Would you support new toll roads?

[SEWIGuy]

^^^

I would say more potential invasion of privacy.  I doubt that the tolling authorities do anything with the data more than to bill you.  And, even on "toll by plate" images, it's been pretty much established that image taking in an open, public area is legal.  (may not be prudent and some cops especially Amtrak and New Jersey Transit tend to forget that)

Now, getting to the potential part.  At the moment, the greatest danger would be data taken from a security breach.  Though, it is probably only a matter of time before law enforcement agencies start requesting (demanding?) toll information to track suspects.

What makes people think that they have a right to privacy when they drive on a public road?

[mightyace]

^^^

Point taken.  But, there is no completely privately owned way to travel any distance.

However, if you don't have a transponder on a toll road and pay cash or not take the toll road.  You have a modicum of privacy.

Of course, anyone including cops that watches you can know to some degree who you are, but they have to be there.

Anything that records data reduces privacy.

The main issue to me, is not that the data is recorded, but that the more data is recorded the more data there is for someone to abuse.

[SSOWorld]

For all we know someone could be abusing the data we type into this or any other website - is that different than a toll transponder?  I think not.

[mightyace]

The difference is that a website like this is a want while some of your transportation is a need.

Also, the chance of someone trying to glean data from this site is rather low.

Another difference is that whatever danger there is at this website has always been there.  However, tracking movement automatically, even partially, is a new phenomenon.

So, part of it is psychological.  For example, baggage fees at most major airlines.  When you think about it, it is logical to charge for bags as those who check bags are carrying more weight on the plane than those who don't.  But, until recently, this was not done.

[J N Winkler]

So, part of it is psychological.  For example, baggage fees at most major airlines.  When you think about it, it is logical to charge for bags as those who check bags are carrying more weight on the plane than those who don't.  But, until recently, this was not done.

There are actually solid justifications for the old pricing system.  It was more transparent--the ticket was all-inclusive, so you knew what you had to pay as you booked it, and did not have to worry about the cost net of luggage fees (typically imposed at a later stage of the booking process) or any additional fees that might be payable at check-in.  It also encouraged people to check in small suitcases which nowadays hog all the room in overhead bins, which were never designed to function as luggage cages.  There was also more certainty about cabin baggage allowances because airlines did not feel pressed to defend a right to charge per case:  you could be sure that you could always carry one bag and "one personal item" (even another bag, e.g. a laptop case) on the aircraft.  That certainty has been lost with EasyJet and possibly some other budget airlines since they have done away with the "personal item" allowance without mentioning it on their websites:  you do not find this out until you show up at the airport.  In EasyJet's case this allows the ticket agent at check-in to order you to cram your laptop bag inside your backpack, just so they can sadistically hit you with a £15 charge for airport bag check-in when you fail (the bag charge at booking is much lower--£7.50, IIRC).

The real purpose of bag fees is not to charge more to the passengers that cost the airlines more to carry, since a single fat passenger can easily cost the airline more in jet fuel than a thin passenger paying the same price for the ticket plus a bag fee to check in a rucksack (my weight plus that of my rucksack--about 180 pounds combined--is about the same, or slightly less, than the average weight for adult American men of my height).  Bag fees are also charged on the basis of unit (essentially a maximum volume and mass per unit) rather than actual mass, even though mass is the key factor in jet fuel consumption.  Rather, since bag fees do not vary in time, unlike the prices of the tickets themselves, the introduction of them is a "price rise that sticks" (guaranteed minimum revenue) and they also allow the airline to run promotions with seductively low headline prices.

Bag fees have the marked disadvantage of lost price transparency and this is one reason à la carte ticketing has not driven the concept of all-inclusive ticketing out of the marketplace despite having had well over a decade to do so.

[agentsteel53]

price transparency?  airlines?    

if someone can explain to me why a ticket from Point A to Point B costs what it does, I would love to know.  For example, why does it cost me $280 to fly from San Diego to Atlanta to Mobile, and back - and $356 to fly to Atlanta only and return, on the exact same flights?  

[Scott5114]

For all we know someone could be abusing the data we type into this or any other website - is that different than a toll transponder?  I think not.

In fact, this is the case. Right now I am riding the data like a mechanical bull. Later I intend to tell it how worthless it is and how I wish it was never born, and possibly slap it in the face a few dozen times.

[agentsteel53]

meh, data is worthless and slapping it around is no big deal.  I mean, approximately half of it is just a bunch of zeroes.

[Grzrd]

An element of the Scope of Work contained in the AHTD's RFP for an "I-69 Innovative Financing" study:

Analyze the potential funding and innovative financing options for the seven I-69 states from
Indiana to Texas, both individually and collectively. The analysis will include an evaluation
of the viability of tolling in each state. This evaluation will include estimates of toll revenue
along with the estimated costs of constructing, operating and maintaining electronic toll
collection facilities. This evaluation of potential toll revenue should assume that the entire
I-69 corridor is operating, not just the section(s) that is/are tolled. If there is a specific reason
to study toll revenue for an individual segment of the corridor, then the report on that portion
of the study should specifically articulate which portions are operating. Future toll revenues
should take into account the expected increase in demand for freight transportation.
Projected demand, particularly freight demand, should be vetted by the I-69 Steering
Committee and the USDOT prior to being applied.

http://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2010/RFP%20Full%20012100%20I69%20Innovative%20Financing%20final.pdf

Is a national toll road looming?

[english si]

In EasyJet's case this allows the ticket agent at check-in to order you to cram your laptop bag inside your backpack, just so they can sadistically hit you with a £15 charge for airport bag check-in when you fail (the bag charge at booking is much lower--£7.50, IIRC).

Typical Sleazy Jet.

The only times I've flown low cost, I've only had one bag (carry on), so I haven't been hit with it. Then again, I don't think I'll be doing any big group of lads flying down to the med, carry on bags only, camping outside trips anymore. Then again, I'd be able to take out my sleeping bag, and put clothes in that, buying toiletries past security. I can still use my 18L rucksack.

[deathtopumpkins]

Exactly! Did I misinterpret that?

Well, Niagara Falls kinda implies the Grand Island bridges rather than the booths that were near downtown Buffalo.

I couldn't remember which specific city they were in. Doesn't really matter though, it's the same general area and should have been fairly evident.