|
|
|
- Thread starter MetroMan
- Start date
- Status
dforthandbview
Senior Member
“God help us if the lefties are ever in charge again at City Hall. We’d go backwards – back to high taxes, back to streetcars, back to the government telling us how to live our lives. It’d be disaster.”
- Councillor Doug Ford in an interview with the Toronto Sun on Tuesday, Sept. 25, 2013.
- Councillor Doug Ford in an interview with the Toronto Sun on Tuesday, Sept. 25, 2013.
Back to high taxes? Did I miss the memo that my taxes went down? Back to streetcars? Did they go away?
hawc
Senior Member
Yeah and any time someone on the right makes a valid point they're just dismissed as uneducated 'Ford Nation'. It cuts both ways.
freshcutgrass
Senior Member
Many people are against the airport simply because it is a misuse of prime downtown park land...not because they are against airlines. And if it is so successful, why does it cost taxpayers millions to subsidize???
Miller brought in the Toronto Act, which gave the city the ability to put itself on par with every other global city on earth by giving it a more diverse way of raising revenue beyond simple property taxes. The VRT & LTT were smart taxes that raised money where it should be raised (car drivers that don't pay their share and the real estate market where millions in profits are being made).
The money has to be raised regardless...only this way it makes far more sense as a revenue source. It's a real shame many of the citizens of this fine city don't deserve the governance they got under Miller.
And BTW...to pay "tens of thousands" in municipal LTT requires paying over a million for your home.
Just because people keep repeating it doesn't make it true, David Miller didn't put us through a garbage strike...striking garbage workers did. How Miller would'a-could'a-should'a handled it in hindsight is beside the fact and hardly amounts to a fatal issue.
Anyway, listening to people who still insist on peddling the Miller = bad, Ford = good argument has lost what little comedic edge it ever had.
hawc
Senior Member
JWBF
Senior Member
He's just living in the fifties.
Amalgimation as an evolution was a great idea, however, it was fubar'd unfortunately, one, we are still struggling to homogenize the proper bits, and two: Harris and company failed (as far as I can see) to destroy the non-conservitive foot hold in Toronto.
It's all tribal, wanting to be distinct, or unique, and protect that being, however, it's too good of a tool for politicians to devide us.
Last edited:
Johnny Au
Senior Member
I believe that the Vehicle Registration Tax would be more effective based on the weight of the vehicle (and type of fuel), rather than a flat fee. For example, 100% electric vehicles can be exempt from the fee, while SUVs would pay much more (around $100 or so per year; hybrid electric-gasoline SUVs would pay $60 per year), and the average car being $60 per year (Smart cars and similar would pay around $30 per year).
No wonder why even Joe Pantalone is against the Miller-era Vehicle Registration Fee.
With my idea, drivers would be paying their fair share of the road, while encouraging drivers to switch to greener vehicles. This way, it is not a "war on cars" but a "war on gasoline guzzlers."
No wonder why even Joe Pantalone is against the Miller-era Vehicle Registration Fee.
With my idea, drivers would be paying their fair share of the road, while encouraging drivers to switch to greener vehicles. This way, it is not a "war on cars" but a "war on gasoline guzzlers."
Last edited:
JWBF
Senior Member
Unfortunately, IMO, the "War On Cars" was created for separation of those who use cars or not, normal people v. tree huggers, etc. Unfortunately, a gas guzzler tax would just be driven back (sorry for the pun) to the same us v. them.
syn
Senior Member
"Examples" is plural. Where are the rest of the supposedly numerous examples?
syn
Senior Member
To add to this:
- Ford paid for his tax freeze and VRT cancellation in the first year with the surplus Miller left over. This surplus was largely due to the LTT.
- Miller did get a major concession from the Union - they could no longer bank sick days. The deal was certainly better than the one they would've had if he'd caved at the start.
As for the idea hate for Miller led to a Ford win...Smitherman wasn't exactly an unsupported candidate. If the vote hadn't been split between several candidates perceived to be on the 'left' Ford wouldn't have won.
Silence&Motion
Senior Member
It doesn't get raised much, but I feel like the "Toronto Cultural Renaissance" of the last decade (i.e. construction of the ROM, AGO, Opera House, Gardiner Museum, RCM, OCAD, etc) contributed to the sense that downtown elites were taking money away from the suburbs to spend on themselves. I remember Harper's comment that ordinary working people were pissed at seeing artists show up at tax-funded galas and complain that they weren't getting enough subsidies. This comment came just after the ROM and the AGO had their big opening galas. Ford's mayoral campaign was premised on much the same sentiment (although not directed specifically at the arts).
The ironic thing is that the Cultural Renaissance was a plan that came out of the Mike Harris government. The point was to create an "Avenue of the Arts" along University Avenue that would be a tourist draw. And it was based on a very right-wing idea that the elites should get more privileges because their success will trickle down to the rest of society. Downtown will attract the tourists, make money, and that will create jobs and such for the poor suburbanites.
And yet Miller, who is supposed to be the poster child for downtown elitism, spent most of his political capital trying to get services out to the suburbs. Many of his most ambitious projects were dedicated primarily to improving life in the suburbs: Transit city, priority neighbourhoods, tower renewal, etc. This is because Miller was driven by the very left-wing idea that the government should attempt to achieve social equality across its neighbourhoods.
The ironic thing is that the Cultural Renaissance was a plan that came out of the Mike Harris government. The point was to create an "Avenue of the Arts" along University Avenue that would be a tourist draw. And it was based on a very right-wing idea that the elites should get more privileges because their success will trickle down to the rest of society. Downtown will attract the tourists, make money, and that will create jobs and such for the poor suburbanites.
And yet Miller, who is supposed to be the poster child for downtown elitism, spent most of his political capital trying to get services out to the suburbs. Many of his most ambitious projects were dedicated primarily to improving life in the suburbs: Transit city, priority neighbourhoods, tower renewal, etc. This is because Miller was driven by the very left-wing idea that the government should attempt to achieve social equality across its neighbourhoods.
vic
Senior Member
Silence&Motion
Senior Member
Yeah, and what THAT place has in common with Queen and Ossington is that they're both in wards that voted for Miller in 2003 and 2006. Their councilor Raymond Cho has been no friend to Ford either.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
S&M:
I know accounting might not be the strong suit of the F'Nation, but the so called cultural renaissance has a total amount of government funding (Federal + Provincial) in tune of what, less than 300M. That's less than 1/10th of the BD extension, to put it in perspective.
AoD
I know accounting might not be the strong suit of the F'Nation, but the so called cultural renaissance has a total amount of government funding (Federal + Provincial) in tune of what, less than 300M. That's less than 1/10th of the BD extension, to put it in perspective.
AoD
- Status