City councillor still explaining pilot project taxing Applewood properties according to combined # of household social media followers

G Papa Tango
Aug 3
5 min read

In a bold move sparking both intrigue and skepticism, City Councillor James Teller has launched a pilot project to tax properties in the affluent Applewood neighborhood according to the combined social media following of their household members. The initiative aims to explore innovative ways of redistributing wealth and addressing social inequalities within the community.

Under this experimental scheme, properties in Applewood will undergo a unique assessment process that considers not only their market value and size but also the cumulative social media influence of their residents. This groundbreaking approach marks a departure from conventional property taxation methods, which typically rely on factors such as property size, location, and market value.

Councillor Teller asserts that this novel approach is designed to foster a more equitable distribution of resources and tackle the growing wealth gap within the city. By leveraging social media metrics, the pilot project aims to recognize the intangible but influential contributions individuals make to society through their online presence.

However, the initiative has generated mixed reactions among residents and experts alike. While some applaud the innovative thinking and commitment to addressing social disparities, others express concerns about the feasibility and fairness of the proposed system.

Critics argue that assessing property taxes based on social media followers could introduce subjective biases and privacy concerns. They raise questions about the reliability and accuracy of social media metrics and the potential for manipulation or gaming of the system. Moreover, opponents contend that such a system could penalize individuals who choose to prioritize privacy or who are not active on social media platforms.

In response to these concerns, Councillor Teller emphasizes that the pilot project is intended as a learning opportunity and welcomes feedback and constructive criticism from the community. He underscores the importance of exploring alternative approaches to taxation that take into account evolving societal dynamics and technological advancements.

As the pilot project unfolds, all eyes will be on Applewood to assess its efficacy and implications for future policy decisions. Whether this unconventional taxation model proves to be a viable solution to address social inequalities or merely a well-intentioned experiment remains to be seen. One thing is certain: the debate surrounding the taxation of social capital is far from over, and its outcome could have far-reaching implications for cities grappling with issues of economic disparity and social justice.

FURTHERMOREOVERKILL

On average in Canada, do suburbanites pay more or less than their share of taxes, G Papa Tango?

On average in Canada, suburban residents tend to pay less than their fair share in local (particularly property) taxes, relative to the costs of the services they consume, while denser urbanites subsidize them.

🏙️ How this imbalance happens

Lower-density suburban homes typically require far more infrastructure per household—longer roads, water and sewer lines, garbage collection routes, utility extensions, etc.—but property taxes don’t scale with these costs. As one Ottawa resident explained:
“A house in an urban area … will have the same flat property tax rate, yet the suburban house usually costs 3 times more in municipal infrastructure needs … urban residents subsidize suburban/rural residents” Reddit+14Reddit+14Reddit+14
With tax systems largely based on property value or square footage—not the actual cost incurred—suburbanites often underpay relative to the infrastructure burden they impose. As summarized by a commenter on the sustainability of such developments:
“Taxes are based on square footage … if you live in the suburbs you pay substantially less … you also consume significantly more in the form of roads, utilities and infrastructure … urban communities subsidize people in the suburbs” Reddit

📄 Evidence from Canada

A Fraser Institute study found that property tax rates on multi-unit urban housing (like condos and apartments) are often significantly higher than for detached suburban homes—even though higher‑density housing generally consumes less per capita in municipal services Fraser Institute.
A Statistics Canada study showed that property taxes are regressive, with lower-income households paying a higher share of their income than higher-income ones. This effect tends to be stronger in large metro areas, which include many suburbs Fraser Institute+3Statistics Canada+3Reddit+3.
In Halifax, a municipality-level analysis found that suburbia costs the city more than twice as much per household to maintain compared to urban neighborhoods—yet taxes don’t reflect that gap policyalternatives.ca +5Reddit+5Reddit+5.

✅ Summary

Area type	Infrastructure cost per household	Relative property tax burden*
Urban (dense)	Lower cost	High rates (often heavier burden than cost)
Suburban	Higher cost	Lower rates (subsidized by urban tax base)

*Property tax is typically similar between areas by assessment class but doesn't scale with service cost differences.

🧭 Broader context

The tax system tends to treat all residential properties similarly, regardless of how much municipal infrastructure they actually use.
Urban dwellers, especially renters in high-density units, often subsidize suburban infrastructure consumption, even though they pay more per square foot or unit.
Federal and provincial tax revenues—collected from all taxpayers including urban residents—are frequently redistributed across the region or province, further subsidizing suburban areas in popular growth corridors like the GTA Reddit.

🧠 Final takeaway

If you're asking whether suburban residents in Canada generally pay more or less than the services they consume, the answer is: they pay less. Urban residents disproportionately cover infrastructure and service costs, effectively subsidizing suburban development.

Great, and can you add a Reddit-like thread in reaction to the above?

🧵r/CanadaDiscussion | Posted by u/InfillEnjoyerDo suburbanites actually pay their fair share in taxes? (Spoiler: probably not)

Just read a deep dive showing that suburban infrastructure costs way more per household, but taxes don’t reflect it. Seems like cities are quietly subsidizing sprawl while taxing denser areas harder. Anyone else notice this?

🔝 Top Comments:

u/ThrowbackPlanner

I work in municipal planning. It’s 100% true. We’re still approving subdivisions that lose money long-term because the development fees don’t cover maintenance 10, 20, 30 years out. It’s like buying a house but refusing to budget for the roof replacement.

u/SourDoughDad

Not surprised. I live in a cul-de-sac with 9 houses. The city plows our road, fixes our water mains, maintains the park down the block... and we all pay less in property tax than my sister’s downtown condo building. 🙃

u/MissingMiddleFTW

Meanwhile in the city: street parking is metered, garbage pickup is once a week if you're lucky, and we get dinged with “special levies” for everything from transit to school board shortfalls.

u/GreenbeltInvader

It’s wild how people in suburbia yell about “paying for the city” when it’s the other way around. Try building anything mixed-use near them and suddenly it’s a fight about shadows and traffic.

u/Devilstriped

Halifax did a study a while back: dense neighborhoods make money for the city; suburbs drain it. But politicians don’t want to touch that because suburban voters scream the loudest.

u/RetiredBoomerOnBike

Funny how when I bike past subdivisions, they have perfect new roads and LED streetlights. Meanwhile my downtown lane is more pothole than pavement. But sure, let’s tax my triplex more because I rent out the basement.

u/GTA_RealityCheck

Can confirm: in Peel, Mississauga was basically bankrolling services for newer subdivisions in Brampton for years. Growth doesn’t pay for itself—it mortgages the future.

u/FutureIsMissingMiddle

The system is backwards. We should be incentivizing density and retrofitting suburbia, not giving free rides to sprawling developments.

💬 u/OriginalPoster replies:

Thanks all! Makes you realize we’re paying for convenience we’ll never use—and footing the bill for others’ two-car garages while we fight for bus shelters. 🤦‍♂️

The Wealthy Place Post