Maritime Union

[Remiel]

They're only twice the size...

And by your logic they are horrible over-represented, given that Ontario has three times the number of people and about 25 extra seats.

Edited May 25, 2011 by Remiel

[punked]

I would just point out the political reality of this Union is it would save no money. NB's francophones would demand the NB francophone laws be imposed on PEI and NS who have very few first language French speakers the cost of this alone on PEI and NS would end any savings found in this union.

I would like to go on the record here to say NB has a large French population and the French laws the province has make sense in that province. The cost is a necessary one for NB, however it is not for NS or PEI.

End of union before it begins when we look at what would actually happen.

[fellowtraveller]

With the separation mindset in Alberta for example. Alberta can afford to be conservative ideologically because of their natural resources, not because of innovation and hard work of their people. The oil tax revenue is huge.

Complete and utter load of uninformed shit. Alberta balanced their budget in the nineties when the price for a barrel of oil was $15. Same conservative government. They did it almost entirely by cutting costs, not by raising taxes or increasing revenues from resources.

Next.

[punked]

Complete and utter load of uninformed shit. Alberta balanced their budget in the nineties when the price for a barrel of oil was $15. Same conservative government. They did it almost entirely by cutting costs, not by raising taxes or increasing revenues from resources.

Next.

Just thought I would point out.

Albert Deficit:

1987-1.4 Billion

1988-500 million

1989-700 million

1990-800 million

1991-400 million

1992-600 million

1993-700 million

1994-400 million

BTW even in the 90s oil windfalls were 30% of Alberta revenues. So don't tell me it wasn't oil. It was 30% oil that paid those checks. BTW in the 80s 50% of it was oil which lead Alberta to be one of if not the highest per capita spenders in Canada. It is easy to cut when you are the highest per capita spender it is a bit harder when you are the lowest.

Just to cut through the Alberta right wing craziness of "We made big cuts in the 90s so you should now to." Stats can says "In 1991, it spent $846 per person while the Canadian average (including Alberta) was $287." The other thing Alberta did in 1990s, they gave 6000 of their Welfare recipients 1 way tickets and a pay off to move to BC. Yah again what you say is right wing bull that ignores the real history of Alberta.

PS I got nothing against Alberta it is doing quite well for itself and I hope it keeps it up. It is the engine of Canada and I am thankful you are there. Just wanted to point out what works there wont work else where because you had more to cut due to your oil money.

Yep not oil money at all.

Edited May 31, 2011 by punked

[fellowtraveller]

For further illustration as to how legislators and population are not linear: Nunavut has 19 legislators and only ~30,0000 people.

All three territories are like that. Yukon has 15 MLAs for 30k people, plus one MP, plus muncipal councils plus an extensive and growing fourth level of governance: First Nations.

Madness.