transit and car use are most certainly (inversely) related. The more people who can be well served by transit, the less traffic, congestion, pollution, and GHG emission, and therefore the better for everyone. Conversely, the more people who need to use cars because transit is inadequate, the worse for everyone. Hence, it is in everyone's best interest to tax the fuel used by cars to fund the improvement of transit. If some people choose to use their cars anyway, they can pay the extra tax.
Again, taxing fuel only taxes the drivers. Those that want to use public transit need to pay their fair share as well. The tax as suggested in Stintz plan would be fair to all.
Not at all. I have no confidence that road traffic will continue to be served if too much attention is paid to people who want to be shuttled around in sardine cans. Neither does it make sense to tax car-related activity to place people in these sardine cans. A mere $45 per year? Then let transit users pay it and enjoy their brand spanking new system.
Yeah, and let's have car drivers pay for the repairs to the crumbling Gardiner Expressway, and for fixing all those potholes everywhere else.
Because it's not like people who don't drive benefit from roads.
Yeah, and let's have car drivers pay for the repairs to the crumbling Gardiner Expressway, and for fixing all those potholes everywhere else.
Because it's not like people who don't drive benefit from roads.
Exactly! Make the user pay! Transit users will pay for their share of road repairs through the price of the good they consume. Enforce bicycle licensing to raise a bit more cash for roads. There is no equitable way to make pedestrians pay for sidewalks, so this can be funded publicly.
__________________
"My life is my own."
Mac Pro 3.0 GHz, Intel Mac Mini 1.83 GHz, 2.16 GHz White MacBook, G4 14" 1.33 GHz iBook, G4 12" 768 MHz laptop,
Exactly! Make the user pay! Transit users will pay for their share of road repairs through the price of the good they consume. Enforce bicycle licensing to raise a bit more cash for roads. There is no equitable way to make pedestrians pay for sidewalks, so this can be funded publicly.
Yeah right, I can see this going over well, the occasional bike riders are complaining about subsidizing the people who bike to work every day or homeless people with bicycles (oh, no wait, they have no money, better write them a ticket or confiscate their bikes). Everyone has the joy of getting their mileage monitored every year so you can pay for the roads you used, so there's an extra tax. But I mostly drove in Mississauga for work but my car resides in Toronto so my money goes to Toronto roads even though I used the ones in Mississauga more. And the cost of everything from mail to shipped goods increases.
What a great plan. That'll also be much more cost effective to collect than you know, regular taxes that pay for roads and sidewalks and lessen the overall cost by spreading it out over years of a persons lifetime and across millions of citizens.
Don't get me wrong, I do feel that public transit riders need to pull their own weight, but they should be paying slightly more over a longer period to a more efficient system that has leadership and at the very least a break even over 10 years business plan, not like the current model of flushing money down the toilet and letting fare dodgers take the system for millions every year. But as far as giving a free pass to the few people who claim not to see the benefits of public transit because it'll make them feel warm and fuzzy during tax season? I doubt very strongly that's the answer.
What began two weeks ago as a $30-billion blueprint to crisscross the city with nearly two dozen new transit lines withered and died before it reached the floor of Toronto city council on Wednesday.
__________________
"My life is my own."
Mac Pro 3.0 GHz, Intel Mac Mini 1.83 GHz, 2.16 GHz White MacBook, G4 14" 1.33 GHz iBook, G4 12" 768 MHz laptop,
Linear Mode
