View Single Post
Old 07-27-2009, 04:48 PM   #188
SebC
tromboner
 
SebC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: where the lattes are
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by calculoso View Post
It could be fully paid for by the developer for all I know.
But you don't know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by calculoso
New buses with absolutely no service? I'd say we're getting what we pay for. Those in the inner city should pay higher fees because they get more service!!
Ignoring the rest of the list doesn't void it. I'm talking (mainly) capital costs here, although if the operational costs are about the same this is an issue as taxation isn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by calculoso
Nope. They're paying for the service that they get, regardless of how crappy it is. They're paying taxes for services long before the services get built.
You're making my point here. The inner city gets services. Suburbia gets services plus capital projects, and the inner city has higher taxation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by calculoso
As with most things, it all evens out.
All right, if you think it evens out, let's change our tax structure that so that communities are responsible for paying for the infrastructure that services them. Shouldn't matter to you, you think they already do.
SebC is offline   Reply With Quote