Western Alienation

[Black Dog]

So, what this Taft person is saying is that when times were tough, Alberta's government spent money to try to stimulate the economy?

Isn't that what they call "Keynesian economics"? Let me know if I'm wrong on that (Alberta public school education  ) Governments should save money when times are good, and spend money during tough times to try to stimulate the economy, isn't that the idea?

Not when that tax money is being shovelled into private coffers. That's called "crony capitalism" (another part of trhe Alberta Advantage).

It seems like this Taft person is criticizing Alberta for following what many people think is a good economic strategy. The article you quoted also didn't say that all of that money went into the resource sector. Weren't you the person who was saying in another thread that governments should spend money to try to diversify the economy? It seems like you are criticizing them here for doing just that.

Again: read the relevant part:

"For an industry that provides 8 times the revenue as Saskatchewan's, Alberta is providing 20 to 70 times the subsidies!"

Also remember, this is the province that is supposedly the bvaston of the free-market. There's nothing free-market about the practice of subsidizing the oil industry.

Also, I have to wonder if maybe Alberta's resource-rich neighbors would be more prosperous if their own governments were more aggressive in promoting those industries. Saskatchewan has lots of oil, and BC has lots of natural gas, but it isn't helping anybody if it stays underground...

Subsidizing is not promoting.

[kimmy]

Taft wrote about being appalled by the amount of public money spent in subsidizing an industry... now 7 years after he wrote his article, Alberta's entire debt is on the brink of being paid off, almost entirely thanks to the industry that money was given to.

I guess you could look at it as corporate welfare or whatever, or you could look at it as an investment that has paid off. Maybe it just depends on where you live.

Subsidizing is not promoting.

I think you're mistaken! (ask a Bombardier executive for a more detailed explanation )

Industries all over Canada have received (and still receive) help in the form of tax breaks, low interest loans, grants, and other types of indirect help from all levels of government. In some cases (agriculture, fisheries, shipbuilding) it is barely keeping heads above water. In other cases it is with the hope that the industry will grow and be an asset and produce benefits that are more than worth the expense. In the case of Alberta's oil industry, the combination of the NEP and low oil prices caused literally hundreds of thousands of jobs to leave the province during the period Taft wrote about. I don't think that anybody can question how important getting the oil industry working again has been to Alberta's current prosperity, and so I don't think you can argue that the money put into it during that period was a bad decision.

Alberta's financial outlook is rosy... BC and Saskatchewan are currently classified as "Have Not" provinces, right? Maybe BC and Saskatchewan should look into boosting their energy industries with some "corporate welfare". It might pay off bigtime for them down the road!

-kimmy

[maplesyrup]

I have a lot of trouble with generalizations. For example the term "Western' alienation, does it necessarily mean the West, or does it mean a group of people primarily in the Calgary area, and eminating from the U of Calgary?

Also do we chose to be alienated, or is that something that is out of our control?

I live in the West and I don't feel alienated.

BTW for those of you interested in PR, there have been some recent links to some helpful articles in the PR thread.

[I miss Reagan]

I guess Klein announced today that Alberta's debt has been payed off. I wonder what those crazy right wing nutcases out in Alberta will do next. They might put the extra money now into health care or something like that. Who knows what their "hidden agenda" is. Lucky Harper didn't get into office, we might get the national debt payed off. But at the expense of cherished programs like billingualism. Damn what would I do with out french on my cheerio box.

[maplesyrup]

I guess Klein announced today that Alberta's debt has been payed off. I wonder what those crazy right wing nutcases out in Alberta will do next. They might put the extra money now into health care or something like that. Who knows what their "hidden agenda" is. Lucky Harper didn't get into office, we might get the national debt payed off. But at the expense of cherished programs like billingualism. Damn what would I do with out french on my cheerio box.

That's great news for Albertans, and they are to be congratulated.

But what does Harper have to do with Alberta's debt? I thought he was involved in national politics, eh!

[I miss Reagan]

But what does Harper have to do with Alberta's debt? I thought he was involved in national politics, eh!

No thought it was that Harper and Klein were in together on a hidden agenda.

My impression was that Harper was going turn the rest of Canada into some sort of Alberta.

[Hawk]

roflmao I miss Reagan is my new best friend xD Awesome argument, and since I have been too busy to post for a while (you know, WORKING and all, keeping Alberta RICHER than all you poor have-not souls haha) I will try and get back into the debate

have a lot of trouble with generalizations. For example the term "Western' alienation, does it necessarily mean the West, or does it mean a group of people primarily in the Calgary area, and eminating from the U of Calgary?

Also do we chose to be alienated, or is that something that is out of our control?

I live in the West and I don't feel alienated.

One thing you can always count on is MS going and posting something COMPLETELY off the current topic and that doesn't address a single thing, by definition a rant. Such is this case, as far as I can tell MS fears to parry in debate and simply wishes to vent =o

Try and answer this one MS, you may live in the West but look at who was elected and where and you will notice your supposed support against the PCs in BC simply dont exist in the force you seem to think they do. You live in the wrong part of the country, go live in Sask. and notice the 'greatness' of NDP rule, live in a territory, live anywhere but the two richest provinces in the country (where 'coincidently' the PCs rule) and tell us how terrible our ways are.

Not when that tax money is being shovelled into private coffers. That's called "crony capitalism" (another part of trhe Alberta Advantage).

Its called INVESTING in the future, the big picture, looking forward instead of backwards. You know, good business strategies. Look at Alberta today, debt free, powerful economy (when it isn't being screwed over by Liberal anti-Americanism), yeah that "crony capitalism" sure was crony =p

I miss Reagan, I am sorry to make your brain work so hard, but the Liberals are not "left". The NDP is not "far left". "Far left" is Marxism or do you consider communists and Marxists "super duper ultra amazingly left"? On what basis? You should not try to place inaccurate labels on people. It is just as ridiculous to refer to democratic socialists as "far left" as it is to refer to the Conservatives as "far right". I do not think you know the difference and as a result, your arguments just fall apart and are ignored.

Thats right, lets ignore the points because we can't counter them and instead 'nullify' the argument by simply picking an argument in a completely unrelated area =p

Heck then all you left-wingers must be wrong in all areas of debate because you dont know the difference between the chocolate content of mars and oh henry chocolate bars.

Lets stay on focus please =p Stop avoiding the issues

[maplesyrup]

[quote

My impression was that Harper was going turn the rest of Canada into some sort of Alberta.

I suppose that is why Harper failed and was defeated, eh.

[Hawk]

[quote

My impression was that Harper was going turn the rest of Canada into some sort of Alberta.

I suppose that is why Harper failed and was defeated, eh.

Yeah, because certain media outlets and Liberal propoganda out East have painted an untrue and blatantly regionalized picture of Alberta.

"Lets all ignore that Alberta under the PCs has prospered GREATLY, is now debt-free, and is STILL the richest province in this country. Who on EARTH would want all the provinces to be this good eh?"

[maplesyrup]

you will notice your supposed support against the PCs in BC simply dont exist in the force you seem to think they do.

How about a little reality check, eh?

Popular Vote Analysis

British Columbia

Party/2000/2004/Change

Lib: 27.7%, 28.6%, up 0.9%

Con: 56.7%, 36.2%, down 20.5%

New Dem: 11.3%, 26.6%, up 15.3%

Not a good omen for you know who!

[I miss Reagan]

[quote

My impression was that Harper was going turn the rest of Canada into some sort of Alberta.

I suppose that is why Harper failed and was defeated, eh.

Yeah, because certain media outlets and Liberal propoganda out East have painted an untrue and blatantly regionalized picture of Alberta.

"Lets all ignore that Alberta under the PCs has prospered GREATLY, is now debt-free, and is STILL the richest province in this country. Who on EARTH would want all the provinces to be this good eh?"

Hey Hawk I hear there are lynch mobs ruling the streets in Alberta chasing out immigrants, people are left bleeding in the street if they don't have a credit card, everyone has a gun, homosexuals aren't allowed to vote, and homeless rates are at 40% because there's no social safety net there!

[maplesyrup]

Yeah, because certain media outlets and Liberal propoganda out East have painted an untrue and blatantly regionalized picture of Alberta.

What's that expression your comments remind me of :

"Everyone's out of step except Little Johnny."

I think at some point one needs to talk responsibility for own's own failings. All the political parties made some errors.

One of the errors made by Harper is that he equivocated on so-cons issues which made people nervous. Also Harper made a huge blunder over Iraq, and that probably more than any other issue, will likely keep him forever away from 24 Sussex Drive.

Politics is the art of compromise.

[Hawk]

you will notice your supposed support against the PCs in BC simply dont exist in the force you seem to think they do.

How about a little reality check, eh?

Popular Vote Analysis

British Columbia

Party/2000/2004/Change

Lib: 27.7%, 28.6%, up 0.9%

Con: 56.7%, 36.2%, down 20.5%

New Dem: 11.3%, 26.6%, up 15.3%

Not a good omen for you know who!

You forget those polls fail to take into account the shifting of MPs immediately following the creation of the CPC, alot of MPs left the CPC and joined the Liberals and NDPs. As a result when they get re-elected (because the people who elected them think they are doing a good job) its under a new banner. Polls fail to take into account many things, one major reason I dont trust them.

As soon as those renegade MPs are required to step into line with party policy I think we will see alot of:

1. Them going independant

2. Them returning to the CPC

3. Them not being re-elected in their ridings

[maplesyrup]

Those are not opinion polls.

Those are actual popular vote election results, and unfortunately, you are living in major denial.

Harper has peaked, and has nowhere to go but down now, becasue of everything he had going for him, and everything the Liberals had going against them in the last election.

I would imagine the last thing Harper wants is for Canadians to really dissect him, to get to really know what he represents, which is what they will do now.

For example why wasn't Harper honest and above board and admit clearly that he supported sending Canadians to fight and die in Iraq just for oil to fuel the economy, eh? :angry:

As I said previously, I think this W alienation thingie is probably a little enclave around the poli sc dept of the the U of C.

[Cartman]

Chretien's federal Liberals did far more to eliminate the debt in Canada than Mulroney's PC's ever did. How are they are left wing? Maybe Harris was left wing too?

How can we in Alberta claim to be alienated if everything is so perfect here? You must be lacking the ability to accomplish something in order to be alienated.

Why did Klein help destroy Harper's election chances by saying that he might violate the Canada Health Care Act? I suspect that put as much fear into voters as Martin could have ever dreamed to. Next year we can still expect to see health care premiums (aka tax) and more privatization of services. If I am wrong I miss Reagan, I owe you a coke (I mean a Pepsi, red coke can colours indicate liberal left-winger commies made it ).

Hey...wait a minute, why is the U of Calgary in terrible debt? Damn left wingers! :angry:

[I miss Reagan]

Yikes What was that all about. I don't know what you owe me a coke for but if you feel Chretien (actually it was Martin as finance minister) paying down a debt created by Trudeau makes him right wing have at her. Toss me that coke.

That's funny...

[Cartman]

if you feel Chretien (actually it was Martin as finance minister) paying down a debt created by Trudeau makes him right wing have at her

Your premise is that right-wing economic policies have made Alberta a utopia. Mulroney pursued right-wing economics and he generated large deficits. You cannot only blame Trudeau.

Governments are not just about balancing budgets. They are about creating a better society in general for everyone. At times, this includes expanding social programs. We do have an environmental deficit in Alberta which will eventually have to be paid.

BTW...how can you say on one hand, that Trudeau as PM created the debt, but on the other, that Chretien as PM did not eliminate the deficit?

I will give ya that coke if Ralph reduces taxes (including health care premiums).

[Hawk]

Your premise is that right-wing economic policies have made Alberta a utopia.  Mulroney pursued right-wing economics and he generated large deficits.  You cannot only blame Trudeau. 

He took over from a completely terrible time period, you should know that if you know anything. He thought of the 'big picture' and worked to better Canada. Sure on the short-term he majorly messed up, but the Liberals used it as leverage to oust him and then simply copied his work which saved alot of Canadians =p Flip-flop anyone?

Governments are not just about balancing budgets.  They are about creating a better society in general for everyone.  At times, this includes expanding social programs.  We do have an environmental deficit in Alberta which will eventually have to be paid.

Funny you should say that, since here in Alberta I LOVE the society. We got piles of hard-working people in almost every industry and very low un-employment in addition to very generous social programs. If you want complete government support for people go live in China, see how glorified your communist utopia is when you get it off paper.

BTW...how can you say on one hand, that Trudeau as PM created the debt, but on the other, that Chretien as PM did not eliminate the deficit?  

Liberals have been creating a debt, then they tried cleaning up by cutting our military to a SHAMING point and now they are destroying our healthcare and school systems with more budget cuts. How is this a step forward? Your problem is your trying to fix a problem by throwing money at it, however when you dont HAVE that money to throw at it you take it from other places that ALSO need money. Instead of using the money to improve efficiency and develop money-making industries you throw more and more at social programs and pointlessly wasteful legislation and laws (such as the Gun Registry). Throwing money around doesn't fix anything

I will give ya that coke if Ralph reduces taxes (including health care premiums).  

You must be the most confused Liberal I know, how can you support tax cuts and expansion of social programs at the same time? You are encouraging a deficit, which you will then blame on the right wing (which coincidentally hasn't been in power in Ottawa for 5 terms, which makes me laugh when people blame them for Canada's current problems)

Ralph has paid off Alberta's debt, has kept PST from being brought in, and has done far more for this province than any Liberal Premier in any other province. While a Liberal would use Alberta's wealth like a cash cow and spend it all and more on social development and create a welfare state out of this province Ralph has gone and built it to an economic titan in the Canadian economy =p

[maplesyrup]

Actually I think most Canadians paid down, or reduced the debt.

[Cartman]

QUOTE 

I will give ya that coke if Ralph reduces taxes (including health care premiums).   

You must be the most confused Liberal I know, how can you support tax cuts and expansion of social programs at the same time? You are encouraging a deficit

How can Bush (the ultimate conservative neo-liberal) cut taxes and engage in war? He is encouraging a deficit.

I am suggesting that a health care premium IS a tax and that there are three levels of government but only one level of taxpayer. You can call it a premium, user-fee, extra-bill whatever, it is still a tax. The only major difference is that it is a flat tax.

By the way, I am not a Liberal. I never have voted Liberal and never will. Why do people persist on labeling others? Are you so insecure about your own logic that you must throw mud?

I must say, however, that Martin and Chretien are a right wing economist's dream team. They reduced the deficit dramatically (on the backs of ordinary Canadians) while Mulroney and Wilson said over and over again that they would and never did. In fact, the deficit get growing and growing until the Liberals formed government. Budget slashing is not simply the domain of Conservatives.

Actually, if you read "The Politics of Taxation in Canada" (nominated for the Donner award) by Hale, he points out that the Mulroney government was actually more sympathetic to the poor (economically) than Chretien's Liberals. These Liberals are far more ruthless than the PC's. Guess why Harper is not PM?

[Hawk]

How can Bush (the ultimate conservative neo-liberal) cut taxes and engage in war?  He is encouraging a deficit. 

The difference is he is waging a war, we are not and could not. Now if you seriously want to shift the focus of this debate down south and to justification for war then please start another topic.

I am suggesting that a health care premium IS a tax and that there are three levels of government but only one level of taxpayer.  You can call it a premium, user-fee, extra-bill whatever, it is still a tax.  The only major difference is that it is a flat tax.

That is exactly why I frown whenever I hear people praise Canadian 'free healthcare'.

#1. Its not free, unless you want an occasional 'checkup'

#2. Its pathetically wasteful

#3. Its not even close to effective at handling the general populous, and waiting years for crucial operations is NOT acceptable.

By the way, I am not a Liberal.  I never have voted Liberal and never will.  Why do people persist on labeling others?  Are you so insecure about your own logic that you must throw mud? 

Sounds like your logic is the the insecure one, you instantly label me a mudslinger and labeller because I thought you were a Liberal. Its an honest mistake, you were defending them so its only natural for me to assume you were one.

I must say, however, that Martin and Chretien are a right wing economist's dream team.  They reduced the deficit dramatically (on the backs of ordinary Canadians) while Mulroney and Wilson said over and over again that they would and never did.  In fact, the deficit get growing and growing until the Liberals formed government.  Budget slashing is not simply the domain of Conservatives.

Speaking as a right winger I can assure you they are not my dream team nor are they any other right-winger-I-know's dream team. I dont know how you come to your conclusions, because no right-winger would support the destructive misuse of taxpayer dollars as payouts to Liberal supporters or for things such as the Gun Registry, and they would never support slashing healthcare, military, and school funding.

Actually, if you read "The Politics of Taxation in Canada" (nominated for the Donner award) by Hale, he points out that the Mulroney government was actually more sympathetic to the poor (economically) than Chretien's Liberals.  These Liberals are far more ruthless than the PC's.  Guess why Harper is not PM?

Harper is not Mulroney, that is what most people fail to understand. You are comparing two vastly different governments, and two vastly different people. The only similarities are that both are furthur right than the Fiberals.

Also ruthless Liberals are not what we want, especially when it is a corrupt ruthlessness that ends in mass scandals, wasted tax dollars, misused public funding, loophole abuse, budget slashing, tax hiking, and pointless legislation.