Alberta Politics Thread

[iggy_oi]

http://globalnews.ca/news/3034357/al...ation-matters/

And people say the NDP are a dictatorship

[Kjesse]

I can't say I've heard anyone claiming the NDP is a dictatorship. Foolish, incompetent, sure, but not a dictatorship.

WR deciding to not allow parents to interfere in student groups signals their moderating stance on social issues. I'm not sure how that makes them a dictatorship, though if you are predisposed to hate the WR I suppose the statement could be made.

WR made a statement over the weekend that they're not waiting on the results of the PC leadership race, which should be expected. Who knows what the PC's will do. Either party would be better for Alberta over the NDP. Ironically, either party would still be better for the so-called unskilled workers than the NDP.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Delgar

I can't say I've heard anyone claiming the NDP is a dictatorship. Foolish, incompetent, sure, but not a dictatorship.

WR deciding to not allow parents to interfere in student groups signals their moderating stance on social issues. I'm not sure how that makes them a dictatorship, though if you are predisposed to hate the WR I suppose the statement could be made.

WR made a statement over the weekend that they're not waiting on the results of the PC leadership race, which should be expected. Who knows what the PC's will do. Either party would be better for Alberta over the NDP. Ironically, either party would still be better for the so-called unskilled workers than the NDP.

I'm interested to hear your reasoning behind this statement.

As for the dictatorship part, I was referring to the fact that many in this thread believe they are simply doing whatever they want.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

I'm interested to hear your reasoning behind this statement.

As for the dictatorship part, I was referring to the fact that many in this thread believe they are simply doing whatever they want.

That's a poor read on your part. They're doing as much as they can within their power and will likely get ousted next election due to their poor performance as the ruling party.

That's democracy, you may want to read up on what a dictatorship is, this is not that.

[Kjesse]

Simply that by shrinking the economy via their economic policies, such as the manner of their carbon tax, bad spending decisions, running record deficits and charging ahead with debt accumulation all while protecting the public sector, is going to lead to a poor economic outlook especially for small business. Those employed by the smaller companies are more likely to lose their jobs.

And in response, who in this thread called them a dictatorship? Is there even one?

[iggy_oi]

You guys really can't handle sarcasm can you?

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Delgar

Simply that by shrinking the economy via their economic policies, such as the manner of their carbon tax, bad spending decisions, running record deficits and charging ahead with debt accumulation all while protecting the public sector, is going to lead to a poor economic outlook especially for small business. Those employed by the smaller companies are more likely to lose their jobs.

And in response, who in this thread called them a dictatorship? Is there even one?

There are other things being implemented that could also counter a lot of the impact you are worried these policies will create. Also it appears the carbon tax will be implemented at the federal level one way or another.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

There are other things being implemented that could also counter a lot of the impact you are worried these policies will create. Also it appears the carbon tax will be implemented at the federal level one way or another.

If done at the Federal level every province would be paying the same rate of tax making it a level playing field.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

Wildrose Panel on Equalization.
http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/al...297/story.html


Lead by U of C professor and former bank of canada economist Frank Atkins. Comments on definition of equalization:





Report summary includes 6 recommendations:

The 6 one is terrible and so is evaluating how other provinces spend the money. I really like the concept of including resource revenue in the calc if spent on op costs but not if spent on debt repayment / savings. This might be the first interesting bit of policy I've seen from the wild rose

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Dion

If done at the Federal level every province would be paying the same rate of tax making it a level playing field.

Yes but my understanding of it is that there will not be 2 carbon taxes, the NDP is just getting our province's started before the federal one is implemented. Point is, that as you said, everyone will have to deal with it so it won't really be impacting our provincial economy any more than any other province's economy

[Coach]

Originally Posted by GGG

The 6 one is terrible and so is evaluating how other provinces spend the money. I really like the concept of including resource revenue in the calc if spent on op costs but not if spent on debt repayment / savings. This might be the first interesting bit of policy I've seen from the wild rose

I liked part as well. Atkins was a prof of mine, and although we agree politically on very little, he was always one of my favorite teachers.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

There are other things being implemented that could also counter a lot of the impact you are worried these policies will create. Also it appears the carbon tax will be implemented at the federal level one way or another.

Really? Like what?

And 'The Government just hiring people' doesnt count.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Locke

Really? Like what?

And 'The Government just hiring people' doesnt count.

Raising the minimum wage to promote more consumer spending and increase business, apprentiship grants to help get people working, trying to get pipelines approved.(despite what most claim) And actually hiring people does count to some extent.

You may not agree with these as being the best solutions, which they may prove to not be, but to dismiss it as not doing anything or claiming they simply won't work based solely on your belief of this seems unconstructive.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

I'm interested to hear your reasoning behind this statement.

As for the dictatorship part, I was referring to the fact that many in this thread believe they are simply doing whatever they want.

In other words, you are not only arguing against strawmen, but you also have no idea what words like "dictatorship" even mean?

[IliketoPuck]

Twitter is such a wonderful time capsule:

http://boereport.com/2016/10/30/what...being-elected/

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Raising the minimum wage to promote more consumer spending and increase business, apprentiship grants to help get people working, trying to get pipelines approved.(despite what most claim) And actually hiring people does count to some extent.

You may not agree with these as being the best solutions, which they may prove to not be, but to dismiss it as not doing anything or claiming they simply won't work based solely on your belief of this seems unconstructive.

the raising minimum wage isn't increasing business, I don't know where that's coming from when you can see a lot of instances of businesses contracting because of it. Because of the increases in priced goods, plus the carbon tax they're not going to have significantly more disposable income to spend.

I like the grants for apprentices, that makes sense

trying to get pipelines approved, all that's happened is that Notley's gotten slapped in the face by Quebec and Ontario and BC after announcing things like the Carbon Tax.

And hiring more people increases the operating deficit and especially worthless if they aren't hiring front line people like doctors and nurses and teachers where the money should be going. Instead it looks like they're just hiring more bureaucrats which is a net deficit increase. It will be interesting to see how many people they jam in to run this carbon tax. On top of that it just makes the pensions more unaffordable under the current budget.

At this point the best thing that they could do is announce a hiring and wage freeze and let some attrition happen.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

Twitter is such a wonderful time capsule:

http://boereport.com/2016/10/30/what...being-elected/

I don't mind this. I think the Fed Liberals and the provincial NDP seemed to both realize that saying stuff and actually governing are two different beasts. I blame voters that fall for the rhetoric every time.

Notley has said a lot of the right things, and while I don't particularly agree with a lot of her policies, she's playing hardball here and there and really making our case out there with the rest of Canada.

She's also doing a lot of what she said she was going to do when she got elected (carbon tax, min wage, tax increases, royalty review etc.) so really none of this should be any surprise. In fact, the magnitude of these have shown that she's willing to compromise a bit. I was expecting a far larger carbon tax, a massive change to royalties etc etc, but she's struck a solid middle ground.

[Bootsy]

Originally Posted by Regorium

I don't mind this. I think the Fed Liberals and the provincial NDP seemed to both realize that saying stuff and actually governing are two different beasts. I blame voters that fall for the rhetoric every time.

Notley has said a lot of the right things, and while I don't particularly agree with a lot of her policies, she's playing hardball here and there and really making our case out there with the rest of Canada.

She's also doing a lot of what she said she was going to do when she got elected (carbon tax, min wage, tax increases, royalty review etc.) so really none of this should be any surprise. In fact, the magnitude of these have shown that she's willing to compromise a bit. I was expecting a far larger carbon tax, a massive change to royalties etc etc, but she's struck a solid middle ground.

Once again can someone please show me where she ran on the carbon tax? I never seen it in her platform.
And as for playing hardball , if that were true she would say we are not implementing any kind of carbon tax until some pipelines are built.

For me this exposes them as the liars that they are and that they cannot be trusted.

[CaptainCrunch]

She didn't have a carbon tax in her platform at all.

And saying that she talks tough now doesn't help when she was doing her traveling road show to the US where she was anti-pipeline.

I do give her credit for telling BC to get stuffed and forget any idea of us buying power from them until they get on board though

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

She didn't have a carbon tax in her platform at all.

And saying that she talks tough now doesn't help when she was doing her traveling road show to the US where she was anti-pipeline.

I do give her credit for telling BC to get stuffed and forget any idea of us buying power from them until they get on board though

Nope she didn't say a carbon tax, she said they would appoint a committee to engage with all Albertans and come up with recommendations for how to proceed with a climate change strategy.

That panel headed by Andrew Leach with co-chairs from Suncor, Enbridge, NGOs and the aboriginal community recommended the best option moving forward for Alberta was a carbon tax and decommissioning of coal power. The NDP have acted upon this strategy as recommended.

So no they didn't implicitly say a carbon tax, but they did follow through with their platform on climate change.

http://www.alberta.ca/documents/clim...ve-summary.pdf