madmax

Business articles should be based on fact. The Author should KNOW what he writing about. It reads more like an Opinion piece trying to present itself as fact. This is inaccurate which is the baseline for the story Some of the revenue generated from shale gas development in these four provinces will be channelled to Quebec via the equalization program to pay for its public services. garbage in garbage out. Newfoundland Oil and Gas does NOT support Quebecs Transfer payments. Infact as you have now read above, Oil Resources are NOT included in the formula. Just as they aren't clawed back in NFLD thus allowing NFLD to be a HAVE province. put another way, should equalization payments be reduced by the amount a province could have expected to generate if it had developed the non-renewable resource in an orderly fashion? How about this.. PUT ANOTHER WAY, should Oil Resource Provinces be included in equalization forula including clawbacks for those provinces which generate more revenue and remove it from the transfer payment. Instead, he propogates a phoney myth. I would expect an Economic Development Consulting firm to know its fact, and not be used to play partisan politics. If BC chooses to ban fracking.... oh wait... thats on the table. Fracking may get your natural gas, it also gets you gas in your drinking water....

What you are suggesting would cost MORE and make it MORE unsustainable.

I think that has been said numerous times. But the Myth of Transfer payments will continue because unless one learns how they work, one is more apt to believe the purpose driven myth. This is really about having the Federal Government Keep all the funding and remove all transfers. Its a hidden message and the concept of transfer payments in the Canadian mindset is the soft underbelly. If these posts said.... QUEBEC GETS 30% of the Health transfer while Alberta Gets 5% And PEI gets .05% peole wouldn't bat an eye. So there are Three Funds Health Social and General Equalization The Equalization has been changed numerour times over the years, and if you read it , its been mainly to changed to accommodate oil driven economies from the 70s forward.

It is also PRETTY EASY to get CAUGHT and Its highly unlikely any Doctor is going to accept a Patients "BRIBE" and put his practice and license in jeapardy. This doctor was caught because of the billings to OHIP, and OHIP flags unusual practices. You cannot get approved for special diet without OHIP and a Doctor. In the case above, we are looking at an $800,000 fraud for the Doctor personally, vs a $2500 claim for food for 10 people. As I said, no one supports fraud, and also in the article the Doctor paid back those monies in full and what isn't stated is those people who received the Special Diet Supplement would go under even further scrutiny, likely loss of ALL benefit for those who engaged in Fraud and they will be on record as having to pay back the exta funds.

Natural Resources and the Equalization Formula 6. A further change was made in 1977, when only 50 percent of the revenue from nonrenewable resources entered the equalization formula, and no more than one-third of total equalization could come from resource revenues. 7. In 1982 the Representative Five-Province Standard (RFPS) was adopted, with Alberta outside the formula. The cap on resource revenues was removed, but because Alberta was not part of the RFPS, most oil and gas revenue was excluded. 9. The 70:30 generic tax-back applies only to equalization recipient provinces (although this is not the case for Saskatchewan, more than 100 percent of whose natural resource revenues are taxed back, as described recently by Courchene, 2004). It does not, therefore, apply to Alberta, with the result that Alberta keeps all of its oil and gas revenues i.e., 100 percent of Alberta’s oil and gas revenues are protected from equalization.

We could put Alberas Oil and Gas revenues back into the formula and put the formula back to a 10 Province standard as it once was. Ontario has no Gas and Oil but all its resources are incorporated into the formula. Why does Alberta get off lucky

Unfortuneately the Author hasn't the foggiest clue how transfer payments work. Nice story, but not enough facts and too much BS.

I think its NUTS for Developing countries which are receiving BILLIONS in Foreign Capital to Indusrialize, are allowed to do so without the "STRICT" environmental standards held here. Why should we close down operations in Canada that have 50 years of progress and battles to implement higher environmental standards, only to disband these operations and open in oountries like Mexico or China and such.

Many have argued that it is already "too late" That said, if Canada went as dark as North Korea, it wouldn't make a Dent in the Climate. You could stop ever car, eliminate all home heating, close down all the stores and roads, no lights. And the effect on the Global temp would be unchanged. Now, what if Canada didn't export Oil to Foreign nations who consume the majority of Canadian Oil? How much effect would this have?

One might ask why we are squandering it to make all that unnecessary packaging. In the meantime, I don't see you living a lifestyle like a Mennonite, who walk the walk........ You personally could cut back on Oil 100% today, but would you? Yes you can cut back on plastic bags... (And if there ever was an argument to ELIMINATE SINGLE USE WASTEBAGS made from OIL) this is a good time. Meanwhile, do you really need that computer? Do you need your Iphone,android, blackberry. Truth is WE DON'T. They are LUXURY items that we BELIEVE we need to communicate. If you are worried about a Gas guzzling car, are you just as concerned to the move to PLASTIC CARS, all made of OIL. An Electric Car , Battery and all is encased in OIL. I am sure you shop and purchase consumer goods, all dressed in PLASTIC and made of Plastic. When the oil is GONE, your life is going to be very different. And since it is "inevitable" Mr Anderson..... treating it like a Resource required for economic Nationalism makes far more sense then a resource to be tossed over to China to meet their growing consumption requirements. In a nutshell, Some naive people beleive a Carbon Tax reduces consumption. In Reality, as the 2nd world war demonstrated. LIMITS on resources was required to get through times of Scarce resources. A day will come when people will be limited to 1 tank of gas per week. If you think this could NEVER happen. China has limited families to ONE CHILD per lifetime. Perhaps you might want to purchase your horse and buggy in advance

NDP: 35% Cons: 31% Lib: 20% BQ: 9% Green: 5% http://www.environics.ca/uploads/File/Environics-Research---Federal-Vote-Intention-Sept-27-2012.pdf

Been around a long time, but I guess he doesn't make it in the big leagues. I have always been aware of Pat Martin and Anders on occassion. But I may have to retract Anders as the big mouth.... because most of the stuff I find of him is him SLEEPING on the job. There is a hillarious (To me) post of poor Anders struggling to stay awake until finally he goes down for the count in Question Period.

LOL....Heck no. Because you blocked him, you actually miss the joke. When a person suggests all "leftists' spend their time on Video game forums, and then I discover that the said person is actually bitter because he was banned from his video game forum community, I can see why he is so bitter having been rejected by the videogame community. There is too much silly stuff in this thread and rather then block, I have decided to have fun with it, and participate in all of its nonsense. Mind you, there have been a handful of decent posts from some others in this thread, but mainly this is all "noise".

.

How does an ADULT get banned from a Video game discussion board ?

Ok, I just found this link on Ipolitics http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2012/10/01/from-the-vaults-parliament-hill-is-alive-with-celibate-cries/ And Rob Anders said he took a vow of Celebacy and would not have sex until marriage. Well its 13 years since that article and apparently Anders is still not married. If thats the case and he has remained celebit all this time.... well... I think he wins hands down... HANDS DOWN ...

That is the purpose of trolling.

Ok, we know these guys. They are unabashedly outspoken and often shot themselves in the foot when its not caught in their mouths. Challenger: Rob Anders is known for Denigrating Vets, calling card carrying Conservatives Liberals and sleeping while on the Job during veteran affairs committee meetings. Obviously looking for a TTC promotion or Senate Seat. Of recent he claimed Mulcair caused Jack Laytons Death. Anders has a history of saying really stupid things and is a close confidant of the PM. Champion: Pat Martin, has assumed the title since Guergis early exit previous to last election. Of Late Pat Martin bold accusations have come back to bite him with a big lawsuit, regarding Racknines role in the Robocall scandal. Pat Martin has been successfully vocal regarding Asbestos, but just as unsuccessfully ruffling status quo. Always good for a soundbite, and fearless, it seems this is his ALI moment. Can he rope a dope a final win, or will a young gun with a long future of foot and mouth disease unseat him. Controversial Champion vs Demoted Insider. Get your votes in.. And I would add in A Liberal, but I don't think there has been anyone loud and vocal enough to compete. I could only think of Hedy Fry and she really hasn't made news since the cross burnings.. THIS POLL IS FOR FUN!!!! ;) Do not take this seriously

Hypocrite2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings Kraychik..... Did Blackdog beat you on your Nintendo.... Seems you got enough to say on the gaming forums. http://www.gamespot.com/search/?qs=Kraychik&filter=forum

No what I see is the Far right and the Far Left polarizing the issue. And Ironically leaving very very very few in the middle. I find myself with some interesting company. The handful of moderates on this issue .... Which is why I like MLW... And I find the same occurring the bill on Life Begins thread.

Not another thread on this....

Agreed and previous point taken... My apologies..

You may be proven correct. But to SUCCESSFULLY sue a government would have to entail that the government has done something wrong or violated the law. But you have to be the naive to believe that upon his release Intelligence services are going to ignore his movements.

Very Likely. His Father was NOT #3 in Al Qaeda. Read any intelligence book on the subject written in the 90s and you will see exactly what position and role he was in. And I don't feel like telling you the name his father was given in Al Qaeda but its NOT hard to find. Now that you are done speculating..... Back from the hypothetical to the current real circumstances. He is in Canada and in Millhaven to serve a sentence.

What that does demonstrate is an eagerness to play with guns and mines and engage in warplay. I am sure many kids play GI JOE but few get to do it for real. And unlike kids of the Lords Resistance, it is voluntary. However, kids also like to smoke pot and or cigs, party all night, drive a car, have sex with other kids their age and possible steal. But Parents are SUPPOSED to take responsibility and say NO to such activities. No different then a Bad parent who teaches his children to steal, play with kniges and guns and not to trust the police. I have seen 8 years taken through this process, and yes, surprise, they become thieves with knife and firearms skills and a hatred towards police. I am convinced that if his father wasn't part of Al Qaeda , neither would this young lad have taken up a jihad. He could just as easily spent more time on the Xbox playing......in Canada.