geoffrey Posted April 24, 2007 Report Posted April 24, 2007 Williams trusts Dion: A sucker is born every minute. Which one of them? Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
Newfie Canadian Posted April 24, 2007 Report Posted April 24, 2007 Some interesting posts in this thread, from nuts to insightful. But who am I to judge? I'm not a fan of Mr. Williams, nor do I hate the man. I suspect that his recent photo op with Mr. Dion was just that and not much more. I recall that when Danny had his little spat with PM that he cozied up to Mr. Harper, so it's all part of the game as far as I'm concerned. Is it logical for Danny to rock to boat so much? Of course not. I suspect part of it is he thinks he's right, (an economist from Memorial University has put out the claim that under the proposals that Newfoundland and Labrador will lose money), and another part of it is the upcoming provincial election. Going toe to toe with the feds, as someone so eloquently put it, makes up for the fact that he hasn't done what he himself has promised with regards to rural Newfoundland, with people still leaving in droves. At any rate, Danny could go out tomorrow and run over the leader of the opposition with a Leopard tank and still get elected with a majority in October, and perhaps part of that is the fact that the provincial NDP is all but nonexistent and the grits haven't been able to recover from Roger Grimes' loss of four years ago, with electing a new leader then turfing him a short while later. But taking on the feds, whether with true and noble purpose or not, always helps...and not just in Newfoundland. I've ranted long enough. Let me end with this. I doubt very much that Danny Williams trusts Stephane Dion, or anyone else for that matter. Quote "If you don't believe your country should come before yourself, you can better serve your country by livin' someplace else." Stompin' Tom Connors
GreenWhiteandPink Posted April 27, 2007 Report Posted April 27, 2007 People, these are the basic facts. In terms of revenue from non-renewable natural resources, which is where the money comes from right now in Newfoundland, we have a window of about 10 or 12 years to accomplish something here. After that, the oil supply declines and the revenue drops off sharply. If we don't use this opportunity to build our economy for coming generations, we will be screwed economically, perhaps indefinitely, with a double whammy demographically (hardly any young people left to support an aging population), and the triple whammy of our debt. We have, per capita, twice as much government debt as anywhere else in the country, and as a result have been living on a shoestring for about 20 years. When people talk about a province or a country moving ahead, Ireland is always the big example. Ireland was in receipt for years of a subsidy (like equalization) from the European Union. Then when the economy started to pick up, they didn't subtract the equalization dollar for dollar, they let Ireland have a period of time to actually build up a head of steam. Now they are net contributors to the European Union. That's what Newfoundland is trying to do. If Canadians want to nickel and dime us down at this point, we'll never get ahead. The vast majority of the money from the Atlantic Accord (which is money from our oil revenue that stays out of the equalization formula) is being used to pay down debt, so that future generations will have a chance to make a go of it in Newfoundland. If we don't make it happen now, the future looks very bleak. BTW, does anyone here realize that Newfoundland, as an independent country, sent food aid in the form of salt fish to Alberta in the 1930's when the depression was at its worst? Quote
jdobbin Posted April 27, 2007 Author Report Posted April 27, 2007 Williams is now calling Harper "Steve." http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams has started referring to the prime minister as "Steve," a nickname used by the U.S. president. But it's hardly a sign of friendship."Well, his buddy George Bush calls him Steve. I can call him Steve, although I'm not a buddy of his," Williams told reporters Friday. The prime minister mocked Williams during question period for unveiling a budget heavy on spending, while still arguing the province has lost out on the new equalization formula. "I see that the government of Newfoundland and Labrador has tabled a budget today that involves record spending, paying down the debt and decreasing taxes," said Harper. Williams fired back that Newfoundland still carries the highest debt load of any other province, and Harper's comment was disrespectful. "For him to come out and conduct himself in the way he does, Steve doesn't deserve any better than that," he said. I wonder how much this is for show and how much Williams actually despises Harper. Quote
geoffrey Posted April 28, 2007 Report Posted April 28, 2007 Williams can't even be respectful, how can I possibly take him seriously? Newfoundlanders should get rid of him ASAP, he gives them all a bad name. Even Quebec sepertists generally have more maturity and respect than this guy. Turf him. Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
jdobbin Posted April 28, 2007 Author Report Posted April 28, 2007 Turf him. That's what people used to about Klein but you guys just called him "Good ol' Ralph." Quote
geoffrey Posted April 28, 2007 Report Posted April 28, 2007 That's what people used to about Klein but you guys just called him "Good ol' Ralph." Even Ralph was more respectful than Williams. I don't recall Ralph tearing down the flag or anything. And we're also not in the 'beggers can't be chooser' position that Newfoundland is. When they pull their weight, then maybe I'll give Williams a second thought... but don't count on it. Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
jdobbin Posted April 28, 2007 Author Report Posted April 28, 2007 Even Ralph was more respectful than Williams. I don't recall Ralph tearing down the flag or anything.And we're also not in the 'beggers can't be chooser' position that Newfoundland is. When they pull their weight, then maybe I'll give Williams a second thought... but don't count on it. Why does Newfoundland have to be in a begger's position? Who is putting them there? Quote
geoffrey Posted April 28, 2007 Report Posted April 28, 2007 Why does Newfoundland have to be in a begger's position? Who is putting them there? Danny Williams, his government policy is viciously anti-oil. And it shows. That's why Newfoundland, that has as many barrels of reserves per capita as Alberta, has a GDP per capita of $5k below the Canadian average, and why Alberta has a GDP of $20k above the Canadian average. It's alllll policy. Williams is a mouth for sure, but he's yet to really show he has the brains to produce anything worthwhile for those that elect him. Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
jdobbin Posted April 28, 2007 Author Report Posted April 28, 2007 Danny Williams, his government policy is viciously anti-oil.And it shows. That's why Newfoundland, that has as many barrels of reserves per capita as Alberta, has a GDP per capita of $5k below the Canadian average, and why Alberta has a GDP of $20k above the Canadian average. That isn't the sole reason for the troubles though, is it? The Atlantic Accord which Harper supported is far better for the province of Newfoundland than what Harper delivered in the budget. Quote
geoffrey Posted April 28, 2007 Report Posted April 28, 2007 Of course the Atlantic Accord was better, but that doesn't mean it was fair. I don't think all that extra money to Quebec is reasonable or fair, but it's better for Quebec. Alberta doesn't have an accord (or a Federal regulatory environment that's any more favourable)... and we do just fine. Newfoundland should too. Why should they expect something better? Williams has chosen to forbid oil and gas development (note that Newfoundland has a WAY WAY better export market than Alberta). He should deal with the political and economic consequences of that choice, rather than blame it on Ottawa like he did with Martin and now with Harper. Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
Michael Bluth Posted April 28, 2007 Report Posted April 28, 2007 Newfoundland should too. Why should they expect something better? Williams has chosen to forbid oil and gas development (note that Newfoundland has a WAY WAY better export market than Alberta). He should deal with the political and economic consequences of that choice, rather than blame it on Ottawa like he did with Martin and now with Harper. Of course it isn't fair. Is it fair that Newfoundland university students have a better deal, counting tuition rates and need-based grants, than students in any of the *have* provinces? No, but if the rest of Canada is going to pay for it why not. I thought equalization was meant to pay for relatively equal levels of service in the have not provinces, not for better services. Quote No one has ever defeated the Liberals with a divided conservative family. - Hon. Jim Prentice
jdobbin Posted April 28, 2007 Author Report Posted April 28, 2007 Of course the Atlantic Accord was better, but that doesn't mean it was fair. It was what Harper promised to the province. And that is why they keep hammering him on that. Quote
GreenWhiteandPink Posted April 28, 2007 Report Posted April 28, 2007 In terms of revenue from non-renewable natural resources, which is where the money comes from right now in Newfoundland, we have a window of about 10 or 12 years to accomplish something here. After that, the oil supply declines and the revenue drops off sharply. If we don't use this opportunity to build our economy for coming generations NL oil reserves are limited, there is only one reserve left to develop, Hebron. After that there is no more oil. NL must maximize as much revenue as possible, if it don't turn it's economic situation around in the next 5-10 NL is screwed. It will always be a "have not" province. It seems like that's what Alberta and Ontario and many of the posters on here want, someone to look down on ridicule insult, etc. geffory said: Williams has chosen to forbid oil and gas development No he has not. He just not letting the Hebron project start untill he can get the best deal possible, no more give aways. Quote
geoffrey Posted April 28, 2007 Report Posted April 28, 2007 NL oil reserves are limited, there is only one reserve left to develop, Hebron. After that there is no more oil. NL must maximize as much revenue as possible, if it don't turn it's economic situation around in the next 5-10 NL is screwed. It will always be a "have not" province. It seems like that's what Alberta and Ontario and many of the posters on here want, someone to look down on ridicule insult, etc. You, like most Newfoundlanders apparently, don't understand how oil is found or drilled for. I promise you there is more oil in Newfoundland, it's guarnteed. Who is willing to explore though? I wouldn't throw money away, betting on the Chavez of the North to maybe allow me to drill if I hand over all my profits to Newfoundland. It's a have-not province by choice, that's my issue. geffory said: Williams has chosen to forbid oil and gas developmentNo he has not. He just not letting the Hebron project start untill he can get the best deal possible, no more give aways. Well then don't blame anyone but Williams for your have-not status now. When he wakes up and realises that royalty rates are a competitive business, then maybe Newfoundland will improve. Until then, you'll be in the same state of affairs. It's remarkable how quickly the Newfies jump on to defend Great Leader. He really has brainwashed them all into thinking he's come kind of savior to the province, sticking it to the man. Well congrats, he stuck it to the man, and now you'll suffer needlessly because of it. Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
GreenWhiteandPink Posted April 29, 2007 Report Posted April 29, 2007 You, like most Newfoundlanders apparently, don't understand how oil is found or drilled for. I promise you there is more oil in Newfoundland, it's guarnteed. NL'ers are perfectly aware of how oil found, but as of now no new significant have been found. The government can sit back and let oil companies take what they want based on the assumption that there is more out there. You can't promise sh*t.! We are are have-not provrince because in the past we have let various resource companies and the Rest of Canada and take our resources. Quote
Michael Bluth Posted April 29, 2007 Report Posted April 29, 2007 We are are have-not provrince because in the past we have let various resource companies and the Rest of Canada and take our resources. Which was unfair. But now that you are a have province you still want to take from other have provinces? Quote No one has ever defeated the Liberals with a divided conservative family. - Hon. Jim Prentice
geoffrey Posted April 29, 2007 Report Posted April 29, 2007 We are are have-not provrince because in the past we have let various resource companies and the Rest of Canada and take our resources. And now you want to take Alberta's resources. That's what the 1/2 resource royalties is all about. Do you believe your entitled to Alberta oil money, and how is that any different from when we stole your fish (and Quebec stole your hydro)? Two wrongs don't make a right. Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
GreenWhiteandPink Posted April 29, 2007 Report Posted April 29, 2007 And now you want to take Alberta's resources. NL never took any of Alberta's resources. NL don't receive "oil money" from Alberta it receives equalization payments from the federal goverment. NL only wants what it was promised! Quote
Canuck E Stan Posted April 29, 2007 Report Posted April 29, 2007 NL only wants ....... Like a lottery winner still wanting his welfare cheques. Quote "Any man under 30 who is not a liberal has no heart, and any man over 30 who is not a conservative has no brains." — Winston Churchill
geoffrey Posted April 29, 2007 Report Posted April 29, 2007 NL never took any of Alberta's resources. NL don't receive "oil money" from Alberta it receives equalization payments from the federal goverment. Uhh huh, that's a pleasent euphanism. Do you not realise that money doesn't fall from the sky, and that a couple of provinces fund the vast amount of equalisation? Alberta and Ontario have net transfers out of their province to the Federal government... that money ends up in Newfoundland (among others). Name it anything you want, but we do fund Newfoundland's standard of living to a great extent. NL only wants what it was promised! That doesn't make their position fair or rational. There was once a promise to keep the slave trade open to slave owners in the Southern United States. Then all of a sudden someone realised a promise is really irrelevant when it makes no sense. Newfoundland wants to become oil rich, AND use everyone else's money at the same time. Unfortunately, that's not the way the world works. Do you feel that Alberta should get increased transfers? We're now subject to the same 1/2 resource revenues calculation as you are. Is it unfair to Alberta, or just unfair to Newfoundland. Promises be damned, what matters is the reasonability in the context of the current situation. Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
Michael Bluth Posted April 29, 2007 Report Posted April 29, 2007 Newfoundland wants to become oil rich, AND use everyone else's money at the same time. Unfortunately, that's not the way the world works. Do you feel that Alberta should get increased transfers? We're now subject to the same 1/2 resource revenues calculation as you are. Is it unfair to Alberta, or just unfair to Newfoundland. Promises be damned, what matters is the reasonability in the context of the current situation. Exactly. It is unfair to Alberta and every other province but Newfoundland. Why does Newfoundland deserve this extra special treatment? Quote No one has ever defeated the Liberals with a divided conservative family. - Hon. Jim Prentice
GreenWhiteandPink Posted April 30, 2007 Report Posted April 30, 2007 So it will enable NL to become a "have" province forever. It would enable us to become a net contributor to equalization as well. Alberta and Ontario will not have to send tax dollars to NL via Ottawa. geoffrey said : We're now subject to the same 1/2 resource revenues calculation as you are. Michael Bluth said: It is unfair to Alberta and every other province but Newfoundland. Yes and if Harper had kept his promise Alberta NS SASK NB PEI MAN BC ONT QUE would also would also be able to exclude 100% of resource revenue as well! So what's the problem. I guess when the oil runs out we will a "have not" province again and Alberta and Ontario can surport us forever, great idea guys! Quote
Michael Bluth Posted April 30, 2007 Report Posted April 30, 2007 So it will enable NL to become a "have" province forever. It would enable us to become a net contributor to equalization as well. Alberta and Ontario will not have to send tax dollars to NL via Ottawa. How? What's the plan? The most recent NL budget is not putting away huge dollars for the future. Is there something magical that will come in their *next* budget? Quote No one has ever defeated the Liberals with a divided conservative family. - Hon. Jim Prentice
GreenWhiteandPink Posted April 30, 2007 Report Posted April 30, 2007 ]How? What's the plan? The most recent NL budget is not putting away huge dollars for the future. Is there something magical that will come in their *next* budget? NO, NOT ANYMORE!! BUT THERE WAS A PLAN .....IT WAS THE 100% EXEMPTION OF RESOURCE REVENUE FROM EQUALIZATION, IT WOULD OF PROVIDED NL WITH A ADDITION $10 BILLION OVER THE NEXT 13 YEARS ENOUGH TO COMPLETELY PAY OFF THE PROVINICAL DEBT!! That was the plan! Don't you understand why William's is pissed off! Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.