Alberta Politics Thread

[para transit fellow]

Originally Posted by GaiJin

Think of all the extra hours people were getting back then though to handle the increased costs, and there wasn't 100k people out of work with no o greatly reduced income. Putting up costs while overall household incomes are down is different than larger costs during the boom time.

Sounds like things were delightfully taken care of by the boom. Except they weren't...

I wasn't getting larger salary due to the boom. I had a five year salary freeze to deal with. And the folks on fixed incomes had a heck of a lot of more trouble than I did. As I recall, a pcaa cabinet minister told people like us to "wear a sweater"

[oilyfan]

Good article about the carbon tax

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/c...nada-1.3895133

Perception vs. reality

Dwayne Bartley certainly isn't sold on the carbon tax.

The retired rancher and Baptist minister lives in Airdrie, Alta., with his wife, who works in nearby Calgary. Between her commute and his diesel truck, they burn a lot of fuel and worry about the impact a carbon tax will have on their bottom line. So much so, that the couple has considered relocating to Mexico to avoid paying the new tax.

"It won't be because we want to, it will be because we have to," he said. "We will be forced out of the country."

Bartley said he and his wife have already started cutting back on steak and other luxury items to prepare for the dramatic increase they expect the new tax will have on their budget.

But the reality of the increases they face is somewhat less dramatic. The new tax will mean the couple will spend about $550 more next year on fuel to run their two vehicles and to heat their home.

[Ducay]

At least the carbon tax is so divissive (and by divissive I mean not at all because everyone hates it) that it alone will ensure the NDP are swiftly booted in the next election.

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by oilyfan

Good article about the carbon tax

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/c...nada-1.3895133

C'mon, Dwayne Bartley. You're going to move to Mexico "not because we want to, but because we have to"... what an over-dramatic turd.

I hate the idea of the carbon tax as much as everyone else, but I can't stand seeing people behave/speak so irrationally.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

C'mon, Dwayne Bartley. You're going to move to Mexico "not because we want to, but because we have to"... what an over-dramatic turd.

I hate the idea of the carbon tax as much as everyone else, but I can't stand seeing people behave/speak so irrationally.

In fairness, oilyfan left out the final paragraphs of that section, which added a great deal of context. Namely: that the CBC reporter calculated how much Mr. Bartley would be likely to pay (based primarily on government estimates), and he admitted that he was surprised it was much lower than he was led to believe.

[oilyfan]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

In fairness, oilyfan left out the final paragraphs of that section, which added a great deal of context. Namely: that the CBC reporter calculated how much Mr. Bartley would be likely to pay (based primarily on government estimates), and he admitted that he was surprised it was much lower than he was led to believe.

It wasn't as funny if I did that! But yes he decides not to move to Mexico once the CBC reporter shows him how much of an idiot he actually is.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

In fairness, oilyfan left out the final paragraphs of that section, which added a great deal of context. Namely: that the CBC reporter calculated how much Mr. Bartley would be likely to pay (based primarily on government estimates), and he admitted that he was surprised it was much lower than he was led to believe.

Who lead him to believe it would be higher I wonder?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

In fairness, oilyfan left out the final paragraphs of that section, which added a great deal of context. Namely: that the CBC reporter calculated how much Mr. Bartley would be likely to pay (based primarily on government estimates), and he admitted that he was surprised it was much lower than he was led to believe.

And this is where Albertans are being trumped

Politicians are taking advantage of those who are to lazy to do the math themselves to create a perception that this is a lifestyle changing tax.

No one would be moving to Mexico because of the PST

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by GGG

And this is where Albertans are being trumped

Politicians are taking advantage of those who are to lazy to do the math themselves to create a perception that this is a lifestyle changing tax.

No one would be moving to Mexico because of the PST

I think part of it is that a pst is fixed, predictable and easily mitigated. I have no idea how much a carbon tax will cost me. Believing the government's estimate is idiotic...seriously stupid. We already know they are showing us the number they want us to see and hiding the ones they don't. Doing your own math is 100% impossible given the variability of the trickle down effect.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Who lead him to believe it would be higher I wonder?

Doesn't take much for one Alberta neighbor to convince another that "their taxes are going up significantly" based on who the government is and what they read online for 5 minutes.

Actually, that's basically the premise for any western economy voter.

[the_only_turek_fan]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

C'mon, Dwayne Bartley. You're going to move to Mexico "not because we want to, but because we have to"... what an over-dramatic turd.

I hate the idea of the carbon tax as much as everyone else, but I can't stand seeing people behave/speak so irrationally.

Part of the reasoning is because 40% of Albertans including me do not get the income enhancement.

This is the part that drives me nuts the most.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Who lead him to believe it would be higher I wonder?

I realize this is question is asked merely as one of your regular efforts at signalling how superior you and your team are compared to everyone else, but the honest answer is both sides.

You want to sit there and blame the right for overestimating the costs and effects, and if we trust this article that is fair. But at the same time your team is almost certainly underestimating them, and on top of that, are actively promoting the tax as a means to encourage people to change their consumption habits.

So if the reality is instead that most people will experience only a "small" inconvenience - in fact, the CBC article makes it clear some people will actually profit - then it becomes obvious that this tax is not designed to engender changes in consumption. Rather, it is what many in the opposition have argued it to be: PST by another name and a wealth transfer mechanism.

[Fuzz]

I've yet to hear much about the part where this carbon tax actually helps reduce carbon. Increasing energy bills is just going to leave people with less money to do the very expensive projects required to increase energy efficiency.

I mean, if they want to tax us, bank that money, an give 100% back to people on the stipulation all of it goes to energy retrofits, well that would be something I could support. Just handing it out to poor people isn't going to reduce anyone's CO2 footprint. Which, if I'm reading the name of this tax correctly, was the point, right?

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Doesn't take much for one Alberta neighbor to convince another that "their taxes are going up significantly" based on who the government is and what they read online for 5 minutes.

Actually, that's basically the premise for any western economy voter.

Excuse me?

It is a fact that my taxes have gone up at all three levels of government this year.

It is a fact that I now pay more, and receive less, at the end of 2016 than I did at the beginning.

It is a fact that my tax burden will be higher next year as a result of the Climate Leadership Plan (or wealth transfer tax scheme, if you prefer).

I don't need to convince anyone of that. It is a fact that is not debatable.

Your opinion that those facts are irrelevant is quite post-truthy.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I've yet to hear much about the part where this carbon tax actually helps reduce carbon. Increasing energy bills is just going to leave people with less money to do the very expensive projects required to increase energy efficiency.

I mean, if they want to tax us, bank that money, an give 100% back to people on the stipulation all of it goes to energy retrofits, well that would be something I could support. Just handing it out to poor people isn't going to reduce anyone's CO2 footprint. Which, if I'm reading the name of this tax correctly, was the point, right?

Yeah. They even said that part of the saving this tax will create is that it will mitigate the effects and costs of climate change in our own little province. So now we won't have to deal with floods or drought anymore.

The NDP also defends its plan by noting the economic analysis produced last fall doesn’t take into account the cost of doing nothing, such as.....the impact of climate change itself on the province.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

Excuse me?

It is a fact that my taxes have gone up at all three levels of government this year.

It is a fact that I now pay more, and receive less, at the end of 2016 than I did at the beginning.

It is a fact that my tax burden will be higher next year as a result of the Climate Leadership Plan (or wealth transfer tax scheme, if you prefer).

I don't need to convince anyone of that. It is a fact that is not debatable.

Your opinion that those facts are irrelevant is quite post-truthy.

Heh. You're missing my point. I'm saying most people make judgment calls on what they hear at the water cooler or down the grapevine, not by doing their own thorough investigations.

But I do love the fact that there are fine folks on CP that spend their days doing all the investigation for the rest of us!

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

Excuse me?

It is a fact that my taxes have gone up at all three levels of government this year.

It is a fact that I now pay more, and receive less, at the end of 2016 than I did at the beginning.

It is a fact that my tax burden will be higher next year as a result of the Climate Leadership Plan (or wealth transfer tax scheme, if you prefer).

I don't need to convince anyone of that. It is a fact that is not debatable.

Your opinion that those facts are irrelevant is quite post-truthy.

So you're moving to mexico too?

[PepsiFree]

I just want a socially progressive and financially conservative government with low taxation.

Where should I move?

[saillias]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...ator-1.3900339

I will be paying an extra $500 a year according to this. That will sting.

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

So you're moving to mexico too?

No, I just put a check mark on the calendar for every day that brings Alberta closer to May 31, 2019.