Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by Slava

I was going to post about the public sector bloating and that reply. I just think it’s the wrong metric. Firstly, to look at it over a decade isn’t really accurate. But second, and probably more important, is that they hired a lot of new employees across the sectors in general. People I know in parks were driving around with nothing to do (their words, not mine). They had people hired and paid with literally no job duties. It’s pure ideology, and frankly laughable that people would characterize this as somehow prudent or responsible.

And on that fiscal front, the carbon tax was terribly implemented. All those funds flowed to general revenue which added a few billion to the budget and they still couldn’t manage to stick to it. I know it’s not in the romanticized version of their government, but it’s financially concerning to say the least.
.

Except most of what you just said is wrong. Maybe you have some anecdotal parks friends who drove around and did nothing, but if you look at the FTE during the NDP time you can easily see that 90%+ of new hires went to three departments, Education, Health and Justice. It wasn't causing bloat, it was filling needs at the time, and driven by the need to ensure we had the health and education supports to deal with a recession. Almost every other department was on a hiring freeze and most didn't even fill vacated positions. I also have friends and family who work in the public service and anecdotally what I heard was more work, but no new people for the vast majority of ministries.

Next you claim that the carbon tax all went to general revenue. This is fully false. They even tracked exactly where carbon tax dollars went because it was specifically meant for green initiatives and NOT general revenues. 25% of it went to rebates, another 25% went to Transit programs, 20% went to ERA and EEA, 10% went to the Small business tax reduction and then there was a blob of 20% of "Other" which I guess you could call "general revenue" but I think it would have been more targeted than that.

The NDP practiced some pretty standard and straight forward keynesian economic policies. I can totally get behind debating Keynesian vs Neoliberal policies because I would argue that the conservative neoliberal policies are much worse for the economy as a whole.

[Slava]

Well aside from the fact I read the budget and know it went to general revenue, they were slatted for it :https://calgaryherald.com/business/e...urplus-by-2023

Basically, they claimed it was going to be revenue neutral and then moved the goalposts.

And as far as the jobs that’s a great feel good story. According to the Fraser Institute (I can hear the groans already!), government jobs increased by 21.5% over their term. https://www.fraserinstitute.org/site...s-recovery.pdf

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Slava

Well aside from the fact I read the budget and know it went to general revenue, they were slatted for it :https://calgaryherald.com/business/e...urplus-by-2023

Basically, they claimed it was going to be revenue neutral and then moved the goalposts.

And as far as the jobs that’s a great feel good story. According to the Fraser Institute (I can hear the groans already!), government jobs increased by 21.5% over their term. https://www.fraserinstitute.org/site...s-recovery.pdf

What do you mean feel good story? Is job creation a good thing or a bad thing?

[TheIronMaiden]

I am not go to pretend the NDP was or is perfect. That said, they are the more stable of the two options we have, and stability is what we need.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Slava

Fiscally, they’re terrible.

Broad statement...can you be more specific?

I'd argue 4 years is a pretty short time to cleanup the mess they inherited. Don't believe me, maybe the looney left-wing nut jobs at the...checks notes...Fraser Institute will change your mind:

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/arti...pc-fiscal-mess

On energy they did a number of things that were emblematic of their ideological approach to things (the royalty review, the appointment of Tzeporah Berman spring to mind).

Royalty review has been thoughtfully discussed here, but okay if you still don't like it.

What exactly did Berman's appointment lead to? Can you see no merit to engaging the 'enemy' in this fashion?

Was she given a $30M/yr embezzlement factory? Sorry, couldn't help a little whataboutism here, but honestly I bet having Berman attend a few meetings achieved more than the war room...which may be nothing, which is still better than negative...

And the continued bloating of the public service under the guise of creating better infrastructure and providing better service to Albertans.

Sounds like another broad stroke and I disagree, but would be happy to discuss more if you want to engage.

Then you have the broken promises about school fees, and the laughable cabinet appointments. And you know I didn’t mention the billions spent on their power debacle, the lightbulbs, the borrowing to pay all these people to do this junk. It was fiscally pathetic. The only reason it looks ok now is we got another royalty boom to cover the tab.

What promise did they break on school fees? That they needed a year or two to implement the changes? Yeah, that's how budgets work.

PPA I'll grant you, though that whole system seems like a bit of a mess.

I've argued about the lightbulbs in the last week or two, but fair enough if you disagree.

Borrowing for operating ain't great. As has been mentioned the NDP are not at all unique in this regard. Un####ing 40 years of bull#### isn't cheap.

It’s not like they were this bastion of good government. They totally got lucky, and it reminds me of the Eddie Murphy bit in Delirious where he’s imitating the white guy saying he was drunk and yelling “I just voted for Jesse Jackson!” The punchline (delivered only as Murphy can) is the same sobered up guy who says “he ####ing won?!” That’s 2015.

And I’ll just say it now. No the UCP isn’t better, because I know that’s what people are going to ask. But that’s my point…two options and a lot of people don’t really want to vote for either.

Not sure what you're on about here. Sounds like you're holding them to an unreasonably high standard while handwaving their achievements away as 'luck'.

[RedHot25]

Originally Posted by Slava

First of all, I never said the UCP or Smith were competent. But that illustrates exactly why this thread is so pointless these days. You can’t have an actual discussion about Alberta politics because as I said earlier you either are voting for the NDP or the UCP. There’s no room for middle ground and posters will just feel like they’re being shouted down.

And, just my opinion here, but these are the voters the NDP supporters (not just voters, but people donating money and time) should be trying to court. Instead, you make a comment about something the NDP did or note things you don’t care for about them, and it’s “why are you voting for the UCP?!?!”

Funny enough I've actually - and this may shock you - voted for pretty much every party at every level of govt. So lump me in as a NDP still if you will, when in this case, it's more like ...

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

I am not go to pretend the NDP was or is perfect. That said, they are the more stable of the two options we have, and stability is what we need.

....like iron maiden is getting at. NDP has a whole bunch to be criticized, but holy f, the UCP has gone so off the rails, we can criticize royalties, light bulbs and the like, and we should, but I am beyond belief. We have a govt lead by someone who thinks pfft, we can just throw borders away and so be it...

...that said, I wasn't targeting you per se, just saw your post as a funny segue to the "let's redraw Alberta's borders with crayon".

At least you respond, unlike someone like Yoho who drives by or complains people's reactions. But, at the same time, and whether this applies to you or not, I am getting a bit tired of this "oh hey, UCP is dumb but we gotta both sides this, NDP this ... Alberta party that .. federal government this ...".just own the provincial opinion. This guise of "I'm just presenting the other side" is pretty tiresome.

And both sides need to stop on tired old cliches "oh NDP bad fiscal". Uh..Oh UCP don't have a care for anyone. Ugh. There is plenty of actual proof how bat#### the current government is that we don't need to pull out this ole troupe.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Slava

Well aside from the fact I read the budget and know it went to general revenue, they were slatted for it :https://calgaryherald.com/business/e...urplus-by-2023

Basically, they claimed it was going to be revenue neutral and then moved the goalposts.

And as far as the jobs that’s a great feel good story. According to the Fraser Institute (I can hear the groans already!), government jobs increased by 21.5% over their term. https://www.fraserinstitute.org/site...s-recovery.pdf

From your link:

“Beginning in 2021, additional revenue resulting from the federally imposed carbon price tied to the construction of the Trans Mountain pipeline will be used to support vital public services as the province stays on track to balance the budget by 2023,” Ceci said.

...

Ceci dismissed concerns that there had been changes to the government’s plans for carbon funds. He said Alberta’s portion of the tax, which he puts at $30 per tonne, would still fund pollution-reducing initiatives, while the federal portion, anything above $30 per tonne, would go to general revenue.

“The Alberta Climate Leadership funds will continue to be re-invested in Alberta – that’s not changing. The additional federally imposed carbon price, that’s tied to Trans Mountain, we’re going to be using that to provide Albertans with vital programs and services that they rely on,” Ceci said.

So they continued with the original plan until 2 years after they left office, but instead of directing all of the federally mandated increase to these same buckets (which were effectively funded), they made a fiscally prudent choice to help balance the overall books. And you're upset about this?

Originally Posted by Slava

And on that fiscal front, the carbon tax was terribly implemented. All those funds flowed to general revenue which added a few billion to the budget and they still couldn’t manage to stick to it.

Are you arguing in good faith? Your own link from your next post contradicts this.

[RedHot25]

And further this argument of "people just dumping one/my opinion/UCP no matter what" needs to be put to bed. I grew up in rural, rural Alberta with alot of different opinions. You get some message board stuff? Try walking as a teenager into a meeting with a complete opposite view on something then what's normally put forth in rural Alberta.

It's advocacy, it's defending your opinion no matter what, and pulling that card sometimes reeks of taking the easy way out

Plus, of course the UCP is going to get all of the attention, they're the current government. Just like if the NDP was in power, they would be getting it just as bad

[Flames0910]

Plus, of course the UCP is going to get all of the attention, they're the current government. Just like if the NDP was in power, they would be getting it just as bad

Only quibble here -- not sure it's fair to say the NDP would be just as bad. The UCP is particularly onerous because they don't care about good governance, just politics. They're really in a league of their own in AB Politics.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Slava

Hey, if the shoe fits. I’m not rehashing it, but there were lots of people who noticed this and called them out for it. It was a fiscal nightmare that is not just pushed away with “those other guys are bad”.

Why not when the other guys are doing the same thing?

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by Slava

Well aside from the fact I read the budget and know it went to general revenue, they were slatted for it :https://calgaryherald.com/business/e...urplus-by-2023

Basically, they claimed it was going to be revenue neutral and then moved the goalposts.

But planning on putting it into general revenue in the future is not just using it in general revenue the whole time. You disagree with the plan to use some in general revenue which is fair. But by the article the first $30/t was still going to specific projects and over that amount would go to support the general revenue to balance the books.

Alberta’s portion of the tax, which he puts at $30 per tonne, would still fund pollution-reducing initiatives, while the federal portion, anything above $30 per tonne, would go to general revenue.

The NDP carbon tax stays out of general revenue, the surplus caused by the Feds goes to general revenue. Isn't preventing deficit spending a big thing for you? I don't really understand why this is a knock against the NDP, if anything they are acting more conservative than progressive here. And again, this wasn't planned on starting until 2021.

Originally Posted by Slava

And as far as the jobs that’s a great feel good story. According to the Fraser Institute (I can hear the groans already!), government jobs increased by 21.5% over their term. https://www.fraserinstitute.org/site...s-recovery.pdf

Straight from the report page 5

art of the reason for the larger growth in government sector employment in this most recent period
(July 2014 to May 2018) is that the duration of growth
has been longer than the previous two periods.
However, if you consider just the first 11 months of
growth in the latest period—a comparable length
of time to the two previous growth periods—government sector employment still grew more in the
most recent period: by 11.3 percent compared to 8.2
percent from 2008 to 2009 and 8.8 percent from
2011 to 2012.

So now we are looking at an actual growth of 11.3% compared to non recession growth of 8.2% and 8.8%. Yes the NDP hired more people, not argueing that, but it is not as far from other periods as the 21.5% makes it look.

As well, this report is looking at Government jobs in Alberta, not just GoA jobs. So without having the breakdown of how many jobs were Federal/Provincial/Municipal/Crown Corp, then it's hard to pinpoint all of the hiring on just Notley. It's like trying to blame inflation completely on Justin. GoA did increase hiring but again it was focused on areas of need.

And this report is actually exactly why I agree with the NDP. In times of recession and low private investment, in order to keep unemployment low and prevent further recessionary trends, the government should step in to fund public works or increase public goods (such as education and healthcare). This report is meant to be scathing, and in the eyes of a Neoliberal economist it is. But to me it reads like a government stepping up to support it's people when the private sector can't or won't.

[Dion]

Decided to join in on the UCP circle jerk

Notley is right

https://twitter.com/user/status/1601633310564028416

[Locke]

Aggressive 'Dude Bro' Adversarialism has always been the best way to influence people to take an honest evaluation of their political ideals and consider aligning their support alongside the person crapping on their head for the lulz.

Its a very mature and sophisticated technique and appears to be working really well, you can tell, discontinue unless you want more of the same regime we currently have.

[Roughneck]

Straws are definitely under provincial jurisdiction.

EDIT: was posted (properly) below

Spoiler!

https://twitter.com/user/status/1601748829594062849

[Ozy_Flame]

Smith is literally grasping at straws.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Locke

Aggressive 'Dude Bro' Adversarialism has always been the best way to influence people to take an honest evaluation of their political ideals and consider aligning their support alongside the person crapping on their head for the lulz.

Its a very mature and sophisticated technique and appears to be working really well, you can tell, discontinue unless you want more of the same regime we currently have.

Do people really dig in their heels and vote against their own best interest, the best interest of the Province, and the best interest of fellow citizens?

Is that really a thing that will happen? I’d like to imagine nobody would be that dumb.

[RedHot25]

Originally Posted by Dion

Decided to join in on the UCP circle jerk :whistle

https://twitter.com/user/status/1601748829594062849

https://twitter.com/user/status/1601751916127866880

https://twitter.com/user/status/1601753356539920384

https://twitter.com/user/status/1601753357865357312

https://twitter.com/user/status/1601755920631201792

Stand up to Ottawa with a potentially unconstitutional law for the straws, people, for the straws.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

Straws are definitely under provincial jurisdiction.

https://twitter.com/user/status/YpwAJXawlJvBAS0Oj8A

Deleted?

[RedHot25]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Deleted?

not sure of the exact tweet, but pretty sure its the same idea as what I just posted.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by RedHot25

not sure of the exact tweet, but pretty sure its the same idea as what I just posted.

It was. Must have missed a letter