Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Personally I think separatists should be locked up or literally rounded up and deported. Maybe we could make a deal with the States or something. Take these people and we’ll sell you oil on the cheap for a month or something.

We’re already selling them oil on the cheap, no?

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by puffnstuff

https://bsky.app/profile/sarobertson.../3mdludueul72c

Jason Kenney: "[Jeffrey Rath] is a clown and a carny barker and thrives on conflict ... the idea that turning into a landlocked statelet with no argument, no legal power to build coastal pipelines or expand our export infrastructure, would be I think economically suicidal."

I would have hoped everyone sane knew this even before Kenney made this obvious statement. I guess it does help that one of their own spoke out though.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

We’re already selling them oil on the cheap, no?

Yes because of other nonsensical, non-separatist stupidity in the country, correct.

[DJones]

Originally Posted by Wolven

There is massive hypocrisy in their position. They want to have the right to tread over the rights of their fellow citizens. They want to separate a part of Canada from the rest of Canada but they have no interest in respecting the rights of others to separate from Alberta to stay in Canada.

Some quick examples:
- Look at how they are trying to ignore the Forever Canadian petition so they can get their question onto the ballot.
- Look at their response to First Nations objections to the separatist referendum question.
- Look at their response to the judges objections to the separatist referendum question.
- Look at their treatment of National Parks as Jasper burned down. Are they now going to carve those parks out of Alberta because they are clearly National property? The Feds are footing the bill for them.
- Their whole boo-hoo argument is that the Feds are trampling their "rights" for trying to save lives in a f'ing global pandemic but they are actively trampling on the rights of 51,000 teachers as well as all of the trans people in the province just for fun.

They have the privilege of living in one of the best places on the planet simply because they got lucky and were born here and the way that they repay that luck is to try and break the very nation that provided them their privilege so that a few of them can profit from it. If they tried to have a freedumb convoy in Russia and go an occupy the capital you wouldn't get a little bit of house arrest and a slap on the wrist, you would have a convoy full of people "falling down a flight of stairs in a construction site". They really do not appreciate how good they have it.

The hypocrisy and the grifts and the dishonesty of it all is out of control. If they do not want to live in Canada then they should voluntarily leave. If they stay and try to destroy Canada for their personal profit then they should be arrested and jailed.

And of course the whole jail thing is another level of their hypocrisy. They want law and order and tougher prison punishments as long as it is applied to everyone else but if you try and apply it to them they cry about FREEDUMB!

All of the hypocrisy you are seeing is your own imagination. It's pretty simple, most people see themselves apart of ever expanding relationships. That's how they give themselves perspective and purpose.

Family > Community > City > Province > Region > Country would be the generic ladder in Canada.

The simple question is do you want your tax dollars and your decision making to majorly go to people thousands of kms away? That's where your money is going, that's whose deciding your laws. That's really the only thing most people care about. Then the follow up question is would you rather your money an decision making be made by people closer to you. There's pretty much no situation where I would prefer people from thousands of kms away making any decision for me. There's the generic saying of I'm socialist with my community but libertarian with my country. That's a wildly standard opinion. That decision making being so far away just destroys peoples sense of community.

40 million people and 5000 km is too big. No one can care about that many people and the needs are to diverse. No one 4000 km away from someone else should be making decisions for anyone. Same as people in Florida deciding the government for people in Seattle. That #### is insane.

We'd all be happier with governments that were controlled more locally. The main critic I see is how Canada could stop or damage them. Which to me is a straight up Realpolitik. The main disincentive for leaving is that the stronger country can punish you for it. Not that its a benefit in staying. Not exactly a winning proposition in the long run.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by DJones

All of the hypocrisy you are seeing is your own imagination. It's pretty simple, most people see themselves apart of ever expanding relationships. That's how they give themselves perspective and purpose.

Family > Community > City > Province > Region > Country would be the generic ladder in Canada.

The simple question is do you want your tax dollars and your decision making to majorly go to people thousands of kms away? That's where your money is going, that's whose deciding your laws. That's really the only thing most people care about. Then the follow up question is would you rather your money an decision making be made by people closer to you. There's pretty much no situation where I would prefer people from thousands of kms away making any decision for me. There's the generic saying of I'm socialist with my community but libertarian with my country. That's a wildly standard opinion. That decision making being so far away just destroys peoples sense of community.

40 million people and 5000 km is too big. No one can care about that many people and the needs are to diverse. No one 4000 km away from someone else should be making decisions for anyone. Same as people in Florida deciding the government for people in Seattle. That #### is insane.

We'd all be happier with governments that were controlled more locally. The main critic I see is how Canada could stop or damage them. Which to me is a straight up Realpolitik. The main disincentive for leaving is that the stronger country can punish you for it. Not that its a benefit in staying. Not exactly a winning proposition in the long run.

It’s not that simple though for like a million reasons.

[DJones]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

It’s not that simple though for like a million reasons.

It's exactly that simple though.

By all means explain why its beneficial to stay without the implication that the rest of Canada will punish the smaller country?

Why are we giving up the ability to govern ourselves and make decisions for ourselves? What is the benefit that couldn't be achieved with a generic free trade agreement. How much political power do you have to give up to get the benefits of Schengen Area type agreement?

America and Canada should split up into likely 10-15 smaller countries based by region. We'd all be happier.

[IliketoPuck]

Like a roomba chewing the corner of a thick carpet.

I’m 40. And I actually spit my drink out.

[DJones]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

Like a roomba chewing the corner of a thick carpet.

I’m 40. And I actually spit my drink out.

My apologies, if this is just a place you guys like to circle jerk anti-Smith sentiments I can leave.

Clicked here by random and got curious.

I'm more than willing to stand by my political sentiments though, If someone changed my mind I'd be thrilled.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by DJones

My apologies, if this is just a place you guys like to circle jerk anti-Smith sentiments I can leave.

Clicked here by random and got curious.

I'm more than willing to stand by my political sentiments though, If someone changed my mind I'd be thrilled.

Go back to Youtube and Calgary Herald comments.

[DJones]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

Go back to Youtube and Calgary Herald comments.

Fair enough, jerk away

[Looch City]

This whole "separatism" discussion exists for one and ONLY ONE reason:

Grift.


That is all.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by DJones

We'd all be happier with governments that were controlled more locally. The main critic I see is how Canada could stop or damage them. Which to me is a straight up Realpolitik. The main disincentive for leaving is that the stronger country can punish you for it. Not that it’s a benefit in staying. Not exactly a winning proposition in the long run.

It’s not about being punished any more than a teenager deciding they don’t want to follow their parents rules anymore and whining about being punished when they realize they have to buy their own food and pay rent.

And the reason people focus on the drawbacks instead of the benefits is because anyone who has actually put any intelligent thought into this knows there are no benefits. Reality is tough and not always fair, but it is what it is.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by DJones

It's exactly that simple though.

By all means explain why its beneficial to stay without the implication that the rest of Canada will punish the smaller country?

Lots of reasons:

-access to the ocean for trade and pipelines

-freedom of movement with the rest of Canada

-Canadian citizenship is more valuable than Albertan citizenship (based on the Clarity Act, Albertans could not necessarily count on retaining Canadian citizenship after separating).

-access to existing free trade agreements and defense pacts. In an acrimonious split, Canada's allies would side with Canada over Alberta.

-more buying power for things like pharmaceuticals, which reduces prices.

-less duplication of services. For instance, Alberta would need to deal with about 3,500 km of international border, vs. the ~500km they currently have.

-security for future standard of living when the oil industry eventually declines.

You seem to take as a given that Alberta will retain most of that after separating, but that doesn't seem likely. Did you pay any attention to Brexit when the Leave side claimed that everything would be the same except they'd save a bunch of money while getting more autonomy? Obviously that didn't happen.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by DJones

America and Canada should split up into likely 10-15 smaller countries based by region. We'd all be happier.

Why stop the happiness there? Go to 64 smaller countries?. Why should people in North Dakota make decisions for the people in South Dakota? What loser province are we being lumped in with in this continental division?

Better yet, why have Alberta separate as a complete entity and not split into two city-states and all the MDs can have their own self-determination?

End of the day, why would I think somebody in High Level is any better at making decisions 'for me' (or me for them) as somebody in the GTA? If we split up regionally (say the Western Canada separation) how would the population base in the Lower Mainland be at making decisions for the folks in Three Hills or Flin Flon? What's the magic proximity to the capital that would see a community not take a happiness penalty?

[The Unshuffler]

Originally Posted by DJones

All of the hypocrisy you are seeing is your own imagination. It's pretty simple, most people see themselves apart of ever expanding relationships. That's how they give themselves perspective and purpose.

Family > Community > City > Province > Region > Country would be the generic ladder in Canada.

The simple question is do you want your tax dollars and your decision making to majorly go to people thousands of kms away? That's where your money is going, that's whose deciding your laws. That's really the only thing most people care about. Then the follow up question is would you rather your money an decision making be made by people closer to you. There's pretty much no situation where I would prefer people from thousands of kms away making any decision for me. There's the generic saying of I'm socialist with my community but libertarian with my country. That's a wildly standard opinion. That decision making being so far away just destroys peoples sense of community.

40 million people and 5000 km is too big. No one can care about that many people and the needs are to diverse. No one 4000 km away from someone else should be making decisions for anyone. Same as people in Florida deciding the government for people in Seattle. That #### is insane.

We'd all be happier with governments that were controlled more locally. The main critic I see is how Canada could stop or damage them. Which to me is a straight up Realpolitik. The main disincentive for leaving is that the stronger country can punish you for it. Not that its a benefit in staying. Not exactly a winning proposition in the long run.

So you’d risk your entire provinces future on being dependant on US goodwill?

That’s all that’ll happen, you’d be landlocked with next to no military power, if the US said we’re taking over your oil fields, what exactly would stop them?

They wouldn’t even need to invade, if they simply stopped buying Alberta oil the economy would collapse in next to no time

You’d literally be bending over asking to be rogered more than a policeman’s radio

If you don’t like decisions being made for you in Ottawa, well Washington DC is even further away

[puffnstuff]

What is the optimal distance for decisions? Is Edmonton too far away from Calgary? Maybe Red Deer is the limit? Or Carstairs?
Its not really the distance...its what party they voted for not being in charge that irks the vast majority of them.

[Fuzz]

Just the same podunk logic that makes them think the individual knows best about everything. It's an extension of "don't trust the experts". 4000 km is too far away, but so is Edmonton. Why would I want someone form Edmonton making my decisions? That's insane. I'm nothing like people from Edmonton. I think people from NW Calgary should make all the decisions for my existence, but through grass roots community centre votes.

Nonsense. You'd break up a country for that? Is that the best you've got? Pathetic.

[Roughneck]

And aside from the people in Battle River-Crowfoot or Calgary-Nose Hill, who is electing people based thousands of kilometres away from their community to represent them?

If Parliament were located in Grande Prairie would we feel better represented? Would people in southern Ontario or Quebec feel less represented?

[Major Major]

Originally Posted by The Unshuffler

So you’d risk your entire provinces future on being dependant on US goodwill?

That’s all that’ll happen, you’d be landlocked with next to no military power, if the US said we’re taking over your oil fields, what exactly would stop them?

They wouldn’t even need to invade, if they simply stopped buying Alberta oil the economy would collapse in next to no time

You’d literally be bending over asking to be rogered more than a policeman’s radio

If you don’t like decisions being made for you in Ottawa, well Washington DC is even further away

He's making a philosophical claim that falls apart immediately and that makes a couple pretty massive assumptions:

-if canada would just screw us later, they're not our friend now
-if only we could make regional decisions that impact us, we would have self-determination

Just thinking about the tanker ban and transmountain for a millisecond completely shatters these assumptions.

Anyhow, after making this incoherent argument, he insulted us all and then left presumably. This is the kind of brain power we're dealing with.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by DJones

It's exactly that simple though.

By all means explain why its beneficial to stay without the implication that the rest of Canada will punish the smaller country?

Why are we giving up the ability to govern ourselves and make decisions for ourselves? What is the benefit that couldn't be achieved with a generic free trade agreement. How much political power do you have to give up to get the benefits of Schengen Area type agreement?

America and Canada should split up into likely 10-15 smaller countries based by region. We'd all be happier.

Alberta would be a “ghost nation”. 500,000 + people would move back to their provinces of origin immediately, causing a huge brian drain among other big problems.

Google AI

Medical Professional Flight: A significant number of doctors have reportedly considered leaving or have already moved. Surveys by the Alberta Medical Association previously indicated that over 40% of physicians were considering practicing elsewhere due to an unstable professional environment.

Youth Out-migration: For the first time in decades, more young people (ages 15–29) began leaving Alberta than moving in starting around 2016. Reports from the Canada West Foundation suggest youth feel less attracted to the province's current economic narrative.

Projected Impacts of Separation: Economists like Trevor Tombe estimate that actual separation could lead to an 8% population loss (roughly 400,000 people) as residents seek stability within Canada. [I think the number would be much higher than this]

Economic Uncertainty: While groups like the Alberta Prosperity Project argue for economic gains, critics warn of "catastrophic" instability.

https://macdonaldlaurier.ca/a-separa...be-in-the-hub/

With a smaller economy, the province’s population and employment would inevitably decline. My model estimates roughly 8 percent of Alberta’s population—about 400,000 people—would leave seeking opportunities elsewhere. This number may actually be an underestimate, since the model reflects only normal migration patterns responding to economic conditions. It doesn’t capture the broader uncertainties and disruptions that separation would unleash.