Bradford Bypass (MTO, Hwy 400 - Hwy 404)

[Northern Light]

Well, if you don't want your tax dollars going to public infrastructure in this country, I suggest you move to idk the moon, I suppose.

I do want them going to infrastructure, but I want maximum efficiency from that investment.

That means prioritizing growth next to major fresh water sources and near existing employment as this produces a higher ROI.

It also means prioritizing forms of transportation that move the most people per dollar invested, on a net basis. (part of that calculation for highways is all the tax that land no longer pays).

It also means treatment that is consistent in principle for transit users and road users. User-pay up to a certain percentage. If we agree on 50%, you can have a significant discount to 407 toll rates, but you need to apply that discount to GO Rail and local transit

That's roughly where local transit is today, though this varies by system; but for GO it would mean a substantially greater subsidy and either lower fares or higher service.

You say you support your tax dollars going to infrastructure but it seems like that's only if its the type you use and prefer.

How about an equal standard, which also means parking at GO lots is paid, just like private lots. And no free work parking unless the workplace also subsidizes those who arrive by transit.

I'm not out to punish drivers, I am one. I just want a consistent principle. How much should the user pay? How much should the government subsidize your commute per km?

 

[Dreambig1]

I do want them going to infrastructure, but I want maximum efficiency from that investment.

That means prioritizing growth next to major fresh water sources and near existing employment as this produces a higher ROI.

It also means prioritizing forms of transportation that move the most people per dollar invested, on a net basis. (part of that calculation for highways is all the tax that land no longer pays).

It also means treatment that is consistent in principle for transit users and road users. User-pay up to a certain percentage. If we agree on 50%, you can have a significant discount to 407 toll rates, but you need to apply that discount to GO Rail and local transit

That's roughly where local transit is today, though this varies by system; but for GO it would mean a substantially greater subsidy and either lower fares or higher service.

You say you support your tax dollars going to infrastructure but it seems like that's only if its the type you use and prefer.

How about an equal standard, which also means parking at GO lots is paid, just like private lots. And no free work parking unless the workplace also subsidizes those who arrive by transit.

I'm not out to punish drivers, I am one. I just want a consistent principle. How much should the user pay? How much should the government subsidize your commute per km?

I'm sorry, I don't support any kind of tolled roadway. It's an obstacle to the free flow of traffic, people, goods, and commerce. Roads should be paid for via taxation, that's it.

 

[Collingwoodbuildinglover]

I'm sorry, I don't support any kind of tolled roadway. It's an obstacle to the free flow of traffic, people, goods, and commerce. Roads should be paid for via taxation, that's it.

Okay one major problem with that scenario is more and more people are switching over to electrical vehicles which are not funding back into the public road infrastructure as most of that is paid for via the gas and road tax which are both on Petro and diesel also if I'm to understand your opinion does that mean that public transit should be completely funded by the taxpayer as well

 

[Northern Light]

I'm sorry, I don't support any kind of tolled roadway. It's an obstacle to the free flow of traffic, people, goods, and commerce. Roads should be paid for via taxation, that's it.

So you're a hypocrite then? You admit it.

All you had to do was say that you supported fare-free transit because it fares impair the free flow of people, goods and commerce, that's it, and you were there.

Except, of course, explaining how you intend to pay for everything.

But you have no answers to that.

 

[Dreambig1]

Okay one major problem with that scenario is more and more people are switching over to electrical vehicles which are not funding back into the public road infrastructure as most of that is paid for via the gas and road tax which are both on Petro and diesel also if I'm to understand your opinion does that mean that public transit should be completely funded by the taxpayer as well

Yes, as it's public transportation, therefore the public ie tax payers should be the ones paying for it. However, eliminate the fees and more people will use it.

 

[Dreambig1]

So you're a hypocrite then? You admit it.

All you had to do was say that you supported fare-free transit because it fares impair the free flow of people, goods and commerce, that's it, and you were there.

Except, of course, explaining how you intend to pay for everything.

But you have no answers to that.

I've explained my position that highways and public transit should be paid for via taxes. Your narrative is your narrative

 

[Northern Light]

I've explained my position that highways and public transit should be paid for via taxes. Your narrative is your narrative

My narrative is evidence based, thought through, public policy.

If you're prepared to support fare-free transit, that's great.

If ridership remained static, which it wouldn't, of course, it would spike......but.....

You're looking at coming up with 4.5B per year for that. That's roughly equal to one extra point on the HST.

Balancing the budget, with current infrastructure spending, at the current rate (provincial) also requires about 1 more point of HST.

Expediting both highway and transit construction will mean about 1 more point of HST.

So, if you're prepared to support a 3% increase in HST to fund the above priorities, and fare-free transit. I will agree, reluctantly to support your highway.

 

[Dreambig1]

My narrative is evidence based, thought through, public policy.

If you're prepared to support fare-free transit, that's great.

If ridership remained static, which it wouldn't, of course, it would spike......but.....

You're looking at coming up with 4.5B per year for that. That's roughly equal to one extra point on the HST.

Balancing the budget, with current infrastructure spending, at the current rate (provincial) also requires about 1 more point of HST.

Expediting both highway and transit construction will mean about 1 more point of HST.

So, if you're prepared to support a 3% increase in HST to fund the above priorities, and fare-free transit. I will agree, reluctantly to support your highway.

Cut costs and wasteful spending in other areas, and raise the HST by half or less than that 3% amount and we've got it.

 

[kamira51]

I am not a 'You People'.

I am someone who came from two parents neither of whom graduated High School and was first in my family to do so, first to go to and graduate university, who quit a corporate office job after 3 promotions in 2 years to go pursue a different career for which I had a passion.

I know what challenges are, and I know what hard work is and I know what risk-taking is all about............

I also know that if I really wanted a job an hour away............I'd plan to move to where the job is..........by all means get the job first and finish your probationary period..............but then move........how is that a more challenging ask that commuting an hour each way twice a day? Its not.

Its only that that the commuting option requires your hand in my pocket to build you a very expensive road which you aren't willing to pay for yourself; if its a toll road.....and you want it.......go for it.

Fantastic argument, but what about the people who have that type of job which requires you to travel around the province?

An example is my current occupation, im an installer of medical imaging equipment for siemens, i travel to many hospitals across the province.

I support transit expansion and highway expansion, I use transit when I can.

 

[Northern Light]

Fantastic argument, but what about the people who have that type of job which requires you to travel around the province?

An example is my current occupation, im an installer of medical imaging equipment for siemens, i travel to many hospitals across the province.

I support transit expansion and highway expansion, I use transit when I can.

I'm not arguing here for removing the provincial highway system, nor do I oppose all expansion.

I simply think expansion near large urban areas is generally a poor use of dollars as it moves relatively few people, tends not to relieve congestion, and tends to cost more per person benefit relative to transit.

The rural network of highways, where there is little or no transit option, need not be tolled.

Where your job might require you to use a tolled highway, they ought to either pay you well enough to absorb the hit or reimburse your expenses.

 

[just east of the creek]

People should be able to work and live were ever thety want without someone dictating any of that to them. I think paying any tolls for highways, especially in the GTA, is stupid. I pay enough for other people as it is in this country.

I am not sure as a taxpayer why I should subsidize your driving habits. This province is deeply in debt, with a government that loves to subsidize everything from hydro on. It’s not sustainable. Tolling and congestion charges are one way of defraying the overhead costs of building and maintaining roads. Roads are not free. Not much is actually. Driving is not some enshrined right either.

Being environmentally conscious is not a negative either. I don’t spray DDT on my crops either. In my grandfathers day it was all the thing - cheap and effective. But over time it was learned that ddt had other environmental and human costs and we moved on. Now we are having similar discussions about another very popular chemical widely used in urban and rural areas. There are costs to stay the course and costs to move on. The costs to stay the course are not so widely understood currently, but may be much more exorbitant over time. There are environmental costs to building the 413 a s well and over time are they outweighed by the negatives? Are there other alternatives or systems of alternatives? The 413 cannot just exist in a vacuum. Once built it may save you a couple of minutes. But once DF’s builder buddies finish building all their car centric housing developments along the route of the 413, then where will you be? Ask someone living in Heart Lake for instance, how that works.

(Dealing with budget deficits and provincial debt is a whole other conversation)

Far too many studies and history have shown the building highways does not solve congestion where uncontrolled expansionary building sprawl takes place. Look at any major 400 series highway in the GTA - the 403 around Hamilton, the QEW towards Niagara, the QEW through Burlington and Oakville, the 401 past Milton and up the Escarpment, the 401 through Oshawa…..etc etc There is not much coherent thought to the DOF plan for highway building as well. Have you given much thought to the 413/407/401 interchange?

UT has long discussed the Ying and yang of highways, transit, urban planning, tolls etc etc. with some very good discussions. Scrolling back through some of these threads makes for Interesting reading.

Enjoy your day. I’m going to plant and experiment a bit with a non glyphosate strategy - perhaps drones. Should be interesting

 

[cryogen]

I am not sure as a taxpayer why I should subsidize your driving habits. This province is deeply in debt, with a government that loves to subsidize everything from hydro on. It’s not sustainable. Tolling and congestion charges are one way of defraying the overhead costs of building and maintaining roads. Roads are not free. Not much is actually. Driving is not some enshrined right either.

Being environmentally conscious is not a negative either. I don’t spray DDT on my crops either. In my grandfathers day it was all the thing - cheap and effective. But over time it was learned that ddt had other environmental and human costs and we moved on. Now we are having similar discussions about another very popular chemical widely used in urban and rural areas. There are costs to stay the course and costs to move on. The costs to stay the course are not so widely understood currently, but may be much more exorbitant over time. There are environmental costs to building the 413 a s well and over time are they outweighed by the negatives? Are there other alternatives or systems of alternatives? The 413 cannot just exist in a vacuum. Once built it may save you a couple of minutes. But once DF’s builder buddies finish building all their car centric housing developments along the route of the 413, then where will you be? Ask someone living in Heart Lake for instance, how that works.

(Dealing with budget deficits and provincial debt is a whole other conversation)

Far too many studies and history have shown the building highways does not solve congestion where uncontrolled expansionary building sprawl takes place. Look at any major 400 series highway in the GTA - the 403 around Hamilton, the QEW towards Niagara, the QEW through Burlington and Oakville, the 401 past Milton and up the Escarpment, the 401 through Oshawa…..etc etc There is not much coherent thought to the DOF plan for highway building as well. Have you given much thought to the 413/407/401 interchange?

UT has long discussed the Ying and yang of highways, transit, urban planning, tolls etc etc. with some very good discussions. Scrolling back through some of these threads makes for Interesting reading.

Enjoy your day. I’m going to plant and experiment a bit with a non glyphosate strategy - perhaps drones. Should be interesting

Can we use your argument (bolded above) with respect to bike lanes, Eglinton East LRT, Alto? Why should I, as a taxpayer, subsidize those modes of transport that I'll never use?

 

[just east of the creek]

Well, if you don't want your tax dollars going to public infrastructure in this country, I suggest you move to idk the moon, I suppose. Canadians pay some of the highest tax rates in the developed world, and even equally higher rates for other things like food, phone, internet, home rent, insurance, gas, etc., so yes, I pay enough, thank you, along with many other people. It's funny listening to people complain about where they want their taxes spent, like they have some sorta choice.

Once you delve into taxes, tax rates and all that goes with it, you open a very complex issue - so how do you enjoy your free health care? And are you one of the 25 to 50 million Americans without any health insurance at all? This is a complex question, along with like questions such as the cost of cell service, which can then be related to many other questions such as Made in Canada, Owned by Canadians, Canadian Health Standards for such things as milk….the black and white comparables just do not tell the story so often.

 

[Dreambig1]

I am not sure as a taxpayer why I should subsidize your driving habits. This province is deeply in debt, with a government that loves to subsidize everything from hydro on. It’s not sustainable. Tolling and congestion charges are one way of defraying the overhead costs of building and maintaining roads. Roads are not free. Not much is actually. Driving is not some enshrined right either.

Being environmentally conscious is not a negative either. I don’t spray DDT on my crops either. In my grandfathers day it was all the thing - cheap and effective. But over time it was learned that ddt had other environmental and human costs and we moved on. Now we are having similar discussions about another very popular chemical widely used in urban and rural areas. There are costs to stay the course and costs to move on. The costs to stay the course are not so widely understood currently, but may be much more exorbitant over time. There are environmental costs to building the 413 a s well and over time are they outweighed by the negatives? Are there other alternatives or systems of alternatives? The 413 cannot just exist in a vacuum. Once built it may save you a couple of minutes. But once DF’s builder buddies finish building all their car centric housing developments along the route of the 413, then where will you be? Ask someone living in Heart Lake for instance, how that works.

(Dealing with budget deficits and provincial debt is a whole other conversation)

Far too many studies and history have shown the building highways does not solve congestion where uncontrolled expansionary building sprawl takes place. Look at any major 400 series highway in the GTA - the 403 around Hamilton, the QEW towards Niagara, the QEW through Burlington and Oakville, the 401 past Milton and up the Escarpment, the 401 through Oshawa…..etc etc There is not much coherent thought to the DOF plan for highway building as well. Have you given much thought to the 413/407/401 interchange?

UT has long discussed the Ying and yang of highways, transit, urban planning, tolls etc etc. with some very good discussions. Scrolling back through some of these threads makes for Interesting reading.

Enjoy your day. I’m going to plant and experiment a bit with a non glyphosate strategy - perhaps drones. Should be interesting

As long as the 413/407/401 interchanges are all directional in terms of connections, I think we are good. I'm sorry to be a bit of an outsider on this one, but I still feel like Toronto is underbuilt as a major city with its population size, with respect to highways and public transit in general, which, along with a tolled 407, has made congestion in that city and area a problem for years now.

 

[Dreambig1]

Once you delve into taxes, tax rates and all that goes with it, you open a very complex issue - so how do you enjoy your free health care? And are you one of the 25 to 50 million Americans without any health insurance at all? This is a complex question, along with like questions such as the cost of cell service, which can then be related to many other questions such as Made in Canada, Owned by Canadians, Canadian Health Standards for such things as milk….the black and white comparables just do not tell the story so often.

Personally, I hate the whole "free healthcare|" argument because it's not free; public tax dollars go to funding public health, and from what I understand, it's one of the most expensive portfolios under provincial government jurisdiction. So when Canadians across the country are spending thousands upon thousands of dollars a year in taxes that go into healthcare, then NO its not "free."