Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Faust

He announced he would destroy unions.

Oh no what are we gonna do?

[Whynotnow]

Originally Posted by Geraldsh

Just finished the survey. It is predicated on the assumption that we are in favour of the plan until the last comment section, where I was able to tell them what I really thought of this government.

It’s an absolute farce of a survey with an obvious goal in mind. Every comment field I got where it said other, I said don’t do this, you aren’t asking the right question. I realize it will mean nothing but gotta do it.

The fact that they are even implying that our pension funds could be used but the government to spur on economic development should be the hard no right there. The Alberta government has only proven itself to be a disaster at ecnonomic development at best and at worst they have used it to line the pockets of sycophantic supporters. I’m close enough to retirement they probably can’t sink me but man my kids could suffer big time from this.

[redforever]

Originally Posted by Whynotnow

It’s an absolute farce of a survey with an obvious goal in mind. Every comment field I got where it said other, I said don’t do this, you aren’t asking the right question. I realize it will mean nothing but gotta do it.

The fact that they are even implying that our pension funds could be used but the government to spur on economic development should be the hard no right there. The Alberta government has only proven itself to be a disaster at ecnonomic development at best and at worst they have used it to line the pockets of sycophantic supporters. I’m close enough to retirement they probably can’t sink me but man my kids could suffer big time from this.

Not only that, but comments were limited in length as to what you could say.

[puffnstuff]

Would 'dont do this you ignorant *****' fit?

Saw someone had run the identical Alberta formula for Ontario, if they wanted to leave CPP. Between Ab and Ont it would be 114% of the current value with the remaining provinces 74 billion in the hole.
That will totally work, right?

[Whynotnow]

Originally Posted by puffnstuff

Would 'dont do this you ignorant *****' fit?

Saw someone had run the identical Alberta formula for Ontario, if they wanted to leave CPP. Between Ab and Ont it would be 114% of the current value with the remaining provinces 74 billion in the hole.
That will totally work, right?

That’s the point that needs to be hammered home. If all the provinces submitted their notice on the same day and used the formula that the Alberta government used there would not be near enough money to go around. So the only conclusion to reach is the number they are using to base the entire decision making on is not the right number, thus the analysis is flawed from the very beginning. It also relies in the demographics of Alberta being a younger population with high incomes remaining true forever, which of course is a risk proposition.

[Torture]

Lol, someone went back to the fair deal panel in 2020 (remember that?) And they said it would be 40-70B for Alberta getting out of CPP. Now we're at 300B only 3 years later lolololol

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Oh no what are we gonna do?

Yoho, did you realize when you thanked this post that I was mocking the wannabe fascists?

[Wormius]

I said the survey was manipulative and shouldn’t be used for any decision making.

[Bill Bumface]

I work for an Ontario company. I'm one of a handful of people in AB, vs. several hundred elsewhere across the country.

My company will not employ people from Quebec, because it's a complete hassle to do so.

I seriously worry about what this could mean for people in my situation.

[Mr.Coffee]

Albertans need to not be so stupid about all of this.

Life doesn’t improve by going to a landlocked roller-coaster commodity economy with 4 million people. It gets significantly worse. By a very wide margin.

[Whynotnow]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Albertans need to not be so stupid about all of this.

Life doesn’t improve by going to a landlocked roller-coaster commodity economy with 4 million people. It gets significantly worse. By a very wide margin.

Exactly, we’ve only been a have province due to the luck of geology and world oil demand. For most of our history we were not an economic powerhouse. This could all happen again to us, and sooner than we’d like.

[GGG]

I honk the Toombes numbers are fairly credible and appear to be in line with all the other work done on the issue in the 2000s

It amounts to a 14% reduction in premiums or on $7500 in contributions or $1050 per year per max CPP payer. That’s a meaningful amount of money but I think it Carries a significant amount of risk. One of the assumptions is that Alberta keeps growing the way it does and maintains that young in migration from the rest of Canada. Should that change the benefit disappears.

And when you think of things that could stop that the likely one is the collapse of oil due to technological change. If that happens it hurts tax base, real estate, jobs and if we have an APP, pensions. Enough of my life is tied into the price of oil. Having a defined benefit CPP backed by more than just Alberta at a higher cost seems like prudent risk management.

This Gambit currently costs Quebec more than the rest of Canada.

The other problem is that Albertans have shown an utter failure at planning and saving. In the choice between a PST and just living off of oil revenues we choose oil revenues every time and fail to save. Given the choice between benefit decreases versus increased “taxation” we will choose cuts. If given the choice I would pay the 14% premium to stay with the CPP

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by GGG

I honk the Toombes numbers are fairly credible and appear to be in line with all the other work done on the issue in the 2000s

It amounts to a 14% reduction in premiums or on $7500 in contributions or $1050 per year per max CPP payer. That’s a meaningful amount of money but I think it Carries a significant amount of risk. One of the assumptions is that Alberta keeps growing the way it does and maintains that young in migration from the rest of Canada. Should that change the benefit disappears.

And when you think of things that could stop that the likely one is the collapse of oil due to technological change. If that happens it hurts tax base, real estate, jobs and if we have an APP, pensions. Enough of my life is tied into the price of oil. Having a defined benefit CPP backed by more than just Alberta at a higher cost seems like prudent risk management.

This Gambit currently costs Quebec more than the rest of Canada.

The other problem is that Albertans have shown an utter failure at planning and saving. In the choice between a PST and just living off of oil revenues we choose oil revenues every time and fail to save. Given the choice between benefit decreases versus increased “taxation” we will choose cuts. If given the choice I would pay the 14% premium to stay with the CPP

I think this is a very reasonable way of looking at it. CPP really has been costing us more, but I think it's worth it. I'd call it the "adults in charge" premium.

[Whynotnow]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

I think this is a very reasonable way of looking at it. CPP really has been costing us more, but I think it's worth it. I'd call it the "adults in charge" premium.

Agree with both of these takes but also concerned with how the no side is going to have to win with this message. Yes it’s likely costing more and could be a bit cheaper, but it only stays cheaper if the economic and employment conditions stay the same. This is a forever decision so you need to look 2-3 generations out on that question. People aren’t good at doing that, many will be fooled into the take the money now.

This is risky, risky business - there is the potential for minor upside and risk of massive downside if our economic fortunes change. Add in that the UCP likely also see this as a political tool(see Desantis on this issue on state investments) and we are playing with fire here, and weakening the nation.

[Ozy_Flame]

UCP wont divulge what they would invest APP money in, so if you think the CPP is risky (which it's not), the APP is like standing on the roof of an airplane at 30000 feet and using vague platitudes to strap yourself in.

[Yoho]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

UCP wont divulge what they would invest APP money in, so if you think the CPP is risky (which it's not), the APP is like standing on the roof of an airplane at 30000 feet and using vague platitudes to strap yourself in.

That’s ok just knowing you Ontarian’s would be footing the whole bill for CPP after would make it worth it.

[Red Slinger]

^There it is. Yoho and his ilk don't actually care about making the lives of Canadians better. Their whole schtick is predicated on sticking it to people who disagree with them. They should start their own political party called the "Cut Off Your Nose to Spite Your Face" Party, or COYNTSYF, or COYNTs for short.

[Ozy_Flame]

Classic example of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by GGG

I honk the Toombes numbers are fairly credible and appear to be in line with all the other work done on the issue in the 2000s

It amounts to a 14% reduction in premiums or on $7500 in contributions or $1050 per year per max CPP payer. That’s a meaningful amount of money but I think it Carries a significant amount of risk. One of the assumptions is that Alberta keeps growing the way it does and maintains that young in migration from the rest of Canada. Should that change the benefit disappears.

And when you think of things that could stop that the likely one is the collapse of oil due to technological change. If that happens it hurts tax base, real estate, jobs and if we have an APP, pensions. Enough of my life is tied into the price of oil. Having a defined benefit CPP backed by more than just Alberta at a higher cost seems like prudent risk management.

This Gambit currently costs Quebec more than the rest of Canada.

The other problem is that Albertans have shown an utter failure at planning and saving. In the choice between a PST and just living off of oil revenues we choose oil revenues every time and fail to save. Given the choice between benefit decreases versus increased “taxation” we will choose cuts. If given the choice I would pay the 14% premium to stay with the CPP

But the threat of removing these funds from the CPP and forcing the rest of Canada to require a larger investment from the rest of the provinces MAY be enough to earn political 'favor/exchange'

Sure we can argue if Quebec having their own pension plan outright was a net benefit, but Quebec can continually hold this country hostage because they have shown they will implement policies in their own self interest.

This is why Alberta and Sask are looking towards using Quebec political tactics.

Playing nice with Ontario and Quebec has not worked.

Now its a risky game to play if the bluff is called and/or it goes to a plebiscite and fails because then it is an idle threat, or worse you may have to live with the consequence.

I like the strategy. However, I do not have a lot of faith in the leaders ability to execute.

But sometimes having a crazy leader making these threats actually is a good thing for getting what you are after.

Donald Trump was able to execute a lot of good deals for the US because people were afraid of what a crazy person would do.

[Fuzz]

"Look at how well it worked for Donald Trump" was not on my bingo card of apologists for this strategy, so I guess I'll take a miss on that one.