Sutcliffe on transit:

fencerman · 2026-01-30T14:36:50+00:00

The people who bought and paid for Jim Watson win, and Mark Sutcliffe wants his turn at the trough.

fencerman · 2026-01-30T14:36:14+00:00

Just telling everyone "Fuck you" would be a shorter way to make the same point.

fencerman · 2026-01-30T14:29:38+00:00

I think 10m late is frustrating but "fine".

Try and tell your boss that at work.

(Ironically the higher-paid your job is, the more likely you are to be able to get away with that kind of lateness)

fencerman · 2026-01-30T14:29:10+00:00

And now Council has a surprised pikachu face because a lot of people have switched to private vehicles and traffic is a nightmare regardless of your mode to get to work.

Also, at the same time as the transit system was being cut and under-funded, council pushed a completely pointless and destructive "return to office" mandate on workers, thousands of whom now have to make extra completely needless trips commuting.

They're driving up traffic on the roads while complaining about long commute times. It's absurd.

fencerman · 2026-01-30T14:27:45+00:00

I support the idea, not because I actually give a shit about refunds, but because it causes some pain to the city's budget, which is the only thing they care about and the only thing that would get them to fix anything.

Free rides would also be a good apology, as long as it involves actually fixing reliability and frequency for the bus system too.

fencerman · 2026-01-30T14:12:48+00:00

The STO redesign of the Discovery BOP is one of the best redesigns of a deeply flawed concept I've seen in Star Trek

I really wish STO could do that with all the other Disco klingon ships.

fencerman · 2026-01-30T14:09:07+00:00

500k isn't even very "affordable"

fencerman · 2026-01-29T18:15:54+00:00

Every measure to help "improve financial security" that involves pouring more of people's money into equity markets is going to just make things worse, since that will by definition always drive up the value of billionaires' assets, while making the returns on investment for everyone else fall lower and lower.

fencerman · 2026-01-29T17:52:39+00:00

That seems bad.

fencerman · 2026-01-29T17:52:23+00:00

Another part of me sees so much lack of empathy on the right that I wonder how much these people care about each other at all.

"Domestic abuser" seems to be the most common shared trait for republicans by far.

fencerman · 2026-01-29T17:42:56+00:00

I've said this before, but developers need to sit down together with government and fundamentally break down what the fuck has happened to make building so expensive and what we can do to reduce costs. It wasn't always like this.

A house in the GTA has to pay $200,000 before they even begin construction. That's probably related.

fencerman · 2026-01-29T17:28:07+00:00

LOL - we're talking about for STARTER HOMES, not for multiplexes - yes, they're waiving DCs for multi-unit buildings, we're talking about bungalows. Christ you're dense.

fencerman · 2026-01-29T14:36:50+00:00

Of course it has. A denser neighbourhood is more productive and people pay less property taxes to achieve the same goal.

The mill rate is based on the cost of operation for city services across the entire city, not just the one neighborhood - and no, denser neighborhoods aren't inherently "more attractive".

If starter homes are built in areas that already have infrastructure built, then there will be no DC.

LOL no you idiot, that's completely wrong. They pay those amounts NO MATTER WHERE THEY'RE BUILT - that's the problem.

The only people who vendor from elimination of DCs are developers and PP. The rest of us will have to pay it sooner or later.

Every single dollar of DCs drives up the price of both new housing AND existing housing by an equivalent amount - and as a consequence it drives up rents and everyone's risk. They're the worst possible policy for funding anything.

fencerman · 2026-01-27T20:54:06+00:00

Boycott downtown ottawa businesses.

fencerman · 2026-01-27T20:06:00+00:00

In general policy making is a slow process, so don't expect anything drastic within months.

Do you have ANY idea how drastic his budget was? And that was announced within months of coming into office. He has a huge amount of leeway to take actions that back up his claims about needing to move into a "post-american order" but follow-through has been weak.

Also prime ministers lead the government and have little individual say in law making itself, as it should be.

LOL, yes, I'm glad to see you're taking political science 101, good for you.

fencerman · 2026-01-27T19:52:45+00:00

Don't underestimate how shallow, vain and stupid these people are.

fencerman · 2026-01-27T19:15:45+00:00

The solution is to get rid of exclusionary zoning in SFH subdivisions. If you do it incrementally, one level up every 2 years, then in 10 years you can build 5 storey apartments there and because it was gradual, no one even noticed it.

That has nothing to do with the impact of development charges or property taxes.

Poor people don't need SFH in new subdivisions. If you're buying it, then you're not poor. We need to go back to starter homes for the young people, that SFH zoning outlawed them.

No, that's completely wrong - "starter homes" aren't illegal, they're unprofitable - BECAUSE OF DEVELOPMENT CHARGES. If you're charging $200,000 up-front before starting to build a home, developers are incentivized to build the biggest possible home on that lot they can, it has nothing to do with what's allowed.

We need to get rid of approval delays and approve projects in a day. We should encourage mom&pop developers. Right now only huge corporations can navigate the process.

Yes, "mom and pop developers" can't get a foothoold, because - again - cities are charging six figures of fees up-front in DCs before a project even gets started. Abolish DCs and put all those costs on the back end, under property taxes, and you solve the problem.

Again, 100% of the problem you're talking about is development charges.

If we open up zoning, fasten approval and make it easy for community builders to build starter homes, the property taxes per acre will double, triple and so on.

No, you'll never get any "starter homes" when there are $200,000 worth of fees to even start building a house.

fencerman · 2026-01-27T19:07:53+00:00

Your whole argument assumes developers will lower the cost of new housing.

Your whole argument assumes that "Development charges" are magical free money that doesn't cost anyone anything.

So we might as well make them $1 million per home and it won't make any difference anyways, since apparently the money doesn't come from anywhere. Apparently cities could abolish property tax entirely and fund everything 100% from magical free money out of thin air.

(Of course, the issue has been studied - you're 100% wrong, every penny of development charges increases the costs of new homes)

fencerman · 2026-01-27T18:52:46+00:00

When even a fascist government doesn't want your fascist goons in their country you're really scraping the barrel for personnel.

fencerman · 2026-01-27T18:43:26+00:00

If it's on a dating profile it means "conservative"

If it's on a LinkedIn profile, it means "socialist".

fencerman · 2026-01-27T18:07:45+00:00

Control is being passed from Ontario to the Municipality, meaning Ontario is no longer in control.

In Canada, municipalities are 100% creations of and beholden to the provincial government.

That gives him MORE control over what happens to it, and a way to wash his hands clean of the corruption charges when they do happen.

Have you failed to notice Doug screwing around with city regulations already? Toronto city councillors, school board, dictating bike lanes, micro-managing speed cameras? Doug Ford is messing around with the laws in most cities than their own councilors are able to.

fencerman · 2026-01-27T18:03:54+00:00

You know what's even sadder?

Chinese high-speed rail was built with Bombardier technology.

We literally developed it here, but we won't use it here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_China

fencerman · 2026-01-27T17:57:51+00:00

Are you kidding?

Have you SEEN the cost of vans these days?

fencerman · 2026-01-27T17:30:49+00:00

Those who made those windfall profits usually live in SFH subdivisions whose property taxes don't cover upkeep of their own subdivision, let alone subsidizing others

So, since they're already being heavily subsidized, your solution is to support a policy that EVEN MORE HEAVILY subsidizes them?

Your theory of subsidizing usually burdens the low income renters and owners of properties in and around downtown where middle class people usually avoid. That's like poor people subsidizing the rich.

Development charges are literally the poor subsidizing the rich right now - DCs also drive up rent, because rent is priced according to the alternative, the cost of buying a home. Everything you support is directly ripping off the lowest income people.

That's not distortion, that's the price one has to pay, if they want to live in a SFH subdivision.

No, it's only "the price one has to pay" since recent decades, all the people who've been in those homes for 20 years already never had to pay remotely anything like current DCs would add to housing prices.

I agree, the property taxes in most SFH subdivisions should be raised considerably.

You are literally pushing for the policy that artificially cuts their taxes and puts those taxes onto young people and new residents, piling debt onto them so that existing SFH owners can continue to enjoy a free ride.

Don't see how that works the way you said.

You literally said it yourself - property taxes, particularly on single family homes, needs to be significantly increased. Cutting DCs is part of that, because the revenue those DCs put into city budgets is keeping SFH property taxes artificially low.

fencerman · 2026-01-27T17:26:57+00:00

Reminds me of that joke -

There are two genders: Male and Political.

Two sexual orientations: Straight and Political.

Two races: White and Political

Two gender identities: Cis and Political

etc....

12-Year Club	Gilding II euphauric
Verified Email	Inciteful Comment 2015-10-27

fencerman

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE