So, holly ####. In the province of freedom these mother####ers are neutering MAID, taking away things like advanced directives for ADULTS. You know, personal choice and responsibility? I guess it's OK to #### all over that if you do it for the Lord. ####s.
Dogs have better end of life care than humans, and the UCP wants to ensure it stays that way.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
What do you not think I understand? I understand that the feds control the majority of tax revenue. No one is arguing otherwise. The 1000s and 1000s of tax returns I've done make that very clear. You guys keep saying this or how you'll blow my mind but then never actually make a point. It's just you're greedy for not wanting to give so much money and power to Ottawa but then at the same time saying Alberta doesn't over contribute. So in that case it wouldn't be greedy I guess since we actually owe so much to the feds. They should thank us for taking over their spending.
I am saying I would flip the system and would remove them from the majority of non-federal concerns.
I'm not looking to blow your mind. Others have explained how it works, but you keep insisting you know better. Higher tax revenue comes from high income earners contributing more, skewing per capita numbers. It's those earner's who's dollars go. Not Alberta. Not you, or me(unless, as I said, you are fortunate). Individual CANADIANS paying CANADIAN taxes. And they are only able to earn more hear because the magical luck of resource deposition. Not from working harder, or being better, or deserving it more.
You feel these extra dollars should come back, despite you never earning them. You haven't justified why it is a just and right reason, you just claim it is yours. It's not, it's Canadian who paid it, as per their responsibility as a citizen. It's no more your money than it is Alberta's.
Now, in the wacko world you imagine, their income will drop, for all the reasons everyone with a brain understands and has explained over and over(please don't make me do this again). So they'll be making less, meaning less tax income, but also because based on stated philosophies, Alberta will have an entirely flat tax, at a lower rate than federal. Good for those already well off, I guess. And why should it even go to you if it is made in Calgary and Ft McMurray? Isn't it more their money than yours? Why should Carstairs get an even cut? And why can't you see how stupid this all is? #### me.
Also, my previous post aobut MAID is EXACTLY why I want experts deciding #### in Ottawa, because this province is run by a bunch of feckless ####s who can't imagine the life situation of someone who isn't born on third base who has been gifted their positions in government, and make decisions based on thr stupid loudest voices in the province, who are also completly unqualified to draw conclusions about anything more complicated than an hour glass.
The Following User Says Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
Minimum wage worker and a Doctor. Both pay taxes based on the same rules. Apparently that means they both contribute equally haha
Huh? Obviously a doctor contributes more taxes.
Min wage is funny though...a min wage worker in any other province contributes more federal tax...
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJones
What do you not think I understand? I understand that the feds control the majority of tax revenue. No one is arguing otherwise. The 1000s and 1000s of tax returns I've done make that very clear. You guys keep saying this or how you'll blow my mind but then never actually make a point. It's just you're greedy for not wanting to give so much money and power to Ottawa but then at the same time saying Alberta doesn't over contribute. So in that case it wouldn't be greedy I guess since we actually owe so much to the feds. They should thank us for taking over their spending.
I am saying I would flip the system and would remove them from the majority of non-federal concerns.
The bolded is actually not true. Canada wide, the Feds raise 37.1% of total revenue and the provinces 52.6%. Alberta is the closest at 41/47.6%, with BC/ON within a % or two each way.
If we look purely at household income taxes, then sure, it's a 60 fed vs 40 prov split Canada wide. Of course this is before we account for federal transfers. Now it's kind of dumb to apply that directly against household income taxes, but since that's the way 'you people' get to your grievance argument let's do it.
Canada wide Household Income Taxes = Federal 26.8% vs Prov 73.2%
BC has the biggest grievance here with 41.6% F vs 58.4% P
Alberta = 41% F vs 59% P. ON 39.5/60.5
But that's all the revenue side. Maybe by 'control' you mean spending?
Canada wide = 41.4% Fed vs 53% Prov.
There is a reasonable argument to be made that Alberta over contributes (but also a lot of holes to poke in it). It's just not nearly as significantly as people want to believe. BC actually has much stronger case to feel aggrieved, and probably Ontario, too.
__________________
The UCP are trampling on our rights and freedoms. Donate $200 to Alberta NDP and get $150 back on your taxes
The Following User Says Thank You to powderjunkie For This Useful Post:
What do you not think I understand? I understand that the feds control the majority of tax revenue. No one is arguing otherwise. The 1000s and 1000s of tax returns I've done make that very clear. You guys keep saying this or how you'll blow my mind but then never actually make a point. It's just you're greedy for not wanting to give so much money and power to Ottawa but then at the same time saying Alberta doesn't over contribute. So in that case it wouldn't be greedy I guess since we actually owe so much to the feds. They should thank us for taking over their spending.
I am saying I would flip the system and would remove them from the majority of non-federal concerns.
The issue is you're not looking at the bigger picture. Let's use the Health Canada example.
Each province then needs their own agency. So instead of having one large agency in Ottawa, you have multiple agencies, probably not much smaller, in each province and all the capital and administration that brings. Maybe you regionalize, but that's even more complicated and costly.
And then, when there is something of national interest (let's say a miracle drug developed in France), you have 10 agencies trying to negotiate deals instead of one. You lose economies of scale and buying power, and frankly, any priority status. And Ontario, Quebec and BC will get all the good stuff before we do.
So, no, having localized decisions isn't always the best plan, especially when looking at the issues from a blanket, generalized perspective.
I'm also a CPA
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to calf For This Useful Post:
So, holly ####. In the province of freedom these mother####ers are neutering MAID, taking away things like advanced directives for ADULTS. You know, personal choice and responsibility? I guess it's OK to #### all over that if you do it for the Lord. ####s.
Dogs have better end of life care than humans, and the UCP wants to ensure it stays that way.
The hospital is operated by Covenant Health — a publicly funded, Catholic health-care provider in Alberta — which does not allow MAID to be administered at any of its sites. William would have to be transferred to another facility.#
So again, we give money to the feds because other provinces can't support themselves but to get our share of that money we need to listen to what the feds say.
They are a completely unnecessary middle man. There is no benefit to them being in the equation. The entire argument for them appears to be that you guys do not want Alberta or your municipalities to be in charge of what are provincial/municipal jurisdiction. You would rather Ottawa make decisions for you.
You do you I guess. Will never make sense to me why people want to give away decision making
So again, you are looking at the situation backward.
First issue you are backward on: The middle man is the province. The Federal Government of Canada is the primary organization and it created the province of Alberta to handle a subset region of the country in a more focused way. If we wanted to abolish an unnecessary middle man then we should abolish the Alberta government.
Aside from being "closer to the issues", the Alberta government adds very little value to the equation. The Federal Government has the currency, has the trade relationships, has the military, has the larger population to bring together to deal with big issues or to pool our resources to get advantages in procurement. In every regard, the Federal Government of Canada brings more value to Albertans than the Government of Alberta.
The job of the Government of Alberta is to handle regional issues of the province with more focus on behalf of the Federal Government and the Citizens of the region. Just like how the Municipal government handles the regional issues of the cities with more focus on behalf of the Provincial Government and the Citizens of the region. The one constant element in all three levels of government is that we are given the ability to elect a representative in each level of government (in the City you get to vote for both a councilor and a Mayor whereas in the Province and Country you only vote for your local representative).
Having said all that, if you want to get down to eliminating unnecessary governments then we could probably just roll BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba into a single Canada-west province that is geographically too big but at least then would have a population more on par with Ontario and Quebec.
Second issue you are backward on: What "decision making" do you think you have? You have no more or less decision making power with the Federal Government in Ottawa than you have with the Provincial Government in Edmonton or the Municipal Government in City Hall. Aside from voting for a representative, none of them are wondering "What does DJones thinks about this issue?" and it doesn't matter how close to the building you get.
This fixation on proximity and distance is weird.
If you live beside City Hall, do you think the councilors will listen to you more than if you live in the outskirts of the city? They won't.
If you live beside the Alberta Legislature Building, do you think they will care what you think more than if you live 500km away? They don't. (In fact they don't care about you at all)
If you live in Ottawa, do you think you have more decision making power than if you live in Calgary? You don't.
We are all the same level of decision makers because none of us are working in the government. An unfortunate reality of our governments is that the only non-government people with more "decision making" influence over the governments are the rich people who can use their money to make things happen for themselves.
So, unless you run for office, you are not a decision maker in government at any level. You vote for a representative at each of those levels and that representative makes the decisions on your behalf. If you feel like you are not represented in the Federal Government, that is because you are either (1) a dimwit who doesn't vote but then expects to have a right to complain about things or (2) keeps voting for the Conservatives when they clearly do not give a crap about you and, even if they were in power, would do zero things you want them to do on your behalf. (If you really wanted to have a voice in this government, you would have voted Liberal so that the MP in your riding would be in the ruling party and thus that MP would have more influence in government to bring the issues of your riding forward.)
If at the core of this you feel that the issue is that the people are not being represented well, then I agree, and we should be electing a government that will implement electoral reform, specifically a MMPR system that still keeps regional representation but also empowers all voters to feel that their vote counts, since voting is the only decision you get to make.
Following that, I think using technology to enable more direct democracy is the real way to give power back to the people. Only one party would be willing to flirt with electoral reform or direct democracy and their colour certainly isn't Red or Blue.
__________________
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Wolven For This Useful Post:
Can someone help me out here, I can't handle all this freedom.
Libertarian my ass. Nothing but Trump style authoritarianism, where one misinformed #### is given a power she should never have been given, to wield it against all the things and people she doesn't like.
Can someone help me out here, I can't handle all this freedom.
Libertarian my ass. Nothing but Trump style authoritarianism, where one misinformed #### is given a power she should never have been given, to wield it against all the things and people she doesn't like.
Her fcuking base will eat it up.
__________________
Captain James P. DeCOSTE, CD, 18 Sep 1993
So again, we give money to the feds because other provinces can't support themselves but to get our share of that money we need to listen to what the feds say.
They are a completely unnecessary middle man. There is no benefit to them being in the equation. The entire argument for them appears to be that you guys do not want Alberta or your municipalities to be in charge of what are provincial/municipal jurisdiction. You would rather Ottawa make decisions for you.
You do you I guess. Will never make sense to me why people want to give away decision making
