Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Main Forums > The Off Topic Forum
Register Forum Rules FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-05-2018, 11:01 PM   #1
combustiblefuel
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Nanaimo
Exp:
Default Newfoundland trieg to save money by eliminating small towns

https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/canada...owns-1.3872487

Don't think I would agree with this if this was happening here.

I noticed I spelt trying wrong in the title if the mods could change that it would be appreciated.
combustiblefuel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2018, 11:05 PM   #2
OldDutch
#1 Goaltender
 
OldDutch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North of the River, South of the Bluff
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by combustiblefuel View Post
https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/canada...owns-1.3872487

Don't think I would agree with this if this was happening here.

I noticed I spelt trying wrong in the title if the mods could change that it would be appreciated.
This is a “have” province BTW. Could you ever see Quebec try and do this?

Such a broken system.
OldDutch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2018, 11:10 PM   #3
Ozy_Flame

Posted the 6 millionth post!
 
Ozy_Flame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Exp:
Default

I would be all for this if it meant the province would save money. The threshold to qualify has to have 90% support from the community, and has to show that the province will save money by shuttering the town.
Ozy_Flame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2018, 02:27 AM   #4
combustiblefuel
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Nanaimo
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDutch View Post
This is a “have” province BTW. Could you ever see Quebec try and do this?

Such a broken system.
Ya total bull####.

Quebec will receive around 11 billion and the rest of "have not "provinces will receive around 1 billion.

The " have" provinces round out as Alberta , British Columbia and Saskatchewan.

The West doesn't see a dime in equalization payments and the one provence that actaul could benifiet is scraping townships to meet their needs.
combustiblefuel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2018, 02:30 AM   #5
combustiblefuel
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Nanaimo
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame View Post
I would be all for this if it meant the province would save money. The threshold to qualify has to have 90% support from the community, and has to show that the province will save money by shuttering the town.
No . Total joke. If this is the case the province should be receiving equalization payments.
combustiblefuel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2018, 06:12 AM   #6
taco.vidal
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by combustiblefuel View Post
https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/canada...owns-1.3872487

Don't think I would agree with this if this was happening here.

I noticed I spelt trying wrong in the title if the mods could change that it would be appreciated.
You can edit your own title under advanced edit.
taco.vidal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2018, 06:16 AM   #7
GGG
Franchise Player
 
GGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: California
Exp:
Default

That looks like a very good policy we should implement in northern Alberta. Saskatchewan would benefit as well. It really bails out a future problem as these people age and their assets aren't worth anything and all young people in the town have left.

Not sure what equalization has to do with this as the economics for shuttering towns is the same regardless of provincial income.
GGG is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GGG For This Useful Post:
Old 04-06-2018, 06:58 AM   #8
Ozy_Flame

Posted the 6 millionth post!
 
Ozy_Flame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by combustiblefuel View Post
No . Total joke. If this is the case the province should be receiving equalization payments.
Two different debates, IMO.

What if Alberta had 10-15 hamlets that were better off shuttered? Does us being a have province then make us a "have not" province?
Ozy_Flame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2018, 07:01 AM   #9
Northendzone
Franchise Player
 
Northendzone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Exp:
Default

I have read a similar article about Nova Scotia and there are many small towns/villages in that province.

from a finaical prespective it makes a lot so sense, but it is a odd concept - a group of people just picking up and leaving. The city infrastructure remains there to face the elemets, but there are no people.
__________________
If I do not come back avenge my death
Northendzone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2018, 07:55 AM   #10
bizaro86
Franchise Player
 
bizaro86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Exp:
Default

I think it potentially makes a lot of sense. You have people who own houses in little towns with no economic future, which makes them feel trapped as they probably ant sell. If the province can save money by buying everyone out, those people have the option to relocate to a more sustainable community.

There are some risks though. The biggest one I could see is people moving to a town in hopes of getting it. Probably should limit it to one payment lifetime per person.
CP group buy in the town that voted 85% to leave?
bizaro86 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to bizaro86 For This Useful Post:
Old 04-06-2018, 08:27 AM   #11
CliffFletcher
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: May 2006
Exp:
Default

This has been going on in Japan for years. It'll become more and more common in ageing countries like ours.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze View Post
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
CliffFletcher is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2018, 08:47 AM   #12
corporatejay
Franchise Player
 
corporatejay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Exp:
Default

I have been advocating for this for years. Small towns cost a disproportionate amount of money compared to big cities and receive less in services. Total no brainer.
__________________
corporatejay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2018, 09:25 AM   #13
troutman
Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer
 
troutman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Crowsnest Pass
Exp:
Default

No I cannot forget where it is that I come from
I cannot forget the people who love me
Yeah, I can be myself here in this small town
And people let me be just what I want to be
troutman is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to troutman For This Useful Post:
Old 04-06-2018, 09:25 AM   #14
Lubicon
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Exp:
Default

Really, other than a actual government buyout of homes this has been happening in Alberta (across the prairies) for years now. People slowly leave resulting in reduction in required services. Elevators shutter and rail lines are abandoned. Eventually the local hospital and school are closed which is the final nail in the coffin for any town. They just naturally shrink as people leave. There used to be towns every 7 miles or so along the railroad. Not any more.
Lubicon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2018, 09:34 AM   #15
CroFlames
Franchise Player
 
CroFlames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Exp:
Default

Conversations about equalization always lead to me getting pissed off.
CroFlames is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:53 AM.

Calgary Flames
2024-25




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021 | See Our Privacy Policy