[DarnDirtyApe]

This is why we are perfectly justified in not taking anything you say seriously.

How is it not true? It's obviously a simplification, but her track record speaks for itself. As an MP for the Federal NDP, she must have supported their stated desire to raise corporate taxes. While on Toronto council, she was present (and presumably didn't complain) while commercial & industrial tax rates were hiked to the point where businesses fled to the 905. Today she wants to make the property tax system "more progressive" starting with >$2MM properties. How can we believe that she will not make other changes to the tax system? I have little faith.

 

[DarnDirtyApe]

It applies to all properties, including land and buildings to be constructed, yes. It's more correct to say it applies to property purchased, since it is paid by the buyer and not, as Doug Ford repeatedly claims, by the seller. It is also a graduated tax, in that it applies at different rates to portions of the sale price/consideration value: 0.5% on the first $55K, 1% on the portion between 55K and 400K and 2% on the portion above 400K. It's not anti-business or anti-wealth, it's just a much-needed source of revenue for the city (it was previously only the province that got a cut of sale proceeds) and it is not opposed by the other candidates in principle. It's just the rates that are at issue.

When a condo developer buys a parking lot for millions of dollars, then her surcharge will apply. If a REIT or pension plan buys an apartment building from another investor, then her surcharge will apply. If an individual buy a $2.5MM rooming house in Parkdale or student housing in the Annex, then her surcharge will apply. Her proposal is anti-business and anti-development, will raise the cost of new housing, and discourage new investment.

This is my main problem with her - she does not understand (or does not care) about the unintended consequences of her policies.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

If there is any criticisms of OC, it isn't her stance on LTT or school lunches for crying out loud, it is the lack of willingness to tackle the issues facing the city in the medium/long-term. Additional buses, kiddie meals are nice and all that, but I think it's not substantative enough.

DDA:

Except that the sky is falling argument has been used for the LTT itself - and the sky didn't fall. Not to deny that a surcharge may have an impact - but I think one need to model the impact of such policies before making blanket statements that it is by default "anti-growth".

AoD

 

[the lemur]

When a condo developer buys a parking lot for millions of dollars, then her surcharge will apply. If a REIT or pension plan buys an apartment building from another investor, then her surcharge will apply. If an individual buy a $2.5MM rooming house in Parkdale or student housing in the Annex, then her surcharge will apply. Her proposal is anti-business and anti-development, will raise the cost of new housing, and discourage new investment.

This is my main problem with her - she does not understand (or does not care) about the unintended consequences of her policies.

So we should just let land and property change hands for millions of dollars and let the city figure out how to earn revenue some other way?

 

[DarnDirtyApe]

With all due respect, there's no way that it's "lack of willingness to tackle the issues facing the city" that has lead to her polling so badly. Maybe that's what well-informed, progressive voters think of her campaign, but unfortunately we are a small minority in this city. For most she's just a complete write-off because of who she is - NDP, married to Jack Layton, bleeding heart liberal, poor public speaker, etc. I don't think it would matter what her platform was, to be honest.

I don't have any facts to back it up, but I would argue that the LTT has had a negative impact on the supply of houses for sale, particularly for starter homes. Trading up has become very expensive, so more people just stay put. Of course this leads to more bidding wars, and higher prices.

When it comes to large-scale projects, I am 100% sure that the impact of tax changes would be modeled in. If demand will allow for it, developers will simply pass on the increase in costs to condo buyers.

 

[nfitz]

It was a stupid thing for Tory to say. It's not necessarily wrong.

It's beyond that. Remember that John Tory was a long-time member of a golf club that until surprisingly recently didn't even allow Jews in - let alone non-whites and women!

I just can't even begin to imagine what goes into one's head when one joins a club that bans Jews. I can only assume that anyone who would join such a club is a racist, and unfit for public office.

Finally: Tory is not an extreme right-winger.

Surely, in Ontario - joining a club that bans Jews is extremely right-wing.

The Front National in France is extreme right wing. UKIP is extreme right wing.

The National Front is even more extreme. I don't see how you can compare the National Front to the UKIP. UKIP isn't very far from Reform. The closest UK equivalent to the National Front is the British National Party.

Nobody in Toronto politics is extreme right wing.

You obviously haven't checked out mayoral candidate Don Andrews - committed fascist and leader of the Nationalist Party of Canada. I invite you to check out their website - http://www.natparty.com/ The text starts with "Racism is your bloodline. Racism is for everyone, not just white nationalists ...". I wouldn't call this extreme right wing. It's beyond that call it neo-Nazi.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

With all due respect, there's no way that it's "lack of willingness to tackle the issues facing the city" that has lead to her polling so badly. Maybe that's what well-informed, progressive voters think of her campaign, but unfortunately we are a small minority in this city. For most she's just a complete write-off because of who she is - NDP, married to Jack Layton, bleeding heart liberal, poor public speaker, etc. I don't think it would matter what her platform was, to be honest.

I don't doubt that for one minute - but of course the funny thing is that this slide didn't happen until the ensuring months, which again points to how labelling affects perception regardless of what her policies stood for.

I don't have any facts to back it up, but I would argue that the LTT has had a negative impact on the supply of houses for sale, particularly for starter homes. Trading up has become very expensive, so more people just stay put. Of course this leads to more bidding wars, and higher prices.

In the City of Toronto the supply of starter homes is going to be unaffordable (and will continue to be so) simply due to limited availability of land for building such homes. One can argue that trading up has become very expensive again due to the same reasons - LTT or not won't change that.

When it comes to large-scale projects, I am 100% sure that the impact of tax changes would be modeled in. If demand will allow for it, developers will simply pass on the increase in costs to condo buyers.

Of course, and we haven't seen a decline in the amount of condo units built or transacted.

AoD

 

[DarnDirtyApe]

nfitz you must be getting desperate, parroting Doug Ford's talking points!

 

[nfitz]

nfitz you must be getting desperate, parroting Doug Ford's talking points!

Am I? Well, why not ... Doug is a man of the people.

I don't pay much attention to his comments. He's generally not wrong about John Tory ... the stuff I've heard him say though always seems so bizarre - because he seems to be completely non-self-aware that most of the comments apply also to himself.

 

[DarnDirtyApe]

Sure, sure... but anyway, I don't think it's a fair criticism. Many private clubs did not admit Jews in the recent past - in fact, there were many clubs started by Jews precisely for that reason - but none are like that today. It's a bit like refusing to buy a Volkswagen or Hugo Boss suit because they used to be affiliated with the Nazis, or to criticize Olivia Chow because she voted for something as a councillor in the 90's. People change and so do institutions...

 

[eleQted]

Sorry to spam this page, but we're looking for intelligent voters to ask some questions to the Toronto Mayoral Candidates.

We have a 6 day timeline to post a question.
The top 3 rated questions will be chosen and posed to all 3 mayoral candidates (OC has already agreed, other 2 in progress).
The candidates will all post their responses in advance of the polls.
Visit www.eleQted.com to post your own top questions.

 

[salsa]

At the end of the day, who cares what Chow says, or has done. She going to get smoked, just like the ON and Fed NDP is getting smoked in the City of Toronto. Her way of thinking re. bigger govt, more socially activist and interferring govt, equal opportunities for all via greater transfers of wealth, is no longer connecting with the voters. For anyone with socialist leanings, there's a lot of merit actually in much of the NDP ideals of no man/woman/child left behind and the idea of equality of result not just of opportunity. I've certainly voted NDP previously. But this mindset is dead in Toronto proper, or at leaxt not strong enough for Dippers to win at city hall or Queens Park.

I'm sure the changing mindset is part of it, but I'd also argue that Chow getting smoked is also largely due to her lackluster campaign. Remember she was poised to win according to the earlier polls, until she squandered it. As for the ON NDP, they got smoked thanks to strategic voting against Hudak and because Horwrath abandoned her base by pretending to be right wing. And for the Fed NDP, without Jack Layton I don't think they will ever again have the same success as they did last election, so I agree with you on that.

This is why we are perfectly justified in not taking anything you say seriously.

Yep, my ignore list is getting bigger.

 

[DarnDirtyApe]

Yep, my ignore list is getting bigger.

I guess you can't read this then... but nothing says intolerance like ignoring those that have other views.

 

[DarnDirtyApe]

I don't doubt that for one minute - but of course the funny thing is that this slide didn't happen until the ensuring months, which again points to how labelling affects perception regardless of what her policies stood for.

It's so hard to know the cause of anything... pundits say that most voters don't even pay attention until late in the campaign, and I don't remember - when did Tory enter the running? My memory isn't so good.

In the City of Toronto the supply of starter homes is going to be unaffordable (and will continue to be so) simply due to limited availability of land for building such homes. One can argue that trading up has become very expensive again due to the same reasons - LTT or not won't change that.

Sure, but at the margin everything has an impact. People do the math and calculate the cost of LTT + realtor fees + moving expenses and decide to stay put. On an $800K house you are looking at almost $25K in LTT. You can understand that people are skittish about any politician promising to increase it, even if it won't directly affect them.

Of course, and we haven't seen a decline in the amount of condo units built or transacted.

We'll see what happens if Chow is elected and follows through on her promise! Until then it's just speculation.

 

[freshcutgrass]

her track record speaks for itself. .

A: What you posted doesn't constitute "her track record".

B: Toronto didn't have high commercial taxes...the 905 made them artificially low. And it's the 905 that screwed up as we can plainly see now.