Alberta Election Thread - Election Day April 16 2019

[Fire]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

They perhaps should work a sliding scale into it. As is, if you earn more than that, you go for zero % to 9%. It doesn't sound like an exemption limit, where it is zero up to 57k, and 9% on earnings above that. It sounds like you cross the threshold, you pay. Which I think would lead to some creative compensation plans and tax tricks, and a lot of people make $57,249 a year.


I do support a shift from income to consumption taxes though.

It should be an exemption limit if that wasn't the plan. Only fair way to do it.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Regorium

This part?

Why is the possibility that being in power and understanding the issues more has changed their opinion not an option?

Then I would expect that during a campaign she would be screaming from the rooftops how she will champion all the new pipelines we could possibly build and to get every ounce of oil out of the ground we can to really get the economy going and gets people working good paying jobs....etc, all while using the carbon tax to actually lower emissions (a lie) so there would be a positive trade off. She should be screaming bloody murder on C-69, but nary a peep.

Instead all she prattles on about is that Kenney was in Ottawa and while there...no new pipelines were built (which is patently false, but i digress) and that going forward we cant look to the past. Not sure what that has to do with her actively and pruposely helping destroy Northern Gateway and EE. At the very least I would never ever expect a sitting premier who wants pipeline capacity to be the most it can, to appoint a former Pembina Institute director and well known anti-oil activist (as well as being on the Tides payroll) to a 5 year stint on the AER. I would never have expected she would hire Bermman and I sure as hell would not expect her to appoint Shannon freaking Phillips as the Enviroment Minister. I mean its just absurd to not see whats going on unless you dont wish to.


Instead she actually suggests that petro-chemical plants are the wave of the future for this province industrial sector.......all the while there are literally hundreds of billions of dollars just sitting in the ground that can be extracted and sold as among the most responsibly mined resources on earth.

She is a great leader for that party and certainly has a charisma that people bought into 4 years ago and may so again. That does not preclude her from being very anti-oil. Her hiring and appointments only reinforce that.

To believe anything else is beyond naive.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

They perhaps should work a sliding scale into it. As is, if you earn more than that, you go for zero % to 9%. It doesn't sound like an exemption limit, where it is zero up to 57k, and 9% on earnings above that. It sounds like you cross the threshold, you pay. Which I think would lead to some creative compensation plans and tax tricks, and a lot of people make $57,249 a year.


I do support a shift from income to consumption taxes though.

Albertans will pay NO tax on the first $57,250 of personal income. For couples, $114,500 will be tax-free. Almost two-thirds of Albertans will be exempt from personal income tax under our plan. We will cut personal taxes on the rest of Albertans’ income by 1 point across the board. Most households will pay less tax overall! All will pay less income tax. Our bold plan works.

I think it's 0% on the first 57K for everyone.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

I think it's 0% on the first 57K for everyone.

I would hope so, but that passage doesn't really clarify it, becuase it says a 1% drop for everyone above the limit.

[Hockeyguy15]

It says a 1% drop on the rest of Albertan's income, which to me says the portion over 57K.

[Fuzz]

We will cut personal taxes on the rest of Albertans’ income by 1 point across the board.

Does that mean on the rest of Albertans whose income is over the limit, or the rest of the income over the limit? I kind of read it either way, but maybe I no English good.

[corporatejay]

I'm voting UCP and there's pretty much nothing at this point that's going to change my mind since the Alberta Party isn't a viable option.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

I think this is a cool idea - not sure when it could be done, but I can't see Alberta not doing this some day if the autonomous driving trend continues to grow.

The sensors used by autonomous vehicles have serious problems with snow and ice. There's doubts about whether they'll ever be able to function reliably in snowy climates.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The sensors used by autonomous vehicles have serious problems with snow and ice. There's doubts about whether they'll ever be able to function reliably in snowy climates.

Doesn't sound like an impossible problem to get around with the right technology involved. Probably just at early adoption stage, but as any product maturity cycle will point to, kinks are found early and dealt with as long as there is a market for it.

[Resolute 14]

Unless they are going to tell us what they intend to set the PST to, it becomes impossible to determine if this is going to raise or lower people's tax burden.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Doesn't sound like an impossible problem to get around with the right technology involved. Probably just at early adoption stage, but as any product maturity cycle will point to, kinks are found early and dealt with as long as there is a market for it.

It's a really really hard problem to solve. The idea that we will have enough autonomous vehicles capable of driving in Alberta winters in short enough timeframe that we will add a lane and make it exclusive is ridiculous. Sure, add a lane, but making it antonymous only sounds like the idea of a group of people who don't quite understand how things work. It's also discriminatory against people who cant' afford the fanciest newest vehicles that will have these features.

[CaptainCrunch]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1111355755813232640


Those bastards

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Unless they are going to tell us what they intend to set the PST to, it becomes impossible to determine if this is going to raise or lower people's tax burden.

Remember when they campaigned on the Carbon Tax? Neither do I.

Surprise Taxes are the worst surprises.

Given the NDP's penchant for spending like drunken sailors on leave in port, if they're going to levy any form of additional taxation they'd best say so now or forever hold their peace.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Locke

Remember when they campaigned on the Carbon Tax? Neither do I.

Surprise Taxes are the worst surprises.

Given the NDP's penchant for spending like drunken sailors on leave in port, if they're going to levy any form of additional taxation they'd best say so now or forever hold their peace.

It’s part of the Liberal platform, not NDP.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

It's a really really hard problem to solve. The idea that we will have enough autonomous vehicles capable of driving in Alberta winters in short enough timeframe that we will add a lane and make it exclusive is ridiculous. Sure, add a lane, but making it antonymous only sounds like the idea of a group of people who don't quite understand how things work. It's also discriminatory against people who cant' afford the fanciest newest vehicles that will have these features.

You're tackling two issues here.

I think given time, the ability to navigate through rough weather will be solved. Right now driverless cars are based on a system of radar and camera recognition. In the future, such technology could be expanded to include GPS positioning (when radar fails in bad weather), embedded radar "tracks" to keep a synced and positioned vehicle on track, and on-demand communication between adjacent cars (through broadcasted signals) to manage proximity and speeds. It may take a partnership between governments and private sector and setting international standards (eg. ISO) to ensure it happens, but it will absolutely get done.

It may be hard now, but it probably won't be in the future. Again, there is an upcoming large market for autonomous cars - especially in wealthy Western nations with cold weather patterns. It will happen. This will not be ignored.

Adding a lane ensures the transition is supported and gradual. Not doing so may compromise a growing market and a general movement towards more personal lifestyle automation that Alberta may have to play catch up on well after other major centers have done it. It's not a matter of if, but when IMO.

[Fuzz]

It's not being ignored, it's just a very hard problem to solve. I'd love autonomous vehicles to take me skiing, I just think the technology is a really long way off. Not 10 years off.

[Ozy_Flame]

Fair enough. That's where we differ.

[Ducay]

Autonomous vehicles that rely on optical sensing (ie visual markers) are not going to work in Canada any time soon. They're great for 6 months of the year, but not at a point where we can dedicate lanes or policy towards them until they can operate in snow-pack conditions or without line of sight of markers.

[Cowboy89]

I was just doing some reviewing of the electoral math on 338 and I just noticed how 'bozo-eruption proof' Kenney's majority government poll position actually is.

Take a look at each region, Southern Alberta, Northern Alberta, Calgary, & Edmonton:

http://alberta.338canada.com/

44 Seats are needed for a majority. There are 19 seats in Southern Alberta, 22 in Northern Alberta, 26 in Calgary, & 20 in Edmonton.

There are only 2-3 seats they could realistically lose in Southern & Northern Alberta regions which gives them a minimum of 38 seats before even having to win anything inside Calgary or Edmonton:

http://alberta.338canada.com/districts/south.htm

http://alberta.338canada.com/districts/north.htm

Now take a look at Edmonton. Since the Education platform was announced the GSA issue has clearly cost them there as you can see the popular vote vs. the NDP diverge, but there's still two solidly UPC ridings (Edmonton South & Edmonton South West) that adds two seats bring the total up to 40:

http://alberta.338canada.com/districts/edmonton.htm

Now look at Calgary:

http://alberta.338canada.com/districts/calgary.htm

The popular vote stayed stable through the Education platform announcement and they are projecting 18 seats. Given that they have basically 40 in their back pocket going into Calgary, they only need 4-5 seats in Calgary to form a majority government. Of those ridings there are some very safe UCP seats. They could take a beating in the popular vote over the next 3 weeks, but their vote is so efficient and the rural ridings so gerrymandered relative to population that it would be highly difficult for the NDP to break through. If that was my intelligence, no wonder the Kenney camp didn't feel they needed to break with their grassroots on the GSA issue.

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

I was just doing some reviewing of the electoral math on 338 and I just noticed how 'bozo-eruption proof' Kenney's majority government poll position actually is.

Take a look at each region, Southern Alberta, Northern Alberta, Calgary, & Edmonton:

http://alberta.338canada.com/

44 Seats are needed for a majority. There are 19 seats in Southern Alberta, 22 in Northern Alberta, 26 in Calgary, & 20 in Edmonton.

There are only 2-3 seats they could realistically lose in Southern & Northern Alberta regions which gives them a minimum of 38 seats before even having to win anything inside Calgary or Edmonton:

http://alberta.338canada.com/districts/south.htm

http://alberta.338canada.com/districts/north.htm

Now take a look at Edmonton. Since the Education platform was announced the GSA issue has clearly cost them there as you can see the popular vote vs. the NDP diverge, but there's still two solidly UPC ridings (Edmonton South & Edmonton South West) that adds two seats bring the total up to 40:

http://alberta.338canada.com/districts/edmonton.htm

Now look at Calgary:

http://alberta.338canada.com/districts/calgary.htm

The popular vote stayed stable through the Education platform announcement and they are projecting 18 seats. Given that they have basically 40 in their back pocket going into Calgary, they only need 4-5 seats in Calgary to form a majority government. Of those ridings there are some very safe UCP seats. They could take a beating in the popular vote over the next 3 weeks, but their vote is so efficient and the rural ridings so gerrymandered relative to population that this is virtually a done deal regardless of how many bozo eruptions (In those safe seats given the demographic incremental bozo eruptions might even solidify his vote!)

Man, that website has some great data and analysis, but it is stuck behind a 2001 website. Its not even a simple html text page, its just complex and clunky enough to be impossible to navigate or enjoy.