Alberta Politics Thread

[VladtheImpaler]

[QUOTE/]
You haven't established that it won't work long term[/QUOTE]

Hahahaha. Well, let's do it 'cause... we have nothing to lose but our chains?

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

[QUOTE/]
You haven't established that it won't work long term

Hahahaha. Well, let's do it 'cause... we have nothing to lose but our chains?[/QUOTE]

You're right, we should just go with what wasn't working because at least we know it's not working

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

You haven't established that it won't work long term

The fact that you believe this is a justifiable argument in favour of risking the livelihoods of millions of people is just utterly insane, dude.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The fact that you believe this is a justifiable argument in favour of risking the livelihoods of millions of people is just utterly insane, dude.

Engels AND Lenin, man.

[OMG!WTF!]

This is an interesting recent article from cnbc...

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/20/why-w...ommentary.html

Some US data....each WalMart employee nets the Walton's $6400. That sounds like a big number but a $3.80 hourly increase to $15 takes care of that $6400 completely and then some.

I think social welfare should be paid by the government. If we want poor people to eat, then we all chip in. Consequently the people with more money need to pay more, not the businesses. Businesses should be as healthy and viable as possible. The Walton family on the other hand should contribute more.

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

This is an interesting recent article from cnbc...

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/20/why-w...ommentary.html

Some US data....each WalMart employee nets the Walton's $6400. That sounds like a big number but a $3.80 hourly increase to $15 takes care of that $6400 completely and then some.

I think social welfare should be paid by the government. If we want poor people to eat, then we all chip in. Consequently the people with more money need to pay more, not the businesses. Businesses should be as healthy and viable as possible. The Walton family on the other hand should contribute more.

This is why you don't tax food banks.

[GaiJin]

My neighbours 2 kids work at the same place, they were asking me if they should start working under the table. Probably a lot of people are going to go that route after the MW increase rather than get the axe or hour reductions.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The fact that you believe this is a justifiable argument in favour of risking the livelihoods of millions of people is just utterly insane, dude.

Are you not making the same argument for your position?

Here's how the debate has gone so far:

Me: this is my reason why I think this will work

You: no you're wrong for reason X, we should try plan y

Me: I disagree with your view and feel your plan y doesn't help for reason y

You: no you're just wrong for reason whatever reason.

And this goes back and fourth

The one difference that I've notice in my defence of the wage increase in contrast to most who oppose it is I acknowledge the fact that there will be problems with the raise in wage while in most people will just insists on their views being the only option. I don't think this plan is perfect or the only possible option, IMO I just haven't seen any better alternatives given

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

This is an interesting recent article from cnbc...

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/20/why-w...ommentary.html

Some US data....each WalMart employee nets the Walton's $6400. That sounds like a big number but a $3.80 hourly increase to $15 takes care of that $6400 completely and then some.

I think social welfare should be paid by the government. If we want poor people to eat, then we all chip in. Consequently the people with more money need to pay more, not the businesses. Businesses should be as healthy and viable as possible. The Walton family on the other hand should contribute more.

They had the total number of hours each of those workers worked? And my guess is they included the management in the total employee count as well, not every worker at Walmart makes under $15/hour nor do they all work in Alberta. So yeah it will cut into their profits, but arguing that it will cripple them is nonsense. Also the exchange rate is a significant factor.

[Corral]

Originally Posted by Handsome B. Wonderful

Consumer Price Index data is available on the Statistics Canada website.

August 1995
Partly skimmed milk, 1 litre

$1.29

Bread, 675 grams

$1.25

0.508 hours work at $5.00 per hour.

August 2016
Partly skimmed milk, 1 litre

$2.30

Bread, 675 grams

$2.99

0.472 hours work at $11.20 per hour (and if it matters 0.353 hours work at the hypothetical $15.00 per hour).

your numbers do suggest the current increase is needed - $15 is perhaps too high - but hey i'm all in favour of taking from the rich to give to the poor - and no I don't believe any of the jobs lost BS

[LanceUppercut]

Ok, here is my alternative plan. Cut the corporate tax rate to zero. Companies will invest more, hire more staff and drive wages up.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by LanceUppercut

Ok, here is my alternative plan. Cut the corporate tax rate to zero. Companies will invest more, hire more staff and drive wages up.

[LanceUppercut]

Hey, we're talking about radical untested ideas that might completely alter/destroy an economy here. Why not go the exact opposite direction?

Heck, we might even con some private enterprise to build some unneeded high speed trains too!

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

Why not lower tax rates? It's working for Ireland.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by GaiJin

My neighbours 2 kids work at the same place, they were asking me if they should start working under the table. Probably a lot of people are going to go that route after the MW increase rather than get the axe or hour reductions.

I'd say go for it! I just had a new garage door opener installed and I paid cash under the table.

[Kjesse]

Originally Posted by Dion

I'd say go for it! I just had a new garage door opener installed and I paid cash under the table.

How much does he charge each time he opens it?

[Coach]

Originally Posted by LanceUppercut

Hey, we're talking about radical untested ideas that might completely alter/destroy an economy here. Why not go the exact opposite direction?

Go for it.

If you put people making over 1m/year in a 70-90% personal tax bracket.

[jammies]

Originally Posted by Handsome B. Wonderful

Why not lower tax rates? It's working for Ireland.

No, it isn't.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by LanceUppercut

Ok, here is my alternative plan. Cut the corporate tax rate to zero. Companies will invest more, hire more staff and drive wages up.

You may actually be on to something here. What if we tried giving a lot of breaks to the rich? We could even send child tax cheques to millionaire parents. That could work couldn't it? What's that? Oh...the Harper government tried that? Did
work? Why not?...actually never mind I have an even bette idea, we could patent ketchup and mustard in the same bottle. Think about it, the overhead packaging and transport costs for fast food companies would be cut in half for those condiments, then they would have to give people a raise because of the savings, and if they don't, then we can in good conscience raise the minimum wage because we would have given them one last chance to do the right thing.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Go for it.

If you put people making over 1m/year in a 70-90% personal tax bracket.