Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 09-20-2018, 02:18 PM   #381
PepsiFree
Participant
Participant
 
PepsiFree's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick Estrada View Post
The reality is that every single party has some of these people. If a party was made up solely of this type of people then you have a point but that's simply not the case as all the parties are mostly comprised of good people. I agree about not voting strictly on party as I'm probably one of the few people here that actually voted for nearly every party once including the Liberals.
I know they are comprised MOSTLY of good people, we totally agree. My simple feeling is, let a party win with the BEST of their people, and that means not voting in the worst, even if they carry the banner. That’s how parties actually get stronger instead of just winning. Doing the opposite is how weak parties find ways to win.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dino7c View Post
tell that to the people who voted for Deborah Drever
...I am.
PepsiFree is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2018, 02:33 PM   #382
GGG
Franchise Player
 
GGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Exp:
Default

Drever I would argue has been an effective MLA for a backbencher with no power. What % of MLAs have passed a private members bill?

The homophobic tweet was bad but she got roasted over those pictures by a bunch of pearl clutchers. She was sacrificed for politics.
GGG is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to GGG For This Useful Post:
Old 09-20-2018, 02:35 PM   #383
PaperBagger'14
Franchise Player
 
PaperBagger'14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Cowtown
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken View Post
It's not a moot point, it's a point you raised about how you're so dyed in the wool partisan you wouldn't vote for another political party even if it meant keeping a ####ing pedophile rapist murder from representing you and your riding.

This kind of outrageous partisanship is toxic to the core.
I vote for whatever party represents my interests as parties have the power, not individuals. My interests do not include pedophilia, murder, rape. My interests also do not include "green" energy, being taxed an absurd amount already with future increases, watching my friends struggle to find work and put food on the table, and having bleak economic outlooks.

If our system was based on an individual (that represents my interests) having authority instead of toeing the party line, then I would be voting for that individual. That isn't how our society works.

Edit: if I believed the NDP were the best for our province and my interests, they would have my vote. Same goes for liberal or Alberta party. It has nothing to do with partisanship but rather representation of myself.

I have also recently looked at the nominees for UCP in my constituency and there is one I already wont be voting for if she wins due to her pro life stance.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilboimcdavid View Post
Eakins wasn't a bad coach, the team just had 2 bad years, they should've been more patient.

Last edited by PaperBagger'14; 09-20-2018 at 02:39 PM.
PaperBagger'14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2018, 02:40 PM   #384
Ozy_Flame

Posted the 6 millionth post!
 
Ozy_Flame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Exp:
Default

I don't know, there's something unsettling about having a bunch of crooks, creeps and criminals running a political party as long as they say "lower the taxes and we're open for business!" This is the exact problem with the Republicans right now - support the t-shirt at any cost even if your team is full of the worst kind of people. Blind support for the party is why democracy is in the state it is at times.
Ozy_Flame is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Ozy_Flame For This Useful Post:
Old 09-20-2018, 02:47 PM   #385
Red Slinger
First Line Centre
 
Red Slinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14 View Post
I vote for whatever party represents my interests as parties have the power, not individuals.
So, what happens when more and more ridings elect people with questionable ethics to govern, based strictly along party lines? Those representatives may eventually be the majority of the party or at the very least they will have sway over the party platform. They will certainly, bit by bit, move the party platform.

If you think this can't happen it already did to the Republicans in the US.
__________________
The of and to a in is I that it for you was with on as have but be they
Red Slinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2018, 02:50 PM   #386
PaperBagger'14
Franchise Player
 
PaperBagger'14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Cowtown
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Slinger View Post
So, what happens when more and more ridings elect people with questionable ethics to govern, based strictly along party lines? Those representatives may eventually be the majority of the party or at the very least they will have sway over the party platform. They will certainly, bit by bit, move the party platform.

If you think this can't happen it already did to the Republicans in the US.
When the party's interest differ from mine strongly enough then I will vote for whomever is aligned with me. If there is no one that represents me to my satisfaction then I will not vote.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilboimcdavid View Post
Eakins wasn't a bad coach, the team just had 2 bad years, they should've been more patient.
PaperBagger'14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2018, 02:55 PM   #387
Manhattanboy
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: May 2004
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken View Post
this just isn't true.
What do you mean? To my knowledge the so called speculation tax (which is a vacant property capital tax) was not part of the NDP platform.

They might have made general references to measures intended to slow increases in property values and address affordability but my BC friends say they were blindsided by this and other post election tax increases.
Manhattanboy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2018, 03:06 PM   #388
Shazam
Franchise Player
 
Shazam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Memento Mori
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken View Post
nah, actually resource revenue is a greater proportion of alberta government revenue now that it was in the 90s. That's the economic legacy of the PC governments of the last 30 years. It's becoming lower and lower now out of bare necessity, but it's not a strategy, it's a reaction to market forces any serious economist saw coming.
Doesn't seem too different than the 90s, hovering somewhere in the low 20% range. In the 80s it was almost 40% of GDP.

Quote:
I also understand the corporate taxes argument. I can get behind arguments that favour exceptionally lower corporate tax rates. The problem is, the 'fiscally conservative' governments weren't making tax policy based on mainstream economics, they've been making it on ideology. I simply can't support that kind of willful blindness in the face of being wrong.
Corporate income tax isn't all that high anyhow, and small businesses have a really low rate. The US was actually one of the highest taxed countries until orangeman came along.

Quote:
And BC's housing bubble is a HUGE problem. It shouldn't make Albertans feel any better to point to a neighbouring province also looking at revenue shortfall deficits as a reason it's OK Alberta's 'fiscally conservative' governments paved the way. If anything, it should help them question even further just how 'fiscally conservative' modern conservative movements actually are.
Point being, people believe that Alberta is a "one-note" province, when in fact other provinces also are "one-note". Like people believe that opening up cat cafes is the path to taxation success.

Probably the best most obvious taxation policy change is to remove the cap gains exception for selling your primary residence. It would be incredibly unpopular though, but it's very efficient (it's really, really hard to hide the fact that someone's sold a house). For cities, the best thing is to put in progressive property taxation. Again, incredibly unpopular but very efficient and much more fair than the current regressive taxation.
__________________
If you don't pass this sig to ten of your friends, you will become an Oilers fan.

Last edited by Shazam; 09-20-2018 at 03:10 PM.
Shazam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2018, 03:25 PM   #389
Flash Walken
Lifetime Suspension
 
Flash Walken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Void between Darkness and Light
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manhattanboy View Post
What do you mean? To my knowledge the so called speculation tax (which is a vacant property capital tax) was not part of the NDP platform.

They might have made general references to measures intended to slow increases in property values and address affordability but my BC friends say they were blindsided by this and other post election tax increases.
Your bc friends might be idiots or liars.

They announced their plans for a speculation tax on the third day of the campaign.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...oans-1.4069193

This shouldn't have surprised them:

Quote:
The government had long promised it would take action on housing affordability in this year's budget, and today announced a wide variety of taxes to curb speculation and decrease demand in the market, including:

A new, provincewide "speculation tax," focused on vacant homes. The tax will be two per cent of the assessed value of properties in 2019.
An increase to the foreign buyers tax from 15 to 20 per cent and the expansion of the tax to properties in other major municipal areas in B.C. outside Metro Vancouver.
An increase in the property transfer tax from three per cent to five per cent.for homes worth more than $3 million.
The government says the full suite of housing measures will be in place by the beginning of next year.

With the revenue it's forecasting, the government is planning to spend $1.6 billion in new housing units — all part of a 30-point detailed housing plan it unveiled as part of the budget.

"What we are looking to do is moderate the market," said James.

"We're taking some bold measures, there's no question."

Last edited by Flash Walken; 09-20-2018 at 03:31 PM.
Flash Walken is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Flash Walken For This Useful Post:
Old 09-20-2018, 04:09 PM   #390
Manhattanboy
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: May 2004
Exp:
Default

But in fairness to BC voters the article refers to the tax applying to people who own vacant homes in BC and don’t pay income tax in Canada.

The current iteration of the speculation tax is a whole lot different than what was in the platform in terms of its application to specific areas and rates.

Serious dishonesty on the part of Horgan.

Last edited by Manhattanboy; 09-20-2018 at 04:31 PM.
Manhattanboy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2018, 04:12 PM   #391
you&me
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame View Post
I don't know, there's something unsettling about having a bunch of crooks, creeps and criminals running a political party as long as they say "lower the taxes and we're open for business!" This is the exact problem with the Republicans right now - support the t-shirt at any cost even if your team is full of the worst kind of people. Blind support for the party is why democracy is in the state it is at times.
No, there's a difference.

The Republican party, is made up of some despicable people, but more importantly, the Republicans (as a party) are doing some despicable things.

I'm not convinced that some climate change denier in the UCP is going to have enough influence to do despicable things.
you&me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2018, 04:18 PM   #392
Ozy_Flame

Posted the 6 millionth post!
 
Ozy_Flame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by you&me View Post
No, there's a difference.

The Republican party, is made up of some despicable people, but more importantly, the Republicans (as a party) are doing some despicable things.

I'm not convinced that some climate change denier in the UCP is going to have enough influence to do despicable things.
You don't think the leader of a party - who claimed climate change was a hoax - can do despicable things? That's about as much influence as one could have over policy formation. Holy moly. That is some Supreme Commander-esque thinking.
Ozy_Flame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2018, 04:33 PM   #393
PaperBagger'14
Franchise Player
 
PaperBagger'14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Cowtown
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame View Post
You don't think the leader of a party - who claimed climate change was a hoax - can do despicable things? That's about as much influence as one could have over policy formation. Holy moly. That is some Supreme Commander-esque thinking.
Quote:
Kenney has said that while he agrees humans are causing climate change, he also believes there is a “legitimate range of perspectives about exactly to what degree” humans are responsible.

“I have said that there is a debate of the precise degree to which there are anthropogenic (human-caused) causes of climate change. I agree with the scientific consensus that there are significant, very significant, anthropogenic causes of climate change.”
https://www.nationalobserver.com/201...climate-change

Ok so there goes that. Drawing parallels between a climate change denier (false) and despicable acts is a bit of a stretch. Seems disingenuous to build a false narrative about someone and trot it out as truth while condemning others.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilboimcdavid View Post
Eakins wasn't a bad coach, the team just had 2 bad years, they should've been more patient.
PaperBagger'14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2018, 05:20 PM   #394
Ozy_Flame

Posted the 6 millionth post!
 
Ozy_Flame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14 View Post
https://www.nationalobserver.com/201...climate-change

Ok so there goes that. Drawing parallels between a climate change denier (false) and despicable acts is a bit of a stretch. Seems disingenuous to build a false narrative about someone and trot it out as truth while condemning others.
That's great, and I'm glad it was in the past - I am well aware of that. But that's not the point I was making. The point I was getting at is saying that a person does not have influence on decision-making. That's just not true, especially as the unequivocally most important person the party as the party leader representing that brand of politics.

Whether he makes good decisions or bad, the leader has considerable influence to shape policy for the party.

Furthermore, it's also not unreasonable to suggest a pattern of political leanings and behavior has the propensity to make voters question the motives and their leadership. Haven't many CP'ers in this very thread said the exact same thing about Notley?
Ozy_Flame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2018, 06:18 PM   #395
GGG
Franchise Player
 
GGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shazam View Post
For cities, the best thing is to put in progressive property taxation. Again, incredibly unpopular but very efficient and much more fair than the current regressive taxation.
Can you explain why you see property tax based on value a regressive form of taxation?
GGG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2018, 06:29 PM   #396
bizaro86
Franchise Player
 
bizaro86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG View Post
Can you explain why you see property tax based on value a regressive form of taxation?
In a world moving away from formalized employment and toward self employment, taxing consumption is easier to enforce, imo.

And our current property tax is basically a consumption tax. It's based on the value of the real estate you use each year.
bizaro86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2018, 06:31 PM   #397
Dion
Not a casual user
 
Dion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Default

Bell: Notley NDP runs away from ghost of its past

https://calgarysun.com/opinion/colum...st-of-its-past

I have to admit that a facebook comment at the end of the above article had me laughing

Quote:
Dave Fryett:

No new approvals. No new approvals. No new approvals. Probably shouted inside the last NDP cabinet meeting. That would explain their unwillingness to do any kind of concrete action to support Trans Mountain. Things like Lougheed would have done like shut the gate valves to BC and Eastern Canada, eliminating the carbon tax or taking the BC and federal government to court for damages. All we get is more carbon taxes and meaningless platitudes like social licence will save us in the end. Oh look, there is another social justice warrior fad trending on twitter, conversion therapy, lets make a mountain out of a molehill like we did on GSA's and get the gullible left wing social media mobs to ramp up the hate machine against the UCP. Anything to distract from the real record of a failing economy and widespread economic misery. Now lets chant the economy is improving, the economy is improving, the economy is improving. If we chant it enough we make it true, George Orwell's dystopian 1984 is here. They must pass around the bong in those cabinet meetings. Simply insanity that they are in power and ruining the province
__________________
Dion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2018, 07:03 PM   #398
Flash Walken
Lifetime Suspension
 
Flash Walken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Void between Darkness and Light
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague View Post
It's not really that baffling to me. I suspect much of it was motivated by the reality that the bleak scientific consensus about climate change would be simplified and seized on by opportunistic zealous environmentalist ideologues to crusade against energy projects (as if they needed more ammunition). Some of the people doing the research are themselves among that cadre. I don't think that's a justifiable reason for trying to hush up research but I immediately assumed that was why they were doing it.
Scientific evidence made their non-science based policy decisions look bad, so rather than accept the science, they chose to destroy it.
Flash Walken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2018, 08:01 PM   #399
GGG
Franchise Player
 
GGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bizaro86 View Post
In a world moving away from formalized employment and toward self employment, taxing consumption is easier to enforce, imo.

And our current property tax is basically a consumption tax. It's based on the value of the real estate you use each year.
Maybe I misread but I thought he was calling property tax regressive and proposing the city change. I more or less agree with you on the role property tax plays.
GGG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2018, 09:07 PM   #400
PaperBagger'14
Franchise Player
 
PaperBagger'14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Cowtown
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame View Post
That's great, and I'm glad it was in the past - I am well aware of that. But that's not the point I was making. The point I was getting at is saying that a person does not have influence on decision-making. That's just not true, especially as the unequivocally most important person the party as the party leader representing that brand of politics.

Whether he makes good decisions or bad, the leader has considerable influence to shape policy for the party.

Furthermore, it's also not unreasonable to suggest a pattern of political leanings and behavior has the propensity to make voters question the motives and their leadership. Haven't many CP'ers in this very thread said the exact same thing about Notley?
Of course the leader has influence, I'm personally more concerned about my backbencher plug which wont. I honestly questioned Notleys belief before about pipelines but I truthfully believe she wants them now, despite her previous stance.

Peoples beliefs and values can and do change, Notley is proof of that, but unfortunately it's too little too late.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilboimcdavid View Post
Eakins wasn't a bad coach, the team just had 2 bad years, they should've been more patient.
PaperBagger'14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:05 AM.

Calgary Flames
2023-24




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021