Wednesday’s Headlines

14 comments

1. Reading Toronto> Exactly, it seems that reducing consumption is the part of the new “green” view. Magazines from Vanity Fair to Toronto Life have “green” issues of which are filled with adds telling us to buy green or stories about all the green products you can buy. Not a word about reducing consumption.

   Canadian Tire leads this contradiction with TV and print ads for a “green” line of power inverter/portable batteries so you can power the outdoors.

2. I think the following opinion should have been posted in the Headlines:

   http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/229728

   These new proposed taxes on land transfer are stupid and ridiculous, they will just push people and businesses into the sprawled areas outside Toronto and squeeze new buyers out of the housing market. Just shows how the mayor and council are out of touch with reality. They are given taxing powers and they choose to tax what is more convenient instead of things that should be taxed. Miller is definitely not the leader I was hoping for Toronto. No wonder Federal and Provincial governments treat city with contempt.

3. Carlos, then in your opinion what should be taxed ?

4. Scott there are many options for tax revenues, but stop going after homeowners and businesses. Maybe it is time to go after consumers and polluters.

   Read the article, there are tons of things to tax to make people change habits and penalize polluters. Going after homeowners and businesses that want to be in Toronto is the shortest way to decrease your tax base and create a donut effect in the region. I am not against taxes but I am against dumb taxes. When the mayor and city hall go for the dumb taxes it is a proof of their lack of leadership and how lazy those pricks in city hall really are.

   These guys paint themselves environmentalists but then put policies to make people live and work in sprawl. They say they are for the poor, but the poor are the ones who will be squeezed out from home ownership and the landlords will just pass the cost to them (another tax on the poor). They say they are for small businesses but then tax them to death and let Wall Mart, Home Depot, etc build big box stores downtown. City Hall is a joke. Miller is not as funny as Lastman, one is left the other is right, one has hair the other is balding, one is tall the other is short, but man, they sure seems to have the same leadership skills…

5. Carlos, Could you be more specific what tons you are talking about? . I thought the story was more against things than for things and I found it a bit hard to find the point beyond the “fairness” arguement. I’m interested so lay it on me.

6. Scott

   Hotels, cigarettes, parking, tolls, entertainment, increases in city services, alcohol in bars and restaurants, rub and tugs (why not?), flight fees from the island airport (that would be awesome), fares on CN and CP for running trains along Toronto (that would freak them out), big box store premiums, supermarkets paying annual fees over their parking spots, cultural and sport events (you could charge $50 in taxes per Leafs ticket and the ACC would still sell out to watch a crappy team play), SUV premiums (for those idots trying to compensate for something), I am sure many more things could be done. Basically spread out the taxes and fees as much as possible in a way where that would not affect anybody that much, work with municipalities around the city to get as many common taxes and fees as possible, if they did that and got their act together then municipalities’ demands for services to be uploaded would be taken more seriously and they could claim a share on sales and income taxes. But God forbid Toronto politicians and bureaucrats to work for their salaries, it is much easier and simpler to keep the municipal taxes based on properties (which will not grow with the economy) and to keep hurting homeowners and small business. Let’s shrink the base tax by having people move to the suburbs and make the GTA into a doughnut, Detroit is a good example to follow when in comes to city planning.

   I hope I laid it on you, now lay it on me why their proposed taxes are such a good idea…

7. wow. Then perhaps you should move to the suburbs and enjoy double the taxes you’ll end up paying years down the road when people start having to pay for the lack of thoughtful planning. Hotels, are already taxed. I’m sure the city would love to tax the island airport if it was allowed to. I think the members of city hall have given all of those items a bit more thought than you have. Why don’t we just tax people breathing because they cause C02 as well. Damn that Mayor Miller.

8. Oh yeah. Last time i checked I didn’t see poor people buying multiple houses in the city, therefore having to pay the land transfer tax. In reality if you can afford to buy a house in the city these days, an extra 1% isn’t going to break the bank.

9. Jay, maybe you should read what I wrote a few weeks ago here in Spacing.ca:

   https://spacing.ca/toronto/?p=1970#comments

   You are not saying anything I already do not know.

   Taxes are still more competitive in the suburbs than downtown, but this land transfer tax (the only one being charge by a municipality in North America) will only make sprawl worse in the short term. Before people and businesses in the suburbs start paying the real costs of low density the damage would have already been done.

   So I guess you are saying that Toronto should only be for the rich. And in case you are living in the Moon, a family that can afford a mortgage for a house in Toronto is not necessarily wealthy. If you assume that by buying a house in Toronto then you are affluent you are mistaken. Believe me, those people who own property in Forest Hill are not going to mind that 1% hike, an extra 20-100 thousand grand is change for them, but $4000 for a middle class family is a lot of money. This tax can be the straw that breaks the camel’s back. More people will choose the suburbs because they can get a bigger new house with lower taxes over a small fixer upper downtown with higher taxes for the same price. Whenever a landlord buys an investment property to rent out do you think he will absorb the costs of that tax? If you do then you are definitely living in the Moon, the landlords will have an excuse to increase rents and keep them high even after the paid rents made up for the tax.

   What I would like to read from you is a counter argument in how this tax will not be bad for the environment, for Toronto families, for people with low income and for small businesses. I stated the reason why it is bad for the city, now tell me why it is good.

   In an ideal world Toronto would get a fair share of the sales taxes and the Province would upload social services (things I agree with Miller), there would be no need for new or higher taxes, but this being Toronto (the goose that lays the golden eggs) that is not going to happen, and we will keep adding to the Federal and Provincial surpluses.

10. Carlos, as elegantly as you have phrased your argument, it has no relevance to reality. The reality is that in less than a year we need about $600 million just to maintain existing services.

    So, in light of this, Toronto essentially has three choices as it looks towards 2008: make devastating cuts to the programs and services Torontonians rely on, declare bankruptcy or use the revenue tools at its disposal to generate money for the 2008 budget year.

    Which one would you choose? Is there another revenue tool that you would employ (it has to ensure revenues flow during 2008)?

11. Dear Adam, if you read my post you will see that I gave tons of suggestion, unfortunately they are not realistic suggestions for city councillors and the mayor, it would be too much work for them.

    But here is another suggestion:
    You do cuts and blame it on the Province.

    The city already lost 100 000 jobs to the suburbs. More people are going to move to houses built in fertile farmland and forests around the city.

    Need money? Find revenue through consumers and polluters, not through homeowners, businesses and investment. To me this just shows how lazy the mayor and city council are. Going after taxes that depend on properties being sold and their corresponding value seems to be a very shaky tax foundation. Stand up to the unions that guarantee a lot of waste, no accountability and a lack of productivity by city workers and bureaucrats. Of course these things are all sacred cows to the NDP crowed in city hall. This crowed has the view that if you own property in Toronto then you are rich and it is ok to tax the rich, it doesn’t matter if it is the old Italian immigrant who worked all his life to pay down the mortgage on that house near College (now feeling the pressures of gentrification) or the young couple who made immeasurable sacrifices saving up for a down payment to a new home. So lets empty the city a bit more, who knows, maybe we will not loose as many jobs and people to the burbs this time…

    City is managed by a bunch of idiots, why is it so hard to admit that? The city can make cuts to services and shift the responsibility to the Province and it can use the revenue tools it has at its disposal, as I stated before I am all for smart taxes, the proposed land transfer taxes is plain dumb. And don’t ask me to explain why all over again, just read my previous comments it is all there.

12. Carlos, maybe you ought to read up a little before you get condescending.

    Hotels are expressly excluded from taxation by the city under the CoTA. Cigarettes are a potential revenue source but will require more time to figure out how to collect the new tax than the City’s got to cobble together the necessary revenue. Ditto for alcohol, parking, sports/entertainment and tolls (tolls also require expensive infrastructure). I’m sure that at somepoint most of those taxes will be implemented to some degree.

    The City has no jurisdiction over flight fees from the island airport (even though that would be awesome), same goes for CN and CP trains. Air and rail transportation are federal jurisdiction. However, a road toll right outside the island airport one day would be brilliant.

    Why would you suggest that only supermarkets pay annual fees for their parking lots? There are many types of business that have grossly oversized parking lots that ought to be taxed. So instead of quibbling over the definition of a big box store, I would apply your supermarket suggestion to any business that has a larger than a to be determined sized parking lot. Either way, developing the policy and infrastructure to collect this type of tax is going to take a significant amount of time.

    SUV premiums is the one place I think you’ve got a point that is relevant to the discussion that’s actually going on. Since mopeds and motorcycles are getting a lower increases to their vehicle registration fees it makes sense to me to hike SUV fees.

    Regarding City employees: they have a legally binding collective agreement and trying to bust unions isn’t pretty for anyone, especially the public.

    So after considering what you’ve put forward, Carlos, all I see are a slew of revenue tools that can’t be used and your willingness to cut programs and services.

    With that plan, the City will have to cut entire departments to get to $600 million. So which departments do you want to get rid of?

    Assuming you don’t want to break the law and stop paying into the legislatively mandated provincial programs your choices could include cutting all of the City’s administrative services (but you’d still need to find another 2% to cut from somewhere else), you could take out half of the municipal services budget, half of the emergency services budget, 75% of the corporate finance budget or a little more than half the transportation budget. If you do want to break the law then you could cut a quarter of the money the City contributes to cost-shared programs but that could cause the province to stop funding every cost-shared initiative and that would sink the City completely.

    They’re all really swell choices. I’m sure you’ll find one you like.

13. I like the one busting unions and firing a bunch of city bureaucrats. Getting rid of half city council would be a bonus. I say break the law, what is the province going to do? Put Miller in jail? I doubt it and I wouldn’t mind that at all. I still think it is better than contributing to urban sprawl and sucking jobs out of Toronto into the suburbs… Was that condescending enough for you? Let me know, I can do better.

    I would just like to know if somebody ever made a study to know how much in lost taxes it cost Toronto loosing 100 000 jobs to the suburbs and not getting any of the 800 000 jobs created around the city. I am sure that is a lot of lost business taxes. But that is irrelevant, making unions happy is more important than treating citizens that pay taxes (renters and homeonwers alike) any respect.

14. Carlos>
    As a homeowner in Toronto and a car owner in Toronto, and part of that financial middle that is not nor wealthy I have some shocking news for you. I don’t mind the taxes at all.

    Tax increases outside of Toronto have been higher and will slowly catch up as those areas develop. As I have said before, property taxes in downtown, although they have gone up proportionaly more than other areas of the mega city, are still lower than the property taxes of every family member of mine who lives in London, Uxbridge, Mount Albert, Lindsay. You may not want to believe it but they complain to me all the time; its true.

    Carlos, when you start talking about idiots and union bosses and all that you kind of loose me.

    Taxes are not the only factor people use when deciding where to live. If they did, I suppose there would be people moving to Kenora. (And Kenora is a great place). The evidence I see all over the city, and I mean the whole city (I was all over north east today) is that homes are being built and they are being built because there is true demand.Most people use the internet now when looking for new homes so maybe the people at the Real Estate Board should consider having agents lower their fees a wee bit ( a trend that is already underway in the US). Generaly speaking every home in Toronto will be sold once every say 60 years; I don’t know how much simpler it could be. At the end of the day it will affect everyone. Simple. (And one can make all the same arguments against consumption taxes too, that if people think it is expensive to go out then they will move to a cheaper town.At least this is simple and may help reduce real esate speculation as well.)

    I do agree with an SUV tax on size especially for parking.