08-28-2016, 09:02 PM
(08-28-2016, 07:19 PM)BuildingScout Wrote:(08-28-2016, 03:36 PM)Elmira Guy Wrote: Charging fees to the townships for services they do not benefit from is absurd.
I am an unswerving supporter of LRT but I don't think people should have to pay for something when there community is not serviced by it.
I don't have kids so I want a discount on my school board taxes. I don't drive a car, so I don't want to pay road taxes. I don't get sick, so I want a discount on my medicare taxes. I never go to the townships, so I want to make sure that none of my tax money goes to them ever since I don't use their facilities.... I also want them to pay for the department of agriculture, which I never use either.
You get the picture, taxes do not work on a per use basis. We pool revenues on to the city/regional/provincial/federal pot and we entrust them to spend in the ways that society benefits the most from that money. Me? I'm pretty happy some of my tax monies are going up north to improve the quality of drinking water in isolated communities.
And this, in short is the answer. It's neither realistic or desirable to micro-target taxes to only people who benefit from specific services. Elmira Guy, you yourself said that St Jacobs and Elmira residents do get transit, so are you saying people in only those two towns should pay, and other towns should not? How far from town? Should Heidelberg, Breslau and St Jacobs residents get a rebate on their Woolwich taxes because they don't benefit from the street maintenance in Elmira? Why should mennonite residents pay to Woolwich for recreation centres they never use?
Really, this kind of thing simply doesn't work. In the end, a plurality of people will elect a government (at each level), and that government then sets priorities for spending and taxation. If you don't agree with the government spending money on project X or Y, work on getting a different government elected next time there is an election.