Alberta Politics Thread v2

[Ozy_Flame]

Don't forget that becoming a politician - or running for office - does not automatically qualify you to make sound economic decisions. Many people who are glued to their political parties assume their parties are making sound economic decisions and run by competent people.

Someone who has ####ty personal finances and a spotty credit history can get into office just as easily as a tight-ass budget conscious financial planner.

More often than not people are no more qualified than you or anyone else is.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Yeah, exactly. Which is the exact reason I don't want to have to vote for some idiot who denies climate change and scientific research in favour of far-right hoax websites he finds on the internet. If he is unable to change his views on that, there's no way he's going to be able to reasonably view evidence contrary to his current opinion no matter how correct that evidence is. I just want someone who can make the best possible informed decisions on the evidence provided. He has shown his inability to do so.

I know it's a unicorn, but I want a fiscally conservative party, socially liberal party that cares about all it's constitutes. One who will do it's best to bring back jobs, but make sure those jobs provide reasonable living wages so they aren't exploiting the impoverished. Realize that the environment is important but not hammer the Alberta economy unreasonably to build some sort of social licence that, evidently, doesn't matter.

But half the time I'm accused of being an NDP supporter and half the time I'm accused of being too far-right because if you don't blindly follow your party, defend even the worst candidates, then you're the 'enemy.'

[Flash Walken]

I'd like to point out that the UCP are not the fiscally conservative party, most of their long held economic policies of previous governments do not have the support of leading economists and often act in contrast to that of modern economics.

It's one of the reasons why whenever the credit rating for the province is downgraded the credit rating agency specifically points out the lack of ability to generate revenue is at odds with maintaining a higher credit rating.

The PC Government that predates the UCP were fiscally reckless, operating a government for decades on volatile resource revenue rather than sound economic policy. No serious economist in the world would endorse a fiscal policy where 20% of the province's operating budget is dictated by the price of a volatile commodity.

It's a reckless mismanagement of the economy built ENTIRELY on a foundation of ideological decision making that has no basis in modern economics.

It's zealotry, pure and simple.

[Oling_Roachinen]

But they got Conservative right in their name!

It's not like that's what Jason Kenney isn't going to campaign on, but yes when your predecessors policy was essentially "let's hope oil stays at $120/bbl" it's hard to argue that.

[dino7c]

So what is the NDP going to campaign on? social licence?

[nik-]

Originally Posted by dino7c

So what is the NDP going to campaign on? social licence?

Second time's the charm?

[woob]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I'd like to point out that the UCP are not the fiscally conservative party, most of their long held economic policies of previous governments do not have the support of leading economists and often act in contrast to that of modern economics.



It's one of the reasons why whenever the credit rating for the province is downgraded the credit rating agency specifically points out the lack of ability to generate revenue is at odds with maintaining a higher credit rating.



The PC Government that predates the UCP were fiscally reckless, operating a government for decades on volatile resource revenue rather than sound economic policy. No serious economist in the world would endorse a fiscal policy where 20% of the province's operating budget is dictated by the price of a volatile commodity.



It's a reckless mismanagement of the economy built ENTIRELY on a foundation of ideological decision making that has no basis in modern economics.



It's zealotry, pure and simple.

Yeah but low taxes, man!

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by woob

Yeah but low taxes, man!

For the rich!

[Vedder]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I'd like to point out that the UCP are not the fiscally conservative party, most of their long held economic policies of previous governments do not have the support of leading economists and often act in contrast to that of modern economics.

.

Your larger point is right, but Jim Prentice actually campaigned on addressing some of the structural revenue problems in Alberta and got destroyed for it.

The lack of a truly fiscally conservetive party in Alberta is mainly because it’s not politically viable.

[Ducay]

Like I said, Climate change is hardly a provincial issue when it is more global in scale (ie can we get China to wise the F-up) when it comes to making a difference. We need Trudeau to go to bat, not Kenney or Notley. "We have to do our part" is a big hoax. Until China, and thus the US, makes big changes, you're just neutering your own economy to give yourself a good feeling.

Spoiler alert: nothing Canada does will change the outcome of climate change. If you're making your decision based on that issue alone, provincially, you're basically admitting to wasting your vote on a non-provincial issue.

"I didn't vote for that CBE trustee because they don't believe the rain in Spain falls mostly on the plain!"

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Ducay

Like I said, Climate change is hardly a provincial issue when it is more global in scale (ie can we get China to wise the F-up) when it comes to making a difference.

Again, a complete failure to read the posts and understand the point. It's not whether or not climate change should matter to Albertans. It's that he denies it completely.

Whether the Earth is spherical or flat, it doesn't really matter to Alberta politics. But I imagine, or at least hope, you would be hesitant in voting-in a flat earth believer? It shows a lack of critical thinking, reasonability and rationality when one of the UCP doesn't believe in science and posts hoaxes on his Facebook page. And even a lack of conviction, 10 years he posts that global warming is a hoax, and when confronted about it he tries to minimize his belief.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Vedder

Your larger point is right, but Jim Prentice actually campaigned on addressing some of the structural revenue problems in Alberta and got destroyed for it.

The lack of a truly fiscally conservetive party in Alberta is mainly because it’s not politically viable.

Nah, I don't think that's accurate. He campaigned on policies that ate around the edge of the issue that would justify service cuts. Things like increasing fees for campsites etc, when the 'structural revenue problem' couldn't be addressed without a significant cut to services or a significant raise in royalties, income and corporate taxes. The 'structural revenue problem' is a roughly 20% shortfall in revenue. That's ####ing massive.

I agree though that it is politically untenable in Alberta to raise revenue from taxes, but his policy proposals were still an extension of the fiscal policies that run counter to mainstream economics.

Any party looking to credibly claim to be conservative fiscally would need to directly address this shortfall in spectacular fashion. In my opinion the NDP have displayed a more fundamentally sound understanding of economics than any PC government since Lougheed, but no one would confuse them with being the most desirable stewards of the economy.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Again, a complete failure to read the posts and understand the point. It's not whether or not climate change should matter to Albertans. It's that he denies it completely.

Whether the Earth is spherical or flat, it doesn't really matter to Alberta politics. But I imagine, or at least hope, you would be hesitant in voting-in a flat earth believer? It shows a lack of critical thinking, reasonability and rationality when one of the UCP doesn't believe in science and posts hoaxes on his Facebook page. And even a lack of conviction, 10 years he posts that global warming is a hoax, and when confronted about it he tries to minimize his belief.

There is more than enough scholarly material and research out there that talks about the "point of no return" being only a couple of decades away (e.g. Earth System Dynamics open access journals), depending on what metrics you are looking at. Even then we are seeing wilder, more severe weather patterns, temperature shifts, and naturally (or not) occurring phenomena.

For politicians to put their heads in the sand and pretend it's not true is disastrous at best. No better than flat-earthers or anti-vaccers. And jumping to extreme conclusions (it'll kill our economy) is also unhelpful and sending the wrong message. The world needs to remove itself from over-reliance on fossil fuels; not obliterate commodity use completely. I think that tends to get lost.

[Jacks]

Your larger point is right, but Jim Prentice actually campaigned on addressing some of the structural revenue problems in Alberta and got destroyed for it.

The lack of a truly fiscally conservetive party in Alberta is mainly because it’s not politically viable.

Prentice didn't lose because of his campaign platform, he lost because of a decade of baggage from his predecessors ending in the disastrous Redford government. He could have campaigned on finding world peace and still lost the election.

[you&me]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Don't forget that becoming a politician - or running for office - does not automatically qualify you to make sound economic decisions. Many people who are glued to their political parties assume their parties are making sound economic decisions and run by competent people.

Someone who has ####ty personal finances and a spotty credit history can get into office just as easily as a tight-ass budget conscious financial planner.

More often than not people are no more qualified than you or anyone else is.

I've come to hold the belief that Canadian politics is such a messy sport with relatively little payoff that anyone running for office is really not that qualified for whatever post they end up being appointed to.

In the grand scheme of attracting the best and brightest, politics simply comes up short on almost every front.

Want to make a difference in the world? Good luck affecting real change... you're simply one vote, or one cog in the machine.

Want to feel a sense of accomplishment at the end of the day? Ummm... Talk about running on the spot.

Want to make bank? The salaries and pensions are (comparatively) laughable.

This is all while your every move and action (before and after being elected) is scrutinized under a microscope.

The real best and brightest are too busy actually getting #### done and making money in their chosen field. Politics gets to draw from everyone that's left...

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by Jacks

Prentice didn't lose because of his campaign platform, he lost because of a decade of baggage from his predecessors ending in the disastrous Redford government. He could have campaigned on finding world peace and still lost the election.

I don’t believe that at all. Prentice was sitting at over 40% in polls as of December 2014. He had strong support up until his budget. What lost it for him was asking Albertans to look in the mirror then raising taxes on the people and not touching the corporations. His whole campaign came off as arrogant and out of touch with the people. The problem was that he wasn’t wrong and his budget was probably going to be a fairly effective one, way better than anything the Wildrose tried to throw out there.

So he lost his support of the right who embraced “no new taxes” and the Center who didn’t want to see a wave of Klein era cuts. There may be a stain of previous PC governments, but his demeanour did it to himself. Why not call an early election when you have 40% support. It wasn’t Redford that took him down, it was him. The only way the past haunted him is that people saw that same arrogance from the PCs before and wanted no part of it, but it was him that acted that way. The worst prt is as a lefty I would take him over Kenney 10 times out of 10 and I think he would have navigated the recession reasonably well.

[SeeGeeWhy]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Kudos to Kenney for coming out

He doesn't have the guts.

Oddly, I think being honest about that might be his best tactic to eradicate that reputation of his party once and for all

[Jacks]

Disagree with that pretty much entirely. 40% is didly squat for a PC party in Alberta, Klein was pulling down way larger support with austerity budgets. The stench of the PC's bled off support and that ridiculous news conference with Danielle Smith crossing the floor was a dagger for his already dropping support. All of the opposition support fell in behind the NDP and the conservative vote was split in two. Don't hope for that to happen again

[Jacks]

The PC's almost lost to the Liberals in 1993 because of spending and deficit.

Klein 1993 44.5% (Klein takes over from the massive debt of the Getty government)
Klein 1997 51.17% (support grows under tough budgets)
Klein 2001 61.9% (support grows even more)
Klein 2004 46.8% (debt paid off, spending taps open up, Klein overstays his welcome and support drops)
Stelmach 2008 52.7& (bounce back after Klein retires, support drops as spending starts to get out of control)
Redford 2012 43.97% (last minute surge on "lake of fire" otherwise support was cratering with poor fiscal management)
Prentice 2015 27.8% (never had a chance)

It's a myth that Albertans won't support a tough budget.

[belsarius]

So 46% of the vote should have been plenty. I just need an explanation of how previous PC governments caused Prentice's support to drop from 46% to 27.8% in 3 months? If Albertans support a tough budget then wouldn't he have gained support? He seemed to think so with the early election call.

Albertans then chose the spending taps party to support instead of the tough budget party. How does eroding support from the previous decade account for this since you seem to imply that the spending is what caused the drop in support.

And to be clear I am under no impression the NDP can win again. Too many seats, especially in Calgary were won by the split-right vote, but I just can't see the narrative that it was previous governments that caused the failure when just 3 months prior to the election he was comfortably in the driver's seat with all that baggage already there.