Chretien begins forming his fascist dictatorship

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by RedFred
A different criticism from me, but the transfers reward provinces who chronically underperform, penalize those that overperform, and (along with the regional unemployment calculation of EI) inhibit migration to job rich provinces from job poor provinces.

Even with equalization payments we still see migration.

The basic theory of the equalization payments is that every Canadian deserves a basic level of services provided by the provinces. Equalization payments provide funding for schools, health care, etc.

One of the myths about equalization payments is that the have-not provinces are to blame for being poor. The reality is that some provinces lack the natural economic conditions to become as successful as other provinces. Having said that, the have-nots are not entirely blameless for their plight.

A great example of luck of the draw is oil. Alberta is a "have" province not because of brilliant government policies, but simply because of oil and natural gas.

Nova Scotia and Newfoundland are expected to become "have" provinces within a few years as off-coast oil revenue starts pouring in.

There's a big debate about whether that oil revenue should count in the equalization calculation. NS and NFLD point out that Alberta received equalization payments from 1955-67 because oil revenues were not included in the calculations at that time. NS and NFLD argue that by reducing equalization payments for each dollar that comes in from oil revenues, they end up in a zero sum game with no benefits from the oil revenues.

[Asher]

A great example of luck of the draw is oil. Alberta is a "have" province not because of brilliant government policies, but simply because of oil and natural gas.

It's a mixture of both. All of the oil revenue in the world is pointless once you have a government like Trudeau and his precious NEP, no?

There's a big debate about whether that oil revenue should count in the equalization calculation. NS and NFLD point out that Alberta received equalization payments from 1955-67 because oil revenues were not included in the calculations at that time.

I really don't buy this, because the amount Alberta received during that time period is nowhere near the amount NFLD is already getting. Further, back then, the "standard" was calculated only by the two "richest" provinces, which was the only reason why Alberta received any in the first place. Once it moved the average of the 10 provinces, Alberta stopped receiving the (small amounts) of money.

[KrazyHorse]

Not quite zero-sum. Still has an impact in overall conditions...

i.e. it makes every province richer.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Asher
I really don't buy this, because the amount Alberta received during that time period is nowhere near the amount NFLD is already getting.

Are you saying that you don't buy their argument that they need money to develop their economy?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Tingkai
Are you saying that you don't buy their argument that they need money to develop their economy?

I don't buy their argument because they're receiving TONS of money per person already, now that they've got offshore stuff (which is being developed with ALBERTA COMPANY and FEDERAL GOVERNMENT capital to begin with), I fail to see why they have any real reason for that.

They're not having to PAY for this new offshore oil stuff at all. The money is coming from Alberta Companies and from Federal Grants.

It's just a thinly veiled ploy to milk the government for more money.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Asher
It's a mixture of both. All of the oil revenue in the world is pointless once you have a government like Trudeau and his precious NEP, no?

The NEP lasted five years. So for about 45 out of 50 years, Alberta has benefited from massive oil subsidies.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Tingkai
The NEP lasted five years. So for about 45 out of 50 years, Alberta has benefited from massive oil subsidies.

No one is saying otherwise.

What I'm saying is it's incredibly easy for an inept government to mismanage the resources to the point of making it a non-benefit.

The Liberals under Trudeau (with the help of Chretien ) clearly demonstrated that.

Another clear example of mismanaging resources is how BC still has a ban on offshore oil exploration. If there's oil off the coast of BC, do you know how much money they could be making? But no, the inept government placed a ban on exploration.

And how the current government is handling the BC Logging dispute.

Hell, the money that funded the grants to help for Alberta's oil exploration came from the province at the time. Ontario didn't even want our oil & gas until decades after we started.

Now the Federal government is giving grants to the east coast so they can fund oil development and exploration, while at the same time the east coast ALSO wants the same equalization payments it was getting before oil revenue.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Asher
Another clear example of mismanaging resources is how BC still has a ban on offshore oil exploration. If there's oil off the coast of BC, do you know how much money they could be making? But no, the inept government placed a ban on exploration.

Bad example. If there is oil there, it is not going anywhere. B.C. might as well save it for future generations or for a time or when the provincial economy has long-term economic problems (e.g. a sustained collapse of the timber industry).

[markusf]

Originally posted by Asher
BC didn't have that problem in the 90s, when the NDPs were in tact.

And you know damn well all of the resources BC has.

The problem was the NDP discouraged businesses from operating there. There was no real point with the tax system they set up. On the other hand, right next door to BC was the place with the lowest taxes in the nation...

You do know that only 25% of Alberta's revenue comes from energy, right?

And you're blind enough to paint BC's total failure in the 90s on the US, rather than the NDP, and Alberta's complete success in the 90s up through today on oil (which has declined every year in terms of percentage of our GDP and revenues), rather than on government leadership?

To the casual observer it'd appear that you're blinding yourself so you don't see the shortcomings of the government you support.

ya bc blows now. I can't believe any idiot would ever vote for NDP, yet they manged to win 2 elections here and run the province into the ground in a mear 8 years. The problem is the unions here are way to strong, and have free riegn to do nearly anything they want. Now that the liberals (basically socrets) came to power in BC they are cutting everything left right and center, and the NDP have something like 3 seats out of 79 in the house.. and the rest are all liberal. Still, there isn't a day that goes by where the unions/ndp aren't screaming bloody murder about something.

[Asher]

I still can't believe some of what the NDP did when they were in office. It would seem they never think ahead.

Like when they thought it'd be a great idea to put rent caps in BC. Renting apartments and stuff was becoming pretty expensive, so the NDP government thought it'd be a great idea to slap a rant cap on it. Voila! Problem fixed! We'll just make it law that they can't charge anymore.

That discouraged developers from building new complexes (why build something you can't profit off of?) and discouraged existing landlords from keeping their rental properties because they were being capped in how much they could sell it for, well under market equilibrium.

The end result was the real cost for housing soared even faster now, since there was less interest in building and renting out additional space as the population kept growing.

Classic NDP!

[markusf]

yes the NDP are completely useless, i am starting to think that demcracy is a bad thing. The problem is less then probably 1% of the population understands what a governments policies actually do. The rest of the population are just sheep, that will do what they are told to do. By the media (NDP contoled here) or the unions and every now and then people wake up to reality and elect a real government.

[Asher]

I wonder if there's any correlation between Alberta having the highest post secondary education rate (65% of all people over 25 have post-secondary education) and how Alberta always votes for the conservative parties?

[markusf]

Originally posted by Asher
I wonder if there's any correlation between Alberta having the highest post secondary education rate (65% of all people over 25 have post-secondary education) and how Alberta always votes for the conservative parties?

LOL Show me one educated province /country state in the world that votes for communist/socialist/NDP government ? Just look at the places where their support comes from.

Also look at the type of people that protest when there is a big world trade conference. The people they interview are always a bunch of idiots that probably never graduated high shcool. I don't think a single one has any clue about economics or the effect of trade policies on the poor etc etc.

[RedFred]

Rent controls in BC were never as severely constraining as in, say Toronto. Rental properties can and still do get built. Renter vacancy rates in major centres were never as low as Calgary or Edmonton right now. Other factors; say for example, migration due to the economic boom in Alberta, knocked the rental market far more out of whack than fairly modest controls. From an economic perspective I agree that these types of controls inhibit the proper functioning of the rental market, but many, many much larger problems currently exist in BC.

The offshore oil dilemma is a tougher one to grapple with. The Liberals are working at lifting the moratorium on offshore drilling but public opinion is still divided. Ongoing treaty negotiations with costal tribes, particularly the Haida in the Charlottes who claim offshore oil, may be jeopardized. Environmental considerations need to be addressed because the northern BC coast is such a biologically diverse gem. All the engineering expertise and then some that was used to drill offshore in the North Sea, will be required. Waves of over one hundred feet are not inconceivable. The area is on top of the 'rim of fire' that circles the Pacific. So some caution and consideration will be required before drilling can take place.

[Asher]

The waves of one hundred feet aren't really a problem.

Hibernia is made to withstand the impact of a huge iceburg, so I'm sure waves won't hurt much.

[RedFred]

Being able to withstand an iceberg impact is remarkable. The fact remains that the BC coast is a high risk area for large earthquakes and tidal waves.

[blackice]

I wonder if there's any correlation between Alberta having the highest post secondary education rate (65% of all people over 25 have post-secondary education) and how Alberta always votes for the conservative parties?

Looking at the employment statistics for that age bracket. Job availability is a more realistic factor. Employers simply do not hire that age bracket no experience is the main factor. You have to have skills I.E. college etc. to survive out there. 7-11 jobs simply do not pay the rent.

Rent…rent controls are good as it stands in Ontario people who do rent because of income can not afford it. Rent control was lifted to encourage building of new apartments. It simply is not being done, condos are going up faster than you can shake a stick at but the people who need affordable housing do not buy condos.

I encourage asher to compare Alberta government stats against say the Auditor generals report to see the propaganda the government there spits out.

Jason Clemens, a Fraser Institute economist, argues that taking energy revenues out of the equalization formula would benefit not only Nova Scotia and Newfoundland, but Alberta as well. Mr. Clemens notes that in 2000-2001, Alberta paid $7.6 billion for equalization, while Ontario shelled out $5.5 billion; if energy revenues were taken out of the formula, Alberta's payments would decrease to about $5 billion. "That would clearly put a bigger fiscal burden on the shoulders of Ontario," Mr. Clemens points out. "Why couldn't Mike Harris come back and say, 'Let's exempt business revenues as well?'"

Natural resources are the only reason Alberta pays more…I will also point out Ontario is the only province never to have needed a hand out…B.C. received equalization payments from 1957 to 1962 and Alberta from 1957 to 1964. Ontario came close in the late 1970s and early 1980s but was excluded because a new rule, called the "personal income override," stopped provinces whose per-capita income exceeded the national average from receiving payments. And so Ontario remains the only province never to have received equalization payments.


Your stats asher on the total of natural revenue over to the Alberta economy is wrong. In fiscal 2000/2001, revenues to the province from crude oil and natural gas accounted for more than 40% or $10.6 billion of Alberta’s total revenues, the result of high commodity.
Between manufacturing of these resources and the resources themselves is about In 2001, energy resource exports totaled $36.1 billion, accounting for about 57% of Alberta's total exports of goods and services. Bad news really, Between 1996 and 2001, Alberta's manufacturing shipments increased by 38% to $42.4 billion.
Alberta's manufacturing sector is closely tied to the resource sector. Almost two-thirds of manufacturing output consists of value-added resource products. NO diversification is bad news, yes both figures are different and done by two different organizations. The story is the same though natural resource related revenue. Interesting to point out both are from the Alberta government sites.

So Taki has a point Alberta has yet to diversify to a point of independence from natural resource revenue. As it was in the past it is today. So with a small percentage being high tech revenue what advantage do they have or what gains have they really made. Any idiot could do the same with the existing resources. What if tomorrow and earthquake hit and swallowed the oil? Could King Ralph keep it together, most say he would get drunk and fade away…

Before 1964, Alberta collected equalization for seven years, giving the province's oil and gas industries a chance to grow. Newfoundland and Nova Scotia want the same opportunity. Now Alberta King Ralphie and Harris say screw them lololol. Here is an interesting study comparing Alaska to Alberta not that far off really read it. Then ask yourself what is Ralphie doing?
http://www.taxpayer.com/ltts/ab/February23-01.htm

The Alberta government has deliberately forgone billions of dollars in potential resource revenue over the past decade - revenue that could have been used to finance important public services like health care and education, says a report released by the University of Alberta's Parkland Institute in November.

http://www.ualberta.ca/~parkland/Pos...oilwealth.html
Humm why? To avoid transfer payments or? You take a stab at it…It would sure help in the health industry out there. Quebec by the by contributes the most to education in Canada.

Taxes on industry per province.
http://www.kpmg.ca/english/services/...l/ctl00113.pdf

As for dictatorships Klien already has one...

[Asher]

Originally posted by blackice
I encourage asher to compare Alberta government stats against say the Auditor generals report to see the propaganda the government there spits out.

That's what I have been doing. Do you mind being a tad bit more specific? It looks like you're trying to sound like you know what y

Jason Clemens, a Fraser Institute economist, argues that taking energy revenues out of the equalization formula would benefit not only Nova Scotia and Newfoundland, but Alberta as well. Mr. Clemens notes that in 2000-2001, Alberta paid $7.6 billion for equalization, while Ontario shelled out $5.5 billion; if energy revenues were taken out of the formula, Alberta's payments would decrease to about $5 billion. "That would clearly put a bigger fiscal burden on the shoulders of Ontario," Mr. Clemens points out. "Why couldn't Mike Harris come back and say, 'Let's exempt business revenues as well?'"

Natural resources are the only reason Alberta pays more…[/QUOTE]
There you have it. Conclusive proof that Alberta pays more. I rest my case.

And in the future, blackice, when you plagiarize entire paragraphs and posts like that, you should cite back to the original source so people don't think you wrote it. 90% of that last paragraph was lifted verbatim from the CBC.

Your stats asher on the total of natural revenue over to the Alberta economy is wrong. In fiscal 2000/2001, revenues to the province from crude oil and natural gas accounted for more than 40% or $10.6 billion of Alberta’s total revenues, the result of high commodity.

Do you mind citing a source for your magical numbers, blackice?
This graph, taken from the Alberta Finance website about Provincial income, would clearly disagree with you, no?

It would seem to me that 18.6% of the revenue is NOT the same as your 40% figure?

So Taki has a point Alberta has yet to diversify to a point of independence from natural resource revenue. As it was in the past it is today. So with a small percentage being high tech revenue what advantage do they have or what gains have they really made. Any idiot could do the same with the existing resources. What if tomorrow and earthquake hit and swallowed the oil? Could King Ralph keep it together, most say he would get drunk and fade away…

WTF? Earthquake in Alberta? SWALLOWING OIL? Are you high, man?

Alberta's economy does have energy as a major source of revenue. But, this economy is FAR more diversified than it once was. See the following charts to illustrate that:


By the looks of things, it's diversifying pretty quickly don't you think?

Before 1964, Alberta collected equalization for seven years, giving the province's oil and gas industries a chance to grow. Newfoundland and Nova Scotia want the same opportunity. Now Alberta King Ralphie and Harris say screw them lololol. Here is an interesting study comparing Alaska to Alberta not that far off really read it. Then ask yourself what is Ralphie doing?
http://www.taxpayer.com/ltts/ab/February23-01.htm

Again, stop taking words from the CBC article without sourcing them. It's bad form.

And the difference here is that Nova Scotia and Newfoundland already receive FEDERAL GRANTS for the explicit purpose of developing their offshore oil and gas reserves. Alberta received NO SUCH GRANTS when we developed our oil and gas industry. In fact, it wasn't until decades later that Ontario even AGREED they wanted Alberta's oil. That's why the situations are different.

Humm why? To avoid transfer payments or? You take a stab at it…It would sure help in the health industry out there. Quebec by the by contributes the most to education in Canada.

Huuuuuuuuuuuh?
The article is saying Alberta doesn't charge as much royalties as other oil producing regions.

The reason is because by taking away less of the oil company's profits, you make it more desirable to work in this region rather than others. By doing that, a support economy builds around the original oil economy, and when it gets to a stage like today's, it's a diverse economy that doesn't depend on oil, but oil keeps away the sales tax and other higher taxes. Which, in turn, attracts even more business...

Taxes on industry per province.
http://www.kpmg.ca/english/services/...l/ctl00113.pdf

All this shows is Alberta's clear tax advantage. Were you trying to point out something else?

As for dictatorships Klien already has one...

How is it a dictatorship in any way?