Alberta Politics Thread

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by nik-

Are you new to the Westminster system?

No, he's simply a troll who's one and only purpose on Calgarypuck has always been to disrupt and derail threads.

Anyway, Notley talked a few decent things. We'll see if she matches actions to words.

[GP_Matt]

Originally Posted by Slava

I'll give her a solid 'C' for the infomercial. I don't buy that the NDP has been reducing spending, but the graph she showed says they are. I would love to see the numbers. I hate the justification of not reducing public servants being some propaganda line about laying off thousands of teachers and nurses...because there couldn't possibly be another way. That said, I'm quite interested to see what programs they've cooked up for job creation and economic diversification.

She said that she was reducing spending but what the graph showed was that she was reducing spending growth.

Under the PCs spending growth was 3-6% per year. Under her budget and going forward it will be closer to 2.5%.

A good step, but hardly a reduction in spending.

[Fuzz]

2.5% is basically inflation, so on a per capita basis spending will decrease given population growth.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

2.5% is basically inflation, so on a per capita basis spending will decrease given population growth.

Well people can always find a way to spin these things, but in the meantime 2.5% growth in the revenue of the provincial budget would be amazing compared to what we have here. So while overall inflation might be 2.5%, its a moot point really.

[transplant99]

My favorite was when she started talking about job creation and immediately launched into poor children who don't get enough to eat. It was just weird.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

She said that she was reducing spending but what the graph showed was that she was reducing spending growth.

Under the PCs spending growth was 3-6% per year. Under her budget and going forward it will be closer to 2.5%.

A good step, but hardly a reduction in spending.

Its going to see what the actual tax revenue figures are going to be this year compared to what they budget as tax revenue.

Last years budget was widely optimistic in terms of the expected price of Oil that they budgeted everything on.

Stating that you're slowing down spending is great, It will be irrelevant based on things like public sector contracts and how they're negotiated.

I would have preferred an honest to goodness complete spending level freeze for this year.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by transplant99

My favorite was when she started talking about job creation and immediately launched into poor children who don't get enough to eat. It was just weird.

My favorite was that people who "could afford to pay more" will. That reasoning just sounds so good because it always sounds like its someone else.

[IliketoPuck]

Posted this in the oil thread as well, but it is relevant for discussion in this thread too.

http://energynow.ca/murray-edwards-t...yager-mnp-llp/

[GGG]

They really should be forced to use the forward strip price for oil as an upper bound. It's not always right but it does provide an unbiased source of data.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Slava

My favorite was that people who "could afford to pay more" will. That reasoning just sounds so good because it always sounds like its someone else.

Its a line popularized by the stupidity of the Occupy movement.

At the end of the day, the new generation of politics has decided to run on speaking points based around class warfare.

Its the upper earners against the mid and lower class, and me as candidate XYZ and firmly occupying your camp and if we go to war, we'll make the #######s pay. Rah Rah Occupy Occupy rabble rabble.

So of course, those upper earners that have options, and mobility who are also frankly people with all of their flaws and other things, look at this and say, "we'll their policies are pretty hostile to me, and they've labeled me as a class enemy".

So yeah, Trudeau saying we'll make the rich pay more, and Notley saying the rich are obligated to pay more isn't a hey we're all in this together, lets work together, its a shot across the bow that's also designed to give the not rich a target of anger.

So what do these guys do, do they simply sit back and take it, or do they simply state, this place doesn't like us, they've poisoned the investment pool (see the article I posted earlier about the crash of capital investment money in this province) and they look for the places that are friendlier to them.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Slava

I'll give her a solid 'C' for the infomercial. I don't buy that the NDP has been reducing spending, but the graph she showed says they are. I would love to see the numbers. I hate the justification of not reducing public servants being some propaganda line about laying off thousands of teachers and nurses...because there couldn't possibly be another way. That said, I'm quite interested to see what programs they've cooked up for job creation and economic diversification.

Honestly, straight 'F' from me just for these words.

I hate the fear-mongering associated with any cuts to Government spending.

"If we spend even a dollar less in Health Care and Education our children will be educated by chimps before they die alone in an alley! Wont someone PLEASE think about the CHILDREN!?!?!?!?!"

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Its a line popularized by the stupidity of the Occupy movement.

At the end of the day, the new generation of politics has decided to run on speaking points based around class warfare.

The very rich pay lower taxes than at any time since the 1920s. If they can't hack the tax environment today, they just have to suck it up the way the rich in the 1930s to 1990s sucked it up. Somehow, those people managed.

And if they think the populist approach of politicians today is bad, they'll be in for a shock if the trends in wealth concentration continue for another 20 years. They'll need to live like the rich in developing countries do, behind walled compounds and with bodyguards for their kids. When wealth disparity gets extreme, the poor find far less civil ways of taking it out on the rich than incremental tax increases.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The very rich pay lower taxes than at any time since the 1920s. If they can't hack the tax environment today, they just have to suck it up the way the rich in the 1930s to 1990s sucked it up. Somehow, those people managed.

And if they think the populist approach of politicians today is bad, they'll be in for a shock if the trends in wealth concentration continue for another 20 years. They'll need to live like the rich in developing countries do, behind walled compounds and with bodyguards for their kids. When wealth disparity gets extreme, the poor find far less civil ways of taking it out on the rich than incremental tax increases.

Especially true if the trend towards automation continues and a living wage can't be established. A lot of the fear that prevents the lower class from going after the wealthy has to do with the fact that they still enjoy a relatively comfortable lifestyle that they don't want to lose. If that starts to deteriorate, at a certain point there's going to be backlash that's a lot less peaceful than what we saw during #occupy.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Especially true if the trend towards automation continues and a living wage can't be established. A lot of the fear that prevents the lower class from going after the wealthy has to do with the fact that they still enjoy a relatively comfortable lifestyle that they don't want to lose. If that starts to deteriorate, at a certain point there's going to be backlash that's a lot less peaceful than what we saw during #occupy.

I pray we have space travel figured out by that point, so that we can ship the poor and unskilled to Alpha Centauri.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

I pray we have space travel figured out by that point, so that we can ship the poor and unskilled to Alpha Centauri.

Well the problem we'll be facing is that it won't just be the unskilled who are poor.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The very rich pay lower taxes than at any time since the 1920s. If they can't hack the tax environment today, they just have to suck it up the way the rich in the 1930s to 1990s sucked it up. Somehow, those people managed.

And if they think the populist approach of politicians today is bad, they'll be in for a shock if the trends in wealth concentration continue for another 20 years. They'll need to live like the rich in developing countries do, behind walled compounds and with bodyguards for their kids. When wealth disparity gets extreme, the poor find far less civil ways of taking it out on the rich than incremental tax increases.

Couldnt agree more. Unfortunately we live in a truly global society now and the super wealthy have more options than ever.

In the meantime us plebeians have to play the cards we're dealt or start talking about Revolution.

I'll start sharpening the pitchforks if you start dousing the rags in oil for the torches.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

I pray we have space travel figured out by that point, so that we can ship the poor and unskilled to Alpha Centauri.

In the meantime we'll have to settle for this:

[LanceUppercut]

It's not just the super rich who can reduce their tax burden. This is a hypothetical example the Financial Post put out today, even going so far as to get government benefits for the low income.

http://business.financialpost.com/pe...on-their-taxes

[Duruss]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

I pray we have space travel figured out by that point, so that we can ship the poor and unskilled to Alpha Centauri.

But has not science fiction just taught us that they will one day return and enslave those that stayed on earth? Possibly with giant robots?

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Duruss

But has not science fiction just taught us that they will one day return and enslave those that stayed on earth? Possibly with giant robots?

But we are prepared for that now.