[Adjei]

Most interestingly, it will cost quite a bit in income losses. Many good jobs will leave for cities with better transit, and Torontonians will have to settle for lower paying jobs.

But voters tend not to notice such connection.

They are only concerned with the short term, not what happens to this region long term.

 

[TOareaFan]

Most interestingly, it will cost quite a bit in income losses. Many good jobs will leave for cities with better transit, and Torontonians will have to settle for lower paying jobs.

But voters tend not to notice such connection.

OK.....before I ask my follow up questions I should point out I am very pro appropriate transit expansion (the word "approptiate" is important and is why I am for, as an example, LRT in Mississauga but against the northern section into Brampton)......i do agree with sissguy in that I think far too many people underestimate the politics of these new taxes and the prioritization of the spending......now to my question.....

.....specifically, which high paying jobs are leaving (or will leave Toronto) for cities with better transit and which cities are those (I want to short Toronto land and go long somewhere else )

 

[innsertnamehere]

They will move anywhere without 3 hour commute times.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

ssiguy2:

As I stated people know that infrastructure takes time to build and realize that it won't pop up tomorrow.People don't have an issue with that and when they see shovels in the ground it reminds them that their hard earned tax dollars are going to where they were intended and not the general slush fund.

That, however, doesn't change the fact that people have bills to pay today, they can't put off their mortgage, rent, food, tuition, entertainment, or transportation bills until the tax stops in 15 years. If Metrolinx wants to win support from the population then people will want to see the trade offs immediately. They can handle the tax increase on one end if they see the increased service and cut to their transit bill on the other.

You just managed to contradict yourself in the span of two paragraphs - so is it that people understanding infrastructure takes time, or is it that people want immediate results? The two ideas are fundamentally incompatible.

Metrolinx is asking people for increased taxes with a vague promise of better service in 15 years. That's a very hard sell when the people over 45 will be retiring by then, the young students will be earning enough to have bought a car by then, the elderly will be 6 feet under, and many people will have left the city for one reason or another.

Not only will this provide immediate benefits that people can see but is a real selling point of the tax itself. It can be taken to the public as a way to convince the people that this really is worth supporting and it will help me today and not more than a decade from now.

The whole point of the tax is to fund capital projects - not quasi-operational ones, which is basically translates into a subsidy. Besides, it wasn't like all the transit projects will go online 15 years later but over a staggered timeframe. The Yonge line took almost a decade to go from approval (via referendum) to opening (which excludes years of planning and studies). Imagine if the people demanded to see results immediately then.

AoD

 

[Rainforest]

.....specifically, which high paying jobs are leaving (or will leave Toronto) for cities with better transit and which cities are those (I want to short Toronto land and go long somewhere else )

Obviously, I do not have the list of those jobs Generally speaking, companies will be reluctant to open offices in Toronto, or in some cases maintain offices in Toronto. They will move to other large cities (Montreal, Ottawa, Vancouver), to U.S. cities, or even relocate within southern Ontario but stay away from 416.

The head offices of the 5 big banks will not take off. They must be in Canada, and as long as Toronto is the largest city in Canada, they will stay here.

However, many medium and small sized companies will set shops elsewhere; in places where their employees either have access to better transit, or can drive easily because of the lower total density. That will reduce the overall pool of jobs available to Torontonians and the surrounding 905 residents, and hence lead to lower average wages.

Speaking of the land value, its relation to jobs and wages is indirect and convoluted, so I will not venture to make any predictions in that matter.

 

[TOareaFan]

Obviously, I do not have the list of those jobs Generally speaking, companies will be reluctant to open offices in Toronto, or in some cases maintain offices in Toronto. They will move to other large cities (Montreal, Ottawa, Vancouver), to U.S. cities, or even relocate within southern Ontario but stay away from 416.

The head offices of the 5 big banks will not take off. They must be in Canada, and as long as Toronto is the largest city in Canada, they will stay here.

However, many medium and small sized companies will set shops elsewhere; in places where their employees either have access to better transit, or can drive easily because of the lower total density. That will reduce the overall pool of jobs available to Torontonians and the surrounding 905 residents, and hence lead to lower average wages.

Speaking of the land value, its relation to jobs and wages is indirect and convoluted, so I will not venture to make any predictions in that matter.

I am aware of the general theory.....have heard it many people times (so not picking on you here) but no later next ever goes beyond the generalities and actually describe which it jobs will leave and where they will go. Meanwhile we have been talking about our bad transits/commutes for the entire length of my working life (30 years)......while the commutes get longer, I haven't seen any job losses.....and I don't anticipate we will......that does not mean we should not try to improve the commute times...but for other reasons....not out of fear of job losses.

 

[TOareaFan]

They will move anywhere without 3 hour commute times.

Who are "they" though?

 

[ssiguy2]

I did not contradict myself.

When you need money for infrastructure it is a hard sell when the benefits won't been seen for at least 15 years as we all know Toronto has never brought in a project on time or on budget for that matter. Torontonians are use to being told about all the projects that are planned but then never get built. It is a matter of trust and the population has absolutely none towards the TTC, Metrolinx, or Queen's Park. Just look at their latest fiasco of Presto which is now costing triple the original budget. To Metrolinx it's just another one of many "unforseen" events but to taxpayers that is yet another example of how they cannot be trusted to control costs and balance the books. People look at that and see yet more reasons why they shouldn't be handing over their money for 15 years hoping that Metrolinx will somehow be the beneficiary of divine intervention and the projects will all of a sudden start coming in on time and on budget.

When people are asked for money on the premise of getting something useful, the agency that is asking for it must have the trust of the people or they will not hand over their hard earned money. That is the problem, people do not trust Metrolinx, the TTC, or Queen's Park with their money and this is why this tax will fail.

To counter the mistrust that is now embedded in the populace, Metrolinx must add a carrot to it's stick approach. People must have some immediate benefit of handing over big bucks so they can see that this is helping them today. It would not only help to greatly offset any new tax increases but is a real bargaining chip to win public support for the new taxes.

Unless the citizens see some immediate relief to their daily transit grind, this tax will not pass and the next Big Move will be just more lines on a paper which will collect dust at City Hall.

 

[Adjei]

If the revenue tools are implemented, once we raise the 50 billion over the 25 years, do we stop there or will these tools be implemented forever?m

 

[W. K. Lis]

Meanwhile, Ontario Finance Minister demand to talk transit with Ottawa

From The Star, at this link:

Ontario Finance Minister Charles Sousa is demanding a meeting with his federal counterpart to break the gridlock on the funding of transit.

In the wake of federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty’s refusal to allow any regional increase to the 13 per cent harmonized sales tax to bankroll new public transit, Sousa said Sunday the two governments urgently need to talk.

“I am . . . writing to request a meeting with you on this critical issue as soon as possible,” the provincial treasurer wrote in a letter to Flaherty obtained by the Star.

Sousa’s missive was a response to the federal finance minister’s broadside Thursday when he warned that tinkering with the HST would contravene the 2010 tax agreement between the two levels of government.

“We did not lower the GST to have it taken away from Ontarians by the (Premier Kathleen) Wynne government with a news sales tax hike,” wrote Flaherty, referring to his cut to the federal tax from 7 per cent to 5 per cent prior to harmonization.

“As you are well aware, the Comprehensive Integrated Tax Coordination Agreement signed by the government of Ontario does not allow for the provincial component of the HST to vary between regions within the province,” the federal treasurer continued.

“Any proposal to raise the rate of the provincial component of the HST within municipal or regional boundaries would contravene the agreement,” he said, referring to Metrolinx’s recommendation last week to raise the HST locally.

“Let me be clear, our government will not accept such a proposed regional sales tax increase on the residents of the Greater Toronto/Hamilton Area,” wrote Flaherty.

But Sousa said the federal treasurer is putting the cart before the horse.

“As you are well aware, the province has not asked the federal government for any changes to the harmonized sales tax,” he wrote Sunday.

“However, since 2010, we have repeatedly requested that the federal government invest in a national transit strategy — with dedicated infrastructure dollars for the building of more transit,” said Sousa.

“This is not only an economic, social and environmental imperative, it is also an urgent obligation of national importance,” he said.

“Moreover, given the (Prime Minister Stephen) Harper government’s commitment to job creation through Canada’s Economic Action Plan, your government would be a natural partner in the creation of an estimated 987,700 person years of employment over the next 20 years through Metrolinx’s $50 billion Big Move projects.”

Sousa, who represents Mississauga South, and Flaherty, representing Whitby-Oshawa, are well-versed on the commuting challenges that grip Greater Toronto. They are both GO train riders who regularly hear about traffic headaches from their neighbours and constituents.

Still, the provincial Liberals and the federal Conservatives appear to be on a political collision course over new taxes to fund transit infrastructure.

Both parties dominate the GTHA electorally and each wants to be seen as a champion for the region.

To Sousa, that means Ottawa has to step up.

“Unfortunately, your government’s current investment in transit through the Building Canada Fund provides only four per cent of the necessary funding needed to address the transit and transportation deficit in the GTHA,” he told Flaherty.

“Congestion is also a significant challenge for businesses. The Toronto Region Board of Trade states that all levels of government must be involved, including a more prominent role by the federal government.”

Indeed, board president Carol Wilding, who estimates congestion costs the region’s economy $6 billion a year, also wants to sit down with Flaherty to discuss the matter.

But embattled Toronto Mayor Rob Ford, a close Flaherty friend and political ally, said on Twitter Sunday that “Kathleen Wynne’s Metrolinx plan takes the easy way out — passing the burden onto taxpayer.”

Ford, under fire over a video that appears to show him smoking crack cocaine and making racist and homophobic slurs, opposes any new taxes to pay for transit.

A 1 per cent increase to the HST is the linchpin of Metrolinx’s transit investment strategy designed to raise $2 billion annually to fund 13 big-ticket transit projects.

Those include a downtown relief subway for Toronto, electrification of some GO train lines, and Mississauga’s Hurontario light-rail transit.

 

[Rainforest]

I am aware of the general theory.....have heard it many people times (so not picking on you here) but no later next ever goes beyond the generalities and actually describe which it jobs will leave and where they will go. Meanwhile we have been talking about our bad transits/commutes for the entire length of my working life (30 years)......while the commutes get longer, I haven't seen any job losses.....and I don't anticipate we will......that does not mean we should not try to improve the commute times...but for other reasons....not out of fear of job losses.

While I cannot provide a proof that there were actual job losses due to inadequate transit, it is equally difficult to prove that such losses did not occur. If a start-up company chooses to set the shop elsewhere and not in Toronto, the transit concerns being one of the reasons, that company will not show in any stats of lost jobs. But the opportunities that company could bring, are getting lost anyway.

Therefore, I believe that the general theory stands ... until proven otherwise.

 

[jje1000]

I don't think as simple as simply losing jobs. People who want to be in Toronto will move there anyways- and people will continue to move close to their jobs to reduce their commute (one of the reasons I think is fueling the rental and condo markets). However, with more people moving into a smaller area, prices will envitably go up, and certain people and industries like the arts or startups may eventually be priced out of the downtown core- meaning that Toronto misses out on those opportunities. Likewise, people who are economically stuck in the suburbs will continue to suffer until they leave Toronto all together for better opportunities elsewhere, which also counts as a loss for the city. The suburbs themselves will also suffer economically due to poor transit- or at least the ones heavily dependent on downtown jobs.

 

[kEiThZ]

You want to sell the taxes in the GTHA? Make full all-day electrified GO service, with TTC fare and schedule implementation, the number one priority.

It's the only way you'll convince the vast majority to vote for the scheme. An LRT replacing a busy bus route in their 'hood won't cut it.

Once again, transit enthusiasts, politicians and bureaucrats all over, fail to recognize the political realities (both the liabilities and the potential). It's exactly like when people thought Rob Ford wouldn't get elected. Everybody underestimated the anger in the inner suburbs. The resemblance to today's political mood is uncanny.

 

[drum118]

If the revenue tools are implemented, once we raise the 50 billion over the 25 years, do we stop there or will these tools be implemented forever?m

Given this $50 Billion is understated in the first place, these tools as well new ones will be here for every.

If you add all the transit systems cost for operation, capital cost and expansion along with the next wave of projects not on the books, you are looking at $150 Billion. Toronto alone will suck $70 Billion off the top.

Since Metrolinx will be servicing a 150+ km radius, all VIA rail will cease and be replace by GO Rail. We have already seen cuts to VIA for this area.

Metrolinx has a number of white elephants projects like TTC the eats up huge chunks of money.

If you want 200+ km service, major upgrading and elimination of grade crossing is going to have to happen along the corridors and a nice cost to do so.

Rome wasn't built over night and people better stop expecting this transit expansion will be done in a short time frame. Quality of service can be the first step, but need crews to do it and rail crews are hard to come by under current rules. Buses are a different story.

 

[CDL.TO]

Cash fare was column 2 of my table. Ticket/token/PRESTO was column 3. Toronto still cheapest of the GTA agencies I listed.

I wasn't referring to anyone in particular. It was a general comment that I think is good to keep in mind when discussing fare policy.