The fact that you have stated you would punch Melky in the head says you are irrational and should not be published. Is this what pro-congestion people have resorted to?

Brooklyn Dad is an exception and does not speak for all pro-congestion-pricing people. Many of my neighbors have expressed similar positions to what Melky said, and I have no desire to punch any of them anywhere.

You want to make the wealthy pay their fair share? We'd all love to see the plan. In the meantime, we tried to make them pay for driving and failed. Now what do you think we should do about all the cars driving through my neighborhood because there's a "free" bridge on the other side?

The fact that you have stated you would punch Melky in the head says you are irrational and should not be published. Is this what pro-congestion people have resorted to? Violence? Can't people disagree on policy without personal attacks? It's very disappointing. I wish people would realize that the government is not addressing the fact that middle class and working class people are hurting. The only people congestion pricing won't hurt are multi-millionaires. We need to find policies that make the ulta-wealthy pay. As someone from a place where the mean salary is $30,000 I am not sympathetic to those who make $200,000 but I do understand that that is not that much money anymore. Congestion pricing is bad public policy but it also highlights something worse; the fact that the left will cut off its nose to spite its face. We should not be fighting each other. We should make the wealthy pay their fair share. But please Brooklyn Dad, cut the attacks. Would you really punch him in the head?

Like Brodsky, Fidler and Weprin, you continue to prove unwilling or unable to back up the claim that congestion pricing is "regressive" with any data. You argue with no facts or data.

Fine, institute a millionaire's tax. Go for it. Let's see what effect that has on the Manhattan-based corporations that hire all of your middle class workers. I don't know. Maybe it'll be OK.

But, more important, how will your millionaire's tax help remove the life-crushing traffic congestion from New York City streets? Congestion pricing would have gotten rid of 120,000 cars a day.

Oh, right, Brodsky had a plan to give us 100 new cops out to handle the double parkers and box blockers and smooth out traffic flow. I suppose that's your plan. Melky, if you were standing in front of me, I'd punch you in the head.

What is real clear is that transit fares will go up which is absolutely regressive. Somehow the brain disorder that accompanies CP-opposition stops them from looking to the next steps after CP has failed.

A millionaire's tax ain't going to cut it so transit cutbacks, canceled projects and the inevitable steep fare hikes will absolutely be regressive.

For once I'd like to see one of you people provide some data to back up your claim that congestion pricing would be a "regressive tax" in NYC. That's an economic argument. You should have some numbers to prove it. What have you got?

Nothing.

Anyway, don't you have a gas tank to fill up, a car horn to blare or some particulate matter to spew out your exhaust pipe? What are you sticking around here for? Your state Assembly gave you the right to drive for free in and out of Manhattan all you want. Go enjoy it while you can.

Here's to hoping that the folks who did listen to the facts will stay motivated and find other ways to reclaim our streets from cars. Let's not drop the ball.

The arrogance of pro-congestion pricing advocates continues to amaze me.

The arrogant cluelessness of anti-congestion pricing advocates in repeating the lies that have been drummed into their heads in the echo chamber continues to amaze me.

You won, okay? Now hurry back to your community boards; I think there might be a development with only two parking spaces per unit up for approval!

Drum Major Institute:
http://www.drummajorinstitute.org/library/report.php?ID=52

COMMUTE:
http://prattcenter.net/commute.php

Transportation Alternatives:
http://www.transalt.org/newsroom/releases/115

He complained that it is unfair to charge for access to Manhattan. But he knows most New Yorkers already pay for access to Manhattan.

He argued that mass transit is not convenient for people in the neighborhoods he represents. Yet he knows that most of them get to Manhattan that way.

These don't seem like honest positions to me.

I don't understand why it's so hard for people to get around the idea of paying for public stuff. People pay to park in public parking lots ALL THE TIME. People pay to park at transit stations all over the place(too little if you ask me) and it's not exactly anarchy.

I like Dave's idea about using CP money to subsidize mass transit for the poor. Let's add commuter trains to that proposal.

Take the wind out of the sails of those politicians why cry that tolls are regressive.

CP had a fault in that it was only 60 hours per week and traffic is always bad. On weekends it should not be free to drive into the city and park for free. Make the toll $4 or something equivalent to the transit fare.

Also can we put the meters back into effect on Sunday? Separation of church/state, whatever the argument is but stop the free curbside give-away.

While I do not believe there are many middle class drivers who take the free bridges to come to the Manhattan CBD (unless they have placardss), there are probably many who use the bridges to avoid tolls on the non-CBD crossings.

This is essential to countering the "once city" argument against CP and other initiatives.

Every person has the right to come into Manhattan; it's their CARS that don't.