NDP removing tolls on Vancouver bridges

[Opeeved]

I do not believe you never saw this in the news. I am not calling you a liar but how could such a staunch NDP supporter NOT remember this major story in the election. Does not pass the smell test....at all. Not one tiny bit.

two things. When have I said I'm a staunch ndp supporter? I've voted for all the major parties both federal and provincial over the years.

I really don't watch the news, at all. Especially make an effort to ignore election time too. I read castanet app here and there and forums. Why is it so hard to believe that this thread is the first I've heard of this? Hell, forums is where I learned of the coalition government.

[Omnitheo]

Look at a population distribution map of BC. Now look at the highway and infrastructure network of the province.

There are 4.5 million people in BC, and 2.5 live in the Vancouver metro area. 400k near Victoria, and another 300 in the Fraser valley.

Essentially this tiny corner of the province makes up the bulk of the population of the province, but the province still needs to build highways and bridges and other services out to the rest of the province.

These combined areas make up about 5,000km2 out of 950,000km2 province.

I'm pretty sure that if that corner of BC can subsidize the construction and maintainance of the hundreds of roads and thousands of bridges dotted across the province, that the rest of BC can help pay for a bridge that will see far more usage and benefit to the province.

When Kelowna gets a second crossing, and the changes to highway 97 through the central okanagan go through, those are going to partially footed by residents of Vancouver who may never use it.

I think people need to be less individualistic here. stop thinking like just someone from the okanagan, and think more like a British Columbian.

[Urban Cowboy]

When Kelowna gets a second crossing, and the changes to highway 97 through the central okanagan go through, those are going to partially footed by residents of Vancouver who may never use it.

I didn't see the lower mainlanders footing the bill for the Coquihalla, given that for the most part it was paid for by us via added costs to goods, and direct tolls when we traveled the route.

Add to that the fact that the tolls were kept in place long after the highway was paid for, even though we were promised they would be removed once the bill was covered, it's pretty easy to say that in fact we also paid for the Bennett Bridge albeit indirectly. The point being for the most part we paid our own way, and didn't get a handout from the largest population base in BC.

Can you blame us for being less than enthusiastic about subsidizing lower mainland commuters?

As has already been pointed out it's really a bunch of BS anyways, given that now many who were using public transit will simply go back to using their private vehicles because they can.

I'm of the mind that people who love the big city life, do so of their own volition, and thus have to accept all the pro's and cons that accompany that choice, including travel sacrifices.

[maryjane48]

Removing bridge tolls is a move born out of political ideology, as are many of the other promises made by the NDP that Urbane listed on the previous page. Under all the political harangue the numbers remain, doing away with bridge tolls won't do away with the expenses associated with building and maintaining a bridge, it is simply a change in who pays. With a move away from a "user pay" approach the bridge expense is spread out among the entire populace of the province whether they use a particular service or not. By funding the expenses through general taxation, most likely sales and income taxes, a sliding scale comes into play where those who are better off financially will bear the lion's share of the burden. This is what it comes down to, whether or not you subscribe to the concept that those with a greater ability to pay should subsidize those of limited means. It has been said that a measure of society's enlightenment can be found in how we look after our less fortunate.

Edited to add: To put this in context, with the median income somewhere just under $30K/yr anyone earning above that would find themselves in the company of the "haves" as opposed to the "have-nots". Whether this means that those people will see an increased tax load is anyone's guess, left-wing governments generally like to target the very well-off, say those well into six digits, but the reality of Canadian politics usually sees the middle class footing a big chunk of the bill.

the bridges lost money from day one . we already were paying millions to make uo the loss . the tolls were waste of time

[rustled]

It's interesting to think about fairness in this context. The bulk of voters in the Lower Mainland are able to determine what will happen in rural areas, simply through the strength of their numbers, whether they understand the implications or not. The decisions about what's best for the entire province are not necessarily made with the entire province in mind.

Looking at traffic volumes, you'd have to find a way to compare the higher volumes of personal vehicle commuter traffic in the Lower Mainland to the resource-heavy use of northern highways, where a logging truck or a busload of mine workers would constitute one vehicle. We've all helped contribute to Skytrain and other public transportation options we never use, just as the Lower Mainland voter contributes to northern highways they'll never use. I tend to think they get more benefit from the northern highways, where options are limited, than the other way around, where they have more choices. But perhaps I'm biased.

I'm not sure there's ever likely to be a perfectly fair way to collect and distribute taxes in B.C.

[Opeeved]

When Kelowna gets a second crossing, and the changes to highway 97 through the central okanagan go through, those are going to partially footed by residents of Vancouver who may never use it.

I didn't see the lower mainlanders footing the bill for the Coquihalla, given that for the most part it was paid for by us via added costs to goods, and direct tolls when we traveled the route.

Add to that the fact that the tolls were kept in place long after the highway was paid for, even though we were promised they would be removed once the bill was covered, it's pretty easy to say that in fact we also paid for the Bennett Bridge albeit indirectly. The point being for the most part we paid our own way, and didn't get a handout from the largest population base in BC.

Can you blame us for being less than enthusiastic about subsidizing lower mainland commuters?

As has already been pointed out it's really a bunch of BS anyways, given that now many who were using public transit will simply go back to using their private vehicles because they can.

I'm of the mind that people who love the big city life, do so of their own volition, and thus have to accept all the pro's and cons that accompany that choice, including travel sacrifices.

Based on your posting style, I call bs. From my recollection you're among the first in line to say- move where the money is..

It was 16 years of your liberal leaders that didn't remove the toll... until election time. As I recall

[Opeeved]

I have to add.. the divisiveness of people in this province is becoming sickening. Want to play that game? Fine.sure. When you want something that's paid for by us all, you know, like health care or pensions? You know which lake one can jump into.

Me me me and have the audacity to to complain about economic infrastructure.

To quote rwede and GB-disgusting.

[maryjane48]

It's interesting to think about fairness in this context. The bulk of voters in the Lower Mainland are able to determine what will happen in rural areas, simply through the strength of their numbers, whether they understand the implications or not. The decisions about what's best for the entire province are not necessarily made with the entire province in mind.

Looking at traffic volumes, you'd have to find a way to compare the higher volumes of personal vehicle commuter traffic in the Lower Mainland to the resource-heavy use of northern highways, where a logging truck or a busload of mine workers would constitute one vehicle. We've all helped contribute to Skytrain and other public transportation options we never use, just as the Lower Mainland voter contributes to northern highways they'll never use. I tend to think they get more benefit from the northern highways, where options are limited, than the other way around, where they have more choices. But perhaps I'm biased.

I'm not sure there's ever likely to be a perfectly fair way to collect and distribute taxes in B.C.

problem with this theory is the bclibs have decimated logging so they trucks have reduced . mining trucks dont drive on bc hiways . semi trucks go everywhere but most are based out the lowermain land . the reality is the lowermain land generates the most taxes and wealth for bc.

now having said that the vancouver area needs to worry less on cars that are ice and start building more mass transit and embracing evs

[mikest2]

It's interesting to think about fairness in this context. The bulk of voters in the Lower Mainland are able to determine what will happen in rural areas, simply through the strength of their numbers, whether they understand the implications or not. The decisions about what's best for the entire province are not necessarily made with the entire province in mind.

Looking at traffic volumes, you'd have to find a way to compare the higher volumes of personal vehicle commuter traffic in the Lower Mainland to the resource-heavy use of northern highways, where a logging truck or a busload of mine workers would constitute one vehicle. We've all helped contribute to Skytrain and other public transportation options we never use, just as the Lower Mainland voter contributes to northern highways they'll never use. I tend to think they get more benefit from the northern highways, where options are limited, than the other way around, where they have more choices. But perhaps I'm biased.

I'm not sure there's ever likely to be a perfectly fair way to collect and distribute taxes in B.C.

problem with this theory is the bclibs have decimated logging so they trucks have reduced . mining trucks dont drive on bc hiways . semi trucks go everywhere but most are based out the lowermain land . the reality is the lowermain land generates the most taxes and wealth for bc.

now having said that the vancouver area needs to worry less on cars that are ice and start building more mass transit and embracing evs

The lower mainland may generate tax revenue, but it sure as shooting doesn't produce any electricity for all those EV's and transit. We'd better hurry up and get site C online. Other things they don't generate are anything we would class as primary industry. Things like mining, natural gas extraction, logging, lumber mills, ranching, grain farming. You know........the stuff the city runs on.

[rustled]

It's interesting to think about fairness in this context. The bulk of voters in the Lower Mainland are able to determine what will happen in rural areas, simply through the strength of their numbers, whether they understand the implications or not. The decisions about what's best for the entire province are not necessarily made with the entire province in mind.

Looking at traffic volumes, you'd have to find a way to compare the higher volumes of personal vehicle commuter traffic in the Lower Mainland to the resource-heavy use of northern highways, where a logging truck or a busload of mine workers would constitute one vehicle. We've all helped contribute to Skytrain and other public transportation options we never use, just as the Lower Mainland voter contributes to northern highways they'll never use. I tend to think they get more benefit from the northern highways, where options are limited, than the other way around, where they have more choices. But perhaps I'm biased.

I'm not sure there's ever likely to be a perfectly fair way to collect and distribute taxes in B.C.

problem with this theory is the bclibs have decimated logging so they trucks have reduced . mining trucks dont drive on bc hiways . semi trucks go everywhere but most are based out the lowermain land . the reality is the lowermain land generates the most taxes and wealth for bc.

now having said that the vancouver area needs to worry less on cars that are ice and start building more mass transit and embracing evs

I've often wondered what would happen to all the wealth at the Lower Mainland if we shut down all resources throughout the province for a couple of months. Yes, that area is where the most income tax is collected, and property taxes, and a lot of carbon tax too. Still, a surprising number of the jobs in the Lower Mainland are a result of resource development outside the Lower Mainland. Ergo, those resources still provide a great deal of our taxes, both directly and indirectly.

BTW, although my post referred to busloads of miners and not mining trucks, there are most certainly mine-related trucks on the northern highways, and on our interior and southern highways, too. Concentrate and more are driven over these roads on a daily basis.

Let's consider all of this in the context of tolls, and think about how difficult it is to determine what's fair in how we help pay for the limited infrastructure so necessary to wealth generation, and the seemingly limitless infrastructure necessary to help people at the Lower Mainland choose from the options available to them.

[36Drew]

but it sure as shooting doesn't produce any electricity for all those EV's and transit.

Wow - you really need to get away more and gain some knowledge before you post. There's several power-generation stations in the Lower Mainland region.

Further to that - it sounds like you know very little history. I suggest you read up on the BC Electric Company and the BC Electric trolleys.

[Opeeved]

It's interesting to think about fairness in this context. The bulk of voters in the Lower Mainland are able to determine what will happen in rural areas, simply through the strength of their numbers, whether they understand the implications or not. The decisions about what's best for the entire province are not necessarily made with the entire province in mind.

Looking at traffic volumes, you'd have to find a way to compare the higher volumes of personal vehicle commuter traffic in the Lower Mainland to the resource-heavy use of northern highways, where a logging truck or a busload of mine workers would constitute one vehicle. We've all helped contribute to Skytrain and other public transportation options we never use, just as the Lower Mainland voter contributes to northern highways they'll never use. I tend to think they get more benefit from the northern highways, where options are limited, than the other way around, where they have more choices. But perhaps I'm biased.

I'm not sure there's ever likely to be a perfectly fair way to collect and distribute taxes in B.C.

problem with this theory is the bclibs have decimated logging so they trucks have reduced . mining trucks dont drive on bc hiways . semi trucks go everywhere but most are based out the lowermain land . the reality is the lowermain land generates the most taxes and wealth for bc.

now having said that the vancouver area needs to worry less on cars that are ice and start building more mass transit and embracing evs

The lower mainland may generate tax revenue, but it sure as shooting doesn't produce any electricity for all those EV's and transit. We'd better hurry up and get site C online. Other things they don't generate are anything we would class as primary industry. Things like mining, natural gas extraction, logging, lumber mills, ranching, grain farming. You know........the stuff the city runs on.[/quote]







crap. You have just Done what I do, see stuff beyond the status quo. Well done!

[rustled]

but it sure as shooting doesn't produce any electricity for all those EV's and transit.

Wow - you really need to get away more and gain some knowledge before you post. There's several power-generation stations in the Lower Mainland region.

Further to that - it sounds like you know very little history. I suggest you read up on the BC Electric Company and the BC Electric trolleys.

I thought Burrard had closed, so I went looking:
http://www.tricitynews.com/lifestyles/g ... -1.2221160
Buntzen: interesting historic context here
http://www.buntzenlake.ca/history/
along with this

Today the Lake Buntzen Power Plant produces less than 0.4% of the power produced by the generating facilities owned by B.C. Hydro.

But to get the full goods:
https://www.bchydro.com/energy-in-bc/ou ... nland.html

Where: The south coast, Lower Mainland and the Fraser Valley, stretching from Bridge River (near Lillooet) to Port Moody in the Lower Mainland.

Facilities:

13 hydroelectric facilities, originally built between 1911 and 1960.
1 thermal plant, decommissioned in 2016.

Total capacity: About 1,104 MW, about 9.3 per cent of BC Hydro's total capacity.

And there's the map. I'll leave it to those of you familiar with how to correctly apply the geographic boundaries to figure out how much to credit to the Lower Mainland alone. So, the Lower Mainland does generate electricity, but not enough if EVs take off in a big way.
Are tolls an appropriate way to encourage commuters in the Lower Mainland to use other publicly funded options?

[hobbyguy]

MJ - your statement about logging is patently false.

The other thing you need to realize is things like the fact that 70,000 lower mainland port jobs are directly linked to exporting the products from the interior and the prairies. Everything from copper to lumber to rapeseed and wheat.

Towns like Kitimat would happily go along churning out cash from 420,000 tonnes of Aluminum sold every year if greater Vancouver magically dropped off the map.

Fully 75% of BC's exports are from outside of the Vancouver-Victoria complex. http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/data/statistics/business-industry-trade/trade/trade-data

The Vancouver-Victoria complex is very light on actually producing and making stuff. Move the capital of BC from Victoria to Cache Creek or Quesnel, and Victoria collapses. Reroute the trade from the rest of BC through Prince Rupert - and Vancouver nosedives.

So it is all interlinked, and the notion that Vancouver is the "center of the universe" is just daft.

[hobbyguy]

Dams truly in the lower mainland:

Buntzen - 73 MW
Stave Falls - 91 MW
Ruskin - 105 MW

By comparison, the Revelstoke dam is 2,480 MW

So ya, without the rest of the province the lower mainland goes dark.