Alberta Election Thread - Election Day April 16 2019

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

I think that's the most sane and realistic solution. They seem the least crazy on all fronts.

I'm just so turned off by the constant negative campaigning.

[robbie111]

Originally Posted by Slava

I think that I'm going to vote first thing on April 9 so that I can try to ignore all the campaigning after that. It's a few days in and I've had enough of the mudslinging already.

At this point I think that I will just vote for the Alberta Party because they're not the other two. I don't know.

Unless Kenney is forced out at the last minute by the RCMP (which will then allow me to vote UCP) then I am also going to vote Alberta Party.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Slava

I'm just so turned off by the constant negative campaigning.

Unfortunately fear mongering is a powerful tool for influencing voters. It has become common practice in political discourse from a grassroots level to a media level and beyond

I am a firm believer that Alberta politics are so moderate that the outcome will not have a great effect on la Longue durée. Not that the outcome will be inconsequential, but it won't dramatically transform the day to day lives of every day Albertans as much as each political party and media member would like you to believe. Likewise, the greater trajectory of Alberta wont be radically shifted either.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Zarley

- As a province, we are in the bottom half of OECD jurisdictions in terms of overall life expectancy at birth.

Would you mind linking your source? All the data I’ve been able to find has Alberta ranked 4th highest amongst provinces. We are below the national average but that is because the three provinces ahead of us(Ontario, BC and Quebec) make up such a large portion of the population.

- We have the 7th worst infant mortality rate among 34 jurisdictions.

According to this link you provided? https://public.tableau.com/profile/a...nalComparisons
We are ranked 7th after 6th placed Canada, so that means there are at least 6 other jurisdictions within Canada with worse outcomes. This might be one of the worst examples of cherry picking data I’ve ever read on this forum, where are the fear mongering police when you need them?

- This poor performance comes despite the 6th highest per capita total health spending (public and private) adjusted for purchasing power parity.

Do you mean amongst the provinces or amongst the 34 jurisdictions?

- Thanks to increases in operational spending by the current government, we now have the highest per capita healthcare spending of any province in the country.

There are a number of factors to consider when looking at why we have higher per capita costs. Our cost of living and competition with non-health care related jobs plays a role. As does the fact that AHS does things like subsidize private sector assisted living facilities.

The point is that we can build as many cancer centres as we want and hire more and more nurses, but we are not going to solve the structural issues with the public health bureaucracy. We need to be studying the approaches to public health used in places like Japan, France, NZ, and Australia which all have lower expenditures and better outcomes. I don't know what the answer is but it's certainly not carrying on with the status quo.

Not to nitpick but according to the data you provided NZ has higher rates of infant deaths.

What is your solution? If your solution is simply to add more private care options, that doesn’t address our cost issues. Most people(not saying you) seem to believe that reducing AHS wages is the go to option, but that doesn’t guarantee better health outcomes at all. If privatization is as efficient of a model as some claim it is then proponents of it should explain why privatized industries(like private education) that also have a public option still need public funding to operate.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Here's another oddball story:

https://twitter.com/user/status/1109138198775500800

So for those who want to attack press progress here’s a good article to attack. His comment about Aryan stock is him acknowledging that him saying that people from Cardston are from superior stock could be construed as racist but instead is because they are a God fearing people.

The tweet implies that he has Aryan undertones in his message. If you want to attack here it should be for his assertion that without God and Family society would collapse.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by GGG

So for those who want to attack press progress here’s a good article to attack. His comment about Aryan stock is him acknowledging that him saying that people from Cardston are from superior stock could be construed as racist but instead is because they are a God fearing people.

The tweet implies that he has Aryan undertones in his message. If you want to attack here it should be for his assertion that without God and Family society would collapse.

Yeah whoever wrote the headline is a dick. The actual article, however, makes no such implication:

And it might just be that they’re “reared” from “superior stock,” albeit he admits that thought “reeks of ‘Aryan’ undertones.”

Good lesson to go past the headline. Pretty click-baity.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Would you mind linking your source? All the data I’ve been able to find has Alberta ranked 4th highest amongst provinces. We are below the national average but that is because the three provinces ahead of us(Ontario, BC and Quebec) make up such a large portion of the population.

According to this link you provided? https://public.tableau.com/profile/a...nalComparisons
We are ranked 7th after 6th placed Canada, so that means there are at least 6 other jurisdictions within Canada with worse outcomes. This might be one of the worst examples of cherry picking data I’ve ever read on this forum, where are the fear mongering police when you need them?

Do you mean amongst the provinces or amongst the 34 jurisdictions?

There are a number of factors to consider when looking at why we have higher per capita costs. Our cost of living and competition with non-health care related jobs plays a role. As does the fact that AHS does things like subsidize private sector assisted living facilities.


Not to nitpick but according to the data you provided NZ has higher rates of infant deaths.

What is your solution? If your solution is simply to add more private care options, that doesn’t address our cost issues. Most people(not saying you) seem to believe that reducing AHS wages is the go to option, but that doesn’t guarantee better health outcomes at all. If privatization is as efficient of a model as some claim it is then proponents of it should explain why privatized industries(like private education) that also have a public option still need public funding to operate.

Private education gets private funding to operate, it doesn’t need private funding to operate. I think most people would be opposed to that model for health care.

The better private school comparison is the charter schools which deliver private education services at no additional cost using public dollars. You can question if they are better performing at education or just better at selecting students

For Private Health Care options I see two avenues.

Allow for completely private hospitals and insurance in a completely parallel system which receives no public money. Currently this exists it just requires travel to the US to participate.

Allow more services to be performed by a privately delivered publicly funded model in a similar model to how your family doctor works.

The first option removes people from the public system the second allows for the competition and profit motive to drive out waste from the system.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Yeah whoever wrote the headline is a dick. The actual article, however, makes no such implication:



Good lesson to go past the headline. Pretty click-baity.

Yeah that was my point.

Though press progress use of partial quotes is terrible throughout that article. They parse out all of the context and just put quotes around the inflammatory words while surrounding it with narrative. At least they included the whole article this time.

[Ozy_Flame]

Yeah I agree. This is a bit of a stretch. However, this is still the same guy who called minimum wage a "communist" idea, mocks climate change, and Bible thumps his politics (just read the Press Progress article to get a taste of that).

[Travis Munroe]

Does the press face punishment? Is there a organization who monitors the press or would that be considered taking a bite out of freedom of speech?

A headline like that, and for that matter, a large portion of headlines should result in direct fines IMO. I also don't believe that a headline should be allowed to speak as an opinion. I force myself to read an article from complete opposite ends of the spectrum to find some middle ground and avoid getting caught up in the bait.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by GGG

Private education gets private funding to operate, it doesn’t need private funding to operate. I think most people would be opposed to that model for health care.

I’m not so sure most people would be opposed, it’s not as if we hear much opposition to the subsidizing of private assisted living facilities or the subsidizing of private education in comparison to how often we hear people complaining that public system teachers and AHS employees are overpaid.

The better private school comparison is the charter schools which deliver private education services at no additional cost using public dollars. You can question if they are better performing at education or just better at selecting students

Is there any data available to show the costs per student and outcomes in charter schools compared to the public system?

[Dion]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1108892178330193920

https://twitter.com/user/status/1109200610283253761

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Dion

https://twitter.com/user/status/1108892178330193920

Dion, do you know what could have legally been done? Does Vivian Krause have a copy of the letter or insight as to what was in the letter to share?

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

https://twitter.com/user/status/1108500914061479936

Originally Posted by Dion

https://twitter.com/user/status/1109200610283253761

Two days ago Vivian Krause stated Notley wouldn’t even answer her calls, now she’s stating she had many calls and met with her caucus and staff. Where do these tweets land on your fear mongering and smear meter Dion?

[PaperBagger'14]

Not trying to crap on the UCP party, but I found online a small blurb which says (about Eva Kiryakos UCP Calgary SE):

"Kiryakos has practiced law for 11 years and one of her main campaign promises is to modify or repeal the Protecting Choice for Women Accessing Healthcare Act".

What that act did was set up boundaries to protect women and health workers from harassment. I was rather confused as to why anyone would be against that, and that an issue like that is one I would move my vote to the AP incumbent for.

I've since asked her about it and I'm awaiting a reply. If anyone is interested I can share what her reasoning is once she gets back to me.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14

I've since asked her about it and I'm awaiting a reply. If anyone is interested I can share what her reasoning is once she gets back to me.

If she did in fact say that I think everyone would be interested to hear her response.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Dion, do you know what could have legally been done? Does Vivian Krause have a copy of the letter or insight as to what was in the letter to share?

This is all I can find so far.

Krause, an independent investigator who has averaged $40,000 a year for the last four years on speaking fees, raised $50,000 in individual donations this year to hire a Calgary law firm to look into the legality of the Tar Sands Campaign, and whether it was indeed charitable activity. She has since shared the law firm’s findings with Rachel Notley’s office.

When I ask the NDP if the government is considering Krause’s push for legal action against these U.S. foundations, cabinet spokesperson Mike McKinnon of the Ministry of Energy says: “Ms. Krause has been a tireless champion of our energy industry and we appreciate her thorough investigative work. We will continue to consider all options going forward, legal and otherwise, in our fight for market access and top dollar for our oil.”

Krause says Notley has the credibility to lead this effort. “I appreciate her approach. She’s measured. She’s firm. She’s not going to over-reach. I want a measured piece of litigation, a nice Canadian, ‘Please stop land-locking our crude.’ ”

Sounds like a plan. About 10 years too late. But still a plan.

https://edmontonjournal.com/business...-the-oil-sands

[Dion]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Two days ago Vivian Krause stated Notley wouldn’t even answer her calls, now she’s stating she had many calls and met with her caucus and staff. Where do these tweets land on your fear mongering and smear meter Dion?

Were does it land?

Just stop!

You're better than that!

[PaperBagger'14]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

If she did in fact say that I think everyone would be interested to hear her response.

I had read a few places make the same claim when researching her and other nominees, so I do believe there is truth.

It seemed weird to be an immigrant whos family came to Canada fleeing persecution (bio description) would take a stance like that, despite her Christian faith.

[Dion]

Some more for you iggy-oi

Vivian Krause, who has done extensive research into U.S.-backed environmental groups operating in Canada, has found through U.S. tax returns that 350.org has received millions in donations from an array of rich American backers, including the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.

Mr. McKibben is also buddies with billionaire Tom Steyer, who pledged US$100-million to Democratic candidates in the 2014 mid-term elections in the hopes of getting the Keystone XL pipeline killed and giving climate change a greater profile. (Mr. Steyer is also a major contributor to Tides U.S.A., which, Ms. Krause has revealed, funds several environmental organizations in Canada).

In other words, money, foreign or otherwise, is not going to be a problem for 350.org and those vowing to stop the Trans Mountain expansion from being built.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opin...worried-about/

“Follow the money,” as researcher Vivian Krauss did, and you’ll find out.

In 2008, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, the William & Flora Hewlett Foundation, and the Tides Foundation sponsored the Tar Sands Campaign to curtail Alberta oil. The 17-page strategy paper by Corporate Ethics International is still available. A decade later, its success is undeniable. Its agenda was to “Stop or limit the expansion of pipelines, up-graders and refineries,” cap oil sands development, and isolate Albertan crude to Alberta has largely succeeded.

“From the very beginning,” the Tar Sands Campaign website tells us, “the campaign strategy was to land-lock the tar sands so the crude could not reach the international market where it could fetch a high price per barrel. This meant national and grassroots organizing [need] to block all proposed pipelines.”

What else did oil sands opponents do?

Krauss tells us: “Among the strategies employed by The Tar Sands Campaign are legal action, putting land and marine access off-limits in the name of protecting wildlife habitat, fomenting First Nations opposition and leveraging their constitutional rights, lobbying and celebrity endorsement.” If you ever wondered why Jane Fonda flew a fuel-powered helicopter over the oil sands or 150 First Nations allied to oppose them—wonder no more.

Strange thing, though, every First Nation whose reserve the pipeline passes through has agreed to its passage. So have 80 per cent of such communities even close to the route. Could the $400 million in agreements Kinder Morgan made with those 51 communities have had something to do with it?

Probably, and that’s a good thing. Canadians should decide what is best for Canada. The economic potential of pipeline construction and oil exports is a substantial benefit for everyone who lives here. Now that we know about the Americans forking out millions of dollars to hold us back, we should stop listening to the politicians and protesters they hire.

https://fcpp.org/2018/04/16/usa-kill...ian-pipelines/