Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[GullFoss]

Additionally, because CPP is not anywhere near a fully funded scheme, focusing on the percentage of money Alberta would take out of CPPIB misses the forest for the trees. Alberta wouldn't destroy CPP if it opted out; it wouldn't even be close. Other Canadians would have to pay a few extra dollars each month to ensure the remainder of CPP stays on solid financial footing.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

I don't understand why there is so much anger on this board about an Alberta Pension Plan. It results in lower contributions and higher payouts because of the way the math works. It's not shady math.

Do you just buy everything Smith tells you at face value? The initial seed money they think they are entitled to is so out to lunch no one with an IQ above 60 believes it. This isn't hyperbole, it's reality(seriously, go find someone who isn't a politician that agrees with these numbers). So without that huge seed money, the numbers are already wrong on payouts. But even with numbers closer to reality, the only reason we would still have an advantage is because of our age demographics, which will change, and most of the benefit will be lost.

It's also predicated on the idea that we can invest it more in Alberta industry, which is kind of insane once you put 3 seconds of thought into it. The CPP has some of the best returns around, an APP is not going to match it. Certainly not by investing in an industry that is by all measures going to shrink drastically over the next 50 years.

The third point is that the CPP is for all Canadians. if you want to be a butt face who thumbs their nose at the rest of Canada every chance you get, well, congrats I guess. The world is full of selfish #######s. But I don't particularly want to be a part of a country that takes regionalism to that kind of FYGM attitude, and I find it pretty gross anyone would, but here we are, led by them.

So is all that worth it for a little bit bigger payouts for a decade?

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

Additionally, because CPP is not anywhere near a fully funded scheme, focusing on the percentage of money Alberta would take out of CPPIB misses the forest for the trees. Alberta wouldn't destroy CPP if it opted out; it wouldn't even be close. Other Canadians would have to pay a few extra dollars each month to ensure the remainder of CPP stays on solid financial footing.

You don't think withdrawing over 50% of CPP would have an impact? Note that that would never happen, but that's the imaginary numbers Smith is clinging to.

[Roughneck]

'It isn't shady math.'


also


'don't focus on the percentage...'


Brilliant.

[Whynotnow]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

'It isn't shady math.'


also


'don't focus on the percentage...'


Brilliant.

Sigh we are in for so much of this…..

[MoneyGuy]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

I don't understand why there is so much anger on this board about an Alberta Pension Plan. It results in lower contributions and higher payouts because of the way the math works. It's not shady math.

Many of us don’t believe the lies and misinformation Smith is and will be putting out.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

I don't understand why there is so much anger on this board about an Alberta Pension Plan. It results in lower contributions and higher payouts because of the way the math works. It's not shady math.

It's not shady math. It's shady bat#### crazy insane ridiculously impossible never-ever-ever going to happen assumptions fed into an utterly asinine math formula that makes no sense unless you're a clod.

But the math is fine. Just like 1 Danielle Smith + 928,895 other Albertans = 928,896 ####ing idiots. The math checks out.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

I don't understand why there is so much anger on this board about an Alberta Pension Plan. It results in lower contributions and higher payouts because of the way the math works. It's not shady math.

Because the CPP is one of the best-managed public pension plans in the world, and Alberta has a proven history of underfunding or looting public investment programs in the interests of short-term greed and expediency. Just look at the sad history of the Heritage Fund.

And the idea that it would be used to prop up the oil and gas industry shows just how reckless its proponents are. A well-run sovereign wealth fund (ie Norway’s) eschews that kind of all-eggs-in-one-basket investment strategy by investing abroad, not at home.

[1991 Canadian]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

I don't understand why there is so much anger on this board about an Alberta Pension Plan. It results in lower contributions and higher payouts because of the way the math works. It's not shady math.

You are correct. It is mathematically factual that Alberta a net contributor to CPP, transfer payments, Canadian GDP growth, etc... We don't get as much out of what we put in. This is a fact.

And despite this, Alberta is still winning. We're ahead, why do we need to run up the score?

-We have some of the lowest taxes in the Western world and generally have good social services
-We have enticed a young labour pool from other parts of Canada (and the world) without paying the full cost of early schooling, retirement, etc
-We have been very fortunate to being sitting on top of a resource that provides immense wealth opportunities
-We generally have a very high standard of living here. I have a great life in Alberta

If we want to start using division and math, where does it end?

Lets say we have an Alberta pension plan. I'm a hardworking Calgarian. I make more money. I pay more taxes. Why should someone in Grande Prairie benefit from my Alberta Pension Plan?

Lets say we have Calgary Pension Plan. I live in the SW. I'm a hardworking SW Calgarian. I make more money. I pay more taxes. Why should someone in NE Calgary benefit from my Calgary Pension Plan?

Lets say we have a SW Calgary Pension Plan. I live in Bayview*. I'm a hardworking Bayviewian. I make more money. I pay more taxes. Why should someone in Altidore benefit from my SW Calgary Pension Plan?


*I actually live in Citadel.

[GGG]

All examples using Calgary Neighbourhoods are supposed to use Lake Bonevista.

[FacePaint]

Originally Posted by 1991 Canadian

You are correct. It is mathematically factual that Alberta a net contributor to CPP, transfer payments, Canadian GDP growth, etc... We don't get as much out of what we put in. This is a fact.

And despite this, Alberta is still winning. We're ahead, why do we need to run up the score?

-We have some of the lowest taxes in the Western world and generally have good social services
-We have enticed a young labour pool from other parts of Canada (and the world) without paying the full cost of early schooling, retirement, etc
-We have been very fortunate to being sitting on top of a resource that provides immense wealth opportunities
-We generally have a very high standard of living here. I have a great life in Alberta

If we want to start using division and math, where does it end?

Lets say we have an Alberta pension plan. I'm a hardworking Calgarian. I make more money. I pay more taxes. Why should someone in Grande Prairie benefit from my Alberta Pension Plan?

Lets say we have Calgary Pension Plan. I live in the SW. I'm a hardworking SW Calgarian. I make more money. I pay more taxes. Why should someone in NE Calgary benefit from my Calgary Pension Plan?

Lets say we have a SW Calgary Pension Plan. I live in Bayview*. I'm a hardworking Bayviewian. I make more money. I pay more taxes. Why should someone in Altidore benefit from my SW Calgary Pension Plan?


*I actually live in Citadel.

Simple... those Laurentian elites in Altidore are trying to destroy your economy in Bayview despite record wages and growth showing otherwise.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by timun

No, in point of fact they didn't. The NDP took their inherited $11B debt up to about $43B, and the UCP took it up to ~$72B in two years.



In year 1 of UCP government they had more non-renewable resource revenue than any year of NDP government, and more tax revenue than 3/4 years of NDP government, but managed to spend more than any NDP government and ran the largest deficit budget we'd ever had at that point. And then Covid happened and they followed it up with another record deficit.

Can we just daily quote this text back to the top of this thread? I the none of the conservatives mouth pieces around here are going to have anything to say about his, because all they can say is that the feel the UPC is better for the economy, but the graph is clear. 2 lucky years with revenue and terrible mis-management otherwise.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

Additionally, because CPP is not anywhere near a fully funded scheme, focusing on the percentage of money Alberta would take out of CPPIB misses the forest for the trees. Alberta wouldn't destroy CPP if it opted out; it wouldn't even be close. Other Canadians would have to pay a few extra dollars each month to ensure the remainder of CPP stays on solid financial footing.

Have your read through Toombe’s analysis of the pension plan and the benefits and risks?

[edslunch]

This is spot on from my perspective:

Anatomy of a disinformation campaign:

1) Start with an improbable assumption - that Alberta’s departure from the CPP would come with a transfer of over half its total assets.
According to the report commissioned by the Government of Alberta, Albertans could expect a whopping $334 billion to be transferred over. No one but the GoA thinks this number is remotely plausible. Economist Trevor Tombe came out with a report yesterday that estimated the transfer at more like 20 to 25% of the total assets. The CPP didn’t offer a number, but their spokesperson pointed out that Albertans are 16% of the participants in the CPP.

2)Paint a rosy picture of how things would roll out, all predicated on the improbable assumption
Lower premiums! Higher payouts! Maybe a retirement bonus!! What’s not to love about this??

3)Embark on a public “consultation” that is more of a sales exercise.
The APP webpage that went live yesterday touts the potential benefits of an APP, without flagging the possibility that the assumption is wrong (see #1) or even mentioning the word “risk.”

The survey that opened up at the same time is a disgrace. It asks whether you’d like lower premiums or higher payouts, but doesn’t ask whether you think the idea of leaving the CPP is good or bad. As Corey Hogan put it, “if you're looking for the ability to give your opinion on the merits of such a plan, you'll be disappointed. It's more a place where you can talk about what colour you'd like your unicorn.”

(Jim Dinning: why are you associating yourself with this?)

4)Tie the issue to regional resentments
The website proclaims “MORE ALBERTA, LESS OTTAWA” and goes on to say that “For decades, Alberta’s young working population, higher employment rates and higher pensionable earnings have resulted in Alberta workers and businesses contributing approximately $60 billion more into the CPP since inception than has been paid out to Albertans during that same time period.” This triggers anger about equalization and implicitly suggests there’s equalization going on in the CPP.

https://lisayoung.substack.com/p/dis..._campaign=post

[Geraldsh]

Originally Posted by edslunch

This is spot on from my perspective:



https://lisayoung.substack.com/p/dis..._campaign=post

This should be printed on turkeys and dropped from airplanes over certain ridings.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

No I wouldn't if it was my decision . And I would vote no in a plebiscite.

That doesn't mean I cant understand why this makes sense from a strategic political strategy standpoint based on the federal governments constant caving to Quebecs demands .

Threatening to remove Alberta's "over" funding of the CPP hits the Feds where it hurts, the bottom line. It is the easiest threat to make to start negotiating better deals for Alberta

This government was elected to get better deals for Alberta, not Canada. Is Alberta lucky to have resources? 100%. But we are also unlucky to not have open access to the Ocean's, Easy Hydro Power, and transportation waterways. We also have to fund expensive winter services that not all provinces do (or to the same extent)

Canada has set the precedent by constantly ceding to Quebecs demands/negotiating them down, and Alberta is realizing that is the only way to get to the negotiating table. Don't be surprised when other provinces follow if this threat tactic works.

People love to say in this thread/ The Federal thread "Why would the Liberals care about Alberta when they know they won't vote for them anyways" And they are correct.

So what option is left? If you aren't getting a seat at the table that you are buying dinner for, the threat of eating elsewhere might make people realize constantly antagonizing the person paying for dinner may lead to less food for themselves.

I think this ignores the value of regulatory stability. Look at head office moves out of Quebec around the time of the referendum. Both in 77 and 95 they lost corporations to stability.

[GullFoss]

No matter how angry some of you are or how much text you write, it doesn't change the facts. Ask yourself how I knew what the broad results of the study would be before the study was released. The underlying facts that Albertans in aggregate pay more into CPP than they receive in benefits isn't really up for debate.

For anyone who actually understands how cpp was designed and it's history prior to CPPIB, it was obvious what the outcome of the study would be because it's axiomatic based on the contribution and benefits formulas.

You can argue that AB should subsidize other Canadians. And that CPP is a reasonable program where subsidies should exist. Those are valid positions are based on values and ideologies. And its plausible a plurality of Albertans feel that way. And if they do, then continuing with CPP makes sense.

But to howl about how the math is based on lies or that AB would necessarily be less responsible with the funds or that it's outside of AB's jurisdiction to unilaterally leave CPP...those are pretty disingenuous arguments imo

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

No matter how angry some of you are or how much text you write, it doesn't change the facts. Ask yourself how I knew what the broad results of the study would be before the study was released. The underlying facts that Albertans in aggregate pay more into CPP than they receive in benefits isn't really up for debate.

For anyone who actually understands how cpp was designed and it's history prior to CPPIB, it was obvious what the outcome of the study would be because it's axiomatic based on the contribution and benefits formulas.

You can argue that AB should subsidize other Canadians. And that CPP is a reasonable program where subsidies should exist. Those are valid positions are based on values and ideologies. And its plausible a plurality of Albertans feel that way. And if they do, then continuing with CPP makes sense.

But to howl about how the math is based on lies or that AB would necessarily be less responsible with the funds or that it's outside of AB's jurisdiction to unilaterally leave CPP...those are pretty disingenuous arguments imo

Expand on that. Why do you think they are disingenuous arguments?

[Fuzz]

Can you provide a quote from any expert that agrees with the numbers as presented?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

. The underlying facts that Albertans in aggregate pay more into CPP than they receive in benefits isn't really up for debate.

It isn’t. But why we pay more is misrepresented by dishonest politicians. Albertans in aggregate pay more because people who are young and high-earners pay more, and Alberta has proportionally more of those people than other provinces. It’s the same reason why people who earn 90k a year pay more taxes than those who earn 50k.

And yet a great many people in this province believe they pay more than their counterparts elsewhere, or that our provincial government directly transfers money to other provinces. And the UCP are happy to foster these myths for political ends.