Daniel Fontaine’s Bad Math

Earlier today (October 28, 2024) New Westminster City Council debated a rezoning application coming for downtown New Westminster. During the debate, Councillor Daniel Fontaine stated the development would bring “four World Trade Centers onto that site” as a visualization of what sort of development would be coming.

The development in question (88 Tenth Street — Columbia Square) would bring up to 3 million square feet of residential units. It also includes 122,000 square feet of retail. Additionally, there would be at least 42,000 square feet of commercial office space, plus some daycare and potentially a school. Let’s say 3,250,000 square feet of development, just to round things off.

During the meeting Councillor Fontaine didn’t clarify which World Trade Center he was talking about, the most famous being the complex in New York City that was tragically destroyed by terrorists in 2001. Vancouver has a World Trade Centre building near Canada Place, perhaps he meant that one?

But he clarified in a Facebook video after the meeting, stating very clearly he was referring to New York’s World Trade Center.

Here’s the problem: his math is completely wrong.

If you assume that by “world trade center” he means either 1 WTC or 2 WTC (these are the “twin towers” that were struck by airplanes in 2001), then he’s wrong. Each tower had a square footage of 4,759,040 square feet. Four “World Trade Centers” would then be over 19,000,000 square feet, nearly six times the size of the 88 Tenth Street redevelopment.

If 88 Tenth Street were really “four World Trade Centers” then it would have to be six times larger than it actually is. It’s not even one World Trade Center, let alone four.

Or maybe he was referring to the entire World Trade Center complex of seven buildings? Problem: seven buildings are way bigger than one building, and their total square footage was 13,400,000 square feet, so four of those would be a whopping 53,600,000 square feet, well over sixteen times bigger than 88 Tenth Street.

Either way, “four World Trade Centers” is wildly incorrect.

Daniel Fontaine needs to remove his video and say he was wildly incorrect with his “four World Trade Centers” statement before it catches on as some sort of warped “truth”.

Can New West municipal candidates follow simple rules?

The New Westminster Record published New West municipal candidate profiles recently, and in them the candidates had to answer a handful of questions. While they weren’t nearly as good as my questions, they did come with one simple rule:

Answers were limited to 50 words unless otherwise specified.

Pretty simple rule, right? Let’s see who was able to follow that simple rule! Candidates get a ✅ for succeeding and a ❌ for failing. Even if you miss one question, you fail! It’s a simple test, you should be able to do it!

Mayoral Candidates

✅ Jimmie Bell

✅ Nikki Binns

✅ Jonathan Cote

❌ Harm Woldring (2/5)

Council Candidates

✅ Chinu Das

❌ Daniel Fontaine (4/5)

✅ Troy Hunter

✅ Mike Ireland

✅ Patrick Johnstone

✅ Jaimie McEvoy

✅ Paul McNamara

✅ Nadine Nakagawa

❌ Benny Ogden (4/5)

✅ Chuck Puchmayr

✅ Angela Sealy

✅ Mary Trentadue

✅ Ellen Vaillancourt

❌ Bryn Ward (4/5)

School Trustee Candidates

✅ Steve Tsonev

❌ Maya Russell (4/5)

❌ Mary Lalji (4/5)

❌ J.P. LeBerg (4/5)

✅ Gurveen Dhaliwal

✅ Dee Beattie

❌ Doug Woodward (2/5)

❌ Danielle Connelly (3/5)

✅ Anita Ansari

❌ Lisa Falbo (2/5)

✅ Cyrus Sy

❌ Alejandro Diaz (3/5)

❌ Mark Gifford (3/5)

Hard-Hitting Conclusions

School Trustee candidates, almost all of you need to go back to school and learn how to follow rules. I mean seriously, only five of you could follow simple directions? That’s not even enough to form a full school board! It’s really depressing to see so many of you fail such a simple set of directions, and I’m not being sarcastic here. Seriously, attention to detail is a key skill that you all should have when you’re trying to get elected to run an $80 million organization. If you can’t be bothered to use a simple word count webpage then why should we trust you to understand the details of complex policies you’ll be coming up with to further the education of our children? That’s a serious question and I invite any of you with a ❌ next to your name to leave a comment below. And this time you don’t have a word limit.

I was originally planning on doing a breakdown between Team Cote and the New West Progressives and the independents but honestly, after seeing the terrible results from the School Trustee candidates I don’t have the willpower. Oh, alright, maybe I do, here we go.

Team Cote: 12/14

New West Progressives: 3/8

Independents: 6/11 (three haven’t answered, let’s pray to God that they read this post and figure out how to follow rules)

Donald Trump’s 650 million person migration

Tonight Donald Trump claimed Hillary Clinton would let 650 million people into the US in a week. While Trump has said some crazy and dangerous things in the past, this one really beggars belief. Let’s look at some of the ways that this is completely off-the-rails insane.

Getting people in

650 million people is a lot of people. Somehow, in a week, they all have to get to the United States. Let’s assume that the entire populations of both Canada and Mexico arrive by land and everybody else arrives by air. Canada and Mexico have about 155 million people combined, so in one week they’d all have to cross the borders. That’s 22 million people per day, or 15,375 per minute, for that entire week. There are 117 land crossings between Canada and the US and 48 between Mexico and the US. That’s 162 crossings that have to handle 15,375 people every minute, so each one has to process 95 per minute, or one person every 0.63 seconds. Of course, there are more people in Mexico than in Canada, so the Mexican border crossings need to process one person every 0.24 seconds while the border guards at Canadian crossings only need a leisurely 2 seconds per person.

Okay, that sounds a little unrealistic. Let’s look at the air arrivals. 500 million people are going to arrive in the United States by air in one week. The largest passenger plane in the world is the Airbus A380. If it’s fully outfit for economy seating, it can hold 853 people. That means you would need to make 586,166 flights into the United States for that week, or just more than 58 flights every minute. There are only 195 Airbus A380s in the world though, so each one would have to arrive in the United States every 3 minutes and 20 seconds. They would have to land, get passengers off, fly back overseas, pick up passengers, and fly back to the US, all in 3:20.

This is starting to sound a little impossible.

The Airbus A380 only needs about 5900 feet to land, but over 9000 feet to take off, so its choice of airports is restricted as well. In the US there are 189 runways longer than 10000 feet, which is amazingly close to the 195 Airbus A380s in the world, so we could just assign one plane to each runway (spreading out the other 6 planes amongst those runways). That makes logistics easier!

But hey, we’re not restricted to just A380s. In 2013 the worldwide commercial fleet was at about 20,000 planes, so let’s press them all into service! 500 million people spread over 20,000 planes means we only need to bring in 25,000 people per plane for that week. Suppose each plane can hold 250 people (that’s just a wild-ass guess), so that’s only 100 flights per plane per week, or 14 every day. Each airplane then has to make a round trip every hour and 40 minutes!

Okay, maybe it’s not that realistic.

Housing them when they’re in the US

Let’s assume that somehow the largest migration in the history of the world is a success and the United States has just allowed 650 million more people within its territory. Luckily the US has a lot of land to spread out in — its current population density is about 86 people per square mile, so tripling this only puts it at about 260 per square mile. This is right about the population density of Albania, Syria, or Sierra Leone. No problems there.

But where do they actually live? Do they live in hotels? There are about 5 million hotel rooms in the US, so that’s a tidy 130 people per room. The average hotel room is about 330 square feet, so each person gets a cozy 2.5 square feet! Who needs to sleep?

Or maybe we billet them in American’s houses. In 2015 there were about 125 million households in the US, so each one would have to take 5.2 people, which is the most realistic thing I’ve calculated tonight.

Feeding them all

Once those 650 million extra people are in the US and have found housing, they probably want to be fed. At any one time the US only has about three days’ worth of food available in the logistics chain, and that’s for 315 million people. Triple the population and you have to triple the amount of food available. The US does export about $150 billion worth of food every year, so maybe they could just stop exporting food and feed the people with that, so each person would get $230 worth of food a year. But 350 million tons of corn is exported annually, so those extra 650 million people could just split all that up and have a half-ton of corn each! That sounds nutritious and totally do-able, if you ignore the fact that the overwhelming majority of that corn is grown for agricultural use (cows, mostly) and isn’t suitable for human consumption.

Don’t forget utilities

These people are going to use electricity as well, mostly to heat more water. In 2015 the average American household used 901 kWh per month, and the average household had 2.54 people, so let’s say each person uses 355 kWh per month. 650 million more people means almost 231,000 megawatt hours per month. The US generated about 410,000 megawatt hours in August 2016, so if we just take the increase in residential load the US’s electricity generation would need to increase by over 50%. In a week.

The average person uses about 90 gallons of water per day, so that’s an extra 58.5 billion gallons of water used every day. On average Niagara Falls has four million cubic feet of water flow over it every minute, which is about 5.8 billion cubic feet every day. One cubic foot of water has 7.48 gallons, so Niagara Falls could supply 43 billion gallons of water every day, which isn’t quite enough for the 650 million people. It’s close enough though, so let’s just say we have tapped Niagara Falls entirely for this influx of people. Oh, and that happened in a week as well.

But that’s not all!

How do you get the people from the airports to where they’ll be living? What about hospitals; assume people visit hospitals at the same rate they do now, hospitals can’t handle three times as many emergency room visits, surgeries, births, deaths, and everything else medical. Do the children go to school? Where? What about jobs? Policing?

There are just too many ways that this is unrealistic. I’m beginning to think that maybe Donald Trump doesn’t really know what he’s talking about.

The astoundingly bad logic of Jordan Bateman

Today BC Transportation Minister Todd Stone announced a ten-year transportation plan for BC. During the press conference he was asked about the Metro Vancouver transportation plebiscite, and if the province is considering reforming TransLink, because this is one of the reasons why people are considering voting ‘no’. His answer?

At this point in time, the province has no plans to make any further improvements to governance at TransLink.

So vote ‘yes’ or vote ‘no’, no matter what happens in the plebiscite the province has no plans to change TransLink’s governance.

And what does Jordan Bateman have to say about this?

Stone killed yes side claim that change will come to TransLink either way. Voting NO the best way to show gov’t we want this fixed.

He’s saying that you should vote ‘no’ so TransLink’s governance will be fixed, using Todd Stone’s statement of “no plans to make any further improvements to governance at TransLink” as support.

What kind of crazy logic is running through Mr. Bateman’s mind? It’s mind-boggling just how bad this logic is!

Seriously, that’s pretty weak, Jordan.

Yet another way the CTF is wrong

The Canadian Taxpayers Foundation continues to say that the proposed 0.5% Congestion Improvement Tax will result in an average household tax increase of $258.

This number is wrong. Plain and simple, it is wrong. I’ve shown this before [here] and here], but I just found a third way to show that they’re wrong.

Back in 2011 BC had a referendum on keeping the Harmonized Sales Tax. An independent panel came up with a report titled HST or PST/GST? It’s Your Decision. In it they presented different statistics and facts to give a neutral viewpoint on the pros and cons of either keeping the HST or switching back to the separate PST/GST.

Page 7 of that report presents these statistics on how British Columbians spend their money, and what percentages are taxed:

This is what is now happening at the cash register.

  • 17 per cent of your spending has an extra seven per cent sales tax.

  • 29 per cent of your spending is subject to the same total sales taxes as before. It has not gone up or down.

  • 54 per cent of your spending is not taxable under the HST or the PST/GST. Nothing has changed.

Let me clarify those three items. The first is goods and services that were not subject to the PST but were subject to the HST. The second is goods and services that were subject to either only the GST or were subject to both PST and GST. The third is goods and services that were non-taxable.

BC returned to the separate GST and PST. What this means is that the first group of goods and services are no longer taxed under the PST. The third group of goods and services were never subject to the PST and they aren’t now. That leaves the second group.

Some of the second group (29% of spending, remember) is subject to GST only, and some of it is subject to both GST and PST. Let’s assume for a minute that everything that you buy that falls in this group is subject to the PST. Let’s also assume that you’re an average household and that your take-home pay is about $55,000 per year (remember, I showed that in an earlier post). Let’s further assume that you spend every dollar that comes in.

That means of your $55,000 you’ve spent 29% of that on goods that are subject to the PST, or $15,950. If you multiply that by the 0.5% CIT, your yearly increase in taxes paid comes to $79.75.

That means for extra taxes of 22 cents a day you get a new, safer, wider Pattullo Bridge. You get a SkyTrain tunnel down Broadway in Vancouver. You get light rapid transit in Surrey and Langley. You get eleven new B-Line bus routes, you get more buses, you get more SkyTrains, you get more SeaBus service, you get more HandyDART service, you get more West Coast Express service, you get more NightBus service, you get more bikeways. You get an improved transportation system in Metro Vancouver.

But just remember, when the Canadian Taxpayers Federation says “the average household will face an annual tax increase of about $258” they’re completely wrong.