Ontario Drivers Pay Bulk of Road Costs

[The Options Menu]

Can everyone point this thread out to fuji. I seem to remember him stating the opposite of the study as the absolute truth in his zeal to keep the city Vehicle tax.

I'm actually shocked he hasn't come in to claim the CAA as kooky!

Actually, this study is something of an outlier. Most past studies HAVE shown that cars are effectively subsidized. The source of funds for the study is somewhat suspicious in that it has a clear pro-car agenda. With that being said, given shifting levels and sources of government funding, it is possible that personal vehicle owners do NOW pay more, at least in the short run ignoring the total cost of car ownership. As was pointed out, it doesn't really change much a heavy vehicles are still massively subsidized compared to the damage they do**, and APPROPRIATE transit delivers a public good that not only helps a city function, but actually helps all drivers.

** With heavy vehicles you can make a case that it helps make goods cheaper to bring to market. Many people, myself included, would much rather see the cost of heavy vehicles go up and the cost of heavy rail go down, with a transition to more of a spoke and hub system. It gets lots heavy vehicles off the roads, is more efficient (as heavy vehicles are heavily subsidized under our system), is greener, and if implemented sanely it should have little impact on the price of goods.

 

[fuji]

Can everyone point this thread out to fuji. I seem to remember him stating the opposite of the study as the absolute truth in his zeal to keep the city Vehicle tax.

I'm actually shocked he hasn't come in to claim the CAA as kooky!

Certainly. Proper studies don't leave out the most significant costs.

 

[Ref]

all this really proves is that we've got a revenue problem.

Ontario has a spending problem, not a revenue problem.

Some stats to remind you of this...

* Ontario's debt has increased by $110 billion since the Liberal government came in to power in 2003
* Ontario pays over $10 billion per year to pay the annual interest on the debt (we are fucked even more if interest rates climb)
* Spending has increased by over 60% since the Liberals came in to power - Over $44 billion more per year
* The rate of population growth increased in all provinces between 2006 & 2011 except for Ontario

http://www.taxpayer.com/media/OntarioDebt_Backgrounder.pdf

http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2011/as-sa/98-310-x/98-310-x2011001-eng.cfm

http://viableopposition.blogspot.ca/2012/03/ontarios-fiscal-history-it-is-not.html

We currently have Frankenspecs screaming for revenue tools....What she really needs to do is control spending and focus on reducing the debt.

Thing is, since the Liberals took office ten years ago, revenues have increased (substantially through higher taxes, premiums and user fees), and had they exercised any form of spending constraint, or even tried to keep spending at recent historical levels, we would not have the massive debt load we do now.

So, to say we have a revenue problem does not make sense to me, considering that revenues have increased substantially, but spending has gone completely out of control!

 

[great bear]

Asking a Liberal to constrain spending and debt is like putting Dracula in charge of the Canadian Blood Agency.

 

[Azprint]

Asking a Liberal to constrain spending and debt is like putting Dracula in charge of the Canadian Blood Agency.

That is hilarious. Too bad your conservative honeys don't have a track record to be anything different when it comes to managing the books.

 

[shakenbake]

Asking a Liberal to constrain spending and debt is like putting Dracula in charge of the Canadian Blood Agency.

And here's proof.

 

[Azprint]

And here's proof.

So that shows that from 2002-2008 Liberals ran balance sheets better untill 2008 when major shit storm hit, that even as much as you would love to blame it on McGuinty, wasn't his fault.