Toll highways?

[eternallyme]

I'm just wondering - should it be considered for the main freeways in Ontario? At this point, it might not be a bad idea.

There are several considerations for tolls:

* NO tolls should be permitted in northern Ontario. That is because of the lack of alternate routes in many cases. For the purpose of this rule, the boundary would be defined as the Severn River. In practice, on existing Highways 11 and 400, tolls would stop at Barrie. All other 400-series highways can be tolled as a result.

* Routes that are not 400-series highways cannot be tolled.

* Tolls should be capped at 5 cents per kilometre on the major freeways for passenger cars, only permitted to increase by 0.1 cent each year. For example, a drive on the 401 from Windsor to the Quebec border would cost about $42 for passenger cars.

* Municipal freeways are not part of this plan (i.e. DVP, Gardiner), but would be determined by the municipality responsible for them.

* All toll revenue should remain in the transportation budget. 75% of the revenue should be dedicated to roads and bridges, while 25% should be dedicated to public transit.

* Transponders would be provided, and should be made fully interoperable with other jurisdictions so that tourists don't get gouged or surprised.

[vid]

There are no roads north of the Severn River. There are, like, 3 First Nations in that region, if that.

Northern Ontario would be defined as it always is: The 9 territorial districts and the city of Greater Sudbury, and the First Nations they surround.

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by vid

There are no roads north of the Severn River. There are, like, 3 First Nations in that region, if that.

I mean the Severn River as in the Simcoe-Muskoka boundary.

[vid]

Well then you don't mean Northern Ontario, you mean Northern and Central Ontario.

[flar]

I think highway tolls are a good idea, but they need to be tiny amounts, not like the ultra expensive 407. I'm talking about throwing a loonie in a basket, more like in the US. They could still bring in a ton of money based on volume.

[Blitz]

There should only be tolls around the GTA where there are lots of alternate routes. Hwy 401 is basically the only decent road connecting Windsor to the rest of the country and thus it would be unfair to us if it was tolled for example.

[sonysnob]

I would not be OK with ANY of my toll dollars going to public transit. If I am going to pay gasoline taxes, HST on gasoline taxes and road tolls, those who ride the bus can subsidize themselves.

[Pimpmasterdac]

With all due respect, this talk of tolling highways is because Toronto/GTA hasn't got their act together for implementing a proper transit strategy. They have an overburdened and incomplete expressway & public transit systems that require significant investments. They've had plenty of proposals and plans that they've poo poo'ed for decades because of special/regional interests.

Now that they finally have a "grand vision" but don't have the cash to pay for it, so the entire province should have highways tolled to fix Toronto's problems!? Sorry if Toronto wants to pay for its transit plans, let them raise property taxes, regional sales taxes, toll their municipal highways in their own area.

Any type of province wide toll would solely be helping Toronto spend their way out their problems with the rest of Ontario's money.

[vid]

Originally Posted by sonysnob

I would not be OK with ANY of my toll dollars going to public transit. If I am going to pay gasoline taxes, HST on gasoline taxes and road tolls, those who ride the bus can subsidize themselves.

People who ride the bus pay bus fares that cover 40% to 60% of the public transit systems operating budget. In addition to this we pay other taxes.

Drivers who use private vehicles of public roads pay fuel taxes that cover 2% to 5% of the transportation budget.

In my city, the entire budget to maintain public roads for private drivers is paid for through property taxes, more than 50% of which comes from companies, which aren't people and therefore don't drive, and multi-unit rental apartments, which pay their taxes through revenue received by rent-paying tenants who prefer buses.

So I think it is kind of the owners of personal vehicles that need to step up to the plate! The tax rate for rental apartments in my city is 2.5 times that of low density single homes and duplexes. No one in my entire family who owns a house pays more property taxes than I do through my rent. Just because someone else owns the building I live in doesn't mean I am not a tax payer. If I wasn't here, he wouldn't be able to pay those taxes.

[sonysnob]

And what surface do the buses run on? The roads themselves are more or less a fixed cost. Car drivers have to pay for the maintenance of not only their vehicles but that of the city's too. In Toronto my commute would take me over two hours by transit yet takes only 35 minutes by car. How much money should I really be shilling out for such lousy service.

Besides in the case of tolling provincial facilities, there is already a reliable revenue source in gasoline taxes.

[vid]

Originally Posted by sonysnob

And what surface do the buses run on?

About 6% of the surface paid for by the taxes that bus riders already pay. I have argued (sarcastically) before that quiet residential side streets should be owned by the property owners on that street through a condominium agreement, and that they can pay for that streets maintenance instead of my taxes going to it. The city only needs to maintain the main roads that are essential for businesses and the city in general to function.

Originally Posted by sonysnob

The roads themselves are more or less a fixed cost.

It's not a fixed cost. The $30 million dollar budget in my city doesn't come close to maintaining all the streets we've built over the years.

Originally Posted by sonysnob

Car drivers have to pay for the maintenance of not only their vehicles but that of the city's too.

Transit drivers pay the same taxes, but they don't pay for car maintenance. That is where the $6,000/year savings come in!

Originally Posted by sonysnob

In Toronto my commute would take me over two hours by transit yet takes only 35 minutes by car. How much money should I really be shilling out for such lousy service.

The car commute is about 25% as long but the cost of the car is more than 4 times that of the bus pass. So it depends on how much you feel your time is worth, and how much disposable income you want to have. Being car free and living downtown, I enjoy both time and disposable income.

Originally Posted by sonysnob

Besides in the case of tolling provincial facilities, there is already a reliable revenue source in gasoline taxes.

Yes, so we should raise gasoline taxes to bring them more in-line with countries like Germany, which also happen to have top-notch roadways!

[sonysnob]

Must be nice to live in a city where you can afford to live downtown. $300,000 for 600 square feet plus condo fees? No thanks.

When I first moved to Toronto I chose an apartment where I could walk to work. That worked until I got a new and better job in Scarborough.

To be honest, I'd pay triple what i pay now to have more time. It's the only thing I don't have a lot of. I think the success of the 407 confirms I am not alone in that.

You can keep your gasoline tax increase too. Ontario already has some pretty good roads. If we need new ones we can toll them, but the province has to own them and the revenue shouldn't be used for other purposes.

Where are you getting your stats from anyways. 6% of readers are wondering.

[eternallyme]

I know the Toronto City Summit Alliance wanted to toll all the highways, at least in the GTA, at 10 to 20 (or more) cents per kilometre (i.e. 407 rates), with the revenues going 100% to public transit.

That would be a difficult sell, since that would be a very expensive trip on all the freeways, and not one penny would go to road maintenance. In my proposal, the toll from Toronto to Barrie would be about $3.20 to $4.50, not up to $30. That would be closer to the price for a trip from Windsor to Ottawa, which is much farther.

If tolls were that high, traffic congestion would increase greatly on nearby 2-lane highways, and also many businesses, especially those requiring heavy trucks, would likely leave the GTA altogether - for example, a company doing a lot of business out west would be more inclined to work out of Sudbury (which is 4-5 hours closer with no tolls) than the GTA. While I do not recommend any tolls in northern Ontario, such is because of the lack of alternate routes more than anything.

http://www.thestar.com/news/transpor...xes-now-report

[Wharn]

Originally Posted by vid

Transit drivers pay the same taxes, but they don't pay for car maintenance. That is where the $6,000/year savings come in!

$6000? What the hell kind of car are you thinking of? A 1985 Merc? I spent $1500 on maintenance last year, and that was on a 10-year-old car that needed new brakes and a full transmission fluid flush. Newer vehicles will only take up about $800 in maintenance. Spoken like someone who doesn't own one and needs to justify his decision.

Originally Posted by eternallyme

I know the Toronto City Summit Alliance wanted to toll all the highways, at least in the GTA, at 10 to 20 (or more) cents per kilometre (i.e. 407 rates), with the revenues going 100% to public transit.

http://www.thestar.com/news/transpor...xes-now-report

What is with all the idiot proposals coming out of Toronto this week? Is there something in the water?

Originally Posted by Pimpmasterdac

With all due respect, this talk of tolling highways is because Toronto/GTA hasn't got their act together for implementing a proper transit strategy. They have an overburdened and incomplete expressway & public transit systems that require significant investments. They've had plenty of proposals and plans that they've poo poo'ed for decades because of special/regional interests.

Now that they finally have a "grand vision" but don't have the cash to pay for it, so the entire province should have highways tolled to fix Toronto's problems!? Sorry if Toronto wants to pay for its transit plans, let them raise property taxes, regional sales taxes, toll their municipal highways in their own area.

Any type of province wide toll would solely be helping Toronto spend their way out their problems with the rest of Ontario's money.

What this guy said.

I need to find a way to permanently leave this totalitarian hellhole.

[Wharn]

double-post

[vid]

Originally Posted by Wharn

$6000? What the hell kind of car are you thinking of? A 1985 Merc? I spent $1500 on maintenance last year, and that was on a 10-year-old car that needed new brakes and a full transmission fluid flush. Newer vehicles will only take up about $800 in maintenance. Spoken like someone who doesn't own one and needs to justify his decision.

Gas? Insurance? License renewal? Car washes? All the silly trinkets people buy for their cars? Car payments if you don't own it yet?

Other costs, in addition to what car owners pay up-front, include Road paving, plowing, sweeping, line painting, traffic policing, accident response, investigation and clean-up, health care costs related to pollution and obesity, the toll on cities like mine that developed for cars instead of people and must now maintain much more infrastructure than a city with this many people ought to, the cost of federal government bailouts to car manufacturers to allow those companies to circumvent the principle of supply and demand, etc.

[sonysnob]

You really hit the nail on the head there. That's why all of the worlds super powers have such crappy roads. 6% of skyscraperpage knows that

[Wharn]

Originally Posted by vid

Gas? Insurance? License renewal? Car washes? All the silly trinkets people buy for their cars? Car payments if you don't own it yet?

All totaled $4375.61 last year, which is still considerably less than your $6000 figure. Not bad considering that includes the fuel gulped up by an aging, troublesome V6.

Originally Posted by vid

Other costs, in addition to what car owners pay up-front, include Road paving, plowing, sweeping, line painting, traffic policing, accident response, investigation and clean-up, health care costs related to pollution and obesity, the toll on cities like mine that developed for cars instead of people and must now maintain much more infrastructure than a city with this many people ought to, the cost of federal government bailouts to car manufacturers to allow those companies to circumvent the principle of supply and demand, etc.

While I agree with most of your ideas on road maintenance (personally I think your condo road ownership idea is brilliant), I do take issue with other points. First of all, roads are over-policed to begin with, and most of the time police only exist to hand out tickets to generate a revenue stream for the government. Cut policing, cut costs, make everyone happy. Secondly, the health care costs are endemic to a malfunctioning system that misallocates all costs to begin with. If there was more private health insurance, then people would be made to pay the price for their bad driving and their lack of exercise.

Thirdly, I take issue with the idea that the bailouts were fundamentally bad. GM and Chrysler were forced into a corner by bad management and big unions which were strengthened by government union shop laws. Fine, a few missteps were made. But the collapse of those two companies would have been catastrophic for the Great Lakes manufacturing economy (not just direct job losses, but also indirect losses through bankruptcy of suppliers), and losing them would have meant a drastic reduction in competition, which would be bad for consumers further down the line. Toyota and Honda dealers already exploit the shit outta people, can you imagine what it would be like if they only had Ford to worry about? Furthermore, both companies have paid back most of their loans and are beginning to make some genuinely good products, which again benefits consumers. I'm normally more laissez-faire, but I think the economic benefits that resulted from the loans far outweighed any trivial costs.

I love how leftists are all in favour of subsidizing solar panel and wind turbine manufacturers, but throw their arms up when an auto manufacturer gets the same treatment.

[vid]

Originally Posted by Wharn

All totaled $4375.61 last year, which is still considerably less than your $6000 figure. Not bad considering that includes the fuel gulped up by an aging, troublesome V6.

That's still a lot of money.

Originally Posted by Wharn

roads are over-policed to begin with, and most of the time police only exist to hand out tickets to generate a revenue stream for the government. Cut policing, cut costs, make everyone happy.

So if we're scrapping enforcement of laws, should we also scrap the laws? People barely know the rules of the road as it is. Perhaps we can simply spend the money on education instead of enforcement.

Originally Posted by Wharn

the health care costs are endemic to a malfunctioning system that misallocates all costs to begin with. If there was more private health insurance, then people would be made to pay the price for their bad driving and their lack of exercise.

We already pay those high costs. They're called "high taxes". Americans have private insurance and aren't doing any better on either front, so I don't see what benefit we're supposed to get from private insurance.

Originally Posted by Wharn

I love how leftists are all in favour of subsidizing solar panel and wind turbine manufacturers, but throw their arms up when an auto manufacturer gets the same treatment.

I'm not angry because it was auto manufacturers and I prefer solar panels and wind turbines (I think the province's approach at using both for large scale generation is misguided, the focus should have been on subsidizing point-of-use installations; my employer would have installed solar panels if it were cheaper, and our electricity bills wouldn't have been affected as badly by time of use pricing if we were able to do so). My anger over the bailouts is based on the government not giving money to forestry corporations with the same bad management/over-reaching union/declining sales combination dooming them to failure. Resolute Forest Products has shifted its focus. The other 6 mills could have if the government didn't ignore their existence.

[Wharn]

Originally Posted by vid

That's still a lot of money.

Worth every penny, in my opinion. Many people I know blow through more than that every year, but spend it on alcohol, prostitutes and pot. I'd like to think I'm putting it towards something that's actually useful.

Originally Posted by vid

So if we're scrapping enforcement of laws, should we also scrap the laws? People barely know the rules of the road as it is. Perhaps we can simply spend the money on education instead of enforcement.

I agree. If it were up to me there would be no freeway speed limits, but at the same time I would expect a lot more out of drivers. Speaking as someone who got fully accredited in the last couple years, the testing and education system for new drivers is a joke. I took an extra set of professional driving courses because there was literally zero instruction time for evasive maneuvers, hazardous conditions, heavy traffic and the like. They helped immensely and I think they should be mandatory, along with basic driving school. It would certainly help the insurance rates.

Originally Posted by vid

We already pay those high costs. They're called "high taxes". Americans have private insurance and aren't doing any better on either front, so I don't see what benefit we're supposed to get from private insurance.

But your complaint was that the many must pay for the mistakes of the few. The American system is also completely screwed up, I was thinking of adopting something more along the lines of Germany.

Originally Posted by vid

I'm not angry because it was auto manufacturers and I prefer solar panels and wind turbines (I think the province's approach at using both for large scale generation is misguided, the focus should have been on subsidizing point-of-use installations; my employer would have installed solar panels if it were cheaper, and our electricity bills wouldn't have been affected as badly by time of use pricing if we were able to do so). My anger over the bailouts is based on the government not giving money to forestry corporations with the same bad management/over-reaching union/declining sales combination dooming them to failure. Resolute Forest Products has shifted its focus. The other 6 mills could have if the government didn't ignore their existence.

Again, agreed re. the wholesale subsidization of solar and wind. Shifting focus, a lot of the forestry industry's problems could also be attributed to supply-and-demand issues, but years of bad management and militant unions certainly haven't helped. Another problem is that Queen's Park and Ottawa don't really care about Northern Ontario's 700,000 people when there 12,000,000 people to please in the South. There's a reason why Highway 400 has been under construction for 30+ years.