Maybe we can get him to immigrate to Seattle?

How dare he infringe on the freedoms of...er...

Hmmm.

I guess that there's not much that the right could say in response to that.

Forget Seattle! What about NYC?

Whilst I'm for this charge as a means to tackle London's congestion problems, because I live in the congestion charge zone I'm not entirely happily. Personally, I don't drive but my partner, a teacher, has to drive everyday out of town so this is going to cost us.

I feel sorry for other public servants based in London who have to travel by car and are paid very poorly. You may say to use public transport but London's public transport is dire. It would take my partner an additional 1-2hrs to make the trip using the crappy train services. I don't see the money raised by this improving matters anytime soon, if at all.

For myself, I'm not looking forward to a mass of new commuters on the already overcrowded, unreliable trains which must surely be the intent of congestion charges.

The congestion charges may be good policy and they may well improve things long term in London but for us living here it looks like more expense, more crowded public transport and little change in congestion as most people will be willing or have little choice in paying the charges.

London continues to become less and less a good place to live if you're not a city banker.

MonkeyX, where are the congestion charges supposed to go? I assumed they were aimed towards some kind of transit (more buses?).

I don't know about Trotskyites, but charging more for private transport and putting the money into public space or transit seems unimpeachably lefty. Seattle has been experimenting a bit with reducing the required or allowed parking space per apartment or office; seems to work fairly often in the actual city, but failed hysterically in a Microsoft office park built at the edge of the already-insufficient suburban bus system. (The 'soft hired valet parkers to fit more cars into the garage. I believe another garage and a transit stop have both been built.)

If MonkeyX does live in the CC zone, he and his partner get a 90% discount. So for £2.50 a week (a lot less than any public transport), they can drive wherever they want.

There's no doubt that public transport in London needs massive improvement. That's part of what the congestion charge is designed to fund. As a regular traveler on both buses and trains, I think there has already been a big improvement under Red Ken on the buses. As to the London Underground, Ken has been stymied by the government's insistence on public-private partnership to fund change.

As the excellent Guardian piece pointed out, there are going to be all sorts of teething troubles with congestion charging. But it's not just neoclassical economists who should cheer for Ken on this one.

If MonkeyX does live in the CC zone, he and his partner get a 90% discount. So for £2.50 a week (a lot less than any public transport), they can drive wherever they want.

There's no doubt that public transport in London needs massive improvement. That's part of what the congestion charge is designed to fund. As a regular traveler on both buses and trains, I think there has already been a big improvement under Red Ken on the buses. As to the London Underground, Ken has been stymied by the government's insistence on public-private partnership to fund change.

As the excellent Guardian piece pointed out, there are going to be all sorts of teething troubles with congestion charging. But it's not just neoclassical economists who should cheer for Ken on this one.

">the introduction of a £5 congestion charge for everyone (almost) who drives into central London.<"

Y'know, it's that "almost" that I wonder about. Does the mayor pay his own fee for his own car or do the taxpayers of London pay the fee for a city owned car or are city-employees (of or above a certain pay grade) exempt? Question ditto for national officials working or domiciled in London.
It seems to me pretty difficult to tailor such a law that does make reasonable provision for firetrucks, trash collection vehicles, and police cars that doesn't include slack for pompous bureaucrats', glitzy celebrities', and well-connected lobbyists' limosines; not to mention -- in London -- the vehicles of royal and aristrocratic families. Top that with another "reasonable" means-tested exemption to working poor who have valid claims that they must either drive to work or lose their jobs, and there seems a real danger that this is one more bullseye drawn on the backs of the common middle class.

I can hardly bear to think about empowering even the iconic British Bobbie with the authority to seize personal property without warrent or due process -- a gov't taking of property scaled thousands of times beyond the nominal value (five
pounds) of the offense. (Or maybe British cars are NOT worth so much more than five pounds... I've never driven one.)

It's a great idea fraught with potential for abuse. I wish the Londoners much luck with the experiment. (Hope it turns out better than their experiments with reducing firearm-violence...)

I believe the Mayor takes the tube to work every day.

This is England and so I am sure the list of exemptions is as long as you like, from the Royals (who never pay for anything so are unlikely to start now) down. However he certailny isn't given the Post Office an exemption so maybe I am being too cynical.

I do find it funny that most of the British right (and the government to be fair) are hostile or at best ignoring this experiment. With the exception of Singapore I think it's by far the largest ever effort to impose congestion charging in the world, a policy that economists have called for for many years.

It's only two bands of charge (£0 and £5) not some clever dynamic pricing system. But I think that basically captures much of the dynamics of London traffic -- jammed between 8 and 7 in the daytime and reasonably free flowing during the night.

Well in Seattle's case, the lack of parking "works" because the non-zoned* areas around downtown are used as park-and-ride subsitutes, as commuters take street parking which could be used by neighborhood residents and walk a few blocks into the free-ride bus zone. (I happen to live in a non-zoned area and we are currently petitioning the city to switch to zoned for just this reason)

vsa

*zoned parking are streets with time limits on how long a car can park without a sticker for that zone. Usually 2 hours, with stickers only available for residents in the zone.

You're right about the discount but couple this with the fees we already pay for parking outside our home and the dire state of public transport and you have an expensive proposition for my teacher girlfriend. Let's not even mention the excessive rents and house prices for living in London. Or the UK's high taxes....

In effect, the CC charges are just another inhibitor for low paid public servants based in London who unlike my partner don't have a higher wage earner to supplement all these costs.

Bravo Red Ken! Now, onward to the details: computerising the charges and paying them by debit card from the antenna above the rear-view mirror. Higher charges on rainy days -- when the service supplied by the road is worth more. And charges graduated by car value because of the higher value of the Police protection of the property.

While on the protection of property, a wee bit of programming the system should bring both car theft and driving without liability insurance rapidly to zero.

Brad DeLong writes, "London Mayor Ken Livingstone wants to charge private automobile drivers entering London to make them feel the congestion they cause--feel it in their pocketbooks, that is. It's a great idea that has every neoclassical economist in the world cheering this former darling of Britain's loony Trotskyite left..."

If Dr. DeLong likes congestion pricing, perhaps he'll step up to something even better...complete privatization of all roadways :-).

"The economics, politics, and technology are right for progressively privatizing highways and creating markets in highway service. Washington State, Virginia, and California have begun to do so. Private highway projects in those states are discussed in detail."

"State highways should be sold section by section to private owners. With private operators responsible for maintenance as well as improvement of the highways, gasoline taxes and other government charges for roads could be phased out. New ideas and new technologies would be applied. For example, to eliminate stop-and-go conditions, private highway operators could vary toll rates by the minute to encourage less peak-hour travel."

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-231.html