Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Slava

It's like talking to people who hate their jobs. After a while, it just falls on deaf ears for me. I get it, you hate it, so why are torture yourself when the solution is so obvious?

I’m just gonna assume that you’ve finally come around and that we’re both in agreement on what the solution to a bad job is.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

Well they did spend a few years in the 19th century killing each other by the hundreds of thousands.

Despite that, the structure under which the United States was setup was much more robust with significantly more foresight than whatever cobbled together nonsense has created perpetual squabbling in this country.

I'm of the mind that Canada was originally populated by people who were by definition okay with colonialism. So when they constructed Canada they did it with a colonialist mindset. This is why central Canada's population base dominates the rest of the country's policies. This was a feature not a bug.

The relationship between Central Canada's and Alberta is basically colonial.

If Canada had Electoral College instead of FPTP it would be worse for smaller provinces since each province becomes a block for electing the leader. Ontario and Quebec's blocks are always going to dominate.

Having an equal and empowered senate would mitigate this, but each province still only has 1/13 of the vote.

In a multi-party system both EC and equal senate get diluted, but if we change to a two-party system more often than not Alberta will still be on the wrong side of the federal government.

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by GGG

It isn’t an either or scenario. The best outcome for all Party’s including the US is No Tarrifs. Taking nuclear options off the board and not negotiating as a united front undermines this task.

If the end result is Tarrifs on everything but Oil and Gas Alberta loses. Alberta also doesn’t have authority to concede or do anything. Alberta can’t trade Dairy for Oil. So by undermining the Canadian negotiating you increase the likelihood of negative outcomes and increase the likelihood of the feds trading something in Alberta’s interest for something in RoCs interest.

Given the nature of confederation accepting everything you say is true Smith is undermining the interest of Alberta because we are tied to Canada. Smith is increasing the likelihood of Ottawa screwing over Alberta and increasing the likelihood of a negative Canadian outcome bs the US while doing absolutely nothing in improving Alberta’s situation.

Like saying Hey Trump don’t Tarrif O+G because I will sue if they try to shut off o+g doesn’t help Alberta. It gives away leverage on our ability to fight back.

Even on the goal of negotiating an energy carve out She has undermined her negotiating position by not presenting a united front.

Of course the best case scenario is no tariffs. However, it's unwise as a negotiating tactic to threaten something that will never happen. Smith sees no reason to spend the political capital to make the threat credible. She probably perceives, and correctly, that using Alberta's oil as bargaining chip would be deeply unpopular, and fit good reason.

It's not Alberta's fault that Ontario has limited leverage. Indeed it's Ontario's fault that Alberta has been restricted to one customer. Ontario and Quebec behaved stupidly by painting their "unity partner" into a corner without contemplating the consequences.

Alberta can hand Trump a better negotiating position by ensuring Trump's supply of cheap oil and restricting his traden battle to less impactful Ontario exports. In the meantime Alberta can be an significantly insulated from the more dramatic consequences of the tariffs to the east. In the long term I assume I don't even need to say the obvious: Trump has endlessn domestic policy levers he can use to compensate Alberta.

This is shaping up to be a fascinating case study in forcing your erstwhile friends into the hands of your rival. If central Canada wants to behave like Alberta's enemy, they should probably contemplate that Trump can be a very powerful friend.

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

When did it break?

Supposedly, confederation was broken already way back in 1885. Or was it 1980? Or wait, did I mean 1995? Sorry, forgot about 2022. I'm losing track of all the times it was broken.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

I’m just gonna assume that you’ve finally come around and that we’re both in agreement on what the solution to a bad job is.

Obviously its to unionize and make the employers life miserable at the same time?

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Slava

Obviously its to unionize and make the employers life miserable at the same time?

Generally the goal is to try and improve the relationship with the employer, but I don’t mind where your head is at on this one.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

Of course the best case scenario is no tariffs. However, it's unwise as a negotiating tactic to threaten something that will never happen. Smith sees no reason to spend the political capital to make the threat credible. She probably perceives, and correctly, that using Alberta's oil as bargaining chip would be deeply unpopular, and fit good reason.

It's not Alberta's fault that Ontario has limited leverage. Indeed it's Ontario's fault that Alberta has been restricted to one customer. Ontario and Quebec behaved stupidly by painting their "unity partner" into a corner without contemplating the consequences.

Alberta can hand Trump a better negotiating position by ensuring Trump's supply of cheap oil and restricting his traden battle to less impactful Ontario exports. In the meantime Alberta can be an significantly insulated from the more dramatic consequences of the tariffs to the east. In the long term I assume I don't even need to say the obvious: Trump has endlessn domestic policy levers he can use to compensate Alberta.

This is shaping up to be a fascinating case study in forcing your erstwhile friends into the hands of your rival. If central Canada wants to behave like Alberta's enemy, they should probably contemplate that Trump can be a very powerful friend.

I'm so confused. Why is it Ontario's fault that Alberta only has one customer? And how can Danielle Smith ensure Trump's supply of cheap oil? And why would Trump use his endless domestic policy levers to compensate Alberta (especially when the United States is Alberta's only available customer for oil)? Why does Trump want to be a powerful friend to Alberta?

There must be some 4d chess being played here that I just don't understand.

[Torture]

Originally Posted by Makarov

I'm so confused. Why is it Ontario's fault that Alberta only has one customer? And how can Danielle Smith ensure Trump's supply of cheap oil? And why would Trump use his endless domestic policy levers to compensate Alberta (especially when the United States is Alberta's only available customer for oil)? Why does Trump want to be a powerful friend to Alberta?

There must be some 4d chess being played here that I just don't understand.

Ontario and Quebec control the Federal Government and they won't let Alberta build pipelines, keep up! I can't answer your other questions, just the first one.

[Torture]

First I am forced to agree with Jason Kenney, now Doug Ford?

Spoiler!

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by Torture

Ontario and Quebec control the Federal Government and they won't let Alberta build pipelines, keep up! I can't answer your other questions, just the first one.

This.

(The other questions were literally answered in my post.)

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Torture

First I am forced to agree with Jason Kenney, now Doug Ford?

Spoiler!

That hat slogan is an awesome troll job. #### you, fat Donny. I don't have much good to say about Doug, but he does get people.

[Torture]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

That hat slogan is an awesome troll job. #### you, fat Donny. I don't have much good to say about Doug, but he does get people.

He's like a modern day Ralph Klein. Don't agree with many of his policies but damn he knows how to jump in front of a parade or wrap himself in the flag.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

In all seriousness, I’m not sure why these people don’t just pursue this. For someone like myself, I like Canada because of all the great things that make it Canada instead of the US. If people hate all those things and love everything about the US… it’s a few hours’ drive away. Go get a job and fill your boots.

The majority of people i know that spout this stuff arent qualified to actually emigrate or get a work visa.

Oh, you want to go be a labourer or a barman in Miami? good luck

I do know many people that live in the USA and generally enjoy it. They have good jobs in Houston, Denver etc. But the kick is that none of these people actually expressed disdain for living in Canada. They worked at some company here, and got offered a promotion in the US company.

[Cappy]

Doug Ford is a proto-typical populist leader.

He's corrupt, has his cronies, sells out every now and then, but still offers populist policies to the people, and does consider the general pop in many cases - like this one.

Not my cup of tea, but he isnt some oil shill trying to come off as an every(wo)man

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

The degree to which those interests are aligned is dependent on the details of the tariffs. But it should be apparent to everyone that Alberta's exports are more coveted by the US than other exports.

That results in reduced alignment of interests with the rest of Canada. What is better for Alberta? The certainty of a recession caused by export taxes on oil? Or an energy carve out and the secondary consequences of a ROC recession?

The ROC has been consistently antagonistic towards Alberta's energy industry. Alberta owes no one any favors.

Really?

Softwood lumber? Potash? Car parts? Electricity? Dairy?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Torture

Ontario and Quebec control the Federal Government and they won't let Alberta build pipelines, keep up! I can't answer your other questions, just the first one.

Disproven over and over.

[Torture]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Disproven over and over.

What are you talking about, everyone knows that Ontario, Quebec, and the lizard people have secretly collaborated to run the country to extract the maximum value from Alberta as colonists - this is why they don't want us to build pipelines or to be in the business of the holy Oil and Gas.

.....Wait a second, if Eastern Canada was colonizing Alberta, wouldn't they want Alberta to extract as much oil and gas as possible so that they could get the maximum value? BoLevi, please help me explain this!

(Do I really need green text?)

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Torture

What are you talking about, everyone knows that Ontario, Quebec, and the lizard people have secretly collaborated to run the country to extract the maximum value from Alberta as colonists - this is why they don't want us to build pipelines or to be in the business of the holy Oil and Gas.

.....Wait a second, if Eastern Canada was colonizing Alberta, wouldn't they want Alberta to extract as much oil and gas as possible so that they could get the maximum value? BoLevi, please help me explain this!

(Do I really need green text?)

Sir...you could the Lizard People and their plans that may or may not constitute Global Domination....out of your mouth. We clear?

Final warning.

[Torture]

Originally Posted by Locke

Sir...you could the Lizard People and their plans that may or may not constitute Global Domination....out of your mouth. We clear?

Final warning.

Sorry, forgot that we're supposed to pretend it's George Soros and Mark Carney pulling Trudeau's strings, the lizard bros don't exist.

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Disproven over and over.

https://globalnews.ca/news/9665917/p...s-slow-report/