ROC

guyser · August 31, 2012

Alberta dipped into Equalization during the low oil price times (80s?) but only for a few years,

Shhh....they dont want the ROC to know this. Some shite doesnt stink ...according to them

Wild Bill · August 31, 2012

I think many in this thread seem to misunderstand the feelings of Westerners towards the East and particularly towards Quebec.

You are not going to change their feelings with nitpicking math about the West receiving transfer payments back in the 30's. That's the sort of thing that makes the average guy's eyes glaze over. The problem is much more visceral.

Westerners, particularly Albertans, are of a very hardworking culture. They have had some very hard economic knocks within recent memory. The NEP was not that long ago. People lost their jobs and their homes in droves. At one point over a third of Calgary's commercial real estate was empty. Make no mistake, their setback was deep and it HURT!

Despite that, they rolled up their sleeves, pulled together and rebuilt their economy. It wasn't Ottawa who made the oil boom out west. Ottawa just followed along and taxed the hell out of it as fast as it could.

When these western folks look to Quebec, they see a province who seems to have a sense of entitlement. To them, Quebec built her economy by blackmailing Ottawa with talk of separation. Quebec appears to be much more in debt than the west yet has incredibly cheap day care and the lowest tuition rates for university students, by far! Quebec may not have oil but it has vast amounts of hydro electricity that most homes are heated with it. As an Ontarioan, the first time I saw that I was shocked to the core!

So Westerners lack respect for the East and Quebec not for audits and accounting but for an impression of their work ethic, or lack of one. In a word, westerners think Quebecers are lazy! They live a better life than other Canadians yet tend to be whiny about not getting enough from Ottawa.

This is a perception and may not be very accurate but once again, in politics perception is everything.

Smallc · August 31, 2012

So Westerners lack respect for the East and Quebec not for audits and accounting but for an impression of their work ethic, or lack of one. In a word, westerners think Quebecers are lazy! They live a better life than other Canadians yet tend to be whiny about not getting enough from Ottawa.

This is a perception and may not be very accurate but once again, in politics perception is everything.

As a head guy, you really shouldn't care about perception though.

Wilber · August 31, 2012

That really isn't the point though. The country started in the East that was where the money was for 200 years. The Federal government used a lot of those rich Easterners money to build the infrastructure out West. They built the railway and most the grain elevators that made so people could actually make a living and develop the West. I know people like Westguy wake up in the morning and think "Screw Quebec, the West made it all by itself and Quebec should to," that is not the real story. This country was built by all of us and no one stealing Alberta's money.

Very true but it wasn't charity. CP made out like bandits, not only in transportation but as land owners. They received huge land grants, many of which turned out to be some of the most expensive real estate in the country as part compensation for building the railway.

That said, I don't like the idea of a country that votes on who gets to remain a member.

Argus · August 31, 2012

Almost every post in this thread completely misses the point. Whether we should want Quebec to leave or not should not be primarily based on its economic value, on what it contributes in taxes or takes away. To use the analogy of family, you don't disown a child or a sibling because they're poor. Now if they're poor and always borrowing money and never paying it back, never acknowledging it, and are obnoxious jerks besides, then maybe you might want to have little or nothing to do with them.

Coincidentally to this topic is today's column in the Globe by Jeffrey Simpson, entitled "To Quebec, Canada barely esists". His opinion is similar to mine. As someone who lives on the border, and has much contact with Quebecers, there is little interest in Canada among Quebecers, much less any affection. I used to read the Gazette all the time, and it always struck me that it was an extremely insular newspaper, with almost nothing in it about Canada as a whole. When there was, it was almost like reports from foreign countries. This was quite unlike reading the Toronto Star or Sun at the time, or the Globe. Quebecers are within confederation because of the economic challenges to being independent. Or, as I've said before, if the oil in Alberta had appeared in Quebec instead Quebecers would have held a referendum and left within a year. I know that some people feel that Quebecers are part of Canada, and of course they are, legally speaking. But emotionally, they have no feeling for you or for Canada. And so, I have none for them.

Simpson

Wild Bill · August 31, 2012

As a head guy, you really shouldn't care about perception though.

Well, not for myself, smallc but if I want to debate how something political works I have to abide by the pertinent parameters.

Elections are won by realists, not by academics. You don't change how large groups of people will vote by hitting them with nitpicking, anal retentive arguments. Most people form their political beliefs in their gut and not their head. If you want to appeal to them you have to adjust your aim.

Or you will lose! Period and end of story.

Smallc · August 31, 2012

Almost every post in this thread completely misses the point. Whether we should want Quebec to leave or not should not be primarily based on its economic value, on what it contributes in taxes or takes away.

oops

Coincidentally to this topic is today's column in the Globe by Jeffrey Simpson, entitled "To Quebec, Canada barely exists".
Simpson

:rolleyes: A comment from a person in Quebec City, pretty much sums up what's wrong with that article:

"I live in Quebec city. No one of my friends or family or work collegues talk about federalism because no one talks about separatism. It's that simple. Do they talk about federalism in BC ? No because they don't have to. Parti Quebecois will probably get elected in a minority government but almost 70% of the voters are against them. I'm proud to live in Quebec but also proud of my country which my ancestors helped discover. Don't believe the politicians (and journalists) who thrive on antagonism."

How often do you hear about federal issues in the Ontario election?

Edited August 31, 2012 by Smallc

Argus · August 31, 2012

Because that's all a country is ever about....

You are a very small thinker, smallc. I've noted that about you before. There seems no room in your life for anything but acceptance of literal truths, legalities and rules.

A country is NOT just about money. I'm not sure how I could explain that to someone as emotionally lacking as to think otherwise.

A comment from a person in Quebec City, pretty much sums up what's wrong with that article:

Too bad you didn't have the ability to respond to it yourself.

How often do you hear about federal issues in the Ontario election?

It's not about thinking about federal issues in a provincial election. It's about being aware of who you are and what you belong to. It's about feeling a part of a broader community, which Quebecers do not. It's not about elections or money. It's about who you are as a people. Almost all Canadians see themselves as Canadians. Quebecers see themselves as Quebecers.

Edited August 31, 2012 by Argus

Smallc · August 31, 2012

You are a very small thinker, smallc. I've noted that about you before. There seems no room in your life for anything but acceptance of literal truths, legalities and rules.

A country is NOT just about money. I'm not sure how I could explain that to someone as emotionally lacking as to think otherwise.

This is embarrassing. I misread your line....I thought you were saying it was just about money. It turns out, I completely agree with you. Sorry about that. A small thinker is something I am not...though I do find literal truths and rules to be vey important.

Too bad you didn't have the ability to respond to it yourself.

I didn't really need to. I don't think the article was worth the time I took to read it this morning.

It's not about thinking about federal issues in a provincial election. It's about being aware of who you are and what you belong to. It's about feeling a part of a broader community, which Quebecers do not. It's not about elections or money. It's about who you are as a people. Almost all Canadians see themselves as Canadians. Quebecers see themselves as Quebecers.

I think you paint with too broad a brush for both Quebecers and other Canadians. In Quebec, most are Quebecers first, and Canadians second. In other provinces (Though not all) it's often the other way around...of course, that doesn't apply to everyone in any province.

punked · August 31, 2012

Alberta only received control of its resources in 1930. Please look at it in prespective. Quebec has received $5b/yr EVERY YEAR in transfer payments since 1957. Despite that Quebec is $250b in debt and threatens to leave Canada. Alberta students pay 6-12k for tuition, Quebec students pay 2500 and they bitch and protest. WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE???

What is wrong with that picture is in Quebec there is an SALES TAX and in Alberta there isn't. You want programs PAY FOR THEM like the rest of the country. If you don't that is fine to but you are presenting a false choice.

Edited August 31, 2012 by punked

Argus · August 31, 2012

I think you paint with too broad a brush for both Quebecers and other Canadians. In Quebec, most are Quebecers first, and Canadians second. In other provinces (Though not all) it's often the other way around...of course, that doesn't apply to everyone in any province.

Perhaps, but I live and work with Quebecers. You don't. Whenever I and someone else speak about something, and if we mention someone who is a Quebecer, there's an often unspoken understanding that they (the Quebecer) isn't one of us, isn't quite like us, won't agree with us. That's just the way it is. And it transcends linguistic lines. There are a lot of Francophone Ontarions living around here, and many of them feel the same way.

As an example, I have made a number of friends at work. And they will visit with me, or we'll go to restaurants together outside of work. I've driven far out to the east, west and south of the city to go and see them, and they've traveled into town to see me. Sometimes it's an hour or more away, but that's okay. But none of us ever go to Quebec to visit with our colleagues or ex colleagues there, and they don't come to see us either. And it's not like I don't like some of them, or vice versa. I guess it's some kind of psychological thing. Quebecers do not want to cross the bridge except to go to work, and they rarely ever venture out past downtown. Most of us on this side have no interest in crossing the bridge either, unless it's to get beer when the beer stores are closed. When people here look to move further out of town to get bigger yards, cheaper houses, maybe get more with nature, they head west and south and east, even the Francophones. They rarely consider heading north into Quebec, even though housing prices there are far cheaper. That's like... a foreign country... practically... It's very much a two solitudes thing.

And no, it's not universal, but it's sure noticeable.

Edited August 31, 2012 by Argus

punked · August 31, 2012

Very true but it wasn't charity. CP made out like bandits, not only in transportation but as land owners. They received huge land grants, many of which turned out to be some of the most expensive real estate in the country as part compensation for building the railway.

That said, I don't like the idea of a country that votes on who gets to remain a member.

The Feds were giving that land away anyhow but no one would settle it because you couldn't get your good to market. First the East had to build the Wests infrastructure before people wanted in. They did by taking all the fish out of the Ocean for themselves and to build this country.

cybercoma · August 31, 2012

Your students are paying way too much for tuition?

Considering Alberta likes to brag about its fiscal position. Hell yeah they're paying too much.

cybercoma · August 31, 2012

Very true but it wasn't charity. CP made out like bandits, not only in transportation but as land owners. They received huge land grants, many of which turned out to be some of the most expensive real estate in the country as part compensation for building the railway.

That said, I don't like the idea of a country that votes on who gets to remain a member.

Let's not forget that the entire railway industry in Canada was built upon conflict of interest in office.

Wilber · August 31, 2012

The Feds were giving that land away anyhow but no one would settle it because you couldn't get your good to market. First the East had to build the Wests infrastructure before people wanted in. They did by taking all the fish out of the Ocean for themselves and to build this country.

Nonsense. Fish had nothing to do with it and the Eastern fisheries didn't disappear to build a railway. It took another hundred years to do that. The railway was a condition of BC joining Confederation. It had to be otherwise there was no point in BC becoming part of Canada. It would have been better off joining the US.

The members of the Montreal syndicate who built it had nothing to do with fishing, they were industrialists and bankers for the most part. A large part of the capital investment came from UK investors. In return for building the railway, the syndicate was given a 20 year exemption from taxes and large land grants, some of which turned out to be large parts of downtown Winnipeg, Calgary and Vancouver. While its construction had some big challenges, it ultimately turned into a very profitable deal for its investors and one of the biggest and bluest chip companies in the country.

TheNewTeddy · August 31, 2012

What really gets me POed is some of the type of discussion like the above.

Quebec takes all our (the west) money

The Atlantic are lazy and takes all our money too

The east is evil

Oh, did I mention the east includes Ontario?

Toronto gets EVERYTHING!!

Really.

I suppose that's why our city has the highest taxes, the most efficient transit system, fire department, and police department, and the highest debt. Something is wrong there and it's not "Gravy". Ontario has downloaded welfare to the cities and then put all the services in Toronto. Guess where the people live? So Toronto, alone among cities in Canada, has to pay huge dollars to welfare, while all the money in Ontario goes to Ottawa, Rural areas, and the 905.

Now that Ontario is getting welfare itself, it has cut back, specifically, on services that are focused on Toronto, like Education (Toronto has a young population) and the like.

The feds, meanwhile, have no interest in helping solve these "Provincial" problems. So while Vancouver gets a new subway line to the Airport, and Montreal gets a new commuter line to it's eastern end, what does Toronto get? An commuter train extension to the next town over? A subway line to the middle of an empty field near a wal-mart? Meanwhile, the Montreal and Vancouver areas get new highways, while Toronto gets...??? I think the 427 was extended to the next street over.

But lo, "Toronto gets everything". Clearly that is the case. That is why more and more business HQs want to relocate to the much much smaller Calgary (1M urban area VS 6M), why Vancouver is the "best" place to live (Toronto often gets lower than other large Canadian cities), why Montreal is 'cool' and 'hip' (Toronto rarely produces anything unique). And so the city that gets everything ends up with cuts and cuts and cuts so that the Ontario government can placate the 905, and Ontario gets cuts and cuts and cuts so the Federal government can placate the west.

Angry because Quebec is stealing your money? Fine.

Angry cause the Atlantic is full of seasonal workers that want wintertime EI? Fine.

But don't take out your anger on Toronto.

And it gets better too.

Quebec likes to get in on the action. Quebec attacks Toronto at every turn, it is the example of how terrible Montreal will become if they let it. When a business leaves Quebec because Quebec is nuts, they go to Toronto, and for that, Quebeckers do not hate the business, or themselves for creating a crappy business climate, they hate Toronto, cause, the came here or something. While those in Quebec look for things "Made in Quebec" and those in the west want "Made in Western Canada", Toronto settles for "Made in Canada, maybe". Our desperate position causes our voters, in shear frustration of not understanding why nothing ever seems to make our city any better, to switch from left-wing socialist idiots to right-wing libertarian buffons as mayor. People here are pissed and don't know why.

I know why.

Quebec wants 45% of all the power in Canada.

The West wants 45% of all the power in Canada.

The Atlantic is satisfied to sit at 10%.

And for fear of losing voters in these areas, the federal government is willing to give them whatever they want.

I say: FINE. Alberta? Quebec? This is Ontario calling. We don't be mediating your disputes anymore. We are leaving with all our money, all our business connections, all our trade, and all our taxpayers. Tah tah.

cybercoma · August 31, 2012

Elections are won by realists, not by academics. You don't change how large groups of people will vote by hitting them with nitpicking, anal retentive arguments. Most people form their political beliefs in their gut and not their head. If you want to appeal to them you have to adjust your aim.

I love how people condone mass ignorance and actually talk down about intelligence, reason, and research. Maybe you want a country guided by the knee-jerk (er... I mean) gut feelings of the masses, but call me crazy... I don't think that's the best idea. We should be striving for an informed electorate, but we have political parties today that would rather the electorate remain stupid and placated. People humbly accept having the wool pulled over their eyes and announce proudly that the couldn't possibly care less. Welcome to New Democracy, where there is no civic duties.

Edited August 31, 2012 by cybercoma

cybercoma · August 31, 2012

In Quebec, most are Quebecers first, and Canadians second.

It seems to me that federalism would work a hell of a lot better if everyone thought this way. Perhaps the people of Québec have a firmer grasp on federalism than the rest of us.

Black Dog · August 31, 2012

What is wrong with that picture is in Quebec there is an INCOME TAX and in Alberta there isn't. You want programs PAY FOR THEM like the rest of the country. If you don't that is fine to but you are presenting a false choice.

Alberta has an income tax.

punked · August 31, 2012

Nonsense. Fish had nothing to do with it and the Eastern fisheries didn't disappear to build a railway. It took another hundred years to do that. The railway was a condition of BC joining Confederation. It had to be otherwise there was no point in BC becoming part of Canada. It would have been better off joining the US.

The members of the Montreal syndicate who built it had nothing to do with fishing, they were industrialists and bankers for the most part. A large part of the capital investment came from UK investors. In return for building the railway, the syndicate was given a 20 year exemption from taxes and large land grants, some of which turned out to be large parts of downtown Winnipeg, Calgary and Vancouver. While its construction had some big challenges, it ultimately turned into a very profitable deal for its investors and one of the biggest and bluest chip companies in the country.

The fish disappeared because we took them out of the ocean to build a country, and because we were to scared of hurting trade with Europe (A lot of Western Trade BTW) to tell them the fish that are in our waters belong to us. Yes we took the Fish out of the Ocean for this country and now that they have no resources we want to tell Eastern Canada to take a hike to people in Alberta pay less taxes? That hardly seems fair.

Again the railway is not the only infrastructure that was needed to settle western Canada. The system of Grain Elevators that made it possible for Western Farmers to get their product to marked didn't build themselves. No interest loans to provincial governments who used them to develop hydro wasn't money that came out of thin air. We have always been a country that helps each other develop because a Strong Canada not only means a Strong NS it means a Strong Alberta.

BTW Nova Scotia isn't putting all those Alberta oil workers threw school for free. Their transition of high school programs which lead into their community collages educate the people Alberta needs. I heard a man on the radio last year I believe he was a pipe fitter that graduated from Nova Scotias community collage pipe fitting program. On their last day of class an oil sands man came recruiting that man signed their WHOLE GRADUATING CLASS up. None of them are working in Nova Scotia now making that province better they are all in Alberta. Alberta grows because Nova Scotia has a good education program. That is the point of Equalization it makes OUR COUNTRY STRONGER.

Here is the problem though people from Alberta want it both ways. They want to see Alberta grow super fast bringing in highly educated Canadians from all across this country, but they don't want to pay their fair share for the programs that have created that resource for them. Newfoundland's Education system is producing the people need, their Healthcare programs are keeping them healthy and in shape. Alberta benefits probably more then they put into the system from other provinces. So stop crying about it.

Edited August 31, 2012 by punked

punked · August 31, 2012

Alberta has an income tax.

Sales tax. My bad friend. Thank you for the correction. I will go back and edit the post.

Edited August 31, 2012 by punked

Wild Bill · August 31, 2012

I love how people condone mass ignorance and actually talk down about intelligence, reason, and research. Maybe you want a country guided by the knee-jerk (er... I mean) gut feelings of the masses, but call me crazy... I don't think that's the best idea. We should be striving for an informed electorate, but we have political parties today that would rather the electorate remain stupid and placated. People humbly accept having the wool pulled over their eyes and announce proudly that the couldn't possibly care less. Welcome to New Democracy, where there is no civic duties.

It's not a question of what we want. It's a question of the way it is! You might disagree with how the masses think but to favour a system where the masses do not get their way is to stray from democracy. In effect, you are calling for an elite run by those that think the same as YOU!

To me, that outcome would be worse than what we have now. I am a great believer in populism. Someone once said that "Democracy is a system where the 'little guy' knows what he wants and deserves to get it, good and hard!" I would not be that mean but still, I believe in a populist democracy. True, mistakes will be made but that is how people learn. Take away their ability to make mistakes and you are taking away their free will.

guyser · August 31, 2012

I suppose that's why our city has the highest taxes, the most efficient transit system, fire department, and police department, and the highest debt.

Not sure if serious.

cybercoma · August 31, 2012

It's not a question of what we want. It's a question of the way it is! You might disagree with how the masses think but to favour a system where the masses do not get their way is to stray from democracy. In effect, you are calling for an elite run by those that think the same as YOU!

No. I'm calling for ignorant partisan hacks to stop deriding academics and research, instead of educating "the masses."