|
cowofwar posted:I pay $700 a month to transit in to my job in Toronto from Hamilton.  I was only ~$500 to Toronto from Milton
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 05:10 |
|
|
cowofwar posted:I pay $700 a month to transit in to my job in Toronto from Hamilton. makes my $104 dollar bus pass seem pretty loving cheap.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
$700 a month that's a lot of transit. Love walking to work 
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 21:10
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:I pay $700 a month to transit in to my job in Toronto from Hamilton. $700/month would pay the interest charges on $280 000 worth of mortgage (at 3%). How much closer to your job could $280 000 get you?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 21:21
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:I pay $700 a month to transit in to my job in Toronto from Hamilton. Holy poo poo you could take like a 10 000 gross cut in pay and not notice if the job change eliminated that commute.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
Furnaceface posted:Barrie, Newmarket and Bradford are all growing way faster than the GO system can handle. When I was doing the Barrie->Union commute the 5:30am train was full by the time we hit King CIty. The 400/401 are in for even more fun as they scramble to try and expand their capacity to meet the increasing demand for routes from north of the GTA into the city center. And yeah, you dont save any money living here anymore if you have to make that trek. I believe this is what smart urban planners are trying to do, but the problem is rhat councillors (and MLAs) aren't listening to their professional staff and are making terrible decisions for political reasons. If Toronto was listening to its planners it would have torn down Gardiner East for example. Nathan Pachal wrote this good article about how Vancouver is not the center of town, and how the region is a federation of complete towns that all have job opportunities. https://pricetags.wordpress.com/2016/01/15/the-city-of-vancouver-is-not-the-centre-of-the-region/ This is exactly what the planners set out to do with the regional growth plan which is decades old. Now it is being undermined by the Province that simply doesn't understand or doesn't care. There is probably a similar plan in Toronto that is being ignored.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
Cowofwar did you get into Hamilton before people realized it was along the lakeshore and prices skyrocketed?Square Peg posted:$700/month would pay the interest charges on $280 000 worth of mortgage (at 3%). How much closer to your job could $280 000 get you? Not everyone likes urban city living.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 21:35
|
|
|
Living on a train or what ever sounds a lot nicer.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
I'm not suggesting he move to Toronto, gently caress that. I'm suggesting he take a pay cut and find a job where he doesn't need to go to Toronto anymore.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 21:41
|
|
|
HookShot posted:No, it's "Spectacles Quarter" as in cool things that happen spectacles, not a word for glasses from the 1800s spectacles. Yeah I went and looked it up and it's just their entertainment district. I prefer the version of Quebec that exists in my head where there is a district dedicated to reading glasses. gently caress off if you want Sunglasses, they do that crap 4 blocks over. We're purists here.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
jm20 posted:Cowofwar did you get into Hamilton before people realized it was along the lakeshore and prices skyrocketed? I try to justify it by it being a great position that pays better than in Hamilton and that I don't have a car or any other transport expenses. I could probably save $150 a month by taking a bike share instead of the TTC but meh.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
there is no bubble https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teSDEaM8OvE
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 01:30
|
|
|
linoleum floors posted:there is no bubble https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teSDEaM8OvE
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 01:42
|
|
|
linoleum floors posted:there is no bubble https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teSDEaM8OvE Uhh, holy poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 01:49
|
|
|
Sign me up for a third mortgage so the tax payer can be left holding the bag...oh wait, something tells me it's my knee caps and not the CHMC securing that loan.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 01:59
|
|
|
linoleum floors posted:there is no bubble https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teSDEaM8OvE So is the mafia like holding this guy's family hostage so he gets on board with their mortgage scam? The guy in this commercial does not look like a willing participant lol. Also OPEN SUNDAY (closed Saturday)
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:04
|
|
|
Furnaceface posted:Really, smart people would be looking at ways to increase the number of jobs locally that could support living there but that is too much forethought and effort for the typical city council member. Better to just build more suburbs and pray. What can a city councilor realistically do that will create a meaningful number of jobs comparable in salary and opportunity to those people have in Toronto?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:07
|
|
|
I put some thought into things and hit upon a way to reverse rural decline and ease the pressure on cities: Offer massive, film & gaming industry level, tax subsidies for firms which allow employees to telecommute. If we can subsidize companies over 50% of their employee salaries just to employ people in an industry , why not offer something similar to encourage growth in rural areas? I know tons of white collar workers who would rather be on the island or the Kootenays rather than a lovely tenement in the West End Most corporations would never take advantage of it, because for some reason offices in Canada have a plantation mentality (I've been told straight up "if I can't see you in the office, it means you aren't working.") but it's worth a shot. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:17
|
|
|
linoleum floors posted:there is no bubble https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teSDEaM8OvE Old news, he's be running that on CP24 for at least 2 years now. Even his competition 'The Cashman' does it. http://oliverjewellery.ca/loans.html YouTube Oliver jeweler cash man for his much much better ads
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:22
|
|
|
Rime posted:I put some thought into things and hit upon a way to reverse rural decline and ease the pressure on cities: That sounds like a system that would be wide open for abuse and fraud. If we're daydreaming about pie-in-the-sky ways the government could help rural communities then you might as well just say we should have huge crown corporations that have a government mandate to hire people for good pay and then let them telecommute, or simply have them locate offices in smaller communities as a way to keeping those communities afloat.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:23
|
|
|
Realistically the only way to solve our future economic implosion is a GMI, but since that's never happening it makes more sense to think of tax subsidies and work programs which are just asinine enough to be enacted by the feds. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:26
|
|
|
I'm confused as to why the government should subsidize rural towns when they are completely useless and a drain on resources. We don't need to subsidize highways and other infrastructure for the cottages of rich people.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:27
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:I'm confused as to why the government should subsidize rural towns when they are completely useless and a drain on resources. We don't need to subsidize highways and other infrastructure for the cottages of rich people. Yeah, seriously.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:30
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:I'm confused as to why the government should subsidize rural towns when they are completely useless and a drain on resources. We don't need to subsidize highways and other infrastructure for the cottages of rich people. Because usefulness is subjective and not everyone wants to live in dense urban environments and there's no reason, in principle, that a society with our level of wealth and technical advancement could not design sustainable rural communities built on a more traditional model of pre-automobile small towns, many of which were more sustainable. Also the point of subsidizing this would specifically be that it would make such communities more accessible to regular working people and thus no longer mere cottages for the rich, which many of the more charming rural communities are at risk of turning into. I mean, taking your statement to its logical extreme, old people are expensive and basically useless so maybe the government should stop providing healthcare or pensions for anyone past retirement age. It's just our inefficient subjective morality that says people should be kept alive past their 60s.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:33
|
|
|
Helsing posted:I mean, taking your statement to its logical extreme, old people are expensive and basically useless so maybe the government should stop providing healthcare or pensions for anyone past retirement age. It's just our inefficient subjective morality that says people should be kept alive past their 60s. Take your statement to its logical extreme, and we're collectively obliged to fund underwater colonies and towns at the tops of mountains. At a certain point, why should we fund this environmentally and financially wasteful style of living?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:37
|
|
|
ah yes, those useless rural towns where people grow all of our food so that we can eat. if only everyone worked in a call centre and lived in the basement rental of an overextended lawyer in the big city, we would have a much more efficient economy
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:37
|
|
|
linoleum floors posted:ah yes, those useless rural towns where people grow all of our food so that we can eat. if only everyone worked in a call centre and lived in the basement rental of an overextended lawyer in the big city, we would have a much more efficient economy A rural town that grows food is not a useless rural town. What fraction of such places do this? Single digit percentage maybe?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:39
|
|
|
gently caress rural Canada. Import all our food from Mexico and China
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:40
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:A rural town that grows food is not a useless rural town. What fraction of such places do this? Single digit percentage maybe? hello im the loving idiot that doesnt understand geography, called lexicon
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:41
|
|
|
linoleum floors posted:ah yes, those useless rural towns where people grow all of our food so that we can eat. if only everyone worked in a call centre and lived in the basement rental of an overextended lawyer in the big city, we would have a much more efficient economy If even 10% of Canada's towns under 50K people are dominated by agriculture, I'll donate $100 to the charity of your choice. I will find 500 other people who want to live on the edge of some random northern lake. We will move there. You will build and maintain roads, water, police and fire coverage, medical facilities, schools, banks, and phone access. Let me know when you're ready.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:42
|
|
|
linoleum floors posted:hello im the loving idiot that doesnt understand geography, called lexicon Excellent refutation, my word you showed me
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:43
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:If even 10% of Canada's towns under 50K people are dominated by agriculture, I'll donate $100 to the charity of your choice. its cool that you cant prove any of this, on the other hand, you know, statistics canada and recorded history of the human race re: development of rural communities around farming but let's just ignore all that because im a moron
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:44
|
|
|
Also lol the romance of the family~ farm ~~~~
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:48
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:Take your statement to its logical extreme, and we're collectively obliged to fund underwater colonies and towns at the tops of mountains. At a certain point, why should we fund this environmentally and financially wasteful style of living? Assuming everyone is given a roughly equal voice in making these decisions then I see no problem with society deciding to build an underwater city, just like I don't have any problem with spending some of our resources to send humans into space. The basic purpose of the economy and government should be first to provide a baseline standard of living, second to provide a baseline standard of freedom, and, once those requirements are met, to do the best job it can to secure the happiness of its citizens. I happen to believe we have the resources to pursue all three of those goals, and the main barriers are political rather than resource based. But really what you're saying is incredibly spurious because I'm reasonably confident that large numbers of people would choose to live in rural communities if lack of employment wasn't an issue, whereas I don't get the impression that large numbers of people strongly desire to live on mountain tops or the ocean floor. I also don't think the cost of supporting rural living through a basic income or a crown corporation would be anywhere near the cost of the projects you describe, so the same trade-offs aren't present.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:50
|
|
|
hmm perhaps the decline of farming is linked to the decline of small communities??? makes you think nah, that's too far fetched
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:50
|
|
|
Haha, but seriously folks, gently caress small towns right up the rear end. Those fuckers are always asking for handouts for things like roads and water. Get with the goddamn times!!!
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:54
|
|
|
linoleum floors posted:its cool that you cant prove any of this, on the other hand, you know, statistics canada and recorded history of the human race re: development of rural communities around farming Can't prove any of what? Fewer than 300K people work in agriculture in Canada (including corporate workers in big cities). In 2011 the rural population was 6M, where "rural" means in cities <1K people *and* lower density than 400 ppl/sqkm. The vast majority of people in rural towns have nothing whatsoever to do with growing our food (even assuming that no agricultural products are exported). Certainly the people commuting from Barrie don't.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:55
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:Can't prove any of what? Fewer than 300K people work in agriculture in Canada (including corporate workers in big cities). In 2011 the rural population was 6M, where "rural" means in cities <1K people *and* lower density than 400 ppl/sqkm. holy poo poo you're a loving retard lol (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:56
|
|
|
linoleum floors posted:holy poo poo you're a loving retard lol Are you having a stroke?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 05:10 |
|
|
You guys including natives in your plans to relocate rural people? They live in some of the most unsustainable places, should probably start there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 02:57
|
|
