Jump to content

Olivia Chow set to become Mayor of Toronto. Canada's largest city


Recommended Posts

The residential rate is the lowest of any municipality in Ontario, and ~50% below the national average. 

The commercial property tax rate is also below-average as well (by 10-15%), though there's an argument to be made that at least this encourages economic activity.

https://www.altusgroup.com/insights/canadian-property-tax-benchmark-report/ (download the "report" on the front page). 

59 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

The tax mill rate applied to a million dollar home, which is the low average home cost in Toronto, would bury residents who grew up in Toronto. You don’t even know how to be a leftist.

Great.  I'm not one.  I'm not particularly concerned with how people are going to afford to keep their big assets either.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

I asked this of @blackbird before.  What makes you think she wants the government to control the means of production?  Or are you just using the term socialist like the nutbars on this forum use it?

I don't think you know what 'social democrat' means. 

It is commonly used as, and in fact defined as

"noun A moderate political philosophy or ideology that aims to achieve socialistic goals within capitalist society such as by means of a strong welfare state and regulation of private industry."

It does not mean that the party wants to control the means of production directly.

Sooo. Would you say then that that would make YOU the 'nutbar'? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

I asked this of @blackbird before.  What makes you think she wants the government to control the means of production?  Or are you just using the term socialist like the nutbars on this forum use it?

Who said anything about controlling the means of production?  Socialism is far more than controlling the "means of production".   Socialists can tax businesses to death or tax workers and everyone to death.  They control property and businesses with regulations and taxes to make it very difficult or impossible to develop land, operate businesses, build apartments, housing or do anything.  They make endless regulations about how everyone is to live.  Under Socialism everyone loses more freedom and life becomes a regimented ordeal in every area.

God sends delusions to certain people who believe in Socialism.   Socialists believe all property and wealth belongs to them to distribute as they see fit.  This is a great lie because it is stealing.  But Socialist draw no line.  There is nowhere they cannot go and nothing they cannot touch.  It all belongs to them to do with as they see fit.   Such people believe government can do anything and build a utopia.  This is the lie.

.

 

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

The residential rate is the lowest of any municipality in Ontario, and ~50% below the national average.

Don't think so. When you look at what people actually pay per square foot it's higher.  Remember that the value of properties in toronto is also higher - so the actual tax rate per square foot of property is way higher.

That's why vancouver's tax rate per 1000 value is so low - the prices are so high that the actual rate per sq foot still works out to be higher.

Here ya go.

https://www.canadianrealestatemagazine.ca/expert-advice/canadian-average-home-prices-by-city-compared-334894.aspx

So the actual tax for two properties which are identical - one in toronto and one in ottawa - is actually higher in toronto.

So raising taxes would be a mistake Toronto already pays more.

3 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

The commercial property tax rate is also below-average as well (by 10-15%), though there's an argument to be made that at least this encourages economic activity.

As per above.

3 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Great.  I'm not one.

Uh huh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"9  Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 10  And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11  And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12  That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. "  2 Thessalonians 2:9-12 KJV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One who has accepted Christ as Lord and Savior and as a logical consequence read his Word (the King James Version in English) has nothing to worry about.  As the world in general appears to be literally going to H, the believer is protected, sanctified and saved. 

" 13  But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: 14  Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. 15  Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle. "  2 Thessalonians 2:13-15 KJV

If you have not yet accepted Christ, you need to deal with it.  Read the Gospel of John, and other epistles in the New Testament.  Once you have have confessed your sinfulness and accepted Christ, you should confess Him before men. 

If you were born into Romanism, you can still make the decision to accept Christ and turn from that false system.  You don't have to do anything except flee from it into the arms of Jesus Christ.

Then you might see more clearly the folly of Socialism and other worldly isms.

"  7  Some trust in chariots, and some in horses: but we will remember the name of the LORD our God. 8  They are brought down and fallen: but we are risen, and stand upright. 9  Save, LORD: let the king hear us when we call. "  Psalm 20:7-9 KJV

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Don't think so. When you look at what people actually pay per square foot it's higher.  Remember that the value of properties in toronto is also higher - so the actual tax rate per square foot of property is way higher.

Not relevant for a few reasons:

1)  Property taxes are percentage-based rather than on square footage for clear and deliberate reasons. 

2) The MPAC assessments for 2023 are based on values from 7 years ago and are no way reflective of current market values

3)  Low property taxes are a feedback loop driving prices higher anyways, just like low interest rates did.  

 

Regardless, we can also look at Toronto's satellite communities and commuter towns (places like Brampton, Guelph, Ajax, Pickering, Oshawa etc) to see property values in the same neighborhood as Toronto, yet roughly double the residential property tax rates.

Even on a per-square foot basis, Toronto's still a lot lower than its neighbors.  PropertyTaxesOntario.thumb.png.a723fd91d3656bd034d8a364c2c3f2d3.png   

 

TDLR:  I pay more property tax in Guelph than someone does for a same-sized home in Toronto worth $2M+ 

Edited by Moonbox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Not relevant for a few reasons:

1)  Property taxes are percentage-based rather than on square footage for clear and deliberate reasons. 

They're based on value - and value translates into per square foot rates obviously.  And either way it's entirely relevant.  The cost for the same home in taxes is more in toronto.

6 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

2) The MPAC assessments for 2023 are based on values from 7 years ago and are no way reflective of current market values

Prices were higher in toronto 7 years ago as well.

6 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

3)  Low property taxes are a feedback loop driving prices higher anyways, just like low interest rates did.  

Cool story but that doesn't change the fact that people in toronto pay more for their property taxes for the same place.

6 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

 

Regardless, we can also look at Toronto's satellite communities and commuter towns (places like Brampton, Guelph, Ajax, Pickering, Oshawa etc) to see property values in the same neighborhood as Toronto, yet roughly double the residential property tax rates.

Well to work that out we need to compare apples to apples. And when you do that toronto is not the lowest.

Lets start off and see how big the difference with Guleph really is.

The average size of a home in Guleph is larger than the average in Toronto.  So while the average price seems lower that's also for more space.

To break it down properly you have to look at the price per square foot.  Here :

https://www.cp24.com/news/this-is-how-many-square-feet-300-000-buys-you-in-different-ontario-cities-1.6104612

so for guleph it's 435 sq feet per 300,000 dollars -  and in toronto it's 247

 So - if you and a guy in toronto both owned 300 k dollars worth of space - you would pay 3,551 dollars or  8.16 per squ foot you owned and he would pay 1,896 dollars or 7.67

Pretty close - and when you start going through some of the other areas around toronto and doing the math toronto is not the lowest. Windsor for example only pays 5.67 per sq foot. That's 26 percent cheaper than toronto.

So toronto is NOT the lowest in ontario at all, it's not even the lowest in that general area. And even for more expensive ones like Guleph its pretty close. It's certainly not a big differene - about 6 percent. Certainly not 50 or anything.

AND - as i mentioned earlier and that report you posted confirmed - their COMMERCIAL property taxes are actually higher whne you work it out and that allows the residential to stay lower.  But if you raise residential without lowering commercial then people wont want to relocate to the area and bring their business.

I realize this gets a little complicated. You can see the dangers of your original simplistic approach without considering all the variables .

 

But in the end toronto is NOT the lowest at all, nor is it considerably lower than some of the higher ones.

Raising property taxes would be a mistake.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, blackbird said:

One who has accepted Christ as Lord and Savior and as a logical consequence read his Word (the King James Version in English) has nothing to worry about.  As the world in general appears to be literally going to H, the believer is protected, sanctified and saved.

The Cummins 6BT  24valve version is a proven engine in a variety of applications, but really shines as the power for heavy 3/4 ton and 1 ton Dodge (RAM) trucks.  The torque band rises quickly and is broad and flat until the governed RPM limit.  If any of you folks are contemplating towing cattle/holiday/toy hauler trailers, this powerplant won't dissappoint. 

" 13  But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: 14  Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. 15  Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle. "  2 Thessalonians 2:13-15 KJV

Farm fresh eggs-boiled, real mayonnaise, chopped green onions, dash of good quality curry, salt & pepper to taste, on a crusty toasted rye bread . . . . . and a big cold dill pickle!  Yummmm

If you have not yet accepted Christ, you need to deal with it.  Read the Gospel of John, and other epistles in the New Testament.  Once you have have confessed your sinfulness and accepted Christ, you should confess Him before men. 

Many moons ago (when the earth was still cooling) we would saddle up and ride downtown Calgary on the Sunday evening before Stampede week.  There would be lots of riders from all over doing the same . . . was a lot of fun then, Cowtown wasn't the metropolitan monster it is now.  Edmonton was always a stuffy place when compared to Calgary with  its oil and beef money, and a western American influence . . . . Edmonton smells of boiled cabbage, Calgary smells of horsesh!t and money . . . and the girls are prettier!

If you were born into Romanism, you can still make the decision to accept Christ and turn from that false system.  You don't have to do anything except flee from it into the arms of Jesus Christ. Then you might see more clearly the folly of Socialism and other worldly isms.

Grew up on the prairie when there was still prairie to grow up on.  Now, you have to cross into Montana to see what bunchgrass looks like anymore.  The Piegan/Blood/Blackfeet haven't fenced, furrowed, fk'ed their traditional lands as the Canadian farmers have done . . . very 'at home' in Montana . . 

"  7  Some trust in chariots, and some in horses: but we will remember the name of the LORD our God. 8  They are brought down and fallen: but we are risen, and stand upright. 9  Save, LORD: let the king hear us when we call. "  Psalm 20:7-9 KJV

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Nefarious Banana said:

 

"Second Thessalonians 2:9–10 says, “[Satan comes] with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.” Satan hates the truth of the gospel and the truth of the cross more than any other truth.

Remember when Satan was on earth, he tried to keep Jesus away from the cross. In Matthew 16:23, when Peter says, “No, no, no. This isn’t going to happen to you,” Jesus says, “Get behind me, Satan!” That’s what Satan wants. He doesn’t want Jesus to die for the sins of the world. Even though at the end, Satan gave up on that strategy and filled Judas to get him to betray Jesus. Nevertheless, at the end, he’s trying to make it as horrible as possible. But his first design was “I’m not going to let him get to the cross, no way.”

Now, Satan is mainly bent on preventing the message of the cross from being spread, from being understood, and from being believed. And he does everything in his power to distort and silence the saving message of the cross."

Where Is Satan Most Visibly Active Today? | Desiring God

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

It's a sign of instability that Toronto will now turn to a true socialist for help, but with working people getting beat up as they have been it was only a matter of time before they considered this.

I doubt most of them are even aware of it. She's just the most familiar name.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

270K at foodbanks... how are we doing with those taxes?

Food banks are not really a reliable indicator of poverty in a city with almost half its population made up of immigrants. 

Most of those immigrants come from poor, hardscrabble countries where you take advantage of anything and everything you can. If you offer someone from Somalia or Afghanistan or even India free food they're going to take it, whether they need it or not. There are also videos on youtube informing Indian students how foodbanks are a great source of free food, and I imagine other foreign students are similarly benefiting.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

If Toronto has “regular gun fights and knifings”, what the heck is happening in Edmonton??  
 

Edmonton has double the homicide rate of Toronto.  

And a lot more natives, who are responsible for the majority of crime that the Somali immigrants/refugees don't get up to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

To break it down properly you have to look at the price per square foot.  Here :

There's a reason why square footage isn't the main determinant of market value, and it's the same reason why municipalities don't set property tax rates by the square foot.  Your breakdown is irrelevant.

Even then, you used numbers for only downtown Toronto, where folks buy 500 sq ft closets condos so they can live in walkable communities close to all of the cool amenities and not have to drive anywhere, which wildly skews the numbers you tried to break down, and even then, property taxes are still higher (in sq footage) in freaking Guelph.  

Edited by Moonbox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

There's a reason why square footage isn't the main determinant of market value, and it's the same reason why municipalities don't set property tax rates by the square foot.  Your breakdown is irrelevant.

It's entirely relevant - don't be such a sore loser :P

The reason municipalities use value is it's easier to calculate on a simple basis but the RATE they come up with and how they arrive at that is based very much on the average per square foot price - that's why places where prices are higher charge lower rates.

If they didn't then people in vacouver would pay insane amounts of tax compared to other places.  So they all look at that and say 'we need to raise x dollars, there's y number of taxable square feet out there, therefore we need to average this - now what rate gives us that"

So - a person with the same place in windsor as in toronto would pay far less taxes in actual dollar amounts. For the same place. So you can't say toronto is the lowest.

19 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Even then, you used numbers for only downtown Toronto, where folks buy 500 sq ft closets condos so they can live in walkable communities close to all of the cool amenities and not have to drive anywhere, which wildly skews the numbers you tried to break down, and even then, property taxes are still higher (in sq footage) in freaking Guelph.  

If we expand to other parts of toronto it proves my point even more.  But - go ahead and calculate the numbers if you like

And your claim was that toronto was the lowest in Ontairo. It's BARELY lower than guleph and it's far higher than freaking WINDSOR. By a lot actually.

Property taxes are already fairly high in Toronto - raising them would be a mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

It's entirely relevant - don't be such a sore loser :P

There you go again, proclaiming victory for yourself.  ?

10 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

The reason municipalities use value is it's easier to calculate on a simple basis but the RATE they come up with and how they arrive at that is based very much on the average per square foot price

Utter nonsense.  Nothing would be simpler than charging a flat property tax rate by square footage.  It would eliminate the need for MPAC assessments and streamline everything.  It would also be retarded,  because property taxes on a $3M condo DT would be lower than a dilapidated wreck on the wrong side of the river, among other reasons.  

20 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

that's why places where prices are higher charge lower rates.

Lower rates are possible because property values are higher and generate more revenue, and because population density allows lower per-capita service costs.  The idea that City Halls are setting their budgets based on their average resident's square footage is ridiculous.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

There you go again, proclaiming victory for yourself.  ?

Yeah - pointing out that something is factually accurate when you thought it wasn't isn't really 'declaring victory'.

But hey - if it makes you feel better about yourself to think of yourself as a victim or something, you do you

31 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Utter nonsense.

Sigh. There you go declaring victory for yourself again.

31 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

  Nothing would be simpler than charging a flat property tax rate by square footage.

Well, actually that would be pretty hard. How would you account for land value? If i have a prime hunk of real estate but havn't built on it yet - i pay no taxes at all? Or  i put an out house on it and that's all the tax i pay? I can sit on 3 acres of land down town with no tax as long as i don't have buildings on it?

That's why it's a consideration but it's not the only factor.

Further it wouldn't account for improvements to the property.

Interestingly enough there ARE proposals out there to look at switching to flat tax system and there are places that do it but for the reasons i just mentioned and others it's not popular at all.

31 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

 

Lower rates are possible because property values are higher and generate more revenue,

THat's literally what i've been saying and you've been arguing against. You've got this weird habit of switching positions in the middle of a discussion and pretending it was your position all along when your arguments don't pan out.

So  a lower rate does not mean the person pays lower tax. They may pay MORE tax for a similar property even though the rate is lower.

31 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

and because population density allows lower per-capita service costs. 

Sure, that can be a factor.

31 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

The idea that City Halls are setting their budgets based on their average resident's square footage is ridiculous.  

Well as i've shown you've been completely and entirely wrong' about literally everything else you've claimed on this subject so you'll understand when i say you very clearly have no idea what is or is not ridiculous or how ANY of this works.

I mean - you honestly thought at the start of this that people in toronto paid less tax for a similar property than anyone else in ontario.

 

Edited by CdnFox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Well, actually that would be pretty hard. How would you account for land value? If i have a prime hunk of real estate but havn't built on it yet - i pay no taxes at all? Or  i put an out house on it and that's all the tax i pay? I can sit on 3 acres of land down town with no tax as long as i don't have buildings on it?

That was point.  They calculate taxes based on property value because it's the only thing that makes sense, not because it's simple.  I provided an example, and now you've provided several on top of that, showing us why a municipality doesn't give a crap what your square footage is.   

3 hours ago, CdnFox said:

That's why it's a consideration but it's not the only factor.

It's a consideration for how much your property is worth.  It has nothing to do with how municipalities set their property tax rates, which is what you've been saying.  

3 hours ago, CdnFox said:

THat's literally what i've been saying and you've been arguing against. You've got this weird habit of switching positions in the middle of a discussion and pretending it was your position all along when your arguments don't pan out.

No, this is what you were arguing:

6 hours ago, CdnFox said:

the RATE they come up with and how they arrive at that is based very much on the average per square foot price

Which is ridiculous.  The municipal budget could not care less what your square foot price is.  All they care about is what your property is worth, how much revenue that generates for them, and what the budget surplus or deficit is.  If they are taking less money in than they are spending, they have to either cut spending or raise taxes. 

In Toronto's case, they can keep trying to go back to the provincial and federal governments for handouts, but it hasn't worked lately.  Consequently, property taxes rates have gone UP, while square footage per person has done the opposite.

Edited by Moonbox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...