(05-27-2021, 09:15 AM)tomh009 Wrote:

(05-27-2021, 06:22 AM)jeffster Wrote: Take a single senior, for example: the cutoff is $18,900, any senior that worked at all (even for a year or two) won’t qualify for transit: OAS and GIS maximums (low income seniors) is already $18,500, this is the least amount of money you can get. If you receive $90 in CPP, some of GIS will be taken away, and likely leave you with an income around $19,000/year.  What I saying is, the only seniors that might qualify are those that came to Canada and don’t qualify for much or any OAS, GIS and CPP. If you were born and raised in Canada, you won’t get this transit discount.

The region needs to look at how they can get young riders to use the transit, and cheap transit is one way. If you’re a student, and even taking a yellow bus, give them a ride for $1.50 or less, so when they are done with school, they are more inclined to us a bus, rather than buy a car. Get them hooked at a young age.

Yes, basically the program gives a 50% discount to seniors who are living on OAS+GIS only (or equivalent), and none to ones who have substantial other income. Currently all seniors get a 16.7% discount on the monthly passes. While the cutoff is too low it's still far better than the current reduced fare system. A graduated approach to the discounts would be better but I think to make this work the region would need to get the income data from CRA as a manual system gets way too complex. Maybe they are working on this? Or maybe CRA won't do it as a matter of policy? Don't know.

Current student pass is $75, or around $0.90/ride assuming you ONLY use it for getting to school and back. The future discounted pass is about $0.55/ride, and the undiscounted still not much over a dollar. If you're looking at a few-times-a-month usage scenario, the discounted fare (with the card) is $1.49, which meets your criteria.

Overall, moving to this system is the right direction. Hopefully, with experience, it can be expanded and improved in the future.

(05-27-2021, 06:22 AM)jeffster Wrote:

(05-26-2021, 09:48 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Two things here...one, you are making assumptions about the wealth of university students, assumptions which are not justified in all cases.

Second, the UPass is not a government subsidy, it is a student subsidy. Students who don't ride transit (perhaps because they are wealthy and can afford a car) subsidize students who cannot afford a car. Students are subsidized by other students.

It's a program that the STUDENTS voted on, and Conestoga also had the opportunity to vote on. Mind you, they eventually did support it, but not in time not to get fucked over by our shitty provincial government.

And for travelwise, I agree those people are unlikely to need a transit subsidy, I am curious though, I am unsure how that program is funded, if workplaces are funding it, then that's perfectly fine, a workplace can (and should) choose to subsidize transit for their employees.

As for means testing, I have no real problem with it. I'd rather we live in a society with a guaranteed basic income, but that isn't the reality we have right now, and given that our government is unwilling to fund transit like they fund roads, and there are limited dollars to spend and a reasonable means testing makes those dollars go farther, those who need them get them, and those who don't help fund our transit service.

But I'm not sure why you are seeming to take this personally. I see nothing wrong with getting upset about injustices in the world that don't affect you, it's the definition of empathy. I just don't happen to think this is a particularly significant one.

That being said, as I said, I agree, the limits are far too low.

I did not know that about University, but I don’t know the details. I only knew about Conestoga having a much higher rate.

As for TravelWise, I’m not sure if it is subsidized by the employer. That said, being the amount of government workers that can use this service (the cities, the region, the libraries, for example), that subsidy is going to be paid by taxpayers either way.

As for means testing, the approach is all wrong, and very old school and ass backwards. For example, the GST credit and Trillium are all means tested. However, as a taxpayer, you’re not having to do any work for that extra cash, if you qualify. It’s automatic. The household income testing for the GRT, is wrong because you need to collect tax information from all members of the family, you need to highlight take-home pay for all members, and you need to ensure them that you’re living well below the poverty level. This is what makes it wrong.

Take a single senior, for example: the cutoff is $18,900, any senior that worked at all (even for a year or two) won’t qualify for transit: OAS and GIS maximums (low income seniors) is already $18,500, this is the least amount of money you can get. If you receive $90 in CPP, some of GIS will be taken away, and likely leave you with an income around $19,000/year.  What I saying is, the only seniors that might qualify are those that came to Canada and don’t qualify for much or any OAS, GIS and CPP. If you were born and raised in Canada, you won’t get this transit discount.

The region needs to look at how they can get young riders to use the transit, and cheap transit is one way. If you’re a student, and even taking a yellow bus, give them a ride for $1.50 or less, so when they are done with school, they are more inclined to us a bus, rather than buy a car. Get them hooked at a young age.

(05-27-2021, 12:00 PM)tomh009 Wrote: It's one more step than today. And one more step than with property taxes. If today's scheme isn't illegal, I don't see why this should be.

I suspect the real problem here is the challenge with the access to income data: without it, it's really hard to do graduated discounts effectively.

While it's far from perfect, this is still much better than the current scheme, at least in my bopinion.

(05-27-2021, 02:28 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: I'm curious, do any of the discount apply to tickets? Transit passes are great for those who ride frequently, but discounted tickets would also be a good option for many other travel patterns.

• Offer subsidized transit products that are reduced by an average of 48%. 
  
• Make multiple types of reduced-fare transit passes available to people living with low-income, including a product that costs as little as $20.
  
• Consider making lower-cost off-peak transit passes available to the general public.
  
• Develop a capacity for experimentation in the interests of acquiring knowledge and proactively shaping the future.
  
• Continue to work with local community support organizations in a common effort to make affordable transit a reality.
  

(05-27-2021, 12:00 PM)tomh009 Wrote: I suspect the real problem here is the challenge with the access to income data: without it, it's really hard to do graduated discounts effectively.

(05-27-2021, 05:14 PM)Bob_McBob Wrote:

(05-27-2021, 12:00 PM)tomh009 Wrote: I suspect the real problem here is the challenge with the access to income data: without it, it's really hard to do graduated discounts effectively.

Why is access to income data a challenge? Anyone applying for ATP who isn't receiving OW/ODSP is required to submit extensive verification of their household income on an annual basis, including CRA assessments, bank statements, and pay stubs.

(05-28-2021, 09:09 AM)tomh009 Wrote:

(05-27-2021, 05:14 PM)Bob_McBob Wrote: Why is access to income data a challenge? Anyone applying for ATP who isn't receiving OW/ODSP is required to submit extensive verification of their household income on an annual basis, including CRA assessments, bank statements, and pay stubs.

Yes, you can ask people to bring in paperwork and have someone go through it and validate it. It will take time, for both the passenger and the staff, and it's no fun for the passenger and it costs money for the region.

Ideally, the GRT staff would scan in an ID card or enter a SIN, and the GRT system would make a request to the CRA system for the family income, and then determine the discount level. The staff member would never see any personal documents or income information, the system would just indicate that this person qualifies for a 40% discount, for example -- and that would automatically be tied to the person's pass or EasyGo card.

(05-28-2021, 12:21 PM)ac3r Wrote: Some banks still use ancient operating systems like OS/2, so I can't imagine what sort of servers the government has running in musty old datacentres.

(05-27-2021, 02:31 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Yeah, getting people onto transit early makes sense as well. But there's also a risk of it appearing to be the stop gap you use until you can get a car.

Regardless, I'm totally in agreement that the proposed system is pretty poor.  The biggest problem remains the fact that driving is massively subsidized...you are unlikely to be able to beat the driving subsidy just by making transit cheaper. If we mandated that parking cost money for example, the travelwise subsidy would be less important.

(05-28-2021, 09:09 AM)tomh009 Wrote:

(05-27-2021, 05:14 PM)Bob_McBob Wrote: Why is access to income data a challenge? Anyone applying for ATP who isn't receiving OW/ODSP is required to submit extensive verification of their household income on an annual basis, including CRA assessments, bank statements, and pay stubs.

Yes, you can ask people to bring in paperwork and have someone go through it and validate it. It will take time, for both the passenger and the staff, and it's no fun for the passenger and it costs money for the region.

Ideally, the GRT staff would scan in an ID card or enter a SIN, and the GRT system would make a request to the CRA system for the family income, and then determine the discount level. The staff member would never see any personal documents or income information, the system would just indicate that this person qualifies for a 40% discount, for example -- and that would automatically be tied to the person's pass or EasyGo card.

(05-28-2021, 02:52 PM)jeffster Wrote: I can't help to think that our "leaders" are pre-occupied with costs of the GRT, and they have changed some routes, reducing services, like Sunday service, earlier and later service, and cutting route length.

(05-28-2021, 03:26 PM)jeffster Wrote: Here is the catch: The region is looking for "household income". Revenue Canada can only give "Family Income".

(...)

Another example: suppose a single mother taking care of a young child (say 7 years old), and two teenagers. She works PT earning $25/hour (so a decent job) for 24 hours a week. That's $31,200. Both her teens have summer jobs, with reduced hours during school year, each earning $4,500/year. That takes the household income up to $40,700, and doesn't qualify them for reduced ticket prices, since they are rich.

Again, with the above case, the CRA doesn't hold the kids income against her as 'family income'. Her benefits, like the GST, Trillium, and CCB, is based on her income only. Yet, the region would count the kids income as household income.

It's petty and disgusting. And it leaves family with zero dignity. And by that, I mean families that actually qualify, have to bring all this proof of poverty to the region. In this day and age, you'd expect better.