April 23 2012: Alberta Provincial Election

[zuluking]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

I have to say I am thinking of not voting this time.

WRA had my vote until the disgusting $300/person pledge.

I already have a governing party that cant see 2 feet in front of their face, I dont want to replace that for another one in different colors.

I'm not a big fan of this policy either, but for all that's good and right, can it please be protrayed for what it is?!?! As FL stated earlier, a resource revenue surplus will be distributed as such:

50% to Heritage Trust Fund
20% to Energy Dividend
20% to Contingency Fund
10% to Municipalities

Maybe, perhaps, 20% of the surplus equals $300. Maybe, perhaps, there is no surplus and 20% of zero is still zero.

To not exercise your democratic right over a singly policy that should not be boiled down to "disgusting $300/person pledge" would be sad and unfortunate.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by zuluking

I'm not a big fan of this policy either, but for all that's good and right, can it please be protrayed for what it is?!?! As FL stated earlier, a resource revenue surplus will be distributed as such:

50% to Heritage Trust Fund
20% to Energy Dividend
20% to Contingency Fund
10% to Municipalities

Maybe, perhaps, 20% of the surplus equals $300. Maybe, perhaps, there is no surplus and 20% of zero is still zero.

To not exercise your democratic right over a singly policy that should not be boiled down to "disgusting $300/person pledge" would be sad and unfortunate.

It amounts to one thing and one thing only; a party that claims to be fiscally conservative spending money they don't have yet. Its just a bad policy, plain and simple.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Slava

It amounts to one thing and one thing only; a party that claims to be fiscally conservative spending money they don't have yet. Its just a bad policy, plain and simple.

No one is hiding the fact this only kicks in if there is surplus.

Only way we will get to surplus situation is a combination of being fiscally responsible and strong resource revenue.

Full pledge .pdf http://www.wildrose.ca/media/2012/04...e-Pledge-3.pdf

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by First Lady

No one is hiding the fact this only kicks in if there is surplus.

Only way we will get to surplus situation is a combination of being fiscally responsible and strong resource revenue.

Full pledge .pdf http://www.wildrose.ca/media/2012/04...e-Pledge-3.pdf

I understand the proposal, but I strongly disagree with it. Squandering 20% of any surplus by sending dividend cheques to all citizens seems anti-fiscally responsible to me.

[MarchHare]

BTW, has the WRP stated who would be eligible for the proposed dividend cheques? Only those who filed a tax return from an Alberta address in the previous year? Only citizens who are legal adults (18+)? All citizens, including children?

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

BTW, has the WRP stated who would be eligible for the proposed dividend cheques? Only those who filed a tax return from an Alberta address in the previous year? Only citizens who are legal adults (18+)? All citizens, including children?

Me and my 17 kids are going to buy a car!

[kirant]

Originally Posted by Rathji

Me and my 17 kids are going to buy a car!

A $5400 car?

Good luck fitting 18 people into that.

[Suave]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

BTW, has the WRP stated who would be eligible for the proposed dividend cheques? Only those who filed a tax return from an Alberta address in the previous year? Only citizens who are legal adults (18+)? All citizens, including children?

You have to have been a Alberta resident for the previous three years (verified by tax returns, or if you didn't file you can register with Alberta registries) and children born in Alberta under the age of 3. If you are in jail, no Danielle dollars for you.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

BTW, has the WRP stated who would be eligible for the proposed dividend cheques? Only those who filed a tax return from an Alberta address in the previous year? Only citizens who are legal adults (18+)? All citizens, including children?

From the document I linked to:

􀁴􀀁 All Canadian citizens who have been continuously resident in
Alberta for at least three years.
􀁴􀀁 Permanent residents of Canada who have resided, filed, and
paid income taxes in Alberta for three consecutive years.
􀁴􀀁 Alberta-born children under the age of three.
􀁴􀀁 Albertans serving with the Canadian Forces temporarily
stationed outside of Alberta.
􀁴􀀁 Prisoners will not be eligible for these dividends.
􀁴􀀁 In the case of Canadian citizens who have been Alberta
residents for three years but have not filed their taxes,
registration can be completed at any Alberta registry.
􀁴􀀁 First Nations people, on the same terms as all other Albertans.

[MarchHare]

So the proposal is to give kids an equal share of the 20% too? Is there any way to guarantee the money will even be used by the intended recipients (e.g. putting it into a trust until the child turns 18, as is frequently done when children earn money)? What's to stop the cheques intended for children from turning into bonus double dividend payments for the parents?

[Jacks]

Here's a question for the left leaners on here.

If the Wildrose manage to keep there momentum in the upcoming weeks and are sure to win a majority. (I know that's a big if)

Do you then switch your vote back to the Libs, AP or ND's?

I'm sure that at least 10% of the 30% the PC's are polling at is support from moderate Libs and potential AP supporters. If they abandon the PC's they could get hurt really badly.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

So the proposal is to give kids an equal share of the 20% too? Is there any way to guarantee the money will even be used by the intended recipients (e.g. putting it into a trust until the child turns 18, as is frequently done when children earn money)? What's to stop the cheques intended for children from turning into bonus double dividend payments for the parents?

Not ignoring you.... just taking my time, trying to figure out if this should have been in green text or followed with /sarc.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Jacks

Here's a question for the left leaners on here.

If the Wildrose manage to keep there momentum in the upcoming weeks and are sure to win a majority.

Do you then switch your vote back to the Libs, AP or ND's?

I'm sure that at least 10% of the 30% the PC's are polling at is support from moderate Libs and potential AP supporters. If they abandon the PC's they could get hurt really badly.

I live in Calgary-Buffalo and will be voting for Kent Hehr as he's been an excellent MLA and has a very strong chance of being re-elected. If I lived in a riding that was a two-way race between the PC and WR candidates, though, I'd probably consider voting strategically.

I'm not all that impressed with Redford and was cautiously optimistic about a potential WR victory, but the dividend announcement completely turned me against them. Sending $300 cheques to toddlers IS NOT sound fiscal managment of our province's money.

[Daradon]

I'll probably stay with a PC vote. I do consider myself moderate and have voted both PC and other parties before so I'll awswer.

I don't mind a lot of the WRA ideas, I just can't vote for them because their financials are so pie in the sky. They are totally out to lunch. Promising everything, they'll find out how hard it is once they get into power I suppose. Course promising everything is a good way to get INTO power when the voting public is upset with their current party. (And rightly so)

I'm not happy with the PC's either, but I think they're the best of two poor options. I probably would vote liberal, but as you said, in a close race I'll probably stick to PC till the end. Even if the gap widens.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by First Lady

Not ignoring you.... just taking my time, trying to figure out if this should have been in green text or followed with /sarc.

Not at all sarcastic. If I'm understanding the proposal correctly, a three year old kid would also receive a dividend cheque? How can anyone claim to be fiscally responsible and think that's a good idea?

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Jacks

Here's a question for the left leaners on here.

If the Wildrose manage to keep there momentum in the upcoming weeks and are sure to win a majority. (I know that's a big if)

Do you then switch your vote back to the Libs, AP or ND's?

I'm sure that at least 10% of the 30% the PC's are polling at is support from moderate Libs and potential AP supporters. If they abandon the PC's they could get hurt really badly.

I think it's a much higher percentage than even that. The Liberals had 26.4% of the popular vote last election. If they're polling at 12-13% now and the NDP are polling about the same, it's pretty clear where the Liberal vote went - into Redford's pocket. Maybe even half of PC's polling numbers come from Liberal voters/supporters in the last election. It's pretty clear that the emergence of the Wildrose has taken all but the reddest of Tories out of the PC party and has gained the 'Stay-at-home' PCs that accounted for lower turnout in the last couple of elections.

[Fire]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

So the proposal is to give kids an equal share of the 20% too? Is there any way to guarantee the money will even be used by the intended recipients (e.g. putting it into a trust until the child turns 18, as is frequently done when children earn money)? What's to stop the cheques intended for children from turning into bonus double dividend payments for the parents?

How about it's none of your business what the parents do with the money. Worry about yourself and stop trying to justify the government keeping more of our money because you think Albertans are irresponsible.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Not at all sarcastic. If I'm understanding the proposal correctly, a three year old kid would also receive a dividend cheque? How can anyone claim to be fiscally responsible and think that's a good idea?

Not that it changes your argument, but I believe the Ralphbucks were given to children as well. I believe I remember my friend getting one for his infant son.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Fire

How about it's none of your business what the parents do with the money. Worry about yourself and stop trying to justify the government keeping more of our money because you think Albertans are irresponsible.

As a taxpayer, it is my business (and yours too) how the government spends our resources. I'm against the concept of dividend cheques for a variety of reasons, but I'm even more opposed to them if the system is setup so that some citizens receive multiple payments.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

The Liberals had 26.4% of the popular vote last election. If they're polling at 12-13% now and the NDP are polling about the same, it's pretty clear where the Liberal vote went - into Redford's pocket.

I know it sounds crazy but I bet 1-3% went to the Wildrose. Liberal was the only real option for people who wanted to get rid of the PC's in the last election.