[Justin10000]

Your logic here is heavily flawed.
1) they live in the suburbs because they choose to. Nobody forces them to live far from transit. (if land is too expensive, live small)
2) i am not "forcing" them to pay more. I am asking them to pay what they consume.
3) If you want to subsidize them, that's honourable. But from a public policy perspective, you can't force everyone else to subsidize. Why not let those who want to subsidize to pay more than required everytime?

My logic is simple: The people you want to use transit live in the suburbs. You raise their fares just so you can pay a bit less, they're going to drive. It's easy to understand. Transit service in the 'burbs is terrible, and many riders do not have the choice of living out there, contrary to your utopian beliefs that every can choose to live where they want. If that was the case, I would live a 5 minute walk from work!

It is your logic that is terribly flawed, Not everyone who lives in the 'burbs owns and lives in huge houses, there are lots of apartment and condo buildings in the 'burbs. The way the city was planned, it's unrealistic to expect everyone should live in the core in super tall condos towers. It does not help that people with higher incomes are moving back into the core, rent fees are increasing, and it's next to impossible to find a condo with 2 rooms, let alone 3 to raise a family.

You must be a libertarian, if you're so concerned you are helping others out. Someone is always going to subsidize someone else. That is a hallmark of society. We help each other out, because the greater benefits are worth it. From a public policy perspective, you have to expect there will be subsidies somewhere. This is small subsidy that only a few, selfish people care about.

I did not bother commenting on your last paragraph, the ignorance was too much to bear.

 

[Justin10000]

Define "cheap" please and provide examples. I am sure many poor renters in your much maligned suburbs would love to take advantage of your grasp of the problem,
.

Shuter St!

Seriously, there isn't many cheap places to rent in downtown, and many of the areas are not really good places to raise families.

 

[rbt]

Shuter St!

Seriously, there isn't many cheap places to rent in downtown, and many of the areas are not really good places to raise families.

Agreed. There are very few 3 and 4 bedroom units downtown for $1200.

 

[sixrings]

truthfully I dont think 3 bedrooms is needed for a lot of families... Theres no reason why 2 kids cant share a room. Obviously if you have a boy and a girl it might be more of a problem. But housing is just one difficult problem about trying to live downtown as a family. There simply arent as many schools or sports programs for children which is important to many people. Although we live in a paranoid society ppl with houses still have back yards to let their children play. I lived in a condo for numerous years which only had maybe a 15 foot squared patch of grass on the outside of the building. The one child in the entire building use to always build a snowman here. It was kinda cute but also kinda sad. The same boy would study in the food court under the cbc building when he was older. I know other cultures have managed to live in small places and should be applauded. But that is simply not our social reality. It will take many years for food court studying to become an exepted way of growing up.

 

[k10ery]

Until the zone system was removed in 1972, TTC made a profit off the backs of the long hauler who got poor service in their zone outside the city core.


Don't you think long haulers time is worth something, since they will spend 2-4 times more riding the system than the short haulers??

As a short hauler, are you prepare to pay the full cost of your rider including all capital cost and operating cost?? If you are, be prepare for that sticker price, as your fare will be a killer.

\

Word, brother

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Your logic here is heavily flawed.
1) they live in the suburbs because they choose to. Nobody forces them to live far from transit. (if land is too expensive, live small)
2) i am not "forcing" them to pay more. I am asking them to pay what they consume.
3) If you want to subsidize them, that's honourable. But from a public policy perspective, you can't force everyone else to subsidize. Why not let those who want to subsidize to pay more than required everytime?

No one denies that sprawl is "bad" or in effect subsidized. Still, you make it sound like there's an infinite amount and variety of affordable housing in Toronto; as if the 905 belt could just close its doors and the 416 could make room for everyone. Very naive.

I always think of these boards as a great place to foster "understanding" between the 416 and 905 and yet there's still people who say riddiculous (and, more to the point, untrue) things like "people live in the suburbs because they're not rich but they want a lot of room."

There's more than 1 reason people "choose" to live in the surburbs. Moreover, to bring this back to the fare argument, you have to understand how people move around the GTA.

Surely it is UNFAIR someone would pay the same fare to get from a new Vaughan station to Union Station as to get from, say, Spadina to Yonge. But it isn't at least as UNFAIR (if not moreso) that someone has to pay a double fare to get from the "wrong side" of Yonge and Steeles to, say, Sheppard station?

Does your model take into account the possibility someone would CHOOSE to live in an awesome downtown house but commute out to Markham or Mississauga for a job? Isn't that person just as "bad" as the surburbanite? How much is that person "consuming"? The issue isn't downtown vs. suburbs: if anything, it's merely the distances between where people CHOOSE to live and work.

Fare zones/distance-based fares were a non-starter pre-Presto. Now that it's coming online, hopefully there are some eggheads at Metrolinx figuring out a fairer system that will recognize the reality of people commuting in all directions, across municipal borders and various transit systems. Any way you slice it, it's just another area in which we're really lagging.

 

[rbt]

The same boy would study in the food court under the cbc building when he was older. I know other cultures have managed to live in small places and should be applauded.

I not certain that Toronto is ready for small apartment living. We do a poor job of having spill-over spaces available during the winter months. Most are semi-private with security (malls) or have very limited hours.

We frown heavily on public affection both at home (parents) and in public spaces like parks. As a culture, we're not ready for people to be living their private lives outside of their home due to shared space with siblings.


My wife and I lived and worked (telecommuted) out of 50sqft to 100sqft rooms for the better part of a year. Very small private rooms in hostels primarily.

It was easy in warmer climates where you could take over space outside to work and failed miserably in cold/wet weather where quiet public spaces like libraries were limited or had restricted hours. Malls were too noisy for concentration.


Toronto was a particular challenge due to the popularity of the libraries making them rather noisy too. Hotels were accommodating to us using their conference space but it probably helped that I've been a Platinum/Diamond member for over 5 years at two chains. I somehow doubt anybody under 20 would find those spaces welcoming.

 

[accura407]

For myself, how high TTC fare is does almost nothing to me whatsoever. Even if one trip costs $10, it has minimum impact on me since I take it for like 5 times a month. So I have not being arguing for my own benefits. I am arguing for what is the right thing to do without unfairly treating any interest groups. Negatively impacting certain groups doesn't mean unfair treatment.

If it wasn't obvious already, you are a very selfish individual but everyone else can see right through your flawed logic...

Is fare by distance a good idea? Sure I think its quite reasonable. GO Transit has been using it since inception and most 905'ers aka 'Suburbanites' are completely fine with the idea...

Can each and every commuter live right beside their daily destination? No. No matter what your selfish mind tells you, this is absolutely impossible. Your entire proposition is based on the platform of... "I live downtown and barely use the TTC so screw everyone else cause I'm fine"

Take for example...I am a student @ Ryerson University. I reside just north of Steeles in a place known as Woodbridge. Being near Weston Rd, I am minutes away from the new subway extension and also in close proximity to a major transit route, VIVA/ZUM.

I have to either pay a DOUBLE FARE just to travel the distance between Highway 7 & Steeles and then continue my trip into downtown. My other option that I use commonly is to either get a ride to Steeles or to a major transit node. This allows me to avoid paying a whole extra fare just to cross a boundary.

Can I take GO Transit? Not really...because York U station is very very limited service and Rutherford GO is quite a bit north of where I reside. Yes, I got stuck exactly in the worst spot! The not-so-far-enough to take GO Market and the too-far-to-take TTC market.

Despite all this, I am residing at my home to travel to school. Why does my family live @ Hwy 7 & Weston Rd? Because it is easily accessible to one working member of the family (Father)...who works in the suburbs. The other member of the family (Mother) also has to commute to an office near Eaton Centre. A sibling (Brother) attends York University and has an easy commute to school as well. The youngest sibling has to attend elementary school and a good one would be preferred.

According to your logic, Me and my mother should live downtown near Yonge & Dundas while my father and my brother should live where I am right now. This way everyone is close to where they go (either school or work) and therefore we are no longer "PUNISHED" for living out in the "burbs"

Better yet, why don't my little brother join me downtown in a reasonably priced area to rent, EAST OF CHURCH, where yeah...you can attain a place for a reasonable cost. I am sure he would love to attend elementary school in Regent Park.

Are the poor/underprivileged/new immigrants forced to live in such an area and send kids to such schools with no choice? Yes for sure. But If you are a MIDDLE CLASS FAMILY you want to have good facilities and services without paying TOP DOLLAR. Is that possible in downtown? NO.

You, 'kkgg7' are probably a single urban young professional that makes ample $$, has no other people to support, definitely no kids, and live in a great downtown lifestyle. Therefore, since your life is great, everyone should just follow your commuter model.

If your thick head cannot still understand why your 'mantra' does not work in real life after reading this real life situation that everyone faces, you are hopeless.

Conclusion: Fare by Distance, a great idea to discuss. Every single person live beside their work/school, please stop.

 

[TOareaFan]

I am done discussin/debating with kkgg7 until I get a bit more clarity about a few things:

1. Who are the suburbanites he has the issues with. I thought it was people within the city of Toronto who use the subway. The "large house far away that is more than they can afford" sounds more like the negative stereotype of 905ers who, as I and others have pointed out, are already subject to fre by distance on GO;

2. If it is 416 folks living far from the core, what say he to apartment dwellers in, say, Jane/Finch? Are many of them availing themselves of more than 400 s.f. per family member?

3. In his "live close to work" vision.....how do 2 income families chose wher to live? His work area? Her work area? Apart?

It is an interesting discussion but very circular (IMO) until we have more background.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

I am done discussin/debating with kkgg7 until I get a bit more clarity about a few things:

1. Who are the suburbanites he has the issues with. I thought it was people within the city of Toronto who use the subway. The "large house far away that is more than they can afford" sounds more like the negative stereotype of 905ers who, as I and others have pointed out, are already subject to fre by distance on GO;

2. If it is 416 folks living far from the core, what say he to apartment dwellers in, say, Jane/Finch? Are many of them availing themselves of more than 400 s.f. per family member?

3. In his "live close to work" vision.....how do 2 income families chose wher to live? His work area? Her work area? Apart?

It is an interesting discussion but very circular (IMO) until we have more background.

Maybe I can help?

1. Don't be fooled, the is lots of that in the city. Willowdale, North York. North and Central Etobicoke. Scarborough north of Sheppard.

2. Good point , can't really dispute that.

3. Flip a coin?

 

[wopchop]

Everyone should live on their own and close to their place of employment or school. Including children. Seven years old? Old enough to have your own place, I say!

 

[Palma]

One thing is clear here: whoever argue against fare by distance system must live far from work and know they are not paying enough but would prefer short commuters keep subsidizing them.

Thanks Palma. You seem to be one of those who advocate what is right and fair, instead of "what is best for me".

Your welcome. i too am glad to see someone giving factual arguments regarding the fare by distance

 

[Palma]

If it wasn't obvious already, you are a very selfish individual but everyone else can see right through your flawed logic...

Is fare by distance a good idea? Sure I think its quite reasonable. GO Transit has been using it since inception and most 905'ers aka 'Suburbanites' are completely fine with the idea...

Can each and every commuter live right beside their daily destination? No. No matter what your selfish mind tells you, this is absolutely impossible. Your entire proposition is based on the platform of... "I live downtown and barely use the TTC so screw everyone else cause I'm fine"

Take for example...I am a student @ Ryerson University. I reside just north of Steeles in a place known as Woodbridge. Being near Weston Rd, I am minutes away from the new subway extension and also in close proximity to a major transit route, VIVA/ZUM.

I have to either pay a DOUBLE FARE just to travel the distance between Highway 7 & Steeles and then continue my trip into downtown. My other option that I use commonly is to either get a ride to Steeles or to a major transit node. This allows me to avoid paying a whole extra fare just to cross a boundary.

Can I take GO Transit? Not really...because York U station is very very limited service and Rutherford GO is quite a bit north of where I reside. Yes, I got stuck exactly in the worst spot! The not-so-far-enough to take GO Market and the too-far-to-take TTC market.

Despite all this, I am residing at my home to travel to school. Why does my family live @ Hwy 7 & Weston Rd? Because it is easily accessible to one working member of the family (Father)...who works in the suburbs. The other member of the family (Mother) also has to commute to an office near Eaton Centre. A sibling (Brother) attends York University and has an easy commute to school as well. The youngest sibling has to attend elementary school and a good one would be preferred.

According to your logic, Me and my mother should live downtown near Yonge & Dundas while my father and my brother should live where I am right now. This way everyone is close to where they go (either school or work) and therefore we are no longer "PUNISHED" for living out in the "burbs"

Better yet, why don't my little brother join me downtown in a reasonably priced area to rent, EAST OF CHURCH, where yeah...you can attain a place for a reasonable cost. I am sure he would love to attend elementary school in Regent Park.

Are the poor/underprivileged/new immigrants forced to live in such an area and send kids to such schools with no choice? Yes for sure. But If you are a MIDDLE CLASS FAMILY you want to have good facilities and services without paying TOP DOLLAR. Is that possible in downtown? NO.

You, 'kkgg7' are probably a single urban young professional that makes ample $$, has no other people to support, definitely no kids, and live in a great downtown lifestyle. Therefore, since your life is great, everyone should just follow your commuter model.

If your thick head cannot still understand why your 'mantra' does not work in real life after reading this real life situation that everyone faces, you are hopeless.

Conclusion: Fare by Distance, a great idea to discuss. Every single person live beside their work/school, please stop.

Ell

if it’s done with Go I do not see what the issue is then once this happens with the TTC. And your logic about your mother and you living downtown misses the whole issue. People live in the suburbs for one main reason - size of the house and land and the perceived safety issues, pure and simple. Does one really need a family room and a living on one floor? Or every child having their own bedroom? And the further you go out to the suburbs ...Vaughan comes to mind you have developments where not only does every child have their own bedroom they have their own washroom. I know one family that has bought a house from a builder, which is being bulit there, 4000 sq. ft for a couple and two boys age 5, 11 and from what I hear is the latest (as I have been told, though I must add the latest for Vaughan) for new developments - having a walkout from the basement to the backyard at the same level. WOW

Fare by distance then should help you not pay that double fare.

 

[Palma]

If it wasn't obvious already, you are a very selfish individual but everyone else can see right through your flawed logic...

Is fare by distance a good idea? Sure I think its quite reasonable. GO Transit has been using it since inception and most 905'ers aka 'Suburbanites' are completely fine with the idea...

Can each and every commuter live right beside their daily destination? No. No matter what your selfish mind tells you, this is absolutely impossible. Your entire proposition is based on the platform of... "I live downtown and barely use the TTC so screw everyone else cause I'm fine"

Take for example...I am a student @ Ryerson University. I reside just north of Steeles in a place known as Woodbridge. Being near Weston Rd, I am minutes away from the new subway extension and also in close proximity to a major transit route, VIVA/ZUM.

I have to either pay a DOUBLE FARE just to travel the distance between Highway 7 & Steeles and then continue my trip into downtown. My other option that I use commonly is to either get a ride to Steeles or to a major transit node. This allows me to avoid paying a whole extra fare just to cross a boundary.

Can I take GO Transit? Not really...because York U station is very very limited service and Rutherford GO is quite a bit north of where I reside. Yes, I got stuck exactly in the worst spot! The not-so-far-enough to take GO Market and the too-far-to-take TTC market.

Despite all this, I am residing at my home to travel to school. Why does my family live @ Hwy 7 & Weston Rd? Because it is easily accessible to one working member of the family (Father)...who works in the suburbs. The other member of the family (Mother) also has to commute to an office near Eaton Centre. A sibling (Brother) attends York University and has an easy commute to school as well. The youngest sibling has to attend elementary school and a good one would be preferred.

According to your logic, Me and my mother should live downtown near Yonge & Dundas while my father and my brother should live where I am right now. This way everyone is close to where they go (either school or work) and therefore we are no longer "PUNISHED" for living out in the "burbs"

Better yet, why don't my little brother join me downtown in a reasonably priced area to rent, EAST OF CHURCH, where yeah...you can attain a place for a reasonable cost. I am sure he would love to attend elementary school in Regent Park.

Are the poor/underprivileged/new immigrants forced to live in such an area and send kids to such schools with no choice? Yes for sure. But If you are a MIDDLE CLASS FAMILY you want to have good facilities and services without paying TOP DOLLAR. Is that possible in downtown? NO.

You, 'kkgg7' are probably a single urban young professional that makes ample $$, has no other people to support, definitely no kids, and live in a great downtown lifestyle. Therefore, since your life is great, everyone should just follow your commuter model.

If your thick head cannot still understand why your 'mantra' does not work in real life after reading this real life situation that everyone faces, you are hopeless.

Conclusion: Fare by Distance, a great idea to discuss. Every single person live beside their work/school, please stop.

Ell

if it’s done with Go I do not see what the issue is then once this happens with the TTC. And your logic about your mother and you living downtown misses the whole issue. People live in the suburbs for one main reason - size of the house and land and the perceived safety issues, pure and simple. Does one really need a family room and a living on one floor? Or every child having their own bedroom? And the further you go out to the suburbs ...Vaughan comes to mind you have developments where not only does every child have their own bedroom they have their own washroom. I know one family that has bought a house from a builder, which is being bulit there, 4000 sq. ft for a couple and two boys age 5, 11 and from what I hear is the latest (as I have been told, though I must add the latest for Vaughan) for new developments - having a walkout from the basement to the backyard at the same level. WOW

Fare by distance then should help you not pay that double fare.

 

[Palma]

Everyone should live on their own and close to their place of employment or school. Including children. Seven years old? Old enough to have your own place, I say!

This is becoming ridiculous - trying to state that people are advocating kids live on their own close to school. Afterall are kids not suppose to be living close to the schools they attend - you cannot just choose any school that is not in close proximity (district) to the house you live in. And I need to add probably being driven to school instead of walking. Its strange people move to suburbs because they perceive it is safe yet children are driven to school. I know someone who moved to Vaughan, her 2 girls age 13 and 11 walked to school and they were looked down upon and other parents would wonder why they were not driven. I mean really - is it not suppose to be the other way around.