Minimus Maximus

I've never had my street plowed, and the only highways that normally see a plow to completely clear snow is Crowchild and Deerfoot. They do a quick plow/sand ASAP while its falling, but then just leave it to melt. We've been curse with such things as chinooks... so the city just counts on them to melt the snow within a few days. It definitely costs us more in lost time and accidents, I've protested this for years coming from a province that plowed streets quickly in a snow storm. But instead of spending money reasonably in this city on snow removal, we spend it on sending our whole council to Newfoundland for a meeting that could be attended by 1 of them. The truth is that they plow and sand all major roads (in Calgary). Residential roads are not plowed, but icy intersections are sanded if the problem is brought to the attention of city hall by enough residents. In a city that may have 4-6 weeks of snow covered streets a year this shouldn't be much of a problem.

Just as often as conservative governments except the devastating left by conservatives extends beyond just finances. Especially in Alberta right. Rich, best health care in the country (though still shit-ah), best education in the country, lowest unemployment in the country. Yup, conservatives are idiots!! These things are reprehensible!! Bring on the socialists!!!! Don't lie geoffrey you know that we albertan's are all impoverished, treaded like slaves by big oil, and want nothing more than to be american. I'm too devastated to go on...

Libertarianism isn't about starvation nor a "let them starve" mentality. Big government is. Mass starvation, especially in modern times, is the result of government policies -- including economic wars -- which block individuals getting food and medicine. A libertarian society would be an inherently more compassionate society than a socialist one, since people help each other because they WANT to -- rather than because they HAVE to -- and most of the money raised to help the less fortunate would go to helping them, rather than paying the bureaucrats in the system whose primary agenda is to perpetuate themselves and expand their power. You cannot have a welfare state without "tax and spend." The problem is that there will always be a paradox: 1) If you're at the margins of taxation, where welfare is more attractive than work, you'll eventually opt for welfare -- it's the logical choice! 2) As the population on welfare or other government handouts grow, so do expenditures. But the working population shrinks (or at least declines in growth). Thus, taxes must go up. 3) As taxes go up, disposable income decreases, and more people begin to think "should I just stop working?" Go back to Step 1, rinse, and repeat until the government goes bankrupt. No doubt! And many levels of government (such as "metropolitan councils") could be closed altogether and not missed one iota. Well you two have really piqued my interest. Yank, could you expand on your comment about people helping each other because they want to and not because they have to? I like the concept but have doubt this would happen if social programs were removed all together. I agree that there is too much government in our lives and would like to see that change, but not at the expense of the people who depend on government for support.

If you pay dividends out the company you have to pay corporate tax first (around 20% for companies with profit < $200K). When you receive dividends from a Canadian corporation you get a tax credit which reduces the personal tax you pay by about 20%. The net result is you will pay roughly exactly the same number of dollars in tax as you would if paid yourself a salary. The only difference is part of those tax dollars are paid by the company so you may think you are getting a huge break on your personal taxes with dividends.If your company is particularily profitable (i.e. $500K in profits) then the corporate tax rate is higher. This means you would end up paying more tax than if you simply paid yourself dividends. I knew there was a catch. I have a good friend who runs a portable welder here in Alberta right now and he swears he pays no tax on the dividends he and his wife recieve. I have e-mailed him a link to your response. Thanks for the info Sparhawk, I will tell my sister in law to stay in Australia and send my taxes to you!? Its all based on percentage usage. My point is that I had internet service long before starting my own company and payed the full price personally. Now my company pays a portion of this cost and me the person pays the remainder. Overall it costs me less for service as a portion is written off as a business expense.

Maybe more. Business tax rates are lower than personal taxation rates but if you leave the money in the company it only can be spent on legimate business expenses. If you actually want to use the money for personal purposes you have to pay the money out of the business as salary or dividends which means you pay personal tax as well. It is also not a good idea to invest the money inside the company because corporate tax rates on investment income are extremely high (close to 50% depending on your province). Bang on Sparhawk. This is the first year I have worked as an independant contractor and am slowly learning the rules. My accountant, who happens to be my sister in law, warned my wife and myself against drawing too much of a salary as we will certainly pay at tax time. The advantage of a small home based business is that I can have my company absorb some of my personal costs ie. internet service, cell phone service etc..., but at the end of the day I still am no more than a salaried employee of my company and the wage I draw is taxed at the same rate as it would be if I was not the owner. The issue of dividends is something we are currently looking into as I have been told that we could each take up to $15000/year? tax free. I am not sure if this is correct as my sister in law is in Australia for the next month or so I will find out for sure when she gets back.

What would you suggest then, we can't surely lock B&E people up for life? I'm in agreement with you but I don't see how this will improve things when they get out. We need to change the structure of punishment and rehab in Canada. I hear ya geoff. I agree that we can't lock people up for life for offences like B&E but longer jail terms for repeat offenders would keep them off of the streets...and keep them from commiting more crimes. Habitual/career criminals don't care about deterrents, it's civil society that cares about deterrents (...and we are civil after all). Maybe some kind of three strikes law?

Regardless of whether or not incarceration is a deterrent it does take criminals off of the streets. Is this not the prime directive of our justice system, to keep the public safe? About 15 years ago I witnessed a couple of young punks trying to break into a store, long story short I ended up being a witness for the prosecution a few months later. I then found out that these kids had been arrested 9 separate times for B&E in the previous year. Less than 2 weeks later I saw the same punks trying to sell some stolen electronics in my neigbourhood pub. Catch and release is great for your fave fishing hole, but it makes for a lousy justice system.

Boru, I've heard similar statements in the past and at one time had found a list of the human rights complaints against the Ab. gov't. After comparing them to human rights complaints in other provinces I found them to be of a similar nature and frequency given population size. I have just checked the Ab. gov't site again and can't seem to track down the same information I had found before. I'm not saying that it's not possible that Alberta has a large backlog (enough to put the State of Texas to shame though, come on) just that sometimes information becomes purposely skewed in order to suit a particular agenda. The right does it to the left, the left does it to the right and before long the truth is nowhere to be found. Could you provide a link for the backlog concerning human rights complaints in Alberta to back up your claim.

Canadians from all parts of this country have had to work hard for what they have. Stories like Kimmy's exist all across this country. The difference is farming in Ontario, fishing in Newfoundland or logging in BC don't provide the same rate of return as oil and gas. My own grandparents grew up in sod huts on the prairies too. Most people in Alberta do not work in the oil fields - they live comfortable lives in urban centers like Calgary and Edmonton collecting their Ralph bucks. Oil is a extremely valuable resource and Alberta won the geographical lottery in that respect. It is the height of arrogance to presume that Albertans deserve this windfall more than equally hard working people in the rest of the country. That said, I would not expect my neighbor to share their 6/49 lottery winnings just because I thought they did not deserve it any more than me. However, I would be very annoyed if my neighbor ran around justifying why they 'deserve' the money and others don't. A little humility in the face of good fortune goes a long way. I agree with everything you have stated here Sparhawk. In my haste to post this I didn't clairify that there are examples of the spirit in which Kimmy wrote her post all over this country. If I have given the impression that Albertan's deserve more than citizens of other provinces then I must appologize to you and others who took my post in that way.

To Kimmy, My own family history is very similar to what you have described in the post above and I would like to thank you for saying what I feel, but could never articulate in such an eloquent and straightforward manner. In fact I would also like to thank August1991 as I find yourself and Kimmy to be voices of reason on many issues where reason is drowned out by partisan squabbling. There are others, but you two are the most prominent and consistant in your fairness and your abilities to push partisan opinion to the side and search for the unbiased truth. Kimmy, your statements concerning Alberta separation are right on the money. I was very negative when I first started reading political forums as many of our fellow Canadian's seem to have a hatred for everything Albertan and cannot seem to distinguish rhetoric from reality. This has only resulted in compounding the separatist bs which I believe is nothing more than Albertan's lashing out at those who wish to put us down. As in any lovers spat the words, "I hate you and want to leave" are more a cry for resolution than a true desire for separation. As an Albertan I find it extremely offensive when fellow Canadians claim that our prosperity came with little or no effort on our parts. I have worked countless hours in the worst of conditions spending much of my time away from family and friends, the moneys great but if you have ever been to places like Red Earth Ab. you would understand that there are no fringe benefits. To those Canadians who think that we Albertan's simply woke up one day with the lap dog of prosperity licking our collective noses I say, you couldn't walk what we Albertan's plow in a day. Although I don't post here very often I do read this forum as I find it a valuable source of information in order for me to learn more about my country and its politics. My own level of knowledge is not up to snuff with many on here, but I read the links and some of the posts in order to gain a better understanding of the issues which affect us all. PS, Gotta get back to work now, just wanted to say I effin' love ya Kimmy (please don't tell my wife that I said that).

Geez, great link there Honest. Do you read anything other than anti-conservative blogs? Conspiracies and Calgarians, oh my! Why should I bother posting anything to show the differences between Bush and Harper when its apparent that others have done so and you simply ignore it? Your an extremist Honest, no matter what information is presented to you, you will continue on with your jihad against Harper and the Cons. I liked your comment about "whatever dribbles out of my mouth", with friends like you the liberals need no enemies.

So do you have anything to back yourself up? Or are you just going to post whatever dribbles out of your mouth? All I am doing is posting what others have written. You are being childish. Show us all how Harper is not simply Bush-lite. Back up your posts. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I suppose this is reverse onus. You posted this crap, you provide sources which back up your claim that the information in this rant is credible. Your the one being childish here dude/dudette, I have never made a claim either way, you have posted something which lacks credibility. The onus is on you as the one who started this thread to provide sources which back up the bloggers claims, unless you don't agree with them.

I agree, your argument is lame. Don't give up though I have heard of a talking dog that supports your position, maybe you two could hook up and create a blog with as much credability as the the one you have posted here. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Favorite Con trick. Can't Con trick..... when they can't address the issues, they attack the person. Now who has ....... promised tax cuts, promised not to alter abortion laws, pledged to make government “smaller” and pledged to increase the military???? Who??? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Where the hell did I say that I was a "con". How about considering the fact that I am a non-partisan Canadian who is sick and tired of the mudslinging from all sides of the Canadian political equation. The so called Honest Politician posted what amounts to a rant with no misgivings or doubts about the credibility of his/her source. I happen to be attacking the source, and anyone who takes it at face value. As far as the rest of your post goes, I NEVER SAID I WAS A CONSERVATIVE.

I agree, your argument is lame. Don't give up though I have heard of a talking dog that supports your position, maybe you two could hook up and create a blog with as much credability as the the one you have posted here.

You posted this crap not me. My logic is fine, yours however....

Utter drivel. I once heard Bush claim that the sky was blue. Harper has also used this same terminology. How long will it be before Canada is fighting imperialistic wars in the middle east if this keeps up? If blogs like this constitute credible sources in your mind you should maybe be watching cartoons and not posting on political forums. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Another personal insult from a conservative. What a joke! I suppose your conservative blogs are all true, right? This is simply another person who cannot fail to see the similarities between Harper and Bush. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I don't remember claiming to be a conservative. My point is that the character who wrote this piece is obviously grasping at staws in an attempt to create a link between Harper and Bush. Your the one who seems to be falling for it hook/line/sinker. Show me credible links to this bloggers position and I will ponder them. Otherwise your cred is in question.

Utter drivel. I once heard Bush claim that the sky was blue. Harper has also used this same terminology. How long will it be before Canada is fighting imperialistic wars in the middle east if this keeps up? If blogs like this constitute credible sources in your mind you should maybe be watching cartoons and not posting on political forums.

It seems to me that you are hell bent on associating the CPC party with American neo-conservative politics. If you mean "new conservative party" then just stick with that.

Maybe I have missed something here, but there seems to be a lot of blame put on the school system and not much discussion about the family life of the victim and the aledged victimizers here. What about the parent/s? As a society we are putting more and more pressure on the school system to raise our children and less and less responsibility on parents. A great man by the name of Don Cherry once made a point about how european hockey players were more likely to wear face shields which resulted in these players having less of an awareness of how high they would carry their stick. The end result being more high sticking incedents. I find there is a parallel to social programs and our social behavior regarding the way in which children are raised today. For many the issue of behavior problems with children has become an "its not my job" situation. We blame schools which lack counselling services while the parent/s are not even brought into the piciture. Why did this young girl not go to her parents? How is it the gov'ts fault that she didn't? We are losing our social structure in this country due to the fact that many households have both parents working, some working more than one job or overtime and someone else has the responsibility to raise our kids. People are less connected to their communities and the children are not learning to respect both family structure and community structure the way they once did. This is intensified the lower you go down the income scale. More social programs are not going to solve this, an awarness of family and community would have a much greater impact. Just my opinion.

Well, I carefully read through your post, but did not see any questions, only statements. Where are these 199 questions??? And wasn't Airbus one of Mulrony's boondaggles??? I seem to remember him taking a lot of flak over Airbus issues. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I found that adding the prefix *What about* and replacing the periods at the end of the statements with question marks resolved this issue for me. I also assumed that RBCON's referal to Airbus was in referance to Chretien's supposed smear campaign against Mulroney during the investigation by the RCMP. Removing this from the list still leaves 198 questions/statements. You may not agree with everything here, but some exellent points to consider.

That was absolutely hilarious! Missed it as I was working late all of last week. I have to say that for all of the bitching that is done about Canadian politicians I am thankful that we can be afforded the opportunity to laugh not only at, but along with our prime minister (he knew this was a joke didn't he?). Still cleaning coffee off of my desk, and from my nose, regarding RM's comment on Harper's cowboy outfit.

Well ya learn something new everyday I suppose. I only know the Social Credit Party from an Albertan perspective and they were very christian right wing to say the least. Interesting to find out that there is more to the story, thanks Eureka.

Make Harper less scary??? I didn't know Jack Layton was a hairdresser. What brought this turn of events Shoop?

This post is the proof in the pudding that even today the education system still fails to teach our young anything meaningful about the region in which they live. You can't seriously believe that Alberta is right wing because of oil, have you ever heard of the Social Credit Party? do you know that this party came into existance well before Leduc#1 was every contemplated? The Social Credit Party was very right wing and came onto the Albertan political scene around the 1930's, the first oil strike in Alberta was around 1945-1948. Please do some research about your home province before spouting off like this. Youthful ideology is only valid if it is tempered with knowledge of the subject you wish to debate. As far as being taken over by neo-con American businessmen, I have to wonder how many oil/gas company CEO's you have rubbed shoulders with in your 18 years? I have been in this industry for about 25 years now and have dealt with many people of high ranking, the majority have been Canadian. The US is a major player in the industry, I am pretty sure that they play a major part in the auto manufacturing industry in Ontario as well. If you don't like the smog in Calgary then please try Toronto. I love this city for the cultural events it offers, but could not live there because of the air quality (and as kimmy pointed out, the wanna be gangsta's). If you don't like the city move to rural Alberta. As far as the Stampede goes... if you don't like it and are a vegitarian then stay at home rent a movie and have a salad. More cow for me and my friends.Mooooo

Eureka, You could be right about this pertaining to a temporary shift in which postal codes resumes would be accepted from, however I seriously doubt that any federal department is so full of personel from Alberta postal codes that a temporary ban on these codes would be of benefit on order to create balance. This is somewhat akin to affermative action based on geograghy rather than sex/race/ethnicity. It may be interesting to find out the concentration of federal employee's based on postal codes to see if there is more to this. Regardless of reasoning why would any Canadian citizen be disqualified from applying for any job within the federal gov't if they are qualified to do so.