Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[Torture]

Originally Posted by Slava

Nice red herring.

My point is that I'm an individual, not associated with the party, posting in a politics thread in a hockey forum, if I want to be a bit hyperbolic that's not misinformation, that's shooting the ####.

If you want to be concerned about actual misinformation that the parties are putting out, fine. In a perfect world we'd all nicely debate the facts and take emotion out of it, I agree.
For instance, I don't love it when Gil McGowan posts about AIMCO returns vs CPP returns in different quarters either, but this kind of stuff is pretty small potatoes compared to the firehose of bull####, gaslighting, and outright lying that comes out of the UCP every single ####ing day.

[DFO]

Originally Posted by Slava

The misinformation about them “taking away your pensions” really needs to stop. There are a million reasons to attack the UCP and Smith. You could even argue that you don’t like the move to an APP from CPP for legitimate reasons. But they’re not taking away your pension, full stop. It’s irresponsible to run around and fan the flames of this rhetoric. I saw an NDP ad to this effect as well, and it’s just off-putting.

I think the NDP are driven to some of these ads because of the absolute tsunami of BS the UCP spouts in almost every turn. A case of fighting fire with fire maybe.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by DFO

I think the NDP are driven to some of these ads because of the absolute tsunami of BS the UCP spouts in almost every turn. A case of fighting fire with fire maybe.

I don’t think they’re driven to anything. They have so many places to attack the UCP and Smith that it’s probably hard to choose which ones to use before the election! Seriously, that could buy ads that just have Smith saying dumb things and leave it at that, and it’s more than enough.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Slava

No, it was a TV as with a roulette wheel and that kind of implication. It’s disingenuous. Surely someone in the NDP has some expertise and can tell the others that this isn’t what’s happening?

OK, well I haven't seen that ad so I'll have to take your word it is misinformation. But that seems suspicious to me.

[Torture]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1656772561806426112

https://twitter.com/user/status/1656767976941469698

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

OK, well I haven't seen that ad so I'll have to take your word it is misinformation. But that seems suspicious to me.

The bottom line is that no one is taking anyone’s pension.

[Fuzz]

Would the UCP give us the choice of staying with CPP or going to APP? Because if not, they are doing exactly what the ad I posted form Notley says they will do, and I don't really see your issue with that ad. If there is another, actual misleading ad, then sure. Let me know if you see it again somewhere, I rarely watch TV ads.

[BlackArcher101]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Would the UCP give us the choice of staying with CPP or going to APP? Because if not, they are doing exactly what the ad I posted form Notley says they will do, and I don't really see your issue with that ad. If there is another, actual misleading ad, then sure. Let me know if you see it again somewhere, I rarely watch TV ads.

Yes and no, a referendum would be needed, so that's the time you get to "choose" probably. Then get stuck with whatever the outcome is.

I fail to see how an APP is even a positive for anyone. Lets take on costs of maintaining a fund, that is now smaller than the CPP and has less cushion? Why?

[AFireInside]

Originally Posted by Slava

The bottom line is that no one is taking anyone’s pension.

When the Alberta pension ends up returning less than the CPP and you get less money in retirement is that not taking away pension? There's zero reason to do this, except as a way to access money. We know that Aimco is going to blow it as they constantly do. A crown corporation with a terrible record investing our money for us. With these lunatics? No thank you.

I'm not sure I understand your position here. They want to take us out of the CPP and create an Alberta one correct or do I have that wrong (I may be misinformed)? Who invests that money for the government? Albertans didn't ask for this.

Now if they gave us the option to opt in, that would be different.

[aaronck]

Originally Posted by Slava

The bottom line is that no one is taking anyone’s pension.

But they want to...really badly.

They also set up a whole Website with questionable facts, and a picture of Rachel and Justin, you know, to cement the story that they are in cahoots and all that.

https://www.notleywantsyoutoforget.ca/

[belsarius]

We can look at the QPP. It has a slightly higher contribution but basically the exact same payout as the CPP.

Quebec Pension Plan and Canada Pension Plan

Alberta has half the population of Quebec so there will be some scaling there, but also I would think a higher % of workers in Alberta reach the full pensionable amount.

On the face of it, there doesn't seem like there is going to be a huge change with an APP. Of course I have no idea on the mathematics to talk about the change in relative return and risk profile of smaller funds, but I think it is probably significant.

I don't trust the UCP to implement it, but really if you look at the QPP as a comparable, it can be done without "destroying the pensions of Albertans".

[Dion]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1656733735377866752

[Monahammer]

Slava has become the master of moving goal posts.

[Monahammer]

"stealing your pension" is far more valid a take than "97 tax increases" that include things as minor as adjusting pricing for drivers licenses. If we're talking about party issued misrepresentation of facts.

[puffnstuff]

Originally Posted by calculoso

I was just coming here to say this too.

Nobody will “have to” pay but the options will be there

Vs

Nobody will ever pay

Very different meanings

We are three weeks away from them saying healthcare? No we've been saying wealthcare. I guess we spoke imprecisely.

[Leeman4Gilmour]

Originally Posted by Torture

Well Calgary, do you want $330M for a Hockey Arena that benefits a billionaire or $1.2B for critical infrastructure that benefits all of us?

https://twitter.com/user/status/1656751002660532224

https://twitter.com/user/status/1656751006821289984

https://twitter.com/user/status/1656751007991472128

other downtown revitalization projects

"Why not both?"

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Slava

Nice red herring.

Hysterical level post. Congrats. You're an endless stream of red herrings in here. 99% of what you say is "yeah, but what about... *insert misinformation and misdirection here* NDP!"

[BlackArcher101]

Originally Posted by belsarius

We can look at the QPP. It has a slightly higher contribution but basically the exact same payout as the CPP.

Alberta has half the population of Quebec so there will be some scaling there, but also I would think a higher % of workers in Alberta reach the full pensionable amount.

And since the UCP seem to like giving richer people options, I'm sure they'll be given the option of pulling out because they can get "better returns" elsewhere or don't need a government pension plan at all. That decreases the amount of people paying into it even more.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by AFireInside

When the Alberta pension ends up returning less than the CPP and you get less money in retirement is that not taking away pension? There's zero reason to do this, except as a way to access money. We know that Aimco is going to blow it as they constantly do. A crown corporation with a terrible record investing our money for us. With these lunatics? No thank you.

I'm not sure I understand your position here. They want to take us out of the CPP and create an Alberta one correct or do I have that wrong (I may be misinformed)? Who invests that money for the government? Albertans didn't ask for this.

Now if they gave us the option to opt in, that would be different.

If you look at the past couple years for Aimco, they've beaten their benchmark. That's not blowing up, and it's not a terrible record. Over the past decade they've outperformed their benchmark by about 0.7%...again not indicative of poor management. And no, it doesn't matter whether that is more or less than another pension fund because the benchmark return for these mandates is what matters. You can't just cherry pick data and say "we could've done better", because the mandates are not necessarily the same.

I have other reasons that I don't like the APP scheme (notably the deranged push for sovereignty), but again...people are not having their pension stolen.

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Slava has become the master of moving goal posts.

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Hysterical level post. Congrats. You're an endless stream of red herrings in here. 99% of what you say is "yeah, but what about... *insert misinformation and misdirection here* NDP!"

I have no idea what you're on about, but feel free to ignore me if you don't want to have a rational conversation.

[timun]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

I’ll take the hit on laziness and admit it. I just finished working and finally got back here but my reply to you would be this- to what extent should the average voter be expected to wade through and not just research all the various issues to the nth extent expected by people in this thread but also verify and confirm all sources and their respective biases or extent and intensity of such biases? How many hours a night do you expect people to go read through and stay in tune with all the issues while making sure that all the 5 million other obligations in the average persons life are adequately maintained, you know, people with kids jobs, billion other ####ing things to do?

Sorry I can’t keep up to the political wizards in here but therein lies the rub and the breakdown. The many people you suggest are “morons” (which ironically only makes you look like a moron but ok) probably have way too much #### going on in their life to dedicate the 40% of their days staying up to the latest and dialed in on biases and claims and fact checking and debate. Misinformation is spreading and you’re right that is a huge problem but see most regular people used to just read the news and could reasonably rely on it.

So when I get an email and there’s some info in it and I just kind of throw it in here to see people’s thoughts, what is ultra counterproductive to the entire premise of this websites purpose are the replies that have built over years shutting down discussion and discourse and not actually discussing the issues at hand. Luckily some other reasonable people came in and actually participated beyond the usual echo chamber critters purposefully trying to stifle such discussion by just outright immediately dismissing the source. The truth is, everyone has their biases, including the lefty echo chamber team in here and so a real fact based discussion would truly take hours of research from reputable sources on both sides to really wade through all the purposeful omitting of key details on any issue or blatant misrepresentations of key facts. The fact that the lefties just sit around here and crow “nobody can even dispute all these issues from the right!” And then when presented with an issue do their mightiest to just shut down the discussions through attacking a source whilst insulting the poster and calling anyone who has valid concerns or objections idiots is a reflection of the state of those posters and quality of this thread. And further, the extreme lack of self awareness in here of said posters is all the more shameful.

So yeah, after I get my kids home from sports practice, that’s where I am now trying to keep up with this bull####, and then getting my kids to bed house cleaned and then some more work I have to do tonight, maybe I’ll hop on at 11pm and go research all the ####ing key issues and related biases and sources for everything. Seems reasonable? No. Like, this is a message board. Discuss the issue- you have no clue about most things about most of these people participating- so stop being dicks? Or, like I said, maybe all you people are incapable?

So you tell me what a reasonable amount of time for people to stay “up to date” with “facts” should be to honour our democratic responsibilities.

Sorry/not sorry, but this is all a red herring. A false equivalency. I'm not arguing that you need to spend hours and hours doing research. You said:

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Based on what I have seen (can't post it, sorry, received it in an email from a group called "Alberta Institute" in an article written by a guy named Peter McCaffrey- not sure his or this group's political association); but this author makes claims that such a program is anticipated to cost $87 Billion, based on the fact that the current grid is 85% non-renewable energy (not sure if this is true?).

It takes mere seconds to go to https://www.google.ca, type in "Alberta Institute Peter McCaffrey", and hit the enter key.

Frankly this should be part of your own personal, basic media literacy.

You say, "Misinformation is spreading and you’re right that is a huge problem but see most regular people used to just read the news and could reasonably rely on it." You can still just read the news and reasonably rely on it. Instead, you're getting your news from emails. Passed on to you by whom? And why? Why would you rely on information passed on to you by email?

You don't need to research the hell out of something to be informed in a superficial way, and it's fine to be be informed in a superficial way. For example I haven't been following the stuff in the news about the Chinese Communist Party's shenanigans with respect to CPC MP Michael Chong and his family. But it doesn't take a rocket surgeon to do some superficial vetting of sources of your information.

You go on to say it's unreasonable to expect people to do some research of their own because they (you) don't have the spare time, and that it's incumbent on "the usual lefty echo chamber critters" to "discuss the issues" and "stop being dicks" about calling people out on crappy sources of information. That is bull####. The idea that you chuck some information out into the ether and other people have an obligation to not pick apart the questionable source is complete, unadulterated bull####.

THAT is how disinformation perpetuates: a false appeal to some bull#### "all sides, many sides" argument that pretends as though patently biased sources are on equal footing to any other source. They're not. Calling out bad sources IS the discussion worth having. Fuzz is not the ###hole here for calling out BS when he sees it. Just because you got it in an email from someone does not mean anyone else is under any obligation to take any of it at face value, and if it's unreliable information, then it merits no discussion whatsoever.