Rural Commuter Rail

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

Yes, all of those things have been made pretty clear throughout the history of this thread.
My point is that there's a distinction between MOOSE's imposed tax, and public tax money. MOOSE isn't asking for public tax money (aside from the Bayview bypass) and their private tax is only applied on buildings in regions that "subscribe" to their service, or that are built by their partners.

You and I as public taxpayers wouldn't be paying for any of MOOSE's plan.

There is no such thing as a private tax. Taxes can only be levied by the state.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

There is no such thing as a private tax. Taxes can only be levied by the state.

That is why Joseph said it will be voluntary.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Provincial planning rules make that kind of sprawl difficult in today's times. There's a reason why most of those sprawling huge lot "country estate" type of subdivisions are not being built anymore.

Rules make them difficult in the cities covered by growth plans. No such rules out in Arnprior.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

That is why Joseph said it will be voluntary.

Exactly. "Voluntary". And if not enough people pay up, the service is cut.

If you're a town now reliant on that service, how do you make sure people pay up? You mandate it. Mr. Potvin knows this.

He also knows that town councils will do his dirty deed for him. If they don't impose taxes, businesses in Moose's zone get stuck with high charges while everyone else does not. At that point, a prospective business can set up just outside the zone and pick up the benefits without the charges. This is why towns will have to impose town wide tax charges.

That said, this whole thing is closer to somewhere between fantasy and scam, than it is to actually becoming a reality.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by acottawa

There is no such thing as a private tax. Taxes can only be levied by the state.

This is pretty much an exact repeat of the arguments that were made 40+ pages ago. It's entirely semantics and a waste of time.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Rules make them difficult in the cities covered by growth plans. No such rules out in Arnprior.

The main thing blocking these 1 acre lot subdivisions from being developed like they were in the past is the provincial rules for drilling new wells are much stricter now due to concerns about water table levels, so new subdivisions can only really be built with piped water which makes building one in the middle of nowhere really expensive.

Most growth in rural areas now is either in towns, or single lot severances along backroads for which well drilling is easier to get approved.

This is one of the biggest holes in Moose's plan.. Without an enormous investment in piped water in rural areas the kind of growth they're relying on won't be possible.

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

This is pretty much an exact repeat of the arguments that were made 40+ pages ago. It's entirely semantics and a waste of time.

The real waste of time is forcing the city of ottawa to go to court when Ottawa is trying to improve transit service.

Anyway without any big private investor loaning them money, they have no chance to get anything going.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

This is pretty much an exact repeat of the arguments that were made 40+ pages ago. It's entirely semantics and a waste of time.

You're the one who brought it up again.

Words have to mean something. Using the word "tax" to mean crowdfunding has exactly as much meaning as using the word "salami."

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

The real waste of time is forcing the city of ottawa to go to court when Ottawa is trying to improve transit service.

Anyway without any big private investor loaning them money, they have no chance to get anything going.

But does that excuse the city from any wrongdoing? No.

Originally Posted by acottawa

You're the one who brought it up again.

Words have to mean something. Using the word "tax" to mean crowdfunding has exactly as much meaning as using the word "salami."

It is the private "equivalent" to a tax. Not the private equivalent to salami.

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

But does that excuse the city from any wrongdoing? No.



It is the private "equivalent" to a tax. Not the private equivalent to salami.

What wrongdoing? They are only moving the line which they have the right to do. MOOSE are acting like babies since they have no money to build rail themselves.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

What wrongdoing? They are only moving the line which they have the right to do. MOOSE are acting like babies since they have no money to build rail themselves.

The original concern(s) was that the city was acting towards discontinuing the PoW bridge (or at least making it permanently inaccessible by rail) without following the proper discontinuance procedures.

The city has since made it clear that they have no such intentions and that they do intend to use the bridge for rail purposes, but the original complaint was made two years ago when this was completely unknown.
In my opinion, it was not an entirely unreasonable move to file a complaint for those reasons in this case.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

It is the private "equivalent" to a tax. Not the private equivalent to salami.

The private sector equivalent of a tax is a robbery.

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

The original concern(s) was that the city was acting towards discontinuing the PoW bridge (or at least making it permanently inaccessible by rail) without following the proper discontinuance procedures.

The city has since made it clear that they have no such intentions and that they do intend to use the bridge for rail purposes, but the original complaint was made two years ago when this was completely unknown.
In my opinion, it was not an entirely unreasonable move to file a complaint for those reasons in this case.

In other words MOOSE made a false assumption without getting their facts straight and now taxpayers are forced to pay for a case that was unnecessary.

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by acottawa

The private sector equivalent of a tax is a robbery.

Exactly

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by acottawa

The private sector equivalent of a tax is a robbery.

So any service or premium fee for said service is robbery to you?

To use one of Joseph Potvin's own examples, it's like if you were charged more to rent an apartment because the building has a pool or a gym in the basement. In MOOSE's case, you get a train station instead.

It is "like" a tax because a certain amount of money is collected to provide a service. That's it. The original post I was responding to was claiming that MOOSE was looking for taxpayers to fund their system, which by your own arguments of semantics is wrong since MOOSE isn't charging a "tax".

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by OtrainUser

In other words MOOSE made a false assumption without getting their facts straight and now taxpayers are forced to pay for a case that was unnecessary.

MOOSE sought those facts through the CTA. You can see that in the wording of their complaints.

Taxpayers are also paying for those fences they put up at the ends of the bridge. Good use of money.

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

MOOSE sought those facts through the CTA. You can see that in the wording of their complaints.

Taxpayers are also paying for those fences they put up at the ends of the bridge. Good use of money.

The fences i have no problem with since it protects the city from getting sued by idiots who may hurt themselves.

The intent by MOOSE wasnt honest, they tried to force the city of Ottawa's hand and it backfired.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

So any service or premium fee for said service is robbery to you?

To use one of Joseph Potvin's own examples, it's like if you were charged more to rent an apartment because the building has a pool or a gym in the basement. In MOOSE's case, you get a train station instead.

It is "like" a tax because a certain amount of money is collected to provide a service. That's it. The original post I was responding to was claiming that MOOSE was looking for taxpayers to fund their system, which by your own arguments of semantics is wrong since MOOSE isn't charging a "tax".

As proposed everything is voluntary, so it is the opposite of a tax, it is a donation (which is why I called it crowdfunding).

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by acottawa

As proposed everything is voluntary, so it is the opposite of a tax, it is a donation (which is why I called it crowdfunding).

Any new developments built by MOOSE's partners would be sold with the premium attached, so it is not entirely voluntary in those cases.

You're probably thinking of areas that would "subscribe" to MOOSE's service which would represent a minority of MOOSE's revenue.

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

Any new developments built by MOOSE's partners would be sold with the premium attached, so it is not entirely voluntary in those cases.

You're probably thinking of areas that would "subscribe" to MOOSE's service which would represent a minority of MOOSE's revenue.

point is those populations are too small to support their business model. I pointed it out to potvin that they should start with bank street first since they will get ridership but he wont do it because he would actually have to build rail.