Beyond.ca

Registration is free! Car Forums - Member Rides Car Forums - Find other members Car Forums - Calendar Car Forums - Frequently Asked Questions Forum Rules and Regulations Car Forums - Search Logout
Beyond.ca - Car Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.3.9 Beyond.ca - Car Forums > Lounge > Society / Law / Current Events / Politics > Calgary Public Transit Discussion Thread


Author
Thread
rage2
Guest

Location: YYC
What I drive: Ricer SUV, Lexus Coupe in Mid Life Crisis Orange
Posts/Day: 1.11
Trader Rating: (25)
User Rating: 99%


quote:

Originally posted by kertejud2
Why wouldn't those areas be contributing via the residential property tax anymore?


Only had 10 mins to put that together. So ya 8.89% is the "expanded" CBD contribution. Still a small drop in the park compared to suburb contributions.

Originally posted by kertejud2
But there's also the issue of where the extra $630M+ came from in revenue between 2012 and 2013. But a lot of that could be because your 2012 spreadsheet is missing over $400M in revenue from property and business tax (Page 25)

The City of Calgary 2012 Annual Report


Your spreadsheet is flawed and has been for a long time.


The data came straight from the city before they decided to stop releasing the figures. Why has it changed since then? Because the city continues to restate numbers after the fact. Why? No clue.

__________________

Originally posted by SEANBANERJEE
I have gone above and beyond what I should rightfully have to do to protect my good name


Report this post | IP: Logged

Old Post 05-18-2017 05:26 AM
rage2 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for rage2 Click here to Send rage2 a Private Message Visit rage2's homepage! Find more posts by rage2 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
 
kertejud2
Newbie

Location: Calgary
What I drive:
Posts/Day: 0.01
Trader Rating: (0)
User Rating: 99%


quote:

Originally posted by rage2

The data came straight from the city before they decided to stop releasing the figures. Why has it changed since then? Because the city continues to restate numbers after the fact. Why? No clue.



But it doesn't come straight from the city. You're using census data for dwellings and treating it like it equates to assessed properties. Which is why you have more homes listed in your spreadsheet for 2012 than the city claims to have total assessment accounts for in 2013.

The Herald is also using median numbers for 'single residential property assessments' so it doesn't take into account the non-residential side at all.

The city's report from 2012 claims $1.5B in property tax and business tax, your spreadsheet doesn't and it isn't surprising why. It is flawed so stop using it to continue the myth that the inner city has the bulk of the tax contribution base in the city.

Report this post | IP: Logged

Old Post 05-18-2017 12:17 PM
kertejud2 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for kertejud2 Click here to Send kertejud2 a Private Message Find more posts by kertejud2 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
speedog
Second Gear

Location: N/A
What I drive:
Posts/Day: 0.66
Trader Rating: (2)
User Rating: 104%


quote:

click for larger version
» Click image for larger version

Report this post | IP: Logged

Old Post 05-18-2017 01:23 PM
speedog is offline Click Here to See the Profile for speedog Click here to Send speedog a Private Message Find more posts by speedog Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
rage2
Guest

Location: YYC
What I drive: Ricer SUV, Lexus Coupe in Mid Life Crisis Orange
Posts/Day: 1.11
Trader Rating: (25)
User Rating: 99%


quote:

Originally posted by kertejud2
It is flawed so stop using it to continue the myth that the inner city has the bulk of the tax contribution base in the city.


Oh good, we're on the same page.

I'll agree the city doesn't publish the data directly, but there are no options other than to pull this data to figure out the revenue distribution by community. At the end of the day, I have *some* data to point to the fact that inner city (including CBD) does not contribute the bulk of the tax revenue. Suburbs do. You just keep claiming that inner city, CBD contributes a majority of tax revenue with zero data backing it up.

__________________

Originally posted by SEANBANERJEE
I have gone above and beyond what I should rightfully have to do to protect my good name


Report this post | IP: Logged

Old Post 05-18-2017 04:18 PM
rage2 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for rage2 Click here to Send rage2 a Private Message Visit rage2's homepage! Find more posts by rage2 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
suntan
First Gear

Location: Calgary, AB
What I drive:
Posts/Day: 0.24
Trader Rating: (0)
User Rating: 97%


quote:

Flat tax structures result in high value assets paying the majority of tax revenue?

Has anyone given the Nobel Prize in economics to kertejud2 yet, as he's overturned about 3000 years of tax theory?

Somebody better tell the Republicans about this, they've been wanting proof for decades now.

Report this post | IP: Logged

Old Post 05-18-2017 04:47 PM
suntan is offline Click Here to See the Profile for suntan Click here to Send suntan a Private Message Find more posts by suntan Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
kertejud2
Newbie

Location: Calgary
What I drive:
Posts/Day: 0.01
Trader Rating: (0)
User Rating: 99%


quote:

Originally posted by rage2
I'll agree the city doesn't publish the data directly, but there are no options other than to pull this data to figure out the revenue distribution by community. At the end of the day, I have *some* data to point to the fact that inner city (including CBD) does not contribute the bulk of the tax revenue. Suburbs do. You just keep claiming that inner city, CBD contributes a majority of tax revenue with zero data backing it up.



Your data is both wrong and incomplete. It's literally missing over half the the tax collected, used dwellings rather than property accounts, and was presented with the belief that business tax and non-res property tax were the same thing.

Your data shows that when you ignore the most valuable buildings in the city, where ~16,000 accounts provide more return than ~450,000 accounts your assertion that "there are a lot more people than businesses and numbers don't lie" means that the numbers absolutely do lie when you don't know what they mean. Which is that you have a rough, but still incorrect idea of where less than half of property tax revenue in the city comes from.

Report this post | IP: Logged

Old Post 05-22-2017 02:31 AM
kertejud2 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for kertejud2 Click here to Send kertejud2 a Private Message Find more posts by kertejud2 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
The time now is 04:12 PM (GMT) Post New Thread   
 
Last Thread   Next Thread
Beyond.ca - Car Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.3.9 Beyond.ca - Car Forums > Lounge > Society / Law / Current Events / Politics > Calgary Public Transit Discussion Thread



Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to this Thread


Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
 

Google
 
Web beyond.ca

Terms of Use - Contact Us - Advertising Info - Archives - Car Blog

Powered by: vBulletin Version 2.3.9
Copyright ©2009 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.

Bringing Car Enthusiasts together in discussion on our car forums

Page Statistics : Page generated in 0.06659889 seconds (70.65% PHP - 29.35% MySQL) with 32 queries.