Highways to hell

[dre]

So, between poor people in Africa, and the poor people near Toronto who can't afford to pay transit fees, you think my tax dollars should go to those people in Toronto.

Our tax dollars should get spent on activities that allow for prosperity and encourage transactions between individuals. And the availability and ease of transporting both people and goods is one of the most important factors in economic stability and prosperity. Not only is it a GOOD thing to fund with taxation, its one of the most important things to fund. Every single person in this country benefits from having modern infrastructure thats available for everyone to use. Its the backbone of commerce.

[Shakeyhands]

as I drove home (for almost 2 hrs...) from work today... I was thinking tolls would be a good idea for cottagers from Toronto. Can't they take public transit to their cottages?????

[Bonam]

Sweet. Please let the operators of all the physical tollbooths know that k?

Whether you automate the system or not though, youre adding lots of overhead, and the problem is they will collect way more than it takes to build or maintain the roads. Once that revenue stream is there its probably there for good.

I dunno, they just took off the toll on the Coquihalla highway in BC pretty recently. Anyway, with a PPP, the exact time/condition when the toll is to be taken off can/should be specified in the contract, and the contract made public. As far as overhead, you are adding some, but not that much, with an automated electronic tolling system.

Anyway, I'm not particularly pro-toll or anything. I just think some people here are overstating the problems with them. If the choice is between no more roads, or more roads added with tolls, I'll take the second option. Whether its the best way or the worst way, the infrastructure has got to be built/expanded somehow. If you wanna build new roads without having them tolled, that's great too, but I don't see it happening when the politically fashionable thing to do these days is to rape drivers in order to pour billions into public transit which is and always will be fundamentally incapable of serving everyone.

[dre]

I dunno, they just took off the toll on the Coquihalla highway in BC pretty recently. Anyway, with a PPP, the exact time/condition when the toll is to be taken off can/should be specified in the contract, and the contract made public. As far as overhead, you are adding some, but not that much, with an automated electronic tolling system.

Anyway, I'm not particularly pro-toll or anything. I just think some people here are overstating the problems with them. If the choice is between no more roads, or more roads added with tolls, I'll take the second option. Whether its the best way or the worst way, the infrastructure has got to be built/expanded somehow. If you wanna build new roads without having them tolled, that's great too, but I don't see it happening when the politically fashionable thing to do these days is to rape drivers in order to pour billions into public transit which is and always will be fundamentally incapable of serving everyone.

I dunno, they just took off the toll on the Coquihalla highway in BC pretty recently

Thats a fair point. It was a decade or two later than they said it would be but its true.

As far as overhead, you are adding some, but not that much, with an automated electronic tolling system.

Hahaha knew that was coming. Thats your focus as a technologist and youre right. Overhead from the need to automate billing would be reduced to close to zero if the technology saw widespread use. Even just setting up a radar camera that took pictures of licence plates and put the data into a billing database would be effective and cost very little... and thats low tech... you can also use transponder systems like EZ-Pass. But theres more to it than just getting the data. You still have to bill/collect small ammounts of money from potentially hundreds of thousands or millions of different customers and that can get very expensive, and if youre going to contract out all that work theres another 10-30% on top of that. You also need to police the highway to catch people who use it without paying their bills or enact legislation that makes makes the government the enforcer.

Im against private toll roads unless the owner can purchase the land without the governments help, and operate the road without the government participating in enforcement/collections. But if a private transportation provider can purchase the land for a road on the market, and build the road itself, and deal with collecting the money from customers, and meet some basic safety guidelines... then thats totally fine.

Im against public tollroads unless the toll is temporary, and theres a sunset clause or a revenue threshold, so we know when it will end. Otherwise its just an easy vehicle for them to stash taxation without having to talk to us about it.

[Black Dog]

No, what I'd be happy with would be people shouldering a proportionate share of the costs, rather than forcing people who choose one mode of commute to subsidize those who choose another.

Sounds nice and, if these choices didn't have huge economic and social implications, entirely reasonable. As it stands, however, drivers are heavily subsidized on everything from the price of gas to the roads they drive on. So let's start with getting driver's to pay their real share and we'll go from there, 'kay?

That's what him and his ilk are all about. Telling everyone else what they should do, and how they should live. Because darn it, they know better than you. Their agenda is really an agenda of anti-freedom. And it extends to most aspects of life. They want to be able to tell you where you should live, when and where you can drive, what kind of car you should drive, what you should eat, what toilets you can use, and what kind lightbulbs you can use. It's about time some of them got punched in the face for thinking they're everyone elses rulers.

Shady: still stuck on full retard.

Our tax dollars should get spent on activities that allow for prosperity and encourage transactions between individuals. And the availability and ease of transporting both people and goods is one of the most important factors in economic stability and prosperity. Not only is it a GOOD thing to fund with taxation, its one of the most important things to fund. Every single person in this country benefits from having modern infrastructure thats available for everyone to use. Its the backbone of commerce.

And how do you propose we pay for the infrastructure? There's a $100B backlog in this country as it is. Do you think existing taxation mechanisms are sufficient?

[dre]

Sounds nice and, if these choices didn't have huge economic and social implications, entirely reasonable. As it stands, however, drivers are heavily subsidized on everything from the price of gas to the roads they drive on. So let's start with getting driver's to pay their real share and we'll go from there, 'kay?

Shady: still stuck on full retard.

And how do you propose we pay for the infrastructure? There's a $100B backlog in this country as it is. Do you think existing taxation mechanisms are sufficient?

And how do you propose we pay for the infrastructure? There's a $100B backlog in this country as it is. Do you think existing taxation mechanisms are sufficient?

I believe we already pay enough taxes to have modern transportation system and maintain it. Its a matter of spending priorities. Critical infrastructure is a good thing to spend on, that has a solid return on investment.

[Black Dog]

I believe we already pay enough taxes to have modern transportation system and maintain it. Its a matter of spending priorities. Critical infrastructure is a good thing to spend on, that has a solid return on investment.

As I said: the backlog alone is estimated to be about half to a third of Canada's total annual budget. Could some of this be taken care of by use of or slight modifications to existing mechanisms (say, a fully dedicated gas tax)? Sure. But given the competing priorities, I don't think there's enough to go around.

[Boges]

As I said: the backlog alone is estimated to be about half to a third of Canada's total annual budget. Could some of this be taken care of by use of or slight modifications to existing mechanisms (say, a fully dedicated gas tax)? Sure. But given the competing priorities, I don't think there's enough to go around.

It's wildly ironic that a public transit user, who's fares are subsidized says drivers don't pay enough.

Every year we pay $75 for a sticker, we pay insurance, we pay a gas tax then sales tax on top of that gas tax, Also if you're driving downtown you're paying for parking.

Black Dog, you've never once said what's a reasonable price for drivers to pay, you just say it isn't enough. What pray tell is enough?

Edited July 1, 2011 by Boges

[Black Dog]

It's wildly ironic that a public transit user, who's fares are subsidized says drivers don't pay enough.

I don't think irony in this case means what you think it means.

Every year we pay $75 for a sticker, we pay insurance, we pay a gas tax then sales tax on top of that gas tax, Also if you're driving downtown you're paying for parking.

Some of this stuff is just hilarious. Insurance? Parking? Registration? What does any of this have to do with infrastructure? The only arguments you can make are the gas tax (a portion of which goes to infrastructure) and general tax revenues (which both drivers and non drivers pay into).

Black Dog, you've never once said what's a reasonable price for drivers to pay, you just say it isn't enough. What pray tell is enough?

I don't have an exact number, but if you have been reading the thread, you'll see what kind of mechanisms I believe are neccesary.

Edited July 4, 2011 by Black Dog

[Boges]

How is it not ironic that someone, who gets his transportation costs subsidized, wants people, who don't get their transportation costs subsidized, to pay much more to use their car?

And I get that insurance and parking are just the cost of driving BUT! why shouldn't registration go to infrastructure? It's a provincial tax, one in which you are forced to pay if you want to drive. If that doesn't go directly to maintaining the road it should.

Black Dog, are you happy with a modest $1 or $2 toll for entering the city of Toronto using the DVP or Gardiner. Or do you believe in something more punitive, say a $5 or $10 daily toll for everyone who wants to go to Toronto.

[Bonam]

How is it not ironic that someone, who gets his transportation costs subsidized, wants people, who don't get their transportation costs subsidized, to pay much more to use their car?

Well, it's not really ironic because it's just the norm. Everyone always wants more stuff and for someone else to pay for it.

[Black Dog]

How is it not ironic that someone, who gets his transportation costs subsidized, wants people, who don't get their transportation costs subsidized, to pay much more to use their car?

It's not ironic because it's not even accurate. Your transportation costs are subsidized. In fact, I would guess they are more heavily subsidized than mine.

And I get that insurance and parking are just the cost of driving BUT! why shouldn't registration go to infrastructure? It's a provincial tax, one in which you are forced to pay if you want to drive. If that doesn't go directly to maintaining the road it should.

I can't say for certain, but I'd guess some of the registration fees go to maintaining the registration system. Some does go into infrastructure.

Black Dog, are you happy with a modest $1 or $2 toll for entering the city of Toronto using the DVP or Gardiner. Or do you believe in something more punitive, say a $5 or $10 daily toll for everyone who wants to go to Toronto.

There's tolls, there's congestion charges, there's electronic road pricing, there's all kinds of mechanisms that can be considered. I don't have a preferred system in mind, but that's not the point.

[Oleg Bach]

Sounds nice and, if these choices didn't have huge economic and social implications, entirely reasonable. As it stands, however, drivers are heavily subsidized on everything from the price of gas to the roads they drive on. So let's start with getting driver's to pay their real share and we'll go from there, 'kay?

Shady: still stuck on full retard.

And how do you propose we pay for the infrastructure? There's a $100B backlog in this country as it is. Do you think existing taxation mechanisms are sufficient?

We don't need to fix the roads and bridges - Lets be like the Americans and let the infrastructure rot - lets buy weapons! WEeeeeee!

[Boges]

I can't say for certain, but I'd guess some of the registration fees go to maintaining the registration system. Some does go into infrastructure.

That's pretty hilarious. Drivers are paying for to maintain a bureaucracy that does little for us.

This is why I despise those ladies at the MTO that I have to pay every birthday for a little sticker.

As for infrastructure. Lots of stuff gets done for roads out here in Halton to help reduce congestion. This is in opposition to the former mayor of your city, that did things to increase congestion like take lanes of traffic away and replace them with bike lanes.

[Black Dog]

That's pretty hilarious. Drivers are paying for to maintain a bureaucracy that does little for us.

You think vehicles should be unlicensed and unregistered?

This is why I despise those ladies at the MTO that I have to pay every birthday for a little sticker.

Yeah because it's their fault.

As for infrastructure. Lots of stuff gets done for roads out here in Halton to help reduce congestion. This is in opposition to the former mayor of your city, that did things to increase congestion like take lanes of traffic away and replace them with bike lanes.

Interesting theory: do you have any evidence at all that bike lanes increase traffic congestion?

[August1991]

Toll roads are a poor way to solve this problem. You will be lied to about what the money will be used for and how long the toll will last, and it cost money and requires permanent employees to collect the tolls.

We are better off just taxing people and businesses for infrastructure.

Wait a second. You pay to park your car on a street in a downtown area. Why should it be any different if your car is moving? IMV, a moving car takes up just as much space as a parked car and so car owners should pay for any road use at least on working days.

----

I don't really care what the government does with the revenues if at least it doesn't waste the money. For example, it could use the revenue to reduce property taxes.

If modern North American cities did this properly, they could eliminate all property taxes and rely solely on congestion taxes for revenues. This would accoplish two things: provide revenue and reduce congestion.

In a sense, congestion imposes costs now on people but this cost has no equivalent benefit to anyone. It is pure waste.

Edited July 4, 2011 by August1991

[dre]

As I said: the backlog alone is estimated to be about half to a third of Canada's total annual budget. Could some of this be taken care of by use of or slight modifications to existing mechanisms (say, a fully dedicated gas tax)? Sure. But given the competing priorities, I don't think there's enough to go around.

This is problem with government spending priorities. Its not the they dont have enough revenue for these core responsibilities. They spend wrong, and spend stupidly, and we socialize risk and privatize profit.

[August1991]

You're basically saying anyone that wants to go from one end of Ontario to the other has to pay just for the privilege of entering the great city of Toronto. Total bullshit.

If you want to toll it, it better be a provincial initiative and the profits should go to everyone in the province (or at least all the communities that use the 401) not just Hogtown.

If you want to fly over it or take the train through it, you have to pay. Why should it be any different if you drive a car?

So the City of Toronto would be mailing out bills to everyone and suspending licenses if people don't pay? Wonderful!

Like credit cards. How 1970s!

Our tax dollars should get spent on activities that allow for prosperity and encourage transactions between individuals.

That would include the possibility of rich people paying poor people to stay off the roads so there would be less congestion. At present, there is no way to conduct such a transaction.

Black Dog, are you happy with a modest $1 or $2 toll for entering the city of Toronto using the DVP or Gardiner. Or do you believe in something more punitive, say a $5 or $10 daily toll for everyone who wants to go to Toronto.

I'd suggest any number that eliminates congestion and ensures fluid traffic. At 3 am on a Monday, it may be free. At 5 pm on a Friday, it might cost $25.

And while I'm on the topic, I would bill someone's insurance company if an accident causes a huge traffic jam. People might drive more carefully if they took into account all the costs of an accident.

Edited July 4, 2011 by August1991

[dre]

Wait a second. You pay to park your car on a street in a downtown area. Why should it be any different if your car is moving? IMV, a moving car takes up just as much space as a parked car and so car owners should pay for any road use at least on working days.

We DO pay for the roads. We pay for them through taxation, fees, etc, and then we extend access to EVERYONE. Thats because the ease of movement of both people and goods is essential to the economy. Any kind of per km fee system will discourage trade and transactions and punish the companies that move our goods around.

And it makes no sense to build a whole new system of collecting revenue to pay for these things, because theres already systems that can be used nicely.

The problem isnt the funding model its that we have not made infrastructure a priority. This is about the most important thing the government does.

[dre]

That would include the possibility of rich people paying poor people to stay off the roads so there would be less congestion. At present, there is no way to conduct such a transaction.

The very last thing we want is lots of people staying off the roads because of unfavorable economics. The movement of people and goods is the backbone of our economy. The government already has a number of well established methods of getting revenue for infrastructure spending, and theres simply no need at all to add another one. No reason to build thousands of tollboths, our outfit millions of cars with transponders, and build a whole new layer of government beurocracy to manage at all. We would gain absolutely NOTHING from it.

[Boges]

You know the perfect solution for you people?

A GPS on everyone's car that tolled people no matter where they went. You drive 1 click to Shoppers at 10pm for some painkillers TOLL!!! You need to pay for convenience of onDemand transportation!!!

Fat chance any government tackling that though, they don't even have the courage to deal with the unsustainability of our healthcare system.

That's another far more contentious thread though.

[Bonam]

If modern North American cities did this properly, they could eliminate all property taxes and rely solely on congestion taxes for revenues. This would accoplish two things: provide revenue and reduce congestion.

It wouldn't work. That's a fundamentally self-defeating tax. If you put a fee on congestion, you reduce congestion. But if congestion is your main source of revenue, you don't want congestion to be reduced, since that kills your revenue stream. City councilors would then be put into the position of having to artificially engineer more congestion, or at least to forestall measures to reduce congestion, in order to keep city budgets afloat.

Terrible idea.

[Bonam]

If you want to fly over it or take the train through it, you have to pay. Why should it be any different if you drive a car?

You do pay: for the car itself, for insurance and registration, for parking, for fuel, for maintenance.

[Bonam]

You know the perfect solution for you people?

A GPS on everyone's car that tolled people no matter where they went. You drive 1 click to Shoppers at 10pm for some painkillers TOLL!!! You need to pay for convenience of onDemand transportation!!!

We already pay for the convenience of on demand transportation. It's called buying a car. No need to be jealous. You too can buy one.

Perhaps the government should charge you a fee for the convenience of on demand posting of nonsense on an internet forum? That is, besides the money you already pay for your computer and internet connection of course. Merely paying for a product is not enough. The government should always charge you a fee to use it.

Edited July 4, 2011 by Bonam

[dre]

It wouldn't work. That's a fundamentally self-defeating tax. If you put a fee on congestion, you reduce congestion. But if congestion is your main source of revenue, you don't want congestion to be reduced, since that kills your revenue stream. City councilors would then be put into the position of having to artificially engineer more congestion, or at least to forestall measures to reduce congestion, in order to keep city budgets afloat.

Terrible idea.

Thats the thing. Congestion is actually a good problem to have. All those people zooming around on the roads are on their way to purchase some things, or perform a service, and many of them are moving goods from one place to another to facilitate transactions between entities and individuals. This is why we have an economy. The government collects taxes from all this economic activity so really good infrasctructre development not only pays for itself but should increase revenue over time. That doesnt mean all infrasture projects make sense of course. Building a bridge to nowhere doesnt do anything for anyone.