The DumbBrexit / #Wexit thread

[thedestroyerofworlds]

52 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

Just another wrinkle on it - why is Alberta so mad at Quebec, when SK and MN take far more per capita than Quebec does? (https://lop.parl.ca/sites/PublicWebsite/default/en_CA/ResearchPublications/201701E#show/hide)

 

In fact, in 2017, Alberta took back more per capita in federal transfers than BC did. 

 

 

There ya go posting things that derail the narrative.   Alberta is supposed to be getting the shaft.   

[ForsbergTheGreat]

2 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

Just another wrinkle on it - why is Alberta so mad at Quebec, when SK and MN take far more per capita than Quebec does? (https://lop.parl.ca/sites/PublicWebsite/default/en_CA/ResearchPublications/201701E#show/hide)

 

In fact, in 2017, Alberta took back more per capita in federal transfers than BC did. 

 

Funny how you wouldn't dare post the per capita numbers that an Albertan puts in....Gee wonder why you would glaze over that part.....

 

 

 

 

It's also funny that you only choose to take one of the subgroups and portrayed it as the whole,  meanwhile once again ignored important context, Unless you don't think that federal transfers for Employment Insurance, the Canada Pension Plan and Old Age Security and net federal government spending on goods and services per capita matter.  

 

When all is said and done, here is the difference between revenue gained and total expenses at a per capita level.....

 

 

 

@Ryan Strome, i really don't know why I attempt anymore, it just bothers me when I see misinformation spread and the easily gullible get sucked into believe it.. I mean why would I expect anyone to double check the validity of the posts....but I think it's time to pull chute, watching this stupidity spread is giving me a head ache.

 

Enjoy your tea party boys, i'm out, so I wont get in your way anymore to stomp all over your childish fantasies.  

Edited October 29, 2019 by ForsbergTheGreat

[BPA]

20 hours ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

Then that begs the question: what was stopping them when oil prices were high?  Seems like successive Alberta governments did not have the foresight to plan ahead.

Just like anything else...why bother with doing something different when the money is coming in?  Only when there is some financial hiccup do people/business look at doing things differently.

[Tortorella's Rant]

Why is it dumb. Sure, the idea they're going to separate from Canada is dumb but their anger isn't necessarily. These movements exist because the people (a significant number of them) feel the current establishments don't care about them and that they have been ignored or continually shafted. This has been a regular occurrence throughout history and is somewhat true in this case too as a most recent of example of this we can see the election was decided by the time the tallies got to Saskatchewan.  These movements or groups don't spontaneously emerge out of the void; they often do speak volumes about the current government or policies in place but of course the other of the aisle is too busy playing partisan football to ever see this, never mind care..

[Warhippy]

17 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

I’ve already pointed out to you why the original NEP was terrible for Alberta. There’s no denying it or arguing for it. 
 

Why are you still going on about this?

Because you're wrong.  you're literally screaming for the benefits of an NEP now and you won't even admit it.

 

You're wrong then, you're wrong now.  Your inability to admit that maybe you were wrong is the heart of your ignorance, that's your problem not mine

[Warhippy]

16 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

funny that. It really still seems to be, as a landlocked New Republic of Albertastan would be even more dependent on the US.

 

I'm not surprised you're getting pushback on this given how deep this part of the myth runs. 

 

 

It doesn't and never ends.

 

NEP in 1982.  Pipelines and refineries with ports in BC, Newfoundland and New Brunswick with an option in Churchill and Quebec.  Refineries and upgraders in every province.  So we're not landlocked and dependent on other nations for our energy needs and can export outside of North America.

 

Alberta:  What a terrible frigging idea, we have to sell to Canada for cheaper than anyone else?  That's crap why should we lose money.  We're going to go with the NAFTA plan instead, America is a dependable purchaser

 

Alberta 2019:  we need pipelines and refineries with ports in BC, Newfoundland and New Brunswick with an option in Churchill and Quebec.  Refineries and upgraders in every province.  So we're not landlocked and dependent on other nations for our energy needs and can export outside of North America.  Our only purchaser right now is America and they have no interest in buying and when they do they are buying it at below market value

 

The rest of the country:

[Warhippy]

14 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

i really don't know why I attempt anymore

BEcause even when you're wrong you keep coming back from a different angle attempting to be right.  You're incapable of being wrong.  Like literally incapable.  There's dozens of arguments with dozens of posters over the years that indicate that clearly.

 

That's fine and all.  But in time someone will come by again, refute your post with factual credible information or once again point out exactly why and how the numbers look so skewed against Alberta (hint, it has a lot to do with wages, population and resource extraction revenues) and you'll call them wrong and come back again.

 

So...see you in what, like 4 hours?

[ForsbergTheGreat]

1 minute ago, Warhippy said:

Because you're wrong.  you're literally screaming for the benefits of an NEP now and you won't even admit it.

 

You're wrong then, you're wrong now.  Your inability to admit that maybe you were wrong is the heart of your ignorance, that's your problem not mine

Hip This is the last time I’ll explain it to you and I’ll be cordial. 
 

You’re are ignoring the negative effects that came along with the benefits. There was more to the NEP in the 80’s than just pipelines and refineries. There were extremely negative conditions (conditions I’ve pointed out over and over) that came along with it, conditions that DID crippled the economy during the downturn of oil. You need to consider ALL context before you can claim something was good or bad.
 

You call me ignorant but you’re the one blind fully ignoring important context, even when that context is laid out in front of you. You stick your nose in the air and continue on making the same debunked statements.  

[ForsbergTheGreat]

2 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

BEcause even when you're wrong you keep coming back from a different angle attempting to be right.  You're incapable of being wrong.  Like literally incapable.  There's dozens of arguments with dozens of posters over the years that indicate that clearly.

 

I have no issue admitting when I was wrong. I have said I was wrong about Makar, I said I was wrong about wanting Vilardi over EP. 

I do have an issue with people spreading stupidity based information taking out of context. That’s when I step in. 

 

2 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

That's fine and all.  But in time someone will come by again, refute your post with factual credible information or once again point out exactly why and how the numbers look so skewed against Alberta (hint, it has a lot to do with wages, population and resource extraction revenues) and you'll call them wrong and come back again.

 

here’s a hint. I’m the one that posts the factual numbers to bring context to the falsified claims, just as I did three posts above. 
 

2 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

So...see you in what, like 4 hours?

nope less. You’d miss me to much

[bishopshodan]

Found this interesting

 

Colby Cosh: The creeping horror Alberta never knew it was voting for

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/topstories/colby-cosh-the-creeping-horror-alberta-never-knew-it-was-voting-for/ar-AAJuRqe?ocid=se

 

 

[JM_]

So probably a good place to summarize the discussion so far.

 

We know, not from spin or fake news that:

Alberta receives a fair, per capita amount back for healthcare.

Alberta receives a fair, per capital amount back for the social transfer.

We can't come up with a good reason why Alberta should receive more than a per capita share, thats what the rest of us also get. No more, no less.

 

Yes, Alberta does not get equalization, but it also chooses not to have a sales tax which every other jurisdiction in Canada has. It could generate 5 to 8 billion in new revenue for very little impact but they don't culturally want it, which is fine, thats their choice. But lets say we all decided Alberta should get a per capita amount back on equalization, which would take some major program changes, but even if we did that we're only talking about up to 2 billion maximum back. A PST is far more fair and effective but here were are.

 

A lot gets made about "per capita taxation" out of Alberta, but this is another thread of the myth. From a federal taxation viewpoint, there's no such thing as provincial boundaries. Its a made up thing, used for various types of analysis. But as far as federal taxation goes it doesn't matter where you live, and thats the plain fact of it. No matter where you earn in Canada you pay the same. 

 

That taxation props up federal programs, everything from our military, to old age security, funding to universities, health and social transfers, infrastructure  to international trade negotiations that all provinces benefit from. For some reason, Alberta likes to pass over this list of benefits as if they didn't exist or they don't benefit. Myth #1. 

 

So, I think most reasonable people would agree that even if equalization could be tweaked a little, overall its been fair to the West. Jason Kenney isn't demanding a national discussion on it, he wants an internal Alberta referendum on it, because he knows if we have a real national discussion his use of anger will be greatly diminished. 

 

___

 

Which brings us to our next line of discussion: international trade.

 

How would New Alberta manage to survive on its own in international trade competition?

 

We know from their complaints that the US already screws them on oil prices so thats not going to get better. They will be a tiny country with almost no leverage for grain and animal product exports. And have a tiny amount of purchasing power as well. 

[Gurn]

14 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

How would New Alberta manage to survive on its own in international trade competition?

 

We know from their complaints that the US already screws them on oil prices so thats not going to get better. They will be a tiny country with almost no leverage for grain and animal product exports. And have a tiny amount of purchasing power as well. 

Bit of a tangent:

I always wondered how some folk in Quebec thought they would be better off as a separate entity, surrounded by hundreds of millions of English speaking  who either wouldn't care about them or in the ROC's case holding a grudge akin to the feelings left by a nasty divorce.

 

To see some in Alberta trying to plot that same plan is just so bizarre to see.

 

Further tangent---- what would Canuckistani  say to all this?

[JM_]

9 minutes ago, gurn said:

Bit of a tangent:

I always wondered how some folk in Quebec thought they would be better off as a separate entity, surrounded by hundreds of millions of English speaking  who either wouldn't care about them or in the ROC's case holding a grudge akin to the feelings left by a nasty divorce.

 

To see some in Alberta trying to plot that same plan is just so bizarre to see.

 

that was a major issue in Quebec. They would have been crushed on trade. The only thing saving them a tiny bit was having a major port but even then it would have been a disaster for them. Alberta and SK leaving to form a new country would be in even worse shape being landlocked. Not only would they be at the mercy of the US, they would be at the mercy of the rest of Canada which outnumbers New Albertastan by a 5:1 ratio.

 

Tangenting even more - what dollar would Albertadesh use? If they tried to keep using the Canadian dollar, that would be bad for oil prices as the Canadian dollar likely goes down since we'd wouldn't have as much crude oil pricing effecting it. Good for oil sales, but lower margins and then bad for purchasing goods from outside the country. If they go with the US dollar it creates new problems. 

Edited October 29, 2019 by Jimmy McGill

[Ryan Strome]

14 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Funny how you wouldn't dare post the per capita numbers that an Albertan puts in....Gee wonder why you would glaze over that part.....

 

 

 

 

It's also funny that you only choose to take one of the subgroups and portrayed it as the whole,  meanwhile once again ignored important context, Unless you don't think that federal transfers for Employment Insurance, the Canada Pension Plan and Old Age Security and net federal government spending on goods and services per capita matter.  

 

When all is said and done, here is the difference between revenue gained and total expenses at a per capita level.....

 

 

 

@Ryan Strome, i really don't know why I attempt anymore, it just bothers me when I see misinformation spread and the easily gullible get sucked into believe it.. I mean why would I expect anyone to double check the validity of the posts....but I think it's time to pull chute, watching this stupidity spread is giving me a head ache.

 

Enjoy your tea party boys, i'm out, so I wont get in your way anymore to stomp all over your childish fantasies.  

 

22 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Hip This is the last time I’ll explain it to you and I’ll be cordial. 
 

You’re are ignoring the negative effects that came along with the benefits. There was more to the NEP in the 80’s than just pipelines and refineries. There were extremely negative conditions (conditions I’ve pointed out over and over) that came along with it, conditions that DID crippled the economy during the downturn of oil. You need to consider ALL context before you can claim something was good or bad.
 

You call me ignorant but you’re the one blind fully ignoring important context, even when that context is laid out in front of you. You stick your nose in the air and continue on making the same debunked statements.  

Honestly I'm done in here. Life is to short lol.

For one hip never admits when he is wrong so it's rich of him to make those claims lol.

 

Jim is so jealous of Alberta being non stop covered on the news and it bothers him so much he will cherry pick certain things to sell other lefties on. Let's be honest those in charge of the NEP said how bad it was but ya Albertans are wrong. Haha

 

You can carry on but it's clear these threads are for a certain 5 or 6 to up vote each other. I have posted countless facts on why the formula is flawed as have you it's pointless at this point to carry on.

 

Some in here are so obsessed with Alberta I don't know why, maybe jealous we are the economic drivers of the country? Maybe because no national news mentions BC? But they've a superiority complex they need help with. 

 

Wasn't hip moving to Airdrie? O nm we are all racists so he ain't moving here anymore, right?

 

Anyway have fun I  can't be bothered as even if they're proved wrong they won't admit it. I should say Jim did admit one blunder when he claimed BC spent more on healthcare however had I not have called him on it the folks that upvoted it I'm sure would have believed it.

 

Cheers man.

Enjoy the ragging on Alberta the rest of you.

Just remember..

 

[JM_]

3 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

 

Jim is so jealous of Alberta

yeah thats it. 

 

Can you just answer the very simple question, why should Alberta get more than a per capita share back? its not a hard thing to answer. 

 

If you want to avoid the topic thats cool, but if you had good answers I'd imagine you'd want to stick around to make your point. 

 

Edited October 29, 2019 by Jimmy McGill

[Gurn]

6 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

Honestly I'm done in here. Life is to short lol.

But you haven't answered this yet:

 

19 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

and? so what? people paid their taxes. It doesn't mean that you get an exact amount back.

 

You're acting like people working in Alberta deserve to get a disproportionate amount of money back than someone earning the same in another province. You've never really answered why that should be so.

 

Answer this for  me please: why should an Albertan get more than a per capita share of federal money back? 

 

I'd really like to hear your explanation for this. 

 

5 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

yeah thats it. 

 

Can you just answer the very simple question, why should Alberta get more than a per capita share back? its not a hard thing to answer. 

 

[ForsbergTheGreat]

17 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

yeah thats it. 

 

Can you just answer the very simple question, why should Alberta get more than a per capita share back? its not a hard thing to answer. 

 

because we pay more per capita.   
if I pay the most for a pie why should I not get a bigger piece. 

 

[Ryan Strome]

42 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

yeah thats it. 

 

Can you just answer the very simple question, why should Alberta get more than a per capita share back? its not a hard thing to answer. 

I'm done, Jim.

Check the other thread.

I have provided links from Ontario news outlets, Alberta outlets doesn't matter, it's dismissed constantly as some how you know better. 

But battle away I'm just not interested. It amazes me how economists are so wrong in your opinion...

We can still be friends 

[Ryan Strome]

43 minutes ago, gurn said:

But you haven't answered this yet:

 

 

 

I have multiple times in multiple threads quoting economists from all over Canada.

I'm done not one of you will change your mind. There is serious superiority complex issues in BC.

[Duodenum]

27 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

because we pay more per capita.   
if I pay the most for a pie why should I not get a bigger piece. 

 

One thing I've pointed out is that West Vancouver pays more than East Vancouver in taxes. Should West Vancouver be getting more of the pie than East Vancouver does?

I've said it a couple times but haven't gotten a reply, perhaps you have one.