Quote:
Originally Posted by quobobo
Roads are an entirely different beast from healthcare. I don't see any reason for the general population to subsidize the heaviest road users (and therefore encourage more road use), do you?
Please explain how our economy would be damaged if the costs of road maintenance were shifted from the general population to road-users.
While you're at it, please explain why someone who never drives should have to pay the same amount for road maintenance as someone who drives everywhere.
Ahh, the "but that's how America does it!" non-argument.
Really, is it that offensive to the Canadian way of life to charge road users for the upkeep of the infrastructure they use? Especially when it can be done simply and transparently through a gas tax?
|
How is healthcare a different beast than infrastructure? The average spent on healthcare is over $5000 per person in Canada. I don't know about you, but I definitely don't spend that much on my 1 or 2 doctor visits every few years. I don't know if I've even cost the system that much in the past 10 years. Maybe I would be better off with that $50,000 in my pocket (or more if you consider that is just the average over the whole population). Users of health care could save up money or buy insurance and pay for it themselves.
Roads and transportation are a cornerstone of our civilization. Roads have dominated western culture for over 2000 years. It doesn't matter what you do in life, or how much you do or don't drive. You benefit from roads directly from just being in this country. Roads support our economy. Millions use roads to get to work and to go shopping where they inject money into and fuel the economy.
The reason health care is provided by the state at no cost is so that everyone can afford it. We have decided that it is not right to be disenfranchised on healthcare based on your standing in life. A good decision if you ask me, one of the best we've ever made as a country.
Same goes for roads. Freedom of movement is important to our society, regardless if you are poor or rich. The poor need to get around just as much, if not more, than the rich. What makes a corporate vice president from West Vancouver getting to work downtown more important than thousands of low wage earners getting to their jobs that they have to live far away from because they can't afford to live closer? At the end of the day, in the big picture of the overall economy, everyone is just as important in making the wheels of society turn. That's why we have things like all people being considered equal. On the micro level we're not (some people have more money, skill, athleticism, or education), on the macro level we definitely are, because we all contribute something.
Making people who are struggling to meet ends meet pay for their movement is as harmful as making them pay for their health care. With a general tax base, the rich and wealthy, who amasses their wealth based on the infrastructure provided that they take advantage of, can pay a disproportionate amount compared to what they personally use. You might not drive a lot, but your income and standard of living is dependent on other people being able to get around.
You might live in the building across the street from where you work at the corporate headquarters of a retail chain, you might never use a road or transit, but your job exists solely because other people are able to use roads and transit to get to their job and make money so they can use roads to get to the store and spend their money buying things from the company you work for.
On a personal opinion note, I also think we pay too much for transit in user fees. Transit, like other services provided by the state, should be payed for by the state. The fees on taking a bus are just as harmful on the poor and middle class like expensive tolls on bridges or fees on healthcare are.
Prev
Linear Mode
