A Stitch in Haste

The bureaucracy that runs many of New York's bridges and tunnels is asking that very question:

According to a survey conducted by the Port Authority, most New Jersey drivers who take its three crossings over the Hudson River each morning earn more than $100,000, officials told The Post. Nearly one-third of drivers who use the Lincoln Tunnel earn more than $200,000.

The Port Authority conducted the survey of drivers' household incomes as it prepares to consider possible toll hikes for next year. ... Port Authority officials say incomes would be only one factor in deciding whether or not to raise tolls.

Of course, incomes should not be even "only one factor" in setting tolls. When the government, at whatever level and in whatever form, decides that a piece of infrastructure, such as a bridge or tunnel, is a natural monopoly that warrants public provision, there is an irrebuttable presumption that the government should base its fee structure on costs and costs alone. The toll should be exactly enough to fund the operations (broadly defined) of the infrastructure -- and not one penny more.

The notion that "people can pay more" is not a justification for charging them more for public infrastructure. The whole point of having the government run a monopoly business is so that it will not behave like a monopoly and extract monopoly rents.

Otherwise what is the government other than just another "greedy capitalist bastard"?

---

Note that a public monopolist, or rate regulator, trying to estimate the demand curve for its monopoly product such that the system's capacity is neither strained nor squandered is an entirely different undertaking from "let's raise prices because we can." Neither is a "peak versus off peak" fare structure an affront to the notion of the "beneficent public monopoly," so long as the differential reflects only the cost of the addition peak capacity and not a rent-extracting abuse of public monopoly power.