The Great Canadian Transit Thread

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by Acajack

One of the basic principles that favours universality in social programs is that the rich need a stake in the system. Otherwise they over time will use a whole bunch of political and other subterfuges to gnaw away and reduce public funding for programs (which they disproportionately support via their higher taxes - they're rich after all) to the point where they end up transferring wealth from the public system to their own pockets - from which they may then pay for their own services privately.

As a result the public services that the Average Joe and Joan rely upon end up getting progressively shittier and shittier. The classic examples of this taken to the extreme are public schools and hospitals in much of the U.S.

You may disagree but there is a method to the madness of keeping a whole bunch of public services at no-cost or low-cost for rich people (who could otherwise) as well as everyone else.

Plus keeping a program universal helps to reduce the stigma associated with using it. Using an "everybody" program is viewed much differently than using a "poor people / welfare program"

[niwell]

Originally Posted by milomilo

It's also administratively much simpler. Just give everyone the benefit with no opt outs, loopholes etc. Then spend the effort to make everyone pay what is deemed to be their fair share on the taxation side.

Agree completely with this and Acajack's point you quoted. I've had the misfortune opportunity of working on several means-tested programs and in many cases the added administrative complications outweigh the supposed benefit of making it "fair" for those who otherwise may not qualify.

Usually the "lost" benefits are inconsequential enough that providing whatever service to the rich then making it up in taxation is the best option. Optics can be a bitch, though.

[CityTech]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I don't understand this. Where are the kids of millionaires getting free transit that is being denied to others?

Also, the most expensive urban transit pass in Montreal is around 85 dollars a month.

And as I said, they are looking at cutting that (roughly) in half for low income families.

In most cities children get free fares. This is everyone under 6 in Ottawa and everyone under 12 in Toronto.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by CityTech

In most cities children get free fares. This is everyone under 6 in Ottawa and everyone under 12 in Toronto.

OK thanks. I wasn't quite putting 2+2 together. That's correct. In Montreal the threshold is 6 years old as well.

I suppose most millionaires' kids under the age of 6 aren't taking transit, and even if so the buses and trains are running anyway (plus they're always accompanied by a revenue-contributing older rider who pays), so there isn't much of an extra cost to the system if any.

But sure, I guess there is a principle in there.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by CityTech

A lot of the people who get government supports for children are wealthy people. It's one of the most unfair things in society.

...

I'm in all in favour of supports for parents, but they should not be given to wealthy parents. The discrimination against childless people has to end.

And you could say the same thing about universal healthcare being discriminatory to young, healthy people; or about public education also being discriminatory to childless taxpayers; or public transit funding discriminatory towards drivers; etc.

The whole point is that they're meant to be universal programs.

We don't really need babies anyway; there's no shortage of immigrants we can take in. In fact, dropping our birth rate to zero and just importing 18 year olds to fill our universities and workforces would probably be more economically efficient.

Sounds like a wonderful society!

(unfortunately it's also the model that Ontario seems to be intent on following)

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by niwell

Agree completely with this and Acajack's point you quoted. I've had the misfortune opportunity of working on several means-tested programs and in many cases the added administrative complications outweigh the supposed benefit of making it "fair" for those who otherwise may not qualify.

Usually the "lost" benefits are inconsequential enough that providing whatever service to the rich then making it up in taxation is the best option. Optics can be a bitch, though.

In the case of Quebec's subsidized daycares specifically, a case can more than arguably be made that they pretty much pay for themselves, as the workforce participation rate of young mothers has skyrocketed since they were implemented. All of which has greatly increased the taxes they pay (income and others), regardless of whether they are low, middle or high income.

[Acajack]

City-Tech:
We don't really need babies anyway; there's no shortage of immigrants we can take in. In fact, dropping our birth rate to zero and just importing 18 year olds to fill our universities and workforces would probably be more economically efficient.

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Sounds like a wonderful society!

(unfortunately it's also the model that Ontario seems to be intent on following)

I have no idea what City-Tech's politics are, so this isn't really about him.

But the low-birthrate/no-kids, pro-immigration squad kind of runs into a huge contradiction given that almost all of them tend to be globalists and pro-developing world.

I don't know how one can reconcile an allegedly sincere concern for conditions and future prospects in poorer nations with picking off so much of the developing world's younger generation (often the best and brightest or at least the most ambitious/promising) to fuel the immigration pipeline in rich countries where fewer and fewer people are having kids of their own - either because they are bad for the planet, they cramp their style or they make too much noise in fancy restaurants and confined aircraft cabins.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by Acajack

the low-birthrate/no-kids, pro-immigration squad kind of runs into a huge contradiction given that almost all of them tend to be globalists and pro-developing world.

I don't know how one can reconcile an allegedly sincere concern for conditions and future prospects in poorer nations with picking off so much of the developing world's younger generation (often the best and brightest or at least the most ambitious/promising) to fuel the immigration pipeline in rich countries where fewer and fewer people are having kids of their own - either because they are bad for the planet, they cramp their style or they make too much noise in fancy restaurants and confined aircraft cabins.

Putting all your eggs in the immigration rather than childbirth basket is disconcerting because, if immigrants ever decide not to come to Canada, then you’re stuck in a “Children of Men” kind of stagnant and ultimately nihilistic society. Also, the rationale for many immigrants to come to Canada is precisely to raise children in a supposedly better environment, so by making Canada a real hassle of a place to raise kids, you might just kill your plan B.

But there is another reason why a country should encourage childbirth over immigration. For a lot of people - myself included - having kids is the main purpose of life itself, and watching my daughter grow is the reason I get up in the morning. I don’t get up in the morning because I want to improve Canada’s productivity by $X/per capita, or to improve our country’s labour mobility.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

Putting all your eggs in the immigration rather than childbirth basket is disconcerting because, if immigrants ever decide not to come to Canada, then you’re stuck in a “Children of Men” kind of stagnant and ultimately nihilistic society. Also, the rationale for many immigrants to come to Canada is precisely to raise children in a supposedly better environment, so by making Canada a real hassle of a place to raise kids, you might just kill your plan B.

But there is another reason why a country should encourage childbirth over immigration. For a lot of people - myself included - having kids is the main purpose of life itself, and watching my daughter grow is the reason I get up in the morning. I don’t get up in the morning because I want to improve Canada’s productivity by $X/per capita, or to improve our country’s labour mobility.

I am 100% with you, but some people's ambition when getting up in the morning is to maximize their investment portfolio, put another luxury car in the garage, or fly off to Punta Cana more often.

But there are also childless people who get up in the morning motivated by finding a vaccine for coronavirus or a cure for some form of cancer. Or helping refugees survive in an unsafe/unsanitary camp.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I am 100% with you, but some people's ambition when getting up in the morning is to maximize their investment portfolio, put another luxury car in the garage, or fly off to Punta Cana more often.

But there are also childless people who get up in the morning motivated by finding a vaccine for coronavirus or a cure for some form of cancer. Or helping refugees survive in an unsafe/unsanitary camp.

Puta Canada or Punta Cana. So many hard decisions.

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[davidivivid]

Quebec City LRT forging ahead with the Provincial Government transfering $419 million to the city to keep the project on track.

Legault government disburses $ 419 million for the Quebec tram

The City of Quebec has spent, so far, $ 65 million for the various works of the structuring transportation network project office, and will be able to continue the preparatory work for the project thanks to the disbursement last week by the government of Quebec , $ 419 million.

This is what Regis Labeaume said on Monday evening, a few minutes before the municipal council. The $ 419 million is part of the $ 1.8 billion envelope invested by the Quebec government in the megaproject.

“With the 215 million that had already been allocated (in 2018), that gives us a total of $ 634 million which [ont] been allocated[s], welcomed Mayor Labeaume.

Reiterating that there will be no cost overruns, the mayor insisted: “We are going to make it for $ 3.3 billion. Not a cent more. ”

[...]

https://www.en24.news/u/2020/03/legault-government-disburses-419-million-for-the-quebec-tram.html

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by davidivivid

Quebec City LRT forging ahead with the Provincial Government transfering $419 million to the city to keep the project on track.


https://www.en24.news/u/2020/03/legault-government-disburses-419-million-for-the-quebec-tram.html

That's exciting for Quebec City!!

[Coldrsx]

Exciting indeed and will be fantastic for the city.

[TorontoDrew]

It makes me feel even more sad and mad for Hamilton thanks to Doug Ford. But way to go QC.

[Darkoshvilli]

Should have been done a while ago.

[Doady]

Hamilton never improved and added bus service for decades. Compare what they did for their bus system in the past 20-30 years to what other places like London, Brampton, Mississauga, Waterloo did. Those systems grew like 50% while Hamilton's grew like 0%. I have 0 sympathy for them. They could have done so much more.

London Transit Commission (1996): 12.3 million riders
London Transit Commission (2018): 23.5 million

Mississauga Transit (1996): 21.4 million
MiWay (2019): 41.2 million

Hamilton Street Railway (1996): 19.7 million
Hamilton Street Railway (2019): 21.6 million

[FrAnKs]

Originally Posted by Doady

Hamilton never improved and added bus service for decades. Compare what they did for their bus system in the past 20-30 years to what other places like London, Brampton, Mississauga, Waterloo did. Those systems grew like 50% while Hamilton's grew like 0%. I have 0 sympathy for them. They could have done so much more.

London Transit Commission (1996): 12.3 million riders
London Transit Commission (2018): 23.5 million

Mississauga Transit (1996): 21.4 million
MiWay (2019): 41.2 million

Hamilton Street Railway (1996): 19.7 million
Hamilton Street Railway (2019): 21.6 million

Makes me wonder : Is hamilton having a ''lack'' on attention due to its proximity of Toronto? Like being in their shadow, hence the lack of funds/investments in transit? I'm just asking.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Doady

Hamilton never improved and added bus service for decades. Compare what they did for their bus system in the past 20-30 years to what other places like London, Brampton, Mississauga, Waterloo did. Those systems grew like 50% while Hamilton's grew like 0%. I have 0 sympathy for them. They could have done so much more.

London Transit Commission (1996): 12.3 million riders
London Transit Commission (2018): 23.5 million

Mississauga Transit (1996): 21.4 million
MiWay (2019): 41.2 million

Hamilton Street Railway (1996): 19.7 million
Hamilton Street Railway (2019): 21.6 million

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLAST_network

I have been thinking that right now, Hamilton should have all their BLAST network as an express bus, specifically running the routes and labeled This can build ridership for their eventual upgrade.

[Doady]

Honestly, I think King Street would have been a great corridor for LRT. But Hamilton could have done a lot for the corridor and all the routes connecting to it already. No more LRT is sad but bus improvements are needed to lay the groundwork for LRT anyways. Hopefully, LRT will still come. I criticize the neglect of transit from the city, but the neglect from the province sucks too.

Originally Posted by FrAnKs

Makes me wonder : Is hamilton having a ''lack'' on attention due to its proximity of Toronto? Like being in their shadow, hence the lack of funds/investments in transit? I'm just asking.

No, it's the same funding formula from provincial and federal gas taxes. It's just that City of Hamilton decided to spend their money on Lincoln M. Alexander Parkway and Red Hill Valley Parkway instead of Hamilton Street Railway. They had the same opportunities (or lack thereof) as the rest of the province. As I said, Waterloo Region has made major improvements to transit over the years. Same with Guelph. Proximity to Toronto hasn't hampered transit in those places, and it certainly didn't hamper the construction of those municipal expressways in Hamilton.