Quote:
Originally Posted by curves2000
I am not going humor you. I have provided basic things that can be looked at without even getting controversial like mass layoffs or crazy cuts. If you really look for cost reductions, they are always found, everywhere and from everyone! This isn't hard to do. I am sure you have done it in your own finances in your life. If citizens are not suppose to notice a 3% tax increase for improve services, would we really miss a 2% reduction on costs and services?
Balance sheet strength matters no matter what. City leaders are telling us that Calgary's budget is in trouble. We should probably listen when we can or else you get into a situation like Toronto or other cities that are beyond a crisis.
|
I don’t know, would we miss a 2% reduction? That depends largely on where it’s coming from and what the actual impact is, something we could evaluate if you armed yourself with more than empty rhetoric and meaningless platitudes about budgeting.
You can play armchair policymaker all you want, but until you “humour me” by providing concrete examples to illustrate your point, there’s really nothing there. Like, zero substance. And I don’t really understand why, if this is an issue you’re presenting yourself as having put thought into, you can’t actually articulate anything meaningful. “Basic examples” are just code for generic platitudes you didn’t put any thought into.
I get that saying things like “cut the budget” feels good because it makes people feel like they’re really smart without having to do any actual intellectual leg work or even really put any thought into a subject but why would anyone take anyone who is reliant solely on platitudes seriously?
“This isn’t hard to do” - It might be, but you’ve illustrated you don’t know how hard it would be because you haven’t actually thought about it.
Just look at where some of the additional money is going:
- Potholes: a noted problem this year that was a hot topic for complaints
- Inglewood pool: Now open through 2026 after protests for its closure
- Water infrastructure: Anyone know why they would be spending money on this after this year?
Then when you consider the fact that 35% of the city’s property taxes go to the province, which is touting a 4.6 billion surplus while offloading extra costs to the city without reducing their share of the property tax, it looks a little more difficult.
The city is trying to fund increases towards things that people are very loudly telling them we need, while dealing with inflation, immigration, and a hostile province. So yeah, seems kind of hard to just “cut the budget.”
But you’re to prove you’ve actually thought about this at all and provide a single concrete example as to how. Even the councils saying so can’t, but they’re admitting they can’t because
they don’t know.