The Comedy Cellar: Live from the Table - Congestion Pricing - Is it Equitable? - Will it work? - Alex Matthiessen, congestion pricing guru

Episode Date: January 17, 2025

A heated argument over congestion pricing. Noam is dead set against it. Npam is aware that people think this is his worst performance! Alex Matthiessen is an environmental strategist and founder/president of the eco-political consulting firm Blue Marble Project, as well as the senior adviser to the Congestion Pricing Now Campaign. In 2010, he began the Move NY congestion pricing campaign, which laid the groundwork for the program.

This is Live from the Table, the official podcast of the world-famous Comedy Cellar. Available wherever you get your podcasts. Available on YouTube. Available on demand on Sirius XM Satellite Radio. This is Dan Natterman, Comedy Cellar comedian. I usually get the early spots for some reason. Anyway, I'm with Noam Dorman. He's the owner of the Comedy Cellar. I actually don't mind the early spots. That's not a complaint. I'm just saying. I'm with Noam, though I don't love being first on the show, but that's another issue. Noam is here. He's the owner of the Comedy Cellar,

the ever-expanding Comedy Cellar. The new Comedy Theater will be opening sometime, hopefully in 2025. Periel is here. Unlikely. It's a city in New York. Once they start constructing it, it should be. Maybe we can get City Councilman Wiener in but otherwise

it's impossible to get anything done. Perry L. Ashenbrand is with us and we have with us Alex Matheson, environmental and season campaign, environmentalist and season campaign strategist. His consulting firm Blue Marble Project

which he founded in 2010 provides strategic communications and issue advocacy campaign. to nonprofit and corporate clients. We welcome him on our program. Alex, good to have you with us. Thank you very much for having me. I think Noam is here to invite you to talk about congestion pricing. So you were one of the people, I have it written here somewhere, in 2010 he began the Move New York Congestion Pricing Campaign, which laid the groundwork for the program. So you're one of the progenitors of congestion pricing.

And you wrote a column in the New York Times right before it came back, urging President Trump to look kindly on congestion pricing. Stand down, yes. So put the mic a little bit closer to you if you don't want to. So here's my first question to you, sir. People are saying that it seems to be working in reducing congestions thus far. Yes. Although we can look into that. What would you say are the three most concerning negative trade-offs of congestion pricing?

You're opening with a tougher one, I see. You're not looking for all the benefits and all the glory. Well, I mean, first of all, we had a very good first week. You couldn't have asked for a better week. We had a substantial reduction in the number of cars coming to the central business district. You had a substantial reduction of traffic. This is why I'm asking, because I could have made a toll of $100 and reduced it even more. I could cut highway deaths in half by lowering the speed limit to 25 miles an hour or even more than half.

So that's why I'm leading with the question. That's fine, all great. What are the negative trade-offs? I mean, I don't think that there are going to be many negative trade-offs over time. I think the one thing I was just going to simply say is that while we had a very good first week, there will be likely a rebound effect where people see how little the traffic was

in this first week, and they suddenly get back in their cars to drive to take advantage of that very sparse traffic. So it will probably fluctuate over time. The hope is and the expectation is that over time, on average, we're going to see a significant reduction in traffic in the New York City in the zone, but also in the areas outside. No matter where this goes, you're still

welcome to come to the Comedy Cellar anytime you want. But I'm really astonished at your answer. Why? Because there's tremendous negative... I know them in my personal life. Well, just give me some examples. Okay, let's see. I have a woman works for me. She's 79 years old. She lives in the Bronx. The subway station is a bus ride from her house. She works here till midnight, one in the morning. How she has been coerced to take a subway, a $200 a month tax going up to almost double that. They wanted $17.

No, $15. Now it's $15. Originally it was $17. No, you know, $17. No, $15. Now it's $15. Originally it was $17. No, no, $15. It was always $15. It was always $15. All right. It's, you know, $2,000 to $4,000 tax, after-tax income. This is untenable for her, even in the summertime, to walk through the Bronx at night by herself, let alone in the icing, freezing winter, she represents many people. I have other employees who have been mugged on the subway. Can I just say, though, I mean, what you're doing is you're picking out specific individual examples. And there's no doubt, there's no doubt that certain individuals are on net going to face more of a hardship than they did before.

So that's just kind of a given. But let me just say, first of all, it's not a tax. It's really a user fee. If you don't want to drive in or if you don't have to drive in, you don't have to pay. It costs $0 if you choose not to drive. If you don't want to work for a living, you don't have to work. No, but that's not quite true. The vast majority of people

who work in New York City, including in the Central Business District, use public transit. It's somewhere between 80 and 85 percent. That's a huge number. The vast majority of those people are low and middle income. So the people you're concerned about, for the most part, are

using and already use mass transit. Okay, what about- The funding that comes from this- Let me stop. What about- It's going to make that system work a lot better. I asked you what the negative trade-offs were. I didn't say they were outweighed

by the benefits in your mind, but what about, I know single moms who live in Staten Island. They drop their kids off to school. They plan their lives around this. They move to Staten Island because They drop their kids off to school. They plan their lives around this. They move to Staten Island because the schools are horrible in Manhattan.

They drop their kids off at school. They go to work in the hospital as a nurse to support these rich doctors. Then they come back. They pick up their kids from daycare. Then they run some errands, and they go home, and they try to have some life for the kids.

This represents hundreds of thousands, tens of, I don't know, tremendous numbers of people. Let me ask you this question. You could go on for an entire hour and give me example after example of situations that sound really sympathetic to me too. Listen, when you have public policy and you're trying to do something big for the city of New York,

a city as complicated, politically difficult and challenging as New York, if you can put forward a policy that has the greatest good for the greatest number of people, then you've succeeded. It doesn't mean that every single person is on net going to feel like they benefited from that. But also, the other thing I would just say is, you know, everybody needs to take a deep breath, especially the New York Post, and let this thing play out and see what happens. Because you'd be surprised. In London and Singapore, they hated the idea. London is back to full congestion. No, no. I can have an answer. Okay, wait, wait.

I want to get my stuff out and I'll let you plenty of to say what you want to say. So first of all, these scenarios I'm painting, these vignettes I'm describing are very, very common. People pay thousands of dollars right now before congestion pricing. It costs thousands of dollars to drive. The car costs tens of thousands of dollars. Insurance, tolls, gas. The subway has always been $2.90. So without the extra $9, we have tremendous evidence that people found it very, very inconvenient or unpleasant to take the subway already. For whatever reason, they were already ready to pay thousands of dollars,

middle-class people, thousands of dollars, rather than take this alternative $2.90 ride. And the plan of congestion pricing, obviously, is to find the tipping point so that the people who can't afford it will submit. Obviously, people like me, it's been awesome driving into work. Awesome. And I feel guilty about it all the time. And they're going to up the price until they find the people that will either stop working in Manhattan,

which over time will happen, right? Or they just submit to the fact that even though they were already paying thousands of dollars, they can't bear it anymore. Now, I want to say, who said the following? Can I just respond? Because otherwise, I'm going to forget everything you said. Okay, say respond. I'm not going to have a chance. So first of all, you know, you're kind of- Why were people paying thousands of dollars already to drive in rather than- You've just made my point for me better than I could make it.

I'm happy. Because you've just made the point that car drivers, on average, are significantly more wealthy than people who take public transit. So you've made my point. Not the people who are paying the $9 is stopping them from driving. No, no, no. The vast majority of drivers, the vast majority of drivers in this city... Are still driving in.

Well, right. That's what I'm saying. I'm talking about the people who can't drive in. No, I understand. You're talking about at the margin, right? You're talking about at the margin. Well, the whole plan depends on that margin. Otherwise, you won't reduce congestion.

Yes, yes. I get that. The people that we are decongesting on the back of are the people who we can't afford it, right? They're not the wealthy. We're doing this on the back of the people who can't afford it. Yeah, but you know what, though? The plan is for the wealthy to keep paying the $9.

The plan is for the people who can't afford it to submit. I understand your point. Am I wrong? There's a certain truth to it, but that's true throughout society. There's certain people who can't go and get a Starbucks coffee because they can't afford Starbucks. Yes, but this is the government doing it. This isn't the free market. And the government's a monopoly here.

Yeah, but the government has to actually figure out how to maintain the commons, how to make sure that the goods of the land are distributed fairly. This is why I'm so surprised. This was not the answer I was expecting from you, and this was not the argument I thought we were going to have, and I'll tell you why. Well, I haven't finished making my comment. Who said the following? Looking at the current system as a whole, most drivers get a raw deal.

We toll virtually every major and some minor crossings between the five boroughs already, yet we don't charge anything on the four of the major crossings in the most congested, most transit-rich parts of the city. So effectively what happens is that all those drivers regularly using those outer crossings are paying so much that the East River Bridges operate without tolls. Essentially, they're subsidizing those other drivers, and that's just unfair and an inequitable system. Who said that? I would say it's either me or Sam Schwartz. It was you saying exactly what I'm saying now.

But I can explain that incredibly easily. You were saying then that it's inequitable to charge these people so much money. Your plan was to lower the other costs. Yes, exactly. They didn't do that plan. Right, but you said that was inequitable. Yes, but what I'm not getting, Noam,

is I'm an advocate. I can go out there with Sam Schwartz and other people who are really smart about this stuff. That's why I'm shocked. Let me just finish. And I can put forward a policy, and it was the best policy. Move New York was the best version of congestion pricing. Unfortunately, Andrew Cuomo, for a variety of reasons, didn't say, hey, these guys are a lot smarter than I am on this. Let's just do the Move New York plan because that's the smartest plan and that's the fairest

plan. So that doesn't mean that congestion pricing done in other ways is a complete inequitable system. Yes, I and Sam and other people like that back then when we were trying to push this thing and get the government to do it, we came up with a plan that was even better than the plan. But I'm here saying that the big trade-off is that this is inequitable. And you're saying, no.

And I'm saying, but you're the one who, I got it from you. But you're talking about a different inequity. What you were saying there is that you've got a lot of drivers using the outer parts of the city where there's not nearly as much traffic and not nearly as many transit options, and they're paying the full toll out there. If congestion pricing was done right, they would pay less because they've got good options. Let me finish. They would pay less because they've got good options, and they're contributing less traffic. And then the people who are contributing the most traffic who are going over those four

East River bridges or across 60th Street would then pay something. So you get a balance in there, and everybody would be kind of contributing, and everybody was paying their fair share. So the fact that we didn't lower tolls in the outer parts of the city, that's too bad. We should have done that. It's inequitable. Well, then let's start a new campaign. You and I can start a new campaign to get those tolls lowered. Sam Schwartz would be right behind you. But you agree that the lack of equity, the inequitableness of it is actually actually, number one, on the list of negative tradeoffs? It's from your own thing. No, but you're mixing apples and oranges here because the inequity is different.

Now everybody's paying something, right? You thought the poor should pay less. Let me finish. Including the people in the outer parts of the city, right? They're paying something as well. So now the inequity, you could still argue based on my argument and Sam Schwartz's argument that those people should be paying less if people coming into the most trafficky area are paying more.

So there's a little inequity there compared to the move New York plan, but it's still a lot better than what it was, which was $6 or $7 versus $0. Better for who? It's better for the vast majority of New Yorkers who benefit from congested pricing. How are they benefiting? Easily.

85% are taking mass transit, and you suddenly have $15 billion that you can invest in the system to make it more reliable, to make it safer. So the very fact that there's less congestion makes the bus system immediately more effective. Exactly. Without putting any money on it.

Exactly. I mean, did you read the New York Times a couple days ago? You talked to pedestrians. There was a woman who said, I used to be scared for my life when I walked across Canal Street. I saw that. It was such nonsense. Listen, but it's no more nonsense than your example of the one person who comes down. She was talking about crossing on a Nonsense. Listen, but it's no more nonsense than your example of the one person who comes down. She's talking about crossing on a red light.

Well, we probably will see less traffic deaths. But the point is that there's a lot of people who have been very excited, including folks from New Jersey, from upstate New York, and so on, who were haters of this thing. And they said, hey, the discussion price is pretty good. They have money. Right. of this thing. And they said, hey, they have money. They have money. Right, but the point I'm making is that, Noam, you're cherry-picking and giving me these vignettes which are sympathetic. They are. There's no question.

I agree with you. Tiana, bring up that map of the traffic deserts and I want to get to the other three things. Well, I do have a question. Look, let these guys... All the people in the in the red areas these are people who live more than 15 minutes from a subway station these are these are not wealthy neighborhoods these are not this is not a small amount of people this is from the new york times

these are all represent lives and then you compound that that inconvenience, many of them have bought houses, bought cars, planned it, many of them work at night, many of them, for many of these people, the walk from the subway to their homes is treacherous. But the subway itself, anybody in my financial situation

will not let their mother, their wife, or their daughter take the subway at certain times of day or to certain neighborhoods. I would not let my daughter drive on the Hutchinson River Parkway. All right, Dan, listen.

I mean, that's, you know, I'd rather she take Metro North. Can I just tell you, let me give you one, let me give you another one. Would you let your wife take the subway at midnight to the Bronx?

I'm not married, but... Would you, or your daughter? My girlfriend? No, I probably wouldn't. Would you? Or your daughter? My girlfriend? No, I probably wouldn't. But the person under your plan has to. What's that? The person under your plan who can't afford has to. Your plan is to make the person less fortunate than you

force their wife to walk home from work when they get off waiting tables late afternoon. The main reason is that we're not traveling at that hour. We're at a certain age where we're kind of in bed by 7. Yes, all my employees travel at that hour. Right, but you have to know, remember, the toll after 9 o'clock, between 9 and whatever it is. They paid it on the way in.

They don't pay it to go home. Right, but, Noam, you can't have a city of 8.5 or 9 million people all driving in at will. It's just not going to work. You have to put a price on all these public resources so there is a balanced use of them. And so, yes, there are going to be

some people who on net face a difficult circumstance, and they're going to adapt like everybody else adapts when things change in society. You think the folks in LA aren't going to do some serious adapting over the next couple of years, given the fires out there? I mean, and the bottom line is the congestion pricing,

and I think that will be proven the case in the coming weeks and months, is that this is a very good public policy for the vast majority of New Yorkers. Whether you're talking about safer streets, cleaner air, better transit, more reliable transit. If cleaner air, then they should let the electric cars go in for free. That would be a very smart thing to do. Can I just... Hold on. But then you're not really addressing the traffic thing.

It's about traffic. In London, they let the electric cars be free. In E.B. White in 1947, he's the one who called New York City the capital of the world. He described the bottlenecks, the decaying bridges, the crowds. Every facility is inadequate. The hospitals and schools and playgrounds are overcrowded. The express highways are feverish. The unimproved highways and bridges

are bottlenecks. There is not enough air and not enough light. There is usually either too much heat or too little, but the city makes up for its hazards and its deficiencies by supplying its citizens with massive doses of a supplementary vitamin, the sense of belonging to something unique, cosmopolitan, mighty, and unparalleled. At certain hours on certain days, it is almost impossible to find an empty taxi, and there is a great deal of chasing around after them. You grab a handle and open the door and find that some other citizen is entering from the other side. Doormen grow rich, blowing their whistles for cabs, and some doormen belong to no door at all, merely wander about the streets, opening cabs for people as they happen to find them. By comparison, on other less hectic days, the city is uncomfortable and convenient.

But New Yorkers temperamentally do not crave comfort and convenience. If they did, they would live elsewhere. But he makes the point that New York is congested. It's bottlenecked. People don't come to New York for convenience. People come to be part of the churn of all of New York is congested. It's bottlenecked. People don't come to New York for convenience. People come to be part of the churn of all of New York. My point being that everything you're saying about New York, this is the same thing people said in the 40s.

New York has always been congested. It has always been full of gridlock. This is nothing new. Not to the extent that it is today. In 2024, traffic was the worst it's ever been in the history of New York. And yes, there's been traffic for a long time. All the more reason why we should do something about it.

You're right. New Yorkers have become inured to congestion. They created externalities that the drivers pay for. They closed 14th Street. They put bike lanes. They made bus lanes. The drivers, and I'm a driver too. I pay this toll, but I take mostly public transit and late at night as well.

And I take bikes. I bike around and I walk around. But now I've lost my train of thought. But we've been trying to do this. So New Yorkers have become accustomed to traffic for decades and decades, for half a century or a century. And finally we're doing something about it. That's actually progress. But it's not the drivers who are complaining about it.

They're the ones sitting in the traffic. They're the ones sitting in the traffic, and they're causing air pollution. They're causing carbon emissions. They're killing and maiming more people in terms of other passengers, pedestrians, bicyclists, and so on. They are having a huge impact. You know people lit on fire on the subways. Listen, you're just a master of the therapy.

There's about 10 deaths on the subway a year and about 140 pedestrians. Fair enough. Maybe that was a snarky point, but the subways are treacherous. Listen, listen, I want to, listen, we're all freaked out by the fact that somebody was lit on fire. That's horrendous. It's horrible. It's frightening for all of us.

But let me just remind you and your listeners of the numbers. 10 people were killed on the subway this year, and that's 10 too many deaths for sure. But remember that there were 250 people killed in vehicle accidents in New York City the same year, this last year. So that's... You mean pedestrians? No, anybody.

It could be pedestrians, it could be... I think it's about 150 pedestrians from what I read or something like that. Well, I don't know. I just know the total number of vehicle deaths in New York City in 2024 is 250. The bike lanes are treacherous and people don't...

And the bike... So you're against bikers now too? No, I'm assuming many of the deaths are people on bikes because I see bicycles. No, there's deaths everywhere. There's deaths of passengers in cars, drivers of cars, pedestrians, cyclists.

But the bottom line is the subway. I've seen a lot of bike accidents. Those are, if not every accident I've seen in the last two years, it's the overwhelming majority. I have never seen a pedestrian hit by a car. I've seen probably- But just read the stats. Their stories are all the same. They get hit all the time. And little kids get hit. I have never seen a pedestrian hit by a car. I've seen probably... Yeah, but just read the stats.

Their stories are all the same. They get hit all the time. And little kids get hit. I've seen like a dozen people. I've never seen anybody killed on a bike, but I've seen like a dozen people bikes hit. I have a friend who got hurt on a bike. No, it doesn't matter how many you've seen.

You're one guy in a city of 8.5 billion people. Just go look at the stories and news stories and the stats. Can I make it... 450 people have died. Well, and in the business... So by that, and many of them are probably in Staten Island or in boroughs where they drive faster. I don't know what point you're making. Well, because the congestion pricing is on the business. The traffic is very slow in the business district.

Not as slow as it was a week ago. Right. But I'm saying that it's likely to me that people getting killed in traffic accidents are people not going 20, 25 miles an hour in gridlock traffic. That's all I'm saying. They're just around the city. But congestion pricing is affecting not just the CBD. It's affecting the entire city. Logically, I don't see how the congestion in gridlock Manhattan that we're trying to alleviate is where all these people are being killed by car accidents.

That is logical, although from what I've read in London, it did reduce overall traffic deaths, pedestrian and car vehicles. There's no question. Although what you're saying is logical. I'd have to look into that a bit more. But I can tell you, Sam Schwartz, who's the leading traffic engineer in the city of New York, and he's world-renowned. He literally coined the name Gridlock.

That's why he's called Gridlock Sam. He will tell you there is roughly a one-to-one relationship between the number of cars you reduce and the number of deaths. I don't mean per car you'll have one less death. But in other words— It's a direct proportion. It's a direct proportion. Maybe we should get cars off the road everywhere. But let me just say, I just want to remind folks, if you've got a city, in a city of 8.5 million people,

we're right now 5 million down from pre-COVID, which was closer to 7.2, but 5 million people of those 8.5 are taking public transit every day. You have 10 deaths in the subway. That is a tiny, tiny, tiny number. And the only reason we're all freaked out about it is the nature of these deaths. I acknowledge that the fire thing was a somewhat

snarky point, but I've had multiple employees in the last 12 months assaulted on the subway. One was slashed. One was pushed down the stairs, had to get 12 stitches in her head. 22. 22 stitches in her head. This is a dangerous subway. Pow! Pow! Pow! Pow! Pow!

Yo, yo, yo, yo, yo! Yo, yo! Yo, step in! Come on, man. Right? Right. Come on, man. Why you touch your phone, man? right it's an old body it's probably um

people who and and that's and these, my employees actually make good money. They're not going home to the South Bronx, where just the walk from the subway to their home is dangerous. And again, I'm telling you, the whole philosophy, the whole strategy of this plan is to make its gains by breaking the financial backs of the people who can't afford otherwise.

Please, Dan. And while the well-to-do people will now benefit from having a quicker ride in, and they'll pay the $9. And believe me, I will happily pay the $9 to avoid traffic. I think they should toll 14th Street, and they could have upped it to $20

as an express lane rather than having it empty 75% of the time. Oh, look, a bus. Let's wait another five minutes. They took a major traffic artery of New York City and they closed it for a sporadic bus

from time to time. And then they say, look at all the congestion. Let's charge people congestion. These people are creating externalities when they drive in rather than saying the dangerous subways are creating externalities that the drivers are paying for. Closing the lanes are creating externalities

that the drivers are paying for. Time is money. Traffic is an externality. The bad school systems are an externality that forces people to move somewhere where they want to commute to Manhattan, where they can get their kids a decent education. All these things are externalities. I'm not sure why education is an externality, but anyway. Because if you can't safely send your kid, I went to New York City Public Schools, to New York City Public Manhattan schools, you move either to Jersey or to Westchester or to Staten Island.

That's not an externality. That's just a bad feature of the city. An externality is when a corporation is profiting and making money but poisoning or harming society in some way or an individual is doing that. So you're citing a lot of examples of just things that could be better in the city. Maybe it's not technically an externality. It functions as an externality in the sense that if I'm a parent and you say, listen, if you want to live here, you're going to have to send your kids to this school where they won't get educated and it's not safe. I say, oh, well, I guess I'm going to have to move somewhere where my kid can get an education and then I'll have to pay the city of New York, you are forcing, your lack of taking care of these schools is creating

a non-optional outlay on my part, unless I'm the kind of parent who's just not going to sweat it. So I consider that a... That's a whole other issue. Tiana, bring up the Jersey one, Tiana. I want to ask you a question about the... The third one is business.

But I wanted to say before, if I may say, you've been dominating the conversation. Yes, I have. I'm sorry. So speaking to the economy, we have, based on reports that have been done over the last couple of years, there's a $20 billion cost to all the traffic in the city. And that's something that will be addressed. If we can stimulate the economy by reducing traffic and all the externalities that it costs and the delays to getting to work

and loss of productivity and so on, that's going to lift all boats. That's just a given. And then the second thing is, I guarantee you that once folks calm down and they accept that this is the new reality, there's no driver who used to drive before who's never going to again drive into the CBD.

That's just not going to happen. Will they drive less than they used to drive? Yeah, they probably will. They may make that decision. They may start to rely on buses or public transit more, or maybe they'll decide to work from home. It's not that easy. Or, by the way, many of these people,

if you think the $9 is so much for folks like us, then many of these people can go to their employers and say, hey, listen, if you want me to get in here and I need to have my car and it's too much of a challenge, I want you to cover my $9 fee. That's not impossible. A lot of businesses could do that. Yeah. Yeah, a lot of businesses will have to do that. But then, of course, then the whole plan is up in. That's probably impossible. A lot of businesses could do that. Yeah. Yeah, a lot of businesses will have to do that. But then, of course, then the whole plan is upended. That's probably what happened in London to some extent. That's why congestion is back.

Here's from the congestion pricing traffic. This is the Holland Tunnel on a Saturday afternoon. This is one of the most marked effects of this congestion pricing plan. One of the benefits. What's that? One of the great benefits. Yeah. The commute. I mean, the reductions in traffic and all the entry points into Manhattan and lower Manhattan have been astonishing.

This one in particular, traffic went down by like 65 or 7%. Listen, what I'm saying is this is not a day that people are working. People coming in, okay, it's a 15-minute reduction. It went from 24 minutes to get to the Holland Tunnel to get into Manhattan to nine minutes. Including some New Jersey drivers. On a Saturday afternoon. Now, Saturday afternoon, people are not coming in to work. They are coming in to shop and go to restaurants.

I guarantee you people are not loading their families onto these buses to come into mid-Manhattan on a Saturday afternoon to go shopping and to the restaurants. But, Noam? This is something that is coming directly out of the pocket of business. Can I just tell you? I mean, I've got an answer to you. A couple of them. First of all, if you're bringing your whole family in to do some shopping, you can afford $9

across the three or four or five people. I'm not talking about those people. I'm talking about the people who stopped driving. No, but I'm saying they're not going to stop driving. They're going to be thrilled. They're going to be thrilled

to go through the Holland Tunnel on a Saturday and be able to... But they did stop driving. Look at the graph. No, no. What I'm saying is that's a point I was trying to make a second ago, which is that once everybody calms down and kind of gets over the shock of a new toll, I guarantee you, and that's the kind of rebounding effect that we talked about, you're going to have kind of a slight reduction in the reduction, if you will. Okay, but you agree that this is a picture of a damage to business? What I would say is this. What I would say is I understand your point,

but the counterpoint is the following. For every one person that's taking their car in, something like six to eight of them are taking mass transit in there. So the idea that just because you're reducing the number of car trips into the central business district means that you're going to starve businesses, it's just kind of inherently flawed. Because the whole-

He's showing it right here. The whole idea of this is to invest in the mass transit system so it's more reliable, it's more accessible, it reaches some of the transit deserts you're talking about. There's been a big expansion of bus services. That's going to take 20 years from now. But the point is you do get a surge of more people using the transit system who proportionally use the transit system a lot more in drive anyway. So over time, and I think not too far in the future, you're going to see more business activity because there's going to be more people coming

into the central business district because the transit system is better. Alex, I understand you're an advocate for this, and I understand you can say it all outweighs it, but I don't understand the denial of it. Obviously, to me, when you reduce drastically the traffic through the Holland Tunnel on a Saturday afternoon, you're taking that out of a hide of businesses. People come to go ice skating, people who go shopping, they go to the restaurants. This is not people going to work. And they're not taking buses to do that. I understand your point, but let's first of all, let's talk again in a month. Bring the other one up.

Let's see what that number looks like in a month because I think it'll probably flatten out a little bit. Secondly, big picture, big picture message here. This is a proposed plan. Give it a chance. Let's give it six months or a year. Let's let all the data come in. It's absolutely possible to make

adjustments to this thing over time, as we learned. This is the first time. No, that's your wrong. No, no, no. They'll never undo it once they get used. Once they start depending on the revenue, it's locked in. No, no, no. They're not going to remove. They're going to still make revenue, but you can make adjustments throughout the week as to when you charge, how much you charge, and so on. But let's give this plan a chance. You guys aren't even giving

it a chance, and you're kind of ignoring the fact that in many respects, people really had a positive response. So fair enough. So if you think it's going to revert, now explain to me why. Now, I'm going to read from the congestion pricing tracker. Today, we concluded the first week, increases in traffic along neighboring but not charged routes, and no discernible impact on commutes within the congestion zone itself. I gave one example, but there's many of them. They're all the same. This is Lenox Hill to Battery Park during rush hour.

Shows absolutely no difference. So if you think- I can tell you why. Yeah, but please do. But also you why. traffic within the zone hasn't shifted as much as the entry points into the zone is for a simple reason, which is that you've got Ubers and Lyfts and taxis, and they're operating mostly in the central business district because that's where a lot of the business is. And they're kind of, you know, a lot of the trips are within the zone. So, and the toll that they are being charged

is quite a bit less than what was originally proposed. They lobbied for this. Yes, exactly. That ought to tell you something. And so the extra amount that they're paying under this new plan is relatively marginal, and the people that can afford Ubers and Lyfts generally can afford it, and they're not going to change that. But it's failing.

I agree. I agree. I want you to be reminded that I was for different plans where Ubers and Lyft would have been charged much, much more, and yellow cabs, by the way, would have been charged less. Less than Ubers and Lyft. And the reason is because yellow cabs got fucked, whatever it was, 10, 12 years ago when it was, was it de Blasio?

I think the de Blasio administration made a major mistake in letting Ubers and Lyfts pour into the city unregulated, unconstrained. And that's why we have so much more traffic in the zone than we used to. And it's a major problem. It's a major fault of the city. And the yellow cab industry and the drivers got screwed as a result. So what I'm saying is that the congestion zone— So there's more we could do to balance that inequity. and i'm saying is the congestion zone is staying congested people from outside the city who would come into you to go to restaurants and bars and stuff like that are just just to clarify yeah and i want to make go ahead sure i'm clear about this i'm not saying

that that that congestion hasn't been reduced throughout the zone. No, that's not true at all. That's the conclusion of the congestion price. No, but you're talking about specific routes, right? And there are specific places. There's like 10 routes. 42nd Street, 9th Avenue. There's probably reasons why that was the case this week. There might've been an accident on 9th Avenue or something else. But in general, my vote would be to, over time, increase the charge on Ubers and Lyfts because wealthy people, on the whole, are the ones using those and they can afford it. And so if you want to make sure they at least pay their fair share, if not get deterred from overutilizing Ubers and Lyfts, then you've got to increase that charge over time. I'd like to say that— But I just want to make clear, the streets have been much quieter, much less honking,

people have felt much safer in terms of the streets within the zone over the last week. We're all bunk. I really do. No. It's obvious. I'm a bike rider. I bike everywhere. It's very palpable.

You can see it. Noam's assertion, and there's some logic to it, is that people put up with traffic and tolls because the alternative is so horrifying. That is, for them, for whatever reason, public transportation is so horrific and inconvenient and awful. But that's not true. But let me just outline Noam's thesis that they are taking their cars in. But I wonder how true that is. If you want to talk about anecdotes, I read an anecdote about some business owner who said, yeah, I never really took the subway before, but I decided to save some money.

It didn't sound like he was on the balls of his ass and had no choice, but he wanted to save money, and he said he took the subway, and it was fine. It wasn't the scenario that you're painting, somebody who's taking their car in because the alternative is just so horrible. It is immoral. This system is not so horrible at all. The subway system is much better than it was. The buses, as you pointed out, are moving much faster as a result of congestion pricing.

And in general, because of work that the DOT has done over many years in terms of dedicated bus lanes and so on, the system is not bad. And I want to clarify again, both I and my girlfriend, who's of a similar age, use the subway all the time. So I want to make sure that's clear. To the Bronx at night? Are there any Koreans... To a bad neighborhood in Brooklyn? You're rich. You're a rich person. Your view of the world... I'm not a rich person. How rich can he be? Yes, you are a rich person.

Anybody can Google you. You're a rich person. You're worth millions of dollars. And anybody... Your life is like mine. It's totally removed from the lives of the people you're describing. Totally removed. No, that's not the case. If you want to say you're not worth millions of dollars, go ahead and say so.

What are you getting into my personal wealth? Because you're rich. There's nothing to be ashamed of. Listen, I'm not denying that this toll is easier for me to pay than many other New Yorkers. Of course. It's meaningless to you. Of course it's not meaningless. It's two cups of course. It's nothing. It's meaningless to you. It's not. Of course, it's not meaningless. That's why.

Why do you think? It's two cups of coffee. Why do you think there's so many people who were against congestion pricing for all these years? I said it's meaningless to you. Including all the very wealthy drivers you're talking about who drive around all the time. No one likes paying a new toll. No one likes paying a new anything. That's a given.

But that includes all the wealthy people you're talking about. Are there any creative solutions to someone in the case, you mentioned an employee that's 79 years old that will have to pay, that it's not tenable for this employee to take public transportation, so she's just going to have to pay the $9 because she comes in during the day. Are there creative solutions for this woman, perhaps, whether it be carpool or Uber pools or something, are there creative solutions to address this particular issue?

I guarantee you, you know, Americans in general are very innovative and adaptive, and New Yorkers especially are that. And I guarantee you there's going to be all kinds of new cottage industries of folks that are going to come out of the woodwork to address whatever the new needs are. So I'm not worried over time that this thing will settle out and bounce out, and everybody on net over time is going to do very well, including lower income people. And I just want to remind you- Dude, I'm happy you're not worried, but we don't base policy on the fact

that you're not worried. I mean... Policy, you have to kind of reject what's going to happen, and then you institute the policy, and you see what happens, and then you make adjustments over time. Also, these drivers...

I want to say one more thing, which is the Community Service Society, which is New York's number one leading anti-poverty organization, did a study a couple years ago showing that a tiny fraction of low-income people actually drive into the central business district and will pay this toll.

The vast majority of poor people rely on mass transit. I want to say three things. Already, before the congestion pricing. Okay, I want to say three things. First of all, one of the most profound lessons of the last 10 years has been the danger and just how distorting aggregate statistics can be in our politics. that the cobbled together groups of people who were disregarded because of aggregate statistics such as you're describing,

people affected by NAFTA, people affected in border towns, whatever, cobbled together a majority for Trump because yes, the majority may be as you're saying, but the pockets of people who are not represented in that majority are significant.

Liberal people are supposed to be concerned about them. They choose to be, they choose to be concerned. Most of them use mass transit. They choose to be concerned. And this transit system is going to be much better. They choose to be concerned or not concerned as it suits them.

Every building of rich. Listen, no. Let me finish. I let you speak. Let me finish. Every building... I'm going to stop you there because I'm telling you, now you're starting to kind of insult me, and I don't appreciate that because I've worked very hard for a long time as an environmentalist to protect the environment. Why am I insulting you? Because you're suggesting that I'm kind of inured or... That shouldn't insult you. That shouldn't insult you.

I am suggesting you're inured, and it shouldn't be insulting. No, no, no. You would suggest any Republican was inured. I know, but listen, what you're doing is you're painting a broad brush. You're talking about public policy writ large across the country

in any number of industries or sectors or whatever, and you're using that broad brush to talk about a very specific program for a very specific program for a very specific city, which is congestion pricing. And the vast majority of people in this city are going to benefit, Noam. You just have to get over it. That's what's going to happen, I guarantee you. Whether it's clean air, safer streets, better transit, shorter commutes. Yes, but the people who are not going to benefit are 100% made up by the people who couldn't afford to fight this policy,

who had to submit to this economic coercion. You and I are going to benefit. We get to work much faster. The people who are not going to benefit are the people who were spending thousands of dollars. The car drivers who own a car, buy gas, buy insurance. But they're at their limit, and now the $9 is going to be too much for them. Listen, can I just say— Am I wrong? Well, you may find— Yes, you are wrong. You are wrong.

I'll tell you why. Because why are those people, just because you're painting this very sympathetic picture of them, and I get it, but why are they so precious in protecting their right to drive a car into the city is more important than the people that live in the same neighborhood who are going and using mass transit every day and are going to benefit from a much better system. I'll tell you why. Tell me why. Because a lot of these people took their life savings and they bought houses and cars in

particular neighborhoods next to schools or whatever it is that the reason was they decided to live in those places, to have a patch of backyard in Staten Island or Brooklyn or Queens, or whatever it is the reason that they did. And they're all in on this stuff now. And with no warning, everything changed for them. And by the way, Hochul...

With no warning? We've been debating this for 50 fucking years. What are you talking about? No, no, nobody ever... No, come on. Come on. That is total bullshit. This became a big issue once Mayor Bloomberg tried in 2007 and 2008.

Nobody knew what the plan would be. Nobody suspected it would actually happen. That's not true. That's not true. We've been writing about this forever. Hochul canceled it indefinitely, she said. Yeah, well, that's Kathy Hochul. Well, that's Kathy Hochul.

She's the governor. But no, you say that... I'm saying I was not a fan of what she did. But I'm right. She canceled it indefinitely. And then right after the election. What's she doing? And we know. And by the way, hold on, hold on, hold on, hold on.

And we know the reason she canceled it before the election. And we know the reason she instituted it right after the election. Because I know the left is so concerned about a thrust on democracy, but they knew it was electoral poison to do this before November 5th. So they did an end run around the democracy, an end run around the will of the people. I didn't do that. That was Kathy Hooper. But that shows how she knew it was unpopular. Who cares?

But no, we've seen poll after poll showing it's not popular. I never claimed it was popular. It's not popular before you do it. It becomes popular when you're done. I've been asking every single person who works for me to take the subway whether they think it's dangerous. Except for one guy, a waiter who works for me. Every single person has said yes. Every single person has said that if they can avoid anybody, any of their, as I said, their girlfriend, their wife, their daughter taking the subway, they do.

I had one young black guy say to me the following. I take subway three, four times a week. The subway itself is a class tiered phenomenon. Class tiered. Don't get insulted. If you take the subway to nice neighborhoods at normal times, as I generally do, as you generally do, there's no problem at all. If you take the subway to rough neighborhoods at rough times, you will regularly experience extreme fear, unless you're a big, muscular man. Now, I ask you-

So the solution is everybody should drive? What kind of city doesn't at least, at the time they're going to force people into a situation, a fiduciary, they're our fiduciary, right? They're supposed to put us first. We say, no, we're going to force these people into situations where they'll regularly experience extreme fear. And you know what?

We're not even going to simultaneously have a new initiative to get the criminals out of the subways, to get police on the streets. We're going to force these people to, maybe they won't get murdered, but they'll be fucking frightened. They'll be nervous.

They'll be, please call me when you get home. Please call me when you get home. And we don't, they don't, in other words, they don't even have the will to clean up the subways. At the same time, they're going to force people who can't afford otherwise.

Any reasonable person would take the Uber home, but the people who can't afford it, they're shit out of luck. But there's only 9% of them. There't afford it, they're shit out of luck. But there's only 9% of them. There's only 10, whatever number you want to put. So we don't have to concern ourselves with them. But that number of people that I concern myself with,

because we spend a lot of time normally concerned about small groups of people who are financially disadvantaged. Until congestion prices, you did. You were the one who worried about the inequity of it. Including the Community Service Society, the city's leading anti-poverty organization, which endorsed this years ago. But you were the one who said it was inequitable. Don't ignore my point. Don't ignore my point.

I didn't make your point again. I will not ignore it. Go ahead. The city's leading anti-poverty organization, the Community Service Society, endorsed this years ago, did investigations and analysis that ended up being in support of it and so on. Why? Why were they in support of it? Because they understand what we understand, which we don't seem to understand,

which is the vast majority of low- and middle-income New Yorkers use and rely on mass transit. They're already using it. That brings me to my point. You just painted this incredibly scary picture of the person who goes home to their scary neighborhood? Is it not true? There are scary neighborhoods in this city. Of course, there are a lot less than there used to be in the 70s or 80s or even 90s.

But nonetheless, it's become a very kind of suburban city in many parts of it and gentrifying. There's all kinds of problems and benefits to that. We could debate that another time. But the point I'm making is you are singling out the driver who's on the margins, who can afford a car, which is a pretty expensive thing, puts them in a certain way in a higher income than most of their fellow New Yorkers on the transit system. But for those people, you're worried about their safety, but you're not worried about the 85% or 90% of the people who take public transit and live in those same communities and are already exposed to the danger you're talking about. So what are you talking about? And we'll benefit from the...

So you're simply saying, I'm not worried about 85% or 90% of New Yorkers, many of whom go to dangerous neighborhoods every night already. I'm worried about those people who drove their cars and now they can't drive anymore. I am worried. Or they can't drive regularly. Hold on. Hold on.

I'm absolutely worried about that 85%. I've been trumpeting their cause all the time. Well, then let's talk about the policies that are going to improve those neighborhoods and reduce the crime. Police on the streets, police on the subways. I know, but you're mixing these issues. You're trying to get transportation to solve the crime issue in New York City? I'm saying that.

We're trying to solve multiple issues. Let's have another conversation. I'm not an expert. I don't follow you. I don't follow you. I think with Gnomes— I want to finish reading. But could I—I mean, for God's sakes, I can't get a word in.

I want to read— Let him speak. Of course you have. I don't blame you for wanting him to. Go ahead, Dan. One of Gnomes— He's a very rational— I don't blame you for wanting him to. Go ahead, Dan. One of Noam's... He's a very rational...

One of Noam's... Bugaboos. His argument is that this is off the backs of those who are now being pushed into the subway because they can no longer afford to drive. Is that debatable? Well, in a sense, yes, because I'm one of those people, in a sense.

You live in a rent-controlled apartment on the Upper East Side. I was pushed onto the subway when UberPool went out of business. I think they're back now. And when they started... I'm not a perfect stand-in for the people that you're championing.

But I was pushed onto the subway and onto the electric city bike that i also use i don't feel myself put upon i feel myself losing a little bit because it was easier to take uber pool maybe or take a cab but i'm also saving money so i i don't feel myself have you seen the videos on tiktok of these young black and hispanic women complaining about this policy and how it's affecting them have you seen them they're all over the place the people specifically ask for safer subways what does new york city do okay we're just gonna have people pay a toll to come into the city

forcing people to take public transportation which is fucking dangerous like y'all are not gonna get me to take the fucking train i don't care look over my shoulder every five minutes like you literally can get on the live by just going to work like it's so common now and i'm like no but new york city y'all gotta get the fuck together like i want to know who approved this new fare congestion fee to go into Manhattan. We already have to pay a fare to go over any of the bridges, any of the tunnels. And now we're paying another fare to be just there under 60th Street. I'd rather walk from my house in Queens to Manhattan than pay that $9 fee. Yes, I've seen some.

Most likely you could find videos. If this were a Trump policy, creating these black women complaining this way, how could he do such a thing? He doesn't care about black people. I don't think so. But the point I'm making is that you're supposing that the people

that are quote-unquote forced into public transportation, which is not just the subway, it's the bus, it's Metro North, it's New Jersey Transit and Long Island Railroad and the express buses. And hopefully those services will be increased. But your supposition being that people that are – there was a guy in my neighborhood growing up that used to drive to Wall Street every day in his car. He didn't have to.

He chose to. He could have easily taken public transportation. He could have done what everybody else did in our neighborhood which was drive to the train station the metro north station and drop the kids off along the way perhaps at school what have you and then take the metro north and so

your supposition is that these people are are being disadvantaged they might find once they start taking public transportation hey you know what this isn't I love taking public transportation, hey, you know what, this isn't so bad. I love taking public transportation. Yes. I do.

I honestly do. But the other thing I want to say, I want to ask you. I understand that your experience on public transportation is not the same experience as someone who lives in the Bronx or Brooklyn. Right. But again, I'll make my point. Why are you so worried about the drivers who might have to take the subway or a bus to that part of the Bronx?

I'll ask you directly, and then I want to read something. And you're not worried about the transit riders who are doing that already? Let me answer. Because there's something that disturbs me about a policy which is, for its salutary goals, targets people who can't... It's not targeting anybody. Huh? It's not targeting anybody. Yes, yes.

That targets people who they assume and assess cannot afford to fight it. That they will submit to the coercion and it is targeting them because by definition, the congestion that is reduced is going to come almost completely by the people who can't afford to pay the toll switching to public transportation. And the additional revenue is going to come almost completely by this user fee on the wealthy. Now, the user fee on the wealthy also kind of disturbs me only because the city is so mismanaged. I don't think they should be papering over the fact that they can't raise taxes anymore and they can't find a way to build subways based on much more revenue than they had. Every time the MTA goes back to Albany, hat in hand, every five years,

raise money for the capital plan, you've got to come up with some sort of- I don't want to get off this. But I just want to say, I don't like the idea of raising revenue that way either. But what does disturb me as a person who has spent my life around middle class, lower middle class people who are struggling in this way,

that the scheme is based on the idea of making people who can't afford otherwise submit to a change in life that they clearly think is against their own interest. And the fact that the people who support it, like you, they don't even want to discuss it. What are you talking about? Why am I here? I've put myself under the gauntlet here to come on your show where I already knew you were going to be very exercised about it. I've not seen one article trumpeting the successes, quote-unquote,

of congestion pricing that has spent one sentence on talking about what I'm discussing, which is, let's look at the faces of the people who we are getting our benefit from. We are benefiting from the fact that

these people can't afford any longer. Someone right here who almost exclusively takes public transportation for financial reasons. Dan, the fact that this wealthy man and you who lives in a rent-controlled apartment in the Upper East Side can't understand the difference between you

and a Puerto Rican woman who's working as a radiology assistant in Staten Island with a single mother who has to drive in, work at the hospital all day, drive home, pick her kid up from daycare. You can't understand the difference. It's unbelievable to me. Okay, let me say something. Hold on. Fine for you to say, you know what?

I understand those people exist, and I'm fine with them paying this price. But you are, like, unbelievable in your lack of empathy. Can I say something? Let me just say one thing. First of all, and I've neglected to say this, I wish I had said it at the outset of the show. It's shocking! Hold on, let me finish. Which is that, remember that folks who have

an income under a certain amount, $50,000, get 50% off if they're regular. 50% off on the second half of the month. Right. The first 10 trips they pay full, the second 10 trips they pay half. So they get something off.

Let me finish. They get a fairly significant discount. So there has been recognition of those people's situation. They pay 75%. I'm wondering where this radiology assistant single mother, how she pays for parking every day. They have parking in the hospital. No. Well, a lot of folks have.

Or they get permits. Or they have the illegal parking policy. Every big major institution, law firm, every business where the rich people work is supported by poorer people, many of them who have families and who drive to work. They are the people implicated in this. Some are right near Grand Central, whatever it is, they might find it convenient, but many of them, it just in the adding an extra hour, hour and a half in the winter to their commute either way, forget about the money. It's unbelievable the things that nobody wants to discuss. Listen, I can make this very simple. The super or the super's assistant or one of the cleaners who works in my building on the

Upper West Side lives in Queens with his family. He drives in every day and he parks for free because the building covers it. This is a very different situation than you or I I don't know where you live, who live in the city and are virtually

unaffected by this. This takes a major toll on this guy's life. You know what this reminds me of? It reminds me exactly of this. This takes a major toll on this guy's life. You know what this reminds me of? It reminds me exactly of this. Let me speak without being interrupted here. Back when people in border towns used to complain about their situation,

everybody, people like you and me, they're bellyaching, they're racist, they're this and that. Until Governor Abbott started busing some migrants into Martha's Vineyard, New York City, and all of a sudden we're racist, they're this and that. Until Governor Abbott started busing some migrants into Martha's Vineyard, New York City, and all of a sudden like, holy shit, this is serious. If there were a

Governor Abbott type solution that would force you or you to go through what I'm describing is many, many people are going through now. If your life was turned upside down the way I'm describing and somebody could demonstrate that by some clever policy device, immediately you would see it differently. Immediately. If you couldn't fix it with money. And this

is an unbelievable lack of empathy and from you who wrote about the inequity of it. No, no, no, no, no. I wrote about the inequity between the tolls and the out of... Right, you felt they should raise the... You're conflating the two issues. No, I'm not, because you said they should raise the toll to come into the specific... Yes, which we did. But lower it in the crossings so that... Which you can thank Governor Cuomo for not doing. Right. So that the people wouldn't have to pay...

But what did you mean by inequity? I meant it's not fair for people who are causing less traffic, who have less transit options, to pay as much as they're paying when you've got a whole lot of other people who are paying zero to go into the most congested, most transit-rich part of the city. You said it's not fair that the people already paying the high tolls from Jersey should now have to pay the- No, that's not what that's- No, no, no, no. I'll look it up.

I'll look it up. I don't think I say anything about Jersey. Just speaking for me. Can I just say one thing on the numbers? Why is it fair up until, you know, and still today, the Port Authority and the Holland Tunnel and the Lincoln Tunnel charges, and the George Washington Bridge charges

something like $13 or $14, depending on E-ZPass, etc., for folks to come from New Jersey to here, right? So why is it so crazy for folks from the Hudson Valley, Connecticut, Long Island, the Queens, Brooklyn, you know, northern Manhattan, etc., to pay something quite a bit less, $9, to come into the same area? And so I'm not sure why you think that, you know, $13 or $14 from New Jersey. You know, I'm wondering whether, by the way, I could be, my feeling on congestion pricing when I first heard about it was excitement

because, hey, who doesn't want less congestion? Noam brings up some interesting points. When all the data's in, I'm willing to admit if it's a failure. I wonder if Noam's willing to admit if it's a success, if he's willing to take the L. Define success. Well, I think that... The vast majority, or sorry,

if a solid majority of New Yorkers feel that... Their lives are better. Their lives are better and life is improved and the quality of life in the city is better. They don't feel that way in London. I've seen, I read a lot about it this week in London. But listen, I want to just remind you. Go ahead and address that. I want to remind you that this is, you know, this isn't a perfect plan, but that's because Cuomo stupidly didn't embrace the Move New York plan, which would have been a much better plan for in the outer parts of the city. But we also gave something

like 20% of the revenue to drivers in the form of investing in improving roads in and out just outside of New York City. So make sure the car drivers got something too. Unfortunately, they abandoned what was already a perfect plan that we had spent years developing. But this is also a good plan. And we can make adjustments if we need to over time. And I guarantee you, I want to emphasize, you know, I am, you know, Noam, you're wrong. I am sympathetic with those people. Of course I am. And I do understand it. I understand the hardship. I understand what it means to kind of have an abrupt, not an abrupt, not unexpected, but a change, an abrupt change in your routine or your life or how you do things. But first of all, New York City is very industrious and it's going to adapt very quickly, I think, in the coming months to help those people get into, if they're not using

their own cars quite as much, find other creative ways to get them into town in a way that's affordable and pretty efficient and so on. That's just the way the world works. And secondly, as I said, we can make adjustments over time. But I do want to remind you that that car driver who used to drive in that's at the margins that you're so worried about was already way ahead of the game in terms of their peers who are taking public transit. And you don't seem to have much sympathy for the other. You have this kind of singular sympathy for people who were wealthy enough to drive at all. Listen, you can't be a poor corporate.

What do you mean by not have sympathy for people taking public transit? Well, I have sympathy. The point is- I have sympathy, and that's why I feel the police should be protecting them. Right now, they're the biggest problem. And the police should be protecting any new additions to the transit system. It no i know that's what i'm saying that's what i've been trying to say earlier which is you're conflating whatever uh subway uh safety and so on i honestly don't follow you well well he i well he if i can i he explained it pretty well but i what he's saying

is you have no he was saying you saying you have sympathy for the people that used to drive and now can't afford to drive. And by the way, I don't know that that's... I think there are people that are just going to make a decision. I can still afford to drive, but you know what? I want to save nine bucks a day. They'll just have a couple

thousand dollars less a year to spend on their trip to Florida with their kid or whatever it is. Well, they'll probably overall make money. From time to time when a tax policy comes Overall they'll be ahead financially. From time to time when a tax policy comes before the country. Let's say a Trump is going to change taxes.

And it's going to cause a $2,000 increase in middle class taxes. Every commentator on MSNBC finds that to be a very, very serious matter. $2,000 to middle-class people has always been considered to be

an outrage. Every liberal person, it's not until congestion pricing that I heard people just discounting the fact that, ah, $2,000, they'll figure it out. They'll forego some other stuff. They won't buy organic.

I don't mean to insult you. The last thing I want to do is insult anybody. But I'm identifying something real that people kind of make it up as they go along and backfill it as they go along. The same issue that would bother somebody deeply, $2,000 more on lower middle class people, going up to $15, going up to $3,000, $4,000, is now something, well, you know, for the greater good. Well, because it's a user fee, not tax money. But it was a different policy. It was a Republican policy. How can you raise taxes on people?

$3,000. If you see it as a user fee and not a tax, then the situation is not an asset. Whatever it is, it's out of their pocket. You see the clever... Well, it's out of their pocket. You see the clever... Well, it's out of their pocket unless... You see the clever, facile rationales that come to your tip of your tongue. Oh, it's not a tax.

It's a user fee. Sorry, Mrs. Rodriguez. Why does she got to be Puerto Rican? Because a lot of these people are minorities. It is a user fee. And listen, I'm going to tell you. That was the argument they used for Obamacare.

It's not a tax. It's a fee. First of all, I want to know, Noam, what is your solution for funding the mass transit system? And also, what is your solution for reducing traffic in New York City? He doesn't want to reduce it. New York City? He doesn't want to reduce it. New York City. And is there a toll that you would accept on the East River Bridges and across 60th Street?

No, no, no, and yes. No, I'm going to work back to that. No, no, you don't have a solution. I have a 30,000-foot position on this, too, which I haven't expressed, which is that— Wait, you've covered just about every angle. No, no, this is something— How long have you been preparing for this? Years.

This is less provable, what I'm going to say, but I believe it very much. New York is magic. I agree. And it's very difficult to reverse-engineer magic. I agree. And it's very difficult to reverse engineer magic. What moves me so much about the This is New York, the E.B. White, let me read a little bit more of it

because it's very, very powerful. It's a miracle that New York works at all. The whole thing is implausible. Every time residents brush their teeth, millions of gallons of water must be drawn from the Catskills and hills of Westchester. I used to work to protect that system.

Who knew it pays millions to be a green? Hold on. Long ago, the city should have experienced an insoluble traffic snarl at some implausible bottleneck. It should have perished of hunger. The workers in its myriad cells have succumbed to nerves from the fearful

pall of smoke fog that drifts over and, I'm skipping around, and the sense of the world's end. It should have been touched in the head have succumbed to nerves from the fearful pall of smoke fog that drifts over. I'm skipping around. And the sense of the world's end. It should have been touched in the head by the august heat and gone off its rocker. Mass hysteria is a terrible force, yet New Yorkers always seem to escape it by some tiny margin. They sit in stalled subways without claustrophobia. They extricate themselves from panic situations by some lucky wisecrack. They meet confusion and congestion with patience and grit, a sort of perpetual muddling through.

Every facility is inadequate. The hospitals, the schools, the playgrounds are overcrowded. The express highways are feverish. The unimproved highways and bridges are bottlenecks. And then finally it goes on, it goes, the city is uncomfortable and inconvenient but new yorkers temperamentally do not crave comfort and convenience if they did they would live elsewhere now i'm saying that's a very romantic view but i'm saying this out of eb white but that's a very romantic what i'm saying is this now this is the new york there's a lot of other people who really appreciate the quality of life improvements so yeah i'm asking let me answer your question. New York is magic, and we don't know how what he's describing contributed to what New York became. Spawning, art movements, music movements, industries, innovation, all these things which it's hard to imagine coming from a city which becomes a playground for the wealthy who can afford thousands of dollars in travel fees. And I think we're playing with fire. I think the congestion, I shoulder the congestion. I drive in every day. I understand. I'm putting my money where my mouth

is. And by the way, every hour I spend in traffic is money too. So I don't know what could be done to reduce congestion. I think there could be clever solutions like having certain lanes, which are congestion lanes with dynamic pricing, like 14th Street could go up to 20, 25, $30 an hour, whatever it takes to keep traffic moving, but also allow the buses to move at whatever speed we think is necessary.

There might be all kinds of clever, ingenious ideas, necessities. So were you out there over the last 10 or 15 years arguing for those? You're asking my answer. That's what I would do, number one. Number two, I would try to get people to take the subways. You know, Elon Musk,

who's a villain, right? He said something that was very smart. He said, I wanted people to take electric cars, not because they were trying to save the environment, but because they were awesome cars. I would like to exhaust the possibility of getting people to take the subway, not because they're trying to do your bidding, but because it's actually a pleasant, clean, safe, and convenient way to travel. And what do you think this $15 billion is meant for? I will make you a $10,000 bet right now. At any time horizon you want. They are not going to improve it. You know why? Because the $15 billion is not going to give them the political will to keep homeless, criminals, all the things that are going on on the subways. That does not take money. That is a decision they have made not to enforce the law.

So you're blaming that on the MTA? No, I'm saying the people who are in charge of making those decisions. That's not the MTA. Don't get smart with me. I'm not going to. I'm saying it's not, it is not, it is not $15 billion is not going to keep the criminals off the subway. They could keep the criminals off the subway.

Now they've decided not to. So why are you getting all exercised about congestion pricing? If that's your concern, I'm saying that we need to have a citywide task force or very direct answer to your question, address the direct answer. Your question to address the homelessness on the subway. Rather than force this on the backs of people who can't do otherwise,

I would first, as a moral prerequisite, I would first make the subways safe such that the people who were in charge of forcing the people on the subways would allow their daughters, mothers, ancestors to take the subway. safe such that the people who were in charge of forcing the people on the subways would allow their daughters, mothers, and sisters to take the subway. That sounds so impressive and so moral, and I'm so admiring of you. I'm not saying you're immoral, but I'm saying there is something that bothers me about rich

people saying, I would never let my daughter take the subway, but I'm going to charge these people so they have to take the subway. My girlfriend, my kids all take the subway. We all take my kids. And by the way, I don't even live in a dangerous neighborhood. All take the subway. We all take the subway. Not to bad neighborhoods, not late at night. Okay. There's no way you would let your – you know you wouldn't let your kids take the subway when it's dangerous. Can I go back?

Your argument is kind of absurd if you knew anything about public policy. I'm known for that. because first of all, at what point, where are you going to draw the line where the subway safety and homelessness is down enough for us to then adopt a very significant, very difficult to pass policy like congestion pricing? That's not the way this works. There have been people, good-hearted, patriotic New Yorkers just like you

who have been working for 50 years to try and get this policy passed. And by the way, that includes a lot of environmental justice organizations, which were populated by black and brown people who are very much in support of this program, the Community Services Society and so on. So, you know, to get something like this done is a Herculean task. It's incredibly hard. There's a reason why we're the first city and state in the country to do it. And now Chicago's mayor is interested in et cetera, et cetera. And there's all kinds of ways to do it. Maybe I should go advise Chicago to do more of a move New York plan,

which would be a little bit more equitable, which I'd be in favor of, and so on. But you can't, you know, they're related issues, but they're separate issues. And you can't just, the politics doesn't work like that. You can't just say, okay, let's put a pause on trying to get this congestion pricing thing done that we've been working for 14 straight years, this last round, to get done because there's been a little uptick in homelessness and so on. We can't, it's just not the way it works. They're separate issues. And now I will join if you want, if you've got some coalition that you're part of that's trying to address the homelessness issue on the subways, I will support that. I will be, you know, I will lend a hand to that and so on.

But the point is, and I just want to remind you, you know, perception can be reality for a lot of people in terms of the choices they make. I get that. But 10 people out of 8.5 million people in the city, 5 million who are taking public transit right now, it's a very, very, very tiny number. In other words, the chance of getting killed on the subway is minimal.

Okay, I'm going to remind you again. I'm going to say it again. But we do have to address it because I understand it. I'm going to say it again. I think this is a very powerful argument. If you want to know how bad the subways are and how inconvenient they are, all you have to do is note the fact

that people are paying thousands of dollars now rather than take them for $2.90. That is a very powerful marketplace proof that people really, really, really don't, a certain subset of people really, really, really don't, a certain subset of people really, really, really don't want to take the subways, and we are going to force them to. I could turn that argument right on its head. Please do.

And the reason is that people like to travel by themselves or with a friend or whatever in a car, listen to music, eat their donuts, and do whatever they want to do, have plenty of space, not be hanging out with the masses and so on.

They want to do that. And those people you're talking about for years have done that. Rich and less rich have done that. Rich is still going to do it. Right. Well, and many of the poor folks that you're talking about

who were driving before are still going to drive. They may not drive quite as often, but I guarantee you. Why are they still going to drive? Because they're going to decide, you know what? I like having my car. That's why they did it in the first place. That's why they spent all the money that you were talking about in the first place, because they really like being by themselves in a car and not being with the masses. They prefer sitting in traffic for hours.

Well, no. Yeah. They like being in the car so much. That's true prefer sitting in traffic for hours well no yeah they like the being in the car so much that's true that's true that's literally so Alex so you actually think that that the reason that that like the funny thing is people who want to be in cars are just

you know and they don't ever okay what's so upsetting to me is that I mean yeah it's true we all see the life the world through their the eyes of their own experiences but I've known so many people. I have people working for me who are not driving because of the reasons you say. They're driving because the alternative is just too inconvenient for them. They have children.

So that's why we have to invest in the mass transit system and make it better and better and better. Yeah, but they're going to be old and dead by the time that happens. But we can— Let the record show you the start of the show, because you know this is 20, 25, 30 years. How do you ever pass any kind of policy if you're worried about a relatively small group of people? You have to think, like I said at the outset, you have to think about what's the best thing for the most number of people. Alex, I think Noam is right. Certainly new subway lines and so forth will take decades.

Can't get anything done in New York. But I do think that surface transportation options can pop up relatively quickly. Either city, you know, either... Vans, shuttle vans. These sorts of things. I mean, Uber,ool and VIA. I used to take VIA all the time. Then you'd have congestion back again.

I don't think... No, because it's VIA. You're having one vehicle with 10 people in it instead of one vehicle with one or two people in it. Maybe this stuff should have happened before. Look, I find the whole thing upsetting, as you can tell. I hope it works out. I don't think it's going to.

I'm surprised that given, just in an objective way, looking at the fast rail thing in Los Angeles, looking at how the Second Avenue subway is a debacle, look at how the plans to fix the schools never pan out. What's that description of mental illness? Doing the same thing over

and over again? This notion that all of a sudden the city is going to get its shit together and things are going to happen and they're going to improve the subways. This city is going to get its shit together and things are going to happen and they're going to improve the subways. This is never going to happen. Hold on. You know this is never going to happen, right?

No. You and I are never going to sit across the table and say, wow, those subways are clean, safe, and quick and they've expanded them. How do we ever think? Well, I could do... We know it's never going to happen.

I'm going to make you a challenge. Invite me back in a year and let's agree right now and shake on it that we will have a very honest conversation about how this has turned out so far. I will admit if there's things that haven't worked out as we had hoped, whether it need to be changed, I will say so, as long as you do the same thing. Deal. Absolutely, it's easier for me than for you because, understand, I'm in the group of people who benefit from congestion pricing. It's easy

to get me to come to your side because... No, no, no. You know all the benefits right now. You're arguing on behalf of people that you think are at the margin. What I'm saying is I'm not an activist for driving to work. So for me to come to you, it's like, oh shit, this is great. You were right.

No. It's harder for you. It's very hard. Because you've committed your life to this plan. So for you to admit, what I'm saying is that if you will admit a year from now, that's right. I'm saying it's going to take, it's going to be more requiring of your honesty to do that.

For me, it's like, yeah, you're right. This is awesome. No, no. Because I'm expecting you to take the same position perspective that you for me, it's like, yeah, you're right. This is awesome. No, no, because I'm expecting you to take the same position perspective that you did today, which is not just what's good for you, but what's good for the people at the margins that you're so worried about, which I'm concerned about too. It's already good for me is what I'm saying.

No, but next year, in a year, we can talk about the people at the margins and we can talk about the program as a whole, the city as a whole, who's benefiting, and so on. In planning for our conversation, which will take place in January of 2026. This is going to be great. What would you classify?

I'm going to take a Quaalude before I come. What would you classify? What will get you to admit that congestion pricing failed? I'm sure I'll give you lots of reasons. If, as you say, this has completely disenfranchised lots of people, too many people around the city, and we haven't seen the benefits of the investments in- What benefits do we need to see for you to say, no, it's working? Well, listen, investing capital into capital programs-income and middle-income communities who suffer a

disproportionate asthma rates and so on. So that's really going to help a lot of people and a lot of people you're talking about. These are real health issues. These are real health issues, exactly. Maybe they'll add more buses to those places that they do have these 15-minute walks to the subway in these. Yeah, exactly. I'm jaded because I'm 62 years old,

living in the city my whole life. I've never seen them accomplish anything. Well, that's fair. Nothing on the drawing board. Like any organization, it's going to go up and down in terms of its effectiveness. I would argue that Jano Lieber, who's the current chair, is the best chair we've had in decades.

He's fantastic. He's a serious guy. Is his name Janet? Jano. Jano. Jano Lieber, who's the current chair, is the best chair we've had in decades. He's fantastic. He's a serious guy. Is his name Janet? Jano. Jano. Jano Lieber. Oh. And he's already reduced a lot of cost and waste.

We have to address the evasion issue. That's on the plans as well. So, you know, we can discuss, but I will have an honest conversation with you in a year about what I think worked and didn't work about this. And do you agree with Noam that if it doesn't work, it's going to be nearly impossible to pull the plug on it because

it's already in motion? I mean, I don't think, I'd be very doubtful that it's so bad that you have to pull the plug on it entirely. I think in the worst-case scenario, you'd have to make some changes to it to make it work slightly better for certain groups or certain times of day. Maybe you increase the change of price for different times of day, like the Move New York plan did. There's all kinds of things you can do to tweak a plan like this

to make adjustments depending on what the real result is after a year. I think they're making New York the place for the wealthy. Well, listen, we're in total agreement on that. To me, I often say about New York, because I grew up on the east end of Long Island, but I've been coming to New York. I've lived here for the last 25 years. I've been coming here since I was a kid through the 70s and 80s and 90s and so on. And I don't like that part of our direction either. This is lock-in.

Right, right. Hold on. Let me just finish. I want to make my point, which is so much that I often refer to New York as being a big outdoor shopping mall, which is what it kind of feels like now. That said, if you're going to make this city work, you've got to make the mass transit system work, and you have to come up with funds. And Noam, I'm sorry, it's not so easy to come up with $15 billion. You think it's a cinch, but how are you going to do that? You can raise sales taxes, which disproportionately hurts low-income and middle-income people. You can increase the payroll mobility tax, which also hurts businesses, which also hurts working people in New York. What else can you do?

You can raise gasoline taxes, which in my view would be a good thing because I think we need less petroleum consumption. But it's not easy to raise money for the mass transit system as big as ours. And the folks who are going to benefit are the 85% of folks who move around the city and rely on public transit every day. That's how you make the city more affordable is to make that system work better and to find ways, creative ways, to raise the money to make it work better without disproportionately hurting the poor. As my father used to say, expenses always rise to meet revenue.

And whatever revenue the city of New York has, every dollar gets accounted for. And then you say, oh, we have no money left over for subways. The fact is that they have to reprioritize their spending. They built the subway system without these tolls. They should be able to build them. They should be able to expand them now when we have more revenue than we ever had in the history of New York City.

We're wealthier. New York City doesn't pay for most of the stuff. New York City's contribution to the subway system is tiny. The country is wealthier than it's ever been. And probably more inequitable than it's ever, almost not ever, but certainly in modern history. And this is increasing the inequity. We're going to...

No, because you keep on forgetting. You're worried about those folks who are wealthy enough to have a car, which is relatively wealthy, because listen, it's expensive to have a car. Hold on, you shouldn't say that. And you're not worrying about the 85% of folks, most of them who are lower middle class,

who are going to benefit. Lower middle class people have cars. Come on now. Lower middle class people drive cars. Right. They're not wealthy. Well, I'm just, I'm saying to think about all the cost of what it takes to-

What about parking in the, what you call the central business district, I guess the rest of us just call Midtown and Downtown, but- well that's another thing by the way how do these people park is there any free parking during the day to be had in i guess you say the employees a lot of employees a lot of municipal employees get these free parking placards and it's a it's kind of a scandal um and it causes a lot of problems and a lot of traffic. And that's something that no politician seems to have the guts to eliminate. What level of effect on business would you consider to be too much? I'm predicting that most, the vast majority of businesses are going to benefit from this.

So what percentage of businesses? What kind of economic theory says, charge people more money to come and you'll benefit from it? Because if the city operates better and it's more attractive to come to and there's less pollution and less traffic and so on. Do you mean my business is going to benefit from it? Your business, probably.

So now that people, if it costs people. Yeah, because the transition will be better. So more people can come in from New Jersey and Long Island to come see the comedy. So you think that if it costs people. By the way, for a guy who runs the comedy. You're not very fun. You're not very fun. You think people.

At least not with me today. Adding $9 per head to the cost of... Not per head, actually, a car loan. So you think adding $9 to the cost of some people coming, a family or people coming in, is going to increase my business because of the countervailing benefits of the subway system? Yes.

What year will we see... The number of people that use the subway system and the mass transit system dwarfs the number of people who drive. What year will we see... The number of people that use the subway system and the mass transit system dwarfs the number of people who drive. What year will we see the subway so improved that the people who now come from Long Island, Jersey, Connecticut, Westchester County that drive in will start using mass transit to come to the comedy cellar such that I'll see an improvement in business?

I think obviously we can't have it overnight. How many years will that take? I don't know. I'm obviously we can't have it overnight. How many years will that take? I don't know. I'm not an economist. I can't predict exactly, but I'm just saying if this thing as we predict on the whole improves life in the city, improves

the economy, improves the loss of productivity. But approximately, what's the time outlook? 10 years? 20 years? No, it's definitely not out that far. I'd say a couple of years. In a couple of years, they're not going to change the subway. But the subway- No, they are.

They just announced this last week that they're starting work on the Second Avenue subway to bring that up to Harlem, to East Harlem. I can't wait to meet you two years from now because I'm going to reduce you to tears. One year. I guarantee you. And they also just- I guarantee you you're going also just- I guarantee you you're going to eat your words.

Two years, they'll be lucky if there's a hole in the ground. Listen, I'm not saying, I didn't say in two years they're going to, I'm just saying that's a good example.

No, I'm saying the opposite, actually, of what you think I was saying. I'm saying that at least the beginning work on that, it's going to take five or seven years to do that. But in the meantime,

business will be impacted negatively until- So are you arguing against extending the 2nd Avenue subway up into East Harlem, which will help a lot of people that you're talking about? I'm asking you a year from now. So business will be impacted in the short run,

because you say business will improve because there'll be a new subway system. But the new subway system is out on the time horizon, but the congestion pricing is now. So we're going to suffer the pinch for a certain number of years, and that's fine for the eventual benefit, which will come when? First of all, if the MTA is going to deploy 265 new electric buses, those benefits are going to be fairly immediate. They're not going to Westchester and Long Island and Jersey. They're going to Queens and other parts of the city. I got to tell you something.

People don't want to take an electric bus when they bring their wife out or their date on a date to come to a nightclub in Manhattan and go home at two in the morning. They don't want to get back on a bus. This is a fantasy. Now, I mean, I'm not the only business. So they're going to pay $9. No, you're acting like $9 is a million dollars.

It's not. A lot of people spend $9, even, you're acting like $9 is a million dollars. It's not. A lot of people spend $9, even low and middle income people, all day long doing lots of different things. Except that we saw that on Saturday afternoon, the Holland Tunnel has dropped suddenly. Let's see what that looks like in a month. We don't know how much. But if it doesn't look like that, then it wouldn't be any congestion. So it's like a cash 22. I could talk about this all day long, but are you going to give me a chance to just-

Yes, whatever. Floor is yours. Say whatever you want. Go ahead. Okay. I just want to let you guys know that there's a man named Leonard Peltier. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry.

No, no problem. Go ahead. And he's a Lakota Native American from South Dakota. Many of you, I hope, know who he is. He's considered around the world to be the U.S. government's number one political prisoner. He's been in prison for almost 50 years for a crime that he was never proven to have done. The lead prosecuting attorney from the Department of Justice came out a couple years ago and apologized, issued a public apology, admitting that the government really had not proven that he did anything wrong. Sorry, I forgot.

I skipped over the lead here, which is that there was a shootout between a few FBI agents on a reservation, Pine Ridge Reservation, in 1975 with some Native Americans who were there who were part of AIM, the American Indian Movement. Two agents were killed, and the FBI and the Department of Justice were determined to make sure that somebody paid for those murders. And there's a lot of extenuating circumstances, but Leonard was never proven to have done it and not even to have aided and abetted it. It's impossible. The people he was accused have aided and abetted it. It's impossible.

The people he was accused of aiding and abetting and helping were exonerated within months of the incident. So the whole thing, it's widely accepted that he was railroaded into prison. Desmond Tutu, the pope, many others have come out and urged— Is it a federal crime or a state crime? I'm sure it was a federal crime. So Biden is not— So Biden has the opportunity to issue a grant of clemency before he leaves office on Monday. And people have been trying for years and years to give some justice and mercy to this Native American, to let him go back to his family.

He's extremely ill in prison. Coleman won in Florida. And it's a travesty. I mean, he was railroaded into prison. It makes a mockery of our U.S. justice system. And I just want to call on Joe Biden. I don't know if Joe Biden listens to your show, but I want to call on him to be the most compassionate and just president and let this man go. Good for you. You know, there are, I mean, I'm taking what you're saying as true,

but there are a number of people being held in prisons in these outrageous fact patterns. And it's always surprised me that when presidents go into their end-of-term pardon thing, that they don't do a better job of pardoning these almost obvious cases, like the Silk Road kid. What they should be doing is they should go to the Innocence Project and say, okay, who's up? Who do we need to pardon or issue grants of competency

or at least remove from death row? This man is, I just briefly before the show looked at him, he's 80 years old. He's not eligible for parole even? No, he's gone up for parole many times. He's got an unblemished prison record as far as I know. He's an old man. He's got diabetes, heart conditions.

He's nearly blind and the prison has not let him get eye treatment and so on. And it's just, it's time to show him some justice. Yeah, on this issue, you and I see very much eye to eye, very much as we talked about before, like our first, we do charity events sometime. And the first one we did was for the Innocence Project. Actually, it's the only one I wanted to do. I wanted to do the Innocence Project every week because I consider it to be such an important organization. The idea that people are in prison for things they didn't do, and it can be proven,

and then there's like a terrible bureaucratic impediment to them getting out. Yeah, it's ridiculous. There's a lot of politics involved too. But if your listeners are interested, they can go to Amnesty International, they can go to The Guardian, where myself, Alex Matheson, and Rose Styron co-authored an op-ed, which gives you a very succinct summary of the situation. But if you have any influence on folks in Washington and the White House, please urge Joe and Jill Biden to release.

This particular case, how did it get your attention? I assume there's a lot of cases where people are in jail. He met him on the subway. He's one of those people you talk about. No, my father, who is a writer, wrote an entire book called In the Spirit of Crazy Horse about Leonard Peltier and about this case and about how he was railroaded into prison. We're the same age. You ever see the movie Little Big Man with Dustin Hoffman? Yes, yes, a long time ago.

I love that movie. It's not sufficiently well-known. I think it may be Dustin Hoffman's greatest performance. It's about the Native Americans. It's such a good movie. Either that or the Urban Cowboy. Was he in Urban Cowboy? Urban Cowboy was, no, that was the John Travolta one.

Oh, no, no. What's the one he was in? Midnight Cowboy? Midnight Cowboy, yeah, yeah. Thank you, thank you. Midnight Cowboy? Urban Cowboy was, no, that was the John Travolta one. Oh, no, no. What's the one he was in? Midnight Cowboy? Midnight Cowboy. Thank you, thank you. Midnight Cowboy. Well, it's been a pleasure. Listen, I feel this, last thing I want to do is insult you. Please don't be insulted. There's nothing personal.

No, at a certain point, though, you feel like you are kind of impugning my motives here in terms of what I'm trying to do. I'm making a good faith effort to be part of something that I think over time is going to prove to be very beneficial in New York City.

And yes, there's going to be arguments. I hear them. I'm sensitive to them. I'm sensitive to the people you're talking about. But everybody, take a big breath. Give it a chance. Let's see what happens.

I see some people, this might insult you. I see some people... Oh, you're waiting until the end to insult me. No, I don't mean it to be insulting. I'm just being honest. I like you very much.

I see some people as almost perfect specimens of their demographic, you know, and there is the, you know, somewhat well-to-do, elite, hyper-educated New Yorker guy who is to the left of me, I'm more of a right-wing guy, but does not have even the slightest day-to-day experience with the gritty real world of minorities, single moms, people struggling, people on, like this. I've had more exposure, more experience

than you think I have. Okay, fair I have fair enough but I am describing something that exists if it doesn't properly apply to you because I see it all the time where the lives of these people that I'm talking about is something they read

about, something they see on TV it's not something they've lived and maybe that makes me overreact to it. Maybe I'm overreacting to the plight of my employees and my wife's family or whatever it is. No, no. I get the points you're making, and I have the same

sympathy you do. Obviously, I'm defending a plan that I worked for 14 years to get done. So, of course, I'm going to be... I think we'll get carried along. But I would say, you know, we should pay special attention to how this affects different groups of people in New York City. And to the extent that some people are still suffering or still struggling because of it in six months, a year or so, then we, those same people you're talking about, should be committed to trying to figure out solutions to help them.

There's also the $50,000 income. If you make less than $50,000, you get a discount. Yeah, we talked about that while you were sleeping. I was against that. I thought it should have been much more generous. I think it should be. Yes, yes, you do have a heart. I think it should be 50% for every trip. How about free? But it doesn't trigger until you do 10, but you get it for 50% on the whole month's

worth of trip. You pay 75%. You pay 50%. No, I'm saying what should have been done. You pay full for the first two weeks and half for the second two weeks.

That comes out to 75%. Right. What I'm saying is it should have been 50% for the whole month. I'm agreeing with you. Yeah, yeah. Do some people get it for free?

No, no. In other words, that anybody who comes in 10 times or more is eligible and they have less than 50 or whatever the number is. And then they are credited so they essentially get 50% for the entire month.

Does anybody get it free? Well, folks who are disabled or using disabled vehicles. And then emergency vehicles and so on. And then there is an income issue for a group in Manhattan. Live from the table. We have to go.

We have another question. Wrap it up, but thank you.