IBM Patents Pricing Motorists Off Highways 805
theodp writes "Self-professed patent reformer IBM snagged a patent Tuesday for the Variable Rate Toll System, which covers the rather anti-egalitarian scheme of pricing motorists off of the roads by raising tolls as congestion increases. 'Congestion pricing of traffic is emerging as a completely new services market for IBM,' boasted Jamie Houghton, IBM's Global Leader for Road Charging."
Great, another way to screw the tax payers... (Score:4, Interesting)
So the toll makes out even, or slightly ahead at best. While the tax payers have to pick up the tab to repair the surface streets that are now getting heavier traffic because of increased pricing on toll roads.
So people with money get to work faster, and people with out will get taxed more. Sounds like a great idea.
-Rick
Mass transit... (Score:2, Interesting)
If you live in the sticks, I imagine this won't be too much of a problem for you. I don't live there and don't intend to find out for sure. Me, I live in Philadelphia (home of the useless muni wifi). I used to work in the far suburbs. I had two options for getting there: 1) Drive on the Schuykyll "Expressway," or 2) take the train. Of course, I had to wait for the train, but then again I didn't have to wait in traffic - evens out. But I could read a book on the way to work, and overall I saved gas money. And in so doing, I'm pretty sure I helped the environment to boot.
If I want to go downtown to the Gallery mall, I can drive, or I can take the trolley that runs one block from my apartment. The trolley goes underground at 40th Street, so it can zip through what would normally be some nice urban gridlock to 13th Street, the end of the line. The Gallery is two blocks on foot from there. Total time saved - usually 10 minutes or so, plus, again, I can read a book and not use gas.
Re:motorists being forced off the road and into bu (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Tone of the summary (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:There's an essential flaw in this plan. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:How to beat IBM here... (Score:3, Interesting)
Really? I think they should organize the building of roads, but not pay for them. Not one dime. Just like water, sewer, or electricity.
Sure, roads are valuable and necessary. And without eminent domain, making them would be ridiculous. But beyond that, I think they should get paid for from user fees. Subsidizing them has led to all sorts of inefficiencies, and created a lot of unnecessary dependence on them.
Fifty years ago, the only way we could do that is with toll roads, which are expensive to run and annoying to use. But with modern tech, we can easily do usage metering and congestion pricing. If I can pay by the trip [wikipedia.org] for my car, there's no reason I shouldn't pay for the road the same way.
Re:There's an essential flaw in this plan. (Score:2, Interesting)
The real crime here is tax dollars are used to build these highways then they are leased to private companies who spend a tiny fraction of the cost to add some cones and toll booths. The companies get rich, hand the lanes back 10 years later at the end of the lease and more tax dollars are needed to repair them.
Re:There's an essential flaw in this plan. (Score:3, Interesting)
People don't use the carpool lanes now, but there is no financial incentive to do so.
I live in Tucson, AZ (Score:1, Interesting)
I think your list of cities that support car-free life is too short. I would add at least Washington DC. Probably most of the major cities (Chicago, Seattle, Miami...) would be tolerable for the car-eschewing citizen. LA feels like an exception, but I haven't really lived there.
The only way decent public transport is going to be built is if there is a DEMAND for it, and the supply is going to come along later.