3 ms·
That's the tricky part though, it would be the provincial government that's cutting all services and leaving them to the wolves. The federal government has noth
by desdiv 10y ago
That's the tricky part though, it would be the provincial government that's cutting all services and leaving them to the wolves. The federal government has nothing to do with this and thus will still expect the federal taxes to be paid in full.
From the viewpoint of the residents it will be a 25% tax cut (ballpark estimate) in exchange for the stoppage of all essential services, hardly a fair deal.
- abz10 10y agoThat would be tricky. I think fairness depends on the value for money - it's possible that they don't need as many services that are being provided with. It's also possible they could provide for themselves cheaper - perhaps with a few lifestyle changes. In anycase it would be up to them to decide what to do. I understand that it's not a politically viable solution but I wanted to add to the list of options the idea that perhaps there is no need to force them to buy government services or force other taxpayers to bail them out. It also sounds like the federal government is spending money to support the area - instead of spending taxpayers money on growth (churn) perhaps a rebate on their federal tax as well.
- acveilleux 10y agoOne of the main service provided to the village in the article is a ferry with a subsidized rate since it's on an island. Without ferry, there's not going to be a village.
- abz10 10y agoIf the village cannot survive without taxes and without a subsidized ferry then I think the answer is clearly to allow the village to disband. You'd no longer need to force other canadian taxpayers to subsidise island residences lifestyles.