Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Recommended Posts

Um....unsure what planet you live on but here on earth , the rate for a homeowner vs the single family rented dwelling is exactly the same.

You pay the same as a condo dweller , rental house, homeowner living in the same taxation zone.

It depends where you live. Fredericton, NB, for example, charges landlords a higher property tax rate on rented dwellings. In fact, it's almost double.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 176
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Putting aside the fact Scotty said "let them go", not "push them off", what Acadian or Black Loyalist was sent away to live in a slum (in contemporary, not modern, terms) and pick through garbage? What Black Loyalist was ever forced out of the British colonies in the Canadas at all?

[ed.: sp.]

They chose to go to Sierra Leone because they just weren't "feelin' it" here in Canada.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One mans freeedom fighter is another mans terrorist I suppose, but then if some people in this country decide to carry out an 'uprising' of some sort i suppose other people could be equally justified in putting down that uprising, weather it be the government representing the majority or the public at large.

Lets say the government increased spending by 20 percent and in return completely washed its hands of the native people, in other words here's your money, live well. If that worked out i think everyone would agree it was worth the extra spending just to put this issue to bed, but what if it didn't? Could we then look at those in charge, the native leadership, and ask them why they couldn't make it work? Or would we still be stuck in this forever cycle of blaming the government for now giving them what they have always wanted?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends where you live. Fredericton, NB, for example, charges landlords a higher property tax rate on rented dwellings. In fact, it's almost double.

I will edit for TO.

Wow, that rate is ridiculous for Fredericton. I would love to hear them explain how one house , owned, uses more taxes than the neighbours house which is rented. Seems really dumb to me !

Link to post
Share on other sites
They chose to go to Sierra Leone because they just weren't "feelin' it" here in Canada.

Yes, I know. How does this relate to Scotty's implied question, though? How can one say any First Nations have nothing left to lose when there are people in the world with less, both economically and socially, than any First Nation in Canada?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I would love to hear them explain how one house , owned, uses more taxes than the neighbours house which is rented. Seems really dumb to me !
It has nothing to do with logic and everything to do with votes. People who own rental properties are 'rich' and therefore can afford to pay more. Vancouver does the same with commercial properties: tax rates that have no connection with usage but allow the politicians to keep the home owners who vote happy.
Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends where you live. Fredericton, NB, for example, charges landlords a higher property tax rate on rented dwellings. In fact, it's almost double.

That is also the situation here in Ottawa.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vancouver does the same with commercial properties: tax rates that have no connection with usage but allow the politicians to keep the home owners who vote happy.

Commercial properties are a whole 'nother ball game and has nothing to do with rich or not.

In fact most rental dwelling owners are not rich and anyone who pegs that as the reason would be slightly loonie.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I know. How does this relate to Scotty's implied question, though? How can one say any First Nations have nothing left to lose when there are people in the world with less, both economically and socially, than any First Nation in Canada?

Not less. Far less. Not only do they have often have no freedom to speak of, but no government assistance or guarantees for food or shelter at all. It's a hardscrabble existence, to say the least. And if you don't make it, then you die, and no one in official circles is going to care, much less cry that you weren't provided with a nice house and food, and education for your kids, and medical care, etc. etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It has nothing to do with logic and everything to do with votes. People who own rental properties are 'rich' and therefore can afford to pay more. Vancouver does the same with commercial properties: tax rates that have no connection with usage but allow the politicians to keep the home owners who vote happy.

Yes, business owners are "rich" too and pay something like $2.30 to the $1 paid by residents where I live and do business.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is also the situation here in Ottawa.

No it isnt. Do your research.

MPAC does assessments across Ontario, the rate charged for homeowners vs rental properties* are exactly the same for the same zone.

* if a rental property has 6 or more units the rules chaneg, but we have been talking about rental homes, not apt buildings or rooming houses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I know. How does this relate to Scotty's implied question, though? How can one say any First Nations have nothing left to lose when there are people in the world with less, both economically and socially, than any First Nation in Canada?

Is that how bad it needs to get? They need to be worse off than everyone else in the world?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I went and checked the website for NB to see what the rates actually are because I don't rent out my home.

For all of NB it is "$1.4573 per $100 of valuation for 2010" and "On behalf of the Office of the Rentalsman under the Residential Tenancies Act, there is a fee of $0.0486 per $100 of assessed value imposed on residential property that is not owner-occupied and is not exempt under the Assessment Act." So it's not actually double and is a fee imposed by the Office of the Rentalsman.

That seems quite low based on anecdotal evidence because friends of ours had their property tax almost double when they began renting out their basement. Perhaps there are other fees that I'm missing.

Edited by cybercoma
Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that how bad it needs to get? They need to be worse off than everyone else in the world?

No. Just pointing out how ludicrous your believe that they have nothing to lose is. Most of the world is worse off than natives are. And unlike natives, they don't have the option of moving to Toronto or Vancouver or Winnipeg any time they want.

Link to post
Share on other sites
In fact most rental dwelling owners are not rich and anyone who pegs that as the reason would be slightly loonie.
You will have to take that up with the voters in Fredriction. The fact is most lefty types do believe landlords are wealthy slumlords that victimize their tenets. I am not claiming it is a view based on reality.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nevermind. Those are the provincial rates. The municipalities set their own rates, based on provincial guidelines. Residential property has a $0 provincial rate (under 0.5 hectares), but the provincial rate for non-owner lived in residential property is $1.4573 per $100 + the Rentalsman fee, as well as whatever the municpalities set. Long story short. Don't buy property to rent out in NB, unless you're going to live in it. I still think our friends were embellishing how much extra they pay.

Link: http://www.gnb.ca/0162/tax/intropt1.asp#establishment

Link to post
Share on other sites

No. Just pointing out how ludicrous your believe that they have nothing to lose is. Most of the world is worse off than natives are. And unlike natives, they don't have the option of moving to Toronto or Vancouver or Winnipeg any time they want.

Has there been a violent revolt yet?

No?

Well, then I guess they still have something to lose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You will have to take that up with the voters in Fredriction. The fact is most lefty types do believe landlords are wealthy slumlords that victimize their tenets. I am not claiming it is a view based on reality.

It's a provincial fee.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Is that how bad it needs to get?

You said when people have nothing left to lose they get violent. I think the point that's trying to be made is that First Nation's haven't reached the point where they've nothing left to lose; hence, the subtle threats of violence are uncalled for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

However....when we combine native injustice with unresolved homelessness issues, increasing poverty, disproportionate wealth, increasing police state etc, then we have the makings of a revolution - that kind that incensed and angry mobs would burn the parliament buildings over. That can be justified as a civil remedy for failing government.

You should pick up picket signs before you pick up rifles and torches. Violence would be a last resort if their best peaceful efforts fail.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, then I guess they still have something to lose.
Natives are engaged in a PR battle. They are trying to shape public opinion so the government will be forced to give them what they want. A violant uprising would ensure they loose that PR battle and makes no sense for them - especially when faced with a government that ignores its own laws to avoid using violance on natives (e.g. caledonia).
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not a fact - it is your opinion based on your own limited experiences.

My opinion, based on my own limited experiences, is that I have seen a band come out of third party management and become successful.

I know because I have audited them during third party management and subsequent to third party management.

Choose to disbelieve my experience all you want. :P

Name the band(s). Name 10 and I'll do my own research.

However, under third party management First Nations always come out worse than when they went in and spend decades getting out of the debt and burdens that third party managers get them into. It is a FACT.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if you don't own land in a city you still pay municipal taxes on your rented home or apartment, and you actually pay at a higher rate than homeowners.

NOPE. At least not in Ontario (which is all that matters). Only land owners are responsible for municipal property taxes. Landlords ~may~ use some of the income they receive to pay the taxes but the burden is squarely on him or her. The renters live municipal tax free.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No it isnt. Do your research.

MPAC does assessments across Ontario, the rate charged for homeowners vs rental properties* are exactly the same for the same zone.

* if a rental property has 6 or more units the rules chaneg, but we have been talking about rental homes, not apt buildings or rooming houses.

MPAC sets the property value assessment for properties and the municipalities set the mill rate. So the tax rate can change from municipality to municipality, and vary between commercial single family residential and rental properties.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...