Kenney’s Byelection landslide.

[silverdoctor]

Originally Posted by bobalong

Nice try, but I do not hate the rest of Canada. My dislike is for people who choose to move here and then display their defeatist attitude, "destroyed Alberta", if that isn't a defeatist attitude I have never seen one. Alberta may not currently be as prosperous as it once was, but destroyed.........hardly.

And somehow "all but" becomes destroyed. who's got the defeatist attitude?

How's Alberta doing at the moment? How much of a discount is the USA getting from Alberta oil?

[jungleboy]

Originally Posted by silverdoctor

So just because you vote, you feel that gives you the right to crow about what's happened to Alberta? The PC's historically drove Alberta into the ground, and the NDP is making it no better.

I have no political affiliation Jungleboy, doubt I ever will. To me, no government has the interest of Canadians in mind, they are just in it for themselves.

If down the road I see someone worth voting for? I'll vote. Had Brian Jean been the man, I would have voted for him, would have gotten off my arse and campaigned for him, but alas, it's going to be the same old and that's what the old boys on AO want. I'm not voting for Kenney or Notley.

Yes absolutely !, because I could be bothered to vote.
As for as you claiming you would have voted for Brian Jean and campaigned for him? That's BS and you know it. He was "the man" in the last election yet you couldn't be bothered to go out and vote. I will suggest that apathy and don't give a crap has more to do with it than the quality of the politicians as you claim...ZERO credibility on this issue.

[silverdoctor]

Originally Posted by jungleboy

Yes absolutely !, because I could be bothered to vote.
As for as you claiming you would have voted for Brian Jean and campaigned for him? That's BS and you know it. He was "the man" in the last election yet you couldn't be bothered to go out and vote. I will suggest that apathy and don't give a crap has more to do with it than the quality of the politicians as you claim...ZERO credibility on this issue.

It's funny. It's always someone else's fault. All of Alberta's problems are someone else's fault, including those that don't vote now.

Jean didn't stand a chance of forming a government last time around, didn't have time and Prentice made sure of it. I'm really surprised Jean got so many seats and was the only opposition really. This time around, he could have kicked the NDP to the curb - but now we'll never know.

Have a good day.

[jungleboy]

wind blowing in here?

[79ford]

Originally Posted by hal53

You have to like all the people from other provinces that moved here in the last 10 years because their home province was in the crapper and there was no work, only to tell us how awful Alberta is and proceed to help elect the same type of dimwits that flushed their home province down the toilet.

Alberta uses resource revenue to heavily subsidize social spending... that is a petro state. A fiscally conservative state like norway, uses its actual revenue to run the state while saving the non renewable money.

I remember you cheering for prentice in the last election.... or maybe wildrose until ol Dani whipped her wildrose shirt off to reveal she was just another pc, lol


Kenney is a career politician and he is just as slippery as synthetic hydrualic oil just like prentice.

Harper cons have pulled off getting trudeau elected federally and the ndp election in alberta.



Face it, the two current provincial and federal governments are in power because everyone wanted anyone but Harper or his lackeys in power. Dear jeebers, a harper lackey got the ndp voted in in alberta out of all places!!! Hahahaha

Harper was trudeaus prime campaign leverage, canada elected a dram teacher to get harper out.

Anyone who does not recognize the risk of using the harper brand to garner votes is silly, look who lost the last round of elections.... you dont pick from the losing teams, thats tantamount to chelsea clinton running for the next presidency.



And hal, for some one like you who moans and complains about people from other provinces... you should be a big ndp supporter, cause aint no one coming out here for work these days

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by 79ford

Alberta uses resource revenue to heavily subsidize social spending... that is a petro state. A fiscally conservative state like norway, uses its actual revenue to run the state while saving the non renewable money.

I remember you cheering for prentice in the last election.... or maybe wildrose until ol Dani whipped her wildrose shirt off to reveal she was just another pc, lol


Kenney is a career politician and he is just as slippery as synthetic hydrualic oil just like prentice.

Harper cons have pulled off getting trudeau elected federally and the ndp election in alberta.



Face it, the two current provincial and federal governments are in power because everyone wanted anyone but Harper or his lackeys in power. Dear jeebers, a harper lackey got the ndp voted in in alberta out of all places!!! Hahahaha

Harper was trudeaus prime campaign leverage, canada elected a dram teacher to get harper out.

Anyone who does not recognize the risk of using the harper brand to garner votes is silly, look who lost the last round of elections.... you dont pick from the losing teams, thats tantamount to chelsea clinton running for the next presidency.



And hal, for some one like you who moans and complains about people from other provinces... you should be a big ndp supporter, cause aint no one coming out here for work these days

Lots of made up statements with no substance.

However yes. Alberta has always relied on royalties to pave the way. Klein rolled that back. Socialists rolled it in Again. The Notley Crew have covered it in solid gold.

Harper had nothing to do with Alberta. That was Stelmach and Redford. Entrenchment of politicians is always present. Fed liberals rebuilt their problems in weeks after being elected and continue to nose dive.

You should of voted better. Non socialist. Your fault. Not Harper.

[hal53]

Originally Posted by 79ford

Alberta uses resource revenue to heavily subsidize social spending... that is a petro state. A fiscally conservative state like norway, uses its actual revenue to run the state while saving the non renewable money.

I remember you cheering for prentice in the last election.... or maybe wildrose until ol Dani whipped her wildrose shirt off to reveal she was just another pc, lol


Kenney is a career politician and he is just as slippery as synthetic hydrualic oil just like prentice.

Harper cons have pulled off getting trudeau elected federally and the ndp election in alberta.



Face it, the two current provincial and federal governments are in power because everyone wanted anyone but Harper or his lackeys in power. Dear jeebers, a harper lackey got the ndp voted in in alberta out of all places!!! Hahahaha

Harper was trudeaus prime campaign leverage, canada elected a dram teacher to get harper out.

Anyone who does not recognize the risk of using the harper brand to garner votes is silly, look who lost the last round of elections.... you dont pick from the losing teams, thats tantamount to chelsea clinton running for the next presidency.



And hal, for some one like you who moans and complains about people from other provinces... you should be a big ndp supporter, cause aint no one coming out here for work these days

Thanks for sharing your astute political view points, I will value them as exactly what I paid for them (you should sit up straighter in your chair, things are going over your head again)

[dmcbride]

Originally Posted by 79ford

Alberta uses resource revenue to heavily subsidize social spending... that is a petro state. A fiscally conservative state like norway, uses its actual revenue to run the state while saving the non renewable money.

I remember you cheering for prentice in the last election.... or maybe wildrose until ol Dani whipped her wildrose shirt off to reveal she was just another pc, lol


Kenney is a career politician and he is just as slippery as synthetic hydrualic oil just like prentice.

Harper cons have pulled off getting trudeau elected federally and the ndp election in alberta.



Face it, the two current provincial and federal governments are in power because everyone wanted anyone but Harper or his lackeys in power. Dear jeebers, a harper lackey got the ndp voted in in alberta out of all places!!! Hahahaha

Harper was trudeaus prime campaign leverage, canada elected a dram teacher to get harper out.

Anyone who does not recognize the risk of using the harper brand to garner votes is silly, look who lost the last round of elections.... you dont pick from the losing teams, thats tantamount to chelsea clinton running for the next presidency.



And hal, for some one like you who moans and complains about people from other provinces... you should be a big ndp supporter, cause aint no one coming out here for work these days

Do you think Norway would do so well with other provinces to support and no access to tide water?

As for the Harper speech, you do realize Alberta voted for him last Federal election right?

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by dmcbride

Do you think Norway would do so well with other provinces to support and no access to tide water?

As for the Harper speech, you do realize Alberta voted for him last Federal election right?

Not to mention what is the average production from an Alberta well versus a norway well.

I shake my head when people don't have the knowledge yet proceed to put themselves out as an oil and gas expert.

[79ford]

Originally Posted by dmcbride

Do you think Norway would do so well with other provinces to support and no access to tide water?

As for the Harper speech, you do realize Alberta voted for him last Federal election right?

Yeah...... but we are talking about what alberta votes for, all I am pointing out is a harper conservative didnt do so well in the last election and the unpopular conservative party he ran swallowed the popular conservative party and now they have harper lackey part two running for re-election.

All I am saying is the same strategy may not work so well the second time around

[79ford]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

Not to mention what is the average production from an Alberta well versus a norway well.

I shake my head when people don't have the knowledge yet proceed to put themselves out as an oil and gas expert.

You dont quite catch what i am saying.... i am comparing the revenue model of the two states. If norway flushed their trillion dollar wealth fund down the toilet their operati g model would not suffer as regular revenue runs the state where as alberta subsidizes social spending with resource royalties like saudi arabia, venezuala, nigeria etc etc

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by 79ford

You dont quite catch what i am saying.... i am comparing the revenue model of the two states. If norway flushed their trillion dollar wealth fund down the toilet their operati g model would not suffer as regular revenue runs the state where as alberta subsidizes social spending with resource royalties like saudi arabia, venezuala, nigeria etc etc

Ok. Let's compare.

Population Alberta 4.067 MM

Population Norway. 5.233 MM

Oil & Gas revenue Alberta 2016

Oil & Gas revenue Norway 2016

GDP Alberta 2016. $3.097 billion

GDP Norway 2016 $15.4 billion

Personal Tax rate Alberta 2016

Personal Tax rate Norway 2016

Now fill in the blanks.

Also Norway doesn't pay billions in transfer payments every year to Quebec and Ontario.

[Taco]

[BuckCuller]

Originally Posted by silverdoctor

That has to be the funniest thing I've seen you post.

Lets look at Harpers track record on Alberta oil for a moment. Obama (real or perceived) stood hard on global warming or climate change - whatever you want to call it. If you don't believe there's something going on environmentally - go step outside. Be it man made, or polar shift, whatever, Alberta is definitely warming up.

When Harper decided to stand on the world stage, remove Canada from the Kyoto accord and fight with every bloody environmental group on the go - he painted a rather large target on Alberta's back. Why did Obama kill keystone? Because Harper couldn't shut his mouth. Politically, Alberta was screwed at that point, yet again. Ethical oil, yeah - environmentalists dug in hard, Harper dug in harder. Who won again?

Enter Trump, passes Keystone - then an oil spill in South Dakota. Pipeline built by Americans using US steel - according to Trump - but Canada takes the blame for the spill. Yeah, Alberta oil sands are looking really good on the world stage.

What is WCS selling to the USA for at the moment? What discounts?

Kenney is threatening to go to war with the BC NDP over Kinder Morgan? Yeah, who's going to win that fight?

I'll be sitting back with a beer and a bag of popcorn if Kenney gets elected. NDP or UCP, frying pan or fire, that's your choices. Alberta is going to lose more.

Your saying that the way to get things done for Alberta is to do nothing at all?

That makes zero sense. If you want to get things done you have to fight for it, validate it, negotiate it not just lay down and stay silent.
Kenny will win the Kinder Morgan fight.

[79ford]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

Ok. Let's compare.

Population Alberta 4.067 MM

Population Norway. 5.233 MM

Oil & Gas revenue Alberta 2016

Oil & Gas revenue Norway 2016

GDP Alberta 2016. $3.097 billion

GDP Norway 2016 $15.4 billion

Personal Tax rate Alberta 2016

Personal Tax rate Norway 2016

Now fill in the blanks.

Also Norway doesn't pay billions in transfer payments every year to Quebec and Ontario.

Maybe albertans just realized they are actually ndp'ers? Wonton government spending funded by resource revenue for the last 15 years....maybe the ndp got voted in because they promised to keep the taps on? And will get voted in if some one threatens to turn the taps off?


Albertans dont like taxes and we love social/ infrastructure spending.... only problem is the resource revenue disappeared. So either billions in cuts or billions in taxes. Taxes are essentially only low because alberta subsidizes social spending with resource revenue and we use soo much resource money to cover the budget you really cant raise taxes or hack the budget in a manner that will be palatable


Lopping out 10 billion to balance a budget or getting enough taxes to even meet halfway will be pretty rough lol.

[silverdoctor]

I've never seen a group with so much bitterness in my life. You're like a bunch of spoiled kids hanging on to their toys, they're MINE!

Many/most of you hate immigration, can't tolerate people from other provinces living here, bash the rest of Canada - especially Quebec - every chance you get... And still have the nerve to believe you write a cheque to Quebec every year.

Without Canada, the US and rest of the world, you wouldn't have an oil patch.


So... Feel free to knock on every door in Alberta, get enough people together (if they don't laugh you off their doorstep), and force a vote for separation from Canada.

Landlocked country within Canada? Another US state? Your choice.

[BuckCuller]

Quebec Proves Canada's Equalization Payments Are Not Always Equal

Appeared in the Huffington Post
Michael Binnion, CEO of Questerre Energy and head of the Quebec Oil and Gas Association, has a great blog post up in which he discusses the impact that equalization payments have on Quebec's energy and natural resource policy.

Looking at Quebec's budget, Binnion observes:

It seems to me the Quebec budget actually exposes a huge problem and many Quebec commentators have pointed it out. Quebec is being paid by the Federal Government for reduced resource royalties and related taxes. Worse if Quebec increased the price of Hydro, increased its mining royalties or developed its oil and gas discoveries, the Federal Government would penalize them.

What Mr. Binnion is pointing out is the moral hazard inherent in the equalization system, or, for that matter, in most any insurance or social welfare system. According to the OECD, Moral hazard describes behaviour when agents do not bear the full cost of their actions and are thus more likely to take such actions.

There are many examples of moral hazard one could cite, but consider what happens when governments become the disaster insurer of last resort, or otherwise transfer the costs of risk-taking from those who take the risk to those who bear the cost.

As researchers at the Wharton Risk Center observe,

Highly subsidized premiums or premiums artificially compressed by regulations, without clear communication on the actual risk facing individuals and businesses, encourage development of hazard-prone areas in ways that are costly to both the individuals who locate there (when the disaster strikes) as well as others who are likely to incur some of the costs of bailing out victims following the next disaster, either at a state level through ex post residual market assessments or through federal taxes in the case of federal relief or tax breaks.

In the case of Quebec, the people of the province do not have to bear the full cost of their decisions to suppress the economic activities of mining or fossil fuel production, because the rest of Canada will make up foregone revenues through equalization payments. Some people might think that sounds like a good deal: after all, Quebec gets to have a high quality of life without having to dirty its hands with things like energy and natural resource production.

Alas, as the economists say, there's no such thing as a free lunch: with the free ride comes dependency, and eventually decay. As Binnion observes:

The Government of Quebec is like a person on Government assistance. If they get a job their assistance goes down. If they lose a job their assistance goes up. In Provinces like Alberta we need to realize that equalization is not something we do for Quebec - it's something we do to them! A model of producing more than you consume is sustainable for a society, but a model of consuming more than you produce is not.

As Fred McMahon of the Fraser Institute proved in an award-winning essay, the situation is not unique to Quebec -- transfers to Atlantic Canada for economic development can also create economic distortions perversely retarding development in Atlantic Canada:

Government influence in the marketplace also operates through a number of other channels: economic development programs, tax policy and rulings, direct and indirect subsidies, etc. When government does step into the marketplace to influence the distribution of resources, the link between price and the most productive use of a resource is broken, and resources can be misallocated to less efficient uses to the detriment of the economy.

Binnion closes out his blog post on an optimistic note, pointing out that it need not be this way for Quebec, any more than it had to persist in Atlantic Canada:

Newfoundland fought the Federal Government and insisted on a deal that did not penalize them for developing Hibernia or Voisey's Bay. Today Newfoundland is a have province. If it worked for Newfoundland it will work for other Provinces too.

Let us hope that Quebec's public -- and her decision makers -- come to understand the moral hazard of equalization payments and reconsider their antipathy to the valuable economic activities that are energy and natural resource development.

[bobalong]

Originally Posted by silverdoctor

I've never seen a group with so much bitterness in my life. You're like a bunch of spoiled kids hanging on to their toys, they're MINE!

Many/most of you hate immigration, can't tolerate people from other provinces living here, bash the rest of Canada - especially Quebec - every chance you get... And still have the nerve to believe you write a cheque to Quebec every year.

Without Canada, the US and rest of the world, you wouldn't have an oil patch.


So... Feel free to knock on every door in Alberta, get enough people together (if they don't laugh you off their doorstep), and force a vote for separation from Canada.

Landlocked country within Canada? Another US state? Your choice.

You really have no clue about Alberta or Albertans, just continue to constantly slag Alberta and Albertans. We have many immigrants come to this province and for the most part welcome them, it is immigrants like you that we do not need. You complain about everything and are obviously to lazy to help effect any positive change. You only come to take, take, take, but want to contribute nothing, immigrants like that we do not want. You really need to go home.

[BuckCuller]

Truth is not bitterness it’s FREEDOM.

[silverdoctor]

Originally Posted by bobalong

You really have no clue about Alberta or Albertans, just continue to constantly slag Alberta and Albertans. We have many immigrants come to this province and for the most part welcome them, it is immigrants like you that we do not need. You complain about everything and are obviously to lazy to help effect any positive change. You only come to take, take, take, but want to contribute nothing, immigrants like that we do not want. You really need to go home.

How have I slagged Albertans? I've slagged your politicians.

And take take take? What exactly am I taking?

[silverdoctor]

Originally Posted by BuckCuller

Quebec Proves Canada's Equalization Payments Are Not Always Equal

Appeared in the Huffington Post
Michael Binnion, CEO of Questerre Energy and head of the Quebec Oil and Gas Association, has a great blog post up in which he discusses the impact that equalization payments have on Quebec's energy and natural resource policy.

Looking at Quebec's budget, Binnion observes:

It seems to me the Quebec budget actually exposes a huge problem and many Quebec commentators have pointed it out. Quebec is being paid by the Federal Government for reduced resource royalties and related taxes. Worse if Quebec increased the price of Hydro, increased its mining royalties or developed its oil and gas discoveries, the Federal Government would penalize them.

What Mr. Binnion is pointing out is the moral hazard inherent in the equalization system, or, for that matter, in most any insurance or social welfare system. According to the OECD, Moral hazard describes behaviour when agents do not bear the full cost of their actions and are thus more likely to take such actions.

There are many examples of moral hazard one could cite, but consider what happens when governments become the disaster insurer of last resort, or otherwise transfer the costs of risk-taking from those who take the risk to those who bear the cost.

As researchers at the Wharton Risk Center observe,

Highly subsidized premiums or premiums artificially compressed by regulations, without clear communication on the actual risk facing individuals and businesses, encourage development of hazard-prone areas in ways that are costly to both the individuals who locate there (when the disaster strikes) as well as others who are likely to incur some of the costs of bailing out victims following the next disaster, either at a state level through ex post residual market assessments or through federal taxes in the case of federal relief or tax breaks.

In the case of Quebec, the people of the province do not have to bear the full cost of their decisions to suppress the economic activities of mining or fossil fuel production, because the rest of Canada will make up foregone revenues through equalization payments. Some people might think that sounds like a good deal: after all, Quebec gets to have a high quality of life without having to dirty its hands with things like energy and natural resource production.

Alas, as the economists say, there's no such thing as a free lunch: with the free ride comes dependency, and eventually decay. As Binnion observes:

The Government of Quebec is like a person on Government assistance. If they get a job their assistance goes down. If they lose a job their assistance goes up. In Provinces like Alberta we need to realize that equalization is not something we do for Quebec - it's something we do to them! A model of producing more than you consume is sustainable for a society, but a model of consuming more than you produce is not.

As Fred McMahon of the Fraser Institute proved in an award-winning essay, the situation is not unique to Quebec -- transfers to Atlantic Canada for economic development can also create economic distortions perversely retarding development in Atlantic Canada:

Government influence in the marketplace also operates through a number of other channels: economic development programs, tax policy and rulings, direct and indirect subsidies, etc. When government does step into the marketplace to influence the distribution of resources, the link between price and the most productive use of a resource is broken, and resources can be misallocated to less efficient uses to the detriment of the economy.

Binnion closes out his blog post on an optimistic note, pointing out that it need not be this way for Quebec, any more than it had to persist in Atlantic Canada:

Newfoundland fought the Federal Government and insisted on a deal that did not penalize them for developing Hibernia or Voisey's Bay. Today Newfoundland is a have province. If it worked for Newfoundland it will work for other Provinces too.

Let us hope that Quebec's public -- and her decision makers -- come to understand the moral hazard of equalization payments and reconsider their antipathy to the valuable economic activities that are energy and natural resource development.

Everyone pays federal taxes, and it's from those taxes that equalization comes from. Alberta doesn't cut a check every year.

How much investment has Canada put into Alberta?

Find a politician that's willing to stand up and make it all fair. Look at Danny Williams, former premier of Newfoundland. Wasn't afraid to stand up to Harper and demand the royalties promised - that the feds tried to take away.

[BuckCuller]

Originally Posted by silverdoctor

How have I slagged Albertans? I've slagged your politicians.

And take take take? What exactly am I taking?

A but whoop’in in the next election cause you don’t vote.

[silverdoctor]

Originally Posted by BuckCuller

A but whoop’in in the next election cause you don’t vote.

Wow, I'm shaking in my boots

[HyperMOA]

Hey Silverdoctor, why don't you run in the next election? You'd be the perfect candidate. You would be that guy that puts Canada/Alberta first instead of every other politician in Canada. (Even those that you say you would've supported but didn't.) You would be the politician that finally earns your vote. On top of all that from reading your posts over the years; there is nothing you don't know. You have the answer to any quandary ever posted. Sounds like the right guy to me.

[BuckCuller]

Originally Posted by silverdoctor

Everyone pays federal taxes, and it's from those taxes that equalization comes from. Alberta doesn't cut a check every year.

How much investment has Canada put into Alberta?

Find a politician that's willing to stand up and make it all fair. Look at Danny Williams, former premier of Newfoundland. Wasn't afraid to stand up to Harper and demand the royalties promised - that the feds tried to take away.

So if you do the math made up figures of coarse.
BC federal tax revinue 3billion
Alberta 10 billion
Saskatewan 4 billion
Manitoba 2 billion
NWT 2 billion
Yukon 1.5 billion
Quebec 4 billion
Newfoundland 3.5 billion
Nova Scotia 1.5 billion
Newbrunswick 1 billion
PEI 1 billion
That’s 23.5 billion in revenue.
Equalization Transfer payments by province
BC no
Alberta no
Sask no
Man 1.82 billion
NWT no
Yukon no
Ont 1.424 billion
Que 11.081 billion
Newfoundland no
Nova Scotia 1.779 billion
NB 1.76 billion
PEI 390 million.
The tax revenues are made up but representative however the Equalization transfer payments are the estimated payments for 2017-2018 fiscal year.
The leftover billions go into Justin Trudeau’s checking account and some federally run social services.
Now I would say...
BC
AB
Sask
NWT
Yukon and
NFLD
Are all writing checks to Quebec.
But remember it’s all in how you do the math.

[silverdoctor]

Originally Posted by HyperMOA

Hey Silverdoctor, why don't you run in the next election? You'd be the perfect candidate. You would be that guy that puts Canada/Alberta first instead of every other politician in Canada. (Even those that you say you would've supported but didn't.) You would be the politician that finally earns your vote. On top of all that from reading your posts over the years; there is nothing you don't know. You have the answer to any quandary ever posted. Sounds like the right guy to me.

I'm not a politician, nor do I have any political affiliation.

Look at the history of the PC's in Alberta. Do you want Redford back? how about Prentice? how about Stelmach? Keep voting in idiots, and you get what you get. I suspect you'll get the same with Kenney, and history will repeat in the form of complaining.

Don't blame me.

[BuckCuller]

I hated the red queen and Stelmach.
I was on the fence with Prentice but he wasn’t too smart calling an election early before proving himself worthy.
Now Kenney, I have always liked Kenney.
My view could change if he doesn’t do a good enough job for me but right now with the parties joined the reality is they and I mean not just Kenney I mean the majority of the UCP will do a good job.
I don’t ever want to collect employment insurance I want to live well and earn it.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by silverdoctor

I've never seen a group with so much bitterness in my life. You're like a bunch of spoiled kids hanging on to their toys, they're MINE!

Many/most of you hate immigration, can't tolerate people from other provinces living here, bash the rest of Canada - especially Quebec - every chance you get... And still have the nerve to believe you write a cheque to Quebec every year.

Without Canada, the US and rest of the world, you wouldn't have an oil patch.


So... Feel free to knock on every door in Alberta, get enough people together (if they don't laugh you off their doorstep), and force a vote for separation from Canada.

Landlocked country within Canada? Another US state? Your choice.

Wow. That is a self generalizing overkill rant.

I think people have no problem with immigration. Most realize that integration doesn't happen over night. People just want to ensure immigrants are coming to Canada to be Canadian and contribute positively to society regardless of where they came from. They must leave their baggage behind and defend their new countries values and morals and laws.

People in Alberta see the disparages that successive eastern run and controlled governments have done to Alberta from the NEP to blocking pipelines today. From spending billions of ALbertan's money on transfer payments to Quebec so that they can get free child day care while they don't have to include their hydropower revenue in the transfer payment formula. Why they can dump raw sewage into the river and scream that our oil is dirty.

Yes...any commodity needs a consumer...but our right within confederation to sell our goods is being blocked by other provinces and is against the law. Nobody is doing anything about it. NDP feds and provinces are colluding against the good people of Alberta.

How about Notley say to BC...no pipeline...constant road blocks...fine. Every single BC made product moving through Alberta on a car, train, truck must pay a special pipeline offset carbon tax duty. That can then go back to the oil companies affected until such time as our right to tidewater is protected.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by silverdoctor

Everyone pays federal taxes, and it's from those taxes that equalization comes from. Alberta doesn't cut a check every year.

How much investment has Canada put into Alberta?

Find a politician that's willing to stand up and make it all fair. Look at Danny Williams, former premier of Newfoundland. Wasn't afraid to stand up to Harper and demand the royalties promised - that the feds tried to take away.

You are an internet surfing expert. Surprised you are so off base on this.

Purpose of transfer payments is for the "have" provinces to give to the "have not" provinces.

It is based upon a running 3 year formula. I believe next year Alberta qualifies for a little because of our books 3 years earlier. Then we go back to paying.

In the formula ALberta's oil and gas industry is included in our provinces income calculation.

BC and Quebec's massive revenue from hydro power does not count. Therefore Quebec can pay for so much more than what we have such as child day care for free for all.

Look at provincial GDP numbers and ask yourself...how does Quebec qualify?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...mestic_product

[BuckCuller]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

You are an internet surfing expert. Surprised you are so off base on this.

Purpose of transfer payments is for the "have" provinces to give to the "have not" provinces.

It is based upon a running 3 year formula. I believe next year Alberta qualifies for a little because of our books 3 years earlier. Then we go back to paying.

In the formula ALberta's oil and gas industry is included in our provinces income calculation.

BC and Quebec's massive revenue from hydro power does not count. Therefore Quebec can pay for so much more than what we have such as child day care for free for all.

Look at provincial GDP numbers and ask yourself...how does Quebec qualify?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...mestic_product

I don’t think Alberta will see a dime. We could have the highest unemployment rate in the country and would not receive equalization payments.