Referendum

[Sodbuster]

[/QUOTE]

This statement says it all.

[jazz]

— believe the system treats all provinces fairly.
.

Like asking a crack head if he opposes free drugs but deep down he knows he shouldnt be taking them.

[Hamloc]

All the referendum results proved was the incompetence of Kenney and UPC government and its abdication of leadership.

On the binding daylights saving vote, a 50/50 split means half of the voters will be unhappy no matter what. Not a pretty picture for candidates to face in next election. Furthermore, the referendum only gave voters 2 options to chose from, the status quo and year round daylight savings time. So voters in favor of year round standard time were excluded from even expressing their opinion. So much for giving all voters a choice.

The equalization question is even more damaging for the government. Despite heavy and misleading pressure by the government for a yes vote, early results show only 60% in favor of the question. Given that only about 1/3 of the eligible voters cast a ballot in the election, there is not the overwhelming response for ending equalization that the government had hoped for and Kenney will be laughed out of provincial/federal leadership meetings if he tries to claim ending equalization is the will of Albertans based on the referendum question.

The only early result speculation I have seen is Edmonton and Calgary at just under 60% support, Medicine Hat I believe was 70%. Never heard anything from the rural municipalities. It will be interesting, higher than I expected with how unpopular Kenney is at the moment.

One thing I am still curious about Dml, I make no secret that I live in Alberta yet for some reason you still won’t tell us what part of Canada you live in. Why is that?!

[oneoff]

Will be interesting to see what the final results are!

We all have individual responsibilities to be positive people… but the financial stability of our western civilization, further the Woke moral hard left denial of King Jesus and Biblical standards… replacing them at our core with evolution and climate change as the moral standards we teach our children: leads to the ungodly ungrateful ungovernability of humanity.

We can return to our heritage of biblical standards… but does anyone seriously believe that is a turn western civilization will take?

God have mercy. We are truly going to need God’s miracles of mercy and forgiveness to reverse the destiny of our civilization. The denial of God’s existence is to doom humanity. In the end as the biblical text states; the end of our age will be our responsibility and choice. The knowledge of good and evil has consequences… the choice of our destination; ( greed and selfishness) our own as a civilization.

Cheers

By your own admission... society is not about to solve the "ungovernable" problem with religion alone. In fact "not about to happen"

In fact; offering religious and belief help as a solution is only a distraction to finding a solution which (again by only sometimes your own admission) that the worldly masses are in charge of their own destiny. Is that not the basis of "religion belief" whilst temporarily inhabiting our current space.
I'd advise sticking to where the solutions are most likely to be found; like science reason and dedication to thoughtful possible worldly application of the most reasonable possibilities of at least temporary courses of following the high roads.

[TOM4CWB]

By your own admission... society is not about to solve the "ungovernable" problem with religion alone. In fact "not about to happen"

In fact; offering religious and belief help as a solution is only a distraction to finding a solution which (again by only sometimes your own admission) that the worldly masses are in charge of their own destiny. Is that not the basis of "religion belief" whilst temporarily inhabiting our current space.
I'd advise sticking to where the solutions are most likely to be found; like science reason and dedication to thoughtful possible worldly application of the most reasonable possibilities of at least temporary courses of following the high roads.

Amazon, Apple, Gates, Tesla/Musk, Google, Facebook, Bitcoin, Birkshire H, Biden, EU ECB, US Fed, IMF, UN... dont see any of the global leaders with the wisdom to change our economic systems, other than to be driven by control brokers like China, Iran, N Korea, India... Japan story 'Inflate our way out of inflation' flavour of the decade... Pandemic cemented 'quantitative easing' to 'cook the books'...

Not convinced in any way that any of these 'leaders' are any where near following the 'High Road'!!!

Sorry to confuse the issues at play now with a dose of reality Oneoff...

Looks like the Biblical 'one world order' led by the Anti-Christ leader [led by evolution, climate change, China, and a woke [sleepy hypnotized] US and EU] ... is civilization's 'high road' solution... difficult to believe any other outcome now!

Cheers! No lack of excitement!!

[TASFarms]

Amazon, Apple, Gates, Tesla/Musk, Google, Facebook, Bitcoin, Birkshire H, Biden, EU ECB, US Fed, IMF, UN...

Cheers! No lack of excitement!!

Vanguard own stock in all of the above

[burnt]

This makes a lot of sense and should really help:

Quebec government announces permanent ban on oil and gas exploitation and exploration

https://westphaliantimes.com/quebec-government-announces-permanent-ban-on-oil-and-gas-exploitation/

[chuckChuck]

The federal equalization program is not well understood. Its not a province to province transfer program.

It's a federal program paid for by federal tax dollars collected at the same tax rate in every province.

The program is designed to ensure poorer provinces without the vast oil and and gas reserves that Alberta enjoys and ability to collect a large amount of provincial taxes (fiscal capacity), can deliver a similar level of health care and social programs across this great country.

Albertans happen to pay a lot of federal tax because their incomes are higher per capita than many other provinces primarily because of the lucrative oil and gas industry.

Albertans aren't smarter nor do they work harder than anyone else, contrary to what some Albertans like to believe. they are just a bit richer because they won the oil and gas geology lottery.

Could the equalization program be improved? Probably. Harper and Kenney had a chance, but didn't do much.

Alberta is the recipient of its fair share of federal transfers for health and social programs.

But the equalization program will never satisfy the Albertans who want to live in a low or no tax state and can't stand the idea that federal tax dollars are redistributed to poorer provinces with a smaller fiscal capacity to raise revenue from provincial taxes.

[sumdumguy]

It’s designed to suck the life outta the West, that’s why special exemptions for Quebec. No it’s not fair nor is it equitable.

[chuckChuck]

It’s designed to suck the life outta the West, that’s why special exemptions for Quebec. No it’s not fair nor is it equitable.

Here is an exchange on Twitter between Trevor Tombe and economist at the U of C who studies Equalization and Dan McTeaugue

Dan McTeague
@GasPriceWizard
· Oct 14
Revenues from Hydro Quebec are not included as govt revenues whereas Ontario Hydro 1 and OPG are. That’s why Quebec is able to show a revenue shortfall that Ontario cannot twitter.com/alexj28833702/…

Trevor Tombe
@trevortombe
This is a very common but entirely false claim. Hydro Quebec revenues are included. 2019/20, for example, included $2.2b from Hydro QC + $800m from water power rentals.

As the referendum approaches, it will be increasingly important to get information from reputable sources.

Trevor Tombe
@trevortombe
·
Oct 15
Replying to
@trevortombe
The level of misunderstanding around this program is staggering -- and unfortunately it also seems to be inversely related to the intensity of view about it.
Reply With Quote

[jazz]

BS chuck, save your cbc cut and paste research. The formula is gamed and everyone knows it. 600B transferred to one province. AB pays for hydro dams, maritimes EI and quebec daycare. And a lot more.

People of AB have spoken, its their province let them run with it.

Cant believe Lougheed didnt torpedo this thing back when he had a chance.

[Guest]

Here is an exchange on Twitter between Trevor Tombe and economist at the U of C who studies Equalization and Dan McTeaugue

Dan McTeague
@GasPriceWizard
· Oct 14
Revenues from Hydro Quebec are not included as govt revenues whereas Ontario Hydro 1 and OPG are. That’s why Quebec is able to show a revenue shortfall that Ontario cannot twitter.com/alexj28833702/…

Trevor Tombe
@trevortombe
This is a very common but entirely false claim. Hydro Quebec revenues are included. 2019/20, for example, included $2.2b from Hydro QC + $800m from water power rentals.

As the referendum approaches, it will be increasingly important to get information from reputable sources.

Trevor Tombe
@trevortombe
·
Oct 15
Replying to
@trevortombe
The level of misunderstanding around this program is staggering -- and unfortunately it also seems to be inversely related to the intensity of view about it.
Reply With Quote

Well let’s see Chuck ?
ONE province collects every year since inception ?? To the tune of 51% or $221B
No , can’t be anything going on there ?? Really ?
FMG , no wonder you swallow so much shit

[blackpowder]

After talking with my first ex the other night, it occurs to me that involving chuck in conversation a similar exercise.
I can't get that time back.

[chuckChuck]

Here is what the University Calgary Economics professor Trevor Tombe says (same University where Steve Harpo got his economics degree ) who has well studied equalization and it applies to all the usual suspects on Agrisilly. If it was so bad you gotta wonder why Harpo and Kenney didn't fix it?

Oct 15
Replying to
@trevortombe
The level of misunderstanding around this program is staggering -- and unfortunately it also seems to be inversely related to the intensity of view about it.

[chuckChuck]

From The Calgary Herald

Opinion: The case against Premier Kenney’s equalization referendum
Author of the article:
Trevor Tombe
Publishing date:
Oct 13, 2021 • October 13, 2021 • 4 minute read •

Proposals to amend the Constitution are very serious matters. They are at the heart of what kind of country we want to live in. And for the first time in nearly 30 years — when a national vote on the Charlottetown Accord was held — Albertans will vote on an important constitutional question: do we support removing the very principle of equalization payments from Canada’s Constitution?

That principle, enshrined in Section 36(2) of the Constitution , is simple: the Government of Canada is “committed to the principle of making equalization payments to ensure that provincial governments have sufficient revenues to provide reasonably comparable levels of public services at reasonably comparable levels of taxation.”

This means ensuring all Canadians — regardless of which province they live in — can access reasonable public services without having to bear abnormally high tax rates to fund them.

Premier Peter Lougheed called this a crucial aspect of Confederation . Today, Premier Jason Kenney is asking you to reject it.

Canada’s equalization program is not perfect, of course. No policy is. But its goal — its very principle — is worth defending. It is not only fair, but it also benefits Alberta.

It’s true that Alberta doesn’t directly benefit from equalization payments, and hasn’t since 1964. But this isn’t because we are victims. It’s because Alberta is a high-income province.

Our economy is stronger , our average incomes are higher , and our government’s ability to raise revenues is above any other province in Canada. Despite years of struggle since oil prices dropped in late 2014, this remains true today. If Alberta had P.E.I.’s personal income tax rates, for example, we could fund our entire health-care system on that alone. But P.E.I. falls well short and needs another 10 point sales tax on top of that to fund health care. Without equalization, P.E.I. would need a sales rate of nearly 25 per cent to make up for it. Alternatively, it could double its already high income taxes. Alberta is luckily spared such difficult circumstances.

We are not and should not be an equalization-receiving province.

But Alberta does indirectly benefit from equalization. If you retire in Nova Scotia, for example, you rely on its health care. When a Canadian moves to Alberta, as nearly 2,000 people per week now do , they bring their education with them. We benefit from quality public services elsewhere in Canada. And were it not for equalization, pressure for federal delivery of health and education would mount. If you favour provincial autonomy in Canada, then a program like equalization makes this possible.

It’s precisely because the very principle of equalization payments is sound that proponents want you to ignore the question and base your vote on a long list of other grievances from carbon taxes to federal spending decisions to partisan dislike of a certain federal politician. A Yes vote, the argument goes, creates “leverage” in future negotiations with Ottawa about all these unrelated issues. This logic is flawed, for at least two reasons.

First, in an important ruling, the Supreme Court of Canada has wisely stated that “(a) referendum result, if it is to be taken as an expression of the democratic will, must be free of ambiguity both in terms of the question asked and in terms of the support it achieves.” If the vote means something other than the question being asked, its result will mean very little and achieve even less. If Premier Kenney wanted to talk about something other than removing Section 36(2), then he asked the wrong question.

Second, no province can amend the Constitution on its own. A referendum vote provides no power to Alberta, legal or otherwise, that we don’t already have. Our premier can — in multiple venues — propose, negotiate and engage thoughtfully any time he wants. Past leaders have done so with great success before. Recent reforms to health and social transfers, to stabilization payments and to the equalization program itself have improved federal transfers significantly. In fact, federal transfers to provincial governments are structurally more evenly distributed than at any point in Canadian history outside of the Second World War .

Of course, there are genuine frustrations in Alberta. Some concern federal policy. This is inevitable in a large and diverse country like Canada. But we don’t need a referendum to improve policy. We need elected representatives willing to roll up their sleeves and do the hard work on our behalf.

Many more frustrations, though, concern provincial policy. Our economy has disappointed, the government’s pandemic handling could have been better (especially recently), and Alberta’s budget is a complete mess. These concerns are very real. But none have anything to do with equalization.

Solutions require action at home and a government willing to focus on them. Inflaming tensions, shifting blame and polarizing issues have not served Alberta well. This referendum offers more of the same.

At worst, it risks long-term damage to our federation, to our politics, to the province. And at best, it’s a costly distraction from Alberta’s real and growing challenges. Vote No to the equalization question on Oct. 18.

Trevor Tombe is a professor of economics at the University of Calgary and research fellow at the School of Public Policy.

https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/columnists/opinion-the-case-against-premier-kenneys-equalization-referendum