[DrCaleb]

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Oh, look! Gas just fell to .859!

Exactly so stop crying like little babies because for once in your lives life might happen to not completely benefit Alberta.
Or leave. And become a landlocked crazy town republican country that can't sell any of it's precious oil anywhere. I'm sure your taxes will stay the same though with all the revenue the Stampede generates for you.



https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/of-course-alberta-is-getting-fleeced-by-ottawa-just-not-in-the-way-you-think

https://thenarwhal.ca/alberta-spending-more-than-we-really-earn-since-1970/

The Narwhal!

What's next, a hard hitting investigation by The Tyee?


It's actually kind of funny, because if you had bothered to read the article, or any comments, you'd realize this thread was about the misdeeds of the Alberta Government and it's suppression of thought. And I was arguing against it.

Keep on trollin' though!

[Prof_Chomsky]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Oh, look! Gas just fell to .859!

Exactly so stop crying like little babies because for once in your lives life might happen to not completely benefit Alberta.
Or leave. And become a landlocked crazy town republican country that can't sell any of it's precious oil anywhere. I'm sure your taxes will stay the same though with all the revenue the Stampede generates for you.



https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/of-course-alberta-is-getting-fleeced-by-ottawa-just-not-in-the-way-you-think

https://thenarwhal.ca/alberta-spending-more-than-we-really-earn-since-1970/

The Narwhal!

What's next, a hard hitting investigation by The Tyee?


It's actually kind of funny, because if you had bothered to read the article, or any comments, you'd realize this thread was about the misdeeds of the Alberta Government and it's suppression of thought. And I was arguing against it.

Keep on trollin' though!

I know exactly what it says, but you're clearly interpreting it how you want to. It's about mis-management of your own money, and piss-poor monetary policy at the provincial level. And it's based on research done at your own University of Calgary.

Again. Facts. Numbers. More facts.

[Prof_Chomsky]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Oh, look! Gas just fell to .859!

Exactly so stop crying like little babies because for once in your lives life might happen to not completely benefit Alberta.
Or leave. And become a landlocked crazy town republican country that can't sell any of it's precious oil anywhere. I'm sure your taxes will stay the same though with all the revenue the Stampede generates for you.



https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/of-course-alberta-is-getting-fleeced-by-ottawa-just-not-in-the-way-you-think

https://thenarwhal.ca/alberta-spending-more-than-we-really-earn-since-1970/

The Narwhal!

What's next, a hard hitting investigation by The Tyee?


It's actually kind of funny, because if you had bothered to read the article, or any comments, you'd realize this thread was about the misdeeds of the Alberta Government and it's suppression of thought. And I was arguing against it.

Keep on trollin' though!

"According to a 2015 paper from Ron Kneebone, a professor of economics at the University of Calgary, this non-royalty income is our most stable source of income as a province.

Kneebone, who’s also a director at the University of Calgary’s School of Public Policy, looked at how much we spend, compared to what we make in these ways.

Looking at data spanning more than four decades — from 1970 to 2014 — he found the province always spends more than it takes in, in non-royalty revenue.

Always.

Every. single. year."

“To put it in a household context, our weekly pay cheque has not been covering our day-to-day expenses,” Minister of Finance Robin Campbell said shortly before his Progressive Conservative Party was voted out of power.

“We have been lucky in recent years that resource revenues provided a bonus that allowed us to pay the bills.”

Kneebone’s paper summed it up: “It is a high-risk budgeting strategy that has been the bane of Albertans for decades.”

[DrCaleb]

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

Exactly so stop crying like little babies because for once in your lives life might happen to not completely benefit Alberta.
Or leave. And become a landlocked crazy town republican country that can't sell any of it's precious oil anywhere. I'm sure your taxes will stay the same though with all the revenue the Stampede generates for you.



https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/of-course-alberta-is-getting-fleeced-by-ottawa-just-not-in-the-way-you-think

https://thenarwhal.ca/alberta-spending-more-than-we-really-earn-since-1970/

The Narwhal!

What's next, a hard hitting investigation by The Tyee?


It's actually kind of funny, because if you had bothered to read the article, or any comments, you'd realize this thread was about the misdeeds of the Alberta Government and it's suppression of thought. And I was arguing against it.

Keep on trollin' though!

I know exactly what it says, but you're clearly interpreting it how you want to. It's about mis-management of your own money, and piss-poor monetary policy at the provincial level. And it's based on research done at your own University of Calgary.

Again. Facts. Numbers. More facts.

You wouldn't know a fact if it came up and asked you for softwood lumber.

First two paragraphs:

$1:

An established Edmonton charity that has supported philanthropy in the community for more than 65 years says the provincial government's inquiry into so-called anti-Alberta activities is polarizing, undemocratic and unfounded.

In a 174-page letter to inquiry commissioner Steve Allan, the Muttart Foundation says the Public Inquiry Into Funding of Anti-Alberta Energy Campaigns is creating a "climate of fear" by suggesting there is a price to be paid for disagreeing with the government.

Now, tell me, how does that line up with your assessment of the article?

[Prof_Chomsky]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

You wouldn't know a fact if it came up and asked you for softwood lumber.

First two paragraphs:

$1:

An established Edmonton charity that has supported philanthropy in the community for more than 65 years says the provincial government's inquiry into so-called anti-Alberta activities is polarizing, undemocratic and unfounded.

In a 174-page letter to inquiry commissioner Steve Allan, the Muttart Foundation says the Public Inquiry Into Funding of Anti-Alberta Energy Campaigns is creating a "climate of fear" by suggesting there is a price to be paid for disagreeing with the government.

Now, tell me, how does that line up with your assessment of the article?

Lol. Oh man. You're either having a stroke, or your computer has a virus. Check the link you're at cause that's not the right one...
https://thenarwhal.ca/alberta-spending-more-than-we-really-earn-since-1970/

[DrCaleb]

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

You wouldn't know a fact if it came up and asked you for softwood lumber.

First two paragraphs:

$1:

An established Edmonton charity that has supported philanthropy in the community for more than 65 years says the provincial government's inquiry into so-called anti-Alberta activities is polarizing, undemocratic and unfounded.

In a 174-page letter to inquiry commissioner Steve Allan, the Muttart Foundation says the Public Inquiry Into Funding of Anti-Alberta Energy Campaigns is creating a "climate of fear" by suggesting there is a price to be paid for disagreeing with the government.

Now, tell me, how does that line up with your assessment of the article?

Lol. Oh man. You're either having a stroke, or your computer has a virus. Check the link you're at cause that's not the right one...
https://thenarwhal.ca/alberta-spending-more-than-we-really-earn-since-1970/

Like I said, not a clue. The article we are discussing is:

http://www.canadaka.net/link.php?id=109550

[herbie]

$1:

established the conditions under which the Government of Canada would enter into negotiations that might lead to secession

Quit misrepresenting the Clarity Act as something that gives a province the "Right to secede". It doesn't. It sets the terms under which Canada might think about letting it, and pretty much makes it as difficult as possible.

[Prof_Chomsky]

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

Lol. Oh man. You're either having a stroke, or your computer has a virus. Check the link you're at cause that's not the right one...
https://thenarwhal.ca/alberta-spending-more-than-we-really-earn-since-1970/

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Like I said, not a clue. The article we are discussing is:

http://www.canadaka.net/link.php?id=109550

So then it is a stroke. I'm well aware of where this discussion thread originated, but the discussion has diverged considerably, with you defending Alberta all the while.

Man, that was a pretty weak way to ignore the facts dude.

[Prof_Chomsky]

herbie herbie:

$1:

established the conditions under which the Government of Canada would enter into negotiations that might lead to secession

Quit misrepresenting the Clarity Act as something that gives a province the "Right to secede". It doesn't. It sets the terms under which Canada might think about letting it, and pretty much makes it as difficult as possible.

[DrCaleb]

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

Lol. Oh man. You're either having a stroke, or your computer has a virus. Check the link you're at cause that's not the right one...
https://thenarwhal.ca/alberta-spending-more-than-we-really-earn-since-1970/

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Like I said, not a clue. The article we are discussing is:

http://www.canadaka.net/link.php?id=109550

So then it is a stroke. I'm well aware of where this discussion thread originated, but the discussion has diverged considerably, with you defending Alberta all the while.

Man, that was a pretty weak way to ignore the facts dude.

Like I wrote, feel free to only read "Anti-Alberta" and keep on trollin' based on that!

And you didn't read anything if your accusatory trolls were equating me to Ezra Levant.

[Prof_Chomsky]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Like I wrote, feel free to only read "Anti-Alberta" and keep on trollin' based on that!

And you didn't read anything if your accusatory trolls were equating me to Ezra Levant.

Wow man. This post is what lead to all this. I posted the below, and Thanos gave his eloquent rebuttal of those clear facts, then you called me a troll. Which BTW is a great way to avoid having to address facts that are inconvenient for you.


"I always like to stick with the facts in these sorts of disputes.

Fact 1: Alberta didn’t own it’s mineral rights until Canada gifted it to them in 1930.
So if you decide to try and leave, we’d like our oil back. Oh, and also all the revenue the province kept from it.

Fact 2: The rest of Canada funds their programs through taxes. Alberta chose to keep their taxes artificially low and rely on the free money generated from oil.
What makes someone who happens to live in Alberta so special they get to pay significantly less tax dollars than everyone else? The majority of you aren’t even involved in the oil industry.

Fact 3: If Alberta had the same tax rate as a median Canadian province, they would generate 18.7B more in taxes and have a budget surplus.

Fact 4: Alberta mis-managed their oil revenues. While countries like Norway levied royalties sometimes approaching 90% of revenue, Alberta took a rate ranging from 1-9%. While Norway paid for their programs through tax dollars and saved their oil royalties to generate additional investment revenue, Alberta spent it.

Fact 5: If Alberta actually could leave Canada, you’d have an even harder time getting Canada to allow pipelines to the coast considering you’d be an estranged bastard son. And the US has continually blocked attempts to go south.

In short, stop acting like whiny little children. You've had a free ride for almost 100 years paid for by the magic coincidence there was oil in your province, and mother Canada ALLOWED you to have it. Now grow up and pay your taxes like the rest of the adults in Canada have been doing since the dawn of time.

P.S. Screw Quebec. That's a whole other issue."

[BeaverFever]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Sometimes trolling only needs pointing out, not a rebuttal.

It wasn’t trolling at all. He laid out several facts.

[BeaverFever]

uwish uwish:

well Doc we are on the same page when it comes to taxes. Now that I have restructured and created a corporation my personal tax burden will be cut by about 50%. After paying a quarter of a million between my wife and I last year we decided to let the whiners pay for things now.

And yet you sure do a lot of whining on this site.
Great one more tax freeloader. Opened an account in Panama yet?

[bootlegga]

Thanos Thanos:

The Quebec provincial government has been crowing quite loudly lately about how they're running a surplus of over $4 billion dollars. Despite being in the black now Trudeau & Morneau quietly gave Quebec another $1.4 billion equalization boost a couple of weeks after the election. Reward the base first. Despite everything ALWAYS reward the base first.

If Alberta charged the same level of taxes as those damned commies in Saskatchewan under Marxist-Leninist leader Scott Moe, we'd be running a $5 BILLION surplus this year:




We could raise $8 Billion in tax revenues and STILL be the lowest taxed province in Canada by a country mile!

Our continuing cycle of deficits is a CHOICE by Alberta governments and voters, not a fait accompli like so many conservatives would believe.

Jim Prentice got a lot of shit for his 'Look in the mirror' comment (and I was one of those who criticized him for it), but I've since come to see he was bang on the money with that statement.

Albertans need to decide once and for all, do we want low taxes and fewer services, or higher taxes and the services we have right now?

The days of having our cake and eating it too are gone and it's time to either grow up...no more sponging off 'Daddy Oil' like we have for the past 40 years.

[BeaverFever]

rickc rickc:

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

]

Like I just said Blue states are richer than the Red States. It’s the Republican flyover country that are the third world shitholes.

What metric are you using to determine that one state is "richer" than another? The ability of the state to tax the living shit out of their residents to fill their coffers? Yeah the blue states win that one hands down. Republican fly over country? Thats a laugh. Florida is one of the most visited states in the country. It is a "fly to" state. Hey don't ask me ask your fellow countrymen. Oh thats right, you can't because they have already left for Florida seeing as its mid November. It looks like quite a few employers are flying into the sunshine state as well. Orlando -Kissimmee-Sanford ares had the nations largest growth of manufacturing jobs last year. Up 23.6% since 2012. Miami-Miami beach-Kendall came in fourth. West palm beach-Boca Raton - Delray beach placed fifth.

You know what the blue states lead in? People leaving. The biggest population losers between 2017 and 2018 were New York and Illinois. The big money people living in New York used to move to Connecticut for a better life. For a while it was the "richest" state in the union. Its blue state confiscate and spend policies have put it in the top 10 of population losers as well. California would be leading the list if it was not for all the illegals pouring over its border. Illegals who happen to mostly be practicing Catholics, as in no birth control. As in birth rates much, much higher than the typical American family. The vast majority of my co workers are people who fled California. I can honestly say that I have never known anyone moving to California. That is why is cost four times as much to rent a U-haul leaving California than it does to rent one going there.

https://www.kxan.com/news/local/austin/ ... n-reverse/

I lived in Florida for 5 years. Its a shithole with a few nice neighbourhoods, many of which are gated and patrolled by private security and also heavy police patrols to keep out the *ahem* folks with hoodies and skittles. People visit there in the winter they don’t move there.

By any measure, household income, educational attainment, federal tax dollars genereted ir received, red states and their citizens are by far the poorest.

$1:

Eighteen of the 19 poorest states have legislatures where both chambers are Republican controlled. New Mexico (46th richest, fifth poorest) is Democratic. But there isn’t another blue or purple state until you get to purple Maine (31st richest, 20th poorest) with its “split” legislature of one party in each chamber. All the states in between (such as Tennessee and Florida) are Republican, both chambers. So is Michigan, where Republicans hold all high state offices (where Donald Trump won in 2016). Above New Mexico, you jump all the way to middle of the pack Vermont (27th richest, 24th poorest) to find a state with both legislative chambers held by Democrats.

... But all five richest states have both legislative chambers controlled by Democrats – Maryland, New Jersey, Hawaii, Massachusetts and Connecticut. Overall, Democrats dominate the 20 richest states.

.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/amp.usatoda ... 1694273002

Even at the county level ,the poorest counties are Red state counties.

Blue states pay more federal taxes than they receive back in federal funding because they subsidize the dysfunctional red states , which rely on receiving more federal funds than they pay in taxes.

Those democrats you hate so much pay your bills.