Alberta Politics Thread

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

For Murray Edwards it was a couple of percentage points.

Hah! Great post! I love it!

Who cares about 'a couple of percentage points?'

I guess it depends on the number they're levied against? But who cares about minor semantics like that?

A percent here, two percent there...whats a few percent among friends??

This isnt a coke deal, its...well...its an attempt at an economy. However poor an attempt.

This attitude is why we're being looked at like a Banana Republic and having our debt rating consistently downgraded.

You know...you can buy those ratings right? Why arent we doing that? Bribing S&P would probably be cheaper than paying debt service on our lower grade!

"Last week the grift was 10%!"

Well this week its 20%. Pray that I dont alter the deal any further...

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Who was she?

Someone who lived in the pre-post-truth world apparently.

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

To avoid a massive amount of criticism (and to actually commit to following through on what they're saying) I don't understand why they don't just come out and say the carbon tax is not going to general revenues and will be handled separately and towards green initiatives or at least x% portion of it to green initiatives.

None of the carbon tax goes to general revenue. It is all allocated to green imitatives, public transit infrastructure and rebates. Why do people think it's general revenue? 10 mil in advertising and they still can't get around the propaganda.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Have you ever heard of Alison Redford?

Krampus Notley will soon replace her

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Dion

Krampus Notley will soon replace her

The fact that the worst atrocity Brian Jean could attack her with was carpooling rather than taking a bus, would suggest to me she's not doing anything illegal or unethical enough to prompt a resignation. (And yes I get that a bunch of people are probably going to go on rants about the ethics part, so can I save those individuals the trouble by saying I already know you disagree and don't care to debate it?)

[Dion]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

The fact that the worst atrocity Brian Jean could attack her with was carpooling rather than taking a bus, would suggest to me she's not doing anything illegal or unethical enough to prompt a resignation. (And yes I get that a bunch of people are probably going to go on rants about the ethics part, so can I save those individuals the trouble by saying I already know you disagree and don't care to debate it?)

What about Derek Fildebrant going after Notley and Mason for their hypocritical stance on partisan ad spending. The one where both attacked Redford for her ad spending and how she and her govt should pay for it. Yet it's okay for NDP

Even better was her attack on the human services minister of the PC party back in 2008 where she said the person should step down for failing Albertans. Yet she stands behind her own human services minister.

In both cases the NDP had double standards. One that applies to her party and those of the opposition.

She sees your wallet open
She takes your money away
Krampus Notley is coming to town

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Dion

What about Derek Fildebrant going after Notley and Mason for their hypocritical stance on partisan ad spending. The one where both attacked Redford for her ad spending and how she and her govt should pay for it. Yet it's okay for NDP

Even better was her attack on the human services minister of the PC party back in 2008 where she said the person should step down for failing Albertans. Yet she stands behind her own human services minister.

In both cases the NDP had double standards. One that applies to her party and those of the opposition.

Was it a similar scenario that caused Redford to resign?

[Dion]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Was it a similar scenario that caused Redford to resign?

So Notley gets a pass from you?

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Dion

So Notley gets a pass from you?

It would just take more than that for me to put her in the Redford category. Not defending her actions, I just think they are on a different level. I doubt there is a politician on the planet who hasn't said or done at least 1 thing that I don't agree with.

[Dion]

Of course, it’s not just those 300 very well-paid Koch employees who are out of luck. It’s also the staff at the bars and restaurants nearby, and the realtors who sell homes, and the reno companies. It’s the salespeople who sell trucks, cars, ATVs and snowmobiles, plus the mechanics who service all of them.
It’s landlords who rent apartments and the clerks at convenience stores and shopping malls.

Koch’s cancellation will have a painful ripple effect. And Koch’s cancellation won’t be the last. Not by a long shot.

But here’s a more subtle way in which the carbon tax will affect Albertans, a way that won’t show up at the pump and won’t be rebated by Premier Rachel and her government.

On the weekend, Hi-Way 9, one of Alberta’s largest trucking companies, sent an email to customers telling them that as of Jan. 1, every shipment within Alberta will be subject to a “carbon surcharge.” Rising fuel costs are such an enormous cost to trucking companies, Hi-Way 9 sees no way to avoid passing the carbon tax on to customers.

Now every pallet, crate, container and stack Hi-Way 9 carries will cost extra. Those costs will undoubtedly be passed on by Hi-Way 9’s commercial customers to their own retail customers – i.e. to ordinary Albertans.

Notley has insisted there will be no trickle-down effect of her carbon tax. But the Canadian Taxpayers Federation estimates examples such as Hi-Way 9’s mean ordinary families will pay – directly and indirectly – about twice as much carbon tax as government propaganda promises, upwards of $1,200 a year.

And if anyone believes they are going to get that back from the NDP, good luck.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/12/1...n-consequences

[Dion]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

It would just take more than that for me to put her in the Redford category. Not defending her actions, I just think they are on a different level. I doubt there is a politician on the planet who hasn't said or done at least 1 thing that I don't agree with.

Fair enough.

She may not be on the same level as Redford but my distaste for Notley is the same. She didn't even have the guts to campain on a carbon tax. Had to wait until she was elected to bring it in.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Dion

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/12/1...n-consequences

So this surcharge will be the equivalent to if fuel prices went up 6-7 cents per litre?

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Dion

Fair enough.

She may not be on the same level as Redford but my distaste for Notley is on the same level. She didn't even have the guts to campain on a carbon tax. Had to wait until she was elected to bring it in.

I thought I'd noticed a few subtle indicators that you don't like her. I'm starting to get suspicious about Locke, resolute and captain as well.

I get where you are coming from about not including it in her campaign platforms, but to be honest I think they still would have won even if they had, there was such a strong hate on in this province towards conservatives at the time. That's just my opinion on that one, no doubt it would have had an impact though.

[Dion]

Editorial: NDP is spending 'big money' on climate change ads (with poll)

It’s true the tax will provide the NDP with money it can use to encourage homeowners to update their furnaces, install insulation or buy better windows, but unless they’re going to cover the entire bill, it will still leave many families deciding whether to put food on the table or throw out a functioning clothes washer and dryer in favour of a pair that’s more efficient.

And if the savings are so compelling, shouldn’t Albertans be making the upgrades themselves, without a sleight of hand — taxing them on the gasoline and energy they need to exist so people who can afford to buy new appliances can get a bit of a discount?

Whatever views a person might have about the tax, the spending is excessive, especially with so many Albertans out of work, an almost $11-billion deficit on the books and a shortage of money for important programs.

The expenditure on advertisements comes as the NDP brings in restrictions on how much political parties can raise and spend during an election.

“Albertans deserve to know that big money isn’t influencing our electoral system,” the NDP’s minister for democratic renewal, Christina Gray, has said of the reforms.

But “big money” is being expended by the NDP in an attempt to shape public opinion. It has spent more flogging its climate change agenda than four political parties will be permitted to spend in the next general election combined.

If that’s not “big money,” it’s difficult to imagine what is.

http://calgaryherald.com/opinion/edi...is-being-spent

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Dion

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/12/1...n-consequences

Well...yeah.

Notley's plan for making 'Big, Bad Corporations' pay, well...yeah. If you want need what they provide, they're passing that on to you.

And 'you' is most of us.

Hooray?

[Dion]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

I thought I'd noticed a few subtle indicators that you don't like her. I'm starting to get suspicious about Locke, resolute and captain as well.

What took you so long

I get where you are coming from about not including it in her campaign platforms, but to be honest I think they still would have won even if they had, there was such a strong hate on in this province towards conservatives at the time. That's just my opinion on that one, no doubt it would have had an impact though.

I look at what has happened in Ontario and hope to God we don't end up like that. Even more that Notley is a fan of Wynne and her green plan.

The massive debt being incured worries me also, especially when they have no set plan on how to pay it off.

She's arrogant and doesn't care what the polls or albertans are saying about her and her govt.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by belsarius

None of the carbon tax goes to general revenue. It is all allocated to green imitatives, public transit infrastructure and rebates. Why do people think it's general revenue? 10 mil in advertising and they still can't get around the propaganda.

People think its going to general revenue because there is nothing announced to the contrary. I think that the plan is for the time being it is heading to general revenue until the province decides otherwise?

I have seen the commercials dozens of times and there is no information there either. It just tells us what an amazing job we're going to be doing and how happy we'll be doing it. While I'm sure that is true (how could we not feel great about saving the planet from certain doom!), that doesn't say a word about this going into programs aside from the general revenue slush fund.

[Bownesian]

https://www.alberta.ca/climate-carbo...ng.aspx#p184s4

Reinvesting in our economy

The carbon levy is the key tool that will pay for the transition to a more diversified economy. Over the next 5 years, the levy is expected to raise $9.6 billion, all of which will be reinvested in the economy and rebated to Albertans.

$6.2 billion will help diversify our energy industry and create new jobs:

• $3.4 billion for large scale renewable energy, bioenergy and technology
• $2.2 billion for green infrastructure like public transit
• $645 million for Energy Efficiency Alberta, a new provincial agency that will support energy efficiency programs and services for homes and businesses

$3.4 billion will help households, businesses and communities adjust to the carbon levy:

• $2.3 billion for carbon rebates to help low- and middle-income families
• $865 million to pay for a cut in the small business tax rate from 3% to 2%
• $195 million to assist coal communities, Indigenous communities and others transition to a cleaner economy

[Slava]

^While I somewhat stand corrected, this is a shell game. Some of those things were already included and I'm not sure that they're all new programs? Is the transit funding new for example or is this the green line they were already supposed to fund anyway?

The rebates are what we saw from day one. That is the largest piece of the puzzle that shows that this wealth redistribution masquerading as environmental policy.

And that $645mm piece is probably the 5 year cost to implement and administer this tax and coordinate rebates and things like that. Is that really creating jobs diversifying the energy industry?

[Fuzz]

I don't see any money set aside to pay for their boondoggling of the PPA deal. Didn't they offer up $1 billion for that? Or does that draw form the unintended consequences fund?