It's economically infeasible for a large percentage of people to drive in a dense urban area, period.
That's true even without congestion pricing. A city would go broke and bulldoze itself trying to add enough stacked lane, highways, and parking to handle everyone who would prefer to drive in or through if the capacity existed.
The rich were driving before, and are still driving.
The difference is that now they are paying for that service they were already using, and those funds are going to public transit which serves the majority of New Yorkers especially those with lower incomes.
The problem is that no one in NYC, rich or poor, has any confidence in the MTA's ability to properly and efficiently use these funds. This stems from a long history of incompetence and wastefulness by the MTA
> no one in NYC, rich or poor, has any confidence in the MTA's ability to properly and efficiently use these funds
They're already using them, and the results show. They could have done it cheaper. But the LIRR is operating at Swiss rail efficiecies since the recent electrification and signalling improvements.
What electrification and signal improvements are you talking about? Signal upgrades are a constant thing in the MTA, both for the LIRR and the subways. They are not something that just started with congestion pricing funds.
Also, efficiency was already on the upswing for the LIRR long before congestion pricing funds[1].
> They are not something that just started with congestion pricing funds
Correct. But they’re being expanded. Early signs are there. And we have precedent to show that funding this work, and funding it sooner, works.
> efficiency was already on the upswing for the LIRR long before congestion pricing funds
Correct. Congestion funds accelerate that process.
I spoke an inarticulately, but the point was trying to make is that we have precedence for quality and efficiency improving capital spending by the MTA. The bonds the MTA issued earlier this year double down on that. The early signs of that spending show those capital deployments are helping in the way the preceding spending did.
Are the funds actually going to public transit, or are they being used to pay off all the people whose support was needed to implement the congestion charges?
> In June 2025, revenue from the congestion toll was used to increase service on more than a dozen bus lines citywide… In October 2025, the MTA sold $230 million worth of bonds to help fund the first projects that were being partially financed using congestion-toll revenue.
Can you source that? Diesel is only 13% more energy dense than gasoline [1] so the difference between the two fuels isn't huge.
I suspect that modern (last five years) turbocharged gasoline engines are probably approaching diesel thermal efficiency, but I don't think that it's correct to say that they generally surpass it. The gasoline Ford EcoBoost is 33% thermally efficient while a BMW N47 turbo-diesel is 42% thermally efficient, as an example [2].
Yes, but measuring miles per volume of fuel and setting increasing targets was a big focus of reducing petroleum dependency since the 70s.
The focus has more recently shifted to reducing overall emissions of CO2 and other harmful gases and particulates, which makes diesel much less appealing.
Not only that, in France for example the liter of Diesel fuel was always 10 to 15 euro cents cheaper at the petrol station due to how regular gasoline and diesel fuel was taxed.
That's why before EVs started to show up on the market en masse if you walked into a dealership they would always recommend that you pick the diesel engine if you wanted to save money of fuel costs.
That was actually the reason why the Yellow vest protests started in 2018 when the French government announced that the taxation gap between diesel and regular gasoline was going to disappear gradually.
Small edit to add to the context:
By that point, when the protests started in 2018, the governments(right and left) of France and the many French automakers had been pushing diesel engines as THE solution to alleviate rising fuel costs and so justifiably, the protesters thought that someone had just pulled the rug from underneath them.
Also this measure was in direct contradiction to Macron's campaign promise which was that he was going to reduce the tax burden or at least not increase it on the middle class, especially the rural middle-class that basically cannot get a job without having a car as public transport is almost non-existent in rural France.
That and many other things which I won't get into since it is not relevant for this discussion really riled people up.
In Canada, diesel fuel is priced around mid-grade gasoline (89). So it's slightly more expensive than regular, but slightly cheaper than premium (91/93).
Based on this, I've always thought of diesel as "more expensive", like you better get 15% more power/miles out of it if it's going to cost more! However, I suspect that most people purchasing diesel vehicles have as their other choice a car that would slurp premium, so for those buyers perhaps diesel is still a discount, even in Canada.
Flea markets at US airshows are not under FAA jurisdiction.
I have attended said airshow for decades and occasionally buy stuff in the flea market myself. Old used scrapyard parts, next to some inventor’s homemade jet engine, next to tons of raw materials of unknown provenance, next to ginsu knives and miracle frying pans. Here’s what it looks like on video. Wow, I missed those hand grenades for only $10 each, what a bargain.
When I had one piece of birthday cake it was "a celebration" but now when I eat two entire cakes by myself it's "gluttony" and "concerning for my health." Makes sense.
Yep. I know Apple has little motivation to support such a project but it would be great to see them work with Valve on this. Having the majority of Steam games "just work" on modern Macs, like they do on the Steam Deck, would be fantastic.
Apple leadership cares more about "games on the Mac App Store built for Metal on a Mac" than it cares about "games on the Mac". This won't change until leadership changes.
Valve is all-in on Linux and their own hardware. They have no reason to invest tons into a platform with an uncooperative vendor who culturally DGAF about gaming. Why run from Windows only to jump into a more hostile ecosystem? You can still run 32-bit x86 games on Windows ARM, you know.
Apple's real goal isn't even the 30% from the Mac App Store. Their vision is to build a library of games that run on iPhone, iPad, Mac, and potentially Apple TV and Vision. You can connect a controller to all these devices, so any game would work (without clunky touch controls). That's why they're pushing Metal and will never adopt Vulkan. They want to make their ecosystem as strong as possible against competing ecosystems.
It's also why they've been pushing SwiftUI and Catalyst, why they don't care for web apps, why the Mac and iPad have gotten closer (they want each device just be a form factor that lets you access the same apps and files, though I expect they'll always keep the Mac as open as it is now), and why they made all their platforms adopt one design language. They probably ported Preview to iOS/iPad, and Home and Clock to the Mac, because they went through the Springboard/LaunchPad and asked themselves: "which of these apps could we bring to every OS?".
It's also why Google is dropping ChromeOS and switching everything to Android. One platform, one app ecosystem. They did it only to keep up with Apple. The tablet/desktop-ish side of their ecosystem lags far behind.
And it's why Valve is going all-in on Linux. Kickstarting an alternative ecosystem.
> They have no reason to invest tons into a platform
Maybe not 'tons', but they've got a solid reason to consider some investment: additional sales from millions of Mac users able to access a huge library of games they were previously denied.
Steve Jobs certainly didn't. I hope it changes because so many coders (Who are also gamers) now use Macbooks or Mac Minis as their development platform.
I remember a friend of mine, gloating about how he could play Unreal Tournament on Mac, and I looked at it, and man did it ever run natively. But I could see a lot rendering wrong and a lot of stutters.
I think the pentium compatibility stuff in the powermac was also supposed to attract gamers, but I recall not being able to progress past the installer for Mechwarrior 2 Mercenaries, which would have been the game that made me change my mind. Ran the installer tho, which was something.
I think it's more than "little motivation" if we're being honest. Right now Valve is quietly targeting MS' attempt to create a walled garden for gaming on Windows and (probably) cut them out. Their very clever approach has been a full end-run around the OS by using Proton, which I'm sure genuinely thrilled Apple... as long as Valve is only doing that to MS.
Why would Apple ever invite Valve to potentially do the same to them?
Especially looking at Apples recent gaming history.
When Cyberpunk, AC, and a couple other AAA titles came to macOS, Apple made a big deal of them being in the mac app store, specifically. They didn't go out of their way to call out that they run on mac, you can get them from Steam, etc. The big deal was they are in the app store.
That's where Apple wants mac gaming to happen so they can get their 30% cut.
I wish that weren't the case, but Apple's gonna Apple.
App stores for desktop computers have pretty consistently failed except for Steam.
I don't think I've installed anything from the App store on my Mini, instead I have just dropped all kinds of images into my Applications folder.
The Windows store is about as marginal as it can get. My corporate desktop at work is locked down with the Windows store disabled, they made it so I can elevate and do almost anything I need to do as a developers but I can't touch Policy Editor stuff and can't unlock it. I miss WSL2 but that's the only thing I miss. I install all sorts of things for work and just install them the way we did before there was Windows 8.
In the Windows 8 era my home computer always got the metadata database corrupted fror the store pretty quickly even though I didn't use it very much. The only thing I really wanted from it was the application to use my scanner back when I had an HP printer. It was obvious that it was possible to rebuild that database because it got fixed temporarily whenever it did one of the 6 month updates but people I talked to in Microsoft Support said I should nuke my account and spend hours reconfiguring all the applications that I actually use just so I can use this one crapplet. Switched to Epson and they have their own installer/updater that works like a normal Windows application. [1] I don't think the machine I built that started on Win 10 has any problems with the store but all I really know or care about is that WSL2 works and it does.
Microsoft dreams that you might buy games from the Windows store but it has an air of unreality to it. If Microsoft tried pulling Activision games out of Steam you know it would just force them to write off the Activision acquisition earlier rather than later.
Not sure if that counts, but homebrews cask is some kind of appstore. Yes, command line based, but I can install closed-source software using "brew install --cask <software-name>"
Apples biggest weakness is games. But it has a pretty large install base when compared to Linux (not counting phones or servers here).Seems like a win/win. Apple gets to address their weaknesses and Valve gets a large target market.
I actually see it as the reverse. Valve might be going for the whole pie and want to carve out a niche for their Steam Box. Inviting Apple to the party might detract from that effort. Or at the very least distract from their main focus.
> Apple gets to address their weaknesses and Valve gets a large target market.
I don't think Apple wants any non-Apple store addressing their weaknesses, especially a solution as competent and well-funded as Steam.
If Valve gains Apple-user mindshare on Mac, what prevents them from expanding to iPhones and iPads in the EU, and likely elsewhere if anti-monopoly laws get entrenched? IIRC, Services is the fastest growing revenue source at Apple.
They don't need Apple for that. People who game already game elsewhere. Steam on Apple feels pointless. I wouldn't be surprised, if Valve will go for smartphones with their own at some point
This is really the endgame, I think. A modern smartphone with a controller attached is effectively the same as a Steam Deck or Switch 2, just with a different OS. Apple has been pushing higher-end games on phones lately (this year has seen iOS versions of Hitman 3, Sniper Elite 4, and Subnautica), and reports are that the new pro phones run them well (the limiting factor being thermal load).
A phone that can run my Steam library is super-compelling -- I travel a decent amount, so being able to chuck something smaller like a Backbone One in my bag vs. a Steam Deck would be a meaningful change.
Games are not a weakness for Apple. They have all the gaming revenue they seem to care about with mobile. They just don't have proper/immediate motivation to apply that effort to desktop. I'm not sure i even care anymore. I'm a valve fanboi at this point, until Gabe leaves and they go corporate.
Mobile overlapping consoles in revenue and Apple had a good way years of taking a 30% cut on top. They are indeed behind fine with sticking as a middleman for gambling simulators that make billions.
It may work out all the same because Apple's attempts such as with Game Porting Toolkit and Metal, boost Valve's attempts with Proton and we may see a convergence where Valve is able to make a majority of Steam games work on Mac without Apple explicitly wanting it.
But, I do think it might actually be a net positive for them on the Mac by expanding the audience of people who might buy a Mac.
Given that full PC-Game-style game sales via the Mac App Store are likely abysmal, at least compared to mobile game revenue, I don’t think they have that much to lose.
> Why would Apple ever invite Valve to potentially do the same to them?
apple on a desktop/laptop is not a primary gaming platform; edge cases, at best
mobile gaming is a different story, but at the end of the day apple is making money off of hardware sales first and foremost, esp. w/r/t laptops and phones.
The idea is that if their salary does not actually cover the expenses of living in and traveling to DC to do their job, you are limiting the pool of potential congressional representatives to those who are independently wealthy or who are finding other ways to make money via their position.
Paying enough to cover the expenses of the job isn't a solution to all problems, just kind of a minimum bar if we want a normal person to be able do the job without relying on other income sources.
At first I am sympathetic to this idea, but the act of running is so expensive and time consuming, it does not matter what the salary will be, the pool is already limited.
You need to be well connected and/or wealthy before you even start.
I think sortition is a great idea but you would probably need a constitutional amendment if you wanted sortition in Congress or the Senate. I think the State's have some discretion over how elections are run but I don't think its enough discretion to allow appointment by RNG. I think the strongest argument you could make is its an election where everyone is forced to vote for themselves and tie-breaks are chosen by RNG but I don't think that would be valid because I assume the courts would demand electors execute some agency.
The text of the constitution for electing congress says:
> The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States
and there is something similar for the Senate after the 17th amendment. I think pre-17th amendment States may have been able to use Sortion to appoint Senators but it would not have been legally enforceable. The State legislature could pre-commit to elect Senators by Sortition but then they could bail out and just decided to choose who they want when it came to the actual selection.
I am definitely not a lawyer, but "chosen... by the People of the several States" does not say the method of this choice. If the people of my state decide that the RNG decides, is that not "chosen by the People" of my state? Or if we still hold elections but one of the choices on the ballot is "RNG-chosen candidate"?
Citizens United isn’t a law, it’s a shitty Supreme Court decision. It’s on the long list of obvious problems we can’t fix without first reforming the courts (I favor increasing the justice count to match the number of circuits, and also drawing the Supreme Court justices by lot for each session from the “lower” courts—shouldn’t be any constitutional issues with that approach, so it’s just a normal law, and it ought to be easier to sell than simply expanding the court and “packing” it since it’s less-partisan)
It's an interesting idea. Is that what's happening? The article doesn't suggest it. People like Richard Burr, Chris Collins or Nancy Pelosi were certainly wealthy enough cover these expenses. It didn't stop them from seeking other ways to make money via their position. If your goal is to stop insider trading, you should focus on stopping insider trading.
If your goal is to make it easier to travel to and live in DC, well, congress has the power to address housing (especially in DC) and airline costs for all Americans.
That's true even without congestion pricing. A city would go broke and bulldoze itself trying to add enough stacked lane, highways, and parking to handle everyone who would prefer to drive in or through if the capacity existed.
reply