[EnviroTO]

For the millionth time, no one--absolutely no one--is asking them to.

Toronto subsidizes the rest of the country. Its infrastructure and other needs could be easily met with a small fraction of that subsidy being re-invested locally instead of supporting public services in other parts of Canada.

What federal infrastructure do we need in Toronto? What federal services or infrastructure should be cut back elsewhere to pay for it? It is one thing to ask that the federal government stop paying for things elsewhere that they don't pay for here and to lower taxes as a result of this. It is quite another to try and hop on board the gravy train and have the federal government pay for projects that aren't part of their mandate. We need the federal government to stop wasting our tax dollars on non-federal spending, not ask them to increase non-federal spending in Toronto.

There should only be three ways federal money gets spent in Toronto:
1. Services and infrastructure of national importance which are run, managed, and ruled by the federal government.
2. Transfer payments to the provinces.
3. Transfer payments to the provinces then transfered to the municipalities.

TTC and GO Transit aren't federal programs. The airport rail link arguably is because both airports and VIA Rail is federal. The federal government had no part in deciding Transit City, subway extensions, and GO priorities.

The federal government lowered sales tax 2% and lowered income tax. If the balance between the federal and provincial government is off then Ontario should raise its income tax and sales tax to reflect its greater responsibility to deliver services. Ontario is a HAVE province so a lowered federal tax by 2% and raised provincial tax by 2% should leave us further ahead (i.e. the whole 2% would stay in the province rather than a fraction of it).

 

[kEiThZ]

For the millionth time, no one--absolutely no one--is asking them to.

Toronto subsidizes the rest of the country. Its infrastructure and other needs could be easily met with a small fraction of that subsidy being re-invested locally instead of supporting public services in other parts of Canada.

This is a result of Toronto's economic bounty. It's the nature of our Confederation that we share our wealth with those who aren't as lucky. It's not like the feds have imposed any extraordinary taxes on Toronto. And its not like they are spending that money anywhere else at Toronto's expense. They simply get more revenue from Toronto because of its high income. And they use the funds on federal programs which benefit all of Canada. There is nothing unfair about that. We could debate about equalization but don't forget the point of the program is to smooth over disparities in services between regions so people don't migrate while shopping for services. If it wasn't for equalization Toronto could get swamped with internal migrants......

As for Toronto subsidizing the rest of the country....where do you think the food we eat, the gas we burn, the electricity we consume, and the stocks we trade (ie large resource and IT companies....none in the 416) come from? Toronto can't survive without the ROC just like the ROC can't survive without us. If the reverse were true, and the feds were subsidizing Toronto would you agree to a cut in that subsidy to build subways elsewhere?

 

[kEiThZ]

The federal government lowered sales tax 2% and lowered income tax. If the balance between the federal and provincial government is off then Ontario should raise its income tax and sales tax to reflect its greater responsibility to deliver services. Ontario is a HAVE province so a lowered federal tax by 2% and raised provincial tax by 2% should leave us further ahead (i.e. the whole 2% would stay in the province rather than a fraction of it).

Exactly. Nobody has any problem raking the federal government over the coals, but I don't see municipalities aiming their one cent campaign at the province. How about implementing a 1-2% sales tax for municipalities?

 

[afransen]

This is a result of Toronto's economic bounty. It's the nature of our Confederation that we share our wealth with those who aren't as lucky. It's not like the feds have imposed any extraordinary taxes on Toronto. And its not like they are spending that money anywhere else at Toronto's expense. They simply get more revenue from Toronto because of its high income. And they use the funds on federal programs which benefit all of Canada. There is nothing unfair about that. We could debate about equalization but don't forget the point of the program is to smooth over disparities in services between regions so people don't migrate while shopping for services. If it wasn't for equalization Toronto could get swamped with internal migrants......

As for Toronto subsidizing the rest of the country....where do you think the food we eat, the gas we burn, the electricity we consume, and the stocks we trade (ie large resource and IT companies....none in the 416) come from? Toronto can't survive without the ROC just like the ROC can't survive without us. If the reverse were true, and the feds were subsidizing Toronto would you agree to a cut in that subsidy to build subways elsewhere?

Oy vey. All those things are bought and paid for, indeed, subsidized by the government.

I thought you were arguing against transfer between regions wrt Alberta oilsands. I think Toronto earns it's dollars a bit more 'honestly' (actually works for them) than the Alberta oil patch, that just happens to sit atop an immense fortune.


You should also be cognizant of the fact that outside of equalization, Ontario is still shortchanged in terms of federal transfers for all kinds of things, including health and immigration. Given the $4 billion just splurged on Quebec infrastructure, I think we'll shouldn't hold out breaths for the matching promise to Ontario of $8 billion. IIRC, Harper told McGuinty to stuff it wrt MoveOntario 2020.

 

[kEiThZ]

Oy vey. All those things are bought and paid for, indeed, subsidized by the government.

You missed my point about the interdependency of the heartland and the hinterland.

I thought you were arguing against transfer between regions wrt Alberta oilsands. I think Toronto earns it's dollars a bit more 'honestly' (actually works for them) than the Alberta oil patch, that just happens to sit atop an immense fortune.

What I opposed was going for some kind of regional income subsidy a la NEP.....a direct subsidy of Ontario from Alberta's oil sands. I am not opposed to the current equalization program in principle. I do think we need better implementation....ie include resource revenues 100% in the calculation, to prevent provinces from drawing equalization and getting oil royalties, limit the ability to provide services to no greater than the paying province (Ontario), etc.

You should also be cognizant of the fact that outside of equalization, Ontario is still shortchanged in terms of federal transfers for all kinds of things, including health and immigration. Given the $4 billion just splurged on Quebec infrastructure, I think we'll shouldn't hold out breaths for the matching promise to Ontario of $8 billion. IIRC, Harper told McGuinty to stuff it wrt MoveOntario 2020.

But this is exactly the point. If we as Canadians agreed that each level of government should stick to what they are good at, then no federal government would get away with such random infrastructure commitments. Are you challenging my premise here, that each level of government should stick to what they are good at/responsible for? And what's your view on their involvement if they have to pay?

As to the other transfer....that doesn't mean we should be demanding funding for subways, we should be addressing the unfairness regarding our treatment within these specific federal programs. I'll leave commitments to Quebec out of this one....we all know they are a 'special' case.

 

[Tdot_one]

It's nowhere on par with the third world. In fact, Scarborough has lower per capita crime rates, than North York or Etobicoke....yet we get the bad rap. There are places to fear at night in TO....Regent Park.....

Per capita crime rates is a pointless measurement in Toronto's case. Most "crime", or to be precise homicides tend to be heavily distributed amongst certain ethnic groups. The rate of homicide amongst black Canadians is probably over 20 per 100,000.

Even in cities like Chicago, New York City, etc, homicides rates are very high amongst Black and Hispanic communities. On the other hand, mainly white cities or suburbs in US have very low homicide rates.

Also keep in mind that cities like Mumbai, India have very low homicide rates. I certainly wouldn't consider it as the only indicator of poverty.

Getting back to the Metrolinx plan....I am quite happy to see them challenge some of the Transit City concept's weaker plans....we need regional thinking to transit in the GTA. Metrolinx might get us there...in a quarter century.....better late than never.

Problem with the Metrolinx is inability to incorporate solutions in problems within our city. I don't see how Metrolink would relieve the overcrowding at Lawrence East, etc. The LRT network that will go through Don Mills seems pretty insufficient as well.

 

[299 bloor call control.]

Any word from the weekend love-in?

The draft RTP will be available Sept. 18th. Anything and everything will be seen then.

 

[kEiThZ]

Per capita crime rates is a pointless measurement in Toronto's case. Most "crime", or to be precise homicides tend to be heavily distributed amongst certain ethnic groups. The rate of homicide amongst black Canadians is probably over 20 per 100,000.

Even in cities like Chicago, New York City, etc, homicides rates are very high amongst Black and Hispanic communities. On the other hand, mainly white cities or suburbs in US have very low homicide rates.

Also keep in mind that cities like Mumbai, India have very low homicide rates. I certainly wouldn't consider it as the only indicator of poverty.

Off topic. We can debate in the other thread....I don't want to add to the derailment on this very interesting topic here.....

Problem with the Metrolinx is inability to incorporate solutions in problems within our city. I don't see how Metrolink would relieve the overcrowding at Lawrence East, etc. The LRT network that will go through Don Mills seems pretty insufficient as well.

1) Metrolinx is a regional transport body and is responsible for the regional transportation plan not the local delivery of service. You should hit up the TTC if you want to fix the Lawrence East bus. Metrolinx has only hit up those routes that have regional implications....Eglinton, Jane, Don Mills. There isn't much comment on the Scarborough RT or the Scarborough Malvern LRT because as designed they don't affect the 905.

2) What's wrong with the LRT on Don Mills? Don Mills will be served by the Sheppard subway and its own light rail. That seems more than sufficient to me.

 

[RedRocket191]

1) Metrolinx is a regional transport body and is responsible for the regional transportation plan not the local delivery of service. You should hit up the TTC if you want to fix the Lawrence East bus. Metrolinx has only hit up those routes that have regional implications....Eglinton, Jane, Don Mills. There isn't much comment on the Scarborough RT or the Scarborough Malvern LRT because as designed they don't affect the 905.

Or, we can advocate for Metrolinx to have a greater role in local service planning...

 

[kEiThZ]

Or, we can advocate for Metrolinx to have a greater role in local service planning...

I have no issue with that, I would love to see Metrolinx take on a TfL kind of mantle. However, I doubt most GTA (particularly 416) residents would support that.

 

[RedRocket191]

I think it depends on where you live. If you believe that your service is crappy and someone else could do better, then you'll probably support regionalisation. If you're content with your service, you'll probably advocate for leaving it alone.

Even if Metrolinx did impose service standards, I'm pretty sure that 95% of the TTC routes would meet or exceed those standards from day one. What's needed are greater frequencies and coverage in the 905, combined with fare integration across all agencies in the region. How that works on paper is no concern of the average commuter.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Why should Metrolinx have a say in GO lines that will serve plenty of Torontonians and an Eglinton line that just barely affects Mississauga but completely ignore a very well used and cripplingly horrible bus route like Lawrence East? (or Dufferin, or Wilson, etc.). Perhaps the streetcar fetish will continue to dictate policy in the 416 and over the next few decades a few more streetcar lines will be proposed but it's the province that's going to pay for them. If the province pays for and gets a say in regional matters and pays for local matters, makes sense for them to get a say in local matters...regional transit lines won't be successful unless local feeder service is up to snuff, and routes like Lawrence East are going to get worse before they get better - unless riders just give up on it. If the city, the province, Metrolinx, etc., has any real interest in actually improving the attractiveness and availability of transit for everyone, they'll pay attention to routes like the 54......the whole point of Metrolinx is to erase municipal boundaries in transit planning!

 

[nfitz]

2) What's wrong with the LRT on Don Mills? Don Mills will be served by the Sheppard subway and its own light rail. That seems more than sufficient to me.

Though everything that has surfaced in the last few days seems to point to the Sheppard subway being converted to LRT - though that shouldn't slow travel times between Don Mills and Yonge on Sheppard.

 

[allabootmatt]

no time to fully address the equalization issue, but will say this: i don't necessarily see much of a role for *any* government in financing the RTP out of general revenue. I think it would be a lot better for the future viability of transit in the GTA if it were done via a mix of road tolls, maybe a small special sales tax, parking surcharge, and some creative debt financing. That seems to be what Metrolinx are proposing but we will have to see.

 

[DavidH]

There isn't much comment on the Scarborough RT or the Scarborough Malvern LRT because as designed they don't affect the 905.

Uh, at present the Scarborough RT is the *only* rapid transit connection available to Durham residents, who access it via Go's 94 Highway 2 / 95 Highway 2 Express services. The planned extension would make this an even easier connection for Durham services.

As for the LRTs, I think that all of the Scarborough LRT routes would have some Durham ridership as Scarborough is a major employment centre for Durham residents.