Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

Comments like this bother me more and more. This driving apart of people and deciding people are "sensible" or "unhinged" as a previous poster mentioned. Everyone is different, everyone has reasons for having political preferences. You deciding they are less then because of this is frankly disgusting. Personally, steps taken by the last NDP government were counter my beliefs and interests so I will be voting UCP. I would prefer to vote for another party, However, given the federal government I dont want to risk using my vote on a party that is not willing to stand up for my interests.

I hope Danielle Smith takes away something you really need at some point in the next 4 years, so you can realize what others have gone through. I'm on a 3 year wait for a referral to a specialist. Not for surgery, not for treatment, on an initial consultation. This is what decades of Conservative policies have brought us. The only reason we even have a new cancer centre after decades of dithering is because, mercifully, we had an NDP government to make it happen.

And now, you somehow feel like boarding the crazy train is worth the risk, because, Oh I dunno, reasons and beliefs? Like what? What could possibly be worse than voting someone who believes cancer is your own fault, woo woo medicine is the cure, you should pay for basic medical care, oil wells only get cleaned up by tax dollars going to corporations, support for billionaire sport franchise owners, pardoning criminals who advocated violence, hell, speaking to them one on one, lying to us, repeatedly, wanting o get rid of public schools, thinking smoking is good for you, and wholly #### it just goes on and on.

How can you possibly justify this as a wise decision? I understated Conservatives be Conservative, and it doesn't matter who is in charge to them, but damn, man, take a step back. Let this party crater so a reasonable Conservative option can arise. If you question the unhinged comments, maybe you should examine them with a rational lens. Sometimes it isn't about one side vs the other, sometimes there is just no justifying an action. Voting for Smith is setting this province on a dark dark path.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

I won't be getting an NDP sign. I don't want any of these unhinged UCP supporters coming and trying to talk "politics" with me.

That's pathetic. Grow a pair

Happy to have my orange sign on my lawn.

[PepsiFree]

Nobody who hated the NDP government can say with a straight face that the UCP hasn't been worse. You can say both suck, you can say you don't want to vote for anyone, but if the NDP ran counter to your interests then voting for the UCP makes you dishonest.

Unless the sole reason you're voting for the UCP is because you have backwards social beliefs. Then sure, I get it. But they spend more, waste more, and do more damage to both private and public industry than the NDP did. Their budgets are worse, our services are worse, we have literally gained nothing from their governance and would be in grave danger as a province had oil not come back up. Every "bad" thing the NDP did the UCP engineered to be significantly worse.

It'd be nice if people would stop pretending otherwise.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

Comments like this bother me more and more. This driving apart of people and deciding people are "sensible" or "unhinged" as a previous poster mentioned. Everyone is different, everyone has reasons for having political preferences. You deciding they are less then because of this is frankly disgusting. Personally, steps taken by the last NDP government were counter my beliefs and interests so I will be voting UCP. I would prefer to vote for another party, However, given the federal government I dont want to risk using my vote on a party that is not willing to stand up for my interests.

forget your financial self interest for a moment.
I'd love to know what personal beliefs you have that the NDP does not share that the UCP does share with you.

considering what they openly espouse, you can understand why we'd think the worst.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by belsarius

1. Lightbulbs
2. Deficit Spending
3. PPAs
4. Carbon tax

Those are the real concrete examples that I see get used. And honestly, I can see the disagreement with those issues. What I can't see is how the UCP is better on any of those fronts.

Thanks, I think that is fair. I actively see how the UPC is worse on all of these fronts.

Lightbulbs is a drop in the bucket compared to their bad spending choices.

In a commodity driven economy I think it is unfair to judge a government on deficit / surplus, since the market is basically going to drive revenues so low there is no way out, or so high you can't spend your way into a deficit. But when I look at spending, the NDP was less likely to socialize costs major private infrastructure (Keystone / Flames Arena...) and did a better job of controlling public salaries (although, the market might have had an influence on that).

PPAs, I'm hoping someone else can help with the details because I am fuzzy on them, but I believe the UPC made a change to the NDPs regulations that pushed power bills higher over the past 2 years? At the end of the day I am not in the weeds enough to comment on the structure, I just care about the $/kwh outcome.

Carbon tax, I'll be honest, I just generally believe the conservative economists who say this is the correct market solution to effect change in our economy, so I support it. But I understand those who don't, I am vehemently against a PST, and see how this can seem like a PST in disguise to many. So I consider the UPCs stance to be worse, but think many could disagree.

[shotinthebacklund]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

Sorry you're sensitive.

Not the reason it bothers me. What bothers me is the willingness to divide. Not much different then the Rep/Dem chasm in the US.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

Not the reason it bothers me. What bothers me is the willingness to divide. Not much different then the Rep/Dem chasm in the US.

Care to enlighten us as to what the UCP are doing that leads you to believe they are the more sensible option right now?

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Why does she do this with her face

Tucker Carlson vibes.

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by #-3

Thanks, I think that is fair. I actively see how the UPC is worse on all of these fronts.

Lightbulbs is a drop in the bucket compared to their bad spending choices.

In a commodity driven economy I think it is unfair to judge a government on deficit / surplus, since the market is basically going to drive revenues so low there is no way out, or so high you can't spend your way into a deficit. But when I look at spending, the NDP was less likely to socialize costs major private infrastructure (Keystone / Flames Arena...) and did a better job of controlling public salaries (although, the market might have had an influence on that).

PPAs, I'm hoping someone else can help with the details because I am fuzzy on them, but I believe the UPC made a change to the NDPs regulations that pushed power bills higher over the past 2 years? At the end of the day I am not in the weeds enough to comment on the structure, I just care about the $/kwh outcome.

Carbon tax, I'll be honest, I just generally believe the conservative economists who say this is the correct market solution to effect change in our economy, so I support it. But I understand those who don't, I am vehemently against a PST, and see how this can seem like a PST in disguise to many. So I consider the UPCs stance to be worse, but think many could disagree.

The PPAs really didn't play a part in the power bills over the last two years. The biggest change was under the NDP there was a cap on the Regulated rate of 6.8cents/kwh which was removed in 2019 by the UCP. For comparison the UCP just had a cap of 13.5 for Jan/Feb/Mar and that cap will be repaid by raising the cost of the RRO, whereas the cost of the cap under the NDP was borne by the province.

And let me just say its nice to see someone who actually understands that the Carbon Tax was originally a conservative idea, to let market forces deal with the cost of carbon. As opposed to a leftist view (like me) who thinks it should be more stringent regulations because I don't trust the market to do anything good for the majority of people.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

Not the reason it bothers me. What bothers me is the willingness to divide. Not much different then the Rep/Dem chasm in the US.

Republicans entire make up is built on division.

[shotinthebacklund]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

Republicans entire make up is built on division.

exactly, do you want to be like a republican? certainly not.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

exactly, do you want to be like a republican? certainly not.

No. I'll remain sensible.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

exactly, do you want to be like a republican? certainly not.

Instead of going on about republicans or the US could you just explain how the NDP went against your beliefs and interests and show some sort of material proof that the UCP has acted in a way and gotten results that support your beliefs and interests?

The solution to being labelled insensible is not to complain about being labelled insensible but to indicate you have some sort of good sense.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

exactly, do you want to be like a republican? certainly not.

Danielle Smith does

[GGG]

With PPAs it was a 1-2 billion dollar mistake.

By implementing the Coal phase out and some elements of the Carbon Tax It allowed power producers out of contracts they entered when privatization first started because changes in regulation made them lose more money on these contracts.

The NDP appeared to not be aware of this consequence of their policy and was a pretty significant screw up by the government.

The one saving grace which limits the damage is Enmax and Capital Power which are wholly owned by the cities got out of their agreements so those likely just transferred costs from cities to the province. The seas with Atco, Altagas (I think) and TC were losses.

I think in general this is a similar magnitude of screwup to the Keystone bet.

[StickMan]

Originally Posted by Red Slinger

A vote for Danielle Smith is a vote Ron DeSantis. Am I doing this right?

Except the provincial NDP and federal NDP are actually integrated. And Jagmeet and Trudeau are a coalition. So there is that.

Sad that most NDP voters don't even understand how their party works.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by StickMan

Except the provincial NDP and federal NDP are actually integrated. And Jagmeet and Trudeau are a coalition. So there is that.

Sad that most NDP voters don't even understand how their party works.

#thankstips

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by StickMan

Except the provincial NDP and federal NDP are actually integrated. And Jagmeet and Trudeau are a coalition. So there is that.

Sad that most NDP voters don't even understand how their party works.

[Looch City]

Lol did Stickman's account get reactivated May 1st? Which position do you hold in Smith's coalition for idiocrasy?

[AFireInside]

Originally Posted by StickMan

Except the provincial NDP and federal NDP are actually integrated. And Jagmeet and Trudeau are a coalition. So there is that.

Sad that most NDP voters don't even understand how their party works.

Except Notley has come out and disagreed with the federal government NDP several times.

Just a few months ago she came out and said that the federal emissions target set by the federal gov and federal NDP are wrong.

The Alberta NDP are pretty much in line with the PC party of the 80s at this point.