Alberta budget news

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by Slava

Because there is no evidence that private care actually saves money. Purely politically though, its a non-starter because people don't believe that someone should get/not get medical attention purely based on whether they can afford it.

There is plenty of evidence that hybrid systems reduce cost and increase positive outcomes. Start with the best health care systems in the world, like Switzerland and work your way towards systems massively outperforming Alberta in Canada like Ontario and Quebec. The only difference is that we have much less private delivery of health services. Nobody is talking about a private only system.

The Wildrose platform would introduce these positive changes.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Link please? (to be clear, I'm being incredulous, not asking you to provide a link!) It is stated explicitly in the link you provided. WRP states that Alberta's per capita income tax revenue is x% higher than the national average. Ok, fine, I will take that number at face value (even though no source is cited.) However, from that statistic, the WRP draws the absurd conclusion that Alberta does not have a revenue problem. The obvious problem with that conclusion is that income tax is only one of many possible sources of revenue. For example, all other provinces rely heavily on sales taxes for revenue whereas Alberta does not. The conclusion drawn in the link you provided is therefore either disingenuous or incompetent.

Looking for a link to prove your assertions. What's the percentage of revenue derived from sales tax per capita in each province and how does that compare to Alberta's revenues?

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Looking for a link to prove your assertions. What's the percentage of revenue derived from sales tax per capita in each province and how does that compare to Alberta's revenues?

Really? Let me spell out my logic for you: Alberta derives 0% of its revenues from sales tax. Ontario (for example) charges an 8% tax on nearly every retail transaction in the province. This contributes a not insignificant amount to its total revenue. Is that difficult to accept.

EDIT: Fata it, I went ahead and googled it even though it was an asinine request. Ontario's sales tax generated#over 17 billion dollars in 2012 (or roughly 30% of all (non federal transfer) revenues. Again, the WRP's conclusion was clearly disingenuous.

[chemgear]

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/po...497/story.html

Smith noted that the budget, presented last Thursday, allocates $205 million to debt repayment by 2016, when the balance of the $17 billion will be borrowed.

"It's kind of like making the minimum payment on a credit card," said Smith. "Does the premier know that if she only pays the bare minimum, it will take 85 years for her to pay off her $17-billion debt?"

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by chemgear

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/po...497/story.html

Smith noted that the budget, presented last Thursday, allocates $205 million to debt repayment by 2016, when the balance of the $17 billion will be borrowed.

"It's kind of like making the minimum payment on a credit card," said Smith. "Does the premier know that if she only pays the bare minimum, it will take 85 years for her to pay off her $17-billion debt?"

Oh good, more silly quotes likening the governance of a province of over three million people to a teenager going shoe shopping. I wish it was possible for politicians in Alberta to frankly and rationally discuss the issues instead of always pandering to the lowest common denominator.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Really? Let me spell out my logic for you: Alberta derives 0% of its revenues from sales tax. Ontario (for example) charges an 8% tax on nearly every retail transaction in the province. This contributes a not insignificant amount to its total revenue. Is that difficult to accept.

EDIT: Fata it, I went ahead and googled it even though it was an asinine request. Ontario's sales tax generated#over 17 billion dollars in 2012 (or roughly 30% of all (non federal transfer) revenues. Again, the WRP's conclusion was clearly disingenuous.

Please, show us a link comparing these figures so we can all be on the same enlightened page that you exist upon. Once again, looking for inter provincial comparison of sales tax per capita. 3rd time asking now.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Oh good, more silly quotes likening the governance of a province of over three million people to running a teenager going shoe shopping. I wish it was possible for politicians in Alberta to frankly and rationally discuss the issues instead of always pandering to the lowest common denominator.

But then you remember pandering to the LCD is how so very many politicians get elected. They know pandering to emotion and populist sentiment is easier for getting electing than trying to use facts and logic.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Please, show us a link comparing these figures so we can all be on the same enlightened page that you exist upon. Once again, looking for inter provincial comparison of sales tax per capita. 3rd time asking now.

Um, I just did. Alberta sales rax revenue: $0. Ontario sales tax revenue: over $17 billion (to put this number in even more perspective, Ontario's revenue from income tax was just over $20 billion.) I'm on my phone and don't know how to copy the link on it but can provide it when I get home (or just google ontario 2012 budget revenue.)

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Um, I just did. Alberta sales rax revenue: $0. Ontario sales tax revenue: over $17 billion (to put this number in even more perspective, Ontario's revenue from income tax was just over $20 billion.) I'm on my phone and don't know how to copy the link on it but can provide it when I get home (or just google ontario 2012 budget revenue.)

I'm more interested in looking at more than one province for one year.

We already know Alberta collects 15% more income tax and 15% more corporate tax than other provinces, on average.

How does this relate to provincial sales taxes on a per capita basis over time? Surely Alberta, with its resource riches, could, or could have, lived off of interest from saving resource revenues instead of introducing more taxes.

[chemgear]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...1mil-less.html

Calgary's share of the Municipal Sustainability Initiative (MSI) will be cut by $51 million per year as a result of last week's provincial budget but that will not put a freeze on hiring.

In a committee meeting Tuesday, Mayor Naheed Nenshi dismissed the need for a hiring freeze after it was announced that Calgary would receive less money than anticipated from the provincial infrastructure fund.

However, city officials are still considering what the cuts will mean for Calgary's property tax bills which will come out this spring.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

I'm more interested in looking at more than one province for one year.

We already know Alberta collects 15% more income tax and 15% more corporate tax than other provinces, on average.

How does this relate to provincial sales taxes on a per capita basis over time? Surely Alberta, with its resource riches, could, or could have, lived off of interest from saving resource revenues instead of introducing more taxes.

In 2012, Ontario's total revenue, subtract federal transfers and non-renewable resource revenues, was 90.5 billion dollars (SOURCE: Government of Ontario). Ontario's population in 2012 was 13.5 million. Therefore, Ontario's per capita non-renewable resource revenue in 2012 was ~$6,703.

In 2012, Albeta's total revenue, subtract federal transfers and non-renewable resources revenues, was 24.2 billion dollars (SOURCE: Government of Alberta). Alberta's population was 3.8 million. Therefore, Alberta's per capita non-renewable resource revenue in 2012 was $6,368.

Considering the higher cost of delivering services in Alberta, it seems clear that Alberta does indeed have a revenue problem. On the other hand, the WRP clearly has an "intellectual honesty" (to borrow a popular expression on this forum) problem.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by chemgear

http://www.calgaryherald.com/life/Bu...520/story.html

With more than half of all school boards in Alberta getting less money from the province next year, some critics are questioning why the Alberta government didn’t instead make deeper funding cuts to private schools.

The province will support private schools to the tune of $206 million in the coming year, an overall five per cent increase from this year. Funding for school boards will rise just 0.8 per cent to $6.1 billion.

Because funding private schooling and under funding public schooling makes it easier to point out the flaws of the public system and why private schooling is oh so much better.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Makarov

In 2012, Ontario's total revenue, subtract federal transfers and non-renewable resource revenues, was 90.5 billion dollars (SOURCE: Government of Ontario). Ontario's population in 2012 was 13.5 million. Therefore, Ontario's per capita non-renewable resource revenue in 2012 was ~$6,703.

In 2012, Albeta's total revenue, subtract federal transfers and non-renewable resources revenues, was 24.2 billion dollars (SOURCE: Government of Alberta). Alberta's population was 3.8 million. Therefore, Alberta's per capita non-renewable resource revenue in 2012 was $6,368.

Considering the higher cost of delivering services in Alberta, it seems clear that Alberta does indeed have a revenue problem. On the other hand, the WRP clearly has an "intellectual honesty" (to borrow a popular expression on this forum) problem.

Are we not spending the non renewable resource revenue?

If we were saving it or something, I could see excluding it, but it's hard to argue we're spending too little when we're spending nearly the same as other provinces, plus another approximately 12 billion excluded from the quote above, I assume out of bias.

That works out to over 3000 per person per year. But that money doesn't count, even though we're spending it.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

Are we not spending the non renewable resource revenue?

If we were saving it or something, I could see excluding it, but it's hard to argue we're spending too little when we're spending nearly the same as other provinces, plus another approximately 12 billion excluded from the quote above, I assume out of bias.

That works out to over 3000 per person per year. But that money doesn't count, even though we're spending it.

Who is arguing that Alberta is not spending enough?

The WRP stated that Alberta generates 14% more per capita income tax revenue than the Canadian average. From that statistic, the WRP then concluded that Alberta does not have a revenue problem and does not need to raise taxes (or additional revenue somehow.)

This is clearly misleading and disingenuous. Indeed, despite having an average wage that is 20% higher than the Canadian average (artificially inflated by Alberta's petro-economy), Alberta generates significantly less non-resource revenue than a province like Ontario. This is especially problematic since the majority of government costs are labour costs and therefore the cost of providing public services in Alberta is significantly higher than in a province like Ontario.

Therefore, Alberta has enjoyed, and continues to enjoy, taxes that are artificially low by relying on non-renewable resource revenues. This has of course lead to a standard of living for Albertans that far exceeds the other provinces in Canada (high wages + low taxes = big screen tvs for everyone!).

The WRP seems to think that this is good policy. Perhaps many Albertans agree (I personally do not.) Fair enough. However, if the WRP does indeed think that this is good policy, then come out and say that and let's have a reasonable discussion. Don't mislead Albertans with cherry-picked statistics and totally fallacious, misleading conclusions.

[Makarov]

To add to this, relying on this article from the Fraser Institute (shiver), it looks like labour costs account for one half of all spending by the Ontario government (and it seems reasonable to assume that the proportion is similar in Alberta.) Therefore, in order to have the same fiscal capacity to deliver services as Ontario, without relying on non-renewable resource revenues, Alberta would need to have per capita non-resource revenue of approximately $7,300. That is a $1,000 (or 14%) shortfall.

[Makarov]

One more post:

Alberta’s spending in the 2012-13 provincial budget is $41.1 billion — that’s $10,683 per person. Compared to the three other biggest provinces, we spend the most.

B.C. is slated to spend $9,530 per capita this year, followed by Ontario at $9,382, and finally Quebec with government budgeted expenditures of only $8,828 per capita. Alberta’s 2012-13 spending is budgeted to be a full $1,000 per person higher than the average of the four largest provinces, and $1,800 more per capita than government expenditures in Quebec.

Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/He...#ixzz2NQYYBtVQ

As you can see, Alberta's per capita spending is roughly 10% higher than other provinces, which is exactly what we would expect with 20% higher labour costs (and labour costs that take up roughly 50% of provincial government spending.)

So you tell me, Danielle Smith: does Alberta primarily have a revenue problem or a spending problem?

[GP_Matt]

According to Stats Can http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tabl...abr69g-eng.htm
The average hourly wage in Alberta is $27.55 and in Ontario it is $24.35. This is a 13% difference.
According to your numbers Ontario budget is $9382 per person and Alberta is $10683 per person. This is also a 13% difference. As labor costs only account for half of the difference, is it safe to say that the other $650 per person or $2.5 billion is a spending problem?

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

According to Stats Can http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tabl...abr69g-eng.htm
The average hourly wage in Alberta is $27.55 and in Ontario it is $24.35. This is a 13% difference.
According to your numbers Ontario budget is $9382 per person and Alberta is $10683 per person. This is also a 13% difference. As labor costs only account for half of the difference, is it safe to say that the other $650 per person or $2.5 billion is a spending problem?

I took my 20% number from the Alberta Government (same link as the budget numbers):

Albertans continue to earn the highest wages in the country, almost 20% above the national average.

But sure, regardless of whether we use your number or mine, I completely support cutting a reasonable amount of spending in strategic areas. That will not get us to any sort of reasonable fiscal balance though.

[Maccalus]

Makarov, One thing your spending numbers also don't take into account is that the other provinces spend much higher percentages of the budget straight onto debt interest than alberta does. Ontario, for example, 9.5% of their budget on debt interest (as per the link you provided in their 2012-2013 plan). This is money that is still being spent, but none of it going to any sort of program or infrastructure. This makes the efficiency of our programs shine is a worse light than many other provinces.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by Makarov

In 2012, Ontario's total revenue, subtract federal transfers and non-renewable resource revenues, was 90.5 billion dollars (SOURCE: Government of Ontario). Ontario's population in 2012 was 13.5 million. Therefore, Ontario's per capita non-renewable resource revenue in 2012 was ~$6,703.

In 2012, Albeta's total revenue, subtract federal transfers and non-renewable resources revenues, was 24.2 billion dollars (SOURCE: Government of Alberta). Alberta's population was 3.8 million. Therefore, Alberta's per capita non-renewable resource revenue in 2012 was $6,368.

Considering the higher cost of delivering services in Alberta, it seems clear that Alberta does indeed have a revenue problem. On the other hand, the WRP clearly has an "intellectual honesty" (to borrow a popular expression on this forum) problem.

You've yet again brought nothing to the table to back up your assertions. Not that I'm surprised really.

Wondering how you got a per capita non-renewable resource revenue number from income that excluded non-renewable resource revenues? Do you have any idea what you are even talking about anymore?

Still waiting for a comparison of revenue from sales taxes per capita across provinces. Until then, the only one having a problem with "intellectual honesty" is you.