[Dichotomy]

This debate is running around in circles again. I could care less about PEAK highway capacity. The Gardiner/DVP is well beyond any hope for PEAK capacity. I am talking about gridlock on a Thursday night or a Sunday. Those are not commuters sitting in traffic. Those are every day, hard working people just trying to come downtown to take their kids to the AGO or the island. Scratch that: gridlock exists in both directions, even those of us who live downtown can't visit our familes on Xmas day without getting bogged down on gridlocked highways.
No city on Earth can hope to build enough capacity for daily commuters. That is an accepted fact. For those people, we need to look at GO Transit, subways, etc.

The Gardiner (with Lakeshore under it)/DVP (and possibly University Ave) are the only routes out of the city. Period. We are digging up Bloor, choking all the other routes with streetcars and painting bicycle lanes (Eastern) on any other route that MIGHT actually move.

That is the point. Since it is too late for our existing arterial roads, we need to improve the DVP/Gardiner combo, not tear them down or truncate them.

Or else, bulldoze Kingston Rd., Bloor/Danforth, Mt. Pleasant, Yonge, O'Connor and Queen St. to make way for 6 lanes - then we can rid ourselves of the horrid Gardiner. (BTW, I am kidding!)

 

[Glen]

Really, think of highway congestion as a market failure, all because the price of highway use is kept artificially low (free), causing demand to exceed supply. Tolls help to correct the market failure.

The price is not free. It is prepaid.

 

[TOareaFan]

Drive/transit isn't the only decision people make when it comes to their commute, but distance. Many people commute very long distances because it is cheaper the live in the outer suburbs and commute in than to live in the city. Making very long commutes more expensive would incent living closer to work.

Beyond that, road congestion is bad for the economy. Waiting thirty years before we deem there to be enough transit alternatives for it to be 'fair' to apply tolls is foolish, naive and resigning ourselves to a hundred billion dollars in lost productivity.

So you would arbitrarily and retroactively punish people for making housing and working decisions in one environment that we no longer think is right.

I'll use where I live as an example. Brampton designated by the provincial government as a place to grow. The current population of 450k is to exceed 600k in the near future.....but it is essentially a blue collar factory/warhouse town.....so if you moved to Brampton as encouraged by government policy (or, worse, if you grew up there as I did) and happened to find a job/career in a sector where all the jobs are downtown Toronto....you get the privilage of either having to move or pay a tax/fee to get to work? That seems "wrong".....but if you front the cost of giving transit alternatives and then recoup that cost, partially, by taxing a choice I make in the future....that seems more acceptable. (IYKWIM)

 

[Whoaccio]

The price is not free. It is prepaid.

So it's free...

 

[afransen]

So you would arbitrarily and retroactively punish people for making housing and working decisions in one environment that we no longer think is right.

I'll use where I live as an example. Brampton designated by the provincial government as a place to grow. The current population of 450k is to exceed 600k in the near future.....but it is essentially a blue collar factory/warhouse town.....so if you moved to Brampton as encouraged by government policy (or, worse, if you grew up there as I did) and happened to find a job/career in a sector where all the jobs are downtown Toronto....you get the privilage of either having to move or pay a tax/fee to get to work? That seems "wrong".....but if you front the cost of giving transit alternatives and then recoup that cost, partially, by taxing a choice I make in the future....that seems more acceptable. (IYKWIM)

You're right, the government should not only give you the right to use the highway at no additional cost; the government should also buy you your gasoline, pay your car lease, insurance, maintenance, etc. Perhaps pay for parking, too.

After all, it would be unfair otherwise.

In all seriousness, you only think the right to free unlimited access to highways is your inalienable right because that has been the norm. Looking at it objectively, is there any justifiable reason why highways should be free at the times when the demand is greater than the supply?

Do you also think that electricity should be sold at artificially low prices, even if that leads to rolling blackouts due to demand outstripping supply? There is not much difference between this and your argument for highways.

 

[Hydrogen]

Comparing electricity generation to highways is not a good comparison; the delivery cost of electricity and its associated infrastructure and highways would be more appropriate.

The costs of highways and roads are born by taxpayers because they are seen as a public good. Whether people own a car or not, we all derive a measure of benefits and advantages from them.

Large highway systems might be better served with a modest toll because that toll can be applied to the maintenance of those highways. Many portions of 400 series highways don't see the same usage as city streets, yet are both necessary and much more costly to maintain.

 

[TOareaFan]

You're right, the government should not only give you the right to use the highway at no additional cost; the government should also buy you your gasoline, pay your car lease, insurance, maintenance, etc. Perhaps pay for parking, too.

After all, it would be unfair otherwise.

In all seriousness, you only think the right to free unlimited access to highways is your inalienable right because that has been the norm. Looking at it objectively, is there any justifiable reason why highways should be free at the times when the demand is greater than the supply?

Do you also think that electricity should be sold at artificially low prices, even if that leads to rolling blackouts due to demand outstripping supply? There is not much difference between this and your argument for highways.

If you read back, you will see that I am a commuter who actually supports the implementation of road tolls or congestion fees.....but only after there is some sort of viable, reasonable option to driving.

For congestion taxes and road tolls to work in reducing road congestion there has to be somewhere for the commuter to go if they reach the desired decision (ie. "driving is too expensive") otherwise it becomes just a targeted tax grab as the driver is forced to pay but has no option that avoids the grab.

There is a significant difference between your electricity example and the highway example....as a consumer of electricity I have the option and ability to shift some of my use to off peak times to avoid paying the high peak rates. I can do my dishes overnight, I can do a load of laundry overnight..etc etc. Unless my boss allows me to work from 11 at night to 7 in the morning.....I can not shift my driving so freely.

 

[Glen]

So it's free...

No, it is paid for already. Hence not free.

 

[Dichotomy]

You're right, the government should not only give you the right to use the highway at no additional cost; the government should also buy you your gasoline, pay your car lease, insurance, maintenance, etc. Perhaps pay for parking, too.

After all, it would be unfair otherwise.

In all seriousness, you only think the right to free unlimited access to highways is your inalienable right because that has been the norm. Looking at it objectively, is there any justifiable reason why highways should be free at the times when the demand is greater than the supply?

Do you also think that electricity should be sold at artificially low prices, even if that leads to rolling blackouts due to demand outstripping supply? There is not much difference between this and your argument for highways.

Where do you get this 'free' argument from? Nearly 40% of the price of gasoline goes to taxes. Every time I fill my tank, I am donating $25 to general revenue. Our gas taxes are significantly higher than in the U.S., BTW. Last figures I saw, over $6 billion in gas taxes were collected last year. How much of that got ploughed back into roads and infrastructure?
Then there is the $4,500 in assorted taxes I paid when I bought my car. Roll in the hundred million or so the city rakes in for parking tags and tickets, plus fines, etc., I wouldn't say anything in this town is 'free' for the motorist.
From where I sit, the average motorist is a net revenue generator for the city/province/country; whereas, the TTC is always looking for handouts.

But you don't hear me demanding LESS money for the TTC, or tear down the Bloor subway line, do you?

It seems like all the solutions on the table are not about making transit better, but at making driving worse, to force people out of cars. That isn't creative thinking.

 

[Whoaccio]

No, it is paid for already. Hence not free.

You are twisting semantics. Everybody knows that "free" refers to the perspective of the end-user of a service. If I buy a BBQ, and my neighbor uses it, it is not "prepaid" for him. It is free.

 

[Dilla]

No, it is paid for already. Hence not free.

You are twisting semantics. Everybody knows that "free" refers to the perspective of the end-user of a service. If I buy a BBQ, and my neighbor uses it, it is not "prepaid" for him. It is free.

Well, we all pay for the BBQ that are our roads. Let me try this...

It's not "free" per say, but you're going to pay for it if you never use it, or use it 3000 times a day. So, there is no cost in actually using it, there's just a cost for it being there which we all incur.

 

[Whoaccio]

The marginal cost is zero. You can use it once and "pay" just as much as someone who has used it 400+ times. That is to say, nothing.

 

[TKTKTK]

The marginal cost is zero. You can use it once and "pay" just as much as someone who has used it 400+ times. That is to say, nothing.

I hadn't realized highways were so cheap. If the marginal cost of highways is zero, then why are people complaining about the expense of their upkeep? ZZZZ.

Just because you pay for something out of your taxes doesn't make it free. Healthcare isn't free. Your benefits at work aren't free. 911 isn't even free.

 

[Glen]

Now I understand how Joe Pantalone got away with promising free car insurance when he ran for MPP years ago.

 

[Whoaccio]

I hadn't realized highways were so cheap. If the marginal cost of highways is zero, then why are people complaining about the expense of their upkeep? ZZZZ.

Just because you pay for something out of your taxes doesn't make it free. Healthcare isn't free. Your benefits at work aren't free. 911 isn't even free.

The marginal cost is zero. Drive on the Gardiner once. How much does it cost you? Drive on the Gardiner again, how much does it cost you? Drive on the Gardiner another 100 times, notice any change in price?

And yes, the marginal cost of health care as the end use sees it is zero. At least for the parts of it covered under OHIP. That is why we have absurd waiting lists for procedures like a hip replacement. Gridlock, waiting lines, it is all the same thing.