Comment 34165

By hunter (anonymous) | Posted September 27, 2009 at 09:04:41

Smith is right on this:

"The bottom line is this, if you want more of something, you tax it less, if you want less of something, you tax it more."

The RHT regulars themselves have questioned why empty properties such as the Connaught are taxed less then occupied ones. They know that this policy encourages property squatting/speculation.

Hamilton has to get itself in a position where it can lower investment, business and property taxes. The last decade or so, they've been waiting for industry and their high tax revenues to return to that they can lower the residential tax rates. It's not working. Investment follows the path of least resistance. To encourage employers/businesses you need to create a business friendly climate and that means lower taxes. It will take some courage to lower taxes before the city can afford to. It's a fact that the left-leaning history of the city will make this politically difficult if not impossible. Punishing business owners while still wanting their money has been shown to be unproductive.

You can be progressive and still business friendly. The two aren't incompatible. It's just zealots of the right (Smith) and zealots of the left (?) that make it seem so.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools