Alberta Election 2019

[GungaDin]

Fear mongering. We know the NDP is unwilling or incapable of solving these problems. Yet you're pushing the idea that votes should be based on an unfounded fear of the conservative bogeyman. Of course we know the government, and government funded organizations, run so efficiently and lean in this province that any threat of reducing spending is an obvious sign of looming catastrophe.

In conclusion... NO, I DISAGREE.

I'm not pushing, or "fearmongering", but you're yelling. The issues you mention are hard, likely require significant public investment to solve, and will take more than four years to "solve". I just think it's unlikely that a party that has cutting government expenditures as a key to its platform will have much of a chance of improving these issues. Feel free to explain how they're going to do it.

FWIW child poverty in the province has been significantly reduced during the past four years of economic shrinkage, but that couldn't be due to the NDP because we all know the left is incapable of solving social problems. /sarcasm

[GungaDin]

The difference of course is party X is in power and we know what they do. They are not a boogeyman. Their debt, decay, and folly is well know and harmful fact. We can only guess how the boogeyman that is party Y may fair, if elected. One party, if they were to run on their record, would have their record found wanting. Therefore they must make the other to be the dreaded boogeyman.

If you think the alberta election is bad, just wait for this fall when a much worse, much more destructive party must decide whether to run on their record or run against a boogeyman. Well, the decision has been made. They showed their hand when they bribed the media.

If you can explain how the UCP party platform is any different from the PC party that ran Alberta for forty years I'll be happy to listen. It's back to the future with the Ralph Klein-like policies and attitudes of the UCP, so I know pretty much exactly what's going to happen and don't need to imagine a bogeyman.

I've seen the damage that caused to this province with the infrastructure deficit we're still trying to solve, with un-built hospitals in Grande Prairie and Calgary, and a Misericordia hospital in Edmonton that needs massive investment. In a related story, a couple of weeks ago the Alberta road builders association was reporting in the Journal that the deteriorating state of the provincial highways network was going to cost billions of dollars to fix, which leads me to suspect that the Klein/West privatization of highways maintenance maybe wasn't the big cash saver it was supposed to be. I could go on, but those who have made up their minds aren't interested in hearing things that contradict their ideological views.

[Smartie123]

If you can explain how the UCP party platform is any different from the PC party that ran Alberta for forty years I'll be happy to listen. It's back to the future with the Ralph Klein-like policies and attitudes of the UCP, so I know pretty much exactly what's going to happen and don't need to imagine a bogeyman.

I've seen the damage that caused to this province with the infrastructure deficit we're still trying to solve, with un-built hospitals in Grande Prairie and Calgary, and a Misericordia hospital in Edmonton that needs massive investment. In a related story, a couple of weeks ago the Alberta road builders association was reporting in the Journal that the deteriorating state of the provincial highways network was going to cost billions of dollars to fix, which leads me to suspect that the Klein/West privatization of highways maintenance maybe wasn't the big cash saver it was supposed to be. I could go on, but those who have made up their minds aren't interested in hearing things that contradict their ideological views.

And the Royal Alex needs a new tower...

[Deathsdoorstep]

Just some facts to throw out there. Not telling anyone how to vote, but:

-A referendum on equalization won't change equalization. FACT.
-Turning off the taps to BC is likely not legal. FACT.
-A petulant attitude to Ottawa makes it more likely, not less, that Justin Trudeau is re-elected. FACT.
-If you think its okay for teachers to out gay kids you are a homophobe. FACT.

Rachel Notley hasn't been great. She implemented a carbon tax that she didn't mention in 2015. She essetntially tried to unionize family farms through the back door. She hired an anti-oilsands activist to the energy regulator.

She cannot deny these FACTS.

But our choice is not limited to fiscally hard-line-socially-knuckledragger and fiscally insane-socially-social-justice. FACT!

[pizmo]

A child asked his father "Dad, do politicians ever tell the truth?"

The father answered, "Only when they call each other liars."

[Deathsdoorstep]

I am as angry at Notley as the next Albertan. If she had kept her promises from 2015 we wouldn't be on the verge of one of the great ass holes of our time becoming Premier.

[Esks1975]

Just some facts to throw out there. Not telling anyone how to vote, but:

-A referendum on equalization won't change equalization. FACT.
-Turning off the taps to BC is likely not legal. FACT.
-A petulant attitude to Ottawa makes it more likely, not less, that Justin Trudeau is re-elected. FACT.
-If you think its okay for teachers to out gay kids you are a homophobe. FACT.

Rachel Notley hasn't been great. She implemented a carbon tax that she didn't mention in 2015. She essetntially tried to unionize family farms through the back door. She hired an anti-oilsands activist to the energy regulator.

She cannot deny these FACTS.

But our choice is not limited to fiscally hard-line-socially-knuckledragger and fiscally insane-socially-social-justice. FACT!

She did say that the would take leadership on the issue of climate change (item 5.13 in the NDP 2015 platform). Could that include implementing a carbon tax? I don't see why it wouldn't.

Re the Bolded: Are you implying a third choice be considered? Just wondering.

[Deathsdoorstep]

She did say that the would take leadership on the issue of climate change (item 5.13 in the NDP 2015 platform). Could that include implementing a carbon tax? I don't see why it wouldn't.

Re the Bolded: Are you implying a third choice be considered? Just wondering.

Mate, I mean no offense, but that's a pretty weak defense of a pretty large tax. I don't think you can implement a tax like that, not mention it in the campaign, and then say "I said I'd do something" as a defense. That OJ Simpson weak.

As for the bolded, I'm not implying anything. I'm flat out saying it.

[Smartie123]

Just some facts to throw out there. Not telling anyone how to vote, but:

-A referendum on equalization won't change equalization. FACT.
-Turning off the taps to BC is likely not legal. FACT.
-A petulant attitude to Ottawa makes it more likely, not less, that Justin Trudeau is re-elected. FACT.
-If you think its okay for teachers to out gay kids you are a homophobe. FACT.

Rachel Notley hasn't been great. She implemented a carbon tax that she didn't mention in 2015. She essetntially tried to unionize family farms through the back door. She hired an anti-oilsands activist to the energy regulator.

She cannot deny these FACTS.

But our choice is not limited to fiscally hard-line-socially-knuckledragger and fiscally insane-socially-social-justice. FACT!

Don’t forget that part about not making health care equally accessible to all....

[pete]

Fiscally prudent you say...
Lets recklessly sue the Federal Government.
Then shred the curriculum the previous government spent 3 years worth of work and $$ on.
To cap it off we'll hold a referendum, that will also likely end up in courts.

[Deathsdoorstep]

Fiscally prudent you say...
Lets recklessly sue the Federal Government.
Then shred the curriculum the previous government spent 3 years worth of work and $$ on.
To cap it off we'll hold a referendum, that will also likely end up in courts.

You're not wrong, but none of that will cost $8 Billion.

[Esks1975]

Mate, I mean no offense, but that's a pretty weak defense of a pretty large tax. I don't think you can implement a tax like that, not mention it in the campaign, and then say "I said I'd do something" as a defense. That OJ Simpson weak.

As for the bolded, I'm not implying anything. I'm flat out saying it.

Is there a way to say that you are going to implement a large tax and actually get elected? I don't recall if Brian Mulruney's conservative government campaigned on implementing the GST. I do remember how it went for Kim Campbell in the following election. I also believe that the GST was necessary to bring fairness to Canadian manufacturers. The manufacturer's sales tax was brutal.

I guess voting for a third party could be quite powerful if a minority government happens.

[GungaDin]

Is there a way to say that you are going to implement a large tax and actually get elected? I don't recall if Brian Mulruney's conservative government campaigned on implementing the GST. I do remember how it went for Kim Campbell in the following election. I also believe that the GST was necessary to bring fairness to Canadian manufacturers. The manufacturer's sales tax was brutal.

I guess voting for a third party could be quite powerful if a minority government happens.

And before that Joe Clarke lost an election when he said he'd use an increased gasoline tax to get rid of the federal deficit. So much for fiscal responsibility. No one ever votes for increased taxation, even if it might be the right thing to do.

[Hugoagogo]

I guess voting for a third party could be quite powerful if a minority government happens.

That is what we wound up with in BC last election with the NDP. Things for the most part have been quite harmonious between the NDP and Green Party for almost two years. That's a long time for a minority government to rule without the call of a new election.

[Deathsdoorstep]

Is there a way to say that you are going to implement a large tax and actually get elected? I don't recall if Brian Mulruney's conservative government campaigned on implementing the GST. I do remember how it went for Kim Campbell in the following election. I also believe that the GST was necessary to bring fairness to Canadian manufacturers. The manufacturer's sales tax was brutal.

I guess voting for a third party could be quite powerful if a minority government happens.

It depends. If you say that you're going to apply a serious tax on carbon.....but that income taxes will be slashed to 5%, 7% and 12%......

[Sectionq]

What I have learned with this election especially when it comes to any of the NDP ads or what I have read from clear NDP supporters is. You either vote for the NDP or you are a hateful, homophobic, racist, greedy, redneck, lowlife who hates healthcare and hates the environment. So basically a horrible human being. Interesting way to go about a campaign I guess.

[pete]

You're not wrong, but none of that will cost $8 Billion.

But if it costs 10% of that, and it's flushed down the toilet without anything in return, save for some popularity points? Spend my tax money, as long as I/ society get services back from it.

[Hugoagogo]

What I have learned with this election especially when it comes to any of the NDP ads or what I have read from clear NDP supporters is. You either vote for the NDP or you are a hateful, homophobic, racist, greedy, redneck, lowlife who hates healthcare and hates the environment. So basically a horrible human being. Interesting way to go about a campaign I guess.

If that's your interpretation, go with it.
Whether we all agree or not, I hope all Albertans get out there and vote.

[Deathsdoorstep]

What I have learned with this election especially when it comes to any of the NDP ads or what I have read from clear NDP supporters is. You either vote for the NDP or you are a hateful, homophobic, racist, greedy, redneck, lowlife who hates healthcare and hates the environment. So basically a horrible human being. Interesting way to go about a campaign I guess.

That's the current default position of the social justice left, mate.

- - - Updated - - -

But if it costs 10% of that, and it's flushed down the toilet without anything in return, save for some popularity points? Spend my tax money, as long as I/ society get services back from it.

You're not wrong. But if it cost $100million to win a court case against the carbon tax I'm all for it. Problem is that they aren't going to win that court case.

I am against carbon tax because it is a tax grab that won't work. If you had a way bigger carbon tax that replaced other taxes then I'd be all for it.

[Sectionq]

If that's your interpretation, go with it.
Whether we all agree or not, I hope all Albertans get out there and vote.

My interpretation?

When you read on twitter NDP supporters including candidates saying things like "Be a good human being" #voteNDP" How else would you interpret that? I saw someone retweet a tweet from Jann Arden who said "I am voting for human decency". How else would you interpret that? I get crap radio reception in my office so I listen to radio programs online. So every time I turn on the radio player on my computer, an NDP ad comes up and it's either the cartoon one of Kenny with scissors and it just says "cut, cut, cut" and talks about how he's going to ruin healthcare. Or its Notley telling me how Kenny will introduce American style healthcare. Or it's the ad where people are talking about what Kenny said or he's shady or we are getting toll roads or "Rachel Notley is not perfect but...... she's not Jason Kenny."

Nothing about where are the problems we have in Alberta which over the past 4 years have been really tough for every Albertan and here's what we are going to do to fix it and make Albertans lives better. It's all attack ads on Kenny and trying to scare people on all the bad things that are going to apparently happen.

When I listen to the UPC ads, its not personal attacks on Notley, it's all about what has happened in Alberta over the past 4 years, what Notley and the NDP have done over the past 4 years and what they are going to do differently. At least I have an idea what the UCP are going to do. The only thing the NDP has told me is apparently Notley is "fighting for me" whatever the hell that means and Kenny is a bad guy that I should be scared of. That's it.

[Hugoagogo]

Yes, your interpretation Q.

Get out there and vote!

[pete]

That's the current default position of the social justice left, mate.

- - - Updated - - -



You're not wrong. But if it cost $100million to win a court case against the carbon tax I'm all for it. Problem is that they aren't going to win that court case.

I am against carbon tax because it is a tax grab that won't work. If you had a way bigger carbon tax that replaced other taxes then I'd be all for it.

So carbon tax pays for schools, health care etc? Its still a tax, just a new name? I'm not sure I follow.

[Deathsdoorstep]

So carbon tax pays for schools, health care etc? Its still a tax, just a new name? I'm not sure I follow.

Yes. It goes into general revenue and rebates. Totally ineffective.

[Beerfish]

The word Carbon tax is the boogey man and plays to the masses. Carbon taxes have a lot more support than the greens and the hippy NDPers. Several oil companies are in favor of them. After a long enough time to exam them in BC they seem to be accomplishing what they are set out to do with out all the dire teeth gnashing.

The problem with the UCP's stand imo is that right now we (as in Alberta) has control over our carbon tax and all that goes with it. the moment kenny removes it th3e feds step in and put their carbon tax in place. Then as pointed out s a long and costly legal battle that will not win.

Then we have the hilariously awful idea of having a referendum on transfer payments. What do they expect the results to be? Everyone knows we are getting the shaft with transfer payments, doesn't matter if you are left, right, center.

For parties that are supposed to be very 'fiscally reasonable' the conservatives like to was a ton of money for no good reason.

I'm also not in favor of across the board large corporate tax cuts because you are rewarding everyone not just the job creators. Find a way to reward job creation and lure new business by all means but I find it distasteful putting extra cash in some large companies that cut jobs. (When Harper cut corp taxes about a week later one of the big banks cut 3,000 jobs....to be more efficient and competitive).

In any case just a matter of hours before the UCP are in and they can start reshaping things the way they want to.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes. It goes into general revenue and rebates. Totally ineffective.

That is not really an accurate statement imo.

https://edmontonjournal.com/news/pol...-been-spent-on

[Deathsdoorstep]

Emma and Janet are wrong. It goes into general revenue. There is no legal mechanism to funnel those funds to green projects. The money goes into GR and at budget time the government then spends.

[BaronAmongYou]

I'd be super curious to know how much of an impact Alberta's carbon tax has had on the global climate change issues. Since the science is settled we should know, with great accuracy, how much temperature has gone down because of the burden we've placed on ourselves. Especially because it's about the environment and saving the planet, not just taking more wealth out of the economy to transfer to people, industries, and cronies favored by whoever is in charge at this particular point in time.

[nafnikufesin]

Ah, the whole "China is doing nothing, so why should anyone bother" argument. Yes, it's much better to be a follower than a leader. (Though China is actually leading there, too, being three years ahead of schedule in terms of meeting their emission reduction targets). Let's keep going back to the past and hope nothing will ever change.

[BaronAmongYou]

Is that China post in response to me?

That's not my argument at all. I said the Alberta taxpayer have made a pretty significant sacrifice to fight the evil that is global warming. I'd just like to to know what our sacrifice accomplished. The science is settled, so it should be easy to produce summarized results that even I can understand. I'd just like to see what we did. Maybe there can be a plaque placed somewhere. "Thanks to the billions of dollars Alberta taxpayers sacrificed, global climate temperatures were reduced by X degrees". Something like that. We can put it next to a heat island, I mean, solar farm.

If it's not in response to me, please ignore.

[Deathsdoorstep]

I'll take up the "why should we when China isn't?" mantle!

China 27% of world emissions.
Canada 2%.
The oilsands' part of that 2%? 6%.

Why cut off our noses to spite our faces?

And DO NOT think for a second that China will say, "Look! Canada is doing it...so should we!!!"

China's emissions are not shrinking. They are growing. Moreover, who is building all of those coal fired plants in Africa? You guessed it...China!

A binding multilateral agreement is 100% necessary! And it should start by banning cruise ships! Not with non-binding non-enforceable emissions reductions countries just ignore. It's all PR!!

That said, if we can reduce particulate and CO2 by implementing a carbon tax that replaces an equal amount of income tax? Sure. Count me in!

But don't tell me that 4c a litre and $20 a month to heat your home in a winter climate will reduce CO2.

I might have been born at night...but not last night.

[Sectionq]

I'll take up the "why should we when China isn't?" mantle!

China 27% of world emissions.
Canada 2%.
The oilsands' part of that 2%? 6%.

Why cut off our noses to spite our faces?

And DO NOT think for a second that China will say, "Look! Canada is doing it...so should we!!!"

China's emissions are not shrinking. They are growing. Moreover, who is building all of those coal fired plants in Africa? You guessed it...China!

A binding multilateral agreement is 100% necessary! And it should start by banning cruise ships! Not with non-binding non-enforceable emissions reductions countries just ignore. It's all PR!!

That said, if we can reduce particulate and CO2 by implementing a carbon tax that replaces an equal amount of income tax? Sure. Count me in!

But don't tell me that 4c a litre and $20 a month to heat your home in a winter climate will reduce CO2.

I might have been born at night...but not last night.

Holy Hell, I actually agree with DDS!!

I live in a winter country, it's below freeze for 5 months a year. I have to heat my home, I don't have a choice. When it's 35 freak below for a month and a half like it was this year, what am I supposed to do, not turn on my furnace? So tacking on a tax to heat my home where the choice is to pay it or freeze to death is not right. I don't even have the option right now to buy electricity from a non carbon burning producer. There is no giant solar farm, there is no nuclear plant. I don't have an alternative right now yet you slap a punishment tax for me heating my home in a winter country and turning my LED lights on. Give me an alternative and I will gladly take it to cut down my carbon footprint.