Alberta Election Poll (new poll added)

[Lubicon]

Originally Posted by Flames0910

Something I've wondered about the UCP budget, and not sure if anyone has done the research —but how do they square removing the carbon tax and cutting the corporate tax rate with balancing the budget and/or eliminating the deficit?

They're proposing to remove billions of dollars of revenue and replace them with...trickle down economics? spending cuts?
(honest question, because isn't that a massive revenue gap?)

That's what I am waiting on answers on too before I can consider them. I want some specifics on exactly what they are going to cut. If they cannot tell me then I don't know how I can vote for them.

[Ozy_Flame]

I hope people realize that when Kenney cuts the Carbon Tax (that "feel good" moment on the first day in power), that the federal carbon tax will kick right in, which begins on April 1.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

I hope people realize that when Kenney cuts the Carbon Tax (that "feel good" moment on the first day in power), that the federal carbon tax will kick right in, which begins on April 1.

Not if we are able to secede from Canada first!

Which is obviously the most surefire way to get pipelines constructed in BC when we aren't even part of the country!

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

I hope people realize that when Kenney cuts the Carbon Tax (that "feel good" moment on the first day in power), that the federal carbon tax will kick right in, which begins on April 1.

The federal carbon tax is revenue neutral and universal. It's a far better implementation than ear-marking tax revenue to other projects.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Regorium

The federal carbon tax is revenue neutral and universal. It's a far better implementation than ear-marking tax revenue to other projects.

You know that the current Alberta Carbon Tax is revenue neutral until 2021, right?

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Regorium

The federal carbon tax is revenue neutral and universal. It's a far better implementation than ear-marking tax revenue to other projects.

Yes, and that's awesome. But is Kenney going to say that? Or lead his base to believe there will be no Carbon Tax at all?

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

You know that the current Alberta Carbon Tax is revenue neutral until 2021, right?

The NDP definition of revenue neutral is not the same as my definition of revenue neutral.

Their definition is that because the entire carbon tax revenue is spent on green projects, that's revenue neutral. My definition is that if the entire tax revenue is returned to taxpayers, that's revenue neutral.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Yes, and that's awesome. But is Kenney going to say that? Or lead his base to believe there will be no Carbon Tax at all?

Is he doing that by claiming he will join the fight against the Feds in the courts?

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Regorium

The NDP definition of revenue neutral is not the same as my definition of revenue neutral.

Their definition is that because the entire carbon tax revenue is spent on green projects, that's revenue neutral. My definition is that if the entire tax revenue is returned to taxpayers, that's revenue neutral.

Okay, so instead of green projects the money goes to low income households. How does that help the economy or make it that much better?

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Yes, and that's awesome. But is Kenney going to say that? Or lead his base to believe there will be no Carbon Tax at all?

If Kenney wins in Alberta and federally Trudeau's government implodes and loses the election this fall to the Conservatives there in fact might not be a carbon tax in Alberta by this time next year at all. If one is not in favor of the carbon tax, voting UCP is the only path to that outcome, albeit as you correctly point out its not entirely in the UCP's control.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Regorium

The federal carbon tax is revenue neutral and universal. It's a far better implementation than ear-marking tax revenue to other projects.

I think both plans have their pluses and minuses. I'm OK with carbon tax going toward things like transit projects and stuff that actually reduces consumption. I'm not fine with rebates that go to people who never paid out what they are getting rebated in the first place. That's just wealth re-distribution. I also don't agree at all with the rates they have set for natural gas used for home heating. I think they are far to high, and going higher.



It's really expensive to reduce heating costs, and it seems punitive for no reason whatsoever. Maybe if they banked that tax for you, and you could withdraw it at a future date to put towards insulation or a furnace, I could get behind that. But to take my tax payed, and give it to retirees or students who haven't really payed the tax doesn't make any sense in an emmisions reduction point of view, as they won't be in a position to reduce their heating emmisions and have little motivation to.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Okay, so instead of green projects the money goes to low income households. How does that help the economy or make it that much better?

The money goes to all households. The federal carbon tax rebate is not income tested.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Regorium

The money goes to all households. The federal carbon tax rebate is not income tested.

https://business.financialpost.com/p...he-policy-tool

The Cameron study out this week found lowest-income households would see the most benefits from such a policy. Those with incomes of under $20,000 would see a net benefit of $195 in Ontario to $831 in Saskatchewan for next year, two provinces without a carbon tax, while households over $150,000 would gain $2 and $621 respectively.

Except it benefits low-income housing the most. Because they consume the least.

Again, you didn't really answer the question.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

https://business.financialpost.com/p...he-policy-tool

Except it benefits low-income housing the most. Because they consume the least.

Again, you didn't really answer the question.

Yeah and I'm okay with benefiting low income, as long as it's a flat amount. The same arguments where regressive taxation hits low income the most, are the exact opposite when you have regressive rebates. It helps low income the most, but now everyone has the same positive reinforcing incentive.

To answer your question, none of it helps the economy. The carbon tax helps the environment. The federal implementation is just superior (in my opinion of course) because it returns more money to the taxpayer, while achieving the same outcomes with regards to reducing personal emissions.

[Buff]

I'm confused about what to do. I like the UCP rep in my riding and I think the NDP rep in my riding needs to be punted to the curb. I don't like NDP as a whole and I'm not a fan of Notely. I agree with many things the UCP stands for, but not all and I'm not a fan of Kenney. The other parties in my riding are weak.

So the best choice is to vote for the best representative in your riding, but then there's the whole Kenney getting in thing. I'm pretty sure I'm going UCP but I have reservations.

[redforever]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

https://business.financialpost.com/p...he-policy-tool



Except it benefits low-income housing the most. Because they consume the least.

Again, you didn't really answer the question.

Yeah, and then you get scenarios like mine. My sister lives with me and her income qualified her to receive the AB carbon tax rebate and I never...and she lives in my house and is not paying the bills!!!

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by redforever

Yeah, and then you get scenarios like mine. My sister lives with me and her income qualified her to receive the AB carbon tax rebate and I never...and she lives in my house and is not paying the bills!!!

My friend's daughter goes to college in Portland. Gets the carbon rebate, doesn't even live in Canada most of the year.

[Lubicon]

Both my kids get the carbon tax rebate. They live at home and are students. They also get a GST rebate now that they are > 18.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Lubicon

Both my kids get the carbon tax rebate. They live at home and are students. They also get a GST rebate now that they are > 18.

See, that bugs the crap outa me. There should be some evidence you pay it for it to be rebated.

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Not sure how expensive his campaigns are. Check out his website, it’s amazing.

http://www.larryforlougheed.ca

Larry Heather is Oscar Fech on steroids.