Alberta Election May 2015

[Michael Hardner]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/alberta/alberta-election-polls-painting-a-bleak-picture-for-prentices-tories/article23999141/

Alberta Conservatives in 3rd place behind the NDP ? Okaaaay.... could Jim Yung Un's glorious reign be over ? 44 years...

[Accountability Now]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/alberta/alberta-election-polls-painting-a-bleak-picture-for-prentices-tories/article23999141/

Alberta Conservatives in 3rd place behind the NDP ? Okaaaay.... could Jim Yung Un's glorious reign be over ? 44 years...

We only have to got go as far back as the last provicinal election to see how drastically wrong the polling can be in Alberta. Having said that there probably is more of a back lash now but a new problem exists for the 'other' parties in that they will split the vote enough to allow the PC's to remain.

The most problematic thing about this whole thing is that everyone in Alberta is crying about how we should make our budgets on non-oil related revenues. I totally agree with that however that means that teachers, doctors, public servants and anything else related to provincial expenditures need to readjust their salaries to below or around the national average if that is the case. The PC's made some recent moves to get off the oil teet (not far enough in my opinion) but now the backlash of the same people who first wanted them to do it. Baffling. With that said, if the PCs do go down, they can only blame themselves as they sold themselves out to the teachers union in order to beat the Wildrose in the last election.

[jacee]

The most problematic thing about this whole thing is that everyone in Alberta is crying about how we should make our budgets on non-oil related revenues. I totally agree with that however that means that teachers, doctors, public servants and anything else related to provincial expenditures need to readjust their salaries to below or around the national average if that is the case.

Nah ... just cancel the subsidies to the oil sands. Taxpayers shouldn't be throwing their money into the pockets of oil execs and shareholders. It's ridiculous when essential services for people are being withheld due to lack of money. Excuse me? What did you do with our money? Gave an oil exec a million dollar bonus? I worked all year to put my tax money into his pocket? :/

If they can't operate without corporate welfare, then they shouldn't be in business.

http://www.greenpeace.org/canada/en/Blogentry/government-subsidies-to-tar-sands-companies-l/blog/28184/

But what would happen if we stopped giving some of the richest companies in the world billions in public dollars to go after the dirtiest and riskiest types of oil?

Deficits would go down.

Pollution would go down.

There would be no impact, or a positive impact, on employment.

.

Edited April 22, 2015 by jacee

[Accountability Now]

Nah ... just cancel the subsidies to the oil sands. Taxpayers shouldn't be throwing their money into the pockets of oil execs and shareholders. It's ridiculous when essential services for people are being withheld due to lack of money. Excuse me? What did you do with our money? Gave an oil exec a million dollar bonus? I worked all year to put my tax money into his pocket? :/

If they can't operate without corporate welfare, then they shouldn't be in business.

http://www.greenpeace.org/canada/en/Blogentry/government-subsidies-to-tar-sands-companies-l/blog/28184/

But what would happen if we stopped giving some of the richest companies in the world billions in public dollars to go after the dirtiest and riskiest types of oil?

Deficits would go down.

Pollution would go down.

There would be no impact, or a positive impact, on employment.

.

Well...that wouldn't be a decision made by the Alberta goverment so I'm not sure why you are bringing it up here. The point I'm making is that in the current system the govenment has to base their budget on oil being at a certain price but due to the volatility, they can see large swings up or down. So many people (including myself) state that we should base the budget on a much lower price of oil and then use any surpluses to address additional needs. The problem is that many people talk the talk but don't walk the walk! If the budget was based on much lower prices then Alberta would have to pay its public servants a much lower rate around the national average.

So these people want the government to govern accordingly but are upset when it affects them. My point is that you can't have it both ways.

[jacee]

Well...that wouldn't be a decision made by the Alberta goverment so I'm not sure why you are bringing it up here.

Because this is not going to happen:

however that means that teachers, doctors, public servants and anything else related to provincial expenditures need to readjust their salaries to below or around the national average if that is the case.

So I suggested an alternative place for cutting back ... taxpayer subsidies lining pockets of oil execs. (See IMF thread)

.

[Accountability Now]

Because this is not going to happen:

So I suggested an alternative place for cutting back ... taxpayer subsidies lining pockets of oil execs. (See IMF thread)

.

So what we're saying is there are two choices: 1) stop giving tax breaks to oil companies who in turn pay way more in royalties and provide jobs and many other economic stimulus or 2) base our budgets on non-oil revenues which means there is no reason that Alberta public workers need to be the highest paid in the country and reward them when oil prices are higher than the budgeted prices.

Hmmmm....which one is really MORE likely.

The only way number 1 has any sort of shot is if Canada went socialist and made their own oil company to do the work.

[jacee]

So what we're saying is there are two choices: 1) stop giving tax breaks to oil companies who in turn pay way more in royalties and provide jobs and many other economic stimulus or

How does that balance out with the costs of the 'cleanup' of the environment and damage to people's health?

I think it's a zero sum game for the taxpayers at best.

2) base our budgets on non-oil revenues which means there is no reason that Alberta public workers need to be the highest paid in the country and reward them when oil prices are higher than the budgeted prices.

Hmmmm....which one is really MORE likely.

The only way number 1 has any sort of shot is if Canada went socialist and made their own oil company to do the work.

Now there's a thought!

.

[Hydraboss]

Create a Canadian federal oil company to take a poke at Alberta's resources and see what the outcome is (please!). I assume you want the Wildrose to take every seat in the province except Edmonton-Strathcona, because that would be exactly what happens.

The vast, vast majority of taxpayers in this province wouldn't care about some CEO getting a few million dollars in under-the-table payments (if anyone could actually prove that's happened/happening) if that money put them to work. For example, do you think anyone in the trades would care if the government shelled out a few million to the head of Shell in exchange for the company building Albian Sands? I doubt any of the 3000 workers, from my company alone, that worked on that site for a few years making six figure incomes would really give a damn. This is no different from the manufacturing industry in Ontario - do you think the CAW would raise a fuss if there was a chance to get all their union jobs back under the same conditions? Not likely.

Back to the election....

Tonight will likely be the make or break for the three parties in contention (even the third place PCs). There is only going to be one leaders' debate, and the three real leaders (and the Liberal) will be on Global for 90 minutes. 90 minutes to convince the 20+% of "undecideds" that they should get off their asses and actually cast a vote (not going to happen though). This is Jean's to lose for the house, Notley's to lose for seats in Calgary, and JP's to lose for everything else. Jim's biggest challenge is to NOT have his party decimated ala the Kim Campbell federal PC party destruction.

Just about time to start the prediction betting.............

[Accountability Now]

How does that balance out with the costs of the 'cleanup' of the environment and damage to people's health?

I think it's a zero sum game for the taxpayers at best.

Show me a link that says its zero sum.

Currently Syncrude and Shell are cleaning their tailing ponds on their own nickel. Not taxpayer money.

[Accountability Now]

Create a Canadian federal oil company to take a poke at Alberta's resources and see what the outcome is (please!). I assume you want the Wildrose to take every seat in the province except Edmonton-Strathcona, because that would be exactly what happens.

I don't doubt there are reasons why the current system exists and that people who are in control have better access to those reasons than I. As such I don't question it as much as others. Having said I do think its a better idea to have a state owned company then to raise the royalties to the effect that most people talk about. I guess the reality is that if the latter were to happen then the oil companies would leave and the government would have no choice but to extract it themselves.

[Hydraboss]

They tried this, to an extent, with Cenovus (formerly Alberta Energy Company - AEC). The province owned a shwack load of AEC but soon found out that it had to play by the same rules as every other energy company and spun it off (first all their oil reserves to go strictly natural gas). You're right in that if the government wants to play in the energy sector in Alberta, they would soon end up being the only player and government bodies aren't exactly known for being successful business-wise.

They should remain the government and the regulator and keep their fingers out of the pot.

[Hydraboss]

If the federal government tried to do the same thing (see: Brazil, Statoil, etc) the shit would hit the fan. The thought of Ottawa trying to control Alberta-owned resources would be near explosive. Hell, we still haven't forgiven the NEP and look how long ago THAT was.

[Accountability Now]

They should remain the government and the regulator and keep their fingers out of the pot.

That's just it. People complain about about giving this money to oil companies but in the same breath no one wants the government to own anything. If we are a capitalist nation then by defintion that means the government stays out.

If the federal government tried to do the same thing (see: Brazil, Statoil, etc) the shit would hit the fan. The thought of Ottawa trying to control Alberta-owned resources would be near explosive. Hell, we still haven't forgiven the NEP and look how long ago THAT was.

Yup. If they decided to take the oil away then they would have to take away all the natural resources away from the other provinces too. And then what else would they take away. Not sure people want that snowball effect.

[Hydraboss]

Maybe the feds should start by taking over all the hydro in Kwebek first, just to see how that goes. Always wise to run test samples before going whole-hog, wouldn't you say?

[Accountability Now]

Maybe the feds should start by taking over all the hydro in Kwebek first, just to see how that goes. Always wise to run test samples before going whole-hog, wouldn't you say?

Lol! I guess it would be worth a try

[WWWTT]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories

What are the chances of the PC winning a majority again? 100%.

Yup, same shit, different day.

Saddam Hussein's mock-elections had more drama than Alberta's

Ever heard the saying "don't hold your breath"?

https://ricochet.media/en/415/what-the-hell-is-happening-in-alberta

Oh well, when you live by the going price per barrel, you die by the going price per barrel!

And heeeeeeeeere comes political death!

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

Yep, big yawner in Alberta election when even Sun news declares Rachel Notley the hands down winner in the televised leaders debate.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2015/04/23/ndp-rachel-notley-outclasses-the-field-in-leaders-debate

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

What happened to the typical conservative response to the NDP that they are just another communist party????

Oh ya, the pc are polling in third right now in Alberta.

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/Notley+promises+school+fees+half+decrease+class+sizes/10978034/story.html

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

Oh here's another one about the Orange wave that's going to give Harper quite a few sleepless nights

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/edmonton/leader+Rachel+Notley+pledges+resurrect+student+summer/10991206/story.html

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

Don't know how the conservatives are going to pull a rabbit out of the hat in Alberta?

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/04/12/alberta-ndp-leader-rachel-notley-holds-rally-in-edmonton-to-overflowing-crowds?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=recommend-button&utm_campaign=Alberta+NDP+leader+Rachel+Notley+holds+rally+in+Edmonton+to+overflowing+crowds

WWWTT

[overthere]

Just about time to start the prediction betting.............

PC 55

NDP 15

Wildrose 13

Liberal 2

[eyeball]

If the federal government tried to do the same thing (see: Brazil, Statoil, etc) the shit would hit the fan. The thought of Ottawa trying to control Alberta-owned resources would be near explosive. Hell, we still haven't forgiven the NEP and look how long ago THAT was.

What if they did it the Norwegian way?

[eyeball]

Maybe the feds should start by taking over all the hydro in Kwebek first, just to see how that goes. Always wise to run test samples before going whole-hog, wouldn't you say?

Well, I admit if Ottawa treated other provinces resources the way it treats BC's fish...Canada probably wouldn't exist.

So....I'm all for Ottawa taking a poke at Alberta's oil. Nothing would get me closer to the promised land of Cascadia faster.

Edited April 24, 2015 by eyeball

[Accountability Now]

What if they did it the Norwegian way?

Again....then Canada would have to take all of the Natural Resources back and we would be a socialist country. If that's what the majority of people want then fine. However its kind of an all or none thing when it comes to resources.

[Accountability Now]

So....I'm all for Ottawa taking a poke at Alberta's oil. Nothing would get me closer to the promised land of Cascadia faster.

How many people in BC actually believe in the idea of Cascadia? I know a fair amount of people in Oregon and they have never heard of it and moreso laugh at the idea.