That is the dumbest logic I've seen, and the Yes side is making some pretty ridiculous claims.But, if we have a YES on the 0.5%, then the cost does get spread a little wider. I don't own a property, don't own a car (Modo is my friend), don't see much in the way of direct taxation. It seems reasonable to me that as everyone benefits from the public transit infrastructure (yep, less cars on the road benefits those who still drive), the cost should be spread around and the 0.5% PST isn't such a bad way to do that. Otherwise, it will be smaller groups (property owners, car owners) who get to carry more of the inevitable increase in cost.
I understand the sentiment about making the vote a vote on confidence for the Translink governance system, but I'm not sure that is the message that will result in a NO vote.
Thank you Ms. Bijoux for pulling up the research. Doesn't surprise me the oil lobby wants to make sure this fails to ensure their market share continues. And look how all the sheep seem to be falling in line.
The oil companies are in no danger of losing market share or income due to public transit. And the BC Liberal government is doing a lot more for cars that passengers of any kind of transport.
I don't care who Jordan Bateman is or works for, he's the only one giving a voice to the No side. Meanwhile the Yes side is pissing away six million+ of tax dollars and another $6 million for Elections BC to monitor and count and yet the Yes side seems to really resent anyone that dares to question the wisdom of throwing more money at Translink.
The main reason we pay the highest gas prices in North America is the number of taxes we already pay - notably 17¢ a litre on every gallon.






