Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction - Page 404

Trainguy · #**8061** Posted **May 17, 2017, 6:43 PM**

Translink has not found a way to pay for their 20% of this project. A gas tax is not the way to go. People find ways of avoiding that. The best way to pay for this thing is a rise in the PST. That way everyone who buys stuff, pays for it even visitors. Home owners should not be saddled with the cost because not everyone is a home owner. Once the project is paid off, lower the PST back to where it was.

Bdawe · #**8062** Posted **May 17, 2017, 6:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trainguy

Home owners should not be saddled with the cost because not everyone is a home owner. Once the project is paid off, lower the PST back to where it was.

Not everyone is a homeowner, and not everyone see's an unearned boost to their wealth from public infrastructure, but homeowners do (as do landlords, and commercial real estate owners )

Trainguy · #**8063** Posted **May 17, 2017, 6:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bdawe

Not everyone is a homeowner, and not everyone see's an unearned boost to their wealth from public infrastructure, but homeowners do (as do landlords, and commercial real estate owners )

Homeowners not anywhere near the project won't see any benefit from it. Go the PST route because it nails everyone rich or poor.

Bdawe · #**8064** Posted **May 17, 2017, 9:10 PM**

why are you so insistent on "nailing" the poor?

CanSpice · #**8065** Posted **May 17, 2017, 9:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trainguy

Homeowners not anywhere near the project won't see any benefit from it.

As a resident of New Westminster I see no benefit from a bridge in Kelowna yet I pay for it.

And your assertion that TransLink hasn't found a way to pay for their portion is incorrect. They have a lot of ways they can pay for it, like raising property taxes slightly, or DCCs, they just haven't picked one yet. And your arguments for a PST increase are a little late, by the way. That ship has sailed.

WarrenC12 · #**8066** Posted **May 17, 2017, 9:27 PM**

Ya PST was a great idea but it won't happen now.

Trainguy · #**8067** Posted **May 17, 2017, 10:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Ya PST was a great idea but it won't happen now.

Depending on which group forms government, get ready for an income tax increase. BC is drunk on borrowing money to the tune of 68 billion with no intention of ever paying it back. The interest payments just keep getting larger. That is money wasted that could be used for transportation projects.

logan5 · #**8068** Posted **May 17, 2017, 11:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trainguy

Depending on which group forms government, get ready for an income tax increase. BC is drunk on borrowing money to the tune of 68 billion with no intention of ever paying it back. The interest payments just keep getting larger. That is money wasted that could be used for transportation projects.

Are you saying the Province is going to declare bankruptcy?

VancouverOfTheFuture · #**8069** Posted **May 18, 2017, 12:57 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trainguy

Depending on which group forms government, get ready for an income tax increase. BC is drunk on borrowing money to the tune of 68 billion with no intention of ever paying it back. The interest payments just keep getting larger. That is money wasted that could be used for transportation projects.

BC is actually pretty good when it comes to the Canadian provinces.

Deficit and net debt by province, 2015-2016

Trainguy · #**8070** Posted **May 18, 2017, 2:18 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

BC is actually pretty good when it comes to the Canadian provinces.

Deficit and net debt by province, 2015-2016

Net debt as a percentage of GDP is a smoke and mirrors game. It is still 68 Billion dollars that needs to be paid back. Generations ahead will be saddled with this increasing debt because governments are not responsible enough with the public purse. The NDP want to borrow another 10 Billion+. How about paying back 10 Billion?

Migrant_Coconut · #**8071** Posted **May 18, 2017, 4:09 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trainguy

Translink has not found a way to pay for their 20% of this project. A gas tax is not the way to go. People find ways of avoiding that. The best way to pay for this thing is a rise in the PST. That way everyone who buys stuff, pays for it even visitors. Home owners should not be saddled with the cost because not everyone is a home owner. Once the project is paid off, lower the PST back to where it was.

Put a fee on construction projects between Clark and Arbutus - then it's just the developers paying for it.

swimmer_spe · #**8072** Posted **May 18, 2017, 4:13 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Put a fee on construction projects between Clark and Arbutus - then it's just the developers paying for it.

Better still, have a fee for developers who are within 1km of a Skytrain station. They also benefit from it.

Jebby · #**8073** Posted **May 18, 2017, 4:50 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trainguy

Once the project is paid off, lower the PST back to where it was.

hahahaha, that's realistic.

VancouverOfTheFuture · #**8074** Posted **May 18, 2017, 6:04 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trainguy

Once the project is paid off, lower the PST back to where it was.

Income Tax, and GST were both meant to be temporary. once a tax is in, it will NEVER NEVER NEVER EVER EVER disappear.

but i agree, the PST, i think, was the best option. since tourism is such a big industry here make those tourists chip in, instead of just property owners and their renters.

twoNeurons · #**8075** Posted **May 18, 2017, 7:47 AM**

Tax by distance from a SkyTrain station. PST has little to nothing to do with transit. homes, on the other hand, increase in value as they get closer to conveniences like transit.

Areas around the broadway corridor should have higher taxes... like ALL other areas within x km of a station. Have it graduated into zones. 1km from station, 1–5km from station. 5+ km from station. B-Line, Seabus, or SkyTrain line could apply

GeeCee · #**8076** Posted **May 18, 2017, 8:19 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Tax by distance from a SkyTrain station. PST has little to nothing to do with transit. homes, on the other hand, increase in value as they get closer to conveniences like transit.

Areas around the broadway corridor should have higher taxes... like ALL other areas within x km of a station. Have it graduated into zones. 1km from station, 1–5km from station. 5+ km from station. B-Line, Seabus, or SkyTrain line could apply

We're trying to encourage people to take public transit though, not incentivize sprawl.

retro_orange · #**8077** Posted **May 18, 2017, 8:24 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by GeeCee

We're trying to encourage people to take public transit though, not incentivize sprawl.

That's what I'm thinking. This thread is starting to sound like the GMT replacement thread...

Migrant_Coconut · #**8078** Posted **May 18, 2017, 8:59 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by GeeCee

We're trying to encourage people to take public transit though, not incentivize sprawl.

How does it encourage sprawl? It's mostly midrises and highrises getting built beside SkyTrain stations anyway. From a layman's perspective, a development fee doesn't change that, only slightly cut into the profit margin. One could argue that it actually discourages low-density buildings because the return on investment is minimal.

Ditto a proximity tax. For rentals, the landlord pays and the tenants are safe; again, encouraging high-density over low. Condos will take a hit, but that's the price of living under/next door to a SkyTrain station - so long as the tax isn't too high, I doubt many owners will mind.

CanSpice · #**8079** Posted **May 18, 2017, 3:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

How does it encourage sprawl? It's mostly midrises and highrises getting built beside SkyTrain stations anyway. From a layman's perspective, a development fee doesn't change that, only slightly cut into the profit margin. One could argue that it actually discourages low-density buildings because the return on investment is minimal.

Ditto a proximity tax. For rentals, the landlord pays and the tenants are safe; again, encouraging high-density over low. Condos will take a hit, but that's the price of living under/next door to a SkyTrain station - so long as the tax isn't too high, I doubt many owners will mind.

Suppose I'm a developer. What's more likely?

"I've been hit by a development fee because I'm building a tower next to a SkyTrain station. Sure, I'd love to make less money because of where I'm building."

"I've been hit by a development fee because I'm building a tower next to a SkyTrain station. Let's take that fee, divide it by the number of units, and add that to the prices so we still make the same profit."

"I'm looking at building a tower next to a SkyTrain station. Eh, I don't want to get hit by a development fee so I'll look more closely at building one slightly farther away."

WarrenC12 · #**8080** Posted **May 18, 2017, 3:52 PM**

PST (or ideally HST) makes the most sense to me as it will expand at pace with the overall economy, which should correspond more directly with transit needs.

Property taxes are an important component, and certainly cities should share in the cost burden, just not 33% when they collect less than 10% of the taxes.