Transfer payments ...

[Bingo]

A lot of talk about Ontario and their 23 billion deficit in give to get ratio with the Feds, and Martin's vote buy returning roughly a 1/5 of it to Ontarians.

Ontario has a population of about 12,000,000 so the deficit was roughly $1916 per citizen, a big number.

Anyone know where Alberta sits in defecit? With 1/4 of the population I wonder where our deficit/per capita number sits?

Looked and looked but couldn't find it anywhere on the net.

[GKDarts]

One guy who would certainly know is Robert Mansell. Don't know if he is still at the UofC Econ department but, it might be worth a call if its really important to you. Mansell has spent a long time on the topic.

[Resolute 14]

I believe Alberta's net-debt is the highest in the nation per capita. Can't find an exact number though.

I thought this was funny. The Government of Canada's website is more than happy to create a page telling us how much Alberta and Ontario receive in federal transfer payments, but not how much it sends.

[photon]

Yeah, I found that site to, and thought the same thing.

I'm actually having problems finding this information.

[photon]

Lol, here's a source:

http://www.separationalberta.com/whyseparation.asp

[Resolute 14]

LOL. I found an article reprinted from the Herald that had the number at $160 billion flowing out of Alberta up to 2003.

On that party's same page, they also said it costs Alberta $500 per second to be in Canada.

[Agamemnon]

Originally posted by Snakeeye@May 10 2005, 11:54 PM
LOL. I found an article reprinted from the Herald that had the number at $160 billion flowing out of Alberta up to 2003.

On that party's same page, they also said it costs Alberta $500 per second to be in Canada.

Flowing out of Alberta, into Canada.

I look out the window and see the highest quality of life in Canada (probably close to the world).

I'm surprised there are that many complaints.

How rich can we get? Is it a contest?

What would we use the money for? To swim in ala Scrooge McDuck? Build more vaults to hold it? Extend our lead as some of the country's (world's) richest people?

Why not just sticky the Transfer Payment threads, rather than watch a new one pop up every couple days? Same w/ Liberals vs. Conservatives...

[Bingo]

Originally posted by Agamemnon+May 10 2005, 05:40 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Agamemnon @ May 10 2005, 05:40 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Snakeeye@May 10 2005, 11:54 PM
LOL.# I found an article reprinted from the Herald that had the number at $160 billion flowing out of Alberta up to 2003.

On that party's same page, they also said it costs Alberta $500 per second to be in Canada.

Flowing out of Alberta, into Canada.

I look out the window and see the highest quality of life in Canada (probably close to the world).

I'm surprised there are that many complaints.

How rich can we get? Is it a contest?

What would we use the money for? To swim in ala Scrooge McDuck? Build more vaults to hold it? Extend our lead as some of the country's (world's) richest people?

Why not just sticky the Transfer Payment threads, rather than watch a new one pop up every couple days? Same w/ Liberals vs. Conservatives... [/b][/quote]
You should write for Hallmark.

As Fotze pointed out I thought it was pretty pertinent given the McGuinty issue in Ontario and how much play there was in the media. I knew Ontario and Alberta have the biggest defecit in money out to money in, but there wasn't any mention of Alberta's situation at all.

If the Liberals are making Ontario's wrong right to buy votes and not doing the same in Alberta because they know the votes can't be bought, that just annoys the hell out of me.

Here's a thought ... since you seem to be hassled by transfer payment threads why open one that is clearly marked as such?

[CaptainCrunch]

Completely agree, if Ontario gets 5 Billion or so back from Ottawa and Alberta gets told to pound sand then we know where the Federal Government's interests lie.

what would we do with the money, maybe it would be nice to boost educational spending, or build some more hospitals, or even do capital re-investment in case some disaster hits our economy. Or the feds decide to punish us futher by taking a larger penalty out of Kyoto.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

I don't know the per capita number, but the 23 billion was based on 2002 public accounts, with Ottawa showing a surplus (what it collects from provinces - what it gives back) of about 30 billion total.

Ontario's share was 23 billion, Alberta's about 6.5 I think (the rest BC).

Alberta's per capita would definitely be higher, but maybe not much.

Incidentally, the latest provincial reports came out and Alberta is now about 15% of GDP - closing fast on Quebec, bigger than BC, and more than twice as large as MB and SK combined.

Guess who's couch cushions Martin found all this money in to give away.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally posted by CaptainCrunch@May 11 2005, 01:40 AM
Completely agree, if Ontario gets 5 Billion or so back from Ottawa and Alberta gets told to pound sand then we know where the Federal Government's interests lie.

what would we do with the money, maybe it would be nice to boost educational spending, or build some more hospitals, or even do capital re-investment in case some disaster hits our economy. Or the feds decide to punish us futher by taking a larger penalty out of Kyoto.

The federal government is interested in getting votes. Both you, I, and the government know that no matter what Ottawa does, Albertans will still vote conservative. It's the way politics always are.

Also, Ontario is a swing province. They will vote Liberal or Conservative. Politicians know this (both Cons and Libs), therefore they always favour Ontario. You would too if you were PM.

Part of the reason Alberta is not powerful enough to incite change in the politics of Canada is the fault of the people who never change who they vote for. Become a swing province, and you'll become more powerful.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally posted by FlamesAddiction+May 11 2005, 01:50 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (FlamesAddiction @ May 11 2005, 01:50 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-CaptainCrunch@May 11 2005, 01:40 AM
Completely agree, if Ontario gets 5 Billion or so back from Ottawa and Alberta gets told to pound sand then we know where the Federal Government's interests lie.

what would we do with the money, maybe it would be nice to boost educational spending, or build some more hospitals, or even do capital re-investment in case some disaster hits our economy.# Or the feds decide to punish us futher by taking a larger penalty out of Kyoto.

The federal government is interested in getting votes. Both you, I, and the government know that no matter what Ottawa does, Albertans will still vote conservative. It's the way politics always are.

Also, Ontario is a swing province. They will vote Liberal or Conservative. Politicians know this (both Cons and Libs), therefore they always favour Ontario. You would too if you were PM.

Part of the reason Alberta is not powerful enough to incite change in the politics of Canada is the fault of the people who never change who they vote for. Become a swing province, and you'll become more powerful. [/b][/quote]
Understandable, but its apparent that Alberta's not going to and is never going to vote for the Liberal's, the majority don't trust and don't believe in what they portray and what they're doing.

conversly the Liberal's have basically said that they don't understand what makes Albertan's tick, and to be perfectly frank have never made an effort to understand, in fact everytime the Liberal's are voted in, they make an effort to punish us, instead of trying to build a bridge.

If we have to sell our souls to the Devil to become a swing province, then its not going to happen, we'll leave that to Ontario.

[CaramonLS]

Originally posted by FlamesAddiction+May 11 2005, 01:50 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (FlamesAddiction @ May 11 2005, 01:50 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-CaptainCrunch@May 11 2005, 01:40 AM
Completely agree, if Ontario gets 5 Billion or so back from Ottawa and Alberta gets told to pound sand then we know where the Federal Government's interests lie.

what would we do with the money, maybe it would be nice to boost educational spending, or build some more hospitals, or even do capital re-investment in case some disaster hits our economy. Or the feds decide to punish us futher by taking a larger penalty out of Kyoto.

The federal government is interested in getting votes. Both you, I, and the government know that no matter what Ottawa does, Albertans will still vote conservative. It's the way politics always are.

Also, Ontario is a swing province. They will vote Liberal or Conservative. Politicians know this (both Cons and Libs), therefore they always favour Ontario. You would too if you were PM.

Part of the reason Alberta is not powerful enough to incite change in the politics of Canada is the fault of the people who never change who they vote for. Become a swing province, and you'll become more powerful. [/b][/quote]
It doesn't help when Chrétien makes about a day worth of campaigning in Alberta for his re-election, most of which is spent in Edmonton in the Edmonton Center riding.

They don't even try to get our votes.

I'm not sure how much time Mr. Martin spent here, but I know it wasn't much.

[Tron_fdc]

A few links on Ontario...... I couldn't find much on Alberta's payments.

http://www.strongontario.ca/english/default.asp

and the man driving it...

http://noncogent.blogspot.com/2005/05/strange-days.html

and one on immigration payments

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...Story/National/

[CaptainCrunch]

We'll he got a pretty good luck at us from 30,000 feet as he flew over us on the way to B.C. and then back to Ontario

[Resolute 14]

So what you are saying, FlamesAddiction, is that we will continue to be treated as second-class Canadians until we vote Liberal?

Quite honestly, even if the Liberals ever gave us a reason to vote Liberal, it would not make a difference. The problem isnt that we aren't a swing province, it is that Ontario has 100 seats in the house while we have around 30. There is no reason at all to consider Alberta when Ontario wins every election. Our deal within Confederation is the problem, not our voting habits.

Until there is a push to reform Confederation, or at the very least, our electoral process (PR), the federal government is always going to treat us as second-class citizens.

Alberta is great inspite of Canada, not because of it.

[GKDarts]

I managed to find some "Mansellian" history on the topic. This is circa 1994:

The Cost of Confederation
30-Year Sapping of Alberta - $165 billion calculated as excess payments — economist
This extremely important article was written by Allen Panzeri of the Edmonton Journal, and appeared in the Wednesday, July 20, 1994 edition of the Edmonton Journal on page A5.
Alberta contributed $165 billion more to Ottawa than it received over the past 30 years, says a University of Calgary economist.

That nearly matches the extra benefit Quebec has received from Ottawa from 1961 until 1991, said Bob Mansell, who has studied and charted transfer payments to and from Ottawa.

The sum, although huge, reflects the political reality of Canada: Alberta lacks effective representation at the federal level to protect its interests, he said Tuesday.

Over that period, Alberta has been the only net contributor — though its per capital income is less than in Ontario and British Columbia.

The provincial government has often raised fears of another National Energy Program. Mansell, who estimates that program accounts for $70 billion of the $165 billion in excess contributions, said those fears could be justified.

"Where does the federal government go if it needs more money? To Central Canada? No, because of the population base. So they'll go to Alberta.

"There's a real danger unless this is corrected."

A number of factors account for the remaining $95 billion in excess contributions, say Mansell and Liberal MLA Mike Percy:

This province has a relatively low unemployment rate, meaning it doesn't get a big transfer in unemployment insurance.
Federal offices and purchases of goods and services are low here compared with Ontario and Quebec.
Federal expenditures are handed out as political favors, meaning they'll more often go to the heavily-populated areas than to the West.
Transfer payments to the so-called "have" provinces — Alberta, British Columbia and Ontario — are lower than to the "have-not" provinces and some of these payments are also capped at a certain limit.
Alberta's main industries — agriculture and energy — are capital intensive and thus subject to the federal capital tax.
The province has a richer personal tax base that's fuelled by the youngest and best-educated workforce in Canada. Per capital, Alberta also has the highest participation in the workforce.
Mansell dismissed figures cited in a recent Canadian Tax Journal article showing Alberta contributed $32.9 billion more than it received between 1977 and 1992. They're only rough figures from Statistics Canada that don't include the necessary adjustments, such as the cost to Alberta of the National energy Program.

But factoring in those adjustments doesn't make the picture any better, he said.

"What it means is that the situation is far worse than it seems from Alberta's point of view. It has been by far the largest net contributor on a per capita basis."

According to Mansell's figures, in 1992 Alberta contributed $4.1 billion more than it received, while Ontario contributed $3.6 billion more than it received.

While it isn't unfair that Alberta should be a net contributor, since it has a strong economy, the province should ask why it isn't being treated fair relative to other provinces, Mansell said.

"When we boom, we should pay in and when we bust, we should take out.

"In the case of Alberta, it's been a one-way street. It should be an insurance policy, but it isn't. Why should Alberta be the biggest net contributor when it isn't the highest income province?"

Those sentiments were echoed by Percy, who raised the Canadian Tax Journal figures to demonstrate the system is "not as sensitive to the unique features of Alberta as it should be."

For example, when oil prices dropped in the 1980s, Alberta should have received more than it contributed.

"If you look at it as an insurance policy, it would be nice to think you can draw down on it, " Percy said.

The MLA said he wasn't raising the figures in an effort to bash Eastern Canada, but to show they indicate the system could be fairer.

Premier Ralph Klein said the system is as fair as it can be and it's no surprise Alberta contributes more than it receives.

"It just shows we're willing to do our fair share for Confederation," he said Tuesday. "I just hope we're not punished unfairly for being generous and prudent."

Mansell said that for Alberta, the transfer-payment system is nearly at the breaking point. If it weren't giving $4 billion a year more to the federal government than it should, the province wouldn't have a deficit.

"The point comes where they're taking so much away from me to give to you, or vice-versa, that the net contributor is going to revolt."

[GKDarts]

Mansell/Schlenker Study...

http://www.cabe.ca/cbe/vol3_2/32-mansell.pdf

[GKDarts]

More Mansell...


https://www.albertaresidentsleague.com/Arti...fordMay2003.htm


In Alberta's case, that means payments to have-not provinces. The University of Calgary's economics dean, Robert Mansell, extrapolating from 1999 Alberta Treasury figures, suggests the average Albertan family of four made a net transfer of about $12,000 in the preceding fiscal year. That is, when federal expenditures in the province, including transfer to citizens, are compared to tax revenues sent from Alberta to Ottawa, Ottawa takes in about $3,000 per capita more than it returns to the province.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally posted by fotze@May 11 2005, 08:11 AM
Mansell should just shut up and be happy that he is lucky enough to live in a province that had dinosaurs in it millions of years ago. This constant moaning of highest educated and hardest working province has got to stop. Quebec and the others mean well, they are trying, they just are trying to find themselves, get a career.

Just wait until the oil dries up, and the coalbed methane, and the gas in shale, all resources that are extremly easy to extract. No financial and human capital was ever spent in developing technologies to get this stuff out of the ground economically. No deaths on snubbing rigs, lost limbs, it's all just gravy.

When it all dries up someday, that's when the rest of Canada will start to transfer a net income to Alberta, like in the eighties when Alberta was suffering becasue of low prices, oh crap I was wrong, Alberta still didn't get any extra money then. charf

Okay, I'm not too sure if your second paragraph is supposed to be sarcastic, but man do I hope it is.