Originally Posted by cabotp
Your missing the the word directly.
In that "patients do not directly pay for the full cost of health care"
or "parents do not directly pay for the full cost in sending their kids to school" We all pay for the full cost. Just part of that cost is directly the other part indirectly.
I'm not saying that car drivers need to foot the full bill of what it costs for them to drive. I am sort of asking are they paying a fair share of that cost. To say they pay enough already does not mean that they may pay a fair share.
What I meant is that not all people are patients (i.e. some people don't or don't hardly ever use hospital or medical services) and people without kids still pay taxes that support the schools for those with kids.
i.e. Are parents paying the true amount of the cost to run and operate schools?
No, because there are many taxpayers without kids who pay taxes that support schools.
I've never used the Vancouver school system and don't have kids. What is a "fair share" for me to contribute to the cost of building and operating Vancouver schools? Based on the present tax system - it will never be "fair" based on "use".
Likewise, drivers may not pay the full cost of building and maintaining roads, since many taxpayers who don't drive pay taxes to support the road infrastructure.
So you can't always look for a relationship between paying (whether direct or indirect) and "use".
In essence, I read the criticism as "some people (i.e. drivers) are leaching off the system" - that applies across the board to many other areas.
I think that the property tax issue is the mayors not wanting to eat up any headroom on current property tax levels - so that they can raise taxes (municipalities are notorious for being poor fiscal managers since they set taxes to fund their budgets, as opposed to setting taxes and basing budgets on estimated tax revenue.
I don't think there' s problem with a vehicle levy if the money were directed to TransLink's road improvements (which, depending on amounts, may just be an internal bookkeeping exercise versus what is proposed).
That said, the impacts on the households affected will be greater with the vehicle levy. The property tax increase averaged $30 or $60 per property, whereas the vehicle levy would be up to $90 per vehicle (and of course it'll be the suburban communities that will have more 2-car households).