Angus, taxes can in fact be counter-productive. However, at the level I propose, and by imposijg it throughout the NYC region, it should not have that effect.

Not by itself. But in combination with other taxes and costs, couldn't it be the straw that breaks the camel's back, when a business is considering relocating jobs?

Angus, taxes can in fact be counter-productive. However, at the level I propose, and by imposijg it throughout the NYC region, it should not have that effect. Take examples of a small or large business. Small business wants to add a new "clerical" type employee at ssay 25k per year. The annual tax for that employee would be $83. Or little mor than a buck a week. Not likely to stop that small business person from hiring an employee that he or she feels is needed.
A large business with a million dollar a year payroll would pay $3,333 per year.

Neither figure would a. be a job killer or b. encourage a business to spend dollars to move out of the greater NY region.

I recognize that this is adding to an already large burden on business---and I regret that. BUT someone has to pay for this. I am not going to cut schools, public safety, seniors or youth to get there.

As to hydrogen, I don't have all the answers. Let's say we confine the production of Hydrogen to only energy efficient methods---and work like hell to improve and expand those efforts. (I am still fascinated by the idea of using ocean currents, for example.) What if we could get HALF of the cars on the roads using zero emission hydrogen produced in an energy efficient manner? That would surely make quite a dent, wouldn't it?

Plus, call me a patriot, but when big business sees a need, good old Yankee tinekrism seems to come through. We'll find a way to make it work. Why? Because we have to.

And you didn't think I was an environmentalist, didja?

Lew from Brooklyn

There was one irrefutable argument against congestion pricing -- elected officials like yourself could and would just squander the money on insiders, leaving us worse off that before. Public services are doomed, and the only question is how much we pay for what we do not get.

I am therefore unwilling to pay higher payroll taxes either. Use the so-called "hidden billions," brought up every time a fare increase is proposed, to pay for transit.

A payroll tax seems like the most straightforward way to increase unemployment in New York. If I have it wrong, please feel free to correct me, but that sounds much worse than a tiny number of upper-middle-class-people being deterred from an activity that endangers and sickens their neighbors.

I'll give you those first two points on your business tax and co-existing modes of transit (even if I don't completely agree), but you're dead wrong on hydrogen. It's not about the lack of infrastructure. Hydrogen is not sustainable. Go ahead and do the research. It's a net energy loser and to top it off it that energy has to come from somewhere else. So I'll ask the question again, where's this energy that's supposed to power our hydrogen fuel cells gonna come from? Hopefully not gasoline or biofuels. Solar and wind aren't enough. So, is it nuclear?

I'll accept SOME of the negativity as understandable dissapointment in the apparent outcome. I would hope, however, that my statement that we need to move past our dispute to finding solutions would be the spirit of our future communications and efforts.

My tax for those that did not get it, would be paid by the businesses and not by the "low income workers". And while I would acknowledge thta all things are passed along to somebody to some degree, at the very least if this were passed off to workers who get paid salaries, someone making 100k a year would pay three times the amount of someone makeing 33k a year.

I also need to state what I consider to be a postulate: that to move millions of people to diverse areas of work, we need not only trains, but cars, buses, ferries and bicycles. ALL must co-exist. None could sustain the absence of the others--at least as to the main three. So, I know there are those of you who view cars as deadly and a waste of space...but I just won't engage in that dialogue any further. Not to be snarky, just because we see things VERY differently.

Finally, it amazes me how some of you continue to react to hydrogen. I am urging that an infra structure be developed. For zero emisission cars. We can develop that infra structure in the most cost efficient net energy positive way. Why? Because it doesn't exist now and we have to. California is using solar power to develop its hydrogen. That's a good start.

Anyway, I made a promise to Streetsbloggers and others. To wit, I was not making my proposal jsut to kill congestion pricing. I will continue to keep that promise. I hope that some of you can find it in your hearts and minds to embrace it.

Lew from Brooklyn

And, as others have noted, hydrogen cars do nothing to reduce congestion, or their other negative impacts on people and communities.

That, along with all the mega-expensive tunnel in his plan, clearly show that his "plan" is simply meant to serve as a distraction from real, proven solutions such as congestion pricing.

The MTA does not operate in a free market. Its a monopoly. There is little motivation for the for profit institution to do anything other than allow the infrastructure to rot while raising prices on consumers.

Certainly, there are many, many problems within the MTA but privatization is unlikely to address anything but the balance sheet.

Ahem -- with city bonds, to be paid only after a guaranteed private profit, for the IRT and BMT.

As WWI inflation raised costs, but not the 5 cent fare set in the Dual Contracts of 1913, some profits were made but no virtually no money was contributed to the city's debt service.

In the end, the private companies were bought out of their contracts using more city bonds, and the city paid again to start rebuilding the lines, which had had deferred maintenance.

The IND, city owned from the start, was also paid for by city bonds.

How does that make any sense? Is making more than $1 million per year really worse to society than driving an SUV around in the city center, making ambulance and fire response times slower, wasting money idling in traffic for small business owners trying to make deliveries, generally polluting and making life unpleasant for pedestrians?