Quote:
Originally Posted by JamieDavid Exchange
Your first reason is pretty weak. I live downtown, and have been for many years. So, why are MY tax dollars being funneled to new infrastructure in the burbs? Why are MY tax dollars going to build schools in the burbs? (When I say "MY", I'm refering to all who pay taxes and live downtown) The new subburb in the SW is costing the city over $50 million in infrastructure costs. Why are all the downtown residents not complaining?
A vibrant subburb has little effect to a city as a whole compared to a vibrant downtown. Every single person living within the City of Winnipeg boarders ALL benefit from a vibrant downtown. It's like a living body. A healthy heart equals a healthy whole body. What would happen if you had a heart that was weak and dying???
|
I'm not saying those are good reasons; you asked why people are against it, and I told you why.
If you are asking why I am against it I would say subsidizing downtown to get people to live there isn't as effective as making it cost more to live in the burbs. If we charged market rates for peoples locational choices (ie. made people in the burbs pay an actual market cost for living there) then downtown would be more attractive.
Trying to solve the problem with even more subsidies is stupid. Don't subsidize anyone, charge market prices, things get solved on their own.
EDIT: If you want the reason why I believe this would be more effective, read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_aversion