,706 times
Reputation: 7997
Quote:
Originally Posted by Astral_Weeks View Post
Why must you assume somebody with a different point of you from yours is somehow far to the left? I don't fit in a neat little box like progressive or far left or right. Capiche?
Fair enough.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2019, 07:39 PM
 
Location: Laguna Niguel, Orange County CA
9,807 posts, read 11,150,706 times
Reputation: 7997
Utilities have been charging more during peak use for years. Something to think about.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2019, 09:00 PM
 
Location: West Los Angeles and Rancho Palos Verdes
13,583 posts, read 15,672,061 times
Reputation: 14049
Quote:
Originally Posted by Astral_Weeks View Post
It doesn't get any less embarrassing for you no matter how many times you repeat yourself.
Why should I be embarrassed? I'm not the one conflating libertarianism with fascism. Go read up on those two ideologies and then get back to me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2019, 09:08 PM
 
Location: Oakland, CA
702 posts, read 954,760 times
Reputation: 1498
Quote:
Originally Posted by ketch89 View Post
The foremost Libertarian public policy research organization in the United States (Cato) disagrees with you.
https://www.cato.org/blog/solution-congestion

Reason Foundation, too.
https://reason.com/blog/2018/04/05/n...tle-politician

... and the U.K.'s foremost free market think tank as well.
https://www.adamsmith.org/blog/londo...l-road-pricing

..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2019, 04:01 PM
 
Location: West Los Angeles and Rancho Palos Verdes
13,583 posts, read 15,672,061 times
Reputation: 14049
John and Ken are talking about this topic next segment. This congestion pricing is to pay for the Olympics, which we were told would not happen! #BamboozledAgain
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2019, 05:33 PM
 
3,953 posts, read 5,081,169 times
Reputation: 4169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Astral_Weeks View Post
Just because you buy beef at the grocery store and your neighbor buys chicken doesn't mean the option for beef is forbidden. We all must make choices with the limited resources we have.
Does the proceeds from beef subsidize the cost of chicken?

... after dozens of years of poor chicken sales, perhaps the grocery store should retool its product.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2019, 05:50 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles (Native)
25,303 posts, read 21,475,684 times
Reputation: 12319
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exitus Acta Probat View Post
John and Ken are talking about this topic next segment. This congestion pricing is to pay for the Olympics, which we were told would not happen! #BamboozledAgain
I caught part of the show a little earlier .
Couldn’t believe the Metro guy was saying it would fund the Olympics.
We were promised it would just be existing infrastructure used for the Olympics and it would be a huge financial win .
Terrible how dishonest these people are .

How many people in L.A would of supported the 2028 games if they realized essentially it means yet another tax hike ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:41 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top