Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

How many experts need to come out and say leaving the CPP is, at best, a very risky idea with a low chance for very modest benefits before Albertans actually accept it?

It’s such a silly idea parroted exclusively by sycophants at this point. Most Albertans don’t want to mess with it, every expert says the UCP is blowing hot air and lying about how great it’s going to be. Hell, Canada’s chief actuary just came out and said Tombe was right about the amount (closer to 20% than the 50+% the UCP is claiming) and you’ve still got the Fraser Institute falling over themselves crying about how they didn’t give an exact percent so it must be over 50% lol.

Leaving the CPP seems to be a position favoured by people who don’t want to deal in fact and logic or aren’t intellectually capable of it. That’s not the kind of people I want making any decisions about anything, but especially not pensions.

So if you leave the CPP with the funds you are owed. You can get a better rate of return with much lower management expenses due to reduced overhead and demographics how would it be worse?

Even if you are getting a 1% increase in your rate of return the benefit would be massive over time. I can’t really see a downside other than potentially buying power due to the overall size of the pool of money.

The demographics benefit is a gigantic one though.

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

I don’t think you understand what was said by Slava. You can just go replicate the CPP. The private investments they are invested in which is a good portion is not just available to everyone. You need to have certain amounts to invest to get in. They also outperform regular funds.

I don’t want anyone picked by this ####hole government managing my future. Or would you like to be like the US and get threats that they are running low on social security? I think so because that’s what this moron wants us to be like.

I think I covered your first comment above in another post.

So what if you had a say in who managed the money?

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by chedder

Smaller groups/smaller investment fund will mean bigger management fees. Scale has its advantages. Also, do you really think the ucp would ever have a smaller fee regardless?

And what happens as our small province ages or if/when oil and gas revenue inevitably shrinks?

I don’t think the demographics in this province are going to change. It’s the one province in canada that younger doers move to and it has the highest paid workers. That has been the case since the start of the cpp. It’s estimated that our province over contributes upwards of $3 billion a year due to number of contributers compared to number of consumers. Even if it’s less than that number the lost capital over 60 years would probably be more than the current value of the CPP pot.

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

And if government meddling and directing investment strategies isn't I concern for you, how would you feel about an NDP or other later elected government directing investments to only include green corporations? Have you thought this through?

If I were setting the fund up I would insure that there would be no political interference and would legislate severe penalties if there was. I would make it self contained. Like any other pension fund.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Goriders

You can get a better rate of return with much lower management expenses due to reduced overhead and demographics how would it be worse?

That's quite the bold statement that duplicating the management of CPP and losing economy of scale will improve efficiency. This is the sort of thing were we really need to consider the source because it goes against basic economic logic.

If this were truly the case there should be a major push to reform the CPP because of performance issues, but CPP is doing a good job with their portfolio.

[BlackArcher101]

Originally Posted by Goriders

I don’t think the demographics in this province are going to change. It’s the one province in canada that younger doers move to and it has the highest paid workers. That has been the case since the start of the cpp. It’s estimated that our province over contributes upwards of $3 billion a year due to number of contributers compared to number of consumers. Even if it’s less than that number the lost capital over 60 years would probably be more than the current value of the CPP pot.

Alberta is not not losing capital, you have to get rid of this baffling notion, the capital belongs to the Canadian people not a government or province. To think so would imply that if we were to "keep it" you'd have to put that money into an APP and give the Alberta gov access to it, or have them direct it into heavier local investments. Then we wouldn't be "losing it" but that would not be beneficial to you or I.

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

It turns out like the QPP where contributions are now higher than the CPP and payouts are the same.

Don’t think Quebec and Alberta are probably the best comparison. Entirely different in almost any metric you could pick. I’d bet none of them benefitting Quebec.

Quebec is good at one thing though. That’s utilizing their political clout. Probably makes up for any of their deficiencies

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Goriders

If I were setting the fund up I would insure that there would be no political interference and would legislate severe penalties if there was. I would make it self contained. Like any other pension fund.

Ok, but you aren't setting up the fund. You are supporting a government that absolutely will not do that and has told us they won't do that. So now you know they will meddle, do you still think it is a good idea?

[SebC]

Supposing that Alberta does successfully make itself richer and rest of Canada poorer by pulling out of CPP, do we think that nothing else will happen to counteract that (say, equalization adjustments)?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Goriders

I don’t think the demographics in this province are going to change. It’s the one province in canada that younger doers move to and it has the highest paid workers. That has been the case since the start of the cpp. It’s estimated that our province over contributes upwards of $3 billion a year due to number of contributers compared to number of consumers. Even if it’s less than that number the lost capital over 60 years would probably be more than the current value of the CPP pot.

Are you in favour of a Calgary Pension Plan? Let’s tell rural Alberta with all their old people to #### off and look after themselves. The demographics of Calgary are even better. We could substantially reduce premiums if we get the rural demographics out of the system. And since immigration tends to go to cities this low age growth will continue far into the future.

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

Alberta is not not losing capital, you have to get rid of this baffling notion. To think so would mean that if we were to "keep it" you'd have to put that money into an APP and give the Alberta gov access to it, or have them direct it into heavier local investments. Then we wouldn't be "losing it" but that would not be beneficial to you or I.

What I mean is because we have a younger population we have a higher percentage of the population than average contributing and a lower percentage of the population than average receiving benefits so we subsidize provinces with older populations. That has been going on since the cpp inception and probably isn’t going to change.

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by GGG

Are you in favour of a Calgary Pension Plan? Let’s tell rural Alberta with all their old people to #### off and look after themselves. The demographics of Calgary are even better. We could substantially reduce premiums if we get the rural demographics out of the system. And since immigration tends to go to cities this low age growth will continue far into the future.

No. But if possible I would be in favour of opting out completely and directing the funds the way you wanted. Or having more options available.

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by SebC

Supposing that Alberta does successfully make itself richer and rest of Canada poorer by pulling out of CPP, do we think that nothing else will happen to counteract that (say, equalization adjustments)?

Does that impact quebec at all with thier pension? I’m not sure how you would tie them together. I don’t think pension monies are accounted for in the equalization formulas.

So I guess I doubt it?

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Goriders

No

You're missing the point. Why not?

[KelVarnsen]

Multi quote exists

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Goriders

Does that impact quebec at all with thier pension? I’m not sure how you would tie them together. I don’t think pension monies are accounted for in the equalization formulas.

So I guess I doubt it?

What I'm suggesting is that if the other provinces (as in their citizens, not just governments) see Alberta pulling further ahead of them at their expense they will come up with something to redistribute that increased Albertan wealth (such as asking the federal government to change to equalization formula, not an effect under the current one). Alberta is unlikely to be able to enrich itself at the expense of the rest of a federation that is designed to redistribute wealth, and invites a reaction by trying.

Nobody is going after Quebec's wealth because they have the political clout and they're also a have-not province, so no it does not apply to Quebec.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Goriders

No

Why not? It will increase our return on investment?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by KelVarnsen

Multi quote exists

Multi quote sucks. It’s much more difficult for the multi quoted person to reply to just that part of the conversation

Triple posts are way better

[SebC]

Originally Posted by KelVarnsen

Multi quote exists

Originally Posted by GGG

Multi quote sucks. It’s much more difficult for the multi quoted person to reply to just that part of the conversation.

Multi-quote is good for when your reply pertains to more that one post.

[Geraldsh]

You guys with your embedded alternate conversations are messing with my one-track mind; how are we going to persuade Goriders and his compatriots they are on the wrong track?