Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

And I guess that's the worst part about how all this is going down...we're now in a 6 month election campaign. Ugh!

That is if she actually calls an election.

If she chooses to delay it though, couldn't that backfire and make the votes she's trying to gain even more upset with her? If she's a loss cause (crossing fingers), it could add even more heat to the UCP, and lose even more seats possibly?

If that's the case, her own party may put pressure on her to stick with the scheduled date so they can salvage as many seats as possible.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

Why does she do that to her cheeks you have to zoom in really good to see if she even has eyes.

There's something about her face and facial expressions that makes her look like a swollen pomegranate.

[Northendzone]

While I don’t mind the government returning some of my money tome, I wish that they would have given more to those in lower incomes and disabled.

The next election is going to be interesting

[GGG]

In a world of high inflation providing a tax rebate to families with incomes of 180k seems like foolish use of dollars. Using a lower cut off of say the median family income woyld have been more reasonable.

I don’t mind targeted energy bill rebates as they go after one of the main inflationary items. I’m not a big fan of the gas tax cut as it encourages consumption

But really rather than drop billions on direct cash put it into program spending on health care or affordable housing or just keep it for the heritage fund.

Direct cash is about the worst option for inflation.

[Flames0910]

Been thinking about who gets left out in Danielle's soccer-mom payout and who would most benefit from a few extra dollars in my life.

My sister: A young lawyer who has been struggling for the last couple of years to get a foothold in her career and was let go the other week after finally finding a company willing to take a chance on her. Nope, not a penny.

My cousin: A single, self-employed jazz musician who has to be incredibly thrifty with every dollar he spends. Nope. Couple of bucks off his electricity bill maybe but that won't make a dent for him.

Yet an established professional couple where one person makes $120k/year and the other makes $50k/year gets $600 per kid.

I'm sorry but two of those people are legitimately struggling with affordability and the other two are simply inconvenienced by inflation. So stupid how this benefit was handled.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Flames0910

Been thinking about who gets left in Danielle's soccer-mom payout and who would most benefit from a few extra dollars in my life.

My sister, a young lawyer who has been struggling for the last couple of years to get a foothold in her career and was let go the other week after finally finding a company willing to take a chance on her? Nope, not a penny.

My cousin, a single, self-employed jazz musician who has to be incredibly thrifty with every dollar? Nope. Couple dollars off his electricity bill maybe but that won't make a dent for him.

Yet an established professional couple where one person makes $120k/year and the other makes $50k/year gets $600 per kid.

I'm sorry but two of those people are legitimately struggling with affordability and the other two are simply inconvenienced by inflation. So stupid how this benefit was handled.

And yet so 'On Brand' for Smith.

[Fuzz]

Alberta Sovereignty within a United Canada Act

ASWUCA...could have done better!

Like, I dunno, Alberta Sovereignty Smackdown of Canada for Rural And Conspiracy Kooks would work.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

While I don’t mind the government returning some of my money tome, I wish that they would have given more to those in lower incomes and disabled.

The next election is going to be interesting

It's going to be nasty and ugly with a lot of attack ads coming from both sides. I do wonder if Smith has the stomach for what is going to come in the spring.

[calgarygeologist]

I didn't watch the press conference but does anyone know if the monthly payments for seniors are for people who have reached a minimum age or is it for anyone who is receiving CPP payments (ie. early CPP)?

[Dion]

not worth it

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

No it wouldn’t imply that at all.

Oh good. Then it seems we’re closer in positions than it would appear. Neither of us wants Albertans to bear 100% of reclamation costs.

Perhaps we could pivot to the remainder of that post which outlines how our royalty framework recognizes reclamation costs as deductible under it’s “revenue minus cost” approach. This effectively means it’s a cost partially born by Albertans. Which is exactly the spirit my position that started this discussion.

I get that deducting reclamation costs from orphan well X against revenues from new well Y isn’t part of the current framework. But in keeping with the spirit of the current framework as I linked, it would suggest that Albertans overcollected royalties on orphan well X (because reclamation activities never occurred and therefore their costs were never deducted).

Does the heart of your issue with this one lie then in wanting the “revenue minus cost” approach of the framework rewritten?

Look, I can’t stand Danielle Smith and her policies. I think we need an election immediately and my vote currently goes to the NDP over this version of the UCP. But this one hunts for me. A fundamental principal of making sure reclamation occurs is either ensuring it’s activities are completed while the company is still earning revenue, or by forcing money to be set aside while it is (like MFSP for the tailings ponds). This program feels in line the the first of those two…getting people actually out there reclaiming the damn things while revenues are being generated. It would need to be written properly, but the concept rings well with me on first blush.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

I didn't watch the press conference but does anyone know if the monthly payments for seniors are for people who have reached a minimum age or is it for anyone who is receiving CPP payments (ie. early CPP)?

I'd expect it to follow the same age requirements as the Alberta Seniors Benefit, at least 65.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Dion

It's going to be nasty and ugly with a lot of attack ads coming from both sides. I do wonder if Smith has the stomach for what is going to come in the spring.

She is a fighter. She is part Cherokee on one side of her family when she needs to be to combat allegations she is a racist and on the other side her grandfather was clairvoyant and left Russia half a decade before he foresaw the Bolshevik revolution when she needs to show that she is not a Putin supporter. She will be fine.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Dion

It's going to be nasty and ugly with a lot of attack ads coming from both sides. I do wonder if Smith has the stomach for what is going to come in the spring.

What's that? People asking her to explain her own words? I haven't seen anyone attacking her on anything she hasn't advocated for herself.

"These are my ideas"

"Those are awful for these reasons"

"Stop attacking me!"

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Flames0910

Been thinking about who gets left out in Danielle's soccer-mom payout and who would most benefit from a few extra dollars in my life.

My sister: A young lawyer who has been struggling for the last couple of years to get a foothold in her career and was let go the other week after finally finding a company willing to take a chance on her. Nope, not a penny.

My cousin: A single, self-employed jazz musician who has to be incredibly thrifty with every dollar he spends. Nope. Couple of bucks off his electricity bill maybe but that won't make a dent for him.

Yet an established professional couple where one person makes $120k/year and the other makes $50k/year gets $600 per kid.

I'm sorry but two of those people are legitimately struggling with affordability and the other two are simply inconvenienced by inflation. So stupid how this benefit was handled.

No offence, but isn’t this always going to be the way? If they gave the money to everyone, you know people will say “they gave that guy the money and he makes too much, what a waste!” So, they set limits and try to do the right thing. Inevitably, there are people not getting it now, who likely need it.

And lest anyone thinks I’m defending the UCP, I’m against this entire policy and think it’s a bad way to address inflation. I also think the NDP would do the exact same thing. It’s good politics to hand out cash to people and inflation gives them an easy reason why they can do that.

[Jason14h]

They give out cash to the demographics most likely to vote in the next election and that are in the swing categories

Seniors and middle class professionals

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by Slava

No offence, but isn’t this always going to be the way? If they gave the money to everyone, you know people will say “they gave that guy the money and he makes too much, what a waste!” So, they set limits and try to do the right thing. Inevitably, there are people not getting it now, who likely need it.

And lest anyone thinks I’m defending the UCP, I’m against this entire policy and think it’s a bad way to address inflation. I also think the NDP would do the exact same thing. It’s good politics to hand out cash to people and inflation gives them an easy reason why they can do that.

I don't think the NDP would have been so obvious with the bribes for votes. $180,000 family income is the threshold? that's way too much.

Where I sit, if your household is making that much, you're doing very well for yourself, and likely don't need the extra money. I don't think the NDP would sink so low to buy votes.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Slava

No offence, but isn’t this always going to be the way? If they gave the money to everyone, you know people will say “they gave that guy the money and he makes too much, what a waste!” So, they set limits and try to do the right thing. Inevitably, there are people not getting it now, who likely need it.

And lest anyone thinks I’m defending the UCP, I’m against this entire policy and think it’s a bad way to address inflation. I also think the NDP would do the exact same thing. It’s good politics to hand out cash to people and inflation gives them an easy reason why they can do that.

I think the complaint is the underlying concept of people with kids needing it more is false. Therefore the distribution basis is significantly flawed.

They also announced the largest subsidy for the least impoverished age group - seniors with what appears to be no income cap.

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

I don't think the NDP would have been so obvious with the bribes for votes. $180,000 family income is the threshold? that's way too much.

Where I sit, if your household is making that much, you're doing very well for yourself, and likely don't need the extra money. I don't think the NDP would sink so low to buy votes.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/cana...nflation-plan/

Rachel Notley, the leader of the New Democratic Party in Alberta, focused her response to the Premier’s announcement on the coming election. Ms. Notley noted Ms. Smith’s measures involve reversing a number of policies that were implemented by the UCP.

The NDP, like Ms. Smith, wo uld reverse the UCP’s earlier cuts to AISH and other support programs, Ms. Notley said.

“And we’ll go further,” she said. “We’ll take action on the things you don’t have a choice about paying for, like groceries, utilities, insurance, gasoline, tuition and housing.”

She also pledged to “restart the largest affordable housing build this province has ever seen,” but did not provide further detail.”

The NDP would have literally tried to buy every voter, in their own words this morning

[Northendzone]

Originally Posted by Dion

It's going to be nasty and ugly with a lot of attack ads coming from both sides. I do wonder if Smith has the stomach for what is going to come in the spring.

it seems to me that over the last little while the tweets by politicians have now got very direct and personal. for example many on Notley's tweets seem to directly mention or tag smith. I feel in the past the tweets used to just mention the opposing party.

Same with the Federal politics.

I really dislike how political battles now really get into the dirt