Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
But remember that sprawl is purely based on the lot size you occupy and not where your lot is located. So if you are on an undivided 50 foot lot in sunnyside you are a bigger contributer to sprawl then someone on a 35ft lot in the suburbs. The only difference between a lot in the inner city and a lot in the burbs is cost. So by wanting to tax people just for living in suburbia isn't really fair what you are proposing is essentially a tax on people who make less income rather than people who are making a choice.
Also where you work matters, perhaps the real culprit behind our road problems is the density of employment downtown. I live and work in the burbs and would never go back. Commute distance is a significant impact on the amount of sprawl you contribute to.
So i would agree with you if you wanted a total overall of the tax system with density based taxation based on lot size, density priced toll roads that are more expensive in rush hour, excessive parking taxes downtown, full responsibility of home owners to replace aging infastructure (water mains etc). And then add some kind of income based scale to make it progressive so that higher income groups pay more in taxes than lower income groups based on their choices.
But just saying increase suburban taxes seems to grosly over-simplify the problem.
|
One significant difference between a lot in Sunnyside is and a lot in the suburbs is that residents in Sunnyside have paid off the capital costs of their infrastructure many times over. Yes, a particular house and lot will cost more in the inner city than it would in the suburbs, but that's not the right comparison to be making. A person in a $500,000 condo downtown subsidizes a person in a $500,000 house in the suburbs (because while they pay the same taxes, the person in the house consumes far more city resources) and that's where the problem is.
Furthermore, "we've got to subsidize the suburbs becasue that's where the poor live" is self-fulfilling. Susidizing the suburbs is part of why it's cheaper to live there. Again, I'm not against progressive taxation at the muncipal level, but there should be a semblance of "user-pay" between people of equal means.
Obviously where you work is part of it, but I contend that centralized employment is overall good for city. Labour mobility, dual income households, efficient public transit etc.