[js97]

If I pay more than my share, that means that some freeloader won't pay his/her share.

The question is, why are there freeloaders out there who want to benefit from living in an egalitarian society but don't want to pay the taxes necessary to do so?

You're completely delusional. People don't pay equally, that's the problem. If there was a 'flat nominal tax' or 'head tax' for every registered Torontonian, you would see the disapearance of the 'left'. The only support they would get will truly be the 1% in the Atwoods/Polleys(would you like to see their tax filing?)


This non-sense that 80% wanted a 3-10% tax increase is absolute garbage - otherwise, how does someone like Rob Ford get elected with almost a 50% mandate, and the other 35-40 % go to a very popular Smitherman that ran on tax FREEZE and reduction (30 dollar VRT)?

Do you really believe that 80% of Toronto wanted a 3-10% tax hike? That's so non-sense.

 

[jn_12]

You're completely delusional. People don't pay equally, that's the problem. If there was a 'flat nominal tax' or 'head tax' for every registered Torontonian, you would see the disapearance of the 'left'. The only support they would get will truly be the 1% in the Atwoods/Polleys(would you like to see their tax filing?)

This non-sense that 80% wanted a 3-10% tax increase is absolute garbage - otherwise, how does someone like Rob Ford get elected with almost a 50% mandate, and the other 35-40 % go to a very popular Smitherman that ran on tax FREEZE and reduction (30 dollar VRT)?

Do you really believe that 80% of Toronto wanted a 3-10% tax hike? That's so non-sense.

Do we really need to drag Ford's stupidity/lies into all of this? The guy promised voters that services wouldn't be cut, only to then realize it was impossible to do so while maintaining his hardline anti-tax promises. People bought his stupidity hook-line-and-sinker. Within months (when it became clear that there was no gravy and that he was going to cut services) people started to wish they hadn't voted for him. His approval rating plummeted. Ultimately, when people realized they were going to lose their services, they offered to spend more to keep them. It's not hard to understand. And if you read the report (my guess is you didn't) you'd notice a demographically diverse group of respondents (13,000 of them actually, which alone is very significant). It wasn't 13,000 people who all live in a co-op who were spurred on by Adam Vaughan.

 

[voxpopulicosmicum]

You're completely delusional. People don't pay equally, that's the problem. If there was a 'flat nominal tax' or 'head tax' for every registered Torontonian, you would see the disapearance of the 'left'. The only support they would get will truly be the 1% in the Atwoods/Polleys(would you like to see their tax filing?)


This non-sense that 80% wanted a 3-10% tax increase is absolute garbage - otherwise, how does someone like Rob Ford get elected with almost a 50% mandate, and the other 35-40 % go to a very popular Smitherman that ran on tax FREEZE and reduction (30 dollar VRT)?

Do you really believe that 80% of Toronto wanted a 3-10% tax hike? That's so non-sense.

I'm not sure whether you're questioning the statistical validity of the poll or the correctness of the opinions reported by the poll. Just because you happen to disagree with those opinions doesn't mean they don't exist. It just means you don't understand the thinking of the people who hold them.

Regarding your assertion that the problem with tax is that people don't pay equally: again, that's your opinion. I think most people would disagree. I, for one, happen to think that progressive taxation is preferable to a flat tax (from the POV of both the social outcomes it generates and the economic theory that underlies it).

For the record, I was raised by a single mom and directly benefitted from social assistance in my childhood. Now, I'm a one-percenter with 10+ years of postsecondary education, and I benefit directly from publicly run institutions and public infrastructure, and indirectly from social assistance provided to my fellow Torontonians. I certainly think raising taxes on the wealthy to pay for social services is a good idea. Without social services, the city will turn into a place that I don't want to live.

 

[RC8]

Without social services, the city will turn into a place that I don't want to live.

This doesn't resonate with conservatives because ideally for them they'd have little to no interaction with the poor.

Ultimately they're fine with spending money trying to protect themselves through private guards, police, cars, and highly secured suburban houses, but they dislike the idea of paying to accomplish a more peaceful and just scenario if it means that some 'lazy' people get rewarded.

If there was a fund for a Downtown Relief Line on Wellington or Adelaide you could opt to pay on a monthly basis, I think the city would raise several million dollars for it.

 

[voxpopulicosmicum]

I understand greed. I like stuff and when I have stuff I still want more stuff. But I also don't want so much stuff that the volume of my stuff is conspicuous. I view this as a matter of good taste, but I suppose it could just as easily (more plausibly?) be motivated by self-preservation.

I know that there is a certain type of person who would prefer to have no contact with the poor, but do they not also understand that by advocating policies that increase wealth disparity, they are painting large targets on themselves? There's a reason that the most highly unequal societies also have the highest crime rates. Why are such people drawn to a future in which they cannot stop at traffic lights for fear of being carjacked? Is it self loathing or self deception?

 

[js97]

I'm not sure whether you're questioning the statistical validity of the poll or the correctness of the opinions reported by the poll. Just because you happen to disagree with those opinions doesn't mean they don't exist. It just means you don't understand the thinking of the people who hold them.

Regarding your assertion that the problem with tax is that people don't pay equally: again, that's your opinion. I think most people would disagree. I, for one, happen to think that progressive taxation is preferable to a flat tax (from the POV of both the social outcomes it generates and the economic theory that underlies it).

For the record, I was raised by a single mom and directly benefitted from social assistance in my childhood. Now, I'm a one-percenter with 10+ years of postsecondary education, and I benefit directly from publicly run institutions and public infrastructure, and indirectly from social assistance provided to my fellow Torontonians. I certainly think raising taxes on the wealthy to pay for social services is a good idea. Without social services, the city will turn into a place that I don't want to live.

So back to my original questions.... have you donated any money/ given back/?

 

[js97]

If there was a fund for a Downtown Relief Line on Wellington or Adelaide you could opt to pay on a monthly basis, I think the city would raise several million dollars for it.

Again, slightly out of touch? How much do you think a DRL will costs? (I for one would be all about it) but do you seriously think that's how much it will cost if Shepperd will cost 1 Billion for 1 stop to Victoria Park - but obviously, those suburbians don't deserve it right?

It might be easier for you to justify your reasoning if you simply paint others as 'conservative' and that be enough reason, but your posts have obviously shown to be out of touch with real financial presures of this world. 10 dollars a month times a million subscribers = 10 Million dollars... again, probably the cleaning budget of the TTC. So where is the rest of the money supposed to come?

p.s. Sorry, I'm not in the 1% yet, but when I get there, I'll sure be happy to VOLUNTARILY contribute to thsoe services I deem necessary... and influence my other 1% friends to do so too.

 

[voxpopulicosmicum]

So back to my original questions.... have you donated any money/ given back/?

Do you mean through the city's weird program, or are you asking generally if I donate money?

If the former, then you will note my previous comments that I believe tax revenues should fund such programs, because otherwise there are freeloaders who aren't paying their share. What part of "publicly funded" is unclear?

 

[RC8]

Again, slightly out of touch? How much do you think a DRL will costs? (I for one would be all about it) but do you seriously think that's how much it will cost if Shepperd will cost 1 Billion for 1 stop to Victoria Park - but obviously, those suburbians don't deserve it right?

It might be easier for you to justify your reasoning if you simply paint others as 'conservative' and that be enough reason, but your posts have obviously shown to be out of touch with real financial presures of this world. 10 dollars a month times a million subscribers = 10 Million dollars... again, probably the cleaning budget of the TTC. So where is the rest of the money supposed to come?

p.s. Sorry, I'm not in the 1% yet, but when I get there, I'll sure be happy to VOLUNTARILY contribute to thsoe services I deem necessary... and influence my other 1% friends to do so too.

That "one station" is actually a 2 km stretch, and the tunnel required for the heavy rail is huge, complex, and very deep.

My idea of what people's money could go to would be something like this: A tunnel on Adelaide or Richmond that goes from Parliament to Trinity Bellwoods, and carries an LRT that then continues on Queen. What would this accomplish? Have you ever tried to get on a Queen or King streetcar at peak hours in that stretch? It's hell. Beyond that stretch it's pretty manageable. That tunnel would be 4km long, much shallower and less complex than what is being proposed at Sheppard. Essentially it would be like the underground tunnel connecting Union with Queens Quay. That type of tunnel doesn't even need a specialised drilling machine, it can literally be dug out with fair standard equipment.

People's donations wouldn't come close to funding it, but it would probably not be much more expensive than that one more stop in the middle of nowhere. Most importantly, if people like you and I were donating $10 a month, do you not think that the giant banks, corporations, and countless businesses that would benefit would just sit there? Sell station names to them and put their names on a plaque somewhere. Put ATMs at every station and let the banks bid for who gets to have all of them. See, because this thing would be incredibly used very soon, it's actually realistic to TRY and build it. It wouldn't hurt to get into some debt for it, either. While it won't pay for itself, it would produce a much greater return than any other transit project in this city could. It's guaranteed to be taken by thousands of people every day, and would lead to a lot less congestion on Queen, King (both inside streetcars and out), and raise property values along Richmond or Adelaide - which often get overlooked downtown.

You are asking if I would donate money to the city. If they were engaging in plans like the one above, I would. Many others would. You'd know where your money is going, whereas now you just have a vague list of black holes - places that wouldn't make the best of your contribution because they can't plan for it.

But if they are fighting a ghost deficit and cancelling reasonable transit projects while replacing them with expensive inadequate and unnecessary subways due to road rage... then no, I'm not interested in helping this fiscally irresponsible mayor build those subways.

 

[js97]

You are asking if I would donate money to the city. If they were engaging in plans like the one above, I would. Many others would. You'd know where your money is going, whereas now you just have a vague list of black holes - places that wouldn't make the best of your contribution because they can't plan for it.

So you're saying you would not donate if you didn't know where the money is going to?

What's the difference between your unwillingness to contribute due to lack of transparency and my unwillingness to pay a mandatory tax that I don't see full value (or know where it is going - transperancy?? Isn't it the same thing? - and we aren't talking about a zero sum game of no services/taxes vs paying for every luxury social services.


FYI, I live along queen/king line and travel downtown everyday... yes it's a nightmare... a better solution would be to utilize & implement the GO train from exibition/leslieville/danforth - but that would be too pragmatic

Just to point out a few holes in your 'idea' Your proposed plan from Trinity bellwoods would go through residential homes along adelaide/richmond and it's no more complex (electrical lines/sewage/ etc) than the shepperd build. And then through the PATH (did we forget about that?) - the most substantial underground complex in north america. Not so 'easy' no?

Do you mean through the city's weird program, or are you asking generally if I donate money?

If the former, then you will note my previous comments that I believe tax revenues should fund such programs, because otherwise there are freeloaders who aren't paying their share. What part of "publicly funded" is unclear?

I'm refering to cities' 'weird' programs, like those posted on the contribute form

http://www.toronto.ca/taxes/vco.htm

Children's Services
Cultural Services and Museums
Emergency Services (Police, Fire and Emergency Medical Services)
Employment and Social Services
Long Term Care Homes and Services
Parks, Forestry and Recreation
Roads and Transportation services
Shelter, Support and Housing
Toronto Animal Services
Toronto Public Libraries
Transit
General Revenues

It's a list of the highly 'fought over' Ford 'cuts' that you can specificly contribute to.. it even gives you a tax credit!

I'm guessing you didn't read the back of your property tax pamphelt, or maybe you don't actually pay property taxes.

 

[voxpopulicosmicum]

I'm refering to cities' 'weird' programs, like those posted on the contribute form

http://www.toronto.ca/taxes/vco.htm

It's a list of the highly 'fought over' Ford 'cuts' that you can specificly contribute to.. it even gives you a tax credit!

I'm guessing you didn't read the back of your property tax pamphelt, or maybe you don't actually pay property taxes.

I don't administer my own household finances; I should actually ask my spouse before confirming that "we" didn't take part in the weird program. But, the reason I don't support it (in principle, at least) is that it undermines my belief that the listed programs should be funded by tax dollars, as they are programs from which we all derive benefit and for which I don't want cheap-ass freeloaders to avoid paying.

 

[RC8]

So you're saying you would not donate if you didn't know where the money is going to?

What's the difference between your unwillingness to contribute due to lack of transparency and my unwillingness to pay a mandatory tax that I don't see full value (or know where it is going - transperancy?? Isn't it the same thing? - and we aren't talking about a zero sum game of no services/taxes vs paying for every luxury social services.


FYI, I live along queen/king line and travel downtown everyday... yes it's a nightmare... a better solution would be to utilize & implement the GO train from exibition/leslieville/danforth - but that would be too pragmatic

Just to point out a few holes in your 'idea' Your proposed plan from Trinity bellwoods would go through residential homes along adelaide/richmond and it's no more complex (electrical lines/sewage/ etc) than the shepperd build. And then through the PATH (did we forget about that?) - the most substantial underground complex in north america. Not so 'easy' no?

There is literally 1 block of low-rise residential on Richmond in between Trinity Bellwoods and Parliament, and it is the first block on the west side of my plan.

It really isn't more complex, as much as you'd want it to be for the sake of this argument.

No comparison with what I propose. I'd want a simpler, lighter, and compact version of this (with much smaller simpler stations like Queens Quay and no operators):

You don't even have to interrupt overheard traffic to build it except for a short section at a time (the tunnel can be covered with wood and metal cladding over which cars can drive while the construction is done underneath.

PATH would love to have more transit connections down there, they'd happily contribute to the effort.

As I said my main problem with the donations is that they can't account for them on a budget, and therefore won't be fully exploited.

I trust the government to not rip me off any more than a supermarket does when I buy milk from them. So long as they can budget for things, I'm willing to contribute.

 

[BurlOak]

No comparison with what I propose. I'd want a simpler, lighter, and compact version of this (with much smaller simpler stations like Queens Quay and no operators):

TTC seems to have come to the conclusion that cut-and-cover is not possible, and tunnelling 20m or more is a better solution. They also need monster stations. If open cut station excavations for a 20m deep hole are 200m long and station spacing is 1km, then virtually the entire road is a mess anyways. I'd rather have the option that has a shorter construction time - obviously the one requiring less excavation.

People may be a bit more likely to donate to a good plan, but TTC seems unable to come up with one.

 

[Electrify]

For the record, if you really want to donate more money to the government's general revenue, the best way to do it is to by some lottery tickets or go to a casino.

 

[EnviroTO]

There's obviously an overwhelming support on here to ensure minimal service cuts to TCHC, Libraries, homeless shelters, food programs, etc etc etc...

I just received my Property Tax Bill, and it gives an opportunity for residents to donate to their favourite service.

http://www.toronto.ca/taxes/vco.htm

What sayeth you?

The concept makes no sense. When there is a humanitarian crisis somewhere you donate money, sometimes with government matching, and you know the money will be new money that wouldn't have made it to the cause otherwise. Here you donate money and there is no commitment by the city to maintain the amount they contribute today or match donations with new money... you could donate more money only to have the portion paid via the tax pool reduced. I don't give to things I think the general social net should take care of. Kids toys at Christmas, a better Thanksgiving Dinner, Make a Wish Foundation are all causes that go beyond and really aren't what should be expected of government to deliver. Basic needs and education in Canada is something I will not donate to... nobody should be able to escape their responsibility as a tax paying citizen on those items and knowing how governments go through promising tax cuts at the provincial and federal levels almost yearly, and talk cuts or freezes (which is a cut) locally any donation to those things is money wasted. Individual generosity should not sweep under the carpet society's greater responsibility and it is dangerous because in economic downturn, when help is needed most, individuals are in the worst position to assist.