Letters, Oct. 18

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 18/10/2024 (581 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Who pays?

In response to Dan Lett’s column on Oct. 15 regarding the relocation of rail yards (Axworthy hired to study rail-line relocation), I offer the following comments.

If the railway itself considered this to be viable from an economic perspective they would/should undertake it themselves.

Aside from the railway’s involvement, whether the source of funding is federal, provincial or municipal, there is only one taxpayer and the existing debt load assumed by all levels of government should be of great concern.

Additionally, after almost 150 years of current use, I wonder if the land occupied by the rail yard is so contaminated as to make it unsuitable for residential or alternate use without incurring extensive environmental cleanup costs.

While the issue of rail yard relocation has been floated a few times over the years, in my opinion, Winnipeg’s focus should be maintaining roads and bridges, not relocating CP’s rail yards.

Greg Chown

Winnipeg

Worth doing

Checking the Free Press while visiting my wife’s family here in Australia, I was very pleased to see there will be a study into relocating the CP rail yards. However, there is another aspect I hope will be studied.

I have been extremely impressed with the public transport here in both Sydney and Brisbane, the two cities I have visited on this trip.

In previous trips here, I also have seen that similar systems exist in all major Australian cities.

This could be an opportunity for Winnipeg to move into the 20th century. Yes, I meant to say 20th century, because Winnipeg is more than 100 years behind Australia and many other cities in the world.

Some research on the internet showed that both Sydney and Brisbane started their public rail systems in the 1880s! Sydney was approximately the size Winnipeg is now, and Brisbane had a population of just over 100,000.

I mention this as I know some naysayers at home will say Winnipeg is too small to have a public rail system and should concentrate on building more roads or widening the ones we have (think Route 90, a.k.a. Kenaston Boulevard).

Numerous studies have shown that process will not solve our traffic problems and will be more expensive to maintain and repair.

Naysayers will also say that it is far too expensive to build what other cities have created. Do they honestly believe it was created in one magic stroke? Approximately 20 years ago, Minneapolis started with one line and since then it has developed several lines. It can be done.

Getting back to rail relocation in Winnipeg, instead of selling all the land around the city with railway tracks to developers, some of it could be reserved for future rapid rail development.

At 78 years of age, I know I won’t be around to see a complete rapid rail system. But future generations will be able to equate our transportation system to Duff’s Ditch, which came about due to the vision of former premier Duff Roblin, possibly our finest premier.

No, I’m not a Conservative supporter, but I recognize strong leadership from wherever it comes.

Should this group led by Lloyd Axworthy be unable to get the ball rolling, I hope our city leaders will never again mention making Winnipeg a “world-class city.”

Tim Proskurnik

Winnipeg

Facts and tax

In his opinion piece on Oct. 15 (Taxing home heating) Gage Haubrich, the prairie director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, continues to spread disinformation about how the carbon tax increases your home heating bills.

He claims that next winter it will cost you $379 to heat your home.

Have you checked your bank account or mailbox in the last week? A family of four in Manitoba received a cheque or direct deposit of $300 if you live in the city. If you live in a rural area, you received $360.

Where do you think that came from? You received the same three months ago, and will receive the same in January. And that will increase as the carbon tax increases.

That more than covers the increase in natural gas and fuel for your vehicles.

If you don’t burn fossil fuels to heat your home and you drive an electric vehicle, you don’t pay the carbon tax. You still get the rebate even if you don’t pay the carbon tax.

The point of the carbon tax is to encourage you to quit burning fossil fuels. Yet organizations like the Canadian Taxpayers Federation and Conservative politicians keep shouting “Axe the Tax” and spreading the lies.

Quit burning fossil fuels and take advantage of the rebate!

Ed Lohrenz

Winnipeg

Gage Haubrich’s Taxing home heating article got me to thinking about taxation in general.

I have no reason to doubt Haubrich’s data —­ nor to accept it without question. His article certainly fits neatly into the “taxes are too high” theme, thereby likely gaining support from a majority of your readers.

Most of the people I know are unhappy about our “high” taxes. Indeed, a few years ago a provincial government lost an election largely because it raised our consumption tax by one per cent. It would be political suicide for our current government to reinstate taxes cut by its predecessor — a significant contributor to our current fiscal difficulties.

So how do we stack up against other countries? Now… I’m not an economist or a skilled researcher, but I can use Google to check up on things. And I only rely on what seem to be legitimate sources.

Each year, The World Population Review publishes its list of the happiest countries. I thought I’d start with the top 10 countries (Canada ranks 15th). It turns out that on two measures — average personal income tax and consumption (sales) tax — we get off pretty lightly. Their data reported we pay 33 per cent and 12 per cent, respectively. The average for the top 10 countries was 47 per cent and 20 per cent, respectively. If you look at the top five, the numbers jump to 52 per cent and 23 per cent.

I’m sure this data can be nitpicked by skeptics, and I’m not 100 per cent sure of its veracity. But it’s “apples to apples.”

The implication is clear. One of the six measures on the “happiness quotient” is satisfaction with government services — particularly health care, policing and social supports.

I think readers will agree that in Canada, at all levels and regardless of political ideology, government services do not get a high grade.

Maybe they’d do better if they had the courage to levy — and we had the willingness to pay — the taxes necessary to support high quality government services.

Terry Dann

Winnipeg

Noise pollution

The editorial cartoon with the noisy leaf blower fellow on Oct. 16 is quite timely.

But what about car and truck drivers with noisy modified mufflers tearing around the city at all hours of the day and night all year round?

Why is nothing being done to curb that racket?

Ben Salnikowski

Winnipeg