Quote:
Originally Posted by SebC
That's not offensive, it's just silly. Whether the renter pays the landlord, who pays the property taxes, or an owner pays the property taxes, the effect is still that the resident of the property is paying the taxes.
Since you are using provincial services as your analogy, if one person earning $100,000 a year lives a in a city, and another lives on top of mountain, should they both expect the same travel time to a hospital? To a school? Or, should the mountain hermit perhaps receive a lower level of service or pay a surcharge that reflects the higher cost of providing services to him?
|
It does matter though, at least to me. People complaining about the tax system, and whether people are paying their fair share ought to at least be payers to begin with.
We can use civic examples as well. I might go to the library every week on my way to a city rink, and you might never use either. Should you opt out of funding these things because you would prefer we have more swimming pools and golf courses? I say no, but that is a similar implication made by the inner city residents who complain about building overpasses or providing services to the suburbs. We're not really talking about commute times to get to services here, but its basic services. Should residents in certain areas pay more for the same services to be provided? If the city allows development to take place aren't they allowing it to take place and committing to a certain standard of services to those communities?