Today’s Headlines

  • Pentagon to Back Transpo Reform? Military Says Climate Change Threatens National Security (NYT)
  • Arbitrators Expected to Give MTA Workers 4 Percent Annual Raise (News)
  • Driver Kills Elderly Man Crossing Street in Bensonhurst; NYPD: ‘No Criminality Suspected’ (News)
  • The Great Cycling PR Campaign of 2009 Continues in the Daily News
  • A Brief History of American Street Design (Planetizen)
  • NY1 Shows a Few Scenes From the First ‘Summer Streets’ of 2009
  • Market-Oriented Parking Policy Can Make Cities More Livable (Austin Contrarian via Streetsblog.net)
  • The Post Keeps Demonizing NYPD Tow Crews as Weprin Unveils a Bill to Extend Impound Lot Hours
  • How They Do Parking Placard Fraud in the Hamptons (Post)
  • Another Reason to Submit Your Bike Etiquette PSA to TA: BikeSnob Will Be Judging, Snobbily

More headlines at Streetsblog Capitol Hill

  • Larry Littlefield

    “Arbitrators Expected to Give MTA Workers 4 Percent Annual Raise”

    That isn’t a raise, it’s a cost of living increase. Any raises workers get under their contract (due to longevity, promotions) would be in addition.

    Now some might object that now that most workers are facing wage freezes, and rents are finally falling, the cost of living is going down, but that isn’t necessarily so.

    Because for those who can’t afford private automobiles with off street parking, private schools, a move to safe suburbs or a doorman guard, private recreational facilities and their own books are going to be out of luck, given what is going to happen to public transit, public schools, public parks, public libraries, police protection, etc. Plus taxes are going nowhere but up. So for those who don’t have a great enough deal to offset this, and are forced to pay for it, NYC is a about to become (once again) unlivable.

    So public employees need raises, and those on Wall Street need bonuses, to offset the decline of public benefits and services.

  • Les Paul

    It is misleading to use the term “Market-Oriented” to describe setting parking meter rates at a level which keeps some curb parking spots open. The point is to use price to manage demand, not maximize profit. In a market, the seller tries to make maximum profit. In the case of parking, the government is not trying to make maximum profit. It is trying to achieve the maximum curb use that does not result in double parking and cruising. If the government was seeking to make max profit from meters, it would set prices that could result in as many as half of spots always being open. Better terms? Maybe “smart parking” or “price managed” parking or “performance” parking.

  • Les, there are all kinds of ways to be oriented towards the market. Maximizing profits is only one of them.

  • Josh

    OK, I’ve gotta say something about this air tragedy that’s been occupying the headlines for the past couple of days. (Disclosure: Before embarking on my present career, I worked as an aerospace engineer for an aircraft company that also operated a flight school.)

    Without a doubt, this was a terrible tragedy. The loss of life, particularly insofar as it involved two families each losing multiple family members, was awful, and I don’t want anyone to think what I’m going to say below is intended to diminish, in any way, their loss.

    But: What the heck? One fatal air collision and everybody is outraged at the lack of safety regulations? (See lead stories on AMNY and various other local papers.) In a field that’s already highly regulated, and with high and strict licensing standards? The amount of coverage that’s given to any single incident involving an airplane/helicopter is a testament to how rarely it happens.

    Meanwhile, as we here all know, cars and trucks (including medallion cabs, livery cabs, commercial trucks, etc.) are responsible for deaths of pedestrians and cyclists and passengers on a weekly basis. Where’s the outrage about that? Where are the calls for tighter safety standards on the ground?