CRTC holds hearings on rural broadband

[Saipan]

Except roads, electricity, and EI to pay for it.

Everyone has roads (ours are pretty lousy). We pay for our elecricity. Not by taxes.

What has EI to do with it?

[guyser]

And you get things like transit systems, hockey rinks, stadiums, concert halls, etc that rural communities don't have.

Quite true.

Simply because You (rural) cannot afford most of those things .

Although Transit systems now are commonplace for many rural areas.

What's your problem?

Absolutely nothing sir.

However, I have to surmise you and saipan cannot understand that the rural community obtains and maintains infrastructure from , in some part, dollars contributed to the general fund on the province or feds.

[Saipan]

That was all there was to radio and television to folks in the hinterlands for decades.

Yes, but we don't want Liberal CBC.

Were you born after cable came in ?

No. Before any television.

[Wilber]

It was pretty clear: there was an erroneous suggestion that the countryside pays for our rinks, stadiums etc. Not so.

They pay for part of them if federal and provincial funds are involved but certainly not as much as you do. But if you want to persist with the negative tax flow line, every citizen of every province that contributes to equalization experiences negative tax flow. It's a mugs game. Under our system, figuring out who actually paid for what is an impossibility. A perfect world if you are a politician or a bureaucrat. We fight about it while they're laughing at us.

Edited October 29, 2010 by Wilber

[Saipan]

Simply because You (rural) cannot afford most of those things .

'Cause we pay for yours.

Although Transit systems now are commonplace for many rural areas.

Never seen any. Even a crosscountry transport like Greyhound is 54 km away. Say you have no car. Wanna walk?

[Michael Hardner]

No. Before any television.

Did you complain about CBC back when there was just radio ?

[Michael Hardner]

Under our system, figuring out who actually paid for what is an impossibility.

I concur. More so if you take all revenue flows into account as I mentioned above.

[Saipan]

Did you complain about CBC back when there was just radio ?

Not exactly. I was complaining about PRAVDA, Rude Pravo and Radio Prague in those days. But not loud enough to end up in jail, 'cause I was planning to "travel".

It's little better now but not quite what I had in mind. I liked it more 40 years ago when I came here, before Liberals started clamping down on personal freedom.

[Wilber]

I concur. More so if you take all revenue flows into account as I mentioned above.

Thing is, even if you could determine actually who paid how much for what, every time federal or provincial funds go into infrastructure, that particular community benefits directly from the revenues and other economic benefits that infrastructure generates. Some rural communities may benefit indirectly (or not). It's just not good enough to say that we pay more in taxes than we receive back.

If someone thinks that every little berg and city along Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence should pay for its little hunk of the 401 so they can do 110 KPH from Pickering to Laval, they're dreaming.

Edited October 29, 2010 by Wilber

[guyser]

Thing is, even if you could determine actually who paid how much for what, every time federal or provincial funds go into infrastructure, that particular community benefits directly from the revenues and other economic benefits that infrastructure generates. Some rural communities may benefit indirectly (or not). It's just not good enough to say that we pay more in taxes than we receive back.

Agree wilber.

The last sentence though is true of cities.

If someone thinks that every little berg and city along Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence should pay for its little hunk of the 401 so they can do 110 KPH from Pickering to Laval, they're dreaming.

And if someone did think that, yes they would be dreaming.

[guyser]

'Cause we pay for yours.

Just stop, you haven't the slightest idea how this works

Never seen any. Even a crosscountry transport like Greyhound is 54 km away. Say you have no car. Wanna walk?

Relevance?

As for see any, of course you havent, that would mean you opened your eyes.....

http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/programs/environment-utsp-smallnruralcomms-1012.htm

[Saipan]

If someone thinks that every little berg and city along Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence should pay for its little hunk of the 401 so they can do 110 KPH from Pickering to Laval, they're dreaming.

Yes, all those Southerners would want that.

Up North we would settle for keeping the dust down and grade the stones off

We pay the same taxes.

[Wilber]

The last sentence though is true of cities.

Really, if you factor in all the things cities and their people use and require that aren't within their city limits, I don't see how you can say that with any certainty.

[guyser]

Really, if you factor in all the things cities and their people use and require that aren't within their city limits, I don't see how you can say that with any certainty.

Not sure I understand what you are meaning here.

But, if I am to assume, then most of those things city people use that arent in city limits would be things they pay extra for.(Unless you mean roads bridges etc)

Lets use the pie, if 80% of alltaxes comes from GTA, then anything the fed or Prov govt pays for is paid for using 80% GTA money.

It also means the rural are paying 20% of say city infrastructure.

[Michael Hardner]

Everyone has roads (ours are pretty lousy). We pay for our elecricity. Not by taxes.

What has EI to do with it?

Electricity rates are "smoothed" out so that the person who lives 500 miles from the power plant in a small town pays much the same as a city dweller.

People in the country get EI. That's part of the net payout you get. Enjoy the money.

[Saipan]

Electricity rates are "smoothed" out so that the person who lives 500 miles from the power plant in a small town pays much the same as a city dweller.

We are closer to Alberta but pay more for oil & gas than Toronto. Even for beef. Proximity doesn't seem to work

Not that it has ANYTHING to do with taxes.

People in the country get EI.

Like everyone.

[Michael Hardner]

Like everyone.

Right. But lots of people live in places where they pay more in tax than they suck out of the system.

Like in Toronto. People pay more in tax in Toronto than people who live where you do - and suck it out of the system.

Get it ?

[Saipan]

Right. But lots of people live in places where they pay more in tax than they suck out of the system.

Of course. That's why all the homeless bums flock to Toronto

[guyser]

Of course. That's why all the homeless bums flock to Toronto

Finally....you get one correct!

[Saipan]

I always do.

[Wilber]

Not sure I understand what you are meaning here.

But, if I am to assume, then most of those things city people use that arent in city limits would be things they pay extra for.(Unless you mean roads bridges etc)

Lets use the pie, if 80% of alltaxes comes from GTA, then anything the fed or Prov govt pays for is paid for using 80% GTA money.

It also means the rural are paying 20% of say city infrastructure.

Your consumption and needs aren't restricted to your city limits. Your city cannot operate without what it gets from elsewhere. If infrastructure in rural areas is more expensive per capita than in cities, that does not mean you need the rural areas any less or that you are being ripped off. That is part of the cost of living in a city. Economies of scale allow cities to be more efficient when it comes to infrastructure, thats all. Rural areas also require cities for many of their needs. You cannot separate one from the other.

[guyser]

Your consumption and needs aren't restricted to your city limits. Your city cannot operate without what it gets from elsewhere. If infrastructure in rural areas is more expensive per capita than in cities, that does not mean you need the rural areas any less or that you are being ripped off. That is part of the cost of living in a city. Economies of scale allow cities to be more efficient when it comes to infrastructure, thats all. Rural areas also require cities for many of their needs. You cannot separate one from the other.

Agree 100%

But for the record, I never said we were ripped off.

I also believe that rural people are more than entitled to have the roads,bridges etc fixed and in good repair.

I dont subscribe to a rural vs city standoff.I value rural areas greatly.

And with respect to this thread, I actually think expanding broadband to rural areas is a great idea. The wave of the future is to have every home hooked up.I think it s a great idea and could spawn many businesses that may otherwise not come to fruition.

I happen to think it would be an amazing way for schools

and educators to not only teach, but to contact parents,send work home, in events of illness kids could 'sit in" as it were while home sick in bed. The whole curriculum could be on the web, and that would improve our kids education.

My only beef comes from my local township and the spending of property tax dollars whereby the make every attempt to screw the cottage owner in favour of the yr round resident. Garbage collection, snow plow etc.

Now thats an argument that infuriates me.

Edited October 29, 2010 by guyser

[Saipan]

I stopped paying Municipal taxes five years ago. Until I get answer to why should I be forced to pay for someone elses sport or hobby while no one pays for mine.

[Michael Hardner]

Of course. That's why all the homeless bums flock to Toronto

As you point out, the homeless come to Toronto from the hinterlands. So, the options are collect government money at home, or come to Toronto to do it.

[Michael Hardner]

I always do.

Are you delusional ? What are you talking about ? You've been claiming that rural taxpayers pay for city toys on this thread, and you've been shown wrong.

You haven't been here long, but you're certainly making an early impression.