April 23 2012: Alberta Provincial Election

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

It's probably been posted already but where can I watch the debate online?

http://watch.ctv.ca/news/#clip657448

[burn_this_city]

I'm pretty impressed with Mason and to an extent Sherman. Redford is running on her party's record, which is nothing to hang your hat on. I like Smith, but I'm not sold on her party's handle on health and education.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

I'm pretty impressed with Mason and to an extent Sherman.

Mason's previous experience in the debates showed. Raj had some good moments but he also missed with some of his attempted zingers, his pauses were a little off putting too. Overall he did better than I expected though.

[yads]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

But doing that through personal taxes is a bad strategy imho.

Possibly, I presume talking about a consumption tax in Alberta is political suicide

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by yads

Possibly, I presume talking about a consumption tax in Alberta is political suicide

I've said it before and I'll say it again, you have to admire Raj for at least being honest. You could probably simplify the party positions down to:

Liberals: Raise Spending, Raise Taxes.
PC: Hugely Raise Spending, Lower Taxes.
Wildrose: Cut Spending, Maintain Taxes.
NDP: Raise Spending, Hugely Raise Taxes.

The PC's position is totally irresponsible.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

I've said it before and I'll say it again, you have to admire Raj for at least being honest. You could probably simplify the party positions down to:

Liberals: Raise Spending, Raise Taxes.
PC: Hugely Raise Spending, Lower Taxes.
Wildrose: Cut Spending, Maintain Taxes.
NDP: Raise Spending, Hugely Raise Taxes.

The PC's position is totally irresponsible.

I would call it more underhanded, because we all know full well that if the electorate rubber stamped another PC majortiy they would just raise taxes anyway. It's really the 'progressive way' to promise so much advancement in services during the election, and then after getting elected threaten to make cuts to services if they don't get their tax hike. That's how the City of Calgary's been run for the past 10 years.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by Rathji

They might be facts, but that still doesn't say why spending above the average is a bad thing. By definition, half the provinces in the country spend more than the average.

If a province is richer, which Alberta certainly is, on what grounds could you possibly justify being below average? I get the idea that we are spending too much, I don't deny that and fully support measures to cut the budget to bring spending more in line with our provincial means. I just don't understand why you have drawn this line that spending more than average is bad.

Would you say your car/home/computer/porn collection is above average in terms of quality? Would you suddenly think you were a fool for spending that money to obtain those things, even if you could afford it? Of course not. I fail to see why anyone would place such unrealistic demands on our government then.

Spending alone doesn't mean anything, but analyzing return on your investment is huge. If you spend double what I do on your car because of your salary, but we both drive a honda civic, are you proud of your spending more? It's nonsense.

So we know it is a fact we spend several times for than other provinces. There is just no denying it. So what do we have to show for it?

Do you believe we have the best Health Care system in Canada? Do we have the best Education system? How about the very best infrastructure, since we spend almost double per person and have for amost a decade?

The assumption made by many here, and the three leftist parties, is that we have to spend more because we certainly have many problems in healthcare, education, and infrastructure, and only more spending will solve the problem. But spending alone, hasn't and won't solve anything.

As Danielle put it (sic) "If spending more was the issue, we would have solved the problems with Health Care a long time ago." We need to start being smart about where we put dollars instead of handing out blank cheques everywhere.

[c.t.ner]

Originally Posted by Jacks

Not even close, I scanned through the video. Here are the stats when the floor was open to free debates.

Fair enough, I'll take my statement back.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Spending alone doesn't mean anything, but analyzing return on your investment is huge. If you spend double what I do on your car because of your salary, but we both drive a honda civic, are you proud of your spending more? It's nonsense.

So we know it is a fact we spend several times for than other provinces. There is just no denying it. So what do we have to show for it?

Do you believe we have the best Health Care system in Canada? Do we have the best Education system? How about the very best infrastructure, since we spend almost double per person and have for amost a decade?

The assumption made by many here, and the three leftist parties, is that we have to spend more because we certainly have many problems in healthcare, education, and infrastructure, and only more spending will solve the problem. But spending alone, hasn't and won't solve anything.

As Danielle put it (sic) "If spending more was the issue, we would have solved the problems with Health Care a long time ago." We need to start being smart about where we put dollars instead of handing out blank cheques everywhere.

This is obviously correct. Efficient spending is the best approach. I don't know how anyone can say we can't be better at spending money. It is our money after all, I damned well expect them to make the most of every dollar.

[GP_Matt]

Did anyone agree with Raj's statement that we have the highest dropout rate in the country because of a lousy education system?
I would think it has something to do with the oil patch hiring kids and paying them truckloads of money before they graduate but could be wrong.
I always thought Alberta actually had a pretty good education system when it came to international testing.

[Senator Clay Davis]

I mean you raise a very valid point. I don't have the numbers but if high school dropout rates have always been high, then I suppose you can blame it on the system. But if its just been the past 10-15 years, then obviously its a little skewed because as you mentioned more kids have been going to the rigs.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

Did anyone agree with Raj's statement that we have the highest dropout rate in the country because of a lousy education system?
I would think it has something to do with the oil patch hiring kids and paying them truckloads of money before they graduate but could be wrong.
I always thought Alberta actually had a pretty good education system when it came to international testing.

His very next point was to infer that eliminating University Tuition would also help with the dropout rates. I dont think those guys working on the rigs are avoiding post secondary because of the prices....

I liked Raj but I think his connection to reality might be a bit tenuous. Did anyone else find it strange how often he would begin a point but then kinds of trail off... without .... really...

[GP_Matt]

I liked some of the points that Raj made, but I always get the feeling from him that sometimes he knows that what he is saying doesn't make any sense so he just states it louder and then leaves when he is questioned.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Must be getting closer and close to the election...

A key adviser to Wildrose Leader Danielle Smith is poised to back a $125-million private hospital for wealthy medical tourists in B.C., proof her party is moving to privatize health care in Alberta, Tory Leader Alison Redford alleged Friday.

“Today we see Lyle Oberg, who is a principal adviser to Danielle Smith on health care, opening a private, five-star, for-profit hospital in British Columbia,” Redford said.

“It speaks to what the agenda is for the Wildrose. ... The Wildrose wants to use public dollars to pay for private health care in private facilities, and that’s not acceptable to me.”

A report published in the Vancouver Sun on Friday said former Tory finance minister Dr. Lyle Oberg is in “discreet talks” with the Westbank First Nation, which has for two years been planning the private 100-bed facility on a site overlooking Okanagan Lake near Kelowna, B.C.

Chief Robert Louie said the band would contribute the land and is looking for a 50 per cent partner to build the centre. He could not be reached for comment Friday.

It would not be Oberg’s first foray into private health care. He is director of North American Healthcare International, which is currently building the five-star, 200-bed Canadian International Hospital in Vietnam. The company’s website bills the project as a “private luxury hospital.”

Oberg, a Progressive Conservative MLA for 15 years, announced in March 2011 that he was leaving the Tories to join the Wildrose, and that he would act as an adviser to Smith.

Oberg could not be reached for comment Friday.

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/...244/story.html

[CaptainCrunch]

Booga Booga Booga Danielle Smith hates homosexuals, prochoice, different races, puppies booga booga hidden agenda booga.

Hidden agenda the last bastien of the truly stupid and the truly desparate.

http://threehundredeight.blogspot.ca/

Unless Smith does something really stupid the Conservatives are on the way to a brutal beatdown and Redman will have lots of time to write her memoirs.

[Sylvanfan]

I came away from that debate pretty convinced that I can't vote for the PC's. I don't think Redford can get the rest of the old boys club in her party in line to follow her leadership. Less about her, more about the clan that she'll likely be working with.

There are things from other parties that I like...but as others have suggested, there are also things that make me scratch my head.

Tough choice as I think a guy like Sherman looks like the best leader of the bunch...but damn is it hard to convince myself that Liberals won't run a big fat inefficient government. Whereas the Wild Rose claims they'll streamline the government....but do I really believe in their ability to actually do it given the chance?

I think it's the most interesting Provincial election in the last 35 years. The PC's need a good scare to force a larger culture shift in that party.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Booga Booga Booga Danielle Smith hates homosexuals, prochoice, different races, puppies booga booga hidden agenda booga.

Hidden agenda the last bastien of the truly stupid and the truly desparate.

http://threehundredeight.blogspot.ca/

Unless Smith does something really stupid the Conservatives are on the way to a brutal beatdown and Redman will have lots of time to write her memoirs.

Why is it that when people try to discuss obvious concerns with the policy of the Wildrose that this is the most common response?

I could be wrong (wouldn't be the first time) but I'm not sure about this brutal beat down either. I drive around the city for work a fair amount, and while there are some ridings where the Wildrose is dominant, its not all of them and not by a lot. I was shocked at how many PC signs are up in my neighborhood today. Its got to be at least 2-1 over the Wildrose.

Then you get to the vote split issue, and peoples legitimate concerns about the Wildrose promising easy fixes for everything and no new taxes, but apparently no cuts either. Now factor in some candidates with questionable comments (at the very least) in their past and I think its a lot closer than some people think.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Slava

Why is it that when people try to discuss obvious concerns with the policy of the Wildrose that this is the most common response?

I could be wrong (wouldn't be the first time) but I'm not sure about this brutal beat down either. I drive around the city for work a fair amount, and while there are some ridings where the Wildrose is dominant, its not all of them and not by a lot. I was shocked at how many PC signs are up in my neighborhood today. Its got to be at least 2-1 over the Wildrose.

Then you get to the vote split issue, and peoples legitimate concerns about the Wildrose promising easy fixes for everything and no new taxes, but apparently no cuts either. Now factor in some candidates with questionable comments (at the very least) in their past and I think its a lot closer than some people think.

Because just like the federal liberal campaigns based around a hidden agenda based around social issues its ridiculous.

Allison Redman just like Ignatief is running on a platform of fear and nothing else.

When you start talking about doing things like repealing human rights in a provincial election it becomes a farce.

I'm all for discussing elections, but its absolutely ridiculous to make assumptions and platform creations based on something that isn't being discussed or campaigned on.

Redman is campaigning the same stupid way that the fed libs do and part of that is the reason that the PC's should be burned to the ground, they're basically making groundless accusations hoping that fear is a amazing motivator because they know that they've futzed things up so much on their side that they can't stand up on their own platform.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

Tough choice as I think a guy like Sherman looks like the best leader of the bunch...but damn is it hard to convince myself that Liberals won't run a big fat inefficient government.

I console myself with the thought that he stands virtually no chance of forming any kind of government, inefficient or otherwise.

(With that said, I will likely be voting Liberal. I can't argue with the PCs needing a timeout, and I can't vote Wild Rose since I'm persuaded neither by their competence nor their sanity among the rank and file, for all Smith's charisma. They actually seem to have the most mediocre slate of candidates of all three parties, which makes me wonder if they needed a little more time to get ready for this election.)

[Slava]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Because just like the federal liberal campaigns based around a hidden agenda based around social issues its ridiculous.

Allison Redman just like Ignatief is running on a platform of fear and nothing else.

When you start talking about doing things like repealing human rights in a provincial election it becomes a farce.

I'm all for discussing elections, but its absolutely ridiculous to make assumptions and platform creations based on something that isn't being discussed or campaigned on.

Redman is campaigning the same stupid way that the fed libs do and part of that is the reason that the PC's should be burned to the ground, they're basically making groundless accusations hoping that fear is a amazing motivator because they know that they've futzed things up so much on their side that they can't stand up on their own platform.

Alright, well lets talk issues. Here's my blog post from a few days ago on whether the Wildrose can actually balance the budget.
http://victorsspoils.wordpress.com/2...ce-the-budget/

No hidden agenda, just the bottom line and the numbers they use don't add up. It's not a hidden agenda; they have to be cutting somewhere to keep their promises, and won't say where. Redford talked about this today as I heard.

Thats the very definition of not being able to stand on your own platform; they pledge to balance the budget, I say fair enough but tell me how?