11,000 AHS workers to lose their jobs

[Trager]

Originally Posted by Scott h

The Foothills currently has a covid outbreak that has infected 46 patients. 11 of them have died so far (25% fatality rate) and many are still sick!!! You probably couldn't pick a WORSE TIME to try and implement an entire hospital wide change over, as the vast majority of the new workers will have never worked in a hospital setting previously.

That is a terrible example. Why are these 25% in the hospital to begin with?

[Jadham]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Here is an interesting read, how Trudeau secretly extended the program in it's present form. That alone makes me not trust him. And then there is the way the entire formula is slanted against the resource based economies like ours. If you honestly believe that Alberta will ever see a payment, let alone stop paying billions more than we receive, then the word gullible comes to mind.

https://calgaryherald.com/news/polit...ive-more-years

You might be willing to accept yet another tax, in the faint hope that it might actually help the province, but I don't trust either the provincial or federal government enough to willingly accept yet another tax.

Actually resource revenues are not included in the equalization formula - see above post #204.

But ok lol. What is better gullible or insane?

"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result".

I am only hearing insanity from the UCP. Nothing new in their playbook.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Jadham

Actually resource revenues are not included in the equalization formula.

But ok lol. What is better gullible or insane?

"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result".

I am only hearing insanity from the UCP. Nothing new in their playbook.

So our oil revenue drops by billions, and we receive zero compensation, and are still expected to supply $10 billion to other provinces. That is proof of how the formula is slanted against us. And that is why Trudeau quietly extended the current formula.

So if the UCP is only spouting insanity, why would you want to trust them by accepting a PST?

[hal53]

Originally Posted by Jadham

Actually resource revenues are not included in the equalization formula - see above post.

But ok lol. What is better gullible or insane?

"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result".

I am only hearing insanity from the UCP. Nothing new in their playbook.

Uh...only Quebec doesn't include their resource revenues in equalization, every other province does..

[Jadham]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

So our oil revenue drops by billions, and we receive zero compensation, and are still expected to supply $10 billion to other provinces. That is proof of how the formula is slanted against us.

So if the UCP is only spouting insanity, why would you want to trust them by accepting a PST?

Umm exactly, the amount we pay to equalization would immediately change. You can go on about what if the formula changes, but we are talking about the current formula, which is killing us (and though extended by Trudeau, the current formula is actually Harper's). You can spend all day talking about what ifs and wishes.

The UCP's playbook, as per their party's forefathers:

-reliance on resource revenue - gone
-tax cuts to companies as per trickle down economics - no help manifesting itself there
-cut public sector and privatize - opaque cost savings, if any, while Shandro and his wife will get rich with their primary care conflict of interest

They haven't proposed a PST. Not having one is their sacred cow.

But okay, why don't you suggest a real way to address this monstrous provincial deficit while still supplying some public services. How would you address the $15 billion + budget shortfall?

[C2C3PO]

Originally Posted by Jadham

I am only hearing insanity from the UCP. Nothing new in their playbook.

Kenney has come out publicly and stated that he would NOT favour introducing a PST until they have exhausted all avenues of cost savings from provincial expenditures, explaining that the public expects that the govt get their house in order before demanding we shell out more from our already over-burdened pockets.

Sounds like real "crazy talk" to me.......

You wanna know what really isn't new? The idea of introducing additional taxes and expecting government spending to diminish. That's like trying to cure drug addiction by giving an addict more drugs. I guess to some that approach works cause you'll eventually kill off the addict just like you'll eventually kill off your tax sources as you bleed people dry, create a larger underground economy and choke off the legitimate economy by removing the incentive to work harder/longer and shrink disposable income further.

[sns2]

Originally Posted by ESOXangler

He can be a real cactus of a human but he does argue reasonably.

In person, he's a prince of a guy

And yes, he does argue reasonably even on issues he is passionate about.

[liar]

Originally Posted by sns2

Then make a law that PST revenue must go towards servicing/paying down debt.

Yeah , kind of like the law the PC implemented just before they lost control of the province about not having elections less than four years apart .... that went well .

[sns2]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

So our oil revenue drops by billions, and we receive zero compensation, and are still expected to supply $10 billion to other provinces. That is proof of how the formula is slanted against us. And that is why Trudeau quietly extended the current formula.

So if the UCP is only spouting insanity, why would you want to trust them by accepting a PST?

Because it is the logical, and equitable next step considering the situation we are currently in, and relative to how provinces and states who do not have oil resources to begin with, in large part handle their revenue issues.

[sns2]

Originally Posted by liar

Yeah , kind of like the law the PC implemented just before they lost control of the province about not having elections less than four years apart .... that went well .

You are preaching to the choir. They are all crooks hell bent on keeping power. The current head crook knows the best way for him to maintain that power is to create dog whistle scapegoats to blame, as he knows most Albertans lick that up.

[Jadham]

Originally Posted by hal53

Uh...only Quebec doesn't include their resource revenues in equalization, every other province does..

Hmm. Yes taxes are compared across the provinces. So us not having a PST is a big loss when compared to other provinces.

Natural resources revenues are not compared across provinces in the same way. But all provinces, including Quebec, have them analyzed.

"In the pre-2004 formula, 100% of natural resource revenues were included in Equalization calculations, but Alberta’s resources were kept out of the standard against which entitlement to Equalization payments was determined. Since 2007, Alberta’s energy resources have been included in the standard, and eligible provinces receive an Equalization payment based on a calculation that either includes 50% of natural resource revenues or excludes those revenues entirely. Eligible provinces automatically receive payments according to the option that yields the larger per capita Equalization payment.

The decision to have two options in relation to natural resource revenues is the result of a political compromise. On one hand, the federal government accepted the recommendations of the Expert Panel on Equalization and Territorial Formula Financing, which – in 2006 – called for 50% inclusion of resource revenues in the Equalization formula.3 On the other hand, the federal government considered itself bound by a pre-2006 election commitment to exclude natural resource revenues from the formula."

[Jadham]

Originally Posted by C2C3PO

Kenney has come out publicly and stated that he would NOT favour introducing a PST until they have exhausted all avenues of cost savings from provincial expenditures, explaining that the public expects that the govt get their house in order before demanding we shell out more from our already over-burdened pockets.

Sounds like real "crazy talk" to me.......

You wanna know what really isn't new? The idea of introducing additional taxes and expecting government spending to diminish. That's like trying to cure drug addiction by giving an addict more drugs. I guess to some that approach works cause you'll eventually kill off the addict just like you'll eventually kill off your tax sources as you bleed people dry, create a larger underground economy and choke off the legitimate economy by removing the incentive to work harder/longer and shrink disposable income further.

We are lacking a tax source that every other province has.

Consumptive taxes, like a PST, do not "kill" the economy - while both personal taxes and business taxes have been shown to do so once they rise above a certain threshold. We will see that in action when Trudeau starts raising those type of taxes in a year or two.

If you want to use an analogy might as well say we are starving ourselves by depriving us a nutrient that every other province has.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by C2C3PO

Kenney has come out publicly and stated that he would NOT favour introducing a PST until they have exhausted all avenues of cost savings from provincial expenditures, explaining that the public expects that the govt get their house in order before demanding we shell out more from our already over-burdened pockets.

Sounds like real "crazy talk" to me.......

You wanna know what really isn't new? The idea of introducing additional taxes and expecting government spending to diminish. That's like trying to cure drug addiction by giving an addict more drugs. I guess to some that approach works cause you'll eventually kill off the addict just like you'll eventually kill off your tax sources as you bleed people dry, create a larger underground economy and choke off the legitimate economy by removing the incentive to work harder/longer and shrink disposable income further.

That is the kind of talk that got him elected. He promised to cut expenses, and was elected. So where did people expect that he would make those cuts? It all comes down to I want cuts, just not cuts that might effect me. We know that the deficit that the NDP were running were not sustainable, so we voted for the cuts

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Jadham

We are lacking a tax source that every other province has.

Consumptive taxes, like a PST, do not "kill" the economy - while both personal taxes and business taxes have been shown to do so once they rise above a certain threshold. We will see that in action when Trudeau starts raising those type of taxes in a year or two.

If you want to use an analogy might as well say we are starving ourselves by depriving us a nutrient that every other province has.

A PST is instant inflation, especially for seniors and people on fixed incomes. Your cost of living is instantly increased, and it goes up the same amount for a senior on a pension or a person on a large wage. The carbon tax is a consumption tax, and how has that benefitted the provinces, or Canada?

[Trager]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

That is the kind of talk that got him elected. He promised to cut expenses, and was elected. So where did people expect that he would make those cuts? It all comes down to I want cuts, just not cuts that might effect me. We know that the deficit that the NDP were running were not sustainable, so we voted for the cuts

AND then what happens if Notley gets voted back in? I am shaking just thinking about it!

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Trager

AND then what happens if Notley gets voted back in? I am shaking just thinking about it!

If Notley gets back in, it will be a race to see whether Notley or Trudeau can bankrupt Alberta first. Trudeau will do what he can to prevent us from making money, and Notley will spend what we have as fast as she can. She will probably hire another 50,000 civil servants to buy more voters.

[ESOXangler]

Originally Posted by hal53

Unless Syncrude is funded solely by the taxpayer, their pensions etc. are irrelevant

Disagree. Pensions for the majority are a result of being competitive with unionized environments. And if the unionized staff of one facility are getting a pension you can sure bet leadership is going to get one. And that ripples thru the industry. The whole point of capitalism is to minimize expenses and increase profit.

And syncrude has had its share of tax payer money. So you're damn rights we can complain. No different than moaning about a carbon tax.

Anyways that's not my point. My point is Kenney and co's buddies will do just fine with the new sifuation and the all these people will be getting less and contributing less to society. Hell with the reduced wages most will qualify for assistance of some type. From housing to child care. And guess who pays for that?

[Trager]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

If Notley gets back in, it will be a race to see whether Notley or Trudeau can bankrupt Alberta first. Trudeau will do what he can to prevent us from making money, and Notley will spend what we have as fast as she can. She will probably hire another 50,000 civil servants to buy more voters.

Exactly!!!!

[C2C3PO]

Jadham I truly appreciate the civil discussion we are having on this topic.

However, by your line of reasoning if consumptive taxes do not diminish spending ( and therefore the economy) then they either have one of two other effects:
1) They increase spending and stimulate the economy; or
2) They have no effect on people's spending habits whatsoever (neutral).

I don't need an economics degree to figure out the right answer is neither of the above !

I will admit that even the talk of adding a PST before any reasonable effort is made to tackle unnecessary govt spending and reduce inefficiencies literally makes my head explode !
I realize other provinces have them and I truly pity them. I don't know how many times I have made a purchase in another province over the phone and they say "Oh, you're from Alberta - you guys don't pay PST. You're so lucky !!!".
In my warped mind I guess I truly resent a certain portion of the population sharing more of the burden than others. If everyone was asked to give an identical amount towards the provincial debt I'd be much more inclined to go along with it but you'd still have to drag me to that point .
And case in point, if consumptive taxes don't really diminish the economy by reducing spending then why do so many people like me who have recreational property in places like BC avoid making any purchases that are absolutely non essential there and instead wait to buy it back in Alberta? Probably the same reason many folks from Saskatchewan and British Columbia travel over to Alberta to shop at the Costco here instead of one relatively close by to where they live. Taxes hurt - plain and simple. Yet it's always the first and simplest solution to government's fiscal shortfalls but they do have negative impacts.

[Jadham]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

A PST is instant inflation, especially for seniors and people on fixed incomes. Your cost of living is instantly increased, and it goes up the same amount for a senior on a pension or a person on a large wage. The carbon tax is a consumption tax, and how has that benefitted the provinces, or Canada?

It is instant inflation only for the year it is initiated.

Many essentials, like food, are PST exempt.

On discretionary items there is PST .... but they are discretionary

Everyone pays.... but the rich guy who buys the high priced items pays more PST at the end of the day because he is spending more.

Exactly, the carbon tax hasn’t killed the economy. The UCP just announced they are adding the $2 billion the provincial carbon tax raised into general revenue.

But I’ll end it there. It’s ok to disagree. And I do like it that the tax GST was reduced in good times. Maybe someday we’ll go back to a flat income tax. I would never favour a new tax in reasonable economic times... which was what the carbon tax felt like.

I do think we should have the lowest PST.. even if it is 1-2% lower.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Jadham

It is instant inflation only for the year it is initiated.

Many essentials, like food, are PST exempt.

On discretionary items there is PST .... but they are discretionary

Everyone pays.... but the rich guy who buys the high priced items pays more PST at the end of the day because he is spending more.

Exactly, the carbon tax hasn’t killed the economy. The UCP just announced they are adding the $2 billion the provincial carbon tax raised into general revenue.

But I’ll end it there. It’s ok to disagree. And I do like it that the tax GST was reduced in good times. Maybe someday we’ll go back to a flat income tax...

The instant inflation is for the first year, and for every year the tax is increased. And it effects clothing and many other products that everyone needs.

My point was that the carbon tax hasn't helped the taxpayers. It cost them more out of pocket, and gained nothing. And pretty much everyone needs to heat their homes, and everyone pays more for every product and every service because of the carbon tax.

[hal53]

Originally Posted by ESOXangler

Disagree. Pensions for the majority are a result of being competitive with unionized environments. And if the unionized staff of one facility are getting a pension you can sure bet leadership is going to get one. And that ripples thru the industry. The whole point of capitalism is to minimize expenses and increase profit.

And syncrude has had its share of tax payer money. So you're damn rights we can complain. No different than moaning about a carbon tax.

Anyways that's not my point. My point is Kenney and co's buddies will do just fine with the new sifuation and the all these people will be getting less and contributing less to society. Hell with the reduced wages most will qualify for assistance of some type. From housing to child care. And guess who pays for that?

Sigh......I'll just leave this alone......

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by hal53

Sigh......I'll just leave this alone......

Anyone that can't see how much revenue that a company like Syncrude brings to Alberta, and to Canada, isn't open to a reasonable discussion. They don't just provide royalty revenue, every employee pays a lot of income tax, as well as all other taxes. The company also purchases products from suppliers all over Canada, which provides even more employment and tax money. And then there is all of the contract work that they supply, more people working and paying taxes. And then there is all of the money that the employees and contractors spend privately, providing even more employment and tax money. So not only do they employ 5000 employees directly, when you consider all of the contractors and businesses that the company and employers keep employed, they provide employment for several thousand more people. And all of those people are paying taxes to the government which is a huge positive cash flow. And that doesn't include the money they donate to the hospitals and other facilities in the province. How many people know that Syncrude has donated a considerable amount to the Stollery?

[amosfella]

Originally Posted by C2C3PO

In my warped mind I guess I truly resent a certain portion of the population sharing more of the burden than others. If everyone was asked to give an identical amount towards the provincial debt I'd be much more inclined to go along with it but you'd still have to drag me to that point .
And case in point, if consumptive taxes don't really diminish the economy by reducing spending then why do so many people like me who have recreational property in places like BC avoid making any purchases that are absolutely non essential there and instead wait to buy it back in Alberta? Probably the same reason many folks from Saskatchewan and British Columbia travel over to Alberta to shop at the Costco here instead of one relatively close by to where they live. Taxes hurt - plain and simple. Yet it's always the first and simplest solution to government's fiscal shortfalls but they do have negative impacts.

I know of people from bc, where 3 or 4 families come to lethbridge together with a 20 foot enclosed trailer, and they go to various businesses in lethbridge, and load that trailer from top to bottom, nose to tail every 3 months.

That bit of the economy is due to not having a PST. Almost every time I go to Costco, I see an enclosed trailer from BC, and the people are loading it full.

My cousin (until he became an empty nester and his wife died) would drive to Calgary Costco every few months from Saskatoon to get large quantity of food, office supplies, etc. for his family and his wife's sister's family. This was most prevalent when his one adopted son was a teen, and would clean up over a dozen eggs for breakfast without thinking twice and be hungry again an hour later. Now that it's just him, he says that its not as worth it.

Again, he said that the savings from not paying PST easily covered the cost of driving to do that shopping. And he'd fill fuel in Alberta as well.

The argument that is made by people that think that taxing more can help bring prosperity is like trying to raise yourself up by standing in a bucket and lifting on the handle. The idea of having taxes at the 'average' that many people use is also a fallacy. The big companies that are looking for places to build a long term project often come to deals with the government about tax rates and the length of time for said tax rates that supersede the tax legislation.

They want the best deal for their dollar, and mere pennies in difference can cause them to go elsewhere. They want to pay the largest amount to their shareholders as is possible. It's not just provincial and federal taxes that they look it, its property taxes, land values, projected land values in the future, etc. This is why the bidding process for the latest Amazon warehouse was so competitive.

Also, kenny for all his faults announced that he and his staff were taking a pay cut. I think that pay cuts across the entire civil service may be coming. Albertans cannot really afford another tax. In fact, most of the purchase price of many things one buys is hidden taxes. Have a look at gasoline and what the wholesale price is, and what the taxes are. Enough to make you throw up in your mouth.

[ESOXangler]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Anyone that can't see how much revenue that a company like Syncrude brings to Alberta, and to Canada, isn't open to a reasonable discussion. They don't just provide royalty revenue, every employee pays a lot of income tax, as well as all other taxes. The company also purchases products from suppliers all over Canada, which provides even more employment and tax money. And then there is all of the contract work that they supply, more people working and paying taxes. And then there is all of the money that the employees and contractors spend privately, providing even more employment and tax money. So not only do they employ 5000 employees directly, when you consider all of the contractors and businesses that the company and employers keep employed, they provide employment for several thousand more people. And all of those people are paying taxes to the government which is a huge positive cash flow. And that doesn't include the money they donate to the hospitals and other facilities in the province. How many people know that Syncrude has donated a considerable amount to the Stollery?

Whoa whoa whoa taker easy on the straw man! I didn't say anything negative about syncrude. Not one thing. And as a person who has spent considerable time at the stollery I do know. But good distraction!

[Jadham]

Well I guess its soon time to do more exciting things than chat on an Internet forum.

Guess I will round my thoughts out with a few points.

While some people may come across to Alberta to do some PST free shopping (especially if they live near the border)... the vast majority of BC and Saskatchewan residents do not. So the “loss of revenue to competition” is not common or large.

We are not talking about a tax to “grow the economy”. We are talking about a tax that will raise government revenues without appreciably hindering the economy ... which has been shown consumptive taxes can do. The PST, hopefully coupled with prudent cuts, can better address the financial apocalypse this provinces is in. And maybe will mean less AHS cuts or less privatization (what this thread is about).

A PST for Alberta has a double effect of both raising tax revenue AND lowering our equalization payments according to the current formula.

The carbon tax sucks and I will never defend it.

Happy hunting.

[Scott h]

Originally Posted by Jadham

A PST for Alberta has a double effect of both raising tax revenue AND lowering our equalization payments according to the current formula.


Happy hunting.

It's very enlightening to see your info on the equalization payments. Pay a provincial sales tax into Alberta coffers and send less $$$ east .....

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Scott h

It's very enlightening to see your info on the equalization payments. Pay a provincial sales tax into Alberta coffers and send less $$$ east .....

Providing the equalization formula isn't changed. Do you trust Trudeau not to change it in response?

[sns2]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Providing the equalization formula isn't changed. Do you trust Trudeau not to change it in response?

This is like saying do you trust it's safe to have a crap cuz there is a mosquito in the bathroom.

Sent from my SM-A705W using Tapatalk

[Soulcousin]

Originally Posted by sns2

This is like saying do you trust it's safe to have a crap cuz there is a mosquito in the bathroom.

Sent from my SM-A705W using Tapatalk

Yeah, but what if you knew that mosquito had malaria? And we all know, where theres one mosquito there is usually more around