Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by GGG

In a world where we trusted put politicians I think the premier being briefed would make sense. Simply because you are choosing not to hire a person and there will be political questions asked. Is the better answer I have no idea what you are taking about? I don’t know.

Do I think that is what happened here? No this appears to be politically motivated. There just an exists a reasonable set of circumstances that could explain why the premier was briefed. If anything it shows Smith has learned to lie better.

Of course it is! "I don't know why Dr Hinshaw was hired, she is a private citizen able to apply for any job she wishes. I presume it is because she is highly qualified and the health team made decisions that should be respected, unless there is reason not to, which I have not heard. Next question!"

But no, UCP voters elected a premier with an axe to grind and and army of grinding wheels to push her to do it. So this is what we get. Thanks again, UCP voters. Hope the inevitable lawsuit payout is worth the deduction on your taxes for winning so hard, you ####ing morons.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

But no, UCP voters elected a premier with an axe to grind and and army of grinding wheels to push her to do it. So this is what we get. Thanks again, UCP voters. Hope the inevitable lawsuit payout is worth the deduction on your taxes for winning so hard, you ####ing morons.

Taxes? We won’t be paying any taxes soon enough so it shouldn’t be an issue. That’s the Alberta Advantage

[GGG]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

The most recent data on global inflation and wage stagnation is unreliable and doesn’t count? You couldn’t even prove me wrong in this post using your own handpicked year.



What are you going on about now? Oh still only one half of the statement I said was debatable as if debunking that portion in isolation will somehow make me wrong for questioning the statement as a whole. Nice.



You keep trying to frame what I’m saying as life hasn’t gotten better at all for anyone and that simply isn’t what I’m saying. Again, the original comment that I referred to as highly debatable was “The world is the best it’s ever been and getting better for 95% of the population” and that statement as written is not proven by the limited data you’ve provided. You’re trying to argue that the average life for that group has gotten better, and that may be the case but stating that is a far cry from saying things have never been better and continue to get better for all of them because there is clearly a segment within that group who are either worse off than they were before or treading water. Neither of which qualifies as getting better.

I’m not sitting here saying it’s gotten worse for everyone or that it hasn’t improved for anyone, or even that it hasn’t gotten better on average for the majority of the population but the data you are using is too simplistic as things like poverty rates are based on fairly arbitrary metrics that once passed don’t measure improvements, just that they’ve remained above the arbitrary line. We don’t have data to demonstrate that someone who just barely got out of poverty 40 years ago isn’t still living just barely out of poverty. Yet you claim that each individual in that group’s life is without question “getting better” since then?

What’s their secret? There’s a lot of people living above the poverty line who can’t even manage continual growth like that who would probably like to know.



It wouldn’t matter which year I pick if you’re going to continue ignoring the getting better for 95% part. Even using your own handpicked year and misleading metrics you haven’t been able to prove that number yourself(you’ve “proven” 93/94% over a specific period) but I’m wrong here for saying that 95% is too high?

Let’s call the original statement what it was, a classic example of using a questionable argument based on misrepresented data to convince people who are struggling not to complain.



If you want to continue moving the goalposts I’m good with stopping here.

I made a comment on someone else’s statement that you’re clearly not interested in discussing and then you’ve tried to spin that into me disagreeing with you on your more vague statement(things are better for most people) when I’m not even saying your statement is wrong.

Read what Jason14h actually wrote and what I actually wrote in response instead reading both as what you wanted either of us to have written.

You claimed

Even without factoring in the number of people who have a worse standard of living today than they had before the pandemic it’s pretty obvious that regardless of the cause the standard of living is not the best it’s ever been and is actually in decline for much more than 5% of the global population(~400M)

So back it up with anything. This is the statement I specifically responded to. This is why I also used 2019 as the reference point because you told me to. So which year did you want me to compare it to? Do you have any evidence to back up your claim?

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by GGG

You claimed


So back it up with anything. This is the statement I specifically responded to. This is why I also used 2019 as the reference point because you told me to. So which year did you want me to compare it to? Do you have any evidence to back up your claim?

Because I told you to?

The message you quoted wasn’t even directed to you but regardless you already took it upon yourself to run some numbers and stated that your results proved the percentage of people whose lives had improved didn’t even hit the claimed post-pandemic number(95%) being debated before the pandemic between 1980 and 2019.

Even though I question the metrics you used to arrive at your conclusion I’m willing to agree with your assessment that I was right to question the 95% figure if that’s what you’re looking for here.

[Jason14h]

You keep trying to frame what I’m saying as life hasn’t gotten better at all for anyone and that simply isn’t what I’m saying. Again, the original comment that I referred to as highly debatable was “The world is the best it’s ever been and getting better for 95% of the population” and that statement as written is not proven by the limited data you’ve provided. You’re trying to argue that the average life for that group has gotten better, and that may be the case but stating that is a far cry from saying things have never been better and continue to get better for all of them because there is clearly a segment within that group who are either worse off than they were before or treading water. Neither of which qualifies as getting better.

I’m not sitting here saying it’s gotten worse for everyone or that it hasn’t improved for anyone, or even that it hasn’t gotten better on average for the majority of the population but the data you are using is too simplistic as things like poverty rates are based on fairly arbitrary metrics that once passed don’t measure improvements, just that they’ve remained above the arbitrary line. We don’t have data to demonstrate that someone who just barely got out of poverty 40 years ago isn’t still living just barely out of poverty. Yet you claim that each individual in that group’s life is without question “getting better” since then?


What’s their secret? There’s a lot of people living above the poverty line who can’t even manage continual growth like that who would probably like to know.

I think you're being slightly pedantic with your argument/dismissal of the original statement

Bringing up things like recent inflation and post covid issues is really ignoring the macro socio and economic factors.

Maybe my statement should have said "95% of this generation is better off then any other generation " to account for short term events.

You seem to get hung up on the developed worlds lower income earners vs humanity and a whole. 1.6 million Canadians are making minimum wage, and approx 20 million in the US. That is 0.28% of worldwide population. (and not all are worst off because a lot of immigrants and refuges making minimum wage are much better off then the alternative)

I can accept that lower middle class western developed world citizens are worst off/facing real struggles over the past 10-20 years. The reality is this is a very small portion of the world.

You can support the lower earners in the developed world, but still acknowledge that almost everyone on the planet is better off over the past 50 years.

Women, Minorities, and 3rd world/developing countries have made exponential gains. And these groups make up the majority of the world.

What % of people do you think are worse off ?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Because I told you to?

The message you quoted wasn’t even directed to you but regardless you already took it upon yourself to run some numbers and stated that your results proved the percentage of people whose lives had improved didn’t even hit the claimed post-pandemic number(95%) being debated before the pandemic between 1980 and 2019.

Even though I question the metrics you used to arrive at your conclusion I’m willing to agree with your assessment that I was right to question the 95% figure if that’s what you’re looking for here.

Those metrics showed at least 93-94%. They did not limit it to 93-94%. It was a check to see if the 95% claim could be true and if it was obvious it wasn’t true. The data certainly shows it not obvious that less than 95% of people are better off.

You made the claim that it’s pretty obvious more than 5% were worse off in 2019 than previously. So I would assume you based that on something

[Ozy_Flame]

Man, this has turned into a Do-Si-Do of bloviated, armchair pro-numbers but faux-scientist melancholia.

[Yoho]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1674508010142720001

Receipts don’t lie

[Fuzz]

Huge resource revenues don't lie?

[PsYcNeT]

Paying down fiscal debt by gaining more infrastructure debt.

[Yoho]

When is this mass exodus I keep hearing about. Wasn’t that the biggest threat to our existence in Alberta…lol

https://twitter.com/user/status/1674762119785648129

[Ozy_Flame]

Alberta called,
people came,
Now house prices are getting insane.

Not for the politics,
Or the Ottawa hate,
Enjoy Toronto real estate.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Yoho

When is this mass exodus I keep hearing about. Wasn’t that the biggest threat to our existence in Alberta…lol

https://twitter.com/user/status/1674762119785648129

What mass exodus? I've never heard that is supposed to be happening?

And it's not a shock what's going on here. Energy is doing well, and people will go where there are jobs.

[The Yen Man]

Wait, so do we like people moving to Alberta or not?

When people were threatening to leave the province, it was doom and gloom.

Now we have people moving into the province, and it's still doom and gloom?

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Slava

And it's not a shock what's going on here. Energy is doing well, and people will go where there are homes

Fyp

[Yoho]

Originally Posted by Slava

What mass exodus? I've never heard that is supposed to be happening?

And it's not a shock what's going on here. Energy is doing well, and people will go where there are jobs.

A lot of talk on here post election that we would lose our best and brightest.
Turns out they are still here.

[BlackArcher101]

Originally Posted by Slava

What mass exodus? I've never heard that is supposed to be happening?

And it's not a shock what's going on here. Energy is doing well, and people will go where there are jobs.

This is also only focusing on the net migration, which should be expected if the overall population of Canada is increasing and Alberta is currently some of the cheaper places to live that have a decent chance of a job. There will still be people leaving, it just doesn't show how many. Seems Yoho thinks this graphic implies no one is leaving.

What types of people are coming in and what types of people are leaving?

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Yoho

A lot of talk on here post election that we would lose our best and brightest.
Turns out they are still here.

Oh, I see. Well I pretty much discount people saying that kind of thing. It happens every election and about every party, and frankly a move to another country or another part of a massive country because you don't like the current politics is questionable. I still think that Smith doesn't survive another 18 months, so to uproot everything for that seems rather short-sighted.

[looooob]

Originally Posted by Yoho

A lot of talk on here post election that we would lose our best and brightest.
Turns out they are still here.

while your observation (same held in the US elections- either side-with false bluster about leaving after results) holds some merit- if people (such as doctors, or other professionals) were going to leave after the election- that may not manifest in the first few weeks after an election- these are complicated people to move in some cases

[Yoho]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Alberta called,
people came,
Now house prices are getting insane.

Not for the politics,
Or the Ottawa hate,
Enjoy Toronto real estate.

I wish I could have moved out East and bought at the peak of a housing bubble.