Prentice Blames Albertans

[Harry Lime]

Originally Posted by Slava

The thing is Norway is a sovereign nation and can have a sovereign fund. I think that Alberta is in a completely different scenario because if we had a fund that was say $150B other provinces would definitely want a piece, as well as the federal government. There is no guarantee that were we to build such a fund that it would just sit there untouched by these outside forces. I don't think that we should spend every last dime, but the comparison of a province to an independent country is just not applicable IMO.

Having too much money is a very good problem to have. There are quite a few avenues to take concerning disparity between the income of one province over another, and lines of communication and negotiation between provinces are much better than they were during the NEP.

An example that I would put forward (and this is just a thought of mine, with no references or research from the University of Awesominton), would be that the money that would be built in the Heritage fund could be used to buy debt incurred by other jurisdictions. The interest rate can be lowered to a better than current number, and the income would be taxable back to the federal government. Put a stipulation that the provinces receiving this new rate would have to bring their deficit under control. This would delay the 'grabbing hands' issue for a couple of decades at least, until Canada's debt is eliminated. That way the more money Alberta makes, the better off all provinces are, but we are still in control of the fund itself.

I'm sure a think tank with 50 mensa members could come up with something better, given a year, and a drunken tavern something better than the think tank, given a weekend.

Why don't we start with being filthy rich and work backwards.

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

Put a stipulation that the provinces receiving this new rate would have to bring their deficit under control. This would delay the 'grabbing hands' issue for a couple of decades at least, until Canada's debt is eliminated. That way the more money Alberta makes, the better off all provinces are, but we are still in control of the fund itself.

How do you enforce a stipulation on a province already running a deficit? There's no mechanism to punish them.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

Why don't we start with being filthy rich and work backwards.

Because trips to Mexico, dinner at Earls once a week, and a new SUV in every driveway. Who cares about schools and roads and hospitals in the future? Live for today!

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Because trips to Mexico, dinner at Earls once a week, and a new SUV in every driveway. Who cares about schools and roads and hospitals in the future? Live for today!

But seriously though, putting the royalty revenue in the heritage trust fund would be a good start, and spending the income from it would balance the needs of today with the needs of the future.

[Frequitude]

I give Prentice a C+ for that.

The Good - He did a good job of setting up the problem at the start and preparing the viewers for difficult near term decisions that I assumed he would announce next. He also hit the mark with his staged proposal to eventually direct 50% of resource revenues to the Heritage Trust Fund.

The Bad - He completely fell flat on specific actionable near-term proposals. It was mostly political-speak statements like "contribute directly to health care", "hold the line on expenses, and "every Albertan will be contributing". I guess I'll give him the benefit of the doubt when he said he didn't want to preempt the budget, but it just gave the whole thing the feel of exactly what the Wild Rose is accusing him of...a government sponsored campaign speech on TV.


Swann gets a D. Not because I disagree with his ideas (I do), but because it just sounded like pipe dream left wing ideals (e.g. "eliminate child poverty") with zero recognition of the current economic environment and nearly zero on how he'd actually balance that kind of budget ("raise corporate taxes"). It was so empty and I can't see how it could get anyone on board with that plan. You want my attention, then give me a plan with what you want to do, how you're going to do it, how you're going to fund it, and what the economic ramafications of it are. I'll probably disagree with it due to my political leanings, but at least you'll have my attention and I'll take you seriously as an alternative.