Alberta PC's way out front

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by darklord700

But do we have problem with not enough employees?

Jan 6, 2012

The Alberta government predicts the province could face a cumulative labour shortage of up to 114,000 workers across all sectors by 2021, up from the previous shortage of 77,000 workers forecast two years ago.

Some of the occupations that anticipate shortages include a variety of trades, health-care workers, financial services, retail sectors, public service careers and restaurant and tourism related jobs

Full .pdf report

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

The PCs don't even have a candidate yet,

Meet Rasheed.

neither does the Alberta Party.

And they likely won't. They will be lucky to top 20 candidates this time round.

Grant Galpin is the WRA candidate, and I think he'd do a good job as MLA as well,

I'm bias, but yes he would be a solid MLA.

but again, I don't think I'm as right wing as the WRA,

I get a kick out of how this label is kicked about. Guess its the fiscal conservatism that brings it on.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by First Lady

Meet Rasheed.

Yeah, found that after I posted. But thanks. It didn't help that the PC parties website has the current MLAs and the coming candidates in separate listings.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by darklord700

Again, don't agree with this. I know the Maritime gives tax credits to retain their young people who are fleeing to Alberta. But do we have problem with not enough employees? I know a few IT guys with 20 years of experience that got layoff recently.

I suggest the government do less instead of more. Policies like this are just prone to abuse. Say I have no intention to leaving Alberta since my families and friends are all here. I will just rake up my student loans no matter what and in ten years the loans are gone. Very rarely do policies like this achieve their main objectives.

A labour crunch in a specific industry is good for people in that industry, but bad for everyone else. If there's a labour crunch in every industry, all those "bad for everyone else"s start adding up to the point that even if the labour crunch includes you, you're not really winning, anymore. And surely it is evident that spending money on people who leave the province is not beneficial to residents of Alberta. You get nothing, and you paid something.

Originally Posted by First Lady

I get a kick out of how this label is kicked about. Guess its the fiscal conservatism that brings it on.

No, it's the fact that you attract all the nutjobs. And stuff like your party leader supporting conscience rights.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by SebC

No, it's the fact that you attract all the nutjobs.

And the other parties don't? Some would say the same about the PC's (Benito) or the Libs (Sherman)

And stuff like your party leader supporting conscience rights.

Ahh giving people the freedom of choice. If that's the worst the Wildrose is doing, I'm not too worried.



And today's survey says.....

Alberta’s Wildrose gaining support while PCs flag, new survey suggests

The poll has the PCs sitting at 37%, down two percentage points from a month ago, with Wildrose solidly entrenched at 30%. The Liberals and NDP are battling for third spot, with 14% and 13% respectively.

<snip>

But the PCs still own northern Alberta, boasting a 39% power base in Edmonton, almost double the Wildrose Alliance, who have 20% support in the capital. Things get murkier in Calgary, where the parties are neck and neck with 36% voter support apiece.

[darklord700]

Wildrose says no tax hike for the next four years. They get my vote. For those who like paying more taxes can keep voting for PC.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2012/02/15...election-looms

[Slava]

Originally Posted by darklord700

Wildrose says no tax hike for the next four years. They get my vote. For those who like paying more taxes can keep voting for PC.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2012/02/15...election-looms

Brilliant. These kinds of promises are infantile. I could runa government and promise to eliminate taxes altogether. In exchange I would provide zero services. Interested?

[darklord700]

Originally Posted by Slava

Brilliant. These kinds of promises are infantile. I could runa government and promise to eliminate taxes altogether. In exchange I would provide zero services. Interested?

You'll get my vote for sure

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Slava

Brilliant. These kinds of promises are infantile. I could runa government and promise to eliminate taxes altogether. In exchange I would provide zero services. Interested?

Every election platform is a promise. Every budget is a promise.

It's just that some parties vary greatly from their promises. Repeatedly.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by First Lady

Every election platform is a promise. Every budget is a promise.

It's just that some parties vary greatly from their promises. Repeatedly.

True. So why would we now elect a group of people who have migrated from that same party?

[darklord700]

Originally Posted by Slava

True. So why would we now elect a group of people who have migrated from that same party?

Because that same party isn't that same party anymore. I have no problem Redford leading the Liberals or the NDP because that's who she is. She shouldn't be cheating Albertans with her conservative moniker when she isn't one.

A conservative don't go to bed with the unions.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Slava

True. So why would we now elect a group of people who have migrated from that same party?

That is only a certain percentage of our supporters/members/MLA's. For those that it applies to, it's more about what they migrated "to" than "from".
Moving to a Party that more accurately reflects their principles is exactly why people will vote for the Wildrose.

[GP_Matt]

Originally Posted by Slava

True. So why would we now elect a group of people who have migrated from that same party?

Are you suggesting that for a new party to be credible it needs to be made entirely by people who have never indicated past support for an existing party?

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by darklord700

You'll get my vote for sure

I am sure that he would, until you have to call the police, ambulance, firefighters, use the roads, pay your kids entire education bill, drink clean water, breath clean air... okay there are a million things that your government dollars go towards. Of course there will be some waste in the process, and I think governments should do their best to reduce such waste, however a lot of what the government does has long term benefits for the province as a whole.

You may despise social programs - I am 99% sure that you do. However supporting many of these programs in turn results in people being healthier, which results in them being more productive and putting more money back into the economy.

Alberta in the Klein years went way to far in terms of cost cutting... look at the Alberta Hospital Edmonton as a very localized example, as I am sure you know it is a psychiatric hospital located in North Edmonton, back in the early-mid 90s there was a recommendation to upgrade/renovate the site and looking at it, it is painfully evident that it is required. So now 20 years down the road, the same problems still exist, however as with any issue if you leave it to fester for 20 years it is going to worsen, the last estimate of cost of renovation was pegged at around 200 million dollars.

What do you think should be done? Should psychiatric patients have a hospital that is of bad quality? Should they have a hospital at all - after many of the people there aren't going to contribute anything to the tax base of the province over their entire life (through no fault of their own in 99% of the cases)

[Cowboy89]

Realistically what's needed is a voter conversation about what services and the quality of said services the public demands in exchange for their taxes and/or Oil and Gas Revenues. The PCs since Redford's nomination as PC party leader bring up a great point that we need to wein ourselves off of using Oil and Gas revenue in the budget and rather should be saving it, which would ultimately mean higher taxes in some form.

If the provincial treasury were a corporate treasury or a family budget I would believe this type of dicipline would be possible. That all said I just do not believe or trust the institution of government in this province to do this. Mark my words, if Redford goes down this road what will happen is simply your taxes will be higher (income, sin taxes, and maybe a sales tax), the civil service will be more bloated with spending and we still won't be saving much more in the Heritage fund from Oil and Gas revenues regardless of the best of intentions. Reason being is that the percieved needs are really bottomless, and when a center party tries to be all things to all people the Heritage fund will ultimately be the one sacrificed.

The only way to provide incentive for the government to more efficiently manage money is to give them less of it in the first place.

[darklord700]

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

You may despise social programs - I am 99% sure that you do. However supporting many of these programs in turn results in people being healthier, which results in them being more productive and putting more money back into the economy.

I don't mind the US model, pay toll for road use, for example. Yes, I despise most social programs, EI, CPP, OAS etc. I believe in you don't work, you don't get to live in a house or eat. I think this will give people more motivation to work and being more productive. Sometimes, a whip is better than a carrot if you want the society to progress.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by darklord700

I don't mind the US model, pay toll for road use, for example. Yes, I despise most social programs, EI, CPP, OAS etc. I believe in you don't work, you don't get to live in a house or eat. I think this will give people more motivation to work and being more productive. Sometimes, a whip is better than a carrot if you want the society to progress.

So what if someone isn't able to work? Let's say they were born with a disability preventing them from working in a consistent job, lets say FASD, autism, schizophrenia or there was something that happened in their life that was of no fault of their own, meningitis for instance resulting in a cognitive impairment. Okay now lets take it a bit further, let's say that a guy gets cancer, leads a healthy life, just luck of the draw... so he can't afford to pay his bills while he is in the hospital or getting treatment, and he sure can't work at his regular job while he is getting treatment... so your plan is to say sorry... that is just the lick of the whip... and sure hope that he is Buddhist so he can have better luck next time.

[darklord700]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

Mark my words, if Redford goes down this road what will happen is simply your taxes will be higher (income, sin taxes, and maybe a sales tax), the civil service will be more bloated with spending and we still won't be saving much more in the Heritage fund from Oil and Gas revenues regardless of the best of intentions. Reason being is that the percieved needs are really bottomless, and when a center party tries to be all things to all people the Heritage fund will ultimately be the one sacrificed.

The only way to provide incentive for the government to more efficiently manage money is to give them less of it in the first place.

My sentiment exactly. It was like when I was getting allowance from my folks, no matter how much they gave me, I managed to piss it away on frivolous things as a teenager.

You think higher taxes translates into better services, just look at the Maritime and see what sorry state they are in 15% HST and they are still piss poor. Their youth come to AB to look for work leaving them with even less tax revenues but more seniors to take care of.

The government has no incentive to do more with less.

[NuclearPizzaMan]

Can any group that makes Danielle Smith their leader truly be considered sane?

The answer of course, is no.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by darklord700

My sentiment exactly. It was like when I was getting allowance from my folks, no matter how much they gave me, I managed to piss it away on frivolous things as a teenager.

You think higher taxes translates into better services, just look at the Maritime and see what sorry state they are in 15% HST and they are still piss poor. Their youth come to AB to look for work leaving them with even less tax revenues but more seniors to take care of.

The government has no incentive to do more with less.

Look at the difference in industry though, people aren't leaving the Maritime provinces because of the tax rates, they are leaving because of the unemployment and lack of industry, which has more to do with a lack of natural resources now the the fisheries have bottomed out rather than anything to do with the tax rates.