Toll lanes coming to QEW

[IM469]

You paid for the electric plant through your taxes. Deal with it.

Absolutely false. Excluding the service and ongoing plant maintenance, the power plants were built with borrowed money creating a bill so extraordinarily high that you have a separate line item on your monthly bill to service the debt. As painful as this could be, maybe you should stow the communist rhetoric and drop the electric power reference since - as in highways and other services - it is a ongoing expense.

Also I am continuing to pay 14 cents a litre for gas for the continuous roadway upgrade & service so I am not buying that the highways need the trivial contribution of a few elitists more concerned that they reach work 15 minutes earlier than the people that paid the bulk of the finances for the highway they are travelling.

 

[rhuarc29]

You don't seem to know. In a market economy price matches supply with those who have the greatest demand.

You seem to be missing the point I've reiterated I think three times now. Just because private interests are run on capitalist principles (and there's nothing wrong with that), doesn't mean our government should be, nor is it. Very few government services in Canada are run that way.

 

[fuji]

You seem to be missing the point I've reiterated I think three times now. Just because private interests are run on capitalist principles (and there's nothing wrong with that), doesn't mean our government should be, nor is it. Very few government services in Canada are run that way.

You got shot down in flames on your attempts to make that argument. You tried citing healthcare or the police and it turned out that they are triaged to give priority to d some cases over others.

You actually haven't proposed ANY alternative. Clearly we need to prioritize access, and clearly we aren't going to hire triage nurses to staff the highway onramps.

Tolls are the only solution anyone has proposed.

I can give you lots of examples of governments charging user fees, auctioning access to resources, etc.

 

[Frankfooter]

You seem to be missing the point I've reiterated I think three times now. Just because private interests are run on capitalist principles (and there's nothing wrong with that), doesn't mean our government should be, nor is it. Very few government services in Canada are run that way.

funghi doesn't support democracy, only plutocracy.
He already claims he moved to the US, where I hope he can happily pay lots of road tolls.

 

[basketcase]

You got shot down in flames on your attempts to make that argument. You tried citing healthcare or the police and it turned out that they are triaged to give priority to d some cases over others.
....

You might have noticed that medical triage in Canada is based on need, not annual income.

But in this case I have no problem if some moron is willing to pay $1000 to save a few minutes while here on vacation.

 

[fuji]

You might have noticed that medical triage in Canada is based on need, not annual income.

Obviously. The point being that it is a strategy to prioritize access to a scarce resource.

How do you propose to prioritize access to the highway?

Not prioritizing access isn't an option, it results in economically devastating gridlock. We certainly could station triage nurses at the onramps but it seems that fees are the usual way of prioritizing use of a resource that confers primarily economic benefits.

 

[basketcase]

...
How do you propose to prioritize access to the highway?
....

As a public institution, any prioritization should be on need instead of wealth.

And what we need instead of prioritization is better options. I would rather the entire highway be HOV2+ during rush hours than have lanes reserved for the wealthy apparatchiks.

p.s. It is interesting that someone who is barely ever in Toronto thinks himself an expert on what the city needs.

 

[fuji]

As a public institution, any prioritization should be on need instead of wealth.

"To each according to his need" may be appropriate in healthcare but it is not the right way to prioritize access to economic resources. It is not hiw we prioritize access to street parking, public airwaves, mineral rights, land, recreation programs, licenses, swimming pools, postal service, etc, etc, etc, etc, we prioritize with a fee.

If you want to prioritize special cases, say you want pregnant women to have priority access, you can allow people to acquire transponders that give them free access, the way we give out parking passes to the handicapped and so on

But generally a fee is the best way to let people send select whether they have a need or not.

PS., I pay property tax to Toronto.

 

[basketcase]

Roads are not an 'economic resource'. They are a route of transportation and not the only one.

 

[fuji]

Roads are not an 'economic resource'. They are a route of transportation and not the only one.

Which is an economic resource. We are talking about alleviating rush hour commuter traffic, which is almost entirely people trying to get to work (economic), mixed with people trying to go shopping (economic), and commercial traffic (economic). Police/fire/ambulance is already prioritized higher than that traffic via sirens and is outside this discussion. People commuting for pleasure tend to avoid rush hour anyway, and if they don't most would agree that is the lowest priority on the road.

You avoided mentioning that you lost the debate on fees being charged for public resources, such as street parking.

 

[basketcase]

Which is an economic resource. ....

By the same spurious reasoning so are hospitals since they keep people healthy enough to be economically productive.

 

[rhuarc29]

"To each according to his need" may be appropriate in healthcare but it is not the right way to prioritize access to economic resources. It is not hiw we prioritize access to street parking, public airwaves, mineral rights, land, recreation programs, licenses, swimming pools, postal service, etc, etc, etc, etc, we prioritize with a fee.

All implemented by a government that can't manage its finances and so needs new ways to make additional income without the political fallout of additional taxes.

You got shot down in flames on your attempts to make that argument. You tried citing healthcare or the police and it turned out that they are triaged to give priority to d some cases over others.

Oh brother....

As basketcase already mentioned, healthcare is prioritized based on need, something that can be readily ascertained. Much more difficult, if not impossible, to do that with traffic on a daily basis.

Your "solution" creates more congestion, but allows quicker access for those who choose to pay the toll; which of course doesn't equate to need whatever you may say. Frankly I think it would be based far more on convenience than need.
My solution, which you don't think of as a solution, is to open up that lane to all traffic, thereby alleviating some congestion across the board. That is an option, whether you think so or not.

Btw, why the hell do you keep claiming victory for your arguments? You didn't win any debate. You haven't swung us over to your line of thinking. I think you have several valid points, because I'm not a stubborn ass who can't see beyond his own viewpoint. That said, I'm further away from agreeing with you then when we started this debate.

 

[fuji]

By the same spurious reasoning so are hospitals since they keep people healthy enough to be economically productive.

Hospitals, police, fire, and ambulances are life critical.

 

[fuji]

All implemented by a government that can't manage its finances and so needs new ways to make additional income without the political fallout of additional taxes.



Oh brother....

As basketcase already mentioned, healthcare is prioritized based on need, something that can be readily ascertained. Much more difficult, if not impossible, to do that with traffic on a daily basis.

Your "solution" creates more congestion, but allows quicker access for those who choose to pay the toll; which of course doesn't equate to need whatever you may say. Frankly I think it would be based far more on convenience than need.
My solution, which you don't think of as a solution, is to open up that lane to all traffic, thereby alleviating some congestion across the board. That is an option, whether you think so or not.

Btw, why the hell do you keep claiming victory for your arguments? You didn't win any debate. You haven't swung us over to your line of thinking. I think you have several valid points, because I'm not a stubborn ass who can't see beyond his own viewpoint. That said, I'm further away from agreeing with you then when we started this debate.

The point that traffic must be prioritized has been made. The point that public services are routinely prioritized by pricing has been made. What point do you and BC possibly still have?

Your ludicrous claims the public infrastructure isn't charged for was easily refuted with a ton of examples, starting with street parking.

Nothing left of your arguments at this point...

Your "solution" is to perpetuate the current unacceptably long commuting times and horrendously inefficient use of our roads. It doesn't scale. The jams will get worse and worse and choke the economic life out of the city.

You have to prioritize traffic.

There are only two ways: do it bureaucratically be handing out transponders or something to those with the greatest need, or charge a toll and let those with the greatest need self select.

No one seems to support the bureaucratic way, which leaves tolls as THE ONLY ACTUAL SOLUTION.

 

[AK-47]

When fuji starts using CAPITAL letters, thats when you know you've gotten under his skin

 

[fuji]

When fuji starts using CAPITAL letters, thats when you know you've gotten under his skin

I have little tolerance for people who are slow on the draw.

 

[AK-47]

I have little tolerance for people who are slow on the draw

Nah, you just wanna have the last word in every thread

 

[rhuarc29]

Your "solution" is to perpetuate the current unacceptably long commuting times and horrendously inefficient use of our roads. It doesn't scale.

Of course it scales. It has always scaled. Obviously in an urban area like Toronto such scaling is difficult due to available real estate to expand. But, unless you want to put controls on population, such scaling is required. Besides, we're talking about space that is already available.

Nothing left of your arguments at this point...

That's funny. I could say the same about yours. Your "solution" doesn't actually solve congestion, it makes it worse on average. Your claim that it speeds up priority traffic has no basis, because it's not based on need, it's based on wealth. You fully admit that at least some government services are not based on your capitalist ideals. I fully admit that some government services are, but that such methods often tend to be based on a fiscally irresponsible government reaching desperately for cash. Unbridled capitalism is basically a plutocracy; I hope you're not advocating for that in Canada.

Just because you don't understand alternative viewpoints, doesn't make the author of those viewpoints slow. Don't insult my intelligence because you choose not to look outside that little box that encapsulates your thinking.

 

[fuji]

Of course it scales. It has always scaled.

Having the longest commute times in North America is failing, not scaling.

That's funny. I could say the same about yours. Your "solution" doesn't actually solve congestion, it makes it worse on average.

The solution proposed by the Ontario government increases the average speed of travel dramatically for the priority traffic.

Your claim that it speeds up priority traffic has no basis, because it's not based on need, it's based on wealth.

Take the communist bullshit to a different thread. People in market economies understand that those willing to pay a higher price have a greater need.

Let me win the point: if two guys are trying to get to work, the economy benefits more, as measured by GDP, by prioritizing the guy with the highest income. A minute of his time is by definition worth more than a minute of the lower income person's time.

 

[rhuarc29]

Having the longest commute times in North America is failing, not scaling.

It's failing to scale.

The solution proposed by the Ontario government increases the average speed of travel dramatically for the priority traffic.

It increases the average speed of whoever uses the lane, that's for sure.

....if two guys are trying to get to work, the economy benefits more, as measured by GDP, by prioritizing the guy with the highest income. A minute of his time is by definition worth more than a minute of the lower income person's time.

Ahh, so we're talking income here and not wealth; oftentimes one does not dictate the other. Besides that, income does not necessarily point to productivity. Even assuming those who inherited their wealth for some reason avoid the priority lane and those who do make the most are also the most productive on average, the increased congestion in non-priority lanes would more than offset any benefit versus opening the lane to everyone. The only actual benefit to having a HOT lane versus a regular lane is that it is a source of income for the government to help account for their fiscal irresponsibility.

Here is what will happen. The HOT lane will be free for certain people. Firemen, police services, paramedics, etc.... Makes sense that these people would be granted free access to the HOT lane. But then they'll open it up to other public sector employees. Politicans; why not? They're big important men/women responsible for running the country after all. Then other public sector workers will receive the same perk. I mean, any tolls collected from these people go right back into the public coffers anyway, so lets grant them compensated access to the priority lane. As if public sector employees didn't already have enough advantage over their private counterparts. Need has now gone right out the window in exchange for granting priority access to the wealthy and those with the right connections. Ahhh, plutocracy at work!

Democratic societies should not have their governments run like that.