- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
There's a job opening at the Mint. Great expense plan.
Worn Out Grunt said:For all the Albertans with parents in other parts of the country - if you don't support equalization, who's supposed to pay for your parents pensions and health care? Do you send a cheque every month?
One of the reasons Alberta is doing so well is that everyone moves there to work, conveniently leaving welfare, education, pension and health care cases where they came from. So if you want to minimize the role and effect of the federal government, how are you going to address these issues?
McGinty is right to complain about the fiscal dividend. Every year Ontario has its human resources expoited to the tune of $23 billion. Perhaps folks shouldn't worry about Alberta, Quebec or Newfoundland leaving, but start thinking about a scenario in which 11 million people just leave and stop sending truckloads of money to the rest of the country.
By the way, the Auto pact expired years ago. Arguments about Ontario gaining unfairly due to federal trade deals is a dead issue.
Yes he is, but the difference is it's OUR free money, were not being subsidized by the rest of the country.Pencil Tech said:Well I thought it was Ralph Klein who is handing out free money.
.... (but when the world goes from consuming oil like a fiend to something sustainable, and Alberta still hasn't changed, where screwed to say the least.)
Kat Stevens said:Buh bye, I'll miss you terribly. Send a postcard when you get settled. Just think, you can keep electing Liberal govts until the end of time, and no more whining about it from us Westerners. Pack lots of sweaters, it"ll be cold out there.
Wingman said:There is confusion with who pays what in the country. It is true that Ontatio has never recieved equalization payments (inception 1957) and Alberta has not received since 1964. It is also true that Alberta has paid around $137 billion into the program since 1957. But this is assuming that the money flows one way.
If you were to take into consideration the federal transfer payments to the provinces over the same period, Alberta and BC would be the only ones to have paid more than they received. Ontario has taken more than $20 billion than they give in equalization payments while Alberta has given more than $100 billion. And Quebec .... well, having received more than $170 billion in equalization payments alone, it could be assumed that they received the same amount in federal transfer payments.
Jumper said:So what your saying is Ontario=Centre of the Canadian Universe and the rest of the country should be kissing ***. This is exactly why Westerners don't trust Ont. We pay our share and that's not the issue. The very real fear for the west is the federal government and those living in eastern Canada, have the perception that we all drive Cadillacs and our driveways are paved with gold, so whay aren't we giving them more money. What Easterners don't realize is that western discontentment is growing and if steps are not taken by the federal government to address our concerns, (Senate reform, Koyto Accord and jurisdiction over health care monies to name a few) the centre of the universe may have to deal with another "Quebec."
If Albertans want more clout, breed more or find a way to attract immigrants faster
No one said Ontario is the centre of the universe. To bite paracowboy - drop the Jan Brady syndrome. For all I hear westerners speaking derisively about "anti-americanism", they certainly seem to take the same stance towards Ontario much of the time. Ontario doesn't run Ottawa - if we did, our premier wouldn't be scrapping with Ottawa all the time over much the same issues as the west does.
You may not like that Ontario votes Liberal but a lot of us don't like the bible thumping neocons westerners vote for, either. It seems all our nuts go out there to get their political support - Day, Harper, who's next? Agree to disagree and vote how you please - it's the nature of our system.
I don't view Albertans or other westerners as having Caddillacs or whatever, I just view their political leanings as different from mine.
Another thing, enough with the threats of separation. If you're going to try it, try it already. All I hear is alot of talking and it's all we've been hearing for quite some time now. Less talk, more action. At least Quebec had the gall to step up and actually make a run at it... of course, they had some semi-legitimate basis for pursuing separation. Alberta won't separate. If some funding and jurisdictional issues were all you needed to pull off separation, every province and territory in this country would be gone by now.
If the PQ and BQ, with all their support and all the clearcut cultural, linguistic, and historical differences between the Quebecois and English Canada, can't muster enough provincial willpower to separate, there's no way on earth Ralph Klein, if he can stay sober long enough, or anyone else in the West is going to manage it. Meanwhile why, if so many here hate Canada and want to break it up, are they in the CF?? I'm mystified, I truly am.
Glorified Ape said:If Albertans want more clout, breed more or find a way to attract immigrants faster. Ontario has 4x the population of Alberta, Quebec has 2x - is it any mystery that they hold more clout in the elections? Of course we're going to decide the elections - we have over 50% of the country's population in our two provinces. That's the nature of representative government... or is that something we should be blamed for too?
Jumper said:They're called Maritimers
Ontario may not run Ottawa however, as you aptly mention Ont carries a significant amount of the vote and your province consistently votes Liberal. Ont may not "control Ottawa" however it certainly sets the agenda.
Yes, yes, those bible thumping, redneck, neocons,and you forgot to say "scary" conservative politicians from the west, why on earth would anyone vote for them; when you can vote for corrupt, cheating, lying, stealing and morally bankrupt politicans from the east. We've stopped trying to figure you people out....
No one has threatened anything, and I don't think there has been a serious attempt at it, however you may see more support for the movement depending on the results of the next federal election.
Hammering on poor old Ralph, I'll bet you can't name who the premier of PEI is? Right off the top of your head, right now...my point exactly. Ralph gets the job done, Canadians know it. I don't think anyone on this post has stated that they hated Canada and I didn't realize discussing regional differences means that you hate Canada or have to leave the CF. This is typical central Canadian liberal philosophy..If you disagree with the left of centre political view point somehow your UN-Canadian. Marsha, Marsha, Marsha, give your head a shake....
Kirkhill said:You know what I think the basis of representative democracy is?
Two sides in a debate coming to a point of mutual irreconcilable differences over an issue that must be decided only one way. Both sides agree to vote on it. One side musters most votes. They win.
Essentially this says to the other side if you act against our will we can put more sticks, swords, guns, into the street than you and you will lose. Resistance is futile. The minority might as well go along.
The minority does. That doesn't mean that they like the result.
The Supreme Court and the Constitution says that that sort of rule is not appropriate for a post-modern society. According to them the will of the majority is a problem if it doesn't produce the "right" answer. At that point experts like themselves will decide what's right. Because they control the power of the state resistance is futile. The majority might as well go along.
The majority does. That doesn't mean that they like the result.
By playing off the minority and the majority on an issue by issue basis it can make it easier to maintain privilege.
The only counter to this, either the tyranny of the majority (which used to be called democracy) or the tyranny of the minority (which just used to be called tyranny) is for those who feel tyrannized to do something about it. A tyrranized majority can rise up, as can a tyrranized minority. The majority has more chance of success.
Money of course can be a great leveller.
The other option of course, is to avoid confrontation and just walk away. This is known as voting with your feet.
It is done every day by millions everywhere. Sometimes large numbers decide to do it together.
Power can come from many sources including money, legal authority or just plain numbers. All societies balance power. Despite all the nonsense about win-win solutions pervading public discourse these days all solutions require giving something to get something. It used to be called compromise.
If Ontario and Quebec want something from Alberta, they will have to pay for it. If Alberta wants something from Ontario and Quebec it will have to pay for it.
Ontario and Quebec deciding that their need is greater because they have greater numbers, and having the Government side with them in order to get elected, smacks muchly of the tyranny of the majority and can be perceived as colonialism.
Ontarians and Qubecois want access to oil and other resources but they are unwilling to pay by allowing representation that supports policies with which they disagree.
Albertans and many other Westerners want not just to be represented but to see their deeply held views reflected in the laws and decisions that govern them. In return they contribute wealth to the national coffers.
If people in society don't see their views reflected in the decisions that are made, if they are constantly derided for not thinking correctly, if the laws of the land no longer reflect the compromises which they can live with, then resentment increases.
And feet start walking - Ontario and Quebec to Alberta, Canada to Australia and the US, Boston to Texas, and to be fair the traffic goes both ways.
Wingman said:Quote from: Wingman on Yesterday at 21:26:15
There is confusion with who pays what in the country. It is true that Ontario has never received equalization payments (inception 1957) and Alberta has not received since 1964. It is also true that Alberta has paid around $137 billion into the program since 1957. But this is assuming that the money flows one way.
If you were to take into consideration the federal transfer payments to the provinces over the same period, Alberta and BC would be the only ones to have paid more than they received. Ontario has taken more than $20 billion than they give in equalization payments while Alberta has given more than $100 billion. And Quebec .... well, having received more than $170 billion in equalization payments alone, it could be assumed that they received the same amount in federal transfer payments.
Quote from: Glorified Ape on Today at 12:40:58
Sources? Quebec receives ridiculous amounts of money, no doubt. I haven't read anything about Ontario receiving more than its share, though. AFAIK it's done on a per capita basis w/ Ontario receiving almost exactly (if not exactly) 4x Alberta's share since it has 4x the population.
Sources:
"A Regional Analysis of Fiscal Balances under Existing and Alternative Constitutional Arrangements," by Mansell and Schlenker (1992) and analysis of Transfer payments from 1992 to 2002 in http://www.ctf.ca/FN2002/chap08.pdf.
As of 1992, when the first was written the balance was Alberta giving $140 billion (about $180 billion in 2005 dollars : Source Bank of Canada) and BC giving $10 billion (2005: $13 billion). Every other province had taken more than given. Reading the second source shows that the trend remained the same with BC balancing the give/take column. I can't seem to get access to the link I had before to the first paper but the executive summary states that Ontario had received more than it gave and AFAIR it was $20 billion.
Quote from: Glorified Ape on Today at 12:40:58
If the PQ and BQ, with all their support and all the clearcut cultural, linguistic, and historical differences between the Quebecois and English Canada, can't muster enough provincial willpower to separate, there's no way on earth Ralph Klein, if he can stay sober long enough, or anyone else in the West is going to manage it.
So to separate you need to have a clearcut cultural, linguistic, and historical difference between factions. I think someone better tell the Americans they really screwed up that one in 1776.
And love him or hate him, you usually know what Ralphie's position is. No dithering there.
RangerRay said:Another thing that many, if not most, representative democracies have is a regional counterweight to heavily populated regions. In the US and Australia, this takes the form of an elected Senate where each administrative unit (state, province, etc.) has the same number of Senators. That way, heavily populated states cannot run rough-shod over the interests and rights of less populated states. Last time I checked, New Yorkers and Californians weren't that upset that they have the same number of Senators as Wyoming and Rhode Island...
Pencil Tech said:I live in Alberta and I don't think, like some, that because I started life on third base that I hit a triple. In the last provincial election more people voted against Ralph Klein than voted for him. The electoral map in this province has been so jerryrigged over the years that it's almost impossible to beat him. Many of us out here are loyal Canadians who don't have a chip on their shoulder, and don't cry like babies at the prospect of sharing some of our unearned riches with parts of the country with fewer $40,000 pickup trucks. And the vast majority of us will never let a few wackjobs convince us to separate from Canada. And anyone in the CF who advocates separation, whether they be from Quebec or Alberta, should be charged, and released 1A.