Smallc Posted November 24, 2011 Report Posted November 24, 2011 Well, Ottawa has a big project underway that should help. Quote
guyser Posted November 24, 2011 Report Posted November 24, 2011 Come to Ottawa, Rush Hour is from 3:30pm to about 6:00PM. Lucky you! Try a rush hour from 7AM to 9PM Monday to Friday. Quote
fellowtraveller Posted November 24, 2011 Report Posted November 24, 2011 I'm aware that it's a regional problem. I suppose the province could do something along the lines of what you suggest and toll the provincial highways to pay for regional infrastructure and transit improvements. The city could charge its own congestion pricing. Why stop regionally?Capital TTC projects are already heavily subsidized by the province and feds, why not extend the toll to other provinces to pay for GTA infrastructure? Quote The government should do something.
Smallc Posted November 24, 2011 Report Posted November 24, 2011 Why stop regionally? Capital TTC projects are already heavily subsidized by the province and feds, As are all capital projects, in every city. Quote
dre Posted November 24, 2011 Report Posted November 24, 2011 (edited) I can see why charging people to move around is a popular idea with some but its a really stupid one. Congested roads are a good thing... they mean that people are racing around buying stuff, delivering goods, going to work etc. If you want a strong economy then you make it as easy and inexpensive for people and goods to move around as possible. Edited November 24, 2011 by dre Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
cybercoma Posted November 24, 2011 Report Posted November 24, 2011 Another way of shifting costs to the middle and lower classes... Exactly. Quote
guyser Posted November 24, 2011 Report Posted November 24, 2011 I can see why charging people to move around is a popular idea with some but its a really stupid one. Congested roads are a good thing... they mean that people are racing around buying stuff, delivering goods, going to work etc. If you want a strong economy then you make it as easy and inexpensive for people and goods to move around as possible. Uh...nope Traffic congestion costs productivity losses in excess of $3 billion a year. Do a google search on 'Cost of traffic congestion in Toronto"....or insert another metropolis. Quote
Black Dog Posted November 24, 2011 Report Posted November 24, 2011 I can see why charging people to move around is a popular idea with some but its a really stupid one. Congested roads are a good thing... they mean that people are racing around buying stuff, delivering goods, going to work etc. Congested roads mean people are sitting in traffic, doing none of those things. Quote
dre Posted November 24, 2011 Report Posted November 24, 2011 Congested roads mean people are sitting in traffic, doing none of those things. Right but the fact that those roads are busy means the government can collect revenue to spend on infrastructure. The real problem would come when those roads are empty. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
dre Posted November 24, 2011 Report Posted November 24, 2011 Uh...nope Traffic congestion costs productivity losses in excess of $3 billion a year. Do a google search on 'Cost of traffic congestion in Toronto"....or insert another metropolis. That means its time to spend on infrastructure, by taxing the economy. Its great news and it means the economy is growing. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
guyser Posted November 24, 2011 Report Posted November 24, 2011 That means its time to spend on infrastructure, by taxing the economy. Its great news and it means the economy is growing. Ok, but the cost has to be bourne somewhere, and funds are tight so tolls is one way. But then....you happen to think... I can see why charging people to move around is a popular idea with some but its a really stupid one You are mix messaging here. Quote
dre Posted November 24, 2011 Report Posted November 24, 2011 Ok, but the cost has to be bourne somewhere, and funds are tight so tolls is one way. But then....you happen to think... You are mix messaging here. Why would revenue be tight in an environment where theres to much economic activity that our infrastructure is over capacity? Infrastructure is the governments most important job, and investing in it means they will collect more taxes later. They are either mis-spending, or not collecting enough. We are gonna be pretty sorry in a decade or so if we are too cheap to pay for vital public infrastructure. And charging people money for "moving" is not a great answer at all. Infrastructure is actually the one thing that its smart for governments to defecit spend on because its an investment. Seems like if we can afford to spend 36 billion in borrowed money on some planes that offer no ROI whatsoever we should be able to build roads. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
fellowtraveller Posted November 24, 2011 Report Posted November 24, 2011 As are all capital projects, in every city. every city is getting billions in provincial and federal money for transit? I don't think so. Edmonton has to perform unnatural acts to get a fraction of what should be their share. I think they are being punished for electing a NDP MP. Twice. Quote The government should do something.
noahbody Posted November 24, 2011 Report Posted November 24, 2011 Edmonton has to perform unnatural acts to get a fraction of what should be their share. I think you're taking "Edmonton sucks" out of context. I think they are being punished for electing a NDP MP. Twice. Edmonton did get $200 million for transit in 2009. What's their fair share? Also which cities are getting more than their fair share in your opinion and how many NDP MPs to they have? Quote
Smallc Posted November 24, 2011 Report Posted November 24, 2011 (edited) Edmonton has to perform unnatural acts to get a fraction of what should be their share. First of all, the Edmonton CMA is less than 1/5th the size of the GTA, and second, Edmonton gets money from the Alberta government (as does Calgary) every year that most cities could only dream of....as well as some federal money. Edmonton is getting its fair share of transit funding. Only $200M a year: http://www.edmonton.ca/city_government/city_wide_initiatives/funding-programs.aspx Edited November 24, 2011 by Smallc Quote
Black Dog Posted November 24, 2011 Report Posted November 24, 2011 Why would revenue be tight in an environment where theres to much economic activity that our infrastructure is over capacity? Infrastructure is the governments most important job, and investing in it means they will collect more taxes later. They are either mis-spending, or not collecting enough. We are gonna be pretty sorry in a decade or so if we are too cheap to pay for vital public infrastructure. And charging people money for "moving" is not a great answer at all. Why not? Infrastructure is actually the one thing that its smart for governments to defecit spend on because its an investment. Seems like if we can afford to spend 36 billion in borrowed money on some planes that offer no ROI whatsoever we should be able to build roads. I don't disagree, but I don't see why you want to take on debt when there's other ways to finance this stuff such as making users pay a bit. Quote
cybercoma Posted November 24, 2011 Report Posted November 24, 2011 Sitting in traffic means people are burning more fuel, which is a good thing for Canada's oil industry. [/hawk] Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.