Kevin O'Leary will invest $1 million if Notley quits.

[Boges]

Is it really that bad in Alberta?

http://www.metronews.ca/news/canada/2016/01/11/kevin-oleary-to-invest-1-million-in-oil-if-notley-resigns.html

Popular finance guru Kevin O’Leary says he’ll invest $1 million in Canadian oil industries — if NDP Premier Rachel Notley resigns.

The former Dragon’s Den host was speaking on Newstalk 1010’s Live Drive radio program about the downturn in the Canadian dollar and economy, largely caused by sinking oil prices.

“I mean no disrespect when I say this but here’s my offer: I’ll invest $1 million in Canadian energy companies if out of grace and for the absolute good of Canada the premier of Alberta resigns,” O’Leary said.

“I wouldn’t touch them now because she doesn’t know what she’s doing.”

“Please step down, please, do it for Canadians,” he begged.

O’Leary attributed layoffs and the plummeting dollar on the inexperience of Notley’s government and poor policy choices, specifically, hikes in corporate tax rate and uncertainty about royalties.

“The Alberta government is in free fall, there’s total chaos there,” he said.

“It’s like a horror movie, it’s an unbelievable series of events.”

The price of oil doesn't appear to be going up any time soon. I can imagine there are a lot of people who left Eastern Canada because they couldn't find work to come to Alberta only to find out there's no work now there either, and it's a lot colder.

Has Notley deceived people, she is an NDPer right? The fact that she opposes oil development and wants to raise taxes can't be a surprise to anyone.

Have the tables been turned, now that the dollar is back down will this be a boon to Eastern Canada and will Alberta feel the massive pinch, I know that most of the jobs created last months came mostly from Ontario.

[PIK]

The people of alberta screwed up and they now know it. Notley and her crew have no idea what so ever on what to do.

[kimmy]

Is O'Leary really suggesting that the Premier of Alberta could raise the global price of oil if "she knew what she was doing"?

-k

[msj]

Is O'Leary really suggesting that the Premier of Alberta could raise the global price of oil if "she knew what she was doing"?

-k

Of course!

Not only that, but she is responsible for Alaska's credit rating falling last week .

[overthere]

I think Notley comprehends the value of resource extraction to Canada, not just Alberta. She appears to understand that a very crucial step is to build infrastructure now to take advantage of markets when the petro cycle turns upward, which it inevitably will in time. Note that the infrastructure required- tidewater pipelines-is built with private money, not govt money. And it supports an industry that- like it or not- is a crucial part of our national economy.

Her strategy has been to try to improve the AB position/optics with green initiatives like carbon taxes(90%+ of the worlds oil has no carbon tax), increased royalties, shutting down coal fired hydro in AB etc. By doing this, she wants to gain some social license.

The result so far, in the last couple months? Two premiers, BC and MN, have recently said they oppose/don't support tidewater pipelines. ON and QC are opposed to Energy East. Our leader Mr Trudeau has no comment on a budget line item his Finance Minister must be losing sleep over. It's on the 'revenue' side of the ledger, an area we can all see is territory that Trudeau is not familiar with at all.

I think what Leary and others take issue with regarding Notley is her refusal to address the expense side of the AB budget. She claims to be following the old track of spending on infrastructure in hard times and laughably mimics Trudeau in speaking of 'social infrastructure", borrowing money now for a theoretical return in the future. But of course she is actually borrowing money for day to day government operations, as well as for capital investment. In hard times, the usual course of responsible govt would be to try to cut expenses for operations, and AB has the highest per capita cost of operations in the country. But no, she has not looked at that at all, because to do so would raise the ire of public service/private sector unions. The unions are not only her strident supporters, many of her MLAs and political staff come straight from them. So, like Christie, the most important element of decision making is not doing the right thing, it is doing what it will take for re election. Some things never change.

[Accountability Now]

Is O'Leary really suggesting that the Premier of Alberta could raise the global price of oil if "she knew what she was doing"?

-k

Kimmy...everyone knows that the price of oil is determined elsewhere however the incentive to invest inside Alberta is completely obliterated by what she is doing with the taxes and royalty policies.

I met yesterday a close friend who is a banker that specializes in oil/gas and he said it will never hit the news but many closed door meetings with these oil execs have shown time and time again that companies could be investing but are choosing not to simply because of these policies and the NDPs general anti-oil regime.

Having any other government wouldn't change the price of oil nor would it even keep Alberta from recovering however it wouldn't be the pile driver that she is putting on us.

Much like Trudeau, Notley feels that the people of Alberta supported and voted her in based on EVERY platform decision when in reality she got in form an anti-PC vote. She won't face that reality and to the right thing (ie cut taxes and provide incentives) because that would go against her 'political' campaign. I have also been told that many NDP MLAs know that they are 'one and done' so they are only using their time to put in the policies they feel will have the most effect.

[overthere]

Notley feels that the people of Alberta supported and voted her in based on EVERY platform decision

Note that the hefty carbon tax was never stated in the AB NDP platform, or campaign, or throne speech.

[Accountability Now]

Note that the hefty carbon tax was never stated in the AB NDP platform, or campaign, or throne speech.

Indeed. It was the extra jab you give a guy while he's down.

[overthere]

Indeed. It was the extra jab you give a guy while he's down.

We can take solace that the repeated sharp kicks in the collective groin are delivered with a lady sized Birkenstock sandal . Small mercies and all that.

[Accountability Now]

We can take solace that the repeated sharp kicks in the collective groin are delivered with a lady sized Birkenstock sandal . Small mercies and all that.

No way...those make for a more direct hit.

[jacee]

Kimmy...everyone knows that the price of oil is determined elsewhere

Absolutely, and it would be the same regardless of who got elected. I expect the Conservatives are now very relieved they lost.

however the incentive to invest inside Alberta is completely obliterated by what she is doing with the taxes and royalty policies.

I met yesterday a close friend who is a banker that specializes in oil/gas and he said it will never hit the news but many closed door meetings with these oil execs have shown time and time again that companies could be investing but are choosing not to simply because of these policies and the NDPs general anti-oil regime.

Having any other government wouldn't change the price of oil nor would it even keep Alberta from recovering however it wouldn't be the pile driver that she is putting on us.

Much like Trudeau, Notley feels that the people of Alberta supported and voted her in based on EVERY platform decision when in reality she got in form an anti-PC vote. She won't face that reality and to the right thing (ie cut taxes and provide incentives) because that would go against her 'political' campaign. I have also been told that many NDP MLAs know that they are 'one and done' so they are only using their time to put in the policies they feel will have the most effect.

Can you point me to any clear evidence that cutting corporate taxes has ever accomplished any economic improvements?

.

[Accountability Now]

Absolutely, and it would be the same regardless of who got elected. I expect the Conservatives are now very relieved they lost.

I would agree that the Conservatives agree they are glad they lost but not for the same reason. This experience we are having with the NDP in Alberta is now showing people what the 'alternative' was truly about. So when the PC or whatever right wing government takes over (and they will), they will always have this lesson to draw back on to back what they are doing.

Can you point me to any clear evidence that cutting corporate taxes has ever accomplished any economic improvements?

Are you looking on the macro sense or just for examples?

Off the top of my head I know that Tim Hortons left Canada and later came back into Canada solely because of the corporate tax changes. When Burger King bought Tim Hortons, they too left the US in favor of lower taxes.

On the macro sense I can offer this one:

http://www.policyschool.ucalgary.ca/sites/default/files/research/tax-competitiveness-chen-mintz.pdf

Canada is losing its edge in the competition for global capital. After a decade of remarkable progress in reducing the tax burden on business investment — moving from one of the least tax-competitive jurisdictions among its industrialized peers in 2000, to ranking in the middle of the pack by 2011 — Canada has slipped by largely standing still. As other countries in our peer group have continued to reform their business-tax regimes, they have surpassed Canada, which has slid from having the 19th-highest tax burden on investments by medium-sized and large corporations in 2012, to the 14th-highest among 34 OECD countries in 2014. Even more worrying is that Canada’s political currents are running the wrong way, with a few provinces having increased taxes on capital in recent years and a number of politicians today floating the possibility of even higher business taxes to help address budgetary strains. But the right approach to raising tax revenue and improving the economy is quite the opposite: lowering rates and broadening the tax base by making Canadian jurisdictions even more attractive to corporate investment.

This article goes into depth talking about 'tax competitiveness' and how we live in a global market. Companies have the ability to pick and choose where they set up shop and most countries have tax treaties. So even though they do business in a given country they will take all the profits (minus 10% for withholding) back to whatever country is most tax advantageous. So instead of getting 25% (Fed and Prov), we will now be getting only 10% only because we weren't tax competitive.

This is particularly true when it comes to oil and gas where not only can they choose where the profits go, they can also choose where to do the work. Companies will pick up and move investments solely on taxation and royalty policies to other areas of oil development.....just to save a few bucks. Again, this new carbon tax didn't help anything on that regard:

The move by Shell comes after several other undeveloped oil-sands projects have been deferred due to cost issues and raises questions about how much of Canada’s oil-sands, the world’s third-largest source of untapped crude, can be recovered profitably. Earlier this year, three major Canadian energy companies said they would shelve plans for new or expanded oil-sands projects and last year France’s Total SA and Statoil ASA of Norway indefinitely postponed projects even before the collapse of crude prices.

Oil sands are some of the highest-cost producers of crude in the world, and have been hard hit by lower prices. They have also faced the prospect of difficulty accessing markets because of the lack of pipelines, and uncertainty about the prospect for tougher regulations on carbon dioxide emissions in Canada.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/royal-dutch-shell-to-abandon-carmen-creek-oil-sands-project-1445987863

[msj]

Business loves to tell people how much regulation and taxes and fees get in the way of them doing business.

Yet, business gets done once the price of oil reaches certain thresholds.

Look, it is always going to be tough to do business in Canada when it comes to resource extraction: we, the people, have certain standards that exceed the standards of many a third world nation.

Any government should not be setting policy based on the whining of an industry when the largest economic factor, which is out of any governments control, is depressed.

Governments should consider counter-cyclical policies which does include finding ways to get pipelines built now rather than 5 years from now.

But the Kevin O'Leary's of the world should have been complaining about the excessive spending by certain governments during the good times.

It makes more sense for a government to run deficits now rather than when oil was at $100. But that gets forgotten and then the the good times roll on and everyone forgets....

[overthere]

Any government should not be setting policy based on the whining of an industry when the largest economic factor, which is out of any governments control, is depressed.

So the applications by several pipeline companies to build major pipelines at their cost, for the benefit of our economy, right now, is 'whining'?

You are one of several here with an extremely bizarre world view. God help us.

[ReeferMadness]

Kevin O'Leary is Canada's Donald Trump - minus the money. A million dollars. hahahahahahahahahahahaha.

Think of O'Leary as mini-me saying 1 MILLION DOLLARS. hahahahahahahaha

[Topaz]

The is very rich so why only a million? I wonder if he's really losing in his energy investments and where was he when the manufacturing sector needed help.

[ReeferMadness]

There are a lot of people who just assumed the good times for the energy sector would never end. They made lots of money when the price of oil went up and patted themselves on the back because they were so smart to invest in it. Now that the price of oil is crashed, they need someone to blame and it obviously isn't themselves.

ETA: and your point about the manufacturing sector is well made. Oil exports artificially inflated the Canadian dollar and contrary to what many were claiming, it hurt the manufacturing sector. Hard to say how much of it will rebound now that the dollar has sunk again.

Edited January 13, 2016 by ReeferMadness

[Moonlight Graham]

Is O'Leary really suggesting that the Premier of Alberta could raise the global price of oil if "she knew what she was doing"?

O'Leary is probably just grandstanding and probably just doesn't like her ideology (that cuts into his fat bank account). Oil is very low and he's probably ready to buy in on the great deals happening in the Alberta/Canadian oil sector, and sees that he can use that to try to drum support for getting that leader out. Kevin never does anything unless it benefits his own bank account. I'm sure if Notley's gone Kevin thinks he stands to make more money, because Notley has gone after the fat-cats a bit to benefit the average joe (or at least has tried). Kevin's interests are not the same as your average Albertan/Canadian.

[On Guard for Thee]

O'Leary is probably just grandstanding and probably just doesn't like her ideology (that cuts into his fat bank account). Oil is very low and he's probably ready to buy in on the great deals happening in the Alberta/Canadian oil sector, and sees that he can use that to try to drum support for getting that leader out. Kevin never does anything unless it benefits his own bank account. I'm sure if Notley's gone Kevin thinks he stands to make more money, because Notley has gone after the fat-cats a bit to benefit the average joe (or at least has tried). Kevin's interests are not the same as your average Albertan/Canadian.

Grandstanding is about all you ca call it. But I reckon it backfired when he was interviewed on Power and Politics this aft. He looked and sounded like a Trump style buffoon wannabe, except with a paltry offer of 1 million. I guess he should stick to game show hosting.

[The_Squid]

I guess he gets a bunch of free publicity (?) just by being a loudmouth clown.

[waldo]

the perfect (twitter) comeback to blowhard O'Leary's want to get his name in the news:

Tomorrow, Kevin O'Leary will tackle high property values in Toronto by selling a 2 bedroom condo, but only if Wynne AND Trudeau resign.

[jacee]

I would agree that the Conservatives agree they are glad they lost but not for the same reason. This experience we are having with the NDP in Alberta is now showing people what the 'alternative' was truly about. So when the PC or whatever right wing government takes over (and they will), they will always have this lesson to draw back on to back what they are doing.

---SNIP---

Thanks for that policy piece from Calgary ... but I was thinking of evidence of positive impact on the economy ... creating good, stable jobs, perhaps effects on the GDP ...

Though I think other indices of development may be more accurate - is, ones that take into account employment, wealth distribution and environmental degredation:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measure_of_Economic_Welfare#Trend_of_ISEW_in_the_USA

Edited January 13, 2016 by Charles Anthony
excessive quoting; [---SNIP---]

[Accountability Now]

Thanks for that policy piece from Calgary ... but I was thinking of evidence of positive impact on the economy ... creating good, stable jobs, perhaps effects on the GDP ...

Though I think other indices of development may be more accurate - is, ones that take into account employment, wealth distribution and environmental degredation:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measure_of_Economic_Welfare#Trend_of_ISEW_in_the_USA

I would love it if we all had good stable jobs and nothing ever changed....especially if we all worked equally hard and were all paid the same so that no disparity would ever come between us. However this doesn't exist and will never exist. The harshest reality facing us right now is that it has become a global market place. The mom and pop shop is no longer competing with the other mom and pop down the street for revenue, they are competing with some manufacturing facility in China. This world market is especially true when it comes to oil/gas as these companies don't care where they drill it, they only care where they can make the most money. People around the world have sharpened their pencil are and are ready to compete on various levels meaning that governments need to compete on many levels just to get business to come here.

Obviously there is a balance that needs to be met in order to have environmentally sound practices and stability for long term gain however the intent of lowering taxes is to get those companies to come here in the first place. If the companies aren't here then there will be no salaries which means greater unemployment, less stability, less wealth to distribute and overall a gloomy situation.

[waldo]

Obviously there is a balance that needs to be met in order to have environmentally sound practices and stability for long term gain however the intent of lowering taxes is to get those companies to come here in the first place. If the companies aren't here then there will be no salaries which means greater unemployment, less stability, less wealth to distribute and overall a gloomy situation.

and just how did that so-called "Alberta Advantage" help diversify the Alberta economy... help to somewhat shelter Alberta from yet another cyclic bounce following the collapse of oil prices? Why didn't all those non-energy companies rush into the province to take advantage of those "low tax rates"? This low-tax mantra is a facade that simply positions BigOil to extend upon the brazillions of profits its taken out of the province. And, again, the current rather minuscule tax increase hasn't even moved Alberta from the "middle of the pack" when comparing respective rates, province-to-province. Notwithstanding, even when the full tax increase comes to fruition, the rate will be no higher than that BigOil worked with under the Ralph Klein era. Imagine that!

.

[overthere]

Whatever happened to the industrial heartland in Ontario and Quebec?