May 2015 Provincial Election Thread v2

[Kavvy]

Originally Posted by Derek Sutton

Well a running a family farm is, the fact that you cannot acknowledge that should be embarrassing.

I grew up on a farm, my Father was a Construction Worker, an Electrician, a Veterinarian, an Equipment Operator, a Mechanic, a Laborer, a Financial Planner, a Truck Driver, a Cowboy; The list goes on. Very, very, very few professions involves such diverse skills and knowledge, and don't even get me started on what my Mother did.

And they all deserve the same safety protection that all other AB workers have doing similar professions in any other industry.

How are you not getting this?

[puckedoff]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

I'm not sure "random guy quoted in small town newspaper article"'s opinion is the best source.

I love how a 24 month integration and exemption period is considered "too quick". When it seems more like farmers ignored the original bill and are now blaming the current government for moving forward with a plan that has been in place for years.

"IT'S A CULTURE!" look at all of these special snowflakes with their special snowflake business that is totally unique in the world of business.

Come on now surely you realize that farming is remarkably different than your average "job".

I think there is merits to both sides of the argument, and as long as the government is reasonable in their implementation this can be a win win.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by Slava

Wow, $10k? That's incredible really. Interesting that we can eliminate half of the population and say 'your environmental impact is no big deal' and just collect from the other half.

I think they really believe that. andrew leach was saying they don't see the value in rebates for new furnaces etc as the people who use them are big offenders with the money to replace these items anyway, and ideologically the govt is not interested in taking less or giving more to the top half.

Re: 10k a good chunk of that is the Libs child care plan. That's 5-10k alone depending on your income and number of kids. Then AB is adding about 3k, plus whatever the carbon tax distribution is. All of which isn't a horrible idea, as long as the people getting it aren't forever trapped in low end jobs because every step from 30k-60k costs them more than they gain.

[Derek Sutton]

Originally Posted by Kavvy

And they all deserve the same safety protection that all other AB workers have doing similar professions in any other industry.

How are you not getting this?

I do get this, go back and read my posts, I have said all along that increased saftey awareness, traning etc... is a good thing. What Farmers are scared of and one of the problems is that fast tracking this legislation will potentially cripple farms financially and put and end to many of their livlehoods, careers and passions.

[PsYcNeT]

Can't they just dip into part of the 7 billion in farm subsidies the Feds provide every year?

[Stormageddon]

Originally Posted by Kavvy

And they all deserve the same safety protection that all other AB workers have doing similar professions in any other industry.

How are you not getting this?

How are you not getting this?

People aren't upset about the safety aspect of it. Although I would argue more safety legislation does not do much to prevent incidents, seeing as how there are still way more injuries at my job then I ever happen on farms in my area.

That's how this bill is getting rammed through, they call it strictly safety legislation but it affects every single aspect of life on a farm.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Can't they just dip into part of the 7 billion in farm subsidies the Feds provide every year?

Why bother farming at all? Producing goods is overrated when the government just subsidizes the effort.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

Does the carbon tax basically equate to an internal Alberta equalization payment scheme?

Not entirely, but yes partially. Some of the money that was collected from all will be distributed to the poor. That falls under the umbrella of "equalization". Then some will be distributed into public services and programs via the general revenue pool. That kind of falls under the umbrella of "equalization" similar to the way income taxes do (rich pay more but public services are consumed by all). Then the rest will apparently be used on energy/efficiency investments. That doesn't fall under the umbrella of "equalization". Heck, it probably benefits the rich.

Again, in an attempt to head off the people who will inevitably get their nickers in a twist that I am suggesting this is just an "OMG NDP tax and spend" program, I am not suggesting that that is the intent. I am however suggesting that it appears to be a part of the outcome.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by Stormageddon

How are you not getting this?

People aren't upset about the safety aspect of it. Although I would argue more safety legislation does not do much to prevent incidents, seeing as how there are still way more injuries at my job then I ever happen on farms in my area.

That's how this bill is getting rammed through, they call it strictly safety legislation but it affects every single aspect of life on a farm.

So two years is "ramming" a bill through?

And of course they are upset about the safety aspect, it's a way bigger hassle to have to issue tax remuneration, give vacation, pay into WCB, and report worker injuries than it is to ignore everything and pay under the table.

Also if your job isn't reporting injuries to OH&S lol at your crappy workplace.

[Jacks]

Just heard an ad on Fan960 advertising Alberta's climate plan. I assume all of the people who complained about the federal action plan advertising will be outraged.

[Frequitude]

Well now you're just passive aggressively trolling, Jacks. Even though the point you are making is 100% valid.

[robbie111]

Originally Posted by Jacks

Just heard an ad on Fan960 advertising Alberta's climate plan. I assume all of the people who complained about the federal action plan advertising will be outraged.

I'm fake outraged right now...Now only 2 million more times for it to play till they match the former ads.

[Stormageddon]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

So two years is "ramming" a bill through?

And of course they are upset about the safety aspect, it's a way bigger hassle to have to issue tax remuneration, give vacation, pay into WCB, and report worker injuries than it is to ignore everything and pay under the table.

You keep bringing up the 2 years stat. Sure it was introduced 2 years ago. The NDP claims all these consultations and reviews were done by the PC's. Uh... were they? Never heard of a single meeting or anything about this bill until now. So the NDP throws together some "consultations" with extremely limited seating in which it is mostly NDP invites anyways rather than farmers? You're right, totally on those lazy, entitled farmers. Buncha jerks, they've had it too good for too long.

[polak]

Why should they consult with them? There is no leeway here.

####in' cowboy up and join the rest of the world with BARE MINIMUM safety and wage regulations.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

Not entirely, but yes partially. Some of the money that was collected from all will be distributed to the poor. That falls under the umbrella of "equalization". Then some will be distributed into public services and programs via the general revenue pool. That kind of falls under the umbrella of "equalization" similar to the way income taxes do (rich pay more but public services are consumed by all). Then the rest will apparently be used on energy/efficiency investments. That doesn't fall under the umbrella of "equalization". Heck, it probably benefits the rich.

Again, in an attempt to head off the people who will inevitably get their nickers in a twist that I am suggesting this is just an "OMG NDP tax and spend" program, I am not suggesting that that is the intent. I am however suggesting that it appears to be a part of the outcome.

I'll say it for you. This is just a tax and spend program.

Originally Posted by Jacks

Just heard an ad on Fan960 advertising Alberta's climate plan. I assume all of the people who complained about the federal action plan advertising will be outraged.

I don't know about outraged, but I dislike it equally.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by Derek Sutton

I do get this, go back and read my posts, I have said all along that increased saftey awareness, traning etc... is a good thing. What Farmers are scared of and one of the problems is that fast tracking this legislation will potentially cripple farms financially and put and end to many of their livlehoods, careers and passions.

If it's useful, the DM recently said they will start the legislation (regulations?) in the spring, use the summer to tweak and finalize in the fall.

Farmers will fall under the act as soon as passed, but not the code until 2017. Their intent was to use the time to try and do it well.

I don't know anything about it really, but I know there are a lot of people concerned.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by Stormageddon

You keep bringing up the 2 years stat. Sure it was introduced 2 years ago. The NDP claims all these consultations and reviews were done by the PC's. Uh... were they? Never heard of a single meeting or anything about this bill until now. So the NDP throws together some "consultations" with extremely limited seating in which it is mostly NDP invites anyways rather than farmers? You're right, totally on those lazy, entitled farmers. Buncha jerks, they've had it too good for too long.

The world is bigger than your field of view.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by Slava

I'll say it for you. This is just a tax and spend program.

...a tax and spend program built upon a moral high ground foundation.

I'm on board with the structure of the tax side. But where it reeks terribly of a tax and spend program is on the distribution side. Giving some back to the poor and putting it into general revenue is a concept so in line with previous held biases about the NDP that it is almost comical.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

...a tax and spend program built upon a moral high ground foundation.

I'm on board with the structure of the tax side. But where it reeks terribly of a tax and spend program is on the distribution side. Giving some back to the poor and putting it into general revenue is a concept so in line with previous held biases about the NDP that it is almost comical.

The cynic in me tells me that this has very little to do with climate change and more to do with a fortunate federal election result that lets the NDP create another tax system.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

The cynic in me tells me that this has very little to do with climate change and more to do with a fortunate federal election result that lets the NDP create another tax system.

I keep trying to fight off the same cynical thought that has been slowly growing over the past few days.

One of the ways I'm doing that is asking myself philosophically what I would dislike about the concept of an emissions and income based tax system instead of just an income based tax system. When I put it that way it sounds kind of right almost.