Letter: Cure for congestion
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Professor Peter Smith (letter, 8 January) is wrong to claim that new types of motive power will cure (or partly cure) congestion. Why should they? We could have completely "clean" metal boxes on wheels; but they'd still impede each other's progress unless and until we find a cure for congestion.
Suggested cures are of two main types: those that rely on the price mechanism and those that don't. The first category includes higher fuel taxes (hitting hardest poor car users in rural areas, who cause little congestion); taxes on non-residential parking space; tolls on motorway use; and congestion charges in cities. All of these are inequitable and possibly ineffective in reducing congestion.
The second category includes the demand management measures used widely in US cities, giving strong incentives for car pools. These are equitable and have proved acceptable. Why do we not adopt them here?
NIGEL SEYMER
Lower Slaughter, Gloucestershire
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments