If You Are A Parent

Hmm, this blog doesn't tell the whole story. What's happening here is that HUGELY successful theatres making thousands a night in profit are using public space (the sidewalk) to buffer their clients. This has made it inordinately difficult for pedestrians and residents of the area to get to and from their destinations during box office hours. Going as far as to obstruct access to public transit.

This motion is to approve a $10k consultancy as to the feasibility of a sidewalk tax for businesses that use that much public space to make money that regularly. We're talking about big productions here like Wicked, Phantom etc. Why shouldn't theatres like that pay up if they use public space to make money? We're not talking about taxing pedestrians. We're talking about taxing businesses using pedestrian space.

i read your links kate. a reasonable observation in comments from the blog you cite.

Here's another one for you: a taxi driver here in Saskatoon told me last week that the gas bar he goes to has been told by the city that they have to block off one of the road entrances to their property because they have too many. I don't think he was kidding either; at Avenue B South and Jameson Street just behind Thomas the Cook the gas bar's got one entrance blocked off with a big portable sign and a couple of large potted plants. You can't make this stuff up.

On the claimed matter of crowd control invoked by the promoters of the referenced proposition, I fought a different version of this battle with Edmonton city council years ago, when they wanted to shut down all after-hours (no booze) dancing places (one of which I enjoyed back in those days), at 3 am, because some such establishment were legitimately problematic.

Council was so insane that they voted on an amendment to the proposed bylaw that would have prohibited all dancing in Edmonton from 3 am to 3 pm, thus making illegal the senior citizens' square dance that was a tradition during Klondike days in Churchill square at noon. The amendment failed on a tie vote. I was there. In chambers. I spoke to council on the matter. In 2001.

The problem with these bone-headed regulationista is that, as Sir Humphrey pointed out in Yes Prime Minister, citizens claim that something must be done, and politicians say: this is something, therefore this must be done.

There is no need to introduce new laws to control problems like this. There are noise, littering, loitering, public nuisance, obstructing a public access-way, and a plethora of other laws on the books to handle all the actual problems that might be occurring in situations like this. There are enough laws in place to invade Poland.

Yes big business can handle any number of laws by transferring the costs through to the customers. But the overhead kills the small establishments that I don't want to see go. I stood on the sidewalk outside the Yardbird Suite twice during Edmonton's recent Jazz City festival. Should the Yardbird Suite be taxed for that?

I think that we are long past the point where by now we should have a constitutional amendment that requires that for every new law passed, one old law has to be stricken from the books.

I agree with Jeff. Anybody who openly uses the public sphere to make money should obviously be taxed for using that sphere. The public sphere belongs to all of us, not just those who are making money off of it.

Those who can obviously afford to pay should pay obviously too. That's why there's a garbage tax in Toronto, because if you can afford to display to the curious at the curb your consumption then you can afford to pay taxes on it.

And if you have a house to sell, or a car to register that means you're rich enough to have a house or a car, and the best opportunity to tax you on this wealth is when money is changing hands in the vicinity of these two items. I mean, if you were just to be suddenly approached in your house or in your car you might not have any money on you, but if you've just sold your house then obviously you're holding, and the same thing applies when you show up to register your vehicle -- if you didn't have the money for the registration, you wouldn't be there.

There's a constant shortage of funds in this country for social programs and daycare and so on. We need to get better at identifying potential sources of funding. For example, educated people, and people with a general sense of wherewithal, make more money, on average, than the less educated. So why shouldn't we have a tax on education and wherewithal? See what I mean? If they're visible? Am I missing something, or what?

I'd like to nominate your last comment, Libby, for the 2007 Eurovision Dryest Droll award. You execute that shtick very well sir. The traps you lay for the unwary are both subtle and complex. Thus the question becomes, should we be taxed when we line up to enjoy your entire revue ;-?

PS to Jeff: We already tax business for using commons facilities: it's called the business tax.

Declare the pennies on your eyes?

jeff, without the business you don't need the sidewalk.

"We need to get better at identifying potential sources of funding. For example, educated people, and people with a general sense of wherewithal, make more money, on average, than the less educated. So why shouldn't we have a tax on education and wherewithal?"

Huh? I can't tell if you're just being tongue-in-cheek here or not.

Of course, we've had a tax on education for quite some time.

As you state, educated people make more money than the less educated.

Make more money = pay more income tax (and a variety of other confiscatory government fees and charges on wealth).

As to a sidewalk tax, it is convincing evidence of the inanity of municipal politics and the petty-mindedness of municipal politicians.

Similar stupidity was proposed at one point to control the massive pedestrian traffic on Oxford Street, the big shopping precinct here in London (UK).

Never mind that this pedestrian traffic consisted of customers who would actually buy things and contribute to the city's wealth - and its tax receipts. D'oh!

Presumably, a large entertainment venue in TO must earn the city a very pretty penny in all the usual taxes and fees - let alone the spin-offs (local bars, restaurants, hotels, shops, even parking lots and hot dog stands) - but no, it's never enough for addlepated municipal meddlers.

What's that old line about killing the goose that lays the golden eggs?

I was going to ask a question about wether or not the TO city council has gone off the deep end, but then I remembered I don't like asking rhetorical questions.

Jeff, all of us who pay municiple taxes already pay for those sidewalks.

Do we maybe need to add a civics class to the high school course load?

I'm all in favour of taxon education. I just wish we could find a cure for pro-state cancer. Alas, it may be the case that the cat is not rebaggable, or it may be just that I'm not bilingual, I'm bilabial (I have two lips, but only one tongue), but hopefully, it is more of a matter of me simply running out of bomb mots.

Haven't you heard? We need high taxes to fight the Christians and the blondes; it's the new conservatism.

:-)

Did anyone consider that it is not the business that is standing on the sidewalk. It is individual citizens that want to use the services the business is offering. As I live in the 905 I think I owe a debt of gratitude to the people of Toronto for supporting a city council that helps to create a vibrant business comunity here.

A tax on the educated????? Talk about a disincentive to staying in school and acquiring those skills that our economy despirately needs. Bad, bad idea!!

If they saved the $10,000 on consultation fees we wouldn't need another ludicrous tax. How can anyone be in favour of more taxes. We are taxed to death already. This is another tax that will make Miller's office more grandiose.
Before any tax is raised we must have accountability on where the taxes already charged are producing the stated results.
Toronto and Ontario seem to be more than anxious to hand out 'consultation fees'. These sound more like adscam than anything.

Seems commissar Miller wants to remove the last incentive there was to go to the city core.

Anyone who would pay a tax on the use of a public utility should be instantly teleported to Cuba.

Any business given a tax bill for the utilization of the sidewalk in their walk-in business should return the favor by moving out of town.

Indefensable frikkin' socialist insanity/greed.

Welcome to the insanity that is Toronto city council. Tax the successful, arguably the businesses that have lineups outside are the most successful ones so lets tax them. Keep it up guys, nothing looks better than a deserted downtown core with noone on the sidewalk. That makes the downtown safer for everyone.

Oh yeah, and add a land transfer tax on top of the existing provincial one, because buying homes is not a positive impact on a community, its much better if people buy homes outside of Toronto ( keeps em off the sidewalks)

"Anybody who openly uses the public sphere to make money should obviously be taxed for using that sphere."

What the heck is "the public sphere"? :0 :)

...is this some new civil concept of collectivist ownership they teach in the Fabian communes of Onterrible?

If you hate the capitalist ethic, be honest enough to say so but don't insult our intelligence with warpped precepts of collectivist integration in the commonwealth tax systems.

First off the merchants in a zoned retail district understand that the sidewalk in a designated retail district is to allow business traffic to access the businesses on that street.

Second, I don't have time to get into here but the argument that the public utilizing to patronize business is somehow theft of public services for profit has been rebuked by the courts enough to leave voluminous precedent.

Too bad the City Council does not bear the same responsibility when businesses are inaccessible because of collapsed roads and sidewalks. Seems taxation only works one way?

Taxing the citizen, who already pays taxes for that sidewalk, for his use of it in a line-up? The business will, after all, just increase its prices; the individual citizen is the one who will pay.

How about taxing line-ups for streetcars and buses?
What about taxing the people who crowd the sidewalks of the Saturday St. Lawrence Market?

What about all those people who have been barred from smoking near their buildings and now, stand out in the middle of the sidewalk, in clumps of hapless smokers - blocking pedestrian traffic?

What about tourists linked up to get into the art gallery, museum or whatever?

Ahh, the possibilities are endless. People must not stop, must not linger; the sidewalks are meant for brisk efficiency.

The possibilities are indeed endless. But could we put a tax on protesters for blocking traffic? Or politicians' motorcades?

Anybody that would line up to see a show or get into a bar is an idiot anyway...sheeple such as that would probably surmise that the increased bar cover charge for access to a popular bar or an increased ticket purchase to see a motion picture is a part of life in the big city and would pay the piper without complaint. The consumer, not the businesses,will get the pinch in the end as they will pay more for popcorn and Cuba libra's.

It's just another of David Miller and his Maoist, Che Guevera comrade councillors spendathon and taxathon.

Goes well with his new 1 bag of garbage allowance every 2 weeks for a family of 5, new car tax, new property transfer tax. After all, someone has to pay for the $25/hour boulevard grass cutters.

I don't know all the ins and outs of taxation in Toronto, but I'll comment more generally. Any tax that a city imposes on a business is an incentive for a business to relocate and an incentive for new businesses to locate elsewhere. I don't know any business that is unwilling to pay taxes, but there is a point at which businesses will leave, and, before that point is reached, a point at which new businesses will locate elsewhere. The same point applies to government regulation. Fewer businesses mean, in general, fewer jobs. Fewer businesses also mean fewer receipts to tax if there's a sales tax, and lower property values for property taxes. Is there a balance to be achieved between low taxes to attract businesses and higher taxes to support necessary government services (like sidewalks)? Of course. Local governments, however, have a distressing tendency to miss the balance and raise taxes too far.

I've seen this in San Francisco, some thirty-five miles from where I live. In the past thirty years, San Francisco has lost the headquarters for perhaps half a dozen major corporations. Some of these losses were the result of acquisitions (Bank of America, Crocker Bank, Fireman's Fund). Some, however, were the direct result of the city's treatment of business (Chevron Texaco is the best example). Just as important, I know of no major businesses who have moved their headquarters to San Francisco in the past thirty years, nor of any major businesses started in San Francisco during that time. I live in Mountain View, which is far more friendly to business (and has about 10% of SF's population). Intuit, Network Appliance, and Google have located here during that period, plus an array of smaller, but not insignificant companies (Verisign, Varian Medical Systems, and some companies whose names don't start with the letter V). Property values are high, which means that property tax receipts are good. People live here to be close to work, and they spend money here. The city has no problem with finances.

Yes Jeff let's tell the whole story about the flight of businesses to Mississisauga, Vaughan, and Markham to escape the huge property tax disparity between homeowners and businesses. Toronto City council won't reign in its spending and refuses to up the property tax on houses to the levels of its neighbours. Even the leftard Toronto Star prints its papers outside of Toronto City limits.

Silicon Valley Jim:
Funny you mention San Francisco having this same problem because that just happens to be where the mayor of Toronto is from.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Miller_%28Canadian_politician%29

What's another $1.2 million?

In seven minutes flat last week the economic development committee decided this debt-plagued city would hand a local theatre company with its own "crippling debt" a $1.26-million bailout....

...The only person who really spoke was Coun. Adam Vaughan. He contended the city was getting the theatre's building "as a bargain" and it was a "secure investment."

It was never revealed publicly that more than half of Theatre Passe Muraille's $867,700 budget last year came from public grants...

http://tinyurl.com/237srn

I hope everyone went to the "profile" link on councilor Vaughn!

This guy is THE typical socialist! Born in TO,Activist mother, city councilor father, and on every committee for "the poor" extant.

The neo -socialist, born, raised, and nurtured at the public tit, and the answer to every problem is to punish the proletariat.

Jeff, there are af ew problems with your argument. First, shows such as Phantom, Wicked, etc, are reserved seating. I have been to a few and walked right in a half hour before the show began.

Aside from that here is the real problem. I live 20 minutes east of Toronto. I used to go to many concerts, plays, sports events, etc. Since the city has allowed the homeless begging to increase(always fun to be harrased by a drunk who hasn't bathed in a month), failed to enforce the law on squeegee kids( drive down Lakeshore BLVD), let the city look like one big dump(Spadina is a good example), hike taxes endlessly already, which in turn has driven up the cost of tickets to events,I now rarely go downtown.

And the place I work at has 4500 people, most who feel the same way. Throw in the fact that this sidewalk "tax" would most surely be passed on to me the consumer, and it's just another reason not to spend my entertainment dollars in Toronto anymore.

Now let's look at Adam Vaughan and David Miller's biggest problem. They continually look for more tax dollars while refusing to even attempt to reign in spending. Listen to Rob Ford sometime on radio talk shows talking about the latest waste and you would be amazed.

You know it's funny, Paul Martin chopped billions in spending to lower the deficit and is hailed as a hero. Miller and Toronto council fail to even pay for their own sandwiches for lunch and nobody on the left raises a peep.

Oh yeah, It's all Mike Harris's fault(sarcasm on)

Well Libby, you win the socialist money-grabber of the day award. The money is out there, you just have to find a way to get it. You feel that as long as 'your' socialist programs need money, you have the right to suck money out of anybody, anywhere, anytime. Screw the social programs, pay for daycare yourself, and feed the homeless to the poor.

Let's instead create some new social programs, like free handguns to everybody for self protection. We could cut welfare payments in order to fund it, which would help encourage them to get a job. They won't turn to crime because all of their potential victims are now armed. We'll save on policing costs, court costs, and incarceration costs. Darwin will do most of the work. This is seen as a truly 'progressive' social program, I'd say, and worthy of your support.

"So why shouldn't we have a tax on education and wherewithal? See what I mean? If they're visible? Am I missing something, or what?"

Yes, you are missing something. We have a tax on education. It's roughly half the taxes on those "rich people's" houses you talk about.

Income taxes, gst, consumption taxes, all are used to fund social programs. The issue is how much is enough. I paid over $30,000 in personal income tax last year, over $3000 in property taxes for a townhouse, pay taxes everytime I gas up or spend a dollar. I would guess roughly 60% of my pay goes to taxes in one form or another.

So please tell me Libby, in your world exactly how much tax is it fair for me to pay, and how much should I actually get to keep for myself for working 6 days a week?

WHHHOOOOOOOOSSSSHHHHH

That sound ladies and gentlemen, was the sound of Libby's beautiful satire going way over your heads at mach .87.

Re-read it. Then smack yourselves. I expect better from the lot of you.

If it's satire i sure missed it. Then again, I've had to endure seeing Olivia Chow on tv 3 days in a row this week. So obviously I'm a little jaded whenever someone throws out the need for higher taxes on me, a rich person.

Just wish someone told me I'm rich:)

.
.
.
.
Libby Raoul WHAT YOU ARE MISSING IS A BRAIN!
.
.
.
.

Jeff, as I commented at the Fighting for Taxpayers blog, I can see this is all part of Mayor Dave and the NDP's plan for reducing congestion in T.O.

The plan is to tax anything that moves, and if it doesn't move tax it until it does. Move out, that is. They should just put up a big sign over the first toll plazas on the 401 and QEW (coming soon, you betcha!). Sign reads: "Abandon All Hope Of Making A Buck Ye Who Enter Here."

This plan worked brilliantly in Hamilton. City Hall taxed the crap out of all the old downtown businesses, so they all moved away. Leaving a ghost town populated by government offices and welfare recipients.

On a larger scale you can see this plan in action in the US Northeast, ground zero of Liberal Socialism in the USA. People are moving to Florida, Arizona, Nevada and etc. in their tens of thousands every year. First people moved to the suburbs, but that wasn't far enough so now they are leaving the state and the entire region just to get their freedom back.

So you see Jeff (and friends) there is a point at which people will say F@#K THIS! and move away. And you, Jeff, are the source of it. That you would even ask the question of a sidewalk tax on big theaters being equitable indicates your determination to destroy anyone with money. Who paid for the sidewalk in the first place, Jeff?

On the bright side, if the GTA'ers all get bled white by Mayor Dave they will vote Conservative in droves. I'm looking forward to that.

And Kate, to address the actual point of the post, I'm relieved to see that even abject drooling imbeciles can find useful work in the public service. ~:D

John, that boom you hear is Libby's satire breaking the sound barrier as it passes over your head.

She's goin' supersonic Paul!

.

Phantom,

Yuk yuk you are so clever to see through the comments and read the minds of their writers ... nevertheless ... I will wait for Libby to state that what she said was a joke. Consider that there is no shortage of people in this country who feel exactly as her comment stated.

.

Further to the point. If anything, perhaps we need to tax the stupid and uneducated since they generally cost society much more than an educated, productive person.

But then, the stupid and uneducated don't have any money do they. Maybe that taxation on them should come in the form of forcing them to work if they able bodied. Plenty of no-brain jobs unfilled all over western Canada right now.

Soooo send us your stupid and uneducated, we have jobs and a life for them.

Squeegee operators also take up public space and are probably operating without a license to boot. Plus, I suspect, but have no proof, that some of them fail to fully report their incomes.

Maybe the City could license them to work the pedestrian lines -- it would be win-win. They could clean our eyeglasses, straighten our ties, or maybe just offer us compliments, "my sir, you are looking strikingly good this evening". Who wouldn't want to pay for that?!

Plus, drivers could toss quarters into roadside buckets out of appreciation for being rid of those pesky squeegee operators.

It would be win-win-win.

John

""""Further to the point. If anything, perhaps we need to tax the stupid and uneducated since they generally cost society much more than an educated, productive person"""""

I agree, lets tax ALL religious business'

That's very interesting Richard. I think next time Vaughan is on CP24 taking phone calls I'll ask why he is not proposing a tax on homeless people. They eat,sleep, and sit on those same sidewalks many times, just like us "rich folk" do waiting for our high society entertainment to start.

Best way to describe Vaughan? I like the way John Derringer on Q107 refers to him. A complete moron who has won the "Tool of the Day" award many times.

On further reflection, this $10 study proposal might mean some friend of Councilor Vaughn needs a new outboard for his ski boat.

Just a possibility, y'know. Seems more likely than Jeff's.

Libby, I agree that some social education programs really work well.....for example, considering that you must be a graduate of a Special Ed program you're reasonably articulate....albeit horribly misguided.

John, how's Councilor Vaughn's buddy supposed to get his new outboard if all the homeless wieners are working in Alberta?

You got to address the REAL problem, which is increasing the incomes of lefty nincompoops and their useful idiot friends.

A brilliant proposal. With the long list of business beating a hasty retreat from the downtown Toronto core, this will also have the side benefit of reducing the number of annoying tourists who would dare clog the city's arteries with their vehicles, belching greenhouse gases into the air.

Thus:

Fewer business & shows, fewer people/tourists in the downtown due to same (or objecting to raised prices to fund the sidewalk tax), fewer cars on the road, lesser need for wider streets;

resulting in:

More streets reduced in width to make room for the inefficient and failure-prone streetcars that really won't be required as fewer people will go downtown.

And Miller and his penny-from-the-deadman's-eyes merry band will continue to whine they don't have enough funding from the province and the feds.

... oh yes, and it all goes back to Mike Harris.

Watching Miller & Co is like driving by an accident: you just have to watch to see how bad the carnage gets. Perhaps this will entice more than 35% of the city's voters to show up at the next municipal election.

Nevertheless, plans for the eventual self-destruction of the Big Smoke proceed according to schedule.

Next step: finding some way to implement a greenhouse gas tax on the number of breaths one takes, and a tax on conservative opinions or points of view. Or eye colour. Number of hairs on your head. Freckles. Halitosis. Whatever.

Actually, I would stridently support a "halitosis tax". Far too many folks with disgusting breath wandering our streets. They could apply for "freshness credits" with receipts for every pack of Certs or Clorets they purchase, or with a demonstrable show of using Listerine on a thrice-daily basis.

mhb23re
at gmail d0t calm

PS - Libby's comment was - despite the lack of visible tag - sarcasm.

Yukon Gold is correct at 12:09 pm, which I also noted at 6:38 am. Regular readers will recognize that Mr. Raoul periodically posts just that form of satire here at SDA. Once you learn to recognize it, it is, as I mentioned, quite good.

I've read that this is merely the first step toward banning the nightclubs in parts of downtown. Vaughan doesn't like them; as a TO socialist, it seems he'd rather see streets entirely devoid of people (Chernobyl is pretty empty of foot traffic, from what I hear), and thinks that by placing a high enough 'sidewalk tax', some clubs will lose enough profit margin to shut down.

Then, of course, the buildings can be used to create more solid gold social housing, at 3 times the going rate per ft/2.

i Then, of course, the buildings can be used to create more solid gold social housing, at 3 times the going rate per ft/2.

maybe I;ll just go do sum drywalling agin then, at UNION scale of coarse:-))))

Seeing as we are writing about useless politicians it is absolutely disgraceful that the Cretin is at the highest level of the Order Of Canada, it makes this whole OOC award just a travesty. More stuff on the Cretin coming out about Adscam. Warning letter from Gomery about Chretien.

"According to the transcript, Doody told the judge that the letter of warning alleged that Chretien had “authorized the financing, selection and management of sponsorship and/or advertising activities in breach of the Financial Administration Act, Treasury Board policies and the guidelines on communication services, public opinion polls and advertising contracts in the context of a process lacking in transparency and failing to optimize resources.”

Ah - that's nothing. In Lower Mainland, we have diamond-hard stupid. Business is taxed on the number of parking spaces they have (or rather, the number of parking spaces they could have if driveways, garbage bins, turn areas, etc could be converted to parking spaces).

BTW: The Canada Line construction is killing businesses - Vancouver City Council doesn't want to give them a tax break ... because it would create a dangerous precedent ... they do however offer their sympathies.

This is the same as taxing fast food restaurants whose drive-through lines block intersections and cause traffic issues. That is one thing I would like to see addressed before they go after sidewalk traffic.

Keith: "This is the same as taxing fast food restaurants whose drive-through lines block intersections and cause traffic issues."

That's what I'm talking about. How about those hockey and baseball games that do the same thing? Even worse all those companies that have employees that cause rush hours.

Tax the sh*t out of the lot!!!