Who are you voting for

[Slava]

Originally Posted by MattyC

I'm with you. I'm probably leaning NDP. I don't think the Liberals actually differ much or at all from the PCs, even though they like to think they do. NDP actually seems to have ideas about how to change things. Yes, Oil and Gas may suffer but, and hold on here because this may blow some people's world view out of whack, the survival of oil companies is not the be-all-end-all of life.

The problem is that in Alberta basically all of us are concerned about energy whether we like it or not. I don't in the industry, but I can tell you that if oil and gas suffers that means my business will suffer. It affects everyone from the engineers working there directly, to the guy running a coffee shop in the plus 15.

[Cflames_12.5]

What is NDP stance on legalization.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Yeah, good thing the fiscally conservative Liberals got here just in time to stop all of that unnecessary spending when they couldn't afford social programs and land-claim settlements.

Did those games not break even? The outlay also included a massive number of awesome infrastructure expenditures like the Canada Line.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by MattyC

I Yes, Oil and Gas may suffer but, and hold on here because this may blow some people's world view out of whack, the survival of oil companies is not the be-all-end-all of life.

It is in this Province. I don't understand how people have missed that this country is dependent upon its natural resources for the maintenance of our way of life.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by polak

Or instead of going to the doomsday, worst case scenario, they reduce labor costs and the ridiculous overhead that most of these companies have and drive innovation to reduce their total operating costs. I think that's far more likely then leaving untapped oil in the ground.

If you think that there's no "fat" to trim from Canadian oil and gas companies budgets, I highly recommend you try working outside of the patch and you'll see that even the most frugal O&G companies have plenty of room to reduce spend.

I agree with you. Doom and gloom for companies that have a propensity to pay engineers, geologists, accountants and other positions with less than 5 years of experience on the generous side of six-figure incomes are not going to suffer as badly as the chicken little crowd are making it out to be.

This whole corporate tone of "NDP! Woe is me!" is overblown and ridiculous. It's just fear of the unknown.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

I agree with you. Doom and gloom for companies that have a propensity to pay engineers, geologists, accountants and other positions with less than 5 years of experience on the generous side of six-figure incomes are not going to suffer as badly as the chicken little crowd are making it out to be.

This whole corporate tone of "NDP! Woe is me!" is overblown and ridiculous. It's just fear of the unknown.

Which is powerful.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Did those games not break even? The outlay also included a massive number of awesome infrastructure expenditures like the Canada Line.

Oh it wasn't all bad, especially the Sea to Sky Highway stuff, but there have been a number of problems ever since where the government repeatedly said they couldn't pay for things and used the Olympics as a scapegoat, even though prior to the games they said there would be no impact on their ability to pay for services, public employees, etc.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

It is in this Province. I don't understand how people have missed that this country is dependent upon its natural resources for the maintenance of our way of life.

Which has been part of the problem, has it not?

[polak]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

It is in this Province. I don't understand how people have missed that this country is dependent upon its natural resources for the maintenance of our way of life.

That is the exact problem and we should be diversifying from that instead of throwing even more eggs into that one basket.

[puckedoff]

Dismantling one of the strongest industries in the province is not the same as diversifying the economy.

And since when is it the governments job to diversify the economy?

[Coach]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

It is in this Province. I don't understand how people have missed that this country is dependent upon its natural resources for the maintenance of our way of life.

We're not missing anything. There are a lot of things about "our way of life" that arguably shouldn't be maintained. And I could go try and solve renewable energy issues on my own, but in the meantime, I can vote for people who find more value in researching alternatives, than maintaining a dying and and increasingly invasive energy source.

We (people, not Canada, or Alberta, but humans) need to move away from it as a whole. If my single vote in a meaningless (from a global perspective) provincial election can help that even a smidge, that's worth it for me.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

^Bud, if you want to go run on a platform explaining what elements of "our way of life" shouldn't be maintained, I wish you the best of luck.

Originally Posted by polak

That is the exact problem and we should be diversifying from that instead of throwing even more eggs into that one basket.

Is anyone suggesting "throwing more eggs" into the basket? My understanding here is everyone's worried that the NDP is going to start tossing the basket around and breaking the eggs that are in there. We need those eggs to survive while we wait for the new goose eggs (or whatever the proper analogy is to alternative revenue sources) to progress to a point where they can supplement the chicken eggs.

Okay this analogy jumped the shark, but the whole argument is really just another appeal to the mysticism of "something different" without a realistic plan for extracting the country from its reliance on resources. Usually this involves some vague, one-sentence commitment to "investing in alternative energy" or "researching other avenues" or "green jobs" or "new techology sectors" or some such nonsense which makes for a nice-sounding soundbite. There is no "there" there, there's no practical solution.

[polak]

Originally Posted by puckedoff

Dismantling one of the strongest industries in the province is not the same as diversifying the economy.

And since when is it the governments job to diversify the economy?

You think that marginally increasing the tax rates for one of the highest paying, highest spending industries in the province is "dismantling" it? Sorry that Alberta is sick of, in essence, subsidizing the $70,000 a year salaries of admin assistants or annual Christmas parties at the Banff Springs.

The entitlement is strong. That industry can take a bit of spending cut and still give it's employees a very comfortable life.

It's the governments job to run the province and considering that the provinces biggest problem is the lack of diversification, I'd say it's 100% their job.

[Jacks]

Oil and Gas is critical to not only the Alberta economy but Canada's economy also.

But hey, lets just build windmill factories and watch the money roll in.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

^Bud, if you want to go run on a platform explaining what elements of "our way of life" shouldn't be maintained, I wish you the best of luck.

Is anyone suggesting "throwing more eggs" into the basket? My understanding here is everyone's worried that the NDP is going to start tossing the basket around and breaking the eggs that are in there. We need those eggs to survive while we wait for the new goose eggs (or whatever the proper analogy is to alternative revenue sources) to progress to a point where they can supplement the chicken eggs.

I think the problem is that a lot of people think that continuing to rely on those eggs is stunting the diversification process. I don't think anyone is saying to quit oil cold turkey and die from withdrawal. We're just saying maybe it's time to start the methadone process or something.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Jacks

Oil and Gas is critical to not only the Alberta economy but Canada's economy also.

But hey, lets just build windmill factories and watch the money roll in.

I like how this argument seems to be "OIL AND GAS WILL LEAVE ALBERTA FOREVER"

.

[puckedoff]

Originally Posted by Jacks

Oil and Gas is critical to not only the Alberta economy but Canada's economy also.

But hey, lets just build windmill factories and watch the money roll in.

Its not just windmill factories that we can get rich off. We also have farming.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by polak

I like how this argument seems to be "OIL AND GAS WILL LEAVE ALBERTA FOREVER"

.

That's fine, just centralize everything and turn it over to government employees

And before every hard-right conservative on here have their collective heads rage-explode, I am kidding.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by polak

You think that increasing the tax rates for one of the highest paying, highest spending industries in the province is "dismantling" it? Sorry that Alberta is sick of subsidizing the $70,000 a year salaries of admin assistants or annual Christmas parties at the Banff Springs.

That industry can take a bit of spending cut and still give it's employees a very comfortable life.

It's the governments job to run the province and considering that the provinces biggest problem is the lack of diversification, I'd say it's 100% their job.

I agree again. I'm pretty sure the collapsed oil prices has far more detrimental effects on O&G business than a 2% increase on corporate tax. Companies are hacking and slashing jobs because they've pegged their operational and business costs at extremely high oil prices, yet a royalty review and a 2% increase in government taxes is the bad guy? Puh-lease. Salaries are huge chunk of an O&G company's costs and reducing average salary rates in mid-to-long term planning (adjusting for tax rates and cost of living percent increases) will go a long way in making these companies sustainable. They should be pegging their cost of business at a much lower oil price, something I am astounded that many have not done so after the last recessionary period.

Diversification is about as important now as it ever has been, and will only become moreso in the future.

People should keep in mind that we don't have to divest away from energy, just put out less of our exported energy products as O&G products. At least in an ideal sense.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I think the problem is that a lot of people think that continuing to rely on those eggs is stunting the diversification process. I don't think anyone is saying to quit oil cold turkey and die from withdrawal. We're just saying maybe it's time to start the methadone process or something.

That process has quite obviously already started but it's not just an Alberta-centric thing. It'll pick up steam, but slowly. It sounds like some people want to give it a bigger kick in the ass (note that we already do; please see capital cost allowance rates for green energy assets) and aren't particularly concerned about the overall consequences of doing so, while others are far more concerned. Count me in the latter camp.