# The Alberta NDP Thread



## FeXL

Thought I'd put up a thread to keep track of the pinko commie bastards.  (For easy access & future referral...)

Oh, look who Rachel hired to be Chief of Staff for our Energy Minister!

Ezra Levant: Meet Alberta’s new colonial chiefs



> A Toronto anti-oilsands activist – still registered as an anti-oil lobbyist – is now running Alberta’s energy department.


What could possibly go wrong?

Not only that, but:



> There are twelve ministers in the Alberta cabinet, including Notley herself, each with a chief of staff. And *ten of those chiefs are, like Mitchell, NDP activists from other provinces, many of whom will commute each week to Alberta from Vancouver, Toronto, or elsewhere.*


M'bold.

Nice. First off, any guesses who foots the travel bill?

Second:



> *There is something weirdly colonial about non-residents being sent in to run a province to which they have few or no ties. It feels as if the NDP believes Alberta lacks people with talent and judgment to govern themselves.* It feels nepotistic – highly paid consolation prizes for failed NDP activists from other campaigns.
> 
> Like Nathan Rotman. He worked on Olivia Chow’s unsuccessful campaign for Toronto mayor. Now he’s the chief of staff to Alberta’s Finance Minister.
> 
> Was there no-one in Alberta with any financial background? No socially conscious businessman, or even an NDP-friendly professor or think tank economist? *Four million Albertans, but not one who understands Alberta’s fiscal situation better than an Olivia Chow door-knocker?*


M'bold.

Yep...

Further:

Wildrose charges NDP energy minister's top staffer was anti-pipeline lobbyist



> The Wildrose Party says it’s a troubling sign that the NDP energy minister’s top staffer was registered as a federal lobbyist for an organization opposed to pipeline projects proposed to ship Alberta oilsands crude.


----------



## heavyall

I'm not sure what anyone expected. It's not as if Albertans can claim that nobody warned them.


----------



## Macfury

heavyall said:


> I'm not sure what anyone expected. It's not as if Albertans can claim that nobody warned them.


What can you say? This election is a classic cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> Thought I'd put up a thread to keep track of the pinko commie bastards.  (For easy access & future referral...)
> 
> Oh, look who Rachel hired to be Chief of Staff for our Energy Minister!


Heh... and had you performed the same kinds of analyses on the previous governments' staffers, to see who was aligned with the oil industry / lobbyists / etc. ? Or do you only call out potential bias when it conflicts with your own position on oil-as-godliness ?

We wouldn't want to move into the realm of hypocrisy, now would we?


----------



## Macfury

Why make your point so badly, CM? You would want someone who had industry experience, but not someone who antagonizes the constituents of the portfolio out of the gate.



CubaMark said:


> Heh... and had you performed the same kinds of analyses on the previous governments' staffers, to see who was aligned with the oil industry / lobbyists / etc. ? Or do you only call out potential bias when it conflicts with your own position on oil-as-godliness ?
> 
> We wouldn't want to move into the realm of hypocrisy, now would we?


----------



## SINC

There is little doubt that there are those who are more than qualified, who are indeed Albertans who could easily do a good job for the NDP if hired. Trouble is, the NDP, so far detached from the mainstream of Alberta politics with just a handful of members for dozens of years, simply do not know who they are or who to approach to find them. That leads them to approach only known NDP loyalists from out of province to tell us how to run our own province. This is a political botch job by the NDP which given their inexperience, should not be unexpected. They are a one-shot, one-time 'protest phenomena' in Alberta who methinks will be reduced back to their original ranks come next election.


----------



## Macfury

Of course they will be decimated--but they are going to be as destructive as possible during their time in office. Hopefully, Alberta will get a Mike Harris to put things back in order.



SINC said:


> They are a one-shot, one-time 'protest phenomena' in Alberta who methinks will be reduced back to their original ranks come next election.


----------



## FeXL

If you are serious about engaging the topic, then I have this question for you: Do you think that Graham Mitchell is the best fit for the position & why/why not?

If this is another of your great steaming loads deposited in the middle of a thread, with no intent to follow up on any rebuttal points made (a la MacDoc), bugger off.



CubaMark said:


> Heh... and had you performed the same kinds of analyses on the previous governments' staffers, to see who was aligned with the oil industry / lobbyists / etc. ?


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> If this is another of your great steaming loads deposited in the middle of a thread, with no intent to follow up on any rebuttal points made (a la MacDoc), bugger off.


I have pretty much given up any hope of CM actually engaging in a discussion on most of his posts. I've been pretty careful to ask him if he understands the subject well enough to engage in a discussion if I prepare a rebuttal. 

Hasn't answered once.


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> If you are serious about engaging the topic, then I have this question for you: Do you think that Graham Mitchell is the best fit for the position & why/why not?


No idea who Mitchell is. That wasn't my point.



FeXL said:


> If this is another of your great steaming loads deposited in the middle of a thread, with no intent to follow up on any rebuttal points made (a la MacDoc), bugger off.


What "great steaming load"? I simply asked a question: have you held previous staffers to the same test of character that you are now applying to the NDP?

If not, you're simply a hypocrite.


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> I have pretty much given up any hope of CM actually engaging in a discussion on most of his posts. I've been pretty careful to ask him if he understands the subject well enough to engage in a discussion if I prepare a rebuttal.
> 
> Hasn't answered once.


Hah! I've answered plenty. But there comes a point when banging one's head against a wall becomes counterproductive. I do this much more, I risk permanent brain injury. 

I am not obligated in any way to go _ad nauseum_ with people who cannot be reasoned with. If you don't like my "great steaming loads" as FeXL states, you are more than welcome to block me. I promise not to be offended.


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> Hah! I've answered plenty. But there comes a point when banging one's head against a wall becomes counterproductive. I do this much more, I risk permanent brain injury.


You answer, but often with nothing substantive. I've praised you whenever you do. If you equate offering tired, overused memes with banging one's head against the wall, I see your point.



CubaMark said:


> If you don't like my "great steaming loads" as FeXL states, you are more than welcome to block me. I promise not to be offended.


I simply don't block people. How else can I point out their great steaming loads? And what if you occasionally pass a niblet of corn and I miss it?


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> I've praised you whenever you do.


Oh, Master! I *live* for those moments! Praise me! Praise me! :love2:


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> Oh, Master! I *live* for those moments! Praise me! Praise me! :love2:


This is the thing. If I give you praise on request, it would lose its value.


----------



## gwillikers

*The Hey Let's Crap On the Alberta NDP Thread* would have been a less disingenuous title. :lmao:


----------



## BigDL

gwillikers said:


> *The Hey Let's Crap On the Alberta NDP Thread* would have been a less disingenuous title. :lmao:


 :lmao: :lmao:

Where's that dang *'LIKE'* button when you need it?


----------



## Macfury

Be honest. If the thread had featured that title, we wouldn't have you good folk busy listing all of the grand things Notley is doing for the province!



gwillikers said:


> *The Hey Let's Crap On the Alberta NDP Thread* would have been a less disingenuous title. :lmao:





BigDL said:


> :lmao: :lmao:
> 
> Where's that dang *'LIKE'* button when you need it?


----------



## FeXL

CubaMark said:


> No idea who Mitchell is. That wasn't my point.


Fair enough.

First off, I performed no "analysis" on any gov't staffers. This was done by a journalist & I merely read & linked the article.

Second, I have no idea how many previous staffers were hired as patronage appointments from out of province. I never read of any, save one.

Third, the one I am aware of was some idiot imported from Ontario to head up Alberta's health reform a number of years back. If memory serves, he talked much, spent a ton of taxpayers money, achieved very little in a positive form, was over-compensated for what he did accomplish & left with a sizeable bonus. Judging from our current state of health care, he did a bang up job...

Is the /sarc required here?

Now, a question for you:

Is it wise to hire someone from out of your petroleum-rich province, who has a record of lobbying against oil, to be part of your energy sector portfolio?


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> Fair enough.
> 
> First off, I performed no "analysis" on any gov't staffers. This was done by a journalist & I merely read & linked the article.
> 
> Second, I have no idea how many previous staffers were hired as patronage appointments from out of province. I never read of any, save one.
> 
> Third, the one I am aware of was some idiot imported from Ontario to head up Alberta's health reform a number of years back. If memory serves, he talked much, spent a ton of taxpayers money, achieved very little in a positive form, was over-compensated for what he did accomplish & left with a sizeable bonus. Judging from our current state of health care, he did a bang up job...
> 
> Is the /sarc required here?
> 
> Now, a question for you:
> 
> *Is it wise to hire someone from out of your petroleum-rich province, who has a record of lobbying against oil, to be part of your energy sector portfolio?*


There are a ton of energy savvy individuals in the province. Ideally I would like to see someone who is neither aligned with Big Oil or passionately opposed to the same. The reason for this is the responsibility of that individual is not to Big Oil, nor is it to Environmental groups. Ultimately that individual should be responsible to Albertans.


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> There are a ton of energy savvy individuals in the province.


The optics of hiring an out of province anti-oil lobbyist to the energy portfolio are terrible.


----------



## Dr.G.

Alberta Throne Speech unveils increase in corporate, personal tax - The Globe and Mail

"The NDP campaigned on a pledge to increase the income tax for those making more than $125,000 to 12 per cent, while also adding a second bracket of 15 per cent for those making more than $300,000."

In Nova Scotia, the 15% rate is for those earning $59,180 or less, and 8.79% for those earning $29,590 or less. Once you hit $150,000 the tax rate is 21%.


----------



## Macfury

I'll admit that on the face of it, preventing unions from being political donors seems to be a good thing.

Next, she'll rule against employing lobbyists in her government.


----------



## Dr.G.

Macfury said:


> I'll admit that on the face of it, preventing unions from being political donors seems to be a good thing.
> 
> Next, she'll rule against employing lobbyists in her government.


She would be smart to get her ministers to employ AB persons as their chiefs of staff.


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> I'll admit that on the face of it, preventing unions from being political donors seems to be a good thing.
> 
> *Next, she'll rule against employing lobbyists in her government.*


As good as that would be it seems extremely unlikely.


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> The optics of hiring an out of province anti-oil lobbyist to the energy portfolio are terrible.


Agreed!
The job of the Energy department is two-fold. First is to make sure that Albertans get the best possible value for their non-renewable resources. Second is to make sure producers are also treated fairly so they will continue to do business in Alberta and provide employment for Albertans. 

One at the expense of the other is no bargain. To sacrifice the provinces biggest economic sector to ideological causes is moronic. This is where participatory democracy can have an impact. The job of the voter does not end with the results of the election. It extends to making sure those MLAs understand that we know who it is that puts food on the table and will hold them to account should they fail to take that into consideration.

I am a firm believer in voters having the right to petition for the recall of any elected official. There is no other way to ensure that those we pay to represent us will do just that rather than representing the view of their party or their parties corporate master.


----------



## FeXL

Dr.G. said:


> She would be smart to get her ministers to employ AB persons as their chiefs of staff.


Bingo!


----------



## FeXL

Jack M. Mintz: Alberta’s bad plays



> Yet, many politicians fall into the trap of promising foolish polices during an election if it can garner sufficient support to win. The difficulty comes in facing the music after the election. Either they must slither out of their promises or forge ahead, with potentially bad consequences undermining their popularity and future winability.


Further:



> Take the seemingly innocuous corporate tax hike from 10 to 12 per cent. This will increase Alberta’s federal-provincial effective corporate tax rate on non-resource new investments from 17 to 18.6 per cent, making it the fourth highest in Canada and 17th highest of 44 OECD countries. Even hard-pressed Ontario and Quebec will have a more tax-competitive environment for manufacturing, forestry and service sectors than Alberta. I estimate Alberta’s capital stock will decline by $9.2 billion in several years as a result of the corporate tax increase alone. Imagine what royalty hikes and other policies will do in terms of investment and jobs once they are determined.
> 
> If the corporate tax hike were to lead to gobbles of new revenue for an Alberta that is busily pumping up promised spending, it might make sense. However, with the disastrous decline in corporate profits and investment, and income-shifting to lower-taxed global jurisdictions, Alberta will raise little revenue. Based on different results from various economics studies on profit-shifting that is easy to financially structure, Alberta will raise somewhere between $50 and $210 million. *No wonder most economists argue that corporate taxes are the worse funding source for public services. Little revenue is gained, with a signal to investors to go elsewhere.*


M'bold.

Good read.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Thought I'd put up a thread to keep track of the pinko commie bastards.  (For easy access & future referral...)
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, look who Rachel hired to be Chief of Staff for our Energy Minister!
> 
> 
> 
> Ezra Levant: Meet Alberta&#146;s new colonial chiefs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What could possibly go wrong?
> 
> 
> 
> Not only that, but:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> M'bold.
> 
> 
> 
> Nice. First off, any guesses who foots the travel bill?
> 
> 
> 
> Second:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> M'bold.
> 
> 
> 
> Yep...
> 
> 
> 
> Further:
> 
> 
> 
> Wildrose charges NDP energy minister's top staffer was anti-pipeline lobbyist



Should you perhaps have called this the "Alberta NDP Bashing Thread", since your agenda is pretty obvious from word one. I take it this is NOT a discussion or debate thread about the policies of those pinko commie bastards.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Just to address all the critics out there who think that this is nothing but an NDP bashing thread. Pretty easy to be critical of a thread title but, thus far, ain't been much positive said about the Alberta NDP by all the NDP supporters on these boards. Mostly crickets...

My agenda, if I even have one, is to expose what I perceive as crappy gov't at any & all levels. Provincially, I wasn't happy with Stelmach, Queenie, Prentice, Smith after she changed party policy to pander to the city voters & especially after she crossed the floor and when she stated she believed in AGW, my own MLA for crossing the floor & others. I have voiced those concerns on various threads on these boards over the years.

As we are currently flying the orange flag, it's the NDP that are now under the microscope. I have seen what the NDP have done to the economies of BC, Saskatchewan & Ontario & want no part of that for Alberta. Can a leopard change its spots? 

I have little faith in their leader & even less in a number of the MLA's who have little to no experience in governing their own lives, let alone a province. I reserve the right to be pleasantly surprised.

I welcome any attempts by anybody to justify some of the asinine things they have already done. Please, feel free. You can start by defending the appointment of Graham Mitchell, from the OP & the reason I started this thread.

And, to illustrate that it's not all criticism, I do endorse their move to maintain education spending to the end of the agreement period, unlike what the PC's were going to do & freeze spending.

Thus far, it's the only positive for me. Got something positive to say about 'em? This is the thread.

Gonna be a long 4 years...



fjnmusic said:


> Should you perhaps have called this the "Alberta NDP Bashing Thread", since your agenda is pretty obvious from word one. I take it this is NOT a discussion or debate thread about the policies of those pinko commie bastards.


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Should you perhaps have called this the "Alberta NDP Bashing Thread", since your agenda is pretty obvious from word one. I take it this is NOT a discussion or debate thread about the policies of those pinko commie bastards.


You gotta stop taking things so personal Frank, you wear your allegiances on your sleeve.

I speak from experience as I had the misfortune to live through two NDP governments in two different provinces and watched the dunderheads destroy the economy of both provinces.

I have little doubt they willl do the same to Alberta and their minimum wage policy is the beginning of the end.

See how happy you are with your chosen amateurs in four years when you and all Albertans will have suffered enough to toss them out as quickly as 'Albertans in a hissy fit' put them in.

The election was no show of support for the pinkos, it was a direct kick in the ass for the PCs and nothing more that we will surely live to regret.


----------



## Macfury

I've already supported the Alberta NDP's move to end union donations to political parties, so it isn't all bashing--it's just the majority of their decisions that deserve bashing.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Just to address all the critics out there who think that this is nothing but an NDP bashing thread. Pretty easy to be critical of a thread title but, thus far, ain't been much positive said about the Alberta NDP by all the NDP supporters on these boards. Mostly crickets...
> 
> 
> 
> My agenda, if I even have one, is to expose what I perceive as crappy gov't at any & all levels. Provincially, I wasn't happy with Stelmach, Queenie, Prentice, Smith after she changed party policy to pander to the city voters & especially after she crossed the floor and when she stated she believed in AGW, my own MLA for crossing the floor & others. I have voiced those concerns on various threads on these boards over the years.
> 
> 
> 
> As we are currently flying the orange flag, it's the NDP that are now under the microscope. I have seen what the NDP have done to the economies of BC, Saskatchewan & Ontario & want no part of that for Alberta. Can a leopard change its spots?
> 
> 
> 
> I have little faith in their leader & even less in a number of the MLA's who have little to no experience in governing their own lives, let alone a province. I reserve the right to be pleasantly surprised.
> 
> 
> 
> I welcome any attempts by anybody to justify some of the asinine things they have already done. Please, feel free. You can start by defending the appointment of Graham Mitchell, from the OP & the reason I started this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> And, to illustrate that it's not all criticism, I do endorse their move to maintain education spending to the end of the agreement period, unlike what the PC's were going to do & freeze spending.
> 
> 
> 
> Thus far, it's the only positive for me. Got something positive to say about 'em? This is the thread.
> 
> 
> 
> Gonna be a long 4 years...



Can a leopard change its spots? It's not the same leopard. Might even be a cougar. 

As a teacher who has seen the damage inflicted, especially morale-wise, but successive self-serving PC governments in this province, I welcome the change. Will the NDP be great after four years? Hard to say, but they couldn't be much worse than the robber barons that have been running the place since I was 6 years old. Under Lougheed there was hope, which eventually become entitlement. Anyhoo, I don't think it's going to be a mere 4 years. The PC's are done in this province, and Alberta tends to favor establishing long-serving gov'ts over transitional ones.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> You gotta stop taking things so personal Frank, you wear your allegiances on your sleeve.
> 
> 
> 
> I speak from experience as I had the misfortune to live through two NDP governments in two different provinces and watched the dunderheads destroy the economy of both provinces.
> 
> 
> 
> I have little doubt they willl do the same to Alberta and their minimum wage policy is the beginning of the end.
> 
> 
> 
> See how happy you are with your chosen amateurs in four years when you and all Albertans will have suffered enough to toss them out as quickly as 'Albertans in a hissy fit' put them in.
> 
> 
> 
> The election was no show of support for the pinkos, it was a direct kick in the ass for the PCs and nothing more that we will surely live to regret.



"Some say the glass is half-empty, some say the glass is half-full. I say the glass is too big." – George Carlin


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> The PC's are done in this province...


Seriously?


----------



## FeXL

fjnmusic said:


> Can a leopard change its spots? It's not the same leopard. Might even be a cougar.


<snort> That's funny. I like that. Especially in light of how many "foreign" chiefs of staff are being imported from outside Alberta? From provinces with NDP history? SSDP...



fjnmusic said:


> As a teacher who has seen the damage inflicted, especially morale-wise, but successive self-serving PC governments in this province, I welcome the change. Will the NDP be great after four years? Hard to say, but they couldn't be much worse than the robber barons that have been running the place since I was 6 years old.


I disagree. It could be much worse & I predict that it will. Education & Health Care will be two topics that are kept in a positive light, largely because most of us can relate to them. However, it will be on the backs of taxpayers to finance the spending spree.



fjnmusic said:


> Under Lougheed there was hope, which eventually become entitlement. Anyhoo, I don't think it's going to be a mere 4 years. The PC's are done in this province, and Alberta tends to favor establishing long-serving gov'ts over transitional ones.


I didn't mind Ralph, either. Even towards the end I felt hope. Since then, not so much.

I agree, the PC's are done. Long overdue, deservedly so & brought upon themselves.

I'm not convinced that the NDP will be here for more than one term, however. They have no experience at running the province, many of them are young & have no managerial knowledge or experience whatsoever. Some of them have never even held a real job. Some how they need to rise to the occasion, some of them need to grow up, all need to learn how to do their job & execute it in a fashion that gets them re-elected, all in less than four years time. Tall order.

I believe that the NDP decision to push the budget announcement back to this fall is at least partly related to the timing of the federal election & they don't want to announce anything which may "upset" Mulcair's apple cart.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Seriously?


I agree. I think they are. They carry the stink of this past election like a herd of skunks. Without massive reformation & fresh branding, they're toast. Wildrose needs to step up, take advantage of the PC's weakness & prove they're the only credible alternative on the right.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Seriously?



Yup. Count 'em. Even their great leader threw in the towel before the election was even over!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Many would have thought the same thing following the Kim Campbell rout.



fjnmusic said:


> Yup. Count 'em. Even their great leader threw in the towel before the election was even over!


----------



## screature

fjnmusic said:


> ... The PC's are done in this province...


You are dreaming in Technicolor.


----------



## screature

duplicate.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Many would have thought the same thing following the Kim Campbell rout.



Kim Campbell WAS the last PC prime minister. After that it was this strange affiliation of Conservative Reform Alliance Party people (CRAP for short) that eventually coalesced under the "Conservative" banner, but there has not been another Progressive ConServative party to govern since. Today's C's have much more in common with their Reform roots, which is why they are really beginning to **** people off.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

screature said:


> You are dreaming in Technicolor.



Do you live in Alberta? We here are loyal to a fault. We do not switch governments capriciously and we for vote the old one out very often. 4 times only in our 110 year history. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

1. Today, most people don't even know what the Reform Party was.
2. People are not suddenly discovering this,
3. Stephen Harper is more "progressive" today than he was 10 year ago.



fjnmusic said:


> Kim Campbell WAS the last PC prime minister. After that it was this strange affiliation of Conservative Reform Alliance Party people (CRAP for short) that eventually coalesced under the "Conservative" banner, but there has not been another Progressive ConServative party to govern since. Today's C's have much more in common with their Reform roots, which is why they are really beginning to **** people off.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Do you live in Alberta? We here are loyal to a fault. We do not switch governments capriciously and we for vote the old one out very often. 4 times only in our 110 year history.


C'mon now, face reality. We didn't vote for a party, we voted to punish a party. That is the real truth.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> C'mon now, face reality. We didn't vote for a party, we voted to punish a party. That is the real truth.



And in 1971, people voted to punish the Socreds. And they did punish them
very well. 😝😝


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## heavyall

This Conservative party did come out of the Reform party, but the similarities end there. They have far more in common with the old PCs than they do with Reform on any issue.


----------



## Macfury

heavyall said:


> This Conservative party did come out of the Reform party, but the similarities end there. They have far more in common with the old PCs than they do with Reform on any issue.


If I had to choose between Reform and Conservative, I would vote Reform hands down.


----------



## fjnmusic

heavyall said:


> This Conservative party did come out of the Reform party, but the similarities end there. They have far more in common with the old PCs than they do with Reform on any issue.



I believe Peter MacKay, the man who sold the PC party down the river after promising not to, was the last man left if the original guard, and he's leaving like so many other rats when they abandon ship. Ain't no P in PC for a long time now, and there ain't much C left either. What you have is Harper's new vision for Canada: a Reform turned Alliance disguised as a Conservative party running the country with little to no accountability.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Actually, that isn't what I see at all. 

It is somewhat "pogressive"--which is to say, going in the wrong direction. It is somewhat "conservative"--but not enough--and still makes far more sense than either the Liberals or NDP. It is accountable--but not to socialists such as yourself--because the party does not share your worldview, except by chance.




fjnmusic said:


> I believe Peter MacKay, the man who sold the PC party down the river after promising not to, was the last man left if the original guard, and he's leaving like so many other rats when they abandon ship. Ain't no P in PC for a long time now, and there ain't much C left either. What you have is Harper's new vision for Canada: a Reform turned Alliance disguised as a Conservative party running the country with little to no accountability.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Actually, that isn't what I see at all.
> 
> 
> 
> It is somewhat "pogressive"--which is to say, going in the wrong direction. It is somewhat "conservative"--but not enough--and still makes far more sense than either the Liberals or NDP. It is accountable--but not to socialists such as yourself--because the party does not share your worldview, except by chance.



If it was so accountable, why on earth is Harper so afraid of media scrums? And why is he so afraid to participate in a televised leaders' debate with the other leaders in a format Canadians have used since the Dawn if television in Canada? If this is your idea of "accountable" then I'm not sure you're using the same definition as the rest of the world.









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

The news media in Canada is woefully hostile to Harper. I would also limit my appearances, rather than have the CBC oversee an unfairly stacked debate or conduct a hostile interview. However, he PM has been accountable to me, by delivering on some of the promises I expected him to keep.


----------



## FeXL

Asked & answered, elsewhere, a number of times.



fjnmusic said:


> If it was so accountable, why on earth is Harper so afraid of media scrums? And why is he so afraid to participate in a televised leaders' debate with the other leaders in a format Canadians have used since the Dawn if television in Canada? If this is your idea of "accountable" then I'm not sure you're using the same definition as the rest of the world.


----------



## heavyall

fjnmusic said:


> What you have is Harper's new vision for Canada: a Reform turned Alliance disguised as a Conservative party running the country with little to no accountability.


As usual, you have no idea what you're talking about. Any semblance of the Reformers have long been left behind in favour of a party that if one could criticize them for anything, it's that they've strayed way too far to the left.

Accountability though? While the bar certainly has been set laughably low, one clearly positive thing the Conservatives have demonstrated, is that they are the most open and accountable government this country has ever had.


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> The news media in Canada is woefully hostile to Harper. I would also limit my appearances, rather than have the CBC oversee an unfairly stacked debate or conduct a hostile interview. However, he PM has been accountable to me, by delivering on some of the promises I expected him to keep.


Or to paraphrase Red Cloud, "He made so many promises I cannot remember them all. He kept only one of them. He promised to destroy the Bill of Rights and he did so."


----------



## CubaMark

heavyall said:


> As usual, you have no idea what you're talking about. Any semblance of the Reformers have long been left behind in favour of a party that if one could criticize them for anything, it's that they've strayed way too far to the left.


My. God.

I knew you guys were off to the wild right, but I didn't realize just how far afield you've travelled....


----------



## fjnmusic

CubaMark said:


> My. God.
> 
> 
> 
> I knew you guys were off to the wild right, but I didn't realize just how far afield you've travelled....



Thank. You. Mark. Nice to hear a voice of reason amid the insanity. Sometimes this feels more like South Carolina than Canada. 
😳 The words Harper and Accountability should not be legally allowed in the same sentence. Aloof, maybe, or Deceptive. Or perhaps Controlling or Micro-Managerial. Whatever the opposite of Open to Discussion in an Open Forum might be.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

You guys are just doing a socialist lap dance. There's no voice of reason here from either of you.



fjnmusic said:


> Thank. You. Mark. Nice to hear a voice of reason amid the insanity. Sometimes this feels more like South Carolina than Canada.
> 😳 The words Harper and Accountability should not be legally allowed in the same sentence. Aloof, maybe, or Deceptive. Or perhaps Controlling or Micro-Managerial. Whatever the opposite of Open to Discussion in an Open Forum might be.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> You guys are just doing a socialist lap dance. There's no voice of reason here from either of you.



If only you knew how to dance, MF. Envy much?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

I do a two-step, quick-step and a bossanova, a little Victor Sylvester and a Rudy Valentino...

However, you are a very talented guitarist, fjn. I couldn't hope to be that good.



fjnmusic said:


> If only you knew how to dance, MF. Envy much?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> I do a two-step, quick-step and a bossanova, a little Victor Sylvester and a Rudy Valentino...
> 
> 
> 
> However, you are a very talented guitarist, fjn. I couldn't hope to be that good.



Aw, now you're just buttering me up. Happy Fathers' day! 😎👍👍🏽👍🏾


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Well two months in, the honeymoon is over, but still the sky has not fallen. However, we could use a little more rain.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Well two months in, the honeymoon is over, but still the sky has not fallen. However, we could use a little more rain.


Yep, and the bad news just keeps coming.

Inexperience is no excuse for just plain stupidity as the Dippers continue to make appointment, after inappropriate appointment:

Brent Dancey, chief of staff, was pardoned for 1993 assault - Edmonton - CBC News

A real premier would step in and stop them before they are made, not keep doing damage control after the fact.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Well two months in, the honeymoon is over, but still the sky has not fallen. However, we could use a little more rain.


Public sector employees might have been having a honeymon... 

People who generate wealth were not.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Public sector employees might have been having a honeymon...
> 
> 
> 
> People who generate wealth were not.



Hey buddy, it's a full year and then some before I get to partake of this pot of gold you keep alluding to. Collective agreements are in place until they expire, amigo. You keep dreaming.

P.S. Three years of 0% and regular cost if living wage increases followed by a whopping 2% next year was what I sacrificed for the PC Alberta Advantage and billion dollar surplus. And what exactly did you give up? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

.


----------



## Macfury

Right on schedule:

Alberta NDP government green lights borrowing of up to $6-billion | Alberta | Ne



> Canadian Taxpayers Federation Alberta Director Paige MacPherson said the government is being "wildly irresponsible" by continuing the PC plan as greater debt leads to higher taxes and an "unloading of the irresponsible choices of today onto Alberta kids."


The sun has come up as always while the kooks in Dipperland dig Alberta's grave a little deeper.


----------



## FeXL

Some of those comments are hilarious. Talk about low-information voters...


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Right on schedule:
> 
> Alberta NDP government green lights borrowing of up to $6-billion | Alberta | Ne
> 
> 
> 
> The sun has come up as always while the kooks in Dipperland dig Alberta's grave a little deeper.


The PC's green-lighted $7 billion a year before for the same reason. I didn't hear you complain then.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> The PC's green-lighted $7 billion a year before for the same reason. I didn't hear you complain then.


Yeah, I did. It was unconscionable. They should have cut spending.


----------



## FeXL

fjnmusic said:


> The PC's green-lighted $7 billion a year before for the same reason. I didn't hear you complain then.


And spent 3. Let's see if the Commies have nearly the same restraint. 

You a betting man, Comrade?


----------



## heavyall




----------



## fjnmusic

heavyall said:


>



Man, she looks good in that picture.

Also, Heavyall, you know this is not actual debt yet, right? It's a line of credit. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Man, she looks good in that picture.


Yeeseshh. Are you looking at that photo from the bottom of a bottle?



fjnmusic said:


> Also, Heavyall, you know this is not actual debt yet, right? It's a line of credit.


Are you not following the thread?


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Also, Heavyall, you know this is not actual debt yet, right? It's a line of credit.


You included the key word, YET.

Step one on the road to ruin by another Dipper government.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> You included the key word, YET.
> 
> 
> 
> Step one on the road to ruin by another Dipper government.



Or anyone, for that matter. Do you have a line of credit? The existence of one is not a problem; it is a problem if you don't repay what you borrow. But given historically low interest rates, it makes more economic sense to borrow than to cut spending at this point. Infrastructure for example is not going to get any cheaper.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Or anyone, for that matter. Do you have a line of credit? The existence of one is not a problem; it is a problem if you don't repay what you borrow


Reminds me of that idiot Democrat congressman from Maryland, Steny Hoyer: 



> Does the country have a spending problem? The country has a paying-for problem.



So fill us in. How does the NDP plan to repay it?


----------



## pm-r

Macfury said:


> …
> … ...
> So fill us in. How does the NDP plan to repay it?



Won't they just join up with Greece??


----------



## Macfury

pm-r said:


> Won't they just join up with Greece??


Will Greece have them?


----------



## pm-r

Macfury said:


> Will Greece have them?


Opps…, never considered that, and probably doubtful as they are a proud race.


----------



## FeXL

So, how are the commies doing? Let's have a look.

Canadian Oil Sands loses $128M in 90 days - $120M were Notley's new taxes



> Canadian Oil Sands just issued its quarterly financials. They lost $128 million in the past 90 days, compared to the $176 million profit they made this time last year.
> 
> And $120 million of that recent loss -- all but $8 million -- is from the Alberta NDP's new tax increase.


OK, that's not so good. Anything else?

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNbNAjcZKeg"]Another oil company posts substantial loss under Alberta NDP[/ame]



> Ezra Levant of TheRebel.Media reports on another oil company reporting significant losses, and it's not due to falling oil prices.


Hmmm, anybody see a pattern here?

I guess the point is, if you have an industry that is already on its knees, why kick it when its down?

Related:

Oilsands may have to be left in the ground, says NDP candidate



> Linda McQuaig, a star New Democratic Party candidate, says Alberta’s oilsands may need to remain undeveloped in order for Canada to meet its climate change targets.
> 
> The NDP candidate for Toronto Centre told Investor Central Network’s _Power & Politics_ there should not be a rush to extract from the oilsands without proper environmental assessments.


I guess we'll just all have to burn unicorn farts, then. By all means, let's vote for the Commies federally, too.

Unbelievable...


----------



## Macfury

Will there be enough rope left in Alberta to hang all the people who admit to voting for these NDP clowns?


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> So, how are the commies doing? Let's have a look.
> 
> 
> 
> Canadian Oil Sands loses $128M in 90 days - $120M were Notley's new taxes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK, that's not so good. Anything else?
> 
> 
> 
> [ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNbNAjcZKeg"]Another oil company posts substantial loss under Alberta NDP[/ame]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm, anybody see a pattern here?
> 
> 
> 
> I guess the point is, if you have an industry that is already on its knees, why kick it when its down?
> 
> 
> 
> Related:
> 
> 
> 
> Oilsands may have to be left in the ground, says NDP candidate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess we'll just all have to burn unicorn farts, then. By all means, let's vote for the Commies federally, too.
> 
> 
> 
> Unbelievable...



You do realize you're mixing up Alberta NDP MLA's with Federal NDP MP's and candidates, yes?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

They all have the same sour aroma.



fjnmusic said:


> You do realize you're mixing up Alberta NDP MLA's with Federal NDP MP's and candidates, yes?


----------



## heavyall

fjnmusic said:


> You do realize you're mixing up Alberta NDP MLA's with Federal NDP MP's and candidates, yes?


Unlike the other parties, there only is one NDP.


----------



## FeXL

I'm not mixing up anything. I'm directly comparing their mindsets & finding no difference...



fjnmusic said:


> You do realize you're mixing up Alberta NDP MLA's with Federal NDP MP's and candidates, yes?


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> I'm not mixing up anything. I'm directly comparing their mindsets & finding no difference...



Well for the last three posters, that's your problem then. You're like those PC users who read spec sheets and processing speeds and conclude that a Lenovo ThinkPad is the same thing as MacBook Pro.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

No spec sheets required--just bad ideas and bad governance, identical across the spectrum. Maybe they wear different deodorant while they conduct their malfeasance.



fjnmusic said:


> Well for the last three posters, that's your problem then. You're like those PC users who read spec sheets and processing speeds and conclude that a Lenovo ThinkPad is the same thing as MacBook Pro.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Notley is a minor player already actively involved in the destruction of Alberta, but Mulcair is the real threat to an entire country with NDP propaganda.


----------



## FeXL

Nice try. Your analogy doesn't even make it out of the gate. 

Further, as has been mentioned before, 11 out of 14 of Notley's CoS are from out of province, patronage appointments given to provincial & federal NDP supporters. SS, DP...



fjnmusic said:


> Well for the last three posters, that's your problem then. You're like those PC users who read spec sheets and processing speeds and conclude that a Lenovo ThinkPad is the same thing as MacBook Pro.


----------



## Macfury

He just thinks Notley is going to give oil money to teachers.



FeXL said:


> Nice try. Your analogy doesn't even make it out of the gate.
> 
> Further, as has been mentioned before, 11 out of 14 of Notley's CoS are from out of province, patronage appointments given to provincial & federal NDP supporters. SS, DP...


----------



## fjnmusic

Well since you seem to be not be able to distinguish between provincial and federal politics, here 's a nice T-shirt souvenir for you.









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BigDL

SINC said:


> Notley is a minor player already actively involved in the destruction of Alberta, but Mulcair is the real threat to an entire country with NDP propaganda.



NDP propaganda very scary, very scary indeed kids Ahooooooooooooooo, Ahoooooooooooo.

Why kids it's as scary as Dr. Tongue's Evil House of Pancakes! Ahooooooooooooo!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1R3G_beQccA


----------



## Macfury

I need to see Thomas Mulcair's 3-D house of Pancakes next, BigDL!


----------



## fjnmusic

BigDL said:


> NDP propaganda very scary, very scary indeed kids Ahooooooooooooooo, Ahoooooooooooo.
> 
> 
> 
> Why kids it's as scary as Dr. Tongue's Evil House of Pancakes! Ahooooooooooooo!
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1R3G_beQccA



I liked Count Floyd's 3D House of Stewardesses.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> I liked Count Floyd's 3D House of Stewardesses.


That's _*Dr. Tongue's* 3D House Of Stewardesses_!!





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> That's _*Dr. Tongue's* 3D House Of Stewardesses_!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +
> YouTube Video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.



Ah, you got me there, my nitpicking friend. But it was part of Count Floyd's Monster Chiller Horror Theatre. Awoooo!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Once again, you're not paying attention. 

I'm comparing the similarities between the two, provincial & federal, *deliberately*. There are very few differences between the policies of the various provincial commies & the federal commies.

As I noted, SS, DP.



fjnmusic said:


> Well since you seem to be not be able to distinguish between provincial and federal politics, here 's a nice T-shirt souvenir for you.


----------



## Macfury

Watch NDP Alberta MLA Rob Loyola praising Hugo Chavez, rapping against capitalism, visting the big "drills" and calling for a tripling of oil royalty rates as the province's oil industry implodes under Notley:





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.







What a disgrace.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Once again, you're not paying attention.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm comparing the similarities between the two, provincial & federal, *deliberately*. There are very few differences between the policies of the various provincial commies & the federal commies.
> 
> 
> 
> As I noted, SS, DP.



Wrong again. The Alberta NDP are not calling for the abolition of the senate, thankfully, for one example. Different jurisdictions, different game plans. You already live in a mixed economy of socialism (not communism) and capitalism. Like roads? Like health care? Find bridges useful? Like paying fairly standard prices for the food you eat? You can thank socialists for those things.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Wrong again. The Alberta NDP are not calling for the abolition of the senate, thankfully, for one example. Different jurisdictions, different game plans. You already live in a mixed economy of socialism (not communism) and capitalism. Like roads? Like health care? Find bridges useful? Like paying fairly standard prices for the food you eat? You can thank socialists for those things.


Sorry, but I thank the real thing, not socialists. It's called a free and open market, something socialists simply do not support.

Even dictators build roads and bridges and feed their subjects.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Sorry, but I thank the real thing, not socialists. It's called a free and open market, something socialists simply do not support.
> 
> 
> 
> Even dictators build roads and bridges and feed their subjects.



I call bull*****, Sinc. There is no way to get roads and bridges built except through a collective effort which is financed by your taxes and everyone else's taxes pooled together. If you can appreciate driving on roadways, then you at least in part support socialism. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> I call bull*****, Sinc. There is no way to get roads and bridges built except through a collective effort which is financed by your taxes and everyone else's taxes pooled together. If you can appreciate driving on roadways, then you at least in part support socialism.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


You're so brainwashed with your crabbed, socialist thinking that you don't believe those thing exist without government. It's sad really.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Like paying fairly standard prices for the food you eat? You can thank socialists for those things.


What the hell is that supposed to mean?


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> I call bull*****, Sinc. There is no way to get roads and bridges built except through a collective effort which is financed by your taxes and everyone else's taxes pooled together. If you can appreciate driving on roadways, then you at least in part support socialism.


Apparently you missed the part of my post that noted that even dictators build roads and bridges, did you Frank?

Please explain to me how that is socialism, would you?


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Apparently you missed the part of my post that noted that even dictators build roads and bridges, did you Frank?
> 
> 
> 
> Please explain to me how that is socialism, would you?



Tell me, Don: how are roads and bridges financed where YOU live? Last I checked it came out of taxes: income taxes, sales taxes, and property taxes being the big contributors. How did you think they were being financed? Sure, private companies bid for who gets the contract, but they are ultimately financed through our taxes. Yours and mine. Collective pooling of funds for the benefit of all citizens. Socialism. 

We live in a mixed economy here in Canada, Don, and it works just fine whether you like it or not. The problems come when certain people try to take advantage of the system (*ahem* Mike Duffy, a Harper appointment).

P.S. And yes, dictators can also take advantage of the system, but I wouldn't call Harper a dictator. Yet.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Public sector unions love to take advantage of socialism.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Apparently you missed the part of my post that noted that even dictators build roads and bridges, did you Frank?


Roads and bridges were being built long before governments muscled in to monopolize their construction.


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Tell me, Don: how are roads and bridges financed where YOU live? Last I checked it came out of taxes: income taxes, sales taxes, and property taxes being the big contributors. How did you think they were being financed? Sure, private companies bid for who gets the contract, but they are ultimately financed through our taxes. Yours and mine. Collective pooling of funds for the benefit of all citizens. Socialism.
> 
> We live in a mixed economy here in Canada, Don, and it works just fine whether you like it or not. The problems come when certain people try to take advantage of the system (*ahem* Mike Duffy, a Harper appointment).
> 
> P.S. And yes, dictators can also take advantage of the system, but I wouldn't call Harper a dictator. Yet.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Evading the direct question are we? Tell me how a dictator building roads or bridges is socialism.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Evading the direct question are we? Tell me how a dictator building roads or bridges is socialism.



Where do you suppose said dictator gets the money to build said roads and bridges?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Roads and bridges were being built long before governments muscled in to monopolize their construction.



Certainly they were, but governments have been around for about as long as there have been people. So who paid for the construction of these roads and bridges? And more importantly, who pays for their construction today? 

The problem is you Conservative wanna-be's aren't even really totally for free enterprise. You use socialist contributions in your lives everyday and don't even realize it. Canada is a mixed economy. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Where do you suppose said dictator gets the money to build said roads and bridges?


A dictator who takes from the unwilling he rules over does not seem to fit your description.



fjnmusic said:


> Wrong again. The Alberta NDP are not calling for the abolition of the senate, thankfully, for one example. Different jurisdictions, different game plans. You already live in a mixed economy of socialism (not communism) and capitalism.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> A dictator who takes from the unwilling he rules over does not seem to fit your description.



Don, anything that involves taxation for the benefit of all is a tenet of socialism, or even further to the left, communism. Cubans call themselves socialists while we call them communists. Either way, it is the pooling of money or resources for the common good, as opposed to every man for himself. 

Most developed countries, including Canada and the USA have mixed economies—a balance of free enterprise and gov't funded/controlled agencies. Roads and other infrastructure, schools, hospitals, and the staff who run them are all examples of socialist principles in our world today. Most people seem fine with that, by the way, especially when they have to take a loved one to the hospital. The question is one of balance: what should be privatized, and what should be gov't owned and operated? For example, I have a hard time understanding how a hockey arena that will generate tons of money for its owner should be financed with any taxpayer money at all. Seems like someone's taking advantage of the system, regardless how wonderful the end product will be. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

You should be happy the arena provides someone else with pleasure fjn--that's socialism instead of voluntary co-operation!


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> You should be happy the arena provides someone else with pleasure fjn--that's socialism instead of voluntary co-operation!



Not exactly, MF. If the city were to be able to take a share of the profits from the new arena, that would be more like socialism. As it is, a certain portion of Edmonton taxes are going to support a private business owned by Darryl Katz, who will keep 100% of the profits. Tickets will be ridiculously expensive and parking spaces are rumoured to start at $35. Per event. Thankfully I live in Sherwood Park so my municipal taxes will be unaffected. I do attend concerts in Edmonton however, and I hope Northlands keeps the coliseum open because I do believe capitalism and the competition it creates could mean the two arenas will have to compete for who gets the big acts. Northlands has been good enough for Paul McCartney, BillyJoel and Bruno Mars, and it has much better parking too. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

The socialism is simply giving your money to a central organization so others can enjoy themselves--never mind if you do.


----------



## heavyall

Most taxes should be voluntary. Projects and programs should be set up like a kickstarter -- if enough people care about it, they will get funded. If they don't get funded, it means the project did not have public support and shouldn't have been done anyway.

Want a new overpass in your area because of the delays from all the trains? Well how badly do you want it? Want a public broadcaster? How badly do you want that? New arena? Swimming pool? Etc, etc...


----------



## Macfury

heavyall said:


> Most taxes should be voluntary. Projects and programs should be set up like a kickstarter -- if enough people care about it, they will get funded. If they don't get funded, it means the project did not have public support and shouldn't have been done anyway.
> 
> Want a new overpass in your area because of the delays from all the trains? Well how badly do you want it? Want a public broadcaster? How badly do you want that? New arena? Swimming pool? Etc, etc...


Yes! In the primitive days perhaps tribal funding was necessary. Today we have the electronic infrastructure to make these choices ourselves.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> The socialism is simply giving your money to a central organization so others can enjoy themselves--never mind if you do.



Agreed, providing that central organization has a governmental function. Donating money to a charity is actually a hallmark of capitalism rather than socialism, because you can choose whether or not you want to invest your dime and how much. With socialist and mixed economies that rate is set by the taxation system, and you can either pay or end up in jail for tax evasion, ultimately. Tax money collected by a municipal government and donated to the Katz metro development fund certainly has socialist hallmarks, but more so if the profits were also to be shared by all of the population. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

heavyall said:


> Most taxes should be voluntary. Projects and programs should be set up like a kickstarter -- if enough people care about it, they will get funded. If they don't get funded, it means the project did not have public support and shouldn't have been done anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> Want a new overpass in your area because of the delays from all the trains? Well how badly do you want it? Want a public broadcaster? How badly do you want that? New arena? Swimming pool? Etc, etc...



That's sort of how it is now, isn't it? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Agreed, providing that central organization has a governmental function. Donating money to a charity is actually a hallmark of capitalism rather than socialism, because you can choose whether or not you want to invest your dime and how much. With socialist and mixed economies that rate is set by the taxation system, and you can either pay or end up in jail for tax evasion, ultimately. Tax money collected by a municipal government and donated to the Katz metro development fund certainly has socialist hallmarks, but more so if the profits were also to be shared by all of the population.


No, that's communism. Socialism is simply someone other than you deciding the best use of your money for the pleasure and edification of others.



fjnmusic said:


> That's sort of how it is now, isn't it?


No.


----------



## FeXL

Trying to figger out how this can possibly be a good thing...

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExNf7G_KeoU#t=27"]Alberta NDP and union share Calgary office [/ame]



> That's the NDP office, all right. But look closer at the sign. It's also the office of the Calgary & District Labour Council. A union!
> 
> Ezra Levant asks: *Can you imagine the reaction if the Conservatives shared an office with an oil company lobbyist?*


M'bold.

Yep...


----------



## FeXL

So, the Commies want your input into that greatest of threats to the planet, "Climate Change".

Climate leadership discussions 

There's a survey an' everything! Unfortunately, there is at least one question that has no satisfactory answer. I gave 'em hell anyways. You'll note that the comment sections are rather limited in size. Gee, wonder why?

And, if you are seriously into self-abuse, you can download the discussion document & go through it. While I haven't read every word, I have scanned enough to know that they're sourcing not only TIPCC© but that final authority on everything, Wiki.

And yet, you are supposed to take them seriously.

It's pretty hard to stomach knowing that the whole premise they're basing the policy, the document & my future tax dollars on is wrong in the first place.

Unbelievable...


----------



## FeXL

Must be JAAT (Just Another Angry Teen)...

The NDP Nomination For Edmonton-Manning Was An Inside Job



> Where @paquette_ndp makes a veiled claim that Lac Megantic was an inside job.


Nice...


----------



## SINC

Kevin gets it.





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## fjnmusic

Here's a relationship you don't hear about much anymore. 

"I don't know why I can't quit you."












Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Here's a relationship you don't hear about much anymore.
> 
> "I don't know why I can't quit you."
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 59537
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Nope, but the NDP has the potential to be far more destructive, and early actions by them show them as complete amateurs bent on destroying the Alberta economy. Watch it happen.

Rookie government with zero experience.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Nope, but the NDP has the potential to be far more destructive, and early actions by them show them as complete amateurs bent on destroying the Alberta economy. Watch it happen.
> 
> 
> 
> Rookie government with zero experience.



Well it would be the Progressive Conservative Party that has brought us to where we are today: $40/barrel crude oil, thousands of layoffs an not much relief in sight. Whining about the NDP won't change anything, and the PC's couldn't have weathered the last three months any better, and you know it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Well it would be the Progressive Conservative Party that has brought us to where we are today: $40/barrel crude oil, thousands of layoffs an not much relief in sight. Whining about the NDP won't change anything, and the PC's couldn't have weathered the last three months any better, and you know it.


My, my Frank, accusing the Conservatives of master minding $40 barrel crude oil?

Really?

You see, the thing is they had nothing to do with that price, but they didn't react to it by raising taxes and royalties and minimum wages. Even the Conservatives were smarter than that. Not so much the accidental government of Notley


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> My, my Frank, accusing the Conservatives of master minding $40 barrel crude oil?
> 
> 
> 
> Really?
> 
> 
> 
> You see, the thing is they had nothing to do with that price, but they didn't react to it by raising taxes and royalties and minimum wages. Even the Conservatives were smarter than that. Not so much the accidental government of Notley



You forget how much people hated Jim Prentice, Don. And the lies and favoritism toward the CAPP was just too much to take. Neither the PC's nor the NDP are responsible for the price of oil today (I never said they were), but the PC's solution was to hack away even more at my profession, which obviously rubs me the wrong way, just like your personal experience leads you to despise unions. How we emerge from this recession will be interesting, but I think one thing's for sure: we have to stop relying on the oil patch to solve all our problems. It's too volatile. Time to diversify.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Neither the PC's nor the NDP are responsible for the price of oil today (I never said they were)


It seems pretty clear to me that is exactly what you wrote:



fjnmusic said:


> *Well it would be the Progressive Conservative Party that has brought us to where we are today: $40/barrel crude oil*



Of course you didn't 'say' it, but you did post it.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Of course you didn't 'say' it, but you did post it.


Because deep down people such as this believe that the government "makes" the economy. That everything either happens or doesn't happen because some government hack refuses to pull one lever or another.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Because deep down people such as this believe that the government "makes" the economy. That everything either happens or doesn't happen because some government hack refuses to pull one lever or another.



You are describing yourself now, as though the NDP are somehow responsible for the economic situation we find ourselves in. As a "person such as this" I am simply pointing out that if there is currently an economic crisis in Alberta, and there is, it really has very little to do with the new gov't, and I would say the previous gov't's failure to diversify the economy (once again) when times were good has led us to the same problem we face every boom and bust cycle: we are too damned reliant on oil to solve all of our problems. This recession could be a long one too, marked by low crude prices and record high prices at the pump. Great for the American refineries, but sucks for us. And we seriously want more pipelines to ship crude out rather than refine it ourselves? Yeah, that's REALLY going to help.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Yeah, that's REALLY going to help.


And raising taxes, royalties and the minimum wage by 50% is going to help? Really?


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> And raising taxes, royalties and the minimum wage by 50% is going to help? Really?



Raising taxes ON PROFITS yes will help. Right now, no one's profiting so you can stop whining about it. Royalties should be reviewed; they're not even as high as they were during the Klein years for gosh sakes. And you can call it a 50% wage hike if you'd like, but it would be more accurate to say a $4.80 wage hike over three years. You don't think you should be worth more on three years, given inflation and the cost of living? We're all going to need a bigger income just to compensate for gas prices.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Raising taxes ON PROFITS yes will help.


And with the NDP assisting with the destruction of the economy, how long do you think there will be any profit to tax?


----------



## BigDL

SINC said:


> And with the NDP assisting with the destruction of the economy, how long do you think there will be any profit to tax?


Interesting!
...NDP assisting with the destruction of the economy?

Federally Conservatives are subject to the whims of world events? Never *their* fault? 

However, when the economic going was good, as a result of surpluses of a former Federal Government, who said me, me, me, Harper or Flaherty? tptptptp


----------



## Macfury

BigDL said:


> Interesting!
> ...NDP assisting with the destruction of the economy?
> 
> Federally Conservatives are subject to the whims of world events? Never *their* fault?
> 
> However, when the economic going was good, as a result of surpluses of a former Federal Government, who said me, me, me, Harper or Flaherty? tptptptp


Absolutely. The government can ride like a big fat monkey on your back and create a drag on the economy--or they can get out of the way. Those are its options.


----------



## Macfury

Uh, gas prices are going down. Inflation is at record lows

CPI Canada 2014 1.47 %
CPI Canada 2013 1.24 %
CPI Canada 2012 0.83 % 

But let us know what the federal government should have done to diversify Alberta's economy. Into what areas should it have diversified?





fjnmusic said:


> Raising taxes ON PROFITS yes will help. Right now, no one's profiting so you can stop whining about it. Royalties should be reviewed; they're not even as high as they were during the Klein years for gosh sakes. And you can call it a 50% wage hike if you'd like, but it would be more accurate to say a $4.80 wage hike over three years. You don't think you should be worth more on three years, given inflation and the cost of living? We're all going to need a bigger income just to compensate for gas prices.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BigDL

Macfury said:


> Absolutely. The government can ride like a big fat monkey on your back and create a drag on the economy--or they can get out of the way. Those are its options.


No! Those aren't the only options.

My point to SINC as to the point you trying to make now, governments don't make the economy. Government are subject, like everyone/everything else, to what is happening at any given point in time around them in this old world.

Government can take public policy measures for a limited portion of the world, the portion of their mandated jurisdiction, their actions are always limited.


----------



## Macfury

Yes, we can agree on that BigDL. That's well stated.



BigDL said:


> No! Those aren't the only options.
> 
> My point to SINC as to the point you trying to make now, governments don't make the economy. Government are subject, like everyone/everything else, to what is happening at any given point in time around them in this old world.
> 
> Government can take public policy measures for a limited portion of the world, the portion of their mandated jurisdiction, their actions are always limited.


----------



## SINC

BigDL said:


> NMy point to SINC as to the point you trying to make now, governments don't make the economy.


No argument there at all, but they sure as hell can *hurt* the economy which is exactly what the accidental NDP government of Alberta is doing by raising royalties, raising taxes and raising the minimum wage by 50% in a depressed Alberta economy with thousands of jobs disappearing daily.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> No argument there at all, but they sure as hell can *hurt* the economy which is exactly what the accidental NDP government of Alberta is doing by raising royalties, raising taxes and raising the minimum wage by 50% in a depressed Alberta economy with thousands of jobs disappearing daily.


The NDP's goal is to create misery so that it can sell its prime product: government support programs.


----------



## CubaMark

*EDIT*: _Thought I was in the Canadian Political Thread. Disregard my post on the distinction between the PCs and the Conservatives._


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> The NDP's goal is to create misery so that it can sell its prime product: government support programs.


What a ridiculous statement.


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> What a ridiculous statement.


They seek power to bring prosperity? You've got to be joking.


----------



## macintosh doctor

Kevin O’Leary on NDP’s stunning win in Alberta: ‘It's a horror movie unfolding’


----------



## FeXL

Yeah, I ran across that yesterday. Pretty revealing what businessmen think of the election result...


----------



## macintosh doctor

FeXL said:


> Yeah, I ran across that yesterday. Pretty revealing what businessmen think of the election result...


we should be scared - because in the end NDP are bitting the hand that feeds them.


----------



## Macfury

macintosh doctor said:


> we should be scared - because in the end NDP are bitting the hand that feeds them.


The NDP doesn't want be fed by anyone other than the taxpayer. Do you think they would shed a tear if the oil industry collapsed? They sit on taxpayer backs like bloated monkeys, while they move money from here to there, and there to here, all the while consuming great gobs of it themselves.


----------



## SINC

macintosh doctor said:


> we should be scared - because in the end NDP are bitting the hand that feeds them.


This is exactly what the accidental government of Rachael Notley is doing to Alberta. (Notice I did not write 'in Alberta'.


----------



## fjnmusic

What a bunch of ill-informed and useless commentary. Oil is $40/barrel, soon to be less. That has nothing to do with the NDP. Arguing about whether to move oil by rail or by pipeline or by hoverboat is irrelevant because THERE WON'T BE ANY OIL TO MOVE ANYWAY unless the price recovers. This may not happen for many years. So bitching about the NDP winning is just sour grapes; at least they have the foresight, unlike the previous PC gov't, to know not to put all our eggs in one basket again. It is time to DIVERSIFY the economy. Diversify or die.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

First, what do you expect the government to do to "diversify the economy"? With 20/20 hindsight, how would you have diversified it? The energy sector represents 25% of the province's GDP--how much do you think it should be?

Second, given the temporary decline in oil revenues, the NDP is not mitigating the price downturn. It's taking a dump on the industry and grinding it in.




fjnmusic said:


> What a bunch of ill-informed and useless commentary. Oil is $40/barrel, soon to be less. That has nothing to do with the NDP. Arguing about whether to move oil by rail or by pipeline or by hoverboat is irrelevant because THERE WON'T BE ANY OIL TO MOVE ANYWAY unless the price recovers. This may not happen for many years. So bitching about the NDP winning is just sour grapes; at least they have the foresight, unlike the previous PC gov't, to know not to put all our eggs in one basket again. It is time to DIVERSIFY the economy. Diversify or die.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

fjnmusic said:


> What a bunch of ill-informed and useless commentary.


That's _your_ opinion.



fjnmusic said:


> Oil is $40/barrel, soon to be less. That has nothing to do with the NDP.


Agreed. However, there is no point kicking a man when he's down, as in, raising royalty rates by 20% in the face of the lowest crude prices we've seen in a very long time. The fallout from that is already apparent. Not only have several oil companies noted first quarter losses, but, in order to offset those losses, the price of gasoline has spiked. Good work, Rachel.



fjnmusic said:


> Arguing about whether to move oil by rail or by pipeline or by hoverboat is irrelevant because THERE WON'T BE ANY OIL TO MOVE ANYWAY unless the price recovers. This may not happen for many years.


Now that is ill-informed. Oil won't stop moving, period. Far, far too much demand with nothing to replace it. While we may never see $110/barrel again, it will recover.



fjnmusic said:


> So bitching about the NDP winning is just sour grapes; at least they have the foresight, unlike the previous PC gov't, to know not to put all our eggs in one basket again. It is time to DIVERSIFY the economy. Diversify or die.


Right. Like, say, investing a ton of tax dollars on a non-existant problem like global warming? Forcing up the price of electricity with further investment in uncompetitive renewables? What excellent plans!

Wonderful use of my tax dollars...


----------



## fjnmusic

Well let's correct one misconception to start with: nobody raised the "royalty rates" by 20% nor was that even proposed, other than by Stelmach several years ago, a PC premier, and they never followed through. The tax on PROFITS was raised by 2% from 10% to 12%, which is technically an increase of 20% since 2 is 20% of 10, but it's a pretty misleading way of presenting a 2% increase. And that's on profits only, so it's not breaking the bank and it's not making companies incapable of paying their employees or meeting their overhead costs. If companies are currently not profitable, then they are NOT PAYING ANYTHING since there are no profits. It's more like something to be prepared for when times are good again. 

This quite a bit different from a change in the royalty rate, which they are planning to study. Companies should have nothing to fear here either if they are running a clean business. A royalty rate is the fair share they SHOULD be paying as compensation to Albertans for the resources they are taking. As a comparison, this fall, Nestle Waters Canada will begin to pay BC a rate of $2.25 per MILLION litres of water for the water they currently pull out of the ground for free. Yes it costs them to get the water, but they are also making a killing on their bottled water sales , and the optics are bad for a province seeing the worst drought they have seen in decades. And the water Nestle takes is just a drop in the bucket (so to speak) compared to the fracking operations going on. So again, royalty rates are an agreed-upon price to pay for the resources you are getting. There is absolutely nothing wrong with revisiting that number and adjusting it of necessary. These companies make plenty during the good times that they should build being considerate into their long range plans.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> The tax on PROFITS was raised by 2% from 10% to 12%, which is technically an increase of 20% since 2 is 20% of 10, but it's a pretty misleading way of presenting a 2% increase. And that's on profits only, so it's not breaking the bank and it's not making companies incapable of paying their employees or meeting their overhead costs.


Wow, look who is misleading who now! C'mon Frank, that BS isn't gonna do it.

If you understood business at all, you would know that profits are used to expand, research, replace infrastructure, buy additional real estate and so on. When you lose 20 percent of that revenue stream, it is exactly that, a 1/5 drop in funds available for all those areas of continued future spending.

Too many people think that all profits after taxes are retained by companies and that is your particular misconception.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Wow, look who is misleading who now! C'mon Frank, that BS isn't gonna do it.
> 
> 
> 
> If you understood business at all, you would know that profits are used to expand, research, replace infrastructure, buy additional real estate and so on. When you lose 20 percent of that revenue stream, it is exactly that, a 1/5 drop in funds available for all those areas of continued future spending.
> 
> 
> 
> Too many people think that all profits after taxes are retained by companies and that is your particular misconception.



Good lord, Don. You're not a fool; try not to sound like one. A company makes a profit after all its overhead is paid for. Let's say the profit is $100. Of that profit they have to pay $10 in taxes. Big whoop. Now they have to pay $12 in taxes. Also big whoop. That is a 2% increase in taxes, not a 20% increase, which sounds like a jump from 10% to 30%, and it's on PROFITS ONLY, if there are any. It is disingenuous to present it any other way. They still keep 88% of their profits instead of 90%. Boo hoo for those poor multinationals. I know math is hard, Don, but this is exactly the argument Jim Prentice was lambasted for and rightly so. Albertans are not stupid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Apparently they are. They let the NDP sneak in the back door...



fjnmusic said:


> Albertans are not stupid.


----------



## Macfury

This is why many of the companies are hunkering down instead of planning for the upturn. Their new business case requires an even higher oil price than before to go back into production. 

But why not reduce teacher's salaries by 2% to help balance the budget--it's just 2% Don! They won't even feel it!


----------



## macintosh doctor

FeXL said:


> Apparently they are. They let the NDP sneak in the back door...


sorry but Ontarians are medically stupid, Alberta is was hung over. 
Explain the tyrant that Ontario voted in twice, after her predecessor left mid term.
there is no other way of saying it nicely - Ontario is Medically, mentally challenged.


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Good lord, Don. You're not a fool; try not to sound like one. A company makes a profit after all its overhead is paid for. Let's say the profit is $100. Of that profit they have to pay $10 in taxes. Big whoop. Now they have to pay $12 in taxes. Also big whoop. That is a 2% increase in taxes, not a 20% increase, which sounds like a jump from 10% to 30%, and it's on PROFITS ONLY, if there are any. It is disingenuous to present it any other way. They still keep 88% of their profits instead of 90%. Boo hoo for those poor multinationals. I know math is hard, Don, but this is exactly the argument Jim Prentice was lambasted for and rightly so. Albertans are not stupid.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


According to your math, that $2 you cite is only 2% of $10? Incredible! Any way you cut if, it *IS* a 20% increase. Now think about that in terms of loss for a company with a $100 million profit? Suddenly they have $20 million less in capital for the future.

You just don't get business. New projects require capital FROM PROFIT. And yes that captial spending can be deducted from taxes, but not before it is saved and spent. Otherwise they have to be like the NDP and borrow on a credit line and pay interest. Internally financed businesses are the most succesful and they are by reducing risk. Risk is created by borrowing.

Note I didn't call you a fool for your novel math skills.


----------



## FeXL

Fair enough. It is a 20% increase in tax on profits.

However, the Royalty Review is still up & coming, likely after the federal election because they don't want to put the federal NDP in any worse light. Oil companies could (will?) be hit twice.

Do you think they'll drop the rate?

If so, why are oil companies already considering Saskatchewan as a better place to do business?



> Saskatchewan Energy Minister Bill Boyd says Canadian oil and gas companies are choosing his province over Alberta for investment in exploration and production because of the new Alberta NDP government’s promise to review Crown royalty rates.





fjnmusic said:


> Well let's correct one misconception to start with: nobody raised the "royalty rates" by 20% nor was that even proposed...


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> But why not reduce teacher's salaries by 2% to help balance the budget--it's just 2% Don! They won't even feel it!


I missed this.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!


----------



## Macfury

BC is also a better spot for energy than Alberta now. Soon Alberta won't have any money left to pay teachers.



FeXL said:


> Fair enough. It is a 20% increase in tax on profits.
> 
> However, the Royalty Review is still up & coming, likely after the federal election because they don't want to put the federal NDP in any worse light. Oil companies could (will?) be hit twice.
> 
> Do you think they'll drop the rate?
> 
> If so, why are oil companies already considering Saskatchewan as a better place to do business?


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Now think about that in terms of loss for a company with a $100 million profit? Suddenly they have $20 million less in capital for the future.


Yeah, but, c'mon.

Anybody who makes $100 million can afford to pay a few more taxes, no?


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Apparently they are. They let the NDP sneak in the back door...



Hardly. They were voted in in an orange sweep of most of the province after people had finally had enough of the PC's. Talk about revisionist history.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Fair enough. It is a 20% increase in tax on profits.
> 
> 
> 
> However, the Royalty Review is still up & coming, likely after the federal election because they don't want to put the federal NDP in any worse light. Oil companies could (will?) be hit twice.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think they'll drop the rate?
> 
> 
> 
> If so, why are oil companies already considering Saskatchewan as a better place to do business?



You are being deliberately obtuse. It's a 2% increase in tax on profits. Instead of keeping 90% of their profits, if there are any profits, they would keep 88%. Math is hard, I know, but actually try figuring it out sometime for yourself. You could also call it a less than 1% drop in the profit for the company, since the difference between 88 and 90 is less than one percent. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Protest vote. A wound self-inflicted on Alberta's economy. 



fjnmusic said:


> Hardly. They were voted in in an orange sweep of most of the province after people had finally had enough of the PC's. Talk about revisionist history.


----------



## FeXL

All I can say is that I hope you're not a math teacher.

The difference, *percentage-wise*, between 1000 & 1200, 100 & 120 and 10 & 12 is all exactly the same: 20%.

Pull out the calculator on your wunnerful little iPhone (w/ Tapatalk!) and multiply 10 by 20%. Repeat the exercise, this time multiplying 10 by 2%. Post the results here & be prepared to defend your position.

Oh, before you post your results, you may wish to check the definition of "percentage point".

I'm also willing to bet that I have as many university math courses under my belt as you do, if not more. My lovely bride is an Education double major (math & phys-ed), & I have one more university math course than her.



fjnmusic said:


> You are being deliberately obtuse. It's a 2% increase in tax on profits. Instead of keeping 90% of their profits, if there are any profits, they would keep 88%. Math is hard, I know, but actually try figuring it out sometime for yourself. You could also call it a less than 1% drop in the profit for the company, since the difference between 88 and 90 is less than one percent.


----------



## SINC

FeXL said:


> All I can say is that I hope you're not a math teacher.
> 
> The difference, *percentage-wise*, between 1000 & 1200, 100 & 120 and 10 & 12 is all exactly the same: 20%.
> 
> Pull out the calculator on your wunnerful little iPhone (w/ Tapatalk!) and multiply 10 by 20%. Repeat the exercise, this time multiplying 10 by 2%. Post the results here & be prepared to defend your position.
> 
> Oh, before you post your results, you may wish to check the definition of "percentage point".
> 
> I'm also willing to bet that I have as many university math courses under my belt as you do, if not more. My lovely bride is an Education double major (math & phys-ed), & I have one more university math course than her.


What he does not get is he uses $100 as an example and claims it is 2% of that 100. In fact the former tax at 10% equalled $10. The new tax at 12% equals $12 or two more than 10 or in real terms, 20 percent more. One who understands math uses the 10, not the 100 in the calculation as a direct comparison.

Do you suppose he uses that 'new math' stuff that leaves kids without any real math skills?


----------



## Macfury

It's shocking to see an educator so strident about his errors.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> All I can say is that I hope you're not a math teacher.
> 
> 
> 
> The difference, *percentage-wise*, between 1000 & 1200, 100 & 120 and 10 & 12 is all exactly the same: 20%.
> 
> 
> 
> Pull out the calculator on your wunnerful little iPhone (w/ Tapatalk!) and multiply 10 by 20%. Repeat the exercise, this time multiplying 10 by 2%. Post the results here & be prepared to defend your position.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, before you post your results, you may wish to check the definition of "percentage point".
> 
> 
> 
> I'm also willing to bet that I have as many university math courses under my belt as you do, if not more. My lovely bride is an Education double major (math & phys-ed), & I have one more university math course than her.



Those big bad oil companies would keep 88% of their profits instead of 90%. Doesn't sound like such a hardship when you put it that way, does it? You blowhard always-right-wingers have been manipulating your presentation of the numbers and you should know it. Or perhaps you missed the math course on "lies, damn lies, and statistics."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

No, you're not even close to getting this.



fjnmusic said:


> Those big bad oil companies would keep 88% of their profits instead of 90%. Doesn't sound like such a hardship when you put it that way, does it? You blowhard always-right-wingers have been manipulating your presentation of the numbers and you should know it. Or perhaps you missed the math course on "lies, damn lies, and statistics."
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> What he does not get is he uses $100 as an example and claims it is 2% of that 100. In fact the former tax at 10% equalled $10. The new tax at 12% equals $12 or two more than 10 or in real terms, 20 percent more. One who understands math uses the 10, not the 100 in the calculation as a direct comparison.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you suppose he uses that 'new math' stuff that leaves kids without any real math skills?



"He" actually understands the mathematical relationship between the quantities, whereas "you" just slant the figures to make them sound worse than the really are. It's disingenuous, and it's the same kind of "math is hard" bull****e that got Prentice fired if you remember. 10% tax increasing to 12% on profits is the same as saying 90% keep profits decreasing to 88% keep profits. Whoo, big loss.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

No!



fjnmusic said:


> "He" actually understands the mathematical relationship between the quantities, whereas "you" just slant the figures to make them sound worse than the really are. It's disingenuous, and it's the same kind of "math is hard" bull****e that got Prentice fired if you remember. 10% tax increasing to 12% on profits is the same as saying 90% keep profits decreasing to 88% keep profits. Whoo, big loss.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

It's not. You are implacably wrong. Park your pride & learn something.

If you want to phrase it correctly, it must be something along the lines of, "There was an increase of 2 *percentage points* (12-10=2), from 10% to 12%, on the tax on oil company profits. This represents a 20 *percent* (10x20%=12) increase over last year."

Percentage points & percent are two distinct concepts. You are employing both concepts in your argument but calling them all, *percent*.

It's not disingenuous nor difficult if you understand the fundamental definitions & the difference between the two.



fjnmusic said:


> It's a 2% increase in tax on profits.


----------

Prentice got fired for a lot of reasons, the least of which was his math, if you'll remember.

As to your "big loss" comment, like SINC noted, that 2 percentage points or 20% can represent millions of dollars at the scale of an oil company.

And, we haven't even got to the Royalty Review, yet.


----------



## heavyall

fjnmusic said:


> Math is hard, I know,


You have a history of saying "math is hard", then going on to display just how hard math is -- for you.


----------



## fjnmusic

Good lord. Do you deny that companies who were keeping 90% of their profits (at a 10% tax rate) are now keeping 88% of their profits (at a 12% tax rate)?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

fjnmusic said:


> Good lord. Do you deny that companies who were keeping 90% of their profits (at a 10% tax rate) are now keeping 88% of their profits (at a 12% tax rate)?


You are sidestepping the original issue, which is your math.

This is part of what you posted first:



fjnmusic said:


> The tax on PROFITS was raised by 2% from 10% to 12%, which is technically an increase of 20% since 2 is 20% of 10, but it's a pretty misleading way of presenting a 2% increase.


This is part of what you posted next:



fjnmusic said:


> Let's say the profit is $100. Of that profit they have to pay $10 in taxes. Big whoop. Now they have to pay $12 in taxes. Also big whoop. That is a 2% increase in taxes, not a 20% increase, which sounds like a jump from 10% to 30%, and it's on PROFITS ONLY, if there are any.


Regarding the first part, it's not a 2% increase, it's a 2 percentage point increase equalling 20% overall.

Regarding the second part, it's a 20% increase in taxes, not 2%. It is, however, a 2 percentage point increase. And, a jump from 10% to 30% is, in fact, a 200% increase, 20 percentage points, not 20%. Only an uninformed, low information voter would think that.

Again, you are using the numbers interchangeably and incorrectly.

Twist, convolute & squirrel around as much as you like. The only thing anybody is denying here is your math.


----------



## fjnmusic

Uh, FeXL....you do realize the word "per cent" means out of one hundred, right? And you still have not answered the question of whether a tax increase from 10% to 12% is equivalent to a change in the amount of profit a company gets to keep from 90% to 88%. I don't think it's me whose mathematically challenged, buddy. Hell, this isn't even math—it's simple arithmetic. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Ok, fine FeXL—you are vindicated. Percentage and percentage points are two different ways of describing numbers to minimize confusion. 

http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/64433.html

And since 2 is 20% of 10 (or 2/10), you could describe the tax increase as 20% if you want to make the change sound really really scary. 

Conversely, if you want to make the change sound really really small, you could talk about the percentage difference in the amount of profit a company gets to keep, which is 88% compared to 90% (88/90) which is less than one percent, about 0.97% actually. 

Do you see? Twist those numbers any way you see fit. The proposal to go from 10% to 12% corporate tax was voted on and approved by Albertans three months ago, so I'm not quite sure what you're still complaining about. Your people lost the vote, fair and square.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> The proposal to go from 10% to 12% corporate tax was voted on and approved by Albertans three months ago, so I'm not quite sure what you're still complaining about.


The horrible damage being done to the Alberta economy maybe???


----------



## FeXL

I bet there's a point to this somewhere...



fjnmusic said:


> Uh, FeXL....you do realize the word "per cent" means out of one hundred, right?


Hey, my math (& arithmetic) works just fine. I just considered it a rhetorical question...



fjnmusic said:


> And you still have not answered the question of whether a tax increase from 10% to 12% is equivalent to a change in the amount of profit a company gets to keep from 90% to 88%.


----------



## FeXL

It's not a matter of vindication or twisting numbers. It's setting a baseline for the discussion so that everybody here is speaking the same language.



fjnmusic said:


> Twist those numbers any way you see fit.


When was it voted on? Are you calling the election results tacit approval of the NDP platform? You still don't get it, do you? Once more, & for the last time: The NDP were not elected in. The PC's were voted out. Prentice & his goons shot themselves in the foot throughout the campaign. This election was a protest vote & all about "Anybody but the PC's". The NDP just had the blind, outhouse luck to have been in the right place at the right time. 

If a herd of asses had campaigned across the province, they would have received votes just so the PC's didn't get in.



fjnmusic said:


> The proposal to go from 10% to 12% corporate tax was voted on and approved by Albertans three months ago...


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> The horrible damage being done to the Alberta economy maybe???



Not from that decision. If a company is not currently profitable it won't be paying any tax on profits. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Yes, I understand that. Can't you see the problem with the NDP's decision? Have you ever been part of a privately run enterprise?



fjnmusic said:


> Not from that decision. If a company is not currently profitable it won't be paying any tax on profits.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> It's not a matter of vindication or twisting numbers. It's setting a baseline for the discussion so that everybody here is speaking the same language.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When was it voted on? Are you calling the election results tacit approval of the NDP platform? You still don't get it, do you? Once more, & for the last time: The NDP were not elected in. The PC's were voted out. Prentice & his goons shot themselves in the foot throughout the campaign. This election was a protest vote & all about "Anybody but the PC's". The NDP just had the blind, outhouse luck to have been in the right place at the right time.
> 
> 
> 
> If a herd of asses had campaigned across the province, they would have received votes just so the PC's didn't get in.



Twisting once again. When they count the ballots, the candidate with the greatest number of votes in each riding wins the seat. It's how ELECTIONS work in this country. First past the post. Winner takes all. Your party lost, so suck it up. Or according to your logic, the party you liked won with fewer votes than the leading party. If the choice was "anyone but the PC's" and Alberta is as right wing as you say, the Wildrose should have won by a landslide.

And once again: when a company goes from keeping 90% of its profits to only keeping 88% profits, how much profit has it lost? Please, humor me with your 20% figure again. Explain it with percent or percentage points, whichever you prefer. I'm all ears.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Yes, I understand that. Can't you see the problem with the NDP's decision? Have you ever been part of a privately run enterprise?



I can see the potential problem with that decision if the end result were a higher tax regime in Alberta than anywhere else in the country. But given that we have no PST, that is simply not the case, and it is exactly what Ms. Notley has been saying all along. Hell, the taxes and royalty rates were higher under Klein, a time of relative prosperity. 

And yes, I have been a part of a number of privately run enterprises. Still run one of my own on the occasional weekend. I am familiar with the concept of supply and demand and staying competitive price-wise. Alberta has a commodity that people want and need and will for some time to come. The oil in the ground isn't going anywhere and the infrastructure to extract is already in place. Until such time as the price of crude oil returns to its former levels or at least a profitable level, everything will be in a state of stasis. Or at least minimal activity. It's not worth it for the companies at this point no matter what the NDP or any gov't does at this point. Are they still going great guns in Sask or Newfoundland, or did the slowdown affect them as well?

A gov't can only do something about factors that it can control. The best choice now is to explore other options.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Whose pocket do you think that extra 20% in profit comes from? It is either added to the price of oil/gas, or if that is not possible, the company puts its operations on hold.

What oil companies do now will determine how quickly the sector recovers. Notley has changed the numbers so that re-entry into the market will be significantly delayed. Her talk of revisiting royalties already has these companies reshifting focus to Sakatchewan and BC.

And what does PST have to do with it? Companies don't pay PST--the end consumer does. 



fjnmusic said:


> I can see the potential problem with that decision if the end result were a higher tax regime in Alberta than anywhere else in the country. But given that we have no PST, that is simply not the case, and it is exactly what Ms. Notley has been saying all along. Hell, the taxes and royalty rates were higher under Klein, a time of relative prosperity.
> 
> And yes, I have been a part of a number of privately run enterprises. Still run one of my own on the occasional weekend. I am familiar with the concept of supply and demand and staying competitive price-wise. Alberta has a commodity that people want and need and will for some time to come. The oil in the ground isn't going anywhere and the infrastructure to extract is already in place. Until such time as the price of crude oil returns to its former levels or at least a profitable level, everything will be in a state of stasis. Or at least minimal activity. It's not worth it for the companies at this point no matter what the NDP or any gov't does at this point. Are they still going great guns in Sask or Newfoundland, or did the slowdown affect them as well?
> 
> A gov't can only do something about factors that it can control. The best choice now is to explore other options.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Whose pocket do you think that extra 20% in profit comes from? It is either added to the price of oil/gas, or if that is not possible, the company puts its operations on hold.
> 
> 
> 
> What oil companies do now will determine how quickly the sector recovers. Notley has changed the numbers so that re-entry into the market will be significantly delayed. Her talk of revisiting royalties already has these companies reshifting focus to Sakatchewan and BC.
> 
> 
> 
> And what does PST have to do with it? Companies don't pay PST--the end consumer does.



Think about it. A company keeping 88% of its profits instead of 90% of its profits is not going to shut anybody down. A low demand for your product or a sudden drop in the price of your product due to competition on the free and open market will shut a company down. Gotta love that free enterprise system, eh!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Yes, it will absolutely do that. Right now the oil companies are planning for the recovery period and their calculations for Alberta have changed significantly. When oil comes back, may of them will be busy elsewhere.

Just look how Alberta teachers were bellyaching about a few percentage points in salary. What difference would those percentage points make in their lives or their decisions?



fjnmusic said:


> Think about it. A company keeping 88% of its profits instead of 90% of its profits is not going to shut anybody down. A low demand for your product or a sudden drop in the price of your product due to competition on the free and open market will shut a company down. Gotta love that free enterprise system, eh!


----------



## FeXL

Seriously? 



fjnmusic said:


> Twisting once again. When they count the ballots, the candidate with the greatest number of votes in each riding wins the seat. It's how ELECTIONS work in this country. First past the post. Winner takes all.


"My party" lost, so I'm just s'posed to roll over & play dead? Not f'ing likely... If anything, I'll be far more engaged than I ever was. As a matter of fact, I have been already.



fjnmusic said:


> Your party lost, so suck it up.


You really have no clue, do you? I'll do _this_ one more time, as well. Slowly & using no big words:

Wild Rose didn't get the support (read: votes) they would have because of the defectors, especially Danielle Smith. I'm a Wild Rose supporter & I had reservations, right down to the last minute before I placed my checkmark. I'm willing to bet that if Smith hadn't crossed the floor, she'd be Premier today. As noted before, this will go down in Alberta annals as the biggest political gaffe in the province's history.



fjnmusic said:


> Or according to your logic, the party you liked won with fewer votes than the leading party. If the choice was "anyone but the PC's" and Alberta is as right wing as you say, the Wildrose should have won by a landslide.


The exact same amount it would have by raising taxes from 10% to 12%.



fjnmusic said:


> And once again: when a company goes from keeping 90% of its profits to only keeping 88% profits, how much profit has it lost? Please, humor me with your 20% figure again. Explain it with percent or percentage points, whichever you prefer. I'm all ears.


----------



## FeXL

You've been pi$$ing & moaning on these boards for some time about the fact that your contract was flat-lined for 3 years & this year you're only getting a 2% raise (or some such).

Are you willing to pay 20% more taxes (2 percentage points) on your take home pay this year? Or, to make it sound less onerous, taking home ~97% of your previous pay? I'm sure it won't bankrupt you...

Followup question: Why should anyone else?



fjnmusic said:


> A company keeping 88% of its profits instead of 90% of its profits is not going to shut anybody down.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> You've been pi$$ing & moaning on these boards for some time about the fact that your contract was flat-lined for 3 years & this year you're only getting a 2% raise (or some such).
> 
> 
> 
> Are you willing to pay 20% more taxes (2 percentage points) on your take home pay this year? Or, to make it sound less onerous, taking home ~97% of your previous pay? I'm sure it won't bankrupt you...
> 
> 
> 
> Followup question: Why should anyone else?



Big difference: if a company is not profitable due to, say, low prices on crude oil, they won't be paying anything extra on taxes on profits because there won't BE any profits to tax. I will still be subject to the provisions of a four year collective agreement because that's how collective agreements work. I may not like these terms, but at least I have a job, so there's that. If I can make sacrifices to help the gov't balance its budget, and I did under Redford, then big corporations should be able to help out too. That's the difference between Prentice and Notley. Prentice let his CAPP buddies off the hook and the voters rightly rejected him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Big difference: if a company is not profitable due to, say, low prices on crude oil, they won't be paying anything extra on taxes on profits because there won't BE any profits to tax.


Why do you keep repeating that? The oil companies are already scaling down their future plans because they know this increase will affect profits when oil prices rise. 



fjnmusic said:


> If I can make sacrifices to help the gov't balance its budget, and I did under Redford, then big corporations should be able to help out too. That's the difference between Prentice and Notley. Prentice let his CAPP buddies off the hook and the voters rightly rejected him.


Sorry? When did you say you took a pay cut? Must have missed that.


----------



## FeXL

Right. Let's see how the foundation of your argument fares after the Royalty Review.

Also, why is it that you can see only the short-term on this & not the medium to long? If there was no point to the increased tax on profits, why was it implemented? See below...



fjnmusic said:


> ...if a company is not profitable due to, say, low prices on crude oil, they won't be paying anything extra on taxes on profits because there won't BE any profits to tax.


Bingo! Not only are they scaling back but, as has been noted, they are exploring other provinces to drill in.



Macfury said:


> Why do you keep repeating that? The oil companies are already scaling down their future plans because they know this increase will affect profits when oil prices rise.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Also, why is it that you can see only the short-term on this & not the medium to long? If there was no point to the increased tax on profits, why was it implemented?


The benevolent NDP is only taxing profits on companies that are losing money, FeXL. Can't you see the beauty of this plan?


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Why do you keep repeating that? The oil companies are already scaling down their future plans because they know this increase will affect profits when oil prices rise.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry? When did you say you took a pay cut? Must have missed that.



A three year flat line in the face of rising inflation on everything else IS a pay cut. Under Klein at least we took a 5% cut at the outset and then were permitted to keep bargaining afterwards. This wage freeze was mean-spirited and put most of the responsibility for budget balancing on public sector workers. But you wouldn't know or care about that since you could have a rat's ass on public sector workers. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

You have curious interpretations for what I would otherwise consider clearly defined terminology...

The 5% rollback under Klein's watch (which my bride was also subject to) I would definitely call a "pay cut". Wages frozen for three years while inflation passes you is NOT a "pay cut". Suppose there was deflation (negative inflation) over that same 3 year period. Could it then be accurately termed a pay raise?



fjnmusic said:


> A three year flat line in the face of rising inflation on everything else IS a pay cut.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> You have curious interpretations for what I would otherwise consider clearly defined terminology...
> 
> 
> 
> The 5% rollback under Klein's watch (which my bride was also subject to) I would definitely call a "pay cut". Wages frozen for three years while inflation passes you is NOT a "pay cut". Suppose there was deflation (negative inflation) over that same 3 year period. Could it then be accurately termed a pay raise?



It's simple, FeXL: compare the spending power you have with the spending power you would have had had the changes not been implemented. If your salary caps out (is not adjusted for inflation), but inflation keeps rising, you will have less spending power in a year than you do now. There's more than way to skin a cat, and there's more than one way to calculate income.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Less spending power ≠ pay cut. Nice try.



fjnmusic said:


> It's simple, FeXL: compare the spending power you have with the spending power you would have had had the changes not been implemented. If your salary caps out (is not adjusted for inflation), but inflation keeps rising, you will have less spending power in a year than you do now. There's more than way to skin a cat, and there's more than one way to calculate income.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> The benevolent NDP is only taxing profits on companies that are losing money, FeXL. Can't you see the beauty of this plan?


The beauty of this plan is that it is pure politics, giving the impression of assuaging both sides while actually accomplishing nothing. It's not rocket surgery.

Rachel gets to say to her supporters, "Look we've applied a tax to the evil oil companies, just like we said we would." All the while saying to her detractors, "Look we've only applied it to the profits. With profits in the toilet, it will have zero effect on oil prices."

And, all this while hiding in the shadows of the federal election so as not to give a bad impression to the federal NDPs. Watch what happens once the election is done. Royalty Review, here we come. Provincial Sales Tax, here we come. Bend over taxpayers, here we come...

I bought a bottle of lube today, so it won't hurt as much later this fall...


----------



## Macfury

So you're saying that, when inflation is calculated, Notley's corporate tax hikes are even more onerous?



fjnmusic said:


> It's simple, FeXL: compare the spending power you have with the spending power you would have had had the changes not been implemented. If your salary caps out (is not adjusted for inflation), but inflation keeps rising, you will have less spending power in a year than you do now. There's more than way to skin a cat, and there's more than one way to calculate income.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> So you're saying that, when inflation is calculated, Notley's corporate tax hikes are even more onerous?


No, I don't recall saying that.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> No, I don't recall saying that.


You were saying that having your wages remain stable was really quite terrible because of the loss in buying power caused by inflation. When you state that the corporations are only facing a 20% increase in taxes, you must obviously also add that same terrible loss in buying power to the equation.


----------



## FeXL

While this applies broadly to all democracies, it can also specifically apply to the Alberta election and, in particular, Alberta's political right.

Playing For Keeps: Business Interests Strike Back At Republicans Opposed To Ex/Im Bank



> It never seems to occur to them that politics is transactional. If you don't deliver what I want, I won't deliver what you want and I'll go find someone who will. *But even if I don't, you're out. Plain and simple.*


M'bold.

Advice Rachel & Crew would do well to heed, if they want to be in for more than a single term.

Substitute "conservatives" for "Republicans" as needed.

Excellent read.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> You were saying that having your wages remain stable was really quite terrible because of the loss in buying power caused by inflation. When you state that the corporations are only facing a 20% increase in taxes, you must obviously also add that same terrible loss in buying power to the equation.



Taxes ON PROFITS. This means instead of keeping 90% of their profits, if there are any, they will only keep 88%. That's less than a 1% difference in their profit margin.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Taxes ON PROFITS. This means instead of keeping 90% of their profits, if there are any, they will only keep 88%. That's less than a 1% difference in their profit margin.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


No, that's 1.7%--plus losses due to inflation. Worse than the deal Alberta teachers were complaining about.


----------



## Macfury

Alberta deficit to grow as province slides into recession - The Globe and Mail

While the NDP government sits like a monkey on the economy's back.

Running a bigger deficit on increased spending! Surprise!


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> No, that's 1.7%--plus losses due to inflation. Worse than the deal Alberta teachers were complaining about.



Ah yes, my mistake. A loss of 1.7 % of the previous profits. Seems like a hell of a lot less than a 20% tax increase when you put it that way, doesn't it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Ah yes, my mistake. A loss of 1.7 % of the previous profits. Seems like a hell of a lot less than a 20% tax increase when you put it that way, doesn't it.


It's still 20% more in real dollars.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Ah yes, my mistake. A loss of 1.7 % of the previous profits. Seems like a hell of a lot less than a 20% tax increase when you put it that way, doesn't it.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


It was a lot when you complained it was coming from your pocket.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> It's still 20% more in real dollars.



It's 1.7 % less profit than they were making previously. In real dollars.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

So, the first real curveball Rachel gets pitched to her & she swings & misses.

The backstory:

There was an accident west of Calgary on the #1 a few days back that closed down eastbound traffic. Some traffic used rural roads to get around the jam. These roads were on the Stoney Reserve & apparently some of the Natives were charging a $20 fee to use the road (nice work if you can get it).

The rest of the story:

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fr_4OWKaNL4#t=828"]Stoney 'highway robbery': Notley says she's powerless[/ame]


----------



## SINC

And so begins the demise of the Alberta NDP as 60% of ballots cast against them:

Wildrose's Panda defeats NDP in Calgary-Foothills byelection battle


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> And so begins the demise of the Alberta NDP as 60% of ballots cast against them:


Nice.

Rachel, you listening?


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> And so begins the demise of the Alberta NDP as 60% of ballots cast against them:
> 
> 
> 
> Wildrose's Panda defeats NDP in Calgary-Foothills byelection battle



In a traditionally conservative riding where Jim Prentice won twice in the last year and a bit? Not so surprising that they didn't choose the NDP candidate.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

They voted with their hearts and heads, not their spleens.



fjnmusic said:


> In a traditionally conservative riding where Jim Prentice won twice in the last year and a bit? Not so surprising that they didn't choose the NDP candidate.


----------



## BigDL

SINC said:


> And so begins the demise of the Alberta NDP as 60% of ballots cast against them:
> 
> Wildrose's Panda defeats NDP in Calgary-Foothills byelection battle


  

Interesting take on the results for Calgary Foothills By-Election. 

The Wildrose candidate finished first. The NDP finished second. The PC candidate finished third ahead of the Liberal, Alberta Party, Green Party candidates and an Independent candidate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calgary-Foothills

By any measure the take away from the vote might be confirmation of the demise of the Progressive Conservative Party in Alberta after 40 odd years. The riding was created in 1971 and represented by a Progressive Conservative in every election and by-election until September 2015 by-election. * It goes down in the history books as a Wildrose gain from the Progressive Conservatives.*


----------



## SINC

BigDL said:


> Interesting take on the results for Calgary Foothills By-Election.
> * It goes down in the history books as a Wildrose gain from the Progressive Conservatives.*


Correct, but with 60% of the ballots not supporting the NDP as the key sideline. The NDP will be a single term accidental government.


----------



## BigDL

SINC said:


> Correct, but with 60% of the ballots not supporting the NDP as the key sideline. The NDP will be a single term accidental government.


Well by my reckoning, 67.64% of the electorate voted against Anne Wilson the NDP candidate in the general election, she finished in 2nd place behind the Progressive Conservative Jim (the quitter) Prentice he finished in 1st place with 59.67% vote against him. 

In the by-election held September 3rd, NDP candidate Bob Hawkesworth had 74.29% voters voting agianst him, he finished in 2nd place behind the Wildrose candidate. The Progressive Conservative candidate finished in 3rd place with 78.41% of voters voting against him.

Progressive Conservative candidate Jim Prentice finished in 1st place in the general election with 59.67% voting against the Progressive Conservatives, versus Progressive Conservative Blair, Houston finishing 3rd in the by-election with 78.41% voting against the Progressive Conservatives, an 18.74% drop in votes.

In the general election Anne Wilson NDP Candidate finished in 2nd place with 67.64% of votes against the NDP versus Bob Hawkesworth finished 2nd in the by-election with 74.29% of voters voting against the NDP a 6.65% drop on votes.

So the Progressive Conservatives went from 1st in the general election to 3rd place finish in the by-election dropping in popularity by nearly 19%. 

The NDP remained in a 2nd place finish, with nearly a 7% drop in popularity. 

Is the Alberta trend of one party forms government for decades and is then thrown out by the people?

After the Alberta general elections the NDP formed government. After the by-election the NDP is still the government. You'll have have to live with that.


----------



## fjnmusic

No matter how you slice it, it's a loss for the taxpayers, who had to pay for three elections in one riding inside of two years. Doesn't seem very fiscally conservative to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Democracy itself requires these expenses.



fjnmusic said:


> No matter how you slice it, it's a loss for the taxpayers, who had to pay for three elections in one riding inside of two years. Doesn't seem very fiscally conservative to me.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Democracy itself requires these expenses.



Jim Prentice quit before they even finished counting the ballots. The win should by rights have automatically gone to the second place finisher. The need to call another by-election is an overt indication of how the previous gov't and its leader did not care at all for cost overrides they themselves created. Again, not very fiscally conservative.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Yes, that is why Prentice and his party lost--he was not fiscally conservative, nor was the party.



fjnmusic said:


> Jim Prentice quit before they even finished counting the ballots. The win should by rights have automatically gone to the second place finisher. The need to call another by-election is an overt indication of how the previous gov't and its leader did not care at all for cost overrides they themselves created. Again, not very fiscally conservative.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Can you quote me the law the says this?



fjnmusic said:


> The win should by rights have automatically gone to the second place finisher.


As I understand it (& I'm more than willing to be corrected on this), the need to call another by-election _is_ the law. Calling them whatever names you are does not change that.

Had the situation been reversed, would you be nearly as amenable to placing the crown on a Conservative or Wildrose head?



fjnmusic said:


> The need to call another by-election is an overt indication of how the previous gov't and its leader did not care at all for cost overrides they themselves created. Again, not very fiscally conservative.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Can you quote me the law the says this?


Don't even bother going there. The _Alberta Elections Act_ says nothing about second-place finishers. if you resign before the election another person can run in your place. If you resign after voting begins, there's a by-election.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Can you quote me the law the says this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As I understand it (& I'm more than willing to be corrected on this), the need to call another by-election _is_ the law. Calling them whatever names you are does not change that.
> 
> 
> 
> Had the situation been reversed, would you be nearly as amenable to placing the crown on a Conservative or Wildrose head?



Not a law so much as common sense. In a foot race, for example, if the lead runner trips and drops out, the victory goes to the one who would have been in second place. It is unusual to have the first place finisher quit before the election is finished, so there is probably no precedent. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Going by whose definition of common sense? Yours?



fjnmusic said:


> Not a law so much as common sense.


Once again, your analogy falls flat. No one votes in a foot race...



fjnmusic said:


> In a foot race, for example, if the lead runner trips and drops out, the victory goes to the one who would have been in second place.


It is unusual. However, the law is clear: a by-election must be held. Deal with it. Your guy lost...



fjnmusic said:


> It is unusual to have the first place finisher quit before the election is finished, so there is probably no precedent.


----------



## SINC

Even the experts agree the jig is up for the NDP:

Alberta NDP's Byelection Loss 'Bad News' For Government: Political Scientist


----------



## Vandave

SINC said:


> Even the experts agree the jig is up for the NDP:


It doesn't take an expert to figure this one out. 

BC had an NDP government and the population was pretty mad at the governing Liberals over a few issues. But, the pain of the NDP years was still too fresh in voters minds 15 years later.

I think the NDP have 3 more years in Alberta and then another 100 in opposition. tptptptp

I understand that Ontario has a similar sentiment. 

In a couple years, that sentiment will be national.


----------



## SINC

Vandave said:


> In a couple years, that sentiment will be national.


If Canadians put the country in this situation, they are misguided in the extreme. Vandave's observation is valid and I might add scary for this country.


----------



## Vandave

SINC said:


> If Canadians put the country in this situation, they are misguided in the extreme. Vandave's observation is valid and I might add scary for this country.


Do you know what I fear more than an NDP government?

I fear the 'slow boil' scenario the most. It's the path that countries like France have taken with their Nanny State. Slowly over time, the population gets addicted and entitled to being supported by government, which ultimately leads to economic stagnation. If that process happens slowly, as it has been for the last 30/40 years, people don't notice it and we continue down the wrong path.

If we throw ourselves into the boiling water immediately, we likewise feel the effect immediately. So, I say we blow the budget, take as much as we can from those who earn and are productive, let's support losing industries and hand out money like it's going out of style. The good news with this approach is we crash quickly and people will see that European style socialism and NDP 1960s style class warfare is irrelevant in first world countries that want to lead economically. 

I think we're lucky in Canada in that we live next to the US and they will provide us an easy benchmark to compare ourselves against.

I think the next four years will be eye opening for Canadians and a much needed reality check. When I bump this thread in 4 years, the US economy will be BOOMING. Our economy will be STAGNANT with high employment, high debt and poor job opportunities for our young adults. The brain drain will once again take hold and our best and brightest will leave for opportunity elsewhere.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Going by whose definition of common sense? Yours?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once again, your analogy falls flat. No one votes in a foot race...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is unusual. However, the law is clear: a by-election must be held. Deal with it. Your guy lost...



Hardly. My girl won. I don't vote in Calgary-Foothills. As far as a Wildrose candidate winning that riding, after every MLA in that riding being a PC since the riding was created in the 70's, I'd have to say that's probably about par for the course. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

I was using your words to me from a few pages back. My guy won, too.

And, if this province is as left-leaning as you say it is, NDP should have won the by-election.

The honeymoon is already over. Now Rachel needs to get to work...



fjnmusic said:


> Hardly. My girl won. I don't vote in Calgary-Foothills. As far as a Wildrose candidate winning that riding, after every MLA in that riding being a PC since the riding was created in the 70's, I'd have to say that's probably about par for the course.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> The honeymoon is already over.


Less a honeymoon and more waking up next to someone you don't even remember meeting at a party in a third-rate trailer park.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Less a honeymoon and more waking up next to someone you don't even remember meeting at a party in a third-rate trailer park.


Ah. That's why this nightmare seems so familiar...


----------



## BigDL

Macfury said:


> Less a honeymoon and more waking up next to someone you don't even remember meeting at a party in a third-rate trailer park.


So just what are the hallmarks of a *third-rate trailer park?*

As an aside perhaps you could also describe a first rate, second-rate and any other-rate trailer parks, if you would be so kind?


----------



## Macfury

BigDL said:


> So just what are the hallmarks of a *third-rate trailer park?*
> 
> As an aside perhaps you could also describe a first rate, second-rate and any other-rate trailer parks, if you would be so kind?


A third-rate trailer park has:

1. Poor overall appearance.
2. No patios on lots. 
3. Sparse application of grass, rocks, or shell to cover ground.
4. Streets in poor condition. 
5. Inadequate laundry facilities.
6. If fences allowed, fences are in poor condition.
7. No mail service.
8. Old trailer models in poor repair. 
9. Manager not available or rarely available.
10. Little or no grounds maintenance, with evidence of trash or refuse on the grounds.

And no, I'm not going to describe the other grades of trailer parks for you, as I did not refer to trailer parks in those categories.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> A third-rate trailer park has:
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Poor overall appearance.
> 
> 2. No patios on lots.
> 
> 3. Sparse application of grass, rocks, or shell to cover ground.
> 
> 4. Streets in poor condition.
> 
> 5. Inadequate laundry facilities.
> 
> 6. If fences allowed, fences are in poor condition.
> 
> 7. No mail service.
> 
> 8. Old trailer models in poor repair.
> 
> 9. Manager not available or rarely available.
> 
> 10. Little or no grounds maintenance, with evidence of trash or refuse on the grounds.
> 
> 
> 
> And no, I'm not going to describe the other grades of trailer parks for you, as I did not refer to trailer parks in those categories.



Sounds like you have some experience with this to know what to watch for.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

It's a side-effect of knowing everything.



fjnmusic said:


> Sounds like you have some experience with this to know what to watch for.


----------



## SINC

I can only shake my head in disbelief:

NDP Jobs Minister wants to bring Syrian refugees to Alberta - The Rebel


----------



## FeXL

Bring 'em!

First job? Replacing all the NDP politicians...


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Think about it. *A company keeping 88% of its profits instead of 90% of its profits is not going to shut anybody down.*


Meanwhile in real life:

More than 500 jobs, nearly half of company's workforce cut

The company reported*a $405-million net loss in the second quarter of this year, *saying it would have been profitable if not for an increase in Alberta's corporate tax rate put in place by the governing NDP.*

PHX Energy layoffs the latest to hit Alberta's oil industry - Calgary - CBC News


----------



## SINC

Unbelieveable:

B.C. pipeline protester takes senior role in Rachel Notley’s Calgary office


----------



## FeXL

The fact that she used to be a CBC reporter should have eliminated her right from the get go...


----------



## fjnmusic

h


SINC said:


> Meanwhile in real life:
> 
> 
> 
> More than 500 jobs, nearly half of company's workforce cut
> 
> 
> 
> The company reported*a $405-million net loss in the second quarter of this year, *saying it would have been profitable if not for an increase in Alberta's corporate tax rate put in place by the governing NDP.*
> 
> 
> 
> PHX Energy layoffs the latest to hit Alberta's oil industry - Calgary - CBC News


They will say anything to avoid blaming themselves. Or poor foresight. Or poor response. I pretty sure the NDP gov't has not become that almighty powerful in just four months. They haven't even seen the budget yet. Any economist worth their salt knows the economy rests on many factors over which no one has any control. It's a recession now—deal with it. You can blame Notley about as much as you can blame Harper.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

It has the power to destroy and discourage and it is using those powers to the max. After ravaging the economy, wait until they turn on the civil servants!



fjnmusic said:


> h
> 
> They will say anything to avoid blaming themselves. Or poor foresight. Or poor response. I pretty sure the NDP gov't has not become that almighty powerful in just four months. They haven't even seen the budget yet. Any economist worth their salt knows the economy rests on many factors over which no one has any control. It's a recession now—deal with it. You can blame Notley about as much as you can blame Harper.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

You certainly weren't that cavalier with Prentice's budget. Double standard, much?



fjnmusic said:


> It's a recession now—deal with it. You can blame Notley about as much as you can blame Harper.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> You certainly weren't that cavalier with Prentice's budget. Double standard, much?


Prentice wasn't increasing teacher salaries--'nuf said!


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> You certainly weren't that cavalier with Prentice's budget. Double standard, much?



Prentice increased taxes more than any government in Alberta history. Hypocrisy much? The NDP have not come anywhere near the kinds of tax increases the PC's were proposing. The economy is suffering for the same reason we are suffering everywhere: we are in a global RECESSION. The Wildrose would be doing no better right now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

We are NOT in a global recession. Alberta is in an NDP-induced funk. Economists are already noting Notley's persecution of the economy. It would have done better under both Prentice AND Wild Rose--even given Prentice's refusal to cut spending. When oil prices rebound, energy companies will be in other provinces and other parts of the world. Nobody has to put up with that amateur-hour nonsense. 



fjnmusic said:


> The Wildrose would be doing no better right now.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> We are NOT in a global recession. Alberta is in an NDP-induced funk. Economists are already noting Notley's persecution of the economy. It would have done better under both Prentice AND Wild Rose--even given Prentice's refusal to cut spending. When oil prices rebound, energy companies will be in other provinces and other parts of the world. Nobody has to put up with that amateur-hour nonsense.



Boy have you been downing the Con job koolaid. If you really believe all of this, you're far more paranoid than I originally suspected. Apparently you don't even understand what the word recession means. No argument will ever convince you to see it any other way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Vandave

I bet Notley will even vote against herself in 3.5 years.


----------



## CubaMark

fjnmusic said:


> Boy have you been downing the Con job koolaid. If you really believe all of this, you're far more paranoid than I originally suspected. Apparently you don't even understand what the word recession means. No argument will ever convince you to see it any other way.


Nail on the head, fjnmusic.

_a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and Macfury,
Signifying nothing._​


----------



## fjnmusic

CubaMark said:


> Nail on the head, fjnmusic.
> 
> 
> 
> _a poor player
> 
> That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
> 
> And then is heard no more: it is a tale
> 
> Told by an idiot, full of sound and Macfury,
> 
> Signifying nothing._​



Glad there's a few people who are still rational on these boards, Mark. I should point out for the record that it was actually Flavor Aid. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

What hypocrisy? Just throwing big words out there again?

It's well known I didn't approve of Prentice's budget &, thus far, I don't approve of much that the NDP has done financially (or anywhere else, for that matter). And, we haven't even seen Rachel's budget or Royalty Review yet.

The worst is yet to come. The NDP will not be able to stop themselves. Trust me...



fjnmusic said:


> Hypocrisy much?


----------



## Macfury

When you're leaning on CM as a tent pole of rationality, you know the whole bigtop is heading for collapse.

There is no global recession. Could be one on the back of Obama's decimation of the American economy coupled with China's difficulties. However, at this point blaming Notley's folly on a global recession is laughable. She owns this.

Pretty funny to see you posting memes in which you blame Harper for a recession though.



fjnmusic said:


> Glad there's a few people who are still rational on these boards, Mark. I should point out for the record that it was actually Flavor Aid.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> When you're leaning on CM as a tent pole of rationality, you now the whole bigtop is heading for collapse.


Come now. Criticizing that bastion of stability?


----------



## Macfury

One growth industry under Notley:

Pawn shops benefit from Alberta's struggling economy | CTV News


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> One growth industry under Notley:


While I don't buy much on Kijiji, I browse certain categories on a semi-regular basis (motorcycles, motorcycle parts, among others). The increase of ads in those two categories in Alberta in the last year is amazing. 

Drive around southern Alberta municipalities whose economy is governed largely by oil (Taber, Brooks, Medicine Hat, Calgary, for instance) & you see For Sale signs scattered all over the place on luxury items: 5th wheel trailers, motorhomes, street & dirt bikes, quads, big 4WD trucks, snowmobiles, etc. I'm betting it's the same further north.

Thx, Rachel.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> While I don't buy much on Kijiji, I browse certain categories on a semi-regular basis (motorcycles, motorcycle parts, among others). The increase of ads in those two categories in Alberta in the last year is amazing.
> 
> 
> 
> Drive around southern Alberta municipalities whose economy is governed largely by oil (Taber, Brooks, Medicine Hat, Calgary, for instance) & you see For Sale signs scattered all over the place on luxury items: 5th wheel trailers, motorhomes, street & dirt bikes, quads, big 4WD trucks, snowmobiles, etc. I'm betting it's the same further north.
> 
> 
> 
> Thx, Rachel.



Again, you don't see the job losses as a direct result of companies shutting down due to the price of oil, as opposed to change in gov't? Very simplistic and knee jerk of you, amigo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Again, you don't see the job losses as a direct result of companies shutting down due to the price of oil, as opposed to change in gov't? Very simplistic and knee jerk of you, amigo.


Not when you combine those occurances with a 50% increase in minimum wage, a 20% increase in corporations tax and an upcoming boost to royalties.

It fosters an atmosphere of doom and gloom, not a new government showing concern or offering some tyoe of aid.

Seems Notley's game plan is to kick us all when we're down. That's why the NDP will have their butts handed to them in three more years.


----------



## FeXL

A small-ish percentage? Absolutely. All of it? Not a chance. Learn something. Go back to that Kevin O'Leary interview video SINC posted a couple weeks back. Then come back & tell me what percentage you think the election of the NDP is responsible for.



fjnmusic said:


> Again, you don't see the job losses as a direct result of companies shutting down due to the price of oil, as opposed to change in gov't?


----------



## Macfury

Time to go into debt!!! Right on schedule from the NDP playbook:

Editorial: Borrowing bonanza | Calgary Herald


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> Time to go into debt!!! Right on schedule from the NDP playbook:
> 
> Editorial: Borrowing bonanza | Calgary Herald


Typical Dippers trying to spend our way out of financial difficulty. God help us if Canadians fall for the same chit with Mulcair.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Typical Dippers trying to spend our way out of financial difficulty. God help us if Canadians fall for the same chit with Mulcair.


They're not spending for any real reason--it's just what they do. It's open season on slops for the hogs.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> A small-ish percentage? Absolutely. All of it? Not a chance. Learn something. Go back to that Kevin O'Leary interview video SINC posted a couple weeks back. Then come back & tell me what percentage you think the election of the NDP is responsible for.



Kevin O'Leary is an idiot. Watching his program is waste of valuable time I could use cleaning the toilets.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

So are people who pay no attention to his views. He is well qualified in his field and far from being an idiot. When you got nothing, resort to name calling?


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> So are people who pay no attention to his views. He is well qualified in his field and far from being an idiot. When you got nothing, resort to name calling?



Just my opinion, Don. Yes I've seen his show and no I don't have much use for the guy. He is obviously biased and shows little objectivity in his analysis. To you he would be the equivalent of a tree higher to me. Just don't see it the same way. But that should be no surprise to you, really.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Just surprised you chose to call him an idiot, Frank. His financial success certainly defies the label.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Just surprised you chose to call him an idiot, Frank. His financial success certainly defies the label.


Why listen to a successful investor with indepth economic knowledge when you could follow the lead of NDP socialist ideologues who give teachers pay raises?


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> Why listen to a successful investor with indepth economic knowledge when you could follow the lead of NDP socialist ideologues who give teachers pay raises?


Not only teachers, but *all union members* will be front and centre at the Dipper trough.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Not only teachers, but *all union members* will be front and centre at the Dipper trough.


Alberta already has one of the largest public "service" burdens per capita in the country.


----------



## Vandave

SINC said:


> Not only teachers, but *all union members* will be front and centre at the Dipper trough.


You have no idea how deep that trough goes. You will in 3 years though.

If the NDP stopped at paying people more, I could almost live with it. What's really damaging with the NDP is they stick their fingers into every aspect of government to use as a platform to enact their ideological beliefs. These are the things the public doesn't see until it completely blows up. So many of these little fiascos happened in BC and I think we didn't know the half of it.


----------



## SINC

Yep, the NDP are parasites on the economy.


----------



## Macfury

I knew a programmer who was hired by the Ontario NDP because they_ literally had no idea _how much they were spending. They tried to close the barn door after it had burned down.


----------



## FeXL

Good information filled response! That'll show us!

Perhaps he is. If so, then what he says should be relatively easy to debunk.

Have at 'er...

<crickets in 3, 2, ...>



fjnmusic said:


> Kevin O'Leary is an idiot.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Good information filled response! That'll show us!
> 
> Perhaps he is. If so, then what he says should be relatively easy to debunk.
> 
> Have at 'er...
> 
> <crickets in 3, 2, ...>


See, O'Leary is not thinking with his heart, so his opinion must be dismissed.


----------



## Vandave

Macfury said:


> I knew a programmer who was hired by the Ontario NDP because they_ literally had no idea _how much they were spending. They tried to close the barn door after it had burned down.


The problem is that the NDP do not hire competent people. The people they put into positions of power are not accomplished at anything other than supporting their niche cause or lobbying. They have no experience managing things and getting stuff done. Put simply, the NDP are full of losers. That's why they fail at pretty much everything they touch.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Alberta already has one of the largest public "service" burdens per capita in the country.



Wa wa wa. It's about time, after 22 years, that teachers and other public service workers get a little respect. Your comments show your arrogance and ignorance on the subject.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Good information filled response! That'll show us!
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps he is. If so, then what he says should be relatively easy to debunk.
> 
> 
> 
> Have at 'er...
> 
> 
> 
> <crickets in 3, 2, ...>



Sorry to interfere with your little right wing love-in. Please continue. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Wa wa wa. It's about time, after 22 years, that teachers and other public service workers get a little respect. Your comments show your arrogance and ignorance on the subject.


Why do they deserve any special respect? It's just a job. Everybody likes to feel special, but we're all essentially just working for the man. Public servants need to be treated decently because they're human beings who answered a want ad. However, they don't need to be treated specially either.

http://www.policyschool.ucalgary.ca/sites/default/files/research/boesenkool-public-wage-growth.pdf



> Public sector wages in Alberta have shot up since 2000. Overall, the public sector wage bill in Alberta has increased 119 percent in the decade following the turn of the century, compared to 63 percent in the rest of Canada. On a per-employee basis, public sector wages in Alberta were broadly in line with public sector wages in the rest of the country in 2000, but are now higher, and in some cases significantly higher, across all categories. In 2010 Alberta’s general government per-employee wages were 35 percent higher than in the rest of Canada; its health and social services wages were 60 percent higher; its local school board wages were 10 percent higher; and its higher education wages were 30 percent higher.
> 
> These numbers suggest that if the Alberta government is looking for ways of reducing spending to eliminate its deficit (or if they are looking to understand why Alberta is spending significantly more per person on government services than other provinces), they could do much worse than setting an objective of bringing their wages in line with those in other Canadian provinces.


----------



## FeXL

Just as I thought.

You know, there used to be a little lefty drummer boy on these boards who would do the same thing. Mouth piece extraordinaire, pi$$ & moan all over the place, opinion on everything yet, when it came time to actually discuss the issue or defend his position, he'd act the same way: serial avoidance. Oh, he had some creative & verbose ways to indirectly tell you he knew nothing on the subject but, in the end, avoidance.

You call O'Leary an idiot, yet offer no evidence to support that. You also offer no evidence to dispute what he notes in the interview, which I'm willing to bet you haven't even taken the time to watch.

In the future, if you can't/won't defend your observations/accusations/whatever, do us all a favour: don't even bother commenting. We don't need another one of those stepping up to the plate...




fjnmusic said:


> Sorry to interfere with your little right wing love-in. Please continue.


----------



## FeXL

Respect is earned, not given. And it sure as hell isn't measured in dollars & cents. You've got the biggest inferiority complex I've ever come across...



fjnmusic said:


> It's about time, after 22 years, that teachers and other public service workers get a little respect.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Just as I thought.
> 
> 
> 
> You know, there used to be a little lefty drummer boy on these boards who would do the same thing. Mouth piece extraordinaire, pi$$ & moan all over the place, opinion on everything yet, when it came time to actually discuss the issue or defend his position, he'd act the same way: serial avoidance. Oh, he had some creative & verbose ways to indirectly tell you he knew nothing on the subject but, in the end, avoidance.
> 
> 
> 
> You call O'Leary an idiot, yet offer no evidence to support that. You also offer no evidence to dispute what he notes in the interview, which I'm willing to bet you haven't even taken the time to watch.
> 
> 
> 
> In the future, if you can't/won't defend your observations/accusations/whatever, do us all a favour: don't even bother commenting. We don't need another one of those stepping up to the plate...



FeXL, if I didn't throw you a bone once in a while and give you something to react against, there would be no dissent at all. You can love O'Leary all you want; I don't care. I just find him kind of slimy and untrustworthy and I am entitled to hold that opinion just as much as you hold disdain for any of the left-wing advocates. But please spare me the "do us all a favour" rhetoric; it makes you sound no different than Harper in his desire to squelch dissent. In other words, you're not the boss of me.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Respect is earned, not given. And it sure as hell isn't measured in dollars & cents. You've got the biggest inferiority complex I've ever come across...



For one who demands rationale for opinions, can you please explain how in the HELL you came up with that comment?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

FeXL said:


> Oh, he had some creative & verbose ways to indirectly tell you he knew nothing on the subject but, in the end, avoidance.





fjnmusic said:


> FeXL, (blah, blah, blah, blah blah)


I rest my case...


----------



## FeXL

You figger it out. You're the bright boy here...



fjnmusic said:


> For one who demands rationale for opinions, can you please explain how in the HELL you came up with that comment?


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> You figger it out. You're the bright boy here...



Okay. You're delusional. Pretty simple really.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

I'm going to address this BS in more detail.

I don't love O'Leary, period. Frankly, I don't care that much for him, either. However, unlike you, I judge a man largely by his argument, not his political stance. Read the first quote in my signature. I don't automatically hold disdain for anyone. Let them open their mouths, have their say. Give them enough rope to hang themselves & see if they do. You do this yourself fairly frequently.

O'Leary's argument during his interview held a lot of water & until someone comes along & actually watches & debunks it, it holds firm with me.

All that you've done is superficially written him off as an idiot with no justification or defence without even viewing the video. What are you afraid of?



fjnmusic said:


> You can love O'Leary all you want; I don't care. I just find him kind of slimy and untrustworthy and I am entitled to hold that opinion just as much as you hold disdain for any of the left-wing advocates.


One again, you are so far from home base you aren't even in the same county. I don't care if you ever defend anything you post. Ever. Nor am I trying to "squelch dissent". By all means, have at 'er!

However, as with our little drummer boy, it goes to credibility, something he never had on these boards. If you can formulate an argument & defend it, take a stand & provide enough evidence to uphold it, you will have people's respect, whether they agree with you or not. If you don't then no matter how loud you holler or how often you post, you're just background noise that nobody cares about.

Want to be an integral part of the discussion? Bring some meat to the table, not soap bubbles.



fjnmusic said:


> But please spare me the "do us all a favour" rhetoric; it makes you sound no different than Harper in his desire to squelch dissent.


I find this the most interesting part of the whole post. Very mature. Sounds like a 6 year old on the playground. Why you slipped into the Child/Child vernacular is beyond me...



fjnmusic said:


> In other words, you're not the boss of me.


----------



## FeXL

As usual, your powers of deduction miss the mark by a mile...



fjnmusic said:


> Okay. You're delusional. Pretty simple really.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> I'm going to address this BS in more detail.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't love O'Leary, period. Frankly, I don't care that much for him, either. However, unlike you, I judge a man largely by his argument, not his political stance. Read the first quote in my signature. I don't automatically hold disdain for anyone. Let them open their mouths, have their say. Give them enough rope to hang themselves & see if they do. You do this yourself fairly frequently.
> 
> 
> 
> O'Leary's argument during his interview held a lot of water & until someone comes along & actually watches & debunks it, it holds firm with me.
> 
> 
> 
> All that you've done is superficially written him off as an idiot with no justification or defence without even viewing the video. What are you afraid of?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One again, you are so far from home base you aren't even in the same county. I don't care if you ever defend anything you post. Ever. Nor am I trying to "squelch dissent". By all means, have at 'er!
> 
> 
> 
> However, as with our little drummer boy, it goes to credibility, something he never had on these boards. If you can formulate an argument & defend it, take a stand & provide enough evidence to uphold it, you will have people's respect, whether they agree with you or not. If you don't then no matter how loud you holler or how often you post, you're just background noise that nobody cares about.
> 
> 
> 
> Want to be an integral part of the discussion? Bring some meat to the table, not soap bubbles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I find this the most interesting part of the whole post. Very mature. Sounds like a 6 year old on the playground. Why you slipped into the Child/Child vernacular is beyond me...



The last part was a joke, FeXL. Fair enough, I'll accept your criticism that I haven't done enough research for why I don't like it trust O'Leary. It's not the name; I mean, I quite like Denis Leary. 

However, I have watched his manner on Dragon's Den a number of times and I find him to be arrogant in a Donald Trump sort of way. I don't know. There's often something about the rich and powerful that is off putting to me, like they believe they deserve their good fortune rather than considering that they may have just been very lucky. 

Timing counts for a lot, and I don't doubt that O'Leary did well for himself, but I don't know that that drive/entrepreneurial spirit/whatever works so well for running a country as it does for running a business. Canada is not a business. It is a country with a mixed economy. Advice coming from an unapologetic capitalist does not reflect what is best for everyone, including the poor and downtrodden. The unapologetic capitalist would kick them off the boat because they consume too many resources and are not earners. 

Maybe that's the root of it for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Respect is earned, not given. And it sure as hell isn't measured in dollars & cents. You've got the biggest inferiority complex I've ever come across...



Still don't know what this means. Sounds a lot more like a personal insult than a well-reasoned argument though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

NDP minimum wage results:

What will a raise to the minimum wage do to Alberta's small businesses? - Alberta Venture

And then this:

Premier Rachel Notley Calls Alberta 'Embarrassing Cousin'


----------



## fjnmusic

You missed the point, Don. She was referring to the environmental record under the previous gov't and she's not wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

She's wrong.


----------



## SINC

Agreed. In fact you can take that one further to, she's wrong for Alberta, period.


----------



## FeXL

Please elaborate.



fjnmusic said:


> ...she's not wrong.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Please elaborate.



The Alberta gov't under PC rule has only given lip service to environmental concerns, particularly when those concerns are brought forward by First Nations' people. They downplay the damage because they will do ANYTHING to help the corporations protect their profits, counting on trickle down economics to compensate for any damage done to the natural world. The PC's never gave a ****e about the citizens that were affected by the pollution, the oil spills, the increased earthquakes due to fracking. They turned a blind eye to it and then wondered why the Obama administration would not take the Keystone pipeline seriously. If you want to win over the gov't down south, you have to take environmental concerns more seriously. Weibo Ludwig was on the right track, even though he broke the law himself to create awareness. 

That's what I mean by saying she's not wrong. And now I fully anticipate all of the environmental impact denial to spew forth like a brand new gusher.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Should have dropped Weibo from your defense. It deflates the whole thing.

Obama's hatred for the Keystone is philosophical not environmental. The oil is is currently being shipped by train. Which do you think is more environmentally sound?


----------



## SINC

Yep, I knew nutcase Weibo back in the 80s when I was publisher of the Daily Herald-Tribune in Grande Prairie. No cred there whatsoever.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Yep, I knew nutcase Weibo back in the 80s when I was publisher of the Daily Herald-Tribune in Grande Prairie. No cred there whatsoever.



No cred to you perhaps, but his family was certainly affected by the sour gas operations near his home. Or do you think that was make believe?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Should have dropped Weibo from your defense. It deflates the whole thing.
> 
> 
> 
> Obama's hatred for the Keystone is philosophical not environmental. The oil is is currently being shipped by train. Which do you think is more environmentally sound?



I think the KEY thing with either is to make sure they don't F up. An oil spill by pipeline, rail or sea is unacceptable at all times. So is a nuclear spill like the one in Fukushima, which is still spilling tons of radiation into the ocean daily. It's not about which is the lesser of two evils; it's about what assurances can the corporations offer the public that they won't destroy the environment in their pursuit of profits? Let me be clear: self-policing does not work. It's like trusting that drivers won't speed through school zones. They'll do it if they can get away with it. 

How much oil do you consider to be an acceptable amount to leak into the surrounding environment? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> No cred to you perhaps, but his family was certainly affected by the sour gas operations near his home. Or do you think that was make believe?


Oddly enough, he was the only one affected. Knew many of his neighbours who made no such claims. He sure affected others lives by blowing up well sites though. Jaysus, first Khadr and now Weibo, Frank. Spare me, I was THERE and know better.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Oddly enough, he was the only one affected. Knew many of his neighbours who made no such claims. He sure affected others lives by blowing up well sites though. Jaysus, first Khadr and now Weibo, Frank. Spare me, I was THERE and no better.



I'm not defending his actions, Don, but I do understand his frustration and helplessness. You talk like the industry can do no wrong. Believe me, they are rich for a reason, and the reason ain't acts of charity.

As for Omar Khadr, I still don't understand why you have such a hate-on for the man. Clearly, you have not watched any actual interviews with him. If there's a gene for forgiveness, it does not exist in your DNA. What's sad is that you seem to proud of that. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

It's not only profits, it's energy for nation.

The environment is not currently being destroyed to provide it.

_Some_ oil spilling is acceptable to me as zero spillage is impossible. My solution is to make the exploration companies put a certain amount of money in escrow and then put a price on each barrel spilled. At that point I would allow them to decide how they will control spills themselves, while the government puts its policing efforts into leak detection.



fjnmusic said:


> I think the KEY thing with either is to make sure they don't F up. An oil spill by pipeline, rail or sea is unacceptable at all times. So is a nuclear spill like the one in Fukushima, which is still spilling tons of radiation into the ocean daily. It's not about which is the lesser of two evils; it's about what assurances can the corporations offer the public that they won't destroy the environment in their pursuit of profits? Let me be clear: self-policing does not work. It's like trusting that drivers won't speed through school zones. They'll do it if they can get away with it.
> 
> How much oil do you consider to be an acceptable amount to leak into the surrounding environment?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

I don't have time to deal with this at length right now but, for the record, there is little to zero _scientific_ evidence to support any relationship between fracking & and increased incidence of earthquakes.



fjnmusic said:


> They downplay the damage because they will do ANYTHING to help the corporations protect their profits, counting on trickle down economics to compensate for any damage done to the natural world. The PC's never gave a ****e about the citizens that were affected by the pollution, the oil spills, the increased earthquakes due to fracking.


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> I think the KEY thing with either is to make sure they don't F up. An oil spill by pipeline, rail or sea is unacceptable at all times.


Promoting the impossible are we?

Using your logic, we ought to ban all vehicles on highways as collisions are unacceptable at all times? Or ban planes as airline crashes are unacceptable at all times?


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Promoting the impossible are we?
> 
> 
> 
> Using your logic, we ought to ban all vehicles on highways as collisions are unacceptable at all times? Or ban planes as airline crashes are unacceptable at all times?



When I board a plane or drive a car, I do not look at a crash as an acceptable outcome. I do everything in my power to make sure it does not happen. Just how big of an oil spill do you consider to be acceptable?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> When I board a plane or drive a car, I do not look at a crash as an acceptable outcome. I do everything in my power to make sure it does not happen. Just how big of an oil spill do you consider to be acceptable?


Just how big is not the issue. Transporting oil in the safest manner possible is, and that method is by pipeline, proven many times over as being the lowest risk. No method of transportation is without risk.


----------



## Macfury

Not an apt analogy. When you get into a car do you bring along an onboard diagnostic computer to warn you of any possible automobile component failure? You do a 200-point inspection of your car to ensue it is in top shape? You ensure that you are well rested and have consumed no alcohol for the past 12 hours?

Probably not _everything _in your power. Just what you consider reasonable enough to ensure that you will likely be safe.

Likelihood of a car crash--one every 18 years. Likelihood of a mechanical failure--far higher. Likelihood you use oil or gas delivered by pipeline? Near 100%. But you still get into the car and drive.



fjnmusic said:


> When I board a plane or drive a car, I do not look at a crash as an acceptable outcome. I do everything in my power to make sure it does not happen. Just how big of an oil spill do you consider to be acceptable?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Then, using your logic, anything on this planet that breaks down should immediately be erased from the face of the planet. 

Had a pipeline oil spill last week, toxic oil all over the place, gotta shut all pipelines down. Had a plane crash last month, kerosene ignited & burned a patch of forest, gotta ground all the planes. Ten days ago there was a car crash down the road, radiator burst open, gasoline & glycol spill on the freeway, gotta take all the cars off the grid. This morning my toaster burned my bread, releasing toxic smoke into the atmosphere, gotta ban all toasters.

Is that the thrust?

Newsflash: Man made stuff breaks. It's an imperfect world. The goal is to minimize said breakage. There is no way to guarantee 100% safety & reliability on anything.

Just how big of an oil spill do you consider to be unacceptable? And, if the number or size of oil spills is the key factor here, compare the safety records of pipelines vs rail cars. Why does the left always denigrate safer pipelines when rail cars have a far higher incidence of spills?

As noted before, the oil is going to move, no matter what. What method of transportation would you use?



fjnmusic said:


> When I board a plane or drive a car, I do not look at a crash as an acceptable outcome. I do everything in my power to make sure it does not happen. Just how big of an oil spill do you consider to be acceptable?


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Then, using your logic, anything on this planet that breaks down should immediately be erased from the face of the planet.
> 
> 
> 
> Had a pipeline oil spill last week, toxic oil all over the place, gotta shut all pipelines down. Had a plane crash last month, kerosene ignited & burned a patch of forest, gotta ground all the planes. Ten days ago there was a car crash down the road, radiator burst open, gasoline & glycol spill on the freeway, gotta take all the cars off the grid. This morning my toaster burned my bread, releasing toxic smoke into the atmosphere, gotta ban all toasters.
> 
> 
> 
> Is that the thrust?
> 
> 
> 
> Newsflash: Man made stuff breaks. It's an imperfect world. The goal is to minimize said breakage. There is no way to guarantee 100% safety & reliability on anything.
> 
> 
> 
> Just how big of an oil spill do you consider to be unacceptable? And, if the number or size of oil spills is the key factor here, compare the safety records of pipelines vs rail cars. Why does the left always denigrate safer pipelines when rail cars have a far higher incidence of spills?
> 
> 
> 
> As noted before, the oil is going to move, no matter what. What method of transportation would you use?



That's nowhere near what I said and you know it. What do you consider to be an acceptable level of risk when it comes to oil spills? Let's try something simpler: what do you consider to be a safe level of blue green algae before you wade into a lake? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Let's try something simpler: what do you consider to be a safe level of blue green algae before you wade into a lake?


About the same level of poison gas before you walk into a gas chamber.

Risk is one thing. Certainty is quite another.


----------



## Macfury

Essentially this does describe the ideal NDP world--no risk, no achievement, no advancement. Just a lot of hardscrabble agrarians slapping each other on the back.


----------



## FeXL

Your question makes no sense. However, if you are asking what do I consider the safest method of transporting crude overland pipelines. Period. It's also the cheapest & most "green". I think using rail to transport crude is folly & only puts money in that famous progressive Warren Buffet's pocket.

Again, how would you prefer to transport crude?



fjnmusic said:


> What do you consider to be an acceptable level of risk when it comes to oil spills?


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Essentially this does describe the ideal NDP world--no risk, no achievement, no advancement. Just a lot of hardscrabble agrarians slapping each other on the back.


Fine. Then put them all in a large room with soothing pink padding on the walls where they won't cause themselves or anyone else harm. Their own little chunk o' Utopia...


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Your question makes no sense. However, if you are asking what do I consider the safest method of transporting crude overland pipelines. Period. It's also the cheapest & most "green". I think using rail to transport crude is folly & only puts money in that famous progressive Warren Buffet's pocket.
> 
> 
> 
> Again, how would you prefer to transport crude?



You're probably right that pipelines are about the safest method that we know of so far. So how do we improve the safety of pipelines? That would be the first concern. The next concern is even if we improve the safety, what guarantee do we have that anyone wants to buy at the prices we need to sell t to turn a profit? There is a glut of oil right now that no amount of cajoling is going to change. We have to re-examine and perhaps reinvent the whole model. That means thinking outside the box, and it does mean giving more than lip service to environmental concerns.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> We have to re-examine and perhaps reinvent the whole model. That means thinking outside the box, and it does mean giving more than lip service to environmental concerns.


Actually, we don't have to do that at all--it's just your demand.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Actually, we don't have to do that at all--it's just your demand.



You're big on economics. If you are paying attention at all, you would know this is not my demand. It is the demand of our biggest trading partner, the U.S. Or you can turn a blind eye and wonder we're not getting pipeline deals approved. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Clearly you have not paid attention. The Democrat Senate approved Keystone XL. It is only being vetoed by Obama. This is simply a cult of personality at work. 



fjnmusic said:


> You're big on economics. If you are paying attention at all, you would know this is not my demand. It is the demand of our biggest trading partner, the U.S. Or you can turn a blind eye and wonder we're not getting pipeline deals approved.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Clearly you have not paid attention. The Democrat Senate approved Keystone XL. It is only being vetoed by Obama. This is simply a cult of personality at work.



So what, if anything, would have persuaded Obama, do you think? Because if the answer is nothing, then it's really a waste of time and resources to pursue it until there's a new president, which won't be for another year at least. And even then, who knows.

That's the why the Alberta NDP is keen on exploring other options, like pipelines to the East, for example. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> That's the why the Alberta NDP is keen on exploring other options, like pipelines to the East, for example.


Where there are no refineries to process the crude? Yeah some sense that makes. Typical NDP dreamers.


----------



## SINC

.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> So what, if anything, would have persuaded Obama, do you think? Because if the answer is nothing, then it's really a waste of time and resources to pursue it until there's a new president, which won't be for another year at least. And even then, who knows.


I don't know what would have persuaded Obama. However, your contention was that the US was opposed for environmental reasons.



fjnmusic said:


> That's the why the Alberta NDP is keen on exploring other options, like pipelines to the East, for example.


I guess they got the memo about construction of TransCanada's Energy East Pipeline Project too late. Another one is not needed.


----------



## Macfury

I used to be jealous of Alberta! That ended a few months back.



SINC said:


> .


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> .



Nope.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

fjnmusic said:


> So how do we improve the safety of pipelines?


Pipelines are not inherently unsafe, save from the Wiebo Ludwigs of the world. You can't protect from intentional sabotage. 

Maintain them properly & you will have few issues



fjnmusic said:


> ...what guarantee do we have that anyone wants to buy at the prices we need to sell t to turn a profit?


See, that's how a free market works. There are no guarantees. 'Sides, if we can't sell it at a profit, we can always subsidize it, just like Renewables...


----------



## FeXL

fjnmusic said:


> So what, if anything, would have persuaded Obama, do you think?


There was no economical nor environmental reason why he should not have approved KXL. It was politicking, pure & simple. 



fjnmusic said:


> That's the why the Alberta NDP is keen on exploring other options, like pipelines to the East, for example.


Pipelines to both the east & west have been on the burner for some time now. The NDP can take no credit for that. Curiously, pipelines in both directions are receiving significant resistance from Green groups which the NDP kowtow to.


----------



## SINC

Another Notley gaff?

Alberta Premier Rachel Notley's directive for royalty review critics to settle down


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Another Notley gaff?


It's not like Notley would allow socialist philosophy to trump the health of the economy, right?


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Another Notley gaff?


Definitely.

Funny, in that photo it looks like somebody just goosed her...


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Another Notley gaff?
> 
> 
> 
> Alberta Premier Rachel Notley's directive for royalty review critics to settle down



Hardly. If the current royalty rate is fair, then those in industry have nothing to worry about. Under Lougheed, there was a review about every year and a half. Her comment is fair and a royalty review is what she campaigned on. Even the president of CAPP agrees we should stop whining and get on with it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

CAPP doesn't want a review. It just wants Notley to stop creating more problems by talking about a review. As to your other point, the NDP is not known for being fair--it acts unilaterally according to its ideology.



fjnmusic said:


> Hardly. If the current royalty rate is fair, then those in industry have nothing to worry about. Under Lougheed, there was a review about every year and a half. Her comment is fair and a royalty review is what she campaigned on. Even the president of CAPP agrees we should stop whining and get on with it.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> CAPP doesn't want a review. It just wants Notley to stop creating more problems by talking about a review. As to your other point, the NDP is not known for being fair--it acts unilaterally according to its ideology.



Wrong again.

http://calgaryherald.com/news/politics/capp-president-doesnt-want-royalty-review-delayed


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

No, I am absolutely right:



> He told the Herald’s editorial board that the review is causing apprehension in Alberta and he wants to see it completed quickly, rather than put off and possibly stunt future investment.


It is only Notley's announcement about a review that is causing apprehension. The exploration companies and producers need to know where they are going to move their rigs when they begin to leave the province.




fjnmusic said:


> Wrong again.
> 
> CAPP president doesn’t want Alberta royalty review delayed | Calgary Herald
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Yeah, Loughheed, a trusted politician with a record of smart economics & advisors that came from Alberta.

Contrast that with a completely unknown entity leading a political party known nation-wide for disastrous financial management & who has imported chiefs of staff from all over Canada as patronage appointments rather than hire someone who actually knows something about the portfolio. Indeed, some of which have actively campaigned against the development of Alberta's resources.

Gee, wonder why the oil industry concerned...



fjnmusic said:


> Under Lougheed, there was a review about every year and a half.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Yeah, Loughheed, a trusted politician with a record of smart economics & advisors that came from Alberta.
> 
> 
> 
> Contrast that with a completely unknown entity leading a political party known nation-wide for disastrous financial management & who has imported chiefs of staff from all over Canada as patronage appointments rather than hire someone who actually knows something about the portfolio. Indeed, some of which have actively campaigned against the development of Alberta's resources.
> 
> 
> 
> Gee, wonder why the oil industry concerned...



Jeez, when you put it that way....those PC's must have really F'ed things up for the population to take such a hard turn to the left in looking for a solution to the problem. Looks like Albertans made the right choice (pardon the pun) in that case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

They made a regrettable choice. 



fjnmusic said:


> Jeez, when you put it that way....those PC's must have really F'ed things up for the population to take such a hard turn to the left in looking for a solution to the problem. Looks like Albertans made the right choice (pardon the pun) in that case.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Right. Just like a warm bowl of pee is acceptable to some in the middle of a desert...



fjnmusic said:


> Jeez, when you put it that way....those PC's must have really F'ed things up for the population to take such a hard turn to the left in looking for a solution to the problem.


----------



## SINC

Just blunder after mistake after screw up continues by Notley:



> *On Thursday, the NDP gave the province's legislative officers a 7.25 per cent raise, voted to send three NDP MLAs and the committee clerk on a junket to Boston in December, and named a well-known NDP supporter to head the supposedly apolitical public affairs bureau.*


Wildrose slams salary boost, junket, patronage appointment by NDP - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## FeXL

Nice. Go Rachel!!!


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Nice. Go Rachel!!!


I remember fjn just weeks ago complaining that Prentice had given government staff raises higher than teachers... just look at Rachel now!


----------



## Macfury

Ohhhh, Rachel:

Alberta Premier Rachel Notley won't rule out tax hikes as provincial budget loom

Rachel, say it isn't so:

NDP may not balance Alberta budget by 2018 | Alberta | News | Edmonton Sun



> Alberta Premier Rachel Notley says the NDP government may not balance the books by 2018 after all.


Now that all of the election campaign promises are off the table, what's next? Notley is certainly sticking to the NDP playbook.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> I remember fjn just weeks ago complaining that Prentice had given government staff raises higher than teachers... just look at Rachel now!



Way higher than teachers, who have averaged 0% over the past three years. Between 2010 and 2015 (when the PC's were governing), MLA's gave themselves a 71% wage increase.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

The destruction of Alberta's economy by the Dippers has only just begun. Stay tuned.


----------



## Macfury

The Notley effect:

Canada’s oilpatch deal ‘famine’: Alberta’s royalty review, uncertainty leave investors on edge | Financial Post



> “Uncertainty is not the friend of deal-making, and the checklist of uncertainty is growing rather than decreasing,” says Craig Hoskins, a partner at Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP.
> 
> Falling commodity prices, *compounded with inaction on pipelines, the election of the NDP government in Alberta — who immediately launched reviews of its royalty and climate change policies — and a federal election in October have added to global economic uncertainties.
> *
> “Back in March, I don’t think anybody expected this level of certainty,” Hoskins said.
> 
> The NDP’s stunning victory in Alberta on a mandate of reviewing the province’s royalty regime, corporate taxes and carbon emissions’ policy has also sucked the oxygen out of M&A deals.
> 
> The hazy outlook meant investors mustered only $9.7 billion in deals in the first half of the year, a 52 per cent decline compared with the same period last year, according to Sayer Energy Advisors.


----------



## SINC

They just don't get it:

Notley NDP looking like Toryland, greenlighting 7.25% bigwig raises and ethics g


----------



## FeXL

Keep going, Rachel. Between you, Angry Tom & Justin, Harper looks better every day...


----------



## SINC

It just keeps getting better as Notley and crew just don't get it. One more 'see ya!'.



> *The Government of Saskatchewan has also made a firm commitment to maintain a stable, competitive regulatory and royalty environment, which helps investors in the oilpatch make long-term plans.* That’s one of the reasons why international energy companies rated Saskatchewan as the best province in Canada for investment potential in the 2014 Fraser Institute survey on that sector.


Yep.

Alberta energy company attracted to Saskatchewan's resources and skilled workforce


----------



## SINC

And now for something completely different.



> Alberta Premier Rachel Notley says the NDP government may not balance the books by 2018 after all.
> 
> During the provincial election campaign in April, the Alberta NDP made a multi-billion dollar fiscal "miscalculation" that saw the party promise to balance the budget by 2018-19, a full year after the Wildrose and Progressive Conservative plans.
> 
> But Notley backed away from that timeframe on Tuesday night, telling reporters the government is "working on that issue."


NDP may not balance Alberta budget by 2018 | Alberta | News | Edmonton Sun


----------



## FeXL

Shocka, I tell you! Shocka!!


----------



## Vandave

SINC said:


> And now for something completely different.
> 
> 
> 
> NDP may not balance Alberta budget by 2018 | Alberta | News | Edmonton Sun


Straight out of the BC NDP playbook.


----------



## Macfury

Vandave said:


> Straight out of the BC NDP playbook.


Funny how Ontario went exactly that route. And the Alberta dupes who voted for them this year are starting to cry---"Wahhhhhhh, we didn't know."


----------



## SINC

That's because the Dippers didn't really win the election. They were handed temporary power as punishment to the PCs. Three more years and they will be toast, but sadly, they will do much damage in that short time as they continue to demonstrate almost daily.


----------



## SINC

Check the poll results at the end of this editorial! 

Editorial: NDP pay raises are an insult (with poll) | Calgary Herald


----------



## FeXL

From SINC's link:



> The government has lost its credibility...


They had some?


----------



## Macfury

They raised teachers' salaries. I hear that flies with some voters.



FeXL said:


> From SINC's link:
> 
> 
> 
> They had some?


----------



## FeXL

Ah, I wondered where he disappeared to. Counting all his money...



Macfury said:


> They raised teachers' salaries. I hear that flies with some voters.


----------



## SINC

*Minimum Wage Hike Another Blow To Alberta Economy*

The Dippers are bent on destroying Alberta's economy and invent a new way to screw it up every day.



> Calgary, September 30, 2015 – *The Alberta government’s reckless plan to increase the minimum wage to $15 per hour could cost the economy at least 50,000 jobs*, and will force employers to cut back on hours, re-think hiring plans, and will definitely mean less opportunity for young Albertans. As Alberta and four other provinces prepare to hike minimum wage tomorrow, new data from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) provides fresh insight into the misguided $15 scheme and minimum wage policies in general.
> 
> Alberta’s minimum wage will go up by a dollar to $11.20 per hour, on its way to $15 per hour by 2018. Other provinces, including Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland and Labrador, also have wage increases going into effect tomorrow. *Almost ninety per cent of Alberta’s small businesses already pay above the minimum wage, however sectors like retail and hospitality, with razor-thin profit margins, will be hit hard by the hike.*


Minimum wage hike another blow to Alberta economy


----------



## Macfury

Take a look at the employment devastation caused by his in several US states. Massive job loss in the youth sector. Workers earning above the minimum wage told to take over their duties, with no increase in compensation.



SINC said:


> *Minimum Wage Hike Another Blow To Alberta Economy*
> 
> The Dippers are bent on destroying Alberta's economy and invent a new way to screw it up every day.
> 
> 
> 
> Minimum wage hike another blow to Alberta economy


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> Take a look at the employment devastation caused by his in several US states. Massive job loss in the youth sector. Workers earning above the minimum wage told to take over their duties, with no increase in compensation.


It is the NDP's infamous union mentality showing through.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> It is the NDP's infamous union mentality showing through.



You don't believe wages in general should rise with inflation? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Although they may rise with inflation, they need not be tied to it.



fjnmusic said:


> You don't believe wages in general should rise with inflation?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> You don't believe wages in general should rise with inflation?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I hadn't notice inflation rise by 50%.


----------



## CubaMark

SINC said:


> I hadn't notice inflation rise by 50%.


*I dont' have the time to go looking for a Canadian equivalent, but south of the border, income sure as heck hasn't kept time with inflation....*

*The Average American Worker Earns Less Today Than 40 Years Ago*

_It's not just unemployment that matters. Many full-time workers take home less money, after inflation, than in decades._










That's why many American workers are actually poorer today than four decades ago. They may be earning more money. But, in real terms, they're getting less for it. Measured in 2014 dollars, the median male full-time worker made $50,383 last year against $53,294 in 1973, according to new U.S. Census Bureau figures.

At $50,383, the figure is the lowest it's been since 2006. It's also $450 lower than in 2013. Women have seen bigger increases in real pay in the last few years, though from a lower (unequal) base. The median female worker earned $30,182 in 1973 (in 2014 dollars), but $39,621 last year.​
(FastCoExist)


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> I hadn't notice inflation rise by 50%.



Whose wages are rising by 50%?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Alberta's minimum wage is currently $10.20/hr. The increase to $15.00 is nearly a 50% increase.



fjnmusic said:


> Whose wages are rising by 50%?


----------



## Macfury

Taxes take most of it.



CubaMark said:


> *I dont' have the time to go looking for a Canadian equivalent, but south of the border, income sure as heck hasn't kept time with inflation....*
> 
> *The Average American Worker Earns Less Today Than 40 Years Ago*
> 
> _It's not just unemployment that matters. Many full-time workers take home less money, after inflation, than in decades._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's why many American workers are actually poorer today than four decades ago. They may be earning more money. But, in real terms, they're getting less for it. Measured in 2014 dollars, the median male full-time worker made $50,383 last year against $53,294 in 1973, according to new U.S. Census Bureau figures.
> 
> At $50,383, the figure is the lowest it's been since 2006. It's also $450 lower than in 2013. Women have seen bigger increases in real pay in the last few years, though from a lower (unequal) base. The median female worker earned $30,182 in 1973 (in 2014 dollars), but $39,621 last year.​
> (FastCoExist)


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> Taxes take most of it.


Unless I'm mistaken (and I'm a little out of it tonight), those figures are _pre-tax income_, so *your argument=invalid.*


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Whose wages are rising by 50%?


My goodness Dippers are so uninformed about their own party's actions on minimum wage.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Alberta's minimum wage is currently $10.20/hr. The increase to $15.00 is nearly a 50% increase.



Certainly, but not all at once. If I understand correctly, the wage goes up by $1.00/hr tomorrow. That's more in the order of 10% or so, still a lot, but I bet an increase of $1.00/hr in YOUR wage you would not even notice. It all depends how much you make to start with. Don't forget those increased wages also mean increased taxes to offset the debt we are saddled with. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> My goodness Dippers are so uninformed about their own party's actions on minimum wage.



Goodness but non-Dippers sure can twist the stats to suit their own purposes. If a person has a wage increase of, say, 3% over each of three years, you would probably call it a 10% wage increase. You don't bother taking the time frame into account. I imagine if you had a wage increase of $4.80 an hour over THREE years, it's going to come out to far less than 50% overall. 

Also, try not be such an an ass in the way you goad me or others who don't see it your way, Don. It's childish.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> Unless I'm mistaken (and I'm a little out of it tonight), those figures are _pre-tax income_, so *your argument=invalid.*


The big problem with your figures is not that the income is affected more by tax than level of compensation. It's that productivity is rising _precisely_ because humans are being replaced by technology wherever their wages are high enough to justify a technological solution. 

Looking at your graph, you would think the workers themselves were suddenly becoming more productive!

Also, the figures cherry pick the golden age, post WWII when the US had unbombed infrastructure so it could dominate world commerce. Guess what? Everyone has infrastructure now and the US is practicing the same economy-killing "progressivism" that hampers much of the world. Between failure to compete and adoption of "progressivism" wages can only go down.


----------



## SINC

Even the CBC recognizes the minimum wage issue.

Minimum wage hike worries small business owners - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Don't forget those increased wages also mean increased taxes to offset the debt we are saddled with.


It adds a pittance to tax revenues while costing jobs, which reduces tax revenue and increases UI. Justifying it as a source of tax revenue is not a strong argument.


----------



## SINC

Another dumb and unnecessary decision:

Alberta representative in U.S. criticizes NDP on way out - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> It adds a pittance to tax revenues while costing jobs, which reduces tax revenue and increases UI. Justifying it as a source of tax revenue is not a strong argument.


*The Impact of Raising the Minimum Wage*

_*Stimulates Small-Business Growth*

One of the main arguments against raising the minimum wage is that higher wages increase operating costs for small business, so much that it causes enough failures to outweigh the benefits of raising the minimum wage (e.g., more disposable income available for consumer spending and higher tax revenues). 

However, a 2004 study by the Fiscal Policy Institute determined the opposite result to be true, finding that* small-business growth doubled in states with higher minimum wages* for the four-year period after the 1997 minimum wage increase. This finding was echoed by economic researchers in "Minimum Wage Increases and the Business Failure Rate," published in the March 1998 issue of Journal of Economic Issues. 

Their research found that during a 30-year period, there was *no correlation between business failures and increased minimum wage* during the two-year period following an increase. The researchers further reiterated the FPI finding that a rise in the minimum wage actually increased small-business activity._​
(Houston Chronicle)


----------



## Macfury

The four years from 1997 to 2000 inclusive had US growth rates between 4% to 5%. 2001 was1%. The article argues both that minimum wage hikes affect almost nobody, but also double small business growth rates--do you see the problem with that? Do you think that national economic growth might have been the driver, or do minimum wage hikes for very few workers lead to economic downturns by year 5?

How about this study that was conducted a whole 10 years later than the ones you site:

The Minimum Wage and the Great Recession: Evidence of Effects on the Employment and Income Trajectories of Low-Skilled Workers



> We estimate the minimum wage's effects on low-skilled workers' employment and income trajectories. Our approach exploits two dimensions of the data we analyze. First, we compare workers in states that were bound by recent increases in the federal minimum wage to workers in states that were not. Second, we use 12 months of baseline data to divide low-skilled workers into a "target" group, whose baseline wage rates were directly affected, and a "within-state control" group with slightly higher baseline wage rates. Over three subsequent years, we find that binding minimum wage increases had significant, negative effects on the employment and income growth of targeted workers. Lost income reflects contributions from employment declines, increased probabilities of working without pay (i.e., an "internship" effect), and lost wage growth associated with reductions in experience accumulation. Methodologically, we show that our approach identifies targeted workers more precisely than the demographic and industrial proxies used regularly in the literature. Additionally, because we identify targeted workers on a population-wide basis, our approach is relatively well suited for extrapolating to estimates of the minimum wage's effects on aggregate employment. Over the late 2000s, the average effective minimum wage rose by 30 percent across the United States. We estimate that these minimum wage increases reduced the national employment-to-population ratio by 0.7 percentage point.


Or this one?

Minimum Wages and Employment: A Review of Evidence from the New Minimum Wage Research



> We review the burgeoning literature on the employment effects of minimum wages - in the United States and other countries - that was spurred by the new minimum wage research beginning in the early 1990s. Our review indicates that there is a wide range of existing estimates and, accordingly, a lack of consensus about the overall effects on low-wage employment of an increase in the minimum wage. However, the oft-stated assertion that recent research fails to support the traditional view that the minimum wage reduces the employment of low-wage workers is clearly incorrect. A sizable majority of the studies surveyed in this monograph give a relatively consistent (although not always statistically significant) indication of negative employment effects of minimum wages. In addition, among the papers we view as providing the most credible evidence, almost all point to negative employment effects, both for the United States as well as for many other countries. Two other important conclusions emerge from our review. First, we see very few - if any - studies that provide convincing evidence of positive employment effects of minimum wages, especially from those studies that focus on the broader groups (rather than a narrow industry) for which the competitive model predicts disemployment effects. Second, the studies that focus on the least-skilled groups provide relatively overwhelming evidence of stronger disemployment effects for these groups.










CubaMark said:


> *The Impact of Raising the Minimum Wage*
> 
> _*Stimulates Small-Business Growth*
> 
> One of the main arguments against raising the minimum wage is that higher wages increase operating costs for small business, so much that it causes enough failures to outweigh the benefits of raising the minimum wage (e.g., more disposable income available for consumer spending and higher tax revenues).
> 
> However, a 2004 study by the Fiscal Policy Institute determined the opposite result to be true, finding that* small-business growth doubled in states with higher minimum wages* for the four-year period after the 1997 minimum wage increase. This finding was echoed by economic researchers in "Minimum Wage Increases and the Business Failure Rate," published in the March 1998 issue of Journal of Economic Issues.
> 
> Their research found that during a 30-year period, there was *no correlation between business failures and increased minimum wage* during the two-year period following an increase. The researchers further reiterated the FPI finding that a rise in the minimum wage actually increased small-business activity._​
> (Houston Chronicle)


----------



## FeXL

50% in 2-1/2 years is close enough to all at once. No job I've ever had has given me a raise anything close to that. Nor, I suspect, have many others experienced anything like it.



fjnmusic said:


> Certainly, but not all at once.


Sure, to those who will still have jobs. Again, you aren't paying attention. Employment levels will not remain static over this transition. Unemployment will go up. Small business, the largest group of employers in the economy, cannot sustain that type of wage growth. Rather than try to deal with the high cost of minimum wage workers, they will do the work themselves, restrict services or merely close shop. 

The only thing that will happen to "all that extra" tax money is it will be paid out in EI premiums. 

What does that gain us? Nuttin', save to put more people on the dole & justify a few more gov't positions to handle it all...



fjnmusic said:


> Don't forget those increased wages also mean increased taxes to offset the debt we are saddled with.


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> The four years from 1997 to 2000 inclusive had US growth rates between 4% to 5%. 2001 was1%. The article argues both that minimum wage hikes affect almost nobody, but also double small business growth rates--do you see the problem with that? Do you think that national economic growth might have been the driver, or do minimum wage hikes for very few workers lead to economic downturns by year 5?


You are misinterpreting the situation. National GDP change does not necessarily correlate with individual workers' increased purchasing power. GDP can rise in the context of an environmental disaster that requires expenditure to clean it up; any expenditure is GDP growth. The question here lies with workers, their economic status, poverty rates and whether a higher minimum wage will _on the whole_ have positive repercussions.

The CBO study (Feb 2014) - more recent than the right-wing NBER studies you cite - concludes that there is a trade-off (as all economic policies do). They examine two wage increase levels and the likely outcome of both: a minimum wage rise to $10.10/hr "...would raise wages for 16.5 million people but could also cost about half a million jobs." That's been touted by the Right as ammo against raising the minimum wage, while the CBO study was criticized: "the report ignores any potential gains in productivity that companies would see like lower turnover and improved motivation, morale, focus and health. And they write that companies could also adjust by reducing profit margins. (CBS)

*Also, on the CBO report:*

_Over all, the budget office estimated that lifting the minimum wage to $10.10 and indexing it to inflation would reduce total employment by about 0.3 percent, or 500,000 workers. But it cautioned that the estimate was imprecise, with the job losses likely to fall in a range from practically nothing to one million.

The proposal would result in winners and losers among the low-wage workers it would target, the report found. Some businesses, squeezed between increased costs and the inability to raise prices or sell more goods, would hire fewer low-wage workers because of a higher minimum wage, the report said.

But increasing the minimum wage would bolster the earnings of about 16.5 million workers: providing $5 billion a year more for families living in poverty, $12 billion a year more for families earning from one to three times the poverty threshold._
(NYTimes)​
In the big picture, corporate profits are at an all-time high, while worker's wages are at an all-time low (Business Insider). The capital-labour relationship has become wildly unbalanced, as companies chase profit incessantly to satisfy shareholders without providing due compensation to the workers who create that profit. 

Driving down real wages decade-after-decade is unsustainable. If the workers aren't paid an appropriate wage, and inflation continues to rise, who exactly is going to be buying the products that are produced for the market?


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> Driving down real wages decade-after-decade is unsustainable. If the workers aren't paid an appropriate wage, and inflation continues to rise, who exactly is going to be buying the products that are produced for the market?


A better question--who is buying the products now if real wages are dropping so severely?


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> A better question--who is buying the products now if real wages are dropping so severely?



The people with jobs are buying them, but they're probably buying less since their wages are proportionately less. There's a balance between driving wages up too fast and not driving them up at all. If you want people to spend more then they have to be compensated reasonably. Oil and gas workers are now facing the kind of income insecurity that we in other lines of work have been experiencing for years. They're not buying much until they have more income security. This is one of the downsides of putting virtually all of your eggs in one basket: no backup plan when the tide turns.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Think about it fjn--if I own a grocery store why don't I just jack up employee wages so they can buy everything?



fjnmusic said:


> The people with jobs are buying them, but they're probably buying less since their wages are proportionately less. There's a balance between driving wages up too fast and not driving them up at all. If you want people to spend more then they have to be compensated reasonably. Oil and gas workers are now facing the kind of income insecurity that we in other lines of work have been experiencing for years. They're not buying much until they have more income security. This is one of the downsides of putting virtually all of your eggs in one basket: no backup plan when the tide turns.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Think about it fjn--if I own a grocery store why don't I just jack up employee wages so they can buy everything?



It's about balance, MF. You don't want to jack them up too quickly, but you also can't not jack them up at all. A good businessperson knows how to find the balance—a little stingy, perhaps, but without demolishing employee morale. Or have you forgotten what it's like to get that first raise when you're a teenager? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

I was generally paid according to the need for my labour as a teen. When there were a lot of kids and few jobs, wages were low. When the work was hard and there were fewer kids they went up. Wages generally had to do with the value of the work, not trying to make people feel good about themselves. I think some people see business as a social welfare program.

However, you didn't answer my question. If I ran a grocery store that needed more customers, why would I not double the wages and offer the increase in Loblaws debit cards. You said that paying high wages creates customers for the business.



fjnmusic said:


> It's about balance, MF. You don't want to jack them up too quickly, but you also can't not jack them up at all. A good businessperson knows how to find the balance—a little stingy, perhaps, but without demolishing employee morale. Or have you forgotten what it's like to get that first raise when you're a teenager?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BigDL

Macfury said:


> I was generally paid according to the need for my labour as a teen. When there were a lot of kids and few jobs, wages were low. When the work was hard and there were fewer kids they went up. Wages generally had to do with the value of the work, not trying to make people feel good about themselves. I think some people see business as a social welfare program.
> 
> However, you didn't answer my question. If I ran a grocery store that needed more customers, why would I not double the wages and offer the increase in Loblaws debit cards. You said that paying high wages creates customers for the business.


It is apparent MF you have never worked, in an area of the country, where minimum wage for the many, is the maximum wage.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> I was generally paid according to the need for my labour as a teen. When there were a lot of kids and few jobs, wages were low. When the work was hard and there were fewer kids they went up. Wages generally had to do with the value of the work, not trying to make people feel good about themselves. I think some people see business as a social welfare program.
> 
> 
> 
> However, you didn't answer my question. If I ran a grocery store that needed more customers, why would I not double the wages and offer the increase in Loblaws debit cards. You said that paying high wages creates customers for the business.



Apparently you don't even read the parts you quote. I said balance is important. I said nothing about artificially inflating wages. Using some of the reasoning you've been presenting, wages should never go up because it hurts business.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

BigDL said:


> It is apparent MF you have never worked, in an area of the country, where minimum wage for the many, is the maximum wage.


You're probably right. Minimum wage is generally offered in no/low-skill, high labour supply jobs.


----------



## Macfury

If you're paying more than you need to attract and retain a productive worker, the increase is "artificial"--or more correctly, discretionary. 

I ask you the question again--you said that paying high wages allows workers to buy your products. How does that work?



fjnmusic said:


> Apparently you don't even read the parts you quote. I said balance is important. I said nothing about artificially inflating wages. Using some of the reasoning you've been presenting, wages should never go up because it hurts business.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Talk about having no clue . . . Where does she think the money would come from to build capability in Alberta? There hasn't been a new refinery built in North America in more than 50 years.

Keystone would hurt upgrading hopes in Alberta, Notley says | Edmonton Journal


----------



## Macfury

Who would buy the upgraded oil if it's going nowhere? Besides, the cost of a refinery is billions. It makes no sense when there's excess refinery capacity in NA.



SINC said:


> Talk about having no clue . . .
> 
> Keystone would hurt upgrading hopes in Alberta, Notley says | Edmonton Journal


----------



## SINC

This just breaking and few details yet, but education takes the first big NDP hit:

Alberta’s education minister announces delays to about 100 new school projects | Edmonton Journal


----------



## SINC

And now this:

Braid: NDP popularity likely to sink again with new budget


----------



## Macfury

To be fair on that one, SINC, they are not delaying them--they are announcing existing delays on projects that preceded them. The headline is badly written.



SINC said:


> This just breaking and few details yet, but education takes the first big NDP hit:
> 
> Alberta’s education minister announces delays to about 100 new school projects | Edmonton Journal


----------



## SINC

*It appears that the natives are getting restless with Notley and her accidental government:*

Letter To The Editor In The Drayton Valley Western Review.

PS: That's Oil Country!



> I really never imagined that the day would come when I would write a letter to anyone in government; however, it appears that day has arrived. I am 54 years old and have been in this beautiful province of Alberta using my privilege to vote each and every single time the opportunity arose. I did not vote for you or your party, but did and do understand that this is how democracy works. I was disappointed, but I decided to give you the opportunity to prove that you were the right person to lead Alberta.
> 
> I don’t even know where to begin itemizing the areas you have failed as a leader & moreover, failed dismally as an Albertan. You have dismissed the very people that you work for as insignificant and will say whatever needs to be said to push your ideological mandate through-regardless if it is based on truth.
> 
> First, you hired anti-oil, out of province people to speak on behalf of the very industry they are against?!? How can that be a “balanced and objective” approach. I am very certain you could find very qualified and knowledgeable people right here within Alberta that actually had first hand knowledge of the oil industry and how it is run. Then, you mention on TV that we are “the embarrassing cousin that no one wants to talk about”. You state we have the worst environmental record...really, please provide the facts to these accusations you are throwing out there. It is interesting that I can only find positive documents to support that Alberta is a leader, compared to other countries. The U.S. has the most dismal record; however, I doubt you and Hilary Clinton took the time to mention that to the media, as you are more than happy to throw Alberta under the bus. You say that this is how the world views us, but I beg to differ-that may be how your boss Mulcair and some folks back East see us, but it is far from the truth. I am ashamed that you are the person who is representing us on the world front, as I fear you will effectively kill our province based on untruths.
> 
> I do not blame the NDP for the price of oil, but I sure blame you for not being the leader we need and supporting hard working Albertans during this economic downturn. You throw “oil on the fire” every time you speak or the rare times there has been any action on your part. While thousands were losing their jobs, the employment minister was out campaigning for your boss-way to have our backs. When companies are struggling and people are trying to feed their families you go ahead with tax increases-you say you are caring and all about social issues-I don’t see that in you at all. Yes, you care about the teachers, the nurses...all the government employees and government union workers-what about the rest of us; do we not factor in? AUPE gets a wage increase & retroactive pay-seriously? Your committee votes a 7.25% raise for highly paid individuals who do not have a worry about where their next meal comes from-seriously? Your committee decides the y will give themselves an all expenses paid trip to Boston (are they aware of the $ difference & that Boston is not in Alberta?) to attend an “ethics” symposium-really? In these difficult economic times for the Albertans not on the government payroll, don’t you think this entitlement to our hard earned tax dollars being wasted is negligent? Speaking of which, you borrow 6 billion dollars, increase taxes & have yet to produce a budget until AFTER the federal election. How can you take more money from us without explaining why. You do know that a good majority of us realize that you will not release that budget as Mulcair feels it may hurt his chances. We Albertans are pretty smart-not just a bunch of ******** that you like to portray us as.
> 
> I have never, in my life, been as angry with a premier (I thought Redford topped the list, but at least she never sold us down the proverbial river) or a party in my life. If this has taught me anything, it is that socialists like to talk about care and concern for people and environment, but in the end you will still spend our tax dollars to benefit your own party and mandate. I would prefer the thieves we had before...at least there were still jobs then and they weren’t trashing our province and one of our respected industries. You and your party are a double edged sword as you will singlehandedly promote the demise of this beloved province. Shame on you.
> 
> Linda Pfannmuller
> Drayton Valley


Yep, she gets it and there is much more to come for the Dippers including a resounding defeat in three years.

Letter to the editor | Drayton Valley Western Review


----------



## fjnmusic

There are three sittings of the Legislature: spring, fall and winter. They do not sit in the summer. Keeping that in mind, it is really quite ridiculous to expect a new gov't to roll out a new budget until the Fall session given the timing of the spring election. I think the whiners need to take a step back and give the new guys a chance. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Any new government who campaigned on a platform should never take half a year to get down to enacting a platform. But then again, an accidental government who won solely by a protest vote had no expectation of governing, so no real plan. Thus the delay. Now we are about to see the amateurs at work destroying our economy while taking marching orders from Taxing Tom.


----------



## Vandave

SINC said:


> Now we are about to see the amateurs at work destroying our economy while taking marching orders from Taxing Tom.


He'll be looking for a job in about 6 months so maybe Alberta will take him in.


----------



## Macfury

Vandave said:


> He'll be looking for a job in about 6 months so maybe Alberta will take him in.


He's an old cowhand...


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Any new government who campaigned on a platform should never take half a year to get down to enacting a platform. But then again, an accidental government who won solely by a protest vote had no expectation of governing, so no real plan. Thus the delay. Now we are about to see the amateurs at work destroying our economy while taking marching orders from Taxing Tom.



And how long did Lougheed's PC Party take to come up with their first budget after taking over from the Social Credit 39 year government?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Lougheed allowed the existing budget for 1971--already passed--to stand. He then delivered a 1972 budget in 1972.

He did not, as Notley is doing, tease the markets then sit it in a corner and blow gas while the province suffers her party's teasing. Clearly, she is deferring to her boss Mulcair not to pass a budget until the federal election is over.




fjnmusic said:


> And how long did Lougheed's PC Party take to come up with their first budget after taking over from the Social Credit 39 year government?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

The most troubling part of it all is the influence Taxing Tom now has on us. That is just plain scary.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> The most troubling part of it all is the influence Taxing Tom now has on us. That is just plain scary.


She can't help it. It's one party provincially and federally and she takes orders from Mulcair. You just know the budget is going to be a pork-filled monster instead of the cuts to public employment and services Albertans demanded of Prentice--or she would have already unleashed the "good news."


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> She can't help it. It's one party provincially and federally and she takes orders from Mulcair. You just know the budget is going to be a pork-filled monster instead of the cuts to public employment and services Albertans demanded of Prentice--or she would have already unleashed the "good news."


Of course, she has to protect those union jobs. It's the Dipper way.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Of course, she has to protect those union jobs. It's the Dipper way.


Ultimately, she will sell out teachers and nurses and make sure bureaucrats have their faces shiny with pork. Spending will go up with nothing to show for it. Four years from now she will still be blaming Prentice.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Ultimately, she will sell out teachers and nurses and make sure bureaucrats have their faces shiny with pork. Spending will go up with nothing to show for it. Four years from now she will still be blaming Prentice.



If that happens, I will be loud and vocal in my disapproval of the Alberta gov't, just as I have been for the past 22 years since I voted for Ralph Klein, who got my ear with the promise of 104,000 jobs. He didn't mention that they would be part time jobs or fast food jobs or jobs in the horse racing industry. He said nothing about bringing in VLT's or raising the Heritage Trust Fund to balance the budget. He certainly said nothing about the 5% wage cut for eight years in a row that my colleagues and I endured before we won back some of our loss through an arbitrated settlement. I will wait and see what the NDP in Alberta unveil on October 27 before I pass judgement. If they try to screw over teachers and nurses the way the previous gov't has done, I will be the first to speak about about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Well, duh!



fjnmusic said:


> If they try to screw over teachers and nurses the way the previous gov't has done, I will be the first to speak about about it.


----------



## SINC

Ya think she's feeling the pressure yet?


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Ya think she's feeling the pressure yet?



That is certainly not the most flattering picture of Premier Notley, but it doesn't change the fact that she is in charge and will prove to be the best premier we've had in many years. Surely you're not suggesting Jim Prentice would have been the better choice?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## CubaMark

SINC said:


> Ya think she's feeling the pressure yet?


Low blow. I sincerely doubt that you would have posted a picture of a male politician who looked their age as proof of 'stress'. It's misogynistic: women are held to a different standard of appearance, of 'beauty', and if they - particularly women leaders - do not live up to that standard, it is portrayed as a sign of their weakness / failings.

Would you - have you ever - posted a photo of a male politician with the intent to show that they are 'feeling the pressure'?

Think about it.


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> Would you - have you ever - posted a photo of a male politician with the intent to show that they are 'feeling the pressure'?


I sure have--this one, in fact:


----------



## Macfury

Given what I've seen so far, the rump of Wild Rose would have done far better.



fjnmusic said:


> That is certainly not the most flattering picture of Premier Notley, but it doesn't change the fact that she is in charge and will prove to be the best premier we've had in many years. Surely you're not suggesting Jim Prentice would have been the better choice?


----------



## heavyall

fjnmusic said:


> That is certainly not the most flattering picture of Premier Notley, but it doesn't change the fact that she is in charge and will prove to be the best premier we've had in many years.


She's already proven to be the worst premier you've had in decades, maybe ever.




> Surely you're not suggesting Jim Prentice would have been the better choice?[


A frightening as it might seem, there is no doubt that Prentice would have been substantially less bad. Granted the bar is pretty low.


----------



## Macfury

heavyall said:


> A frightening as it might seem, there is no doubt that Prentice would have been substantially less bad. Granted the bar is pretty low.


Given Prentice was fired for refusing to cut spending, Notley is aiming well below him.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Given what I've seen so far, the rump of Wild Rose would have done far better.


And yet the Wildrose did not win the election, largely because the electorate did not deem them trustworthy, given the recent defection of several members to the PC party. So they didn't like the PC's and they didn't trust the Wildrose. Two right wing parties, certainly further to the right than the NDP. Interesting. All those people who could have chosen not to vote, and yet they granted the NDP a sizeable majority for four years. I wonder how that works if everyone hates the NDP as much as you say they do.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Given Prentice was fired for refusing to cut spending, Notley is aiming well below him.


Do not forget that Prentice was also hiking taxes 59 different ways to pay for the PC's misspending, something that did not go over well with voters, and something the Wildrose leader Brian Jean pointed out on a number of occasions. It is ironic that the conservatives, whom one would think would be the better guardians of the public purse, were promising to increase taxes on the average Albertan far more than anything in the NDP platform.


----------



## fjnmusic

That's actually pretty funny! Almost as stressed out as this guy:



Macfury said:


> I sure have--this one, in fact:



P.S. Do you think Mr. Harper will be gracious when he congratulates new Prime Minster in 8 days from now?


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> That is certainly not the most flattering picture of Premier Notley, but it doesn't change the fact that she is in charge and will prove to be the best premier we've had in many years. Surely you're not suggesting Jim Prentice would have been the better choice?


Nope, not a chance.


----------



## SINC

CubaMark said:


> Low blow. I sincerely doubt that you would have posted a picture of a male politician who looked their age as proof of 'stress'. It's misogynistic: women are held to a different standard of appearance, of 'beauty', and if they - particularly women leaders - do not live up to that standard, it is portrayed as a sign of their weakness / failings.
> 
> Would you - have you ever - posted a photo of a male politician with the intent to show that they are 'feeling the pressure'?
> 
> Think about it.


Many times over the years. Far more males than females with similar comments or as under stress. It is a commonly used tactic by media, particularly when the person makes questionable comments or decisions.


----------



## SINC

Premier Rachel Notley criticized for politicizing government communications - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Premier Rachel Notley criticized for politicizing government communications - Edmonton - CBC News



What, no comment? Lazy forum writing. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> What, no comment? Lazy forum writing.


You mean you want me to tell you yet again, how badly she is fumbling the ball for the NDP? Consider it done.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> You mean you want me to tell you yet again, how badly she is fumbling the ball for the NDP? Consider it done.



I don't want you to just say it. Any fool can do that. I'd like you to explain the actual cause-effect relationship in some verifiable way. Otherwise you're just whining. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> I don't want you to just say it. Any fool can do that. I'd like you to explain the actual cause-effect relationship in some verifiable way. Otherwise you're just whining.


Actually any fool can read the link and understand the issue as well as the politicization of the office. If you need help grasping that perhaps ask one of your collegues for assistance?


----------



## FeXL

Curious this same advice is never delivered to the queens of no-comment posts on these self-same boards...



fjnmusic said:


> I don't want you to just say it. Any fool can do that. I'd like you to explain the actual cause-effect relationship in some verifiable way.


She's a hypocrite, plain & simple:



> While in opposition, Notley was a sharp critic of the politicalization of public communications by the PAB. In a June, 2013 interview with CBC, she criticized the government of then-premier Alison Redford for inserting partisan statements into government news releases.


----------



## SINC

> “Union bosses and big business representatives aren’t in the best position to give advice on how to kick-start the economy. *Now is not the time for tax hikes and lofty new schemes proposed by so-called experts,” said Amber Ruddy, Alberta Director for CFIB.


Amen to that.

Alberta government misses the mark with Advisory Committee


----------



## CubaMark

SINC said:


> Actually any fool can read the link and understand the issue as well as the politicization of the office. If you need help grasping that perhaps ask one of your collegues for assistance?


Huh. How about that. I get jumped on all the time for posting items I think are of interest without adding at least a smiley face or something. beejacon


----------



## Macfury

Agreed, but you need your ass kicked.



CubaMark said:


> Huh. How about that. I get jumped on all the time for posting items I think are of interest without adding at least a smiley face or something. beejacon


----------



## SINC

CubaMark said:


> Huh. How about that. I get jumped on all the time for posting items I think are of interest without adding at least a smiley face or something. beejacon


Well then, I am glad to be in such elite company!


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> Agreed, but you need your ass kicked.






+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## SINC

Another indicator that the accidental government of Rachel Notley will be gone in a single term.



> The NDP, oddly enough, took a fundraising nosedive, raising just $83,000 in the third quarter compared with $270,000 in the second.


Graham Thomson: Alberta’s PC party circling the fiscal drain | Edmonton Journal


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Another indicator that the accidental government of Rachel Notley will be gone in a single term.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Graham Thomson: Alberta’s PC party circling the fiscal drain | Edmonton Journal



Accidental. You keep using that word; I don't think it means what you think it means. 56 seats out of 88 is an awful lot of accidents. I think perhaps you mean conspiracy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Nope, I mean accidental. You just don't get voters put them in power in a single fit of rage and are regretting it more every day.


----------



## Macfury

An accident. Just as with the NDP majority in Ontario, it was a massive fit of pique--however, if many of the people who exacted their vengeance on the Liberals knew that every other dimbulb had the same bright idea at the same time, they would have changed their minds in a hurry.



fjnmusic said:


> Accidental. You keep using that word; I don't think it means what you think it means. 56 seats out of 88 is an awful lot of accidents. I think perhaps you mean conspiracy.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Nope, I mean accidental. You just don't get voters put them in power in a single fit of rage and are regretting it more every day.



One or two risings might be accidental. 56...? Nope. You're misusing the term. This was an orchestrated movement and whether you bought into or not, the Alberta NDP ran the best campaign by far. They DESERVED to win. In another three and a half years they may be out, certainly. But they're in NOW and doing everything they promised to do. Must be weird for you to see a government actually live up to its campaign promises.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Who wants to see neophytes keep their promises to destroy the Alberta economy? And why would it surprise anyone to see the NDP behind such promises?



fjnmusic said:


> But they're in NOW and doing everything they promised to do. Must be weird for you to see a government actually live up to its campaign promises.


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> One or two risings might be accidental. 56...? Nope. You're misusing the term. This was an orchestrated movement and whether you bought into or not, the Alberta NDP ran the best campaign by far. They DESERVED to win. In another three and a half years they may be out, certainly. But they're in NOW and doing everything they promised to do. Must be weird for you to see a government actually live up to its campaign promises.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Sorry that you just cannot grasp what really happened Frank. It is disappointing to see someone so blinded by the orange that you cannot face the truth.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Who wants to see neophytes keep their promises to destroy the Alberta economy? And why would it surprise anyone to see the NDP behind such promises?



It was your PC friends that destroyed the economy, if anyone. That ball was in motion a long time ago. The NDP are not interested in destroying the economy. God you can be myopic. There is more than one to run a province.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Sorry that you just cannot grasp what really happened Frank. It is disappointing to see someone so blinded by the orange that you cannot face the truth.



It is also disappointing to see someone so stubborn in their mindset that they cannot see that 56 seats out of 88 does not constitute an accident. By saying that it was an "accident", you are saying that Albertans are basically idiots. I take offense to that assumption. You just have a hard time admitting defeat. But you'd better get used to it, because there's a very good chance the situation will repeat itself on Monday, except with a Liberal government instead of an NDP one. If the Cons win, they still lose, because they won't get anything bigger than a minority. Harper is done. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> It is also disappointing to see someone so stubborn in their mindset that they cannot see that 56 seats out of 88 does not constitute an accident. By saying that it was an "accident", you are saying that Albertans are basically idiots. I take offense to that assumption. You just have a hard time admitting defeat. But you'd better get used to it, because there's a very good chance the situation will repeat itself on Monday, except with a Liberal government instead of an NDP one. If the Cons win, they still lose, because they won't get anything bigger than a minority. Harper is done.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Oh my, an NDP educator of children calls us idiots? Really Frank, you can do better, or maybe not, given the NDP slant you hold?

Accidental Frank. Get used to it. It was as surely as you are an NDP orange kinda guy.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Oh my, an NDP educator of children calls us idiots? Really Frank, you can do better, or maybe not, given the NDP slant you hold?
> 
> 
> 
> Accidental Frank. Get used to it. It was as surely as you are an NDP orange kinda guy.



If I'm so NDP Orange, why do I not support Mulcair at the federal level? You have a simplistic view of the world and those around you. It is also not me who views Albertans as idiots. That view would be reserved for one who sees a carefully executed election victory as an accident. Using your logic, the Toronto Blue Jays accidentally beat Texas a few days ago. Had nothing to do with skill or preparation. 

Not accidental, Don. Get used to it. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Seriously? I accept that the victory is the result of a legitimate vote count--however, had Wild Rose remained intact, it would have a majority today. Notley did not run a skillful campaign, nor did she need to with Wild Roe out of the picture.



fjnmusic said:


> If I'm so NDP Orange, why do I not support Mulcair at the federal level? You have a simplistic view of the world and those around you. It is also not me who views Albertans as idiots. That view would be reserved for one who sees a carefully executed election victory as an accident. Using your logic, the Toronto Blue Jays accidentally beat Texas a few days ago. Had nothing to do with skill or preparation.
> 
> Not accidental, Don. Get used to it.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Seriously? I accept that the victory is the result of a legitimate vote count--however, had Wild Rose remained intact, it would have a majority today. Notley did not run a skillful campaign, nor did she need to with Wild Roe out of the picture.



Wild roe: fish eggs of the wilderness. One can speculate endlessly on what could have happened, but it didn't. Woulda, coulda, shoulda...didn't. Rather than complain about how things didn't turn out the way one wanted, at some point one needs to move on and find a way to get the best out of the new people in charge. Shock, denial, anger and depression are followed at some point by acceptance in most of the human population. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> Seriously? I accept that the victory is the result of a legitimate vote count--however, had Wild Rose remained intact, it would have a majority today. Notley did not run a skillful campaign, nor did she need to with Wild Roe out of the picture.


Yep, some just don't get it. The accidental government of Rachel Notley. Proof in just over three years now.


----------



## SINC

For the benefit of those who think Albertans are not sorry they accidently elected the Notley bunch.


----------



## Macfury

You would probably offer the same advice to an antelope being killed by a pack of hyenas: "Relax, antelope, and just try to get the best out of those hyenas."

I was certainly never shocked by the Alberta results, only angered at the confluence of thoughtless voters who achieved a result they never intended. I've also accepted the downgrade in the Alberta economy. Never depressed because Notley will be an ugly footnote in history a few years hence. You'll get a Mike Harris soon enough to clear the stables of the mess created by the NDP wrecking ball.



fjnmusic said:


> Wild roe: fish eggs of the wilderness. One can speculate endlessly on what could have happened, but it didn't. Woulda, coulda, shoulda...didn't. Rather than complain about how things didn't turn out the way one wanted, at some point one needs to move on and find a way to get the best out of the new people in charge. Shock, denial, anger and depression are followed at some point by acceptance in most of the human population.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> For the benefit of those who think Albertans are not sorry they accidently elected the Notley bunch.



You're right; that is a pretty sorry looking little gathering.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Why are you comparing two entirely different provinces?


----------



## SINC

Considering Alberta is the only province with no sales tax and it was a policy of the Conservative government long before the Dippers were even heard of in Alberta, that is a totally weak and unimpressive comparison. Too bad Brad Wall couldn't govern both though. I went to school with his dad and like his dad, he's a fine guy.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Why are you comparing two entirely different provinces?



Because people like to bitch and moan about how the NDP are going to tax the hell out of us here in Alberta. So far, it appears the NDP's tax regime is less than that of the wonderful PC government just next door. It's entirely relevant. Unless you're bother by the implications of course. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Different revenue structure... and the NDP hyenas have just gotten started...



fjnmusic said:


> Because people like to bitch and moan about how the NDP are going to tax the hell out of us here in Alberta. So far, it appears the NDP's tax regime is less than that of the wonderful PC government just next door. It's entirely relevant. Unless you're bother by the implications of course.


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Because people like to bitch and moan about how the NDP are going to tax the hell out of us here in Alberta.


Give them a chance. Mulcair has ordered them not to produce a budget until after the election to supposedly assist him in his national losing campaign. Too bad they didn't have the cajones to tell him to pound salt. Oh, wait, Notley doesn't have any.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Give them a chance. Mulcair has ordered them not to produce a budget until after the election to supposedly assist him in his national losing campaign. Too bad they didn't have the cajones to tell him to pound salt. Oh, wait, Notley doesn't have any.



Exactly. Give them a chance. Mulcair won't matter because he won't be Prime Minister anyway. And the personal tax increases for Albertans have already been published and are listed in that pic I posted comparing AB and SK provincial tax regimes. What's going to be a bitter pill to swallow is that AB is likely much further in debt than the PC's led us to believe, and that the contingency funds built up will not get us very far, mainly because not much has been saved for a rainy day. Cutting services however is not the answer to the problem. Diversification is. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Diversification is.


And how will a provincial government diversify Alberta's economy? Where is Alberta going to excel because Notley says it will?


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> And how will a provincial government diversify Alberta's economy? Where is Alberta going to excel because Notley says it will?


It cannot and will not. Any reasonable thinking politician knows full well that oil is king and will be for another century. Diversification talk is just that, talk. Never gonna happen.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> It cannot and will not. Any reasonable thinking politician knows full well that oil is king and will be for another century. Diversification talk is just that, talk. Never gonna happen.


It's like the ridiculous talk of building multi-billion dollar refineries when there is excess capacity on the continent already.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> And how will a provincial government diversify Alberta's economy? Where is Alberta going to excel because Notley says it will?



By encouraging industries that don't really exclusively on oil and gas for their success. Water extraction for example. Much more valuable to life on earth than fossil fuels. How has putting all our eggs in one basket helped us so far when times are tough? And it could be YEARS before the price of oil goes back up, and maybe never. Everyone needs a Plan B. The Alberta PC's are not it and neither are the CPC's. Canada deserves a government with more vision. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> It cannot and will not. Any reasonable thinking politician knows full well that oil is king and will be for another century. Diversification talk is just that, talk. Never gonna happen.



It ain't king at these prices. And in any event, it's Saudi Arabia that has a far greater impact on the price than we do. Simple fact, like it or not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

So Alberta is going to sell water? Current price in the US is one cent per gallon. 

Go for it, man!




fjnmusic said:


> By encouraging industries that don't really exclusively on oil and gas for their success. Water extraction for example. Much more valuable to life on earth than fossil fuels. How has putting all our eggs in one basket helped us so far when times are tough? And it could be YEARS before the price of oil goes back up, and maybe never. Everyone needs a Plan B. The Alberta PC's are not it and neither are the CPC's. Canada deserves a government with more vision.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> So Alberta is going to sell water? Current price in the US is one cent per gallon.
> 
> 
> 
> Go for it, man!



Even cheaper if you're Nestle Waters Canada. Their cost went UP to $2.37 per million litres or something like that in BC.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

With your plan to diversify into water extraction, Alberta could have a piece of that!



fjnmusic said:


> Even cheaper if you're Nestle Waters Canada. Their cost went UP to $2.37 per million litres or something like that in BC.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> With your plan to diversify into water extraction, Alberta could have a piece of that!



Don't be an arse. Water is the most valuable resource that exists and you know it. I'm not saying we should gouge; I'm saying it demands protection. Look at California. They truck in all of their water now. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> By encouraging industries that don't really exclusively on oil and gas for their success. *Water extraction for example.* Much more valuable to life on earth than fossil fuels. How has putting all our eggs in one basket helped us so far when times are tough? And it could be YEARS before the price of oil goes back up, and maybe never. Everyone needs a Plan B. The Alberta PC's are not it and neither are the CPC's. Canada deserves a government with more vision.


Oh, that's brilliant!

Expert sees Alberta water shortage looming - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## Macfury

No, California does not truck in all of its water. Los Angeles pipes it in from outside the city, while some hard hit cities truck it in from neighbouring cities--intrastate.

So if you don't want to sell Alberta's water, how will protecting it create a diversified economy?



fjnmusic said:


> Don't be an arse. Water is the most valuable resource that exists and you know it. I'm not saying we should gouge; I'm saying it demands protection. Look at California. They truck in all of their water now.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

So, how many trucks does it take to supply water to 37 + million souls do ya figure? 

Maybe one truck per person per week? Wonder if the US has that many trucks? Must be quite a trick to truck it all, don'tcha think?


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> So, how many trucks does it take to supply water to 37 + million souls do ya figure?
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe one truck per person per week? Wonder if the US has that many trucks? Must be quite a trick to truck it all, don'tcha think?



Lots and lots, Don. No argument there. That doesn't mean it's not the most valuable resource that exists though. You can live without oil and gas; you can't live without water. 

By the way, have you checked the election results for Atlantic Canada yet? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> You can live without oil and gas


Tell me that when you're freezing yer bag off just one winter without oil and gas.


----------



## Macfury

You can't live without water and you can't sell it for more than a penny a gallon--so it is not the most valuable resource that exists. You're making no sense. 




fjnmusic said:


> Lots and lots, Don. No argument there. That doesn't mean it's not the most valuable resource that exists though. You can live without oil and gas; you can't live without water.


----------



## fjnmusic

You could have all the oil and gas in the world, but you'd be dead inside of a week without water. Don't be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling. (Inception)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> You could have all the oil and gas in the world, but you'd be dead inside of a week without water. Don't be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling. (Inception)


Yahoo--it's a water rush. Line those trucks up at the Alberta border!


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Yahoo--it's a water rush. Line those trucks up at the Alberta border!



You are a silly person. Water is not the most valuable resource because you can make a fortune buying it and selling it (although people do, charging outrageous prices for tap water in plastic bottles), it is the most valuable resource because it is essential to the survival of all life on earth. And we have a lot of it here in Canada. If you could stop thinking in terms of dollar signs for a moment, you might have more than a frail grasp on the big picture. It's not always about profit. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

I asked you how you were going to diversify Alberta's economy and you suggested water--that's why we're talking about its price. In terms of economic diversification of course it's about profit--otherwise there would be no point in selling it. 



fjnmusic said:


> You are a silly person. Water is not the most valuable resource because you can make a fortune buying it and selling it (although people do, charging outrageous prices for tap water in plastic bottles), it is the most valuable resource because it is essential to the survival of all life on earth. And we have a lot of it here in Canada. If you could stop thinking in terms of dollar signs for a moment, you might have more than a frail grasp on the big picture. It's not always about profit.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> I asked you how you were going to diversify Alberta's economy and you suggested water--that's why we're talking about its price. In terms of economic diversification of course it's about profit--otherwise there would be no point in selling it.



I have no idea. What do you suggest, O wise one? I'm just a school teacher.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

You said the government was going to diversify the economy--and that Prentice should have done it earlier. You must have had some idea about what you wanted.



fjnmusic said:


> I have no idea. What do you suggest, O wise one? I'm just a school teacher.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> You said the government was going to diversify the economy--and that Prentice should have done it earlier. You must have had some idea about what you wanted.



Stop badgering. Alternate forms of energy would be a good start. We're going to need to do something, 'cause oil and gas ain't doing it anymore. Here's your homework assignment, Macfury: think of three industries that Alberta would be wise to invest in given the tough times the oil and gas industry is facing right now. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Alternate forms of energy won't make you any money either--who will buy your alternate energy when oil and gas are cheap? You can't beat natural gas co-gen for inexpensive reliable electricity.

I certainly won't help you to fill in the blanks on a fool's errand. No individual or government can diversify the economy. It's a complex interaction between supply, innovation and market forces that rises up organically--not through some top-down Soviet style five-year plan.



fjnmusic said:


> Stop badgering. Alternate forms of energy would be a good start. We're going to need to do something, 'cause oil and gas ain't doing it anymore. Here's your homework assignment, Macfury: think of three industries that Alberta would be wise to invest in given the tough times the oil and gas industry is facing right now.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Alternate forms of energy won't make you any money either--who will buy your alternate energy when oil and gas are cheap? You can't beat natural gas co-gen for inexpensive reliable electricity.
> 
> 
> 
> I certainly won't help you to fill in the blanks on a fool's errand. No individual or government can diversify the economy. It's a complex interaction between supply, innovation and market forces that rises up organically--not through some top-down Soviet style five-year plan.



Okay then. According to your logic, we're doomed. Might as well just burn the place down because they are no other possible conceivable solutions to our problems. Without oil and gas we are nothing. NOTHING, I tell you. NOTHING!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Okay then. According to your logic, we're doomed. Might as well just burn the place down because they are no other possible conceivable solutions to our problems. Without oil and gas we are nothing. NOTHING, I tell you. NOTHING!
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk




Now he's getting it.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Now he's getting it.



Well, actually he's getting sarcastic, but if you want to take it as a win, I won't stand in your way. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## CubaMark

*Alberta female politicians targeted by hateful, sexist online attacks*

After reading a veiled threat online last weekend against Premier Rachel Notley, MLA Karen McPherson reported it to the legislature security team.

The Facebook post suggested that taking over the government would require "a lone gunman," adding it was not something the poster condoned but that "bad things happen to bad leaders."

McPherson had seen disturbing comments about the premier before, but this post on a Facebook page called Out the NDP in Alberta was of particular concern.

"The tone went from dissatisfied to more action focused," said McPherson, who has also been the target of online misogynistic comments since being elected in the riding of Calgary-Mackay-Nose Hill in May.

"The comments I'd seen before that hadn't referred to harming anyone. That comment seemed to be a tipping point, where more of that violent imagery was used."

On Tuesday CBC revealed Notley's security detail is closely monitoring online activity following several posts that appear to threaten her life.

Many of those posts take aim at her gender, using profane references to female anatomy.

One post suggested someone kill the premier, calling her a c---.

Another said, "That dumb bitch is going to get herself shot."​
(CBC)


----------



## Macfury

After 10 years of hateful comments against Stephen Harper, suddenly CM gets his back up in defense of Notley.


----------



## SINC

Another broken Dipper election promise:

New Alberta Health Services board appointed by province - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Another broken Dipper election promise:
> 
> 
> 
> New Alberta Health Services board appointed by province - Edmonton - CBC News



How is that a broken promise? A new board at a lower rate of pay? Please explain, O Wise One.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

The NDP campaigned on no central board--and thus no pay.



fjnmusic said:


> How is that a broken promise? A new board at a lower rate of pay? Please explain, O Wise One.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> How is that a broken promise? A new board at a lower rate of pay? Please explain, O Wise One.


Certainly, glad to oblige O Stunned One, since you do not seem to be able to read anything on your own in a link I post, note this from the link:



> Wildrose health critic Drew Barnes said he's disappointed the NDP appears to have reversed itself. *During the spring election campaign, he said, the NDP vowed to get rid of AHS and return to local decision-making.*
> 
> "They're going the opposite way. Here we've created more layers of bureaucracy in a system that is already too non-responsive."
> 
> The Wildrose, he said, believes a centralized board cannot properly manage different needs across all parts of the province.


Seems a waste of my time teaching a teacher how to read, but I digress.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Well, since you do not seem to be able to read anything on your own in a link I post, from the link:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems a waste of my time teaching a teacher how to read, but I digress.



Do you not suspect that once in office, after looking at the books of your predecessor, and looking at the current political and economic climate, it might be wise to revise your plans as necessary? Or do you think the governing party should be bound to election promises for the next four years, at a time with incomplete information, because we wouldn't want to upset this guy in St. Albert or any of the other OCD citizens out there? I have more admiration for someone who can adapt. I'll bet that extra year before a proposed balanced budget really has your panties in a bunch too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Do you not suspect that once in office, after looking at the books of your predecessor, and looking at the current political and economic climate, it might be wise to revise your plans as necessary? Or do you think the governing party should be bound to election promises for the next four years, at a time with incomplete information, because we wouldn't want to upset this guy in St. Albert or any of the other OCD citizens out there? I have more admiration for someone who can adapt. I'll bet that extra year before a proposed balanced budget really has your panties in a bunch too.


I suspect yer a$$ is suckin slough water. Excuses have never meant much to me


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Do you not suspect that once in office, after looking at the books of your predecessor, and looking at the current political and economic climate, it might be wise to revise your plans as necessary?


Not on the medical board decision. But you can pretty much bet that, given the choice between offering citizens more freedom and command and control, the NDP will err on the side of authoritarianism.


----------



## FeXL

That's a cop out. As a political candiate, if you have no idea what you are getting into in the second place you have no business being there in the first place.

If the NDP didn't know what was on the books within a few percent or a couple million bucks then they should have conducted a bit more homework & due diligence. A thorough perusal of the current budget would give you that.



fjnmusic said:


> Do you not suspect that once in office, after looking at the books of your predecessor, and looking at the current political and economic climate, it might be wise to revise your plans as necessary?


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> That's a cop out. As a political candiate, if you have no idea what you are getting into in the second place you have no business being there in the first place.
> 
> 
> 
> If the NDP didn't know what was on the books within a few percent or a couple million bucks then they should have conducted a bit more homework & due diligence. A thorough perusal of the current budget would give you that.



Sure....except when the previous government lies about the budget and when you take over you find all kinds of expenses that have been unaccounted for. I didn't think you were that naive. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

What does that have to do with setting up a medical board that you promised to eliminate?



fjnmusic said:


> Sure....except when the previous government lies about the budget and when you take over you find all kinds of expenses that have been unaccounted for. I didn't think you were that naive.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Sure....except when the previous government lies about the budget and when you take over you find all kinds of expenses that have been unaccounted for. I didn't think you were that naive.





Macfury said:


> What does that have to do with setting up a medical board that you promised to eliminate?


Nothing, except it was a NDP lie during the campaign, and is now a broken promise by the government.


----------



## FeXL

I'm not that naive, which is why I noted "a few percent or a couple million bucks". Do you have evidence of more? If so, I'd be happy to hear of it.

If all you got is bluster, spare me.



fjnmusic said:


> Sure....except when the previous government lies about the budget and when you take over you find all kinds of expenses that have been unaccounted for. I didn't think you were that naive.


----------



## Macfury

And here it comes... Notley is set deliver the largest deficit budget in Alberta history. Of course, they have to pay lip service to the unions so the public sector will be spared. The NDP has been crying for years in the wilderness, wanting to show Albertans how socialists can transform the economy. Thankfully they have all the answers required to make things right.

NDP to table largest deficit budget in Alberta history as provincial revenues plummet with oil prices | National Post



> Lost in the hullabaloo over Rachel Notley’s NDP snuffing out the 44-year Tory dynasty has been the magnitude of the fiscal squeeze now facing the province.
> 
> The collapse of crude oil prices that had former Progressive Conservative premier Jim Prentice warning Albertans to brace for a $7-billion hole in provincial revenues will result in his NDP successors tabling a budget Tuesday that forecasts the largest-ever deficit in the province’s history.
> ............
> 
> Earlier this week, Notley assured reporters there won’t be “any big surprises” in the budget.
> 
> *“It will be a budget that focuses on three primary things: preserving the stability and effectiveness of our front-line public services,” *she said. “It will also be focused on mapping out a plan to balance (the books) and … looking at new initiatives around economic stimulation and job growth.”
> 
> --------
> 
> Paige MacPherson, Alberta director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, warned the government that it can’t create jobs or grow the economy by giving out money.
> 
> *“Economic diversification in my mind is mostly code for subsidies,” she said. “If you look in the past in this province, corporate welfare has been a big failure and we’ve wasted a lot of money.”
> *
> At the legislature Friday, Wildrose Leader Brian Jean expressed alarm that *the NDP is putting Alberta’s triple A credit rating at risk by continuing to borrow for capital projects*.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> And here it comes... Notley is set deliver the largest deficit budget in Alberta history. Of course, they have to pay lip service to the unions so the public sector will be spared:
> 
> 
> 
> NDP to table largest deficit budget in Alberta history as provincial revenues plummet with oil prices | National Post



Makes up for the public service not being spared for the last three budgets when times were getting good for everyone in the private sector. You only see what you want to see. Do you even live in Alberta? Or do you just like to stick your nose in?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

I like to stick my nose in. 

The NDP is one big party from coast to coast so it's all socialist SOP.



fjnmusic said:


> Makes up for the public service not being spared for the last three budgets when times were getting good for everyone in the private sector. You only see what you want to see. Do you even live in Alberta? Or do you just like to stick your nose in?


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> I like to stick my nose in.
> 
> 
> 
> The NDP is one big party from coast to coast so it's all socialist SOP.



Says you. Just as Screature berates me for knowing nothing about Eastern Canada, I must say that having lived for 50 years in Alberta, I have a better-informed view of Alberta than you do as well as an appreciation for the views of the population that resides here. Albertans are not all ********, and we have many fine liberal arts and multicultural events in and around the capital city. Though Albertans tend to be more conservative in their views, for better or worse, they are obviously not afraid to try something different if the old ways don't work anymore. A 44 year experiment is long enough. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Yes, I'm well aware that you have many festivals and expressions of the arts (most of them supported by big oil sponsorships).

Clearly some Albertans were not afraid to gamble their economy and livelihoods on this experiment. The 60% of Albertans who did not support Notley know the outcome of the experiment already.

The old ways work just fine--it was Prentice who was deviating into "progressive" territory and failing. 

I have always had plenty of respect for Albertans and have consistently defended them when others have attacked them. Having voted in an NDP government has tied my hands--I can't defend Albertans unequivocally as I once did. 



fjnmusic said:


> Says you. Just as Screature berates me for knowing nothing about Eastern Canada, I must say that having lived for 50 years in Alberta, I have a better-informed view of Alberta than you do as well as an appreciation for the views of the population that resides here. Albertans are not all ********, and we have many fine liberal arts and multicultural events in and around the capital city. Though Albertans tend to be more conservative in their views, for better or worse, they are obviously not afraid to try something different if the old ways don't work anymore. A 44 year experiment is long enough.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Yes, I'm well aware that you have many festivals and expressions of the arts (most of them supported by big oil sponsorships).
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly some Albertans were not afraid to gamble their economy and livelihoods on this experiment. The 60% of Albertans who did not support Notley know the outcome of the experiment already.
> 
> 
> 
> The old ways work just fine--it was Prentice who was deviating into "progressive" territory and failing.
> 
> 
> 
> I have always had plenty of respect for Albertans and have consistently defended them when others have attacked them. Having voted in an NDP government has tied my hands--I can't defend Albertans unequivocally as I once did.



Well that was actually a very pleasant post, all things considered. To be honest, Alberta's gov't was starting to feel like we were in purgatory, so any change is welcome. Given that the oil and gas industry has pretty much bottomed out, we may have nowhere to go but up. Fingers crossed. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

And yet, despite all this "hardship", the public sector is still far better compensated than the private sector.



fjnmusic said:


> Makes up for the public service not being spared for the last three budgets when times were getting good for everyone in the private sector.


As do all of us.



fjnmusic said:


> You only see what you want to see.


That's a call to authority, a logical fallacy. Argument fail.

Besides, you give me no more quarter than you do MF, despite the fact that I've lived here longer than you.



fjnmusic said:


> Do you even live in Alberta? Or do you just like to stick your nose in?


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> And yet, despite all this "hardship", the public sector is still far better compensated than the private sector.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As do all of us.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's a call to authority, a logical fallacy. Argument fail.
> 
> 
> 
> Besides, you give me no more quarter than you do MF, despite the fact that I've lived here longer than you.



And where do you live, little boy?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Why? You coming down to buy me a beer?



fjnmusic said:


> And where do you live, little boy?


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Why? You coming down to buy me a beer?



Depends what you're drinking.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

I'm an unapologetic beer snob, loves me my craft brews.

While I'm always looking for a new brew I haven't tried, I prefer the second half of the taster tray. I like big, hop-forward Pacific Northwest style IPA's. I love casked beers, especially imperial stouts & barleywines. I'm finding that I like American style sours, although they are difficult to find. Not too many brewing them, I've only had a dozen or so different ones. Really enjoy Imperial Red Ales & Red IPA's, too. Always on the hunt for a nice hop forward American pale ale, as well.



fjnmusic said:


> Depends what you're drinking.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> I'm an unapologetic beer snob, loves me my craft brews.
> 
> 
> 
> While I'm always looking for a new brew I haven't tried, I prefer the second half of the taster tray. I like big, hop-forward Pacific Northwest style IPA's. I love casked beers, especially imperial stouts & barleywines. I'm finding that I like American style sours, although they are difficult to find. Not too many brewing them, I've only had a dozen or so different ones. Really enjoy Imperial Red Ales & Red IPA's, too. Always on the hunt for a nice hop forward American pale ale, as well.



Wish I could say I was more of a beer connoisseur, but I took a hankering to Rickard's Red some time ago and haven't looked back sense. Only problem is, the damn stuff is hard to find, and Keith's doesn't quite do it for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Was talking to some around Traverse City, Michigan who said the peninsula now has the highest number of craft breweries per capita on the continent. Said local farmers are turning to growing hops just to supply them all:

Microbreweries


----------



## FeXL

As far as mainstream efforts at drinkable beer are concerned, Rickard's Red is eminently drinkable. I almost always have a few bottles in the beer fridge. I also don't mind the Rickard's White for a lawnmower beer, something to drink in the heat of the summer that has a lighter body & lower alcohol content.

I agree on Keith's Red. It's nowhere near as drinkable.



fjnmusic said:


> Wish I could say I was more of a beer connoisseur, but I took a hankering to Rickard's Red some time ago and haven't looked back sense. Only problem is, the damn stuff is hard to find, and Keith's doesn't quite do it for me.


----------



## Macfury

That's one ugly, self-serving NDP budget coming down the pipe.


----------



## SINC

Yeah, I watched him and heard him utter the word diversify once. Too bad he never offered anything concrete to diversify anything. Unless of course blowing away our flat tax system to hit Albertans squarely in the wallets is diversification? Could it have been 5% on booze, or was it the $5 a carton on smokes? Wonder if that will apply to Justin's upcoming smokes?


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Wonder if that will apply to Justin's upcoming smokes?


Hey, don't tax Justin's medicine!


----------



## SINC

.


----------



## Macfury

The takers are very happy with the budget at any rate.


----------



## FeXL

No wonder they held off until after the federal election...

Big deficit, bigger debt: Alberta goes on spending spree to spur stalled economy



> “*It outlines an ambitious infrastructure plan that will fix roads, build schools and expand hospitals* in communities right across this province, putting Albertans back to work and supporting economic growth,” Finance Minister Joe Ceci said Tuesday during an embargoed news conference before he delivered his budget speech in the legislature.


M'bold.

Imagine that. Recall what I said earlier about the two sacred cows, Health Care & Education? Bang on.

Expand hospitals, what an f'ing joke. Nearly every small town in the province lost its hospital in the great centralization experiment. So, instead of getting them back, the big centres will get bigger & better. Screw the rural folk. Thx. Plus, where do they expect to get staff for all these expansions? There's already a shortage of doctors & nurses in the province.

What we need is more efficiency, not more wasted tax dollars thrown at the same problem & expecting change.

So, what's the reaction to the budget been?

Royal Dutch Shell Plc quits Carmon Creek oilsands project over lack of pipeline capacity



> Squeezed by falling oil prices and a lack of pipeline capacity, Royal Dutch Shell plc said Tuesday it is halting the development of its Carmon Creek thermal oilsands project in northern Alberta and expects to take a $2 billion restructuring charge as a result of the decision.


Related:

Shell cancels $2B project MINUTES after Alberta NDP unveils "attack budget"; 1450 jobs wiped out



> It’s a disaster for Shell — they’re writing off $2 billion dollars.
> 
> More importantly, 1,450 Canadian families are out of a job. Those were six-figure jobs, many of them held by First Nations workers.
> 
> And of course the 80,000 barrels of oil per day that Carmon Creek was going to produce is gone too. Even at forty dollars a barrel, that’s $3 million a day.
> 
> Obviously low world oil prices are part of the problem. But Shell is investing billions in other parts of the world.
> 
> *So why did they announce they were killing the project yesterday, at 3:46 p.m. Alberta time?
> 
> Well it’s obvious. Because they were waiting to see what Alberta’s first NDP Budget looked like. It confirmed their worst fears. So they pulled the plug.*


M'bold.


----------



## Macfury

Don't worry FeXL, public sector jobs are safe with Notley. No matter how heavily the economy crashes and burns, they will hold their cushy jobs.

And Notley certainly is brave--she doesn't care that Moody's is becoming concerned abut the province's credit rating.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> And Notley certainly is brave--she doesn't care that Moody's is becoming concerned abut the province's credit rating.


Frankly, I'd be surprised if she even knew what that meant...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Frankly, I'd be surprised if she even knew what that meant...


May have just been feeling Moody that day.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> May have just been feeling Moody that day.


Oh, nicely played...


----------



## fjnmusic

Haters gonna hate. It wouldn't have mattered much what she announced. Do you have anything constructive to say? Do you have any specific suggestions for how to get the price of oil back up to where it used to be? Otherwise you just sound like you're whining.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Time to cut the size and wages of Alberta's bloated public sector down to size. If I'd seen a healthy dollop of that, the other stuff might have constituted a balanced approach. As it is, it's all about maintaining Alberta's inflated government at the expense of everyone else.

The price of oil will come back, but the industry will not--it's already withdrawing following delivery of the budget--as long as Notley remains in power. 




fjnmusic said:


> Haters gonna hate. It wouldn't have mattered much what she announced. Do you have anything constructive to say? Do you have any specific suggestions for how to get the price of oil back up to where it used to be? Otherwise you just sound like you're whining.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Time to cut the size and wages of Alberta's bloated public sector down to size. If I'd seen a healthy dollop of that, the other stuff might have constituted a balanced approach. As it is, it's all about maintaining Alberta's inflated government at the expense of everyone else.
> 
> 
> 
> The price of oil will come back, but the industry will not--it's already withdrawing following delivery of the budget--as long as Notley remains in power.



Nope. Been there, done that. Public sector is an easy target, but far from a fair target. We're still living through cutbacks. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

It's an easy target and a fair target. It seems you are a one-issue voter.



fjnmusic said:


> Nope. Been there, done that. Public sector is an easy target, but far from a fair target. We're still living through cutbacks.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Blah, blah, blah. Once again, I don't hate Notley. Just think she, too, is probably the single, most under qualified Premier this province has seen since 1905. That, along with many of her fellow MLA's.



fjnmusic said:


> Haters gonna hate.


Actually, it would have. It has been proven time & time & time again that a government that tries to spend it's way out of debt fails miserably every time. It is the height of folly & it will fail, to the detriment of the people in this fine province.

When times are tough the last thing anybody should do is go on a spending spree. Kick the taxpayers when they're down. Brilliant... 

Kick business in the groin when things are already tough. More brilliance...

In addition to the spend, spend, spend budget is the outright lie that they will be in the black by 2019. Just in time for the election. Not...



fjnmusic said:


> It wouldn't have mattered much what she announced.


Do you? "Haters gonna hate"? Does that qualify as constructive? How about defending the budget in some way, shape or form?



fjnmusic said:


> Do you have anything constructive to say?


The price of oil is controlled by the market, not by the NDP or any other gov't.



fjnmusic said:


> Do you have any specific suggestions for how to get the price of oil back up to where it used to be?


----------



## Macfury

Lovers gonna love?


----------



## SINC

Meanwhile in Alberta


----------



## Macfury

The NDP thinks it can suspend the laws of economics... I think that period of suspension is already over.

Why Alberta's NDP budget will likely make the province rely even more on oil and gas | Financial Post



> Alberta’s NDP government is taking bold steps to reduce its reliance on oil, including borrowing heavily to boost infrastructure and sponsoring economic diversification.
> Alberta NDP’s budget will force the oilpatch to fend for itself
> 
> Claudia Cattaneo: Alberta Finance Minister Joe Ceci tabled a “shock absorber” tax, spend and borrow budget Tuesday for Canada’s top oil and gas producing province to ease the impact of low commodity prices on provincial finances
> 
> But while it can run away from oil for a while, or downplay it while pursuing its green agenda, it won’t be able to hide from it.
> 
> Alberta still needs an oil-price recovery to balance its books — or end up in a risky spot. *The likely unintended outcome: The higher the debt, the more Alberta will need oil and gas to be its reliable cash cow.*





> Credit rating agencies were already sounding the alarm Wednesday.
> 
> Moody’s Investor Services warned Alberta is facing “a deterioration of its credit metrics over the next 24 months.”
> 
> The agency said in a report it expects the province’s debt burden to increase to around 60 per cent of revenues by 2016-17 from 30 per cent as of March 31, rising to around 80 per cent by 2017-18.
> FP1028_Alberta_Budget-GS
> 
> “This projected debt burden is high for an oil-dependent regional government, and surpasses Moody’s previous expectations,” Moody said.
> 
> ---------------
> 
> Of course, Alberta could significantly boost its resource income by promoting export pipelines, which would increase the prices received for its oil, a strategy that doesn’t seem high in Notley’s agenda.


----------



## Macfury

Alberta NDP’s budget will force the oilpatch to fend for itself | Financial Post



> Ceci said his government is prioritizing stable funding for health care, education and social services as the province battles a mild recession, plans to return to a balanced budget by 2019/2020, and will help with job creation and economic diversification in areas like* petrochemicals, agriculture, tourism, technology, creative industries and manufacturing*.


I wish this neophyte Ceci would actually explain what he's trying to do. Under successive PC governments, the economy was already diversifying quite nicely. Seems like his strategy is to strangle the oil industry so that the other sectors will look bigger by comparison.


----------



## Macfury

The Notley effect is diversifying more oil jobs from the productive sector to the public sector:

Devon Energy cuts 200 jobs in Alberta oilpatch to lower capital spending - Calgary - CBC News



> Devon Energy says it has cut 15 per cent of its Canadian workforce as the company responds to lower capital spending plans.
> 
> Oklahoma-based Devon said the staff reductions, completed Wednesday, mean about 200 employees have been let go in all areas of the company's Canadian operations, including its Calgary offices and northern Alberta field operations.
> 
> Devon spokeswoman Nadine Barber said the company has significantly reduced capital spending in Canada after completing some major projects such as its Jackfish heavy oil facility.
> 
> She said the company expects Canadian capital spending to remain at "lower than historic levels for the foreseeable future."


I suspect the "forseeable future" will be about 3 years and six months.


----------



## FeXL

Go Rachel!!!

BLOODBATH: Alberta budget kills 3,000 oil & gas jobs in first 48 hours



> It’s a bloodbath. Rachel Notley’s extremist budget killed more than 3,000 oil and gas jobs in the first 48 hours.
> 
> Literally within hours of the budget, Shell cancelled its Carmon Creek oilsands project, killing 1,450 jobs. Watch our video report here.
> 
> Then MEG Energy announced it had laid off almost a third of its staff. Here’s our video about that.
> 
> And mighty Cenovus announced 700 more layoffs. See the video here.
> 
> And then Devon Energy announced 200 layoffs. If you’re not sick of bad news, watch the video here.
> 
> These are just the big companies, that make the news. When a small company has to lay off five people, it doesn’t make headlines.


Oh, & from the link?



> Alberta has a brand new budget and Finance Minister, Joe Ceci is calling it the "Alberta Way".
> 
> ...
> 
> *The budget earmarks 80% of the $2.7 billion in new taxes towards public sector compensation.*
> 
> Well, besides all the goodies and raises for the NDP's union friends, I have another reason for being suspicious:
> 
> "The Alberta Way" is a registered trademark of the Alberta Union of Provincial Employees. Strange.


Emphasis mine.

Related:

GUNTER: Notley increasing spending as Albertans lose jobs



> While hundreds of thousands of Alberta families are exercising restraint in their family budgets, the New Dems are bulling ahead with an additional $1.5 billion in spending this year, despite running a deficit of $6.1 billion, despite already having the highest per-capita spending of any province and despite having to borrow money ($4 billion) for day-to-day operations for the first time in 23 years.
> 
> Albertans are trimming expenses wherever they can. *The NDP can't even find a single employee to lay off out of the 117,000 - many of thousands of them middle-level managers - at Alberta Health Services (AHS).*


Bold mine.

I can hardly wait until the Royalty Review...


----------



## Macfury

I'm going to brand them the "Not-me" government. Pain everywhere, except in the well-larded unproductive sector.

Where is all her anger that the previous government didn't finance oil refineries to create jobs? If that's what's required to create value added employment, why is this now off the table?

I love Ceci's announced plan for diversification, which includes diversifying into *petrochemicals*!


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> I love Ceci's announced plan for diversification, which includes diversifying into *petrochemicals*!


That caught my eye & made me laugh, too.


----------



## fjnmusic

Another perspective on Kleinomics and its effects on Alberta's economy. Some of you may not like the implications. 
http://www.vueweekly.com/ralph_kleins_true_legacy/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

I stopped reading when they accused the Fraser Institute of having extreme right wing ideologues. If you are going to conduct an objective analysis of anything, try to keep the hyperbole out of it...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> I stopped reading when they accused the Fraser Institute of having extreme right wing ideologues. If you are going to conduct an objective analysis of anything, try to keep the hyperbole out of it...


Likewise, this anger over the government failing to diversify the economy when it was diversifying on its own. The Parkland Institute is "non-partisan: but always left wing. It supports a glut of deficit spending as easily as it breathes.

Nasty creatures to sharpen that axe at Klein's death.

I'd finish pointing out the errors if you wanted to debate them, fjn.


----------



## fjnmusic

Point away, amigo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Peter Foster: The Alberta disadvantage


----------



## SINC

Yep . . .


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Yep . . .



Because the previous plan worked SO well. Please, Lord, send me another oil boom and I PROMISE I won't squander it like the PC's did last time. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Oil prices will go up again, but the industry in Alberta will not recover because of what Notley is doing today. 



fjnmusic said:


> Because the previous plan worked SO well. Please, Lord, send me another oil boom and I PROMISE I won't squander it like the PC's did last time.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Tsk, tsk.

GUNTER: Notley increasing spending as Albertans lose jobs | | Calgary Sun


----------



## FeXL

Curious, the NDP doesn't need an oil boom to squander away other people's money...



fjnmusic said:


> Because the previous plan worked SO well. Please, Lord, send me another oil boom and I PROMISE I won't squander it like the PC's did last time.


----------



## SINC

Why Alberta's NDP budget will likely make the province rely even more on oil and gas


----------



## fjnmusic

9.5 million litres of water each year to one family farm for a generation due to an industry F up. Still think water isn't the most precious resource we have?
http://edmontonjournal.com/storylin...amily-farm-contaminated-by-a-nearby-gas-plant


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Yes I still think that's true.



fjnmusic said:


> 9.5 million litres of water each year to one family farm for a generation due to an industry F up. Still think water isn't the most precious resource we have?
> Alberta’s energy regulator has ordered water delivery to an Edson family farm contaminated by a nearby gas plant | Edmonton Journal
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Don't blame Notley; she's fixing Klein's mess.

http://edmontonjournal.com/storyline/evening-read-dont-blame-the-premier-shes-fixing-kleins-mess


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Don't blame Notley; she's fixing Klein's mess.
> 
> Evening read: Don’t blame the premier â€“ she’s fixing Klein’s mess | Edmonton Journal


Did you notice, like I did, that the author of that piece wrote it in the first person but didn't have the courage to sign his or her name to the opinion. And that is all it is, one person's opinion. Further when it is published in The Journal by an unidentified person, it is the lowest form of journalism and without credibility.


----------



## FeXL

I believe the term "Yellow Journalism" defines it quite well.

The whole story is typical progressive bull$h!t. Blame preceding governments for today's issues, even though they haven't been in power for years. Ralph hasn't been Premier since 2006 yet the current state of the economy is somehow all his fault? Sounds like the same rallying cry one hears from the States: "But, but, but... BUSH!!!", despite the fact that no Bush has been in power for more than 8 years now.

What a crock.

The paragraph that stuck out for me was this little gem:



> Remember those heady days when Ralph Klein was crowing about slaying the debt? At what cost, fellow Albertans? Did amnesia arrive along with the flu this fall? *It was at the cost of schools, health care, infrastructure maintenance and construction, and services to the most vulnerable — children, the sick, the elderly, the disabled and the poor.*


M'bold & the part I'm going to address.

On Alberta education ("schools"):



> British Columbia, Ontario, and Alberta are the top performers among all the provinces


Well, so much for the damage done to Alberta schools.

On health care (from 2014):



> With new figures that show Alberta still spending nearly 20 per cent more than the national average on health care...


Contrary to what the anonymous author noted, health care spending was not the issue. Efficiency? Absolutely! Shortage of money? Not a chance. And, if Rachel figgers that throwing more money at the same problem without making any changes will make the problem go away, she's just as clueless as her 3 priors...

So much for the shortage of health care spending myth.

On infrastructure. When I hear the word infrastructure, I think of things like roads & highways, schools, hospitals. 

I drive & ride a lot, all over southern BC, southern & central Alberta, southern Saskatchewan, northern Washington, northern Idaho & all over Montana. None of those areas has roads as nice as Alberta's. Period. I don't know about the respective spending, I don't care. The proof is in the pudding. 

As to construction & maintenance of schools, I'll go by what I see locally. Photographing sporting events & chasing my littluns all over southern Alberta, there are few schools which have not received massive recent (< 12 years old) upgrades. Any who have not yet received upgrades have been scheduled to do so or are in the middle of them. There have also been a number of new schools built in the area.

As to construction of hospitals, there is currently a massive addition to the Lethbridge Regional underway & a new hospital was recently built in SE Calgary. Now, while I don't like the fact that most local municipalities lost their hospitals, in the face of that, newer, bigger, better centralized facilities is the next best thing & obviously it is happening.

So much for Alberta's infrastructure collapsing.

That debunks the first 3 of the 4 points the author utilizes as examples. As to the last, the author does not detail what "services" they are specifically talking about but merely use the phrase as a talking point (Oh, think of the children...). As such, I'll leave the point lost in it's ambiguity.

The author is all over the map with blame, as well. It's all Klein's fault, yet they talk about:



> We, the Albertans of today, are the future generations for the folks who lived here in, say, the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s. When was the last time anyone grumbled about the fiscal state the Albertans of those times left us? Who’s even aware of what those long-ago governments presented in their budgets?


Funny, if memory serves, those were the years of Social Credit domination in Alberta. Is that somehow Klein's fault, too?

A final point: Curious thing about Klein, he was able to balance the budget on $35/barrel oil, too...


----------



## BigDL

SINC said:


> Did you notice, like I did, that the author of that piece wrote it in the first person but didn't have the courage to sign his or her name to the opinion. And that is all it is, one person's opinion. Further when it is published in The Journal by an unidentified person, it is the lowest form of journalism and without credibility.





Edmonton Journal said:


> As you all know, the NDP government budget came out this week. Plunging oil prices and declining corporate income tax revenues will take a $7.3 billion-sized bite out of the provincial treasury, but rather than scale back spending, the province will take on more debt. As Calgary Herald columnist Naomig Lakritz argues, the spending in the budget is “a welcome change.”


I'm not sure if reading acuity or reading comprehension is called into question but the above quote came from the linked article. So what level of journalism is attained now that we know the views of *Naomig Lakritz of the Calgary Herald ?*


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> I believe the term "Yellow Journalism" defines it quite well.
> 
> 
> 
> The whole story is typical progressive bull$h!t. Blame preceding governments for today's issues, even though they haven't been in power for years. Ralph hasn't been Premier since 2006 yet the current state of the economy is somehow all his fault? Sounds like the same rallying cry one hears from the States: "But, but, but... BUSH!!!", despite the fact that no Bush has been in power for more than 8 years now.
> 
> 
> 
> What a crock.
> 
> 
> 
> The paragraph that stuck out for me was this little gem:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> M'bold & the part I'm going to address.
> 
> 
> 
> On Alberta education ("schools"):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, so much for the damage done to Alberta schools.
> 
> 
> 
> On health care (from 2014):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Contrary to what the anonymous author noted, health care spending was not the issue. Efficiency? Absolutely! Shortage of money? Not a chance. And, if Rachel figgers that throwing more money at the same problem without making any changes will make the problem go away, she's just as clueless as her 3 priors...
> 
> 
> 
> So much for the shortage of health care spending myth.
> 
> 
> 
> On infrastructure. When I hear the word infrastructure, I think of things like roads & highways, schools, hospitals.
> 
> 
> 
> I drive & ride a lot, all over southern BC, southern & central Alberta, southern Saskatchewan, northern Washington, northern Idaho & all over Montana. None of those areas has roads as nice as Alberta's. Period. I don't know about the respective spending, I don't care. The proof is in the pudding.
> 
> 
> 
> As to construction & maintenance of schools, I'll go by what I see locally. Photographing sporting events & chasing my littluns all over southern Alberta, there are few schools which have not received massive recent (< 12 years old) upgrades. Any who have not yet received upgrades have been scheduled to do so or are in the middle of them. There have also been a number of new schools built in the area.
> 
> 
> 
> As to construction of hospitals, there is currently a massive addition to the Lethbridge Regional underway & a new hospital was recently built in SE Calgary. Now, while I don't like the fact that most local municipalities lost their hospitals, in the face of that, newer, bigger, better centralized facilities is the next best thing & obviously it is happening.
> 
> 
> 
> So much for Alberta's infrastructure collapsing.
> 
> 
> 
> That debunks the first 3 of the 4 points the author utilizes as examples. As to the last, the author does not detail what "services" they are specifically talking about but merely use the phrase as a talking point (Oh, think of the children...). As such, I'll leave the point lost in it's ambiguity.
> 
> 
> 
> The author is all over the map with blame, as well. It's all Klein's fault, yet they talk about:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Funny, if memory serves, those were the years of Social Credit domination in Alberta. Is that somehow Klein's fault, too?
> 
> 
> 
> A final point: Curious thing about Klein, he was able to balance the budget on $35/barrel oil, too...



Well, I'll give you credit for being thorough, even if I don't agree with some of your premises.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## CubaMark

BigDL said:


> I'm not sure if reading acuity or reading comprehension is called into question but the above quote came from the linked article. So what level of journalism is attained now that we know the views of *Naomig Lakritz of the Calgary Herald ?*


Indeed. If people could, y'know, learn how to use Google, they'd perhaps manifest a little less outrage.

The authors' name was not attached to the article due to a quirk, I'm guessing, in the sharing feature of the Edmonton Journal smartphone app (much like how Safari's "Reader mode" often strips out a person's name and other info from the page).

The link to Lakritz' article is right on the front page of the Edmonton Journal, byline and all....


----------



## FeXL

Thx. It's called debunking a story. It's something that many around here could use a lesson in. It's not even that difficult when faced with all the codswallop in that story.

BTW, if you can find error in any of the facts I presented, I welcome the correction. If not, then you may accept them as the truth, not a premise.



fjnmusic said:


> Well, I'll give you credit for being thorough, even if I don't agree with some of your premises.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Thx. It's called debunking a story. It's something that many around here could use a lesson in. It's not even that difficult when faced with all the codswallop in that story.
> 
> 
> 
> BTW, if you can find error in any of the facts I presented, I welcome the correction. If not, then you may accept them as the truth, not a premise.



I don't accept them as truth at all. But I do respect your right to voice your opinion in a point by point way. Sometime when I have more leisure time, I will look at your arguments more closely.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Yet, in the complete absence of anything backing up the authors' points, you're going to believe he/she/it?



fjnmusic said:


> I don't accept them as truth at all. But I do respect your right to voice your opinion in a point by point way. Sometime when I have more leisure time, I will look at your arguments more closely.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Yet, in the complete absence of anything backing up the authors' points, you're going to believe he/she/it?



The account matches up pretty damn close to what I remember from living and working in "Ralph's World." He did those of my profession no favors. Most of my 27 years of teaching have been under Ralph's rules, which basically seemed motivated by revenge for that one teacher who told him he would never amount to anything. He did drop out of grade 9 (my wife's uncle attended school with him in Calgary), so his disdain for the teaching profession was pretty much worn on his sleeve. It wasn't until Stelmach that we began to see anything close to a fair deal for teachers again. Sorry, but in my world view, Klein was nothing but an asshole.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

This disdain translated into one of the largest most well-compensated teaching staffs in Canada?



fjnmusic said:


> The account matches up pretty damn close to what I remember from living and working in "Ralph's World." He did those of my profession no favors. Most of my 27 years of teaching have been under Ralph's rules, which basically seemed motivated by revenge for that one teacher who told him he would never amount to anything. He did drop out of grade 9 (my wife's uncle attended school with him in Calgary), so his disdain for the teaching profession was pretty much worn on his sleeve. It wasn't until Stelmach that we began to see anything close to a fair deal for teachers again. Sorry, but in my world view, Klein was nothing but an asshole.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> This disdain translated into one of the largest most well-compensated teaching staffs in Canada?



You have no idea. You're not a teacher, and you're definitely not a teacher in Alberta who had to live through the Klein cutbacks. We're a damn good bunch of teachers in spite of the PC's, not because of them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

You may be damned good, but you're also among the most well-compensated in the country.



fjnmusic said:


> You have no idea. You're not a teacher, and you're definitely not a teacher in Alberta who had to live through the Klein cutbacks. We're a damn good bunch of teachers in spite of the PC's, not because of them.


----------



## FeXL

Curious, my bride has been teaching for a similar period of time & over the same time frame. And, even though she was unhappy about the 5% rollback a number of years back, she had few complaints about Klein as a politician.



fjnmusic said:


> He did those of my profession no favors.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Curious, my bride has been teaching for a similar period of time & over the same time frame. And, even though she was unhappy about the 5% rollback a number of years back, she had few complaints about Klein as a politician.



Klein was a great politician. Very charismatic. I even voted for him in 1993, when he promised 104,000 jobs. Little did I know. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CubaMark

*An interesting article on the challenge of nailing down job numbers in Alberta:*

*StatsCans job numbers a puzzle to sort out*

Today is Jobs Friday, usually a pretty good day for economists and financial reporters alike.

The monthly release of the Labour Force Survey from Statistics Canada probably gets more attention than any other of the agency's reports.

It sets the unemployment rate nationally and for each province and city, something that can then affect public policy, like employment insurance payments. It also tells us how many jobs were created across the country.

But over the past 10 months, something odd has been happening with the numbers in Alberta. The monthly survey showed the market holding up pretty well, with virtually no net job losses.

On the ground in Alberta, that seemed impossible. The province is in recession and job cuts are regularly announced in the oilpatch. Everyone seems to know someone who has lost a job. The energy sector estimates that 35,000 positions have been cut.

There's been a lot of head scratching. Are people losing energy jobs and going to retail? Are they moving to another province? Pivoting to self-employment?

Here's where it gets interesting, though. There's the other employment report, called the SEPH, the Survey of Payroll Employment and Hours. It also comes out monthly, but to little fanfare because of the time lag, two months behind the Labour Force Survey.

However, in August, the SEPH showed that there had been 53,000 jobs lost in Alberta in the past year. The August Labour Force Survey showed that 41,000 jobs had been created over the same period.

That's a difference of 94,000 jobs. So what's going on? Which report is right?​
(CBC)


----------



## Macfury

The jobs primarily disappear from exploration, but are maintained in production. Petrochemical jobs actually expand during a low price phase, simply because feedstock is cheap. Not enough detail to say, though.


----------



## FeXL

Of couse they are...

Alberta NDP 'sorry' for pay hikes and junkets gaffe 



> Once again, nothing focuses the mind like a hanging.
> 
> The Notley NDPers voted last week for big pay hikes to legislature bigshots and a trip to Boston for some of themselves.
> 
> On Tuesday they beat a hasty retreat.
> 
> A statement goes out from committee number one Denise Woollard, an NDP MLA representing an Edmonton riding.
> 
> It’s released a couple hours before a meeting where politicians are set to come back and jaw over last week’s vote.
> 
> The statement says “a mistake was made” echoing the words of former premier Alison Redford when she exited.
> 
> The NDP members “sincerely apologize.”
> 
> They no longer support the pay hike and none of them want to go to Boston.


They'll be even sorrier in about 3-1/2 years...


----------



## FeXL

And, again, they're sorry...

Don Braid: Alberta NDP learns to backtrack faster than a failing fundraiser



> There’s nothing in politics like a good free-for-all over party fundraising.
> 
> The one that hit the Alberta legislature Thursday was a classic of its kind, the first case anybody can recall of a cabinet minister defending a dubious fundraising event, and apologizing for it abjectly only seconds later.
> 
> That what Health Minister Sarah Hoffman did, after being handed a panicked note from the premier’s office.


Can't help myself, gotta do it: What a Sorry Bunch!

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> And, again, they're sorry...
> 
> 
> 
> Don Braid: Alberta NDP learns to backtrack faster than a failing fundraiser
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can't help myself, gotta do it: What a Sorry Bunch!
> 
> 
> 
> BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!



Gloat away. It's not like no politician before the Alberta NDP has ever F-ed up. It just depends what they F up about. 

Speaking of which, how did that $500 a plate PC fundraiser with former Premier Jim Prentice go that was scheduled shortly after the election May 5? Now I'll bet THAT was a sorry bunch. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> And, again, they're sorry...
> 
> Don Braid: Alberta NDP learns to backtrack faster than a failing fundraiser
> 
> 
> 
> Can't help myself, gotta do it: What a Sorry Bunch!
> 
> BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!


They were so sorry... that they were caught!

Consider the $250 an inoculation fee for your business or industry against the NDP virus.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> They were so sorry... that they were caught!
> 
> 
> 
> Consider the $250 an inoculation fee for your business or industry against the NDP virus.



So one ad says "Premier Rachel Notley and Cabinet yada yada" and the other revised one says "Rachel Notley and her team." Big deal. It's the same people, and it's still a party fundraiser. Nothing illegal here. No one's putting a gun to anyone's head to go to it. The only thing you can't do is turn public event into a fundraiser, which is what appeared to happen on May 24. I regularly get requests for money from the NDP party. I also get spam for other charities too. Doesn't mean I send them anything. Annoying, but not illegal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

This was paid access.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> This was paid access.



But only if you attend the fundraiser. They changed the wording, and all clear. The optics may be bad, but the concept of lobbying for special access is as old as Canada itself. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Yep, Ted gets it, Ray Chill and the Dippers don't:

Morton: If the NDP wanted, it could cut spending and maintain front-line services | Calgary Herald


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Yep, Ted gets it, Ray Chill and the Dippers don't:
> 
> Morton: If the NDP wanted, it could cut spending and maintain front-line services | Calgary Herald


It's like closing washrooms in pubic parks, the moment you cut their budget by a nickel. Pretending this is all about "front-line services" is just a diversion from the thick layers of fat and pork in management.


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> It's like closing washrooms in pubic parks, the moment you cut their budget by a nickel. Pretending this is all about "front-line services" is just a diversion from the thick layers of fat and pork in management.


Yep, 'cept for one thing. You left out union cuts, just like the Dippers do. Can't touch those overpaid, under worked fat cat union folks now, can we?


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Yep, 'cept for one thing. You left out union cuts, just like the Dippers do. Can't touch those overpaid, under worked fat cat union folks now, can we?


Nope, because that's where they're carving out a niche for when their government goes down in four years.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Yep, Ted gets it, Ray Chill and the Dippers don't:


Excellent analysis.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Yep, 'cept for one thing. You left out union cuts, just like the Dippers do. Can't touch those overpaid, under worked fat cat union folks now, can we?



Overpaid? Underworked? Clearly you have never been a teacher. Or a nurse. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Overpaid? Underworked? Clearly you have never been a teacher. Or a nurse.


Nothing against either profession, Frank, daughter is teacher and wife was nurse. Know how hard they work.

What I am referring to is the provincial civil service where my buddy's wife, a very typical not too bright gal makes $120,000 a year to be the assistant to an assistant in a ministers department in a downtown high rise, who gets off early every Friday to go camping or out on the quad with hubby. 

And make no mistake, there are thousands of that kind on the government payroll.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> And make no mistake, there are thousands of that kind on the government payroll.


Exactly. This is precisely the type of worker, the middle manager, who needed to be targeted during the joke Rachel revealed as the NDP budget. Not a single position was eliminated.

During a time when all businesses in Alberta are cutting costs, conducting layoffs, trimming the fat, there was not a single extraneous body in the Public Service?

Bull****...


----------



## Macfury

Read the posts. We are not attacking front line workers.



fjnmusic said:


> Overpaid? Underworked? Clearly you have never been a teacher. Or a nurse.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

So, there's a few things wrong with this concept, I'm going to address at least a couple of them.

First off, the problem. Rachel & Co are spending $750,000 on a marketing plan to sell their budget to the public.

Wait, wha...?

Yep. That brings us to the first problem. If a government budget is so crappy that you need an ad campaign to sell it, maybe the problem isn't the people's lack of understanding.

Second, couldn't that 3/4 of a million dollars be used for something more pressing? Like, maybe, the *budget*?

Third, I didn't approve of Redford's efforts to do the self-same thing two years ago. Neither did Brian Mason, leader of the Alberta NDP at the time. Where is his disapproval now?

No surprise: Notley's NDP spent big bucks to sell job-killing budget



> Rachel Notley and her NDP are under fire for spending taxpayer money to promote their attack budget.
> 
> ...
> 
> They have a new television and online advertising campaign worth over $750,000 to try to sell their massive deficit to regular Albertans who know that *deficit and debt can only harm our economy.*


M'bold.


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> First off, the problem. Rachel & Co are spending $750,000 on a marketing plan to sell their budget to the public.
> 
> Wait, wha...?
> 
> Yep. That brings us to the first problem. If a government budget is so crappy that you need an ad campaign to sell it, maybe the problem isn't the people's lack of understanding.



*Oh, hypocrisy, thy burden is great....*

*Tory Family Tax Cuts: Public Pays For Ads For Measures Not Yet Approved*

After the ad industry watchdog received a number of complaints from the public about the *$2.5-million* Canada Jobs Grant campaign, the government promised not to repeat the ads.

Critics say they're back to their old tricks.

Dennis Howlett of the advocacy group Canadians for Tax Fairness says public funds should not be used to push an agenda that's still a matter of debate in Parliament.

Promoting legislated tax measures is one thing, said Howlett.

"But when it's still a partisan political debate, then its not fair for the government to spend tax dollars. It undermines democracy."

* * *​
After being hammered for closing veterans offices across Canada as part of its austerity measures, Veteran Affairs is spending *$5 million* touting how well it treats veterans.

There's a *$5.5 million* anti-drug campaign airing that was rejected by three national medical groups — the Canadian Medical Association, the College of Family Physicians of Canada and the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada — because they said it had become "political football."

There's also *$7.2 million* for a campaign that promotes Canada's 150th anniversary in 2017 — ads that end with the tag line "Strong. Proud. Free."​
(HuffPo)


----------



## FeXL

I'm sure there's a point to the above post. Unfortunately for the poster grasping at straws, it doesn't apply to me...


----------



## SINC

CubaMark said:


> *Oh, hypocrisy, thy burden is great....*
> 
> Snip


Point that is overlooked being the Dippers were supposed to be 'different and above it all' according to their campaign.

Turns out they're not only similar, but the very same.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Point that is overlooked being the Dippers were supposed to be 'different and above it all' according to their campaign.
> 
> Turns out they're not only similar, but the very same.


Ah. Thx for clarifying. I was wondering what the hell a post fit for the Canadian Political Thread was doing here. 

Must be more of that journalism training...


----------



## FeXL

So, Rachel wants to bring Occupational Health & Safety to the farm. I have very mixed feelings about this. 

While I have no issues with making farm life safer, the last thing any farmer needs is some snot-nosed, overpaid, underworked, unionized gov't official breathing down his neck at every turn.

Wildrose Country

Link to google drive document. (I know, I know...)


----------



## CubaMark

*Rachel Notley announces Alberta's climate change plan*

Alberta Premier Rachel Notley announced today that she is imposing a limit on oil sands emissions and phasing out all coal power usage in her province by 2030 in a major push to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

In her address at Edmonton’s Science Centre, Notley pledged to invest in green jobs, energy, and infrastructure as well as taking steps to protect the health of future generations.

“This is the day we stop denying there is an issue and this is the day when we start doing our part,” said Notley. “Climate change is real, it is caused by human activity.”

She said that anyone in doubt could see the Columbia Icefield glaciers, which are steadily receding as the atmosphere warms, describing Alberta as being on the “front line,” of climate change, alongside coastlines across the world.

Crucially, Parks and Environment Minister Shannon Phillips announced a 100-megatonne limit on carbon pollution from her provinces oil sands in a bid to curb emissions, which she said would help reduce the global row over use of oil sands energy.

Phillips also announced a shift from high-polluting coal power to renewables by 2030 as a second key plank of Alberta’s climate change strategy.

* * *​
Murray Edwards, the billionaire chairman of Canadian Natural Resources Ltd., also voiced support for Alberta's climate plan's addressing of oil sands emissions and was one of the speakers at Notley's address.

“The framework announced will allow ongoing innovation and technology investment in the oil and natural gas sector. In this way we will do our part to address climate change while protecting jobs and industry competitiveness in Alberta,” Edwards said.​
(NationalObserver)


----------



## SINC

Here we go. $320 extra tax on your heating bill in 2016, then up to $480 in 2017 plus 4.7 cents per litre on gas.

And now we go to wind for power, what a joke that is. :lmao:

Alberta's climate change strategy targets carbon, coal, emissions - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## FeXL

Rachel is a f'ing idiot & so is anybody who believes this crap.

It's commonly held knowledge, even among warmists, that atmospheric CO2 levels prior to 1950 were simply not high enough to have an effect on planetary temperatures.

The Columbia Icefields have been melting for over 150 years. Why? Because the planet has been coming out of the Little Ice Age...



> She said that anyone in doubt could see the Columbia Icefield glaciers, which are steadily receding as the atmosphere warms, describing Alberta as being on the “front line,” of climate change, alongside coastlines across the world.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Rachel is a f'ing idiot & so is anybody who believes this crap.
> 
> 
> 
> It's commonly held knowledge, even among warmists, that atmospheric CO2 levels prior to 1950 were simply not high enough to have an effect on planetary temperatures.
> 
> 
> 
> The Columbia Icefields have been melting for over 150 years. Why? Because the planet has been coming out of the Little Ice Age...



And your point is? Face it: she's in charge and you're not. Better learn how to play the game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Three more years of this kind of hardship imposed on Albertans will see RN and the Dippers handed their butts a la Kim Campbell.


----------



## Macfury

You really are weird sort of defeatist--when it comes to telling others wha tto do. The game will not continue to be played this way. Better learn how to upend and defeat it instead!

Your pick is a fruitcake.



fjnmusic said:


> And your point is? Face it: she's in charge and you're not. Better learn how to play the game.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> You really are weird sort of defeatist--when it comes to telling others wha tto do. The game will not continue to be played this way. Better learn how to upend and defeat it instead!
> 
> 
> 
> Your pick is a fruitcake.



It's easy for the mouse to yell at the elephant. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> It's easy for the mouse to yell at the elephant.


Who is the supposed elephant?


----------



## FeXL

My point is that she is an uninformed idiot who know nothing, zip, nadda, about the science of the political game she's playing.



fjnmusic said:


> And your point is?


And yet, I pay her salary. Which means that she's accountable to me. 

And, I know how to play the game. In three years+ she will lose miserably. Bookmark this post...



fjnmusic said:


> Face it: she's in charge and you're not. Better learn how to play the game.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> My point is that she is an uninformed idiot who know nothing, zip, nadda, about the science of the political game she's playing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And yet, I pay her salary. Which means that she's accountable to me.
> 
> 
> 
> And, I know how to play the game. In three years+ she will lose miserably. Bookmark this post...



Again, your hurling of insults says far more about you than it does about her. People voted for her. They did not vote for you. Armchair critics are a dime a dozen. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

It's not an insult. It's an assessment. An accurate one, in this case. If anyone is insulted by it, perhaps it's a bit close to the mark. 

She is woefully uninformed on the topic of global warming. Period. She is also an idiot if she uses the Columbia Icefield as some form of shoring for her argument. It took 3 whole sentences to completely debunk her argument and I'm no genius.



fjnmusic said:


> Again, your hurling of insults says far more about you than it does about her.


Yes, there were some disillusioned folk who voted for her once. Woohoo! So what? It won't happen again, I promise you that.



fjnmusic said:


> People voted for her. They did not vote for you.


Well then, consider yourself among the counted.



fjnmusic said:


> Armchair critics are a dime a dozen.


----------



## Macfury

I don't recall you following your own wise counsel on Stephen Harper or the previous PC government. You yowled and creeched and criticized and clawed at your hair shirt. 

You're simply full of manure.



fjnmusic said:


> Again, your hurling of insults says far more about you than it does about her. People voted for her. They did not vote for you. Armchair critics are a dime a dozen.


----------



## fjnmusic

No insults, hey? You boys have a lot to learn. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

What--that you're fundamentally dishonest? That was coming through loud and clear for years.

That you expect anybody to listen to you about abstaining from undermining the current government and helping to pave its exit is pretty amazing.




fjnmusic said:


> You boys have a lot to learn.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> What--that you're fundamentally dishonest? That was coming through loud and clear for years.
> 
> 
> 
> That you expect anybody to listen to you about abstaining from undermining the current government and helping to pave its exit is pretty amazing.



You talk and talk. You say nothing. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

You have almost no capacity for understanding--don't blame me!

Your life is a series of simple notes: "I vote for NDP because NDP give teacher money."



fjnmusic said:


> You talk and talk. You say nothing.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> You have almost no capacity for understanding--don't blame me!
> 
> 
> 
> Your life is a series of simple notes: "I vote for NDP because NDP give teacher money."



You are a broken record. I don't believe I've read a single divergent thought from you in over two years. Yawn.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Guess it's because you're always "thinking outside the box" fjn.



fjnmusic said:


> You are a broken record. I don't believe I've read a single divergent thought from you in over two years. Yawn.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Call it what it really is 101.

Terence Corcoran: Tax, spend, regulate and repeat | Financial Post


----------



## SINC

Bill 6 and the end of the family farm in Alberta.

https://mycattleworld.wordpress.com/2015/11/23/bill-6-and-the-end-of-the-family-farm/


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Bill 6 and the end of the family farm in Alberta.
> 
> https://mycattleworld.wordpress.com/2015/11/23/bill-6-and-the-end-of-the-family-farm/


Typically, such legislation is supported by industrial sized farms and Monsantos in order to drive family businesses into bankruptcy.

I feel for you my friend. Notley is devastating the Alberta economy in record time. This sort of regime isn't simply incompetent--it's evil. Naturally, the government and its legions of employees make sure they're insulated from the massive punishment they're visiting on Albertans.

Still, Notley's punishment will be a great thing to witness.


----------



## SINC

The plan that's not a plan at all. Even Notley cannot explain how it works:

Alberta Premier Rachel Notley says most Albertans won’t feel the pinch with new carbon tax | Edmonton Journal


----------



## Macfury

She knows it will cause massive harm to middle and low-income Albertans--she just doesn't want to articulate it. Going to take a while to undo this monster's mischief.



SINC said:


> The plan that's not a plan at all. Even Notley cannot explain how it works:
> 
> Alberta Premier Rachel Notley says most Albertans won’t feel the pinch with new carbon tax | Edmonton Journal


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> The plan that's not a plan at all. Even Notley cannot explain how it works:
> 
> Alberta Premier Rachel Notley says most Albertans won’t feel the pinch with new carbon tax | Edmonton Journal


She doesn't think seniors on a fixed income are going to notice 75 bucks a month being drained out of their wallets?????????

OTOH if the province were to abolish all of the gouge fees that the privateers are already tacking onto our utility bills, I am pretty sure that many of us would come out a bit ahead even after the carbon tax.

BTW additional taxation of the natural gas we use to heat our homes is despicable. I know several seniors who would find the government prescribed 18°C to be unbearably cold! Kind of like that idiot energy minister that suggested we put an extra sweater over our down jackets a few years ago.


----------



## Macfury

Socialist mindset--the old hag will tell you what's comfortable.



eMacMan said:


> BTW additional taxation of the natural gas we use to heat our homes is despicable. I know several seniors who would find the government prescribed 18°C to be unbearably cold!


----------



## eMacMan

Thing is those who are on the low end of the income curve do not have the money to buy more fuel efficient vehicles or add a layer of insulation and new windows to their homes.


----------



## SINC

eMacMan said:


> Thing is those who are on the low end of the income curve do not have the money to buy more fuel efficient vehicles or add a layer of insulation and new windows to their homes.


This is what makes the plan a complete failure. Seniors on a fixed income do not have the funds to upgrade their homes to get the rebate. In other words, the Dippers say you will get a refund, BUT, only if you have the financial resources to spend more than you would get back anyway. A fools errand by an inexperienced bunch of bozos.


----------



## CubaMark

Here's one comment on the story that appears to be reasonable:

_*Annie says:*
November 24, 2015 at 8:28 am

This bill was in progress before the NDP came into power.

Perhaps you could clarify some things.

The Edmonton Journal had an article on this.

“The new legislation will mean farmers and ranchers must provide safe work conditions and training to everyone doing any commercial work — not regular farm chores”
– how is this a bad thing?

“The proposed bill will require Alberta’s 43,000 farms and ranches to purchase mandatory insurance coverage to protect workers if they’re injured on the job, and protect the operation if the farmer is sued. Until now, farmers could opt out, leaving approximately 60,000 workers without pay or access to health or physiotherapy benefits to get them back on the job.”
– again, how is this a bad thing?

Why would you choose to not have pay, or benefits, for you or your employees? I am certain that most of us know someone who was injured on a farm. Most of us have that story about someone who was killed on a farm. Most of us know someone who was killed, and they didn’t have insurance, and their families either had to sell the farm, or really struggle.
– if this legislation can prevent some of that, how is that a bad thing?

“while farmers and ranchers need to follow occupational health and safety regulations starting Jan. 1, they will be given time to learn the rules, train their employees and come up to speed. ”
– that seems fair, doesn’t it?

“Under the proposed changes to various bodies of legislation, workers will have the right to refuse unsafe work without fear of being fired.”
– how is that not fair to the employer?

“Provincial investigators will be able to enter a farm site to do safety inspections and impose penalties.”
– realistically, do you think that the government has the time, the money, or the inclination to inspect every farm? They don’t inspect every workplace – ever. I strongly suspect that if there are chronic complaints, or numerous injuries, that is when inspections will take place, just like in any other workplace.

“Workers will be able to join unions and bargain for wages, and they will be paid minimum wage, overtime and vacation pay. Such labour rights and employment standards will be hashed out for spring 2016 with room for some finagling.”

Further comments in other articles state that, for example, calving season doesn’t recognise holidays – you can’t get your cows to not calve on a holiday, so they are working on concessions for that. That seems fair.

A CBC news article states “Right now, less than five per cent of the province’s 40,000 farms and ranches carry the (insurance) coverage.
It goes on to state ” For full-time employee earning $50,000 a year, it can cost anywhere between $850 and $1,450.”
(link: Alberta farms subject to workplace safety rules under new bill - Edmonton - CBC News )

If we break that down, for each employee, at the highest rate of $1450, that works out to $27.88/week, or less than $4/day.
Is that really too much to pay, when you compare it to the cost of you, or one of your employees being injured and unable to work? The costs of healthcare, physiotherapy, perhaps needing prosthetics?

So, specifically, how is it really going to affect your operation?

From a day to day standpoint, how is it going to affect you? I suspect, for the majority of operators, it really won’t.

How is it really going to affect your cash flow? Is that $27.88/week/full time employee backbreaking?

I can see where yeah, it is just one more rule to follow – but that is one of the not-so-joys of business.

But for those who are against this legislation? Why? Specifically – cash flow? training? Or is it merely that you do not want another regulation to follow?_​


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> Socialist mindset--*the old hag *will tell you what's comfortable.


_Really_, MF? Misogynist much?


XX)


----------



## Macfury

I'm not a "progressive", so I still recognize a difference between men and women. Male politicians as bad as she is are old coots.



CubaMark said:


> _Really_, MF? Misogynist much?
> 
> 
> XX)


----------



## Macfury

eMacMan said:


> BTW additional taxation of the natural gas we use to heat our homes is despicable. I know several seniors who would *find the government prescribed 18°C *to be unbearably cold! Kind of like that idiot energy minister that suggested we put an extra sweater over our down jackets a few years ago.


Do you have a link for this?


----------



## fjnmusic

CubaMark said:


> _Really_, MF? Misogynist much?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> XX)



I see I'm not the only one who noticed. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> Do you have a link for this?


I think the ministers name was Murray Smith. At the time natural gas prices were through the roof, it was a typically cold Alberta winter and Albertans were screaming for some sort of relief. Said minister suggested lowering the thermostat and adding a sweater. 

For those already wearing down jackets indoors it seemed rather insulting. 

Nowadays of course lowering the thermostat would have zero impact on our natural gas bill. Last month we paid about $3 for a gigajoule of natural gas. The bill for natural gas was $40, the additional $37 was in the form of Privateer fees. While adding a provincial gouge of $75 would put the bill well over $100, it would do absolutely nothing to encourage conservation.


----------



## CubaMark

eMacMan said:


> I think the ministers name was Murray Smith. At the time natural gas prices were through the roof, it was a typically cold Alberta winter and Albertans were screaming for some sort of relief. Said minister suggested lowering the thermostat and adding a sweater.


So, you're talking about the* former Conservative government*'s recommendation of 18C, not the current Alberta NDP government.

I'm sure there was no intentional desire to infer the latter....


----------



## Macfury

So it was an old coot who said this. My apologies.



CubaMark said:


> So, you're talking about the* former Conservative government*'s recommendation of 18C, not the current Alberta NDP government.
> 
> I'm sure there was no intentional desire to infer the latter....


----------



## CubaMark

eMacMan said:


> I think the ministers name was Murray Smith. At the time natural gas prices were through the roof, it was a typically cold Alberta winter and Albertans were screaming for some sort of relief. Said minister suggested lowering the thermostat and adding a sweater.


I'll give you points for a good memory. And it's rather ironic that you're citing an NDP critique of the former Conservative government to criticize the current NDP government (which, so far as I am aware, has not told Albertans to lower their thermostat setting).

The exchange was from 2003 in the Alberta legislature. Energy Minister Murray Smith was quizzed by NDP Brian Mason:

*The Speaker:* Hon. members, the hon. Member for Edmonton- Highlands does have the floor.

*Mr. Mason: *Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The Minister of Energy’s answer to those who can’t afford sky-high home heating bills is: turn down the thermostat, and put on a sweater. There may be a run on knitting needles and yarn, but Albertans know that this is an attempt to trivialize their difficult situation. Will the minister admit that his home heating strategy involves nothing more than two knitting needles and a ball of wool?

*Mr. Smith:* Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member’s question. In fact, if I were actually to refer to strategies that are on web sites by the utility companies that supply natural gas in Alberta, you would find that they talk about turning down thermostats. You’ll find that they talk about being able to lower the temperature in a home. This valuable information on reducing consumption, a strong conservation message for the natural gas that’s used in Alberta, can save Alberta homeowners and renters upwards of a hundred dollars in a heating season. There are tremendous new technologies and new innovations in that. In fact, some of that includes computer- controlled thermostats. Some of that concerns putting information with respect to home heating in the homes. 

Also, insulation is a very important piece.

So I think that each and every one of us has a responsibility for our own conservation in our own home as well as in our place of work.

*The Speaker:* The hon. member.

*Mr. Mason: *Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Why are Albertans being forced to start up web sites for cold people such as www.coldpeople.com in a desperate attempt to get the message through to this government that sky-high home heating bills are really hurting people?

*Mr. Smith:* Well, you know, Mr. Speaker, when I pick up the phone and answer the phone, I get some discussion of different and various ways to help Albertans cope with increasing commodity prices. In fact, here’s one that says:
_Personally I looked ahead 2 years ago at what was happening and replaced all windows, purchased an automatic thermostat,insulated my attic to above standard, and refinished my basement with lots of insulation along with a high efficien t furna ce. Than kfully Karen and I are able to afford this unlike many other Albertans. The price I think will only go higher so money well spent and I get my own personal rebates every day._​


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> .... the current NDP government (which, so far as I am aware, has not told Albertans to lower their thermostat setting).


Yeah,they have--but it's only slightly more generous--between 19 and 20 degrees for the peons:

Alberta's One Simple Act - Simple Solutions - Home Heating



> Remember those sweaters your Grandma knit? Put them on. When it’s cold outside and you’re at home, set the temperature between 19° and 20°C.


----------



## SINC

The dire situation here in Alberta continues as my email below this morning will attest to, yet the Dippers remain willfully ignorant of the dire consequences they have foisted on the people of Alberta. 

I supported this lottery as a heart attack victim by buying a $25 ticket each year for many years now. Suddenly last year instead of a year long profitable and successful calendar based daily draw, they opted to go the $100 ticket route and get all their funds in a single month, February of 2015. I wrote the group and warned them it was ruining a good thing with greed and was assured by them it would be a success, so I bought a ticket anyway. Apparently I was among the few who did and they lost their collective butts.

Things like this are screams of warning to the Notley Crew who plunder ahead with the destruction of our province.


----------



## CubaMark

So you admit that Albert's NDP is a kinder government than the previous Conservative government. Good! Making progress!


----------



## SINC

CubaMark said:


> So you admit that Albert's NDP is a kinder government than the previous Conservative government. Good! Making progress!


I assume you refer to Mcfury's post and not mine, do you?


----------



## CubaMark

SINC said:


> The dire situation here in Alberta continues as my email below this morning will attest to, yet the Dippers remain willfully ignorant of the dire consequences they have foisted on the people of Alberta.


"The challenging Alberta market includes a large number of charity lotteries, and regrettably we were unable to meet our revenue expectations for last year's charity lottery."​
Done, how does last year's economic underperformance (under a Conservative government) coupled with increased competition for donations from other charities (set up during a Conservative government one would assume to serve people suffering from Conservative policies) become the fault of Alberta's NDP?

Are NDP economic and social policies so dire in their critics eyes, so dastardly and powerful, that they can travel back through time and inflict untold damage to our ancestors? :yikes:


----------



## CubaMark

SINC said:


> I assume you refer to Mcfury's post and not mine, do you?


Yes - we're in sync (no pun intended) you and I today....


----------



## eMacMan

CubaMark said:


> So, you're talking about the* former Conservative government*'s recommendation of 18C, not the current Alberta NDP government.
> 
> I'm sure there was no intentional desire to infer the latter....


Yep, but the attitude remains the same. The con men were asking Albertans to suffer so as to advance the cause of the Holy Graille of privatization, the NDP wish to sacrifice us at the alter of the Al Gore Chapel of Global Warming. However to meet the current regime dream, I believe the recommended winter indoor temp will have to be dropped to around 12°C.

BTW I would have no problem with dropping the Privateer fees altogether and raising the cost of natural gas to $5 a Gigajoule. Even in the coldest months I would come out at least $25 ahead. The other 10 months of the year I would do even better. More importantly, reducing ones consumption would then be directly rewarded with a reduced utility bill.

Despite the promises of palm trees, Alberta will continue to see at least six months of winter a year, unless the Russians are correct and that goes up to eight months. This is also a province that covers a lot more inhabited territory than many other provinces. Most of our energy is not wasted. It goes into heating our homes and delivering goods from A to B. So anything that raises those costs will dramatically impact the bottom line. Those near the bottom of the financial ladder will inevitably be hit the hardest.


----------



## SINC

CubaMark said:


> "The challenging Alberta market includes a large number of charity lotteries, and regrettably we were unable to meet our revenue expectations for last year's charity lottery."​
> Done, how does last year's economic underperformance (under a Conservative government) coupled with increased competition for donations from other charities (set up during a Conservative government one would assume to serve people suffering from Conservative policies) become the fault of Alberta's NDP?
> 
> Are NDP economic and social policies so dire in their critics eyes, so dastardly and powerful, that they can travel back through time and inflict untold damage to our ancestors? :yikes:


I didn't insinuate it was the NDP's fault in any way in that post. 

What I am pointing out is that Notley Crew are ignoring the warning signs of a financial collapse via their new policies that will leave Alberta in dire straights, but they plunder on anyway.


----------



## FeXL

Reasonable? Prima facie, yes.

Uninformed? Completely.

Why? Read the responses to her comment.



CubaMark said:


> Here's one comment on the story that appears to be reasonable:


----------



## SINC

Looks like Notley logic to me . . .


----------



## SINC

eMacMan said:


> I think the ministers name was Murray Smith. At the time natural gas prices were through the roof, it was a typically cold Alberta winter and Albertans were screaming for some sort of relief. Said minister suggested lowering the thermostat and adding a sweater.
> 
> For those already wearing down jackets indoors it seemed rather insulting.
> 
> Nowadays of course lowering the thermostat would have zero impact on our natural gas bill. Last month we paid about $3 for a gigajoule of natural gas. The bill for natural gas was $40, the additional $37 was in the form of Privateer fees. While adding a provincial gouge of $75 would put the bill well over $100, it would do absolutely nothing to encourage conservation.


This is what eMacMan is referring to as I just got my electricty bill yesterday. I used about $66 worth of actual electricity (and $9 of that was an 'administration fee') and had an additional $77 tacked on to 'deliver it' to my home. See for yourself what privatization has done to our costs in Alberta.


----------



## Macfury

It isn't so much that privatization has caused it--it's that it appears on your bill, instead of getting sucked out of general tax revenue.


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> It isn't so much that privatization has caused it--it's that it appears on your bill, instead of getting sucked out of general tax revenue.


The thing is, there were never any charges above the cost per unit used until privatization. All those 'extras' became possible at that time.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> The thing is, there were never any charges above the cost per unit used until privatization. All those 'extras' became possible at that time.


What I'm saying is that the province paid the transmission charges out of general revenue. They could not do that when transmission was privatized.


----------



## eMacMan

It should be noted that the Utility supplies the gas or electricity and even reads the meter all covered in the cost per unit. Billing is done by a different company and probably costs them $2-3 per household. So my Gas bill adds $34/month on top of the unit fee and the electric bill adds about $70 on top of the unit fee. Those are what I call Privateer fees!

One recent fee add on is to cover construction of additional high tension lines to supply power to Montana and Idaho. Of course to do that there will need to be new generation facilities built. You can bet on another gouge fee for those. If Nutley goes ahead and closes down coal plants, then those new generation facilities will end up supplying Albertans. More facilities will then need to be built to supply the Montana market, which will result in yet another new fee.

Of course with interest rates hovering so close to zero, it would make much more sense to finance those lines via bonds, and bill the downstream customer a sufficient amount to pay the bond costs.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> It isn't so much that privatization has caused it--it's that it appears on your bill, instead of getting sucked out of general tax revenue.



Wrong again. It is a direct result of Steve West taking something that was working fine and Fwording with it by deregulating it. It took forever for people to sign up, and the end result is basically a regulated rate again, except that private companies skim a hell of a lot of a profit off the top. The price we pay for some predictability in utility bills each month.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> The thing is, there were never any charges above the cost per unit used until privatization. All those 'extras' became possible at that time.



Exactement, as the French would say. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

So prior to deregulation, transmission was free?



fjnmusic said:


> Wrong again. It is a direct result of Steve West taking something that was working fine and Fwording with it by deregulating it. It took forever for people to sign up, and the end result is basically a regulated rate again, except that private companies skim a hell of a lot of a profit off the top. The price we pay for some predictability in utility bills each month.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> So prior to deregulation, transmission was free?


Transmission was and is covered by the unit fee. In the case of electricity. Fortis buys electricity from the generator, transmits it to everyone in my part of the province, maintains the lines and even reads the meter. All of that is covered in the unit cost of electricity. 

Enmax bills me according to the meter reading supplied to them by Fortis, pays Fortis it's unit fee (or a portion thereof), and launches legal proceedings should I refuse to pay. That is all they do, but somehow when it is all said and done they collect an additional $70/month in Privateer Fees. That they choose to call one of those fees a transmission fee falsely implies that they somehow are responsible for delivering it to my meter, but that claim is entirely bogus!


----------



## SINC

Fairview knows.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Fairview knows.



Fairview knows ****e.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Death by a thousand cuts: Alberta grows increasingly unaffordable as governments dig deeper in our pockets | Opinion | Calgary Sun


----------



## SINC

.


----------



## SINC

.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> .



That should be a comma instead of a period after the word "started."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> .



Who needs safety on the farm anyway? You're not a real farm kid until you're missing a couple of digits. And remember what our great PC leader once said about BSE and the economy: "Any self respecting farmer would just shoot, shovel and shut up." Now THAT'S the Alberta way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Let's analyze this, piecemeal, shall we?

Minus the sarcasm, a legitimate question.

Before we answer this, how endemic is the problem?



> Deaths: Between 1990 and 2009, 355 people were killed on...42,000...farms and ranches in Alberta


Hmmm. An issue, obviously but doesn't sound that bad. How about we compare that to highway traffic accidents in Alberta. There is data for 2012 here (pdf, page 14).

345 deaths by traffic accident in 2012 _alone._

I fail to see the issue. Sad? Absolutely! However, it's 1/20th of what is happening on Alberta highways! A little perspective is in order here.



fjnmusic said:


> Who needs safety on the farm anyway?


My analysis stops here. The rest is simply hyperbole & a complete disconnect from the topic at hand.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Let's analyze this, piecemeal, shall we?
> 
> 
> 
> Minus the sarcasm, a legitimate question.
> 
> 
> 
> Before we answer this, how endemic is the problem?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm. An issue, obviously but doesn't sound that bad. How about we compare that to highway traffic accidents in Alberta. There is data for 2012 here (pdf, page 14).
> 
> 
> 
> 345 deaths by traffic accident in 2012 _alone._
> 
> 
> 
> I fail to see the issue. Sad? Absolutely! However, it's 1/20th of what is happening on Alberta highways! A little perspective is in order here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My analysis stops here. The rest is simply hyperbole & a complete disconnect from the topic at hand.



Those farm deaths are pretty scary, considering the traffic deaths could well have included farmers as well. Why don't you compare to, say, people working in offices or pharmacies or schools? There is nothing wrong with insisting on safety standards for farms. Most provinces already have them. These standards are not an attack on family farms; if anything, they're designed to help farmers and their children survive. Literally. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Might be meaningful if it was about safety. It isn't. It's about crony capitalism and diving family farms and individual players out of the market.


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Those farm deaths are pretty scary, considering the traffic deaths could well have included farmers as well. Why don't you compare to, say, people working in offices or pharmacies or schools? There is nothing wrong with insisting on safety standards for farms. Most provinces already have them. These standards are not an attack on family farms; if anything, they're designed to help farmers and their children survive. Literally.


It is unwarranted interference is a chosen way of family life whose practitioners know fully well the risks involved, made the choice to accept them and work to mitigate them like any family would want, to protect each other. And the added cost to operations and family well being are so very unnecessary.


----------



## FeXL

Exactly! You make my point for me.

It can be safely assumed that, besides employing another level of gov't bureaucracy, OHS's main goal is to reduce workplace injuries & deaths.

The 3 people a year who kick off from terminal paper cuts or eating someone's science experiment from the office fridge aren't significant enough to figure into the equation.

It's a well known axiom that 20% of the money will get you 80% of the results. Let's focus on something with a bit more of an impact besides 18 deaths per year.



fjnmusic said:


> Why don't you compare to, say, people working in offices or pharmacies or schools?


I agree. I noted that in my first post on the topic. However, this needs to be tempered by the fact that the average family farm is nothing like any business out there and your average gov't employee doesn't have a clew about the average family farm.

A few years back there was this big kerfuffle about slip tanks in the back of pickup trucks not being properly labelled per MSDS standards. Fines were handed out to owners of unlabelled slip tanks left, right & centre. While I agree to a point, everybody in the agricultural & construction industry knows full well that the only things carried in those slip tanks is gasoline or diesel fuel. It's only the gov't bureaucracies that didn't...

Educate, don't legislate.



fjnmusic said:


> There is nothing wrong with insisting on safety standards for farms.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Might be meaningful if it was about safety. It isn't. It's about crony capitalism and diving family farms and individual players out of the market.


In many respects I agree.

The implementation & operation of this will take time & money, many of whom do not have either or.

Sure, the bigger operations who have a half dozen or more employees can sluff the task off to some unsuspecting minion but the average mom & pop family farm may not have the time. They know full well the dangers involved & don't need legislation nor inspectors leaning over their shoulders reminding them.

I would also add that this is at least partly about control.


----------



## Macfury

You'll often find these larger operations pushed for the legislation. Case-in-point, in Amarillo, Texas large chain restaurants pushed for legislation that all BBQ restaurants must place expensive odour-reducing filters on their grill stacks. It was legislation designed only to drive the mom-and-pops out of business.



FeXL said:


> In many respects I agree.
> 
> The implementation & operation of this will take time & money, many of whom do not have either or.
> 
> Sure, the bigger operations who have a half dozen or more employees can sluff the task off to some unsuspecting minion but the average mom & pop family farm may not have the time. They know full well the dangers involved & don't need legislation nor inspectors leaning over their shoulders reminding them.
> 
> I would also add that this is at least partly about control.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Exactly! You make my point for me.
> 
> 
> 
> It can be safely assumed that, besides employing another level of gov't bureaucracy, OHS's main goal is to reduce workplace injuries & deaths.
> 
> 
> 
> The 3 people a year who kick off from terminal paper cuts or eating someone's science experiment from the office fridge aren't significant enough to figure into the equation.
> 
> 
> 
> It's a well known axiom that 20% of the money will get you 80% of the results. Let's focus on something with a bit more of an impact besides 18 deaths per year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree. I noted that in my first post on the topic. However, this needs to be tempered by the fact that the average family farm is nothing like any business out there and your average gov't employee doesn't have a clew about the average family farm.
> 
> 
> 
> A few years back there was this big kerfuffle about slip tanks in the back of pickup trucks not being properly labelled per MSDS standards. Fines were handed out to owners of unlabelled slip tanks left, right & centre. While I agree to a point, everybody in the agricultural & construction industry knows full well that the only things carried in those slip tanks is gasoline or diesel fuel. It's only the gov't bureaucracies that didn't...
> 
> 
> 
> Educate, don't legislate.



Alright. I'll buy that for a dollar.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

.


----------



## SINC

..


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> ..



Well that seems pretty silly. Your people just finished LOSING an election a few months ago. Perhaps you don't understand how these things work. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Well that seems pretty silly. Your people just finished LOSING an election a few months ago. Perhaps you don't understand how these things work.


Wrong again Frank. My people as you call them did not lose. I did not vote PC. The accidental election of the Dippers will be short lived and Notley will be tossed a la Kim Campbell in 3.5 years. Sadly, it will not be before she inflicts so much damage on our province and its residents, that it will take years to recover. Watch it happen. Especially if the recall legislation goes ahead.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Wrong again Frank. My people as you call them did not lose. I did not vote PC. The accidental election of the Dippers will be short lived and Notley will be tossed a la Kim Campbell in 3.5 years. Sadly, it will not be before she inflicts so much damage on our province and its residents, that it will take years to recover. Watch it happen. Especially if the recall legislation goes ahead.



Well, Don, unless your people are the NDP, which does not seem likely, then yes, your people lost. Try again in three and a half years, and thanks for playing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

NDP director Anne McGrath to become Notley's deputy chief of staff | CTV News

Meet Notley's new Chief of Staff.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_McGrath


----------



## SINC

.


----------



## Macfury

Simply put, most people in the NDP fold have aspirations that are indistinguishable from communists, dictators and other thugs. They will destroy freedoms, gobble up income, and ravage economies with their only goal to gain as much autocratic power as possible.



SINC said:


> NDP director Anne McGrath to become Notley's deputy chief of staff | CTV News
> 
> Meet Notley's new Chief of Staff.
> 
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_McGrath


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> Simply put, most people in the NDP fold have aspirations that are indistinguishable from communists, dictators and other thugs. They will destroy freedoms, gobble up income, and ravage economies with their only goal to gain as much autocratic power as possible.


Hey! Some of my best pals are Communists. Enough with the slander, buddy.

As for "destroy freedoms, gobble up income, and ravage economies" I daresay you have confused _commun_ism with _capital_ism.


----------



## Macfury

Those are some real powerful economies Communists have built! Cuba! Albania! Yugoslavia! They had to build walls around those places to keep people from enjoying their bounty and freedoms.



CubaMark said:


> Hey! Some of my best pals are Communists. Enough with the slander, buddy.
> 
> As for "destroy freedoms, gobble up income, and ravage economies" I daresay you have confused _commun_ism with _capital_ism.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Especially if the recall legislation goes ahead.


Wait...what? Serious? I hadn't heard. Where/when?


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Meet Notley's new Chief of Staff.


Perfect. Out of the frying pan, into the fire...

Hunker down, ladies & gents. Only 3-1/2 more years...


----------



## SINC

FeXL said:


> Wait...what? Serious? I hadn't heard. Where/when?


It's just an idea trying to take hold via a petition, but one can always hope. 

https://www.change.org/p/the-albert...ecall-legislation-for-the-alberta-legislature


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> Those are some real powerful economies Communists have built! Cuba! Albania! Yugoslavia! They had to build walls around those places to keep people from enjoying their bounty and freedoms.


I would have to state that US citizenship is now the worlds most toxic. I know Russians, Czechs, Poles and Chinese living right here in the Pass and they do not feel their former nations are any threat to their current well-being. 

OTOH Many Americans living outside the US, including myself, have either renounced our citizenship or are seriously considering giving it up rather than give the IRS a direct pipeline to our bank accounts. Those Americans who do cling to that citizenship are often forced to spend thousands of dollars annually to file tax returns and finance control forms, all to show that they owe no taxes. Even then they resort to praying that their expensive cross-border accountant hasn't blown an 8938, 3520 or F(u)BAR, thereby placing their life savings at extreme risk.

Logically this has also changed most of us from America's best good will ambassadors to its biggest detractors.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> It's just an idea trying to take hold via a petition, but one can always hope.


Got it! Thx.

Found it this morning, 13,700 signatures required, signed up. Just rechecked, 9606. Moving fast.


----------



## SINC

*Klassen: Notley owes us the numbers for climate action*












> It’s hard not to be cynical about the climate change farce starting in Paris today. It’s even more difficult not to be enraged (sickened?) by the eco-illogical cheerleading of Premier Rachel Notley leading the pack. She couldn’t handicap Alberta’s energy-driven economy any faster if she were OPEC itself. That Notley should be so smugly proud of this fact is perhaps her own kick in the teeth to Albertans.
> 
> Toot toot! Tens of thousands of people making superficial proclamations from nearly 200 countries have been carbon-jetted, driven, boated to the City of Light. On the boondoggle are most of our premiers and territory leaders and/or their reps, along with our prime minister and federal environment minister (so they can add their extensive knowledge and five minutes of experience to the issue).
> 
> Scientists from any remotely related special interest group, most government funded, are there. Some Canadian medical students are there to make the case that global warming is unhealthy; that will stop the conference dead in its tracks.
> 
> One can only hope and pray that our entire economy isn’t handed over on a silver platter in some preening, “look at me, how good am I?” gesture. Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall is going in the hope of controlling efforts to “kneecap” that province’s economy. Godspeed, Premier Wall, Godspeed.
> 
> If there is any consolation to the pretence, and if letters to the editor are any indication, Albertans are having none of it.
> 
> Let’s start with the $3-billion-per-year carbon tax to be collected from Albertans at about $500 for an average household. The high cost will discourage energy waste, says Notley, and anyways, 60 per cent of people are going to get a rebate. First of all, this is a cost to the Alberta consumer that will have negligible impact on the world, or even Alberta’s environment, because this doesn’t stop consumption. We still have to heat and light our homes and put gas in the car.
> 
> The three major oilsands developers smiled at the podium with Notley because their emissions cap has actually been increased, and their development plans won’t be constrained until well after Notley’s long gone. But the biggest tell is the rebate: don’t all households need to be encouraged to reduce their consumption? Having the top 40 per cent of earners pay that bill for the other 60 per cent is simple wealth redistribution, tax revenue without calling it a sales tax (the bogeyman).
> 
> Presenting this as some environmental coup is ridiculous and insulting.
> 
> Having rushed to say we’re dumping all our coal-fired plants in very short order for what will result in not a burp of actual global environmental difference, Notley owes us the rest of it. How much are we, the taxpayer, going to pay to buy off these facilities, and then build new ones for whatever replaces that generation capacity? Having induced companies to invest in power generation in the only province in Canada where public utility infrastructure is built at the risk of private investors, you can’t now say, sorry, changed our minds. We’re not Venezuela after all, so it’s right these companies have to be compensated.
> 
> Current estimates are between $4 billion and $12 billion for early retirement of these coal plants alone. Then there’s the cost of replacing them with new hugely expensive plants for the unreliable renewables, their transmission lines, and backup systems that will have to be built — paid for by the taxpayer or the consumer; either way, that’s you and me. How many billions will that be?
> 
> In return, apparently Alberta will suddenly diversify into new renewable industries, solving a problem Europeans and Americans have been working on for decades with exponentially bigger budgets and expertise — and all with our $3 billion per year (minus bureaucracy collection costs). We’re good — but that good?
> 
> Notley owes us the numbers.


Klassen: Notley owes us the numbers for climate action | Calgary Herald


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> NDP director Anne McGrath to become Notley's deputy chief of staff | CTV News
> 
> 
> 
> Meet Notley's new Chief of Staff.
> 
> 
> 
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_McGrath



And?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> And?


And Notley continues to insult the people of Alberta by hiring former commies to assist in running the province as well as bringing Dipper federal control into play here. Why are we not surprised?


----------



## CubaMark

SINC said:


> And Notley continues to insult the people of Alberta by hiring former commies to assist in running the province as well as bringing Dipper federal control into play here. Why are we not surprised?


Hey, Commies are Canadians too!  :heybaby:


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> And Notley continues to insult the people of Alberta by hiring former commies to assist in running the province as well as bringing Dipper federal control into play here. Why are we not surprised?



She's entitled to hire whomever she pleases. She's the premier. That's how it works. You don't have to act all butthurt every time another left leaning person is hired.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> Hey, Commies are Canadians too!  :heybaby:


Sure, but they should be left in an attic somewhere and kept out of sight.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> And Notley continues to insult the people of Alberta by hiring former commies to assist in running the province as well as bringing Dipper federal control into play here. Why are we not surprised?


Having listened to fjn pissing his petticoat and moaning over every tiny nuance that upset his delicate constitution during recent governments, it's hilarious to watch him demanding silence. Ain't gonna happen.


----------



## eMacMan

Those coal plants were acquired from the province at about 10% of their real value. Not at all sure, but suspect almost nothing has been spent on upgrades. Am very sure the companies have been taking depreciation on those plants to offset tax loads. Bottom line paying the companies the depreciated value should not bankrupt the province.

If rumours about the TPP are even 10% accurate, and the younger Trudeau indeed rushes headlong into signing it, then it will be almost impossible for Rachel to shutdown those plants. The one thing we know for sure is that the TPP puts corporate interests ahead of provinces and even nations.


----------



## CubaMark

eMacMan said:


> ....paying the companies the depreciated value should not bankrupt the province.


Be careful there, eMacMan - that's the kind of proper math that got the Yanks all hot and bothered with Cuba, leading to a 50+-year-long embargo!


----------



## Macfury

I thought Obama fixed that for ya!



CubaMark said:


> Be careful there, eMacMan - that's the kind of proper math that got the Yanks all hot and bothered with Cuba, leading to a 50+-year-long embargo!


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> I thought Obama fixed that for ya!


*Sadly, no*. The embargo remains in place... a few very minor exemptions have been made with little effect. I have doubts that Obama will be able to do it before he leaves office – he can use executive orders to further mitigate its effects, but since Clinton gave away the President's power to unilaterally lift it.


----------



## Macfury

I was being sarcastic. The amount of pomp and circumstance surrounding his minor twitches made it sound like they were ready to build a causeway to Havana.



CubaMark said:


> *Sadly, no*. The embargo remains in place... a few very minor exemptions have been made with little effect. I have doubts that Obama will be able to do it before he leaves office – he can use executive orders to further mitigate its effects, but since Clinton gave away the President's power to unilaterally lift it.


----------



## FeXL

There's not a single left leaning person in Alberta who could do the job?



fjnmusic said:


> You don't have to act all butthurt every time another left leaning person is hired.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> There's not a single left leaning person in Alberta who could do the job?



Why does it have to be someone from Alberta? I'd go with whomever is most qualified, regardless of where they hail from. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Once again, because the optics are bad.

Alberta Premier hires staff from out of province? It's a patronage appointment, pure & simple.



fjnmusic said:


> Why does it have to be someone from Alberta? I'd go with whomever is most qualified, regardless of where they hail from.


----------



## FeXL

Further on this Bill 6 Charlie Foxtrot.

Alberta to amend Bill 6 to clarify kids, neighbours can still help out on family farms



> The legislation would extend workers’ compensation and workplace rules on hours, *vacation pay and collective bargaining* to 43,000 farms and ranches.


Of course it's all about safety. Lying bitch.

Unemployment in Alberta just went up...



> “You may not know that I was a member of 4H..."


I'll bet. The Sissy Scissors 4H sewing club?


----------



## eMacMan

Heard an earful on this at the Barber Shop this AM. 

Ironically it's great for the Hutterite colonies that are essentially large family owned farms. If you can consider 20+ households to be a family. 

Not so great for the independent rancher I was talking to. Much of the year it's just he and his wife. Over the winter one of his sons drops by to help keep equipment in good working condition. But come haying, roundup, and sometimes calving he does hire a few extra hands on a temporary basis. So he seems to be considered big agri-business and gets all the extra gubmin shivs. 

I've omitted his colorful opinions of Ms. Rachael.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Further on this Bill 6 Charlie Foxtrot.
> 
> 
> 
> Alberta to amend Bill 6 to clarify kids, neighbours can still help out on family farms
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it's all about safety. Lying bitch.
> 
> 
> 
> Unemployment in Alberta just went up...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll bet. The Sissy Scissors 4H sewing club?



Your misogyny is showing again. If they are amending the legislation, isn't that a good thing? It means they're listening. Rare quality in a politician these days. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Oil and gas sector losing confidence in Alberta following Notley’s policy changes: survey | Financial Post

All Canadians will feel impact of Alberta's oil patch pain


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Oil and gas sector losing confidence in Alberta following Notley’s policy changes: survey | Financial Post
> 
> 
> 
> All Canadians will feel impact of Alberta's oil patch pain



And they always have. It's a major resource sector. So what would you suggest the NDP should DO to raise the price of oil and gas? 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> And they always have. It's a major resource sector. So what would you suggest the NDP should DO to raise the price of oil and gas?


Stop changing policy that is hurting the industry. It is in trouble yet the Dippers continue to assault it with new taxes.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Stop changing policy that is hurting the industry. It is in trouble yet the Dippers continue to assault it with new taxes.



And you honestly believe that anything we do here is going to have an impact on the price of a barrel of oil? Isn't OPEC a far bigger influence? Forgive the comparison, but it's a bit like saying if we can reduce green house gas emissions here by driving hybrids it will save the planet, when one volcano goes off and offsets 100 years of our efforts. I think perhaps you give far too much credit/blame to a fledgling new party that really doesn't have a lot to do with the outcome. They industry was in trouble before May 5, 2015, and will be in trouble for a long time to come.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> And you honestly believe that anything we do here is going to have an impact on the price of a barrel of oil? Isn't OPEC a far bigger influence? Forgive the comparison, but it's a bit like saying if we can reduce green house gas emissions here by driving hybrids it will save the planet, when one volcano goes off and offsets 100 years of our efforts. I think perhaps you give far too much credit/blame to a fledgling new party that really doesn't have a lot to do with the outcome. They industry was in trouble before May 5, 2015, and will be in trouble for a long time to come.


Wow, that one went right over your head. Point is they are kicking the industry when it is down. What they should be doing is backing off and letting it try to recover, not adding more weight to its problems.


----------



## FeXL

Yeah, yeah, yeah... Calling a spade a spade has always been an issue for you progressives, hasn't it?

Your complete lack of understanding is showing.



fjnmusic said:


> Your misogyny is showing again.


It's got nothing to do with the headline & everything to do with the quote. That's why I quoted it...



fjnmusic said:


> If they are amending the legislation, isn't that a good thing?


If she was actually listening, she wouldn't be pursuing it in the first place. Nor this whole Global Warming/Carbon Tax bull****.

This is nothing more than theatrics for those who are too ignorant to understand what is actually going on to make it appear she's listening.

Are you fooled by it? I'm certainly not.



fjnmusic said:


> It means they're listening. Rare quality in a politician these days.


----------



## FeXL

You see, there's the issue. Far too many progressives think that a government can _successfully_ control free market prices. I know this is going to come as a huge surprise but there is nothing the NDP can do to raise oil & gas prices. 

The simple truth is that economy of this province is largely resource based. This _cannot_ be changed overnite. Any introduced legislature that affects resources negatively will have an effect on the economic health of the whole province.

The solution is to quit kicking the petroleum industry while it's down.



fjnmusic said:


> So what would you suggest the NDP should DO to raise the price of oil and gas?


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> You see, there's the issue. Far too many progressives think that a government can _successfully_ control free market prices. I know this is going to come as a huge surprise but there is nothing the NDP can do to raise oil & gas prices.


Yo do realize that this is precisely fjnmusic's point, don't you?



FeXL said:


> The solution is to quit kicking the petroleum industry while it's down.


No, the solution is to recognize that the massively subsidized petroleum industry is too expensive to continue supporting, and this is precisely the time to make the move to alternative energy technologies that are better for the environment, for human health, and some might say the planet. I know you'll only see the last part of that phrase and go off on a rant about AGW conspiracies again  but it's impossible to deny the first two effects of the industry.


----------



## FeXL

Now, yes. 

But it doesn't change the fact that you don't kick your main economical factor in the groin when it's already on its knees.



CubaMark said:


> Yo do realize that this is precisely fjnmusic's point, don't you?


Asked & answered, elsewhere. First off, renewables are subsidized at a far higher rate than petroleum. Period. Plus, what many progressives erroneously pursue as "subsidies" are simple tax breaks that any industry receives.

Secondly, there are no, none, zero, economically viable alternative energies on this planet save hydro. Even nuclear, which I happen to (kind of) support, cannot survive without massive gov't injections of taxpayer dollars.

If you are referring to renewables, despite the mainstream BS that is claimed about them reaching price parity, not even close. Factor in backup capacity (coal, natural gas, diesel, biomass), factor in storage (batteries), factor in grid construction, factor out subsidies, not even close.

As to your claims about being better for the environment, again, not even close. Backup generators will always be required for renewables. It they are not operating continuously at rated output and are constantly spinning up & down to account for shortages in renewable they are not only running extremely inefficiently but they are subject to more maintenance & breakdowns. They simply were not designed for that type of operation. There are hundreds of tons of concrete required for the installation of a single wind generator, concrete which requires the massive production of cement which is one of the biggest sources of CO2 humans put into the atmosphere.

The topic of dead birds & bats is indefensible.

Solar panel construction requires the use of toxic chemicals and the production of aluminum which is very energy intensive, either new or recycled.



CubaMark said:


> No, the solution is to recognize that the massively subsidized petroleum industry is too expensive to continue supporting, and this is precisely the time to make the move to alternative energy technologies that are better for the environment, for human health, and some might say the planet.


Once gain, you claim to know things about me & yet, you know nothing. Factoring in all parts of the equation reveals that renewables are more toxic to the planet than petroleum. The irony is, if you were truly concerned about the health of the planet, renewables would be the last thing you should support.



CubaMark said:


> I know you'll only see the last part of that phrase and go off on a rant about AGW conspiracies again


Not only here, but on the Alternative Energy thread, your claims have been empirically debunked numerous times. You choose to ignore the facts, at mankind's & the planet's peril.



CubaMark said:


> but it's impossible to deny the first two effects of the industry.


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> First off, renewables are subsidized at a far higher rate than petroleum. Period.


Hah. No. Not even close.



FeXL said:


> Plus, what many progressives erroneously pursue as "subsidies" are simple tax breaks that any industry receives.


 Even if that were the case, it still amounts to a subsidy that artificially reduces the cost of the product. Why are you for subsidies for fossil fuels, but against them for less-dirty energy production?



FeXL said:


> Secondly, there are no, none, zero, economically viable alternative energies on this planet save hydro. Even nuclear, which I happen to (kind of) support, cannot survive without massive gov't injections of taxpayer dollars.
> 
> If you are referring to renewables, despite the mainstream BS that is claimed about them reaching price parity, not even close. Factor in backup capacity (coal, natural gas, diesel, biomass), factor in storage (batteries), factor in grid construction, factor out subsidies, not even close.


Do the same calculations for the fossil fuel industry and its related 'supports'. Your pro-fossil fuel bias prevents you from accurately accounting for those costs.



FeXL said:


> As to your claims about being better for the environment, again, not even close.











FeXL said:


> Backup generators will always be required for renewables. It they are not operating continuously at rated output and are constantly spinning up & down to account for shortages in renewable they are not only running extremely inefficiently but they are subject to more maintenance & breakdowns.


Uh-huh. And the fossil fuel industry operates 100% of the time, completely reliable, never breaks down. Yup. Wanna buy a bridge?

Alternative energy sources are at the beginning phase of their development, and there are technical barriers to efficiency, reliability and storage. But none of that justifies this absolute _boner of hatred_ you and others in here have toward anything that is not fossil fuel. 

Storage systems are improving daily. Batteries are getting better. Capacitors are more reliable. Physical storage solutions are being created. It's a time of new discovery, with, y'know, _science_. You negative nellies are the equivalent of cranky old men who still like their rotary phones and refuse to accept the benefit of smartphones.



FeXL said:


> The topic of dead birds & bats is indefensible.


We must immediately shut down all airports! No more glass skyscrapers (Item #3)! FeXL the World Wildlife Fund patron of the year demands we protect all animals everywhere! (well, except those who die by the tens of thousands on oil-soaked beaches or tailing ponds, those bastards were asking for it).



FeXL said:


> Solar panel construction requires the use of toxic chemicals and the production of aluminum which is very energy intensive, either new or recycled.


Alternative materials are being used today to create new kinds of solar panels. The technology is maturing, improving and addressing the environmental issues raised. I still find it hilarious that one of your criticisms is this, while you would sacrifice an arm to keep the gasoline flowing, with all of its lovely toxic emissions. What was that word you like to throw around (apparently without understanding its definition?). Ah, yes. Hypocrite!



FeXL said:


> Not only here, but on the Alternative Energy thread, your claims have been empirically debunked numerous times. You choose to ignore the facts, at mankind's & the planet's peril.


I've made claims in the AE thread? Huh. And here I thought I was just posting new and interesting news in the alternative energy field. I must go over there and see what all (your) fuss is about...


----------



## FeXL

Moved this over to the Alternative Energy Thread where it belongs.



CubaMark said:


> Hah. No Not even close.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Wow, that one went right over your head. Point is they are kicking the industry when it is down. What they should be doing is backing off and letting it try to recover, not adding more weight to its problems.


Wow, you totally missed the point. Kicking the industry or not kicking the industry at this point makes no difference. Unless the price of a barrel improves to the point where it is a profitable industry again, nothing will change. The industry is in a state of hibernation. It's as good a time as any to look at the other aspects of the industry such as environmental footprint. Lord knows nobody was doing it when the price was $140/barrel. If not now, when?


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Yeah, yeah, yeah... Calling a spade a spade has always been an issue for you progressives, hasn't it?
> 
> Your complete lack of understanding is showing.
> 
> 
> 
> It's got nothing to do with the headline & everything to do with the quote. That's why I quoted it...
> 
> 
> 
> If she was actually listening, she wouldn't be pursuing it in the first place. Nor this whole Global Warming/Carbon Tax bull****.
> 
> This is nothing more than theatrics for those who are too ignorant to understand what is actually going on to make it appear she's listening.
> 
> Are you fooled by it? I'm certainly not.


Sound alike you've imbibing quite liberally at the Reform/Conservative Kool Aid trough. You won't even consider that there could be environmental impacts from industry in Alberta. Hence your declaration of "Global Warming/Carbon Tax bull****." You're even more closed-minded than the people you criticize of being closed-minded.


----------



## BigDL

fjnmusic said:


> Sound alike you've imbibing quite liberally at the Reform/Conservative Kool Aid trough. You won't even consider that there could be environmental impacts from industry in Alberta. Hence your declaration of "Global Warming/Carbon Tax bull****." You're even more closed-minded than the people you criticize of being closed-minded.


Not closed minded, deluded and [ame]http://youtu.be/EsCyC1dZiN8[/ame]


----------



## FeXL

Sounds like you're the typical progressive with his head up his ass.

There, now that we've exchanged insults, has the topic moved forward at all? No, it hasn't. So, instead of throwing out insults, why not actually address the topic? Hmmm?



fjnmusic said:


> Sound alike you've imbibing quite liberally at the Reform/Conservative Kool Aid trough.


Those are your words, not mine. Of course industry has environmental impacts. Your point is?



fjnmusic said:


> You won't even consider that there could be environmental impacts from industry in Alberta.


Serious? That's a pretty tenuous thread you're attempting to connect two entirely disparate concepts with.

Oh, and, no. Rachel is embarking down the path of AGW despite zero, none, nada, empirical evidence to support her position. That's what I mean when I say if she was actually listening (to the science), she wouldn't be supporting the concept.

It's also what I mean when I say a Carbon Tax is crap. It does absolutely nothing in regards to the reduction of CO2 to the atmosphere. All it does is shuffle money around from hand to hand, from the poor to the rich, all the while the gov't administrators take their substantial cut. Despite all screeching to the contrary, it is _not_ revenue neutral.



fjnmusic said:


> Hence your declaration of "Global Warming/Carbon Tax bull****."


I'm more than willing to listen to anyone present their case in a clear, concise, fact-filled fashion. If you want to defend your position on Global Warming, you know where the thread is. If you want to debate Carbon Taxes, it's the same thread.

If all you got is accusations against others with no actual defence of your own, save ad homs, insults, straw man arguments, red herrings, & logical fallacies, then the close-minded one is in the mirror.

Have at 'er...



fjnmusic said:


> You're even more closed-minded than the people you criticize of being closed-minded.


----------



## FeXL

Fabulous!!! More of that 24 carat gold plated, diamond studded "Critical Thinking" on display. Further proof that you got nuttin'. Thanks for the confirmation.

Isn't there a weather thread that requires your attention?



BigDL said:


> Not closed minded, deluded and


----------



## BigDL

FeXL said:


> Fabulous!!! More of that 24 carat gold plated, diamond studded "Critical Thinking" on display. Further proof that you got nuttin'. Thanks for the confirmation.
> 
> Isn't there a weather thread that requires your attention?


...been there done that! Seem you must be further in the past than I imagined or is it your other condition that being troublesome?


----------



## FeXL

Nope. My superior intellect is doing just fine, thank you.



BigDL said:


> ...been there done that! Seem you must be further in the past than I imagined or is it your other condition that being troublesome?


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Nope. My superior intellect is doing just fine, thank you.


fjn is thinking so far "outside the box" that you can't see his reply.


----------



## FeXL

Gotta luv them transparent governments...

Secret deal on Alberta’s oilsands emissions limits divides patch



> A hard cap on oilsands emissions that became part of Alberta Premier Rachel Notley’s climate change plan was the product of secret negotiations between four top oilsands companies and four environmental organizations, the Financial Post has learned.
> Alberta’s carbon tax plan ‘one more reason why the Western Canadian oilfield is going to slowly die’
> 
> The companies agreed to the cap in exchange for the environmental groups backing down on opposition to oil export pipelines, but the deal left other players on the sidelines, and that has created a deep division in Canada’s oil and gas sector.


And, before the screeching starts about how Rachel didn't know anything about this, she knew in enough time to incorporate it into her speech. She could have just as easily put her stamp of disapproval on it.

She didn't...


----------



## SINC

Yep, the countdown is on to bye bye Dippers already.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Yep, the countdown is on to bye bye Dippers already.



LOL! That's about like saying as soon as you're born, you begin dying, even if you live to 90. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> LOL! That's about like saying as soon as you're born, you begin dying, even if you live to 90.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


No, it is the death knell of the Dippers in Alberta. Watch it happen, Frank, watch it happen.


----------



## CubaMark

*Rachel Notley addresses the criticisms of the farm safety bill (excerpt):*

_This common sense framework will be the product of consultations that will occur before the regulations are developed and, then again, after they are drafted and before they are adopted. Family farmers, farmworkers, and other agricultural stakeholders will be invited to participate. Through this process, we will achieve the long overdue goal of protecting farmworkers while continuing the current goal of supporting our farmers.

I have been asked about what we are doing to address the legitimate concerns raised by farmers and ranchers. Let me be clear: Farming is not a just a business in Alberta, it is a way of life and, as I mentioned, over the past days we have heard from farmers and ranchers across this province. We are listening and we will continue to listen.
I also want to clarify what this legislation does not do. This legislation:


Does not interfere with families’ ability to teach their children about farming and pass on their way of life.
Will not prevent neighbours from volunteering to help each other out.
Will not regulate or interfere with children’s ability to participate in doing chores around the farm.
Will not interfere in any way with farm kids’ ability to learn about agriculture and grow within the 4-H system.
Will not require you to register your children with the WCB.
Will not regulate how you operate your household.
Will not interfere with recreational activities on the farm.
It was a mistake that our intentions and these limitations were not included in the text of the bill. They were always intended to be introduced in regulation. Between what was explicitly stated, and what was intended, fear and miscommunication has filled the gap. 

*I take responsibility for that.*_​


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> No, it is the death knell of the Dippers in Alberta. Watch it happen, Frank, watch it happen.



It's going to be the rebirth of business in Alberta, Don, apparently a business plan that you don't have the vision to see. Alberta has a terrible reputation as far as the oilsands' environmental impact, rightly or wrongly, so if you really want to increase investment again, you have to change the story being told. The previous gov't was too lazy or too obstinate to do anything about that reputation, so a change was needed regardless. 

Rachel Notley is smarter than most of the right wing whiners and is tackling the problem head on by trying to change the perception of Alberta as resource exploiters who don't care about the planet. Albertans are good people and hard workers, but we're going to need new opportunities to weather this storm. The previous gov't was certainly short on new ideas. Alberta will recover and thrive again with the "Dippers" at the wheel. Watch it happen, Don, watch it happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Seems even Brian Jean, currently MLA for Fort Mac and leader of the WR felt a slow down was needed in resource exploitation in Alberta's oil sands' industry. 
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...nt-ex-mp-says/article16413969/?service=mobile


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

In other news, for those who just don't get it, an injured farm worker speaks out in favor of Bill 6. 
http://globalnews.ca/video/2377144/injured-former-farm-worker-speaks-out-in-favour-of-bill-6/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Bull****. Bull****. And more Bull****...

If she were _actually_ listening, she wouldn't even go down this road.



CubaMark said:


> _This common sense framework will be the *product of consultations that will occur before the regulations are developed* and, then *again, after they are drafted and before they are adopted.* Family farmers, farmworkers, and other agricultural stakeholders will be invited to participate. Through this process, we will achieve the long overdue goal of protecting farmworkers while continuing the current goal of supporting our farmers.
> 
> I have been asked about what we are doing to address the legitimate concerns raised by farmers and ranchers. Let me be clear: Farming is not a just a business in Alberta, it is a way of life and, as I mentioned, over the past days we have heard from farmers and ranchers across this province. *We are listening and we will continue to listen.*
> I also want to clarify what this legislation does not do. This legislation:_​


M'bold.


----------



## FeXL

You make broad, sweeping statements like this & expect to be received with any credibility?

Just shaking my head...



fjnmusic said:


> Rachel Notley is smarter than most of the right wing whiners...


----------



## FeXL

So Global combed the province, searching out that one injured farmer who'd support the meme.

What about the hundreds of thousands, some of which have been injured, too, who do not want the bill passed?



fjnmusic said:


> In other news, for those who just don't get it, an injured farm worker speaks out in favor of Bill 6.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> ...so if you really want to increase investment again, you have to change the story being told.


The oil patch was never short of investment. Why make thing up?


----------



## FeXL

Only to environmentalists. Alberta oilsands oil is far cleaner than, say, Venezuela's, which is welcomed with open arms in the US. The story being told must not necessarily be right or wrong, it must be _correct_. This is a concept many have issues with.



fjnmusic said:


> Alberta has a terrible reputation as far as the oilsands' environmental impact, rightly or wrongly, so if you really want to increase investment again, you have to change the story being told.


Yet, if ads had been bought with taxpayer money promoting oilsands oil & spreading the truth about it, there would have been a hue & cry.



fjnmusic said:


> The previous gov't was too lazy or too obstinate to do anything about that reputation, so a change was needed regardless.


No argument. However, nothing Rachel has come with yet indicates that she has any more innovation or common sense. She's alienated the oilpatch, she's pissed off the farmers, she's insulted anyone who knows anything at all about "Global Warming" & carbon taxes, she's slammed thousands of perfectly capable Albertans by hiring CoS from out of province. Whose next?



fjnmusic said:


> The previous gov't was certainly short on new ideas.


Alberta will recover only when the Dippers are gone. In 3-1/2 years... 



fjnmusic said:


> Alberta will recover and thrive again with the "Dippers" at the wheel.


----------



## Macfury

Alberta's unemployment rate rises--and it ain't just energy:

Alberta unemployment rate reaches 7%, nearly 15,000 jobs lost | Calgary Herald



> The biggest decreases from October were seen in transportation and warehousing (-6,200); accommodation and food services (-3,900) and information, culture and recreation (3,900). The biggest gains came in manufacturing (+3,000); construction (+2,700) and educational services (1,900).


----------



## SINC

Alberta's crippling carbon tax


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Alberta will recover and thrive again with the "Dippers" at the wheel.


Are you talking about public sector salaries?


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> You make broad, sweeping statements like this & expect to be received with any credibility?
> 
> 
> 
> Just shaking my head...



She's smarter than you. She's earned the title of Premier while you sit back as an armchair critic. Just because you don't understand the game plan does not make your intellect any greater. You seem to have a frail grasp on the big picture, my fellow Albertan.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Alberta's unemployment rate rises--and it ain't just energy:
> 
> 
> 
> Alberta unemployment rate reaches 7%, nearly 15,000 jobs lost | Calgary Herald



Got any brilliant ideas for how to reign in OPEC production and lift the price of oil? Because until we are no longer at the mercy of countries we don't control, it's going to be awfully hard to control industry-related jobs here. Ever wonder why OPEC decided to flood the market? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> She's smarter than you. She's earned the title of Premier while you sit back as an armchair critic. Just because you don't understand the game plan does not make your intellect any greater. You seem to have a frail grasp on the big picture, my fellow Albertan.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


LOL! Earned? Pure BS. She was gifted the job by an angry electorate who now deeply regret their stupidity voting for the SpeNDPers.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> The oil patch was never short of investment. Why make thing up?



Never? Hmm. So where are those investors now? The reason for the slowdown has little do with Alberta and everything to do with the international price of a barrel of oil. OPEC has far more influence on that. Companies do not invest when it is not profitable. If that oil price goes back up, they will resume operations, regardless of who or what is in power in Alberta or anywhere else.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> So Global combed the province, searching out that one injured farmer who'd support the meme.
> 
> 
> 
> What about the hundreds of thousands, some of which have been injured, too, who do not want the bill passed?



So you deny her story? Or it just isn't important to you? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

fjnmusic said:


> Seems even Brian Jean, currently MLA for Fort Mac and leader of the WR felt a slow down was needed in resource exploitation in Alberta's oil sands' industry.
> http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...nt-ex-mp-says/article16413969/?service=mobile
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Interesting that there are no right wing reactions to Brian Jean's words, one politician who is the closest to the action in Fort McMurray. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Never? Hmm. So where are those investors now? The reason for the slowdown has little do with Alberta and everything to do with the international price of a barrel of oil. OPEC has far more influence on that. Companies do not invest when it is not profitable. If that oil price goes back up, they will resume operations, regardless of who or what is in power in Alberta or anywhere else.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That's what you think. Truth is those investers will not return until we turf the SpeNDPers.


----------



## Macfury

Understood. But they will not return to Alberta in droves under the NDP regime when there are friendlier economies available.



fjnmusic said:


> Never? Hmm. So where are those investors now? The reason for the slowdown has little do with Alberta and everything to do with the international price of a barrel of oil. OPEC has far more influence on that. Companies do not invest when it is not profitable. If that oil price goes back up, they will resume operations, regardless of who or what is in power in Alberta or anywhere else.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

The oil shock has already filtered through the economy. These are non-energy jobs disappearing.



fjnmusic said:


> Got any brilliant ideas for how to reign in OPEC production and lift the price of oil? Because until we are no longer at the mercy of countries we don't control, it's going to be awfully hard to control industry-related jobs here. Ever wonder why OPEC decided to flood the market?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> LOL! Earned? Pure BS. She was gifted the job by an angry electorate who now deeply regret their stupidity voting for the SpeNDPers.



And? She's still Premier for at least another three and a half years. That's a lot of butt hurt you're going to have to endure. And she won fair and square, in a general election, just like every other politician does. He have a very odd notion of how elections work and are used to determine representatives in a representative democracy. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> The oil shock has already filtered through the economy. These are non-energy jobs disappearing.



These are energy-related jobs. When a big industry like oil is hit there are many ripple effects. But the cute, once again, is to get the price of oil up by lowering the supply from places like OPEC countries. For all you know, this is how WW3 is fought—by hitting Western nations where it hurts. It is a campaign that no bombing run can ever fix.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Understood. But they will not return to Alberta in droves under the NDP regime when there are friendlier economies available.



They will as long as there is oil in the ground, and plenty of it. Read the Brian Jean link and what he said about Fort Mac before stepping down from Federal politics. We, as Albertans, need to not act desperate. We have the resource that industry wants. In spades. Even the U.S., although they focus on the "dirty oil" mantra because they want to drive down our selling price. So long as they drive cars and fly planes and produce plastic water bottles, they're going to need oil.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> That's what you think. Truth is those investers will not return until we turf the SpeNDPers.



We shall see. It seems to me that when the price is right, all kinds of business gets done, regardless of personal feelings. There's no guarantee that whoever gets elected in 2019 will be better than the ones you hate now. Alberta has lots of oil resources, the infrastructure to get at it, and a better tax rate than any other jurisdiction in Canada. When the price is right, say $60 or $70 a barrel consistently, they will resume operations. Meanwhile it's EI or find another job for those laid off. I've had to do this early in my career; no worker is immune. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

CubaMark said:


> *Rachel Notley addresses the criticisms of the farm safety bill (excerpt):*
> 
> 
> 
> _This common sense framework will be the product of consultations that will occur before the regulations are developed and, then again, after they are drafted and before they are adopted. Family farmers, farmworkers, and other agricultural stakeholders will be invited to participate. Through this process, we will achieve the long overdue goal of protecting farmworkers while continuing the current goal of supporting our farmers.
> 
> 
> 
> I have been asked about what we are doing to address the legitimate concerns raised by farmers and ranchers. Let me be clear: Farming is not a just a business in Alberta, it is a way of life and, as I mentioned, over the past days we have heard from farmers and ranchers across this province. We are listening and we will continue to listen.
> 
> I also want to clarify what this legislation does not do. This legislation:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Does not interfere with families’ ability to teach their children about farming and pass on their way of life.
> 
> Will not prevent neighbours from volunteering to help each other out.
> 
> Will not regulate or interfere with children’s ability to participate in doing chores around the farm.
> 
> Will not interfere in any way with farm kids’ ability to learn about agriculture and grow within the 4-H system.
> 
> Will not require you to register your children with the WCB.
> 
> Will not regulate how you operate your household.
> 
> Will not interfere with recreational activities on the farm.
> 
> 
> It was a mistake that our intentions and these limitations were not included in the text of the bill. They were always intended to be introduced in regulation. Between what was explicitly stated, and what was intended, fear and miscommunication has filled the gap.
> 
> 
> 
> *I take responsibility for that.*_​



Careful, Mark. We don't want to confuse the truth with the theories people would prefer to believe about the sky falling.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

More trouble for the SpeNDPers.

https://www.mailoutinteractive.com/...l&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer


----------



## Macfury

A difference of a dollar a barrel will change their tune and send them hiking for greener pastures.



fjnmusic said:


> They will as long as there is oil in the ground, and plenty of it. Read the Brian Jean link and what he said about Fort Mac before stepping down from Federal politics. We, as Albertans, need to not act desperate. We have the resource that industry wants. In spades. Even the U.S., although they focus on the "dirty oil" mantra because they want to drive down our selling price. So long as they drive cars and fly planes and produce plastic water bottles, they're going to need oil.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## eMacMan

Two huge problems with the Farm Legislation.

First is the attitude of let's pass something bad now then pretend we'll patch it later. As we have seen time and again bad legislation is seldom repealed or amended down the road. There is every reason to fully address concerns of the family farm or ranch right off the top. 

Most family farms hire casual labour at some point. If they are lucky they are able to find the same individuals year after year. If that is not the case this safety training becomes an annual expense that doubles the cost of hiring help. The alternative then becomes for the Farmer or Rancher to assume even more of the burden to offset the additional cost. Working themselves past the point of exhaustion is almost certain to lead to more rather than fewer accidents.

Ironically some big agra such as the Hutterite colonies will get a pass under this legislation where as the true family operation will be hit the hardest.

This legislation is the legislative equivalent of Adobe Flash. A much better alternative is to get the code correct from the beginning, rather than pretending they'll patch it later.


----------



## FeXL

It's patently obvious to anyone with a clew that she doesn't have one.

Pretty sure I'm at least a few steps above that.



fjnmusic said:


> She's smarter than you.


So, what's the thrust here? She is like unto God? Above reproach? Beyond criticism? BOHIC? Horse****... 

Like any person who _works for me_, she is subject to intense scrutiny and, if required, reprimand.



fjnmusic said:


> She's earned the title of Premier while you sit back as an armchair critic.


Well, seeing as you seem to have such a vast & clear understanding of her "game plan", please, explain it to us peons...



fjnmusic said:


> Just because you don't understand the game plan does not make your intellect any greater. You seem to have a frail grasp on the big picture, my fellow Albertan.


----------



## FeXL

You're a great one to quote numbers as some sort of "might is right" backing for your argument. Here it is, back at you:

You've found one person who endorses gov't interference on Alberta farms. Fine. There are hundreds of thousands of others who have no interest.



fjnmusic said:


> So you deny her story? Or it just isn't important to you?


----------



## SINC

I guess the SpeNDP will have to pass on wind too as it uses the coal they banned.


----------



## SINC

Keep it up Notley, you are alienating a huge majority of Albertans. Your accidental government is a one trick pony and we can undo the damage when we kick your butt out.

Albertans dislike NDP climate change plan, especially the tax, survey shows | Calgary Herald


----------



## FeXL

But Rachel is so much smarter than the rest of us... :love2:

What do us ignorant peons know?


----------



## SINC

> *The Alberta NDP is using an obsolete "you elect us, we govern you" style that was already rapidly dying 20 years ago -- a style that became highly ineffective under the information openness of the Internet.*


The Alberta NDP Needs A Lesson On 21st Century Governing - Todd Herron


----------



## SINC

> *Alberta is being destabilized and divided by a government that’s trying to do too much too fast; and as a result, not doing some things well at all.
> 
> The NDP’s seven-month record for activism is nothing short of staggering.
> 
> Notley has never before seemed so stressed in the legislature.*


This government is going to self destruct.

Braid: The NDP threatens to outrun itself and the province, too | Calgary Herald


----------



## SINC

.


----------



## fjnmusic

They're doing exactly what they said they'd do when people voted them in. Unusual to see a politician keep a promise, perhaps? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

No-they are doing things that were never in their campaign. However, they have kept their promises to ruin Alberta's economy in certain fashions.



fjnmusic said:


> They're doing exactly what they said they'd do when people voted them in. Unusual to see a politician keep a promise, perhaps?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> No-they are doing things that were never in their campaign. However, they have kept their promises to ruin Alberta's economy in certain fashions.



You really don't pay attention do you? Obstinacy is not a virtue. The things they are doing now are exactly what they campaigned on. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Running family farms into the ground? Don't remember that one.



fjnmusic said:


> You really don't pay attention do you? Obstinacy is not a virtue. The things they are doing now are exactly what they campaigned on.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Running family farms into the ground? Don't remember that one.



Whose farms are being run into the ground? If you can't afford to pay for the safety of your workers on your farm, maybe you're in the wrong business. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Whose farms are being run into the ground? If you can't afford to pay for the safety of your workers on your farm, maybe you're in the wrong business.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


They're in the wrong province right now.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> The Alberta NDP Needs A Lesson On 21st Century Governing - Todd Herron


Brilliant analysis. I don't think there's a single sentence in the article I have issues with.

This paragraph should be emblazoned upon politician's foreheads the world over:



> *The best type of success in a society is when a society itself, rather than its government, solves its own problems. Government has a strong role in creating fertile environments that allow this to happen. This shifts the government from a "we rule you" to a "we support you" relationship with citizens.*


All emphasis mine.

Get out of my face, Rachel. You work for me, not the other way around. When I want something from you, I'll ask. Until then, sit quietly in the corner & try not to screw something up...


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> This government is going to self destruct.


It doesn't matter what they do for the next 41 months. In 7 months they've already shown they don't have a clue about either politics or Albertans. They've already alienated just about everybody in the province except the unionistas &, by the sounds of Bill 8, they're working hard at pissing off the teachers.

The honeymoon is over. Congratulations on heading the first single session political party in Alberta's 110 year history, Rachel... :clap::clap::clap:


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> ...by the sounds of Bill 8, they're working hard at pissing off the teachers.


Took Bob Rae a year or two to **** off the teachers. Looks like Notley is going to yank their chains right after they kissed her ass at the election booth.


----------



## FeXL

Husky Energy Inc to sell assets, cut Alberta spending to survive in oil’s ‘uncharted territory’



> Husky Energy Inc. is considering the sale of part of its vast midstream business and will cut capital spending – *particularly in Alberta* – in 2016 to make itself more resilient in a low oil price environment.
> 
> In capital spending plans for next year announced Tuesday, the Calgary-based integrated oil company said it would trim investment to about $2.9 billion to $3.1 billion in 2016, from $3.1 billion in 2015, and from $5.1 billion in 2014.


Emphasis mine.

But why, oh why, only in Alberta? 



> Husky, majority owned by Hong Kong billionaire Li Ka-Shing, is holding back spending in Alberta, where *the new NDP government has raised corporate taxes, is implementing a controversial carbon tax and is expected to reveal a new oil and gas royalty regime by the end of the month.*


M'bold.

Ya don't say...


----------



## SINC

More business leaving:

Encana plans to shift spending from Alberta to Texas | Calgary Herald


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> More business leaving:
> 
> Encana plans to shift spending from Alberta to Texas | Calgary Herald


But fjn just guaranteed us that these oil companies would never do that! That they would be roaring back to Alberta regardless of Notley's malfeasance!


----------



## SINC

Well the SpeNDPers passed Bill 6 using closure and sealed their fate as a one term government.

Majority of Alberta farmers oppose mandatory ‘one-size-fits-all’ legislation

Calgary, December 10, 2015 –The Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) today released survey data highlighting farmers’ serious concerns about the Alberta Government’s Bill 6 - the Enhanced Protection for Farm and Ranch Workers Act. 

According to the CFIB research, Alberta farmers say the most effective ways to promote farm safety are making safety measures more affordable (51 per cent), safety promotions at farm shows/demonstrations (45 per cent), and safety education programs in schools (42 per cent). Only seven per cent of Alberta farmers say government legislative requirements are most effective at promoting farm safety. 

Farmers care about their employees; in fact, most of their employees are friends and family. “CFIB members believe one farm fatality is one too many. That’s why the Alberta government needs to listen to farmers and focus on practical ways to improve farm safety, rather than imposing blanket rules that don’t reflect the realities of farming,” said Amber Ruddy, CFIB’s Alberta Director. 

“Even with the amendments to exempt family members, there are many outstanding concerns with Bill 6. There are fundamental flaws in the legislation that will hamper growth and development of our agricultural sector. Given this, the government needs to stop and consult with Alberta farmers.”


CFIB’s data reveals mandatory inclusion of legislation included in Bill 6 would have a negative impact on their farms:

· 79 per cent say mandatory inclusion of agriculture under the Employment Standards and Labour Code would have a negative impact on their business
· 75 per cent say mandatory inclusion of agriculture under the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OH&S) would have a negative impact on their business
· 62 per cent say mandatory inclusion of agriculture under the Workers’ Compensation Act (WCB) would have a negative impact on their business


“Occupational Health & Safety, WCB, Employment Standards and the Labour Code were not written with the realities of farming in mind. Agriculture is not a nine to five business, especially during peak production, like harvest or calving season. We know calves aren’t all born before 4:59 pm,” added Ruddy. “Alberta’s economy is already fragile and Bill 6 will hit Alberta’s agriculture sector hard. The Government should be working to keep agriculture competitive in order to attract the next generation of farmers. Unfortunately, Bill 6 will do the exact opposite.”

“Clearly there are many reasons why Bill 6 is unworkable for Alberta farmers,” said Ruddy. “We urge the government to stop, listen and start a genuine consultation with farmers to find ways to improve farm safety without threatening the livelihood of thousands of Alberta producers.”


----------



## eMacMan

To say that Worker's Comp has a horrendous reputation in Alberta would be an understatement. I would be very surprised to learn that anyone ever got a dime out of them without resorting to involving a lawyer.

Does prove that the NDP are no better than any other party when it comes to catering to corporate buds. Too bad they became so con-like so soon after the election.

Doubt that this will cost them very many seats in the next election. Rural Alberta is quite solidly Wild Rose with a sprinkling of PC MLAs.

OTOH The Harper discovered that the more people you toss under one bus or another the more likely you are to get a solid boot to the butt come the next election.


----------



## SINC

Martin: Notley’s climate-change plan will be the Alberta Disadvantage | Calgary Herald


----------



## SINC

As is becoming more apparent every day, Notley has no idea:

Alberta Premier Rachel Notley facing backlash over oilsands emissions cap | Financial Post


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> More business leaving:
> 
> 
> 
> Encana plans to shift spending from Alberta to Texas | Calgary Herald



Great. More opportunities for someone else.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Well the SpeNDPers passed Bill 6 using closure and sealed their fate as a one term government.
> 
> 
> 
> Majority of Alberta farmers oppose mandatory ‘one-size-fits-all’ legislation
> 
> 
> 
> Calgary, December 10, 2015 –The Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) today released survey data highlighting farmers’ serious concerns about the Alberta Government’s Bill 6 - the Enhanced Protection for Farm and Ranch Workers Act.
> 
> 
> 
> According to the CFIB research, Alberta farmers say the most effective ways to promote farm safety are making safety measures more affordable (51 per cent), safety promotions at farm shows/demonstrations (45 per cent), and safety education programs in schools (42 per cent). Only seven per cent of Alberta farmers say government legislative requirements are most effective at promoting farm safety.
> 
> 
> 
> Farmers care about their employees; in fact, most of their employees are friends and family. “CFIB members believe one farm fatality is one too many. That’s why the Alberta government needs to listen to farmers and focus on practical ways to improve farm safety, rather than imposing blanket rules that don’t reflect the realities of farming,” said Amber Ruddy, CFIB’s Alberta Director.
> 
> 
> 
> “Even with the amendments to exempt family members, there are many outstanding concerns with Bill 6. There are fundamental flaws in the legislation that will hamper growth and development of our agricultural sector. Given this, the government needs to stop and consult with Alberta farmers.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CFIB’s data reveals mandatory inclusion of legislation included in Bill 6 would have a negative impact on their farms:
> 
> 
> 
> · 79 per cent say mandatory inclusion of agriculture under the Employment Standards and Labour Code would have a negative impact on their business
> 
> · 75 per cent say mandatory inclusion of agriculture under the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OH&S) would have a negative impact on their business
> 
> · 62 per cent say mandatory inclusion of agriculture under the Workers’ Compensation Act (WCB) would have a negative impact on their business
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “Occupational Health & Safety, WCB, Employment Standards and the Labour Code were not written with the realities of farming in mind. Agriculture is not a nine to five business, especially during peak production, like harvest or calving season. We know calves aren’t all born before 4:59 pm,” added Ruddy. “Alberta’s economy is already fragile and Bill 6 will hit Alberta’s agriculture sector hard. The Government should be working to keep agriculture competitive in order to attract the next generation of farmers. Unfortunately, Bill 6 will do the exact opposite.”
> 
> 
> 
> “Clearly there are many reasons why Bill 6 is unworkable for Alberta farmers,” said Ruddy. “We urge the government to stop, listen and start a genuine consultation with farmers to find ways to improve farm safety without threatening the livelihood of thousands of Alberta producers.”



Are you ignoring the part where family and friendly neighbors are not included in this legislation? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

I think Notley is in the process of creating far more opportunities for someone else.



fjnmusic said:


> Great. More opportunities for someone else.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Screw the changes. Are you ignoring the part where the majority of Albertans don't want the legislation, period?



fjnmusic said:


> Are you ignoring the part where family and friendly neighbors are not included in this legislation?


----------



## FeXL

Yeah, cool.

Scrap dealers can start picking up the pieces for $20/ton...



fjnmusic said:


> Great. More opportunities for someone else.


----------



## FeXL

BTW, fjn, how's that days old request for an explanation of the NDP policy for dummies coming along?

Kinda itchin' to see how they're doing...


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> BTW, fjn, how's that days old request for an explanation of the NDP policy for dummies coming along?
> 
> 
> 
> Kinda itchin' to see how they're doing...



They have this thing called Google now, FeXL. If you're so interested, you could always look it up. Me, I'm quite happy with how politics are working out, both in Alberta and in Canada as a whole. And if that pisses you off, well that's just icing on the cake. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Me, I'm quite happy with how politics are working out, both in Alberta


Enjoy it while you can, Frank, they're on their way out:

New poll shows plunge in NDP support since summer | CTV Calgary News


----------



## SINC

*Power changes everything for NDP*



> *Hypocrites and bullies.
> 
> That’s what Alberta’s New Democrats are.*
> 
> Hypocrites because in using their majority to shut down debate on Bill 6, their ham-fisted, blunt-instrument farm safety legislation, they are adopting the same tactics – precisely the same – that they so often complained about when used by former Tory governments.
> 
> And bullies because no matter how much Alberta farmers and ranchers complained about the bill, no matter how many angry protests, no matter how many calls and emails to legislature offices, the NDP will push through their hard-core leftist agenda to treat family farms and ranches like assembly lines and construction sites.


Power changes everything for NDP


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Enjoy it while you can, Frank, they're on their way out:
> 
> 
> 
> New poll shows plunge in NDP support since summer | CTV Calgary News



Not for a long time, Don. You have at least three and a half more years to whine and complain. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> *Power changes everything for NDP*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Power changes everything for NDP



Seriously? Gunter? Consider the source.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Enjoy it while you can, Frank, they're on their way out:
> 
> 
> 
> New poll shows plunge in NDP support since summer | CTV Calgary News



Also from the article you cited: "If the election were held tomorrow, they’d probably still form government simply because they’ve got so many votes in Edmonton.” Not time to count your chickens just yet. Or any other part of the farm, for that matter.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Not to worry, they will continue to dig a hole they cannot recover from by election time.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Not to worry, they will continue to dig a hole they cannot recover from by election time.



They may need a back hoe. That's a lot of time to dig. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Just as I figgered. All hat, no horse... 

Funny that you & CM have both used the same limp-wristed excuse this week when backed into a corner. Straight out of the Progressive Playbook.

You give the impression that you are knowledgable about NDP policy. I'm asking you to personally share that wealth of knowledge. Please, elaborate. If you can't, there's no shame. Put on your big girl panties, admit you can't, quit the braggadocio & move on.

If otherwise, please share...



fjnmusic said:


> They have this thing called Google now, FeXL.


----------



## FeXL

On the contrary, I find the execution perfect.

They took enough rope to hang themselves & here we are. The only thing that surprises me is the rapidity with which the've managed to accomplish the feat...



fjnmusic said:


> And if that pisses you off, well that's just icing on the cake.


----------



## FeXL

Again, straight out of the Progressive Playbook. "Consider the source". Brilliant!!! Bravo!!!

If Gunter's argument is that weak, then a few simple words, a clearly stated summary, should demolish anything he has to say. Instead, you illustrate precisely how feeble your own position is.

:clap::clap::clap:



fjnmusic said:


> Seriously? Gunter? Consider the source.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Just as I figgered. All hat, no horse...
> 
> 
> 
> Funny that you & CM have both used the same limp-wristed excuse this week when backed into a corner. Straight out of the Progressive Playbook.
> 
> 
> 
> You give the impression that you are knowledgable about NDP policy. I'm asking you to personally share that wealth of knowledge. Please, elaborate. If you can't, there's no shame. Put on your big girl panties, admit you can't, quit the braggadocio & move on.
> 
> 
> 
> If otherwise, please share...



I have never claimed to be knowledgeable about NDP policy. I know what they campaigned on, I know who I voted for, I know I keep getting money requests just like any other party and I know I am not interested in being a card-carrying member. I admire their strategy for winning the election, I'm glad the right wing parties had their ASSES handed to them, and I'm glad Bill 6 passed. Beyond that, we shall see.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Again, straight out of the Progressive Playbook. "Consider the source". Brilliant!!! Bravo!!!
> 
> 
> 
> If Gunter's argument is that weak, then a few simple words, a clearly stated summary, should demolish anything he has to say. Instead, you illustrate precisely how feeble your own position is.
> 
> 
> 
> :clap::clap::clap:



Hardly. Gunter has always been anti-progressive even when he wrote for the Edmonton Journal. The bias is obvious. He is an editorialist, not a journalist. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

To all of you right-minded folk: are death threats against someone you don't agree with something you would condone as acceptable behavior? 
http://www.vice.com/en_ca/read/albertans-keep-threatening-to-kill-premier-rachel-notley


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Great question. Do "progessives" accept child molestation as acceptable behaviour? 



fjnmusic said:


> To all of you right-minded folk: are death threats against someone you don't agree with something you would condone as acceptable behavior?
> Awful Misogynists Keep Threatening to Kill Alberta Premier Rachel Notley | VICE | Canada
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## heavyall

fjnmusic said:


> To all of you right-minded folk: are death threats against someone you don't agree with something you would condone as acceptable behavior?
> Awful Misogynists Keep Threatening to Kill Alberta Premier Rachel Notley | VICE | Canada


I was reluctant to actually come out and say it, but I've been wondering if she really has strayed into the territory where some people would start thinking about killing her. I guess she has.

It's not acceptable, but it's certainly understandable.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Great question. Do "progessives" accept child molestation as acceptable behaviour?



Way to not answer the question.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

heavyall said:


> I was reluctant to actually come out and say it, but I've been wondering if she really has strayed into the territory where some people would start thinking about killing her. I guess she has.
> 
> 
> 
> It's not acceptable, but it's certainly understandable.



I guess at one time I might have felt that there was nothing wrong with Ralph Klein that a bullet couldn't fix, but I would never have dreamed of posting that sentiment for all the world to see. Never mind foreign terrorists; seems we've got plenty of homegrown ones to deal with.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> I admire their strategy for winning the election


BWAHAHAHAHA!

You call an accidental stroke of luck 'strategy'? Good grief, how little you truly understand how they came to power.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> BWAHAHAHAHA!
> 
> 
> 
> You call an accidental stroke of luck 'strategy'? Good grief, how little you truly understand how they came to power.



BWAHAHAHAHA! How little you understand of how little any of that matters. If you win an election because of the perfect storm of opponents canceling each other, you still win the election. Not Rachel's fault the parties you support are bozos. Yup, that's a hell of a strategy, actually. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## heavyall

fjnmusic said:


> I guess at one time I might have felt that there was nothing wrong with Ralph Klein that a bullet couldn't fix, but I would never have dreamed of posting that sentiment for all the world to see. Never mind foreign terrorists; seems we've got plenty of homegrown ones to deal with.


Klein wasn't destroying entire industries. Klein wasn't destroying the family farm. Klein didn't have 1000 jobs a week leaving the province. Suicide rates didn't climb 30% under Klein. Klein wasn't running up the provincial debt while raising taxes at the same time.


----------



## fjnmusic

heavyall said:


> Klein wasn't destroying entire industries. Klein wasn't destroying the family farm. Klein didn't have 1000 jobs a week leaving the province. Suicide rates didn't climb 30% under Klein. Klein wasn't running up the provincial debt while raising taxes at the same time.



Klein f'ed me over an good, both for job prospects and income. You don't know the half of it. 

In any event, Rachel and the NDP are not responsible for any of the things you've listed either, unless you can demonstrate that the NDP are responsible for the world price of oil dipping below $37. Give your head a shake. These are tough times. The previous government could have helped prepare for them but the squandered our fortunes instead. Take a look at OPEC's market manipulation and you'll see where the real challenge lies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## heavyall

fjnmusic said:


> Klein f'ed me over an good, both for job prospects and income. You don't know the half of it.
> 
> In any event, Rachel and the NDP are not responsible for any of the things you've listed either, unless you can demonstrate that the NDP are responsible for the world price of oil dipping below $37. Give your head a shake. These are tough times. The previous government could have helped prepare for them but the squandered our fortunes instead. Take a look at OPEC's market manipulation and you'll see where the real challenge lies.


The low oil price didn't help, but the mass exodus out didn't happen until after Notley's tax and royalty plans were introduced. People still drive cars. Oil is still being sold at the same or higher capacities to meet the demand. It's still being extracted. The companies that do that are just moving to places that are less anti-business.


----------



## Macfury

heavyall said:


> The low oil price didn't help, but the mass exodus out didn't happen until after Notley's tax and royalty plans were introduced. People still drive cars. Oil is still being sold at the same or higher capacities to meet the demand. It's still being extracted. The companies that do that are just moving to places that are less anti-business.


And it isn't simply a matter of coming back when prices rise. Extracting oil from the oil sands is already more difficult than traditional extraction. There are so many jurisdictions that will welcome these businesses instead of kicking them when they're down.


----------



## fjnmusic

heavyall said:


> The low oil price didn't help, but the mass exodus out didn't happen until after Notley's tax and royalty plans were introduced. People still drive cars. Oil is still being sold at the same or higher capacities to meet the demand. It's still being extracted. The companies that do that are just moving to places that are less anti-business.



Oh? And where exactly are they moving to? Perhaps hibernating or suspending operations or downsizing would be a better description. A company will only survive so long without a profit. Especially a big company. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Dr.G.

fjnmusic said:


> oh? And where exactly are they moving to? Perhaps hibernating or suspending operations or downsizing would be a better description. A company will only survive so long without a profit. Especially a big company.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iphone using tapatalk


:d


----------



## CubaMark

heavyall said:


> I was reluctant to actually come out and say it, but I've been wondering if she really has strayed into the territory where some people would start thinking about killing her. I guess she has.


Huh. Interesting.

On one hand, it's quite telling how so few of the right-wingers in here are sufficiently concerned at assassination chatter. Their silence speaks volumes.

On the other:



heavyall said:


> It's not acceptable, but it's certainly understandable.


When we "progressives" dare to suggest that terrorism is a natural byproduct of our warplanes bombing the hell out of MidEast villages, homes, even weddings, "not acceptable, but understandable", we're lambasted as 'coddling the enemy', 'jihadi sympathizers', blah blah blah.

But when right-wingers are upset about occupational health and safety regulations and suggest murder as a proper response? Oh, they're just naughty boys speaking their minds a little too frankly.

Yup.


----------



## SINC

Yep . . .

Milke: Rachel Notley’s policies are sure to benefit B.C. and Saskatchewan | Calgary Herald


----------



## SINC

CubaMark said:


> Huh. Interesting.
> 
> On one hand, it's quite telling how so few of the right-wingers in here are sufficiently concerned at assassination chatter. Their silence speaks volumes.


Yep, indeed it does. If one gives no notice to the very few crackpots who post such crap, they don't get the attention they crave and will stop. Never throw gas on a fire.

Didja ever even stop to consider that?


----------



## SINC

Yep, that too . . .

Investor confidence waning in Alberta | Financial Post


----------



## SINC

And of course this . . .

Opinion: First craft brewery has left, thanks to Alberta government | Edmonton Journal


----------



## fjnmusic

Dr.G. said:


> :d






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Yep, indeed it does. If one gives no notice to the very few crackpots who post such crap, they don't get the attention they crave and will stop. Never throw gas on a fire.
> 
> 
> 
> Didja ever even stop to consider that?



Or they'll seek bigger and more noticeable targets for their demonstrations. Remember Weibo Ludwig? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

The stupidity just goes on and on . . .

Alberta's Bill 10 leaves parents powerless in deciding their child's education | Opinion | Calgary Sun


----------



## heavyall

CubaMark said:


> When we "progressives" dare to suggest that terrorism is a natural byproduct of our warplanes bombing the hell out of MidEast villages, homes, even weddings, "not acceptable, but understandable", we're lambasted as 'coddling the enemy', 'jihadi sympathizers', blah blah blah.
> 
> But when right-wingers are upset about occupational health and safety regulations and suggest murder as a proper response?  Oh, they're just naughty boys speaking their minds a little too frankly.
> :


So what you're telling me here is that you don't understand the difference between domestic revolution and international terrorism. Why am I not surprised.


----------



## Macfury

heavyall said:


> So what you're telling me here is that you don't understand the difference between domestic revolution and international terrorism. Why am I not surprised.


CM says it was fine for Castro to kill people in order to foment a domestic revolution.


----------



## SINC

Well, his ought to be interesting with a greeny at the helm:

NDP’s Royalty Review Czar Dave Mowat Is a Climate Change Propagandist Trained by Al Gore | CANADIAN MARKET REVIEW


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Well, his ought to be interesting with a greeny at the helm:
> 
> NDP’s Royalty Review Czar Dave Mowat Is a Climate Change Propagandist Trained by Al Gore | CANADIAN MARKET REVIEW


Taking bets on which energy company leaves Alberta next? Who ever thought that Alberta would achiever greater economic diversity by halving the energy sector?


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Taking bets on which energy company leaves Alberta next? Who ever thought that Alberta would achiever greater economic diversity by halving the energy sector?



I'll bet OPEC would have, if they actually cared what happen's in Alberta. So all these companies that are leaving...where exactly are they going? It are they just shutting down until prices are better? It's an important factor. Oil prices have been dropping for quite some time. I imagine plastic water bottle makers must be downsizing too. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## heavyall

fjnmusic said:


> I'll bet OPEC would have, if they actually cared what happen's in Alberta. So all these companies that are leaving...where exactly are they going? It are they just shutting down until prices are better? It's an important factor. Oil prices have been dropping for quite some time. I imagine plastic water bottle makers must be downsizing too.


Oil production is still expanding pretty much everywhere in the world outside of Alberta.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> I'll bet OPEC would have, if they actually cared what happen's in Alberta. So all these companies that are leaving...where exactly are they going? It are they just shutting down until prices are better? It's an important factor. Oil prices have been dropping for quite some time. I imagine plastic water bottle makers must be downsizing too.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Saskatchewan and BC in Canada, although some of them have soured on Canada altogether after Notley was elected.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Saskatchewan and BC in Canada, although some of them have soured on Canada altogether after Notley was elected.



You give one individual far too much credit or far too much blame. I'm not sure which.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Blame. She is a wrecking ball. I don't see Notley capable of building, just destroying.



fjnmusic said:


> You give one individual far too much credit or far too much blame. I'm not sure which.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Well, his ought to be interesting with a greeny at the helm:


F me...


----------



## FeXL

This just got personal...



SINC said:


> And of course this . . .
> 
> Opinion: First craft brewery has left, thanks to Alberta government | Edmonton Journal


----------



## SINC

https://www.change.org/p/elections-...3474&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=sms


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> https://www.change.org/p/elections-...3474&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=sms



Poor sport. You really don't understand how elections work, do you? Your party lost. You'll have another shot in three and a half years. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Poor sport. You really don't understand how elections work, do you? Your party lost. You'll have another shot in three and a half years.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Talk about not understanding, check a mirror. I only posted the link to demonstrate how support is slipping away from the SpeNDP. I had nothing to do with the site or the intent, just pointing out the unrest the Dippers have created in the province, or perhaps you haven't noticed?


----------



## Macfury

fjn was one of the "poorest sports" around during PM Harper's tenure. It's a hallmark of "progressives" to try to stifle criticism of their champions. Waiting for Notley to start eating the teachers--then we'll hear some yowling! 



SINC said:


> Talk about not understanding, check a mirror. I only posted the link to demonstrate how support is slipping away from the SpeNDP. I had nothing to do with the site or the intent, just pointing out the unrest the Dippers have created in the province, or perhaps you haven't noticed?


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> fjn was one of the "poorest sports" around during PM Harper's tenure. It's a hallmark of "progressives" to try to stifle criticism of their champions. Waiting for Notley to start eating the teachers--then we'll hear some yowling!


That seems pretty typical of all true believers regardless the color of the skunks stripes.


----------



## SINC

It just keeps getting worse:

Albertans waking up to NDP nightmare | Calgary Sun


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> It just keeps getting worse:
> 
> 
> 
> Albertans waking up to NDP nightmare | Calgary Sun



Waa waa waa. More poor sports. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Lot your job because of Notley? Poor sport!


----------



## FeXL

FFS. Is that it? There are any number of salient points listed in the article that you could address & all you got is "poor sports"?

Another Content Free Post brought to you by another music guy. Do you really want to go down that road? What the hell is it with you music guys, anyway?



fjnmusic said:


> Waa waa waa. More poor sports.


----------



## fjnmusic

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

The discussion isn't about who voted for what party. It is about the systematic destruction of the Alberta we knew by the socialists and their continuing forced ideology.


----------



## FeXL

You're the one ignoring facts here, GT...



fjnmusic said:


> View attachment 64337


----------



## Rps

SINC said:


> The discussion isn't about who voted for what party. It is about the systematic destruction of the Alberta we knew by the socialists and their continuing forced ideology.


You mean the government your Province elected. It sounds like you guys are living in Ontario.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> You're the one ignoring facts here, GT...



GT? You been hitting the sauce a little early this year? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Perfect!


----------



## SINC

It just keeps getting worse under The Dippers. 

John Ivison: Liberals fear Alberta economic meltdown


----------



## SINC

Cracking the numbers on a crackpot SpeNDP idea:





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> It just keeps getting worse under The Dippers.
> 
> John Ivison: Liberals fear Alberta economic meltdown


Still trying to track down the size and total taxpayer cost of the entourage for her Paris junket. You would think she should have learned from the Redford Regime.


----------



## Rps

SINC said:


> It just keeps getting worse under The Dippers.
> 
> John Ivison: Liberals fear Alberta economic meltdown


Say Sinc, is all of the end of the Alberta World stuff real or is it just press? What is the current debt to GDP rate for Alberta? Here in Ontario it was a comfortable 27% give or take.....but I fear it is creeping up to the 40 range, which is bad. What are the current Alberta numbers......I think debt to GDP is about a good a benchmark as you can find.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> Say Sinc, is all of the end of the Alberta World stuff real or is it just press? What is the current debt to GDP rate for Alberta? Here in Ontario it was a comfortable 27% give or take.....but I fear it is creeping up to the 40 range, which is bad. What are the current Alberta numbers......I think debt to GDP is about a good a benchmark as you can find.


Alberta was at 4%. NDP promises to hold the line at 15%, though that is probably mathematically impossible given their spending glut and gutting of the economy.


----------



## Rps

So the rate is not too bad. I don't think they have gutted the economy, this would have happened no matter who was in. But I think both Alberta and Ontario have voters remorse.


----------



## FeXL

Nope. Entirely intentional. The similarities, especially recently, are revealing...



fjnmusic said:


> GT? You been hitting the sauce a little early this year?


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> So the rate is not too bad. I don't think they have gutted the economy, this would have happened no matter who was in.


I meant in addition to the energy price drop.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> It just keeps getting worse under The Dippers.


Great. The last time the federal Liberals took an interest in Alberta's economy it cost us $100 billon...

The only reason the bastards would be interested in our economy now is because of what they can milk it for, rather than any altruistic concern.

Screw you, Justin. We've got enough issues dealing with one set of progressives. Stay the hell away...


----------



## FeXL

Pure. Class.



> "Two-faced" Notley laughs about farm-killing Bill 6 at NDP party


[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6T2SbteyvDk"]"Two-faced" Notley laughs about farm-killing Bill 6 at NDP party[/ame]


----------



## SINC

It just doesn't quit.

CFIB says it has eyeopening memo on NDP minimum wage policy | Globalnews.ca


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> It just doesn't quit.


This keeps going she'll be begging to step down by summer. Keep hammering away...


----------



## SINC

More bad news:

Alberta's NDP government in local food fight over Bill 6, carbon tax and minimum wage - Calgary - CBC News


----------



## SINC

On and on . . .

Alberta Premier Rachel Notley facing backlash over oilsands emissions cap | Financial Post


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> On and on . . .


Last line from the article:



> So far, this one looks like amateur hour.


The whole 7 month shift so far looks like amateur hour...


----------



## SINC

Still more on Minimum wage:

Editorial: Maximum lesson on minimum wage | Calgary Herald


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Still more on Minimum wage:


Notley back down? Not a chance. Way too much ego at work in that little power trip she's on...


----------



## heavyall




----------



## SINC

Yep, they dunno ****e and they are killin' our province.


----------



## SINC

Will it never end?

Opposition MLAs on ethics committee accuse NDP of not wanting to consult Albertans | Calgary Herald


----------



## SINC

Falling further every day.

New poll shows plunge in NDP support since summer | CTV Calgary News


----------



## fjnmusic

In all fairness, for those who think the Alberta NDP's plan is so grossly unfair.









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

And more goodies for the haters.









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> In all fairness, for those who think the Alberta NDP's plan is so grossly unfair.
> View attachment 64441
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Alberta is gouging because the taxes were not necessary, given its resource base. The NDP should have slashed spending and gutted the public service middle management fat cats.


----------



## SINC

Alberta is now less free


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Alberta is now less free



http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/04/26/koch-brothers-fraser-institute_n_1456223.html


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Alberta is now less free


I'm mourning for Alberta. I used to talk it up all the time as a model of freedom nd prosperity, but I have had to keep my mouth shut since Notley's regime began to clamp down on the province.


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Koch Brothers, Tea Party Billionaires, Donated To Right-Wing Fraser Institute, Reports Show


So what? Their donations change nothing, but the SpeNDPers have changed Alberta. And not for the better. Thanks to the donations of these people, the institute is able to uncover these terrible economic policies that hurt average Albertans including teachers.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> So what? Their donations change nothing, but the SpeNDPers have changed Alberta. And not for the better. Thanks to the donations of these people, the institute is able to uncover these terrible economic policies that hurt average Albertans including teachers.


I believe teachers are temporarily protected from the havoc the NDP is wreaking on other Albertans. I believe the attitude of the teacher's union is: "Buzz off! I'm alright, Jack!"


----------



## SINC

A government so terribly inexperienced that they did not properly research their pre-election promises and now are backing away from 'some or all' of them. Figures with Dippers, doesn’t it?



> Alberta's finance minister says low oil prices may force him to hit the brakes on millions of dollars in initiatives promised by the NDP government such as child-care benefits, school fee reductions, student hiring and environmental retrofits.
> 
> *Joe Ceci said in a year-end interview that some or all of a dozen programs set to begin in the 2016-17 fiscal year may be delayed*.


Alberta's finance minister says low oil may delay programs, initiatives


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> A government so terribly inexperienced that they did not properly research their pre-election promises and now are backing away from 'some or all' of them. Figures with Dippers, doesn’t it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Alberta's finance minister says low oil may delay programs, initiatives



Everybody breaks election promises in response to the ups and downs of the economy, including all of your favorite Con men. Nothing surprising here. You act like you've never seen this before. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Feel free to cite some examples...



fjnmusic said:


> Everybody breaks election promises in response to the ups and downs of the economy, including all of your favorite Con men. Nothing surprising here. You act like you've never seen this before.


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Everybody breaks election promises in response to the ups and downs of the economy, including all of your favorite Con men. Nothing surprising here. You act like you've never seen this before.


Nope, never seen an amateur government so ill prepared to govern with such a tiny understanding of what government is all about. The finance minister's comments indicate that potentially, ALL of their promised programs are being reconsidered. That is a 100% failure rate. Can't say I have EVER heard that from any other party.


----------



## SINC

She's out of her friggin' mind. I should pay more to heat my home so Calgarians can have more LRT? Good God how stupid can the SpeNDPers get?

Carbon tax could pay for Green Line of Calgary's LRT, Rachel Notley suggests - Calgary - CBC News


----------



## FeXL

Further on the cost of that Carbon Tax.

Alberta's New Carbon Tax Will Cost Over $1,000 per Albertan Annually



> Where is this 3 to 4 Billion dollars per year (more later) to come from?
> 
> Well, there is really only one answer; it might be somewhat invisible, but we Albertan's will have to pay it, and that my friend works out to about $1,000 per person per year, or $4,000 per family of four. And if it brings in $8 billion in a few years, that is over $8,000 per family of four per year. We will pay it in the form of higher transportation costs (both public and private); higher heating costs and to a lesser extend in the cost of everything we buy from groceries to toys.


I have a question for those of you on the public teat: teachers, nurses, government workers, etc...Is your wage increase for the next 3-1/2 years under the NDP going to cover even the cost of this Carbon Tax, let alone everything else they're going to be gouging us for?

Are you starting to feel the squeeze from this gov't yet?

FJN, you've been teaching a while. You're making something in the neighbourhood of $70,000/year (unless you've got your Masters and/or are in administration). You might get a 5% increase (but I doubt it) in the next contract. Ballpark, that's a $3500 raise over the next 3 years or so. Assuming you are married with no kids, at a $1000/person/year that's 6 grand coming out of your family budget over the next 3 years.

That means you'll owe the NDP another $2500, after your raise. And, if you have children, add another $3000 each. And, that's assuming the NDP don't raise the Carbon Tax.

Any of this starting to sink in yet?


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Further on the cost of that Carbon Tax.
> 
> 
> 
> Alberta's New Carbon Tax Will Cost Over $1,000 per Albertan Annually
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have a question for those of you on the public teat: teachers, nurses, government workers, etc...Is your wage increase for the next 3-1/2 years under the NDP going to cover even the cost of this Carbon Tax, let alone everything else they're going to be gouging us for?
> 
> 
> 
> Are you starting to feel the squeeze from this gov't yet?
> 
> 
> 
> FJN, you've been teaching a while. You're making something in the neighbourhood of $70,000/year (unless you've got your Masters and/or are in administration). You might get a 5% increase (but I doubt it) in the next contract. Ballpark, that's a $3500 raise over the next 3 years or so. Assuming you are married with no kids, at a $1000/person/year that's 6 grand coming out of your family budget over the next 3 years.
> 
> 
> 
> That means you'll owe the NDP another $2500, after your raise. And, if you have children, add another $3000 each. And, that's assuming the NDP don't raise the Carbon Tax.
> 
> 
> 
> Any of this starting to sink in yet?



You really ought to do your homework more thoroughly, amigo. Alberta teacher salaries and collective agreements are easily searchable on the web. I'll answer your question if you improve your guessing accuracy. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Yep, looks to me like FeXL is light by about $20 grand a year for teachers in Edmonton Catholic.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Yep, looks to me like FeXL is light by about $20 grand a year for teachers in Edmonton Catholic.



Again, I don't work for Edmonton Catholic, never said I did, but teacher salaries in Alberta today top out between $90,000 and $100,000, depending on education and experience. And they should; it's a very specialized job. If it was easy, anybody would go into it. 

The problem is not the wage; I have never complained about how much teachers make in Alberta. It's the forced contract by the Redford gov't for the last four years whereby there was no negotiation and no wage increase to keep up with the cost of living. And this is exactly what you anti-public sector types wanted and got under the PC regime: balance the books on the backs of public sector workers, while at the same time proclaiming that "we're all in this together." 

Well, if we REALLY are all in this together, then a wage freeze for everyone (including MLA's, who gave themselves a 71% wage increase between 2010 and 2015) or a tax that hits everyone would be a fair way to go. I'm not big on more taxes, but I'll be damned if my wages have to be cut back again in order to make your tax burden easier. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Your wages WILL be cut back because they ARE the tax burden. Working for the government is not like working for private companies where wages are based on supply and demand.



> Again, I don't work for Edmonton Catholic, never said I did, but teacher salaries in Alberta today top out between $90,000 and $100,000, depending on education and experience. And they should; it's a very specialized job. If it was easy, anybody would go into it.


It's easy enough that if you quit today, 40 applicants would take your place in a heartbeat.




fjnmusic said:


> The problem is not the wage; I have never complained about how much teachers make in Alberta. It's the forced contract by the Redford gov't for the last four years whereby there was no negotiation and no wage increase to keep up with the cost of living. And this is exactly what you anti-public sector types wanted and got under the PC regime: balance the books on the backs of public sector workers, while at the same time proclaiming that "we're all in this together."
> 
> Well, if we REALLY are all in this together, then a wage freeze for everyone (including MLA's, who gave themselves a 71% wage increase between 2010 and 2015) or a tax that hits everyone would be a fair way to go. I'm not big on more taxes, but I'll be damned if my wages have to be cut back again in order to make your tax burden easier.


----------



## SINC

It contines to get much worse as lack of experience shows through.

Braid: NDP drifting into exhaustion and unreality as Alberta’s crisis mounts | Calgary Herald


----------



## Macfury

This is unbelievable. What an amateur:



> Ceci almost floored me, to be honest, when he said in an interview on Monday that the loss of Alberta’s Triple A credit rating wouldn’t cost the province more, *because lenders have already been factoring in the state of the economy, and charging more.*
> 
> “The (finance department) officials have said repeatedly that the market has already priced that into our borrowing going forward,” he said. “So it’s not as big as critics would talk about.”





SINC said:


> It contines to get much worse as lack of experience shows through.
> 
> Braid: NDP drifting into exhaustion and unreality as Alberta’s crisis mounts | Calgary Herald


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> It contines to get much worse as lack of experience shows through.
> 
> 
> 
> Braid: NDP drifting into exhaustion and unreality as Alberta’s crisis mounts | Calgary Herald



A rather silly comment. As each day passes, they gain more experience. It's not like the previous PC gov't with all of their experience were trustworthy with our tax dollars. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Your wages WILL be cut back because they ARE the tax burden. Working for the government is not like working for private companies where wages are based on supply and demand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's easy enough that if you quit today, 40 applicants would take your place in a heartbeat.



Wrong again. Those in the oil industry have been making money hand over fist the last few years while teachers just plugged along and the PC's "balanced" their budgets on the backs of public sector workers. They weren't really balanced budgets at all, not even under Klein, but you bought into it because it sounded good. Well in Alberta today we have a government that actually values the contributions of the public sector, even if you don't, based on your rather ignorant comments. I suppose you'd prefer to see schools and hospitals run like private businesses. They tried to privatize everything in Alberta back in the 90's. Didn't work out so well, and today private schools have become simply a branch of the public education system, except they can turn away students if they're not good enough for Nabob. Thank your PC buddies for that contribution.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Absolutely! Most public sector types cry about how hard their jobs are, but equally qualified people would jump into their position at 75% of the salary in a heartbeat. One may do one's job well, but there is no position in the public sector so difficult "nobody wants to do it." 



fjnmusic said:


> I suppose you'd prefer to see schools and hospitals run like private businesses.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Absolutely! Most public sector types cry about how hard their jobs are, but equally qualified people would jump into their position at 75% of the salary in a heartbeat. One may do one's job well, but there is no position in the public sector so difficult "nobody wants to do it."



I never said nobody wants to do it. But to do the job well requires experience, something you right-wing Con-men continually say that Rachel Notley and Justin Trudeau lack. Interesting bit of irony there. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

It isn't so much that they lack experience but that they clearly cannot do the job.



fjnmusic said:


> I never said nobody wants to do it. But to do the job well requires experience, something you right-wing Con-men continually say that Rachel Notley and Justin Trudeau lack. Interesting bit of irony there.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

> Notley deserves credit over Bill 6
> 
> As an agricultural producer, I was appalled at the anti-Bill 6 demonstrations at the legislature, the lineups of expensive machinery and especially the death threats made against Premier Rachel Notley, her cabinet ministers and other NDP members.
> 
> Once fully implemented, this bill would protect the rights and safety concerns of farm employees. This should have been in place years ago; after all, it is a human rights law. Agriculture was the only industry in Alberta that did not have this protection, and Alberta the only province that did not do so.
> 
> Although I have never voted NDP, I applaud Notley and her party for their initiative. Regardless of party affiliation, recognize her progressive advance in agriculture and let her party know your positive feelings on this important bill.
> 
> Maurice L. Parrent, Clyde


From the December 22 Edmonton Journal. There are a lot more supporters of Bill 6 than many people realize, particularly people who frequent this forum who look for any opportunity to criticize the Alberta government.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> From the December 22 Edmonton Journal. There are a lot more supporters of Bill 6 than many people realize, particularly people who frequent this forum who look for any opportunity to criticize the Alberta government.


Maurice probably owns a corporate farm conglomerate and is delighted to see family farms go under.


----------



## FeXL

So, the progressive Edmonton Journal found the second person in the province who supports Bill 6. You're right, that's a 100% increase. Woohoo...

That said, I'm a big fan of, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". Can anybody cite examples of workers' rights in Alberta that were being abrogaded? Can anybody cite examples of the numerous accidents that were specifically caused by unsafe working conditions, the untold thousands of workers being forced to conduct themselves in an unsafe manner, etc.?

Where is this rash of incidents that justifies the invasion of government into farms & ranches province-wide? What is the precis that unions will make farms & ranches a better place to work?

In addition, much of the resistance to the bill was not only about the content of the bill, but how the process was executed. There was little to no consultation with the people actually affected by the legislation. Who do you s'pose has more of a clew about how a farm or ranch operates: a 4th generation family farm owner or a snot-nosed, freshly minted, 22 year old NDP MLA whose nearest exposure to actual agriculture is the semi-weekly walk past the rutabaga bin in the vegetable aisle en route to the tofu & sushi bar at the local superstore?

This is the 21st century. A politician attempting to ram legislation down people's throats sans consultation & feedback is just as likely to end up with said legislation rightfully rammed up her backside...



fjnmusic said:


> From the December 22 Edmonton Journal. There are a lot more supporters of Bill 6 than many people realize, particularly people who frequent this forum who look for any opportunity to criticize the Alberta government.


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> From the December 22 Edmonton Journal. There are a lot more supporters of Bill 6 than many people realize, particularly people who frequent this forum who look for any opportunity to criticize the Alberta government.


That is due to the NDP's ability to offer opportunities that abound with the union dogma they are ramming down the throats of Albertans. They will suffer the biggest defeat ever of a provincial government in just over three years time. Watch it happen.


----------



## fjnmusic

Methinks the ladies doth protest too much. That's a lot of backlash from one little farmer's letter to the editor.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Methinks the ladies doth protest too much. That's a lot of backlash from one little farmer's letter to the editor.


The backlash is against you, fjn, for suggesting it has much meaning.


----------



## FeXL

You seemed to put an awful lot of faith in "one little farmer's letter to the editor".

So, groove, can you answer any of the questions? Does your response further the conversation in any way, shape or form? Or are you satisfied that your Content Free Post addresses the issue in a satisfactory manner? 

Or does it merely sidestep the issue because:
1) You don't understand the issue in the first place;
2) It simply does not matter to you if factual discussion of the issue ever take place;
3) You realize that the facts of the issue do not support your side of the argument & any straw man argument you can effectively utilize distracts from the issue;
4) All of the above.



fjnmusic said:


> Methinks the ladies doth protest too much. That's a lot of backlash from one little farmer's letter to the editor.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> You seemed to put an awful lot of faith in "one little farmer's letter to the editor".
> 
> So, groove, can you answer any of the questions? Does your response further the conversation in any way, shape or form? Or are you satisfied that your Content Free Post addresses the issue in a satisfactory manner?
> 
> Or does it merely sidestep the issue because:
> 1) You don't understand the issue in the first place;
> 2) It simply does not matter to you if factual discussion of the issue ever take place;
> 3) You realize that the facts of the issue do not support your side of the argument & any straw man argument you can effectively utilize distracts from the issue;
> 4) All of the above.


Why do you keep calling me Groove? GT and I are not the same person. Of course, if you were REALLY intelligent you would already know that. GT and I have disagreed on many things. Too much eggnog, perhaps?


----------



## fjnmusic

When Conservatives claim the Alberta election wasn't really a vote for the NDP, show them this photo.


----------



## FeXL

'Cause ya both revert to the same CFP's when ya got nuttin'.

Ya don't wanna be compared to him? Quit posting like him...



fjnmusic said:


> Why do you keep calling me Groove?


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> 'Cause ya both revert to the same CFP's when ya got nuttin'.
> 
> 
> 
> Ya don't wanna be compared to him? Quit posting like him...



Weakest response I've ever read in these forums. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> When Conservatives claim the Alberta election wasn't really a vote for the NDP, show them this photo.


Edmonton.


----------



## FeXL

You haven't ben looking very hard.

Are you going to answer the questions or are you going to continue to distract & obfuscate?



fjnmusic said:


> Weakest response I've ever read in these forums.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> You haven't ben looking very hard.
> 
> Are you going to answer the questions or are you going to continue to distract & obfuscate?


It's Christmas. Give it a rest. I don't even remember the questions you keep referring to. I'm spending quality time with my family right now. May you find peace and happiness this holiday season. 😘


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> When Conservatives claim the Alberta election wasn't really a vote for the NDP, show them this photo.
> View attachment 64601


Will gladly do so. How many Albertans do you think were there? Lemme guess. Oh, about 0.00000001% of the total population of Alberta should be close enough.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Will gladly do so. How many Albertans do you think were there? Lemme guess. Oh, about 0.00000001% of the total population of Alberta should be close enough.



The NDP supporters did not stop at the edge of the photograph. In fact, they numbered in the millions. That's how they were able to win the election so handily. That and the other leaders were not particularly convincing. That's how the PC government in particular did so terribly, despite having had a 44 year dynasty. Still warms my heart really, and still amazing how you're still in denial over the loss. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> The NDP supporters did not stop at the edge of the photograph. In fact, they numbered in the millions. That's how they were able to win the election so handily. That and the other leaders were not particularly convincing. That's how the PC government in particular did so terribly, despite having had a 44 year dynasty. Still warms my heart really, and still amazing how you're still in denial over the loss.


Denial? Hardly. I watch each day as the accidental governing SpeNDPers destroy Alberta's economy with union biased programs that harm us all.

Like I have stated before, they will suffer the consequences when people fully realize the mistake they made in the next election and turf them out entirely, 'cept for Redmonton of course, where their only real support has always been when they had a handful of MLAs and likely will again.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Denial? Hardly. I watch each day as the accidental governing SpeNDPers destroy Alberta's economy with union biased programs that harm us all.
> 
> 
> 
> Like I have stated before, they will suffer the consequences when people fully realize the mistake they made in the next election and turf them out entirely, 'cept for Redmonton of course, where their only real support has always been when they had a handful of MLAs and likely will again.



So that's quite a few years of whining and complaining we're going to have to endure then, is it? And who do you think SHOULD have won the May 5 election then? As I recall, you weren't a big fan of either the PC's or the Wildrose. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Wildrose should have won--however, even the Liberals would have governed better than this amateur act.



fjnmusic said:


> So that's quite a few years of whining and complaining we're going to have to endure then, is it? And who do you think SHOULD have won the May 5 election then? As I recall, you weren't a big fan of either the PC's or the Wildrose.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Wildrose should have won--however, even the Liberals would have governed better than this amateur act.


There's one important thing the Wildrose were missing however: the confidence of Alberta voters. Oh yes, and enough actual seats to actually give them government status, let alone majority government status. The Wildrose were looked at as turncoats. Even now, the unite-the-right sounds more like an act of desperation. It's the same tactic that backfired on them exactly one year ago. You can complain about the NDP all you'd like, but it's the decades of PC policies that got us into the mess we're in today. Combine that with dangerously low oil prices, and for a province notable for putting all if its eggs in one oily basket, we have found ourselves in quite a predicament. Any gov't would have a tough time right now.


----------



## BigDL

Macfury said:


> Wildrose should have won--however, even the Liberals would have governed better than this amateur act.


Coulda, woulda, shoulda, but they didn't...<point and say> HA ha!


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> So that's quite a few years of whining and complaining we're going to have to endure then, is it? And who do you think SHOULD have won the May 5 election then? As I recall, you weren't a big fan of either the PC's or the Wildrose.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I voted Wildrose as a protest NOT the SpeNDPers.


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Any gov't would have a tough time right now.


Agreed, just like any OTHER government would do a better job.


----------



## heavyall

SINC said:


> Agreed, just like any OTHER government would do a better job.


It would be nearly impossible to do worse. A Magic 8 Ball would be more effective.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> There's one important thing the Wildrose were missing however: the confidence of Alberta voters.


I don't event think a vote represents confidence when it is a protest vote.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> I don't event think a vote represents confidence when it is a protest vote.


You really don't appear to have much respect for the collective will of Alberta voters. Does that lack of respect extend to the previous 44 years as well?


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> You really don't appear to have much respect for the collective will of Alberta voters. Does that lack of respect extend to the previous 44 years as well?


Of course not.


----------



## SINC

And Alberta Dippers blindly follow along the same path.

The Insane Cost of Ontario's Energy Calamity: Consumers Forced to Pay $170 Billion for Pointless Wind Power


----------



## SINC

Yep . . .

Ewart: ‘High ideals’ forecast to generate higher electricity prices in Alberta | Calgary Herald


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Yep . . .
> 
> Ewart: ‘High ideals’ forecast to generate higher electricity prices in Alberta | Calgary Herald


The thing that most people don't realize is that the NDP energy policy is DESIGNED to make electricity almost unaffordable.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Of course not.


Interesting, considering it's the same province and they're the same voters.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> The thing that most people don't realize is that the NDP energy policy is DESIGNED to make electricity almost unaffordable.


Again, an interesting twist. As one who lives and pays power bills in Alberta, I recall deregulation being the thing that drove prices up, a decidedly PC bit of legislation that backfired terribly for many years.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Interesting, considering it's the same province and they're the same voters.


I don't respect the choice of a minority of voters in the last election.



fjnmusic said:


> Again, an interesting twist. As one who lives and pays power bills in Alberta, I recall deregulation being the thing that drove prices up, a decidedly PC bit of legislation that backfired terribly for many years.


The price of electricity before deregulation was subsidized by taxes, so you were paying higher prices through your taxes already. While deregulation was intended to create lower prices through a free market for electricity, the model was flawed--it is not a free market. However, the intention was to lower electricity prices. The NDP model is _designed_ to raise electricity prices.


----------



## SINC

I know Graham Hicks well and he gets it. Too bad the Dippers don't:

Hicks on Biz: Alberta going back to the 80s


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> I know Graham Hicks well and he gets it. Too bad the Dippers don't:
> 
> 
> 
> Hicks on Biz: Alberta going back to the 80s



Awesome! There was some great music in the 1980's. Talking Heads, Pretenders, John Mellencamp, The Police. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> I don't respect the choice of a minority of voters in the last election.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The price of electricity before deregulation was subsidized by taxes, so you were paying higher prices through your taxes already. While deregulation was intended to create lower prices through a free market for electricity, the model was flawed--it is not a free market. However, the intention was to lower electricity prices. The NDP model is _designed_ to raise electricity prices.



Forgive me, but I don't have faith in your ability to predict things that haven't happened yet. You already botched two major election predictions in one calendar year. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

The post you were referring to is not a prediction. It's an analysis of the energy market. The NDP has already said prices of electricity are going to escalate significantly under their management.



fjnmusic said:


> Forgive me, but I don't have faith in your ability to predict things that haven't happened yet. You already botched two major election predictions in one calendar year.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Meet the REAL Rachel Notley, unionist to the core:



> Alberta’s NDP, Unions, and the Minimum Wage
> 
> When analyzing public policy, one must typically ignore stated goals and understand the economic incentives that make groups favor certain forms of economic intervention.
> 
> *Unions, as a group, tend to favor market restrictions that prop up their higher wage rates.
> 
> Alberta’s NDP, led by Rachel Notley, favors unions.*
> 
> This an important factor in the NDP arguing for a 50% increase to Alberta’s minimum wage, despite protests from the business community and anyone with an understanding of basic economic law. NDP goal to hike minimum wage has nothing to do with helping less productive workers make more income, regardless of what their stated objectives are.
> 
> Minimum wage laws are a classic form of monopolistic grants of privilege that benefit some groups at the expense of others. Despite the proclaimed objective of minimum wage laws, which is to increase incomes of the most marginal workers, the actual effect is the exact opposite — it makes them unemployable because they are not sufficiently productive to be employed at the legal wage rates. *This means that minimum wages will always cause more unemployment than otherwise — any economist who denies this is either a liar or a fool who doesn’t even understand the basic principles of price controls.*


Alberta’s NDP, Unions, and the Minimum Wage | CANADIAN MARKET REVIEW


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Meet the REAL Rachel Notley, unionist to the core:


Unions also support minimum wage hikes. That way you can no longer hire two or three trainees for the price of a more experienced union worker. It essentially kills on-the-job training as a means of getting ahead.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Unions also support minimum wage hikes. That way you can no longer hire two or three trainees for the price of a more experienced union worker. It essentially kills on-the-job training as a means of getting ahead.



Unions support regular, predictable wage increases for ALL workers, which an increase in minimum wage is supposed to help precipitate. I've worked two union jobs in my life: as a Safeway worker and as a teacher. How many have you worked? What experience do you have as a union worker and as a non-union worker in order to be able to speak authoritatively on the working conditions, benefits and challenges of either way? In my experience, unions advocate for stable and fair cost of living increases tied to training and experience. Now why is that such a bad thing? 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Whatever benefits union worker receive is not the point. The point is that that advocating for an increase in minimum wage by unions is designed to benefit only the unions and not the dwindling number of people employed at the new minimum wage.

The only thing I have against unions in general is that the government does not allow one to fire them when they strike. If withdrawing their less-than-stellar skill sets from the workplace does not cause the employer to weep bitter tears and negotiate a new settlement, then the striking worker are probably not very valuable.





fjnmusic said:


> Unions support regular, predictable wage increases for ALL workers, which an increase in minimum wage is supposed to help precipitate. I've worked two union jobs in my life: as a Safeway worker and as a teacher. How many have you worked? What experience do you have as a union worker and as a non-union worker in order to be able to speak authoritatively on the working conditions, benefits and challenges of either way? In my experience, unions advocate for stable and fair cost of living increases tied to training and experience. Now why is that such a bad thing?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Whatever benefits union worker receive is not the point. The point is that that advocating for an increase in minimum wage by unions is designed to benefit only the unions and not the dwindling number of people employed at the new minimum wage.
> 
> The only thing I have against unions in general is that the government does not allow one to fire them when they strike. If withdrawing their less-than-stellar skill sets from the workplace does not cause the employer to weep bitter tears and negotiate a new settlement, then the striking worker are probably not very valuable.


I don't think there were many happy customers last time there was a teachers' strike, both for students and parents or for teachers, who give up salary to make a point. Seems to me that teachers are considered very valuable, though not essential (that was already established in a court of law).


----------



## Macfury

If the striking teachers could have been fired and replaced, the parents would have been much happier.



fjnmusic said:


> I don't think there were many happy customers last time there was a teachers' strike, both for students and parents or for teachers, who give up salary to make a point. Seems to me that teachers are considered very valuable, though not essential (that was already established in a court of law).


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> If the striking teachers could have been fired and replaced, the parents would have been much happier.


Unlikely. You seem to be of the opinion that anyone with a degree could walk in and start teaching. You clearly have no concept of what the job entails or what many years of experience can so to help the students. Not that there are scab teachers anyway, since there is a rigorous certification process prior to even being hired.

But you evade the question: how many union and non-union jobs have you actually worked at to give you a basis I for comparison?


----------



## Macfury

I have worked at a unionized school for a full year and also at a CAW automotive plant. I saw nothing that would indicate that the majority of the teachers offered anything unique to their pupils--despite their high opinion of themselves.

You may be an exception, fjn, but these are my honest observations.



fjnmusic said:


> Unlikely. You seem to be of the opinion that anyone with a degree could walk in and start teaching. You clearly have no concept of what the job entails or what many years of experience can so to help the students. Not that there are scab teachers anyway, since there is a rigorous certification process prior to even being hired.
> 
> But you evade the question: how many union and non-union jobs have you actually worked at to give you a basis I for comparison?


----------



## FeXL

Right. So, even if the economy is in a recession, regular as rain, union workers expect a raise. It doesn't matter that everywhere else, people are trimming fat, cutting overhead, laying off workers, closing shop, we want our raise, dammit!!!



fjnmusic said:


> Unions support regular, predictable wage increases for ALL workers,


First off, I jes' luvs me a good, old-fashioned logical fallacy. In this case, your call to authority: "If you ain't worked in a union, you don't know squat!!!"

Horse feathers & bull pucky. If that was true, then one of the few threads you, yourself, could legitimately post on in these boards would be the union threads. Pretty sure you've never been a weatherman, politician, climatologist, terrorist, comedian, solar, wind or electrical engineer, refugee, journalist, priest or software engineer yet you've commented on most of those threads. And, that's just from the first page of this forum.

And, from your logic, the 4 months I spent one summer as a park ranger between semesters in university (the only union job I've ever held in my life) immediately qualifies me as some sort of expert, a veritable genius, on the subject.

Right?



fjnmusic said:


> What experience do you have as a union worker and as a non-union worker in order to be able to speak authoritatively...


And, I'd just love to read a list of the myriad of challenges that a union worker meets on a daily basis that a non-union worker never experiences.



fjnmusic said:


> ...on the working conditions, benefits and challenges of either way?


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> ...the 4 months I spent one summer as a park ranger between semesters in university (the only union job I've ever held in my life) immediately qualifies me as some sort of expert, a veritable genius, on the subject.


You and I are both experts then!


----------



## FeXL

Having been dating or married to the same teacher for the last 25 years gives me a certain perspective. So does having children going through the educational system. So does my own personal experiences with the educational system. None of these things in & of themselves make me any kind of an authority but I consider myself reasonably informed on the topic.

I can say unequivocally that there are both better & poorer teachers and the system would benefit from the loss of many of the poorer ones. And, despite your claims to the contrary, many years of the same old thing doesn't necessarily make them any better. 



fjnmusic said:


> Unlikely. You seem to be of the opinion that anyone with a degree could walk in and start teaching. You clearly have no concept of what the job entails or what many years of experience can so to help the students.


I'm not sure what you mean by "scab" but if you mean crappy, poor or some such other low rating, you are fortunate to be working in a district where they don't exist. On the other hand, in the real world, they do exist. 

Time & again my children bring home the same names of teachers whom they dislike. And, always for the same reasons: poor teaching ability. This is hardly sour grapes. Despite my contributions to their gene pool, they are hard workers & high achievers. They consistently earn final marks in the high 90's & have received any number of awards for the highest mark in their class. This fall one brought home a personalized plaque for achieving the highest mark in 5 core subjects last year, in AP (advanced placement) classes, no mean feat. 

Interestingly, my lovely bride, the teacher, often mentions the same names in criticism.

There are mediocre & poor teachers in the system, new & old. However, because of the unions, good luck getting rid of them. They'll be shuffled from school to school, district to district, even province to province, for far more years than they deserve. 

Some of them should be fired but the likelihood of that happening is slim. I personally know several substitute teachers who are wonderful teachers & excellent with kids and have been trying unsuccessfully for years to get on full time. There are several factors in this equation but one of them is the fact that, unlike the real world, poor teachers are seldom fired.



fjnmusic said:


> Not that there are scab teachers anyway, since there is a rigorous certification process prior to even being hired.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> You and I are both experts then!


Yep. He can't use that argument any more...


----------



## SINC

Yep, a year to remember to never again allow Dippers any power. 

Gunter: 2015 The year the NDP demolished the Alberta Advantage | Opinion | Calgary Sun


----------



## SINC

And now this:

NDP have set Albertans on a troubling course for 2016 | EDITORIAL | Editorial |


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Having been dating or married to the same teacher for the last 25 years gives me a certain perspective. So does having children going through the educational system. So does my own personal experiences with the educational system. None of these things in & of themselves make me any kind of an authority but I consider myself reasonably informed on the topic.
> 
> 
> 
> I can say unequivocally that there are both better & poorer teachers and the system would benefit from the loss of many of the poorer ones. And, despite your claims to the contrary, many years of the same old thing doesn't necessarily make them any better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean by "scab" but if you mean crappy, poor or some such other low rating, you are fortunate to be working in a district where they don't exist. On the other hand, in the real world, they do exist.
> 
> 
> 
> Time & again my children bring home the same names of teachers whom they dislike. And, always for the same reasons: poor teaching ability. This is hardly sour grapes. Despite my contributions to their gene pool, they are hard workers & high achievers. They consistently earn final marks in the high 90's & have received any number of awards for the highest mark in their class. This fall one brought home a personalized plaque for achieving the highest mark in 5 core subjects last year, in AP (advanced placement) classes, no mean feat.
> 
> 
> 
> Interestingly, my lovely bride, the teacher, often mentions the same names in criticism.
> 
> 
> 
> There are mediocre & poor teachers in the system, new & old. However, because of the unions, good luck getting rid of them. They'll be shuffled from school to school, district to district, even province to province, for far more years than they deserve.
> 
> 
> 
> Some of them should be fired but the likelihood of that happening is slim. I personally know several substitute teachers who are wonderful teachers & excellent with kids and have been trying unsuccessfully for years to get on full time. There are several factors in this equation but one of them is the fact that, unlike the real world, poor teachers are seldom fired.



I won't get into the other parts right now because I don't have the time, but "scab" in union parlance usually refers to a replacement worker. Seeing as all teachers work for a union/professional association, when there is a strike, it's not like scab teachers can replace the striking workers as the school board locks out employees at the same time. Teachers strike only as a last resort when all other negotiations fail. They do not strike capriciously because it will usually cost them a great deal in the short term for long term gain. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Another perspective from the inside (for those who can manage to put away their torches and pitchforks for a few moments).
http://m.torontosun.com/2015/12/18/year-end-q--a-with-alberta-premier-rachel-notley


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Pure bafflegab and lip service from Notley. She talks one game while destroying economic opportunity.



fjnmusic said:


> Another perspective from the inside (for those who can manage to put away their torches and pitchforks for a few moments).
> Year end Q & A with Alberta Premier Rachel Notley | Canada | News | Toronto Sun
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> Pure bafflegab and lip service from Notley. She talks one game while destroying economic opportunity.


Yep, watch the damage continue for three more years. By the time the people of Alberta toss her sorry ass out (and they will) it will take a decade to correct her carnage.


----------



## Rps

About the same length of time as it took Lougheed?


----------



## SINC

Business confidence in Alberta plummets under the Dippers, just one more indicator of the anti-business policies they are imposing on the province. Why are we not surprised?



> Rough year in small business confidence ends on lowest note
> 
> Toronto, December 31, 2015 – Canada’s small business confidence dropped to 55.7 in December, its weakest month in its weakest year since the 2008-09 financial crisis.
> “The year is ending with more of a thud than with a whimper as Alberta’s ongoing struggles continue to be felt throughout the country,” said Ted Mallett, Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) chief economist. “Industry confidence remains weak across most sectors and opinions on the general state of business’ health have moved towards the negative.”
> 
> On a scale between 0 and 100, an index above 50 means owners expecting their business’ performance to be stronger in the next year outnumber those expecting weaker performance. One normally sees an index level of between 65 and 70 when the economy is growing at its potential.
> 
> Optimism dropped a point to 65.9 in British Columbia. *Alberta set an all-time record low for the second time in four months, plummeting to 33.1, and remains by far the weakest in the country and the only province below the national average.* Saskatchewan rose to 56.3, while Manitoba fell two points to 66.4. Ontario dropped to 59.9, just edging out Quebec, which saw a three point climb to 59.6. Newfoundland and Labrador’s business confidence bounced back from last month, climbing to 64.8. Nova Scotia picked up four points to reach 71.0, the highest mark in the country. New Brunswick’s confidence made a small jump to 61.8. Prince Edward Island fell two points to 61.1.
> 
> The natural resources sector remains the weakest, followed by agriculture, manufacturing and construction. There are no offsetting signs of strength among other industries, with none scoring higher than a sluggish 61.0.
> 
> Short-term employment plans are weak compared to Decembers in 2014 and 2013, with 15 per cent of business owners expecting to cut staff levels in the next few months versus 19 per cent who are expecting to add.
> 
> December, 2015 findings are based on 759 responses, collected from a stratified random sample of CFIB members, to a controlled-access web survey. Data reflect responses received through December 14. Findings are considered accurate to +\- 3.6 per cent 19 times in 20.


Rough year in small business confidence ends on lowest note


----------



## Macfury

Small businesses fare the worst under the NDP, because of the onerous requirements of crushing regulatory burdens.


----------



## SINC

Yep, some people get it. The Dippers? Not so much.

Columnist Chris Nelson believes it’s time we admit it: The energy industry backstops our prosperity | Calgary Herald


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Yep, some people get it. The Dippers? Not so much.
> 
> 
> 
> Columnist Chris Nelson believes it’s time we admit it: The energy industry backstops our prosperity | Calgary Herald



It certainly does, at least here in Alberta, and especially since 1971 or so. Your point? Seems to me this fact is why we should have diversified WHEN TIMES WERE GOOD, rather than wait until another recession before we consider the downside of roller coaster budgeting. During the booms we spend like drunken sailors, only to discover just how broke we really are when times are tough. And all of this under Conservative money management, I might add. Extra money to help out the horse racing industry, anyone? 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

1: Government does not "diversify the economy."
2. The economy had already significantly diversified over the past 25 years.
3. Public service wages among the highest in the country anyone? Drunken sailors.



fjnmusic said:


> It certainly does, at least here in Alberta, and especially since 1971 or so. Your point? Seems to me this fact is why we should have diversified WHEN TIMES WERE GOOD, rather than wait until another recession before we consider the downside of roller coaster budgeting. During the booms we spend like drunken sailors, only to discover just how broke we really are when times are tough. And all of this under Conservative money management, I might add. Extra money to help out the horse racing industry, anyone?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Rps

I have quite a few members of my family living in Alberta, and it has always been feast or famine. As fjn has pointed out, during the good times it's spending like drunken sailors, then comes the fall and its hand wringing. Alberta has a resource mentality when it comes to its economy: oil, coal, wood, even horses and cattle. So I think what we have here is a government who is riding into the way.......time will tell if it will catch it for the ride back.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> I have quite a few members of my family living in Alberta, and it has always been feast or famine. As fjn has pointed out, during the good times it's spending like drunken sailors, then comes the fall and its hand wringing. Alberta has a resource mentality when it comes to its economy: oil, coal, wood, even horses and cattle. So I think what we have here is a government who is riding into the way.......time will tell if it will catch it for the ride back.


Agriculture remains strong and energy as a percentage of the economy holds a much smaller stake than in previous decades. 

However, oil is unlikely to meet any rosy NDP targets anytime soon, and they are decimating that same industry as time passes. It will get really ugly for Notley.


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> Agriculture remains strong and energy as a percentage of the economy holds a much smaller stake than in previous decades.
> 
> However, oil is unlikely to meet any rosy NDP targets anytime soon, and they are decimating that same industry as time passes. It will get really ugly for Notley.


I was chatting with a guy who lives nearby and works security at a certain location that gives him the inside track yesterday over a beer at the pub. 

He told me that police are investigating 238 separate death threats *in the Peace River area alone* made towards Rachel Notley. That area was her father Grant's home riding for many years when he led the NDP. If she does not smarten up soon, there could be some serious trouble ahead for her.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> I was chatting with a guy who lives nearby and works security at a certain location that gives him the inside track yesterday over a beer at the pub.
> 
> 
> 
> He told me that police are investigating 238 separate death threats *in the Peace River area alone* made towards Rachel Notley. That area was her father Grant's home riding for many years when he led the NDP. If she does not smarten up soon, there could be some serious trouble ahead for her.



You sound like you're advocating death threats here, Don, or at least sympathizing with the threat makers. Be careful. It's not cool to blame the victim. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

You're really reaching there. Don is merely passing along what he heard.



fjnmusic said:


> You sound like you're advocating death threats here, Don, or at least sympathizing with the threat makers. Be careful. It's not cool to blame the victim.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> You're really reaching there. Don is merely passing along what he heard.


Exactly. This is the same guy who fed me the correct information on the mountie shot here in the city a year ago. He was bang on the money with the details.



fjnmusic said:


> You sound like you're advocating death threats here, Don, or at least sympathizing with the threat makers. Be careful. It's not cool to blame the victim.


As for me promoting death threats is the real stretch. I posted what I was told with a caution that in my mind Notley and her security team should heed. The US is not the only place where radical groups exist that promote violence a la the Ayrian bunch that also exists here in Alberta.

If the NDP keep pissin' in the oil patch's corn flakes, they are gonna continue to create problems not only for themselves, but for all Albertans.

To date the Dippers have demonstrated that they are not smart enough not to kick a sleeping dog or oil workers when they are down.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Exactly. This is the same guy who fed me the correct information on the mountie shot here in the city a year ago. He was bang on the money with the details.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As for me promoting death threats is the real stretch. I posted what I was told with a caution that in my mind Notley and her security team should heed. The US is not the only place where radical groups exist that promote violence a la the Ayrian bunch that also exists here in Alberta.
> 
> 
> 
> If the NDP keep pissin' in the oil patch's corn flakes, they are gonna continue to create problems not only for themselves, but for all Albertans.
> 
> 
> 
> To date the Dippers have demonstrated that they are not smart enough not to kick a sleeping dog or oil workers when they are down.



If there's any threat of violence that gets carried out, I believe it will be the "good ol' boys" from Alberta to watch for, not immigrants or refugees. Ironic. The biggest thing we have to fear is fear itself. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

It sounds like you're saying that Notley has the most to fear from people whose livelihoods she is destroying--why is that ironic?





fjnmusic said:


> If there's any threat of violence that gets carried out, I believe it will be the "good ol' boys" from Alberta to watch for, not immigrants or refugees. Ironic. The biggest thing we have to fear is fear itself.


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> If there's any threat of violence that gets carried out, I believe it will be the "good ol' boys" from Alberta to watch for, not immigrants or refugees. Ironic. The biggest thing we have to fear is fear itself.


Nope, WE have nothing to fear from these threats, but Notley sure does.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> It sounds like you're saying that Notley has the most to fear from people whose livelihoods she is destroying--why is that ironic?



Because you righties go on and on about how dangerous a place Canada is becoming what will all the refugees and all, while it appears the threat is already clear and present with some hate-filled old stock Canadians. You don't really have a clue what a terrorist is if you think it's okay to make death threats against politicians. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Nope, WE have nothing to fear from these threats, but Notley sure does.



And if that's how you actually feel about your fellow human beings, then I feel sorry for you. No big deal—she's just a celebrity. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Because you righties go on and on about how dangerous a place Canada is becoming what will all the refugees and all, while it appears the threat is already clear and present with some hate-filled old stock Canadians.


People whose livelihoods are being destroyed by an old fool have every reason to hate Notley. 



fjnmusic said:


> You don't really have a clue what a terrorist is if you think it's okay to make death threats against politicians.


Nobody here advocated death threats. Do you think if you say it often enough it will become true?


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> People whose livelihoods are being destroyed by an old fool have every reason to hate Notley.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody here advocated death threats. Do you think if you say it often enough it will become true?



Hate, yes. Utter death threats, no. That would be illegal and constitute a threat of terrorism, or at the very least a threat of assault. If it's not okay foe Weibo Ludwig to do it and hence be branded an Eco-terrorist, then it's not okay for anyone else either. We've had arguments many times before about what constitutes terrorism. Do you believe death threats against an individual constitutes a threat of terrorism? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

I would call a death threat against an individual a "death threat."



fjnmusic said:


> Do you believe death threats against an individual constitutes a threat of terrorism?


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> I would call a death threat against an individual a "death threat."


Yep. Agreed. How did terrorism even enter the picture? It has nothing to do with terrorism.

How many other provincial premiers do you suppose have had so many death threats against them? Let me hazard a guess. None?

That indicates a loud and clear message to Notley that she is somehow bringing them upon herself, does it not? (Sorry, couldn't resist the wording.)

Changing the NDP policies and method of delivery would seem to be the solution to the issue.


----------



## FeXL

I jes' luvs me a post that writes itself...

Alberta man arrested after Air Canada flight forced back to Toronto



> *Jaskaran Sidhu* of Fort McMurray, Alta., has been charged with two counts of mischief, assault causing bodily harm, and endangering the safety of an aircraft.


BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!



fjnmusic said:


> If there's any threat of violence that gets carried out, I believe it will be the "*good ol' boys*" from Alberta to watch for, not immigrants or refugees.


No $h!t...



fjnmusic said:


> Ironic.


----------



## fjnmusic

And why can't Sidhu, from Alberta, be a good ol' boy? Is he a refugee terrorist? Are you calling attention to his last name for some reason? Is "assualtive and combative" behaviour acceptable if it's aimed at a premier you don't like? And for what it's worth, India, the flight's destination, is not known to be a Muslim country.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Perhaps today's PC party needs to focus more on the P and less on the C. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Perhaps today's PC party needs to focus more on the P and less on the C.
> [/quote]
> 
> Perhaps you might want to focus on the reality of today's oil price meltdown and recognize the NDP are attacking an industry already on its knees. Not to mention increasing the minimum wage by 50% and the business tax by 20% in the middle of the largest recession the province has seen in many long years. Did I mention over 100,000 job losses they are ignoring as well? The Dippers simply don't have the experience to govern and it shows.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Perhaps you might want to focus on the reality of today's oil price meltdown and recognize the NDP are attacking an industry already on its knees. Not to mention increasing the minimum wage by 50% and the business tax by 20% in the middle of the largest recession the province has seen in many long years. Did I mention over 100,000 job losses they are ignoring as well? The Dippers simply don't have the experience to govern and it shows.



The NDP didn't lay off those workers. Stop blaming the messenger. It's the price of oil internationally. Whining about the NDP won't help. Why do you think the Prentice PC's bailed out and called an election a year too soon? They didn't want to be left holding the bag when things got rough. All the laid off workers would be well advised to start preparing for their second career choice, because those oil prices may not be bouncing back any time soon, and pumping more money into oil and gas right now is a waste of time. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> The NDP didn't lay off those workers. Stop blaming the messenger. It's the price of oil internationally. Whining about the NDP won't help. Why do you think the Prentice PC's bailed out and called an election a year too soon? They didn't want to be left holding the bag when things got rough. All the laid off workers would be well advised to start preparing for their second career choice, because those oil prices may not be bouncing back any time soon, and pumping more money into oil and gas right now is a waste of time.



So who then exactly, do we blame for a 50% increase in minimum wage and a 20% increase in business taxes that definitely contributes to many of the layoffs and will continue to do so in the future?


----------



## Macfury

You seem to ignore the fact that Notley has exacerbated the oil lay-offs with her regressive policies. Many of those jobs will never return as energy companies invest in more business friendly provinces and companies.



fjnmusic said:


> The NDP didn't lay off those workers. Stop blaming the messenger. It's the price of oil internationally. Whining about the NDP won't help. Why do you think the Prentice PC's bailed out and called an election a year too soon? They didn't want to be left holding the bag when things got rough. All the laid off workers would be well advised to start preparing for their second career choice, because those oil prices may not be bouncing back any time soon, and pumping more money into oil and gas right now is a waste of time.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

This has to be the most ridiculous meme I've seen in some time. You can negotiate royalties, spend some money on the arts and put together a rainy day fund without advocating the regressive business policies of "progressives."



fjnmusic said:


> Perhaps today's PC party needs to focus more on the P and less on the C.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> So who then exactly, do we blame for a 50% increase in minimum wage and a 20% increase in business taxes that definitely contributes to many of the layoffs and will continue to do so in the future?



Sigh. We've been through this before. As of today, minimum wage has increased less than 10% and business taxes have risen 2%—from 10% to 12%. #mathishard


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Rps

fjnmusic said:


> Sigh. We've been through this before. As of today, minimum wage has increased less than 10% and business taxes have risen 2%—from 10% to 12%. #mathishard
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I'm not a math wiz, but isn't moving from 10% to 12% a 20% increase?


----------



## SINC

Rps said:


> I'm not a math wiz, but isn't moving from 10% to 12% a 20% increase?


It is to everyone in the universe but Frank and the Alberta NDP!


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> I'm not a math wiz, but isn't moving from 10% to 12% a 20% increase?


Math is _very_ hard for fjn.


----------



## fjnmusic

Rps said:


> I'm not a math wiz, but isn't moving from 10% to 12% a 20% increase?



Nope. It's an obfuscation, a deliberate misrepresentation of the numbers. One could also say that companies used to keep 90% of the profits; now they only keep 88%. One could also say they make 97.7777% of the profits that they used to make, or that the profit has dropped by about 2.3% of what it used to be. Hardly a catastrophe, but some people like to twist because #mathishard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Good grief, a teacher who has no concept of basic math is scary. If a business paid $100,000 in taxes before the NDP on 10% of $1,000,000 revenue, they will now pay $120,000 in taxes on 12% on the same revenue. So now, what percentage is $20,000 over the original $100,000? Yep it's 20% more all day long.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Good grief, a teacher who has no concept of basic math is scary. If a business paid $100,000 in taxes before the NDP on 10% of $1,000,000 revenue, they will now pay $120,000 in taxes on 12% on the same revenue. So now, what percentage is $20,000 over the original $100,000? Yep it's 20% more all day long.



Good lord. You know nothing about statistics (or math either, apparently). Numbers can be presented in any way you want to make them look bigger or smaller. Do you deny that businesses who used to keep 90% of their profits will now only keep 88% when moving from a 10% to 12% tax rate?

Your fictional business that formerly kept $900,000 of their profits (not revenue) on each million dollars of profits (not revenue) before now keeps $880,000 of their profits (not revenue). That is in no way, shape or form a 20% loss in profits, let alone revenue. If times are tough and there are no profits to be made, they would pay NOTHING. Give your head a shake. All day long. 

It's no wonder students have a tough time with math when their grandparents can't even figure it out. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

I think that teachers should be allowed to earn 98% of their gross current salaries. If the reduction in business profits is a pittance, it won't matter much to teachers either.



fjnmusic said:


> Good lord. You know nothing about statistics (or math either, apparently). Numbers can be presented in any way you want to make them look bigger or smaller. Do you deny that businesses who used to keep 90% of their profits will now only keep 88% when moving from a 10% to 12% tax rate?
> 
> Your fictional business that formerly kept $900,000 of their profits (not revenue) on each million dollars of profits (not revenue) before now keeps $880,000 of their profits (not revenue). That is in no way, shape or form a 20% loss in profits, let alone revenue. If times are tough and there are no profits to be made, they would pay NOTHING. Give your head a shake. All day long.
> 
> It's no wonder students have a tough time with math when their grandparents can't even figure it out.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Rps

I think what we have here is, as stated in Cool Hand Luke, a failure to communicate. Frank, you are correct and so is Sinc. The issue that I see is the 20% increase in business tax, it doesn't matter if the move was from 10 to 12% that 2% rise is a 2O% increase. So you both can spin it as you like.

Just one small other point, revenue is not profit.


----------



## fjnmusic

Rps said:


> I think what we have here is, as stated in Cool Hand Luke, a failure to communicate. Frank, you are correct and so is Sinc. The issue that I see is the 20% increase in business tax, it doesn't matter if the move was from 10 to 12% that 2% rise is a 2O% increase. So you both can spin it as you like.
> 
> 
> 
> Just one small other point, revenue is not profit.



Exactly. Or as the French would say, exactement. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> I think that teachers should be allowed to earn 98% of their gross current salaries. If the reduction in business profits is a pittance, it won't matter much to teachers either.



If my salary was $60,000 and was reduced by $1200 (or 98% of the previous salary) to $58,800, I don't think there would be a lot of sympathy from anyone, and I wouldn't be justified in claiming I had endured more than a 1.2% cutback. Now, seeing as I experienced a 5% wage cutback for eight years in a row under the illustrious Klein revolution (5x8=40, the equivalent of a 40% wage cutback in any single given year), yes, I think I'm in a position to judge your BS sky-is-falling numbers as over-inflated. And again, the tax increase the Alberta government has proposed is based on PROFITS, not revenue. Big difference. No profits, no increased taxes. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Remember that you didn't have to pay tax on the clawback! No wages, no tax!



fjnmusic said:


> No profits, no increased taxes.


The NDP is good at making "no profits" happen.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Remember that you didn't have to pay tax on the clawback! No wages, no tax!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The NDP is good at making "no profits" happen.



Yes, I suppose there were some benefits. It took a strike (after eight years of wage cutbacks equivalent to a one-time chop of 40%, mind you) and a binding arbitration to get back HALF of what we gave up, not to mention wages lost during the strike. This is what I remember every time you suggest cutting public sector wages AGAIN to balance everybody else's books. We've been down that road before. You honestly have no idea what you're talking about or what we've gone through in Alberta. Ed Stelmach was the only PC Premier who treated public sectors fairly. And he paid the price too. 

P.S. I notice you didn't dispute my calculations. That's because they're correct. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Bottom line is this. It is a 2% increase in the tax RATE. BUT if a company makes identical profits year to year, it is a 20% increase in real dollar taxes paid. That is a rock solid fact.


----------



## Macfury

Your calculations are (finally) mathematically correct but do not reflect the way such numbers are expressed. Tell you what--why don't you express the minimum wage increase in parallel fashion for a fair comparison?

Any company staying in Alberta will lose that profit every year, not just once. It's no wonder businesses in the province are in evacuation mode.




fjnmusic said:


> Yes, I suppose there were some benefits. It took a strike (after eight years of wage cutbacks equivalent to a one-time chop of 40%, mind you) and a binding arbitration to get back HALF of what we gave up, not to mention wages lost during the strike. This is what I remember every time you suggest cutting public sector wages AGAIN to balance everybody else's books. We've been down that road before. You honestly have no idea what you're talking about or what we've gone through in Alberta. Ed Stelmach was the only PC Premier who treated public sectors fairly. And he paid the price too.
> 
> P.S. I notice you didn't dispute my calculations. That's because they're correct.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

FFS, I thought we had beat this dead horse into hamburger months ago. Yet here we are, once again, completely & entirely unable to discern the difference between percent and percentage points. They are _*not*_ the same animal & cannot be used interchangeably!

For the last f'ing time... The increase in taxes on profits of two percentage points (from 10% to 12%) represents a 20% increase.

In addition, your subsequent post about a 5% reduction for 8 years adding up to 40% is also completely off the mark.

I truly despair for the children in your school district. Especially if you teach anything save band class...



fjnmusic said:


> Nope. It's an obfuscation, a deliberate misrepresentation of the numbers.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> FFS, I thought we had beat this dead horse into hamburger months ago. Yet here we are, once again, completely & entirely unable to discern the difference between percent and percentage points. They are _*not*_ the same animal & cannot be used interchangeably!
> 
> 
> 
> For the last f'ing time... The increase in taxes on profits of two percentage points (from 10% to 12%) represents a 20% increase.
> 
> 
> 
> In addition, your subsequent post about a 5% reduction for 8 years adding up to 40% is also completely off the mark.
> 
> 
> 
> I truly despair for the children in your school district. Especially if you teach anything save band class...



FFS, FeXL. You don't need to become a condescending a-hole every time you try to talk to me. Not everyone uses the same terminology you use, and the math as I presented is absolutely correct. I lived with said cutbacks so don't preach to me about how hard these poor companies are going to have it when they have to pay SLIGHTLY more taxes on their PROFITS, not their REVENUES. And if it's a tough year and there's no profits, then there's nothing extra to be paid. FFS, pay attention. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Now this may stir up some reactions....
http://edmontonjournal.com/news/loc...-conservative-than-albertans-think-poll-finds


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Now this may stir up some reactions....
> Just a little to the left: Albertans not as conservative as they think, poll finds | Edmonton Journal


Nothing new here if you look at the board members political affiliations and union ties. A failed attempt with a questionable poll designed to bolster the Dipper viewpoint that the Journal fell for, hook, line and sinker.


----------



## fjnmusic

"Conservatives in Alberta are loud, well-connected and well-funded, but they are not the majority. Progressives are. The myth of Alberta as this great conservative heartland needs to be put to bed.

Compared to the rest of Canada, Alberta is a demographic anomaly. The 18- to 35-year-old demographic is simply massive here compared to the over-55 set. According to the poll, more than two-thirds of Albertans age 18-29 identify as progressive. Alberta has twice the university graduates it had in 1991. More than two-thirds of university graduates identify as progressive."

http://edmontonjournal.com/opinion/columnists/0106-oped-kinney


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

If I come across as condescending, it's because the simplest of concepts seems to escape you, despite clear, elementary, step by step explanations.



fjnmusic said:


> FFS, FeXL. You don't need to become a condescending a-hole every time you try to talk to me.


Anybody who wishes to describe in correct terms uses the identical language I use. 



fjnmusic said:


> Not everyone uses the same terminology you use, and the math as I presented is absolutely correct.


And no, this is not correct. Math Fail...



fjnmusic said:


> ...business taxes have risen 2%—from 10% to 12%.


Wah, frickin' wah. You weren't the only one who lived with those cutbacks.

Besides, I never said anything about the cutbacks, save that your math was incorrect. _You_ pay attention.



fjnmusic said:


> I lived with said cutbacks... FFS, pay attention.


However, now that you've brought them up, here's the real math on them, as well.

You say you lost 40% of your wages (8 years times 5% = 40%). Bull$h!t.

For the sake of easy calculations, let's say you were making $100,000/year during that time: The 1st year, you took a 5% cut on your $100,000, $5000.
The 2nd year, you took a 5% cut on your $100,000, $5000.
The 3rd year, you took a 5% cut on your $100,000, $5000.
...
The 8th year, you took a 5% cut on your $100,000, $5000. 

So, over 8 years you would have grossed $800,000 (8 years X $100,000) prior to the pay cut. 
Subsequently, over 8 years, you took a 5% cut on $100,000 for a total of $40,000 (8 years X $5000).

Now, for the skill-testing question:

What percentage of $800,000 is $40,000? Go ahead, get your little calculator out & punch the keys. I'll wait.

Better yet, I'll even tell you what numbers to enter: 800,000 X 0.05. Sonuvagun. 40,000... Go ahead, try it yourself.

You took a 5% pay cut. Period. That is the black & white of the issue. Now, over the years, how many people have you p!ssed & moaned to about that so-called 40% pay cut? Tens? Hundreds? Thousands?

How many other teachers have agreed with you? How many of you sat there in the staff room commiserating, staring into your coffee cup, swearing at the rotten Conservative SOB's who foisted a 40% pay cut onto you when, in fact, it was 5%?

That's why I fear for our children...

Now, if pointing out the fact that a particular school teacher, who has allegedly passed some sort of "extensive screening process" or similar such thing, cannot perform basic math makes me an a-hole, I'll hold the crown high.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> If I come across as condescending, it's because the simplest of concepts seems to escape you, despite clear, elementary, step by step explanations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anybody who wishes to describe in correct terms uses the identical language I use.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And no, this is not correct. Math Fail...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wah, frickin' wah. You weren't the only one who lived with those cutbacks.
> 
> 
> 
> Besides, I never said anything about the cutbacks, save that your math was incorrect. _You_ pay attention.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> However, now that you've brought them up, here's the real math on them, as well.
> 
> 
> 
> You say you lost 40% of your wages (8 years times 5% = 40%). Bull$h!t.
> 
> 
> 
> For the sake of easy calculations, let's say you were making $100,000/year during that time: The 1st year, you took a 5% cut on your $100,000, $5000.
> 
> The 2nd year, you took a 5% cut on your $100,000, $5000.
> 
> The 3rd year, you took a 5% cut on your $100,000, $5000.
> 
> ...
> 
> The 8th year, you took a 5% cut on your $100,000, $5000.
> 
> 
> 
> So, over 8 years you would have grossed $800,000 (8 years X $100,000) prior to the pay cut.
> 
> Subsequently, over 8 years, you took a 5% cut on $100,000 for a total of $40,000 (8 years X $5000).
> 
> 
> 
> Now, for the skill-testing question:
> 
> 
> 
> What percentage of $800,000 is $40,000? Go ahead, get your little calculator out & punch the keys. I'll wait.
> 
> 
> 
> Better yet, I'll even tell you what numbers to enter: 800,000 X 0.05. Sonuvagun. 40,000... Go ahead, try it yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> You took a 5% pay cut. Period. That is the black & white of the issue. Now, over the years, how many people have you p!ssed & moaned to about that so-called 40% pay cut? Tens? Hundreds? Thousands?
> 
> 
> 
> How many other teachers have agreed with you? How many of you sat there in the staff room commiserating, staring into your coffee cup, swearing at the rotten Conservative SOB's who foisted a 40% pay cut onto you when, in fact, it was 5%?
> 
> 
> 
> That's why I fear for our children...
> 
> 
> 
> Now, if pointing out the fact that a particular school teacher, who has allegedly passed some sort of "extensive screening process" or similar such thing, cannot perform basic math makes me an a-hole, I'll hold the crown high.



If I had been making $100,000 during that time period, I'd have been laughing all the way to the bank, you condescending little prick. The 5% cut was presented as a one time thing, to help the balance the books. When the gov't under Klein continued to take away 5% for eight years in a row, until we were able to arbitrate some of it back, we continued to lose money. I wasn't even making $50,000 at the time, let alone $100,000, but using your numbers, $5000 (5%) x 8 = $40,000. That would have been the EQUIVALENT of 40% in a single year, assuming every other year stayed as it was. If the pay cut was foisted once, that's one thing, but it wasn't. Read the whole of what you have been assigned. Don't just cherry pick for details. 

The assoholic nature of your criticisms of me as a teacher are frequent and not forgiveable. What do you do for a living so we can make fun of you? Seriously, you need to learn some manners. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Attended the Canadian Club's Outlook 2016 economic forecast in Toronto today. There was nothing but derision for the Alberta NDP's regressive economic policies and their uneasonable forecasts for revenue.


----------



## Macfury

I remember that from university. Took a couple of years for those starry eyed kids to lose their "progressive" unicorn horns. I was actually normal to begin with, so no hard adjustment for me.



fjnmusic said:


> "Conservatives in Alberta are loud, well-connected and well-funded, but they are not the majority. Progressives are. The myth of Alberta as this great conservative heartland needs to be put to bed.
> 
> Compared to the rest of Canada, Alberta is a demographic anomaly. The 18- to 35-year-old demographic is simply massive here compared to the over-55 set. According to the poll, more than two-thirds of Albertans age 18-29 identify as progressive. Alberta has twice the university graduates it had in 1991. More than two-thirds of university graduates identify as progressive."
> 
> Opinion: Alberta — More progressive than you think | Edmonton Journal
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

fjnmusic said:


> blah, blah, blah, blah, blah...


<just shaking my head...>

I didn't say you were making $100k. I said, let's use those figures for easy calculations. Apparently, they're not that easy. Fine.

5% of 50,000 is $2500. Multiply that by 8 years, that's $20,000, subtract it from what you would have made before the cut over 8 years, that's $400,000. Guess what, 20 grand is still only 5% of $400k. 

So you were making less than $50K. Fine. Let's go with $46,832. Multiply that by 8 years, that's $374,656 before the pay cut over 8 years. A 5% pay cut for one year would be $2341.60. Multiply that by 8 years, you get $18732.60. That also represents, wait for it, a grand total of 5% of $374,656.

It doesn't matter what the numbers were, a 5% pay cut is just 5%. It's not 8x5%=40%!!!



fjnmusic said:


> I wasn't even making $50,000 at the time, let alone $100,000, but using your numbers, $5000 (5%) x 8 = $40,000. That would have been the EQUIVALENT of 40% in a single year, assuming every other year stayed as it was.


What I do for a living is not a secret on these boards. If it makes you feel better, mock away. At least I can do basic math.



fjnmusic said:


> What do you do for a living so we can make fun of you?


And you need to learn some math.



fjnmusic said:


> Seriously, you need to learn some manners.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Blahblahblah



Either way, if I were making $50,000 at the time, that's $20,000 out of my pocket, not yours. Multiply that by the 35,000 or so teachers in the province, and voila, you've just found yourself an easy $700 million to balance the budget with over that eight year period of time. Except we as Albertans hardly shared the burden. The budget was balanced (or pretended to be balanced) on the backs of public sector workers primarily. I do not favour a PST, but it would be a much fairer way to balance the budget if the provincial debt was really everyone's responsibility. Did you get gouged by the government under Ralph Klein? Or did you enjoy your"Ralph bucks"? If you did not get gouged, then you need to learn some empathy for other human beings. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

The burden in this case IS the salaries of public sector workers. Nothing is carried on their backs--it is the taxpayer who is carrying them.



fjnmusic said:


> Except we as Albertans hardly shared the burden. The budget was balanced (or pretended to be balanced) on the backs of public sector workers primarily.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> The burden in this case IS the salaries of public sector workers. Nothing is carried on their backs--it is the taxpayer who is carrying them.



I call bull****. If the salaries are on par with average weekly earnings for Albertans with degrees, which they are, then it is not a burden. It is the cost of having an educated society. Deal with it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Who cares about degrees these days? They are overabundant and over-rated. However, the salaries are not on par--they are way over. It is not the cost of having an educated society, but the cost of an employer indifferent to the pain the hiring and pay packages/benefits are causing citizens. It is a significant burden and a terrible drag on the economy.



fjnmusic said:


> I call bull****. If the salaries are on par with average weekly earnings for Albertans with degrees, which they are, then it is not a burden. It is the cost of having an educated society. Deal with it.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Barry Cooper: It’s not just Albertans who’ve noticed what Notley is up to | Calgary Herald


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Who cares about degrees these days? They are overabundant and over-rated. However, the salaries are not on par--they are way over. It is not the cost of having an educated society, but the cost of an employer indifferent to the pain the hiring and pay packages/benefits are causing citizens. It is a significant burden and a terrible drag on the economy.



Mm-hmmm. And you don't suppose exorbitant pay and benefits might just be why the industry people are out of work right now? Unsustainable model. For a long time, they got paid far more than we teachers do. I think out of it as we may be slow and steady like the tortoise, but we're usually protected during tough times. In the industry then can make tons of money, like the hare, (and spend it freely too, don't kid yourself) but when hard times come, there are devastating consequences. Slow and steady wins the race in this province. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Absolutely not. High pay in various private sector concerns is associated with something called supply and demand, a reality that does not trouble the public sector. With benefits, public sector workers are bankrupting provinces, counties and municipalities. There's no slow and steady. Public sector union members are at the trough, feeding fast and furious.

The term "public servants" is rarely used today because of this.



fjnmusic said:


> Mm-hmmm. And you don't suppose exorbitant pay and benefits might just be why the industry people are out of work right now? Unsustainable model. For a long time, they got paid far more than we teachers do. I think out of it as we may be slow and steady like the tortoise, but we're usually protected during tough times. In the industry then can make tons of money, like the hare, (and spend it freely too, don't kid yourself) but when hard times come, there are devastating consequences. Slow and steady wins the race in this province.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

With all respect due to your massive personal sacrifice, that's less than $100 million/yr. In the big picture, chicken feed...



fjnmusic said:


> ...you've just found yourself an easy $700 million to balance the budget with over that eight year period of time.


Just because private sector wages weren't arbitrarily cut doesn't mean the burden wasn't shared. Higher taxes, cost of living increases, loss of services, loss of sales, whatever.

Do you have any numbers to back up your claim about the budget being "on the backs of public sector workers primarily."? That sounds like a wonderful meme but pardon me if I ask for a little evidence...



fjnmusic said:


> Except we as Albertans hardly shared the burden. The budget was balanced (or pretended to be balanced) on the backs of public sector workers primarily.


Fair to whom? Time & again it has been shown that across the board flat rate consumer sales taxes affect the lower income earners the most. How is that fair?



fjnmusic said:


> I do not favour a PST, but it would be a much fairer way to balance the budget if the provincial debt was really everyone's responsibility.


FFS, I've told you time & again my bride is a teacher. No, we weren't gouged. Yes, we were affected. However, unlike you we weren't offended. It made fiscal sense to us. 

Almost nothing the NDP have done so far has made any fiscal sense whatsoever.

And, yes, we did enjoy our "Ralph Bucks" afterwards as a testament to the sacrifices (not limited to but including teacher pay cuts) we had made during the interim.

As to your BS statement about empathy, haven't seen or heard much extended from you to the tens of thousands of oil patch workers & associated subsidiaries who have lost their entire job, not just a lousy 20 grand over 8 years. My business lost more than that the first year of the recession in '08 alone. Since then, my sales have never recovered & I'm down well over 6 figures from years previous to the recession. I & hundreds of thousands of other Albertans would swap our losses for yours in a minute.

You talk about empathy. Try a little perspective...

Nor have I heard much (any?) criticism from you of the NDP policies which are currently effecting massive negative change to Alberta's economy which will affect even more Albertans, including you & your family. You think the PC's were bastards because they took $20k from you over the course of 8 years. Wake the hell up. By the time Rachel & her Knotheads get done with you, you'll be wishing for the financial restraint of the PC's. It's going to cost your family that much alone just to finance phase _one_ of the Carbon Tax. Wait 'til the rest of the feces hits the oscillating air device...



fjnmusic said:


> Did you get gouged by the government under Ralph Klein? Or did you enjoy your"Ralph bucks"? If you did not get gouged, then you need to learn some empathy for other human beings.


----------



## SINC

*Jen Gerson: Anger over Notley government leads to growing fringe protests, threats of violence*



> George Clark belongs to no political party. He’s a middle-aged man who owns a construction company that builds wind turbines and solar panels, and he believes in the power of the people. On Facebook he boasts a small following of Albertans disaffected with the province’s eight-month-old NDP government. Now, thanks to an arcane reading of the Elections Act, he is convinced he’s found a way to remove Premier Rachel Notley from office legally and democratically well before the end of her first term.
> 
> In that effort he will almost certainly fail. *But Clark is the avatar of an angry Alberta. And after a year of economic downturn and political upheaval, the brand of determined populism Clark embodies is on the rise on the fringes of Alberta’s political culture, organizing opposition to Notley and her government via plebiscite, popular protest, weird legal counter-measure — and, in extreme cases, even threats of violence.*
> 
> Clark’s Albertans First is one of a handful of new grassroots political groups that have formed on social media in the Notley era. There’s No NDP Alberta and there’s Stand Up For Alberta. There’s Albertans For 206 Recall Legislation. There are regional groups centred in Grande Prairie and Red Deer. They’re all incensed by the NDP’s ceaseless rat-a-tat of legislation — including measures to improve farm safety, to introduce a carbon tax and to increase corporate taxes — but they also speak to a sense of bewilderment at the ascension of a socialist government in a province with no living memory of far-left rule, let alone any real experience with a handover of power from one party to another.


More here:

Jen Gerson: Anger over Notley government leads to growing fringe protests, threats of violence


----------



## fjnmusic

I've really grown bored discussing most Alberta politics things with many of you, as your views are so entrenched that no matter what I say you'll shoot it down. I am wasting my time even trying. You'll need to find a new whipping boy because I'm done. Have a nice life. Maybe if the tone becomes less hostile someday I might reconsider, but for now this thread among others has become too much of a timesucker. Haters gonna hate. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BigDL

fjnmusic said:


> I've really grown bored discussing most Alberta politics things with many of you, as your views are so entrenched that no matter what I say you'll shoot it down. I am wasting my time even trying. You'll need to find a new whipping boy because I'm done. Have a nice life. Maybe if the tone becomes less hostile someday I might reconsider, but for now this thread among others has become too much of a timesucker. Haters gonna hate.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Good Idea!

The outsiders never feel so at home until the antithesis of their ideals are entrenched. Here and in Ottawa.

In their view happy days are here again what with downward pressure on the values of the Loonies.


----------



## Macfury

Are you implying that your views are NOT entrenched? Interesting angle.



fjnmusic said:


> I've really grown bored discussing most Alberta politics things with many of you, as your views are so entrenched that no matter what I say you'll shoot it down. I am wasting my time even trying. You'll need to find a new whipping boy because I'm done. Have a nice life. Maybe if the tone becomes less hostile someday I might reconsider, but for now this thread among others has become too much of a timesucker. Haters gonna hate.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

BigDL said:


> In their view happy days are here again what with downward pressure on the values of the Loonies.


What does that even mean? Take a nap and try again old friend.


----------



## BigDL

Macfury said:


> What does that even mean? Take a nap and try again old friend.


Oh! Darn a missing apostrophe. :yikes:


----------



## FeXL

Typical response for a defenceless position.

That's OK, FJN. You enjoy your tax increases & your user fee increases & your liquor & beer price increases & paying for a Carbon Tax. When (not if) it comes, enjoy the PST & don't forget that the Royalty Review hasn't happened yet, either.

You'll need a 20% increase (my definition of 20%, not yours) in your salary just to put as much in your pocket as you once had under the hateful, thieving, Conservative bastards...



fjnmusic said:


> Haters gonna hate.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> What does that even mean? Take a nap and try again old friend.


Don't you recognize that? That's more world class Critical Analysis from BigDL. When he wanders off the Weather Thread that's what we get exposed to...


----------



## SINC

The economy tanks while the Dippers fiddle with no idea what the hell they are doing to our economy and in turn to the entire economy of Canada:

*CFIB calls for emergency debate in legislature on Alberta’s economic crisis*

AB government urged to put moratorium on any major new public policies until economy has recovered

CALGARY, January 8th, 2015 – Following today’s Statistics Canada release of Alberta’s job numbers, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) is appealing to the Alberta government to recall the legislature early for an emergency debate on the economic crisis plaguing Alberta’s economy and small business.

According to Statistics Canada figures, there has been a major decline in full-time employment since this time last year. The job numbers come on the heels of CFIB’s latest Business Barometer results released on December 31 that showed Alberta small business confidence plunged to an historic low of 33.1 on the 100 point scale, the weakest level ever recorded anywhere in the country.

“During the last recession, many big businesses enacted significant cost cutting measures and laid people off in droves, but thankfully small and medium-sized business held on to their staff as long as possible, providing much needed stability to the economy,” said Amber Ruddy, Alberta Director for CFIB.

“This time, however, things appear to be different. By all indications, we are starting to see rapidly growing lay-offs by smaller, independent businesses, as they struggle to survive the extended downturn. When so many entrepreneurs are shedding jobs, and at serious risk of failure, that spells serious, fundamental trouble for Alberta,” said Ruddy.

According to CFIB’s Business Barometer numbers, the employment picture for small and medium-sized businesses has changed significantly in the past few months, with 30 per cent of business owners now saying they plan to reduce their full-time workforce, compared to only 9 per cent who intend to hire.

“The level of frustration and despair in the small business community is unequivocally evident. Our elected leaders must do a better job of understanding the realities of independent business and discuss ways to take meaningful action to support Alberta small business community through this most difficult time. There is no time to waste,” said Ruddy.

Citing major new policies, such as personal and corporate tax hikes, huge jumps in the minimum wage, a massive new carbon tax, and the prospect of granting sweeping new tax powers for city governments, CFIB calls for an immediate moratorium on any further policy changes until the economy has sufficiently recovered. 

“Although low oil prices are at the heart of Alberta’s economic problems, the piling on of one bad policy after another has made a bad situation a lot worse. We are calling for the Premier and her government to hit pause on any additional major public policy changes until the economy has sufficiently recovered,” said Ruddy.

The Legislature is scheduled to resume on the second Tuesday in February. But the Government House Leader has until January 15 to file a legislative calendar, and could recall the house earlier than February 9th to have an emergency debate on the economy.


----------



## FeXL

Related to SINC's post above.

The death of the Alberta dream



> Large-scale layoffs, empty office towers, falling house prices: Alberta has been gutted by the glut.


No, the NDP do not control the price of oil.

Yes, they do create policy that can help or further hurt our economy...

Further:



> Alberta’s options are limited. The NDP’s talk of diversifying the economy is easier said than done. Consider two sectors that enjoyed a strong 2015: agriculture and tourism. Combined they account for just 3.5 per cent of Alberta’s GDP. Oil and gas makes up 25 per cent, with far higher wages. *Even the NDP’s Bilous admits “diversification is probably more of a medium to long play.*”


M'bold

Good. By then, they'll be gone. Along with half the problems...


----------



## fjnmusic

344 boxes. That's a lot of secrets to hide. http://edmontonjournal.com/news/loc...ot-followed-says-alberta-privacy-commissioner


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Thank goodness the commissioner found no wrongdoing. Now that protocols have been established, these concerns will be a good lesson for Notley to maintain all documents after she loses the next election. 



> “I’m not going to speculate that it was an intentional effort to hide something,” (Clayton) said.





fjnmusic said:


> 344 boxes. That's a lot of secrets to hide. Document shredding rules not followed after Alberta election, investigation finds | Edmonton Journal
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Hey, FJN, nice to see you back!

While you're here, perhaps you care to respond to my post & questions here. 



fjnmusic said:


> 344 boxes. That's a lot of secrets to hide.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Hey, FJN, nice to see you back!
> 
> 
> 
> While you're here, perhaps you care to respond to my post & questions here.



You are a troll, FeXL. I have wasted enough time trying to have anything remotely resembling a conversation with you. You don't talk; you lecture. Goodbye, troll.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

So, what do you do in a classroom? Sit down & have a conversation with the kids or do you lecture to them?

Same here. This board is one big public classroom. If you don't get it, then consider yourself fortunate to have others around who can explain it to you...

Want a conversation? Head over to the Shang. I understand they encourage light coffee talk there. Personally, I prefer something with a bit more substance.

Want to learn something? There are any of dozens of threads here that will furnish you with a learning experience, including this one.

Goodbye, FJN. I've enjoyed educating you...



fjnmusic said:


> You are a troll, FeXL. I have wasted enough time trying to have anything remotely resembling a conversation with you. You don't talk; you lecture. Goodbye, troll.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> So, what do you do in a classroom? Sit down & have a conversation with the kids or do you lecture to them?
> 
> 
> 
> Same here. This board is one big public classroom. If you don't get it, then consider yourself fortunate to have others around who can explain it to you...
> 
> 
> 
> Want a conversation? Head over to the Shang. I understand they encourage light coffee talk there. Personally, I prefer something with a bit more substance.
> 
> 
> 
> Want to learn something? There are any of dozens of threads here that will furnish you with a learning experience, including this one.
> 
> 
> 
> Goodbye, FJN. I've enjoyed educating you...



Your closed-mindedness prevents you from being persuasive. Mostly you end up talking to yourself, truth be told (m'bold). Sorry to say, but you haven't actually persuaded me about anything yet, much less educated me. And after losing two big elections in one year, you sadly come across as a poor sport who can't believe his parties lost. Whatevs. Have a nice life, whatever you do beyond typing on forums.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Kevin O'Leary promises $1M to Canadian oil if Notley steps down | Toronto Star


----------



## FeXL

I'm far more open-minded than you are. Any day of the week & twice on Sundays. You are all about "the left is best, screw the rest". I'm all about "show me".

In addition, I'm completely at a loss as to the connection between the state of one's open-mindedness & how persuasive they are... 



fjnmusic said:


> Your closed-mindedness prevents you from being persuasive.


Well, that's _your_ truth...



fjnmusic said:


> Mostly you end up talking to yourself, truth be told (m'bold).


Unlike you (by your own admission) I've never attempted to persuade anybody on these boards of anything. I present some facts, maybe an opinion & let others make up their own minds. I can lead a horse to water. That is all...



fjnmusic said:


> Sorry to say, but you haven't actually persuaded me about anything yet...


On the contrary, you now know the difference between percent & percentage points and a 5% cutback vs 40%... 



fjnmusic said:


> ...much less educated me.


I have no idea where TF this comes from. You are way off the mark with this comment.

First off, federally, I would have been more surprised if Harper would have won yet another term. Very unlikely. My disappointment is centered on the fact that ~40% of the country voted for a hairdo. Every time the Dauphin opens his mouth I am reminded again of exactly how vapid he is. The light is on in the hallway but there is _nobody_ home...

Provincially, I'm not surprised that the PC's lost their butts, even tho I'm not a PC supporter. I saw it coming, as did many Albertans. Disappointed that WR didn't get in? Yep, but certainly not a case of disbelief, for reasons I've outlined on this very thread.



fjnmusic said:


> And after losing two big elections in one year, you sadly come across as a poor sport who can't believe his parties lost.


----------



## FeXL

‘Sell everything,’ global banking giant tells investors and brace for ‘cataclysmic year’



> RBS has advised clients to brace for a “cataclysmic year” and a global deflationary crisis, warning that the major stock markets could fall by a fifth and *oil may reach US$16 a barrel.*
> 
> The bank’s credit team said markets are flashing the same stress alerts as they did before the Lehman crisis in 2008.
> 
> “Sell everything except high quality bonds. This is about return of capital, not return on capital. In a crowded hall, exit doors are small,” it said in a client note.


M'bold.

I can hardly wait to see Rachel's response...


----------



## Macfury

To paraphrase Ebenezer Scrooge, Notley will have "...no choice but to raise your royalties."



FeXL said:


> ‘Sell everything,’ global banking giant tells investors and brace for ‘cataclysmic year’
> 
> 
> 
> M'bold.
> 
> I can hardly wait to see Rachel's response...


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Kevin O'Leary promises $1M to Canadian oil if Notley steps down | Toronto Star


"Bring It On!" quoth she. 

http://m.huffpost.com/ca/entry/8964356


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> "Bring It On!" quoth she.


Trouble is, all she will do is bring down Alberta and the country with it. With no experience, no idea and no support, she will fail and be gone in 39 dreadful months ahead while she inflicts absolute pain on Albertans.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Trouble is, all she will do is bring down Alberta and the country with it. With no experience, no idea and no support, she will fail and be gone in 39 dreadful months ahead while she inflicts absolute pain on Albertans.



Hyperbole much? No, the sky is not falling and the future will be better than you seem to think. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Hyperbole much? No, the sky is not falling and the future will be better than you seem to think.


Be specific then--what is your government doing to make Alberta's future brighter? No NDP talking points. Canada's overall growth is predicted to be anemic over the next four years. With the blows she's raining on the energy industry, where are the good times coming from before she's thrown out of office?


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Be specific then--what is your government doing to make Alberta's future brighter? No NDP talking points. Canada's overall growth is predicted to be anemic over the next four years. With the blows she's raining on the energy industry, where are the good times coming from before she's thrown out of office?



Maybe at this point it's about survival. That can be worth more than you think. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Maybe at this point it's about survival. That can be worth more than you think.


Yeah, OUR survival is what it is all about and the pain is about to be inflicted upon us. The Dippers are a plague on all of Canada for their inexperience in governing a province that has influence on so much of the county's economy. They will be tossed from office as quickly as they gained it next election.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Yeah, OUR survival is what it is all about and the pain is about to be inflicted upon us. The Dippers are a plague on all of Canada for their inexperience in governing a province that has influence on so much of the county's economy. They will be tossed from office as quickly as they gained it next election.



So you've said time and again, ad nauseum. In the meantime, do you have anything positive to offer, some advice perhaps, or are you only able to offer criticism? Because frankly, it's getting a little boring. There is another three and a half years to go before another election, and, trust me, O'Leary won't be solving any of your problems. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> So you've said time and again, ad nauseum. In the meantime, do you have anything positive to offer, some advice perhaps, or are you only able to offer criticism? Because frankly, it's getting a little boring. There is another three and a half years to go before another election, and, trust me, O'Leary won't be solving any of your problems.


Sure I can off alternatives. Stop. Full stop on the destructive taxation, minimum wage folly and foolish carbon taxes that lie ahead. 

Do you think for a moment the policies of the NDP will change on these fronts? Didn't think so and neither do I. They are hell bent on the economic destruction of the province and in turn the country. Trouble is when you have zero experience and a socialistic agenda, you have a single motive and will plow ahead with it, be damned the consequences.


----------



## SINC

*The Alberta Prosperity Fund perhaps says it best:* 



> “The Notley NDP will go down in history as one of the most destructive economic forces to hit Alberta in its long climb from a prairie settlement to an economic powerhouse.”
> 
> “It is a sad day for a province that was once a beacon of hope for those seeking a better life. Like our Facebook page to add your name to a growing number of Albertans who feel it's not too late to turn Alberta around.”
> 
> “Alberta's Finance Minister Joe Ceci has missed the mark. Alberta's new carbon tax will extract $6 billion, not $3 billion, in tax from Albertans once fully ramped up to $30 per tonne. 'Like' our Facebook page and 'Share' this post if you feel Albertans deserve to know the truth about the NDP's destructive tax and spend agenda.”
> 
> “There is no mystery here. An absence of Mandate Letters shows Premier Notley has no plan for Alberta and does not trust her Ministers to deliver on a general direction. The good news is that we now know that the buck starts and stops on Premier Notley's desk.”


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Sure I can off alternatives. Stop. Full stop on the destructive taxation, minimum wage folly and foolish carbon taxes that lie ahead.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think for a moment the policies of the NDP will change on these fronts? Didn't think so and neither do I. They are hell bent on the economic destruction of the province and in turn the country. Trouble is when you have zero experience and a socialistic agenda, you have a single motive and will plow ahead with it, be damned the consequences.



That's like saying we won't hire anyone without experience. So how does one get experience? One needs to get out a work a job. But how does one find a job without experience?

Granted, the NDP in Alberta are still a little wet behind the ears, but it isn't like the government before them was doing us any favours. 59 new taxes promised in last March's budget. For a guy that decries taxes, that should have got your attention. The Wildrose were just as green as the NDP, plus they were viewed as turncoats, so they weren't a viable option either. Really, you're complaining about a state of helplessness. 

Got to go. Chat later. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Maybe at this point it's about survival. That can be worth more than you think.


No hyperbole on my part, the NDP appears to be working against survival and against recovery. I can't see anything they're doing to create wealth--only to remove wealth from businesses and citizens. Wealth creation is not being incentivized.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> The Wildrose were just as green as the NDP, plus they were viewed as turncoats, so they weren't a viable option either. Really, you're complaining about a state of helplessness.


They were seen as turncoats, but they were still a viable option. Holding the status quo would have been less harmful than the current policies.


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> That's like saying we won't hire anyone without experience. So how does one get experience? One needs to get out a work a job. But how does one find a job without experience?


One gains experience by observing and listening to peers and others who have gone down the road before you. If the NDP had practiced that, they would never have imposed new and destructive taxation and policies on business, industry and individual Albertans with a full blown recession looming.


----------



## Rps

My two cents worth here. First, when ever there is a radical change on party-in-power, there is a knowledge gap. We saw this in Ontario with Bob Rae's NDP. Yes there is a danger in a massive flood of change, but you make mistakes due to lack of experience and gain experience due to mistakes.

Second, the NDP in Alberta did not create this melt down, they may add more pain, but they didn't cause this. Alberta has always been feast or famine. OPEC and Saudia Arabia has flooded the world with oil. The real fear is a bankrupt Saudi Arabia and an unsettled Middle East! Seeds of world war, maybe....

The issue I see is that Alberta is in an "Oh my g_d! You did what you said you were going to do" moment. If the NDP do not recognise what may be destructive policies, then you will be in for a rough ride. Ideology over reason is an error many newbie governments make. Give them two years and let's see how they do..


----------



## CubaMark




----------



## Rps

Tyler, I weep for the future!


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> My two cents worth here. First, when ever there is a radical change on party-in-power, there is a knowledge gap. We saw this in Ontario with Bob Rae's NDP. Yes there is a danger in a massive flood of change, but you make mistakes due to lack of experience and gain experience due to mistakes..


Rae never filled the knowledge gap over his term of office.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> Tyler, I weep for the future!


Patrick can't even spell "if".


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> Rae never filled the knowledge gap over his term of office.


Very true, but where could he get it? I often think that key Ministers should run for office, no matter what party they belong to. I see where this would help at the municipal levels, such as comptroller or treasurer of a municipality.

The PM should have the best person possible as a cabinet minister, which mans it could be someone in or out of the party....or even out of Parliament.


----------



## Macfury

Like Notley, Rae chose philosophical purity over emulating successful policies elsewhere. It isn't a matter of needing experience as much as it is a matter of knowing what has and hasn't worked before. 



Rps said:


> Very true, but where could he get it? I often think that key Ministers should run for office, no matter what party they belong to. I see where this would help at the municipal levels, such as comptroller or treasurer of a municipality.
> 
> The PM should have the best person possible as a cabinet minister, which mans it could be someone in or out of the party....or even out of Parliament.


----------



## FeXL

Why do you s'pose they're not in power?



fjnmusic said:


> 59 new taxes promised in last March's budget.


No, they weren't as green. There were 17 WR candidates elected in the 2012 election, representing a sizeable portion of the province. There were 4 NDP, _all_ in Edmonton.

In addition, the whole party was not viewed as turncoats, just the ones who crossed the floor. 

WR was very viable. The biggest issue with WR was a rookie leader. Noted before, if Smith had stayed the course, she'd be Premiere right now.



fjnmusic said:


> The Wildrose were just as green as the NDP, plus they were viewed as turncoats, so they weren't a viable option either.


----------



## FeXL

NDP driving more business out?

Exclusive: Key Alberta Operator May Shut-In Cold Heavy Oil Production In Days, Source Says



> One of Canada's largest integrated energy companies may be on the verge of taking drastic measures in the heart of the country's oil patch. A source familiar with the matter told Oilpro on the condition of anonymity that Husky Energy may shut down its Alberta cold heavy oil production (CHOPS) within days. The source said that the move will be made *"in response to the unresponsive government of Alberta to the oil and gas industry"* and low oil prices.


Further:



> Husky is currently constructing 3 new steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) facilities in Saskatchewan, the source said, "*basically across the provincial border from Alberta due to the political regime in Alberta. Alberta is no longer interested in oil and gas development.*" The projects are the Rush Lake project and the Edam East and Edam West SAGD projects, located nearby.
> 
> The government of Saskatchewan recognizes "the need for economics that provided a steady business climate, level tax base for business and jobs and wealth for the residents to pay taxes for the services we all require." *This bodes well for Saskatchewan, even as Alberta, according to the source, is unresponsive to the oil and gas industry and the low prices that are hurting it.*


M'bold.

C'mon, Rachel. Why don't you & your Knotheads delay the Royalty Review again (already delayed twice)? Why don't you milk the industry for a few more billion bucks (BS carbon tax)? Despite impossible odds, some of us are still managing to keep our heads above water. Can hardly wait for your foot to come down on the rest of us.

Brad Wall must be smiling in his sleep...


----------



## SINC

Well, well, well, what a surprise. Non union employees feel the wrath of Rachel:

Alberta finance minister announces two-year salary freeze for managers and non-union employees in public service | Edmonton Journal

But, but, what about unions sharing in our pain? Huh? Not on Rachel's watch!


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> But, but, what about unions sharing in our pain? Huh? Not on Rachel's watch!


Just watch it happen--eventually they throw their own to the wolves as a public sacrifice.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Why do you s'pose they're not in power?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, they weren't as green. There were 17 WR candidates elected in the 2012 election, representing a sizeable portion of the province. There were 4 NDP, _all_ in Edmonton.
> 
> 
> 
> In addition, the whole party was not viewed as turncoats, just the ones who crossed the floor.
> 
> 
> 
> WR was very viable. The biggest issue with WR was a rookie leader. Noted before, if Smith had stayed the course, she'd be Premiere right now.



Well thank God for small favors. A person would have to be a fool to wish for Danielle Smith to be in charge of anything right now, least of all a splintered party and a fragile economy. Premier Smith? Not in this lifetime. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Well, well, well, what a surprise. Non union employees feel the wrath of Rachel:
> 
> 
> 
> Alberta finance minister announces two-year salary freeze for managers and non-union employees in public service | Edmonton Journal
> 
> 
> 
> But, but, what about unions sharing in our pain? Huh? Not on Rachel's watch!



We've been sharing the pain long before you even knew about it, Einstein. This year was our big 2% raise after three years of zero. Don't preach about sacrifice. I imagine we'll be looking at zero or worse as well. You haven't even felt pain yet. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

CubaMark said:


>



I'll see your "kudatah" and raise you one "Hakuna matata." 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> You haven't even felt pain yet.


I know that all too well and neither have you. 

If she does touch unions, you will to a degree with a freeze, but that won't be the part that will hurt you. What WILL hurt you is when on top of that freeze you have to pay more for goods and services to offset the 20% increase in business tax Notley instituted that will be passed on to consumers, the extra cost of driving with increased fuel costs due to carbon taxes, the extra cost to heat your home with a carbon tax added, the extra costs for electricity with the banning of coal on top of the carbon tax, as well when they pay off the coal industry the $12 billion they promised them to shut down as compensation. Did I mention the increase on top of all that for electricity generated by wind and solar that could double the per Kw/Hr rate (or more).

But I'm sure that you know all that and find it an acceptable move to 'diversify' the Alberta economy and help destroy the Canadian economy when JT also brings in another carbon tax on top of it all and raises your income taxes too.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> I know that all too well and neither have you.
> 
> 
> 
> If she does touch unions, you will to a degree with a freeze, but that won't be the part that will hurt you. What WILL hurt you is when on top of that freeze you have to pay more for goods and services to offset the 20% increase in business tax Notley instituted that will be passed on to consumers, the extra cost of driving with increased fuel costs due to carbon taxes, the extra cost to heat your home with a carbon tax added, the extra costs for electricity with the banning of coal on top of the carbon tax, as well when they pay off the coal industry the $12 billion they promised them to shut down as compensation. Did I mention the increase on top of all that for electricity generated by wind and solar that could double the per Kw/Hr rate (or more).
> 
> 
> 
> But I'm sure that you know all that and find it an acceptable move to 'diversify' the Alberta economy and help destroy the Canadian economy when JT also brings in another carbon tax on top of it all and raises your income taxes too.



We've had it pretty easy with the largess that comes with oil and gas, Don. No denying that. And yeah, times will get tough for everybody. At least I have a job, so I'm not gonna bitch when thousands are losing theirs. However, I also see a disconnect when we can have a billion and a half dollar Powerball lottery in the midst of a recession. That could buy a lot of school supplies, or feed the homeless, or find some make work projects to help keep people afloat. I just really hate seeing money wasted. Maybe I'm more fiscally conservative than you think. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> However, I also see a disconnect when we can have a billion and a half dollar Powerball lottery in the midst of a recession. That could buy a lot of school supplies, or feed the homeless, or find some make work projects to help keep people afloat. I just really hate seeing money wasted. Maybe I'm more fiscally conservative than you think.


That doesn't have anything to do with conservatism. Someone can also point to inflated public sector wages, arts subsidies, or the money people spend on wine and say that this money could be better used to feed the poor or buy school supplies. The Powerball lottery is the result of hundreds of millions of desperate people kicking in $2 for a chance at financial salvation--no more than that.


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Well thank God for small favors. A person would have to be a fool to wish for Danielle Smith to be in charge of anything right now, least of all a splintered party and a fragile economy. Premier Smith? Not in this lifetime.


No argument there.


----------



## FeXL

Yeah, 'cause Rachel & her Knotheads are doing such a bang-up job...



fjnmusic said:


> A person would have to be a fool to wish for Danielle Smith to be in charge of anything right now, least of all a splintered party and a fragile economy.


----------



## FeXL

Brutal...



fjnmusic said:


> This year was our big 2% raise after three years of zero.


----------



## fjnmusic

Went to a great meet 'n' greet with three of our local MLA's. Wonderful people, and easy to talk to. They're doing an excellent job so far. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Have another glass of the kool aide.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Have another glass of the kool aide.



Well, technically it was Flavor Aid (though we've been down that road before). I stuck with Diet Coke, though the appetizers at the Sawmill were superb—paid for by MY Union deductions, not your taxes before you go off about that. Estefania in particular I was so impressed by: young, wise, eager, articulate... and a graduate of the school I teach at as well. Couldn't have been more proud of this young lady than I was on Election Day. These folks will make a positive difference in the world, naysayers notwithstanding. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> These folks will make a positive difference in the world, naysayers notwithstanding.


Even the greatest destroyers are eager and articulate--and make an enormous difference in the world.


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Well, technically it was Flavor Aid (though we've been down that road before). I stuck with Diet Coke, though the appetizers at the Sawmill were superb—paid for by MY Union deductions, not your taxes before you go off about that. Estefania in particular I was so impressed by: young, wise, eager, articulate... and a graduate of the school I teach at as well. Couldn't have been more proud of this young lady than I was on Election Day. These folks will make a positive difference in the world, naysayers notwithstanding.


Since you brought it up, those union deductions came out of the public purse that paid your salary.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Since you brought it up, those union deductions came out of the public purse that paid your salary.



That's funny. Because it appears my after tax dollars and those of other Albertans pay YOUR salary. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> That's funny. Because it appears my after tax dollars and those of other Albertans pay YOUR salary.


Except for the fact I don't have a salary. I do have a pension I paid into with MY after tax dollars for 40 years which came from the private sector. Ditto for CPP and OAP which I also paid into since its inception.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> That's funny. Because it appears my after tax dollars and those of other Albertans pay YOUR salary.


You can only count the contributions of private sector Albertans--public sector "contributions" are all courtesy of the taxpayer.

I'm sure, however, that SINC contributed far more to the various public pension plans than he is collecting. They're typically a very bad deal--that's why membership isn't optional.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> You can only count the contributions of private sector Albertans--public sector "contributions" are all courtesy of the taxpayer.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure, however, that SINC contributed far more to the various public pension plans than he is collecting. They're typically a very bad deal--that's why membership isn't optional.



So in your opinion no money that I actually earn, and have been earning for about 27 years, is actually mine, because it all comes from income taxes, property taxes, general revenue or some other government source. So when I buy products from a business that you own, I am just letting you have some of your tax money back. If this is the way you rationalize it, then it's no wonder you're so bitter. How do you suppose teachers, nurses, doctors and other members of the civil service should be paid for the work they do? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Rps

I am getting confused here. Pensions and such are not "earned income" even though you earned income to contribute to them. My audit background has always taught me to follow the money. So, the question is....who signs your pay cheque or who paid the bill. In the case of a teacher, unless they work in a private school, it is tax dollars.....so we pay teachers salaries via taxes. When a teacher buys something they pay via their pay cheque.


----------



## Macfury

Much of the civil service should not be paid at all. Their work is meaningless, unnecessary and a drag on the economy--the result of government empire building. To the degree that some people need to provide government functions, all of that money belongs to taxpayers--it is derailed, detained, and some of the money is stripped away through inefficiency. When these people spend their salaries it is not a contributor to the economy in any real sense. The money was ours to begin with, but now there is less of it than we started with--and someone else is spending it instead of us.




fjnmusic said:


> So in your opinion no money that I actually earn, and have been earning for about 27 years, is actually mine, because it all comes from income taxes, property taxes, general revenue or some other government source. So when I buy products from a business that you own, I am just letting you have some of your tax money back. If this is the way you rationalize it, then it's no wonder you're so bitter. How do you suppose teachers, nurses, doctors and other members of the civil service should be paid for the work they do?


----------



## fjnmusic

Rps said:


> I am getting confused here. Pensions and such are not "earned income" even though you earned income to contribute to them. My audit background has always taught me to follow the money. So, the question is....who signs your pay cheque or who paid the bill. In the case of a teacher, unless they work in a private school, it is tax dollars.....so we pay teachers salaries via taxes. When a teacher buys something they pay via their pay cheque.



True, but what I'm hearing from some here on this board is that even my pay cheque is not really "my money" because I am beholden to the taxpayer for it. What they fail to realize is that when I buy something from, say, someone's business, then they also become dependent on people's taxes because that's where my "money" comes from. This of course does not take into account that I also play in a band in weekends and therefore am just as susceptible to the ups and downs of the economy in my second job. And yet, when I open my wallet to pay for stuff, I don't really distinguish from which job this particular $20 dollar bill came from. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Much of the civil service should not be paid at all. Their work is meaningless, unnecessary and a drag on the economy--the result of government empire building. To the degree that some people need to provide government functions, all of that money belongs to taxpayers--it is derailed, detained, and some of the money is stripped away through inefficiency. When these people spend their salaries it is not a contributor to the economy in any real sense. The money was ours to begin with, but now there is less of it than we started with--and someone else is spending it instead of us.



Well thank you for your honesty. That explains a lot.  Except that civil servants also pay taxes. Hmmm. Perhaps we should get rid of police officers to; I mean, they're just a drag on the company. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

The contribution to taxes by the public sector isn't a contribution. If I fire one public servant who pays 30% taxes, then suddenly the entire salary returns to the tax base.

And no, all police officers should not be fired. Policing is part of several categories of public service actually necessary to operate a civil society. However, in Toronto, where crime is declining, adding more police officers IS a drag on the economy.




fjnmusic said:


> Well thank you for your honesty. That explains a lot.  Except that civil servants also pay taxes. Hmmm. Perhaps we should get rid of police officers to; I mean, they're just a drag on the company.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> The contribution to taxes by the public sector isn't a contribution. If I fire one public servant who pays 30% taxes, then suddenly the entire salary returns to the tax base.
> 
> 
> 
> And no, all police officers should not be esefired. Policing is part of several categories of public service actually necessary to operate a civil society. However, in Toronto, where crime is declining, adding more police officers IS a drag on the economy.



Well now at least I can see where your rather narrow minded views come from, and why you have such a hardon/hate on for teachers. It is sheer lunacy, of course, but I can see where it comes from. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

I don't hate teachers. I believe that they receive far too much compensation for a job that already has too many applicants (no scarcity at all) and that their contracts are negotiated by disinterested "public servants" who would rather cave to demands and push unfunded liabilities to the future than face the reality of the burdens these contracts are placing--and will continue to place--on society.

The salary should be set at the point where applicants are interested but no longer rushing like a horde of cats to the cream when an opening is announced. Gold-plated benefits were once offered as compensation for truly being a public servant--taking a job that might offer a lower salary in exchange for a generous retirement package. Now both salaries and benefits are platinum-plated.



fjnmusic said:


> Well now at least I can see where your rather narrow minded views come from, and why you have such a hardon/hate on for teachers. It is sheer lunacy, of course, but I can see where it comes from.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> I don't hate teachers. I believe that they receive far too much compensation for a job that already has too many applicants (no scarcity at all) and that their contracts are negotiated by disinterested "public servants" who would rather cave to demands and push unfunded liabilities to the future than face the reality of the burdens these contracts are placing--and will continue to place--on society.
> 
> 
> 
> The salary should be set at the point where applicants are interested but no longer rushing like a horde of cats to the cream when an opening is announced. Gold-plated benefits were once offered as compensation for truly being a public servant--taking a job that might offer a lower salary in exchange for a generous retirement package. Now both salaries and benefits are platinum-plated.



How about the number of applicants based on the number of school children, keeping class size at a reasonable maximum (say 25 or so in high school). I've taught classes of 41 with learning disabilities and I've taught classes of 12, and there is no debate about which class got the better education.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Are you saying that if the ad advertised 41 children per class there would be no applicants?



fjnmusic said:


> How about the number of applicants based on the number of school children, keeping class size at a reasonable maximum (say 25 or so in high school). I've taught classes of 41 with learning disabilities and I've taught classes of 12, and there is no debate about which class got the better education.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Are you saying that if the ad advertised 41 children per class there would be no applicants?



I'm saying class size is never advertised. If the truth were known it would scare off many potential customers. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Are you saying that if the ad advertised 41 children per class there would be no applicants?



You don't understand how it works. There are no ads for specific classes or sizes you are interviewed to be an employee for the board, or you may apply to a specific position that appears in the papers (a combination of specialties that may be shuffled around on a moment's notice). If you're already in the system, it's even more mysterious. I just got my third list of subjects/students today for classes that begin in about two weeks. That's the third timetable change since September for Sem 2. The key word is flexibility and many of today's teachers have to be a jack of all trades and master of none. 

I am saying larger classes tend to be feared the most because of the inordinate amount of time they take to prepare for and assess, and the kids often lose out on teacher availability because the teacher is swamped. Couple that with semesters with no preps and you've a perfect recipe for burnout. Not a good plan for your oldest and wisest teachers let alone your young enthusiastic ones. I high percentage of noobies quit within the first five years due to the stress of the job.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## heavyall

fjnmusic said:


> Except that civil servants also pay taxes.


Only the ones who have other incomes. A civil servant by definition is not a tax payer. They do not contribute to the tax rolls, they take from them. 

That's not a value judgement on the work they do, nor is it making any qualification on whether they earned their salaries. The money you make is yours to keep, just don't fool yourself into thinking that you PAY taxes. Because as a public employee, you do not.


----------



## Macfury

I understand that there are no advertisements for class size. I do know teachers who are desperate for jobs and have joined the substitute pool waiting for one of the full-time teachers to leave. They fully understand class sizes and conditions, but would take a full-time position in a heartbeat.



fjnmusic said:


> You don't understand how it works. There are no ads for specific classes or sizes you are interviewed to be an employee for the board, or you may apply to a specific position that appears in the papers (a combination of specialties that may be shuffled around on a moment's notice). If you're already in the system, it's even more mysterious. I just got my third list of subjects/students today for classes that begin in about two weeks. That's the third timetable change since September for Sem 2. The key word is flexibility and many of today's teachers have to be a jack of all trades and master of none.
> 
> I am saying larger classes tend to be feared the most because of the inordinate amount of time they take to prepare for and assess, and the kids often lose out on teacher availability because the teacher is swamped. Couple that with semesters with no preps and you've a perfect recipe for burnout. Not a good plan for your oldest and wisest teachers let alone your young enthusiastic ones. I high percentage of noobies quit within the first five years due to the stress of the job.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

heavyall said:


> Only the ones who have other incomes. A civil servant by definition is not a tax payer. They do not contribute to the tax rolls, they take from them.
> 
> 
> 
> That's not a value judgement on the work they do, nor is it making any qualification on whether they earned their salaries. The money you make is yours to keep, just don't fool yourself into thinking that you PAY taxes. Because as a public employee, you do not.



That's the biggest pile of manure I've seen this morning. Perhaps you can explain where that big chunk of my paycheque goes each month in the section called "income tax." Filing it and disclosing on my T4 is certainly not an option. Same goes for CPP, EI, and all kinds of other deductions. Your reasoning is simply not logical. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> I understand that there are no advertisements for class size. I do know teachers who are desperate for jobs and have joined the substitute pool waiting for one of the full-time teachers to leave. They fully understand class sizes and conditions, but would take a full-time position in a heartbeat.



I'm certain they would, but it doesn't mean they'd be good at it. In job interviews, experience tends to be preferred. Sometimes dubs stay subs for a reason. Not criticizing, as there are many excellent people who sub (I have one right now as I am sidelined with an injury). The most preferred subs? Retired teachers, because they know what they're doing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## heavyall

fjnmusic said:


> That's the biggest pile of manure I've seen this morning. Perhaps you can explain where that big chunk of my paycheque goes each month in the section called "income tax." Filing it and disclosing on my T4 is certainly not an option. Same goes for CPP, EI, and all kinds of other deductions. Your reasoning is simply not logical.


After deductions, you're just taking less out of the tax pool, at no point are you adding to it. Private sector adds to government revenue, public sector takes from it.


----------



## SINC

heavyall said:


> After deductions, you're just taking less out of the tax pool, at no point are you adding to it. Private sector adds to government revenue, public sector takes from it.


That is very sound logic indeed. Returning dollars re-labelled as income tax to the pool from which it was withdrawn for services rendered does in no way increase government revenue whatsoever.


----------



## Macfury

Sorry to hear you're injured. Is everything OK?



fjnmusic said:


> I'm certain they would, but it doesn't mean they'd be good at it. In job interviews, experience tends to be preferred. Sometimes dubs stay subs for a reason. Not criticizing, as there are many excellent people who sub (I have one right now as I am sidelined with an injury). The most preferred subs? Retired teachers, because they know what they're doing.


----------



## FeXL

Kerr: O’Leary is merely saying what investors are already thinking about Notley



> *Notley’s hungry NDP regime has gorged itself on the productive parts of Alberta’s economy, raising corporate and personal taxes and imposing a new carbon tax, while tens of thousands of private sector Albertans have already lost their jobs.*
> 
> The energy industry is barely afloat. *Alberta NDP policies are the financial equivalent of tossing an anvil to a drowning swimmer*, while those fortunate civil servants on Notley’s good ship Government sail blissfully onward, enjoying the buffet that never closes.
> 
> *The NDP won’t reduce public sector spending, partly for ideological reasons and partly because so many who voted NDP, work in the public sector.* Notley will certainly not reduce taxes or royalties to boost the economy, as O’Leary suggests she should. That would be anathema to the NDP, as it was to many of Alberta’s previous, drunken sailor PC governments.
> 
> *Despite plummeting government revenues, Notley’s NDP is blithely spending more than ever, even borrowing to fund its own operations.* Her regime’s solution to every problem is to raise Albertans’ cost of living and of doing business by imposing higher taxes to fund their profligacy.
> 
> *Meanwhile, uncertainty from Notley’s thrice-delayed review of energy royalties has frozen two streams of capital that Alberta desperately needs*: equity (stock market) financings, which are the lifeblood of the oilpatch because they feed the second stream, drilling expenditures.
> 
> Without drilling, there’s no fracking, no seismic shot, no bids at land sales, and energy production declines. Thus, there’s less royalty money for the government, but also less demand for rig hands, tradespeople, clerks, technicians, pipe and tool salespeople, geologists, accountants and engineers, not to mention the lawyers and bankers who help raise money for the industry when times are good.
> 
> All those unemployed, nervous Albertans spend less on restaurant meals, clothing, appliances, renovations, holidays, houses, new cars, etc., which drags down the whole economy.
> 
> *Kevin O’Leary correctly notes that Notley’s royalty-uncertainty-based-freeze on capital spending by energy companies will continue, until investors know what the new rules are.
> 
> Alberta already has a royalty regime that adjusts the government’s take as commodity prices change. Leave it alone, Rachel.*
> 
> As O’Leary points out, energy is Canada’s largest export and a huge contributor to the equalization payments our province sends elsewhere. It’s all very well to talk about diversification, but energy is the source of Alberta’s wealth today.
> 
> *Strangling the golden goose that pays for almost everything, in order to impress green activists who see oil and gas as evil, is not going to get any more export pipelines built. It’s just bad policy.*
> 
> Beyond energy, *Notley’s newly imposed higher minimum wage ensures that less profitable industries like hospitality and food services will hire fewer people and that more vulnerable, lower-paid Albertans will be thrown out of work.*
> 
> Rachel Notley didn’t cause Alberta’s recession, but *her government’s disastrous policies will certainly prolong it,* by delaying the day when Albertans will see the benefit of eventually higher commodity prices.
> 
> And Kevin O’Leary may be a blowhard, but he’s absolutely right that *Notley’s NDP government is not competently managing Alberta’s economy, making the difficult situation they inherited immeasurably worse.*


All bold mine.


----------



## SINC

How much worse can it get? Plenty with these clowns at the helm!

Alberta given 'negative' outlook by Moody's rating service - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Sorry to hear you're injured. Is everything OK?



Not real good actually. Stained, Stretched, sprained—either way it hurts like a buggar. Spent the last several hours at emerge, got and X-ray. Then told to stay off as much as possible for the next week or two. Good medical coverage, with solid staff, made the waiting at merge not nearly so bad. Now I got a good reason for taking it slow. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

http://www.pressprogress.ca/how_dec...mismanagement_made_a_mess_of_alberta_finances


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Most of the information in that article is uncredited and the article is unsigned. I could pick it apart piece by piece with credited information.



fjnmusic said:


> How decades of conservative mismanagement made a mess of Alberta's finances
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

You're very lucky about the short wait at Emergency. My last four trips had wait times of between five and 12 hours (I left after 12). Hope you feel better soon.



fjnmusic said:


> Not real good actually. Stained, Stretched, sprained—either way it hurts like a buggar. Spent the last several hours at emerge, got and X-ray. Then told to stay off as much as possible for the next week or two. Good medical coverage, with solid staff, made the waiting at merge not nearly so bad. Now I got a good reason for taking it slow.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> You're very lucky about the short wait at Emergency. My last four trips had wait times of between five and 12 hours (I left after 12). Hope you feel better soon.



Thanks. It's less painful today, but I won't be running marathons anytime soon. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Oh man, does this one fit the bill!


----------



## SINC

Hmmmm


----------



## SINC

.


----------



## FeXL

So, one big defence of the climate change policy was that it would make the RoC more amenable to things like pipelines. It was BS then & this proves it in spades...

Braid: NDP smiles at the rest of Canada, gets the finger back




> It has to be clear by now. Care Bear diplomacy isn’t working for Alberta.
> 
> The province takes one economic blow after another from Canadians, despite NDP Premier Rachel Notley’s cheery efforts to make friends across the country.
> 
> Tuesday’s flat rejection of the Energy East pipeline by 82 Montreal-area municipalities means Alberta is now under virtual economic blockade.
> 
> Every cross-border project that matters to the energy industry is stymied by objections from provinces, municipalities and interest groups.
> 
> *And it’s a funny thing — the objectors never seem to mention Alberta’s noble climate change policy, the one that was supposed to soften opposition to pipelines.*


M'bold.

Funny, they can dump billions of litres of raw sewage into the St. Lawrence without recourse, yet a perfectly safe pipeline is anathema. And, blood oil from overseas arriving via tanker is fine, but domestic oil is not.

With the exception of the last two paragraphs, not a bad article. This province needs 100% less of Knothead, not more...

Related:

I trust Montreal area mayors will politely return their share of $10B in equalization supported by west

Not likely, Brad...

A comment at WUWT nails it.



> A few years ago, Brent crude was trading at ~US$100/barrel on the ocean, West Texas Intermediate was ~US$80 at Cushing OK, and Edmonton Light was $60 – all approximately similar crude oil qualities. This huge price differential that cost Canada tens of billions of dollars was due to the absence of adequate export pipeline capacity, which has been blocked on all fronts by green extremists.
> 
> Montreal refineries receive foreign crude via oil tankers that travel up the St. Lawrence River, fighting their way against the strong current and the constant bombardment of floating turds, gratuitously supplied (“pas des charges”) by Mayor Denis. Eastern Canadian refineries (and consumer)s pay a huge premium to buy this foreign crude, when they could be buying much cheaper Alberta crude.


More (from Brian Jean):



> It’s very simple – Rachel Notley’s plan is failing. She told us that in order to get the “social license” to build pipelines, Albertans would have to pay for a $3 billion carbon tax. *We now have the tax, but still no pipelines in sight and a premier who refuses to stick up for Alberta’s interests.*


M'bold.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> So, one big defence of the climate change policy was that it would make the RoC more amenable to things like pipelines. It was BS then & this proves it in spades...
> 
> 
> 
> Braid: NDP smiles at the rest of Canada, gets the finger back
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> M'bold.
> 
> 
> 
> Funny, they can dump billions of litres of raw sewage into the St. Lawrence without recourse, yet a perfectly safe pipeline is anathema. And, blood oil from overseas arriving via tanker is fine, but domestic oil is not.
> 
> 
> 
> With the exception of the last two paragraphs, not a bad article. This province needs 100% less of Knothead, not more...
> 
> 
> 
> Related:
> 
> 
> 
> I trust Montreal area mayors will politely return their share of $10B in equalization supported by west
> 
> 
> 
> Not likely, Brad...
> 
> 
> 
> A comment at WUWT nails it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More (from Brian Jean):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> M'bold.



Yes yes yes BUT—oil is still stuck at historic lows and you're not going to see investment as long as that black cloud hangs over our heads.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

You would see investment in a pipeline to new markets. They'd start work on KeystoneXL today if it was approved.




fjnmusic said:


> Yes yes yes BUT—oil is still stuck at historic lows and you're not going to see investment as long as that black cloud hangs over our heads.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> You would see investment in a pipeline to new markets. They'd start work on KeystoneXL today if it was approved.



But why would they? Maybe a year or two ago. Today, anything that is not profitable, not even in the short term, is shunned. Investors are sheep that way. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

The money is already there for either project. They're not shilling for additional investment to make it happen.



fjnmusic said:


> But why would they? Maybe a year or two ago. Today, anything that is not profitable, not even in the short term, is shunned. Investors are sheep that way.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> The money is already there for either project. They're not shilling for additional investment to make it happen.


MF, don't bother. When you use facts in a discussion with FJN, you are accused of lecturing & being a troll.


----------



## FeXL

(here comes the lecturer...)

Because the oil is going to move, period. Even at 5 bucks a barrel, there will be a demand.

Pipelines are more efficient, less expensive & safer than rail.



fjnmusic said:


> But why would they?


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> MF, don't bother. When you use facts in a discussion with FJN, you are accused of lecturing & being a troll.



Also MF, be careful about talking TO the actual poster rather than actually talking ABOUT them in the third person; you wouldn't want the other poster, say FeXL, for example, to think you were accidentally showing them any respect. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> (here comes the lecturer...)
> 
> 
> 
> Because the oil is going to move, period. Even at 5 bucks a barrel, there will be a demand.
> 
> 
> 
> Pipelines are more efficient, less expensive & safer than rail.



So it goes to 5 bucks a barrel. With every barrel you pull out of the ground, you're going deeper in debt. It's costing you millions, billions to stay in business, just for the sake of staying in business. How long do you suppose this model can sustain itself? Strange set of economic principles you're working with when you assume you can run at a loss indefinitely. Sure people will keep buying oil. Funny thing is, they'll probably buy even more of it at fire sale prices. As a supplier, you become an oil whore, willing to sell to the nearest customer. And how long will that last? Last I heard, we'd need about $60/barrel to be profitable again. What's your number for profitability? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> What's your number for profitability?


Good question for you Frank. What's your number for profitability shutting down oil and coal for wind and solar? Oh wait, let me give you a hint. It will never happen in your lifetime. Fossil fuel will be king for another century. Unless of course you want to heat your home with solar or wind and drive a vehicle you can afford on either for any distance.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> What's your number for profitability?


For Alberta, depends on the project. Some can be profitable for a little north of $26, while others are higher--in the $45 range.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> For Alberta, depends on the project. Some can be profitable for a little north of $26, while others are higher--in the $45 range.



Back in the 90's (not the gay 90's, the other ones), Klein's people were projecting oil at $20 a barrel, even though they knew it was worth considerably more than that. The bastard cut the civil service (even though he didn't need to) and got lucky by lowballing oil and finding ways to get the Texans come and invest. There was a time when the royalty was 0% until a company became profitable and then it would supposedly rise to 25%. Well, it's amazing how profitable many oil and gas companies became--just not quite profitable enough to hit that 25% threshold mind you. And the gov't of the day I recall during Stelmach's reign was largely failing to collect on even a 1% return. You know companies—why should I pay it if he's not paying it. CAPP ran this place, not the PC's. 

So my question is this: if those HUGE profits both for CAPP and for Alberta were made when the price of a barrel of oil was relatively low, what's the deal today? Is there something else the PC gov't wasn't telling us? Something that got permanently destroyed in those 344 boxes perhaps? Maybe it's the pain meds talking, but I have a feeling there's always been a whole lot more going on behind the scene that made Alberta wealthy than we've been led to believe, and why suddenly we're in the poorhouse. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Nice red herring.

You asked why build pipelines, I replied, giving 3 solid reasons. That is all.



fjnmusic said:


> So it goes to 5 bucks a barrel.


----------



## FeXL

Earn your respect. Answer questions. Defend your position. Don't bail every time you find yourself in a tough spot.



fjnmusic said:


> ...to think you were accidentally showing them any respect.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> The bastard cut the civil service (even though he didn't need to)...


I've never seen a civil service so lean that it didn't need cutting.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> I've never seen a civil service so lean that it didn't need cutting.



I would guess you've never worked for the civil service. The people are know are living pretty close to the bone. Everyone seems to think everyone else has got it so good. Take teaching, for example. On the surface, easy job, right? Just put up with those kids for five hours a day, go home and collect your paycheque. However, there is a HUGE amount of unpaid work that must still be done in order to survive those five hours or even make them interesting or, occasionally, even inspiring. In one subject, for example, Digital Photography, brand new to me this year, you really have three courses in one: history, exposure and composition. I have three sections for a total of about 76 students. So that's three final marks per student, largely based on a portfolio of some 33 photographs that are supposed to be organized alphabetically by topic, have a unique title, and include metadata such as camera lens size (in mm), ISO, shutter speed and aperture. That's 33 photos x 76 students, which represents 3 blocks out of my current 8 block workload. It's a F of a lot of work, and that's just for one "optional" subject. This branch of the civil service is highly demanding and highly time-consuming, and certainly cannot be done by "just anyone" as I've discovered when I've had subs in for me. 

There's probably many occupations, both civil and non-civil, that could use some trimming, but please be careful not to condescend about someone's livelihood when you probably have no idea what they actually have to go through on a daily basis. Nobody's got is as easy as you think wen you start looking closer. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Dr.G.

fjnmusic said:


> I would guess you've never worked for the civil service. The people are know are living pretty close to the bone. Everyone seems to think everyone else has got it so good. Take teaching, for example. On the surface, easy job, right? Just put up with those kids for five hours a day, go home and collect your paycheque. However, there is a HUGE amount of unpaid work that must still be done in order to survive those five hours or even make them interesting or, occasionally, even inspiring. In one subject, for example, Digital Photography, brand new to me this year, you really have three courses in one: history, exposure and composition. I have three sections for a total of about 76 students. So that's three final marks per student, largely based on a portfolio of some 33 photographs that are supposed to be organized alphabetically by topic, have a unique title, and include metadata such as camera lens size (in mm), ISO, shutter speed and aperture. That's 33 photos x 76 students, which represents 3 blocks out of my current 8 block workload. It's a F of a lot of work, and that's just for one "optional" subject. This branch of the civil service is highly demanding and highly time-consuming, and certainly cannot be done by "just anyone" as I've discovered when I've had subs in for me.
> 
> There's probably many occupations, both civil and non-civil, that could use some trimming, but please be careful not to condescend about someone's livelihood when you probably have no idea what they actually have to go through on a daily basis. Nobody's got is as easy as you think wen you start looking closer.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Sounds like you are a dedicated and talented professional, fjn. Kudos. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> I would guess you've never worked for the civil service. The people are know are living pretty close to the bone. Everyone seems to think everyone else has got it so good. Take teaching, for example. On the surface, easy job, right? Just put up with those kids for five hours a day, go home and collect your paycheque. However, there is a HUGE amount of unpaid work that must still be done in order to survive those five hours or even make them interesting or, occasionally, even inspiring. In one subject, for example, Digital Photography, brand new to me this year, you really have three courses in one: history, exposure and composition. I have three sections for a total of about 76 students. So that's three final marks per student, largely based on a portfolio of some 33 photographs that are supposed to be organized alphabetically by topic, have a unique title, and include metadata such as camera lens size (in mm), ISO, shutter speed and aperture. That's 33 photos x 76 students, which represents 3 blocks out of my current 8 block workload. It's a F of a lot of work, and that's just for one "optional" subject. This branch of the civil service is highly demanding and highly time-consuming, and certainly cannot be done by "just anyone" as I've discovered when I've had subs in for me.
> 
> There's probably many occupations, both civil and non-civil, that could use some trimming, but please be careful not to condescend about someone's livelihood when you probably have no idea what they actually have to go through on a daily basis. Nobody's got is as easy as you think wen you start looking closer.


With a daughter who is a teacher and vice principal I can tell you that Frank is not kidding in his description above. Our daughter leaves home at 7:20 a.m. and rarely gets home before 6:00 p.m. I can also attest to the extra unpaid hours, especially at report card time when she spends her entire weekends grading her and her peers students, as they cross check each other's results. The dealings with parents in a predominately native school population presents challenges that require her to go far beyond what I ever imagined a teacher should have to absorb or endure. I would not want that job for any amount of money. It is a love affair with teaching that keeps many of them going, certainly not salary or working conditions.


----------



## Macfury

If teachers don't like the compensation or working conditions, they should find something they like better.

It's a vocational decision, not a disease.


----------



## Rps

Well, I teach and on my best days my prep to class ratio is about 10 to 1. That is 10 prep hours for each 1 hour of teaching. Question for you Frank, is your ratio about the same? As for getting into another profession, we can throw stones at any profession, probably even yours McFury....and by the way before I taught I had my own business.....also a profession which had many unpaid hours.

It's easy to say if you don't like it leave........try it sometime, especially when you have a family and mortgage....not so easy.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> It's easy to say if you don't like it leave........try it sometime, especially when you have a family and mortgage....not so easy.


Right--just like any other working stiff. Nothing unique about weighing the risks of staying with the job or risking a new career.


----------



## SINC

People are really starting to catch on now.


----------



## fjnmusic

Dr.G. said:


> Sounds like you are a dedicated and talented professional, fjn. Kudos. Paix, mon ami.



Thanks, Dr. G. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> With a daughter who is a teacher and vice principal I can tell you that Frank is not kidding in his description above. Our daughter leaves home at 7:20 a.m. and rarely gets home before 6:00 p.m. I can also attest to the extra unpaid hours, especially at report card time when she spends her entire weekends grading her and her peers students, as they cross check each other's results. The dealings with parents in a predominately native school population presents challenges that require her to go far beyond what I ever imagined a teacher should have to absorb or endure. I would not want that job for any amount of money. It is a love affair with teaching that keeps many of them going, certainly not salary or working conditions.



You hit the nail on the head, Don. And I would not presume how easy anybody else's job is either. I've never worked in the oilfield, but I don't envy the long hours or strenuous working conditions those guys and girls have to endure. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> If teachers don't like the compensation or working conditions, they should find something they like better.
> 
> 
> 
> It's a vocational decision, not a disease.



Again, you miss the point. We chose our occupation because we love what we do, not because we hate it. I would hope the same holds true for you. I have done many other things, still do on the side, but teaching is something that called to me. I know many promising teachers who left the profession long ago because they burnt out or didn't realize how much work it was going to be or were just unlucky with hiring. I'm a survivor. Not wrt the kids, because the kids are great, always refreshing, but the politics, the cutbacks, the hidden agendas, the paradigm shifts, the dumbing down trends in numeracy and literacy, and then we wonder why kids today don't understand the difference between your and you're, and why they can't tell time on a round face clock. What I criticize about your stance is that you seem to think I'm here to complain about how hard I have it, when all I'm asking is that you show some respect for a profession that you seem to know very little about. Claiming that teachers are overpaid, for example, gets under my skin faster than anything because of the extreme boorishness and misinformation behind the statement. But I'm sure you know that, which is exactly why you do it. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Rps said:


> Well, I teach and on my best days my prep to class ratio is about 10 to 1. That is 10 prep hours for each 1 hour of teaching. Question for you Frank, is your ratio about the same? As for getting into another profession, we can throw stones at any profession, probably even yours McFury....and by the way before I taught I had my own business.....also a profession which had many unpaid hours.
> 
> 
> 
> It's easy to say if you don't like it leave........try it sometime, especially when you have a family and mortgage....not so easy.



It's hard for me to quantify, Rps, because if it's a new subject, then there is a huge learning curve that occupies much of my off campus cranial workload. In fact, I'd say, and many teachers would probably agree, sometimes it feels like there's never a time when I'm NOT prepping, planning, rearranging, or discovering some little Meme that would work great for that one class. It's helpful, really helpful, if you've taught a subject before and have materials you can already use, even if they need to be updated, or have a colleague that lends you some of their stuff. You still have to figure it out though and take ownership and present it as though you're in charge. Kids can sniff out a pretender, and it's not fair to them to pretend you know what you're doing if you don't. Teaching is a confidence game, and after about a month off due to stress and followed by a leg injury, I can honestly say it's a job like no other confidence-wise. But the payoff is the understanding in the kids' faces when the finally get it, and they improve their understanding from when they started in September. I don't know how many other jobs get the same amount of homework with no extra pay (teachers are paid for the others spent instructing), but even the homework can be rewarding. 

So to answer your question, Rps, I have no idea quantitatively. Lots. Your numbers sound pretty accurate depending on the context. A lawyer may send an invoice documenting all the time they spent preparing for a case; and the customer gets the bill at the end. I've been there. If teachers submitted their "billable hours," the Departments of Education would shutdown across the country because they simply couldn't afford us. Not even the noobies. Especially not the noobies, who'd fold like a deck of cards without mentors. We have far more influence and we contribute far more than we realize. Amen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Dr.G.

fjnmusic said:


> It's hard for me to quantify, Rps, because if it's a new subject, then there is a huge learning curve that occupies much of my off campus cranial workload. In fact, I'd say, and many teachers would probably agree, sometimes it feels like there's never a time when I'm NOT prepping, planning, rearranging, or discovering some little Meme that would work great for that one class. It's helpful, really helpful, if you've taught a subject before and have materials you can already use, even if they need to be updated, or have a colleague that lends you some of their stuff. You still have to figure it out though and take ownership and present it as though you're in charge. Kids can sniff out a pretender, and it's not fair to them to pretend you know what you're doing if you don't. Teaching is a confidence game, and after about a month off due to stress and followed by a leg injury, I can honestly say it's a job like no other confidence-wise. But the payoff is the understanding in the kids' faces when the finally get it, and they improve their understanding from when they started in September. I don't know how many other jobs get the same amount of homework with no extra pay (teachers are paid for the others spent instructing), but even the homework can be rewarding.
> 
> So to answer your question, Rps, I have no idea quantitatively. Lots. Your numbers sound pretty accurate depending on the context. A lawyer may send an invoice documenting all the time they spent preparing for a case; and the customer gets the bill at the end. I've been there. If teachers submitted their "billable hours," the Departments of Education would shutdown across the country because they simply couldn't afford us. Not even the noobies. Especially not the noobies, who'd fold like a deck of cards without mentors. We have far more influence and we contribute far more than we realize. Amen.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Once again, you take a dedicated and talented professional approach to the profession of teaching. You are a credit to this profession. :clap::clap: Paix, mon ami.


----------



## Dr.G.

SINC said:


> With a daughter who is a teacher and vice principal I can tell you that Frank is not kidding in his description above. Our daughter leaves home at 7:20 a.m. and rarely gets home before 6:00 p.m. I can also attest to the extra unpaid hours, especially at report card time when she spends her entire weekends grading her and her peers students, as they cross check each other's results. The dealings with parents in a predominately native school population presents challenges that require her to go far beyond what I ever imagined a teacher should have to absorb or endure. I would not want that job for any amount of money. It is a love affair with teaching that keeps many of them going, certainly not salary or working conditions.


Studies have shown that being a teacher AND VP in a school is one of the most stressful positions there is in the field of K-12 teaching. Kudos to Crystal. :clap::clap:


----------



## Macfury

I have nothing against teachers--however I don't hold them in special regard either. Each individual has the ability to do well or just phone it in. 

When I say teachers are overpaid, I simply mean that those who negotiate teacher salaries and benefit packages do so for the sake of expediency--not to reflect market conditions or ability to pay. They receive higher pay simply because they are in the public sector. 



fjnmusic said:


> Again, you miss the point. We chose our occupation because we love what we do, not because we hate it. I would hope the same holds true for you. I have done many other things, still do on the side, but teaching is something that called to me. I know many promising teachers who left the profession long ago because they burnt out or didn't realize how much work it was going to be or were just unlucky with hiring. I'm a survivor. Not wrt the kids, because the kids are great, always refreshing, but the politics, the cutbacks, the hidden agendas, the paradigm shifts, the dumbing down trends in numeracy and literacy, and then we wonder why kids today don't understand the difference between your and you're, and why they can't tell time on a round face clock. What I criticize about your stance is that you seem to think I'm here to complain about how hard I have it, when all I'm asking is that you show some respect for a profession that you seem to know very little about. Claiming that teachers are overpaid, for example, gets under my skin faster than anything because of the extreme boorishness and misinformation behind the statement. But I'm sure you know that, which is exactly why you do it.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

An Alberta mother’s call to action: When parents lose rights, children are endangered | Calgary Herald


----------



## Macfury

It's all about bending structure toward an all-powerful state. Separating the bonds between parents and children is just part of their strategy.



SINC said:


> An Alberta mother’s call to action: When parents lose rights, children are endangered | Calgary Herald


----------



## SINC

Welcome to the NDP's Alberta . . .


----------



## CubaMark

*Even if an NDP Premier lays down a pipeline, the critics won't be happy...*

*Alberta PoliticsA good day for Rachel Notley – but you'd never know it with media and opposition in full-scale, unrestrained meltdown*

Premier Rachel Notley, after less than nine months in office, secured the tentative approval of the premier of Ontario and the enthusiastic endorsement of the prime minister of Canada, both members of a different political party than hers, for a pipeline to carry diluted bitumen from Alberta to New Brunswick for refining.

Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne praised Alberta’s climate change plan at a news conference in Toronto yesterday as the key to the progress, and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau practically swooned over the potential benefits of the pipeline while attending an international meeting of powerful political and business leaders in Switzerland.

This, of course, is not all that is needed for the so-called Energy East Pipeline to succeed. The biggest hurdle is likely to be the province of Quebec, which, like Alberta, has a history of aggressively promoting its own interests on many issues.

Still, as far as Energy East is concerned, four of the five provinces through which it must pass now appear to be on side, more or less. Some were already there, but this has nevertheless come about largely because of Ms. Notley’s environmental policies and her mature approach to Canada’s national conversation about pipelines.

The Notley Formula involves both finding ways to lower the province’s carbon footprint and building consensus through respectful collaboration with other provinces for the infrastructure we need to market this resource.​
(AlbertaPolitics)


----------



## Macfury

So no pipeline.



CubaMark said:


> *Even if an NDP Premier lays down a pipeline, the critics won't be happy...*
> 
> *Alberta PoliticsA good day for Rachel Notley – but you'd never know it with media and opposition in full-scale, unrestrained meltdown*
> 
> Premier Rachel Notley, after less than nine months in office, secured the tentative approval of the premier of Ontario and the enthusiastic endorsement of the prime minister of Canada, both members of a different political party than hers, for a pipeline to carry diluted bitumen from Alberta to New Brunswick for refining.
> 
> Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne praised Alberta’s climate change plan at a news conference in Toronto yesterday as the key to the progress, and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau practically swooned over the potential benefits of the pipeline while attending an international meeting of powerful political and business leaders in Switzerland.
> 
> This, of course, is not all that is needed for the so-called Energy East Pipeline to succeed. The biggest hurdle is likely to be the province of Quebec, which, like Alberta, has a history of aggressively promoting its own interests on many issues.
> 
> Still, as far as Energy East is concerned, four of the five provinces through which it must pass now appear to be on side, more or less. Some were already there, but this has nevertheless come about largely because of Ms. Notley’s environmental policies and her mature approach to Canada’s national conversation about pipelines.
> 
> The Notley Formula involves both finding ways to lower the province’s carbon footprint and building consensus through respectful collaboration with other provinces for the infrastructure we need to market this resource.​
> (AlbertaPolitics)


----------



## FeXL

You're right. Because every tiny bit of benefit that any pipeline delivers to Albertans will quickly be ground into dust by the orders-of-magnitude greater folly fostering non-existant problems like global warming and pointless excursions of futility into renewable energy.

Lose the carbon tax, quit pi$$ing away money on renewables, get an economic policy in place that doesn't drive investors away in a particularly volatile time, yeah, a new pipeline is a step in the right direction. 

Three strikes and a positive is still in the red...



CubaMark said:


> *Even if an NDP Premier lays down a pipeline, the critics won't be happy...*


----------



## SINC

CubaMark said:


> *Even if an NDP Premier lays down a pipeline, the critics won't be happy...*
> 
> *Alberta PoliticsA good day for Rachel Notley – but you'd never know it with media and opposition in full-scale, unrestrained meltdown*
> 
> Premier Rachel Notley, after less than nine months in office, secured the tentative approval of the premier of Ontario and the enthusiastic endorsement of the prime minister of Canada, both members of a different political party than hers, for a pipeline to carry diluted bitumen from Alberta to New Brunswick for refining.
> 
> Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne praised Alberta’s climate change plan at a news conference in Toronto yesterday as the key to the progress, and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau practically swooned over the potential benefits of the pipeline while attending an international meeting of powerful political and business leaders in Switzerland.
> 
> This, of course, is not all that is needed for the so-called Energy East Pipeline to succeed. The biggest hurdle is likely to be the province of Quebec, which, like Alberta, has a history of aggressively promoting its own interests on many issues.
> 
> Still, as far as Energy East is concerned, four of the five provinces through which it must pass now appear to be on side, more or less. Some were already there, but this has nevertheless come about largely because of Ms. Notley’s environmental policies and her mature approach to Canada’s national conversation about pipelines.
> 
> The Notley Formula involves both finding ways to lower the province’s carbon footprint and building consensus through respectful collaboration with other provinces for the infrastructure we need to market this resource.​
> (AlbertaPolitics)


I have coffee from time to time with David Climenhaga, the author of that piece as he lives across town from me and is a regular reader of my site.

David and I do not see eye to eye on politics, but when reading his opinions, it helps to have some background for perspective. 

David led a newsroom quest to unionize the Calgary Herald and lost, in 1999 and 2000. He has been an active and aggressive member of the NDP party for years and also worked many years for the Alberta Union of Public Employees. He is currently the operating head of the Alberta Nurses union if I recall correctly.

I like David as a person and he is a fine writer. I watched him visibly cringe over a coffee the first time I mentioned that Notley's election was accidental at a July get together.

One always knows what his opinion on politics will be. That of course, will be the ideology of the NDP party. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Climenhaga


----------



## SINC

More of HER.

Rachel Notley and her know-it-all gang don?t foster long-term relationships | Opinion | Calgary Sun


----------



## FeXL

They still don't get it...

Agriculture minister returns to Red Deer to apologize for Bill 6 debacle



> Just weeks after facing a rural revolt over proposed farm safety legislation, Agricultural Minister Oneil Carlier returned to Red Deer Friday to apologize again for his government’s mishandling of Bill 6 and to pledge to “*get this right.*”


The only way this could ever "get right" is if the legislation was buried under the manure pile out back...


----------



## SINC

http://m.metronews.ca/#/article/new...y-husband-given-government-email-account.html

Oh yeah, this is normal. Yep, riiiiight!


----------



## SINC

Yep.



> *“The world has figured out in the past nine months that (Alberta NDP Premier) Rachel Notley has no idea what she is doing,” he said. “Her government is killing that province. She is totally clueless and she is killing this country. I think Canadians should get on their knees and beg her to take a holiday.”*


Sinking economy may lead to Trudeau ouster: O'Leary | Warmington | Canada | News


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Yep.


Hard to find anything to disagree with, there...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Hard to find anything to disagree with, there...


Other than that the Liberals could bring themselves to dump PM Selfie.


----------



## SINC

More results of Rachel Notley's mismanagement.



> Business Barometer®
> Alberta small business confidence in free-fall
> Drops 4.3 points in January to another record low
> *
> CALGARY, January 28, 2016 – The Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) today released the Business Barometer results for January showing Alberta’s small business confidence dropped 4.3 points to 28.8. *This latest result is 26 points below the January 2015 index and continues to break records for the weakest level ever reported anywhere in Canada in the Business Barometer’s® 15 year history.**
> *
> “*Alberta’s small business confidence is in free-fall with even more lay-offs on the horizon.* *In the last recession, confidence levels began rebounding much more quickly.* At this point, it is not clear how low it might go,” said Amber Ruddy, Alberta Director of CFIB.
> *
> Small business hiring plans further weakened in January with 35 per cent of owners saying they will reduce their full-time workforce, up five points from December. *Only nine per cent say they intend to hire in January, unchanged from the previous month.*
> *
> *“A third of small businesses in Alberta report they will have to shrink their workforce, a last resort for many businesses,”* said Ruddy.
> *
> Concern with insufficient domestic demand shot up 10 points in January with 71 per cent of business owners in Alberta reporting weak demand for their goods and services as their top limitation.
> *
> “To improve spirits the Alberta Government should announce a firm release date for the provincial budget. *Entrepreneurs want to know a plan is being developed to deal with the mounting challenges in the economy. *In light of the current economic downturn, the government would be wise to reconsider the $15 minimum wage proposal and carbon tax scheme,” added Ruddy.
> *
> On a scale between 0 and 100, an index above 50 means owners expecting their business’ performance to be stronger in the next year outnumber those expecting weaker performance. *An index level between 65 and 75 is typically when the economy is growing.
> *
> Optimism in British Columbia fell to 62.8. **Saskatchewan rose two points to 58.7*, while Manitoba fell five points to 61.4.* Ontario dropped to 58.4, while Quebec saw a two point jump to 61.2. *Newfoundland and Labrador’s slipped to 63.2. *Nova Scotia fell two points, but its 69.0 mark is the strongest in Canada. *New Brunswick’s confidence rose to 62.8. *Prince Edward Island fell a point to 60.3.
> *
> The January 2016 findings are based on 712 responses collected from a stratified random sample of CFIB members to a controlled-access web survey. *Data reflect responses received through January 18. *Findings are considered accurate to +\- 3.7 per cent 19 times in 20.
> *


More here:

Business Barometer


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> More results of Rachel Notley's mismanagement.


Her & her union supporters don't care about small business. They've got their slated raises, their retirement packages, their job guarantees.


----------



## SINC

Alberta electricity rates to rise sharply because of climate plan: study | Globalnews.ca


----------



## FeXL

Hey, we could be just like Ontariowe!!!

And, all for a measly reduction which will completely and entirely disappear under China's & India's CO2 output.

And, note the last paragraph. Who d'ya s'pose will be on the hook for the payouts to coal producers to quit early? Why, taxpayers, of course. All on top of the added costs of electricity.


----------



## Macfury

With high made-in-Alberta energy gouging, you can diversify yourself out of the manufacturing sector, just as Ontario did.



FeXL said:


> Hey, we could be just like Ontariowe!!!
> 
> And, all for a measly reduction which will completely and entirely disappear under China's & India's CO2 output.
> 
> And, note the last paragraph. Who d'ya s'pose will be on the hook for the payouts to coal producers to quit early? Why, taxpayers, of course. All on top of the added costs of electricity.


----------



## SINC

Alberta NDP are all idiots. For months they allow the economy to fester while speculating what they might do to royalties. Turns out NOTHING.

What a FUBAR this turned out to be. Doing nothing that tanked the provincial economy. Idiots every one.

Live: NDP will maintain existing royalty structure for Alberta's oilsands | Edmonton Journal


----------



## fjnmusic

There you go, you big whiners. The sky is not falling after all. 

http://globalnews.ca/news/2485331/alberta-to-unveil-new-royalty-framework-on-friday/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Notley was a fool for leaving this hanging over the heads of the industry for so long, killing investment and driving some players out of the province altogether.

This was political malpractice.



fjnmusic said:


> There you go, you big whiners. The sky is not falling after all.
> 
> Royalties remain the same for Alberta oilsands projects, says Notley | Globalnews.ca


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Alberta NDP are all idiots. For months they allow the economy to fester while speculating what they might do to royalties. Turns out NOTHING.
> 
> 
> 
> What a FUBAR this turned out to be. Doing nothing that tanked the provincial economy. Idiots every one.
> 
> 
> 
> Live: NDP will maintain existing royalty structure for Alberta's oilsands | Edmonton Journal



Seriously, Don? You think a whole bunch of finger-crossing would have made one damned bit of difference? The economy is what it is. People don't invest when it's not profitable to do so. Good times will return inevitably. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

No at all. The province is setting a terrible tone for business and choking chances for recovery. Government can't create an economy out of nothing, but they can sure as hell kill one.



fjnmusic said:


> Seriously, Don? You think a whole bunch of finger-crossing would have made one damned bit of difference? The economy is what it is. People don't invest when it's not profitable to do so. Good times will return inevitably.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Notley was a fool for leaving this hanging over the heads of the industry for so long, killing investment and driving some players out of the province altogether.
> 
> 
> 
> This was political malpractice.



Really. So businesses left because of what the Royalty Review MIGHT say. Sounds like pretty poor businessmen to me. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

They redirected their efforts to more stable business environments--exactly what an astute businessperson would do faced with gross uncertainty. 



fjnmusic said:


> Really. So businesses left because of what the Royalty Review MIGHT say. Sounds like pretty poor businessmen to me.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> They redirected their efforts to more stable business environments--exactly what an astute businessperson would do faced with gross uncertainty.



And where exactly is the oil and gas industry more stable at the moment? Anywhere but the oilsands? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Saskatchewan and BC are welcoming them.



fjnmusic said:


> And where exactly is the oil and gas industry more stable at the moment? Anywhere but the oilsands?


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Saskatchewan and BC are welcoming them.



Welcoming, yes. But what is the rate of return? Are the taxes less, including PST? Are the businesses honestly expecting to make a higher rate of return after all the investment in infrastructure somewhere else when the world price of oil is the same? 
Last I read Nestle's was planning to bleed BC dry of clean water to the the tune of about $2.25 per million litres. Boy, that sounds like a profitable venture for BC. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Are the businesses honestly expecting to make a higher rate of return after all the investment in infrastructure somewhere else when the world price of oil is the same?


Yes.


----------



## FeXL

This is either one of the most remarkably stupid or wilfully ignorant things I've even seen posted on these boards.



fjnmusic said:


> The economy is what it is.


Good times will return much faster with a government that is receptive to investment, not punishing. Like, in 3-1/2 years when the Knotheads are gone, gone, gone... :clap:



fjnmusic said:


> Good times will return inevitably.


----------



## FeXL

Partly, yes. How long should investors have to wait in order to get an answer? The better part of a year? Not hardly...

In addition, carbon taxes are another reason energy companies are leaving.

Of course, I could provide a more complete list but all that would accomplish is me being called a lecturer & a troll. Funny, I always thought a troll was more like your typical progressive poster, all hat & no horse...



fjnmusic said:


> So businesses left because of what the Royalty Review MIGHT say.


----------



## SINC

Notley destruction continues, an incredibly stupid move that will devastate our economy:



> This carbon tax is anything but revenue neutral
> 
> Alberta’s new broad-based carbon tax is a tax on everything that moves. It will raise the price of gas and home heating, costing Alberta families an estimated $300 to $600 per year. That will rise to over $900 per year for the average family by 2030. Some can expect rebates, but we have little idea what that will look like.
> 
> The price of clothing, food and everything transported will also increase. Shutting down coal-fired electricity plants and subsidizing green energy companies (corporate welfare by a friendlier name) will raise electricity prices. The province will lose investment, and rural communities will be hit hard.
> 
> Every policy must be measured on its impacts. It’s crucial to weigh the impacts of the carbon tax on Albertan families, businesses and rural communities, compared to the impacts the carbon tax could have on global climate change.
> 
> Let’s rely on the sunniest of predictions for reducing Alberta’s greenhouse gas emissions. The government-commissioned report states, “implementation of our full policy framework … would roughly stabilize emissions, by 2030, just above current levels at approximately 270 (megatonnes).” The report notes we produced 267 megatonnes in 2013. The idea is to stop our emissions from growing, but let’s be clear: that is three megatonnes more than we produced in 2013.
> 
> Canada contributes 1.65 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions – nothing compared to big emitters China and the U.S. – according to recently released World Resources Institute data for 2012. (It was also recent revealed that China has been under-reporting its coal consumption by up to 17 per cent.) Of Canada’s emissions, Environment Canada says oil-rich Alberta contributed 36.8 per cent in 2013.
> 
> Using the predictions in Alberta’s climate report, under a carbon tax we’ll increase our emissions by 1.1 per cent (from 2013 levels) by 2030. So after 13 years of the carbon tax, we’ll have increased global emissions by 0.007 per cent, versus an increase of one tenth of a per cent if we had no carbon tax. That’s it. It’s like arguing whether you should use a shot glass or an eye-dropper to fill a swimming pool. Either way we’ll have done virtually nothing to reduce global climate change. But a carbon tax will have certainly made Albertans poorer.


Alberta's crippling carbon tax


----------



## Macfury

Carbon taxes are all about raising revenue and micro-managing people's lives.


----------



## Vandave

Macfury said:


> Carbon taxes are all about raising revenue and micro-managing people's lives.


Carbon taxes are far better than carbon trading. The political reality is that we are going to deal with GHG emissions one way or another. 

At least with carbon taxes, there is an opportunity for the government to give tax breaks elsewhere on cleaner energy sources. With carbon trading, we would be shipping money overseas to corrupt dictators or spending money on all sorts of hair-brained ideas run by political leaches.

I think it's by far the lessor of two evils and I think those of us on the right side of the political spectrum need to just suck this one up.


----------



## Vandave

It hasn't even been a year yet in Alberta. It's going to be a LONG 3 years. Notley has to have the worst job in Canada right now.


----------



## Macfury

Vandave said:


> It hasn't even been a year yet in Alberta. It's going to be a LONG 3 years. Notley has to have the worst job in Canada right now.


Largely because she's doing the worst job.


----------



## Macfury

Vandave said:


> Carbon taxes are far better than carbon trading. The political reality is that we are going to deal with GHG emissions one way or another.
> 
> At least with carbon taxes, there is an opportunity for the government to give tax breaks elsewhere on cleaner energy sources. With carbon trading, we would be shipping money overseas to corrupt dictators or spending money on all sorts of hair-brained ideas run by political leaches.
> 
> I think it's by far the lessor of two evils and I think those of us on the right side of the political spectrum need to just suck this one up.


There are no cleaner energy sources except natural gas that will make any difference to emissions warranting that level of taxation.


----------



## Vandave

Macfury said:


> There are no cleaner energy sources except natural gas that will make any difference to emissions warranting that level of taxation.


Isn't that the point though? We're trying to encourage alternatives. Look at Nevada. They subsidized solar and it expanded greatly.

Natural gas is very cheap relative to oil ($ per KJ). It's the conversion and transition costs that prevent more usage. Use some of that carbon money to offset those costs.


----------



## Macfury

Vandave said:


> Isn't that the point though? We're trying to encourage alternatives. Look at Nevada. They subsidized solar and it expanded greatly.


Nevada plants are underperforming:

High-Tech Solar Projects Fail to Deliver - WSJ

Electricity rates are skyrocketing.

Then NV Energy screwed residential solar micro-generators because their production was eating into their profits.

I call it a failure.


----------



## SINC

Looks good on these bumbling fools.

NDP drop to third place in a recent poll | Calgary Herald


----------



## SINC

They actually think they are doing the right things for Alberta. Sad how mistaken accidental governments can be.


----------



## CubaMark

SINC said:


> They actually think they are doing the right things for Alberta. Sad how mistaken accidental governments can be.


SINC, what is the source for that poll?


----------



## SINC

Yep, this nails it.

Klassen: We’ve taken ourself out of the energy game (with poll) | Calgary Herald

Here is another poll result from this article. (Poll above taken on Facebook)



> Why is Canada being such a schmuck? In worldwide oil play, where every other country does whatever it can to develop its oil and gas assets, how is it that Canada is the only player actively taking itself out of the game?
> 
> Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s latest announcement that there will be additional delays in pipeline approvals must have prompted a chuckle that began in the U.S. and turned into an all out belly-splitter by the time it spread to Venezuela, the Middle East and North Africa. These countries get the main rule that we don’t: he who can deliver first, wins.
> 
> Anyone who still believes the environmental narrative that restricting oil production is about saving the Earth is naive; it’s all about money.
> 
> Let’s take the example of the United States. While Canada writhes to accommodate American concerns about our oil, the U.S. has taken complete advantage of the delay by exploiting its resources, and why wouldn’t it? It’s what smart countries do. In the time it’s taken to quash the proposed 1,400 kilometres of Keystone XL pipeline, 19,200 kilometres of American pipeline has been built, some of it serving Canada.
> 
> The U.S. has quickly gone from being an importer of oil, to becoming the largest oil producer in the world, now exporting overseas for the first time in 40 years. The large American-owned oil companies operating in Canada are actually doing quite well; in fact, the more paralysis on Canadian fronts, the bigger their value stateside. We’ve just paid for that by sacrificing the smaller Canadian companies with no net decrease in overall oil production. Oops.
> 
> In fact, while our governments are being do-goody apologists-in-chief, Washington has furthermore committed to helping Kenya raise $18 billion for a 900-kilometre pipeline that will roll through endangered species habitats in the Great Rift Valley to the Indian Ocean. It’s only an environmental issue it seems, when it’s a Canadian pipeline.
> 
> We even marginalize ourselves in our own country. How amusing it must seem to our competitors, that in turning on ourselves, we implode our industry, unable to get pipelines built to supply even our own family. The irony that Eastern Canada will buy even more oil from the U.S. rather than from a domestic industry that employs so many of them and pays so many of their bills, is beyond a joke. That Canada sits on the third largest oil reserves in the world, and we can’t even create domestic independence, much less an export industry, is not only an embarrassing failure, but one can hardly imagine that it’s prudent national policy. Yet here we are.
> 
> Looking forward to a guarantee of massive government grants, alternative energy sources are the new frontier of capitalism, good at sponsoring the rhetoric that fits the stick-it-to-the-man perspective we seem to absorb with such fervour and lack of critical thinking. As for the other objectors, does anyone really think obstruction of pipelines can’t be salved with more money?
> 
> *For its part, Alberta’s carbon tax will reduce energy use not a whit, but will cycle more money to government. Ottawa’s new rules for project approval will be arbitrary, based on cabinet political opinion rather than the evidence-based science of National Energy Board professionals who achieve the most stringent standards on the planet. This is nothing less than a way for the feds to take control of provincial assets — an egregious interference and outrageous demonstration of political swagger.*
> 
> More dithering on pipelines is likely to make this all a moot point: Demand for oil doesn’t remain unsatisfied, and someone else will fill the order. Delaying pipelines just changes who profits — and apparently, it won’t be Canada, even in Canada. What rubes we must seem, behaving as though we believe other countries are joining us in a kind of lower-emissions Peace Corps initiative. Outmanoeuvred we are in this game, to say the least.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Yep, this nails it.


Excellent analysis.

Puts the blame squarely in the laps of the ignorant, uninformed, kowtowing, progressive politicians, right where it belongs...


----------



## CubaMark

SINC said:


> (Poll above taken on Facebook)


Well... "on Facebook" is akin to saying "on planet earth".

Was the poll done by a person among his group of friends?

Was the poll done by a particular group on Facebook?

If it was done by a particular group, what is the group?

One would expect that a Facebook group such as "Run them G-D commie Notley Morons outta Alberta!" would produce a poll result somewhat different than a group such as "Albertans for Informed Public Energy Policies", etc.

Polls don't take place in a vacuum, and without context, their value cannot be properly interpreted.

Actually, damn near any "poll" performed by special interest groups, or persons untrained in survey design and implementation, are pretty much worthless. Those that appear in Facebook, newspapers, on various websites - all they tend to do is reinforce the gist of a given narrative among the already converted / inclined.


----------



## SINC

CubaMark said:


> Well... "on Facebook" is akin to saying "on planet earth".
> 
> Was the poll done by a person among his group of friends?
> 
> Was the poll done by a particular group on Facebook?
> 
> If it was done by a particular group, what is the group?
> 
> One would expect that a Facebook group such as "Run them G-D commie Notley Morons outta Alberta!" would produce a poll result somewhat different than a group such as "Albertans for Informed Public Energy Policies", etc.
> 
> Polls don't take place in a vacuum, and without context, their value cannot be properly interpreted.
> 
> Actually, damn near any "poll" performed by special interest groups, or persons untrained in survey design and implementation, are pretty much worthless. Those that appear in Facebook, newspapers, on various websites - all they tend to do is reinforce the gist of a given narrative among the already converted / inclined.


Took me a while to source it, but it was done by the Calgary Sun and here is the page with an updated result, so now you can run down the Sun as not reflecting the views of Albertans as well? It reflects my views and 99% of the folks I know in my area of Alberta perfectly FWIW.

In three more years, the Alberta NDP will be rejected by a huge majority. Watch it happen.


----------



## CubaMark

SINC said:


> ....now you can run down the Sun as not reflecting the views of Albertans as well? ....


I merely questioned the source of a "Facebook poll" as you described it. I have no idea if the Calgary Sun represents the views of most Albertans, it may do so precisely, but the only way to know that with any sort of confidence is to conduct a properly designed and implemented survey, not an internet point-and-click "whaddaya think" poll.


----------



## SINC

CubaMark said:


> I merely questioned the source of a "Facebook poll" as you described it. I have no idea if the Calgary Sun represents the views of most Albertans, it may do so precisely, but the only way to know that with any sort of confidence is to conduct a properly designed and implemented survey, not an internet point-and-click "whaddaya think" poll.


There is another way to know the mood of the electorate. It's called interacting with average Albertans which I do every day. Read comments sections on CBC and in major newspapers. Check Twitter and yep, even Facebook. If you took the time to do so, you would find the overwhelming majority of Albertans are kicking their own asses for accidentally electing the Dippers.


----------



## SINC

Seems to me the opinion of our NDP government falls every day from every quarter:

Canadians Not Approving Of Notley And Trudeau – Oilprice News


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Seems to me the opinion of our NDP government falls every day from every quarter:
> 
> 
> 
> Canadians Not Approving Of Notley And Trudeau – Oilprice News



People tend to blame the current government for the state of the economy whether it is their fault or not, independent of whether the've earned the credit or the blame. Here in Alberta, the price of oil and gas colours every perception. Do you really think you would see such negative knee-jerk type reactions of oil were sitting at, say, $60 a barrel right now? Or $80 a barrel? If Companies were climbing all over themselves to get those drills back in the ground? The prices will rebound at some point; they always do. And whoever is in charge will then be looked at as saviours, even if they just had lucky timing. It happened during the "Klein revolution."

There's been a shift to the left recently. You've seen it in Canada and you're seeing it in the buildup in popularity of Bernie Sanders style "democratic socialism" in the US. You may not personally like the political and economic left end of the spectrum, but you cannot deny its existence, rightly or wrongly, or its appeal to people who have had enough of the old regime. Alberta governments and Canadians have four year mandates; we're still barely into year one. Lots of time for things to turn around. Mark my words. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

I don't believe the hatred would be as severe if oil were higher, but it would still be severe. I also don't think the negative reactions are knee-jerk--they are shock and horror at the ineptitude of the government. The government is an added burden to the oil shock.



fjnmusic said:


> People tend to blame the current government for the state of the economy whether it is their fault or not, independent of whether the've earned the credit or the blame. Here in Alberta, the price of oil and gas colours every perception. Do you really think you would see such negative knee-jerk type reactions of oil were sitting at, say, $60 a barrel right now? Or $80 a barrel?


----------



## SINC

No one I know is blaming the Notley government for the price of oil, nor its fall. What they are blaming her for, and rightly so, is her foolhardy social policies. She and her rookie crew will further destroy the economy and add a very heavy tax burden on the beleaguered industry and the people of Alberta she simply has no sympathy for, in her fervour to tax us to death.


----------



## FeXL

What SINC said.



fjnmusic said:


> People tend to blame the current government for the state of the economy whether it is their fault or not, independent of whether the've earned the credit or the blame.


No, it doesn't, except for maybe the low information voters.

Ralph Klein balanced the budget on $30 oil. Were people cheering because of the price of oil or because the budget was balanced?

And, yes, informed people would still be pissed at the Knotheads' crappy economic policy, even at $100 oil. Billions of dollars coming out of taxpayers pockets to fund Pie In The Sky & Unicorn Fart projects like carbon taxes, global warming, renewable energy , $15/hr minimum wages & other social atrocities are complete folly no matter what the price of oil.



fjnmusic said:


> Here in Alberta, the price of oil and gas colours every perception. Do you really think you would see such negative knee-jerk type reactions of oil were sitting at, say, $60 a barrel right now? Or $80 a barrel? If Companies were climbing all over themselves to get those drills back in the ground?


Funny, have zero recollection of the Klein government being praised for the increase in crude prices. Responsible spending? Yes. Can you support your conjecture?

Who will be looked upon as saviours is the small c conservatives that will take over the reins in 3 years. I'd prefer Wildrose, myself.



fjnmusic said:


> The prices will rebound at some point; they always do. And whoever is in charge will then be looked at as saviours, even if they just had lucky timing. It happened during the "Klein revolution."


You can't make blanket statements like that. Some areas have moved left, others have moved right. It's the natural course of democracy.

The US has been left for 8 years & look where it's got them. I dare you to defend a _single_ policy of Obama's. They never left the recession, true unemployment is over 20%, the debt accrued by Obama is greater than that of *all the presidents* prior to him, combined. His foreign policy is a complete & utter failure. He has been more racially divisive than any president, ever. His domestic policy is also a complete failure. His true Charlie Foxtrot is forcing medical insurance companies into bankruptcy because there aren't enough paying into it to support those taking out of it.

As to Sanders' popularity, what other choice does the American left have? Shrillary? HA!!! As thick as the left is, even they are getting a sense that all things are not well in Bill's Wife's camp. Small surprise Sanders is moving up...



fjnmusic said:


> There's been a shift to the left recently. You've seen it in Canada and you're seeing it in the buildup in popularity of Bernie Sanders style "democratic socialism" in the US.


Oh, it exists, alright. Like a thorn in the arse of society. And, to repeat, the only appeal the NDP had in Alberta was as an alternative during a protest vote. It certainly wasn't because of any political platform plank. Look how their popularity has already shrunk. The honeymoon is long over.

There is no way in hell the NDP can turn the economy around in the next three years. Not with the profligate spending they have already announced (and will continue to do, as they simply cannot help themselves). No matter what oil prices do.

Watch the "old regime" relegate the NDP to the dustbin of Alberta political history in 3 years. Mark _my_ words...



fjnmusic said:


> You may not personally like the political and economic left end of the spectrum, but you cannot deny its existence, rightly or wrongly, or its appeal to people who have had enough of the old regime. Alberta governments and Canadians have four year mandates; we're still barely into year one. Lots of time for things to turn around. Mark my words.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> What SINC said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, it doesn't, except for maybe the low information voters.
> 
> 
> 
> Ralph Klein balanced the budget on $30 oil. Were people cheering because of the price of oil or because the budget was balanced?
> 
> 
> 
> And, yes, informed people would still be pissed at the Knotheads' crappy economic policy, even at $100 oil. Billions of dollars coming out of taxpayers pockets to fund Pie In The Sky & Unicorn Fart projects like carbon taxes, global warming, renewable energy , $15/hr minimum wages & other social atrocities are complete folly no matter what the price of oil.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Funny, have zero recollection of the Klein government being praised for the increase in crude prices. Responsible spending? Yes. Can you support your conjecture?
> 
> 
> 
> Who will be looked upon as saviours is the small c conservatives that will take over the reins in 3 years. I'd prefer Wildrose, myself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can't make blanket statements like that. Some areas have moved left, others have moved right. It's the natural course of democracy.
> 
> 
> 
> The US has been left for 8 years & look where it's got them. I dare you to defend a _single_ policy of Obama's. They never left the recession, true unemployment is over 20%, the debt accrued by Obama is greater than that of *all the presidents* prior to him, combined. His foreign policy is a complete & utter failure. He has been more racially divisive than any president, ever. His domestic policy is also a complete failure. His true Charlie Foxtrot is forcing medical insurance companies into bankruptcy because there aren't enough paying into it to support those taking out of it.
> 
> 
> 
> As to Sanders' popularity, what other choice does the American left have? Shrillary? HA!!! As thick as the left is, even they are getting a sense that all things are not well in Bill's Wife's camp. Small surprise Sanders is moving up...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, it exists, alright. Like a thorn in the arse of society. And, to repeat, the only appeal the NDP had in Alberta was as an alternative during a protest vote. It certainly wasn't because of any political platform plank. Look how their popularity has already shrunk. The honeymoon is long over.
> 
> 
> 
> There is no way in hell the NDP can turn the economy around in the next three years. Not with the profligate spending they have already announced (and will continue to do, as they simply cannot help themselves). No matter what oil prices do.
> 
> 
> 
> Watch the "old regime" relegate the NDP to the dustbin of Alberta political history in 3 years. Mark _my_ words...



I'm not going to try to convince you of anything. It would be a wasted effort. You see it your way, and I see it mine (but we both see it slipping away). Paix, mon ami.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Typical. I have facts, you have Unicorn Farts.

Give me some _facts._ Bring some empirical evidence to the discussion that illustrates the superiority of the economic policy of the NDP, progressives, liberals, left, whatever.

Numbers are a good place to start. Describe to me in simple terms the financial benefit of spending billions of dollars on a carbon tax. Give a brief synopsis on the advantages of delaying a decision on petroleum royalties 3 times over the course of 8 months. Put together a precis on the advantages to small business of a $15/hr minimum wage.

I'm more than willing to listen to anybody who can cobble together a coherent argument supporting any/all of those 3 scenarios. That's more than you can say. Who is the close-minded one here?



fjnmusic said:


> You see it your way, and I see it mine


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Typical. I have facts, you have Unicorn Farts.
> 
> 
> 
> Give me some _facts._ Bring some empirical evidence to the discussion that illustrates the superiority of the economic policy of the NDP, progressives, liberals, left, whatever.
> 
> 
> 
> Numbers are a good place to start. Describe to me in simple terms the financial benefit of spending billions of dollars on a carbon tax. Give a brief synopsis on the advantages of delaying a decision on petroleum royalties 3 times over the course of 8 months. Put together a precis on the advantages to small business of a $15/hr minimum wage.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm more than willing to listen to anybody who can cobble together a coherent argument supporting any/all of those 3 scenarios. That's more than you can say. Who is the close-minded one here?



I don't have any interest in your assignment. You don't know how to have a civil discussion, and whenever I've gone to the effort to provide evidence for you, you dismiss it anyway. What's the point? 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Avoid, obfuscate & muddy the waters.

Where's the surprise?

And, when have you _ever_ provided _evidence_?



fjnmusic said:


> I don't have any interest in your assignment. You don't know how to have a civil discussion, and whenever I've gone to the effort to provide evidence for you, you dismiss it anyway. What's the point?


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Avoid, obfuscate & muddy the waters.
> 
> 
> 
> Where's the surprise?
> 
> 
> 
> And, when have you _ever_ provided _evidence_?



Zzzzz. Boring. Same old same old. At least try a different approach. 

Btw, how's that Anti-Progressive thread going? I don't think I've seen anyone post there other than you. You can have some nice arguments with yourself. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

I'm sue it bores you to be asked repeatedly for something substantive in support of the NDP. Making snoring noises does not look good on you. So far you have made a case for the NDP that they pay government workers more money. Other than that, they are diversifying the economy--though you don't know how.

Why are their policies good for Alberta and how will this good be achieved? 



fjnmusic said:


> Zzzzz. Boring. Same old same old. At least try a different approach.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> I'm sue it bores you to be asked repeatedly for something substantive in support of the NDP. Making snoring noises does not look good on you. So far you have made a case for the NDP that they pay government workers more money. Other than that, they are diversifying the economy--though you don't know how.
> 
> 
> 
> Why are their policies good for Alberta and how will this good be achieved?



Guess we'll have to wait and see.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

This is exactly the point. You seem to have voted on teacher's salaries, and screw everything else. Let them eat cake.



fjnmusic said:


> Guess we'll have to wait and see.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> This is exactly the point. You seem to have voted on teacher's salaries, and screw everything else. Let them eat cake.



How did I vote on teacher salaries? We've been getting screwed for the last four years under PC Premier Alison Redford and her successors, but we were treated fairly under PC Premier Ed Stelmach. You over simplify, especially when you really don't what you're talking about. I support the deal that is the fairest regardless of which party is in power. The NDP have restored funds to the classroom, not to teacher salaries. There are still many months left to go on this contract. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

What I'm saying is that this is the only issue where you identify any detailed support for the NDP. The rest is: "We'll see."



fjnmusic said:


> How did I vote on teacher salaries? We've been getting screwed for the last four years under PC Premier Alison Redford and her successors, but we were treated fairly under PC Premier Ed Stelmach. You over simplify, especially when you really don't what you're talking about. I support the deal that is the fairest regardless of which party is in power. The NDP have restored funds to the classroom, not to teacher salaries. There are still many months left to go on this contract.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Truth's the truth. Can't change it, live by it.



fjnmusic said:


> Zzzzz. Boring. Same old same old. At least try a different approach.


Yuk it up, Progressive Boy. Take a look at each threads' posts & views. Divide one into the other. There is far more interest per post in my thread than yours.

I know, I know. Using facts in a discussion with you is tantamount to lecturing & trolling...



fjnmusic said:


> Btw, how's that Anti-Progressive thread going? I don't think I've seen anyone post there other than you. You can have some nice arguments with yourself.


----------



## FeXL

No, they stopped the cutback planned by the Conservatives (which, incidentally, is the sole thing Rachel has done that I agree with).

Big difference.



fjnmusic said:


> The NDP have restored funds to the classroom...


----------



## SINC

A one term government destined for defeat.

Alberta polls say united-right party could easily oust NDP | Opinion | Edmonton Sun


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> A one term government destined for defeat.
> 
> 
> 
> Alberta polls say united-right party could easily oust NDP | Opinion | Edmonton Sun



How quickly people forget. Uniting the right in the form of Wildrosers cross the floor to join the PC's is what lost the PC's the election in the first place. All these bull****e polls reveal is how fickle people can be. And how the PC's bailed a year early because they knew how bad the economy was going to get. Yup, that's responsible leadership. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> How quickly people forget. Uniting the right in the form of Wildrosers cross the floor to join the PC's is what lost the PC's the election in the first place. All these bull****e polls reveal is how fickle people can be. And how the PC's bailed a year early because they knew how bad the economy was going to get. Yup, that's responsible leadership.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


And how conveniently you avoid the inevitable. The NDP are done as of now. Sadly we will have to endure their bad policies and bad government for three more years. But revenge will be Albertans when they toast the Notley Crew in '19. Watch it happen uder the banner of "No, Not(ley) In '19".


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> And how conveniently you avoid the inevitable. The NDP are done as of now. Sadly we will have to endure their bad policies and bad government for three more years. But revenge will be Albertans when they toast the Notley Crew in '19. Watch it happen uder the banner of "No, Not(ley) In '19".



It's not even been a year yet. Nine months at best. A lot can happen in three years. That is, unless you really WANT the economy to fail, just to prove your point. Seems a lot like shooting yourself in the foot to me. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Not even close.

What lost the race for the PC's was their arrogance in not listening to the very people they polled looking for solutions.

What lost the race for Wildrose was the floor crossers, especially Danielle Smith.



fjnmusic said:


> Uniting the right in the form of Wildrosers cross the floor to join the PC's is what lost the PC's the election in the first place.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Not even close.
> 
> 
> 
> What lost the race for the PC's was their arrogance in not listening to the very people they polled looking for solutions.
> 
> 
> 
> What lost the race for Wildrose was the floor crossers, especially Danielle Smith.



So what makes you think anything is different with those opposition parties now? You think two minutes in the penalty box was enough to change the right-wing PC sense of entitlement? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Watching the colossal sense of entitlement on display with Notley is making people nostalgic for the old sense of entitlement.



fjnmusic said:


> So what makes you think anything is different with those opposition parties now? You think two minutes in the penalty box was enough to change the right-wing PC sense of entitlement?


----------



## SINC

Premier Brad Wall of Saskatchewan today on Facebook, "Don't let the NDP anywhere near our economy."

Yep, he gets it big time!


----------



## FeXL

The PC's haven't changed a bit. No surprise & I don't care 'cause I gave up on them long ago. If they disappear into nothingness there won't be any tears shed from this little corner of the province. Goodbye & don't let the door hit ya on the ass on the way out.

As to Wildrose, Brian Jean has had some time as leader to establish himself. The wounds from the floor crossers have had some time to heal. Danielle Smith is nought but a bad memory. I believe they're in a better position now than they were at election time.

I'm not interested in any melding/joining/circle jerk/whatever with the PC's. Period.



fjnmusic said:


> So what makes you think anything is different with those opposition parties now? You think two minutes in the penalty box was enough to change the right-wing PC sense of entitlement?


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> The PC's haven't changed a bit. No surprise & I don't care 'cause I gave up on them long ago. If they disappear into nothingness there won't be any tears shed from this little corner of the province. Goodbye & don't let the door hit ya on the ass on the way out.
> 
> 
> 
> As to Wildrose, Brian Jean has had some time as leader to establish himself. The wounds from the floor crossers have had some time to heal. Danielle Smith is nought but a bad memory. I believe they're in a better position now than they were at election time.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not interested in any melding/joining/circle jerk/whatever with the PC's. Period.



Well, then there's something we can agree on. Not the worth of the WR, but the fact that uniting the right is a bad idea. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

AN Amazon bestseller:

[ame=http://www.amazon.ca/The-Destroyers-Rachel-Notley-Alberta/dp/0995016801/ref=zg_bs_books_1]The Destroyers: Rachel Notley and the NDP's War on Alberta: Sheila Gunn Reid: 9780995016804: Books - Amazon.ca[/ame]


----------



## FeXL

In my mind, they're two distinct, incompatible philosophies.

One is the Good Ol' Boys Club with all the baggage & sense of entitlement that accompanies it. Thx but, no thx.

The other is the young upstart, return to grass-roots, basic small-c conservative philosophy. I just don't know if Brian Jean is the person to lead it.



fjnmusic said:


> Well, then there's something we can agree on. Not the worth of the WR, but the fact that uniting the right is a bad idea.


----------



## SINC

'Bout right.


----------



## SINC

A demonstration of continuing NDP stupidity while Saskatchewan's Brad Wall gets it.

Industry, not government, responsible for reclaiming orphaned wells | Calgary Herald


----------



## SINC

And she professes to be a leader?

No long-term future in tar sands, says Alberta's premier | Environment | The Guardian


----------



## FeXL

The other side of that coin is there is no long term future for her as premier, either...


----------



## FeXL

While this is more politicking against the BC NDP by Christy Clark than anything else, there are salient points raised.

B.C. government slams Alberta governments, past and present



> The Alberta government’s program spending costs are about $2,000 more per person than in B.C. with results not worth anywhere near the extra cash.
> 
> “It has never been more important to be vigilant,” says the Throne Speech to British Columbians.
> 
> The B.C. government then pledges to “resist the temptation to spend our way into trouble.”
> 
> Like the trouble in Alberta.


And yet, what're the Knotheads doing? Spending their asses off.

Thx, Rachel. Bang-up job so far...


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> While this is more politicking against the BC NDP by Christy Clark than anything else, there are salient points raised.
> 
> 
> 
> B.C. government slams Alberta governments, past and present
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And yet, what're the Knotheads doing? Spending their asses off.
> 
> 
> 
> Thx, Rachel. Bang-up job so far...



Uh, dude. You may not want to gloat. She was talking primarily about the previous PC government.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Right--and Notley is creaming their record.



fjnmusic said:


> Uh, dude. You may not want to gloat. She was talking primarily about the previous PC government.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Uh, dude. How many times do I have to tell you, as far as I'm concerned, the last good PC government this province had was under Ralph Klein.

Stelmach, Queenie & Prentice were idiots, most decidedly not conservative, & their records show it. When Stelmach got elected in '06, my support for the PC's vanished. The article mentions that 9 years ago the profligate government spending started. No coincidence.

Shortly after, Wildrose got it's start & eventually developed into a political party I could support.



fjnmusic said:


> Uh, dude. You may not want to gloat. She was talking primarily about the previous PC government.


----------



## SINC

While there is little to make me believe this will happen, one can always hope.

BREAKING: Rachel Notley May Be Removed From Power March 8 – Oilprice News

Clark claims he can remove Notley from office - The Taber Times


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> While there is little to make me believe this will happen, one can always hope.
> 
> 
> 
> BREAKING: Rachel Notley May Be Removed From Power March 8 – Oilprice News
> 
> 
> 
> Clark claims he can remove Notley from office - The Taber Times



Clark is an idiot. He does not understand how representative democracy works. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Clark is an idiot. He does not understand how representative democracy works.


He does indeed understand it. I think you may be the one who is confused.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> He does indeed understand it. I think you may be the one who is confused.



Please explain how you think this little attempted "kudata" is going to work here in Canada. I'm curious.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

It may not work, but there is an accepted avenue for what he is attempting.



fjnmusic said:


> Please explain how you think this little attempted "kudata" is going to work here in Canada. I'm curious.


----------



## SINC

Point being it is likely what a huge majority of Albertans want right now. The Notley crew are damaged goods and will remain so in three years time.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> It may not work, but there is an accepted avenue for what he is attempting.



This is not an explanation. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> This is not an explanation.


But this is.



SINC said:


> Point being it is likely what a huge majority of Albertans want right now. The Notley crew are damaged goods and will remain so in three years time.


----------



## SINC

Oh yeah . . .


----------



## SINC

Yep.

Braid: Would somebody please stand up for Alberta? Maybe the government? | Calgary Herald


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> But this is.



Nope. Not an explanation either. The question was how would a coup d'état work exactly in Alberta? There is no allowance for such a thing anywhere in policy and it would undermine the democratic process. Saying people are pissed off may or may not be true, but it is certainly not an explanation. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Nope. Not an explanation either. The question was how would a coup d'état work exactly in Alberta? There is no allowance for such a thing anywhere in policy and it would undermine the democratic process. Saying people are pissed off may or may not be true, but it is certainly not an explanation.


The 'coup d'état' as you call it, is an attempt to unseat a government by people who are distressed at the actions, or inaction by the current crop of Dippers. That is an explanation why such moves are being attempted by ordinary people who want change. Seems the change they got by accident, is worse than the change they wished for when voting last election. So yes, it is an explanation and one you likely cannot live with, but an explanation nevertheless.


----------



## FeXL

Are you so informed on domestic policy that you can be absolutely, 100% sure of that?



fjnmusic said:


> There is no allowance for such a thing anywhere in policy and it would undermine the democratic process.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Are you so informed on domestic policy that you can be absolutely, 100% sure of that?



Yup.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> The 'coup d'état' as you call it, is an attempt to unseat a government by people who are distressed at the actions, or inaction by the current crop of Dippers. That is an explanation why such moves are being attempted by ordinary people who want change. Seems the change they got by accident, is worse than the change they wished for when voting last election. So yes, it is an explanation and one you likely cannot live with, but an explanation nevertheless.



People can regret the way they voted, they can regret the way the majority voted, they can regret all sorts of things on behalf of whomever they believe they feel they speak on behalf of, but they cannot overthrow a democratically elected government, not in this country. There are many of us "progressive" minded types who would have loved to overthrow the Harper and Prentice governments, but since we are grown ups, we knew that we would have to wait until the next election whether we liked it or not. Besides, it was more fun to watch the Alberta PC's and the Federal implode on themselves anyway. 

The Notley NDP government has broken no laws that it needs to be removed from office. You don't have to like them, but as many have pointed out, it's only three plus years until the next mandatory election date. You can learn to be patient just like the rest have had to be. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> People can regret the way they voted, they can regret the way the majority voted, they can regret all sorts of things on behalf of whomever they believe they feel they speak on behalf of, but they cannot overthrow a democratically elected government, not in this country. There are many of us "progressive" minded types who would have loved to overthrow the Harper and Prentice governments, but since we are grown ups, we knew that we would have to wait until the next election whether we liked it or not. Besides, it was more fun to watch the Alberta PC's and the Federal implode on themselves anyway.
> 
> The Notley NDP government has broken no laws that it needs to be removed from office. You don't have to like them, but as many have pointed out, it's only three plus years until the next mandatory election date. You can learn to be patient just like the rest have had to be.


I'm not sure why you insist on lecturing me like it was I who started this petition. I have nothing to do with it and have noted here previously that I do not think it has a chance in hell of working. 

I am fully aware that the next election is our only opportunity for change and in my opinion, Albertans will not make the same mistake by electing the NDP ever again. The accidental government of Rachel Notley is done, Toast even.


----------



## SINC

Talk about crass . . .

Standing on graves to push an agenda, Notley NDP give stump speech at Hinton crash memorial service


----------



## FeXL

<snort>



fjnmusic said:


> Yup.


----------



## SINC

Yes Rachel, this is how you try to muzzle the truth.

NDP seeking to muzzle opposing journalists | GUNTER | Columnists | Opinion | Edm


----------



## Rps

fjnmusic said:


> People can regret the way they voted, they can regret the way the majority voted, they can regret all sorts of things on behalf of whomever they believe they feel they speak on behalf of, but they cannot overthrow a democratically elected government, not in this country.


I know I have been down this road before, but this is where an equal and elected Senate would be of benefit. If it's election was half way through the Commons mandate, and if it was indeed the chamber of sober thought, it would balance out the effects of a majority government. Here in Ontario,, much like what I read from Alberta, we have a large number who disagree with the current leaders policies....their election may have been more of a protest vote than an endorsement. A Provincial equal and elected Senate might be in order. With Mr. Trudeau's pledge for electoral reform ( which may be the great non issue ) maybe it's the form of government we should be looking at and not how we elect it.


----------



## MacGuiver

SINC said:


> Yes Rachel, this is how you try to muzzle the truth.
> 
> NDP seeking to muzzle opposing journalists | GUNTER | Columnists | Opinion | Edm


The new Liberal Left slogan should be: Because its 1984!


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Yes Rachel, this is how you try to muzzle the truth.


Beat me to it. 

Can't have any dissent on the narrative now, can we?

'Sides, those righties ask all the tough questions...


----------



## SINC

FeXL said:


> Beat me to it.
> 
> Can't have any dissent on the narrative now, can we?
> 
> 'Sides, those righties ask all the tough questions...


This one too?


----------



## SINC

Notley is just not going to win this one.

Why the Premier of Alberta shouldn't get to decide who is "media" - The Globe and Mail


----------



## CubaMark

SINC said:


> Notley is just not going to win this one.
> 
> Why the Premier of Alberta shouldn't get to decide who is "media" - The Globe and Mail


Probably not. But Levant gave the NDP a gift with this:

_Notley's spokeswoman and communications director Cheryl Oates provided a written statement on Tuesday about the decision.

"The government's position is that if you have testified under oath that you are not a journalist, then we don't consider you a journalist," she said.

Oates's comment refers to testimony given by Levant in a libel suit in 2014. He told the court that he was a commentator and a pundit, not a reporter._ (CBC)​


----------



## Macfury

He still says he is not a reporter. And being a reporter is not required to be a member of the press. Have you ever heard of editorial writers or press photographers?



CubaMark said:


> Probably not. But Levant gave the NDP a gift with this:
> 
> _Notley's spokeswoman and communications director Cheryl Oates provided a written statement on Tuesday about the decision.
> 
> "The government's position is that if you have testified under oath that you are not a journalist, then we don't consider you a journalist," she said.
> 
> Oates's comment refers to testimony given by Levant in a libel suit in 2014. He told the court that he was a commentator and a pundit, not a reporter._ (CBC)​


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> He still says he is not a reporter. And being a reporter is not required to be a member of the press. Have you ever heard of editorial writers or press photographers?


Or opinion columnists?


----------



## SINC

CubaMark said:


> Probably not. But Levant gave the NDP a gift with this:
> 
> _Notley's spokeswoman and communications director Cheryl Oates provided a written statement on Tuesday about the decision.
> 
> "The government's position is that if you have testified under oath that you are not a journalist, then we don't consider you a journalist," she said.
> 
> Oates's comment refers to testimony given by Levant in a libel suit in 2014. He told the court that he was a commentator and a pundit, not a reporter._ (CBC)​


Gift? Hardly.

All that statement has done is to p!ss off the vast majority of people on social media and further degraded the image of the Alberta NDP and especially Notley.

She and her party keep digging their grave deeper every day with every stupid move like this one.

She will suffer one of the biggest defeats of a sitting government in a provincial election in three short years. She is just not bright enough to realize it yet.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Gift? Hardly.
> 
> 
> 
> All that statement has done is to p!ss off the vast majority of people on social media and further degraded the image of the Alberta NDP and especially Notley.
> 
> 
> 
> She and her party keep digging their grave deeper every day with every stupid move like this one.
> 
> 
> 
> She will suffer one of the biggest defeats of a sitting government in a provincial election in three short years. She is just not bright enough to realize it yet.



Not bright enough? Misogynist much?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Not bright enough? Misogynist much?


Yep, that's right. Not bright enough to understand the repercussions of what she is doing, not only in this instance, but many others. The fact she is female has no bearing on that opinion. Under the NDP education directive, she could apparently be any one of dozens of genders if she attended school.


----------



## Macfury

That's ridiculous. The fact that Notley is not very bright has nothing to do with her sex.



fjnmusic said:


> Not bright enough? Misogynist much?


----------



## SINC

She lost again!

Rachel Notley's NDP lifts ban on The Rebel, says it made a mistake - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> She lost again!
> 
> 
> 
> Rachel Notley's NDP lifts ban on The Rebel, says it made a mistake - Edmonton - CBC News



Admitting you made a mistake is losing in your mind? Interesting. Misogynist much? She's smarter than you. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Gender has nothing to do with it whatsoever. She lost this battle.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Admitting you made a mistake is losing in your mind? Interesting. Misogynist much? She's smarter than you.


Are you the kind of person who calls "racist" if someone disagrees with Obama? You should be ashamed of yourself for watering down the meaning of misogyny.

And I doubt Notley is very smart. She's certainly not demonstrating it.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Gender has nothing to do with it whatsoever. She lost this battle.



Perhaps, but you have been hypercritical of her from the start, particularly with respect to intelligence. She has a law degree and 50 years of life experience to go with. She is very intelligent. You just can't see it and continue to insult her intelligence. Your comments seem very misogynistic in my opinion. And kind of whiny and repetitive too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Are you the kind of person who calls "racist" if someone disagrees with Obama? You should be ashamed of yourself for watering down the meaning of misogyny.
> 
> 
> 
> And I doubt Notley is very smart. She's certainly not demonstrating it.



Why should I be ashamed? For pointing out an obvious bias against a female premier? Why do you doubt she is intelligent? That reeks of misogyny, my friend. And I said nothing about Obama. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Perhaps, but you have been hypercritical of her from the start, particularly with respect to intelligence. She has a law degree and 50 years of life experience to go with. She is very intelligent. You just can't see it and continue to insult her intelligence. Your comments seem very misogynistic in my opinion. And kind of whiny and repetitive too.


If you cannot understand that the premier has mad mistake after mistake you are uninformed. Those are not the moves of an intelligent person. They are the moves of one who is using newfound power irresponsibly with little real thought to the consequences.

And by the way, I was just as critical of both Redford and Prentice. Both of them were as reckless using power as Notley has turned out to be. And once again, is has nothing to do with gender and everything to do with intelligent decision making (or lack thereof).


----------



## Macfury

Being female has nothing to do with it. Espousing a bankrupt ideology and screwing up royally does. Being a lawyer does not make one intelligent. Neither does walking the Earth for 50 years.




fjnmusic said:


> Why should I be ashamed? For pointing out an obvious bias against a female premier? Why do you doubt she is intelligent? That reeks of misogyny, my friend. And I said nothing about Obama.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> If you cannot understand that the premier has mad mistake after mistake you are uninformed. Those are not the moves of an intelligent person. They are the moves of one who is using newfound power irresponsibly with little real thought to the consequences.
> 
> 
> 
> And by the way, I was just as critical of both Redford and Prentice. Both of them were as reckless using power as Notley has turned out to be. And once again, is has nothing to do with gender and everything to do with intelligent decision making (or lack thereof).



And all three just happen to be women, the first three ever in Alberta. My criticism stands. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Being female has nothing to do with it. Espousing a bankrupt ideology and screwing up royally does. Being a lawyer does not make one intelligent. Neither does walking the Earth for 50 years.



You know you could just as well be describing yourself, except for the lawyer part. But the "bankrupt ideology" certainly fits your pattern. The world can only be as you see it. There is no other possible interpretation. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

You could certainly claim it was true--but then you might have to back it up. I'm not too worried about that.



fjnmusic said:


> You know you could just as well be describing yourself, except for the lawyer part. But the "bankrupt ideology" certainly fits your pattern. The world can only be as you see it. There is no other possible interpretation.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> And all three just happen to be women, the first three ever in Alberta. My criticism stands.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Boy oh boy, have you lost it or what?

Jim Prentice is a woman? :lmao:

Or did you look up Prentice's gender in the NDP school gender bathroom guide?

Your accusations die on that kind of misinformation.

:lmao:


----------



## SINC

The respect continues to rot for Notley.

Premier Notley's popularity continues to crater | Alberta | News | Edmonton Sun


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Boy oh boy, have you lost it or what?
> 
> 
> 
> Jim Prentice is a woman? :lmao:
> 
> 
> 
> Or did you look up Prentice's gender in the NDP school gender bathroom guide?
> 
> 
> 
> Your accusations die on that kind of misinformation.
> 
> 
> 
> :lmao:



My bad. I was thinking of Smith, Prentice-in-drag. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CubaMark

*Ezra Levant's Goons Threw Me Out of His "Open, Non-Partisan, Public" Meeting*


Though I’d become somewhat of a thorn in Levant’s side, it was my possession of the only recording of his racist anti-Roma tirade after Sun News thought they’d effectively purged it from existence - a recording which aided in forcing him to, again, issue a grovelling apology - which cemented his disdain for me.

And perhaps explains why the self-described “fearless Rebel Commander” is so, utterly terrified of me.

When The Rebel, Levant’s online vanity project launched after Sun News’ demise, promoted an “EMERGENCY PUBLIC MEETING” regarding Alberta’s future under the “extremist” Notley regime - an event billed as “an independent, non-partisan meeting, open to the public for free” - I reserved a pair of seats.

After receiving a confirmation email from Amanda Achtman, Levant’s loyal apprentice who first served him at Ethical Oil before joining him at Sun News and now The Rebel, I was surprised to find another email, this one directly from Levant, notifying me of his personal intervention to cancel my reservation, claiming to be “concerned from your past conduct that you will be disruptive and profane.”

Knowing Levant’s assertions were fabricated, I requested evidence to support his allegations of my “past conduct” or “track-record” of being “disruptive and profane.”

I posted a screenshot of the exchange to twitter, and quickly received numerous invites to be another’s +1 for the Calgary event.

* * *​
I took a right-leaning friend - a Levant fan - up on the ‘+1’ offer and agreed to meet at the Carriage House Inn, the town hall’s location, a half-hour before its scheduled start.

I arrived in good time, maneuvered my way through the steady-stream of attendees and proceeded to the check-in tables. Before I had a chance to confirm my attendance, however, I was whisked away by a pair men whom Levant hired, it seemed, to specifically watch for me and prevent my participation. When I asked for an explanation as to why I was disallowed from this “open to the public” forum, I was told it was open to everyone — except me.

Neither man could explain why, only that they were under strict orders to ensure I didn’t get in.

When Levant ventured out to greet people, he accidentally offered me a hearty “Hello, and welcome!” before recognition set in, after which he frantically turned-tail and rushed away, shouting that I was “not welcome here,” refusing to answer when I asked him to come back, face me, and explain why.

* * *​
When the police arrived, they seemed completely baffled by the farce. According to his gatekeepers, Levant claimed I’d “long been banned” from the Carriage House Inn, though I’d never once before set foot there. He also alleged I had a “track-record” of disrupting his events - his guards even claimed there were pictures, though neither I nor the police were allowed to see them - and he had a documented history of my ejections — again, flat-out lies.​(CanadaLandShow)


----------



## Macfury

Levant is a private citizen and is free to carry out his own meetings in whatever way he sees fit--even if some people are offended by that. It is an entirely different matter from legislative press conference access.


----------



## SINC

Yep, about right . . .


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Levant is a private citizen and is free to carry out his own meetings in whatever way he sees fit--even if some people are offended by that. It is an entirely different matter from legislative press conference access.



Nope, not if they're advertised as "open to the public." What a hypocrite. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Even if he is a hypocrite in private life (I certainly won't take the word of some blogger without proof) it doe not affect the larger issue of press access to government conferences.



fjnmusic said:


> Nope, not if they're advertised as "open to the public." What a hypocrite. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Even if he is a hypocrite in private life (I certainly won't take the word of some blogger without proof) it doe not affect the larger issue of press access to government conferences.



It does if the press gallery does not consider him to be press for limited access types of functions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Even if the pres gallery decides that he is not "media" for specific events inside the legislature, he is still allowed to attend media press conferences. What may or may not have occurred at Levant's private function has no bearing on that.



fjnmusic said:


> It does if the press gallery does not consider him to be press for limited access types of functions.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## heavyall

fjnmusic said:


> Nope, not if they're advertised as "open to the public." What a hypocrite. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Open to the public is not the same thing as open to the media. I've been to many open community meetings where no media whatsoever were allowed in.


----------



## FeXL

I'm a university dropout with more than 50 years of life experience.

And I can poke holes you could drive a Mack truck through in every decision she's made since being elected, save one. If she's "intelligent" does that make me an f'ing genius?

The logical fallacies in your post could fill a book...



fjnmusic said:


> She has a law degree and 50 years of life experience to go with.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Not bright enough to understand the repercussions of what she is doing, not only in this instance, but many others.


I'm not so sure. Here's why...

The very nature of the NDP beast is to spend, spend, spend, tax, tax, tax. I think deep down they realize it but are simply unable to stop. Nobody can be that wilfully ignorant of the consequences. They simply cannot help themselves. Even if they see the cliff directly in front of them, they cannot stop. It's an addiction. It's in their DNA. 

There is no real long term plan, it's immediate satisfaction that counts. 

Who cares about tomorrow? Today we spent & taxed well...


----------



## Macfury

On top of that, they realize that they are weasels in the henhouse and that their days are already numbered, so the feeding frenzy begins on Day One.

--


FeXL said:


> I'm not so sure. Here's why...
> 
> The very nature of the NDP beast is to spend, spend, spend, tax, tax, tax. I think deep down they realize it but are simply unable to stop. Nobody can be that wilfully ignorant of the consequences. They simply cannot help themselves. Even if they see the cliff directly in front of them, they cannot stop. It's an addiction. It's in their DNA.
> 
> There is no real long term plan, it's immediate satisfaction that counts.
> 
> Who cares about tomorrow? Today we spent & taxed well...


----------



## CubaMark

*Small Calgary 'kudatah' bemuses Albertans*










It started in the Walmart parking lot at Westbrook Mall, and that's where it ended about 10 minutes later.

A small group of Albertans gathered early Friday afternoon to stage a "kudatah" — protesting the NDP government and urging people to sign their petitions calling for plebiscites regarding NDP policies.

The group, called Albertans First, says on its Facebook page it supports the "right of Albertans to maintain and build a strong non-government controlled province."

* * *​
Initially, the group had planned to hold their rally on March 8, but "increasing desperation and losses of hope and life for Albertans" prompted organizer George Clark to move the date up.​
(CBC)


----------



## SINC

George Clark is not appreciated in the opinion of the vast majority Albertans any longer. In fact there are now movements afoot to have him investigated for raising over $27,000, (insisting he did it fraudulently via 'his online scam') as many folks are now claiming on social media. He may find himself in more hot water than he bargained for in the weeks and months ahead.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> George Clark is not appreciated in the opinion of the vast majority Albertans any longer. In fact there are now movements afoot to have him investigated for raising over $27,000, (insisting he did it fraudulently via 'his online scam') as many folks are now claiming on social media. He may find himself in more hot water than he bargained for in the weeks and months ahead.



Couldn't happen to a nicer con man.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

(cross posted in the Anti Progressive thread)

So, with rather bizarre social experiments being foisted upon the unsuspecting populace by Progressive governments, it's always revealing to examine how said experiments have fared elsewhere.

Hey, Seattle! How's that $15 minimum wage working out for ya?

Well, in a nutshell:



> The American Enterprise Institute blog reveals the not very surprising news that 10 months into Seattle's radical experiment of boosting the minimum wage to $15 an hour over a period of years, *the city has suffered the worst job losses since the Great Recession.*


M'bold.

More:



> *The chart below shows that while the city of Seattle experienced a sharp drop in employment of more than 11,000 jobs between April and December last year (light blue line, BLS data available here), employment in Seattle’s neighboring suburbs outside the city limits (the Seattle MSA jobs less Seattle city jobs) increased over that period by nearly 57,000 jobs and reached a new record high in November 2015 before falling slightly in December.*


M'bold.
Please, Rachel, could you make it $20/hr? Pretty please, with Progressive sugar on top? :love2:


----------



## SINC

Truth done with much humour:

Premier Notley and friends just keep bumbling along | Opinion | Calgary Sun


----------



## SINC

There is no other word to describe them. Sleazeballs!

NDP going ahead with plans to allow donors to pay to meet premier | Calgary Herald


----------



## SINC

Yep, a real fair player:

Rachel Notley accused of disrespect in setting date for Calgary-Greenway byelection - Calgary - CBC News


----------



## SINC

Ah yes, she is all above board. No ethics issue here, or is there?

Wildrose calls for ethics probe into Notley’s role at Ontario NDP fundraiser | Calgary Herald


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Ah yes, she is all above board. No ethics issue here, or is there?
> 
> 
> 
> Wildrose calls for ethics probe into Notley’s role at Ontario NDP fundraiser | Calgary Herald



Just because the Wildrose are crying wolf doesn't mean there's a wolf.


http://www.progressalberta.ca/apf_poll_smells

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Will she ever learn? Apparently Notley.

Notley fundraised for pipeline opponents | Opinion | Calgary Sun


----------



## SINC

Yep,still at it . . .


----------



## SINC

But it appears to be back on, or off, or on, or 

Alberta NDP going ahead with private event to meet premier at fundraiser - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> But it appears to be back on, or off, or on, or
> 
> 
> 
> Alberta NDP going ahead with private event to meet premier at fundraiser - Edmonton - CBC News



It's for the party faithful. What do you care if they have a fundraiser? PC's did it all the time. It's fairly normal for political parties. As I recall, there was a $500 a plate dinner with Jim Prentice scheduled shortly after the last election. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

It's not the fundraiser. It's the paid lobbyist meeting before the fundraiser.



fjnmusic said:


> It's for the party faithful. What do you care if they have a fundraiser? PC's did it all the time. It's fairly normal for political parties. As I recall, there was a $500 a plate dinner with Jim Prentice scheduled shortly after the last election.


----------



## FeXL

Just because she denies it doesn't mean it's not behind her, staring you right in the eyes...



fjnmusic said:


> Just because the Wildrose are crying wolf doesn't mean there's a wolf.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Will she ever learn? Apparently Notley.


Did you see that list of attendees also included <spit> Labatt's? Interesting to see if that conversation has any influence on craft brewing legislature in the province.


----------



## SINC

SINC said:


> But it appears to be back on, or off, or on, or
> 
> Alberta NDP going ahead with private event to meet premier at fundraiser - Edmonton - CBC News


Damn it is hard to keep track.

$1,000 per head dinner with Notley cancelled over ethics | iNews880


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Damn it is hard to keep track.
> 
> 
> 
> $1,000 per head dinner with Notley cancelled over ethics | iNews880



So they CHOSE to cancel it, pending the outcome of the investigation, which they had been cleared for originally. It's not that they were instructed that they had to. Sounds like a lot of Wildrose whining to me. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Well, how about holding input sessions from farmers for bill 6 in Edmonton and Calgary during spring seeding and calving and fall harvest?

How much valid input will city slickers have that will serve farmers well anyway?

Do the NDP even have a clue about anything? Good grief!



> *Bill 6 ‘consultation’ fraught with problems: CFIB
> 
> Alberta Government still doesn’t get it; hosts sessions in big cities during busy farming season*
> 
> Calgary, January 24, 2015 – The Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) is calling into question the parameters the Alberta Government set for the consultation on Bill 6 - the Enhanced Protection for Farm and Ranch Workers Act. A new Ag Coalition recently raised concerns and the sentiment is echoed by Alberta agri-business. The Alberta Government is currently convening working groups to develop technical elements of the Bill 6 legislation. The meetings are being scheduled from March to August in Calgary and Edmonton.
> 
> “The inflexible and highly selective nature of the meetings shows the Alberta Government has their own agenda in mind,” said Amber Ruddy, Alberta Director for CFIB. “The reality is spring is calving and seeding season, while meetings in August may begin to interfere with harvest time. Why doesn’t the government meet farmers in the rural communities where these policy changes will have an impact?”
> 
> Six technical working groups (TWGs) are being established to work on the development of employment standards regulations, occupational health and safety (OHS) standards, and labour relations legislation. Stakeholders can fill out the six-page form to apply to be considered for one of twelve seats at one of the tables. Spots have been earmarked on each table for representatives from the agricultural sector, labour groups, and technical experts.
> 
> “Rolling out the red carpet for labour groups by guaranteeing spots on all committees is an attempt to water down the voice of farmers. There are inherent flaws in how this consultation was designed, including that workers’ compensation changes were never given a meaningful opportunity for discussion,” added Ruddy. “Alberta’s economy is in a fragile state and Bill 6 hits Alberta’s agriculture sector hard.”
> 
> CFIB urges the government to go back to the drawing board and figure out a better process to genuinely listen and respond to the serious concerns about the legislation being raised by agri-business owners across the province.


----------



## SINC

Edmonton Journal columnist Paula Simons on Twitter nails it:

Last week, in my column about the absurd "Kudatah" (sic) attempt to overthrow the NDP party from within, I make a crack that the NPD communications strategists were scarcely more sophisticated than poor George Clark.

I think that may have been unkind. To Clark. What the Sam Hill is wrong with the NDP's strategic thinkers? Are they stoned? First, picking a pointless fight with Ezra Levant, now this? 

It's not about ethics. It's about optics. Ethics commissioner Marguerite Trussler may have passed this idea, but it doesn't pass the smell test for an NDP government that promised to do things differently. 

What do you suppose you eat at a $10,000 a plate dinner? Roasted haunch of hippogriff, finished with pixie dust?


----------



## FeXL

Sounds like a lot of NDP backtracking to me.



fjnmusic said:


> Sounds like a lot of Wildrose whining to me.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Do the NDP even have a clue about anything? Good grief!


You bet!

Rachel was actually, _actually_, in 4H. That makes her a flaming genius on all things agricultural, not limited to but including, bull****...


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Roasted haunch of hippogriff, finished with pixie dust?


More like unicorn tenderloin...


----------



## FeXL

Hafta forward this ad to my kid sister that got laid off this morning. (BTW, thank you, Rachel...)

Alberta oilfield workers!

From the comments:



> How can one feed a family, pay a mortgage, take caribbean holiday at $17/hr? That's terrible. These people are such hypocrites.


Yep.

I'm thinking ya sign on, head out every day & point out to the Saskatchewan populace, one on one, what a crappy job every NDP government in Canada has ever done, get paid for it & walk away richer for the experience, while Brad Wall gets re-elected.


----------



## SINC

Dippers ot Dip****s?

Alberta NDP cancels ritzy fundraiser ”now under investigation” and fights fresh controversy in Ontario


----------



## FeXL

See what happens, Rachel, when there is an economically inviting atmosphere?

Shifting towards low-sustaining capital projects, operations begin at Edam East heavy-oil thermal project



> Steam operations have started at the Edam East project near Lloydminster, the first of three new heavy-oil thermal projects in the province.
> 
> With Premier Brad Wall on hand for the official opening ceremony on Tuesday, the Edam East development is part of what Husky Energy describes as its “ongoing transition into a low-sustaining capital business.” By the end of this year, the company says more than 40 percent of overall production is forecast to come from low-sustaining capital projects. That compares to just eight per cent in six years ago. compared to just eight percent in 2010.


Further:



> "Despite low oil prices, our province’s energy sector continues to attract billions of dollars in new investment..."


B-b-b-b-but...CARBON TAX!!! $15/HR MINIMUM WAGES!!! UNIONIZED FARM WORKERS!!! THESE ARE THE REAL ISSUES IN ALBERTA!!! WAHHHH...


----------



## SINC

Another Notley not.

http://m.metronews.ca/#/article/news/calgary/2016/03/02/ndp-job-creation-program-in-limbo.html


----------



## SINC

Welsh village to sue government over 'alarmist' rising sea level claim - Telegraph


----------



## FeXL

More layoffs, more spending cuts in hard-hit oilpatch as job losses top 100,000



> Despite signs of life in oil prices, companies in Calgary continue to retrench, cutting jobs, shutting in production and scaling back spending plans.
> 
> ...
> 
> Repsol Oil and Gas Canada Inc., the company formally known as Talisman Energy, confirmed Thursday that it would lay off 10 per cent to 15 per cent of its staff over the course of the week, but would not give a specific number.
> 
> ...
> 
> On Wednesday, fracking company Calfrac Well Services Ltd. announced that it has cut another 500 jobs from its North American operations, bringing its total number of layoffs in the region during this downturn to 2,300 and leaving Calfrac with 1,200 employees in Canada and the U.S.


Further:



> *More than 100,000 people have lost their jobs in the Canadian oilpatch over the course of the downturn, which has pushed the province into a deep recession.*


M'bold.

So, Rachel, what sort of efforts have you been initiating to make Alberta more attractive to business investment?


----------



## Macfury

Diversifying opportunities for the public sector?



FeXL said:


> So, Rachel, what sort of efforts have you been initiating to make Alberta more attractive to business investment?


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Diversifying opportunities for the public sector?


<snort>


----------



## fjnmusic

Your observations can be so simplistic. Who's going to invest right now? You seem to be in denial that the depressed oil economy is a real thing and that there won't be hope for that industry while prices remain low. Furthermore, nobody controls the price on an international commodity like oil apart from say OPEC. The problem, my dear friends, is that Alberta, and by extension Canada, has become far too dependent on JUST ONE INDUSTRY to solve all of their problems for them. It's not about what is Rachel Notley not doing now, it's mainly about what the previous government didn't do for the past several years and decades to ensure we didn't have all our eggs in one basket.

It's like being a farmer and relying completely on the weather, and then having a ****ty year with not enough moisture, like this year is shaping up to be in Alberta, and then realizing there's no Plan B. Add say BSE to that equation and you have the recipe for the collapse of another industry. 

If you looked at the situation from a more mature perspective, you'd stop blaming the NDP for things they have no control over.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

_If_ government is responsible for such things, then the PCs have already significantly lessened Alberta's dependence on oil.

What is Notley doing right now?



fjnmusic said:


> Your observations can be so simplistic. Who's going to invest right now? You seem to be in denial that the depressed oil economy is a real thing and that there won't be hope for that industry while prices remain low. Furthermore, nobody controls the price on an international commodity like oil apart from say OPEC. The problem, my dear friends, is that Alberta, and by extension Canada, has become far too dependent on JUST ONE INDUSTRY to solve all of their problems for them. It's not about what is Rachel Notley not doing now, it's mainly about what the previous government didn't do for the past several years and decades to ensure we didn't have all our eggs in one basket.
> 
> It's like being a farmer and relying completely on the weather, and then having a ****ty year with not enough moisture, like this year is shaping up to be in Alberta, and then realizing there's no Plan B. Add say BSE to that equation and you have the recipe for the collapse of another industry.
> 
> If you looked at the situation from a more mature perspective, you'd stop blaming the NDP for things they have no control over.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

That's who... 

Curious, innit, that somebody in the _energy_ sector is investing in todays market.



fjnmusic said:


> Who's going to invest right now?


Whose in denial here? As of 2013, energy was 25% of Alberta's economy. That means that 75% _isn't_ energy. And, that's nearly 12% less than it was in 1985. All done under the PC's.  Wonder of wonders.

Same question: What's Rachel doing to create investment in Alberta's economy, energy or otherwise?



fjnmusic said:


> You seem to be in denial that the depressed oil economy is a real thing and that there won't be hope for that industry while prices remain low.


FFS, nobody, not one single body on these boards has said that. Why do you keep repeating that, _ad nauseum_, if nobody here is saying it? It's like a broken record with you. For that matter, I've never come across anybody who has said that, anywhere. Must be those progressive boards you hang out on. Quit repeating **** that nobody here, save you, is saying.



fjnmusic said:


> Furthermore, nobody controls the price on an international commodity like oil apart from say OPEC.


25%, man. That's it, that's all.

What's Rachel doing about the other 75%, _Friend_?



fjnmusic said:


> The problem, my dear friends, is that Alberta, and by extension Canada, has become far too dependent on JUST ONE INDUSTRY to solve all of their problems for them.


Damn straight it is! How long is she going to sit on her hands, waiting for the price of oil to go up? She's already wasted close to a year.

And, how long are you going to blame previous governments instead of holding her feet to the fire for doing nothing, herself?



fjnmusic said:


> It's not about what is Rachel Notley not doing now, it's mainly about what the previous government didn't do for the past several years and decades to ensure we didn't have all our eggs in one basket.


You, like Rachel, know nothing about farming. Keep your farming analogies to yourself. If you did, you wouldn't have backed her BS farming bill. Don't even pretend...



fjnmusic said:


> It's like being a farmer and relying completely on the weather, and then having a ****ty year with not enough moisture, like this year is shaping up to be in Alberta, and then realizing there's no Plan B. Add say BSE to that equation and you have the recipe for the collapse of another industry.


Maturity? Yeah, 'cause that's the real problem here. Have you checked the mirror lately?

If you looked at the situation with any kind of objectivity at all, you could see that Rachel has done nothing to foster growth in Alberta's economy for nearly a year. In fact, she's done quite the opposite. By taking 8 months to produce a royalty review that, essentially, changed nothing, all the while investors fled the province, by announcing a regressive carbon tax amounting to billions of dollars out of taxpayers pockets, by taking the first steps to a $15/hr minimum wage and hurting all small businesses in the province in the process, as well as raising unemployment rates, these are all things the Knotheads have already done.

Or, was that the PC's, too?



fjnmusic said:


> If you looked at the situation from a more mature perspective, you'd stop blaming the NDP for things they have no control over.


You are still completely unable to present an argument with facts & defend your position. Maturity, indeed...


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> That's who...
> 
> 
> 
> Curious, innit, that somebody in the _energy_ sector is investing in todays market.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whose in denial here? As of 2013, energy was 25% of Alberta's economy. That means that 75% _isn't_ energy. And, that's nearly 12% less than it was in 1985. All done under the PC's.  Wonder of wonders.
> 
> 
> 
> Same question: What's Rachel doing to create investment in Alberta's economy, energy or otherwise?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FFS, nobody, not one single body on these boards has said that. Why do you keep repeating that, _ad nauseum_, if nobody here is saying it? It's like a broken record with you. For that matter, I've never come across anybody who has said that, anywhere. Must be those progressive boards you hang out on. Quit repeating **** that nobody here, save you, is saying.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 25%, man. That's it, that's all.
> 
> 
> 
> What's Rachel doing about the other 75%, _Friend_?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Damn straight it is! How long is she going to sit on her hands, waiting for the price of oil to go up? She's already wasted close to a year.
> 
> 
> 
> And, how long are you going to blame previous governments instead of holding her feet to the fire for doing nothing, herself?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You, like Rachel, know nothing about farming. Keep your farming analogies to yourself. If you did, you wouldn't have backed her BS farming bill. Don't even pretend...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maturity? Yeah, 'cause that's the real problem here. Have you checked the mirror lately?
> 
> 
> 
> If you looked at the situation with any kind of objectivity at all, you could see that Rachel has done nothing to foster growth in Alberta's economy for nearly a year. In fact, she's done quite the opposite. By taking 8 months to produce a royalty review that, essentially, changed nothing, all the while investors fled the province, by announcing a regressive carbon tax amounting to billions of dollars out of taxpayers pockets, by taking the first steps to a $15/hr minimum wage and hurting all small businesses in the province in the process, as well as raising unemployment rates, these are all things the Knotheads have already done.
> 
> 
> 
> Or, was that the PC's, too?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are still completely unable to present an argument with facts & defend your position. Maturity, indeed...



What's the point? All you want to do is rip my views to shreds if you don't like them. As I said before, you still don't know how to have a mature conversation. You don't know how to respectfully agree to disagree. Not much incentive for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

I asked kindly.



fjnmusic said:


> What's the point? All you want to do is rip my views to shreds if you don't like them. As I said before, you still don't know how to have a mature conversation. You don't know how to respectfully agree to disagree. Not much incentive for me.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> I asked kindly.



Not you. The other guy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> _If_ government is responsible for such things, then the PCs have already significantly lessened Alberta's dependence on oil.
> 
> 
> 
> What is Notley doing right now?



I think Notley is waiting for the right opportunity to present itself. Success is mostly about timing. Just check Ralph Klein's track record.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

You see somebody looking for an opportunity to do something you can't define.

I see somebody doing nothing except increasing the burdens on businesses and taxpayers.




fjnmusic said:


> I think Notley is waiting for the right opportunity to present itself. Success is mostly about timing. Just check Ralph Klein's track record.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

HA!!! Brilliantly played! Academy performance! Well done, young Lochinvar!!!

You creep out of your safe space, the first thing you do is accuse other people of not being mature, when they respond in kind, you pull out the feigned hurt card &, once agan, the questions go unanswered.

Bravo!!! :clap::clap::clap:

The least you can do when you receive your award is to give me an honourable mention, as I supplied you with your out. I know not what you would have done without that...

<bows gracefully...>



fjnmusic said:


> What's the point? All you want to do is rip my views to shreds if you don't like them. As I said before, you still don't know how to have a mature conversation. You don't know how to respectfully agree to disagree. Not much incentive for me.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> You see somebody looking for an opportunity to do something you can't define.
> 
> 
> 
> I see somebody doing nothing except increasing the burdens on businesses and taxpayers.



That's why you're not a visionary.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> HA!!! Brilliantly played! Academy performance! Well done, young Lochinvar!!!
> 
> 
> 
> You creep out of your safe space, the first thing you do is accuse other people of not being mature, when they respond in kind, you pull out the feigned hurt card &, once agan, the questions go unanswered.
> 
> 
> 
> Bravo!!! :clap::clap::clap:
> 
> 
> 
> The least you can do when you receive your award is to give me an honourable mention, as I supplied you with your out. I know not what you would have done without that...



You want people to converse only in a manner acceptable to you. In your view, people can't even just shoot the **** once in a while. Everything must be an argument that has been well researched and documented so you can shoot it down point by point. You do not concede. It's get boring quite, frankly. Try listening for a change of pace. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> That's why you're not a visionary.


You can't be a visionary unless you can express a vision. What you're describing is blind faith with no evidence.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> You can't be a visionary unless you can express a vision. What you're describing is blind faith with no evidence.



Just because you don't understand or agree with the vision doesn't mean someone else doesn't have one. I'm sure Donald Trump, for example, has a vision, but it's a vision that makes me fearful for the safety of the planet and its citizens. Bernie Sanders has a vision that likely would result in moving the US much more to the left, though how that would work in a country with so much resistance is unclear. What is clear, however, with Brad Wall being the last remaining Conservative premier, is that Canada has moved much further to the left than you would like to admit. There are many visionaries at work on this vision today, from coast to coast to coast.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

What is Notley's vision?



fjnmusic said:


> Just because you don't understand or agree with the vision doesn't mean someone else doesn't have one. I'm sure Donald Trump, for example, has a vision, but it's a vision that makes me fearful for the safety of the planet and its citizens. Bernie Sanders has a vision that likely would result in moving the US much more to the left, though how that would work in a country with so much resistance is unclear. What is clear, however, with Brad Wall being the last remaining Conservative premier, is that Canada has moved much further to the left than you would like to admit. There are many visionaries at work on this vision today, from coast to coast to coast.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> What is Notley's vision?



Find out tomorrow at 3:00. Same time George Clark's kudatah is supposed to take over the legislature. We'll all be waiting with baited breath to see how that one turns out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

So essentially you are following her blindly on faith with no ability to even articulate her vision on any level.



fjnmusic said:


> Find out tomorrow at 3:00. Same time George Clark's kudatah is supposed to take over the legislature. We'll all be waiting with baited breath to see how that one turns out.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> So essentially you are following her blindly on faith with no ability to even articulate her vision on any level.



Not at all. Times have changed since her party became government last May. I think I'd rather hear the throne speech before commenting on it, as most patient and mature people would do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

So what is her vision up until now?



fjnmusic said:


> Not at all. Times have changed since her party became government last May. I think I'd rather hear the throne speech before commenting on it, as most patient and mature people would do.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> So what is her vision up until now?



Patience, Macfury. You will know within the next 24 hours. Or you can go to the NDP website if you can't wait that long.

Here, let me Google that for you: top 5 Alberta NDP achievements so far.



> It's been less than a year since we elected the first Alberta New Democrat government with Rachel Notley, but we've been able to support the achievement of so much with the help of members and supporters like you. Going through every single one of our government's achievements would take too long, so we asked some of our members to name their top five choices.
> 
> Here's what they came up with (in no particular order):
> 
> 1. Standing up for Trans and Gender Variant Albertans
> 
> In November 2015, Justice Minister and Solicitor General Kathleen Ganley moved Bill 7, an amendment to the Alberta Human Rights Act that added gender identity and gender expression as explicitly prohibited grounds for discrimination. Speaking about the Bill, Minister Ganley said, "These proposed changes will ensure trans and gender variant Albertans are treated with the dignity and respect that they deserve. No Albertan should be denied basic services for being true to themselves."
> 
> The Bill was applauded by LGBTQ* groups across the province and represented a big step forward for diversity, inclusion, and human rights in our province.
> 
> 2. Creating a Ministry for the Status of Women
> 
> During the 2015 election, Alberta's New Democrats set the standard for gender equity presenting a slate of candidates comprised of 50% women, the highest of any party. Premier Rachel Notley continued that standard on May 24 by introducing a gender balanced Cabinet at the government's public swearing in.
> 
> Also introduced was the province's first Minister responsible for the status of women in 19 years, Shannon Phillips, and the new Minstry she oversees, the Ministry for the Status of Women. Speaking on the work on the Ministry, Minister Phillips noted, "Building a better Alberta means realizing the potential of the women who live here. Alberta is a wonderful place to live, work and raise a family, and yet more than half our population still faces disadvantages because they are women. Our government committed to create a Ministry to lead initiatives for greater gender equality in Alberta."
> 
> 3. Supporting business with the Job Creation Incentive program
> 
> It's no secret that Albertans are weathering a challenging economic storm right now. Rachel Notley and her New Democrat team have been working hard to address the issues that matter most to Albertans. Diversifying our economy is toward the top of that list and we know that the best way to get that job done is by working with and supporting Alberta businesses.
> 
> In November, our NDP government introduced the Job Creation Incentive program to address economic challenges facing businesses in the province and help stimulate the economy. Speaking about the program, Minister for Economic Development and Trade Deron Bilous said, "In challenging times like these, we need to show leadership and partner with business to grow the economy. This program is designed to support employers of all sizes in order to help diversify our economy and create new jobs that support families right across the province.”
> 
> 4. Setting the standard for Climate Leadership in Canada
> 
> One of the bigger announcements from Rachel Notley in 2015 was the introduction of Alberta's first serious plan to tackle climate change. The announcement brought together industry, First Nations, and environmental leaders to applaud and support the initiative our government undertook. The Plan also set the standard for climate leadership in Canada and was the talk of the UN's COP21 Conference on Climate Change.
> 
> The Plan marries meaningful targets with practical strategies to move Alberta forward on this vital issue. Speaking about the Plan, Premier Notley outlined, "Our goal is to become one of the world's most progressive and forward-looking energy producers. We are turning the page on the mistaken policies of the past, policies that have failed to provide the leadership our province needed."
> 
> 5. Introducing a budget that invests in families and the economy
> 
> Returning to the issue of the economy, Rachel Notley and Joe Ceci continued the practice of making history when the Legislature reconvened for its fall sitting by introducing the province's first Alberta New Democrat budget. There was plenty to talk about in the budget, but the element about which we're most proud is how Minister Ceci's budget bucked the trend of downloading cuts onto Alberta families during difficult times. Instead, this budget made a point of taking Alberta in a new direction, investing in families and the economy, while protecting the services on which we rely.
> 
> Speaking about his budget, Minister Ceci noted, "This budget is deeply rooted in the values we all share as Albertans. We are an entrepreneurial and innovative group. We are hard working and resilient. We are community minded and look out for one another.
> 
> Albertans told us they want a plan that supports good jobs and a strong economy. They told us that they want families to have health care and education and to have all of that protected while ensuring that every public dollar is well spent. And that's exactly what we're going to do."
> 
> For a longer list of achievements, check out Alberta New Democrat Leader Rachel Notley's 2015 in Review note on Facebook.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjn, if you're trying to be amusing, I don't understand the joke.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> fjn, if you're trying to be amusing, I don't understand the joke.



What is amusing? These are the exact words from the website. I've said many times the vision is to move the province further to the left. More emphasis on the folk fest and other cultural events. Less emphasis on oil, more on the environmental cleanup from the companies who get our oil. Fair wages in the public sector. The Energy East pipeline. I believe you are being deliberately obtuse. If the throne speech later today doesn't clear up the agenda and thereby the vision for the upcoming year for you, I don't know what will. Again, you may not like the vision, which is much more socialism oriented, but it is what it is. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

You pride yourself on "thinking outside the box" but asked to articulate a personal opinion regarding Notley's vision, you quote from the NDP website. Perhaps the NDP offers no more than a series of website talking points.



fjnmusic said:


> What is amusing? These are the exact words from the website. I've said many times the vision is to move the province further to the left. More emphasis on the folk fest and other cultural events. Less emphasis on oil, more on the environmental cleanup from the companies who get our oil. Fair wages in the public sector. The Energy East pipeline. I believe you are being deliberately obtuse. If the throne speech later today doesn't clear up the agenda and thereby the vision for the upcoming year for you, I don't know what will. Again, you may not like the vision, which is much more socialism oriented, but it is what it is.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> What is amusing? These are the exact words from the website. I've said many times the vision is to move the province further to the left. More emphasis on the folk fest and other cultural events. Less emphasis on oil, more on the environmental cleanup from the companies who get our oil. Fair wages in the public sector. The Energy East pipeline. I believe you are being deliberately obtuse. If the throne speech later today doesn't clear up the agenda and thereby the vision for the upcoming year for you, I don't know what will. Again, you may not like the vision, which is much more socialism oriented, but it is what it is.


You're kidding, right?

The folk fest and other cultural events are going to save the Alberta economy and provide diversification? 

Now THAT's amusing! Care to explain how a three day event on a hillside in downtown Edmonton is going to solve the issues facing Alberta and the energy sector? Just how does that work, anyway?

:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:

On second thought it is downright ridiculous.

What it really is, is more Dipper ideology that is bad for Alberta.


----------



## fjnmusic

You asked about vision. You didn't ask about economic strategy. Again, for the 17th time, we will hear all about that TODAY AT 3:00 during the Throne Speech. I would like to see what the plan is as well. Surely you can wait another six hours—it's not going to kill you. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> You pride yourself on "thinking outside the box" but asked to articulate a personal opinion regarding Notley's vision, you quote from the NDP website. Perhaps the NDP offers no more than a series of website talking points.



What is your problem? Why don't you explain to me what the PC vision or the Wilderose vision is at the moment of it's so easy to do? All I've heard about is "unite the right," which worked SO well for them back in December 2014. At least the NDP has done exactly what they said they would do so far, whether you agree with their principle or not. Bill 6 for example is now a good law regarding the safety of paid farm workers. That's an accomplishment to be proud of. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Folk festivals galore!


----------



## FeXL

What I'm trying to do here is raise the quality of the discussion on these boards from "Rachel's smart! She's 50!" to "Rachel shows she has vision because...".

You categorically refuse to engage. When you got nuttin', you got nuttin'. That's fine. However, don't go putting on airs that you've got some sort of inside track as to what's going on inside her head.



fjnmusic said:


> You want people to converse only in a manner acceptable to you.


There's nothing wrong with just chewing the fat. I quite enjoy that, actually. Thing is, you never bring facts to the table. Ever. _Everything_ is shooting the ****. That's what's so tiresome about all of this.



fjnmusic said:


> In your view, people can't even just shoot the **** once in a while.


If you can't defend your position with facts, then you have an untenable position & you need to re-evaluate. Or go find some facts.

And, yes, that's one of the things I do. I systematically tear down walls of BS, brick by brick, with _facts_.

You sound just like the Global Warming guys: "Why should we give you our data when all your going to do is use it against us?"

Damn straight. That's why I expect you to bring facts to the table.



fjnmusic said:


> Everything must be an argument that has been well researched and documented so you can shoot it down point by point.


I'll concede the day you bring actual facts to the table, presented in a well-thought out argument that makes sense.



fjnmusic said:


> You do not concede.


Not really. I quite enjoy dismantling your BS. Although, frankly, there hasn't been much of a challenge...



fjnmusic said:


> It's get boring quite, frankly.


To what? "Rachel's smart! She's 50!" HA! Not a chance. "Rachel has vision." Where?

I keep waiting for you to say something substantive. Give us something we can sink our teeth into. Screw the organic alfalfa sprout wheat wrap & grass smoothie crap you've been serving up. Where's the meat & potatoes? Where's your passion?



fjnmusic said:


> Try listening for a change of pace.


----------



## FeXL

Yeah, the economy has taken an even greater hit.

Because the Knotheads have done nothing to fix the problem & everything to exacerbate it.



fjnmusic said:


> Times have changed since her party became government last May.


Nobody's asking you to comment on the throne speech. We're asking you to elaborate on her "vision" for this province. Are you saying that the only place her "vision" exists is in the throne speech? Then how are you privy to that?

Or, as some suggest, are you just taking it on blind faith & hoping that something will come out if it?



fjnmusic said:


> I think I'd rather hear the throne speech before commenting on it, as most patient and mature people would do.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> What I'm trying to do here is raise the quality of the discussion on these boards from "Rachel's smart! She's 50!" to "Rachel shows she has vision because...".
> 
> 
> 
> You categorically refuse to engage. When you got nuttin', you got nuttin'. That's fine. However, don't go putting on airs that you've got some sort of inside track as to what's going on inside her head.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's nothing wrong with just chewing the fat. I quite enjoy that, actually. Thing is, you never bring facts to the table. Ever. _Everything_ is shooting the ****. That's what's so tiresome about all of this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you can't defend your position with facts, then you have an untenable position & you need to re-evaluate. Or go find some facts.
> 
> 
> 
> And, yes, that's one of the things I do. I systematically tear down walls of BS, brick by brick, with _facts_.
> 
> 
> 
> You sound just like the Global Warming guys: "Why should we give you our data when all your going to do is use it against us?"
> 
> 
> 
> Damn straight. That's why I expect you to bring facts to the table.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll concede the day you bring actual facts to the table, presented in a well-thought out argument that makes sense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not really. I quite enjoy dismantling your BS. Although, frankly, there hasn't been much of a challenge...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To what? "Rachel's smart! She's 50!" HA! Not a chance. "Rachel has vision." Where?
> 
> 
> 
> I keep waiting for you to say something substantive. Give us something we can sink our teeth into. Screw the organic alfalfa sprout wheat wrap & grass smoothie crap you've been serving up. Where's the meat & potatoes? Where's your passion?



You are a broken record and you wouldn't recognize a fact if it bit you in the ass. You should also avoid words like "always" and "never" since you appear not to know what they mean. Your style tends to be abrasive and is not conducive to conversation. And that's a fact. Until that changes, do not expect me to address many of your questions if at all. Learn some manners first. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Well, it ain't much, but it's a start. Lessee...

I think that we can agree that the single, biggest issue facing Albertans right now is the economy. Let's see if any if the "Big Five" does anything to ameliorate that.

1. Nope.
2. Nope.
3. Nope. (anybody else see a pattern here?)
4. Ditto. 
5. Rinse, repeat.

Thx for addressing the biggest problem facing Albertan's, Rachel...



fjnmusic said:


> Here, let me Google that for you: top 5 Alberta NDP achievements so far.


----------



## Macfury

fjn, I was polite to you and you did not provide a single fact. You seem allergic to committing to any personal position.


----------



## FeXL

How about you go first? Tit for tat an' all...

'Sides, they aren't governing the province right now. Rachel is. S'pose ta be... Maybe...

In addition, if it's so difficult to do, then get the hell out & make room for somebody who can.



fjnmusic said:


> Why don't you explain to me what the PC vision or the Wilderose vision is at the moment of it's so easy to do?


Once again, the only person on these boards saying that is you. Nobody else has.



fjnmusic said:


> All I've heard about is "unite the right," which worked SO well for them back in December 2014.


It's not a good law. It's full of issues. I'd get into it but, there's no point in trying to discuss said things with you.



fjnmusic said:


> Bill 6 for example is now a good law regarding the safety of paid farm workers.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> fjn, I was polite to you and you did not provide a single fact. You seem allergic to committing to any personal position.



My personal position is that I believe in Rachel Notley far more than I ever believed in Jim Prentice, Alison Redford, Brian Jean, Danielle Smith, Rick McIver or Ralph Klein. I did believe in Ed Stelmach, even though he was a PC, because he kept promises to teachers that his predecessors had reneged on, from paying a fair wage adjusted to match the average weekly earnings for Albertans to paying the government's share of the unfunded liability (which it had reneged on since 1956). Ed had a great vision, which wasn't revealed until he had been in office for a while, like most new leaders. He was stabbed in the back by his own party, not by the electorate at large. 

As far as Rachel Notley, most things have been housekeeping kinds of responsibilities so far. As I've said before, listen to the throne speech at 3:00 today if you really want to know what the vision moving forward is. I didn't write the book on NDP policy; I have access to the same info as you do—via the media. If you pay attention today, you may learn something. 

Paid, mon amis.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

And yet, my point stands...



fjnmusic said:


> You are a broken record...


Here's one for you: You couldn't argue your case out of a wet paper bag.



fjnmusic said:


> ...and you wouldn't recognize a fact if it bit you in the ass.


Lesseee, where is it...ah, yes: "DON"T TELL ME WHAT TO DO!!!" tptptptp



fjnmusic said:


> You should also avoid words like "always" and "never" since you appear not to know what they mean.


I give what I get. Check the mirror...



fjnmusic said:


> Your style tends to be abrasive and is not conducive to conversation.


Ooooooo, finally, a "fact".



fjnmusic said:


> And that's a fact.


It doesn't matter in what tone the questions are asked. You don't answer them anyway. Eg, your exchange with MF on this very thread.



fjnmusic said:


> Until that changes, do not expect me to address many of your questions if at all.


Lessee...highlight, copy, paste:

I give what I get. Check the mirror...

I find it interesting that you don't see this. In your safe space thread, you conduct yourself in a most polite manner. You get out here in the real world & one of the first posts you make questions my maturity. Several posts later, you question MF's. Then, when I respond in kind, it's all my fault 'cause I ain't got no manners.

As always, distract from whatever the topic at hand is & place the blame on somebody else. Straight out of the Progressive Playbook.

Physician, heal thyself...



fjnmusic said:


> Learn some manners first.


----------



## fjnmusic

For those who are interested in such things, like "What's the Vision?" Again, find out for yourself at 3:00 today. Only four and a half hours away. Meanwhile, here's Graham Thompson's preview.

http://edmontonjournal.com/news/pol...o-introduce-its-first-truly-ndp-throne-speech


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

I'd hazard a guess that most of us on these boards would rather get our fingernails pulled out by a pair of pliers than listen to Rachel blow smoke up our kilts in some twisted version of a throne speech.

I'll be cleaning out the cat box, myself.

The subsequent online precis will be much easier to stomach...



fjnmusic said:


> For those who are interested in such things, like "What's the Vision?" Again, find out for yourself at 3:00 today.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> I'd hazard a guess that most of us on these boards would rather get our fingernails pulled out by a pair of pliers than listen to Rachel blow smoke up our kilts in some twisted version of a throne speech.
> 
> 
> 
> I'll be cleaning out the cat box, myself.
> 
> 
> 
> The subsequent online precis will be much easier to stomach...



Then don't bitch about how you don't know what her vision is. And don't expect me to translate it for you. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

I'm not. MF & I were both asking you if you knew what her vision is.

You don't.

And, don't flatter yourself. As I explicitly noted in my post, I'll pick it up online afterwards. It'll be a lot closer to reality that way...



fjnmusic said:


> Then don't bitch about how you don't know what her vision is. And don't expect me to translate it for you.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> I'm not. MF & I were both asking you if you knew what her vision is.
> 
> 
> 
> You don't.
> 
> 
> 
> And, don't flatter yourself. As I explicitly noted in my post, I'll pick it up online afterwards. It'll be a lot closer to reality that way...



High on negativity and full of ****e. An interesting though common combination.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

So much for the Dippers throne speech. From the Edmonton Journal:



> Critics said the economic action takes the form of ill-advised government intervention


 
Throne speech puts Alberta government focus on economy, jobs | Edmonton Journal


----------



## FeXL

As the head bull****ter on these boards, I'll have to defer to your vast knowledge...



fjnmusic said:


> High on negativity and full of ****e. An interesting though common combination.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> So much for the Dippers throne speech. From the Edmonton Journal:


Yep. The only ones patting themselves on the back over her economic policy are the Knotheads.

The rest of us are well & truly screwed.


----------



## SINC

FeXL said:


> Yep. The only ones patting themselves on the back over her economic policy are the Knotheads.
> 
> The rest of us are well & truly screwed.


Well, they do follow the NDP mantra. Throw money at it. OUR money.

Woe be the people of Alberta. 

'Cept unions of course. the fat cat packages, salaries and benefits will live on, never being touched by Rachel and her Notley crew.


----------



## CubaMark

SINC said:


> Well, they do follow the NDP mantra. Throw money at it. OUR money.


Funny how you are all up in arms about the NDP "throwing money" around. YOUR money.

It was the Conservative Party that ran up $12-billion in debt over the previous decade (when crude was at $100/barrel, double its current price), following Klein's "debt-free" declaration. Your gnashing of teeth must have been performed with cotton balls in your mouths, 'cause it sure wasn't as noisy as what you're making now.


----------



## Macfury

Selective hearing on you part.



CubaMark said:


> Funny how you are all up in arms about the NDP "throwing money" around. YOUR money.
> 
> It was the Conservative Party that ran up $12-billion in debt over the previous decade (when crude was at $100/barrel, double its current price), following Klein's "debt-free" declaration. Your gnashing of teeth must have been performed with cotton balls in your mouths, 'cause it sure wasn't as noisy as what you're making now.


----------



## fjnmusic

CubaMark said:


> Funny how you are all up in arms about the NDP "throwing money" around. YOUR money.
> 
> 
> 
> It was the Conservative Party that ran up $12-billion in debt over the previous decade (when crude was at $100/barrel, double its current price), following Klein's "debt-free" declaration. Your gnashing of teeth must have been performed with cotton balls in your mouths, 'cause it sure wasn't as noisy as what you're making now.



Remember the time Klein got pissed out of his skull (I know, which time?) and descended upon the poor homeless people at the Herb Jamison centre after midnight in Edmonton. He threw a bunch of loose pocket change at them and told them to get a job. Funny, but I thought he always said you can't just throw money at the problem. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Klein did it once, but the NDP do it all the time and just demonstrated their superior skills at it with this throne speech.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Klein did it once, but the NDP do it all the time and just demonstrated their superior skills at it with this throne speech.



Klein did it once THAT YOU KNOW ABOUT, but he used to get drunk and abusive on a fairly regular basis. He had special bodyguards just to keep him hidden from the public when he went on his benders. That was how he broke his ribs in a hot tub "accident" that time. 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...rable-moments/article10574416/?service=mobile


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Notley seems to govern in a drunken stupor without the influence of alcohol!



fjnmusic said:


> Klein did it once THAT YOU KNOW ABOUT, but he used to get drunk and abusive on a fairly regular basis. He had special bodyguards just to keep him hidden from the public when he went on his benders. That was how he broke his ribs in a hot tub "accident" that time.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Notley seems to govern in a drunken stupor without the influence of alcohol!



That comment is pretty ignorant. Care to explain yourself? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Seems straight forward to me. She governs like a drunk with no real thought or purpose. An excellent analogy for the entire NDP.


----------



## CubaMark

Some real winners at the #Kudatah gathering....

























(VICE)


----------



## fjnmusic

CubaMark said:


> Some real winners at the #Kudatah gathering....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (VICE)



Yup. These people are the kind of citizens we should be looking to for answers.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Seems straight forward to me. She governs like a drunk with no real thought or purpose. An excellent analogy for the entire NDP.


Exactly. She seems to be off-balance and rudderless.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Yup. These people are the kind of citizens we should be looking to for answers.


It's very easy to make fun of protesters who are exercising their democratic rights by singling out particular individuals. I remember the "progressive" Occupy Wall Street folks in Toronto who kept defecating in public.

Why not counter their ideas instead of poking fun at a few photos?


----------



## FeXL

Agreed...



fjnmusic said:


> Yup. These people are the kind of citizens we should be looking to for answers.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> It's very easy to make fun of protesters who are exercising their democratic rights by singling out particular individuals. I remember the "progressive" Occupy Wall Street folks in Toronto who kept defecating in public.
> 
> 
> 
> Why not counter their ideas instead of poking fun at a few photos?



Because the subject of this thread is the Alberta NDP who just began the Spring Legislative sitting yesterday. Nowhere near Toronto. Or had you not noticed?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> Why not counter their ideas instead of poking fun at a few photos?


Which ideas should we counter? The Nazi references to the NDP, the ones referring to a "final solution"? Or the woman with the "Let Parents Deside" - "Deside" what? Hope to god it's not a question about homeschooling....


----------



## Macfury

The Toronto protests were an example.



fjnmusic said:


> Because the subject of this thread is the Alberta NDP who just began the Spring Legislative sitting yesterday. Nowhere near Toronto. Or had you not noticed?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Because the subject of this thread is the Alberta NDP who just began the Spring Legislative sitting yesterday. Nowhere near Toronto. Or had you not noticed?


I certainly noticed that the subject matter of the thread raised by yourself was demonstrations against government. That opens the door to comparisons of similar demonstrations in other jurisdictions to use as comparisons and most certainly deserves consideration in this or any other thread where it becomes part of the discussion. To apply your logic would preclude discussion of the world price of oil in this thread as it is not 'made in Alberta.'


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> I certainly noticed that the subject matter of the thread raised by yourself was demonstrations against government. That opens the door to comparisons of similar demonstrations in other jurisdictions to use as comparisons and most certainly deserves consideration in this or any other thread where it becomes part of the discussion. To apply your logic would preclude discussion of the world price of oil in this thread as it is not 'made in Alberta.'



I didn't start this thread, Don. It was started by FeXL to keep track of those "pinko commie bastards."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> I didn't start this thread, Don. It was started by FeXL to keep track of those "pinko commie bastards."


I did not state you did start the thread, Frank. I meant you raised the current subject of discussion, namely demonstrations at the Alberta leg.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> I did not state you did start the thread, Frank. I meant you raised the current subject of discussion, namely demonstrations at the Alberta leg.



Indeed. The Alberta legislature, now being run by the pinko commie bastard NDP government. Nowhere near Toronto. So what does this demonstration have to do with the Occupy movement? Sounds like a pretty tenuous connection if there is one at all.

And really, this is one for Macfury to justify since he brought it up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

.


----------



## SINC

The Dippers still don't get it.


----------



## FeXL

So, FJN, having seen the throne speech, why don't you enlighten us with your comments about the NDP economic plan for the upcoming year? What effect do you think it will have on jobs?


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> So, FJN, having seen the throne speech, why don't you enlighten us with your comments about the NDP economic plan for the upcoming year? What effect do you think it will have on jobs?



Go right ahead. You know everything anyway. There's nothing I can teach you that wouldn't require an open mind. It's your thread; you explain the pinko commie bastard's agenda if you care so much. I'm bored of arguing with you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

You haven't committed to a single original thought about Notley's vision or government, fjn.



fjnmusic said:


> Go right ahead. You know everything anyway. There's nothing I can teach you that wouldn't require an open mind. It's your thread; you explain the pinko commie bastard's agenda if you care so much. I'm bored of arguing with you.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> You haven't committed to a single original thought about Notley's vision or government, fjn.



Why do you care so much what I think? I've contributed plenty. Why should I contribute more, just for your target practice? If you want to find out more, look it up. There's nothing stopping you. You're too bossy to actually discuss politics with. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

An' I'm gonna hold my bref 'til I turn blue!!!

Grow up, FJN. Just admit that you don't know & move on. It's not a crime...



fjnmusic said:


> You're too bossy to actually discuss politics with.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> An' I'm gonna hold my bref 'til I turn blue!!!
> 
> 
> 
> Grow up, FJN. Just admit that you don't know & move on. It's not a crime...



You are childish in your argumentative style. That's why I have no interest in explaining anything to you. You nitpick and call it discussion. Like I've said, there's not a lot of incentive for me. It ain't me that needs to grow up. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

By my count you haven't contributed so much as expressed your faith that Notley will turn things around. I can look at Notley's speech and see nothing hopeful for your province. That's why I'm asking your opinion. You must see something in these details that I do not.



fjnmusic said:


> Why do you care so much what I think? I've contributed plenty. Why should I contribute more, just for your target practice? If you want to find out more, look it up. There's nothing stopping you. You're too bossy to actually discuss politics with.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> By my count you haven't contributed so much as expressed your faith that Notley will turn things around. I can look at Notley's speech and see nothing hopeful for your province. That's why I'm asking your opinion. You must see something in these details that I do not.



Yes I do, but there is simply no way for me to convey that to you that you are going to understand. I've been to a rally where she spoke to the party faithful, and there is a great deal of support for Premier Notley and her party that you simply would fail to appreciate. What you hear about in the press and from wing nuts like George Clark and Ezra Levant is just a lot of sour grapes. Yes, there are many people who are unemployed in Alberta, due to the oil industry going into hibernation for a while. If and when the price of oil goes back up (and it inevitably will), the jobs will return. The gov't can't control that. What it can influence is perception, and right now, rightly or wrongly, Alberta suffers from the perception that it sells "dirty oil." One of the things both Notley and Trudeau are trying to do is change the perception by emphasizing environmental concerns. That may not matter to you, but it matters to a hell of a lot of other people we do business with. The old practice of raping the land just doesn't fly anymore. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Yep, this certainly makes me much more confident that Notley and her Dippers won't be playing favourites with unions. Yesssirrreee boy!

Wildrose attacks appointment of former top Alberta union official to lead government contract talks | Edmonton Journal

Notley has proven herself unbelievably stupid to even consider such a thing.


----------



## Macfury

Alberta oil just winds up in the pool of oil for sale. If you believe carbon taxes will make people buy Alberta oil--I appreciate that you expressed an opinion on it. I suppose that standing in a crowd with like-minded people might create a sense of euphoria about Notley and the NDP, but Albertans at large are not feeling it,

I suspect that jobs will return to the companies who are still left in Alberta after another three years have elapsed, but many of them will have moved permanently out-of-province. The carbon tax will make US shale oil even more competitive.




fjnmusic said:


> Yes I do, but there is simply no way for me to convey that to you that you are going to understand. I've been to a rally where she spoke to the party faithful, and there is a great deal of support for Premier Notley and her party that you simply would fail to appreciate. What you hear about in the press and from wing nuts like George Clark and Ezra Levant is just a lot of sour grapes. Yes, there are many people who are unemployed in Alberta, due to the oil industry going into hibernation for a while. If and when the price of oil goes back up (and it inevitably will), the jobs will return. The gov't can't control that. What it can influence is perception, and right now, rightly or wrongly, Alberta suffers from the perception that it sells "dirty oil." One of the things both Notley and Trudeau are trying to do is change the perception by emphasizing environmental concerns. That may not matter to you, but it matters to a hell of a lot of other people we do business with. The old practice of raping the land just doesn't fly anymore.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Yep, this certainly makes me much more confident that Notley and her Dippers won't be playing favourites with unions. Yesssirrreee boy!
> 
> 
> 
> Wildrose attacks appointment of former top Alberta union official to lead government contract talks | Edmonton Journal
> 
> 
> 
> Notley has proven herself unbelievably stupid to even consider such a thing.



Don, this man has 5 years experience on the union side and 20 years on management side from what I understand. Sounds pretty balanced to me. How does that not make him qualified to lead contract talks?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Don, this man has 5 years experience on the union side and 20 years on management side from what I understand. Sounds pretty balanced to me. How does that not make him qualified to lead contract talks?


Once a union man, always a union man. Now we will have the AUPE on both sides of the table negotiating with 'their own' man. A conflict of interest in the extreme.


----------



## SINC

*NDP would howl if the PC’s did this*



> Alberta’s New Democrat government is just about as ethically challenged as the tired old Tory government it replaced.
> 
> If the New Dems are still a little less entitled, privileged and patronage-happy, it’s only because they haven’t been at the trough as long.
> 
> Since assuming office last May, *the NDP have tried to give unilateral raises to senior bureaucrats, reinstate expensive out-of-country junkets for MLAs and twice — twice — hold fundraising events at which special access to the premier appeared to be on sale to those willing to make large donations to party coffers.*
> 
> There are also questions about Premier Rachel Notley’s presence at a Toronto fundraising dinner for the Ontario NDP. While corporations and unions are banned from making political donations in Alberta, companies and organizations that do business in Alberta paid nearly $10,000 to the Ontario wing of Notley’s party for an “intimate dinner” with her and Ontario NDP Leader Andrea Horwath.
> 
> *Then there are the little matters of Notley appointing failed NDP candidates and out-of-province lobbyists to plum posts in Alberta’s civil service and her government’s attempts to bar critical reporters from official government events.*
> 
> And they’ve have only been in office nine months!
> 
> But none of these examples trump two this week.
> 
> *Literally one day (this Monday) Kevin Davediuk is a contract negotiator for the Alberta Union of Provincial Employees (AUPE) and the next day Notley appoints him to be her chief advisor on negotiations with the AUPE and other public-sector unions.*
> 
> Imagine the howls from the NDP if the Tories had appointed an oil executive to be in charge of negotiations over new royalty rates.
> 
> *If you want to know what kind of pro-union activist Davediuk is, go to Google or YouTube and watch the video “Artspace Under Siege, June 11, 2014, morning Air Raid Siren.”*
> 
> Artspace is a housing co-op overlooking the North Saskatchewan just east of downtown Edmonton. It’s home to about 180 people, 30 of whom are disabled. The disabled residents collectively employ 30 caregivers who help them live independently.
> 
> *In the spring of 2014, AUPE (with Davediuk as negotiator) rejected a 15% wage increase and took the caregivers out on strike. Even though over 80% of Artspace’s residents were innocent bystanders to the dispute, they allege (AUPE denies) that picketers blockaded everyone’s vehicles as the came and went from their homes. They shouted insults and profanities in the faces of residents and visitors, and even (allegedly) intimidated families with children as they attempted to enter Artspace buildings.*
> 
> My favourite, though, was AUPE’s use of an air raid siren early one morning to disturb every resident whether they are party to the wage dispute or not. When a man nursing his sick child comes out to ask the AUPE siren cranker (not Davediuk, although witnesses claim he was there) to stop, the cranker curses the father out loudly and aggressively.
> 
> And now the Notley government wants us to believe taxpayers can trust Davediuk to protect their interests in upcoming wage talks with teachers, nurses, hospital workers and others.
> 
> *Also this week, the Wildrose alleged the NDP have been operating a secret campaign office (and using taxpayers’ money to do it) in the riding of former Tory MLA Manmeet Bhullar, who died last November in a highway accident.*
> 
> The government denies this is anything more than an outreach office to help its MLAs “connect with Calgarians.” And maybe that’s true.
> 
> But why are two of its employees well-known NDP campaigners? Why was it only opened after Bhullar’s death when a by-election became necessary? And what does it do that the outreach office in the premier’s downtown Calgary office can’t?
> 
> *None of this may be technically unethical. But it sure stinks.*


NDP would howl if the PCs did this | Columnists | Opinion | Edmonton Su


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> *NDP would howl if the PC’s did this*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NDP would howl if the PCs did this | Columnists | Opinion | Edmonton Su



Written by Gunter. None of this is unethical. Consider the source.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Written by Gunter. None of this is unethical. Consider the source.


Now why did I just know you would post something like that?

Lemme outline if for you Frank. 

You are on the outside looking in. Gunter is on the inside looking deeper than you ever can. He is there reporting on the Dippers every single day. His insight is far more factually based than your exposure can ever be.

Gunter 1 fjn 0


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Now why did I just know you would post something like that?
> 
> 
> 
> Lemme outline if for you Frank.
> 
> 
> 
> You are on the outside looking in. Gunter is on the inside looking deeper than you ever can. He is there reporting on the Dippers every single day. His insight is far more factually based than your exposure can ever be.
> 
> 
> 
> Gunter 1 fjn 0



Let me quote from the article you posted:

"None of this may be technically unethical."
– Lorne Gunter

So is he lying? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

He is acknowledging the reality of his examples. Lying? What a stretch. Like I noted, he is much closer to the facts than you.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> He is acknowledging the reality of his examples. Lying? What a stretch. Like I noted, he is much closer to the facts than you.



If the things he describes are not unethical, then what's the problem? There's plenty of things Klein did that stunk to high heaven, but that didn't make them illegal or unethical.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

No surprise here with a union government in charge. Screw the taxpayers and the economy, unions come first.

For Alberta government unions paycheques still going up | Opinion | Calgary Sun


----------



## SINC

*Ndp Fuelling Outrage -- As Well As Political Engagement That Could Be Their Demise
*


> The NDP deserves our thanks: Its often bumbling and cynical approach to governing Alberta has fuelled political engagement to a peak not seen since the early 1990s.
> 
> And judging by Wednesday's union-related shenanigans, the NDP seems to be doing whatever it can to build that peak so it fits nicely in the mountains of the Canadian Rockies. Mount BS.
> 
> The highlight, er, lowlight, of this week's opening day of a new legislative session was the revelation that the NDP had quietly hired away a veteran Alberta Union of Provincial Employees (AUPE) contract negotiator to, well, play a leading role in the government's union negotiations. "AUPE will be negotiating from both sides of the table with no representation for taxpayers," charged Wildrose MLA Derek Fildebrandt.
> 
> "There's no real conflict," Finance Minister Joe Ceci told reporters. "There's a perception of conflict."
> 
> Yes, Ceci! Yes, there is that perception. Now to get the NDP to understand that perception is reality. It's also troubling Davediuk wasn't hired through an open competition; he was appointed Tuesday as "chief adviser on negotiations" after leaving AUPE Monday. It was only mentioned in order papers passed late Tuesday. No announcement. No news conference. No answers, until someone noticed and called them on it.
> 
> He's the best man for the job, said Ceci. So good, one must suppose, the NDP didn't even need to hold an open competition for the plum position!
> 
> Ceci said Davediuk will simply bow out from negotiations that land him in a conflict of interest. Well, AUPE is Alberta's largest union. According to the government's website, approximately 75 percent of Alberta government employees are members of AUPE. So, Davediuk won't be part of an unknown portion of negotiations with three quarters of the government's workforce. Sound like that makes sense? I wonder whether the NDP knows yet just how much work he'll really be able to do. I hope they tell us freely.
> 
> This whole debacle reminds me of times Premier Rachel Notley would raise hell - and rightly so - from across the aisle over some of the Tory's hiring practices. Said Notley, back in 2013, after then-premier Alison Redford hired an energy industry giant as chair of the new Alberta Energy Regulator Board: "I have always been convinced that Alison Redford is in the pocket of Big Oil but I am personally shocked that she would be so open about it in this case," Notley said.
> 
> Let's change a couple words and tee this up for the opposition. Remember, one criticism of the NDP is the perception it's a union lapdog.
> 
> "I have always been convinced that (Rachel Notley) is in the pocket of (the unions) but I am personally shocked that she would be so open about it in this case."
> 
> Disappointing. Did Notley mean it when she said it back in 2013? Likely. Does she know hiring Davediuk now is just as shocking? She must.
> 
> Meanwhile, several hundred people (over a thousand by some counts) from around the province were outside the legislature Wednesday rallying against the Notley government, just the latest of many rallies. One placard in the crowd read Stand Up For Alberta. On another was written Rachel Notley Has To Go. Organizers said more than 164,000 people had signed a pair of petitions calling for plebiscites over pieces of government legislation. And a Wildrose petition in support of proposed recall legislation sat at 8,750 signatures Friday afternoon. The province hasn't seen this many upset, enraged and engaged Albertans since 1993 and the spending cuts that followed Ralph Klein's coronation as premier.
> 
> These people hope to make a difference. And it looks like the Dippers are doing everything they can to help.


Maudie: NDP fuelling outrage -- as well as political engagement that could be their demise | Opinion | Edmonton Sun


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> *Ndp Fuelling Outrage -- As Well As Political Engagement That Could Be Their Demise
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maudie: NDP fuelling outrage -- as well as political engagement that could be their demise | Opinion | Edmonton Sun



More BS from the right wing Edmonton Sun rag. Hardly surprising. Consider the source.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> More BS from the right wing Edmonton Sun rag. Hardly surprising. Consider the source


Truth hurts, eh?


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Truth hurts, eh?



If it were truth it might. But we're talking more editorials from the Sun. Not that far off from Ezra Levant. Consider the source. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Both the Sun and the Journal are owned and controlled and backed by Post Media. They hold equal sway in terms of their accuracy. Perhaps you forgot that fact when making your accusations against the validity of one or the other?


----------



## fjnmusic

Meet George Clark: the man behind the recent "kudatah" on March 8 at the Alberta Legislature, interviewed on the Ryan Jesperson Show on 630 CHED. 

http://omnyapp.com/shows/ryan-jespersen-show/jespersen-george-clark-in-the-hot-seat


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

The bottom line is that a vast majority of Albertans are pissed with Notley and the Dippers. Ask anyone you meet, read Twitter, read Facebook, check all local news stations and it is obvious the accidental government of Rachel Notley is doomed to one term and will be tossed in three short years.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> The bottom line is that a vast majority of Albertans are pissed with Notley and the Dippers. Ask anyone you meet, read Twitter, read Facebook, check all local news stations and it is obvious the accidental government of Rachel Notley is doomed to one term and will be tossed in three short years.



Again with that bull****e "accidental" government line. The NDP were elected with a sizeable majority, whether you accept it or not. The fact that some people may regret the way they voted now is irrelevant. That some people wish to blame the NDP for the fact that they are unemployed after choosing to work in a volatile industry is childish. Smart people find a backup plan. And if people were really as anti-NDP as you say, they would have voted Wildrose—there was nothing stop them. People voted in a majority NDP government in very large numbers across the province. You're just going to have to accept that at some point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Again with that bull****e "accidental" government line. The NDP were elected with a sizeable majority, whether you accept it or not. The fact that some people may regret the way they voted now is irrelevant.


Actually you are mistaken about two things, Yes, it was definitely an accidental election that backfired on Albertans and the fact they are now reviled is totally relevant. You must hang out with nothing but fellow Dippers or reject the obvious truth that exists that the NDP are not at all popular any longer in Alberta, save for Redmonton.

Proof to come next election.


----------



## Rps

Sinc, I'm not so sure if accidental is totally correct here, but your election reminds me of when Bob Rae and his crew won in Ontario ( where you living here then?). Rae won a " they other guys screwed up so much how bad can this guy be" election. Shortly after we found out. His problem, and much like Ms. Notley I think, is there was little to any cabinet experience or, more critically, member experience. The NDP in Ontario also did not have a legislative legacy base to draw on ( no prior ministers or critics ) I fear your guys have the same situation. The problem is you can not stop or turn the Titanic around in the short term.....I also believe they will be a one termed.


----------



## SINC

Rps said:


> The problem is you can not stop or turn the Titanic around in the short term.....I also believe they will be a one termed.


Which is exactly why Albertans made a mistake when vengeance against Prentice accidentally elected Notley and the single term will confirm that. Thousands have written me saying they made a mistake electing the NDP and since so many acted out of vengeance, the Dippers were 'accidentally' put in power. I and many other Albertans know that to be true. And no, I did not vote NDP.


----------



## fjnmusic

Rps said:


> Sinc, I'm not so sure if accidental is totally correct here, but your election reminds me of when Bob Rae and his crew won in Ontario ( where you living here then?). Rae won a " they other guys screwed up so much how bad can this guy be" election. Shortly after we found out. His problem, and much like Ms. Notley I think, is there was little to any cabinet experience or, more critically, member experience. The NDP in Ontario also did not have a legislative legacy base to draw on ( no prior ministers or critics ) I fear your guys have the same situation. The problem is you can not stop or turn the Titanic around in the short term.....I also believe they will be a one termed.



I hear what you're saying, Rps, certainly about inexperience. However, Lougheed's PC party had exactly the same kind of inexperience when they started and they ended up in power for 44 years (way too long for any party IMHO). This gov't was definitely not "accidental" because people could have voted Wildrose if they didn't like the PC's. Clearly they did not, and today, ten months later, the right wing parties are still in total disarray with not much in common. 

The problem for the NDP is that they came into power just as oil was tanking, our golden goose. That's probably why Prentice called the election a year too early according to the PC's own fixed election date "law." If oil were still up at say the $80 level, or if it returns there, everyone will be partying like drunken sailors again and the NDP will be saviours, even though it would just be attributable to lucky timing. How do you think Ralph Klein got to be so "great"? His gov't was definitely not great with handling money. He got lucky.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> This gov't was definitely not "accidental" because people could have voted Wildrose if they didn't like the PC's. Clearly they did not, and today, ten months later, the right wing parties are still in total disarray with not much in common.


They should not have anything in common. Again Wildrose was mistrusted because of the defection of is leader to the PCs. They would have won otherwise.




fjnmusic said:


> The problem for the NDP is that they came into power just as oil was tanking, our golden goose. That's probably why Prentice called the election a year too early according to the PC's own fixed election date "law." If oil were still up at say the $80 level, or if it returns there, everyone will be partying like drunken sailors again and the NDP will be saviours...


No partying. The economy will never recover fully or perform as it did given the heavy hand of the NDP regime. People will wonder where the energy companies went and why the new $80 doesn't feel like the old $80. 

Notley will call a royalty review that will further drive business out of the province.

I lived the Bob Rae nightmare and Notley is Rae on speed.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> They should not have anything in common. Again Wildrose was mistrusted because of the defection of is leader to the PCs. They would have won otherwise.



That is such a ridiculous statement. If they hadn't lost or had poor leadership they would have won. What you're really saying is that neither the PC's nor the WR's were viable choices to lead the province. Which is funny because that's exactly what I've been saying and what most Albertans believed on May 5 of last year as well. How the ND's will perform in three years is sort of irrelevant at the moment. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

No. WR Was a viable choice. It simply wasn't trusted following the defection to the PCs.



fjnmusic said:


> That is such a ridiculous statement. If they hadn't lost or had poor leadership they would have won. What you're really saying is that neither the PC's nor the WR's were viable choices to lead the province. Which is funny because that's exactly what I've been saying and what most Albertans believed on May 5 of last year as well. How the ND's will perform in three years is sort of irrelevant at the moment.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Yep and the NDP are relevant in the minds of Albertans right now, plotting how badly they can destroy them at the polls in three years.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> No. WR Was a viable choice. It simply wasn't trusted following the defection to the PCs.



Listen to yourself. If they weren't trusted they weren't a viable choice. If they hadn't lost they could have won.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Perhaps you don't understand the meaning of "viable." They were _"capable of working successfully" _as a government. However, their leader made them appear untrustworthy by siding with the PCs.



fjnmusic said:


> Listen to yourself. If they weren't trusted they weren't a viable choice. If they hadn't lost they could have won.


----------



## SINC

More truth than politicians want to hear.

Carbon pricing's fatal flaw | Opinion | Toronto Sun


----------



## SINC

.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Perhaps you don't understand the meaning of "viable." They were _"capable of working successfully" _as a government. However, t...heir leader made them appear untrustworthy by siding with the PCs.



I think you blame Danielle Smith far too much for the fall of the Wildrose. There were at least a dozen turncoats. If the party wasn't viable, they weren't viable. They probably still aren't.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

I maintain they were viable, but simply were not elected.



fjnmusic said:


> I think you blame Danielle Smith far too much for the fall of the Wildrose. There were at least a dozen turncoats. If the party wasn't viable, they weren't viable. They probably still aren't.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> I think you blame Danielle Smith far too much for the fall of the Wildrose. There were at least a dozen turncoats. If the party wasn't viable, they weren't viable. They probably still aren't.


Had Danielle not defected, she would be premier today, hands down.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Had Danielle not defected, she would be premier today, hands down.



If she was so great, she should have been premier no matter what she did. Clearly she was not so great. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

That's nonsense. Politics is as much happenstance as it might be talent. In Notley's case it is happenstance minus talent.




fjnmusic said:


> If she was so great, she should have been premier no matter what she did. Clearly she was not so great.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## eMacMan

Pretty much echos what I have more concisely said in various greenhouse gas threads.

Carbon pricing's fatal flaw | Goldstein | Columnists | Opinion | Toronto Sun

Carbon taxes, and Cap and Trade rob from the poor and give to the rich. They're just Trickle Down economics on steroids.


----------



## SINC

Maudie: NDP fuelling outrage -- as well as political engagement that could be their demise | Opinion | Edmonton Sun


----------



## SINC

Medicine Hat mayor frustrated after second oil company pulls out | Alberta | New


----------



## SINC

The Dippers are paying this guy $600,000 for six months work.

Alberta hires energy executive as point person for plan to transition off coal | Globalnews.ca


----------



## SINC

Alberta coal producers fire back at report questioning plant shutdown payout | Financial Post


----------



## SINC

The Dippers never learn to quit meddling and supporting unions. Let the poor sick bastards die, we must allow strikes. One can only hope cabinet gets ill during a strike.

Alberta public sector workers to be allowed to strike under proposed legislation - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## Macfury

It' a slam dunk for the unions for the next three years. 



SINC said:


> The Dippers never learn to quit meddling and supporting unions. Let the poor sick bastards die, we must allow strikes. One can only hope cabinet gets ill during a strike.
> 
> Alberta public sector workers to be allowed to strike under proposed legislation - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## SINC

They just don't get it. Or do they care little about carbon and more about cash?

Carbon pricing: Poorer, not greener | Opinion | Toronto Sun


----------



## FeXL

You a bettin' man, FJN?

I look forward to the NDP having their asses handed to them in this, the second byelection since they stumbled into power.

Gunter: Calgary byelection will speak volumes about true support for Alberta NDP



> On March 22, the second byelection of the NDP era will be held in the Calgary-Greenway constituency.
> 
> The NDP lost to Wildrose in a by-lection in Calgary-Foothills last September. Another NDP loss on Tuesday would indicate that beyond Edmonton, the New Democrats were nothing more than the party many voters went to to oust the old, tired Tory dynasty.
> 
> *If they lose again, we’ll know pretty conclusively that the NDP weren’t elected for who they were (democratic socialists with obsessions for spending, taxes and climate change) but for who they weren’t (the Prentice Tories).*


M'bold.

Yep.

However, there is one observation he makes that I must emphatically disagree with:



> Wildrose and the Tories have to get together for the good of the province.


No. Absolutely not. The only difference between the Alberta PC's of today & last year is that Prentice is gone. Not nearly enough change of guard...


----------



## SINC

Oh my, what a surprise. The Dippers are dip chits.

Stay out of decisions about who covers Alberta legislature, government told - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## SINC

Ho hum, another sure thing.

NDP won’t be re-elected, predict two-thirds of Albertans in new poll | Calgary Herald


----------



## SINC

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/blogs/troubled-waters-alberta-s-self-inflicted-wounds

Troubled Waters—Alberta’s self-inflicted wounds


----------



## SINC

Yep, it is the Dipper way . . .

Socialist minister wants to freeze out private labs


----------



## SINC

Evidence is mounting showing the Alberta NDP are One-Hit Wonders


----------



## fjnmusic

Feeling like an echo chamber lately, Don? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Feeling like an echo chamber lately, Don?


It isn't an echo chamber at all. I just thought agreeing with all of Don's posts was becoming superfluous. I read each of the links.


----------



## SINC

The only echo chamber you will be concerned with is the empty seats in the legislature that used to host NDP butts come the next provincial election. Yhey are grinding themselves into oblivion every passing day with one bad policy after another including this asinine debacle.

Rapping Alberta mom blasts transgender student guidelines, raises international eyebrows - Calgary - CBC News


----------



## FeXL

So, FJN, NDP placed 4th behind the Liberals in the by-election.

You may consider this a portend of things to come in three years.

Nah, nah, nah, nah,
Hey, hey,
Goodbye...



FeXL said:


> You a bettin' man, FJN?
> 
> I look forward to the NDP having their asses handed to them in this, the second byelection since they stumbled into power.


----------



## SINC

Salary freeze announced at Alberta's agencies, boards and commissions - Edmonton - CBC News

Didja notice? Not (ley). One. Single. Union. Member. Affected?


----------



## SINC

Frankly this Notley out of province pinko commie imports to run our province is getting sickening.

B.C. pipeline protester takes senior role in Rachel Notley’s Calgary office | Financial Post

Editorial: Notley’s image problem | Calgary Herald


----------



## SINC

The dimwit Dippers just don't get it.

Klassen: NDP’s power plan is dim | Calgary Herald


----------



## SINC

Whoops!

Oops! Hotel receipt links Notley NDP staffer to environmental lobby group at government meeting


----------



## SINC

The sheer stupidity and economic hardship on Albertans by killing coal based power. idiots, every last one of them.

Alberta NDP’s plan to phase out coal could triple power bills: Coal Association | Globalnews.ca


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> The sheer stupidity and economic hardship on Albertans by killing coal based power. idiots, every last one of them.
> 
> Alberta NDP’s plan to phase out coal could triple power bills: Coal Association | Globalnews.ca


This is all ideologically based. They don't care about how it affects people.


----------



## SINC

Stupidity in risking bad folks to bad groups.

Oops! Hotel receipt links Notley NDP staffer to environmental lobby group at government meeting - The Rebel


----------



## FeXL

So, FJN, Saskatchewan has a provincial election come Monday.

You a betting man? What's chances that the NDP are going to win over Brad Wall's Saskatchewan Party? Especially since Rachel & the Knotheads have done such a bang-up job next door for nearly a year? Think that'll have any influence on the outcome? I do.

Was in Saskatoon over Easter weekend. Saw Saskatchewan Party signs all over the place, in the country, small towns & the cities.

I give the NDP 3 chances: small chance, slim chance, no chance.

What say you?


----------



## SINC

FeXL said:


> I give the NDP 3 chances: small chance, slim chance, no chance.
> 
> What say you?


Aren't those the chances of the Alberta Knotley heads being re-elected as well?


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Aren't those the chances of the Alberta Knotley heads being re-elected as well?


Yeppers...


----------



## SINC

Yep, Dippers do more damage than good.

Fildebrandt and Panda: Let the market drive diversification, not politicians | Calgary Herald


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Yep, Dippers do more damage than good.


They hit the nail on the head when they say, much like I've repeated on these boards, gov't has no business being in business.


----------



## FeXL

What's this? 

Hey, FJN, you a betting man?

Apparently there's another provincial election on the horizon. April 19, Manitoba is going to kick out the NDP! Woohoo!!!

Tories ahead at halfway point



> The Liberals are stumbling, the NDP effort lacks spark and the Progressive Conservatives appear to be cruising to victory.
> 
> Those are conclusions of a panel of political experts interviewed by the _Free Press_ as the Manitoba election campaign reaches its midway point today.
> 
> They say while the result isn’t carved in stone — a scandal could arise or PC Leader Brian Pallister could make a deadly error in one of several upcoming leadership debates — *a pattern has developed that, if unchecked, would see a wave of Tory blue sweep the province April 19.*


Go PC's!!!

And, in three years, 

Nah, nah, nah, nah,
Hey, hey, 
Goodbye

to Rachel & Camp!!! :clap::clap::clap:

I just hope the thousands of dollars that you & your family are going to pay for each and every year of the Knothead's Carbon Tax was worth this little dalliance with Progressive politics.

'Cause I'll tell ya right now, you won't be getting that money back with a raise. Not in this economy. There will be revolutionary war if the unions get a raise when there are a fresh 100,000 unemployed oil workers in the province.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> So, FJN, Saskatchewan has a provincial election come Monday.
> 
> 
> 
> You a betting man? What's chances that the NDP are going to win over Brad Wall's Saskatchewan Party? Especially since Rachel & the Knotheads have done such a bang-up job next door for nearly a year? Think that'll have any influence on the outcome? I do.
> 
> 
> 
> Was in Saskatoon over Easter weekend. Saw Saskatchewan Party signs all over the place, in the country, small towns & the cities.
> 
> 
> 
> I give the NDP 3 chances: small chance, slim chance, no chance.
> 
> 
> 
> What say you?




I don't really pay attention to Saskatchewan politics. But I hear Brad Wall has many admirers.


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> I don't really pay attention to Saskatchewan politics. But I hear Brad Wall has many admirers.


There is a reason Wall has so many admirers. Brad Wall represents everything Rachel Notley does not.


----------



## FeXL

Hey, FJN, Wall's been re-elected in a landslide & the NDP head lost his seat!

Premier Brad Wall: You can expect a government that's proud of oil and gas in this province



> Speaking to a room of fired up Saskatchewan party faithful, newly re-elected Premier Brad Wall was blunt about his government's support for the energy, mining, and farming sectors.


What part dya s'pose Rachel's performance for the last 11 months next door played in this outcome?

Do you think it was her complete lack of support for energy? Or do you think it was her complete absence of support for farm _owners?_ Perhaps her multi-billion dollar a year taxpayer funded Carbon Tax?

Which of these do you think will most contribute to Rachel's exodus in 3 years?

Jes' askin'...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Hey, FJN, Wall's been re-elected in a landslide & the NDP head lost his seat!


Notley should make road improvements on border roads, so that the oil and gas equipment leaving Alberta for Saskatchewan won't be damaged by potholes. Great "make work" project.


----------



## zen.state

A general question to all... how is a Canadian Mac forum such a hotbed for so many ultra-conservative people?

Wouldn't a political forum be a better place to show how backward you are? Just saying.


----------



## Macfury

zen.state said:


> A general question to all... how is a Canadian Mac forum such a hotbed for so many ultra-conservative people?
> 
> Wouldn't a political forum be a better place to show how backward you are? Just saying.


The backward material promotes "progressivisim" and can be found in the "Progressive Thread." Enjoy!


----------



## zen.state

Progressivism and conservatism contradict each other, so I simply don't buy the progressive angle.

Alberta was clearly over the PC party when the NDP was elected. I was shocked that they didn't go farther right with Wild Rose.

Anyway, most people tend to hide their worst qualities, but conservatives seem to think it's their duty to show everyone how inhumane they are.

I have said this before, but just to remind those who forget, I am not on the left either. I believe in doing what is right for the nation and it's people, and that takes ideas from the right and left, along with everything in between. 

I'm sure you have all had disagreements with the parties or politicians you do support, and the issue with political lines is that most often feel obligated to blind support with some things they don't agree with. In fact, if you're clearly on the far left or right then there is no need to ever state how you feel, because it's obvious without your input. 

Is the moderate intellectual dead? I never meet many others. Do what is humanly, nationally and internationally right, not what yes men tell you to do and think.


----------



## Dr.G.

zen.state said:


> Progressivism and conservatism contradict each other, so I simply don't buy the progressive angle.
> 
> Alberta was clearly over the PC party when the NDP was elected. I was shocked that they didn't go farther right with Wild Rose.
> 
> Anyway, most people tend to hide their worst qualities, but conservatives seem to think it's their duty to show everyone how inhumane they are.
> 
> I have said this before, but just to remind those who forget, I am not on the left either. I believe in doing what is right for the nation and it's people, and that takes ideas from the right and left, along with everything in between.
> 
> I'm sure you have all had disagreements with the parties or politicians you do support, and the issue with political lines is that most often feel obligated to blind support with some things they don't agree with. In fact, if you're clearly on the far left or right then there is no need to ever state how you feel, because it's obvious without your input.
> 
> Is the moderate intellectual dead? I never meet many others. Do what is humanly, nationally and internationally right, not what yes men tell you to do and think.


Valid points, zen.state, especially your concluding comment.


----------



## FeXL

I have a question back. Who on these boards do you think is ultra-conservative? Feel free to name names, I don't think anybody will be offended.



zen.state said:


> A general question to all... how is a Canadian Mac forum such a hotbed for so many ultra-conservative people?


----------



## FeXL

What about the PC's do you think made them lose favour?



zen.state said:


> Alberta was clearly over the PC party when the NDP was elected.


Compared to the current Alberta PC's, yes, Wildrose is further right. If you go back to say, the Klein PC's, Wildrose is pretty close. Wildrose now is where the Alberta PC's should be.



zen.state said:


> I was shocked that they didn't go farther right with Wild Rose.


----------



## FeXL

This is entirely unnecessary...



zen.state said:


> Wouldn't a political forum be a better place to show how backward you are? Just saying.


----------



## zen.state

FeXL said:


> I have a question back. Who on these boards do you think is ultra-conservative? Feel free to name names, I don't think anybody will be offended.


The main ones that come to mind are you and SINC. There are others, but I'm basing this on what I have seen here over the last few years, and forget many of the people's name on here. This is also my first visit since mid-2014.

I just notice a lot of conservative ideals shared here, and you especially seem quite extreme. I could be wrong, but that's what you put out there calling the NDP commies. I disagree with a lot of their thinking, but would certainly never call them commies.

Do you consider Scandinavian nations as a bunch of commies also?


----------



## FeXL

First off, welcome back.

Fair enough. Thank you for your candor.

I won't speak for SINC but I think SINC is probably somewhat more conservative than me. Frankly, I can't think of a single person on these boards, past or present, who would qualify as ultra-conservative. 

As for myself...

Few years back I ran across one of those online political tests, whereby you answer a series of questions & your "rating" shows up at the end. For a laugh I answered the questions as truthfully as I could (I seem to recall 20 or 30 questions, thought it was reasonably thorough) & was somewhat surprised when the analysis came back, "Libertarian". I'd heard the term before but was somewhat unclear as to the true definition. After I researched a bit more, I would say that there are definitely libertarian tendencies in my political makeup. It would be accurate to say there are also a number of conservative values. In addition, without getting into any detail, there are a select few things which I agree with from a liberal perspective. I'd draw a line at probably 85% conservative/libertarian values and 15% liberal values, ±. As to exactly how strong my conservative views are, on a scale from 1-5, with one being centrist and 5 being ultra-conservative, I'd put myself between about 2 and 2-1/2.

Surprised?

That popping sound you hear is Progressive heads on these boards exploding.

In addition, that probably hasn't changed much over the years. I did not have the liberal youth/conservative middle age changeover that some speak of.



zen.state said:


> The main ones that come to mind are you and SINC. There are others, but I'm basing this on what I have seen here over the last few years, and forget many of the people's name on here. This is also my first visit since mid-2014.
> 
> I just notice a lot of conservative ideals shared here, and you especially seem quite extreme.


The NDP are derived from the old CCF, who were full socialist (they wanted to eliminate capitalism entirely) and had more than a few communistic tendencies. That's why I call them commies.



zen.state said:


> I could be wrong, but that's what you put out there calling the NDP commies. I disagree with a lot of their thinking, but would certainly never call them commies.


The only Scandinavian country I'm even remotely informed on is Norway. I'd call them socialists but they are similar to us in that they have a constitutional monarchy & prime minister. 



zen.state said:


> Do you consider Scandinavian nations as a bunch of commies also?


----------



## fjnmusic

zen.state said:


> A general question to all... how is a Canadian Mac forum such a hotbed for so many ultra-conservative people?
> 
> 
> 
> Wouldn't a political forum be a better place to show how backward you are? Just saying.



Thank you for noticing, kind internet stranger! You'd think they'd be PC users with all the conservative minded views they express.


----------



## zen.state

The main thing the NDP need to do is grow some stones. They're too soft.


----------



## Macfury

I largely support the Ontario PCs and the federal Conservatives because they're the only parties who represent my interests even part of the time. However, I thought Stephen Harper's government spent too much and did not cut worthless bureaucracy deeply enough. I don't believe in any corporate welfare--ever. So there are significant differences between me and the parties I might vote for.

If someone could prove to me that a guaranteed minimum income program could achieve an efficiency that would save money by eliminating all other programs, I would probably support it.

Like FeXL, I recall seeing the NDP platform papers in the early 1980s. If those platform planks had been enacted, we would have been two-thirds on the way to communism.




zen.state said:


> The main ones that come to mind are you and SINC. There are others, but I'm basing this on what I have seen here over the last few years, and forget many of the people's name on here. This is also my first visit since mid-2014.
> 
> I just notice a lot of conservative ideals shared here, and you especially seem quite extreme. I could be wrong, but that's what you put out there calling the NDP commies. I disagree with a lot of their thinking, but would certainly never call them commies.
> 
> Do you consider Scandinavian nations as a bunch of commies also?


----------



## CubaMark

zen.state said:


> The main thing the NDP need to do is grow some stones. They're too soft.


Agreed. Mulcair's vision of the NDP was crafted for electability - or what he thought was electability, exactly at a time when Canadians wanted something as far from Harper's Conservatives as possible.



MacFury said:


> Like FeXL, I recall seeing the NDP platform papers in the early 1980s. If those platform planks had been enacted, we would have been two-thirds on the way to communism.


Doubtful. Our "good neighbours" south of the border surely would have intervened, one way or another, to ensure that didn't happen.


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> Doubtful. Our "good neighbours" south of the border surely would have intervened, one way or another, to ensure that didn't happen.


I had always counted on that safety valve.


----------



## zen.state

Macfury:

You once identified as a libertarian, which makes sense. Libertarians are typically right-minded, but just hate all the sketchy stuff that regular conservatives tolerate. In fact, libertarians are the ones I identify most with on the right.

Government, at least in Canada, should be smaller, and in turn we would pay less tax, and use the tax we would still pay on worthy things.

I think our military should be MUCH larger, but only for defensive purposes. Russia cannot be trusted, and we shouldn't be so reliant on NATO and NORAD. What better way to help the unemployment rate in Canada, and also the international trade market, by increasing military equipment and soldiers/sailors/airforce personnel. 

Also, lets put the Bank of Canada back in control of our money. Seriously.

Anyway... back to Alberta politics.


----------



## Macfury

I am still libertarian, but any libertarian I might vote for has only made a half-hearted effort at being elected. This why I say that PCs and Conservatives occasionally represent my views. But not most of the time.

If we eliminated corporate welfare and the massive bureaucracy that supports it, I believe there would be plenty of money left over for social programs--and the overall tax burden would be much lighter. I may not support the idea of those programs, but if you cut my taxes by one quarter, I would not complain to much if you increased the social welfare budget.



zen.state said:


> Macfury:
> 
> You once identified as a libertarian, which makes sense. Libertarians are typically right-minded, but just hate all the sketchy stuff that regular conservatives tolerate. In fact, libertarians are the ones I identify most with on the right.
> 
> Government, at least in Canada, should be smaller, and in turn we would pay less tax, and use the tax we would still pay on worthy things.
> 
> I think our military should be MUCH larger, but only for defensive purposes. Russia cannot be trusted, and we shouldn't be so reliant on NATO and NORAD.
> 
> Anyway... back to Alberta politics.


----------



## Dr.G.

"If we eliminated corporate welfare and the massive bureaucracy that supports it, I believe there would be plenty of money left over for social programs--and the overall tax burden would be much lighter. I may not support the idea of those programs, but if you cut my taxes by one quarter, I would not complain to much if you increased the social welfare budget."

:clap: Well said, mon ami. Paix.


----------



## zen.state

I think the best way to tax corporations is to purely base it on how many jobs they create, and literally nothing else. A standard like how many employees per 1 million grossed or netted. Something to keep the size of the company out of the equation.

Companies that employ a lower rate of people will pay higher tax. I can all but guarantee that would help the economy through employee taxes alone.


----------



## Dr.G.

zen.state said:


> I think the best way to tax corporations is to purely base it on how many jobs they create, and literally nothing else. A standard like how many employees per 1 million grossed or netted. Something to keep the size of the company out of the equation.


I guess that view eliminates giving tax breaks to companies that export jobs out of Canada. Welcome to the cause, mon ami. :clap: 

Ford's $2.5B engine plant to be built in Mexico - Business - CBC News


----------



## SINC

So very true.


----------



## Dr.G.

SINC said:


> So very true.


Just saw this ..............


----------



## FeXL

Dr.G. said:


> Just saw this ..............


Yep. Passed through the second one two weekends ago on the Trans-Canada at Walsh coming back from Saskatoon. I see it's grown since then.

I think the first one is 'Shopped. There weren't no fence...


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> If someone could prove to me that a guaranteed minimum income program could achieve an efficiency that would save money by eliminating all other programs, I would probably support it.


I've been reading a bit about this. Wasn't it Sweden who was going to implement it? Interesting idea, in the face of eliminating all other forms of welfare. Like to see the numbers.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> I've been reading a bit about this. Wasn't it Sweden who was going to implement it? Interesting idea, in the face of eliminating all other forms of welfare. Like to see the numbers.


Not sure who has tried it. I once did a rudimentary number crunch on the US and the numbers seemed to work out. The cost of delivering these programs is huge, so they need to fire every one of the people who are delivering these programs and collapse the bureaucracy as well. Of course, that means things like eliminating public housing--you use your income to rent or buy like everyone else.


----------



## Dr.G.

FeXL said:


> Yep. Passed through the second one two weekends ago on the Trans-Canada at Walsh coming back from Saskatoon. I see it's grown since then.
> 
> I think the first one is 'Shopped. There weren't no fence...


Refugees from Alberta most likely tore it down in their attempt to flee to SK. Premier Brad Wall was just being interviewed on CBC and said that he would get Alberta to pay for a new wall to keep the folks out of SK. He threatened to send rats across the SK/AB border.


----------



## SINC

This makes one wonder if the Dippers are trying to force all suppliers to AHS to be union firms, among a slew of other concerns.

Former Alberta Health Services CEO Vickie Kaminski says she resigned due to NDP political interference - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## FeXL

Dr.G. said:


> He threatened to send rats across the SK/AB border.


Too late...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Too late...


Thankfully, they already have the vermin isolated in the Edmonton area...


----------



## SINC

Knotley had nothing to say that instilled any confidence in her band of Dippers last night during her address on TV. It was little more than a taxpayer expense aimed at bolstering the federal NDP meeting currently being held in Edmonton.

And Canadian scientists agree as well:

Top Canadian scientists call foul on oilsands monitoring changes | Globalnews.ca


----------



## Macfury

I guess the scientists were not union members.



SINC said:


> Knotley had nothing to say that instilled any confidence in her band of Dippers last night during her address on TV. It was little more than a taxpayer expense aimed at bolstering the federal NDP meeting currently being held in Edmonton.
> 
> And Canadian scientists agree as well:
> 
> Top Canadian scientists call foul on oilsands monitoring changes | Globalnews.ca


----------



## SINC

This is so very true for first time NDP voters who made a terrible mistake.


----------



## SINC

Lol, but true enough.


----------



## SINC

+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## FeXL

Graham Thomson: After a warm embrace, NDP delegates stab Rachel Notley in the back

Rachel probably thought it would be a positive thing to host the federal NDP convention in Edmonchuck. The actual good news is, it formed & pounded another nail in the coffin of Alberta NDP's.



> On Saturday, they embraced Premier Rachel Notley.
> 
> On Sunday, they stabbed her in the back.
> 
> Delegates to the federal NDP convention in Edmonton are a fickle lot.
> 
> They resoundingly rejected Thomas Mulcair, choosing instead to launch a leadership race to find his successor. And after listening to Notley give an impassioned speech about the need to help Alberta build more oil pipelines, delegates did the opposite.
> 
> They supported a motion involving the “Leap Manifesto,” a radical document from activists within the party calling on Canada to, among other things, wean itself off fossil fuels within a generation. The manifesto is not pipeline friendly, to put it mildly.


I first posted about the "Leap Manifesto" back in September.

And now, that stigma is smeared all over Rachel, despite her protestations to the contrary.

Nah, nah, nah, nah,
Hey, hey...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Graham Thomson: After a warm embrace, NDP delegates stab Rachel Notley in the back
> 
> Rachel probably thought it would be a positive thing to host the federal NDP convention in Edmonchuck. The actual good news is, it formed & pounded another nail in the coffin of Alberta NDP's.


Lie with dogs, wake up with fleas...


----------



## FeXL

As always, Rex nails it.

Rex Murphy: Dumping on Alberta in its own backyard



> What an odd thing it is for the New Democratic Party to hold its national convention in Edmonton this weekend, since Alberta, as all Canada knows, is facing dire economic times due to the slump in its oil industry. And yet, before the convention even began, the party’s current leader, Tom Mulcair, announced quite enthusiastically that, should his party adopt a policy of “leaving fossil fuels in the ground,” he, as a CBC headline put it, “will do everything” to keep them there.
> 
> Is this really a message to be highlighted in Edmonton? Was Salt Spring Island, B.C., not available for the meet? Or the Sierra Club’s home offices? What about Al Gore’s palatial compound? Why go to Alberta with the proclaimed attitude that, if things are bad now for your major industry, let’s see if we can make them worse? Would Mulcair go to Oshawa or Windsor, Ont., to proclaim he’s open to banning automobiles? How about to Saint John, N.B., to put a hold on shipbuilding? *The ironies summoned are staggering.*


M'bold.

Yep.

More:



> Alberta’s cardinal industry is in tatters: more than 100,000 jobs have been lost, its revenues have fallen off the cliff, and what little hope the industry has is being strangled by the fevered and irrational opposition to any pipeline — north, south, east or west — that might restore at least a few jobs. *And here is the NDP, having been blasted to also-ran status in the recent election, heading to the one province dependent on the energy industry with a pre-packaged pledge to do all it can to suffocate what’s left of that industry.*


M'bold.

Ra-chel! Ra-chel! Ra-chel! beejacon


----------



## FeXL

Only 3 more years...

I guess Broten couldn't talk someone into resigning their $95K/year job so he could fill their seat.



> He resigned as leader of SaskNDP today


A very telling statement on the mindset of the commune. I thought that everything that was yours is mine, too...


----------



## SINC

Alberta's Dippers. Too stupid to learn from their own party's mistakes in Manitoba. 

How Manitoba's 'green' power dream became a nightmare of runaway costs


----------



## heavyall

SINC said:


> Alberta's Dippers. Too stupid to learn from their own party's mistakes in Manitoba.
> 
> How Manitoba's 'green' power dream became a nightmare of runaway costs


It really is astounding how badly the NDP bungled that here. Instead of seeing the Hydro *power* for what it was (a clean revenue stream), they instead looked at the goose itself and proceeded to cook it. They siphoned billions of dollars out of the company (putting it deep into debt) and used it for pet projects with no-tender, cost-plus contracts.

Four more sleeps and we finally get rid of the NDP economic boat anchor in Manitoba!


----------



## Macfury

heavyall said:


> It really is astounding how badly the NDP bungled that here. Instead of seeing the Hydro *power* for what it was (a clean revenue stream), they instead looked at the goose itself and proceeded to cook it. They siphoned billions of dollars out of the company (putting it deep into debt) and used it for pet projects with no-tender, cost-plus contracts.
> 
> Four more sleeps and we finally get rid of the NDP economic boat anchor in Manitoba!


Looking forward to what looks like a stunning PC majority in Manitoba. Happy to see that because he and Brad Wall can put up a firewall against some of Trudeau's insane policies that require provincial support.


----------



## SINC

A year of Notley and we still suffer from the wisdom of Rachel.


----------



## FeXL

Is this what it appears to be?

Red Rose Country



> If true, this is a 'little' incendiary. Leftist 'democracy' in action. Calling Andrew Coyne.
> 
> The NDP pre-prepared a "ruling" for the "neutral" speaker to read in their favour, then accidentally gave it to @RicMcIver instead.​
> Just before Ric was thrown out of the Alberta Legislature:
> 
> Vid: MLA Ric McIver furious after the speaker apparently ruled on his point of order before debate​


Why would the Speaker of the House have a prepared statement prior to debate?


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Is this what it appears to be?
> 
> 
> 
> Red Rose Country
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why would the Speaker of the House have a prepared statement prior to debate?



Seems legit.


----------



## FeXL

Hey, FJN, Federal NDP in third, Saskatchewan NDP gone, Manitoba NDP just got the shoe, what's Rachel's chances in another 3 years?

Conservatives win majority in Manitoba



> Manitobans gave Progressive Conservative Leader Brian Pallister one of the province’s most resounding political victories in decades Tuesday, handing Greg Selinger defeat and ending almost 17 years of NDP rule.


I was out on the Hawg last nite & I heard the cheer from the east over the exhaust.

More:



> The size of Mr. Selinger’s defeat comes partly from the NDP’s move to the left of the political spectrum under his premiership, according to Paul Thomas, a professor emeritus of political science at the University of Manitoba.
> 
> *Former NDP premier Gary Doer kept the party tied to the centre for his decade in power, from 1999 to 2009. He reduced income taxes and posted a string of balanced budgets – turning in a surplus every year but one. While Mr. Doer was constrained, Mr. Selinger has instead embraced bigger deficits, sidestepping balanced-budget rules once considered sacrosanct.*


M'bold.

This is why Rachel doesn't stand a snowballs' hope in hell of coming back. I don't care what oil does, you can't form an election platform on a history of billions of dollars of BS carbon tax, a deficit that jumps a billion dollars every time she opens her mouth and the promise of a balanced budget that gets pushed back another year with every press release. _Especially_ in Alberta...


----------



## Macfury

Yep. Hoping that an oil price spike will put lipstick on the NDP pig is a sad dream. If prices rise, Albertans will realize how little those prices are helping them in an economy thrown into shambles by the Notley crew.



FeXL said:


> This is why Rachel doesn't stand a snowballs' hope in hell of coming back. I don't care what oil does, you can't form an election platform on a history of billions of dollars of BS carbon tax, a deficit that jumps a billion dollars every time she opens her mouth and the promise of a balanced budget that gets pushed back another year with every press release. _Especially_ in Alberta...


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Yep. Hoping that an oil price spike will put lipstick on the NDP pig is a sad dream. If prices rise, Albertans will realize how little those prices are helping them in an economy thrown into shambles by the Notley crew.


Plus, the second oil revenues start rolling in she won't be able to resist the pathological urge to spend, spend, spend, even more.


----------



## FeXL

Turns out math really IS hard for the Alta. NDP



> It was a year ago this week that former Tory Premier Jim Prentice set off a controversy when he said to then-candidate Rachel Notley during a televised leaders’ debate that "math is difficult."
> 
> But last Thursday’s provincial budget may just prove Prentice was right.
> 
> IF the price of oil rebounds, and IF Alberta’s economy recovers despite the crushing new "green" taxes and regulations the NDP are piling on, and IF the NDP can resist spending most of the extra cash that comes with an economic recovery, then *MAYBE Notley and Finance Minister Joe Ceci MIGHT balance the budget by 2024.
> 
> With any luck, the NDP will be out of office for five years by then.*


M'bold.

More:



> *On Monday, Ceci said it wasn’t that important that within 24 hours, DBRS, the main Canadian credit rating agency, had dropped the province’s Triple-A standing by a whole notch.*
> 
> It absolutely is significant. *The typical credit downgrade takes weeks. Earning one in just a day takes a special kind of fiscal incompetence.*
> 
> And the most common downgrade is half-a-notch, not a whole one.


M'bold.

Ra-chel! Ra-chel! Ra-chel!


----------



## SINC

The wisdom of Rachel Knothead. Brilliant.


----------



## SINC

And that minimum wage hike is sure paying off:

Minimum wage hikes cost of child care | Local News | St. Albert Gazette


----------



## SINC

The stupidity of a carbon tax in a broken economy.

REVERSE THE ALBERTA CARBON TAX

https://www.taxpayer.com/resource-centre/petitions/petition?tpContentId=111


----------



## SINC

Monkey see, monkey do . . .

Alberta's determined to follow Ontario into green-energy hell


----------



## FeXL

I guess when the hard reality of a fiscal slap in the face interrupts your unicorn fart world, even the NDP can be brought to their senses. Or are they merely pandering for votes? Either way...

Alberta, B.C. discuss deal to swap pipeline for electricity 



> Multilateral talks are ongoing between the B.C. and Alberta governments centring on a deal that would see one help facilitate the construction of an oil pipeline to the West Coast in exchange for a long-term contract to buy electricity.
> 
> *NDP Premier Rachel Notley said in an interview she is no longer unreservedly opposed to the Northern Gateway pipeline, a reversal from her previous position that helps breathe new life into a $6.5-billion project many have written off as dead.*




I know, huh?

And this related article about PM Pompadour:

Enbridge’s Northern Gateway resuscitated as Trudeau wavers on tanker moratorium



> Enbridge Inc.’s Northern Gateway pipeline may get a new lease on life as the Canadian government wavers on a planned tanker moratorium that was previously thought to spell the end for the project.


What's taken a while to work it's way past the thick-headedness of the left is that a prosperous Alberta (& Saskatchewan) means a prosperous Canada. When the oil is flowing, everybody in the country benefits.

Now, let's get those pipelines built...


----------



## SINC

*Cfib Challenges Premier's Minimum Wage Assertions*

CALGARY, April 26, 2016 – Contrary to the government’s belief, the prevailing story that a large number of minimum wage earners are single parents is a myth. On Thursday, Premier Notley justified the government’s plans to press ahead with their $15 minimum wage proposal by claiming: “it is not appropriate for a single parent to work 50 or 60 hours a week and have to stop at the food bank two or three times every week to feed their family.”

According to the most recent Minimum Wage Profile published by the provincial government, 38,600 people earn minimum wage. Statistics Canada says 1.5% are single parents with children under the age of 18, that’s roughly fewer than 600 people.

“If the government really wants to help the tiny fraction of full-time minimum wage earners trying to support a family, why not take steps immediately and exempt them from having to pay income tax and focus provincial support programs?,” said Amber Ruddy, CFIB’s Alberta director. The province should stop taking a slice off the paycheques of individuals on minimum wage, instead of passing the buck to business owners or consumers.”

Alberta’s small business community has been concerned about the proposed $15 minimum wage policy since it was proposed. Key concerns include:

1. The Alberta government’s own advisors say: "it's reasonable to assume significant job loss is one realistic possibility"
2. Economic impact analysis demonstrating otherwise haven’t been presented
3. The Premier herself admitted Alberta’s fragile economy cannot handle this shock

“Premier Notley claims to be interested in evidence-based policy, yet hiking Alberta’s minimum wage so high, so fast will result in significant job losses and do little to help those the government says it’s meant to,” added Ruddy. “How will these job losses from big jumps in the minimum wage be reconciled with the government’s so-called jobs plan?” added Ruddy.

Over the years, CFIB has surveyed independent business owners extensively on how large increases in minimum wages impact their business. For more information visit: How will a $15 per hour minimum wage impact your business?


----------



## Macfury

It's simply a backdoor gift to unions, whose rates are pegged to the minimum.


----------



## FeXL

On Moody's Alberta downgrade.

Moody's Downgrades Alberta's Rating to Aa1, Maintains Negative Outlook



> "The downgrade of Alberta's credit rating, along with our negative outlook, reflects the province's growing and unconstrained debt burden, extended timeframe back to balance, weakened liquidity, and *risks surrounding the success of the province's medium-term fiscal plan given the outlook for subdued growth.*" said Moody's Assistant Vice President Adam Hardi, lead analyst for Alberta.


M'bold.

Translation: Rachel, your solution blows...


----------



## SINC

Utter NDP arrogance one year after election


----------



## SINC

Manitoba NDP goes down with a message for Notley


----------



## SINC

Watch Notley and company ignore the warning this sends out . . .

Minimum wage causing major loss - The Orange County Register


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Watch Notley and company ignore the warning this sends out . . .
> 
> 
> 
> Minimum wage causing major loss - The Orange County Register




Orange County? You mean, in California? That's an interesting comparator.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Orange County? You mean, in California? That's an interesting comparator.


Same wage, same kinds of devastation to the unskilled job market. It's an excellent comparison. It's simply numbers.


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Orange County? You mean, in California? That's an interesting comparator.


Apparently you missed the amount of devastation the $15 rate caused. The locale means nothing, the rate means everything. Watch it happen in Alberta in exactly the same manner.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Apparently you missed the amount of devastation the $15 rate caused. The locale means nothing, the rate means everything. Watch it happen in Alberta in exactly the same manner.



Well, for one thing, $15/hour there is the equivalent of about $20/hour here. Second, our min wage in Alberta is currently $11.20/hour—nowhere near the California comparator. Third, we are planning to hit $15 in 2018, two more years away. Not sure why you think the sky is falling in Alberta already.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Well, for one thing, $15/hour there is the equivalent of about $20/hour here. Second, our min wage in Alberta is currently $11.20/hour—nowhere near the California comparator. Third, we are planning to hit $15 in 2018, two more years away. Not sure why you think the sky is falling in Alberta already.


$15 is not $20 in California--it is still $15. And no, the sky is not falling already--it will begin to descend throughout the year. Get ready for automation at McDonalds and A&W. Those low skilled student jobs are GONE!


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Well, for one thing, $15/hour there is the equivalent of about $20/hour here. Second, our min wage in Alberta is currently $11.20/hour—nowhere near the California comparator. Third, we are planning to hit $15 in 2018, two more years away. Not sure why you think the sky is falling in Alberta already.


Or more correctly, $15 there is about $11 here, but that is more than it should be and the Dippers have already surpassed that level here and the damage is done.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> $15 is not $20 in California--it is still $15. And no, the sky is not falling already--it will begin to descend throughout the year. Get ready for automation at McDonalds and A&W. Those low skilled student jobs are GONE!



Are you taking into consideration the exchange rate? $15 US is certainly the equivalent of about $20 CAD. Automation has been available in McDonald's for quite a while already. My daughter works there, so I'm aware. The point of increasing the minimum wage is so that all earners can still participate in the economy and make a living. You can't keep the wage down forever. And why would you want to?


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Or more correctly, $15 there is about $11 here, but that is more than it should be and the Dippers have already surpassed that level here and the damage is done.



How do you figure that, Don? The American dollar is worth more than the Canadian dollar, not less. That means $15 in California would buy you about $20 worth of stuff in Canada right now.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> How do you figure that, Don? The American dollar is worth more than the Canadian dollar, not less. That means $15 in California would buy you about $20 worth of stuff in Canada right now.


But $15 still buys you $15 worth of stuff in California.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> But $15 still buys you $15 worth of stuff in California.



That's like saying pesos are worth the same as dollars are worth the same as euros. The buying power if each currency is quite different. Couple that with the fact that stuff costs less in California compared to Alberta and you have the consequences of a "worth less" currency.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> That's like saying pesos are worth the same as dollars are worth the same as euros. The buying power if each currency is quite different. Couple that with the fact that stuff costs less in California compared to Alberta and you have the consequences of a "worth less" currency.


It's the relative increase in the cost of labour--not the relative value of the currency that is operative here. If Mexicans increased the price of unskilled labour by 40 to 50% they would face the same fallout... in pesos.


----------



## Macfury

Puerto Rico: Minimum wage boosts helps to create economic devastation... with dignity!

Puerto Rico?s crisis illustrates the risks of minimum wage hikes - Business Insider



> What's more, the Puerto Rican predicament results in large part from policy mistakes by the federal government — with directly relevant lessons for the economic debate on the U.S. mainland.
> 
> Take the minimum wage. Right now, progressives around the country are campaigning to raise it to $15 an hour — more than double the current $7.25 minimum and even higher than the $10.10 supported by President Obama.
> 
> Advocates confidently assert that this huge increase in the price of labor could be imposed with no significant job-killing impact, or at least that any such consequences would be outweighed by reductions in income inequality.
> 
> Puerto Rico's economic ruin, however, is partly a story of the damage an ill-considered minimum wage hike can do.


----------



## FeXL

So, under Rachel's outstanding leadership, S&P has just downgraded us for the second time in 5 months; from AA+ to AA.

(caution: link to CBC inside)

Red Rose Country



> Standard and Poor's has downgraded Alberta's credit rating for the second time in five months.
> 
> The bond rating agency has dropped Alberta's rating from AA+ to AA. It last downgraded Alberta in December when it removed the province's long-lauded triple-A rating.


Ra-chel, Ra-chel, Ra-chel...


----------



## Macfury

Oh, those _haters_! Just when a worker's paradise was around the corner!



FeXL said:


> So, under Rachel's outstanding leadership, S&P has just downgraded us for the second time in 5 months; from AA+ to AA.
> 
> (caution: link to CBC inside)
> 
> Red Rose Country
> 
> 
> 
> Ra-chel, Ra-chel, Ra-chel...


----------



## eMacMan

Long overdue, probably inadequate, and just possibly anti-Semitic. It certainly would never happen with the Cons in charge.

New legislation takes aim at payday loan companies | Local News | Airdrie City View



> ...“When you reach interest rates of 600 per cent or more, those are predatory (practices),” she said. “The reality is, when you’ve got a 600 per cent rate of interest, it becomes extremely difficult to pay back the loan.
> 
> “The rates of default are increased because you’ve got these astronomically high interest rates and the borrower is more likely to default. We see that model as a predatory practice.”
> 
> Tony Irwin, president of the Canadian Payday Loans Association, said the new regulations would institute an “entirely different product” than what is offered today.
> 
> “(The proposed legislation) is really devastating for the payday loan industry in Alberta. It will lead to store closures and job losses for hundreds of Albertans who work in the industry in a time when the economy is not doing so well,” he said. “Payday loans, small sum short-term loans, are expensive to provide.”
> ....


----------



## Macfury

So instead of people on the fringes of bankruptcy being able to get an emergency loan at a high interest rate, they will get no loan at all. Utterly perverse legislation that will serve nobody well.

Your notion that the legislation is "just possibly anti-Semitic" is really offensive.




eMacMan said:


> Long overdue, probably inadequate, and just possibly anti-Semitic. It certainly would never happen with the Cons in charge.
> 
> New legislation takes aim at payday loan companies | Local News | Airdrie City View


----------



## SINC

Notley NDP stack Bill 6 panels with union friendlies


----------



## SINC

READ THIS frightening section from the Alberta NDP's new Carbon Tax legislation (Bill 20):



> *52 In this Part (of the bill), "property" includes computer hardware.
> 
> 53 For the purpose of carrying out duties under this Act and the regulations, the Minster or an officer may enter on any land, whether or not that land is enclosed.
> 
> 54(1) For the purpose of carrying out duties under this Act and the regulations, the Minister or an officer may do all or any of the following:
> 
> (a) enter, WITHOUT A WARRANT, at any reasonable time, the following premises for the purpose of conducting an inspection, audit or examination . . .*


You can read the full bill here: http://tinyurl.com/jqnwklm


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> READ THIS frightening section from the Alberta NDP's new Carbon Tax legislation (Bill 20):
> 
> 
> 
> You can read the full bill here: http://tinyurl.com/jqnwklm


Yep Liberty Lice are not limited to the Con banner. 

Bottom line another very expensive constitutional challenge in the making.


----------



## FeXL

Further on that wunnerful Carbon Tax.

How you could go to PRISON under Alberta NDP’s new carbon tax law



> Yesterday Rachel Notley introduced a new massive carbon tax in Alberta, that will take effect on January 1st. I’ll walk you through some of it. It’s over a hundred pages.
> 
> They don’t even pretend that it’s about global warming. Yes, the law is called the “Climate Leadership Implementation Act”. But we submitted an access to information request, asking for any environmental studies showing the effect this tax will have on the world’s climate.
> 
> They have no such studies.
> 
> Oh, and why does this law talk about hiring “undercover officers”? Who can, it says, come into any building, office, store, garage, farm, whatever. Inspect anything, look for anything, take any document, use your computer. No search warrant.
> 
> I've inserted the entire bill below, so you can read it yourself.
> 
> The word "levy" appears 260 times. "Tax" appears another 55 times. "Warrant," as in a search warrant — 15 times. "Search", eight times. "Seize", three times.
> 
> "Prison" or "imprisonment" is in there 15 times. "Fine" is in there 19 times.
> 
> "Jobs" — yeah. Zero times.


----------



## SINC

Nutley has no idea.

Like Germany, Denmark Admits Wind Power Generation Is Too Expensive

https://www.technocracy.news/index....nmark-admits-wind-power-generation-expensive/


----------



## FeXL

So, I guess Ontariowe's clueless premier was in Edmonton last week. Whoop de frickin' do...

I guess she doesn't like open criticism. She's rather that people talk about her & her policies behind her back, then? Is she beyond reproach when present or something? 

Wildrose regrets welcome of Wynne to Alberta legislature



> The controversy erupted after Wynne met with Premier Rachel Notley in Edmonton on Thursday to sign a memorandum of understanding on energy and climate change initiatives. She was then introduced in the legislature, where about half the Wildrose caucus sat while other MLAs stood and applauded.
> 
> In question period, Wildrose finance critic Derek Fildebrandt derided Wynne for her Liberal government's climate change and financial plans and questioned why Notley had invited her to Alberta, and not Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall.
> 
> Wildrose's actions, which included Fildebrandt heckling Notley, drew the ire of the NDP government and were also condemned by members of the Progressive Conservative caucus and the leaders of the Liberals and Alberta Party.


Here's a tip: you don't get to choose when & where to receive plaudits, nor criticism. You're a politician. It's your job. Open season, no bag limit, 24/7/365. Deal with it, princess...


----------



## Macfury

Just wondered if anyone in Alberta had noticed a bunch of new folk festivals created by Notley to stimulate the economy? I hear some NDP voters were counting on those.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Just wondered if anyone in Alberta had noticed a bunch of new folk festivals created by Notley to stimulate the economy? I hear some NDP voters were counting on those.


Haven't heard about any down here but it's not the sort of thing I'd follow in the first place. Seems to me to be more likely in Cowtown & especially Edmonchuk.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Haven't heard about any down here but it's not the sort of thing I'd follow in the first place. Seems to me to be more likely in Cowtown & especially Edmonchuk.


You'd probably just perceive the economic benefits without realizing the impact folk festivals had on your bottom line.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> You'd probably just perceive the economic benefits without realizing the impact folk festivals had on your bottom line.


You owe me a new keyboard & monitor...


----------



## SINC

Everybody gets it but the Knotheads.

Alberta restaurants say ‘Now Is Not the Time’ for minimum wage hike | Calgary Herald


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Everybody gets it but the Knotheads.
> 
> Alberta restaurants say ‘Now Is Not the Time’ for minimum wage hike | Calgary Herald


The basic premise that businesses owe someone a living because their skill set includes loading dishes into a dishwasher is ludicrous. The NDP effect is typically to drive the smallest business out of business, or force them to significantly cut staff--the big corporations will replace workers with robots.


----------



## SINC

A shining example of restraint in tough times by the head Knothead her own fine self.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> A shining example of restraint in tough times by the head Knothead her own fine self.



Kind of makes you long for ol' steady Eddie, don't it? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

As distasteful and non-conservative as he was? Yes. Head & shoulders above Rachel. I'd swap in a minute...



fjnmusic said:


> Kind of makes you long for ol' steady Eddie, don't it?


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> As distasteful and non-conservative as he was? Yes. Head & shoulders above Rachel. I'd swap in a minute...


There's something about watching Venezuela played out in your own backyard that makes you nostalgic for politicians who were simply adequate.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> There's something about watching Venezuela played out in your own backyard that makes you nostalgic for politicians who were simply adequate.


I'd argue the simply adequate observation but, yes, nailed it.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> I'd argue the simply adequate observation but, yes, nailed it.


With Notley moving the goalposts closer and closer to hell, "adequate" moves around on the playing field quite a bit. Watching Kathleen Wynne froth at the mouth in Ontario is actually making me nostalgic for Dalton McGuinty, who was merely incompetent and corrupt.


----------



## SINC

Well done Knotheads.

NDP carbon tax will cause Calgary Food Bank to spend extra $31K on waste costs

http://m.metronews.ca/#/article/new...-cause-calgary-food-bank-spend-extra-31k.html


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Well done Knotheads.
> 
> http://m.metronews.ca/#/article/new...-cause-calgary-food-bank-spend-extra-31k.html


There's compassion for ya! Don't try to cross the regime's cash grab.


----------



## SINC

Yep, this tax and spend thing is working out really well for us.

The tax bill was the final straw: Escoba Bistro is closing its doors | Calgary |


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Yep, this tax and spend thing is working out really well for us.
> 
> The tax bill was the final straw: Escoba Bistro is closing its doors | Calgary |


There we go:


> Some city councillors told Postmedia they’ve never heard the hue and cry they’ve experienced after this year’s bills went out, and are* primarily pointing their fingers at Alberta’s NDP government for boosting its share of the municipal tax take by 10%.*


----------



## FeXL

Rachel's spending has all been chump change so far. Now, watch the real squandering start...

Oil just did something it hasn't done for nearly 11 months



> Both major oil benchmarks, US West Texas Intermediate and Brent crude, closed the later part of Tuesday above $50 a barrel.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Rachel's spending has all been chump change so far. Now, watch the real squandering start...
> 
> Oil just did something it hasn't done for nearly 11 months


Yep--let loose the borrowing because Notley's economic recovery plan counts on much higher oil prices.


----------



## FeXL

Grab your ankles. Here it comes...

Alberta carbon tax legislation passes, marks first stage of climate-change plan



> Premier Rachel Notley’s government used its majority in the legislature Tuesday to pass legislation that includes a carbon tax and completes the first stage of Alberta’s landmark strategy to combat climate change.


More:



> The carbon levy is to take effect Jan. 1. Gasoline at the pumps will rise by 4.49 cents a litre and diesel will go up 5.35 cents a litre.
> 
> The government estimates higher heating and gasoline fees will cost the average family an extra $443 next year.
> 
> Opposition members say the government is lowballing that figure.
> 
> “This is going to pull at least a thousand dollars from every household in Alberta,” said Wildrose Opposition Leader Brian Jean.


Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.

Incensed would be an understatement...


----------



## Macfury

What's the mater FeXL--don't you have a government union job that will protect you from the fallout?



FeXL said:


> Grab your ankles. Here it comes...
> 
> Alberta carbon tax legislation passes, marks first stage of climate-change plan
> 
> 
> 
> More:
> 
> 
> 
> Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.
> 
> Incensed would be an understatement...


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> What's the mater FeXL--don't you have a government union job that will protect you from the fallout?


Rachel's estimates of $443/yr/family are way low. It'll be closer to that per person. My lovely bride is a teacher (who did _not_ vote for the Knotheads, BTW). You can bet in this economy there will not be increases which will offset the costs of a Carbon Tax. 

And fjn's isn't gong to protect him, either...

Everybody who supports a Carbon Tax says that by raising the cost of energy, it will wean people off of extra energy use. I've noted before, when the price of fuel drops a couple of cents/litre I don't know a single person who shouts out, "Woohoo!!! Jump in the car, honey! Hustle up, kids, we're going for a joyride!!!" We sure as hell don't.

In the winter, our thermostat is already turned down to 18°. How much further should we turn it down? We don't have home air conditioning. We use the amount of gasoline we do because it's what is required to get us to & from work & the littluns to & from school, sports, music. Of the thousands of dollars we spend on gasoline every year very little goes into treating ourselves to a motorcycle ride (which gets 50 mpg) or a family holiday. We spend money on fuel largely for necessity, not for luxury.

The idiots behind these laws say, buy yourself a more fuel efficient vehicle, you'll save money. Bull****. We have a Surburban for two reasons. It'll haul half my studio around for location photography. It'll also haul my bride & a bunch of littluns & gear around for sports or the occasional holiday. Combined city/highway, winter/summer it gets 15.5 mpg. If we buy a newer Suburban, we'll spend $30k and _maybe_ get an additional 4 mpg. How many years of 4 mpg gas savings will it take to recoup $30,000? I'll let you in on a little secret: at our current miles/yr & fuel price, that Suburban and another will be worn out & we'll be on our third. _Thirty four years._

OK, fine, they say. Buy yourself a small car, one that you can use when you don't need a fullsize vehicle. We've looked at that, too. The percentage of the Suburban miles that could be transferred to a smaller vehicle is around 50. Factor in the cost of a dependable, relatively low miles used car that'll carry 4 or 5 people & at least some gear (say $12K), insurance, maintenance, add it all up & it's over a 10 year payback. There's a reason nobody makes a Capital Investment based on a 10 year return. It doesn't make financial sense. 

We're caught in the middle & there is no way out. Right now it's cheaper to deal with an older, gas guzzling SUV that's not being fully utilized 1/2 the time, along with concomitant fuel price increases, than it is to get either a newer used one with better gas mileage or a used car to split duty with.

The thing that pisses me off the most is the alleged reason: Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global F'ing Warming. Oh, the name has changed a number of times but the supposition never has.

Every day another piece of research comes out showing the warmists just what a farce the whole charade is. Yet the Progs wake up in the morning, put their brains in a jar in the refrigerator, then hit Assbook & Twitter to lap up the narrative like it was crack, without ever asking a question, like good little acolytes. 

Global Warming ain't science: It's religion at its finest. A century from now people will look back, shake their heads & wonder how so much of the populace could be duped so effectively...


----------



## heavyall

FeXL said:


> Grab your ankles. Here it comes...
> 
> Alberta carbon tax legislation passes, marks first stage of climate-change plan


I'm really surprised that no one has shot her yet.


----------



## Macfury

heavyall said:


> I'm really surprised that no one has shot her yet.


A few ehMacers practically swoon when she cackles out a few destructive words.


----------



## SINC

Knotheads forge blindly ahead as usual:

NDP has no proof carbon tax will do any good | | Calgary Sun


----------



## SINC

Check out the overwhelming opposition to the NDP carbon tax when Albertans asked if they support the plan:


----------



## eMacMan

So it is pretty easy for me to calculate the direct costs of the new Carbon levy. Should be about $275 in 2018 and about $180 next year. About half of that will be in the electric bill. Rebates will be about $300, so directly it will be about a wash. I wonder if those rebates will also grow at 2% a year + inflation. 

However this does not include the impact of higher fuel bills on grocery costs and other purchases. No way to even guess at that number. Of course there is no relief for greenhouses so forget about buying locally grown produce for at least nine months of the year.

Now there is very little room for further reductions here. Our average annual gas consumption is under 25GJ which is way below average. Our electric bill is somewhat below average and orders of magnitude less than all star environmentalists such as Al Gore, David Suzuki and Leonardo D. The sad truth is 500-1000 people would have to die to offset the extravagance of just those three.

Both of my vehicles are relatively fuel efficient and the cost of replacement would never be completely offset by any fuel savings I could attain. Weather permitting I already ride the bicycle locally between May and October. The savings from that are at best marginal, the benefits being more physical than financial.

One thing this does mean is that individuals who normally do not have to bother filing Provincial Tax returns, now will have to do so. Many of these people are seniors and the government should be looking to reduce or eliminate their red-tape burden, rather than increasing it.


----------



## Macfury

eMacMan said:


> So it is pretty easy for me to calculate the direct costs of the new Carbon levy. Should be about $275 in 2018 and about $180 next year. About half of that will be in the electric bill. Rebates will be about $300, so directly it will be about a wash. I wonder if those rebates will also grow at 2% a year + inflation.


It makes these people wards of the state, when they used to be consumers.


----------



## eMacMan

I see our rebate will increase to $450 for 2018. I would suggest our total expense will remain neutral. However a sizeable portion of our towns budget goes into fuel for various things like snow plows, garbage collection, back hoes, street sweepers, the fire chiefs butt-mobile....Plus heating and electricity for the various town buildings. I think that has to negatively or rather positively impact local property taxes. That is they will be going up even faster! Something tells me the leftovers from the rebate will come nowhere close to matching that property tax increase.


----------



## FeXL

NDP reasonable? Not a chance...

Alberta greenhouse operators latest casualty of NDP carbon tax with rejection of common sense amendment



> Wildrose MLA Nathan Cooper tried to have natural gas used in commercial greenhouses exempted from the NDP’s carbon tax.
> 
> This was a smart amendment. We know that purple fuel used by farmers will be exempt from the carbon tax but what about greenhouse producers who use natural gas to heat their greenhouses earlier in the season or late into the fall? This is Alberta. We have a short growing season and the best way for greenhouse producers to offset that unfortunate fact is the use of clean burning natural gas. Cooper’s amendment sought to level the playing field between different types of agricultural producers in Alberta.
> 
> The NDP shot Cooper’s amendment down like every other common sense measure that was brought forward to get in between these NDP destroyers and our money.
> 
> NDP MLA Thomas Dang offered the latest NDP excuse. *He said natural gas is currently cheap so it’s ok to hike this huge operating expense for Alberta greenhouses.*


M'bold.


----------



## Macfury

Hope you're enjoying those folk festivals...



FeXL said:


> NDP reasonable? Not a chance...
> 
> Alberta greenhouse operators latest casualty of NDP carbon tax with rejection of common sense amendment
> 
> 
> 
> M'bold.


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> NDP reasonable? Not a chance...
> 
> Alberta greenhouse operators latest casualty of NDP carbon tax with rejection of common sense amendment
> 
> 
> 
> M'bold.


The conmen tended to promote Big Agra at the expense of the family operation. Any whom expected to see this trend reversed under Nutley will of course be sadly disappointed.


----------



## SINC

Good grief the Knotheads can't even hire Canadians to help in McMurray and bring in a US firm instead. Typical Dipper crap. Must be some union ties in there somehow. All that talk about diversifying Alberta's economy doesn't seem to matter no matter how many times they claim they are keeping cash here in the province.

American NGO hired to handle deluge of donations for Fort McMurray - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Good grief the Knotheads can't even hire Canadians to help in McMurray and bring in a US firm instead. Typical Dipper crap. Must be some union ties in there somehow. All that talk about diversifying Alberta's economy doesn't seem to matter no matter how many times they claim they are keeping cash here in the province.


They don't want to keep all of their eggs in one basket, so they're diversifying out-of-province.


----------



## Macfury

*New folk festivals?*

I know that Notley promised the masses some new folk festivals, but I checked the list and it seems that only the ones I know about are running this summer--Canmore, Calgary and Edmonton and some smaller regulars. Am I missing something?


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> I know that Notley promised the masses some new folk festivals, but I checked the list and it seems that only the ones I know about are running this summer--Canmore, Calgary and Edmonton and some smaller regulars. Am I missing something?


You're not, but Notley is.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Good grief the Knotheads can't even hire Canadians to help in McMurray and bring in a US firm instead. Typical Dipper crap. Must be some union ties in there somehow. All that talk about diversifying Alberta's economy doesn't seem to matter no matter how many times they claim they are keeping cash here in the province.
> 
> American NGO hired to handle deluge of donations for Fort McMurray - Edmonton - CBC News


I think ultimately this shows how little faith Notley has in Albertans.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> I think ultimately this shows how little faith Notley has in Albertans.


That's OK. In three years, we're going to return the favour...


----------



## SINC

FeXL said:


> That's OK. In three years, we're going to return the favour...


And undo most of what she's doing including the farm bill and carbon tax.


----------



## chasMac

What is most galling to me is to see how happy her and cadre are at the prospect of new taxation that will have the effect of making most everything more expensive. They are genuinely beaming. Please - a little gravitas, this will hurt.


----------



## eMacMan

I wonder how long it will be before Trudeau doubles down on the carbon tax. That double whammy will no doubt put a lot of seniors living on fixed incomes out on the ice flows.


----------



## chasMac

Frightening stuff: 

Climate change, gender diversity among topics being tackled in sweeping overhaul of what’s taught in Alberta schools | Calgary Herald


----------



## Macfury

chasMac said:


> Frightening stuff:
> 
> Climate change, gender diversity among topics being tackled in sweeping overhaul of what’s taught in Alberta schools | Calgary Herald


Yup. you can't shove this garbage down the throats of adults--so they try to force their bankrupt ideology onto kids.

Only "progressives" can swallow this manure and claim it tastes like sweet cream.


----------



## chasMac

Macfury said:


> Yup. you can't shove this garbage down the throats of adults--so they try to force their bankrupt ideology onto kids.
> 
> Only "progressives" can swallow this manure and claim it tastes like sweet cream.


This is more along the lines of indoctrination than education, not telling us how to think but what to think. I've got kids in school and am consistently getting the impression that if a concept is too hard it can safely be ignored. Specifically, of course, I am speaking of Math. 80% of the day should be devoted to it IMO. Everything else is devolving into politics. Even in the case of sciences. Math remains pure.


----------



## eMacMan

chasMac said:


> This is more along the lines of indoctrination than education, not telling us how to think but what to think. I've got kids in school and am consistently getting the impression that if a concept is too hard it can safely be ignored. Specifically, of course, I am speaking of Math. 80% of the day should be devoted to it IMO. Everything else is devolving into politics. Even in the case of sciences. Math remains pure.


You obviously have yet to encounter the Core Math curriculum currently touted as the latest and greatest way to destroy young minds.


----------



## chasMac

eMacMan said:


> You obviously have yet to encounter the Core Math curriculum currently touted as the latest and greatest way to destroy young minds.


No not familiar with that. I still stand by what I said in that it is hard to derive anything resembling 'activism' from math. What with science classes now becoming guilt-fests over global-warming. Social Studies, Language Arts - those have been lost causes for years now, I'm afraid.


----------



## eMacMan

Varcoe: Leaked forecast suggests climate plan could cost Alberta billions, but NDP say analysis is invalid | Calgary Herald

First up, all of the revenue generated will go to the banksters. Alberta is spending more than it brings in, therefore ultimately the Banksters get it all.

Secondly any new programs will mean even more for the banksters. 
Bigger Debt = More interest = Smiling Banksters.
Bigger debt = Poorer Credit rating = Higher Interest = Grinning Banksters

Finally most of the energy used in Alberta goes for such important things as heating our homes, running our homes, getting to and from work, bringing food from areas that produce it to our plates.... Creating a tax that adversely impacts these things without determining the the final bill, is excessively irresponsible even by governmental (non)standards!



> So, is this an accurate picture of the carbon plan’s real-world effects?
> 
> Provincial officials say it reflects a worst-case scenario and was used to mitigate the potential fallout.
> 
> They point out the analysis didn’t include several steps taken in the final plan, such as adopting a small business tax cut, exempting farm fuel from the levy, or creating a new petrochemical diversification initiative.
> 
> Other measures — such as providing rebate cheques rather than tax credits to consumers, a five-year exemption on oil and gas fuel used in the field, and measures to protect trade-exposed industries — would also alter its conclusions.
> 
> “This was one of the pieces that was in the machine at that time — a very small piece containing some assumptions that never happened. So therefore the GDP and job impacts are not going to happen,” Phillips says.
> 
> “This is not a prescriptive or a predictive document in any way, shape or form and should not be interpreted as such.”
> 
> There is an easy way, of course, to completely discount this information: release an update on the implications of the new strategy.
> 
> Government officials say they don’t have updated figures because key policy pieces are still being formed and analysis is ongoing.


----------



## SINC

Hurtin Albertan charities a Knothead specialty. 

Nixon and Pitt: Alberta's carbon tax will adversely affect every charity and non-profit from Meals on Wheels to STARS | Opinion | Calgary Sun


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Hurtin Albertan charities a Knothead specialty.
> 
> Nixon and Pitt: Alberta's carbon tax will adversely affect every charity and non-profit from Meals on Wheels to STARS | Opinion | Calgary Sun


The NDP probably sees charities as competitors with government programs.


----------



## eMacMan

> Shelters require natural gas to keep facilities warm through the winter, but the carbon tax will hike that cost roughly 70%.


While we may be an exception, the cost of Natural Gas averages about 20% of our natural gas bill, the rest goes to privatization gouge fees. In cases like that cost will go up about 10% not 70%. Even if the cost of gas is about 70% of the gas bill, the increase would be about 35%. Article writers do themselves no favours by exaggerating effects.

Maybe Nutley could compensate for that carbon tax by mandating a $10/month maximum on those gouge fees. *PLEASE!*


----------



## FeXL

So, if the numbers are incorrect, what's your version, Rachel? Surely somebody must have thrown together a spreadsheet for you...

Varcoe: Leaked forecast suggests climate plan could cost Alberta billions, but NDP say analysis is invalid



> Alberta’s climate plan could lead to 15,000 fewer jobs, a $4-billion drop in household income, as well as lower corporate profits, oil exports and overall economic activity.
> 
> That’s what Alberta Treasury Board and Finance officials initially projected last November in an internal analysis conducted for the NDP government — data the province doesn’t deny, but insists was based on invalid assumptions that make the information irrelevant.
> 
> The province hasn’t released a fully detailed economic impact assessment, but preliminary government analysis from November — dated about a week before the climate strategy was unveiled by Premier Rachel Notley — shows an array of potential consequences.


----------



## Macfury

The $4 billion is a tax that Notley gets to spend. That's all that matters to that miserable creature,


----------



## SINC

Yeah the Knotheads tax burden and minimum wage diversification policies are working so well, but wait until that carbon tax kicks in. 

Downtown Calgary retail businesses rapidly closing as layoffs, oil prices take their toll


----------



## FeXL

I haven't picked up a gold club since the 80's when a coupla buddies used to entice me (with beer) into going out & playing whack-f**k.

That said, if I had know about this, I would have gone out & played a round or sixteen...

Politicians as range targets?



> If you’d like a dartboard with Stephen Harper’s face for a bullseye, online retailer Zazzle.ca has some available right now.
> 
> Now that Harper is no longer prime minister, the $101 price tag might strike Harper haters as a little steep. Still, one can be delivered by June 29. Just click “Express Shipping” at checkout.
> 
> I sure hope Alberta NDP MLA Marie Renaud doesn’t find out about the Harper dartboards though. She’d be outraged, wouldn’t she?
> 
> On the weekend, the St. Albert New Democrat was almost purple with indignation over the fact last Friday organizers of the Big Country Oilmen’s annual golf tournament in the southern Alberta beef and energy town of Brooks placed a cutout of Premier Rachel Notley’s head to one side of the 15th hole.


BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Whiners gonna whine...


----------



## CubaMark

*Reform party registers with Elections Alberta, vows to woo right-wing voters*

A provincial arm of a prairie protest movement that ascended to the role of Official Opposition in the federal parliament is now officially registered with Elections Alberta as a political party.

The Reform Party of Alberta filed its papers along with a petition containing 8,100 signatures. It joins the list of 10 political parties that can legally fundraise and field candidates in future provincial elections.

"We went to rallies. We went to coffee shops. We stood at hockey games, football games," said party organizer and leader Randy Thorsteinson, whose storied political pedigree goes back decades.

Thorsteinson was leader of the Alberta Social Credit party, before creating and leading the Alberta Alliance which was the forerunner to the Wildrose party. He's now pinning his hopes on a new, although familiar, party for provincial voters.​
(CBC)


----------



## SINC

CubaMark said:


> *Reform party registers with Elections Alberta, vows to woo right-wing voters*
> 
> A provincial arm of a prairie protest movement that ascended to the role of Official Opposition in the federal parliament is now officially registered with Elections Alberta as a political party.
> 
> The Reform Party of Alberta filed its papers along with a petition containing 8,100 signatures. It joins the list of 10 political parties that can legally fundraise and field candidates in future provincial elections.
> 
> "We went to rallies. We went to coffee shops. We stood at hockey games, football games," said party organizer and leader Randy Thorsteinson, whose storied political pedigree goes back decades.
> 
> Thorsteinson was leader of the Alberta Social Credit party, before creating and leading the Alberta Alliance which was the forerunner to the Wildrose party. He's now pinning his hopes on a new, although familiar, party for provincial voters.​
> (CBC)


Oh FFS stop already. Fracturing the vote will allow the NDP to remaiin in power. These buys are idiots.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Oh FFS stop already. Fracturing the vote will allow the NDP to remaiin in power. These buys are idiots.




Au contraire; mon ami. The more the merrier! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## heavyall

SINC said:


> Oh FFS stop already. Fracturing the vote will allow the NDP to remaiin in power. These buys are idiots.


I disagree. This could be the catalyst that will bring the right together in Alberta while making sure that the PCs understand that they will not be running any such unified party.


----------



## Macfury

heavyall said:


> I disagree. This could be the catalyst that will bring the right together in Alberta while making sure that the PCs understand that they will not be running any such unified party.


Agreed. The PCs need to drop the "C" before they can be trusted in office again. Hopefully Reform can achieve that.


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> Agreed. The PCs need to drop the "C" before they can be trusted in office again. Hopefully Reform can achieve that.


So they should just be known as the "P"s? The _Progressives_?


:heybaby::lmao:


----------



## Macfury

Yes. They need to come back and run as the "progressives" they were governing as. Hopefully the Reform Party can unite the rest of them.



CubaMark said:


> So they should just be known as the "P"s? The _Progressives_?
> 
> 
> :heybaby::lmao:


----------



## heavyall

CubaMark said:


> So they should just be known as the "P"s? The _Progressives_?
> 
> 
> :heybaby::lmao:


It's what they are. The PCs haven't been conservative in any meaningful way for a very long time.


----------



## Macfury

heavyall said:


> It's what they are. The PCs haven't been conservative in any meaningful way for a very long time.


CM is so far to the left that the PCs are the essence of right wing.


----------



## Macfury

Uniting Wildrose and the PCs in Alberta no easy task for Jason Kenney - Politics - CBC News



> Despite recent turmoil that has weakened Jean's leadership, Wildrose is nevertheless a big meal for the PCs to swallow whole. Polls conducted in the province before the party's upheaval found 34 per cent of Albertans supported Wildrose, on average, compared to 27 per cent for the New Democrats and 26 per cent for the Progressive Conservatives.
> 
> *Due to the regional breakdown of that vote, those numbers would likely be enough to deliver Wildrose a majority government if an election were held now. *


----------



## SINC

The destruction of Alberta continues . . .

Alberta NDP making a bad situation worse | EDITORIAL | Editorial | Opinion | Tor


----------



## SINC

Most honestly stated thing I have seen recently.


----------



## fjnmusic

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

How short the memories of low information voters can be. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

A reminder about seat projections on Election Day from last May. Doesn't look too accidental to me.










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Why would seat predictions not make it accidental?

(Those two memes were lame-ass--can't you Google something better?)


----------



## fjnmusic

As Chapter 13 of the Book Of MacFury states; never miss an opportunity to take a cheap shot when you can without providing an alternative yourself. Peut karma revenir à vous mordre dans le cul, mon ami. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

I use original material only, by and large. Provides for better quality control.



fjnmusic said:


> As Chapter 13 of the Book Of MacFury states; never miss an opportunity to take a cheap shot when you can without providing an alternative yourself. Peut karma revenir à vous mordre dans le cul, mon ami.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> I use original material only, by and large. Provides for better quality control.



You provide no material. You only criticize other people's material. Which is even more pathetic really. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Of course I've uploaded plenty of material, much of it original, using my incredible Photoshop skills!

Tell you what--if you give me some sort of theme, I will make an original one for you!



fjnmusic said:


> You provide no material. You only criticize other people's material. Which is even more pathetic really.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Of course I've uploaded plenty of material, much of it original, using my incredible Photoshop skills!
> 
> 
> 
> Tell you what--if you give me some sort of theme, I will make an original one for you!



I didn't say fabricate. I said provide. I have provided tons of links to back up what I say, and all you do is criticize. You provide no evidence yourself. Please, find some evidence from beyond Ezra Levant's rants that support your criticism of the Alberta NDP, because from where I live, they're doing very well under the circumstances.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

From where I live in that same Alberta, the truth looks more like this:

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/blo...-alberta-government-towards-net-debt-position


----------



## Macfury

You only provide links, but you are not able to discuss the material in them. You post a link about the economy needing to be diversified and then I show you that the economy has already diversified significantly prior to the Notley regime. No response from you. I ask you how much of the Alberta economy should be in energy. No answer. 

And no, Alberta is not doing well under the circumstances. If you are a government sector worker, things must look just fine. On the ground, the Notley regime is causing massive suffering.



fjnmusic said:


> I didn't say fabricate. I said provide. I have provided tons of links to back up what I say, and all you do is criticize. You provide no evidence yourself. Please, find some evidence from beyond Ezra Levant's rants that support your criticism of the Alberta NDP, because from where I live, they're doing very well under the circumstances.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

.


----------



## MacGuiver2.0

Macfury said:


> .


Is that the Maple Leaf of David? How offensive!


----------



## Macfury

> Is that the Maple Leaf of David? How offensive!


.


----------



## chasMac

Honestly, you don't ever feel a little uneasy walking by old Canada centennial monuments?


----------



## MacGuiver2.0

Macfury said:


> .


LOL!!! Well played!:lmao:


----------



## SINC

WTH is the NDP thinking appointing a Toronto university professor who is and was anti-oilsands to an Alberta environmental committee? Keep these imported whackos out of our province.

Alberta co-chair of climate change advisory group regrets likening oilsands to 'Mordor' - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## Macfury

Oil prices have rallied somewhat. I remember an EhMac member saying the Notley Regime would be considered "heroes" because of this.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> WTH is the NDP thinking appointing a Toronto university professor who is and was anti-oilsands to an Alberta environmental committee? Keep these imported whackos out of our province.
> 
> 
> 
> Alberta co-chair of climate change advisory group regrets likening oilsands to 'Mordor' - Edmonton - CBC News



You make it sound like everyone from within the province is pro-oilsands. Sure, it has been a boon economically, at least until it wasn't, but perhaps having a better environmental record would actually be good for business. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> You make it sound like everyone from within the province is pro-oilsands. Sure, it has been a boon economically, at least until it wasn't, but perhaps having a better environmental record would actually be good for business.


It won't be good for business. Either you do it for your own reason or you don't. Enviro wingnuts hate all fossil fuels and will pretend that if only one thing or another was done, they will no longer oppose oil projects. Once changes are made, they move the goalposts. Those who buy fossil fuels buy them at the best price the can get them because they need them, not because they are choosing from a wide variety of equally priced options.


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> It won't be good for business. Either you do it for your own reason or you don't. Enviro wingnuts hate all fossil fuels and will pretend that if only one thing or another was done, they will no longer oppose oil projects. Once changes are made, they move the goalposts. Those who buy fossil fuels buy them at the best price the can get them because they need them, not because they are choosing from a wide variety of equally priced options.


And have you noted they do so while driving cars, taking public transit, flying in planes, using plastics for most of their needs, etc. while opposing fossil fuels? They are hypocrites every one from Suzuki on down.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> And have you noted they do so while driving cars, taking public transit, flying in planes, using plastics for most of their needs, etc. while opposing fossil fuels? They are hypocrites every one from Suzuki on down.


Naturally. But they can usually afford the increased costs of their own demented strategies.


----------



## SINC

Onward and upward for the blind leading the blind and destroying Alberta in the process.


----------



## FeXL

Sic 'er, Brad!

Notley hits back at Wall over beer tax, calls criticism another ‘political drive-by’



> As of Aug. 5, the markup on beer will be set at $1.25 a litre—regardless of where the beer is made—but there will be grants available for Alberta-based small brewers.


----------



## SINC

Proof positive that Notley and the NDP are idiots:

Alberta NDP’s plan to phase out coal could triple power bills: Coal Association | Globalnews.ca


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Proof positive that Notley and the NDP are idiots:
> 
> Alberta NDP’s plan to phase out coal could triple power bills: Coal Association | Globalnews.ca


They simply don't care. Their demented pet strategies are all that matters.


----------



## Macfury

It's working in New York state--of course it will work in Alberta:

The latest innocent victim of the ‘fight for $15’ | New York Post

*After four decades of 24/7 service, the Del Rio Diner on Kings Highway near West 12th Street closes forever Monday morning — done in by craven New York politicians pandering to the “fight for $15.”

Owner Larry Georgeton, 66, also blamed Health Department inspection fees and rising rents, but, “The minimum-wage law was the straw that broke the camel’s back.”*


----------



## SINC

Yeah, she sure is popular . . .

In midst of downturn, Albertans turn to dumping on NDP government with political swag | National Post


----------



## Macfury

> Moochers electing looters to steal from producers.


Well said. 

How's that economic diversification working out for you folks? I hear there are some more folk festivals planned...




SINC said:


> Yeah, she sure is popular . . .
> 
> In midst of downturn, Albertans turn to dumping on NDP government with political swag | National Post


----------



## SINC

The mayhem and sheer stupidity continues daily.

NDP declares war on business | Calgary Sun


----------



## Macfury

Wonder what they'll list among their achievements in the next election?


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> Wonder what they'll list among their achievements in the next election?


It won't matter according to the latest poll. They are guaranteed a boot out of office.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> It won't matter according to the latest poll. They are guaranteed a boot out of office.



And the source of this absolutely legitimate looking statistically flawless meme? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> And the source of this absolutely legitimate looking statistically flawless meme?


I assumed anyone would know just from daily news reports, but for those who live in a cocoon, they all say pretty much the same thing.

Toss the Knotheads out of power before they do more damage, but of course with over two years to go, they will continue to ruin Alberta.

NDP drop to third place in a recent poll | Calgary Herald

Wildrose hold substantial lead over ruling Alberta NDP: poll | Metro News

Rachel Notley and the NDP: fresh faces or ruin of Alberta? - Edmonton - CBC News

Alberta polls say united-right party could easily oust NDP | GUNTER | Columnists


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> I assumed anyone would know just from daily news reports, but for those who live in a cocoon, they all say pretty much the same thing.
> 
> 
> 
> Toss the Knotheads out of power before they do more damage, but of course with over two years to go, they will continue to ruin Alberta.
> 
> 
> 
> NDP drop to third place in a recent poll | Calgary Herald
> 
> 
> 
> Wildrose hold substantial lead over ruling Alberta NDP: poll | Metro News
> 
> 
> 
> Rachel Notley and the NDP: fresh faces or ruin of Alberta? - Edmonton - CBC News
> 
> 
> 
> Alberta polls say united-right party could easily oust NDP | GUNTER | Columnists



Closer to three years actually, Don. You may want to settle in. And unless you folks on the right get your ****e together, it could be much longer than that. Let's see: Brian Jean with the WR, Jason Kenney wanting to take over the PC's, Randy Thorsteinson wanting to bring everybody under the Reform Party banner.... yup, lots of entertainment for years to come. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Do be careful when you generalize. Also, according to one of your own sources, there's this:

"But the Orange Crush remain strong in Edmonton — 44 per cent of decided voters in the capital region said they would vote for the governing parts. Twenty-one per cent of Edmonton voters said they would vote for the PCs and 18 per cent for the Wildrose."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Do be careful when you generalize. Also, according to one of your own sources, there's this:
> 
> "But the Orange Crush remain strong in Edmonton — 44 per cent of decided voters in the capital region said they would vote for the governing parts. Twenty-one per cent of Edmonton voters said they would vote for the PCs and 18 per cent for the Wildrose."


And do be careful when you pick specifics. Edmonton Dippers won't carry the election. The NDP will be tossed out of power and for good. Watch it happen.


----------



## Macfury

Edmonton--home of public sector unions!



fjnmusic said:


> Do be careful when you generalize. Also, according to one of your own sources, there's this:
> 
> "But the Orange Crush remain strong in Edmonton — 44 per cent of decided voters in the capital region said they would vote for the governing parts. Twenty-one per cent of Edmonton voters said they would vote for the PCs and 18 per cent for the Wildrose."
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> And do be careful when you pick specifics. Edmonton Dippers won't carry the election. The NDP will be tossed out of power and for good. Watch it happen.



If we're still alive when that day comes. I won't be holding my breath. You do realize they're only a quarter of the way into this mandate. And again, unless you have ONE viable option on the right, as opposed to three or four (don't forget George Clark's Kudatah group), it won't really matter how many ways you split the vote—you won't win.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Edmonton--home of public sector unions!



What a simplistic view you have. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

No, I have a view of the simplistic motives of voters. Much of Edmonton benefits from government largesse. The end.



fjnmusic said:


> What a simplistic view you have.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> No, I have a view of the simplistic motives of voters. Much of Edmonton benefits from government largesse. The end.



Hardly. There are public sector workers throughout the province, and there are certainly many right-wingers in Edmonton, trust me. There are oil refineries near Sherwood Park and big industry in Fort Saskatchewan. The world is seldom cut and dried as you appear to think it is. Whether you approve or not, there is a great deal of support for the premier in the province's capital, the home of the Legislature. Go figure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Well at least one Alberta industry doesn't appear to be suffering, either from the economy or the increase in minimum wage. 











Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

I guess when you're drinking yourself into a stupor over the mismanagement of the economy...


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> I guess when you're drinking yourself into a stupor over the mismanagement of the economy...




Funny, but usually you need an INCOME in order to drink yourself into a stupor. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Not if it's the last of your money.



fjnmusic said:


> Funny, but usually you need an INCOME in order to drink yourself into a stupor.


----------



## Macfury

Venezuela is the crystal ball for Notley's "progressive" policies.

Long Lines and Empty Shelves | The Weekly Standard



> Hugo Chávez may be dead, but the disaster he set in motion is still very much alive. Several years ago, back when Chávez was still busy turning Venezuela into Zimbabwe, I asked a friend what he expected for his country once Hugo left power. "El chavismo is like a 70-year-old bus with loose steering, failing brakes, and no suspension, hurtling down a mountain road with cliffs on both sides and no guard rails," he said. "After Chávez, the next driver may or may not be another madman, but it will still be the same bus hurtling down the same road." And now, with Chávez's chosen successor, Nicolás Maduro, steering, the wheels are coming off the bus.


----------



## SINC

The obvious sheer stupidity of the NDP is astounding.

Notley’s lawsuit to stop power companies from leaving contracts ‘could be a Monty Python script’


----------



## SINC

So, how's that minimum wage bump working out for the Dippers?

Lethbridge pub owner considers cutting staff by 50% to combat minimum wage hike | Globalnews.ca


----------



## SINC

One more fine policy move by the Dippers is working well to destroy the Alberta economy.

Kevin Libin: Alberta keeps coming up with creative new ways to scare away badly needed investment


----------



## Macfury

The NDP and its supporters don't have any real concept of an economy. They just want to control how the small economic pie that's left is divided.


----------



## chasMac

Even greeny business owners are against the forthcoming carbon tax:

Braid: Struggling Calgary business cries out to NDP – help, don’t hurt | Calgary Herald

As someone who derives a good portion of his income from property development, I can tell you it is a truly terrifying situation out here. The bust in the '80's was nothing compared to this.


----------



## Macfury

The bust in the '80s was part of the business cycle. The real pain this time is Notley who is sitting like a monkey on the back of people who are already struggling.



chasMac said:


> Even greeny business owners are against the forthcoming carbon tax:
> 
> Braid: Struggling Calgary business cries out to NDP – help, don’t hurt | Calgary Herald
> 
> As someone who derives a good portion of his income from property development, I can tell you it is a truly terrifying situation out here. The bust in the '80's was nothing compared to this.


----------



## chasMac

Exactly. And we get it x100, the dip****s are not the cause of the low oil prices - but please don't make it worse. When some braindead pol says:



> Economic Development Minister Deron Bilous flat-out denies it.
> 
> The carbon tax will not be deferred, he added. “Part of the reason we’re moving forward with that is *it’s the right thing to do*.”


That is the reasoning??? So we are well and truly fu*ked


----------



## SINC

The idiots continue to add more taxes.

NDP MLA's proposal could see taxpayer money rebate election expenses - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## SINC

Yep . . .


----------



## SINC

The mood in Alberta today.


----------



## FeXL

Shoring up the list of supporters...

StatsCan: Alberta adds 47,000 government jobs -- while private sector unemployment soars



> First, 20,000 fewer young people are working now than a year ago, down 6.3%. *And that’s going to plunge even further when the NDP jacks up minimum wage.*
> 
> Next, look at private sector workers. Down more than 70,000 jobs. That's 4.6%. And imagine what’s going to happen when the NDP brings in their carbon sales tax, and jacks up their other taxes.
> 
> Finally: Public sector employment. Government workers. Unionized. Pensions. Paid for by tax dollars. You know — the real fat cats. 35 hour work weeks, long lunch breaks, long vacations, lots of sick days.
> 
> They’ve had their best year ever! They’ve grown by a staggering 47,000 people. That’s 12.7%.


Bold from the link.


----------



## SINC

The Dippers weren't smart enough to leave well enough alone with power companies and the carbon taxes. Now once again they show they are not smart enough to roll back their plans, even when their own top adviser wishes he could. Typical Knotley brain dead party.

Brains behind Notley NDP climate change plan says no one figured to be in this electricity argy-bargy


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> The Dippers weren't smart enough to leave well enough alone with power companies and the carbon taxes. Now once again they show they are not smart enough to roll back their plans, even when their own top adviser wishes he could. Typical Knotley brain dead party.
> 
> 
> 
> Brains behind Notley NDP climate change plan says no one figured to be in this electricity argy-bargy




How exactly is putting taxpayers on the hook for $2 billion "leaving well enough alone"? And how exactly is "less profitable" defined in law? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Incredible to watch these stumblebums attempting to negotiate the real world


----------



## FeXL

How come you're suddenly worried about this $2 billion? What about all the other billions the NDP already has or will put the taxpayer on the hook for?



fjnmusic said:


> How exactly is putting taxpayers on the hook for $2 billion "leaving well enough alone"?


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> How come you're suddenly worried about this $2 billion? What about all the other billions the NDP already has or will put the taxpayer on the hook for?


It becomes golden when Notley empties her bladder on it.


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> How exactly is putting taxpayers on the hook for $2 billion "leaving well enough alone"? And how exactly is "less profitable" defined in law?


By NOT triggering the PPA clause with the fatal carbon tax, that's how.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> It becomes golden when Notley empties her bladder on it.


Well, hell, if that's all it takes, I got three beers behind mine right now. Where do I sign?


----------



## FeXL

"We didn't model this"...

Jaysus...

Brains behind Notley NDP climate change plan says no one figured to be in this electricity argy-bargy



> Ooops.
> 
> They didn't think it would happen.
> 
> They didn't figure electricity prices would go this low.
> 
> Because they didn't believe electricity prices would go this low, they didn't believe the electricity contracts would be unprofitable or become more unprofitable. Not even with a hike to the carbon levy and added costs to coal-fired electricity green-lighted by the Notley NDP government.
> 
> Bottom line.
> 
> There was no need to worry about power companies giving back electricity contracts and landing them back in the lap of Alberta consumers who would be forced to pick up the tab.
> 
> But electricity prices are this low and the Notley NDP are going ahead with their plans and power companies are lining up to give back contracts.


Some "brain"...


----------



## Macfury

More successes from the NDP playbook--Venezuela raises minimum wage by 50 per cent:

Venezuela Raises Wages 50% as Oil Tour Seeks to Lift Prices - Bloomberg


> The wage increase becomes effective Sept. 1, Maduro said, and applies to all workers earning minimum wages and all public employees, members of the armed forces and pensioners. He also increased the amount of food vouchers, while adding that he could order a further wage increase by year-end if necessary.


Economic dignity in action (in the middle of economic collapse).


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> More successes from the NDP playbook--Venezuela raises minimum wage by 50 per cent:
> 
> 
> 
> Venezuela Raises Wages 50% as Oil Tour Seeks to Lift Prices - Bloomberg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Economic dignity in action (in the middle of economic collapse).



How does Venezuela have anything to do with the NDP? You're losing it, buddy. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Same program, same economic philosophy--Venezuela is just further along the implementation timeline.


----------



## CubaMark

Except, insofar as I am aware, Alberta doesn't have the nefarious activities of the U.S. State Department / USAID / National Endowment for Democracy (NED) to deal with....

Clinton Emails Reveal Direct US Sabotage of Venezuela | News | teleSUR English


----------



## FeXL

So, what's the thrust here? Maduro is correct & this is all the US' fault?

Bull****...



CubaMark said:


> Except, insofar as I am aware, Alberta doesn't have the nefarious activities of the U.S. State Department / USAID / National Endowment for Democracy (NED) to deal with....


----------



## MacGuiver2.0

FeXL said:


> So, what's the thrust here? Maduro is correct & this is all the US' fault?
> 
> Bull****...


That seems to be what I'm hearing. Socialism would be a whopping success in Venezuela if not for capitalist bastards in the U.S. government. How that works, I'm not sure.


----------



## Macfury

MacGuiver2.0 said:


> That seems to be what I'm hearing. Socialism would be a whopping success in Venezuela if not for capitalist bastards in the U.S. government. How that works, I'm not sure.


Apparently they're producing radio shows that are embarrassing to Venezuela. Telling the truth could achieve that...


----------



## FeXL

MacGuiver2.0 said:


> That seems to be what I'm hearing. Socialism would be a whopping success in Venezuela if not for capitalist bastards in the U.S. government. How that works, I'm not sure.


I'd love for some Prog to come along & explain that to me, as well.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Apparently they're producing radio shows that are embarrassing to Venezuela. Telling the truth could achieve that...


Hell, if radio propaganda is that powerful, you'd think somebody would have used it against Russia, North Korea & the Middle East by now.

That said, it must have hurt to have to pin something negative on Bill's Wife...


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Same program, same economic philosophy--Venezuela is just further along the implementation timeline.



Venezuela is also a country, while Alberta is a province. Big difference. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Yes indeed.

Graham Thompson: Alberta’s NDP needs to take a break and get back in touch with reality | National Post


----------



## SINC

Uh huh.

Poll shows Alberta premier's popularity weakening | CTV Calgary News


----------



## SINC

And this too.

Alberta NDP is upping the ante in its PPA blame game | News | Edmonton Sun


----------



## FeXL

Poor economic policy is poor economic policy, no matter what the scale.



fjnmusic said:


> Venezuela is also a country, while Alberta is a province. Big difference.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Poor economic policy is poor economic policy, no matter what the scale.



Perhaps, but national currency is also national currency. There is no Alberta dollar that operates separately from the Canadian dollar. Canada as a whole is a mixed economy, not a socialist one. Even Alberta is mainly capitalist. The things that represent socialism are things like education, health care, infrastructure, emergency services and so on. You guys are comparing apples with oranges again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Rps

Frank, it may be mixing apples and oranges together, but they are both fruit! Governmental policies impact on branches of the legislative tree. Poor economic policy affects and effects social programs, and social programs affect and effect economic policy. From my perspective, and based on how things are going in Ontario, our government ( the fiberals ) would probably effect the same policies that the NDP are putting in place in Alberta. I think, here in Ontario, they have made some poor decisions and even poorer non-decisions.....just as your NDPers have. Both have inherited scandals and collapsing markets and slowing economies. It's how they react to the issues that I think Sinc et al are complaining about.....some of which you have to agree is justified.


----------



## Macfury

An agreement to provide those things that the private market is not yet able to deliver isn't socialism.

But agreed that our collapsing health care system and overpriced educational system are definitely socialism.




fjnmusic said:


> Perhaps, but national currency is also national currency. There is no Alberta dollar that operates separately from the Canadian dollar. Canada as a whole is a mixed economy, not a socialist one. Even Alberta is mainly capitalist. The things that represent socialism are things like education, health care, infrastructure, emergency services and so on. You guys are comparing apples with oranges again.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> An agreement to provide those things that the private market is not yet able to deliver isn't socialism.


MacFury, would you privatize the education system......


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> MacFury, would you privatize the education system......


I would convert it to a voucher system to allow public and privately operated schools to compete first. Essentially I would allow the public system to operate for as many people who think it is a great idea.


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> I would convert it to a voucher system to allow public and privately operated schools to compete first. Essentially I would allow the public system to operate for as many people who think it is a great idea.


A number of years ago I worked on the voucher system as part of a political party. On the face of it, it sounds like a good approach but is extremely flawed and does not mesh with the educational practises as we know them. It can be a very prejudicial approach to the allocation of educational services and, it's greatest flaw, quality control.


----------



## Macfury

I think it fails when the powers that be want it to fail.

I have no problem with it not meshing with educational practices as we know them!

But why is it prejudicial? And how can its quality control be any worse than public schools where marks no longer have any meaning.




Rps said:


> A number of years ago I worked on the voucher system as part of a political party. On the face of it, it sounds like a good approach but is extremely flawed and does not mesh with the educational practises as we know them. It can be a very prejudicial approach to the allocation of educational services and, it's greatest flaw, quality control.


----------



## Rps

It has a number of nom starters politically. First, it caters to the wealthy who probably could afford to send their kids to better schools, second what do you do with the undesirable schools and teachers due to parents wanting to send their kids to Trinity College instead of the high school on the corner of Trinity and Eslewhere. This approach can create an educational ghetto.......take a look at states in the U.S. That have tried it.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> It has a number of nom starters politically.


These are not non-starters. It's simply unpalaoable to the establishment,



Rps said:


> First, it caters to the wealthy who probably could afford to send their kids to better schools....


The wealthy can already afford to send their kids to better schools.



Rps said:


> ...second what do you do with the undesirable schools and teachers due to parents wanting to send their kids to Trinity College instead of the high school on the corner of Trinity and Eslewhere.


You lay them off and close the schools.


----------



## Rps

Okay, so where do the kids go to school when you shut them down. The issue is education is politically run by people who are guessing what will be required in the future....what should have happened is schools should be run as a business with principals being replaced by business managers. Each year the "system" imposes standards to be met. And before you return comment, in wealthy areas those schools get more money per student than poorer areas....money should not be the issue, it should be educational excellence. This is not a knock against teachers, they have a tough job and unless you've done it you may not realise what it takes in time and task.....it is the individual boards and Province which causes problems.

I add this as an after thought, I would welcome Frank's perspective on this topic.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> Okay, so where do the kids go to school when you shut them down.


If they have been accepted elsewhere, what's the problem?


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> If they have been accepted elsewhere, what's the problem?


But that is the problem, under your approach there is no elsewhere.


----------



## FeXL

Who said anything about currencies? We were comparing economies.



fjnmusic said:


> Perhaps, but national currency is also national currency.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> But that is the problem, under your approach there is no elsewhere.


If there are no hotel rooms available elsewhere I stay in the same hotel. If someone builds better hotels, I go there.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Who said anything about currencies? We were comparing economies.



You can't compare economies without taking into account currency. Alberta affects and is effected by every other jurisdiction in Canada that also benefits or is damaged by Alberta's success or lack thereof. Hence equalization payments. If you try to compare a national economy like Venezuela's with a provincial one like Alberta's, you're always going to come up short. Unless you're satisfied with superficial answers like "see what happens when you embrace socialism."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Yes, if anything, Alberta is being protected from the full effects of its perverse policies by the rest of Canada.



fjnmusic said:


> You can't compare economies without taking into account currency. Alberta affects and is effected by every other jurisdiction in Canada that also benefits or is damaged by Alberta's success or lack thereof. Hence equalization payments. If you try to compare a national economy like Venezuela's with a provincial one like Alberta's, you're always going to come up short. Unless you're satisfied with superficial answers like "see what happens when you embrace socialism."
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Why not?



fjnmusic said:


> You can't compare economies without taking into account currency.


As Venezuela is affected & effected by every other country it deals with, too.



fjnmusic said:


> Alberta affects and is effected by every other jurisdiction in Canada that also benefits or is damaged by Alberta's success or lack thereof. Hence equalization payments.


We're not comparing economies. We're highlighting the negative effects of Progressivism on an economy, whether on the scale of a country or a province. I would argue that it can be measured right down to the scale of large cities, as well. As an example, there are a number of hellholes in the US that have been Democrat controlled for decades.

That said, there are states & provinces that have economies as large or larger than some countries. Why is the comparison irrelevant?

In addition, I always support my "Progessivism sucks" argument with empirical data.



fjnmusic said:


> If you try to compare a national economy like Venezuela's with a provincial one like Alberta's, you're always going to come up short. Unless you're satisfied with superficial answers like "see what happens when you embrace socialism."


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> If there are no hotel rooms available elsewhere I stay in the same hotel. If someone builds better hotels, I go there.


Bingo! So by this statement you are a supporter of poor schools.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Why not?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As Venezuela is affected & effected by every other country it deals with, too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We're not comparing economies. We're highlighting the negative effects of Progressivism on an economy, whether on the scale of a country or a province. I would argue that it can be measured right down to the scale of large cities, as well. As an example, there are a number of hellholes in the US that have been Democrat controlled for decades.
> 
> 
> 
> That said, there are states & provinces that have economies as large or larger than some countries. Why is the comparison irrelevant?
> 
> 
> 
> In addition, I always support my "Progessivism sucks" argument with empirical data.



Your data is flawed. It's no different than comparing Alberta with Norway. One is a province, one is a country. You might as well compare continents and say, "See how well this continent is doing!" Or hemispheres. Or species. You suggest that Alberta is doing badly because the NDP are in charge, negating all of the bad policies the PC's put in place before them. The biggest fault of the NDP is ****ty timing. Talk about a classic case of 'post hoc; ergo propter hoc.'


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> Bingo! So by this statement you are a supporter of poor schools.


I can take my voucher wherever I want. How does that make the school I go to poorer? But yes, abandoning a school that is ineffective would certainly make it poorer.


----------



## FeXL

How? Show me.



fjnmusic said:


> Your data is flawed.


Yet these sorts of comparions are done all the time. I don't understand your issues with them.



fjnmusic said:


> It's no different than comparing Alberta with Norway. One is a province, one is a country. You might as well compare continents and say, "See how well this continent is doing!" Or hemispheres. Or species.


I'm not suggesting anything. The proof is there, right in front of you.



fjnmusic said:


> You suggest that Alberta is doing badly because the NDP are in charge, ...


How about you elaborate on some of those bad PC policies?

The only thing classic about this whole debacle is the Progs complete & utter failure to do anything positive in a time of hardship. All they've managed to do is hire tens of thousands of public servants. Was there really a shortage? Don't bother, it's rhetorical.

I don't care how the economy got this way. You can cry & whine & point fingers all day & it doesn't matter. What I care about, and what would show true leadership, is to implement economic action & policy that gets us out of this mess. Right now, it ain't happening. Fifteen months into their reign and the NDP are a complete & utter economic basket case.



fjnmusic said:


> ...negating all of the bad policies the PC's put in place before them. The biggest fault of the NDP is ****ty timing. Talk about a classic case of 'post hoc; ergo propter hoc.'


If Red Rachel is doing such a bang up job, why is she at her lowest popularity since she was elected? Because the honeymoon is long over, the makeup is off, the lingerie is in the bottom drawer and the ugly reality is sinking in.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> If Red Rachel is doing such a bang up job, why is she at her lowest popularity since she was elected? Because the honeymoon is long over, the makeup is off, the lingerie is in the bottom drawer and the ugly reality is sinking in.


Yep. There is no help coming from the province, only deeper and deeper layers of misery adding to the burdens of businesses and Alberta's citizens.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> How? Show me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet these sorts of comparions are done all the time. I don't understand your issues with them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not suggesting anything. The proof is there, right in front of you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How about you elaborate on some of those bad PC policies?
> 
> 
> 
> The only thing classic about this whole debacle is the Progs complete & utter failure to do anything positive in a time of hardship. All they've managed to do is hire tens of thousands of public servants. Was there really a shortage? Don't bother, it's rhetorical.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't care how the economy got this way. You can cry & whine & point fingers all day & it doesn't matter. What I care about, and what would show true leadership, is to implement economic action & policy that gets us out of this mess. Right now, it ain't happening. Fifteen months into their reign and the NDP are a complete & utter economic basket case.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If Red Rachel is doing such a bang up job, why is she at her lowest popularity since she was elected? Because the honeymoon is long over, the makeup is off, the lingerie is in the bottom drawer and the ugly reality is sinking in.



Same old boring talking points. You believe what you want to believe, I'll believe what I believe. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Same old boring talking points. You believe what you want to believe, I'll believe what I believe.


t's the policies that do the harm--whether to a province or a country.


----------



## FeXL

Same old tired, "I can't counter your arguments so I'm going to sign off now" response.

You wonder why people don't engage you. The exchange was civil, a number of questions were asked, opportunities were given for you to respond, nothing.

It's the same, tired old bull**** from you, fjn, every time. You got nothing. _Ever..._

And, this ain't a belief system. These are cold, hard facts. Deal with them.



fjnmusic said:


> Same old boring talking points. You believe what you want to believe, I'll believe what I believe.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Same old tired, "I can't counter your arguments so I'm going to sign off now" response.
> 
> 
> 
> You wonder why people don't engage you. The exchange was civil, a number of questions were asked, opportunities were given for you to respond, nothing.
> 
> 
> 
> It's the same, tired old bull**** from you, fjn, every time. You got nothing. _Ever..._
> 
> 
> 
> And, this ain't a belief system. These are cold, hard facts. Deal with them.



I've got plenty and I talk with plenty of people in online forums. I just don't like to share any of it with you, because you are abusive. All you've done here is reinforce what I've known about you for some time. Have a nice day. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Quote me the abusive passages from our exchange, sans my final summary when I called bull****.

I'm tired of you claiming stuff that doesn't happen, I'm tired of you spewing nonsense with no evidence, I'm tired of you calling me the problem when it's patently obvious to everyone on these boards, save you, exactly where the problem is.



fjnmusic said:


> ...because you are abusive.


----------



## FeXL

Keerist, they can't even manage a coffee budget, let alone run a provincial economy...

NDP MLA’s online expense filings expose EXTREME coffee pod usage



> The NDP MLA for Red Deer-South has a serious caffeine addiction. Barb Miller spent $4,868.50 on coffee pods in one quarter alone. Three months!


More:



> *If the NDP can't manage something as small as the coffee pod budget in their offices, they shouldn't be in charge of something as large the provincial budget.*


Link's bold.

Yep...

But they're doing a helluva job! Just ask any Prog <coughfjncough>.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Quote me the abusive passages from our exchange, sans my final summary when I called bull****.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm tired of you claiming stuff that doesn't happen, I'm tired of you spewing nonsense with no evidence, I'm tired of you calling me the problem when it's patently obvious to everyone on these boards, save you, exactly where the problem is.




* yawn * 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Jazuz will these idiots never learn? Wanna bet those paltry 144 employees are union?

AHS laundry privatization stopped after Sarah Hoffman intervenes - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## SINC

Yep.

McIver: Separating PPA fact from NDP fiction


----------



## FeXL

Exactly. As always & forever will be, fjn, you got nuttin'.

You walk around in your cloistered little world, cranial-rectal inversion intact, reading all the little Progressive talking points while nodding your head in perceived victimized agreement &, in reality, understanding zero, nada of the real issues surrounding you.

However, that's OK. I would have been surprised to find out otherwise. You fit the mould perfectly.

Congratulations!!!



fjnmusic said:


> * yawn *


----------



## FeXL

When you control the language...

3 ways NDP scrubbed Alberta Oilsands website to omit “good news”



> The NDP are quietly scrubbing all the good news facts from the Alberta Government Oilsands website.
> 
> The two versions of the website look almost the same and if you weren’t already familiar with the website, you may not notice the changes. But the archived version from April 2015, just one month before the NDP took power, is more fact laden and more positive than today’s current incarnation.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Exactly. As always & forever will be, fjn, you got nuttin'.
> 
> 
> 
> You walk around in your cloistered little world, cranial-rectal inversion intact, reading all the little Progressive talking points while nodding your head in perceived victimized agreement &, in reality, understanding zero, nada of the real issues surrounding you.
> 
> 
> 
> However, that's OK. I would have been surprised to find out otherwise. You fit the mould perfectly.
> 
> 
> 
> Congratulations!!!



If you got nuttin' nice to say, best not say anything at all. And you got nuttin. M'bold.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> If you got nuttin' nice to say, best not say anything at all. And you got nuttin. M'bold.


Seriously, fjn--anyone can see that you make claims, but don't support those claims in any logical fashion. You may not like FeXL, but he's right that you don't defend your positions--to anyone here.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Seriously, fjn--anyone can see that you make claims, but don't support those claims in any logical fashion. You may not like FeXL, but he's right that you don't defend your positions--to anyone here.



Well, MF, I do converse with you on occasion since your manners are arguably better than FeXL's. I find my quality of life is noticeably improved when I do not engage with him. I don't need to encourage further abusive dialogue and if there's one thing FeXL is good at it's abuse. 

As far as my point of view in a discussion is concerned, I back up and explain what I am presenting all the time, usually with links and quotes from other sources that I consider to be reputable. The Rebel Media would be one source that I have found to be notoriously UNreputable, though others, including yourself, seem to like it. To me the bias is obvious, even moreso than in what you might see as the "liberal media."

We're not going to agree on very much politically, and I'm not going to persuade you and you're not going to persuade me. I'm okay with that. What I DON'T accept is that there is only one way to post on a friggin' discussion forum with strangers on general topics. Opinions are fine. They don't have to be substantiated. We're unlikely to agree anyway. However, abusive behaviour too me is NOT fine and should not be tolerated. No one has the right to act like an asshole to someone else or insult them to try to make them feel stupid. I'm pretty sure we can both agree on that. If not, let me know. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

I find myself much less likely to argue if someone says "this is my opinion." The default position I associate with any post otherwise is: "This is fact."


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> I find myself much less likely to argue if someone says "this is my opinion." The default position I associate with any post otherwise is: "This is fact."



I guess that's where we differ then. I assume every is spouting their opinion, which may or may be backed up with facts. Take Chem trails, for example. There's a pretty simple scientific explanation for what we see on the sky, better known as condensation trails. But conspiracy theories are always so intriguing, so you get a bunch of gullible believing there's some kind of mind altering chemical being sprayed on the people. I believe theories abound, and people spout opinions all the time. Even "facts" involve a certain amount of interpretation, particularly regarding politics. But even so, there is nothing to stop mature adults with differing points of view from having a polite and respectful conversation. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

A good example for me is the GHG thing. I don't care if people believe greenhouse gases are killing them or destroying the planet. I get my back up when they say that it's indisputable and then build costly policies around it that impoverish me! As a gonzo opinion, I'm cool with it.

But even on chemtrails I would want the believer to provide enough information to hang themselves. Just enough problems with the fact, so that the fiction falls apart.


----------



## SINC

Most Albertans oppose Knotheads carbon tax plan.

68% of Albertans opposed to NDP's climate change strategy, poll suggests - Calgary - CBC News


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> A good example for me is the GHG thing. I don't care if people believe greenhouse gases are killing them or destroying the planet. I get my back up when they say that it's indisputable and then build costly policies around it that impoverish me! As a gonzo opinion, I'm cool with it.
> 
> 
> 
> But even on chemtrails I would want the believer to provide enough information to hang themselves. Just enough problems with the fact, so that the fiction falls apart.



I understand. I dislike taxes just as much as you do, even though my wage is a result of taxes. What I despise even more than taxes is when taxes were collected with a certain intention and then spent on something frivolous instead. Using tax money to bail out the horseradish industry would be one small example, a personal favorite of Ralph Klein. Balling out the banks in the US would be another. Or the auto industry. Or Bombardier. Or RIMM. Or the Edmonton arena. 

If a for-profit cannot remain profitable or attract enough customers to stay in business, then it closes shop. That's what happened to Target in Canada. Fair game. Taxes are meant to support those social programs, like Health and Education, infrastructure, emergency responders, and basically the things we all share but could never pay for otherwise. That's a fair use of taxes. The key is not to waste the money they provide.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

My posts to you were not impolite until I got tired of your usual waffle & chicken defence.

You know, the one where you start waffling 'cause you cannot defend your claims & then turn chicken & say you've had enough of that particular conversation.



fjnmusic said:


> I don't need to encourage further abusive dialogue and if there's one thing FeXL is good at it's abuse.


Pure, undiluted bull****.



fjnmusic said:


> As far as my point of view in a discussion is concerned, I back up and explain what I am presenting all the time, usually with links and quotes from other sources that I consider to be reputable.


Yet, even with those fantastic powers of deduction you can detect that The Rebel Media is unreputable, you've never once posted anything that contradicted anything they've ever reported on.

That tells me more about your abilities as a researcher than theirs.

In addition, in many cases they are the only ones reporting on the topic. You certainly won't read about many of their stories on CBC.



fjnmusic said:


> The Rebel Media would be one source that I have found to be notoriously UNreputable, though others, including yourself, seem to like it.


Actually, there's 2 ways. Your way, in which you make yourself look like a fool every time you post because you can't defend your position, or like nearly everybody else on these boards does, by actually defending their position.

Your choice.



fjnmusic said:


> What I DON'T accept is that there is only one way to post on a friggin' discussion forum with strangers on general topics.


Yes, they are. So, exactly how does one identify an opinion as opposed to, say, an alleged fact from you?

I've suggested a number of times ways that you could actually do that & escape all the grief. Yet you still persist. Deal with it.



fjnmusic said:


> Opinions are fine.


Again, show me the abuse.

Which part of these four posts on the topic was abusive to you?

Post 1

Post 2

Post 3

Post 4



fjnmusic said:


> However, abusive behaviour too me is NOT fine and should not be tolerated


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> My posts to you were not impolite until.....etc etc etc


Boy, you must have had a traumatic experience in junior high. I almost feel sorry for you. 

Pretty every word you post reeks of bottled up hostility. Sad.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Were you bullied in school, fjn?



fjnmusic said:


> Boy, you must have had a traumatic experience in junior high. I almost feel sorry for you.
> 
> Pretty every word you post reeks of bottled up hostility. Sad.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Were you bullied in school, fjn?



Not really, but I see it everyday as a teacher. The pattern is undeniable. Bullies generally have a lot of pent up anger and insecurities that they then take out on others, but no amount of abuse ever solves the problem. It takes a real awakening to end the cycle of abuse. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

My kid has come home from school regularly and told me that people have misused the term "abuse" and "bullying" when what they really mean is that they were annoyed or were told something they did not like to hear.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> My kid has come home from school regularly and told me that people have misused the term "abuse" and "bullying" when what they really mean is that they were annoyed or were told something they did not like to hear.



That may be, but I'm pretty sure I know the difference between annoyance and bullying. The latter is targeted, repeated and a type of oneupmanship, where the bully derives a certain satisfaction from the process and could care less about the victim's feelings. I'd say bullying is on the edge of sociopathy if the bully displays no remorse. Normal people can read signals and know when to back off. Bullies don't. This to me seems like something more involved than simply annoyance or being told something one does not like to hear. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> Yet, even with those fantastic powers of deduction you can detect that The Rebel Media is unreputable, you've never once posted anything that contradicted anything they've ever reported on.


And yet, *The Rebel / Ezra Levant* remain notorious for lying and fabricating and inventing. As an esteemed member of ehMac once noted, _"It doesn't matter how many people support Levant. The truth is independent of that."_


----------



## fjnmusic

CubaMark said:


> And yet, *The Rebel / Ezra Levant* remain notorious for lying and fabricating and inventing. As an esteemed member of ehMac once noted, _"It doesn't matter how many people support Levant. The truth is independent of that."_



He also conveniently forgets that whole BS about refugees allegedly beating a young girl with chains at a school in the maritimes, a story denied by all, including the original source. If it were legit it would have been front page news everywhere. One sees what one wants to see.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

If you armchair shrinks took a look in the mirror as often as you "analyze" others, the quality of these boards would increase by an order of magnitude...



fjnmusic said:


> Boy, you must have had a traumatic experience in junior high. I almost feel sorry for you.
> 
> Pretty every word you post reeks of bottled up hostility. Sad.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> My kid has come home from school regularly and told me that people have misused the term "abuse" and "bullying" when what they really mean is that they were annoyed or were told something they did not like to hear.


<coughfjncough>


----------



## FeXL

Feel free to debunk any of The Rebel links I've posted recently.



CubaMark said:


> blah, blah, blah...


----------



## FeXL

The story was not denied by all. It was pulled without retraction. Learn the difference.

And, there have been followups to the story. You just won't see them on MSM.

One indeed sees what one wants to...



fjnmusic said:


> He also conveniently forgets that whole BS about refugees allegedly beating a young girl with chains at a school in the maritimes, a story denied by all, including the original source. If it were legit it would have been front page news everywhere. One sees what one wants to see.


----------



## FeXL

Oh, but Red Rachel's doing a bang-up job!!!

Kevin Libin: Alberta keeps coming up with creative new ways to scare away badly needed investment



> Premier Rachel Notley has said repeatedly she wants to “encourage” and “attract investment” to Alberta, which sure could use it. But her government just unleashed an advertising campaign not to promote the province’s relatively low taxes and skilled labour but to announce that the NDP is fighting against alleged “backroom” corporate skulduggery to “protect Albertans” from greedy businesses.
> 
> *Actually, what Albertans need protecting from is capricious climate policy changes rolled out with great enthusiasm last year by an NDP government.* Especially since it didn’t think to check the legal consequences of dramatically raising carbon levies on power companies whose contracts protect them against changes in law affecting their profitability.


M'bold.

Nailed it!!!

More:



> _n barely a year of governing the NDP has rattled any investors considering putting money into Alberta by announcing new carbon taxes, caps on emissions, a ban on certain fuels, and threatening (but ultimately passing on) royalty changes. Last month it changed regulations to make it harder for distressed oil companies to sell off oil licences. Now, it wants to wiggle out of 16-year-old contracts by painting business leaders as scoundrels. *Add it up and the message the NDP is sending is loud and clear: Alberta is no longer open for business.*_


_

M'bold._


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> Feel free to debunk any of The Rebel links I've posted recently.


Why should I put in the effort? Has Ezra visited Oz and received a new heart, brain and sense of ethics?

He's the boy who cried, spectacularly, _wolf_. His reputation precedes him, for all but the willfully blind who hang off his every bigoted word.


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> Why should I put in the effort? Has Ezra visited Oz and received a new heart, brain and sense of ethics?
> 
> He's the boy who cried, spectacularly, _wolf_. His reputation precedes him, for all but the willfully blind who hang off his every bigoted word.


Stick to Buzzfeed and those badasses at Crooks & Liars!


----------



## fjnmusic

CubaMark said:


> Why should I put in the effort? Has Ezra visited Oz and received a new heart, brain and sense of ethics?
> 
> 
> 
> He's the boy who cried, spectacularly, _wolf_. His reputation precedes him, for all but the willfully blind who hang off his every bigoted word.



The truth is out there, Mark, but good luck getting this low information type to actually consider it. There is no actual discussion with some people, unfortunately, because they don't know how to respond without being abusive. M'bold. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

So, what's the thrust here? Once a mistake is made, there's no chance for redemption?

Then consider _yourself_ unredeemable for the rest of your life...



CubaMark said:


> Why should I put in the effort? Has Ezra visited Oz and received a new heart, brain and sense of ethics?


Who would that be? Sure ain't me...



CubaMark said:


> ...for all but the willfully blind who hang off his every bigoted word.


----------



## FeXL

Talk, talktalk, talktalk.

And nary a word is said.

You wouldn't know the truth if it jumped out of Red Rachel's skirts & slapped you in the face. Low information, alright. Look in the mirror.

The reason there's no discussing with some people is because you don't discuss. You insist on agreement, no matter what the topic. Whatever fjn says is golden. Any breach of that is constituted "abuse".

Screw that...



fjnmusic said:


> The truth is out there, Mark, but good luck getting this low information type to actually consider it. There is no actual discussion with some people, unfortunately, because they don't know how to respond without being abusive. M'bold.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> The truth is out there, Mark, but good luck getting this low information type to actually consider it. There is no actual discussion with some people, unfortunately, because they don't know how to respond without being abusive. M'bold.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


fjn, you would be classified as a high opinion, no fact voter.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> fjn, you would be classified as a high opinion, no fact voter.



Hardly. 

And even conservatives are getting a little pissed off with Jason Kenney campaigning in Alberta while collecting a federal MP's salary. 










http://www.pressprogress.ca/conservative_talk_radio_host_calls_for_jason_kenney_resignation


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Jason Kenney is the next Jim Prentice in waiting. He too will be soundly rejected by Albertans. If he put his efforts into merging the cons with the Wildrose, he might help. Trying to resurrect a dead horse con party is futile. The thing is he knows it certainly suspects it, or he would have resigned his seat in Parliament at the beginning of his campaign


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Jason Kenney is the next Jim Prentice in waiting. He too will be soundly rejected by Albertans. If he put his efforts into merging the cons with the Wildrose, he might help. Trying to resurrect a dead horse con party is futile. The thing is he knows it certainly suspects it, or he would have resigned his seat in Parliament at the beginning of his campaign



Not that I am a fan of the any of the parties on the right, but it seems the pissing contest to see who can lead a unite-the-right makes conservative politicians their own worst enemies. The smart money would be on the Wildrose; at least they've earned their official opposition status. And Brian Jean walks the walk like he talks the talk (for the most part). The PC's should realize that no government that has been defeated has ever returned to power in Alberta history. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Given the data set, you don't have much of a theory there.



fjnmusic said:


> The PC's should realize that no government that has been defeated has ever returned to power in Alberta history.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## eMacMan

Awfully low on the misuse of Governments funds scale. Interesting only 'cause the NDP make believe they are an environmentally sensitive option and k-cups are about as environmentally responsible as disposable diapers.

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/ndp-coffee-expenses-gets-wildrose-233403813.html



> Earlier this year Miller submitted receipts for $4,800 of K-Cups, thousands of single-servings of coffee and tea.
> 
> "I regularly hold meetings with stakeholders and constituents and offer them coffee as a courtesy," Miller said in a statement. She was not available for an interview Friday.
> 
> "I bought the coffee for the constituency office in bulk at a good price. There is nothing untoward about purchase."


----------



## Macfury

The environment has long been the left's excuse for leveraging greater government control. The actual state of the environment is a side issue.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Given the data set, you don't have much of a theory there.



Given the data set, taken over 111 years, I'd say the facts speak for themselves. Can you prove otherwise? 

And considering Jason Kenney is being paid as a federal MP to represent his constituents in Ottawa, and as a former head and "fiscal hawk" of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, and being fiscally conservative yourself (I thought), do you think Kenney should resign his federal post while canvassing support to lead the PC party in Alberta? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

The data set is not the number of years, its the unusually small sample of actual regime changes. I hope your theory holds when Notley has her ass tossed out of office in the next election.

Regarding Kenney, it hardly matters to me. I think half the public sector should resign because they provide no value to Canadians.



fjnmusic said:


> Given the data set, taken over 111 years, I'd say the facts speak for themselves. Can you prove otherwise?
> 
> And considering Jason Kenney is being paid as a federal MP to represent his constituents in Ottawa, and as a former head and "fiscal hawk" of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, and being fiscally conservative yourself (I thought), do you think Kenney should resign his federal post while canvassing support to lead the PC party in Alberta?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Knotley's NDP no strangers to dirty politics.

Don Braid: Alberta NDP is meddling with Jason Kenney’s leadership bid | National Post


----------



## SINC

More proof the Alberta Knotley NDP are idiots:



> *Every Alberta student, male and female alike, now has the right to use the girls’ washrooms and change rooms, depending not on the reality of biology, but purely on the student’s own feelings.*


Carpay: NDP guidelines will not create safe, caring schools | Calgary Herald


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> More proof the Alberta Knotley NDP are idiots:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Carpay: NDP guidelines will not create safe, caring schools | Calgary Herald




Yup, this is a problem. I've been questioning this particular policy since March or whenever it was announced. The point was not to provide a third, gender-neutral washroom, but to allow the student the choice based on self-identification. I can think of more than a handful of boys who could be feeling a little feminine on any day of the week and thus would exercise the right to "see how the other half live."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## eMacMan

fjnmusic said:


> Yup, this is a problem. I've been questioning this particular policy since March or whenever it was announced. The point was not to provide a third, gender-neutral washroom, but to allow the student the choice based on self-identification. I can think of more than a handful of boys who could be feeling a little feminine on any day of the week and thus would exercise the right to "see how the other half live."
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I think this will be more of an issue with locker rooms. Can't imagine too many healthy high school boys passing up an excuse to visit the girls locker room at change time.

Some policies are idiotic, this is one of them.


----------



## FeXL

Alberta in worst recession since government began recording data in 1980s as deficit balloons to $10.9 billion



> Alberta’s economy is headed for the largest two-year contraction on record, as private sector investment continues to fall, by a projected 16 per cent this year, and the government’s deficit balloons to almost $10.9 billion.


More:



> The fiscal update shows the government now expects to borrow $7 billion this year for operating expenses — to keep the lights on at government facilities — *which is 31 per cent higher than the $5.4-billion in direct borrowing the province had originally budgeted.*
> 
> The additional borrowing is partly the result of a draw down from the contingency fund at the end of last year, but it’s also from higher-than-budgeted government expenses and spending. The province is now forecasting $52.3 billion in expenses over the course of 2016, up $1.2 billion from the initial budget.


M'bold.

Bang up job, Rachel. Mebbe if you wouldn't have hired 24,000 public servants in the last year and a bit...

On a personal note, was covering a commercial presence at Whoop Up Days in Lethbridge this afternoon (folkfest, MF). Had 3 of the province's finest walk past, Lethbridge East, Sherwood Park & forgot where the 3rd was from. Strolling along, smiles a mile wide. 

I thought to myself, "Only 2-1/2 more years left. Enjoy it..."


----------



## SINC

Today at a press conference, NDP treasurer Ceci said he felt most Albertans supported the NDP sending up to $32 billion by 2017.

The friggin' guy is on drugs if he believes that. He and his party will suffer the same fate as the previous government at the polls in '19 and will be remembered as only a one term wonder government of destruction. Trouble is, not until they destroy most of the province.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Today at a press conference, NDP treasurer Cici said he felt most Albertans supported the NDP sending up to $32 billion by 2017.


Have him put our money where his mouth is. Call an election or, at the very least, a referendum on the topic today.


----------



## SINC

Dipper destruction continues.

Braid: The NDP’s Q1 financial report is a genuine tear-jerker | Calgary Herald

Kevin Libin: Alberta’s NDP won’t ease up on spending no matter how low revenues go

Gunter: Alberta's NDP may have inherited this mess but they're sure making things much, much worse | Opinion | Edmonton Sun


----------



## SINC

It just doesn't end:

NDP's plan for the province is the exact opposite of 'a prudent approach'


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Have him put our money where his mouth is. Call an election or, at the very least, a referendum on the topic today.



You seem not to understand how government actually works. The NDP won the election. With a sizeable majority. They can pretty much do what they like until the enemy election, whether you approve or not. And there's not a damn thing you can do about it, except complain on online forums. How's that George Clark multi-phase "kudata" coming along anyway? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

He's complaining about this idiocy on an online forum--how is that not understanding?



fjnmusic said:


> You seem not to understand how government actually works. The NDP won the election. With a sizeable majority. They can pretty much do what they like until the enemy election, whether you approve or not. And there's not a damn thing you can do about it, except complain on online forums.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> He's complaining about this idiocy on an online forum--how is that not understanding?



He seems to think, along with so many other low information voters, that you can somehow force a government out of office early if you just complain enough. If that were the case, Klein would have been finished long before he resigned from natural causes. I know that no amount of protests changed his mind about anything. In other words, suck it up princesses: 2019 is still close to three years away. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Which brings us to the other question: whatever happened with George Clark's kudata movement? It was billed as the way to overthrow Notley's NDP government. Now? Crickets.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Just be patient Frank. In little more than two years now, Albertans will kick the NDPs butt so hard they won't know what hit them. Sadly, the new government will then be forced to undo, reject, revoke and refuse all the NDP policies that failed us so badly in the past 18 months or so. 

Watch it happen and don't think for a minute that it will not.

See what you and the Dippers have to look forward too?


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Just be patient Frank. In little more than two years now, Albertans will kick the NDPs butt so hard they won't know what hit them. Sadly, the new government will then be forced to undo, reject, revoke and refuse all the NDP policies that failed us so badly in the past 18 months or so.
> 
> 
> 
> Watch it happen and don't think for a minute that it will not.
> 
> 
> 
> See what you and the Dippers have to look forward too?



Yes, but we can do a lot of damage in the meantime. MOOHOOHAHAHA!!!











Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

It's true--all it is is damage.


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Yes, but we can do a lot of damage in the meantime. MOOHOOHAHAHA!!!


Sadly that is all too true of the premier and her dense ministers at work in the NDP government.


----------



## SINC

Ceci got it all wrong. 90% of poll respondents against Dippers. 

Editorial: NDP making ‘things worse’ (with poll) | Calgary Herald


----------



## SINC

And Knotley has no idea. 

Resorting to rhetorical cheap shots makes Rachel Notley look defensive | Edmonton Journal


----------



## chasMac

Just came back from across the pond and have read a few articles on the jump in beer prices over here. Anyone seen this at their local? Will be confirming for myself tonight. This does not make me happy at all.


----------



## SINC

Have not noticed it at the retail level yet, nor at pubs to date. I suspect they stocked up on supply to avoid the price increase for a period of time. It is absolute idiocy to put more taxes on beer when the economy is in the tank. A pub owner I have known for years tells me they are not going to increase beer prices, but given the double whammy of the increase in minimum wage, they will be laying off staff to offset the beer increase and additional labour costs. Nice job you NDP arses.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Have not noticed it at the retail level yet, nor at pubs to date. I suspect they stocked up on supply to avoid the price increase for a period of time. It is absolute idiocy to put more taxes on beer when the economy is in the tank. A pub owner I have known for years tells me they are not going to increase beer prices, but given the double whammy of the increase in minimum wage, they will be laying off staff to offset the beer increase and additional labour costs. Nice job you NDP arses.


Laid off... with dignity!


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> Have not noticed it at the retail level yet, nor at pubs to date. I suspect they stocked up on supply to avoid the price increase for a period of time. It is absolute idiocy to put more taxes on beer when the economy is in the tank. A pub owner I have known for years tells me they are not going to increase beer prices, but given the double whammy of the increase in minimum wage, they will be laying off staff to offset the beer increase and additional labour costs. Nice job you NDP arses.


Ironic that for those of us whom are close to the border it will soon be cheaper to buy our beer in BC.


----------



## SINC

Ain't it the truth? The Dipper ignorance is astounding!



> The line item that shows the NDP can’t clean up Alberta’s balance sheet
> 
> There’s little they can do on the jobs front to counter the tens of thousands of departed energy and energy-related jobs, no matter how heavily ministers tout their grants to Alberta’s microbrewers and their workforce of potential hundreds. *Notley’s budgeting efforts have shown reluctance to act seriously at rescuing their own leaky vessel, and the premier says repeatedly she won’t be a public-service slasher.*
> 
> One recently revealed NDP decision shows just how stubbornly this government will refuse to even touch the financial scissors? *Proudly preserving the sanctity of … unionized government laundry services.*


The line item that shows the NDP can't clean up Alberta's balance sheet

They just don't get it.

Braid: How the NDP thinks about everything | Calgary Herald


----------



## Macfury

The NDP just created 24,000 new NDP voters. It's their bribery base of solid support.



SINC said:


> Ain't it the truth? The Dipper ignorance is astounding!
> 
> 
> 
> The line item that shows the NDP can't clean up Alberta's balance sheet
> 
> They just don't get it.
> 
> Braid: How the NDP thinks about everything | Calgary Herald


----------



## SINC

One mistake after another by Knotley Dippers.

Editorial: The NDP’s dirty laundry (with poll) | Calgary Herald


----------



## Dr.G.

My brother-in-law, who is a supporter of the Wild Rose party, sent me this joke.

The Red Phone ......



Rachel Notley, Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin all die and go to hell. While there, they spy a red phone and ask what the phone is for. The devil tells them it is for calling back to Earth.

Putin calls Russia and talks for 5 minutes. When he's finished the devil informs him that the cost is a million dollars, so Putin writes him a cheque.

Next Donald Trump calls America and talks for 30 minutes. When he's finished the devil informs him that the cost is 6 million dollars, so Donald Trump writes a cheque.

Finally Rachel Notley gets her turn and talks for 4 hours. When she's finished, the devil informed her that there would be no charge and feel free to call Alberta anytime.

Putin goes ballistic and asks the devil why Rachel Notley got to call Alberta for free.

The devil replied, "Since Rachel Notley became Premier of Alberta, the province has gone to hell, so it's a local call."


----------



## fjnmusic

Yuk! Yuk! Yuk! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Dr.G.

fjnmusic said:


> Yuk! Yuk! Yuk!
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Don't blame me ................ I just passed on the "joke". Paix, mon ami.


----------



## CubaMark

*Why does the Right wing always advocate violence over dialogue and compromise?*

*Alberta Wildrose leader Brian Jean apologizes for comment about beating Notley*










Wildrose leader Brian Jean has apologized for what he's calling an "inappropriate attempt" at humour when he told a public meeting it was illegal to "beat" Alberta Premier Rachel Notley.

The official Opposition leader's comment came during a Fort McMurray town hall meeting of Wildrose supporters Tuesday night.

Jean, who represents a Fort McMurray riding, was responding to an audience member's questions about the need to push ahead with construction of a seniors housing project in Fort McMurray, which was ravaged by a wildfire in the spring.

According to a recording taped by the Fort McMurray Today newspaper, Jean responded: "I've been beating this drum for 10,11 years. I will continue to beat it, I promise. But it's against the law to beat Rachel Notley."

Minutes later, Jean returned to the microphone and seemed to offer an apology for his comments.

"I have to compliment that woman (Rachel Notley) and I shouldn't have said what I said," Jean told the audience. "I think Rachel Notley deserves a hand of applause. And that was tough to say."​
(CBC)​


----------



## FeXL

Apparently you've never seen the 10:10 video and array of other assorted violence aimed at global warming sceptics by the _measured_ left...



CubaMark said:


> Why does the Right wing always advocate violence over dialogue and compromise?


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> *Why does the Right wing always advocate violence over dialogue and compromise?*


I guess that's because the left is doing it full tilt. Stop being so sanctimonious!


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> I guess that's because the left is doing it full tilt. Stop being so sanctimonious!


The blinders on his rose coloured glasses must be the size of tall buildings...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> The blinders on his rose coloured glasses must be the size of tall buildings...


I wish Jean hadn't lied that Notley deserved applause.


----------



## fjnmusic

CubaMark said:


> *Why does the Right wing always advocate violence over dialogue and compromise?*
> 
> 
> 
> *Alberta Wildrose leader Brian Jean apologizes for comment about beating Notley*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wildrose leader Brian Jean has apologized for what he's calling an "inappropriate attempt" at humour when he told a public meeting it was illegal to "beat" Alberta Premier Rachel Notley.
> 
> 
> 
> The official Opposition leader's comment came during a Fort McMurray town hall meeting of Wildrose supporters Tuesday night.
> 
> 
> 
> Jean, who represents a Fort McMurray riding, was responding to an audience member's questions about the need to push ahead with construction of a seniors housing project in Fort McMurray, which was ravaged by a wildfire in the spring.
> 
> 
> 
> According to a recording taped by the Fort McMurray Today newspaper, Jean responded: "I've been beating this drum for 10,11 years. I will continue to beat it, I promise. But it's against the law to beat Rachel Notley."
> 
> 
> 
> Minutes later, Jean returned to the microphone and seemed to offer an apology for his comments.
> 
> 
> 
> "I have to compliment that woman (Rachel Notley) and I shouldn't have said what I said," Jean told the audience. "I think Rachel Notley deserves a hand of applause. And that was tough to say."​
> 
> 
> (CBC)
> ​



The mind boggles, Mark. Even when Jean himself apologizes for the error of his ways, certain "high opinion low information" voters will continue to defend things that are indefensible. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CubaMark

fjnmusic said:


> certain "high opinion low information"


h-o-l-i - "Holier than Thou" - yep, fits!


----------



## Macfury

He's apologizing to media snowflakes. Anyone who seriously believes he was advocating "beating" old Notley is smoking something.



fjnmusic said:


> The mind boggles, Mark. Even when Jean himself apologizes for the error of his ways, certain "high opinion low information" voters will continue to defend things that are indefensible.


----------



## FeXL

You're the most prevalent HOLI guy on these boards, fjn. Wouldn't be looking down my nose too far if I were you...



fjnmusic said:


> blah, blah, blahblah...


----------



## fjnmusic

CubaMark said:


> h-o-l-i - "Holier than Thou" - yep, fits!







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Even Brian Jean gets it. His followers do not. 










http://m.calgarysun.com/2016/09/01/...ers-come-to-his-defence#.V8nNZsaJ_7M.facebook


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Either way, the social networks are a cesspool that you can dip into to find whatever you want.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Either way, the social networks are a cesspool that you can dip into to find whatever you want.



Social networks? This is the Calgary Sun, normally a bastion for conservative fans everywhere. And they don't usually invent stuff like the Rebel Media does. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

The Sun was looking into the cesspool of social media to find "defenders."



fjnmusic said:


> Social networks? This is the Calgary Sun, normally a bastion for conservative fans everywhere. And they don't usually invent stuff like the Rebel Media does.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> The Sun was looking into the cesspool of social media to find "defenders."



I'm curious: do you think Jean was justified in saying what he said? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

I don't believe he should have said it, because there are enough impressionable fools who would see it as a license to beat someone. That's how low our culture has fallen.




fjnmusic said:


> I'm curious: do you think Jean was justified in saying what he said?


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> I don't believe he should have said it, because there are enough impressionable fools who would see it as a license to beat someone. That's how low our culture has fallen.



Fair enough. On this we agree. He also clearly regretted saying it soon after the words came out of his mouth. May he have an enjoyable honeymoon and a chance to get away for a while.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Nope. He caved to the political correctness crowd & all the snowflakes who got butt hurt.



fjnmusic said:


> He also clearly regretted saying it soon after the words came out of his mouth.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Nope. He caved to the political correctness crowd & all the snowflakes who got butt hurt.




Nope. He apologized and backtracked moments after he said it, before anyone started complaining. He likely heard the audible gasp from some of the people in the room. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

He just realized the tedious responses that would start coming in shortly after and figured it would be best to pacify the snowflakes now instead of later.



fjnmusic said:


> Nope. He apologized and backtracked moments after he said it, before anyone started complaining. He likely heard the audible gasp from some of the people in the room.


----------



## FeXL

Yeah, from the Political Correctness Whiners & the Butt Hurt Snowflakes.

Nobody in their right mind, except for the perpetually offended left, would have considered his remark as anything more than a bad joke that wouldn't end.



fjnmusic said:


> He likely heard the audible gasp from some of the people in the room.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> He just realized the tedious responses that would start coming in shortly after and figured it would be best to pacify the snowflakes now instead of later.



Which begs the question: why say it in the first place? It certainly had only tangential reference to the point he was making, and he was praising Ms. Notley's efforts with seniors only moments later. He stuck his foot in his mouth, way in, and you appear to not know what "snowflakes" actually are. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

No argument: it was a bad call. However, it didn't imply physical violence to Red Rachel any more than the golf targets on the links a couple months ago that the perpetually offended left whined about, either.

I don't understand why it's so difficult for the left to find genuine issues to complain about, rather than chasing this SJW BS around. There is much out there to pick apart, on both sides of the spectrum. Why chase the imaginary?



fjnmusic said:


> Which begs the question: why say it in the first place?


----------



## Macfury

That praise was a line of BA designed to assuage the snowflake critics. Senior are worse off under Notley.



fjnmusic said:


> Which begs the question: why say it in the first place? It certainly had only tangential reference to the point he was making, and he was praising Ms. Notley's efforts with seniors only moments later. He stuck his foot in his mouth, way in, and you appear to not know what "snowflakes" actually are.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Senior are worse off under Notley.


Everybody's worse off under Red Rachel. Even her staunchest supporters. The bill just hasn't been delivered yet.


----------



## FeXL

Who will pay when NDP’s carbon tax chills business climate?



> Albertans know the NDP’s carbon tax coming January 1, 2017 will cost us hundreds more annually on personal items like bills and fuel but businesses will also have to raise their prices to deal with increased transport and other hidden costs which they’ll pass on to consumers.


More:



> The NDP are killing business and investments with corporate tax hikes, property tax hikes, additional costs to businesses in the form of the minimum wage and other taxes that will make life a lot more expensive for citizens.


----------



## FeXL

Good ol' Rex.

Rex Murphy: The environmental crowd knows no compromise



> The environmental protesters who are determined to throttle Alberta’s oil industry are so invested in the narrow, regressive world of their own doom-laden vision of the future, and the fanatic, narcissistic righteousness that is the hallmark of that vision, that they see themselves as having a licence to to do just about anything, no matter how morally reprehensible, in the pursuit of their cause.


He sums:



> P.S. If Alberta Premier Rachel Notley believes her concessions to the anti-pipeline forces will give her “social licence” to build pipelines, she is a child. That crowd knows no compromise. Montreal was just a taste of their tactics. And *Premier Notley should recognize that she has to fight for the oil industry, or its opponents will eventually close it down altogether.*


M'bold.

'Cause without that oil revenue, what's gonna pay for all those social programs...


----------



## FeXL

Hey, how's the latest experiment in North American socialism, Albertistan, doing?

Calgary says goodbye to more than 4,000 businesses in 2016



> This year, more than 4,100 businesses have closed. In the first seven months of 2015, approximately 3,500 companies halted operations.


More:



> The Canadian Federation for Independent Business says the fragility of local businesses should serve as notice for the government that it’s time to rethink piling on additional operating costs including property tax hikes, the new carbon tax and an increase to Alberta’s minimum wage.


Yeah, good luck with that. Red Rachel is far too busy shoring up her voting bottom line, hiring new sniveling servants.

Layoffs at Calgary-based ConocoPhillips Canada start this week



> Layoffs at ConocoPhillips Canada that were announced in July are taking effect this week, with the most impact in Calgary, a spokesperson confirmed Sunday.
> 
> ...
> 
> “Approximately 1,000 employees will be impacted worldwide with about 300 in Canada (mainly at our Calgary head office),” he wrote.


More:



> In a July statement, Evans had said low commodity prices *along with the company’s inability to get product to new markets* resulted in lower prices in Canada relative to other countries.


M'bold.

Pipelines, anyone?

h/t SDA

From their comments:



> Equalization must continue. Just because Alberta's going down the tubes doesn't mean that Quebec has to suffer.


Ed Zachery...


----------



## Macfury

Hey, but many of those people losing their jobs had higher minimum wages--with dignity. I hear that Notley is going to boost the economy with some folk festivals.


----------



## macintosh doctor

Macfury said:


> Hey, but many of those people losing their jobs had higher minimum wages--with dignity. I hear that Notley is going to boost the economy with some folk festivals.


Well - she just raised the minimum wage to $15/hr 

if the economy was struggling now, just wait for it.. 
a happy meal with be $10 and Tim's coffee $5
Notely is going about everything incorrectly.


----------



## Macfury

Correctly for her goals--which is to narrow the gap between union wages and non-union wages, so that non-union workers can no longer compete on price.



macintosh doctor said:


> Well - she just raised the minimum wage to $15/hr
> 
> if the economy was struggling now, just wait for it..
> a happy meal with be $10 and Tim's coffee $5
> Notely is going about everything incorrectly.


----------



## macintosh doctor

Macfury said:


> Correctly for her goals--which is to narrow the gap between union wages and non-union wages, so that non-union workers can no longer compete on price.


you are using compete very loosely - I cannot imagine the corporations flocking with flush with cash in hands waving it freely - saying, " quick, minium wage is up" 

Raising minimum wage only increases unemployment, only the best employees are kept at the new wage. Mediocre employees are tossed or prices of products and services go up
Raising minimum wage causes corporations to look into more automation to replace workers. [McDonald's less cashiers ]

I am sure this will attract more companies in Alberta what with all those NDPs policies. They just love to go where their costs of doing business is higher. The happiest people will be all those temporary foreign workers !

It'll be interesting to see the consequences of such an action. 
A thorough review a year or two later will be most enlightening.


----------



## Macfury

I think you misunderstood me. Unions support minimum wage increases because it makes it harder to give less skilled workers a chance at lower wages. 



macintosh doctor said:


> you are using compete very loosely - I cannot imagine the corporations flocking with flush with cash in hands waving it freely - saying, " quick, minium wage is up"
> 
> Raising minimum wage only increases unemployment, only the best employees are kept at the new wage. Mediocre employees are tossed or prices of products and services go up
> Raising minimum wage causes corporations to look into more automation to replace workers. [McDonald's less cashiers ]
> 
> I am sure this will attract more companies in Alberta what with all those NDPs policies. They just love to go where their costs of doing business is higher. The happiest people will be all those temporary foreign workers !
> 
> It'll be interesting to see the consequences of such an action.
> A thorough review a year or two later will be most enlightening.


----------



## SINC

Political insanity.

Alberta NDP's green plan not likely to succeed |


----------



## CubaMark

macintosh doctor said:


> ...Raising minimum wage only increases unemployment, only the best employees are kept at the new wage.


You may want to look at the recent studies from UC Berkeley, which claims the opposite:

“The policy will have large positive effects on living standards and very small effects on employment,” concludes UC Berkeley’s team of labor market researchers from the Institute for Research on Labor and Employment in the latest in a series of studies of minimum wage policies under consideration or being implemented by cities and states across the country.

The New York analysis is based on a comprehensive new labor market model that the researchers developed to project how workers, businesses and consumers will adjust over the five years of the higher minimum wage’s phase-in. The model draws on an extensive academic literature on the economics of labor markets, business practices and consumer markets and examines the interactions among the various effects.

* * *​
Among the other key findings:


About 37 percent of the New York workforce will benefit from increased earnings.
For those receiving higher wages, annual pay will increase $4,900 a year on average (in 2015 dollars), boosting consumer spending.
Three industries account for nearly half of the workers getting increases: retail (18 percent), health care and social assistance (16 percent) and restaurants (14 percent).
Overall payroll costs in the state will increase by only 3.2 percent, since many businesses already pay over $15 and many workers getting a raise already earn over $9, the state’s current minimum wage. Also, labor costs average one-fourth of business operating costs.
Businesses will experience lower employee turnover, generating savings in recruitment and retention costs that will offset about one-eighth of the higher payroll costs. Worker productivity will also increase.
Putting all these effects together, the report estimates a very small net gain of about 3,200 jobs after five years, equivalent to 0.04 percent of 2021 employment in New York state.


----------



## Macfury

Those are projections based on models. Actual data shows the opposite.

Even in New York where the "model" predicts great things, McDonalds and other restaurants have already begun replacing workers with computer terminals and cooking machines. They're right about one thing--worker productivity will increase, because those workers not laid off will be working much harder.

I'm amazed that any study would dare to predict a: "0.04 percent" increase in employment over five years. This is probably 10 times their own predicted margin of error.

Oh what comfort displaced workers will get from those models.



CubaMark said:


> You may want to look at the recent studies from UC Berkeley, which claims the opposite:
> 
> “The policy will have large positive effects on living standards and very small effects on employment,” concludes UC Berkeley’s team of labor market researchers from the Institute for Research on Labor and Employment in the latest in a series of studies of minimum wage policies under consideration or being implemented by cities and states across the country.
> 
> The New York analysis is based on a comprehensive new labor market model that the researchers developed to project how workers, businesses and consumers will adjust over the five years of the higher minimum wage’s phase-in. The model draws on an extensive academic literature on the economics of labor markets, business practices and consumer markets and examines the interactions among the various effects.
> 
> * * *​
> Among the other key findings:
> 
> 
> About 37 percent of the New York workforce will benefit from increased earnings.
> For those receiving higher wages, annual pay will increase $4,900 a year on average (in 2015 dollars), boosting consumer spending.
> Three industries account for nearly half of the workers getting increases: retail (18 percent), health care and social assistance (16 percent) and restaurants (14 percent).
> Overall payroll costs in the state will increase by only 3.2 percent, since many businesses already pay over $15 and many workers getting a raise already earn over $9, the state’s current minimum wage. Also, labor costs average one-fourth of business operating costs.
> Businesses will experience lower employee turnover, generating savings in recruitment and retention costs that will offset about one-eighth of the higher payroll costs. Worker productivity will also increase.
> Putting all these effects together, the report estimates a very small net gain of about 3,200 jobs after five years, equivalent to 0.04 percent of 2021 employment in New York state.


----------



## SINC

CubaMark said:


> You may want to look at the recent studies from UC Berkeley, which claims the opposite:


On the other hand YOU may want to look at the reality IN ALBERTA. Everybody gets it but Knotheads.

*One in four Alberta businesses will lay off employees due to $15 minimum wage*

*89% oppose minimum wage hikes during economic downturns*

Calgary, September 15, 2016 – Following the Alberta government’s announcement earlier this week that $15 an hour minimum wage has been enacted in regulation, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) released new survey data today casting further doubt on this controversial policy decision.

The impact on Alberta businesses will be severe. When asked what actions your business would take to cope with $15 minimum wage, 26 percent will reduce the hours of staff and 26 per cent will cut down on the number of employees.

Alberta businesses were asked to agree to disagree with the following statements.

Governments should increase the minimum wage rate during economic downturns 2 percent agree, 89 per cent disagree, 9 per cent don’t know

When asked if Governments should be required to conduct and publicly release the results of a thorough employment and economic impact analysis for proposed minimum wage increases, 89 per cent agreed, four percent disagreed, 7 per cent don’t know

“Premier Notley stated that her aggressive minimum wage policy won’t kill jobs. Then show us the evidence. Small business owners have expressed a fundamentally different perspective based on their experience. If the Premier valued the views of entrepreneurs she should listen and act on what they have to say,” said Amber Ruddy, CFIB’s Alberta Director.

“The Labour Minister’s view that this provides the business community certainty, completely misses the point. I haven’t heard a single business celebrating the predictability of this new government induced hurdle to their business,” concluded Ruddy.

The control web accessed survey was conducted from June 13, 2016 to August 9, 2016 and received 7,495 responses from businesses across Canada including 1,030 in Alberta.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Political insanity.


Nope. Just insanity...

The good news is, Red Rachel won't make it past the next election anyway. So, she can sit there & cry in her "Green" tea whilst watching her plans all go by the wayside when they're trashed by the next conservative gov't.

Related:

NDP says Alberta will have 30 per cent renewable power by 2030 but questions loom



> The province’s climate change panel called for an auction system where producers *will bid for contracts that will include government support* for the development of new renewable capacity.





> But Phillips said the province can’t yet put a price tag on *how much it will spend to subsidize renewable development.*





> But he said there *needs to be revenue certainty for potential producers*...


My bold.

So, to all you renewables supporters out there... Thought they had reached parity & no longer needed subsidization?

What a crock...

And, to the 3rd quote: Why? Let the free market decide if they make it or not. My business has to...


----------



## SINC

Yep, the NDP building Alberta's economy by hiring local.

Province hires U.S. company to robocall Albertans regarding vehicle registration notices | CTV Calgary News


----------



## Macfury

I guess the only contractors in Alberta were not unionized.



SINC said:


> Yep, the NDP building Alberta's economy by hiring local.
> 
> Province hires U.S. company to robocall Albertans regarding vehicle registration notices | CTV Calgary News


----------



## SINC

They should, but they won't.

NDP should fire Berman after new comments on pipelines


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> Yep, the NDP building Alberta's economy by hiring local.
> 
> Province hires U.S. company to robocall Albertans regarding vehicle registration notices | CTV Calgary News


Are all the Canadian robocall companies are owned by the con men? I can understand the NDP not wanting to line Harpoon buddy pockets but can see no other excuse for going out of country and paying a 1/3rd currency exchange premium.

BTW The robocall starts out: "This is a message from...." 

Seriously how many people hang around to hear the part where they tell you, they are not going to tell you, your plates are up for renewal.

Locally, the RCMP are not issuing warnings for expired tags. Yep that's a $310 ticket, and if the local code enforcement nazi spots your car parked on the town streets a bonus municipal ticket. 

I am suggesting this was not a money saving stunt, it's a Cash Cow.


----------



## Macfury

Give her time--Notley policies in full flower:

Venezuela: Over 15% of People Eat Garbage to Survive - Breitbart


----------



## FeXL

On a personal note...

Talked to an old friend this weekend, haven't seen him in years. He's been working at a local government weight scale since the early 80's & is now a supervisor of some sort. In addition to the scale work, they also send out patrols to check both farm & commercial trucks for compliance.

They received a notice a couple of weeks back that they are to scale back patrols because of cutbacks.

I jes' luvs it when hard fiscal reality rears up & slaps socialists in the face...

Have another old friend who contacts to the provincial government for repairs & maintenance at the southern provincial parks. He's been doing this for several years now. When the PC's were in power, he'd receive a cheque within 2 weeks of submitting an invoice. Since Red Rachel took over that timeline has extended to a month or more. In order for him to get the jobs, he has to cut his margins pretty tight. If payment runs longer than a month, interest gets added to his materials credit card account & he makes even less.

He has taken to adding several percent on his bids to offset the extra costs, therefore costing the government more money. At his scale, that's not much, However, if all the gov't vendors are doing that, it will be significant cash.

Way to go, Rachel!


----------



## Macfury

Bloated government expenses... with dignity!

(Just wait until those folk festivals kick in!)


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> On a personal note...
> 
> Talked to an old friend this weekend, haven't seen him in years. He's been working at a local government weight scale since the early 80's & is now a supervisor of some sort. In addition to the scale work, they also send out patrols to check both farm & commercial trucks for compliance.
> 
> They received a notice a couple of weeks back that they are to scale back patrols because of cutbacks.
> 
> I jes' luvs it when hard fiscal reality rears up & slaps socialists in the face...
> 
> Have another old friend who contacts to the provincial government for repairs & maintenance at the southern provincial parks. He's been doing this for several years now. When the PC's were in power, he'd receive a cheque within 2 weeks of submitting an invoice. Since Red Rachel took over that timeline has extended to a month or more. In order for him to get the jobs, he has to cut his margins pretty tight. If payment runs longer than a month, interest gets added to his materials credit card account & he makes even less.
> 
> He has taken to adding several percent on his bids to offset the extra costs, therefore costing the government more money. At his scale, that's not much, However, if all the gov't vendors are doing that, it will be significant cash.
> 
> Way to go, Rachel!


Way back when I was self employed or working contract, I got tired of waiting 6-8 weeks to get paid. Changed my billing. I upped my rate by 12%, then gave a 10% discount if payment was received within a week. One company that had insisted everything had to be billed through their head office and had been taking 6 weeks to pay was suddenly able to hand me a check as soon as I turned in my invoice. 

Does not work as well with governments, but at least you get paid for waiting, and they know why they are being billed extra.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

eMacMan said:


> Way back when I was self employed or working contract, I got tired of waiting 6-8 weeks to get paid. Changed my billing. I upped my rate by 12%, then gave a 10% discount if payment was received within a week. One company that had insisted everything had to be billed through their head office and had been taking 6 weeks to pay was suddenly able to hand me a check as soon as I turned in my invoice.
> 
> Does not work as well with governments, but at least you get paid for waiting, and they know why they are being billed extra.



Brilliant! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Western Feedlots shutting down; Canada's biggest feeder blames 'headwinds' in cattle industry



> But Plett said while market forces have put strain on the business, *recent policy decisions by the provincial NDP government* also contributed to Western’s decision to suspend operations. *He criticized what he called the “layering on of policy on agribusiness” through government measures such as Bill 6 and the carbon tax.*
> 
> “Alberta used to have the Alberta Advantage . . . *Of late, a number of moves have made it much more difficult to do business in Alberta as opposed to other jurisdictions,*” Plett said.


M'bold.

Ra-chel. Ra-chel. Ra-chel...


----------



## Macfury

Diversifying Alberta's industry into government employment.



FeXL said:


> Western Feedlots shutting down; Canada's biggest feeder blames 'headwinds' in cattle industry
> 
> 
> 
> M'bold.
> 
> Ra-chel. Ra-chel. Ra-chel...


----------



## SINC

Sums it up nicely . . .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXVpAoo4_FA





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## SINC

Way to go RayChill. Continuing to destroy Alberta every single day. 

Fildebrandt: Western Feedlots closure the last straw for NDP | Opinion | Calgary Sun


----------



## eMacMan

FWIW I drive by a few feedlots either on my way to Lethbridge or Calgary. They were all operating well below capacity long before the election. Not sure of all of the reasons, but I am sure it is not one single item.


----------



## Macfury

eMacMan said:


> FWIW I drive by a few feedlots either on my way to Lethbridge or Calgary. They were all operating well below capacity long before the election. Not sure of all of the reasons, but I am sure it is not one single item.


Yes, that's what the article said. Notley put the nail in the coffin. She's too big a monkey on people's back.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

eMacMan said:


> FWIW I drive by a few feedlots either on my way to Lethbridge or Calgary. They were all operating well below capacity long before the election. Not sure of all of the reasons, but I am sure it is not one single item.



Never let facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Never let facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory!


You didn't read SINC's article, clearly.

Ans how can someone conspire to be grossly incompetent?


----------



## SINC

Another similar assault by Notley and her Dippers. 

Alberta Government Rubbing Salt in the Wound - Business In Calgary


----------



## SINC

Retail and hospitality feel minimum wage hike pain

Survey results show past impact, future harm to entrepreneurs

Edmonton, September 28, 2016 – With a $15 minimum wage now enacted in law and the latest hike coming this weekend, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) released new survey data today on how the retail and hospitality sector has felt the negative impact of past hikes, and how it feels about future planned increases.

When asked: What impact have past increases to the minimum wage had on your business? Fifty-four percent of Alberta business owners in the retail and hospitality sector saw reduced business profits, half (49 per cent) passed along hikes through higher prices, 43 per cent had no choice but to reduce the hiring of youth and less experienced workers and 41 per cent reduced hours of staff.

“A dwindling bottom-line for small business owners means they have fewer dollars to invest in training, equipment and exploring ways to innovate and stay afloat. Small business owners tell us that lack of business income means they are forgoing salaries themselves and are barely hanging on. Close to half of business owners in the retail and hospitality sectors are effectively making less than $15 per hour,” said Amber Ruddy, CFIB’s Alberta Director.

When asked: If the minimum wage rate was increased immediately to $15.00/hr, which of the following actions would your business take? Fifty-six per cent say they will reduce the hiring of youth and inexperienced workers, 55 per cent will increase prices, 50 per cent will reduce hours and 45 per cent will cut down on the number of employees.

“While the premier believes the Alberta government is ‘striking the right balance’, shouldn’t that imply some give and take? What is being done to soften the blow to businesses, especially in the retail and hospitality industry operating on thin profit margins? It’s time to see some compassion and compromise to avoid the unintended consequence of higher prices and fewer opportunities for young people,” concluded Ruddy.

The control web accessed survey was conducted from June 13, 2016 to August 9, 2016 and received 7,495 responses from businesses across Canada including 1,030 in Alberta and 254 in the retail and hospitality sector.


----------



## FeXL

"You have to pass it to find out what's in it..."

Where have I heard that before?

Alberta NDP refuses to release economic impact study of carbon tax



> On Wednesday, Wildrose Energy Critic Leela Aheer said Albertans have a right to know the implications of the carbon tax via the government’s own experts.
> 
> “It’s an absolutely imperative aspect of making sure that Albertans understand where that carbon tax is going to go,” Aheer said. “These are Albertans’ hard earned dollars.”
> 
> But Premier Rachel Notley’s spokeswoman Cheryl Oates said the Climate Change Leadership Plan will have a positive affect on the economy, adding the data can be seen on page 60 in the government’s 2016 budget.
> 
> On page 60, the government predicts the GDP will rise to just more than $316 billion by 2017 in 2007 dollars, a 1.6 per cent increase from $311 billion (2007 dollars) in 2016.
> 
> However, that page doesn’t mention the carbon levy and the specific economic impacts associated with it.


Too afraid we'll find out the truth...


----------



## FeXL

If it was almost anybody but Red Rachel uttering these words, I'd suspect some genuine altruism at work. However, in her case, I can't help but think, "She running out of other people's money..."

Alberta won't support Ottawa's climate change plans without a pipeline: Notley



> Alberta Premier Rachel Notley drew a line in the oilsands Monday when she said she will not support Ottawa’s climate change plan unless the federal government makes progress on new oil pipelines to Canada’s coasts.
> 
> “An ambitious public policy move like this, even one as worthwhile as this, needs to be built on top of a fundamentally healthy economic foundation,” Notley said at an event at city hall.
> 
> “And a new pipeline is what will give that, not only to Alberta, but to all of Canada.”


----------



## Macfury

If she's serious, credit where it is due. However, her support for the carbon tax is already sad.



FeXL said:


> If it was almost anybody but Red Rachel uttering these words, I'd suspect some genuine altruism at work. However, in her case, I can't help but think, "She running out of other people's money..."
> 
> Alberta won't support Ottawa's climate change plans without a pipeline: Notley


----------



## FeXL

Way to go Rachel!!! What remains to be seen is if the newly unemployed, freshly minted conservative voters will outnumber all the snivelling servants she's hired on...

Restaurants say they will cut hours, staff due to hike in Alberta minimum wage



> Restaurant owners and operators in Alberta say they will have to cut hours or lay people off to cope with a higher minimum wage.
> 
> Mark von Schellwitz, vice-president of the Western Canada region of Restaurants Canada, says *78 per cent of operators have said they will cut hours, while nearly half will go through a round of layoffs.*


M'bold.

Who would have predicted this?


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Who would have predicted this?


Even the Alberta NDP predicted this--but it's good for unions, so it went forward.


----------



## SINC

Typical of Notley.

Rachel Notley's disconnect with Alberta couldn't be more pronounced


----------



## SINC

More proof of Notley's lunacy. 

Carbon tax opposed by 67% of Albertans, poll suggests - Calgary - CBC News


----------



## SINC

The steady but sure decline of Alberta Dippers. 

Braid: Shocking poll shows huge backing for PCs and unity drive | Calgary Herald


----------



## Macfury

I wanted Wildrose to step up to the plate, but by now anything that would sweep that ignoramus Notley out of office feels like a clean, fresh start for the province.

How is that economic diversity working out for y'all? I hear that Notley is going to kick start the economy with some folk music festivals.


----------



## SINC

Alberta Small Business Reject Multi-Billion Dollar Carbon Tax

If a carbon tax is implemented, 79% want it to be truly revenue neutral

CALGARY, October 25, 2016 – The Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) today released new survey data that shows Alberta’s entrepreneurs believe there will be major negative impacts on their business when the carbon tax takes effect.

Eighty-six per cent said it would increase their operating/input costs, 85 per cent stated it would reduce their profitability, 66 per cent believed it would increase pressure to freeze/cut salaries, while 59 per cent said it would cause them to delay investments inside their business (e.g. employees, equipment).

“Clearly, in the minds of business owners, the cost of the carbon tax will cause a lot of pain. Benefits of the one point reduction in the small business corporate income tax rate will be relatively modest. If businesses are not profitable, they are not paying small business corporate taxes but are still on the hook for the carbon tax. This is in addition to the flood of other government mandated costs and regulations that will be hitting small business owners in the next couple of years,” said Amber Ruddy, Alberta Director.

Business owners were also asked: Should all revenues generated from carbon pricing be revenue-neutral (i.e. all revenue generated must go toward tax reductions)?

Seventy-nine per cent agreed (65 per cent strongly agreed, 14 per cent somewhat agreed), while 13 per cent disagreed (3 per cent somewhat disagreed, 10 per cent strongly disagreed), and 8 per cent were undecided. 

“With Alberta still struggling through the worst recession in a generation, the timing simply couldn’t be worse for the government to take billions out of the economy to spend as they see fit. The concept of ‘revenue-recycling’ belongs in the trash bin, it’s simply a fancy way of saying politicians will spend all of the money collected. Those dollars could be hard at work in small businesses, but instead will be siphoned off for the government’s green pet projects,” concluded Ruddy.

The CFIB survey was a controlled-access, web-based survey of 865 respondents conducted from July 21 to August 29, 2016.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> I wanted Wildrose to step up to the plate, but by now anything that would sweep that ignoramus Notley out of office feels like a clean, fresh start for the province.


This. I am vehemently opposed to any merger of Wildrose/Conservatives because the Conservatives have still not learned any humility. However, seeing as Brian Jean has done little to capitalize on Rachel's follies...


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Eighty-six per cent said it would increase their operating/input costs, 85 per cent stated it would reduce their profitability, 66 per cent believed it would increase pressure to freeze/cut salaries, while 59 per cent said it would cause them to delay investments inside their business (e.g. employees, equipment).


I never took the survey but the results pretty much agree with what I would have noted.

Screw Rachel & the Hairdo for any form of "Carbon" tax...


----------



## eMacMan

As graft goes this is probably pretty minor. I don't know if the $4000 covered lift tickets for opening day at one of Colorado's ski resorts.

Still the minister came away with no information that could not have been gleaned in one serious online search session. Well she did come away with a three day Colorado junket for her and a staff member.



> Alberta's justice minister says marijuana has not been a "cash cow" for Colorado, but neither has it led to widespread criminal activity.
> 
> Kathleen Ganley travelled to Colorado late last week to talk to U.S. officials about how they dealt with the legalization of marijuana in their state.
> 
> The federal Liberals intend to legalize pot in the spring of 2017, and provinces are scrambling to prepare for the change.
> 
> The priority for Alberta, Ganley says, is to get a regulatory framework in place to ensure that pot stays out of the hands of children, and that provincial roadways remain safe from impaired drivers.


Marijuana wasn't 'cash cow' for Colorado, Alberta's justice minister learns - Calgary - CBC News


----------



## Macfury

One joke in Colorado--police were reassigned to policing illegal marijuana sales instead of marijuana use.



eMacMan said:


> As graft goes this is probably pretty minor. I don't know if the $4000 covered lift tickets for opening day at one of Colorado's ski resorts.
> 
> Still the minister came away with no information that could not have been gleaned in one serious online search session. Well she did come away with a three day Colorado junket for her and a staff member.
> 
> 
> Marijuana wasn't 'cash cow' for Colorado, Alberta's justice minister learns - Calgary - CBC News


----------



## eMacMan

You notice that claiming to worship at Al Gore's First Church of Alarmist Climatology does not prevent the NDP from participating in needless carbon producing junkets.


----------



## SINC

Red Rachel continues to pound nails in the coffin of Alberta small businesses.

*Small business confidence takes another turn for the worse

Record 40 per cent of AB entrepreneurs may resort to layoffs within next 3 months*

Calgary, October 27, 2016 – Alberta small business confidence dropped five and a half points in October to 41.5 according to the monthly Business Barometer® index published by the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB). This figure again approaches the lowest low experienced during the 2008-2009 recession.

Staffing intentions worsened with 40 per cent of Alberta businesses saying they may enact full-time reductions in the next three months. This shot up 13 points over September. Only five per cent plan to hire, half the number of September.

“Small business owners are deeply uncertain about the future and it is affecting their day to day operations in a big way. Employers are making tough decisions about staffing levels and have indicated there are more adjustments to come,” says Amber Ruddy, Director of Provincial Affairs for Alberta.

Insufficient demand continues to be the biggest limitation on business growth (68%). Sixty-nine per cent of entrepreneurs list tax and regulatory costs as a major cost constraint, while 66 per cent cite wage pressures. These indicators were down two points each from September.

The general state of business remained negative. Fourteen per cent of business owners say the general state of business health is good, while 35 per cent state they are in bad shape.

“Half-baked government policies like the $15 minimum wage and a multi-billion dollar carbon tax ignore current economic realities. Employers are making changes in their businesses now to prepare for pain yet to come,” said Ruddy.

The national Business Barometer index dipped to 57.7. The other provincial numbers were: PEI (65.8), British Columbia (65.5), Nova Scotia (65.5), Quebec (64.8), Ontario (60.4), New Brunswick (56.1), Manitoba (55.6), Saskatchewan (55.1) and Newfoundland & Labrador (44.4).

Measured on a scale of 0 and 100, an index level above 50 means owners expecting their businesses’ performance to be stronger in the next year outnumber those expecting weaker performance. According to past results, index levels normally range between 65 and 75 when the economy is growing at its potential.

October 2016 findings are based on 651 responses, collected from a stratified random sample of CFIB members, to a controlled-access web survey. Data reflect responses received through October 17. Findings are statistically accurate to +/- 3.8 per cent 19 times in 20.


----------



## Macfury

See, SINC--only two-thirds of the entrepreneurs are having trouble with the new minimum wage laws and constraining hiring. I remember our local Dipper saying this would never happen.


----------



## SINC

The Dippers just don't get it.

Alberta MLAs and the carbon tax double standard | Alberta | News | Edmonton Sun


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> The Dippers just don't get it.


Like I've noted before: I don't know a single person who, when the price of gas drops, says, "Hey, let's go for a drive!!"


----------



## SINC

Yep, take a former reporter for our local weekly newspaper and make him the lead expert on energy in Alberta. Sure, that will fix things up. So well qualified. Must be a card carrying Dipper as far too many reporters are.

New program offers Albertans methods to save on energy | Edmonton Journal

Province kicks off energy efficiency programs | Environment | St. Albert Gazette


----------



## SINC

Hypocrites, every last one of the Dippers in Alberta. Knotheads!

Alberta MLAs and the carbon tax double standard | Alberta | News | Edmonton Sun


----------



## SINC

The Dippers Carbon Tax will die in 2019.

Wildrose members give leader mandate to fight to end Alberta carbon tax | CTV News


----------



## SINC

Any of you Dipper supporters paying attention to this?

*"Perfect solution, with low cost and emissions and good investment, doesn't exist, authors say"*

How incredibly stupid on the part of the NDP!

Accelerated coal phase-out could cost Alberta $8 billion, new study concludes - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## SINC

And this too from a guy so insecure he has to wear a rug to appear in public.

Alberta NDP are biased against homeschooling | Opinion


----------



## SINC

*Small business demand government release full analysis of proposed environmental policies*

Entrepreneurs want government to be open about the cost and benefits of all major new policies including the carbon tax and phasing out of coal electricity



> CALGARY, November 2, 2016 – The Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) today released new survey data that reveals near unanimous agreement among Alberta’s entrepreneurs that government environmental policies must be accompanied by goals, measurements, and full public disclosure of a cost-benefit analysis. This survey comes on the heels of a brief government statement outlining partial impacts of the Climate Leadership Plan.
> 
> Business owners across Alberta were asked to what extent do they agreed or disagreed with a series of statements:
> 
> · *99 per cent agreed* there should be strong evidence that any environmental policy has environmental benefits before it is implemented (92 per cent strongly agree, 7 per cent somewhat agree, no respondents disagreed, and 1 per cent said they didn’t know)
> 
> · *99 per cent agreed* any environmental policy should have clearly stated goals that can be measured and reported regularly to evaluate success (88 per cent strongly agreed, 11 per cent somewhat agreed, 1 per cent somewhat disagreed, no respondents strongly disagreed or said they didn’t know)
> 
> · *99 per cent agree* that before implementing and operating a carbon pricing mechanism, the details about the costs and (potential) benefits should be disclosed publicly (91 per cent strongly agreed, 8 per cent somewhat agreed, 1 per cent strongly disagreed, and no respondents either somewhat disagreed or said they didn’t know)
> 
> “Business owners want the government to do its homework before implementing new environmental policies, like the multi-billion dollar carbon tax. Unfortunately, we’ve seen the Premier and cabinet ram through policies related to the environment and the economy, without conducting and publicly releasing the full analysis,” said Amber Ruddy, Alberta Director.
> 
> “It’s time to take the cloak of secrecy off the carbon tax analysis. It may be uncomfortable for this government to disclose how many more jobs will be lost, but Albertans deserve to know. Cryptic statements devoid of detail confirm this is a risky experiment and we’re flying blind,” concluded Ruddy.
> 
> The CFIB survey was a controlled-access, web-based survey of 865 respondents conducted from July 21 to August 29, 2016.


*Yet the Dippers continue to blindly forge ahead into the unknown.*


----------



## SINC

There will be a revolt if they proceed with this madness. 

Rallies planned across Alberta to protest carbon tax


----------



## SINC

Even the NDP know they have no chance of being re-elected. 

Shannon Phillips warns the right would undo climate change programs | Calgary Herald


----------



## SINC

And yes, Albertans are pissed. 

Man charged with threats after call to Alberta environment minister - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## CubaMark

*Renewable energy program to add 5,000 megawatts of capacity by 2030, says environment minister*










A renewable energy program generating wind, hydro and solar power will add 5,000 megawatts of capacity to the province's grid, according to Environment Minister Shannon Phillips.

"There will be a competitive process among wind energy companies to bid on a contract for renewable power in the province," Phillips told the Calgary Eyeopener.

* * *​
The Renewable Electricity Program will be administered by the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) and is expected to add 5,000 megawatts of renewable electricity capacity by 2030. 

Speaking Thursday morning at an annual wind energy conference in Calgary, Phillips said the program is a "key part" of the province's Climate Leadership Plan to meet its target of having 30 per cent of Alberta's electricity come from renewables.

* * *​
this puts Alberta as a leader for new wind development in Canada," said conference spokesperson Jean Francois Nolet. 

"It is very positive. It's about $10-billion in investment that is coming up in this province."

And while wind technology has come a long way, some believe the Alberta plan for renewable is highly ambitious.

"It's a big issue to try and integrate wind when it's not exactly predictable all the time," said Michael Moore with the University of Calgary's School of Public Policy.

The provincial government estimates 7,200 jobs will be created in Alberta from renewable power projects.​(CBC)​


----------



## CubaMark

*Ah, the oil companies doing their part to kill Albertan jobs too....*

*Oilsands workers worry driverless trucks will haul away their jobs*










At the Suncor oilsands mine north of Fort McMurray, drivers and heavy equipment operators nervously watch as massive trucks rumble by with no one behind the wheel.

With each passing truck, workers can imagine their jobs slipping away.

"Trucks don't get pensions, they don't take vacations, it's purely dollars and cents," said Ken Smith, president of Unifor 707A in Fort McMurray.

Canada's largest private-sector union, Unifor represents 3,400 employees at Suncor and considers the emergence of the automated haulage system, or AHS, a greater threat than any economic downturn in the oilpatch.

"The second wave of layoffs due to technology will be crippling to Fort McMurray, for sure," said Smith.

Once those jobs disappear, Smith said, he's worried his members won't be able to find work that comes close to earning the $200,000 annual salary an operator on site now makes.

"It's one of our biggest fears," he said. "That these autonomous-haul trucks will replace one-third of our workforce."

The use of driverless trucks is part of a year-long pilot project by Suncor.

* * *​
Each autonomous truck represents an estimated loss of five jobs, said Smith, who predicts the technology being tested today will put 1,000 workers, some 30 per cent of the workforce, on the unemployment line. And that's just at the main Suncor mine. There are several other massive mines in the region.

* * *​
the company has said its autonomous dump trucks have "hauled over one billion tons of overburden and minerals at large-scale mines" in Chile and Australia. Aside from safety features, Komatsu promotes its system as a way to "help its mining customers significantly improve their productivity, thereby becoming their indispensable partner."

The company told CBC News the use of autonomous-haul trucks doesn't necessarily mean massive job losses.​
(CBC)​


----------



## eMacMan

Regarding that $2/watt capacity windmill project.

We know that current technology can easily supply power in Alberta at less than 3¢/hour wholseale.

We also know that wind power seldom produces more than 70% of face-plate rating and that for only about 30% of the time.

Putting those figures together, it will take 35 years for that project to generate enough electricity to pay for itself at fair wholesale value. That figure does not include maintenance, which is typically at least $1000/year/windmill. 

Albertans are already saddled with exorbitant electrical bills thanks to Ralphies privatization deals and the associated gouge fees. Projects such as this can only inflate prices further as they need at least 5 times the current wholesale rate to provide a reasonable profit.


----------



## FeXL

Don't recall anybody on these boards complaining about driverless vehicles in the sense of lost jobs. Safety? Yes. Unemployment? Nope.

And, only you would confuse progress with ideologically ignorant sabotage, _ie._ alternative energy, carbon taxes, etc...



CubaMark said:


> Ah, the oil companies doing their part to kill Albertan jobs too....


----------



## SINC

Yep, this pretty much nails it.

NDP's renewable energy strategy equates to nothing more than 'magic wand' thinking | | Calgary Sun


----------



## SINC

So then, let me get this straight. The NDP government legislates whopping increases in the Alberta minimum wage. Got it.

The NDP government now insists all businesses follow their new wage rates or face penalty under law. Got it.

The NDP government funds many programs that employ minimum wage employee positions. Got it.

The NDP government refuses to increase grants to said programs to cover the cost of the minimum wage increases to those employees. Got it.

So the people who operate these programs lay off people to avoid deficits. Got it.

The NDP government refuses to honour its own minimum wage laws. Got it

No minimum wage increase for provincially-funded positions | Local News | St. Albert Gazette


----------



## Macfury

Sweet!


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> So then, let me get this straight. The NDP government legislates whopping increases in the Alberta minimum wage. Got it.
> 
> The NDP government now insists all businesses follow their new wage rates or face penalty under law. Got it.
> 
> The NDP government funds many programs that employ minimum wage employee positions. Got it.
> 
> The NDP government refuses to increase grants to said programs to cover the cost of the minimum wage increases to those employees. Got it.
> 
> So the people who operate these programs lay off people to avoid deficits. Got it.
> 
> The NDP government refuses to honour its own minimum wage laws. Got it
> 
> No minimum wage increase for provincially-funded positions | Local News | St. Albert Gazette


I think beyond the basic pathological liar requirement, most politicians are habitual hypocrites.

I would further suggest that at the point they become Governor, Premier, President or Prime Minister those failings have become irreversible. This crosses all party lines and applies equally to those who are left, right or dead center.


----------



## SINC

So, the rampant and outright hatred for Red Rachel and her NDP has spilled over to the PC leadership contest. I am not even remotely surprised given the number of times I hear "that bitch is ruining Alberta" from hundreds of people, men and women every day, that gender has raised its ugly head and it further makes me believe that the NDP are done like dinners not even half way through their mandate. Oh wait, they had no mandate to instigate half the legislation they are forcing full bore on the people of Alberta. Bitch indeed.

Alberta PC Leadership Candidates Quit, Citing Harassment And 'Trump-Style Politics'


----------



## eMacMan

Sometimes politicians refusal to back away from a dumb idea can cost them dearly. I think this will be the case with Rachel. 

What it comes down to is this, even the Goreshippers recognize that a carbon tax will do nothing to reduce Carbon emissions. The only way it can have that effect is by being so severe that it pushes those at the bottom of the financial spectrum onto the streets or better yet causes them to starve or freeze to death. Those who are just a rung or two up from the bottom realize they are next. 

IOW in a province experiencing unemployment issues, even those who might be expected to embrace a carbon tax, know it's a dumb idea.

This from the Seattle PI regarding a carbon tax ballot measure in Washington State. A state noted as being more liberal or progressive than most.


> But voters rejected Initiative 732, the carbon tax measure.
> 
> Sponsors of I-732 said residents have a moral responsibility to curb greenhouse gas emissions. The tax sought to encourage businesses to conserve or switch to clean energy by making fossil fuels more expensive, and make the tax system fairer by using the revenues to reduce other taxes.
> 
> Businesses say the tax will drive up fuel and energy costs and put Washington companies at a competitive disadvantage. The carbon tax would start at $15 a ton of carbon emissions in July, go up to $25 the next year and incrementally increase afterward.
> 
> Some major environmental and other groups — including those that backed Gov. Jay Inslee's proposal last year to cap emissions and make carbon polluters pay — opposed the initiative. They said it took the wrong approach.


Minimum wage measure wins, carbon tax loses - seattlepi.com


----------



## SINC

The Dippers just never play fair. 

Great Western Brewing, Steam Whistle, win latest battle in Alberta beer war - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## SINC

*AB government declares job creation strategy a success while businesses suffer*



> 94 per cent of small business owners’ not confident in AB government’s vision to support entrepreneurship
> 
> Calgary, November 15, 2016 –Following a recent update on the Alberta Jobs Plan, a new Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) survey reveals small business owners’ have an overwhelmingly negative perception of the provincial government’s vision to support entrepreneurship.
> 
> “The provincial government makes frequent reference to the importance of the small business sector in almost-daily news releases, but all the talk is not resonating,” said Amber Ruddy, CFIB’s Alberta Director.
> 
> When asked: How confident are you that the Alberta government has a vision to support small business and entrepreneurship?
> „ 94 per cent were not confident (16 per cent not very confident, 78 per cent not confident at all)
> „ Six per cent were somewhat confident
> „ Close to zero per cent indicated they were very confident (only 4 respondents out of 985)
> 
> “There is a growing disconnect between the government’s so-called job creation policies and the entrepreneurs they are meant to support. Initiatives like the investor tax credit or access to financing programs are too modest and restrictive in scope compared to the wide-spread and enduring pain of punitive carbon taxes and job-killing minimum wage hikes,” said Ruddy.
> 
> October’s findings from CFIB’s Monthly Business Barometer showed a record 40 per cent of Alberta small and medium-sized businesses may resort to layoff in the next three months. Insufficient demand is a top limitation for entrepreneurs while major cost constraints stem from tax, regulatory, and wage pressures.
> 
> “With the unemployment rate creeping up, the Alberta government is ramping up the spin. Hiring plans have never been in a more dismal state. Proclaiming the Alberta Jobs Plan is working, is completely removed from the current economic reality. The fact that so few business owners are very confident in the Alberta¹s government’s vision for entrepreneurs says it all,” concluded Ruddy.
> 
> CFIB urges the government to postpone the carbon tax, future minimum wage hikes until the economy sufficiently recovers. Small business owners would welcome a more pragmatic approach to the development and timing of major new public policies.
> 
> The CFIB survey was a controlled-access, web-based survey of 985 respondents conducted from September 13 – October 6, 2016.


----------



## Macfury

It _IS _working, SINC! It's making Albertans more dependent on government!


----------



## Freddie_Biff

What? A PC chooses to join the Alberta NDP? That's got to annoy a few people here. 










https://www.facebook.com/rachelnotley/posts/10154585722846427


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> What? A PC chooses to join the Alberta NDP? That's got to annoy a few people here.


A PC committing politcal suicide by joining the Dippers is a cause for celebration. She too will meet the wrath of the electorate in just over two years and send her packing along with Red Rachel. Watch it happen. Then we can begin to undo the damage these dummy dippers are causing our province.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> A PC committing politcal suicide by joining the Dippers is a cause for celebration. She too will meet the wrath of the electorate in just over two years and send her packing along with Red Rachel. Watch it happen. Then we can begin to undo the damage these dummy dippers are causing our province.



You underestimate the sensibilities of female voters, who do not approve of Trump-style bullying tactics and the same old boys' club in the PC ranks trying to run the show in the same old PC way. They were voted OUT after 44 years for a reason. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> You underestimate the sensibilities of female voters, who do not approve of Trump-style bullying tactics and the same old boys' club in the PC ranks trying to run the show in the same old PC way. They were voted OUT after 44 years for a reason.


You got the part about PCs right. The next government will be formed by the Wildrose. It will be the only sure way to get rid of Red Rachel. Janson Kenney? Phhhhht. PCs will continue to be in the opposition with Rachel and Brian.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> You got the part about PCs right. The next government will be formed by the Wildrose. It will be the only sure way to get rid of Red Rachel. Janson Kenney? Phhhhht. PCs will continue to be in the opposition with Rachel and Brian.



Personally, I think we need even more parties on the right. Albertans want choice!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> A PC committing politcal suicide by joining the Dippers is a cause for celebration. She too will meet the wrath of the electorate in just over two years and send her packing along with Red Rachel. Watch it happen. Then we can begin to undo the damage these dummy dippers are causing our province.


Better that the cucarachas skitter from underneath the fridge before the next election, I say.


----------



## SINC

The sheer NDP stupidity is overwhelming. 

'Dangerous' NDP power contract move would turn Alberta into a 'banana republic': Calgary Chamber of Commerce | News | Calgary Sun


----------



## FeXL

On the contrary, I think it's fabulous. The more CINO's show their true colours in the next couple of years, the easier it will be to vote them out.



Freddie_Biff said:


> What? A PC chooses to join the Alberta NDP? That's got to annoy a few people here.


----------



## SINC

Yep. 

How can Alberta get its economy revving again when Notley is taking advice from eco-extremists?


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Yep.
> 
> How can Alberta get its economy revving again when Notley is taking advice from eco-extremists?


It can't rev up and Notley knows it. She's trying to do as much socialist damage as she can before she gets her arse booted out of office.


----------



## SINC

Even the vast majority of Alberta municipal governments outright reject the NDP carbon tax. The Dippers forge on making moves that will surely be undone the minute they are turfed from power in a little over two years. Sadly, the damage continues to mount.

Health minister downplays cool reception from rural leaders - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## Macfury

This is their one shot at it for this century, SINC. They're throwing more and more of their feces against the wall in the hope that some of it sticks after they're gone.

I am so looking forward to seeing Notley's sour face on election day.



SINC said:


> Even the vast majority of Alberta municipal governments outright reject the NDP carbon tax. The Dippers forge on making moves that will surely be undone the minute they are turfed from power in a little over two years. Sadly, the damage continues to mount.
> 
> Health minister downplays cool reception from rural leaders - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## SINC

Three-quarters of Alberta entrepreneurs oppose expedited phase-out of coal generated electricity

*Removing affordable and reliable electricity sources fast-tracks economic pain*

CALGARY, November 22, 2016 – The Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) released new survey data today that shows Alberta’s entrepreneurs oppose plans to accelerate the phase-out of all coal generated electricity. This follows yesterday’s reaction from Alberta’s Environment Minister to the federal government’s intention to eliminate the use of coal to generate electricity nationally by 2030.

“Environmental issues are a concern for many Canadians, small business owners included. They feel strongly about environmental stewardship, and support conservation efforts, but also want to grow the economy and create jobs,” said Amber Ruddy, Alberta Director.

Coal generated electricity has historically been Alberta’s main source of power. Under existing federal rules, two-thirds of the province’s 18 coal-fired power plants are scheduled to be retired by 2030.

However, the Alberta and now federal government are moving ahead with plans to phase-out all coal generated electricity by 2030, and in turn, many people are concerned it will mean added costs for taxpayers, job losses, and higher electricity bills for small and medium-sized business.

Business owners across Alberta were asked: Should the Alberta Government phase-out all coal generated electricity by 2030 in order to transition to renewable energy? Only 14 per cent said yes, while 73 per cent said no, 12 per cent were undecided, and 1 per cent had no interest. 

“Entrepreneurs are worried the accelerated phase-out will mean higher electricity costs for their business. While the demand for electricity grows, so will the need for the Alberta government to spend large sums of taxpayer dollars on alternative energy sources. The provincial government has been unable or unwilling to explain what the financial cost will be for small business,” said Ruddy.

“This is policy will pile additional costs onto Alberta’s small businesses for decades to come. Before moving ahead one more inch, the government should conduct and publicly release a comprehensive impact analysis on employment and the economy, and what it will mean for small and medium-sized businesses and their employees,” concluded Ruddy.


*CFIB Survey Question
This survey was conducted from June 1st to July 15 2016.
There were 656 responses from Alberta businesses.*

Background: Coal has traditionally been Alberta’s main source of electricity. Under existing federal regulations, coal-fired power plants must meet greenhouse gas emission standards or retire when they reach 50 years of operation. This means 12 of Alberta’s 18 coal-fired generating plants are scheduled to be retired by 2030. Some suggest the Alberta Government should phase out all coal generated electricity by 2030 in order to transition to renewable energy. Doing so would require that the remaining 6 plants shut down early, which may incur additional costs to government.

Supporters say: It would reduce the amount of air pollution and improve air quality and health; Environmental leadership would give Alberta the credibility needed to attract investment in its renewable resources.

Opponents say: It would lead to higher electricity rates as renewable resources (e.g. wind and solar) are more costly and often unreliable; People working in the coal mining and energy industry will lose their jobs.

Should the Alberta Government phase-out all coal generated electricity by 2030 in order to transition to renewable energy?


----------



## Macfury

SINC, they simply don't care about business--any more than a tick cares about its host, as long as the blood keeps flowing.


----------



## SINC

Great Job those Dippers are doing for Alberta business:

*Alberta small business confidence wavers 

45% of AB entrepreneurs look to layoff within next 3 months, new rock-bottom low*



> Calgary, November 24, 2016 – Alberta small business confidence dropped four points in November to 37.3 according to the monthly Business Barometer® index published by the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB). The indicator made some gains since the lowest point recorded in March (26.5), but is trending downward again.
> 
> Staffing intentions worsened with 45 per cent of Alberta businesses saying they may enact full-time reductions in the next three months. This is up five points over last month. Only four per cent are looking to hire staff, compared to five per cent in October. Both staffing intention figures are the worst documented in Alberta.
> 
> “Modest gains in optimism have eroded showing Alberta’s economy is still in a very delicate state. The shedding of positions is concerning and expected to get worse. Each month new rock bottom records are being set for the wrong reasons,” says Amber Ruddy, Director of Provincial Affairs for Alberta.
> 
> Insufficient demand is a limitation for 65 per cent of businesses. Seventy-one per cent of entrepreneurs list tax and regulatory costs as a major cost constraint, while 65 per cent point to wage pressures. Fuel and energy costs (57%) shot up 7 points this month, the highest it’s been in over two years.
> 
> “Higher taxes, more regulation, increased wage pressures, and fuel and energy costs are the tip of the iceberg. Small businesses are tapped out and want this government to slow down, reflect, and incorporate the small business perspective in every action taken,” said Ruddy.
> 
> The general state of business remained negative. Sixteen per cent of business owners say the general state of business health is good, while 35 per cent state they are in bad shape, largely unchanged from October.
> 
> The national Business Barometer index rose to 59.4. The other provincial numbers were: PEI (71.4), British Columbia (69.0), Nova Scotia (64.9), Quebec (63.8), Manitoba (63.2) Ontario (62.2), New Brunswick (59.4), Saskatchewan (51.3) and Newfoundland & Labrador (42.3).
> 
> Measured on a scale of 0 and 100, an index level above 50 means owners expecting their businesses’ performance to be stronger in the next year outnumber those expecting weaker performance. According to past results, index levels normally range between 65 and 75 when the economy is growing at its potential.
> 
> November 2016 findings are based on 623 responses, collected from a stratified random sample of CFIB members, to a controlled-access web survey. Data reflect responses received through November 12. Findings are statistically accurate to +/- 3.9 per cent 19 times in 20.


----------



## Macfury

I hear government is hiring. And Notley promised to establish more folk music festivals.


----------



## Rps

SINC said:


> A PC committing politcal suicide by joining the Dippers is a cause for celebration. She too will meet the wrath of the electorate in just over two years and send her packing along with Red Rachel. Watch it happen. Then we can begin to undo the damage these dummy dippers are causing our province.


Two years is a long time with the electorate Sinc. But I agree I think the NDP is done in Alberta......will it be a Mulroney type collapse I don't know, thoughts....


----------



## eMacMan

Rps said:


> Two years is a long time with the electorate Sinc. But I agree I think the NDP is done in Alberta......will it be a Mulroney type collapse I don't know, thoughts....


I think the carbon tax will kick them pretty hard and right where it hurts.

In Canada that taxed carbon is being used to heat homes, transport food and other goods, and simply move people over very vast distances. It will not reduce CO2 emissions one iota, while still having an inflationary effect. Even those Albertans who are not on fixed incomes will have friends or relatives who are.

The impact will be akin to the Mulroney Loonie.


----------



## SINC

An old friend who lives in Calgary sent me an email yesterday. He got a notice from EnMax that his natural gas bill would rise by $181 a year in 2017, a further $250 in 2018 and an undetermined amount over and above that in 2019.

He is awaiting the same notice from his electricity provider. Add to that the gasoline taxes, the food price increases on freight due to that same gasoline tax and anything else you buy that uses fossil fuels including all plastics, etc. and you will be out $thousands per year.

And these NDP clowns actually think they can get elected again in 2019? We would be far better served by using science to reduce emissions from coal and leave the plants the hell alone. China alone spews out more coal emissions in a single day than Canada does in a year. This is madness being orchestrated by idiots like Notley and Trudeau.


----------



## Macfury

They know they won't get re-elected, SINC. This is throwing a much feces as possible against the wall and hoping some of their radicalism sticks.



SINC said:


> An old friend who lives in Calgary sent me an email yesterday. He got a notice from EnMax that his natural gas bill would rise by $181 a year in 2017, a further $250 in 2018 and an undetermined amount over and above that in 2019.
> 
> He is awaiting the same notice from his electricity provider. Add to that the gasoline taxes, the food price increases on freight due to that same gasoline tax and anything else you buy that uses fossil fuels including all plastics, etc. and you will be out $thousands per year.
> 
> And these NDP clowns actually think they can get elected again in 2019? We would be far better served by using science to reduce emissions from coal and leave the plants the hell alone. China alone spews out more coal emissions in a single day than Canada does in a year. This is madness being orchestrated by idiots like Notley and Trudeau.


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> An old friend who lives in Calgary sent me an email yesterday. He got a notice from EnMax that his natural gas bill would rise by $181 a year in 2017, a further $250 in 2018 and an undetermined amount over and above that in 2019.
> 
> He is awaiting the same notice from his electricity provider. Add to that the gasoline taxes, the food price increases on freight due to that same gasoline tax and anything else you buy that uses fossil fuels including all plastics, etc. and you will be out $thousands per year.
> 
> And these NDP clowns actually think they can get elected again in 2019? We would be far better served by using science to reduce emissions from coal and leave the plants the hell alone. China alone spews out more coal emissions in a single day than Canada does in a year. This is madness being orchestrated by idiots like Notley and Trudeau.


My projected increase is $23/year. Less than one month of EnMax gouge fees. My average gas bill is around $6-8/month with another $30 of gouge fees thrown in. That is of course a fairly small suite we are heating. That $180/year increase sounds like it would be typical of the MacMansions so common in the newer areas of Calgary.


----------



## SINC

eMacMan said:


> My projected increase is $23/year. Less than one month of EnMax gouge fees. My average gas bill is around $6-8/month with another $30 of gouge fees thrown in. That is of course a fairly small suite we are heating. That $180/year increase sounds like it would be typical of the MacMansions so common in the newer areas of Calgary.


He lives in a 1400 sq ft two storey he bought 28 years ago in the south Chapparell area.


----------



## SINC

How true this is:

Rachel Notley's disconnect with Alberta couldn't be more pronounced | Opinion | Calgary Sun


----------



## SINC

Another round of applause for Red Rachel for her support of Alberta's economy. 

Alberta nosedives on global oil and gas investment ranking - Calgary - CBC News


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Another round of applause for Red Rachel for her support of Alberta's economy.
> 
> Alberta nosedives on global oil and gas investment ranking - Calgary - CBC News


I hear Notley is planning some folk festivals to balance things out.


----------



## SINC

Everybody in the world gets it except the dummies in the Alberta NDP. 

NDP climate plan will accomplish nothing but the unnecessary punishment of Albertans | Opinion | Calgary Sun


----------



## Macfury

It will put tax money into union paycheques--that's all it's about anyway.



SINC said:


> Everybody in the world gets it except the dummies in the Alberta NDP.
> 
> NDP climate plan will accomplish nothing but the unnecessary punishment of Albertans | Opinion | Calgary Sun


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> It will put tax money into union paycheques--that's all it's about anyway.


Nope Alberta is running deficit. Every penny raised will line the vaults of Banksters. Any claims otherwise are smoke screens.


----------



## SINC

Red Rachel just does not get it, but she will come 2019.

Public anger against energy prices isn't going away


----------



## SINC

A little video for all those NDP types who want to leave fossil fuels in the ground:

https://vimeo.com/31586887


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> A little video for all those NDP types who want to leave fossil fuels in the ground:
> 
> 
> 
> https://vimeo.com/31586887



Deja vu.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

That voice sounded like Hannibal Lechter!



SINC said:


> A little video for all those NDP types who want to leave fossil fuels in the ground:
> 
> https://vimeo.com/31586887


----------



## SINC

Trudeau and Notley alert:

Green energy costs a fortune and has never worked


----------



## CubaMark

_*Ezra stoking the fires again. Race-baiting, lying, little weasel.....*_

*Lay off the lynch mob tactics, Ezra*

At the big anti-carbon-tax rally in Calgary on Sunday, about 1,000 Albertans gathered to register their opposition to the carbon tax, the NDP government … and the media.

Haley Jarmain, a 23-year-old student and part-time reporter, was there to cover the rally for NewsTalk 770, the big talk radio station in Calgary.

As one of the speakers attacked the media for its coverage of a rally in Edmonton the week before — coverage which focused on a “lock her up” chant directed at Premier Rachel Notley — audience members turned to the reporters at the back of the hall and booed.

“People were glaring and booing and it made us all feel a little uncomfortable, at which point I went into the hallway, where I stayed for the majority of the rally,” Jarmain later said during an interview with 770 talk show host Rob Breakenridge.

After the rally ended, a visibly upset man walked up to Jarmain.

“He got very close to me, looked me directly in the eye,” Jarmain told Breakenridge. “He was a taller man, taller than I am. He looked me right in the eye, and said, ‘You’re dead.’”

* * *​
Later, the rally organizer — journalist, activist and libelist Ezra Levant — attacked Jarmain. He set up a website using her name, (haleyjarmain.ca), mockingly offered a $1,000 reward for information about who threatened her and suggested she had made the whole thing up.

Levant — who once lost an $80,000 libel case after he called someone a liar — called Jarmain a liar, without offering evidence.

On social media, Levant’s devoted anonymous followers started viciously attacking her — an uncomfortable experience for anyone, let alone a 23-year-old part-time reporter.

* * *​
I believe that propagandists like Levant deserve the same protection under the law that traditional journalists enjoy. “The trouble with fighting for human freedom,” said the American journalist H. L. Mencken, “is that one spends most of one’s time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.”

But I think I might be done defending this particular scoundrel.​
(iPolitics)


----------



## FeXL

While not condoning alleged death threats, with all the lies & accusations the left has been making recently, and the sudden withdrawal of said accusations when evidence to the contrary comes to light, pardon me if I sound a little bit sceptical about this latest accusation.

This boils down to a he said/she said situation & I'll wait until some real evidence surfaces either way.

As far as the "Lock her up" chant directed to Red Rachel, wah, frickin' wah. Time to put on your big girl panties & grow a thicker skin. If that's the worst that's ever said to you, you've got nothing to complain about.



CubaMark said:


> Ezra blah, blah, blah


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Ummm, yeah. Not exactly stellar argumentative skills there, mon ami. If this were a courtroom, I believe they would call it contempt. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> As far as the "Lock her up" chant directed to Red Rachel, wah, frickin' wah. Time to put on your big girl panties & grow a thicker skin. If that's the worst that's ever said to you, you've got nothing to complain about.


Agreed!


----------



## FeXL

Duplicate post.


----------



## FeXL

Who the hell is this directed at? At least quote some text so everybody knows.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Ummm, yeah. Not exactly stellar argumentative skills there, mon ami. If this were a courtroom, I believe they would call it contempt.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Who the hell is this directed at? At least quote some text so everybody knows.




You. Mon ami. You might actually have to click on the graphic to see the context.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Who the hell is this directed at? At least quote some text so everybody knows.


Instead of quoting messages, he's now inexplicably using screen grabs from his iPhone.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Instead of quoting messages, he's now inexplicably using screen grabs from his iPhone.



Yes he is. It's much faster. And if you don't like it, well that's unfortunate. Have a happy day! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

I wasn't talking to you Freddie!



Freddie_Biff said:


> Yes he is. It's much faster. And if you don't like it, well that's unfortunate. Have a happy day!


----------



## FeXL

So I can be exposed to some Prog meme that was thought up by some idiot with the mentality of a kindergardener? No thx.

I'll take my chances with my wilful ignorance.

Now, as to your observation accompanying said screen grab...

I see you're still practicing your satire. Contempt? Of what? Stupid, baseless, Prog arguments? Absolutely! They disgust me.

But how, in this particular context? Use small words so you don't confuse yourself.

While we're at it, still waiting for your explanation regarding the connection between all those American nukes & Trump not hitting all his intel briefs. Why don't you go back to one of your fabulous moderated sites, ask the question & quote the response here? I'll accept that.

Or is that where your info came from in the first place?

Questions, questions, questions...



Freddie_Biff said:


> You. Mon ami. You might actually have to click on the graphic to see the context.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Instead of quoting messages, he's now inexplicably using screen grabs from his iPhone.


Well, it's guaranteed to forego a response from me. I don't click on anything without knowing in advance what it is.

I guess if you're frightened of having your ass handed to you in an even argument, that's a good way to avoid it...


----------



## FeXL

Lookit that! The exodus has begun. They're leaving before the Carbon Tax is implemented!

Rachel Notley's chief of staff Brian Topp resigns



> The most powerful person in the Alberta government — next to Premier Rachel Notley — has resigned.
> 
> In a surprising move, Brian Topp, chief of staff to the premier and the architect of much of the government’s aggressive agenda since the 2015 election, stepped down at 4 p.m. Wednesday.


Good. Don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way back to Ontariowe.

Now, is the next Commie going to be better or worse?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> So I can be exposed to some Prog meme that was thought up by some idiot with the mentality of a kindergardener? No thx.
> 
> 
> 
> I'll take my chances with my wilful ignorance.
> 
> 
> 
> Now, as to your observation accompanying said screen grab...
> 
> 
> 
> I see you're still practicing your satire. Contempt? Of what? Stupid, baseless, Prog arguments? Absolutely! They disgust me.
> 
> 
> 
> But how, in this particular context? Use small words so you don't confuse yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> While we're at it, still waiting for your explanation regarding the connection between all those American nukes & Trump not hitting all his intel briefs. Why don't you go back to one of your fabulous moderated sites, ask the question & quote the response here? I'll accept that.
> 
> 
> 
> Or is that where your info came from in the first place?
> 
> 
> 
> Questions, questions, questions...




It wasn't a "prog meme." It was a screenshot of your "blah blah blah" summation so as to provide some....uh....context. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> I wasn't talking to you Freddie!



No, you seem to prefer to talk about me, Macfury. I'm flattered.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

'Cause setting the example for all the little people is simply far beneath such a lofty...perch.

Notley declined secure bus transport the day premiers discussed climate change: 'She's a 'hypocrite,' Brian Jean says



> Earlier this month, Premier Notley went to Ottawa and attended a working dinner with the other premiers and Prime Minister Trudeau on the subject of dollars for health care.
> 
> Bus transport was made available for the premiers following the dinner and after a day where earlier chatter was all about the virtue of fighting climate change.
> 
> Jean says he found out when the dinner meeting concluded Notley did not take the bus. There was room for all, including security, he'd been told. But Notley didn't take the bus, an actual bus.


More:



> In fact, the only one who did take the bus after the meeting was Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall often slimed as hating Mother Earth because he won't buy into a carbon tax.


Good on you, Brad. :clap:


----------



## Macfury

Great!



Freddie_Biff said:


> No, you seem to prefer to talk about me, Macfury. I'm flattered.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Well, it's guaranteed to forego a response from me. I don't click on anything without knowing in advance what it is.
> 
> 
> 
> I guess if you're frightened of having your ass handed to you in an even argument, that's a good way to avoid it...



Funny thing is that you are the very "idiot with the mentality of a kindergartener" whose words that you don't want to read, since it was your own words I had quoted. Now that's irony—thank you! You made my day. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Gawd! You are so witty! Just like a 5 year old. :baby::love2:



Freddie_Biff said:


> Funny thing is...


----------



## SINC

They know not what they are doing to Alberta. Damn Dipper dummies.



> A family-run greenhouse southeast of Calgary finished its last harvest Thursday before closing the business for good, *citing cost pressures created by the Alberta NDP government’s new labour and climate policies.*
> 
> *“You couldn’t come up with better policies to crush not only small farms, but I think small Alberta businesses in general,”* said Paul Hotchkiss, owner of Hotchkiss Herbs and Produce.
> 
> He said his margins are pennies, not dollars, adding his business can’t stay profitable when facing higher heating and wage costs. *The increases are anticipated as a result of Bill 6 and its overtime and workers compensation for farm employees, rising minimum wage and the carbon tax coming in the New Year.*


Way to go Red Rachel!

Calgary-area greenhouse owners say NDP policy pressure killed their business | Globalnews.ca


----------



## Macfury

Again, SINC--they don't care. These are not union jobs or businesses going under.


----------



## FeXL

In reading Red Rachel's response in the Calgary Sun to questions that raise the amount of ire in Albertans regarding the carbon tax yesterday, she noted that she's not getting the anger that the questioner described. Sitting in her ivory tower, I'm not surprised.

Maybe it's time to get the point across.

Oh, here's some elementary school mathematics for her:

Do you think struggling businesses are just going to eat this cost because you don't understand economics?

From the tweet above:



> We have received 2 similiar letters the past week; they are both adding 1% to their transportation invoices.
> 
> ...
> 
> Our revised contract "terms & conditions" read as follows: Prices due not include PST, GST or Carbon Taxes.


Comments on the above tweet:

Redrose Country



> A tax by any other name is still a tax and it *always* trickles down.


Links' bold.


----------



## Dr.G.

Nothing to do with the NDP, but this is the only Alberta thread here in ehMacLand.

How a 47-year-old burger became a fixture in the Alberta legislature - Home | As It Happens | CBC Radio


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Dr.G. said:


> Nothing to do with the NDP, but this is the only Alberta thread here in ehMacLand.
> 
> 
> 
> How a 47-year-old burger became a fixture in the Alberta legislature - Home | As It Happens | CBC Radio



I heard that on CBC! Pretty bizarre what must be taken in as an official document sometimes. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Dr.G.

Freddie_Biff said:


> I heard that on CBC! Pretty bizarre what must be taken in as an official document sometimes.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


 True.


----------



## SINC

If only Rachel Notley and the Alberta NDP could read and comprehend.

The Truth About China – 2,400 New Coal Plants Will Thwart Any Paris #COP21 Pledges

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/12...l-plants-will-thwart-any-paris-cop21-pledges/


----------



## Dr.G.

Alberta carbon tax calculator: How much will you pay — or get back? - Calgary - CBC News Multimedia


If I lived in AB, I would have to pay about $300. Exactly where would this money go, and for what purpose would the funds be utilized?


----------



## SINC

That tax calculator is so wrong that it must have been written by Notley herself. ALL carbon taxes to EVERY business will trickle down to the consumer. The very limited calculator deliberately ignores 90% of the real carbon taxes EVERY Albertan will pay. The calculator is nothing but NDP propaganda, omissions and lies.


----------



## Dr.G.

SINC said:


> That tax calculator is so wrong that it must have been written by Notley herself. ALL carbon taxes to EVERY business will trickle down to the consumer. The very limited calculator deliberately ignores 90% of the real carbon taxes EVERY Albertan will pay. The calculator is nothing but NDP propaganda, omissions and lies.


Sinc, don't shoot the messenger. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Dr.G. said:


> Sinc, don't shoot the messenger. Paix, mon ami.



Easy now, Dr. G. It's like asking a leopard to change its spots. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

It's like asking the NDP to understand business!


----------



## Freddie_Biff

It's liking asking a narcissist to feel empathy and compassion. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> It's liking asking a narcissist to feel empathy and compassion.


Bingo! Notley substitutes ideology for empathy and compassion. She doesn't care how much grief her policies cause--as long as they make her feel good about herself.


----------



## SINC

Dr.G. said:


> Sinc, don't shoot the messenger. Paix, mon ami.


The comment was in no way directed at you. It simply pointed out that the calculator deliberately misleads those who use it.


----------



## SINC

SINC said:


> The comment was in no way directed at you. It simply pointed out that the calculator deliberately misleads those who use it.


And so it begins:


----------



## Dr.G.

SINC said:


> The comment was in no way directed at you. It simply pointed out that the calculator deliberately misleads those who use it.


OK. No problem. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## Macfury

Notley's philosophy in action:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/santa-cl...recession-hit-venezuelans-tell-143324096.html



> As a harrowing economic crisis makes food scarce for millions of Venezuelans, many families cannot buy their children Christmas presents, decorate their home, or even host a holiday dinner.


The sweet fruits of progressivism. They only nationalized the oil industry to help Venezuelans. Their policies were designed to help the poor and needy. Judge them on their intentions, not their results. Like that old gag: which government creates the most millionaires in the shortest period of time? Socialist of course, provided the population consists primarily of billionaires.


----------



## SINC

The trickle down continues:

Alberta trucking companies add carbon tax surcharge to customers' bills - Calgary - CBC News


----------



## Macfury

I hope they continue to show this tax grab as a separate line item. The NDP appears to be composed of heartless bureaucrats, kicking Albertans when they're down. Just campaigning on killing the carbon tax alone will win the next election for the new government--with only a few holdouts in Edmonton believing that they're part of some sort of imaginary prog revolution.


----------



## SINC

This is exactly what Knothead's Dippers are up to.


----------



## SINC

Red Rachel's Office Door.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Red Rachel's Office Door.



If you believe climate change is an imaginary problem, that certainly explains a lot. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

OK, just before I disembowel yet another of your fantasies, let's clarify some terms.

Define "climate change" as you have used it in your sentence, please.



Freddie_Biff said:


> If you believe climate change is an imaginary problem, that certainly explains a lot.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> If you believe climate change is an imaginary problem, that certainly explains a lot.


Freddie, you have been incapable of articulating even the most basic assumptions about so-called climate change. This explains a lot about your concerns about "climate change."


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Freddie, you have been incapable of articulating even the most basic assumptions about so-called climate change. This explains a lot about your concerns about "climate change."



I am quite capable of articulating. I don't bother trying to articulate such matters with you or your alt-right friends because you are incapable of even comprehending that such a phenomenon could actually exist. If you believe it is a myth, why should I try to make you let go of your little fantasy? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

It's funny to see "can't" hiding behind "won't." 



Freddie_Biff said:


> I am quite capable of articulating. I don't bother trying to articulate such matters with you or your alt-right friends because you are incapable of even comprehending that such a phenomenon could actually exist. If you believe it is a myth, why should I try to make you let go of your little fantasy?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> It's funny to see "can't" hiding behind "won't."



Exactly. As in you won't consider that climate change is real. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

I've considered it. I had even hoped that warming was true. However, the evidence doesn't support anything but largely natural variation.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Exactly. As in you won't consider that climate change is real.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> I've considered it. I had even hoped that warming was true. However, the evidence doesn't support anything but largely natural variation.



That's a pretty vague answer. Why should anyone consider your opinion to be more substantial than the view of actual scientists? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Simply because I understand why the theory fails and you can't articulate why you believe it succeeds--short of an appeal to authority. Only Galileo was right, even though the thundering herds beat their chests in great numbers.



Freddie_Biff said:


> That's a pretty vague answer. Why should anyone consider your opinion to be more substantial than the view of actual scientists?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Simply because I understand why the theory fails and you can't articulate why you believe it succeeds--short of an appeal to authority. Only Galileo was right, even though the thundering herds beat their chests in great numbers.



Galileo would also have gone with the opinion of scientists: climate change is something we ignore at our own peril. And you, mon ami, are no Galileo. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Where did you learn your history? This sort of misinformation is utterly staggering...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Galileo would also have gone with the opinion of scientists...


----------



## Macfury

Now time to put your brain to work. Where does the author of this piece go wrong? Cite scientific reasoning:

100% Of US Warming Is Due To NOAA Data Tampering | The Deplorable Climate Science Blog


----------



## FeXL

Define "climate change".



Freddie_Biff said:


> Exactly. As in you won't consider that climate change is real.


----------



## FeXL

Another appeal to authority. Argument _fail_.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Why should anyone consider your opinion to be more substantial than the view of actual scientists?


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Where did you learn your history? This sort of misinformation is utterly staggering...


Agreed. And from a _teacher_, yet. Glad my children don't go to school in the Edmonton area...


----------



## FeXL

Galileo would have gone where the evidence took him. Much the same as Macfury, myself & many other people sceptical of the narrative & in the complete absence of evidence to the contrary have done...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Galileo would also have gone with the opinion of scientists...


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Now time to put your brain to work. Where does the author of this piece go wrong? Cite scientific reasoning:


No way he touches that with a ten foot pole. Hell, he won't even give a definition for "climate change", he's so afraid of having his butt handed to him.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Where did you learn your history? This sort of misinformation is utterly staggering...




Galileo would have gone where the evidence led him. The climate has changed significantly since humans started pumping extra chemicals into the atmosphere. It is you who is ignoring the facts here. There is no action without consequences. You seem to be in denial that anything involving petrochemicals could actually be bad for the planet. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Another appeal to authority. Argument _fail_.














Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Galileo would have gone where the evidence led him. The climate has changed significantly since humans started pumping extra chemicals into the atmosphere. It is you who is ignoring the facts here. There is no action without consequences. You seem to be in denial that anything involving petrochemicals could actually be bad for the planet.


The climate has not changed significantly and there is little if any connection to CO2. The fact that you're wetting your pants over climate change is not proof. I don't mind you holding that delusion as long as you don't try to strong-arm other people into sharing it. 

Doesn't really matter anyway because the "Paris Accord" is going down the dumper next year.

Nice work on that article, Freddie--you really showed us you're made of sterner stuff.


----------



## FeXL

Look, I got no truck with you using my words, but at least give me credit for the quote.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Galileo would have gone where the evidence led him.


Where? How? And exactly how much of this inestimable change can be apportioned to mankind with the balance to Ma Nature?

Let's establish a baseline: Even believers acknowledge that there was not enough influence from mankind's emissions prior to 1950 to be measurable.

Good. There's our start.

Now, exactly what has happened to our climate in the last 66 years that has never happened before? What part is unprecedented?

Let's go through a list. For expediency, I reluctantly use Wiki:
1. High temperature record? Nope. Death Valley, 1913.
2. Low temperature record? Yes. Antarctica, 1983. Goes against Global Warming.
3. Rainfall record? Nope. Long term, 1 year & 10 year records established prior to 1950.
4. Snowfall record? Yep. 24 hour, 1 year & one season records post 1950. Goes against Global Warming.
5. Drought record? None noted. And none to my knowledge. Historical droughts have been much worse.
6. Hurricane record? No. Quite the contrary. There has been a 10 year hurricane drought.
7. Tornado record? Some recent records established.
8. Sea level rise record? No significant increase or decrease in rates of sea level rise.
9. Atmospheric CO2 concentration record? Not even close. 7000 ppm in the Paleozoic.

Funny, I don't see "significant" climate changes anywhere, let alone anything that can be blamed on mankind. Most changes noted above go against GHG theory.

And, you know why? Pre-industrial atmospheric CO2 concentrations have been calculated around 280 ppm. In 1950 they were around 310 ppm. Now, they're around 400 ppm. It is well known that around 96% of the CO2 in the atmosphere is naturally generated, Ma Nature, with the balance of anthropogenic origins.

So, 4% of 310 is 12.4 ppm and 4% of 400 is 16 ppm. Therefore, mankind's entire contribution to measurable atmospheric CO2 concentration over the course of the last 67 years has been *less than 4 parts per million.*

And, this is for a compound which is not a poison, but an essential nutrient for plant photosynthesis.

In addition, Paleozic evidence shows that atmospheric CO2 concentrations reached as high as 7000 ppm, more than 17 times greater than what is current, & yet we're still here to talk about it. So much for impending "tipping points". Plus, even in the presence of all that atmospheric CO2, there was an ice age. Things that make you go hmmm...



Freddie_Biff said:


> The climate has changed significantly since humans started pumping extra chemicals into the atmosphere. It is you who is ignoring the facts here. There is no action without consequences. You seem to be in denial that anything involving petrochemicals could actually be bad for the planet.


----------



## eMacMan

Worshipping at the alter of Al Gore's First Church of Man Made Global Warming, requires a suspension of logic equal to anything found in any of the worlds dominant religions.

You have to believe that climate itself is static, despite ample evidence to the contrary.

You have to believe that atmospheric CO2 reflects energy back to earth but not back into space. 

You have to believe in a massive positive feed back loop that works only on CO2 produced by man but not the remaining 90% of CO2 which is nature's own. 

You have to believe there are no negative feedback loops which would offset the positive loop. 

You have to believe in the Michael Mann hockey stick despite the shattering impact of a 20 year plateau.

You have to blindly believe in computer models as the only proof of theory, even though said models are consistent only in their failure to predict past or future.

You have to believe in temperature data points that are variables not constants, changing whenever NASA discovers the current data set makes its models look idiotic. 

You have to believe a carbon tax that is designed to have zero impact on CO2 emissions will somehow magically eliminate peoples need; to heat their homes, feed their families, and get from A to B. 

I have said it before and repeat it here. Those who truly believe should be encouraged to sell their cars, sell their furnace as scrap and discard their dishes and refrigerators. Give your life savings to Al Gore, but do not demand that I do the same.

What the Carbon tax will do is cause inflation. Any farmer or rancher can tell Rachel that a big expense is fuel. You cannot plow or harvest fields with a Nissan Leaf. You cannot transport bales of hay with a Ford Ranger. You cannot use Vespas to deliver cattle to the slaughter house. All require heavy equipment and heavy equipment requires fuel to make it run. Increase those costs and the cost of food goes up. Of course if the goal is to force small ranchers or farmers to sell to big Agra then the Carbon Tax is tailor made to achieve that goal.

Now Rachel estimates the impact will be $400+ on a household. So a typical senior couple will get a $300 rebate and start out $100 in the hole, with a fixed income and facing rising expenses in every aspect of their lives.


----------



## FeXL

C'mon, Freddie! No witty football referee rejoinder? Cat got your tongue? Your Global Warming fantasy world just come crashing down in the face of actual facts? Waiting for a response from one of your other AGW-friendly blogs you can re-post here? Huddled in a dark corner & can't reach the keyboard? Use your damn phone & post another attempt at Swiftian satire! Or is Tapatalk broke down?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> C'mon, Freddie! No witty football referee rejoinder? Cat got your tongue? Your Global Warming fantasy world just come crashing down in the face of actual facts? Waiting for a response from one of your other AGW-friendly blogs you can re-post here? Huddled in a dark corner & can't reach the keyboard? Use your damn phone & post another attempt at Swiftian satire! Or is Tapatalk broke down?



Sorry, did you post something? I went out with friends last night. Unlike you, I actually have a life outside of this little sandbox we call ehMac. Have a nice day! 

P.S. how would you be able to see any witty football rejoinder if you have your graphics filter turned off? Perhaps you are more curious than you'd like to admit. 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

eMacMan said:


> Worshipping at the alter of Al Gore's First Church of Man Made Global Warming, requires a suspension of logic equal to anything found in any of the worlds dominant religions.
> 
> You have to believe that climate itself is static, despite ample evidence to the contrary.
> 
> You have to believe that atmospheric CO2 reflects energy back to earth but not back into space.
> 
> You have to believe in a massive positive feed back loop that works only on CO2 produced by man but not the remaining 90% of CO2 which is nature's own.
> 
> You have to believe there are no negative feedback loops which would offset the positive loop.
> 
> You have to believe in the Michael Mann hockey stick despite the shattering impact of a 20 year plateau.
> 
> You have to blindly believe in computer models as the only proof of theory, even though said models are consistent only in their failure to predict past or future.
> 
> You have to believe in temperature data points that are variables not constants, changing whenever NASA discovers the current data set makes its models look idiotic.
> 
> You have to believe a carbon tax that is designed to have zero impact on CO2 emissions will somehow magically eliminate peoples need; to heat their homes, feed their families, and get from A to B.
> 
> I have said it before and repeat it here. Those who truly believe should be encouraged to sell their cars, sell their furnace as scrap and discard their dishes and refrigerators. Give your life savings to Al Gore, but do not demand that I do the same.
> 
> What the Carbon tax will do is cause inflation. Any farmer or rancher can tell Rachel that a big expense is fuel. You cannot plow or harvest fields with a Nissan Leaf. You cannot transport bales of hay with a Ford Ranger. You cannot use Vespas to deliver cattle to the slaughter house. All require heavy equipment and heavy equipment requires fuel to make it run. Increase those costs and the cost of food goes up. Of course if the goal is to force small ranchers or farmers to sell to big Agra then the Carbon Tax is tailor made to achieve that goal.
> 
> Now Rachel estimates the impact will be $400+ on a household. So a typical senior couple will get a $300 rebate and start out $100 in the hole, with a fixed income and facing rising expenses in every aspect of their lives.



All good points, eMacMan. However, I have a feeling that in two days the sky will not fall, though I could be wrong. Gasoline prices already fluctuate wildly, for example, even before a carbon tax. When gas hit $1.30 per litre all kinds of businesses said it would ruin them financially and raised their prices accordingly. When it dropped back down to $0.70 or $0.80 they certainly did not drop their prices again in response. We shall see.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Nope, surfed ehMac last night with my phone, something I never do. Saw all the crap you've been posting. Confirmed my earlier observation about childish garbage.

But, hey, post away! I'm sure the huddled masses appreciate your erroneous observations.



Freddie_Biff said:


> how would you be able to see any witty football rejoinder if you have your graphics filter turned off? Perhaps you are more curious than you'd like to admit.


----------



## FeXL

Yes, many did drop prices. Many businesses deal with this by adding on a gasoline surcharge. As the price of fuel goes up, so does the surcharge. As the price of fuel goes down, so does the surcharge.

Many just ate the increase while it was there. We did, largely because the cost of fuel is not a big part of the business overhead (neither our own usage, nor freight). However, we will not be eating the Carbon Tax. Prices go up Jan 1, (the first increase we've had in 5 years) with a note on our invoices that the increase is in specific response to Red Rachel's Carbon Tax.



Freddie_Biff said:


> When gas hit $1.30 per litre all kinds of businesses said it would ruin them financially and raised their prices accordingly. When it dropped back down to $0.70 or $0.80 they certainly did not drop their prices again in response. We shall see.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Sorry, did you post something? I went out with friends last night. Unlike you, I actually have a life outside of this little sandbox we call ehMac. Have a nice day!


Does EhMac take up so much of your time that you can't both have a busy social life and read and respond to a few posts?


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Does EhMac take up so much of your time that you can't both have a busy social life and read and respond to a few posts?


Takes a lot of time to Photoshop those little referee pitchers, an' come up with all those witty repartees...


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> All good points, eMacMan. However, I have a feeling that in two days the sky will not fall, though I could be wrong. Gasoline prices already fluctuate wildly, for example, even before a carbon tax. When gas hit $1.30 per litre all kinds of businesses said it would ruin them financially and raised their prices accordingly. When it dropped back down to $0.70 or $0.80 they certainly did not drop their prices again in response. We shall see.


The sky won't fall. Alberta will simply become uncompetitive, more businesses will fail and more Albertans will struggle to pay for the basics. The NDP's own analysis of the tax said as much.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Yes, many did drop prices. Many businesses deal with this by adding on a gasoline surcharge. As the price of fuel goes up, so does the surcharge. As the price of fuel goes down, so does the surcharge.


It would be great if NDP voters took some lessons in basic economics. Applying unicorn philosophies to real life economies has disastrous consequences.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Takes a lot of time to Photoshop those little referee pitchers, an' come up with all those witty repartees...


I appreciate the hard work that goes into those witty rejoinders--can you imagine the sweat equity that goes into typing a new phrase into the NFL referee meme generator?

https://memegenerator.net/Nfl-Referee


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> It would be great if NDP voters took some lessons in basic economics. Applying unicorn philosophies to real life economies has disastrous consequences.


Yep, Trudeau and Notley both.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> I appreciate the hard work that goes into those witty rejoinders--can you imagine the sweat equity that goes into typing a new phrase into the NFL referee meme generator?


O. M. G. :yikes:


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> It would be great if NDP voters took some lessons in basic economics.


I find it stunning that so many so-called adults have zero, none, nada, no idea of what's happening in their own backyard. I mean who, aside from the Progs on this board, haven't heard of a fuel surcharge that raises & lowers with the cost of fuel?

They have no clue...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> I find it stunning that so many so-called adults have zero, none, nada, no idea of what's happening in their own backyard. I mean who, aside from the Progs on this board, haven't heard of a fuel surcharge that raises & lowers with the cost of fuel?
> 
> They have no clue...


Yeah but Ralph Klein...


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Yep, Trudeau and Notley both.


That's OK. It's cementing Red Rachel's reputation as an economic idiot (among other things) & she will be the only single term premier in Alberta's history.

Even The Hairdo's rep is taking a dive.

Hey, fjn, how's that old Steam song go?

"Nah nah nah nah, hey hey, goodbye..."


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Yeah but Ralph Klein...


Exactly. "He made teachers take a 40% wage cut!!!" 

Just shaking my head...

Whaddya s'pose the coffee klatch will be saying about the carbon tax after she gets done with them.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

5 x 8 = 40

Pretty tough to understand. I know some of you are mathematically challenged, but Jeez, you can even punch this one into your calculator. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Asked. Answered.

Unbelievable.

And you are a teacher. Frightening...  I _seriously_ hope it's drama.

It's no wonder you & your coffee klatch think Red Rachel will save the world. Go talk to one of the math teachers on your staff, come back & tell me what he/she/it said. I want to know if this is endemic to your whole staff or if it's just a few ignorant outliers.

My lovely bride, a double major (math/phys-ed), with nearly 30 years of teaching under her belt, including 12 years of preparing grade 12 students for provincial math exams, thinks you're an idiot. So does our oldest child, currently a mechanical engineering student and who received over a dozen awards for the highest class mark over the course of high school, not limited to but including, linear math, calculus, physics & chemistry. Not some little country school with 150 students, either. A 4A school with over 250 graduating that year.

I just think you're an embarrassment to the occupation.

Get help.

If you don't know what you're talking about, keep the hole under your nose shut.



Freddie_Biff said:


> 5 x 8 = 40


----------



## SINC

Red Rachel doesn't get it. Kevin does. 

O'Leary: Open letter to Premier Rachel Notley | | Edmonton Sun


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Asked. Answered.
> 
> 
> 
> Unbelievable.
> 
> 
> 
> And you are a teacher. Frightening...  I _seriously_ hope it's drama.
> 
> 
> 
> It's no wonder you & your coffee klatch think Red Rachel will save the world. Go talk to one of the math teachers on your staff, come back & tell me what he/she/it said. I want to know if this is endemic to your whole staff or if it's just a few ignorant outliers.
> 
> 
> 
> My lovely bride, a double major (math/phys-ed), with nearly 30 years of teaching under her belt, including 12 years of preparing grade 12 students for provincial math exams, thinks you're an idiot. So does our oldest child, currently a mechanical engineering student and who received over a dozen awards for the highest class mark over the course of high school, not limited to but including, linear math, calculus, physics & chemistry. Not some little country school with 150 students, either. A 4A school with over 250 graduating that year.
> 
> 
> 
> I just think you're an embarrassment to the occupation.
> 
> 
> 
> Get help.
> 
> 
> 
> If you don't know what you're talking about, keep the hole under your nose shut.



You are such an a-hole. Despite that fact, and the fact that your lovely bride and wonderful son appear to be just as clueless as you are, allow me to explain, yet again, a concept that seems to elude you. 

Say a teacher (or any other worker) were earning $70,000 a year. A 5% cutback would represent $3,500. Are you with me so far? So if the wage were to remain constant for the sake of argument, and the wage were not reinstated to what the former wage was, and that same cutback were to happen for eight years in a row, the total amount deducted from the previous salary would be $28,000—the equivalent of 40% OF ONE YEAR'S WAGES WAGES. Klein's promise was a temporary cutback until the budget was balanced. It was balanced within a year or two, but once he started cutting there was no way he was giving back until he was forced to by the legal system. 

FFS, it's not that hard to understand, even for someone so ignorant of the facts as you.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

No.

Alberta teachers did not get a 40% wage cut under Klein's stewardship. Period. They got a 5% wage cut, *per year*, for a helluva lot less than 8 years.

No amount of twisting, turning, obfuscating, Prog-speak (but I repeat myself), non-existant math skills, wilful ignorance or anything else will change that.



Freddie_Biff said:


> blah, blah-blah, blah, blah.


----------



## FeXL

Maybe I am. At least I'm not ignorant.



Freddie_Biff said:


> You are such an a-hole.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> No.
> 
> 
> 
> Alberta teachers did not get a 40% wage cut under Klein's stewardship. Period. They got a 5% wage cut, *per year*, for a helluva lot less than 8 years.
> 
> 
> 
> No amount of twisting, turning, obfuscating, Prog-speak (but I repeat myself), non-existant math skills, wilful ignorance or anything else will change that.



A helluva lot less, huh? Perhaps you'd like to recount that, because I along with every teacher in Alberta, lost 5% in 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001 before binding arbitration returned half the sacrifice back to us. EIGHT YEARS. You don't care because it didn't come out of your pocket, but I remember it well. We lost what would amount to about another 10% due to inflation under your hero, Alison Redford with a wage freeze for 3 years and a whopping 2% in the 4th year. So yeah, I'd have to see I've done a HELLUVA lot more to balance Alberta's books out of my own pocket than you have.

Odd that never actually said what it is you do for a living as far as I can remember, yet you take potshots at my occupation on a regular basis. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Maybe I am. At least I'm not ignorant.




Alrighty then. You are an ignorant a-hole. Better? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

<sigh> Oh, the sacrifices...



Freddie_Biff said:


> ...before binding arbitration returned half the sacrifice back to us. EIGHT YEARS.


Lovely bride->teacher. Remember?



Freddie_Biff said:


> You don't care because it didn't come out of your pocket, but I remember it well.


<sigh> Alison, my hero... :love2: 

Not. XX)

Yes, and how many people in the private sector got wage increases over that same period of time?

You don't "deserve" an increase every year. Any more than the private sector does. If it happens, be thankful. If you still have a job at year's end, again, be thankful. Quit p!$$ing & moaning about me, me, me. Despite what you think to the contrary, the sun does not rise & set on public sector wages.



Freddie_Biff said:


> We lost what would amount to about another 10% due to inflation under your hero, Alison Redford with a wage freeze for 3 years and a whopping 2% in the 4th year.


So, what's this? A dick measuring contest? You lose...



Freddie_Biff said:


> So yeah, I'd have to see I've done a HELLUVA lot more to balance Alberta's books out of my own pocket than you have.


Funny, my occupation is a matter of record on these boards. Perhaps, with those bloodshot eyes & all the steam coming out of your ears you missed it. Along with many other facts your ideology has blinded you to.

Actually, I take potshots at your ignorance. The fact that such ignorance is educating today's youth scares the hell out of me. If my children were your students, I'd change schools. I cannot make it any plainer than that.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Odd that never actually said what it is you do for a living as far as I can remember, yet you take potshots at my occupation on a regular basis.


----------



## FeXL

BTW, interesting assumption.

Not confirming nor denying but I made a point of making said offspring sexless.



Freddie_Biff said:


> ...wonderful son...


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Blah blah blah



Well I tried to explain, but it appears you have no interest or empathy for anything I have to say. You are hypercritical. And you are relentless, like a moth to a flame. If I ignore you, you criticize. If I respond, you criticize. Your modus operandi is insults and you seem not to be all that pleasant of a person at the best of times. You are infatuated with being right, not with being kind. Unless you can grow up and learn to converse like an adult, I'm sorry to say but you're just not worth my time. I know you are likely to make fun of this response, but I can't help that. Goading is what you do, the bully's trademark. There's not many people I write off, but sadly you are one. I truly hope you have a better year this year. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> You are such an a-hole. Despite that fact, and the fact that your lovely bride and wonderful son appear to be just as clueless as you are, allow me to explain, yet again, a concept that seems to elude you.
> 
> Say a teacher (or any other worker) were earning $70,000 a year. A 5% cutback would represent $3,500. Are you with me so far? So if the wage were to remain constant for the sake of argument, and the wage were not reinstated to what the former wage was, and that same cutback were to happen for eight years in a row, the total amount deducted from the previous salary would be $28,000—the equivalent of *40% OF ONE YEAR'S WAGES WAGES*. Klein's promise was a temporary cutback until the budget was balanced. It was balanced within a year or two, but once he started cutting there was no way he was giving back until he was forced to by the legal system.
> 
> FFS, it's not that hard to understand, even for someone so ignorant of the facts as you.


Well, for a teacher I am afraid it is you who do not have a clue how to use basic math.

If you had made the $70,000 per year you used as an example for those eight years, you would have made $560,000 with no cutbacks.

You state you lost $28,000 in total in your example.

5% of 560,000 = $28,000.

Let me make that easy for you:

10% of $560,000 = $56,000 divided by 2 = $28,000.

It wasn’t taken in a single year and it isn’t anything but 5%. Not 40% in any way, shape, form or math.

So any way you cut it, you’re dead wrong.

* Seems to me that little addition is a failed way to try and cover your butt, isn't it?


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> I'd have to see I've done a HELLUVA lot more to balance Alberta's books out of my own pocket than you have.


Since Alberta teacher wages are among the highest in Canada, you've also taken a lot out of the budget--so it's a wash.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Well, for a teacher I am afraid it is you who do not have a clue how to use basic math.
> 
> 
> 
> If you had made the $70,000 per year you used as an example for those eight years, you would have made $560,000 with no cutbacks.
> 
> 
> 
> You state you lost $28,000 in total in your example.
> 
> 
> 
> 5% of 560,000 = $28,000.
> 
> 
> 
> Let me make that easy for you:
> 
> 
> 
> 10% of $560,000 = $56,000 divided by 2 = $28,000.
> 
> 
> 
> It wasn’t taken in a single year and it isn’t anything but 5%. Not 40% in any way, shape, form or math.
> 
> 
> 
> So any way you cut it, you’re dead wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> * Seems to me that little addition is a failed way to try and cover your butt, isn't it?



Don, I give you credit for better listening skills, but perhaps that credit is misplaced. I never said 40% in one year; I said 5% per year is like the equivalent of 40% in any given year. I was at the time trying to figure out how much I'd given up. This is a problem for anyone who takes a temporary wage cut but then never has their original wage reinstated. If it had been one year once, it would have been $3500—a considerable amount, but something one can live through for the most part. Keep cutting for seven more years, and now you are $28,000 behind where you would have been had things just been left the way they were. Admittedly, it's better to have a job with reduced pay most times than not to have a job at all, but you must look at the big picture to understand lost earnings. When teachers went on strike on 2003, many were off for more than a month. Those were very hard times, but it was a choice that has to be made to recoup some lost earnings. I really wish you folks on these boards would stop preaching about what you perceive to be my incorrect calculations when clearly you are misquoting what I said. I was there. I experienced it. And I'm pretty sure you would not be singing the praises of the government of the day if it was your wages that had been affected. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Since Alberta teacher wages are among the highest in Canada, you've also taken a lot out of the budget--so it's a wash.



And how much of a wage cut did you take between 1994 and 2001, Macfury? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Don, I give you credit for better listening skills, but perhaps that credit is misplaced. I never said 40% in one year; I said 5% per year is like the equivalent of 40% in any given year. I was at the time trying to figure out how much I'd given up. This is a problem for anyone who takes a temporary wage cut but then never has their original wage reinstated. If it had been one year once, it would have been $3500—a considerable amount, but something one can live through for the most part. Keep cutting for seven more years, and now you are $28,000 behind where you would have been had things just been left the way they were. Admittedly, it's better to have a job with reduced pay most times than not to have a job at all, but you must look at the big picture to understand lost earnings. When teachers went on strike on 2003, many were off for more than a month. Those were very hard times, but it was a choice that has to be made to recoup some lost earnings. I really wish you folks on these boards would stop preaching about what you perceive to be my incorrect calculations when clearly you are misquoting what I said. I was there. I experienced it. And I'm pretty sure you would not be singing the praises of the government of the day if it was your wages that had been affected.


Nope, I would have accepted I had to give up 5% in total to help the province and never cried about it. Then or now as a matter of fact.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Nope, I would have accepted I had to give up 5% in total to help the province and never cried about it. Then or now as a matter of fact.



If you would have accepted that you had to give up 5% of your wages to help the province, then why are you crying about a 4.5% carbon tax now? You're helping the province. It's roughly the same proportion, except that the 5% wage cut was on gross income, not net. It would have been closer to 8-10% of net income. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> And how much of a wage cut did you take between 1994 and 2001, Macfury?


What difference would it make?

Besides, the possibility of government wage rollbacks is part of the deal when you receive such insanely generous public sector benefits.


----------



## Macfury

SINC is OK with a government that is getting its ship in order--not one where you're contributing bucketsful of money to a government with a gaping hole in the bottom of the boat.



Freddie_Biff said:


> If you would have accepted that you had to give up 5% of your wages to help the province, then why are you crying about a 4.5% carbon tax now? You're helping the province. It's roughly the same proportion, except that the 5% wage cut was on gross income, not net. It would have been closer to 8-10% of net income.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> What difference would it make?
> 
> 
> 
> Besides, the possibility of government wage rollbacks is part of the deal when you receive such insanely generous public sector benefits.



The difference it makes is substantial, if you want to belittle what others have sacrificed to provide the "Alberta Advantage." 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> The difference it makes is substantial, if you want to belittle what others have sacrificed to provide the "Alberta Advantage."


The overall teacher's package including benefits is really generous. Nobody says you had to enjoy a rollback, but most people in the private sector look at your overall compensation package and wonder what you're bitching about.


----------



## FeXL

And so it starts..

Last 2-3 weeks fuel price in Lethbridge has been an uncharacteristically steady $1.039/litre. It usually moves up & down a cent or two.

Today, $1.139. 10 cent jump.

Thx, Rachel. Bitch...


----------



## FeXL

Bull$h!t! How? Where? Explain using small words & pictures exactly how this Carbon Tax is helping the province?

All it is doing is putting money into gov't coffers to be pi$$ed away on crap that nobody wants or needs. It sure as hell ain't going to do anything for the climate.



Freddie_Biff said:


> ... then why are you crying about a 4.5% carbon tax now? You're helping the province.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Bull$h!t! How? Where? Explain using small words & pictures exactly how this Carbon Tax is helping the province?
> 
> All it is doing is putting money into gov't coffers to be pi$$ed away on crap that nobody wants or needs. It sure as hell ain't going to do anything for the climate.


Don't worry FeXL--Freddie says it's just a tax on the rich.


----------



## FeXL

Oh, & BTW, fukc you. Again.  

You can say what you want about me, a$$hole. Leave my family out of this.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Despite that fact, and the fact that your lovely bride and wonderful son appear to be just as clueless as you are...


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Don't worry FeXL--Freddie says it's just a tax on the rich.


Freddie would breathe Rachel's farts for the rest of his life if she told him it was good for him...


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> The overall teacher's package including benefits is really generous. Nobody says you had to enjoy a rollback, but most people in the private sector look at your overall compensation package and wonder what you're bitching about.



I'm not bitching. I think teacher pay and benefits in Alberta is very good. Pay in the oil industry is also very good in Alberta—provided there is work. If one must survive temporarily with unemployment or lost wages that is one thing. If one must survive for several years that is another. When Klein "balanced the books" there was no real shortfall, otherwise his gov't would keep t have started posting surpluses so soon after the initial cuts. But his cuts went on for far longer than necessary and were a clear sign of a power grab, not a tool for balancing the budget. At the same time, he was skimming from the Heritage Trust Fund to "balance the budget," and average Albertans fell for it. He was a terrible money manager, as is Mr. Trump down South, but both have charisma that seems to get them through the day. 

Teacher pay and benefits are still good, but the point was about about how much does the sacrifice cost over time. Those who strike for a month know that they will never get that money back, but then you don't get paid when you are not working, so it's a gamble. A short strike can be beneficial to the worker, a prolonged one not so much. Had there been no cutbacks, I would have earned $28,000 (using those figures) during that same period, a not insubstantial amount. For the 30,000 teachers in the province, the government saved about $840 million dollars over eight years. The frustrating thing was that it took binding arbitration to get even a fraction of that back once the gov't had started posting multi-billion dollar surpluses. 

I'm sure you care about monekd this since it didn't affect you personally unless you weee part of the public sector. I'm just asking that if you want me to put myself in the shoes of industry workers today (and I do—my band and I raised $9000 for Fort Mac last May), then try doing the same for others. Everyone is trying to survive. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Oh, & BTW, fukc you. Again.
> 
> 
> 
> You can say what you want about me, a$$hole. Leave my family out of this.



You brought them into it. And your dumb cat too, I believe. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> SINC is OK with a government that is getting its ship in order--not one where you're contributing bucketsful of money to a government with a gaping hole in the bottom of the boat.


Yep, Mcfury gets it.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Don, I give you credit for better listening skills, but perhaps that credit is misplaced. I never said 40% in one year; I said 5% per year is like the equivalent of 40% in any given year. I was at the time trying to figure out how much I'd given up. This is a problem for anyone who takes a temporary wage cut but then never has their original wage reinstated. If it had been one year once, it would have been $3500—a considerable amount, but something one can live through for the most part. Keep cutting for seven more years, and now you are $28,000 behind where you would have been had things just been left the way they were. Admittedly, it's better to have a job with reduced pay most times than not to have a job at all, but you must look at the big picture to understand lost earnings. When teachers went on strike on 2003, many were off for more than a month. Those were very hard times, but it was a choice that has to be made to recoup some lost earnings. I really wish you folks on these boards would stop preaching about what you perceive to be my incorrect calculations when clearly you are misquoting what I said. I was there. I experienced it. And I'm pretty sure you would not be singing the praises of the government of the day if it was your wages that had been affected.


Hmmmm


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Hmmmm



Try this. You can use pencil and paper if you don't trust your calculator. What percent of 70,000 is 28,000?

(Hint: 28/70 will give you the same proportion) 

ETA: incidentally, I hate the "new math" just as much as you do. Half the kids today can't even tell time on a round clock. Most use their phone calculators in lieu of knowing timestables.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Try this. You can use pencil and paper if you don't trust your calculator. What percent of 70,000 is 28,000?
> 
> (Hint: 28/70 will give you the same proportion)
> 
> ETA: incidentally, I hate the "new math" just as much as you do. Half the kids today can't even tell time on a round clock. Most use their phone calculators in lieu of knowing timestables.


Try this, be honest and use the correct earnings of $560,000 in total. After all, honesty is the best policy. It's 5% all day long, any day. Skewing figures to suit your venting and your cause isn't cool.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Try this, be honest and use the correct earnings of $560,000 in total. After all, honesty is the best policy. Skewing figures to suit your venting and your cause isn't cool.



You entirely missed the point. Go ahead and see it the way you want to see it. And 4.5 cents per litre is not going to break anybody's budget, so maybe you can stop whining about that. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> You entirely missed the point. Go ahead and see it the way you want to see it. And 4.5 cents per litre is not going to break anybody's budget, so maybe you can stop whining about that.


Geez Frank, it isn't the 4.5 cents, its the trickle down that adds at least 5% again to every single thing you buy that is trucked into Alberta. You either don't or won't see, that it is a regressive across the board tax.


----------



## FeXL

Yeah, I did. But that doesn't mean carte blanc to call them names, asshole. You've brought your daughter into discussions on these boards & nobody attacked her.

Grab a f'ing clue...



Freddie_Biff said:


> You brought them into it. And your dumb cat too, I believe.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Yeah, I did. But that doesn't mean carte blanc to call them names, asshole. You've brought your daughter into discussions on these boards & nobody attacked her.
> 
> 
> 
> Grab a f'ing clue...



You said your wife and kid think I'm an idiot. Grab an f'ing clue yourself, asshole. "Lovey bride" (your words) and "wonderful son" aren't derogatory in any event, and I was quoting you. Seems I hit a nerve.

See, that's the main problem with you FeXL. You don't talk to me as a person. Every word is full of derision. And yet you're surprised when some of that contempt comes back in your face. Think about what you're putting out. 

How about this: as a New Year's Resolution, we don't we just agree not to be assholes to each other anymore. It's worth a shot. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Yes, they do. You are an idiot if you think that a 5% salary rollback for 8 years in any way, shape or form equals a 40% rollback. Period. And so is anybody else. I don't care what colour you paint it. I don't care how much you backtrack. I don't care how many codicils you tack on to the back end of your original argument. I don't care how much you twist, turn, obfuscate, or otherwise try to change your statement.

Admit you're wrong & move on.



Freddie_Biff said:


> You said your wife and kid think I'm an idiot.


Here's your non-derogatory statement, asshole:



Freddie_Biff said:


> ...your lovely bride and wonderful son appear to be *just as clueless* as you are,


My bold.

Yeah, you hit a nerve. It's now open season on anybody you bring up in one of your posts. Consider yourself warned.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Grab an f'ing clue yourself, asshole. "Lovey bride" (your words) and "wonderful son" aren't derogatory in any event, and I was quoting you. Seems I hit a nerve.


The main problem with me is that I've been far, far, too patient & polite to just another clueless, Prog internet asshole.

You have earned every derisive word I've ever thrown at you & then some. And yet you act surprised when people get pissed off with you for never defending your statements, when you waffle & obfuscate about an issue, when you cry victim, when you show you couldn't pass a grade 7 math test, etc., etc., etc.

Yet, here you are again, just two pages after you sworn me off. Again. What's it now, 4 or 5 times? You're the one with the problem letting go.



Freddie_Biff said:


> See, that's the main problem with you FeXL. You don't talk to me as a person. Every word is full of derision. And yet you're surprised when some of that contempt comes back in your face. Think about what you're putting out.


How about as a New Year's resolution you put your big girls panties on & act like a reasonable human being who shuts the hole under his nose if he doesn't know anything about the issue, who actually defends his position in a reasonable fashion, who accepts criticism of his posts by people who know more on the topic than he does, who doesn't cry, whine or play victim when he loses an argument, who admits when he's wrong & moves on and who just generally acts like an adult?

How about that?

You want less derision? Earn it. *5% over 8 years is not f'ing 40%.* 'Til the cows come home. 

There are people on these boards who I am politically & economically diametrically opposed to, yet I still have at least some respect for them. Know why? 

*'Cause they don't post stupid $h!t on these boards.*

Rachel's smart. She's 50!
Trump is neither wise nor intelligent (despite the fact that he's a billionaire).
5% for 8 years is 40%.
*Et al.*

You want change? Initiate it...



Freddie_Biff said:


> How about this: as a New Year's Resolution, we don't we just agree not to be assholes to each other anymore. It's worth a shot.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> blah blah blah whine snivel big girl panties whine snivel



Have a Happy New Year, my friend! I hope you find the peace in your heart you so desperately crave. 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Dr.G.

Freddie_Biff said:


> Have a Happy New Year, my friend! I hope you find the peace in your heart you so desperately crave.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


A fine thought, Frank. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Try this, be honest and use the correct earnings of $560,000 in total. After all, honesty is the best policy. It's 5% all day long, any day. Skewing figures to suit your venting and your cause isn't cool.



Seriously, I don't understand why some of you take such exception to this example. Yes, $28,000 is 5% of $560,000. So what? I was looking at the total amount of money cut back, which is how the calculations for arbitration were arrived at. $28,000 is 40% of $70,000, which is what the cut backs EQUIVALENT would have looked like had they amen place in one year instead of spread over eight years. 

This is how the legal system saw it. The ATA was looking for 28% compensation, the gov't was offering 0%. The arbitrator split the difference and we got 14%. You probably looked at that and said wow! The teachers got a huge raise! Of course, that was after eight years of cutbacks, so it was still a net loss, but it was the best we were going to get. Those of you with a myopic view, who do not see the big picture, unfortunately just do not get it. It doesn't really matter whether you get it, however, because the arbitragers, who know what they're talking about, DID get it. 

Have a nice day. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Have a Happy New Year, my friend! I hope you find the peace in your heart you so desperately crave.


I find these posts to be so bizarre in their reasoning. Why can't a person who wants you to make at least a half-assed effort to defend your ideas already have peace in their heart?


----------



## Macfury

I don't think arbitrage has any monopoly on truth--it's just a gamble you take and maybe they will see things your way. 



Freddie_Biff said:


> Seriously, I don't understand why some of you take such exception to this example. Yes, $28,000 is 5% of $560,000. So what? I was looking at the total amount of money cut back, which is how the calculations for arbitration were arrived at. $28,000 is 40% of $70,000, which is what the cut backs EQUIVALENT would have looked like had they amen place in one year instead of spread over eight years.
> 
> This is how the legal system saw it. The ATA was looking for 28% compensation, the gov't was offering 0%. The arbitrator split the difference and we got 14%. You probably looked at that and said wow! The teachers got a huge raise! Of course, that was after eight years of cutbacks, so it was still a net loss, but it was the best we were going to get. Those of you with a myopic view, who do not see the big picture, unfortunately just do not get it. It doesn't really matter whether you get it, however, because the arbitragers, who know what they're talking about, DID get it.
> 
> Have a nice day.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> I find these posts to be so bizarre in their reasoning. Why can't a person who wants you to make at least a half-assed effort to defend your ideas already have peace in their heart?



Because obviously he doesn't. And whenever I do make an effort he just insults it anyway. Some people just aren't worth the effort it seems.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> I don't think arbitrage has any monopoly on truth--it's just a gamble you take and maybe they will see things your way.



Arbitration, you mean? Arbitrage has to do with the buying and selling of securities. Well, at least arbitraters tend to be objective and fair-minded. Point made though. They look at the total amount lost and make their calculations accordingly. A 14% for one year raise was still only a fraction of what was lost over eight years. Though to be fair, using your reasoning, it was only a 1.75% increase. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

It may not be worth your effort but I reckon he can still have peace in his heart.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Because obviously he doesn't. And whenever I do make an effort he just insults it anyway. Some people just aren't worth the effort it seems.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Arbitration, you mean? Arbitrage has to do with the buying and selling of securities.



You're right--way wrong word choice!


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> It may not be worth your effort but I reckon he can still have peace in his heart.



With that much venom? Doubtful. Some people just prefer to be pissed off. Not my circus, not my monkeys. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> You're right--way wrong word choice!




God bless autocorrect. 










More at damnyouautocorrect.com


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> I find these posts to be so bizarre in their reasoning. Why can't a person who wants you to make at least a half-assed effort to defend your ideas already have peace in their heart?


Thx, MF. They are not mutually exclusive. I have great peace in my heart for many.

Just none for idiot Progs in a constant state of denial...


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Seriously, I don't understand why some of you take such exception to this example. Yes, $28,000 is 5% of $560,000. So what? I was looking at the total amount of money cut back, which is how the calculations for arbitration were arrived at. $28,000 is 40% of $70,000, which is what the cut backs EQUIVALENT would have looked like had they amen place in one year instead of spread over eight years.
> 
> This is how the legal system saw it. The ATA was looking for 28% compensation, the gov't was offering 0%. The arbitrator split the difference and we got 14%. You probably looked at that and said wow! The teachers got a huge raise! Of course, that was after eight years of cutbacks, so it was still a net loss, but it was the best we were going to get. Those of you with a myopic view, who do not see the big picture, unfortunately just do not get it. It doesn't really matter whether you get it, however, because the arbitragers, who know what they're talking about, DID get it.
> 
> Have a nice day.


Ah, at last the truth comes out!

You swallowed the union skewed propaganda. Hook, line and stinker!

:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Ah, at last the truth comes out!
> 
> 
> 
> You swallowed the union skewed propaganda. Hook, line and stinker!
> 
> 
> 
> :lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:



I do not understand your reasoning. We got the best deal we could under the circumstances. So be it. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> I do not understand your reasoning. We got the best deal we could under the circumstances. So be it.


Well, let me try to enlighten you.

Union pissed off.

Union hires lawyers who invent tainted math formula to fight government in court.

Union members fall for badly miscalculated math scheme and apparently some still believe it to this day.

Any questions?


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


>


Wrong again.

He said "let the eastern bastards freeze in the dark".

We on the other were warm and had lights.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Well, let me try to enlighten you.
> 
> 
> 
> Union pissed off.
> 
> 
> 
> Union hires lawyers who invent tainted math formula to fight government in court.
> 
> 
> 
> Union members fall for badly miscalculated math scheme and apparently some still believe it to this day.
> 
> 
> 
> Any questions?



Yup. Why are you so dismissive of our accomplishments? Why do you scoff? It's like now you're insulting that you think we should have been more insistent on a higher amount. We knew we wouldn't get everything we gave up. We agreed to a wage cut until the province was able to cut the deficit and show a surplus. This was accomplished after two years. We were willing to help out by taking a cut in wages for two years, not eight. The decision under arbitration was less than what we were asking but better than zero. A 14% increase was substantial and helped to make Alberta teachers among the best in Canada. I am happy with my teacher salary and benefits despite having lived through some tough times and a premier who didn't respect our work nor our sacrifice. I also respected Ed Stelmach because he started to taking responsibility for the unfunded liability as well as tied our income to the Alberta average weekly earnings for five years, which was quite fair, in exchange for five years of labour peace. As for the current government, we shall see. Any questions? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Wrong again.
> 
> 
> 
> He said "let the eastern bastards freeze in the dark".
> 
> 
> 
> We on the other were warm and had lights.



That's when he was mayor of Calgary. Deregulation happened while he was Premier. Your memory is failing, Don.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## eMacMan

Freddie_Biff said:


> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



It was the idiot cabinet minister Smith who made that remark. My reply was: "It is impossible to put a sweater over a down jacket.


----------



## FeXL

"But it's only 4.5%!!! It's less than what teachers did under Klein!!! Albertans should be proud to be helping out!!!"

Idiot...

Calgary rec centre eyes turning off arena heaters due to carbon tax



> Hockey fans at a southeast recreation centre are being advised to bundle up and bring blankets to games as the non-profit facility looks at ways to cope with Alberta's new carbon tax.


More:



> Turner said operators have estimated the impact of the levy would increase the facility's annual natural gas bill, which last year was about $60,000, *by about 33 per cent* without any changes. More troubling is on the electrical side of the bill, also powered by natural gas, which is expected to see *an estimated 20 per cent* hike on its annual $360,000 bill.


My bold.

Curious, idn't it, how that 4.5% trickles down to a figure far larger? Just like anybody with enough brain power to melt the frost accumulated on their foreheads in a hockey arena called it.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

For the record, it's 4.5 cents/litre, not 4.5%. 

"But my wife and kid and cat think you're an idiot!"

Speaking of idiots....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Whatever. The point remains the same, no matter the numbers. The full cost to Albertans is a helluva lot more than the Lying NDP and their website called.

And you still don't know the difference between 5% & 40%. That point also remains...



Freddie_Biff said:


> For the record, it's 4.5 cents/litre, not 4.5%.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Whatever. The point remains the same, no matter the numbers. The full cost to Albertans is a helluva lot more than the Lying NDP and their website called.
> 
> 
> 
> And you still don't know the difference between 5% & 40%. That point also remains...



Apparently you don't even know what a percent is. It sure ain't the same as cents/litre, though they do both have the word "cent" in them. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## eMacMan

Not sure about the rest of the province but the impact of the carbon tax in the southwest corner of Alberta is now known. Gas went up 7¢ a litre. Since it would normally drop about 3¢ once the holiday traffic was over the total impact is 10¢/ litre. Don't forget it also costs more to transport it to the gas stations!

I think it is safe to apply that 2.25:1 ratio to the NDP estimate of cost to the average Albertan. In other words $900/year/household should prove a fairly accurate guess if slightly conservative guess. 

So even after rebates that senior couple on a fixed income will have to come up with an additional $50/month to keep their heads above water.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

eMacMan said:


> Not sure about the rest of the province but the impact of the carbon tax in the southwest corner of Alberta is now known. Gas went up 7¢ a litre. Since it would normally drop about 3¢ once the holiday traffic was over the total impact is 10¢/ litre. Don't forget it also costs more to transport it to the gas stations!
> 
> I think it is safe to apply that 2.25:1 ratio to the NDP estimate of cost to the average Albertan. In other words $900/year/household should prove a fairly accurate guess if slightly conservative guess.
> 
> So even after rebates that senior couple on a fixed income will have to come up with an additional $50/month to keep their heads above water.



If by "conservative guess" you mean alarmist sky-is-falling let's not give any of the blame to the gouging by the distributors, then sure, that's fairly accurate. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CubaMark

Here's what the pro-Carbon Tax folks are saying. How do these statements line up with the criticisms voiced in this thread?

*Five Handy Facts About Alberta’s New Carbon Tax*


Fact #1: Two-Thirds of Albertans Will Receive a Rebate*
Fact #2: All of the Money Raised by the Carbon Tax Will Stay in Alberta
Fact #3: Taxing Carbon is Not a New-Fangled Idea
Fact #4: There’s No Time Like the Present
Fact #5: The Carbon Tax Will Not Unfairly Harm Industry


----------



## eMacMan

CubaMark said:


> Here's what the pro-Carbon Tax folks are saying. How do these statements line up with the criticisms voiced in this thread?
> 
> *Five Handy Facts About Alberta’s New Carbon Tax*
> 
> 
> Fact #1: Two-Thirds of Albertans Will Receive a Rebate*
> Fact #2: All of the Money Raised by the Carbon Tax Will Stay in Alberta
> Fact #3: Taxing Carbon is Not a New-Fangled Idea
> Fact #4: There’s No Time Like the Present
> Fact #5: The Carbon Tax Will Not Unfairly Harm Industry


 #1) I have already illustrated that the rebate will fall short of covering added costs. Even if the NDP guestimates are accurate. They are not for example 4.5¢/litre of gas does not cover the additional transportation costs. Those big tandem tankers suck a lot of diesel getting gasoline to the pumps.
#2) Rachel has already been caught hiring and contracting out of province.
#3) That does not make it a good idea. Since it is designed to hit the poor and farmers and ranchers harder than most I would argue it is a very bad idea.
#4) If Rachel really thought this was a great idea, put it to a referendum, you know that thing that all politicians hate. Participatory democracy.
#5) I guess if you think forcing family farms and ranches to sell to big Agra is fair, you can make that argument.


----------



## FeXL

Prior to the New Year's increase, local gasoline prices were around a buck a litre. 4.5% of $1 is pretty damn close to 4.5 cents.

As a matter of fact it's nearly an order of magnitude closer than 5% is to 40%, Mr. Percentage Man. And this criticism coming from the guy who didn't know the difference between percentage & percentage point, either. That whole percentage world is just foreign to you, isn't it?



Freddie_Biff said:


> Apparently you don't even know what a percent is. It sure ain't the same as cents/litre, though they do both have the word "cent" in them.


----------



## FeXL

DeSmog Blog? Seriously? No further debunking required.

Talk about crap that rots your brain...



CubaMark said:


> Here's what the pro-Carbon Tax folks are saying. How do these statements line up with the criticisms voiced in this thread?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Prior to the New Year's increase, local gasoline prices were around a buck a litre. 4.5% of $1 is pretty damn close to 4.5 cents.
> 
> 
> 
> As a matter of fact it's nearly an order of magnitude closer than 5% is to 40%, Mr. Percentage Man. And this criticism coming from the guy who didn't know the difference between percentage & percentage point, either. That whole percentage world is just foreign to you, isn't it?



Nice try, but no. 4.5 cents/litre remains constant whether the price is $0.79/litre or $1.29/litre, whereas percentage would have the actual cents/litre fluctuate with the price. Just admit you're wrong and I'll move on, Mr. Percentage Points man. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## eMacMan

The issue is not how much the government rakes in per litre, but how much the tax ends up costing the consumer.

Post New Year the price rose 7¢/litre at a time when it would have traditionally dropped 2-3¢/litre. The cost to the consumer is 7-10¢/litre. Part of that difference is due to increased transport costs and part is due to greed, but the impact on the consumer remains constant no matter how you attempt to shift the blame.

FWIW the greed factor was entirely predictable but not including in the absurdly underestimated cost guess.


----------



## SINC

Three quarters of Albertans agree that the NDP don't get it and are doomed.

Brian Jean: Time and again, NDP MLAs prove they just don't get it | Guest column


----------



## SINC

Even the cartoonists get it.


----------



## Macfury

Hold on SINC, I hear public sector unions are pretty much behind her.


----------



## FeXL

As I noted earlier, it doesn't matter if it's 4.5 cents or 4.5%. The numbers are nowhere close to reality & are just another Red Rachel Prog lie.

Oh, and 79 cent fuel? You've seen the last of that.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Nice try, but no. 4.5 cents/litre remains constant whether the price is $0.79/litre or $1.29/litre, whereas percentage would have the actual cents/litre fluctuate with the price.


Sure! Just as soon as you admit that 5% ain't 40%. 

Like I noted earlier: You want change? Step up to the plate & initiate it.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Just admit you're wrong and I'll move on, Mr. Percentage Points man.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Hold on SINC, I hear public sector unions are pretty much behind her.


Even with the wage hikes the unions have received/will receive, no way in hell they realize that raise after the carbon tax.

Red Rachel just alienated the whole province.

The only issue that remains is to convince the total ideologues they've been screwed, too. Denial isn't just a river in Egypt...


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> As I noted earlier, it doesn't matter if it's 4.5 cents or 4.5%. The numbers are nowhere close to reality & are just another Red Rachel Prog lie.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, and 79 cent fuel? You've seen the last of that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure! Just as soon as you admit that 5% ain't 40%.
> 
> 
> 
> Like I noted earlier: You want change? Step up to the plate & initiate it.



I never stated that 5% is 40%, but explaining anything to you is like talking to a wall. I'm sure if I tried to explain it (yet again), you'd go off half-cocked anyway since you'd confuse it with cents per litre. Hey, remember back in the 90's? We were docked 5 cents/litre from our paycheques for eight years in a row! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## eMacMan

Read one of those disappearing news stories about a Calgary Condo complex where the residents were without hot water for a week due to a dead boiler. It was one of those stories that had disappeared by the time I went back to post a link. 

Anyways the reporter seemed to focus on the inconvenience of going to Grandmas or the Y for a shower. Which got me thinking about a minor crisis in our own household this week. The bathroom fan vent froze, so no shower. We resorted to face cloth baths, something the condo residents could have done with a single kettle of boiling water mixed with cold in the bathroom sink. That's what we did and it was sufficient motivation to clean the duct and get that fan working in a hurry. 

Now that got me to thinking that the energy savings from this style of hygiene is roughly on a par with energy efficient light bulbs. That is invisible on the power bill, but sufficient to have all true Goreshippers writhing in celebration of energy saved. 

*So I propose this: Everyone who truly believes the Carbon Tax is a good thing, should do only face cloth baths for the next six weeks then report back on how good they feel about their efforts to save the world. It's what Rachel wants for you. Mind you she will doubtless be using her deluxe four head shower before soaking in the hot tub.
*


----------



## FeXL

Dude, I remember that! It added up to, like, 40%, man. Damn that Ralph Klein for putting the provinces finances back in order, all on the backs of poor, overworked & underpaid teachers & nobody else. Damn him!!!

Wah, f'ing, wah.

Knew you couldn't do it...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Hey, remember back in the 90's? We were docked 5 cents/litre from our paycheques for eight years in a row!


----------



## FeXL

Yes, you did. 



fjnmusic said:


> Now, seeing as I experienced a 5% wage cutback for eight years in a row under the illustrious Klein revolution (*5x8=40*, the equivalent of a 40% wage cutback in any single given year)...


Yeah, my bold. 

Interesting thing, that search function.

So, wanna spread more BS or are you going to stop now, admit you were wrong & move on? Or are you merely going to perpetuate the lie?



Freddie_Biff said:


> I never stated that 5% is 40%...


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Dude, I remember that! It added up to, like, 40%, man. Damn that Ralph Klein for putting the provinces finances back in order, all on the backs of poor, overworked & underpaid teachers & nobody else. Damn him!!!
> 
> 
> 
> Wah, f'ing, wah.
> 
> 
> 
> Knew you couldn't do it...



Nope. If added up to 40 cents/litre. Thanks Rachel! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Yes, you did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, my bold.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting thing, that search function.
> 
> 
> 
> So, wanna spread more BS or are you going to stop now, admit you were wrong & move on? Or are you merely going to perpetuate the lie?



Again, for the umpteenth time. The fact that you cannot comprehend is not my problem. Tell me how much is 28,000 divided by 70,000? Just a fraction or a decimal or an equivalent percentage will do. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Blah blah blah
> 
> 
> 
> Knew you couldn't do it...



Couldn't do it? I did it. What did you sacrifice exactly? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

I comprehend perfectly.

You posted that you never said 5x8=40. I just proved you wrong. Again. 

As to your question, it's not relevant to the argument. I don't care what it is. It doesn't matter. It's just noise. All I need to know is that it ain't 5%/yr over 8 years.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Again, for the umpteenth time. The fact that you cannot comprehend is not my problem. Tell me how much is 28,000 divided by 70,000? Just a fraction or a decimal or an equivalent percentage will do.


----------



## FeXL

Couldn't man up & admit you were wrong.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Couldn't do it? I did it.


Asked & answered. Do try to keep up. Exactly...



Freddie_Biff said:


> What did you sacrifice exactly?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> I comprehend perfectly.
> 
> 
> 
> You posted that you never said 5x8=40. I just proved you wrong. Again.
> 
> 
> 
> As to your question, it's not relevant to the argument. I don't care what it is. It doesn't matter. It's just noise. All I need to know is that it ain't 5%/yr over 8 years.



You're afraid to the answer the question. Simple math! That's funny. Let me demonstrate, fraidy-cat. 28,000 divided by 70,000 is 0.4, or 40% (or 40 cents/litre in your world)—exactly what I said it was. If a wage cut were for one year, that would be one thing. When it extends over several years, it becomes substantially more. Not a difficult concept to grasp, even for a brainiac like yourself. Furthermore, the cost over several years is EXACTLY what arbitrators use to decide on an appropriate settlement—eight years in this case. Do some reading. 

ETA: I never said that 5% and 40% are THE SAME THING. I certainly did say that 5x8=40. I don't know why you're so fixated on this. You're like someone who knows he's lost the argument who's trying pathetically to save face at any cost. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Couldn't man up & admit you were wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asked & answered. Do try to keep up. Exactly...



During the Klein cutbacks of 1994-2000 what exactly did you sacrifice? I'm sorry I didn't memorize your answers, and I certainly don't remember you answering the question. Refresh my memory. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

A public sector pay cut is not a sacrifice.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> A public sector pay cut is not a sacrifice.



What an idiotic statement. I gave up a significant amount of my wages, not to mention a sudden cutback in jobs and security to help Klein balance the books and got a big FU in return. It didn't cost you a cent. I survived, but I had to take both a drop in pay and work part-time for several years to make ends meet. How dare you say something so ignorant. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

You're just like any other wage slave whose management is tightening the books. In the private sector, people don't say that they're "making sacrifices" for GM--they take their cuts because they hope that the pain will result in still having a job down the road. They're not doing it for GM any more than you were doing it for Alberta, unless it was a voluntary offer on your part. Or during the time of the cuts, would you also say that taxpayers were making fewer sacrifices for you?



Freddie_Biff said:


> What an idiotic statement. I gave up a significant amount of my wages, not to mention a sudden cutback in jobs and security to help Klein balance the books and got a big FU in return. It didn't cost you a cent. I survived, but I had to take both a drop in pay and work part-time for several years to make ends meet. How dare you say something so ignorant.


----------



## FeXL

I'm sorry, did you say something new? No? Then don't bother wasting the pixels.



Freddie_Biff said:


> blah, blah blah, blah blah


----------



## FeXL

Matter of record. Go find it. Try reading the posts for a change, instead of ignoring them.

Must be more of that selective memory things you Progs always seem to fall prey to...



Freddie_Biff said:


> I'm sorry I didn't memorize your answers, and I certainly don't remember you answering the question.


----------



## FeXL

Me, Me, Me, Me, Me. I, I, I, I, I. Poor whiner had to take a second job. Typical Prog narcissism. It's not all about you.

Everybody in the province made sacrifices. 



Freddie_Biff said:


> I survived, but I had to take both a drop in pay and work part-time for several years to make ends meet.


----------



## SINC

FeXL said:


> Me, Me, Me, Me, Me. I, I, I, I, I. Poor whiner had to take a second job. Typical Prog narcissism. It's not all about you.
> 
> Everybody in the province made sacrifices.


Yep, like nurses for example. My wife, an RN, and her fellow nurses used to go to the pharmacy to buy everyday items they needed like Q-Tips, cotton balls and tongue depressors because the hospitals had to quit buying them to trim budgets. The nurses sucked up the similar wage rollbacks, took money out of their own pockets and aren't still whining about it today.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Me, Me, Me, Me, Me. I, I, I, I, I. Poor whiner had to take a second job. Typical Prog narcissism. It's not all about you.



If you add inflation over 22 years it' a 100% salary cut.


----------



## FeXL

Christ, don't tell Freddie that. He'll go into apoplexy...


----------



## SINC

The rotting of Alberta is accelerating under the Red Rachel No Democrats. 

Alberta’s tough climate talk similar to policy missteps from the likes of Venezuela - and it’s being noticed


----------



## SINC

The stupidity is astounding.

Carbon tax will cost Alberta schools millions, push up school fees, Wildrose says | Edmonton Journal

And then there is this:

Canada may already be carbon neutral, so why are we keeping it a secret? | Financial Post


----------



## FeXL

Don't let climate alarmists muzzle your skepticism




> Two things happened in Alberta politics this week that demonstrate just how zealous “green” politicians everywhere are about the theory that human activities are causing dangerous climate change.
> 
> ...
> 
> First, on Tuesday the NDP caucus officially demanded that Wildrose Leader Brian Jean remove MLA Don MacIntyre from his post as opposition critic for renewable energy and electricity.
> 
> Why? Had MacIntyre been pilfering funds from taxpayers? Had he been harassing interns? Making racist statements?
> 
> No. *MacIntyre’s sin was expressing doubts about the manmade climate change theory.* In short, the NDP wanted MacIntyre removed for exercising his right to free expression.


M'bold.

Huh. Sound like anybody on these boards?

More:



> Alberta’s NDP also sought to justify their imposition of a carbon tax on everything that moves in Alberta (and every home that is heated and every light that is switched on) by claiming that at least one American state – Washington – is doing the same thing. On the Tuesday edition of CBC TV’s Power and Politics, Alberta Environment Minister Shannon Phillips insisted Washington would soon have a tax similar to Alberta’s.
> 
> Except the state of Washington isn’t imposing a carbon tax. Indeed, in November Washington voters rejected a statewide plebiscite (59% to 41%) to enact a carbon tax. *Later Phillips claimed that what she meant was that since the failure of the plebiscite, Washington Governor Jay Inslee has asked state legislators to consider imposing one despite voters clear rejection of such a tax.*


M'bold.

Of course that's what she meant. Why can't Progs ever just put on their big girl panties & admit they were wrong?

Good article, with some excellent recommended reading.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> The stupidity is astounding.


They simply do not care what it costs the public. Their core voters, the unions, are safe & sound because of the disproportionate pay they receive. As for the rest, screw 'em. The more people Red Rachel puts on the dole, the more become dependent upon her for handouts.

Win/win. For the next two yeas...beejacon


----------



## SINC

'Bout right . . .


----------



## eMacMan

eMacMan said:


> Read one of those disappearing news stories about a Calgary Condo complex where the residents were without hot water for a week due to a dead boiler. It was one of those stories that had disappeared by the time I went back to post a link.
> 
> Anyways the reporter seemed to focus on the inconvenience of going to Grandmas or the Y for a shower. Which got me thinking about a minor crisis in our own household this week. The bathroom fan vent froze, so no shower. We resorted to face cloth baths, something the condo residents could have done with a single kettle of boiling water mixed with cold in the bathroom sink. That's what we did and it was sufficient motivation to clean the duct and get that fan working in a hurry.
> 
> Now that got me to thinking that the energy savings from this style of hygiene is roughly on a par with energy efficient light bulbs. That is invisible on the power bill, but sufficient to have all true Goreshippers writhing in celebration of energy saved.
> 
> *So I propose this: Everyone who truly believes the Carbon Tax is a good thing, should do only face cloth baths for the next six weeks then report back on how good they feel about their efforts to save the world. It's what Rachel wants for you. Mind you she will doubtless be using her deluxe four head shower before soaking in the hot tub.
> *


So I tossed out this challenge, thinking now here is a way that the faithful can prove they truly believe. Unlike the light bulb scam it won't cost anything. It won't hurt anyone else. It will even reduce the carbon footprint by an amount equal to or greater than replacing those lightbulbs. Does not require spending tens of thousands of dollars increasing wall insulation and replacing the windows. Does not require spending further tens of thousands on solar panels. It is absolutely free. 

Yet not a single taker. Maybe I shoulda added a "double dog dare" to the challenge.


----------



## Macfury

Venezuela, Notley's model for Alberta, shows how minimum wage hikes just make everyone richer:

Venezuela minimum wage to rise by 50% 'to combat inflation' - BBC News



> Venezuela's government has announced a 50% increase in the minimum wage and pensions amid runaway inflation.
> 
> President Nicolas Maduro says the move will protect jobs and incomes. Critics say it may worsen the crisis.


Don't listen to those critics, Maduro--neither does Notley!


----------



## SINC

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZheP5GhX0I


----------



## FeXL

Dead Rose Country



> We're headed for -50c Arctic temperatures. The NDP message: walk or take the bus & pay ~30% more for home heating.


From the comments:



> The local economy has seen its private sector wage contribution drop by $800 million...
> 
> Calgary area employment income down over $800 million in 2016 | Calgary Herald
> 
> ...
> 
> The downtown commercial tax base has tanked, and the City of Calgary is set to increase municipal taxes on 76% of the small businesses that reside outside the central core:
> 
> http://calgaryherald.com/news/local...y-assessments-plunge-6-billion-year-over-year
> 
> The class A downtown office tower vacancy rate has doubled in the past year to almost 24%:
> 
> Downtown office vacancy rates expected to keep climbing | Calgary Herald
> 
> A new provincial carbon/consumption tax began this month, throwing more straw in the engine of the economy, actual winter temperatures are in the region for much of the winter, and we're being told to have some skin in the game.


And just what is Red Rachel doing to take the edge off all this? 

Consistently?


----------



## FeXL

Duplicate post.


----------



## SINC

Yep they do so.


----------



## Macfury

Notley is diversifying Alberta--by finding a thousand new ways to take money out of the pockets of its citizens.


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> Notley is diversifying Alberta--by finding a thousand new ways to take money out of the pockets of its citizens.


That and adding a couple of folk festivals.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> That and adding a couple of folk festivals.


I hear that public sector voters in the Edmonton area just eat those up!


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> I hear that public sector voters in the Edmonton area just eat those up!



Especially green onion cakes and ginger beef—both Alberta delicacies. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Ginger beef sounds Asian. Is there an Alberta spin?



Freddie_Biff said:


> Especially green onion cakes and ginger beef—both Alberta delicacies.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Ginger beef sounds Asian. Is there an Alberta spin?



Actually it was invented in Calgary. You could look it up. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ginger_beef


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

That's just an Alberta take on classic Chinese ginger beef. I thought you were referring to an occidental recipe.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Actually it was invented in Calgary. You could look it up. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ginger_beef


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> That's just an Alberta take on classic Chinese ginger beef. I thought you were referring to an occidental recipe.



Ginger beef as we know it did not exist until the guy from Calgary created it. The usual shape wasn't selling, so he decided to cut them into strips and deep fry them so they would look more like French fries. I listened to the interview with the guy on the radio.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Ginger beef as we know it did not exist until the guy from Calgary created it. The usual shape wasn't selling, so he decided to cut them into strips and deep fry them so they would look more like French fries. I listened to the interview with the guy on the radio.


Must have spread really quickly--seems like I've been eating it forever in Toronto. Good on you, Calgary!


----------



## SINC

Has the time come?

Why leaving Canada makes sense for Alberta, and U.S. would likely welcome a new state


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Has the time come?
> 
> 
> 
> Why leaving Canada makes sense for Alberta, and U.S. would likely welcome a new state



Even better: why don't you just go and leave the rest of us who love our country to live here. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Has the time come?
> 
> Why leaving Canada makes sense for Alberta, and U.S. would likely welcome a new state


Alberta would be better off if it could export the section containing Notley.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Even better: why don't you just go and leave the rest of us who love our country to live here.


'Cause the 25% of you who support Notley could not support yourselves without us.


----------



## FeXL

The compassionate, intellectual, left...

SHOCK VIDEO: Rebel reporter assaulted at Women's March — $1,000 reward to find him



> Yesterday our Alberta bureau chief, Sheila Gunn Reid, was hit in the face by an NDP thug, right on the steps of the Alberta Legislature.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> The compassionate, intellectual, left...
> 
> 
> 
> SHOCK VIDEO: Rebel reporter assaulted at Women's March — $1,000 reward to find him



She should sue him. She's got footage. She appears to be provoking some sort of reaction, but he assaulted her, no question. Your point?


----------



## FeXL

Freddie_Biff said:


> Your point?


Remember all those Klein supporters punching CBC reporters on the steps of the legislature? Recall all those Harper supporters punching CBC reporters on the steps of parliament?

Yeah, me neither.

The left is _unhinged_...


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> She should sue him. She's got footage. She appears to be provoking some sort of reaction, but he assaulted her, no question. Your point?


She did much better, she gave the evidence to the Edmonton Police Service and laid a complaint. EPS is now investigating. I hope they charge the guy, give him a criminal record and three months in the pokey for his lefty and cowardly act of violence. Totally unacceptable in today's society.


----------



## Macfury

B-b-b-but someone challenged Notley's narrative!!



FeXL said:


> The left is _unhinged_...


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> B-b-b-but someone challenged Notley's narrative!!


Precisely. I'm going to savour their tears of despair like a $40 bottle of bourbon-barrelled imperial stout in a little over two years. Much like I have the tears of the Progs south of 49...


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Remember all those Klein supporters punching CBC reporters on the steps of the legislature? Recall all those Harper supporters punching CBC reporters on the steps of parliament?
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, me neither.
> 
> 
> 
> The left is _unhinged_...



One guy is unhinged. You don't know his background. Maybe he just got pissed off by that reporter in his face. Maybe he's a unite the right guy. You don't know. You assume too much. He did turn his back to her before resorting to punching her. I think she was trying to create her own story by badgering people. In any event, he did punch her, he should face assault charges. This ****e happens every day between people regardless of political affiliation. How in the world do his actions impugn the rest of the hundreds of demonstrators that didn't punch out the Rebel reporter?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> She did much better, she gave the evidence to the Edmonton Police Service and laid a complaint. EPS is now investigating. I hope they charge the guy, give him a criminal record and three months in the pokey for his lefty and cowardly act of violence. Totally unacceptable in today's society.



I hope so too. He crossed a line. But that line has nothing to do with lefty or righty politics. She has just as much right to be there as she did, no matter how annoying she was trying to be to those around her.


----------



## SINC

I see, so the violent buffoon was representing the 'we don't support the NDP' side, was he?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> I see, so the violent buffoon was representing the 'we don't support the NDP' side, was he?



Don, it wasn't an NDP rally FFS. Anyone who wanted to support women's rights was there, including some who apparently just wanted to stir the pot.


----------



## CubaMark

The culprit has been identified and charged:

Man charged in connection with alleged assault on Rebel employee | Metro Edmonton


----------



## Freddie_Biff

CubaMark said:


> The culprit has been identified and charged:
> 
> 
> 
> Man charged in connection with alleged assault on Rebel employee | Metro Edmonton



Seems she found what she was looking for. In any event, he needs to account for his actions and pay whatever penalty is deemed appropriate.


----------



## SINC

The jerk is claiming innocence in a TV interview, saying he hit the camera on the tripod, not her. Guess he is not bright enough to figure out that her eye was on the viewfinder when he did it. Dummy. Be nice to see him get 30 days to smarten him up.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> The jerk is claiming innocence in a TV interview, saying he hit the camera on the tripod, not her. Guess he is not bright enough to figure out that her eye was on the viewfinder when he did it. Dummy. Be nice to see him get 30 days to smarten him up.



No doubt. BUT....is there proof of her injury, beyond the first hand POV shot? Are there are any photos or video from another point of view, perhaps with the events leading up to him hitting her or her camera? I assumed it was a phone camera for some reason, which means her eye didn't need to be on any viewfinder.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

After looking at the footage again, yup, that was a tripod. There is zero movement before he contacts it. Further more, when he speaks to her he is speaking to someone to the left of the camera, not behind the camera. I have a feeling she fabricated the whole "he hit me in the face" part which would explain why people did not react that much. Smells a lot like a set up, and is a little typical of the Rebel Media's tactics, actually. The most he would be liable for is property damage if that's the case. I'll bet that's the ultimate decision, since that's the only thing that can be proven. Clearly, he did give his consent to be filmed or interviewed and she persisted anyway despite him asking her to go away. Doesn't give him the right to break her camera (which still works, by the way), but it certainly does mitigate his circumstances. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Also, the story has hardly been buried, as this CTV broadcast shows. Reid is clearly off to the camera's left. As well, the camera remains standing on the tripod or it wouldn't have been able to record the conversation that continues afterwards. It seems to me there is a certain responsibility to be objective when reporting, rather than to create the news, as the RM has a reputation for doing. 

http://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/canada...t-uttering-threats-at-women-s-rally-1.3255561


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> After looking at the footage again, yup, that was a tripod. There is zero movement before he contacts it. Further more, when he speaks to her he is speaking to someone to the left of the camera, not behind the camera. I have a feeling she fabricated the whole "he hit me in the face" part which would explain why people did not react that much. Smells a lot like a set up, and is a little typical of the Rebel Media's tactics, actually. The most he would be liable for is property damage if that's the case. I'll bet that's the ultimate decision, since that's the only thing that can be proven. Clearly, he did give his consent to be filmed or interviewed and she persisted anyway despite him asking her to go away. Doesn't give him the right to break her camera (which still works, by the way), but it certainly does mitigate his circumstances.


Well, your bias against The Rebel is showing with this post. When someone swings in your direction and the camera hits you in the face, you would describe it exactly the way she did.

Set up? Seriously? Yeah sure, she hired him earlier to stage the event. Yeah, that's it. Makes perfect sense.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Well, your bias against The Rebel is showing with this post. When someone swings in your direction and the camera hits you in the face, you would describe it exactly the way she did.
> 
> 
> 
> Set up? Seriously? Yeah sure, she hired him earlier to stage the event. Yeah, that's it. Makes perfect sense.



Of course I'm biased against the Rebel, based on prior experience, and I suspect this was a set up. He wan't n on it, he was the target. Someone a little on edge who had a bas against Ezra and the RM. However, he did take the bait and will likely have to pay restitution accordingly. I doubt the camera was even damaged, and it didn't even fall down from the tripod. Jostled a little, but still upright and still filming. Reporters do need the permission of the people they interview to broadcast, and it seems pretty clear she did not get his permission. She looked more like she was goading him, which again undermines her journalistic credibility and objectivity. It also appears clear that he did not hit her, but he did hit her camera. Her narrative sure makes it SOUND like she wants us to believe he hit her in the face, but I'm guessing from the lack of reaction of the many observers, that probably isn't the case. In fact, the non reaction of what seemed to be a "prog" crowd was exactly the reaction she was hoping for. People get plunked for YouTube all the time. But that's not journalism. Reid is not exactly a shrinking violet when it comes to controversy and provocations, with her rather heartless treatment of the Estafania Cores-Vargas for example and disparagement of Dave Quest during the May 2015 election, so methinks there's more to this story than meets the eye.


----------



## SINC

Report released today on the NDP Notley government and how they handled the Fort Mac fire sent to me via email. A damning look at pure incompetance:


David Yurdiga, M.P.
Fort McMurray – Cold Lake
Parliament of Canada
Statement
January 26, 2017

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Forest Fire Failure

Fort McMurray, AB — Today M.P. David Yurdiga, M.P. Deepak Obhrai P.C., and M.P. Rachael Harder released a joint statement in relation to the NDP management of the Fort McMurray Fire.

“According to information obtained from a series of FOIs to the Alberta government, the NDP’s management of the Fort McMurray forest fire was nothing short of incompetent. There were problems at every stage of the crisis; they were ill-prepared to prevent the fire, slow to intervene, and they may have put displaced citizens in danger during re-entry.”
“When the fire began on May 1, Rachel Notley’s NDP was incredibly slow in asking for help. It took three days before they bothered to draft a request for assistance from the Department of National Defence. The DND had already positioned three aircraft in the region -- resources that were so badly needed[1]. Even after homes, businesses and city infrastructure were burned to the ground, Alberta’s provincial leaders refused to reach out for assistance.”
“The former Minister of Municipal Affairs Danielle Larivee sent the Canadian Armed Forces home, while the fire raged on. On May 12 it was decided that the assistance of the CAF was no longer needed[2]. At this point, the fire had reached 229,000 hectares[3]. Four days later, the emergency conditions remained extreme, and another 55,000 hectares in the province had burned[4]. After the CAF had been sent home, it took seven weeks before the fire was declared under control on Jul. 4. By then the fire had claimed nearly 600,000 hectares of land including people’s homes and livelihoods.”

“On May 5th, a day after the province announced a state of emergency, Kyall Glennie, Issues Manager for the Alberta NDP, emailed officials at the department of Alberta Agriculture and Forestry, asking what firefighting resources the province had[5]. This was four days after the fire began. It demonstrates a clear lack of readiness and organisation from the Premier’s office.”
“When it came time for re-entry, the NDP decided to lower safety standards – possibly putting citizens in danger. On May 15, Morgan Kehr, director of the Wildfire Operations Section, recommended requiring wildfire hotspots be extinguished within 300 meters of Highway 63 and 881[6]. After failing to control the flames, the Alberta Agriculture and Forestry Ministry reduced the safety condition requirements on May 22. Now, hotspots only needed to be extinguished within 150 meters of the highways[7]. Evidently, the appearance of success was more important than the actual safety of residents.”
“To make matters worse, firefighting specialists on the ground were not consulted and the published re-entry criteria were missing critical information. Connor Wollis with the Alberta Emergency Management Agency, criticised, internally, the re-entry information’s sloppy instructions. He pointed out that the instructions only focused on hazards on homeowners’ property and there was no guidance for forested areas, where more hazards existed. Darryl Johnson, a wildfire specialist at the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, admitted he was not consulted before the re-entry document for the municipality of Wood Buffalo was published[8].”

“In the 2016 budget, the NDP also made reckless cuts to wildfire prevention and management programs. They reduced Airtanker contracts by 5.1 million dollars and cut funding for FireSmart grants that funded projects focused on fire preparedness planning, public education and fire mitigation projects such as creating buffers between buildings and forests.[9]”

“While Alberta’s political elite managed to avoid the effects of the wildfire, tens of thousands of Fort McMurray residents were forced find shelter in trailers, sleep on the floors of recreation centres and watch from afar as their homes were destroyed. The government’s slow reaction time combined with budget cuts to wildfire prevention resources and inability to properly organise a re-entry plan meant citizens weren’t able to return home until June 1st, at the earliest.”

-30-

Media Contact
Jim Tibbetts
Legislative Director
[email protected]
Tel: 613-992-1154

[1] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 24 https://www.dropbox.com/s/2xfesalgyokjtan/2016-G-0237 Records.pdf?dl=0FirefoxHTML\Shell\Open\Command
[2] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 119 (use the link above)
[3] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 114 “”
[4] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 177 “”
[5] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 274 “”
[6] Alberta Agriculture and Forestry FOI. Part 1, page 15 (ATIP Notes) https://www.dropbox.com/s/n2ei429b8...613470.pdf?dl=0FirefoxHTML\Shell\Open\Command
[7] Alberta Agriculture and Forestry FOI. Part 2, page 7
https://www.dropbox.com/s/y400xqk8m...613480.pdf?dl=0FirefoxHTML\Shell\Open\Command P.7
[8] Alberta Agriculture and Forestry FOI. Part 2, page 23 https://www.dropbox.com/s/y400xqk8m...613480.pdf?dl=0FirefoxHTML\Shell\Open\Command
[9] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 278
https://www.dropbox.com/s/2xfesalgyokjtan/2016-G-0237 Records.pdf?dl=0FirefoxHTML\Shell\Open\Command


Backgrounder
On May 1, 2016 at 4 p.m. an out of control wildfire was discovered south-west of Fort McMurray.
The following day the fire had ballooned from two hectares to 1,250 coming within two kilometres of Highway 63 – one of the few escape routes for people fleeing the fire.
By May 4th, 80,000 people had evacuated the city and found refuge in surrounding communities such as Lac La Biche, Edmonton and Calgary. The fire had reached Highway 63, cutting off one of the few escape routes.
It took four days for the Alberta Emergency Management Response initiated a draft to request assistance from the Department of National Defence (DND). By that time, 90 per cent of homes in the Waterways neighbourhood, 70 percent in Beacon Hill and 1,600 structures in the city had burned.
On May 11th, two fires joined, creating a wildfire of 229,000 hectares in size, by May 20th, an estimated 503,674 hectares had been affected.
On May 18th, the Alberta government announced that citizens would be able to begin returning home by June 1st if safety conditions were.
The day before re-entry was scheduled to begin, Notley announced that the return was on track, despite the fact that 2,000 evacuees in heavily damaged neighbourhoods were only able to return in September.
On June 15th, two weeks after a majority of the residents returned, Alberta ordered a review into its response to the forest fires and the decisions made during the evacuation.
O`Neil Carlier, Minister of Agriculture and Forestry denied wildfire budget played a role in Fort McMurray fire, stating that “every necessary resource was available when this fire started.” Despite this, the Notley government`s cuts to wildfire resources in the budget meant the province had fewer air tankers heading into peak wildfire season.

[1] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 24 https://www.dropbox.com/s/2xfesalgyokjtan/2016-G-0237 Records.pdf?dl=0FirefoxHTML\Shell\Open\Command
[2] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 119 (use the link above)
[3] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 114 “”
[4] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 177 “”
[5] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 274 “”
[6] Alberta Agriculture and Forestry FOI. Part 1, page 15 (ATIP Notes) https://www.dropbox.com/s/n2ei429b8...613470.pdf?dl=0FirefoxHTML\Shell\Open\Command P.15
[7] Alberta Agriculture and Forestry FOI. Part 2, page 7
https://www.dropbox.com/s/y400xqk8m...613480.pdf?dl=0FirefoxHTML\Shell\Open\Command P.7
[8] Alberta Agriculture and Forestry FOI. Part 2, page 23 https://www.dropbox.com/s/y400xqk8m...613480.pdf?dl=0FirefoxHTML\Shell\Open\Command
[9] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 278
https://www.dropbox.com/s/2xfesalgyokjtan/2016-G-0237 Records.pdf?dl=0FirefoxHTML\Shell\Open\Command


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Report released today on the NDP Notley government and how they handled the Fort Mac fire sent to me via email. A damning look at pure incompetance:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Yurdiga, M.P.
> 
> Fort McMurray – Cold Lake
> 
> Parliament of Canada
> 
> Statement
> 
> January 26, 2017
> 
> 
> 
> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
> 
> 
> 
> Forest Fire Failure
> 
> 
> 
> Fort McMurray, AB — Today M.P. David Yurdiga, M.P. Deepak Obhrai P.C., and M.P. Rachael Harder released a joint statement in relation to the NDP management of the Fort McMurray Fire.
> 
> 
> 
> “According to information obtained from a series of FOIs to the Alberta government, the NDP’s management of the Fort McMurray forest fire was nothing short of incompetent. There were problems at every stage of the crisis; they were ill-prepared to prevent the fire, slow to intervene, and they may have put displaced citizens in danger during re-entry.”
> 
> “When the fire began on May 1, Rachel Notley’s NDP was incredibly slow in asking for help. It took three days before they bothered to draft a request for assistance from the Department of National Defence. The DND had already positioned three aircraft in the region -- resources that were so badly needed[1]. Even after homes, businesses and city infrastructure were burned to the ground, Alberta’s provincial leaders refused to reach out for assistance.”
> 
> “The former Minister of Municipal Affairs Danielle Larivee sent the Canadian Armed Forces home, while the fire raged on. On May 12 it was decided that the assistance of the CAF was no longer needed[2]. At this point, the fire had reached 229,000 hectares[3]. Four days later, the emergency conditions remained extreme, and another 55,000 hectares in the province had burned[4]. After the CAF had been sent home, it took seven weeks before the fire was declared under control on Jul. 4. By then the fire had claimed nearly 600,000 hectares of land including people’s homes and livelihoods.”
> 
> 
> 
> “On May 5th, a day after the province announced a state of emergency, Kyall Glennie, Issues Manager for the Alberta NDP, emailed officials at the department of Alberta Agriculture and Forestry, asking what firefighting resources the province had[5]. This was four days after the fire began. It demonstrates a clear lack of readiness and organisation from the Premier’s office.”
> 
> “When it came time for re-entry, the NDP decided to lower safety standards – possibly putting citizens in danger. On May 15, Morgan Kehr, director of the Wildfire Operations Section, recommended requiring wildfire hotspots be extinguished within 300 meters of Highway 63 and 881[6]. After failing to control the flames, the Alberta Agriculture and Forestry Ministry reduced the safety condition requirements on May 22. Now, hotspots only needed to be extinguished within 150 meters of the highways[7]. Evidently, the appearance of success was more important than the actual safety of residents.”
> 
> “To make matters worse, firefighting specialists on the ground were not consulted and the published re-entry criteria were missing critical information. Connor Wollis with the Alberta Emergency Management Agency, criticised, internally, the re-entry information’s sloppy instructions. He pointed out that the instructions only focused on hazards on homeowners’ property and there was no guidance for forested areas, where more hazards existed. Darryl Johnson, a wildfire specialist at the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, admitted he was not consulted before the re-entry document for the municipality of Wood Buffalo was published[8].”
> 
> 
> 
> “In the 2016 budget, the NDP also made reckless cuts to wildfire prevention and management programs. They reduced Airtanker contracts by 5.1 million dollars and cut funding for FireSmart grants that funded projects focused on fire preparedness planning, public education and fire mitigation projects such as creating buffers between buildings and forests.[9]”
> 
> 
> 
> “While Alberta’s political elite managed to avoid the effects of the wildfire, tens of thousands of Fort McMurray residents were forced find shelter in trailers, sleep on the floors of recreation centres and watch from afar as their homes were destroyed. The government’s slow reaction time combined with budget cuts to wildfire prevention resources and inability to properly organise a re-entry plan meant citizens weren’t able to return home until June 1st, at the earliest.”
> 
> 
> 
> -30-
> 
> 
> 
> Media Contact
> 
> Jim Tibbetts
> 
> Legislative Director
> 
> [email protected]
> 
> Tel: 613-992-1154
> 
> 
> 
> [1] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 24 https://www.dropbox.com/s/2xfesalgyokjtan/2016-G-0237 Records.pdf?dl=0FirefoxHTML\Shell\Open\Command
> 
> [2] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 119 (use the link above)
> 
> [3] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 114 “”
> 
> [4] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 177 “”
> 
> [5] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 274 “”
> 
> [6] Alberta Agriculture and Forestry FOI. Part 1, page 15 (ATIP Notes) https://www.dropbox.com/s/n2ei429b8...613470.pdf?dl=0FirefoxHTML\Shell\Open\Command
> 
> [7] Alberta Agriculture and Forestry FOI. Part 2, page 7
> 
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/y400xqk8m...613480.pdf?dl=0FirefoxHTML\Shell\Open\Command P.7
> 
> [8] Alberta Agriculture and Forestry FOI. Part 2, page 23 https://www.dropbox.com/s/y400xqk8m...613480.pdf?dl=0FirefoxHTML\Shell\Open\Command
> 
> [9] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 278
> 
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/2xfesalgyokjtan/2016-G-0237 Records.pdf?dl=0FirefoxHTML\Shell\Open\Command
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Backgrounder
> 
> On May 1, 2016 at 4 p.m. an out of control wildfire was discovered south-west of Fort McMurray.
> 
> The following day the fire had ballooned from two hectares to 1,250 coming within two kilometres of Highway 63 – one of the few escape routes for people fleeing the fire.
> 
> By May 4th, 80,000 people had evacuated the city and found refuge in surrounding communities such as Lac La Biche, Edmonton and Calgary. The fire had reached Highway 63, cutting off one of the few escape routes.
> 
> It took four days for the Alberta Emergency Management Response initiated a draft to request assistance from the Department of National Defence (DND). By that time, 90 per cent of homes in the Waterways neighbourhood, 70 percent in Beacon Hill and 1,600 structures in the city had burned.
> 
> On May 11th, two fires joined, creating a wildfire of 229,000 hectares in size, by May 20th, an estimated 503,674 hectares had been affected.
> 
> On May 18th, the Alberta government announced that citizens would be able to begin returning home by June 1st if safety conditions were.
> 
> The day before re-entry was scheduled to begin, Notley announced that the return was on track, despite the fact that 2,000 evacuees in heavily damaged neighbourhoods were only able to return in September.
> 
> On June 15th, two weeks after a majority of the residents returned, Alberta ordered a review into its response to the forest fires and the decisions made during the evacuation.
> 
> O`Neil Carlier, Minister of Agriculture and Forestry denied wildfire budget played a role in Fort McMurray fire, stating that “every necessary resource was available when this fire started.” Despite this, the Notley government`s cuts to wildfire resources in the budget meant the province had fewer air tankers heading into peak wildfire season.
> 
> 
> 
> [1] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 24 https://www.dropbox.com/s/2xfesalgyokjtan/2016-G-0237 Records.pdf?dl=0FirefoxHTML\Shell\Open\Command
> 
> [2] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 119 (use the link above)
> 
> [3] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 114 “”
> 
> [4] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 177 “”
> 
> [5] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 274 “”
> 
> [6] Alberta Agriculture and Forestry FOI. Part 1, page 15 (ATIP Notes) https://www.dropbox.com/s/n2ei429b8...613470.pdf?dl=0FirefoxHTML\Shell\Open\Command P.15
> 
> [7] Alberta Agriculture and Forestry FOI. Part 2, page 7
> 
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/y400xqk8m...613480.pdf?dl=0FirefoxHTML\Shell\Open\Command P.7
> 
> [8] Alberta Agriculture and Forestry FOI. Part 2, page 23 https://www.dropbox.com/s/y400xqk8m...613480.pdf?dl=0FirefoxHTML\Shell\Open\Command
> 
> [9] Alberta Executive Council FOI, page 278
> 
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/2xfesalgyokjtan/2016-G-0237 Records.pdf?dl=0FirefoxHTML\Shell\Open\Command



My God, Don, couldn't you make your post shorter so it doesn't take up so much screen space?


----------



## Macfury

Anyone could see Notley's response to the fire was incompetent. Only hard-bitten progs cheered her "compassion."


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> My God, Don, couldn't you make your post shorter so it doesn't take up so much screen space?


Sorry the incompetence required the space to show what a disaster Notley really is.

Add to that I used a computer and not iPhone screens shots that put 10% of the info in the same space as I used.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Add to that I used a computer and not iPhone screens shots that put 10% of the info in the same space as I used.


Yep. You did it to add value to the post, not out of laziness.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Yep. You did it to add value to the post, not out of laziness.



Laziness? You have a solution when using an iPhone? Or are you of the opinion that ehMac users should be using laptops or desktops only?


----------



## heavyall

Freddie_Biff said:


> Laziness? You have a solution when using an iPhone? Or are you of the opinion that ehMac users should be using laptops or desktops only?


For an online forum? Yes. Only a masochist would try to so that on a phone.


----------



## heavyall

Freddie_Biff said:


> My God, Don, couldn't you make your post shorter so it doesn't take up so much screen space?


I love how you quoted the whole thing, effectively doubling the space that it originally took up, then went on to complain about how much space was being used. 

That is trolling done right!


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Laziness? You have a solution when using an iPhone? Or are you of the opinion that ehMac users should be using laptops or desktops only?


Provide a link and a short comment instead.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

heavyall said:


> I love how you quoted the whole thing, effectively doubling the space that it originally took up, then went on to complain about how much space was being used.
> 
> 
> 
> That is trolling done right!



Why thank you.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Provide a link and a short comment instead.



I do provide a link, but there's a good chance you won't read it. So there's that.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> I do provide a link, but there's a good chance you won't read it. So there's that.


I read a precis and then follow the link if it's interesting. I don't generally spend a lot of time on screen shots of news stories because there's no poster context.


----------



## SINC

NDP spending is adding to the deficit problem.

Alberta's Budget Deficit: Why Spending is to Blame, 2017

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/studies/albertas-budget-deficit-why-spending-is-to-blame-2017


----------



## Macfury

Folk festivals cost money.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> I read a precis and then follow the link if it's interesting. I don't generally spend a lot of time on screen shots of news stories because there's no poster context.



Well good for you. You do whatever you like, I'll do what works best from my phone, since that's where I normally use ehMac. See? Problem solved. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Sure--the lazy route!



Freddie_Biff said:


> Well good for you. You do whatever you like, I'll do what works best from my phone, since that's where I normally use ehMac. See? Problem solved.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Sure--the lazy route!



In what way is that lazy? I do the research, maybe add a comment, quote some of the relevant parts and provide a link, same as you do. You just have a format fetish.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## eMacMan

Not getting much attention other than locally, where it is a very hot topic. Anna has just moved to the area but did a good job on this story, It is complicated and did require at least that much ink. 
Queen of the Castle - Crowsnest Pass Herald - Anna Kroupina

I have met Wildlife officer Mr. Clark on a couple of occasions and have found him to be exceptionally well informed and very knowledgeable about the Castle area. The last paragraph in my quote seems to accurately sum up the NDP approach to government.

Also mentioned in the article is local rancher Alex Shenton. I talked to him just 3 days ago. He felt that this was a case where all the local stakeholders had valid view points and had they been properly consulted could have come up with a far better approach than presented in the draft document. He is among ranchers who will lose grazing rights but is also very environmentally conscious. He pointed out that grazing cattle actually opens things up and create better grazing conditions for elk. Far from competing the two complement each other.



> The draft management plan has been designed following a consultation period that was launched after the initial announcement on Sep. 4, 2015. Minister Phillips stated that the government sought input from key stakeholders to inform the draft management plan, including environmental advocates, hunting and fishing advocates, the Alberta Off Highway Vehicles Association, as well as the Crowsnest Pass Quad Squad.
> 
> However, the Alberta Fish and Game Association and the Quad Squad have a very different impression of the government’s collaborative intent.
> 
> Clark indicates that while the government did make steps to seek his recommendations and opinion, his input was falling on deaf ears.
> “I believe that they have tried to do a public consultation process, but I also feel that they haven’t listened to what we’ve been saying,” he says.
> 
> According to Clark, he had many concerns with the overall process that the decision was made. *“I was put on the Management Board, which was supposed to be making recommendations to the government, and as far as I’m aware, I haven’t voted on any recommendations,” he says. “So I’m not sure why this board was even convened because the government is obviously not listening to what we are saying. That is my main disappointment with the NDP government.”*


----------



## FeXL

The fallout continues...

Alberta’s Keystone Excavating Ltd. shutting down after 35 years



> Keystone Excavating Ltd. has announced it is closing its doors, saying it can’t continue to provide the same quality of work “within the macro business environment in Alberta.”
> 
> “*The macro business environment has everything to do with gratuitous government policy*, increasing cost of doing business in Alberta, and lack of consumer and investor confidence,” the company said in a statement.


M'bold.

GO RACHEL!!!


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> M'bold.
> 
> GO RACHEL!!!


Eventually it will be an economy based entirely on government employment and handouts.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Eventually it will be an economy based entirely on government employment and handouts.


Precisely the way the left likes it. Complete dependence upon gov't largesse...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Precisely the way the left likes it. Complete dependence upon gov't largesse...


It's why the left is getting behind guaranteed income proposals--imagine a whole vast swath of Canadians entirely dependent on the government for everything!


----------



## Freddie_Biff




----------



## Freddie_Biff

I guess it pays to do your homework first. Good luck with that unite-the-right thing, kids. Hello NDP again in 2019. 










http://www.inews880.com/2017/02/02/98967/?sc_ref=twitter


----------



## Macfury

Did you read the article? What's the problem?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Did you read the article? What's the problem?



Did you read the article? Alberta law does not allow for the merging of parties. They'd have to both dissolve and start again. They'd also forfeit all monies raised so far in the process. What's in it for the WildRose? PC's would better just to cross the floor and join the WR party.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> PC's would better just to cross the floor and join the WR party.


Agreed!


----------



## FeXL

Nope. Not in 2019. Not ever again. Not a chance...

Wanna bet a cool thousand bucks on it, Freddie?

I'll betcha another thousand against your observation that Trump will be gone by year end, for that matter.

SINC can hold it. Put your money where your mouth is.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Hello NDP again in 2019.


----------



## FeXL

So?



Freddie_Biff said:


> They'd have to both dissolve and start again.


----------



## Macfury

I already made the offer to have SINC hold the money on an NDP bet. All mouth, not money.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Nope. Not in 2019. Not ever again. Not a chance...
> 
> 
> 
> Wanna bet a cool thousand bucks on it, Freddie?
> 
> 
> 
> I'll betcha another thousand against your observation that Trump will be gone by year end, for that matter.
> 
> 
> 
> SINC can hold it. Put your money where your mouth is.



I don't need to take your money, kid. Put it back in your pants.


----------



## FeXL

Ah, the strength of your convictions reveal themselves.

You could consider it partial payback for all those hard Klein years where you & your fellow teachers took that 40% hit...



Freddie_Biff said:


> I don't need to take your money, kid. Put it back in your pants.


----------



## SINC

No wonder the Edmonton Journal changed their colours to orange:

Opinion: Alberta needs a sales tax now | Edmonton Journal


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> No wonder the Edmonton Journal changed their colours to orange:
> 
> Opinion: Alberta needs a sales tax now | Edmonton Journal


Signed by a bunch of government-teat-suckers.



> There are only two ways to deal with Alberta’s fiscal gap. The first is massive cuts to government expenditures. All of us support greater efficiency where it can be found, but we believe it is wrong to suggest — as some continue to do — that cuts alone can solve the problem.


Yes they can.



> Alberta’s public spending overall is similar to other provinces.


Is that supposed to be normal?


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> From your quotes:
> Alberta’s public spending overall is similar to other provinces.


That's an odd claim. I wonder how they measured it.

Page 10:
http://www.rbc.com/economics/economic-reports/pdf/provincial-forecasts/prov_fiscal.pdf

Program expenses are noticeably higher than B.C. and Ontario. This does not account for cost of living and higher non-government salaries (competing employers), but I would like to see a source for their claim.


----------



## Macfury

I've also seen data that consistently shows spending and public sector wages notably higher in Alberta--except when Ralph Klein nicked teachers for a 40% wage cut.

It's not surprising that the signatories want to see more government spending--as its beneficiaries.



Beej said:


> That's an odd claim. I wonder how they measured it.
> 
> Page 10:
> http://www.rbc.com/economics/economic-reports/pdf/provincial-forecasts/prov_fiscal.pdf
> 
> Program expenses are noticeably higher than B.C. and Ontario. This does not account for cost of living and higher non-government salaries (competing employers), but I would like to see a source for their claim.


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> I've also seen data that consistently shows spending and public sector wages notably higher in Alberta--except when Ralph Klein nicked teachers for a 40% wage cut.
> 
> It's not surprising that the signatories want to see more government spending--as its beneficiaries.


And apparently as long as Notley is in power, unions will continue to get wage increases:

Rachel Notley promises prudence, but not wage freezes, in looming public-sector contract talks - Calgary - CBC News


----------



## Macfury

To Notley, the province is just soil and fertilizer to grow a rich crop of government employees.


----------



## Beej

*State of play*

There's nothing new here, but it gives a quick rundown of how the current state of play came about. A good quick update for the less engaged.

Editorial: Alberta’s new politics (with poll) | Calgary Herald


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Beej said:


> There's nothing new here, but it gives a quick rundown of how the current state of play came about. A good quick update for the less engaged.
> 
> 
> 
> Editorial: Alberta’s new politics (with poll) | Calgary Herald



Good article, Beej.


----------



## Macfury

Beej said:


> There's nothing new here, but it gives a quick rundown of how the current state of play came about. A good quick update for the less engaged.
> 
> Editorial: Alberta’s new politics (with poll) | Calgary Herald


I get a strong sense that _The Herald's_ "Editorial Board" musings are more of a wish list than prognostication.


----------



## SINC

Closing Ontario coal plants didn't cut air pollution by much, says Fraser Institute - Windsor - CBC News

And it won't in Alberta either. It will just increase generation costs to Alberta consumers.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> And it won't in Alberta either. It will just increase generation costs to Alberta consumers.


You cold-hearted bastard! What about all the untold benefits from virtue signalling?


----------



## SINC

FeXL said:


> You cold-hearted bastard! What about all the untold benefits from virtue signalling?


OH yeah, those!


----------



## SINC

Yep, the unions and Red Rachel too.

*Labour leaders show little regard for taxpayers*

Your letters for Monday, Feb. 6 | Calgary Herald


----------



## SINC

Now the Dippers want union friendly legislation in place to force more organized labour groups upon Alberta businesses. The Dippers are taking this step to destroy Albertan's right to remain union free.



> Alberta's NDP government is taking aim at the province's labour laws.
> 
> Having built its ranks from labour and social activists, there was an expectation that upon being elected the NDP would right the wrongs of what they felt were decades of backward and regressive labour legislation.
> 
> Now, it's time to "unstack the deck," says Alberta Federation of Labour President Gil McGowan.
> 
> Alberta union prepares for biggest round of contract talks with right to strike
> Alberta couple pays high price advocating for farm workers' rights.
> 
> McGowan has led the AFL for 12 years. He says every time a new labour minister was appointed, he would deliver the same message.
> 
> This time is no different.
> 
> "We feel strongly that Alberta law needs to be updated to make sure that Albertans have the same kind of rights and protection in the workplace that are enjoyed by other Canadians," McGowan said.
> 
> Nearing the halfway point of its mandate, the NDP government has been studying the Alberta Employment Standards Code, the Labour Relations Code, and the Occupational Health and Safety Act.
> 
> And although there have been amendments over the years, some labour laws have remained untouched since 1976.
> 
> *Bob Barnetson, an associate professor of labour relations at Athabasca University, says there are key areas on the government's radar that, if changed, would make it easier to organize unions and land a first contract.*
> 
> Barnetson says Alberta has among "the most regressive labour laws" in Canada.
> 
> *He says bringing in what's known as "first-contract legislation" and a "card check" system of certifying a union would lead to more organized workplaces in Alberta.*
> 
> First contract, or first-arbitration legislation, would impose a first contract through arbitration, if a contract couldn't be reached through bargaining, according to Barnetson.
> 
> 'Alberta law needs to be updated to make sure that Albertans have the same kind of rights and protection in the workplace that are enjoyed by other Canadians.' - Gil McGowan, President, Alberta Federation of Labour
> 
> "It sounds far more Draconian than it actually is," Barnetson says, adding that the existence of legislation is an incentive for employers to work through the process to reach a collective agreement.
> 
> A "card check" system of forming a union requires employees to simply sign a card or petition. The current system in Alberta requires a mandated follow-up vote by members 10 days after registering with the Alberta Labour Relations Board.
> 
> "The delay that goes on between applying and having the vote gives the employer the time to terrorize the bargaining unit and put a chill on the organizing drive," Barnetson says.
> 
> "When you go from card check to voting, certification applications drop by half and there's a significant drop in the success rate."
> 
> Amber Ruddy, director of provincial affairs for the CFIB, says it's not the time to be layering on new regulations for small business. (CFIB)
> 
> The Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) says although its members support balanced labour laws, it wants to participate in any discussion before changes are made.
> 
> Amber Ruddy, director of provincial affairs for the CFIB in Calgary, says if the government is considering a "modernization" of labour laws, they should be considered "thoughtfully and thoroughly."
> 
> *With 10,000 small and medium-sized employers, Ruddy says most don't have the benefit of administrative support or human resource departments to adjust to new rules or regulations.*
> 
> "If there are significant changes to any areas, vacation allowances, paid leave, any further requirements, we'd want to see those proposals come forward right away and have small business owners weigh in," Ruddy said.
> 
> Former Alberta oilpatch workers hesitant to return as activity picks up
> Nearly one in five Alberta workers earns $15 an hour or less, advocacy group says
> Many businesses are still struggling in a fragile economy, she added.
> 
> *"It's not a great time to be layering on new costs and new regulations," Ruddy said.*
> 
> If the government does want to bring in "progressive" changes, it will face pushback, McGowan says.
> 
> "There's no doubt that right-wingers and some in the employer community will claim that the sky is falling," he said.
> 
> Labour Minister Christina Gray said in an emailed statement she is committed to reviewing Alberta's labour laws to ensure they reflect today's workplace, but declined to specify what changes are coming.
> 
> "Albertans deserve modern, fair and family-friendly workplaces," Gray said.
> 
> "In some cases, Alberta's labour legislation has not been reviewed in decades. The nature of work life in Alberta has changed a lot in that time."
> 
> A report reviewing Alberta's Workers' Compensation Board is expected this spring.
> 
> The next session of the legislature begins March 2, with the introduction of a new budget sometime in March.


Alberta government considers changing labour laws - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## SINC

And the natives are getting more restless as Notley faces threats. And the NDP think they are popular?

Statistics show Notley has been the most threatened Alberta premier | Edmonton Journal


----------



## SINC

As the world rejects carbon pricing, Notley stumbles blindly along a dead end road.

Jack Mintz: The public backlash rises as the credibility of high-cost low-carbon policies collapses


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> As the world rejects carbon pricing, Notley stumbles blindly along a dead end road.
> 
> Jack Mintz: The public backlash rises as the credibility of high-cost low-carbon policies collapses


Her only hope is to create more public sector union voters before the election...


----------



## FightingShibas

Macfury said:


> Her only hope is to create more public sector union voters before the election...




That's been part of the plan since day one. Make everyone dependent on the government. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Sadly, you're correct. People mistake control for charity. This is why I I no longer support basic universal income to replace all other social programs. If you owe your entire income to the government, you no longer have any independence.



FightingShibas said:


> That's been part of the plan since day one. Make everyone dependent on the government.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

The Dippers just can't stop meddling where there are no issues. Forcing their views on everyone. More chite to be undone once we rid ourselves of this plague. 

Edmonton Chamber of Commerce questions timing of NDP government's review of labour laws - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## Macfury

Their internal polling shows them they have a limited time left to crap on the province before someone busts the toilet.



SINC said:


> The Dippers just can't stop meddling where there are no issues. Forcing their views on everyone. More chite to be undone once we rid ourselves of this plague.
> 
> Edmonton Chamber of Commerce questions timing of NDP government's review of labour laws - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## eMacMan

*Why I Distrust the Man-Made Global Warming Theory, Part I*

_Normally this would reside in the Global Warming thread a place all true believers avoid lest they come face to face with the reality of their beliefs. Posting it here because Notley's belief in global warming has resulted in a carbon tax and will no doubt lead to other extortionate programs. My entire critique is rather lengthy so I am presenting in byte sized bits._

First reason:
Al Gore, Al Gore, Al Gore. 

The man is the principal promoter of man-made global warming (AGW). Without Al Gore's proselytizing, most of us would never have heard of AGW. The man is first, foremost and always a major league politician. By definition; greed, lust and deception are the very core of his being. 

The Great Goreacle claims to believe, and has done a remarkable job of promoting his "beliefs". Yet his main home gobbles electrical power at 25 times the national average. Limo drivers wait with idling engines to whisk him away from speaking engagements before he can be asked questions. He flies to the next engagement in a private jet. He recently spent millions on a beach front home, which will be destroyed if sea levels rise by even 20% of his catastrophic claims. 

His true interest seems to revolve entirely around peddling carbon credits. Credits which can be manufactured out of thin air or purchased for mere pennies. Credits which are then resold for obscene profit margins, while failing to reduce manmade CO2 output by as much as a milligram. Credits which only benefit Al Gore and his cronies.

Would you trust anything Donald Trump, Harper, Trudeau, Dubya, Robert Ford or Barack Obama says? Then why would you trust Al Gore? The Great Goreacle is about as sincere as the evangelical preachers who drive Rolls Royces and proudly display their Rolex watches.


----------



## eMacMan

*Why I Distrust the Man-Made Global Warming Theory, Part II*

The money. The money. The money. 

Besides Al Gore and his "carbon credit scam" we have "the carbon tax con" being promoted as a grand solution. Carbon taxes give the Banksters and governments every reason to rig the science and they are doing so shamelessly. The climate prof who dares challenge AGW is likely to find himself working without funding or not working at all. If the theory had any validity at all, its proponents would welcome challenges rather than stifling them!

Carbon taxes hit the poor the hardest and ultimately go directly into the pockets of the Banksters. Let's not kid ourselves the governments collecting this tax are in debt to their eyeballs, so carbon taxes will go directly into the Bankster vaults. Should any government dare attempt to divert any of that tax revenue away from the Banksters, said Banksters will force those governments to take the austerity vow.

The only way that carbon taxes can reduce CO2 emissions is if the taxes batter those on the bottom rung of the fiscal ladder so severely as to make them homeless. Ideally it should leave them freezing to death on ice flows. Of course those on the bottom rung had already cut energy consumption to the absolute minimum, so very little real savings will result. At that point the believers will proclaim the sacrifice insufficient and those on the next rung will suffer a similar fate. Short of that carbon taxes will have zero impact on man made CO2 emissions, but will enormously engorge the super elite at the expense of the rest of us.


----------



## Macfury

What I find particularly offensive is that the government claims to rectify its theft by handing out "rebates."0 Essentially, they are turning money they have stolen from these people into welfare payments and transforming them into dependents.


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> What I find particularly offensive is that the government claims to rectify its theft by handing out "rebates."0 Essentially, they are turning money they have stolen from these people into welfare payments and transforming them into dependents.


Bad enough being so poor there is no reason to file tax returns. Worse to be forced to choose between filing returns or having your pockets picked. 

How can the carbon tax reduce emissions if the sacrificial lambs are not sacrificed?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

eMacMan said:


> The money. The money. The money.
> 
> Besides Al Gore and his "carbon credit scam" we have "the carbon tax con" being promoted as a grand solution. Carbon taxes give the Banksters and governments every reason to rig the science and they are doing so shamelessly. The climate prof who dares challenge AGW is likely to find himself working without funding or not working at all. If the theory had any validity at all, its proponents would welcome challenges rather than stifling them!
> 
> Carbon taxes hit the poor the hardest and ultimately go directly into the pockets of the Banksters. Let's not kid ourselves the governments collecting this tax are in debt to their eyeballs, so carbon taxes will go directly into the Bankster vaults. Should any government dare attempt to divert any of that tax revenue away from the Banksters, said Banksters will force those governments to take the austerity vow.
> 
> The only way that carbon taxes can reduce CO2 emissions is if the taxes batter those on the bottom rung of the fiscal ladder so severely as to make them homeless. Ideally it should leave them freezing to death on ice flows. Of course those on the bottom rung had already cut energy consumption to the absolute minimum, so very little real savings will result. At that point the believers will proclaim the sacrifice insufficient and those on the next rung will suffer a similar fate. Short of that carbon taxes will have zero impact on man made CO2 emissions, but will enormously engorge the super elite at the expense of the rest of us.



Boy. Where can I get some of what you've been smoking? Rebates are there to compensate those with the least income, and they're sent out regularly each month.


----------



## Beej

eMacMan said:


> The only way that carbon taxes can reduce CO2 emissions is if the taxes batter those on the bottom rung of the fiscal ladder so severely as to make them homeless.


This is wrong, but please continue. The rant is entertaining.


----------



## eMacMan

Freddie_Biff said:


> Boy. Where can I get some of what you've been smoking? Rebates are there to compensate those with the least income, and they're sent out regularly each month.


As previously noted, how can carbon taxes reduce emissions if the sacrificial lambs are not sacrificed?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

eMacMan said:


> As previously noted, how can carbon taxes reduce emissions if the sacrificial lambs are not sacrificed?



If they reduce emissions, great. That's a bonus. They're designed to get the wealthiest to pay more taxes. It's a response to the flat tax Klein introduced, which let the wealthiest get away with paying less taxes. If there's a debt to tackle, why are you whining about taxes? At least this is distributed fairly, instead of beating the ****e out of one sector, like the public service. If you're truly a conservative-minded voter, you should be rejoicing that the NDP is doing something to tackle Alberta's debt problem with resorting to a provincial sales tax.


----------



## eMacMan

Beej said:


> This is wrong, but please continue. The rant is entertaining.


True and false. Where a high emitting industry is mobile, they will move from a taxed location to a non-taxed location. While there will be reduction of emissions, jobs and tax revenue in the taxed location, there will be corresponding increases in the non-taxed destination. Net impact will be zero.

If you have any examples of Carbon taxes actually reducing net emissions, other than by making people homeless, feel free to trot them out.


----------



## eMacMan

Freddie_Biff said:


> If they reduce emissions, great. That's a bonus. They're designed to get the wealthiest to pay more taxes. It's a response to the flat tax Klein introduced, which let the wealthiest get away with paying less taxes. If there's a debt to tackle, why are you whining about taxes? At least this is distributed fairly, instead of beating the ****e out of one sector, like the public service. If you're truly a conservative-minded voter, you should be rejoicing that the NDP is doing something to tackle Alberta's debt problem with resorting to a provincial sales tax.


Thanks for confirming my main point, Carbon taxes cannot and are not intended to have any impact on man made CO2 emissions. Do keep in mind they are a minor inconvenience to the wealthy but hit the poor the hardest. However they do line the pockets of the super wealthy.

The fact that carbon taxes are being promoted as the ultimate solution for AGW is a pretty good indicator that AGW is a crock.


----------



## Beej

eMacMan said:


> If you have any examples of Carbon taxes actually reducing net emissions, other than by making people homeless, feel free to trot them out.


Okay, I'll bite.

Does your definition of "making people homeless" apply to every sales tax? If not, I'm unclear on your meaning.

On high emitting mobile industries, it is not black and white (ie. mobile, not mobile) as you portray the matter, but you have a point that advocates should consider.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Boy. Where can I get some of what you've been smoking? Rebates are there to compensate those with the least income, and they're sent out regularly each month.


Huh? Rebates are given twice a year, not monthly. January and July.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> If they reduce emissions, great. That's a bonus. They're designed to get the wealthiest to pay more taxes. It's a response to the flat tax Klein introduced, which let the wealthiest get away with paying less taxes. If there's a debt to tackle, why are you whining about taxes? At least this is distributed fairly, instead of beating the ****e out of one sector, like the public service. If you're truly a conservative-minded voter, you should be rejoicing that the NDP is doing something to tackle Alberta's debt problem with resorting to a provincial sales tax.


Carbon taxes are essentially stealth sales taxes. Alberta's debt problem is a spending problem--its overgrown public sector could use a lot of pruning.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

eMacMan said:


> Thanks for confirming my main point, Carbon taxes cannot and are not intended to have any impact on man made CO2 emissions. Do keep in mind they are a minor inconvenience to the wealthy but hit the poor the hardest. However they do line the pockets of the super wealthy.
> 
> The fact that carbon taxes are being promoted as the ultimate solution for AGW is a pretty good indicator that AGW is a crock.



It has nothing to do with any indication you describe. Climate change is quite real, whether you deny it or not, as are earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanoes and avalanches. Many are just part of the cycle of nature, but many others, such as the amount of plastic entering the environment, or nuclear radiation from Fukushima, are absolutely Man-made. You honestly believe we are benign creatures who do not affect our world? We absolutely do; the question is what we can do about it. 

Carbon tax is one way, though not all that affective in my view. Severely cutting down our use of plastic or finding more environmentally ways of disposing of it is another, but we have become far too reliant on plastic to be able to do much. If adding a carbon tax that so far has appeared to bring DOWN the price of gas at the pump, then so be it. I haven't seen the change on every other commodity, so I'll wait and see there. 

As far as your contention that the carbon tax hits the poor hardest, I think you need to explain how you arrived at that conclusion.


----------



## Macfury

The plastic you use in Alberta doesn't wind up in the ocean!

Carbon taxes did not bring down the price of gasoline. They prevented it from becoming more affordable.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Huh? Rebates are given twice a year, not monthly. January and July.



Correction: it depends how much you're getting back. Could be four times a year, could be twice, could be once. 



> Payments will be mailed or direct deposited according to the amount a household can receive: $400 or more will be delivered in four payments in January, April, July and October; $200-$399 in payments in January and July; $100-$199 in a single January payment.


https://www.google.ca/amp/edmontonj...-it-will-affect-your-wallet/amp?client=safari


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

If you give them back their carbon taxes, why should they reduce their use of carbon?

You're describing a situation in which lower income earners have no incentive to lower carbon production. The rich will be able to afford as much carbon as they want. So essentially, you're doing nothing for CO2.


----------



## SINC

The whole thing is a stupid scheme that the Dippers will pay dearly for in 2019 as it accomplishes nothing but to hurt the economy..


----------



## eMacMan

To be clear nobody is denying global warming. Twenty thousand years 30% of the worlds land mass was buried under ice sheets at least a mile deep and in many areas more than two miles deep. Between then and 5000 years ago those ice sheets retreated to where they just covered Greenland, Antarctica and the Ice Cap covering most of Iceland. That retreat was caused by global warming and sea levels over that period of time rose over 130 Meters.

Since then conditions have been unusually stable. We have seen several periods such as the Medieval Warming Period where the North West Passage was indeed free of ice and temps were hotter than today. There have also been intervening cold periods such as the Maunder Minimum and the Mini-Ice Age when temps were colder than present. Currently we seem to be following a curve nearly identical to the Medieval Warming Period, with zero indicators that temps are rising faster than previous warming intervals.


----------



## FightingShibas

eMacMan said:


> To be clear nobody is denying global warming. Twenty thousand years 30% of the worlds land mass was buried under ice sheets at least a mile deep and in many areas more than two miles deep. Between then and 5000 years ago those ice sheets retreated to where they just covered Greenland, Antarctica and the Ice Cap covering most of Iceland. That retreat was caused by global warming and sea levels over that period of time rose over 130 Meters.
> 
> Since then conditions have been unusually stable. We have seen several periods such as the Medieval Warming Period where the North West Passage was indeed free of ice and temps were hotter than today. There have also been intervening cold periods such as the Maunder Minimum and the Mini-Ice Age when temps were colder than present. Currently we seem to be following a curve nearly identical to the Medieval Warming Period, with zero indicators that temps are rising faster than previous warming intervals.




How dare you use logical thinking to explain this. Don't you know that the answer to all our problems is to give the government more money so they can take care of us better. Just give in, assimilation is the only way. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Freddie Biff tells us that a lot of Albertans are coming around to the "progressive" way of thinking, happy to give up their freedom and incomes in exchange for more coddling. He predicts Notley will walk away with the next election, Albertans are so happy with the way she's performed--helping fight deficits with higher taxes, and hiring more union people at the government level has been a win-win.



FightingShibas said:


> How dare you use logical thinking to explain this. Don't you know that the answer to all our problems is to give the government more money so they can take care of us better. Just give in, assimilation is the only way.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FightingShibas

Macfury said:


> Freddie Biff tells us that a lot of Albertans are coming around to the "progressive" way of thinking, happy to give up their freedom and incomes in exchange for more coddling. He predicts Notley will walk away with the next election, Albertans are so happy with the way she's performed--helping fight deficits with higher taxes, and hiring more union people at the government level has been a win-win.




Some Albertan's do too many drugs. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Freddie Biff tells us that a lot of Albertans are coming around to the "progressive" way of thinking, happy to give up their freedom and incomes in exchange for more coddling. He predicts Notley will walk away with the next election, Albertans are so happy with the way she's performed--helping fight deficits with higher taxes, and hiring more union people at the government level has been a win-win.



Macfury likes to misrepresent what people say. I have claimed none of the things listed above. I have expressed my support for her and the Alberta NDP but that has nothing to do with an election in 2019. All I know is if you're going to spend your time counting the days or hoping that the right wing parties in Alberta will get their collective ****e together, then you perhaps delusional. It wouldn't be that hard to split the right again at this point.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FightingShibas said:


> Some Albertan's do too many drugs.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



And some don't do enough. Your point? I don't believe I've met you yet, and this is not a particularly good first impression. Follow Macfury's rant's at your own peril.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> The plastic you use in Alberta doesn't wind up in the ocean!
> 
> 
> 
> Carbon taxes did not bring down the price of gasoline. They prevented it from becoming more affordable.



The point has to do with global environmental awareness, a quality that you clearly lack. Why should I worry about pollution if I didn't cause it? Because we all breathe the same air, genius.


----------



## FightingShibas

Freddie_Biff said:


> And some don't do enough. Your point? I don't believe I've met you yet, and this is not a particularly good first impression. Follow Macfury's rant's at your own peril.




My own peril? How should I interpret that statement? I'm not following anybody's rant thank you very much. I agree that the right needs to get their act together before the next election, but I don't think for one second that Rachel and her cronies are doing anything resembling a good job of governing Alberta. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Beej

FightingShibas said:


> Just give in, assimilation is the only way.


Welcome to ehmac.

That counts as the welcome mat. We're cheap.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Macfury likes to misrepresent what people say. I have claimed none of the things listed above. I have expressed my support for her and the Alberta NDP but that has nothing to do with an election in 2019. All I know is if you're going to spend your time counting the days or hoping that the right wing parties in Alberta will get their collective ****e together, then you perhaps delusional. It wouldn't be that hard to split the right again at this point.


You told us that there was a lot more support in Alberta for the NDP than anyone realized and the Notley was far more popular than the polls indicated. You also told us that no party in Alberta ever regains power--so that the Progressive Conservatives would never win. How else should we interpret that?


----------



## Macfury

I think what Freddie is saying is that if you listen to him and reflect his views in your own posts, he won't hurl abuse at you.



FightingShibas said:


> My own peril? How should I interpret that statement? I'm not following anybody's rant thank you very much. I agree that the right needs to get their act together before the next election, but I don't think for one second that Rachel and her cronies are doing anything resembling a good job of governing Alberta.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> The point has to do with global environmental awareness, a quality that you clearly lack. Why should I worry about pollution if I didn't cause it? Because we all breathe the same air, genius.


I don't care if you worry about it--it's your ulcer--but you can't do anything about India bringing hundreds of coal plants online!


----------



## FightingShibas

Macfury said:


> I think what Freddie is saying is that if you listen to him and reflect his views in your own posts, he won't hurl abuse at you.




I never was much good at "toeing the party line". Pretty sure I'm not too worried about what somebody might say to me in an Internet forum. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> You told us that there was a lot more support in Alberta for the NDP than anyone realized and the Notley was far more popular than the polls indicated. You also told us that no party in Alberta ever regains power--so that the Progressive Conservatives would never win. How else should we interpret that?



I'd say stop putting words in my mouth is how I would interpret that. I never authorized you to speak on my behalf.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FightingShibas said:


> I never was much good at "toeing the party line". Pretty sure I'm not too worried about what somebody might say to me in an Internet forum.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Welcome to ehMac at any rate, but if you want to know what I think, just ask. I don't appreciate Macfury trying to speak for me. And yes, some people take too much drugs. And some clearly don't take enough.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> I'd say stop putting words in my mouth is how I would interpret that. I never authorized you to speak on my behalf.


These are things I recall you actually said. I would find the quotes for you so I don't have to approximate if it makes you feel better.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Welcome to ehMac at any rate...


FightingShibas has been here since 2011.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> I don't appreciate Macfury trying to speak for me. And yes, some people take too much drugs. And some clearly don't take enough.


Gotta agree with Mcfury. He presented a fair overview of what you have claimed time and again here on ehmac.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> FightingShibas has been here since 2011.




So? I've never met him or her. Politely stop jumping in, Mr. Helper. Not every conversation demands your involvement.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> These are things I recall you actually said. I would find the quotes for you so I don't have to approximate if it makes you feel better.



Macfury: take the hint...politelyf uc koffnow. Thank you kindly. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Gotta agree with Mcfury. He presented a fair overview of what you have claimed time and again here on ehmac.



But the better question is why is Macfury so obsessed with me? I never asked for this much attention. Plus, what if a person changes their mind along the way? I thought you were a Trump supporter at first, but lately you haven't been quite so complimentary about His Donaldness. It's this pigeon-holing bull****e that gets tiresome. Give it a rest. Have an actual conversation without presuming.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> But the better question is why is Macfury so obsessed with me? I never asked for this much attention. Plus, what if a person changes their mind along the way? I thought you were a Trump supporter at first, but lately you haven't been quite so complimentary about His Donaldness. It's this pigeon-holing bull****e that gets tiresome. Give it a rest. Have an actual conversation without presuming.


I have never been a Trump 'supporter'. I have though, stated that I think his presidency will do some long term good for politics, both in the US and here at home in that it will cause change. And that is a good thing. And to be clear, not presuming, are you now implying Notley cannot not win re-election when you write, "Plus, what if a person changes their mind along the way?"


----------



## Beej

SINC said:


> I have never been a Trump 'supporter'."


You never left the impression of being a Trump supporter with me. Granted, just a lurker for the election. My $2 (two cents, plus inflation).


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> I have never been a Trump 'supporter'. I have though, stated that I think his presidency will do some long term good for politics, both in the US and here at home in that it will cause change. And that is a good thing.


That's always been clear, SINC. I don't see how it could have been misinterpreted. You've been very open in your criticism of Trump.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> But the better question is why is Macfury so obsessed with me?


I'm not obsessed with weeds, but I will generally pull them out when I come across them. Even the stubborn ones.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> I have never been a Trump 'supporter'. I have though, stated that I think his presidency will do some long term good for politics, both in the US and here at home in that it will cause change. And that is a good thing. And to be clear, not presuming, are you now implying Notley cannot not win re-election when you write, "Plus, what if a person changes their mind along the way?"



I don't know if Notley would win re-election or not, but she's a hell of a lot more organized than the other guys. She's also kept her campaign promises, which despite your preference for right wing parties, you've got to admire. I voted NDP, as did a ton of other Albertans, and I'd vote NDP again, given the other options. It was the first time I've voted NDP in my life. The thing that gives her the advantage is drive. The PC's and the WR's are a total clusterf*ck at the moment, and they don't have much time to get their ****e together. Between the egos of Jason Kenney and Brian Jean, there is a real problem. So we'll see. Though the polls would suggest otherwise, Notley actually has a reasonably good chance given the other options. And if oil bounces back and jobs return, that could be what it takes.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> I'm not obsessed with weeds, but I will generally pull them out when I come across them. Even the stubborn ones.



See that's your problem. You act like own the fukcing forum. You don't. It's not your job to troll everything someone writes. In fact, it's a little creepy.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> See that's your problem. You act like own the fukcing forum. You don't. It's not your job to troll everything someone writes. In fact, it's a little creepy.


I generally address posts where I believe substandard effort has gone into formulating them, whether I agree with them or not. Sometimes I have no issue with what you post.


----------



## SINC

Things are not looking good for Notley and the Dippers in a Mainstreet/ Post Media poll released today. No surprise to anyone but the Dippers I suppose. And of course REDmonton, full of government union folks buck the trend.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Things are not looking good for Notley and the Dippers in a Mainstreet/ Post Media poll released today. No surprise to anyone but the Dippers I suppose. And of course REDmonton, full of government union folks buck the trend.


Looking good to me! Even if oil rebounds, Notley will be no hero--just a big monkey on the back of working voters. A few months after she's swept from office, everything she's worked for will be gone!


----------



## SINC

Yep, that poll further shows that if a provincial election were held today the results would be a Wildrose win with 48% of the vote, PC second at 24% and the Dippers at just 16%.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> I generally address posts where I believe substandard effort has gone into formulating them, whether I agree with them or not. Sometimes I have no issue with what you post.



Again, I do not seek your approval. No one does. Constant uninvited commenting is trolling. Once in a while is normal. You act like the gatekeeper.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Again, I do not seek your approval. No one does. Constant uninvited commenting is trolling. Once in a while is normal. You act like the gatekeeper.


Don't worry about my approval! Don't like my comments? Block me!


----------



## eMacMan

*Why I Distrust the Man-Made Global Warming Theory, Part III*

_Normally this would reside in the Global Warming thread a place all true believers avoid lest they come face to face with the reality of their beliefs. Posting it here because Notley's belief in global warming has resulted in a carbon tax and will no doubt lead to other extortionate programs. My entire critique is rather lengthy so I am presenting in byte sized bits.
_
I told you this was lengthy. Three posts in and I am still sorting out the red flags.

*Propaganda. Propaganda. Propaganda.*

Notice how almost every news cast has some minor event supposedly caused by AGW, loudly touted even if there is no possible connection to AGW? That's called propaganda. If the great Ice sheets were to return and bury Canada under kilometers of ice and snow, rest assured the MSM propaganda mill would somehow try to blame it on Anthropogenic Global Warming.

Another part of the propaganda process involves labeling those whom disagree with the AGW theory as; "Charlatans", "On the take", Crackpots and/or "Deniers". The intent being to ridicule all contradictory evidence and stifle debate. This approach strongly suggests the AGW theory is known to be fatally flawed. The true believers must truly believe their theory is truly unable to with-stand vigorous debate or even casual scrutiny.

It comes down to this. Goebbels set the bar for propaganda campaigns. AGW has all the markings of a classic long term propaganda campaign. That propaganda is almost always false is something we should have learned from the Holocaust, Vietnam, and the current slaughter in the Middle East. When propaganda is used to promote something like AGW, it is safest to disbelieve the propaganda and continue that skepticism until someone is able to rationally convince you otherwise.

EDIT: WTH Just last night I heard that shallow ponds on private property are contributing to Global Warming. As I said outright propaganda. Thanks to whatever idiot that hung that out there for a perfect example.


----------



## Macfury

I have always asked AGW disciples what they would do if they believed for a fact the globe was cooling. Would they increase CO2 production to return the earth to their ideal temperature? So far, not a single taker. Ice Ages are acceptable--just not a little warming.



eMacMan said:


> _Normally this would reside in the Global Warming thread a place all true believers avoid lest they come face to face with the reality of their beliefs. Posting it here because Notley's belief in global warming has resulted in a carbon tax and will no doubt lead to other extortionate programs. My entire critique is rather lengthy so I am presenting in byte sized bits.
> _
> I told you this was lengthy. Three posts in and I am still sorting out the red flags.
> 
> *Propaganda. Propaganda. Propaganda.*
> 
> Notice how almost every news cast has some minor event supposedly caused by AGW, loudly touted even if there is no possible connection to AGW? That's called propaganda. If the great Ice sheets were to return and bury Canada under kilometers of ice and snow, rest assured the MSM propaganda mill would somehow try to blame it on Anthropogenic Global Warming.
> 
> Another part of the propaganda process involves labeling those whom disagree with the AGW theory as; "Charlatans", "On the take", Crackpots and/or "Deniers". The intent being to ridicule all contradictory evidence and stifle debate. This approach strongly suggests the AGW theory is known to be fatally flawed. The true believers must truly believe their theory is truly unable to with-stand vigorous debate or even casual scrutiny.
> 
> What it comes down to this. Goebbels set the bar for propaganda campaigns. AGW has all the markings of a classic long term propaganda campaign. That propaganda is almost always false is something we should have learned from the Holocaust, Vietnam, and the current slaughter in the Middle East. When propaganda is used to promote something like AGW, it is safest to disbelieve the propaganda and continue that skepticism until someone is able to rationally convince you otherwise.


----------



## eMacMan

Once you are alert to it, the subtle signs of indoctrination become very noticeable.

Elsewhere I was participating in a discussion on Glacial remnants in the Canadian Rockies. These are not true glaciers but tiny scraps left behind when the great ice sheets completed their retreat about 5000 years ago. They are now too small to create their own micro-climate. The prof leading the discussion stated that these remnants would disappear within a few years due to man-made global warming and it was already too late to do anything to stop it.

Had he left out the man-made part of that statement, there is a good possibility that it is accurate. There has been a general warming trend over the past 5000 years, but it has been more or less a saw tooth graph rather than a curve or a straight line. This period is defined by prolonged periods of gradual warming followed by sudden severe cooling then a return to warming. So if the current warming trend continues without interruption, then without any help from man those glacial remnants would still disappear. 

Whether he is a only victim of indoctrination or is actively advancing it, is open to debate, but he is part of the AGW feedback loop


----------



## SINC

Everything the NDP touch is rejected absolutely by Albertans in record numbers. Not a chance of getting re-elected is the message over and over again. What fun we will have undoing all this crap come 2019. Latest Calgary Herald poll is but one more nail in the coffin.


----------



## Macfury

There have been a lot of folk festivals promised by the NDP to diversify the economy, SINC--will these also be canceled?


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> There have been a lot of folk festivals promised by the NDP to diversify the economy, SINC--will these also be canceled?


Well I have yet to see one new one take off. Attendance must be poor as no one has heard about tickets for any of them. Do you suppose the NDP could have underestimated the demand? Or perhaps they didn't use union musicians?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Don't worry about my approval! Don't like my comments? Block me!



If I block you, you'll still comment. I just won't be able to see what you say behind my back. I was hoping you could be more mature than that. Trolling is for those who can't handle adult conversations.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> If I block you, you'll still comment. I just won't be able to see what you say behind my back. I was hoping you could be more mature than that. Trolling is for those who can't handle adult conversations.


It only _feels _like trolling. I generally respond to any lazily reasoned post, regardless of the author.


----------



## eMacMan

Maybe she could bring back Thunder in the Valley. However the main source of income in and around The Crow is coal mining and ranching, so I can't see her doing anything which would allow her to capture this riding from the Wild Rose Party.


----------



## eMacMan

*Why I Distrust the Man-Made Global Warming Theory, Part IV*

_Normally this would reside in the Global Warming thread a place all true believers avoid lest they come face to face with the reality of their beliefs. Posting it here because Notley's belief in global warming has resulted in a carbon tax and will no doubt lead to other extortionate programs. My entire critique is rather lengthy so I am presenting in byte sized bits.

_Finally the last of the red flags or rather the last one I am going to address.
*
"The Science is Settled" and "The 97% consensus". *

I can see my first year Physics prof going Vesuvial had any student dared utter either phrase in his classroom. Science is never settled. The entire basis of science is continually questioning and re-evaluating what we think we know. Quadrupelly so for Climate Science which is still very much in its infancy. 

Even if the 97% claim is accurate, it is also irrelevant. While I am sure the Roman Catholic hierarchy truly believed in science via consensus, scientists such as Galileo, Copernicus, and Kepler proved how wrong consensus can be. Even so their heliocentric theory, where they believed the sun was the center of the universe, proved partially flawed. It is merely the center of our solar system, just one of billions of stars circling the center of our galaxy, which in turn is but one of billions of galaxies..

Let's not forget Einstein who elegantly dusted off some old crackpot theories and forever changed the face of gravitational physics. 

More recently relegated to the scientific trash pit is the Shrunken Apple theory of Geology. It was originally postulated by American Geologist James Dwight Dana, and stubbornly promoted by the Geological establishment into the 1960s. The Shrunken Apple was ultimately displaced by the previously ridiculed wingnut theories of Continental Drift and Plate Tectonics. Finally poetic justice prevailed and the 97% were subducted right along with the Shrunken Apple. 

The bottom line is, when asked for empirical data supporting the AGW theory the response is always: "The Science is Settled." or "There is a 97% consensus..." Usually that is followed by a denier, wingnut, anti-environmentalist comment, or some similar attempt at ridicule. The data itself is never forthcoming. 

BTW the 97% consensus claim has been more than adequately debunked.


----------



## Macfury

Yep, they contacted 10,257 earth scientists, then discarded the views of all but 77 of them. Of those 77 scientists, 75 thought humans contributed to climate change. Voila 97%! But it's convincing enough to some EhMacers who tout that figure.


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> Yep, they contacted 10,257 earth scientists, then discarded the views of all but 77 of them. Of those 77 scientists, 75 thought humans contributed to climate change. Voila 97%! But it's convincing enough to some EhMacers who tout that figure.


So that could just as easily be interpreted to mean that .73% sufficiently support the hypothesis to the point of being deemed worthy of counting.

Almost always completely ignored/overlooked is the key phrase: "Contributed to climate change". Hardly a ringing endorsement for man caused cataclysmic global warming, even though that is exactly what the so-called consensus purports to support.


----------



## CubaMark

eMacMan said:


> _While I am sure the Roman Catholic hierarchy truly believed in science via consensus, scientists such as Galileo, Copernicus, and Kepler proved how wrong consensus can be. _


_

You may find this article interesting:

Going Bananas: The Real Story of Kepler, Copernicus and the Church_


----------



## Macfury

I hear Notley is really excited about those new planets--says she has first dibs to put a tax on them!


----------



## eMacMan

CubaMark said:


> You may find this article interesting:
> 
> Going Bananas: The Real Story of Kepler, Copernicus and the Church


Always nice to revisit that story. 

It might also explain the religious overtones pervasive in the ACGW Theory.

Faith is believing what your brain says can't be so!


----------



## FeXL

Not.



Freddie_Biff said:


> I don't know if Notley would win re-election or not...


Cite for me the exact news article where she said she would implement a carbon tax.

Cite for me the exact news article where she said she would unionize farm workers.



Freddie_Biff said:


> She's also kept her campaign promises...


And yet, despite that, she's polling below both of them...



Freddie_Biff said:


> The PC's and the WR's are a total clusterf*ck at the moment...


Not a snowball's chance in hell.



Freddie_Biff said:


> ...Notley actually has a reasonably good chance given the other options.


I hope oil bounces back before the election. Big time. Know why? 'Cause then the royalty agreement on profits will kick in & give Albertans _one more_ reason not to vote for her.



Freddie_Biff said:


> And if oil bounces back and jobs return, that could be what it takes.


----------



## FeXL

You are insecure, aren't you...



Freddie_Biff said:


> You act like own the fukcing forum.


----------



## FeXL

Oh, but you do. You crave it, like a 5 year old craves ice cream. Admit it...



Freddie_Biff said:


> I never asked for this much attention.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Oh, but you do. You crave it, like a 5 year old craves ice cream. Admit it...


----------



## Macfury

Couldn't go with a smaller picture--had to attract attention.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Couldn't go with a smaller picture--had to attract attention.



Whatever arouses you, Macfury.


----------



## Macfury

Now you're bringing arousal into it. I would never have associated that with a troll illustration.


----------



## SINC

People just do not want a carbon tax.

Majority of Albertans still oppose carbon tax: poll | iNews880

But Knothed and the Dippers just don't get it.

Don Braid: NDP needs to heed widespread rejection of climate-change plan | National Post


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> People just do not want a carbon tax.
> 
> 
> 
> Majority of Albertans still oppose carbon tax: poll | iNews880
> 
> 
> 
> But Knothed and the Dippers just don't get it.
> 
> 
> 
> Don Braid: NDP needs to heed widespread rejection of climate-change plan | National Post



If you were to ask them, most people would likely prefer no taxes at all. However, they also seem to like their affordable health care and education, road construction and maintenance, and always on call fire and police services—things financed through taxes.


----------



## FightingShibas

Freddie_Biff said:


> If you were to ask them, most people would likely prefer no taxes at all. However, they also seem to like their affordable health care and education, road construction and maintenance, and always on call fire and police services—things financed through taxes.




True, but the hundreds of thousands of dollars they are wasting on their climate change propaganda could be much better spent elsewhere or not at all. No country can sustain constant deficit spending, eventually creditors will say no more. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FightingShibas said:


> True, but the hundreds of thousands of dollars they are wasting on their climate change propaganda could be much better spent elsewhere or not at all. No country can sustain constant deficit spending, eventually creditors will say no more.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Well, I agree that the timing may not be the best, but responsible stewardship of the environment is something I will always defend.


----------



## Freddie_Biff




----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> If you were to ask them, most people would likely prefer no taxes at all. However, they also seem to like their affordable health care and education, road construction and maintenance, and always on call fire and police services—things financed through taxes.


Health care is not affordable, it is just hidden in the general budget. Education costs way too much money. Road construction and maintenance should be financed by user fees. Fire and police services, OK.

So based on this, why not a carbon tax?



Freddie_Biff said:


> Well, I agree that the timing may not be the best, but responsible stewardship of the environment is something I will always defend.


This is not responsible stewardship of the environment as it achieves nothing. You've never explained how this tax can help the environment. So if doesn't help the environment, is just another tax and it is poorly timed--but you're still good with it.


----------



## SINC

That meme conveniently omits to mention the inherited mess Brad Wall had to clean up, left by yet another failed NDP government in his province.


----------



## Macfury

One of these premiers may still have a political future. The other is Rachel Notley.


----------



## SINC

The Dippers dig themselves in deeper.

Information commissioner slams Alberta government for poor state of freedom of information - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## eMacMan

*Why I Distrust the Man-Made Global Warming Theory, Part V*

_Normally this would reside in the Global Warming thread a place all true believers avoid lest they come face to face with the reality of their beliefs. Posting it here because Notley's belief in global warming has resulted in a carbon tax and will no doubt lead to other extortionate programs. My entire critique is rather lengthy so I am presenting in byte sized bits.

_*The Theory*

So what is the Anthropogenic Catastrophic Global Warming theory? It is based on a tenuous observation that atmospheric CO2 increases as global temperatures rise. Don't even consider the possibility that the correlation could also be a result of Global Warming. The ACGW crowd claims that CO2 is not a result but the primary cause, and it must therefore be so. It supposedly does so by not reflecting solar radiation back into space, while it reflects back to earth radiation that has reflected from earth. This is the so-called greenhouse gas effect. 

Now even the ACGW crowd admits that as greenhouse gases go CO2 is an incredibly weak one. Besides being weak it is but a trace, comprising a mere .04% of the earths total atmosphere, with mans share possibly being as high as .004% of the atmosphere. They then go on to claim that as manmade CO2 warms the planet ever so slightly it creates a 3:1 or even 6:1 positive feedback loop by releasing other more potent greenhouse gases. For whatever reason it does not create any negative feedback loops, nor do any of the positive feed back gases that are released. 

According to various IPCC predictions: Current flooding notwithstanding, ACGW has shifted California into an era of perpetual drought. Snow will never again grace Vermont ski slopes. The Arctic ice floes have already melted. Seasonal shipping through the Northwest passage is now a reality. And the polar bears, having successfully survived the warmer Medieval Warming Period have all died. In the very near future that expensive beachfront property Al Gore recently purchased will be submerged as sea levels rise at an unprecedented rate.

Given their spectacular predictive fail rate, one would think the entire IPCC crop of crooks would be dumped at sea without life vests or even better abandoned on ice bergs. Instead the NDP prefers to invest in their badly flawed theory, or rather force Albertans to invest, giving us no say in the matter.

Now I suppose those who can without reservation buy the Official 9/11 Conspiracy Theory, would also be capable of swallowing this one, even if they can't digest it. After all, the science is settled and there is a 97% consensus. Besides, refusing to open wide leaves you wide open to the charge of being a Climate Change Denier.


----------



## eMacMan

Freddie_Biff said:


> Well, I agree that the timing may not be the best, but responsible stewardship of the environment is something I will always defend.


I hate to point out the obvious, but if your stewardship is based on a flawed theory, then it is not responsible.

When it comes to electrical rates we need look no further than Ontario to see how devastating trying to reduce CO2 emissions can be. Shutting down reliable coal plants while promoting spotty solar and wind does not just raise rates $30/ton it sends them skyrocketing higher and faster than an IPCC hockey stick.

Promoting nuclear fission power plants, as environmentally desirable is absolute insanity. Even if there are no more meltdowns we still don't have a clue in hell as to how we can safely rid our selves of the spent fuels rods and other nuclear waste.

Delaying construction of much needed water and waste water treatment plants while building more windmills reeks of stupidity. Just ask native Canadians what a great idea it is to deny them clean drinking water.


----------



## FeXL

I disagree. I believe that, in our current political situation, taxes are a necessary evil & that most people would agree to pay them _if they felt their tax dollars were being spent on something reasonable, useful, achievable._

Trying to "save the planet" via a carbon tax is not only based on a faulty premise in the first place, in the second place it's been proven to be ineffective at reducing global CO2 emissions.

Why are we trying to re-invent the wheel?



Freddie_Biff said:


> If you were to ask them, most people would likely prefer no taxes at all.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> That meme conveniently omits to mention the inherited mess Brad Wall had to clean up, left by yet another failed NDP government in his province.


It's curious how the left always blames the conservative precursor for the financial situation the freshly elected liberal inherited, whereas the policies of the newly elected conservative is entirely to blame instead of the financial situation inherited from their liberal precursors...


----------



## Macfury

Even if people "prefer no taxes at all" why does that justify a carbon tax--essentially a tax on scientific illiteracy?


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> ...essentially a tax on scientific illiteracy?


Oh, I _like_ that... :clap:


----------



## eMacMan

*About those windmills*

I took the time to track down and compile the wind readings from the Pincher Creek Airport. The charts below show maximum percentage of power generated for each month and the year of 2016. 

The second chart shows how well they did when it got really cold. Will let you draw your own conclusions, but remember 35% is considered the absolute minimum for a non-subsidized 30 year payback. That does not include cost of additional transmission lines which as Albertans are discovering are not at all cheap.

I could not find a power curve for the Nordex 1.5MW which makes up the majority of windmills in southern Alberta, but I did find curves for a different 1.5MW generator and a slightly larger Nordex unit and used those as the base for my calculations. My calculations should if anything be too generous.


----------



## SINC

.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> I disagree. I believe that, in our current political situation, taxes are a necessary evil & that most people would agree to pay them _if they felt their tax dollars were being spent on something reasonable, useful, achievable._
> 
> 
> 
> Trying to "save the planet" via a carbon tax is not only based on a faulty premise in the first place, in the second place it's been proven to be ineffective at reducing global CO2 emissions.
> 
> 
> 
> Why are we trying to re-invent the wheel?



Well I certainly agree with you on that first part. I have no problem with the money I pay in taxes being spent wisely and on the purpose for which it was intended. However, past governments using tax money to bail out failing businesses like Magscan, Novatel, Swan Hills and for some reason the racehorse industry really rubbed me the wrong way. Klein was not my hero.


----------



## FeXL

Klein did much more good than he did bad.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Klein was not my hero.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Well I certainly agree with you on that first part. I have no problem with the money I pay in taxes being spent wisely and on the purpose for which it was intended. However, past governments using tax money to bail out failing businesses like Magscan, Novatel, Swan Hills and for some reason the racehorse industry really rubbed me the wrong way.


That's what it looks like when government actively "diversifies" the economy. Yet this is just what you want Notley to do.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Klein did much more good than he did bad.



Perhaps from your point of view. He demolished the education system as we know it and attacked the morale of educators on a regular basis. This was bad management. But hey, how about those horse races!


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> That's what it looks like when government actively "diversifies" the economy. Yet this is just what you want Notley to do.



Not at all. I want government to provide services. You want money going into bad business decisions. I've been against that from the start.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Not at all. I want government to provide services. You want money going into bad business decisions. I've been against that from the start.


Nope. I want no money going into businesses. But you were the one that said that government needed to do more to "diversify the economy." How do you square that?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Nope. I want no money going into businesses. But you were the one that said that government needed to do more to "diversify the economy." How do you square that?



By encouraging, not by balling out. Big difference.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> By encouraging, not by balling out. Big difference.


So how do you "encourage" without any cost to the province?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> So how do you "encourage" without any cost to the province?



I would say promotion in the form of publicity is a big part of business. If one avenue starts to become unfashionable or unprofitable, as the oil sands currently are, then you encourage those businesses to use the capital they've already invested and retool for another sector. Tax reduction incentives, as opposed to bail outs, can also be a good starting point, providing they taper off eventually. I believe that's what the government is currently attempting in Alberta. 

What do you suggest?


----------



## Macfury

I don't suggest anything at all. A government plan to "diversify the economy" will result in failure. The oil sands are not currently unprofitable, but they are less profitable. If tax reductions work, then Notley has gone in the opposite direction by raising corporate taxes. If she offers specific tax incentives then the government is again picking winners--which usually become losers.

Honestly, her greatest achievement seems to be to diversify Alberta's economy by driving oil producers to BC and Saskatchewan.



Freddie_Biff said:


> I would say promotion in the form of publicity is a big part of business. If one avenue starts to become unfashionable or unprofitable, as the oil sands currently are, then you encourage those businesses to use the capital they've already invested and retool for another sector. Tax reduction incentives, as opposed to bail outs, can also be a good starting point, providing they taper off eventually. I believe that's what the government is currently attempting in Alberta.
> 
> What do you suggest?


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> I would say promotion in the form of publicity is a big part of business. If one avenue starts to become unfashionable or unprofitable, as the oil sands currently are, then you encourage those businesses to use the capital they've already invested and retool for another sector. Tax reduction incentives, as opposed to bail outs, can also be a good starting point, providing they taper off eventually. I believe that's what the government is *currently attempting in Alberta*.


Can't argue with that wording, 'cept to add 'and failing'.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Failing? Maybe you should get up to date. 


> Signs of economic recovery continue, deficit steady
> 
> 
> 
> As reported in the government’s 2016-17 Third Quarter Fiscal Update and Economic Statement, Alberta’s economy is forecast to return to growth in 2017, following a prolonged downturn due to the oil price shock. While many Alberta families are still facing challenges due to the oil collapse, there continue to be green shoots in the economy:
> 
> There were 199 rigs drilling in January 2017, the highest level since early 2015
> Alberta exports reached $8 billion in December 2016, 47 per cent above the low point in April 2016
> Employment has grown by 18,000 since bottoming out in July 2016
> Alberta’s economy is expected to grow by 2.4 per cent in 2017, spurred by higher oil and manufacturing exports, a modest improvement in oil prices, continued public-sector infrastructure investment and continued reconstruction after the Fort McMurray wildfire.
> 
> “A full economic recovery will take time after such a long downturn, but we are starting to see encouraging signs for Alberta in the year ahead. Some challenges still remain and that’s why we are sticking to our plan of putting Albertans to work by creating good jobs and diversifying our economy. We will continue to protect the services that Albertans depend on.”
> 
> Joe Ceci, President of Treasury Board, Minister of Finance
> Fiscal highlights
> 
> The 2016-17 deficit is forecast to be $10.8 billion, consistent with the forecasts provided in the first and second quarter updates. Increased expense is offset by higher revenue and removal of the $700-million risk adjustment. It has been removed as the end of the fiscal year approaches.
> 
> Total revenue is now forecast at $42.9 billion, $1.5 billion higher than at budget, mainly due to improving resource revenue, federal transfers and investment income. The forecast for West Texas Intermediate (WTI) is now US$48/bbl, US$6 higher than estimated at budget.
> 
> Total expense is forecast at $53.7 billion, an increase of $2.6 billion from budget. In addition to the one-time expense being reported for the coal-transition agreements, main operating expense increases include:
> 
> $284 million for health system pressures and drug costs
> $179 million mainly to support higher caseloads for social services related to the downturn, such as Income Support and AISH; and child intervention
> $104 million primarily for school enrolment growth to ensure there are teachers in every classroom
> $72 million increase for agriculture-related spending such as income support to producers affected by low cattle prices
> Capital Plan spending is forecast at $7.3 billion, a $1.2 billion decrease from budget. Poor weather, soil and site conditions, and local permitting approvals contributed to construction delays. A number of projects in Fort McMurray, including the Northern Lights Health Centre repairs and heliport and three schools, were delayed due to the Wood Buffalo wildfire. Most of these funds are committed to specific projects and will be re-profiled to the next fiscal years. Even with the decrease this year in the Capital Plan, spending is still about $1 billion more than the average of the last five years.
> 
> Coal transition agreement
> 
> On the advice of the Office of the Auditor General, government is recording a one-time $1.1 billion expense for agreements to phase out coal-fired electricity generation by 2030. Actual payments of this amount will be made over the next 14 years and is simply being reported in the 2016-17 fiscal year. This amount will be funded through the price on carbon.
> 
> As a result of this accounting treatment, government will exceed the operating expense increase limit legislated in the Fiscal Planning and Transparency Act. Under the Act, operating expense increases are limited to one per cent of budgeted operating expense, with exceptions for collective bargaining, First Nations settlements and disaster spending.
> 
> Borrowing Authority
> 
> Government is increasing its borrowing authority by $14.5 billion to fund fiscal and capital plan needs into the next year. This also provides flexibility to borrow when rates are lower. The amount authorized is consistent with the 2017-18 targets published in Budget 2016.
> 
> 2016-17 Third quarter forecast ($ millions)
> 
> Full-year forecast
> 
> Budget 2016-17
> 
> Q3 forecast
> 
> Change from Budget
> 
> Income taxes
> 
> $15,730
> 
> $14,803
> 
> $(927)
> 
> Non-renewable resource revenue
> 
> 1,364
> 
> 2,430
> 
> 1,066
> 
> Other revenue
> 
> 24,341
> 
> 25,705
> 
> 1,364
> 
> Total revenue
> 
> 41,435
> 
> 42,938
> 
> 1,503
> 
> Operating expense (net of in-year savings)
> 
> 44,094
> 
> 44,868
> 
> 774
> 
> Climate Leadership Plan operating expense
> 
> 325
> 
> 1,380
> 
> 1,055
> 
> Disaster/emergency assistance expense
> 
> 246
> 
> 1,354
> 
> 1,108
> 
> Other expense
> 
> 6,432
> 
> 6,142
> 
> (290)
> 
> Total expense
> 
> 51,097
> 
> 53,744
> 
> 2,647
> 
> Risk adjustment
> 
> (700)
> 
> -
> 
> 700
> 
> Deficit
> 
> $(10,362)
> 
> $(10,806)
> 
> $(444)
> 
> Energy and economic assumptions
> 
> 
> 
> Budget 2016
> 
> Q3 forecast
> 
> Change from Budget
> 
> WTI (US$/bbl) *
> 
> 42
> 
> 48
> 
> 6
> 
> Exchange rate (US¢/Cdn$)*
> 
> 73.5
> 
> 76.0
> 
> 2.5
> 
> Real GDP growth (%)**
> 
> -1.4
> 
> -2.8
> 
> -1.4
> 
> Unemployment rate (%)**
> 
> 8
> 
> 8.1
> 
> 0.1
> 
> *2016-17 fiscal year
> **2016 calendar year
> 
> 9-Month Actuals ($ millions)
> 
> Apr 1 to Dec 31
> 
> Budget
> 
> Actuals
> 
> Change from Budget
> 
> Revenue
> 
> $30,842
> 
> $32,600
> 
> $1,758
> 
> Expense
> 
> 38,358
> 
> 39,307
> 
> 949
> 
> Deficit
> 
> $(7,516)
> 
> $(6,707)
> 
> $809
> 
> Related information
> 
> Third Quarter Fiscal Update and Economic Statement
> Economic outlook
> Budget 2016
> Multimedia
> 
> Watch the news conference
> 
> Media inquiries
> 
> Mike Brown
> 587-783-2704
> Press Secretary, Treasury Board and Finance


The layout works better in the original link. 

https://www.alberta.ca/release.cfm?xID=463353C834F7B-DFE7-3D21-B07EF3F88C6617C7


----------



## SINC

Ah Frank, you can keep swallowing the Kool Aid, but the fact of the matter is the only folks who consider the Dippers to be successful are themselves Dippers. They will be tossed from power forever in 2019 and every single poll to date shows that to be true at about 75% to rid ourselves of the NDP plague versus 25% who are delusional.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Ah Frank, you can keep swallowing the Kool Aid, but the fact of the matter is the only folks who consider the Dippers to be successful are themselves Dippers. They will be tossed from power forever in 2019 and every single poll to date shows that to be true at about 75% to rid ourselves of the NDP plague versus 25% who are delusional.



That's fine. In the meantime, which is more than two years, I will celebrate our increasing good fortune before one of the right wing parties bankrupts the province again.


----------



## FightingShibas

Freddie_Biff said:


> That's fine. In the meantime, which is more than two years, I will celebrate our increasing good fortune before one of the right wing parties bankrupts the province again.




Back away from the pipe. Time to lay off the drugs before you do irreversible damage to your grey matter. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FightingShibas said:


> Back away from the pipe. Time to lay off the drugs before you do irreversible damage to your grey matter.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Weird comment. Ad hominem attacks are not usually very persuasive. Economic forecasts from financial institutions, however, hold considerably more weight. 










http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/calgary/alberta-leads-gdp-growth-2017-td-forecast-1.3786058


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Failing? Maybe you should get up to date.


Are you joking? Take a look at all the debt the province is racking up. This is just a list of terrible news.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Are you joking? Take a look at all the debt the province is racking up. This is just a list of terrible news.



Please read the article just two centimetres above your most recent post.


----------



## Macfury

Don't forget the part you clipped out of view:



> But even that level of growth would mark only "a muted rebound compared to past experiences, and will barely bring the level of GDP back to that recorded in 2014," the report cautions.
> 
> "While certainly an improvement, the pace of growth is only about half that recorded coming out of the previous recession and economic activity will still fall short of 2014 levels," it says.


Oh my, how Albertans will applaud!

TD later noted that any jurisdiction with a carbon tax faces reduced prospects going forward.




Freddie_Biff said:


> Weird comment. Ad hominem attacks are not usually very persuasive. Economic forecasts from financial institutions, however, hold considerably more weight.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Alberta should lead in GDP growth for next 2 years, TD forecasts - Calgary - CBC News


----------



## FightingShibas

Freddie_Biff said:


> Weird comment. Ad hominem attacks are not usually very persuasive. Economic forecasts from financial institutions, however, hold considerably more weight.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/calgary/alberta-leads-gdp-growth-2017-td-forecast-1.3786058




Any growth to the private sector in Alberta will be in spite of the NDP. Not because of them. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

FightingShibas said:


> Any growth to the private sector in Alberta will be in spite of the NDP. Not because of them.



Notley is so incompetent that if she were presented with two buttons, one to make the world price of oil rise and another to make it go down, I'm not sure I could predict which one she would push.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FightingShibas said:


> Any growth to the private sector in Alberta will be in spite of the NDP. Not because of them.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Perhaps you could elaborate on this theory. So far you have made some pretty sweeping generalizations that sound more like gut level reactions than reasoned opinions.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Notley is so incompetent that if she were presented with two buttons, one to make the world price of oil rise and another to make it go down, I'm not sure I could predict which one she would push.



You really don't get it. She could skate circles around you, competence wise, and it ain't just cause "she's in her 50's" and has experience as a lawyer. You are truly myopic when it comes to seeing the whole picture. Her strategy is actually WORKING. Alberta is recovering, and the PC's, who actually think they have a chance again, bailed a year early to avoid having to deal with the hard ****e. Accidental or not, this government won the contest fair and square, regardless of what happens in 2019, and you're just going to have to deal with it, since you're too afraid to actually do anything more than complain. She's the premier, just like Donald is the President, and you might as well get used to it. Her actions have been completely legal and she has a mandate to keep her campaign promises. Suck it up, snowflakes.


----------



## Macfury

No she couldn't skate circles around me. Her abilities are mediocre. Alberta is experiencing one of the slowest recoveries on record thanks to Notley's malfeasance. And of course we're dealing with it--by pointing out the abject failure of her regime.



Freddie_Biff said:


> You really don't get it. She could skate circles around you, competence wise, and it ain't just cause "she's in her 50's" and has experience as a lawyer. You are truly myopic when it comes to seeing the whole picture. Her strategy is actually WORKING. Alberta is recovering, and the PC's, who actually think they have a chance again, bailed a year early to avoid having to deal with the hard ****e. Accidental or not, this government won the contest fair and square, regardless of what happens in 2019, and you're just going to have to deal with it, since you're too afraid to actually do anything more than complain. She's the premier, just like Donald is the President, and you might as well get used to it. Her actions have been completely legal and she has a mandate to keep her campaign promises. Suck it up, snowflakes.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> No she couldn't skate circles around me. Her abilities are mediocre. Alberta is experiencing one of the slowest recoveries on record thanks to Notley's malfeasance. And of course we're dealing with it--by pointing out the abject failure of her regime.




Exactly. You're doing nothing more than whining from your armchair. That's less than incompetent. That's useless.


----------



## Macfury

If I believed it was useless I would stop doing it! And it's much less harmful than voting for someone who is destroying the province's economy. Perhaps if I posted more referee memes I would find it even more rewarding.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Exactly. You're doing nothing more than whining from your armchair. That's less than incompetent. That's useless.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> If I believed it was useless I would stop doing it! And it's much less harmful than voting for someone who is destroying the province's economy. Perhaps if I posted more referee memes I would find it even more rewarding.



Of course, YOU don't believe it's useless. But how is it actually changing anything? Maybe you should run for office. Except—oh, wait—you're in Toronto. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Of course, YOU don't believe it's useless. But how is it actually changing anything?


Well, I can tell you how it has changed some things for Albertans. For example the NDP are taking money out of the pockets of Albertans during its weakest economy in many years, claiming they will have some desirable effect on global warming. Time and again that has been shown to be a hopeless goal, but they do not listen. Then the Dippers give some Albertans about half their money back as refunds to the tax disguised as a levy to bribe them into believing in the impossible.

Here's a hint for Red Rachel and her Dippers: It ain't foolin' anyone!

NDP drop to third place in a recent poll | Calgary Herald


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Of course, YOU don't believe it's useless. But how is it actually changing anything? Maybe you should run for office. Except—oh, wait—you're in Toronto.


I think it's changing things, by instigating NDP supporters such as yourself to publicly make extremely weak cases for the party. ("She's 50!") If I can change just one Alberta vote, its worth trying.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> I think it's changing things, by instigating NDP supporters such as yourself to publicly make extremely weak cases for the party. ("She's 50!") If I can change just one Alberta vote, its worth trying.



Man, I threw you that bone too.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Man, I threw you that bone too.


Hey, we all blow it sometimes.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Hey, we all blow it sometimes.



I wouldn't say you blew it; you just walked right into it. It happens.


----------



## SINC

No chit Sherlock.

Editorial: Alberta headed down a slippery slope | Editorial | Opinion | Edmonton


----------



## FeXL

What measurable evidence do you have to support your conjecture?



Freddie_Biff said:


> She could skate circles around you, competence wise, and it ain't just cause "she's in her 50's" and has experience as a lawyer.


Show me where somebody, anybody, one single person for that matter, has said anything about any of her actions being illegal?



Freddie_Biff said:


> Her actions have been completely legal...


Once again: show me the quote from her campaign platform that says anything about unionizing farm workers or implementing a carbon tax.



Freddie_Biff said:


> ...she has a mandate to keep her campaign promises. Suck it up, snowflakes.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

http://edmontonjournal.com/news/local-news/alberta-economy-on-road-to-recovery-conference-board-says


----------



## FeXL

Anecdotal, so make of it what you will.

Was in Calgary over the weekend. Met up with an old friend whom I first met in university. She works for a property management company who owns a tower in downtown Calgary, among other properties. 

She was talking to their CFO about the carbon tax & what effect it had on their business. He told her that they had received their January gas bill & it was around $48,000. The carbon tax on that? Eight grand. 

Just in case yer a Prog with math issues <cough>Freddie<cough> that's much closer to 17% in real dollars...


----------



## FeXL

So, Freddie, exactly what portion of this recovery can be contributed to Red Rachel's stunning fiscal policy?

Small words, direct quotes, empirical evidence only. No pictures, please...



Freddie_Biff said:


> blah, blah, blah


----------



## Macfury

Based on the already failed OPEC deal to cut production and make oil rise to $60 a barrel. That ain't happening.



> The economy will also be helped by the work to rebuild the 2,500 homes and other structures destroyed by last year’s Fort McMurray wildfires...


Maybe burn down another city?



> However, the report doesn’t expect these advances will lead to immediate improvements in Alberta’s job market.
> 
> It foresees an unemployment rate averaging 8.4 per cent this year, up slightly from 2016, before dropping to 7.7 per cent in 2018.





Freddie_Biff said:


> Alberta economy on road to recovery, conference board says | Edmonton Journal


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> So, Freddie, exactly what portion of this recovery can be contributed to Red Rachel's stunning fiscal policy?
> 
> 
> 
> Small words, direct quotes, empirical evidence only. No pictures, please...



Blah blah blah. Good enough for you?


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Blah blah blah. Good enough for you?


This only works as a sassy gag if you had previously demonstrated any facility for or interest in supporting your ideas. "Blah blah blah." is pretty much expected.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> This only works as a sassy gag if you had previously demonstrated any facility for or interest in supporting your ideas. "Blah blah blah." is pretty much expected.



Hey buddy, I support all my ideas. You just don't like the supports and so do your best to be obtuse. There's not really a lot of point to in trying to explain anything to someone who refuses to understand. Enjoy your illusions while they last.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> This only works as a sassy gag if you had previously demonstrated any facility for or interest in supporting your ideas. "Blah blah blah." is pretty much expected.


All this does is confirm the well-known fact that Freddie is FOS & couldn't back an argument if his life depended on it.

Not surprised in the least. I love when they show their true colours on a public forum...


----------



## FeXL

You support nothing. Conjecture piled on top of supposition piled on top of opinion ends up nothing more than a pile of BS.

Where's the beef?



Freddie_Biff said:


> Hey buddy, I support all my ideas.


Why did I ask, then? I'd be honestly surprised if Red Rachel had done anything positive in connection with the limited recovery we seem to be experiencing. Here's your chance to show just how wrong I am.

Go for it. Educate the unwashed masses. Illustrate your Progressive superiority.



Freddie_Biff said:


> There's not really a lot of point to in trying to explain anything to someone who refuses to understand.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Hey buddy, I support all my ideas. You just don't like the supports and so do your best to be obtuse. There's not really a lot of point to in trying to explain anything to someone who refuses to understand. Enjoy your illusions while they last.


I'll grant that you often accompany your posts with pictures. You've never backed any of your opinions with facts--just found other articles from people who share your opinions. Those rosy predictions about Alberta's economy have already collapsed like a house of cards, but you were incapable of launching any defense.


----------



## FeXL

Further on Red Rachel...

Kevin Libin: The revenge of Canada’s climate deplorables could lead to our very own Trump

First off, addressing the carbon tax BS as she "merely pursues her campaign promises":



> It’s hard to overstate how unwelcome the NDP’s climate policies have been in Alberta, although it wasn’t hard to predict that imposing a carbon tax in a province built on carbon came off as particularly belligerent. *Premier Rachel Notley hadn’t said a word about it in campaigning for election*, but afterward claimed that in town halls she’d heard people “wanted a government that was going to take action” on emissions. Of course, such town halls are notorious for representing no actual towns, but rather a self-selected group of highly motivated policy activists. Everywhere else, regular Albertans wanted nothing of the sort.


Awright, let's hear no more about that bull$h!t.

Next, on the truthiness of "2/3's of Albertans will get a rebate" nonsense:



> Now, a month after the carbon tax kicked in, nearly two-thirds of Albertans oppose it, despite Mainstreet’s poll question reminding them it was “aimed at … gaining social licence across Canada for new pipeline projects.” It also mentioned that “full rebates will go to an estimated 60 per cent of Albertans” and “two-thirds of Albertans will receive at least a partial rebate.”
> 
> That is absolutely untrue by the way, although it does conveniently echo the government’s spin. *As University of Calgary economist Trevor Tombe calculated, only one-third of Albertans will get a rebate.* Had survey respondents been told that harsher truth, opposition might easily have registered even higher.


A lying Prog? :yikes: Stunning, I know...

Lastly, a telling quote on Red Rachel's so-called popularity:



> What it will look like in Canada we might soon find out, as tempers rise against unresponsive rulers in two powerful provinces, and possibly elsewhere. The picture in Alberta is particularly grim. *As a new poll from Mainstreet Research for Postmedia confirms, the Alberta NDP is on an entirely different planet than the rest of the province on some of its biggest, most impactful policies.*


Yep.

All bold mine.

Na na na na, hey, hey, goombye...


----------



## Macfury

Hey FeXL--I hear the Wild Rose and PC parties will be fighting so hard, that Notley is going to ooze back into office to the delight of public sector union members across the province.


----------



## FeXL

At this rate the provincial Communist party is going to pass her.

Wait!!! I repeat myself...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> At this rate the provincial Communist party is going to pass her.
> 
> Wait!!! I repeat myself...


Darn. By quoting you I repeated yourself again!


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Darn. By quoting you I repeated yourself again!


Hate when that happens...


----------



## FeXL

Surge in gas prices fuels inflation



> A surge in gasoline prices helped drive Canada's annual inflation rate well beyond expectations in January to 2.1 per cent — a*n increase that coincided with the implementation of new carbon-pricing policies in Ontario and Alberta.*


M'bold.

Coincided???  How about, "was caused by"?

More:



> BMO chief economist Douglas Porter said the dramatic jump in pump prices was a combination of the underlying strength in oil prices and the new carbon levies that came into effect last month in both Ontario and Alberta.
> 
> "That was the big story as to why overall inflation is now back above two per cent for the first time in a couple of years," Porter said.


Brilliant deduction, Dougie. You get paid much for that prescience? 

Further:



> *In Alberta, the annual inflation rate hit 2.5 per cent last month after an increase of one per cent in December. Gas prices in Alberta soared 33.9 per cent last month, a gain that Statistics Canada says was partly attributable to a new carbon levy in the province. *


M'bold.

Thank you, Rachel.

So, Freddie, has your raise covered the price increases in gasoline & natural gas, the carbon tax, the trickle down effect caused by the aforementioned, the increased cost of food sourced from Alberta's freshly minted unionized producers, plus inflation?

Jes askin'.

Maybe it's time for Rachel to throw another Folk Festival so she can tell us all how fortunate we are...


----------



## CubaMark

_Oh, man... this pushes *all* the buttons of the anti-Notley, climate-change-denier crowd.... what's that phrase certain jackasses in here like to use, "heads exploding everywhere"? _ :lmao:

*Alberta announces $36M rebate program for solar panels on homes, businesses*










The Alberta government is putting up $36 million for a rebate program to encourage rooftop solar panels on homes and businesses.

Environment Minister Shannon Phillips says more details are to come and the rebates are to be available as early as this summer.

Phillips says the use of solar panels has doubled since 2015 and the goal is to have new panels on 10,000 Alberta rooftops within three years.

The program is expected to create 900 jobs in the next few years, and reduce solar installation costs by up to 30 per cent for homes and 25 per cent for businesses.

Phillips says the solar panels would reduce greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to taking 100,000 vehicles off the road.
(GlobalNews)​


----------



## Macfury

Pathetic and predictable, following similar failed policies globally. What do you think would happen if too many people went off grid?


----------



## eMacMan

Totally useless in AB as the electricity generated can only offset the electricity purchased. In Alberta more than half of the electrical bill is gouge fees so there is little real benefit to the homeowner.


----------



## FeXL

All this does, jackass, is reinforce what the prescient among us have been saying since day one: The only way alternative energy can exist is via tax-payer funded, gov't subsidies.



CubaMark said:


> blah, blahblah, blah, blahblah


----------



## FeXL

Further to the above bull$h!t, just for the hell of it, I thought I'd have a look at just how many houses there are in Alberta, kinda give some idea of exactly how Shannon's hallowed 10,000 house target reflects.

According to this 6 year old 2011 Statscan page, there were 883,265 detached houses, 46,590 mobile dwellings (mobile homes, houseboats, railroad cars), and 402,215 classified as "other" in Alberta in 2011. "Other" includes "semi-detached house, row house, apartment or flat in a duplex, apartment in a building that has fewer than five storeys and other single-attached house". Most of these would be able to take advantage of this program. Let's call it 75%, on the conservative side.

So, 883,265 + 46,590 + (.75 X 402,215) = 1,231,516 houses in Alberta. Now, for the mathematically challenged Progs among you, that means that Shannon's glorious target is to equip less than one percent of Alberta's homes with solar heating.

Recall that this is the medium term _target_, not how many houses are currently equipped.

Another stunning Prog achievement. Thing is, this publicity stunt will be enough to buy thousands of low information Progs' votes. They won't bother doing the math nor care that their own tax dollars are paying for it.

$36,000,000 that won't affect 99% of the people. Great return on the investment.

If this product was truly viable more people than that would be out purchasing it on their own, sans the subsidy.

Go, Rachel... :yawn:


----------



## eMacMan

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Frankly you can butcher grammar to yer hearts content and I ain't gonna say boo. You don't get off so lightly when it comes to math. (10000/1,200,000)*100 is a bit under 1%. Yer aim was off by a coupla orders of magnitude.


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> (10000/1,200,000)*100 is a bit under 1%.


Just realized that. Thx. I stand corrected.


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> Just realized that. Thx. I stand corrected.


Rachel's Achilles Tendon is math. It's high ground we can't afford to concede. Especially as there is no need to exaggerate.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

eMacMan said:


> Rachel's Achilles Tendon is math. It's high ground we can't afford to concede. Especially as there is no need to exaggerate.



Indeed.


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> .
> 
> So, 883,265 + 46,590 + (.75 X 402,215) = 1,231,516 houses in Alberta. Now, for the mathematically challenged Progs among you, that means that Shannon's glorious target is to equip less than one percent of Alberta's homes with solar heating.
> 
> Recall that this is the medium term _target_, not how many houses are currently equipped.
> 
> Another stunning Prog achievement. Thing is, this publicity stunt will be enough to buy thousands of low information Progs' votes. They won't bother doing the math nor care that their own tax dollars are paying for it.
> 
> $36,000,000 that won't affect 99% of the people. Great return on the investment.
> 
> If this product was truly viable more people than that would be out purchasing it on their own, sans the subsidy.
> 
> Go, Rachel... :yawn:


Couple of thoughts. The article was typically vague. God forbid anyone get their 5#it together before they make an announcement. First it says solar panels, which sadly in the CO2 warped minds of the NDP probably means solar electric. No question that solar heating or hot water is a much more efficient and cost effective use of solar power, but it seems unlikely that is the intended direction.

The other thought is: No way are you going to install solar panels on 10,000 homes for 36,000,000. That's $3600/home. Just the power inverter needed to feed the DC back into the grid can cost from $5-10,000 and solar panels are still over $2/watt by the time you include shipping and installation. 

Bottom line is that I suspect the consumer will still be facing a pricetag that cannot be recovered under the current Alberta billing regime. That and/or the cost of the program will be much higher than represented. Any claim the program will reduce panel costs is simply pie-in-the-sky math. Ask Ontario!


----------



## Beej

eMacMan said:


> Just the power inverter needed to feed the DC back into the grid can cost from $5-10,000


That cost seems high. I'm more familiar with U.S. data where sales volumes are much higher, so maybe it's part of things being expensive in Alberta. Do you have a recent (2012+) source?


----------



## eMacMan

Beej said:


> That cost seems high. I'm more familiar with U.S. data where sales volumes are much higher, so maybe it's part of things being expensive in Alberta. Do you have a recent (2012+) source?


I have a 2016 direct quote for $13000 CDN for one capable of working with an 8KW generator to charge a big battery bank. Also works as an inverter when running off the batteries. A smaller 3-4KW version of the same unit would be required for a typical solar set-up. I think the $5-8000 range would be accurate. That would be $3750 to $6000 USD.


----------



## Beej

eMacMan said:


> I have a 2016 direct quote for $13000 CDN for one capable of working with an 8KW generator to charge a big battery bank. Also works as an inverter when running off the batteries. A smaller 3-4KW version of the same unit would be required for a typical solar set-up. I think the $5-8000 range would be accurate. That would be $3750 to $6000 USD.


Thanks. Very helpful.

$4k to $6k still sounds high to me, but within the range of other sources, adjusted for high local costs and a small market. 10,000 in sales over a number of years does not seem like enough to bring down the cost to California/Texas/Germany levels. Try spending billions. Then you get local inverter factories...

https://www.siemens.ca/web/portal/e...estsinsolarinvertermanufacturingincanada.aspx

I can think of better uses for the money.


----------



## SINC

Waytogo Rachel, you go girl!

*91% Not Confident Provincial Government Is Committed To Improving Biz Climate
* 


> Calgary, March 2nd, 2017 – The Alberta Director of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB), Amber Ruddy, will be available in the foyer of the Legislature this afternoon to comment on the Throne Speech and what it means for the province’s small and medium-sized businesses.
> 
> “Setting the right tone ahead of the budget means signalling that Alberta is open for business during the fragile recovery that appears to be underway. Even though the 2016 budget was called the Alberta Jobs Plan, the average small business owner doesn’t have much to show for it,” says Ruddy.
> 
> When Alberta’s entrepreneurs were asked, “How confident are you that the provincial government is committed to improving the business climate for small business in Alberta?”
> „ 66 per cent are “not confident at all”
> „ 25 per cent are “not very confident”
> „ 7 per cent are “somewhat confident”
> „ 1 per cent are “very confident”
> „ 1 per cent “don’t know”
> 
> “Bringing forth a credible plan to balance the budget, ruling out a provincial sales tax, and reducing operational spending, are all ways to show this government is focused on the needs of entrepreneurs,” said Ruddy.
> 
> For more information about CFIB’s pre-budget recommendations, please visit Alberta: Lobbying.
> 
> Survey results are based on 1,077 responses, collected from CFIB members in Alberta to a controlled-access web survey. Data reflect responses received between January 30 and February 10, 2017.


----------



## FeXL

Woohoo!!!


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Waytogo Rachel, you go girl!
> 
> *91% Not Confident Provincial Government Is Committed To Improving Biz Climate
> *


Could those numbers reveal the fact that... the NDP has no commitment to improving the business climate?

I hear that they're planning some folk festivals though.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Could those numbers reveal the fact that... the NDP has no commitment to improving the business climate?


None whatsoever. It's not their voter base. I hear that the unions are all getting raises, however. Gotta offset the high inflation rate caused by the carbon tax...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> None whatsoever. It's not their voter base. I hear that the unions are all getting raises, however. Gotta offset the high inflation rate caused by the carbon tax...


You don't want them to suffer. Some of them are still smarting from Klein's 40% pay cuts...


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> You don't want them to suffer. Some of them are still smarting from Klein's 40% pay cuts...


Yeah. Wasn't that a bitch. 

And he completely demolished the entire Alberta education system at the same time. Had to start from scratch again, with one room schoolhouses, slates & handheld brass recess bells. My children will never be the same.

My lovely bride had to dig out her great-grandmother's trunk up in the attic & borrow the old schoolmarm outfit. One day a chinook wind caught that big ol' skirt & she rolled like a tumbleweed until she got caught in the barbwire fence a half mile down the road. The shoes pinched something horrible and I don't even talk about corsets anymore...


----------



## Macfury

All you had to eat were those apples the kids brought in and put on her desk...



FeXL said:


> Yeah. Wasn't that a bitch.
> 
> And he completely demolished the entire Alberta education system at the same time. Had to start from scratch again, with one room schoolhouses, slates & handheld brass recess bells. My children will never be the same.
> 
> My lovely bride had to dig out her great-grandmother's trunk up in the attic & borrow the old schoolmarm outfit. One day a chinook wind caught that big ol' skirt & she rolled like a tumbleweed until she got caught in the barbwire fence a half mile down the road. The shoes pinched something horrible and I don't even talk about corsets anymore...


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> All you had to eat were those apples the kids brought in and put on her desk...


Well, to be honest...some of the apples _did_ have worms in 'em. 

And there was this girl who brought in a bouquet of dandelions once. Didn't taste bad but the stains on everyone's teeth were hell to get out...


----------



## FeXL

The good news is the gym class never had any shortage of Prog tears to slake their thirst with.


----------



## Macfury

When I was a kid, we had a 10% cut in our rations for 10 years--we ate nothing!!!


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> When I was a kid, we had a 10% cut in our rations for 10 years--we ate nothing!!!


Proof that rationing creates conservatives. Free everything is the only reasonable response to prevent this outcome that everyone agrees is bad.*

*I don't mind conservatives when they agree with me.


----------



## Macfury

Universal Basic Smorgasbord.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Universal Basic Smorgasbord.


Jeezuz. Don't tell Rachel...


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Praise from the Calgary Herald.











> Braid: A throne speech to please families, not fiscal critics
> 
> Published on: March 2, 2017 | Last Updated: March 2, 2017 5:09 PM MST
> The NDP’s latest throne speech is a laser beam aimed at the loyalty and votes of Alberta’s modest-income families, while virtually ignoring larger conservative concerns about debt and deficits.
> The most-hyped symbol is the elimination of school fees for busing and instructional materials like textbooks. This is sure to be popular with struggling parents. People whose kids have just finished school will wish it were retroactive, but no luck there.
> 
> A Calgary family with three kids in a CBE school will save $1,400 a year, the government says.
> 
> The measure will cost the government $54 million this year — about $10 million more than the election campaign promise in 2015. The province may cover even more of these costs later on.
> 
> Along with many other NDP measures, the elimination of these fees is directed at the treasure-trove of suburban voters who belonged to the Progressive Conservatives for four decades.
> 
> Premier Rachel Notley’s crew imagined a 2019 election campaign in which conservatives scream for cuts, and she dares them to bring back school fees and payday loans, eliminate child tax credits, and remove the hard cap on home electricity prices — another measure the NDP will enact in this session.
> 
> “Rates will be capped below the average price families have paid over the last decade,” the speech says. “If electricity prices go up beyond the cap, electricity bills won’t. Period.”
> 
> The New Democrats want to avoid the crisis faced by the Ontario Liberals, whose green campaign has pushed electricity prices so high that the province is now forced to cut them sharply.
> 
> The NDP even has an angle on the unpopular carbon tax. If it were ever abolished — which the conservative parties vow to do — two-thirds of Alberta families would lose up-front cash rebates that are often higher than the carbon tax they pay.
> 
> The state of provincial finances is barely mentioned in the speech. It does does not include the words debt, deficit, or fiscal. In the whole document, there’s only one money-related pledge, to cut the growth of government spending.
> 
> Not reduce spending, mind you, but only control the rate at which it climbs. In the current fiscal year, the province spends $53 billion, $10.8 billion more than its revenue.
> 
> The NDP points to some spending cuts that are real, although they’re almost irrelevant in dollar terms — frozen salaries for political staff, MLAs, ministers and civil service managers.
> 
> They government also trumpets last week’s welcome attack on the absurd compensation for executives in many government-appointed agencies, boards and commissions. No more golf course memberships or fine-wine dinners with customers and lobbyists.
> 
> But even though the speech ignores the wider fiscal picture, it’s very business-friendly. The NDP touts business growth and diversification through a variety of incentive programs. Finance Minister Joe Ceci argues credibly that the new royalty regime has brought many working rigs back to Alberta.
> 
> The speech is also clear that Notley will keep fighting for pipelines and tidewater access. There’s no courting of the enviro fringe here — if her climate-change policy isn’t good enough for those people, so be it.
> 
> But the target market for this budget is really “ordinary Albertans” with their “family budgets,” as well as those in serious need. Everything is aimed at “making life better” for most people in the province.
> 
> The NDP promises to push on toward $25-a-day child care. There will be a new law “ensuring child death reviews receive the proper care and attention” — an obvious response to the appalling case of Serenity, the indigenous child who died in care without so much as a fatality report for two years afterward.
> 
> Notley is trying to build a wall of support with the middle class and the underprivileged, and daring conservatives to storm it. They might find it harder than they think.
> 
> Don Braid’s column appears regularly in the Herald
> 
> [email protected]
> 
> Twitter/DonBraid


http://calgaryherald.com/news/politics/braid-a-throne-speech-to-please-families-not-fiscal-critics


----------



## Macfury

Let's see, I'll tax you like hell and bribe you by giving you a little bit of it back--all the while racking up massive deficits. There's one for the families!

Braid is a noted NDP apologist, so this weird spin on failure is no surprise.

:lmao:“Now is not the time to let our steady hand waver.”:lmao:


----------



## SINC

Bottom line: As a retiree, I am now paying school fees. Again. Long after I paid them for our three children.

People with school age kids win. I lose.

Way to go Red Rachel.


----------



## Macfury

Yup. Notley's generosity always involves digging deep into other people's pockets.



SINC said:


> Bottom line: As a retiree, I am now paying school fees. Again. Long after I paid them for our three children.
> 
> People with school age kids win. I lose.
> 
> Way to go Red Rachel.


----------



## FightingShibas

If they want to please Alberta families, they should be stepping down from power. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

FightingShibas said:


> If they want to please Alberta families, they should be stepping down from power.


They're not yet finished destroying the machinery of prosperity. Small business needs another pounding, farmers need to be flattened and the oil industry needs another sucker punch.


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> They're not yet finished destroying the machinery of prosperity. Small business needs another pounding, farmers need to be flattened and the oil industry needs another sucker punch.


Yep, driving more nails in the coffin that will become the NDP in just two years.


----------



## CubaMark

SINC said:


> People with school age kids win. I lose.


That's the short view.

The long view is this: 
Your (not that arduous) fees contribute to overall education in the province. An educated population leads economic and social development, lower crime, etc. You win in a better quality of life... down the road. 

If investments in the economy float all boats, why can't we appreciate social investments for the dividends they also pay?


----------



## SINC

It is nothing short of supporting the few by the many. I paid my own way, as everyone should. This is just socialism at work.


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> That's the short view.
> 
> The long view is this:
> Your (not that arduous) fees contribute to overall education in the province. An educated population leads economic and social development, lower crime, etc. You win in a better quality of life... down the road.
> 
> If investments in the economy float all boats, why can't we appreciate social investments for the dividends they also pay?


SINC paid those fees out of pocket and will now have to pay them again through taxes.


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> SINC paid those fees out of pocket and will now have to pay them again through taxes.


SINC never struck me as the silver spoon type of guy. If he went to public schools others paid his way. He then paid school taxes when his kids were in school. Hardly insignificant as they amount to at least half of our property tax bills in Alberta. While he was doing that his tax load was heavier as seniors were spared the school tax portion of their property tax. 

Now when he should be enjoying the very benefit that increased his tax load earlier in life it is no longer there.

He has a point.


----------



## Beej

eMacMan said:


> He has a point.


I agree. As does anyone who criticizes accumulated government debt related to "investments" that were really operating costs. Not debt for roads and bridges, or even bad economic development ideas (another debate)...just plain not paying for the cost of government services. 

I am open to borrowing for investing in human and social capital, but there has been a clear inter-generational subsidy.


----------



## eMacMan

It's seemed obvious that NOAA and NASA have been engaged in data tampering. I recall hearing on the radio that through out Alberta 2010 was one of the coldest years on record, yet NOAA/NASA said we were slightly warmer than normal. Similar anomalies for Argentina.

Since then I have not trusted data from either source. Nice to have the obvious confirmed.

Whistleblower reports data tampering at NOAA
https://realclimatescience.com/100-of-us-warming-is-due-to-noaa-data-tampering/

The real tragedy is this was done in such a manner as to contaminate raw data making it far more difficult for serious climate scientists to do their job. 









Still I guess as long as the Dippers don't lose faith and reconsider things like the Carbon Tax all is well.


----------



## SINC

This ought to be required reading for every Alberta Dipper and anyone who voted for these imbeciles.

*Alberta's Carbon Tax Is Already A Failure*

http://calgaryherald.com/opinion/columnists/milke-albertas-carbon-tax-is-already-a-failure


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> This ought to be required reading for every Alberta Dipper and anyone who voted for these imbeciles.
> 
> 
> 
> *Alberta's Carbon Tax Is Already A Failure*
> 
> 
> 
> http://calgaryherald.com/opinion/columnists/milke-albertas-carbon-tax-is-already-a-failure



Ftombthe comments section of the article you posted:

"Sorry but you misunderstand how this works and so does the author. The deal low income people get is basically this: Here's a rebate, if you don't burn carbon you can keep it all, if you do burn some carbon you'll have to pay some of it back through the carbon tax. The incentive is still very much there because they must still pay the carbon tax if they burn carbon. It's very simple math and this program was developed by economist, who specialize in incentive programs, they got the incentives right here, unfortunately people like this author who seems to have trouble with basic math are misleading people."


----------



## eMacMan

^^^
Not making any sense. 

The way Alberta gas and electric bills are set-up more than half the bill is gouge fees. I recall a summer bill where I paid $3.00 for natural gas and $30.00 in gouge fees. Even if I shut off the pilot lights the savings would be inconsequential.

If Red Rachel was serious about cutting consumption she should start by dumping the gouge fees. Then there would be clear fiscal results if you reduced consumption.


----------



## Macfury

An economist you say?

It's ludicrous. The rebates are money that belongs to them in the first place. They do not fully compensate them for Notley's scheme. And the poor can't simply cut back on heating their homes or driving to a job. It's just another tax--the only scheme that one-trick pony can muster.

Doesn't really matter as this program will be washed away along with the rest of the garbage Notley's been piling up at the legislature, following her upcoming defeat. 



Freddie_Biff said:


> Ftombthe comments section of the article you posted:
> 
> "Sorry but you misunderstand how this works and so does the author. The deal low income people get is basically this: Here's a rebate, if you don't burn carbon you can keep it all, if you do burn some carbon you'll have to pay some of it back through the carbon tax. The incentive is still very much there because they must still pay the carbon tax if they burn carbon. It's very simple math and this program was developed by economist, who specialize in incentive programs, they got the incentives right here, unfortunately people like this author who seems to have trouble with basic math are misleading people."


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> An economist you say?
> 
> It's ludicrous. The rebates are money that belongs to them in the first place. They do not fully compensate them for Notley's scheme. And the poor can't simply cut back on heating their homes or driving to a job.
> 
> Doesn't really matter as this program will be washed away along with the rest of the garbage Notley's been piling up at the legislature, following her upcoming defeat.


Yep those on the bottom rung have already squeezed consumption to a minimum.


----------



## Macfury

eMacMan said:


> Yep those on the bottom rung have already squeezed consumption to a minimum.


What idiotic regulations such as this do is turn people who are trying to maintain a decent life against all odds into government supplicants. Suddenly, instead of using their own money to buy things, they're waiting on a quarterly government cheque as though they were on welfare.


----------



## Beej

eMacMan said:


> The way Alberta gas and electric bills are set-up more than half the bill is gouge fees.


I think you are referring to fees for fixed costs and costs not related to how much gas is used. How does the infrastructure get paid for without this? Maybe the cost should be lower or higher, but there are no free pipelines, meters, call centres, etc.


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> Suddenly, instead of using their own money to buy things, they're waiting on a quarterly government cheque as though they were on welfare.


A carbon tax should be matched with income, property, and other tax reductions but, at some point, a rebate is helpful for the lowest income families. 

It is not either/or, but I get your point on dependency. This applies to any form of user fee implemented with a nod to progressive taxation. Why not just have the fee?


----------



## CubaMark

eMacMan said:


> The way Alberta gas and electric bills are set-up more than half the bill is gouge fees. I recall a summer bill where I paid $3.00 for natural gas and $30.00 in gouge fees. Even if I shut off the pilot lights the savings would be inconsequential.


Serious question, since I don't know: (How) have the Alberta gas / electric bills changed since the NDP came into office?


----------



## eMacMan

CubaMark said:


> Serious question, since I don't know: (How) have the Alberta gas / electric bills changed since the NDP came into office?


They have not and that's the entire point. When they are structured such that almost zero usage still gives you a big bill there is no point in trying to conserve. 

Just more evidence that Rachel has no interest in reducing consumption.


----------



## SINC

CubaMark said:


> Serious question, since I don't know: (How) have the Alberta gas / electric bills changed since the NDP came into office?


They most certainly have changed by the addition of the carbon tax to the natural gas bill, but the admin/infrastructure fees are what are the killers.

You can see here that the gouge fees are higher than the gas costs.


----------



## eMacMan

*Why I Distrust the Man-Made Global Warming Theory, Part VI*

_Normally this would reside in the Global Warming thread a place all true believers avoid lest they come face to face with the reality of their beliefs. Posting it here because Notley's belief in global warming has resulted in a carbon tax and will no doubt lead to other extortionate programs. My entire critique is rather lengthy so I am presenting in byte sized bits.

_*The Theory Again*

According to the Great Goreacle; Sea Levels will rise at unprecedented rates and by the end of the century will be 400mm higher than they were in 2000. An increase of 4mm/year. Meanwhile increasing the atmospheric CO2 levels from .04% to .044% will increase storm surges by 2 orders of magnitude and cities such as San Francisco will be wiped out.

That's not climate change. This is climate change: 
[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USIAcXfv39k[/ame] 
Slow it down and watch it at 1/4 speed. Notice the Continental Ice sheets advancing and retreating? That's climate change! Notice the glacial melting between 18,000 years ago to 5000 years ago? In that time period seal level rose by 130 meters or about 10mm/year. That's Global Warming! 

Over the past 5000 years things have been unusually stable. Even so we have seen at least three warming periods and at least two mini ice ages.










Now look at NOAAs take on the San Francisco Tide levels. This is our longest record of sea levels. Even so an accurate determination of sea level requires one year or longer running averages. 1860-1885 shows a 4.5mm/year sea level rise. 1900-2000 shows 2mm/year. Far from unprecedented. Notice the line is almost straight, no hockey stick effect between 1950 and 2000. Bottom line, the Goreacles Doomsday prediction is well within natural levels over the past 150 years.

The reality is even if the Great Goreacle proves correct. We are not talking climate change. We are not even talking ACGW. We are talking minor variations of normal climatic fluctuations. That minor uptake in CO2 levels is also well within historical norms and those super surges, that the Goreacle is using to leverage cash from our wallets, are super nonsense.


----------



## Macfury

Much of the measured change in sea level can be attributed to shifts in the ocean floor.


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> Much of the measured change in sea level can be attributed to shifts in the ocean floor.


Particularly in the San Fran area. However SF has the only records going back far enough to show levels before man was contributing to CO2. I find the consistent 2mm/year rise from 1900-1950 and no visible increase from 1950-2000 to be very illuminating. Surely if the hockey stick had any life in it at all they should be skyrocketing post 1980.

Interestingly I found at least one study, combining multiple tidal gauge records, which claims from 1990 to 2010 the level flattened out altogether. Will have to see if I can track it down again.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

eMacMan said:


> _Normally this would reside in the Global Warming thread a place all true believers avoid lest they come face to face with the reality of their beliefs. Posting it here because Notley's belief in global warming has resulted in a carbon tax and will no doubt lead to other extortionate programs. My entire critique is rather lengthy so I am presenting in byte sized bits.
> 
> _*The Theory Again*
> 
> According to the Great Goreacle; Sea Levels will rise at unprecedented rates and by the end of the century will be 400mm higher than they were in 2000. An increase of 4mm/year. Meanwhile increasing the atmospheric CO2 levels from .04% to .044% will increase storm surges by 2 orders of magnitude and cities such as San Francisco will be wiped out.
> 
> That's not climate change. This is climate change:
> [ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USIAcXfv39k[/ame]
> Slow it down and watch it at 1/4 speed. Notice the Continental Ice sheets advancing and retreating? That's climate change! Notice the glacial melting between 18,000 years ago to 5000 years ago? In that time period seal level rose by 130 meters or about 10mm/year. That's Global Warming!
> 
> Over the past 5000 years things have been unusually stable. Even so we have seen at least three warming periods and at least two mini ice ages.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now look at NOAAs take on the San Francisco Tide levels. This is our longest record of sea levels. Even so an accurate determination of sea level requires one year or longer running averages. 1860-1885 shows a 4.5mm/year sea level rise. 1900-2000 shows 2mm/year. Far from unprecedented, the Goreacles Doomsday prediction is well within natural levels over the past 150 years.
> 
> The reality is even if the Great Goreacle proves correct. We are not talking climate change. We are not even talking ACGW. We are talking minor variations of normal climatic fluctuations. That minor uptake in CO2 levels is also well within historical norms and those super surges, that the Goreacle is using to leverage cash from our wallets, are super nonsense.



A very informative post. Thank you.


----------



## Beej

eMacMan said:


> However SF has the only records going back far enough to show levels before man was contributing to CO2.


I thought the UK would have older records, given the importance of the navy to their empire.

A quick check gets this, which only goes back to 1870:
https://www.bodc.ac.uk/data/hosted_data_systems/sea_level/historical_uk_tide_gauge_data/search/


----------



## SINC

Stupid is as stupid does.

Alberta repeats Ontario?s budget and energy blunders


----------



## SINC

And speaking of stupid, Albertans can now line up for free light bulbs and shower heads.

And where did the money come from? Albertan's own pockets via the Carbon Tax, that's where. P'sssst, they like to call it a levy.

And what provincial business did they buy these products from? Nope, not an Alberta firm. Instead that $21 million went to an Ontario firm.

And just where were these products made? If you guessed China, take a bow.

The Alberta NDP. Dippers doin' Albertans up the bum. 

Again. Or is that still?

It's NDP Alberta. Free stuff for everyone


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> And speaking of stupid, Albertans can now line up for free light bulbs and shower heads.
> 
> And where did the money come from? Albertan's own pockets via the Carbon Tax, that's where. P'sssst, they like to call it a levy.
> 
> And what provincial business did they buy these products from? Nope, not an Alberta firm. Instead that $21 million went to an Ontario firm.
> 
> And just where were these products made? If you guessed China, take a bow.
> 
> The Alberta NDP. Dippers doin' Albertans up the bum.
> 
> Again. Or is that still?
> 
> It's NDP Alberta. Free stuff for everyone


I've expressed my opinion on energy saving bulbs before, but let's review: 
This is Alberta, ten months of the year all that "wasted" energy helps to heat your home. The other two we don't need no stinkin' light bulbs at all.

It is idiotic to replace closet, attic, basement or any other bulbs that see only limited use. If you must replace bulbs limit the effort to those which are on several hours a day. Even then do not expect to see any measurable drop in your electric bill. A bulb that is on 12 hours a day will at most save $2/month at 10¢/KWH, but only for those two summer months if you indeed turn it on then. Oh if that bulb is only on an hour a day, say a bathroom or kitchen the savings is 17¢/month. 

Like it or not neither CFBs nor LEDs produce the clean spectrum and flicker free light that make incandescent bulbs such great reading lights.

Still if Rachel wants someone to take some of those seized incandescents off her hands I am more than happy to offer some of them a new home where they will be loved and appreciated.

Some links about other CFB or LED bulb issues.
Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs: A New Cancer Risk in Your Home
https://banledlighting.wordpress.com/
https://www.consumeraffairs.com/homeowners/ge_light_bulbs.html


----------



## Macfury

The switch away from incandescents was pushed by bulb manufacturers who happily sell bulbs for $6.99 instead of 69 cents. Idiots can use the expensive purchase to signal their virtue to other idiots.


----------



## Beej

eMacMan said:


> all that "wasted" energy helps to heat your home.





> It is idiotic to replace closet, attic, basement or any other bulbs that see only limited use.


I agree with these parts. Sometimes the push to be zealous about some new technology linked to political ends distracts people from the basics. How is it better, how much does it cost, and where are the best applications of this technology.

This is before getting into broader issues such as the life cycle emissions or chemicals involved in one technology over another.


----------



## Macfury

if the technology were superior, relative to cost, one would not have had to legislate against incandescents. The notion of the federal government siding with industry to outlaw a 100 watt bulb is offensive.


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> if the technology were superior, relative to cost


The conflict is over cost. Some argue no other cost, others argue there are costs not included in the market. A fair debate to have.


----------



## Macfury

Beej said:


> The conflict is over cost. Some argue no other cost, others argue there are costs not included in the market. A fair debate to have.


Well, go ahead an argue the costs not included in the market. I'll finish you off later.


----------



## eMacMan

More than cost. If a CFB breaks near a baby he is going to breath in a dose of Mercury easily 1000 times the so-called safe guidelines. I guess that is not really am issue as they are already being pumped full of Mercury in the form of Thymiserol used in those dozens of vaccinations.

LEDs contain lead and arsenic, hardly welcome visitors in any home. At the moment both types are eventually destined for landfills, no reason to keep those heavy metals out of the groundwater.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Wow! A year has gone by already since George Clark led that historic Kudatah with his 500,000 followers to take over the Alberta government. Great success!


----------



## Macfury

It's ironic isn't it? Notley is doing a better job of overthrowing the NDP herself--I love it when a plan comes together!



Freddie_Biff said:


> Wow! A year has gone by already since George Clark led that historic Kudatah with his 500,000 followers to take over the Alberta government. Great success!


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> It's ironic isn't it? Notley is doing a better job of overthrowing the NDP herself--I love it when a plan comes together!



Yup. Enjoy those alternative facts. I imagine in your world the WildRose is not experiencing backlash over the "feminism is cancer" mail out either.


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> Well, go ahead an argue the costs not included in the market. I'll finish you off later.


Feel free to argue for or against the idea of human-caused climate change. I'll let you know when I see a convincing argument on either side.


----------



## Macfury

Beej said:


> Feel free to argue for or against the idea of human-caused climate change. I'll let you know when I see a convincing argument on either side.


Having heard no convincing argument on either side, I'll just assume that you won't support any stupid policies. You're too small a prize.


----------



## Macfury

When your house is on fire, you're going to elect the person with the fire hose, not the crazy lady with a can of gasoline. I don't think a single line from the immediately fired "director of communications of Campus outreach" is going to save Notley's sizzling bacon from election disaster. 



Freddie_Biff said:


> Yup. Enjoy those alternative facts. I imagine in your world the WildRose is not experiencing backlash over the "feminism is cancer" mail out either.


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> You're too small a prize.


This is not convincing. beejacon


----------



## Macfury

Beej said:


> This is not convincing. beejacon


.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> When your house is on fire, you're going to elect the person with the fire hose, not the crazy lady with a can of gasoline. I don't think a single line from the immediately fired "director of communications of Campus outreach" is going to save Notley's sizzling bacon from election disaster.



You miss the point. Again. The WildRose would do much better if they didn't reveal their true colours now and again. Feminism is cancer. Let that sink in.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Feminism is cancer. Let that sink in.


Carbon tax rejected by 75% of Albertans polled. Let that sink in.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Carbon tax rejected by 75% of Albertans polled. Let that sink in.



What does that have to do with the misogyny represented in the Wild Rose party? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> What does that have to do with the misogyny represented in the Wild Rose party?


Just pointing out the now obvious result that the WR will be elected in spite of it, since the outright rejections of NDP policies is now certain in poll after poll after poll. And you're welcome.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Just pointing out the now obvious result that the WR will be elected in spite of it, since the outright rejections of NDP policies is now certain in poll after poll after poll. And you're welcome.



So you're okay with the idea that "Feminism is Cancer" then, on this International Women's Day? Talk about a one track mind.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> So you're okay with the idea that "Feminism is Cancer" then, on this International Women's Day? Talk about a one track mind.


If you're choosing between catclysmic economic failure or thinking about comments from some stupid guy who has lost his position several years ago, most Albertans would not support the NDP.


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> If you're choosing between catclysmic economic failure or thinking about comments from some stupid guy who has lost his position several years ago, most Albertans would not support the NDP.


Macfury gets it. Went right over Biff's head.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> If you're choosing between catclysmic economic failure or thinking about comments from some stupid guy who has lost his position several years ago, most Albertans would not support the NDP.



Again, you fail to address the actual topic at hand. Do you think that feminism is cancer? Does your wife agree with you? Your mother? Your sister? Your daughters?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Macfury gets it. Went right over Biff's head.



Don, you still fail to answer the question. Went right over your head apparently.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Don, you still fail to answer the question. Went right over your head apparently.


Gee Frank, I answered that question in my first post. Now who doesn't get it?



SINC said:


> Just pointing out the now obvious result that *the WR will be elected in spite of it,* since the outright rejections of NDP policies is now certain in poll after poll after poll. And you're welcome.


Uh, that is my opinion of how important that utterance will be by election time and especially by a FORMER (as in not now a member) WR member.

Phhhht comes to mind!


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Gee Frank, I answered that question in my first post. Now who doesn't get it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uh, that is my opinion of how important that utterance will be by election time and especially by a FORMER (as in not now a member) WR member.
> 
> 
> 
> Phhhht comes to mind!



Don, you have not stated a single thing to refute the statement that "feminism is cancer." That simple statement is going to **** off a great percentage of Alberta voters in my opinion. So you support the statement? Would your wife support it? Your mother? Your sister? Your daughter? Please stop evading the question. Either you support the statement or you don't, and your refusal to actually answer the question means that I'm going to assume you support it. Unless you have the cojones to speak up, that is.


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> *posted a picture*


I get the joke, but this sort of thing seems to be the standard response. Ehmac was often ugly, but people did not avoid opposing opinions with such vigour. They debated, instead of avoiding (more often than not). I won't overstate the quality of said debate/angry retaliation, but a majority picture response, often just to change the topic, was funny, not the norm.

Guess I've become an old timer griping. Oh well.

"Back in my day, people actually debated or, at least, ranted at each other. Nowadays the kids just run to their echo chamber, dropping pictures and changing topics to avoid the discomfort of possibly being wrong." I need a porch and a rocking chair.

Alternatively, the broad topic threads (e.g. American Politics) may have done this. Starting new topics with the daily news instead of taking some time to flesh out (rant about) yesterday's topic. That's my charitable take.

Your take?


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Don, you have not stated a single thing to refute the statement that "feminism is cancer." That simple statement is going to **** off a great percentage of Alberta voters in my opinion. So you support the statement? Would your wife support it? Your mother? Your sister? Your daughter? Please stop evading the question. Either you support the statement or you don't, and your refusal to actually answer the question means that I'm going to assume you support it. Unless you have the cojones to speak up, that is.


I have more cajonez than you ever will, Frank. Enough to tell you to put your insinuations where the sun does not shine. Enough to vote against the socialist bastards that now hold Alberta ransom. And enough to tell you that no reasonable person should even consider that remark in any way. Also enough to completely reject your feeble attempt to insinuate I would support such a thing. And finally enough to know your hero socialists would bankrupt Alberta if given another mandate. It will not happen. Not even close.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> I have more cajonez than you ever will, Frank. Enough to tell you to put your insinuations where the sun does not shine. Enough to vote against the socialist bastards that now hold Alberta ransom. And enough to tell you that no reasonable person should even consider that remark in any way. Also enough to completely reject your feeble attempt to insinuate I would support such a thing. And finally enough to know your hero socialists would bankrupt Alberta if given another mandate. It will not happen. Not even close.



A roundabout reply, but a reply finally. Thank you. It does take cojones to reject one of the tenets of Alberta's Official Opposition party, especially in this testosterone-laden province. I am glad to hear that you reject that view held by a number of members of the WildRose caucus. The next question is where do you draw the line in terms of supporting that party's platform? Rejecting the NDP and supporting the WildRose are not exactly the same thing.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Rejecting the NDP and supporting the WildRose are not exactly the same thing.


You can hold onto that security blanket come election day.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> You can hold onto that security blanket come election day.



Who's talking about elections? That's over two years away. I'm talking about the here and now, and you appear to be oblivious to it. If the WildRose, whom one would think to be the most likely heirs to the throne, keep shooting themselves in the foot with slogans like "feminism is cancer," then why on earth do you think they are in any position to actually lead the province? It's not about winning an election; it's about having a vision and following through on that vision if you succeed in forming the next government. You seem obsessed with payback in 2019 but seem to be incapable of actually articulating what the WildRose vision is.


----------



## Macfury

Some thoughts.

The quality of posting has dropped significantly with misguided posters believing that memes and inane images are the equivalent of well-crafted arguments. I used to respond with original research until I realized those posts were not read. One poster in this thread admitted, for example that he/she simply ignores posts in a discussion if they are not pleasing or supportive.

Even older EhMacers have now been jaded by social media and their ability to participate in long-form debate has diminished. Also see misapplication of referee memes as a good example of how social media norms have rendered them incapable of debate--not only are they not legitimate points of debate, they frequently fail to select the appropriate logical fallacy. They no longer understand the process of debate.

Since many posters now believe that citing an article supports their position, you won't see any participation unless they can find an article to which they can link. If you ask them to explain their link, you will get no reply--they probably don't understand it themselves. I've seen posters link to articles where the headline appeared to support their position, but the text actually attacked their position. It seems impossible to me that they read the article.

Some posters can smell a losing argument a mile away and simply won't comment on a position where they know they are wrong. So you might challenge an NDP policy position and those who actually support the NDP but oppose the policy will not comment for fear of undermining the NDP. They will also disengage from any discussion where they're being intellectually roundhoused. This is where you see: "I'm bored," or accusations of bullying. They can not accept that they have failed to defend their positions.

Finally, a complete abandonment of classical liberalism has resulted in an elimination of interest in most of its virtues. For example, the value of privacy is no longer worth discussing unless it can be used to undermine a political opponent. Recent WIKILeaks allegations that the CIA is using common consumer electronics to spy on citizens without warrant are of no interest unless they make Trump look bad.




Beej said:


> I get the joke, but this sort of thing seems to be the standard response. Ehmac was often ugly, but people did not avoid opposing opinions with such vigour. They debated, instead of avoiding (more often than not). I won't overstate the quality of said debate/angry retaliation, but a majority picture response, often just to change the topic, was funny, not the norm.
> 
> Guess I've become an old timer griping. Oh well.
> 
> "Back in my day, people actually debated or, at least, ranted at each other. Nowadays the kids just run to their echo chamber, dropping pictures and changing topics to avoid the discomfort of possibly being wrong." I need a porch and a rocking chair.
> 
> Alternatively, the broad topic threads (e.g. American Politics) may have done this. Starting new topics with the daily news instead of taking some time to flesh out (rant about) yesterday's topic. That's my charitable take.
> 
> Your take?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Some thoughts.
> 
> 
> 
> The quality of posting has dropped significantly with misguided posters believing that memes and inane images are the equivalent of well-crafted arguments. I used to respond with original research until I realized those posts were not read. One poster in this thread admitted, for example that he/she simply ignores posts in a discussion if they are not pleasing or supportive.
> 
> 
> 
> Even older EhMacers have now been jaded by social media and their ability to participate in long-form debate has diminished. Also see misapplication of referee memes as a good example of how social media norms have rendered them incapable of debate--not only are they not legitimate points of debate, they frequently fail to select the appropriate logical fallacy. They no longer understand the process of debate.
> 
> 
> 
> Since many posters now believe that citing an article supports their position, you won't see any participation unless they can find an article to which they can link. If you ask them to explain their link, you will get no reply--they probably don't understand it themselves. I've seen posters link to articles where the headline appeared to support their position, but the text actually attacked their position. It seems impossible to me that they read the article.
> 
> 
> 
> Some posters can smell a losing argument a mile away and simply won't comment on a position where they know they are wrong. So you might challenge an NDP policy position and those who actually support the NDP but oppose the policy will not comment for fear of undermining the NDP. They will also disengage from any discussion where they're being intellectually roundhoused. This is where you see: "I'm bored," or accusations of bullying. They can not accept that they have failed to defend their positions.
> 
> 
> 
> Finally, a complete abandonment of classical liberalism has resulted in an elimination of interest in most of its virtues. For example, the value of privacy is no longer worth discussing unless it can be used to undermine a political opponent. Recent WIKILeaks allegations that the CIA is using common consumer electronics to spy on citizens without warrant are of no interest unless they make Trump look bad.



Best post you've written in a long time, Macfury. You make your points without attacking anyone personally, and I know I am far more likely to take your concerns seriously as a result. Bravo. Well done. 

And for what it's worth, the old adage "in motherland, TV watches you" gives me the heebie-jeebies with Smart TV's today regardless of the political stripes of those behind the espionage. That issue absolutely should concern all of us. 

I sense the best part of this discussion has only just begun.


----------



## Macfury

One person commenting that "feminism is cancer" hardly matters to me, any more than one NDP supporter saying something else. That you're transfixed by this shows me how desperate NDP supporters must be. How about woefully unpopular policies that are destroying economic opportunities and heaping hardship on Albertans? When someone is burning down your house, you're unlikely to question the person holding the fire hose. The NDP is so awesomely unsuited to governing that a simple promise to undo their policies will be an example of great governance. The Bob Rae arc is playing itself out in front of my eyes. Any government that puts its trust in people instead of ever larger, more invasive and more intrusive government will be a step in the right direction.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Who's talking about elections? That's over two years away. I'm talking about the here and now, and you appear to be oblivious to it. If the WildRose, whom one would think to be the most likely heirs to the throne, keep shooting themselves in the foot with slogans like "feminism is cancer," then why on earth do you think they are in any position to actually lead the province? It's not about winning an election; it's about having a vision and following through on that vision if you succeed in forming the next government. You seem obsessed with payback in 2019 but seem to be incapable of actually articulating what the WildRose vision is.


----------



## SINC

Another brilliant move by the Alberta NDP:

Alberta tells prosecutors: Don't waste time on cases with 'slim chance' of conviction - The Globe and Mail


----------



## SINC

.


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> Some thoughts.


Could you summarize this post with a snappy headline? 

Thanks for the response. Interesting ideas on the influence of social media, the decline of liberalism, and increase in partisanship. That last one was always there, but the other two almost seem to multiply the impact.


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> One person commenting that "feminism is cancer" hardly matters to me, any more than one NDP supporter saying something else.


I assume that statement was made as a joke, not to be taken literally. Not that any idea is beyond ridicule, but jokes are risky in politics. Hopefully the lesson for the students was not too harsh. The 2010s is a decade of outrage culture.


----------



## Macfury

Beej said:


> I assume that statement was made as a joke, not to be taken literally. Not that any idea is beyond ridicule, but jokes are risky in politics. Hopefully the lesson for the students was not too harsh. The 2010s is a decade of outrage culture.


Some lowlife Wild Roser said this on an Alberta campus. That's supposed to get the NDP re-elected.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> One person commenting that "feminism is cancer" hardly matters to me, any more than one NDP supporter saying something else. That you're transfixed by this shows me how desperate NDP supporters must be. How about woefully unpopular policies that are destroying economic opportunities and heaping hardship on Albertans? When someone is burning down your house, you're unlikely to question the person holding the fire hose. The NDP is so awesomely unsuited to governing that a simple promise to undo their policies will be an example of great governance. The Bob Rae arc is playing itself out in front of my eyes. Any government that puts its trust in people instead of ever larger, more invasive and more intrusive government will be a step in the right direction.



And so I ask again: what is the WildRose vision for the province? Because I think due to some of their extreme views (lake of fire, anyone?), they are having a hell of a time trying to articulate their own vision. They only thing they've done so far is criticize the government, bug at least the NDP are following through on their campaign promises.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> ...bug at least the NDP are following through on their campaign promises.


This is why the NDP will get tromped. They had the honesty to follow through on their promises and give people got a good look at the fruits of their policies.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> This is why the NDP will get tromped. They had the honesty to follow through on their promises and give people got a good look at the fruits of their policies.



And yet again: what is the WildRose vision for Alberta? Because right now, they just seem kind of whiny. About everything.


----------



## FightingShibas

Freddie_Biff said:


> And yet again: what is the WildRose vision for Alberta? Because right now, they just seem kind of whiny. About everything.




That seemed to work good for the NDP. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FightingShibas said:


> That seemed to work good for the NDP.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



So what you seem to be implying is that the WildRose, contenders to the throne, have no vision. Yeah, that's about what I thought. Even Jason Kenney has a vision, just not a very good one. "Unite the right" is a strategy, not a vision.


----------



## FightingShibas

Freddie_Biff said:


> So what you seem to be implying is that the WildRose, contenders to the throne, have no vision. Yeah, that's about what I thought. Even Jason Kenney has a vision, just not a very good one. "Unite the right" is a strategy, not a vision.




I'm not implying anything. I was simply pointing out that the NDP were among the biggest whiners before they were elected and even after they were elected, blaming many of the problems caused by their bad decisions on the previous conservative government. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> And yet again: what is the WildRose vision for Alberta? Because right now, they just seem kind of whiny. About everything.


Here it is:

Policies - Wildrose.ca

And they have every reason to complain... about almost everything the NDP is doing to feather its own nest and kowrow to left-wing lunacy.


----------



## FeXL

At this point, "Anybody but NDP" will be enough to win. If the much hated Alberta Liberals ran with that slogan, they would garner more votes than the NDP in the upcoming election.

Enjoy the next two years, Freddie. I called it back then & I'll repeat it: the NDP are toast in Alberta.



Freddie_Biff said:


> And yet again: what is the WildRose vision for Alberta?


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Some thoughts...


:clap::clap::clap:

The point of which obviously went, "Whoooosh", over certain heads...


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> And so I ask again: what is the WildRose vision for the province? Because I think due to some of their extreme views (lake of fire, anyone?), they are having a hell of a time trying to articulate their own vision. They only thing they've done so far is criticize the government, bug at least the NDP are following through on their campaign promises.


That is all any party has to do to rid ourselves of the parasites the NDP have become. Albertans need no more reason than the adverse effects the NDP have had on them in the past two years to turf them, and would vote for anyone but the NDP without a second glance at policy. They just want this nightmare over.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> At this point, "Anybody but NDP" will be enough to win. If the much hated Alberta Liberals ran with that slogan, they would garner more votes than the NDP in the upcoming election.
> 
> 
> 
> Enjoy the next two years, Freddie. I called it back then & I'll repeat it: the NDP are toast in Alberta.



We could both be dead in two years. It's a long time in politics. I will enjoy the absence of right wing ideologues being in charge and milking the taxpayers into paying for bad investments for the next two years.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> That is all any party has to do to rid ourselves of the parasites the NDP have become. Albertans need no more reason than the adverse effects the NDP have had on them in the past two years to turf them, and would vote for anyone but the NDP without a second glance at policy. They just want this nightmare over.




Woulda coulda shoulda. Didn't.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Woulda coulda shoulda. Didn't.


Nobody know that in addition to being incompetent, Notley would aggressively destroy the underpinnings of the economy. You have to experience something as terrible as this to ensure it never happens again.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Nobody know that in addition to being incompetent, Notley would aggressively destroy the underpinnings of the economy. You have to experience something as terrible as this to ensure it never happens again.




Strange. You keep saying it, and I just keep seeing the opposite. Rachel is doing a great job. She's the best premier we've had in a long time.


----------



## Macfury

You're a unionized government employee. I imagine things look pretty sweet from that perch.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Strange. You keep saying it, and I just keep seeing the opposite. Rachel is doing a great job. She's the best premier we've had in a long time.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> You're a unionized government employee. I imagine things look pretty sweet from that perch.



I am also a parent and a tax paying citizen. Your point?


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> I am also a parent and a tax paying citizen. Your point?


First of all, as a government employee your taxes are not contributions to the provincial purse. Second, you are insured against the worst the government is doing to destroy the private sector.


----------



## FightingShibas

Freddie_Biff said:


> Strange. You keep saying it, and I just keep seeing the opposite. Rachel is doing a great job. She's the best premier we've had in a long time.




I just threw up in my mouth a little bit reading that. Are you actually serious? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

FightingShibas said:


> I just threw up in my mouth a little bit reading that. Are you actually serious?


Sure he is. 

After all, he is a teacher, a union member, a member of the education field that his Dipper government have sworn not to touch financially, and no salary cuts immanent anytime soon.

Wouldn't you be serious in his situation? :lmao:


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> First of all, as a government employee your taxes are not contributions to the provincial purse. Second, you are insured against the worst the government is doing to destroy the private sector.



We've been through this before. If it's coming off of my paycheque and into provincial coffers, yer damn right it's a contribution. Second, I am no more insured than the next person. If I do a bad job, I can get fired same as anyone else. You are so full of ****e, Macfury.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FightingShibas said:


> I just threw up in my mouth a little bit reading that. Are you actually serious?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



I voted for her, and I'm serious. Just because your view is different does not make you right and me wrong. There are many of us who voted for her, the biggest chunk of voters in Alberta, and we'd vote for her again. I admire what Ms. Notley has done. Sorry to hear you swallowed your own puke.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Speaking of that wonderful opposition party in Alberta who wants to become the next government, it seems the person who was fired for the "feminism is cancer" e-mail controversy doesn't actually exist. 










http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/...let-investigates-wildrose-on-campus-1.4020636


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> We've been through this before. If it's coming off of my paycheque and into provincial coffers, yer damn right it's a contribution. Second, I am no more insured than the next person. If I do a bad job, I can get fired same as anyone else. You are so full of ****e, Macfury.


Not commenting on your particular talents, but in my experience, if teachers do a bad job they are assigned to another school or given administrative duties. 

Your taxpayer "contribution" is just the money taken from others in taxes and shuffled back into the pool. It isn't net revenue any more than the sales tax you pay. If the money wasn't first taken from people like SINC, he would be buying goods himself and paying the same amount of tax.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Not commenting on your particular talents, but in my experience, if teachers do a bad job they are assigned to another school or given administrative duties.
> 
> 
> 
> Your taxpayer "contribution" is just the money taken from others in taxes and shuffled back into the pool. It isn't net revenue any more than the sales tax you pay. If the money wasn't first taken from people like SINC, he would be buying goods himself and paying the same amount of tax.



Yup, same old ****e. According to you, anyone with a public service job might as well be a non-citizen. It is a very offensive point of view you hold on this, no matter how much you try to rationalize it.


----------



## Macfury

Look, if your tax contribution is meaningful, then Notley could solve her growing debt problem by hiring a million teachers. Look at all that income tax revenue flowing in! This isn't a knock on people who work on the public dime--it's simple accounting.


----------



## eMacMan

*Why I Distrust the Man-Made Global Warming Theory, Part VII*

_Normally this would reside in the Global Warming thread a place all true believers avoid lest they come face to face with the reality of their beliefs. Posting it here because Notley's belief in global warming has resulted in a carbon tax and will no doubt lead to other extortionate programs. My entire critique is rather lengthy so I am presenting in byte sized bits.

_*The Other Drivers

*The biggest challenge the ACGW believers have is trying to portray CO2 as the primary climate driver. Not only must an incredibly weak greenhouse gas be the primary driver, but it must be an order of magnitude (10 times) more powerful than all other climate drivers combined. Otherwise mans contribution to Global Warming drops from 10% to totally insignificant, and the pickpockets are exposed for common crooks with gargantuan ambitions. No one has come close to explaining the mechanics. How could this single driver completely dominate our climate? Does some space super monster periodically swoop by earth and suck a large portion of the CO2 from the atmosphere triggering the advance of continental ice sheets? 

This failure to acknowledge, understand and incorporate other drivers is the main reason IPCC and other computer models fail to predict forward and fail to predict backward, even when NOAA and NASA try to help by tampering with the empirical data. Truth is we do not know all the drivers nor do we understand how they interact, hence my initial claim that climate science is not settled and is in its very infancy.

What other drivers? Number one the sun. Solar radiation reaching earth is not a constant. Besides the well known 11 year sunspot cycle, there are longer sunspot cycles interacting with the main one. Think of it as waves canceling or reinforcing at various points in time. Those who study these cycles think the planet is slipping into another minimum cycle, similar to the Maunder Minimum. If a second or third minimum follows we could even have another mini ice age.

Something else that is just starting to get serious attention is the strength of earth and solar magnetic fields. Right now as sun spot magnitudes continue to dwindle those fields weaken, and cosmic radiation can have more of an impact. Very significant in light of the Svensmark hypothesis.
https://calderup.wordpress.com/category/3b-the-svensmark-hypothesis/

Then you have land and under water volcanic activity. Large meteor strikes….. Minor short term drivers but they can still have an impact. 

What about long term drivers? The Milankovitch Cycles, explained here:
Milankovitch Cycles and Glaciation
Three different long term cycles with different periods. Scientists are not yet at all sure how they interact, but they probably have a lot more to say about real climate change than man-made CO2. Again there is the Svensmark Hypothesis supported by a remarkable dovetailing of astronomical and geological data. 

Comes down to this: If you like the Geocentric Theory of Astronomy and the Shrunken Apple Theory of Geology. ACGW should be right up your alley.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Look, if your tax contribution is meaningful, then Notley could solve her growing debt problem by hiring a million teachers. Look at all that income tax revenue flowing in! This isn't a knock on people who work on the public dime--it's simple accounting.



No, it's Macfury's fantasy world again. They can only hire as many teachers as there are students for them to teach. If teachers' taxes don't matter, then we should stop paying them and it won't make any difference to government revenue.


----------



## Macfury

If your school hired an extra teacher, would overall tax revenue increase, decrease or remain the same?



Freddie_Biff said:


> No, it's Macfury's fantasy world again. They can only hire as many teachers as there are students for them to teach. If teachers' taxes don't matter, then we should stop paying them and it won't make any difference to government revenue.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> If your school hired an extra teacher, would overall tax revenue increase, decrease or remain the same?



If my school fired all the teachers, would overall tax revenue increase, decrease or remain the same? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

I'll make it easy for you by actually answering the question instead of fidgeting around it. Revenue would remain identical. Costs would decrease.



Freddie_Biff said:


> If my school fired all the teachers, would overall tax revenue increase, decrease or remain the same?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> I'll make it easy for you by actually answering the question instead of fidgeting around it. Revenue would remain identical. Costs would decrease.



And your children would have no school to go to, meaning one of the parents would have to quite their job and stay home to mind the kids. Your little vacuum jar experiment doesn't extend very far in the real world. Stop twisting the truth. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

One issue at a time! Do you see now why government employees don't contribute to tax revenue?



Freddie_Biff said:


> And your children would have no school to go to, meaning one of the parents would have to quite their job and stay home to mind the kids. Your little vacuum jar experiment doesn't extend very far in the real world. Stop twisting the truth.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> No, it's Macfury's fantasy world again. They can only hire as many teachers as there are students for them to teach. If teachers' taxes don't matter, then we should stop paying them and it won't make any difference to government revenue.


Give it up Macfury. The Biff is trained to teach, not learn. You waste your time on the learning aspect.


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> Do you see now why government employees don't contribute to tax revenue?


Not as simple as you are implying. If an entity is private sector, the employees contribute to taxes. If the same entity is owned by government, then the employees still contribute. The issue you may be getting at is that government owned/operated entities overpay and allow for lower productivity. Competition does not apply to them in the same way it applies to everyone else. Their competitive advantage is politics.

That seems worthy of discussion, but saying that by nature of ownership, the tax issue is decided is a weak claim.


----------



## Macfury

I'm saying that it is not a net contribution. You can't increase government tax revenues by hiring more government employees.



Beej said:


> Not as simple as you are implying. If an entity is private sector, the employees contribute to taxes. If the same entity is owned by government, then the employees still contribute. The issue you may be getting at is that government owned/operated entities overpay and allow for lower productivity. Competition does not apply to them in the same way it applies to everyone else. Their competitive advantage is politics.
> 
> That seems worthy of discussion, but saying that by nature of ownership, the tax issue is decided is a weak claim.


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> I'm saying that it is not a net contribution. You can't increase government tax revenues by hiring more government employees.


Address the example I gave. Does the net contribution claim change based on ownership?

I am fine with responding to a direct question from you, without memes. Well, maybe one meme, if it's particularly apt.


----------



## Macfury

Entity A is government owned and hs one employee paid $10,000 and taxed at 10%. There is no net revenue to government from the taxation. It costs $10,000 to get $1,000/

Company is privatized. Government earns $1,000 in income tax at no cost.



Beej said:


> Address the example I gave. Does the net contribution claim change based on ownership?
> 
> I am fine with responding to a direct question from you, without memes. Well, maybe one meme, if it's particularly apt.


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> Entity A is government owned and hs one employee paid $10,000 and taxed at 10%. There is no net revenue to government from the taxation. It costs $10,000 to get $1,000/
> 
> Company is privatized. Government earns $1,000 in income tax at no cost.


Tax revenue is the same in both examples. If entity A is paid for by user fees, nothing changes. Ownership does not make your point. The deficit does not change without making other assumptions.

Toronto could sell it's electric utility or not, but that has nothing to do with the revenues from property taxes paid by employees of the utility.

This hill is 40%.


----------



## Macfury

Yes, if you are mimicking private enterprise by monopolizing some service paid for by user fees, or if you're the LCBO you are dealing with a different revenue stream, so you are making extra profit by taxing your own employees. Opening another licquor store might earn your greater profits and more income tax revenue.



Beej said:


> Tax revenue is the same in both examples. If entity A is paid for by user fees, nothing changes. Ownership does not make your point. The deficit does not change without making other assumptions.
> 
> Toronto could sell it's electric utility or not, but that has nothing to do with the revenues from property taxes paid by employees of the utility.
> 
> This hill is 40%.


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> Yes, if you are mimicking private enterprise by monopolizing some service paid for by user fees, or if you're the LCBO you are dealing with a different revenue stream, so you are making extra profit by taxing your own employees. Opening another licquor store might earn your greater profits and more income tax revenue.


You are moving the goal posts. Ownership, in and of itself, does not define the impact on the government's budget.

40%.


----------



## Beej

Somewhat appropriate....

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQ4yd2W50No[/ame]


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Give it up Macfury. The Biff is trained to teach, not learn. You waste your time on the learning aspect.



I have a hard time with alternative facts, I admit.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Beej said:


> Not as simple as you are implying. If an entity is private sector, the employees contribute to taxes. If the same entity is owned by government, then the employees still contribute. The issue you may be getting at is that government owned/operated entities overpay and allow for lower productivity. Competition does not apply to them in the same way it applies to everyone else. Their competitive advantage is politics.
> 
> 
> 
> That seems worthy of discussion, but saying that by nature of ownership, the tax issue is decided is a weak claim.



Macfury has been trying to make this bull****e claim forever. He figures if your paycheque comes from government revenue, then the fact that you pay taxes is cancelled out by the source of your income being the government. It's an incredibly weak argument but he seems incapable of letting it go.


----------



## Macfury

You're right. Ownership is not essential. It would be different for any government entity that is also a profit centre-i.e., charges people as though it were a business. It would be like paying salary and then stealing some of it back. (It probably doesn't need to be said that I am filled with revulsion for any such entity as the LCBO).

Employees of a non-profit centre, such as an elementary or high school would be a wash--at best a transfer of money from one level of government to another.

I appreciate the thoughtful discussion. 



Beej said:


> You are moving the goal posts. Ownership, in and of itself, does not define the impact on the government's budget.
> 
> 40%.


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> I appreciate the thoughtful discussion.


Same here. The Yoda clip was over the top on my part. My only excuse is that Star Wars is always relevant.


----------



## eMacMan

*Why I Distrust the Man-Made Global Warming Theory, Part VIII*

_Normally this would reside in the Global Warming thread a place all true believers avoid lest they come face to face with the reality of their beliefs. Posting it here because Notley's belief in global warming has resulted in a carbon tax and will no doubt lead to other extortionate programs. My entire critique is rather lengthy so I am presenting in byte sized bits.

_*The Math, The Math, The Math*

The Bottom Line. I've placed it at the top lest your eyes glaze over before you get here: 
Even if The Great Goreacle is not exaggerating (very unlikely), mans contribution to a 100year-40cm rise in sea level will be just 2 or 3cm. Number is based on the fact that sea level was rising at 2mm/year without mans help prior to 1950 and continued at that pace with mans help from 1950-2000. *Are you ready, willing and able to spend $5000USD for each family member in the hope of reducing a 100 year sea level change by just 2 or 3cm? Are you willing to spend double that? Are you?*

Look out below 'cause here we go. The ACGW cabal claims all we need to do to control global warming is shift $7 Trillion of our dollar$ to the Gore-Rothchild vaults. Not Rothchild dollars, not Gates Dollars, not Gore Dollars, our dollars. That's only $600 per household they claim. As bad math goes that's pretty bad. Those capable of doing the math for themselves realize that's $1000/person then multiply by 5, because at least 80% of the planetary population doesn't have two nickels to rub together. So it's really $5000USD/person or $25,000CDN for a family of 4. And here's where it gets good. Neither the Carbon Credit Scam nor the Carbon Tax Con are designed to reduce CO2 emissions at all. You can bet the pension that the ACGW cabal will be back saying: "It didn't work. We have to double down!"

Let's look at global climate change as managed by nature, and recall that if the man-made CO2 contribution is to wreak the havoc claimed, mans 10% contribution to CO2 has to have an impact far beyond just adding to or offsetting nature by 10%. All of my earlier postings would indicate the opposite.


----------



## FeXL

Then we'd just end up paying you all pogie...



Freddie_Biff said:


> If teachers' taxes don't matter, then we should stop paying them and it won't make any difference to government revenue.


----------



## FeXL

Instead of puling out the "I'm all butthurt" card, why don't you actually address the argument? 

Your wages and therefore your expenditures all come from taxpayers pockets. Yes/no?

That fact doesn't make you any better or any worse than anybody else. It merely is.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Yup, same old ****e. According to you, anyone with a public service job might as well be a non-citizen. It is a very offensive point of view you hold on this, no matter how much you try to rationalize it.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Instead of puling out the "I'm all butthurt" card, why don't you actually address the argument?
> 
> 
> 
> Your wages and therefore your expenditures all come from taxpayers pockets. Yes/no?
> 
> 
> 
> That fact doesn't make you any better or any worse than anybody else. It merely is.



No, they don't, and I wish you'd curtail your use of childish terms like "butthurt" and "snowflake." They make you sound less intelligent than you really are. 

The old "my tax dollars pay your wages" argument is ridiculous. My after-tax dollars pay your wages. So what?

We each have an hourly wage or a salary from which is deducted a certain amount for tax dollars, CPP, EI, and what not. Those are very real dollars in my eyes and definitely affect my take home pay. Those dollars go to pay for the same things your deductions do. Why negate the contribution of public service workers? Your argument is extremely short-sighted.


----------



## Macfury

They don't pay anyone's wages. If you buy something you are merely giving back the money that was taken from them.



Freddie_Biff said:


> after-tax dollars pay your wages. So what?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> They don't pay anyone's wages. If you buy something you are merely giving back the money that was taken from them.



What colour is the sky in your world, Macfury?


----------



## Macfury

Doesn't matter. You're not contributing to the tax pool or paying anyone's wages. This is a fact, not an insult. Again, if you could contribute to people's wages or grow tax revenue then simply hiring more government workers in non-profit centres would be the magic bullet for the economy--instead of driving a bullet through the economy.



Freddie_Biff said:


> What colour is the sky in your world, Macfury?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Doesn't matter. You're not contributing to the tax pool or paying anyone's wages. This is a fact, not an insult. Again, if you could contribute to people's wages or grow tax revenue then simply hiring more government workers in non-profit centres would be the magic bullet for the economy--instead of driving a bullet through the economy.



Nope. Anyone that pays taxes contributes to the tax pool. What that pool is then spent on, whether it's roads or police or health care worker salaries, is irrelevant. The taxes are deducted from wages, no matter what your revisionist thinking tells you. And you should be happy we public service workers pay too, or you'd be footing an even bigger tax bill.


----------



## Macfury

If you stopped working, we'd be footing an even smaller tax bill! 



Freddie_Biff said:


> Nope. Anyone that pays taxes contributes to the tax pool. What that pool is then spent on, whether it's roads or police or health care worker salaries, is irrelevant. The taxes are deducted from wages, no matter what your revisionist thinking tells you. And you should be happy we public service workers pay too, or you'd be footing an even bigger tax bill.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> If you stopped working, we'd be footing an even smaller tax bill!



Give it up, Macfury. You desperately hold on to a ridiculous notion the way a drowning man holds on to anything that might float. If my T4 says I pay taxes, I pay taxes. And if you are ever out of work, then my EI deductions pay for your EI too. That's the way our economy works.


----------



## minstrel

As a public sector employee, every cent of my wages comes from tax dollars. Now I too pay taxes. In a way, I partially pay myself. All that means is a smaller portion of my gross pay comes from "other people's" tax dollars. However, every public sector employee takes far more money from the public purse than they return. That's not to say we do not provide a necessary service. Although many may disagree on the appropriate level of compensation, I'm sure no one is advocating all public sector jobs should be eliminated. Surely some of them are worth keeping? Doctors, nurses, teachers, ...?


----------



## Macfury

Hi Minstrel, the question is only academic--we're not discussing the value of the positions, only whether these positions are net contributors to the tax pool. As Beej rightly points out, it's not strictly based on public versus private. Someone working for the LCBO contributes to the tax pool, even though they're government employees, because their income is derived from retail sales.



minstrel said:


> As a public sector employee, every cent of my wages comes from tax dollars. Now I too pay taxes. In a way, I partially pay myself. All that means is a smaller portion of my gross pay comes from "other people's" tax dollars. However, every public sector employee takes far more money from the public purse than they return. That's not to say we do not provide a necessary service. Although many may disagree on the appropriate level of compensation, I'm sure no one is advocating all public sector jobs should be eliminated. Surely some of them are worth keeping? Doctors, nurses, teachers, ...?


----------



## minstrel

Hi MF

Thanks for your reply. I believe I understand at least your point of the recent set of posts to this thread. I didn't consider the "value" of such positions as part of the discussion...just thought I'd throw that in for clarity. I just don't fathom how it can be misunderstood that *every* public sector employee (and let me restate that I myself am in such a position) withdraws a sizeable portion of his or her wage from the public purse. Even when I account for deductions such as income tax, EI, and CPP, I am still a net drain on the remaining taxpayers of Canada. It doesn't matter what my T4 says; all the money I am able to pay out in deductions has been given to me by the taxpayers of Canada.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

minstrel said:


> As a public sector employee, every cent of my wages comes from tax dollars. Now I too pay taxes. In a way, I partially pay myself. All that means is a smaller portion of my gross pay comes from "other people's" tax dollars. However, every public sector employee takes far more money from the public purse than they return. That's not to say we do not provide a necessary service. Although many may disagree on the appropriate level of compensation, I'm sure no one is advocating all public sector jobs should be eliminated. Surely some of them are worth keeping? Doctors, nurses, teachers, ...?



Not if you ask Macfury. He's been critical of the public service for as long as I've known him. In any event, yes you are correct that public service wages come from the tax base, but you are out to lunch if you assert that public service employees do not pay taxes, which is what our learned friend likes to assert time and time again. Welcome to ehMac, by the way.


----------



## Macfury

Minstrel has been here for much longer than you or I have, Freddie!

And nobody is saying that you don't go through the motions of paying taxes--it's only that you are not a net contributor to the tax pool. It's that simple!


----------



## minstrel

Hi FB

Thanks for labelling me "out to lunch". Just thought I'd actually post, rather than lurk, and that's the welcome I get...wow!

If you actually read my posts, I never did "assert that public service employees do not pay taxes". I too am a teacher, and I know the size of the line on my T4 entitled "income tax deducted". What I said was every cent of my pay comes from taxes deducted from taxpayers. That means that every deduction from my pay check is already taxpayer dollars. There are no new dollars there. All I'm doing by paying income tax, or CPP, or EI, is returning those dollars to the public purse for redistribution. Some of those dollars come back to me as future pay. Pretty good deal for me, in my opinion. 

And I've read "what our learned friend likes to assert time and time again". Although like many others he may dispute the value he gets from the public service, he has never (to the best of my recollection) stated that public servants do not pay taxes. Feel free to correct me. My memory is anything but photographic.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

minstrel said:


> Hi FB
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for labelling me "out to lunch". Just thought I'd actually post, rather than lurk, and that's the welcome I get...wow!
> 
> 
> 
> If you actually read my posts, I never did "assert that public service employees do not pay taxes". I too am a teacher, and I know the size of the line on my T4 entitled "income tax deducted". What I said was every cent of my pay comes from taxes deducted from taxpayers. That means that every deduction from my pay check is already taxpayer dollars. There are no new dollars there. All I'm doing by paying income tax, or CPP, or EI, is returning those dollars to the public purse for redistribution. Some of those dollars come back to me as future pay. Pretty good deal for me, in my opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> And I've read "what our learned friend likes to assert time and time again". Although like many others he may dispute the value he gets from the public service, he has never (to the best of my recollection) stated that public servants do not pay taxes. Feel free to correct me. My memory is anything but photographic.



Fair enough. Thanks for the clarification, Minstrel. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Maybe someone should ask minstrel for his take on that infamous 40% teachers salary rollback in Alberta. It would be interesting to see if teachers in Ontario do math differently.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Maybe someone should ask minstrel for his take on that infamous 40% teachers salary rollback in Alberta. It would be interesting to see if teachers in Ontario do math differently.



Don't be an ass, Don. You know that's not what I said. You twist. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Don't be an ass, Don. You know that's not what I said. You twist.


It's not ME who is the ass, Frank.

This is how you *TRIED* to justify your statement:



Freddie_Biff said:


> Don, I give you credit for better listening skills, but perhaps that credit is misplaced. I never said 40% in one year; I said 5% per year is like the equivalent of 40% in any given year.


But again you failed. You continued to maintain that, and I quote, "5% per year is like the equivalent of 40% in any given year", which is not possible. By way of example, suppose your salary is $70K per year. 5% of that is $3.5K. 40% of that is $28K.

Now please explain to me how $3.5K = $28K because that is exactly what you wrote.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> It's not ME who is the ass, Frank.
> 
> 
> 
> This is how you *TRIED* to justify your statement:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But again you failed. You continued to maintain that, and I quote, "5% per year is like the equivalent of 40% in any given year", which is not possible. By way of example, suppose your salary is $70K per year. 5% of that is $3.5K. 40% of that is $28K.
> 
> 
> 
> Now please explain to me how $3.5K = $28K because that is exactly what you wrote.



Total amount of money lost, Don. It's not a hard concept. 5% loss per year x 8 years is like 40% taken off in any given year. THE 5% CUTBACK WAS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE PERPETUAL. We voted to accept the cutback for one year only. The Klein government chose to extend those cutbacks indefinitely until we won some of it back through arbitration. Honestly, you alt-rights make yourself sound like fools when you misquote.


----------



## Macfury

Klein will never live down those 40% cuts. Of course there was a 10% hike in 1977, which means teachers had a 400% pay hike as well.


----------



## eMacMan

Freddie_Biff said:


> Total amount of money lost, Don. It's not a hard concept. 5% loss per year x 8 years is like 40% taken off in any given year. THE 5% CUTBACK WAS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE PERPETUAL. We voted to accept the cutback for one year only. The Klein government chose to extend those cutbacks indefinitely until we won some of it back through arbitration. Honestly, you alt-rights make yourself sound like fools when you misquote.


Sorry Freddie this is obviously the new math in all its glory and you're going to have a devil of a time selling it to old timers. You took a 5% pay cut. You lost 5% of your income. Would be the same as my losing a contract that counted for 5% of my annual income back when I was self employed. It hurts but you compensate, or you find another way to make a living.

Any ways this is the twisted style of math that Mann employed to create his infamous and thoroughly discredited hockey shtick graph. That people can twist their minds into this thought pattern explains how the Great Goreacle has managed to sell the ACGW myth. How Rachel could be dumb enough to believe it and how Albertans were ultimately saddled with a carbon tax. A series of dominoes all triggered by the new math.


----------



## FeXL

Then quit acting childish and stick to the subject at hand, instead of introducing all manner of red herrings to distract.

This argument is pure math, a subject you have displayed your difficulty with numerous times. It has nothing to do with public service worth to society. It's all dollars & cents.



Freddie_Biff said:


> No, they don't, and I wish you'd curtail your use of childish terms like "butthurt" and "snowflake."


Ridiculous or not, it's bang on.

And, as MF has pointed out, when public servants spend money, all they are doing is giving money back to the people who gave it to them in the first place.

That's what...



Freddie_Biff said:


> The old "my tax dollars pay your wages" argument is ridiculous. My after-tax dollars pay your wages. So what?


Mine, too. So imagine how I feel paying for overpriced public sector wages and gold-plated pension plans when many don't even have a job, are struggling to keep their heads above water and have no pension plan to speak of.

And to hear you p!$$ & moan about a 5% cutback for a few year or had to have a second job once...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Those are very real dollars in my eyes...


The only thing I'm negating is your claim that public sector workers contribute to the economy. Without tax dollars, the public sector would be a mere shadow of its current self & taxpayers would have a helluva lot more disposable income. Money that we could use to contribute to the economy ourselves, rather than get siphoned through some convoluted, inefficient bureaucratic process that eats up even more taxpayer dollars than just your wages & pension plans.

A little humility here would go a long way to offset the sense of entitlement that your posts convey...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Why negate the contribution of public service workers?


And your argument is completely absent...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Your argument is extremely short-sighted.


----------



## FeXL

minstrel said:


> Thanks for labelling me "out to lunch". Just thought I'd actually post, rather than lurk, and that's the welcome I get...wow!


Don't take offence. It's just Freddie in another CFP (Content Free Post) rant...


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Klein will never live down those 40% cuts. Of course there was a 10% hike in 1977, which means teachers had a 400% pay hike as well.



You probably don't remember, but Klein and his people voted themselves a 30% wage increase before they "led by example" and took a 5% wage cut, netting them a 25% wage increase. But of course that information probably doesn't fit your narrative.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

minstrel said:


> Hi FB
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for labelling me "out to lunch". Just thought I'd actually post, rather than lurk, and that's the welcome I get...



Sorry if I offended you. That was not my intent. I will choose my words more carefully.
Welcome to the world of not lurking.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> You probably don't remember, but Klein and his people voted themselves a 30% wage increase before they "led by example" and took a 5% wage cut, netting them a 25% wage increase. But of course that information probably doesn't fit your narrative.


They should have taken an even bigger pay cut and many of them should have been let go.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> They should have taken an even bigger pay cut and many of them should have been let go.



Well that's not the way it went down, if you're talking about our elected representatives. That's why I never considered the PC's to be particularly good money managers. More like stealing from the cookie jar at every opportunity.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Well that's not the way it went down, if you're talking about our elected representatives. That's why I never considered the PC's to be particularly good money managers. More like stealing from the cookie jar at every opportunity.


Yes, I'm talking about the reps. Nothing wrong with cutting costs but cut yourself too,


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Yes, I'm talking about the reps. Nothing wrong with cutting costs but cut yourself too,



Thing is, Alison Redford and Jim Prentice did the exact same thing before they froze our wages. Yup, quite the example.


----------



## FeXL

You keep on bringing up Redford & Prentice as shining examples of PC governance. I'm willing to bet you won't find a single fan of either on these boards. Go ahead, ask.

I'm sure as hell not.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Thing is, Alison Redford and Jim Prentice did the exact same thing before they froze our wages. Yup, quite the example.


----------



## FightingShibas

I would argue that neither Redford or Prentice were conservatives in name only. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Beej

FightingShibas said:


> I would argue that neither Redford or Prentice were conservatives in name only.


This concept has come up before, and I generally agree with the specific negative claims at the time. But the positive side of the claim seems lacking. Which conservative party leaders, federal or provincial, do you consider true conservatives? Maybe Wall?

If you have to dig back multiple generations, then I question the definition and would like more details.


----------



## MazterCBlazter

Banjos, I hear banjos!​


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> You keep on bringing up Redford & Prentice as shining examples of PC governance. I'm willing to bet you won't find a single fan of either on these boards. Go ahead, ask.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure as hell not.



Fair enough. But it WAS the same party that was in power for all those years.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FightingShibas said:


> I would argue that neither Redford or Prentice were conservatives in name only.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Even Klein was a Liberal originally, but was recruited to run as a Conservative because it provided him better opportunities.


----------



## Macfury

I think Ontario's Mike Harris was about as close as it gets for me on the provincial level. Harper is about as good as it gets on the federal level.



Beej said:


> This concept has come up before, and I generally agree with the specific negative claims at the time. But the positive side of the claim seems lacking. Which conservative party leaders, federal or provincial, do you consider true conservatives? Maybe Wall?
> 
> If you have to dig back multiple generations, then I question the definition and would like more details.


----------



## SINC

Yep, the NDP sure are popular.


----------



## FeXL

Exactly. Which is why they got their asses handed to them in the last election. CINO's. Which is also exactly why I don't want the bastards elected in the next election & want no part of a merger with them.

I know you won't agree with me but the last decent leader Alberta Conservatives had was Ralph Klein.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Fair enough. But it WAS the same party that was in power for all those years.


----------



## eMacMan

The NDP would probably be a very polarizing party anyways. Love em or hate em, no in-betweens. However Rachel has gone way out of her way to make things more so. The lack of transparency and consultation is blinding.

Latest example she set a review meeting on the Castle Wilderness draft, last Friday in Pincher Creek. Notified only one of the three local papers and that after press deadline. Too boot it was in the midst of a four day storm pattern, so you can bet the Flatlander Government Rep did not show up at all.


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> Latest example she set a review meeting on the Castle Wilderness draft, last Friday in Pincher Creek.


Responded to a phone poll on that a few days back. Bunch of questions as to whether I was in favour of the proposed provincial park, whether I was in favour of off road vehicle operation in it, etc., etc., etc. The questions had a decidedly "green" bent to them.

Had a certain amount of difficulty understanding the person asking the questions. Needed to request repeats a number of times.


----------



## eMacMan

A bit of an afterthought on the ACGW series.
A late in the contest Hail Mary has been the bit about ocean acidification. A deceptive name, clearly intended to cause panic. The ocean is actually slightly alkaline. Again keep in mind that nature is responsible for at least 90% of the almost un-measurable shifts, and that further engorging the Gore-Rothchild vaults will not impact mans share one iota. 

A good read on the subject here:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/01/02/a-neutral-view-of-oceanic-ph/



> So there you have it. The oceanographic dataset confirms the gradual decline in pH, but doesn’t provide enough data prior to about 1960 to tell us much of anything. As usual, the problem is that the changes due to CO2 are so small that they are difficult to dig out of anything but the most accurate of datasets. This doesn’t mean that we can’t use the existing oceanographic measurements … it just means that we need to be cautious in their use.


----------



## FeXL

The thing on ocean "acidification" (a misnomer if there ever was one) is, if corals, molluscs, _et al_ with calcareous shells were able to not only evolve but thrive in the presence of thousands of PPM of atmospheric CO2 concentration, I don't even need to waste time looking at recent/current CO2 concentration levels.

They survived 1000-7000ppm. They're gonna survive 400...


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> The thing on ocean "acidification" (a misnomer if there ever was one) is, if corals, molluscs, _et al_ with calcareous shells were able to not only evolve but thrive in the presence of thousands of PPM of atmospheric CO2 concentration, I don't even need to waste time looking at recent/current CO2 concentration levels.
> 
> They survived 1000-7000ppm. They're gonna survive 400...


You're not supposed to know that and I believe under the BO admin it was illegal to even point it out.


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> You're not supposed to know that and I believe under the BO admin it was illegal to even point it out.


Exactly. It completely blows the narrative out of the "acidified" water.

It's merely one of the reasons that earth scientists are among the biggest groups of sceptics out there. Every time one of these idiots presents another doomsday scenario for 400ppm or 500ppm or whatever, I just go back a couple of 10's or hundred's of millions of years, look at the data & shake my head at the stupidity. 

But they've got _SCIENCE_ on their side. XX)

Where's that technicolor vomiting emoticon when you need it...


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Exactly. Which is why they got their asses handed to them in the last election. CINO's. Which is also exactly why I don't want the bastards elected in the next election & want no part of a merger with them.
> 
> 
> 
> I know you won't agree with me but the last decent leader Alberta Conservatives had was Ralph Klein.



Listen, I voted for Ralph back in '93 when he campaigned on the promise of 104,000 new jobs. He was very charismatic. He was funny. But he also had a hate-on for teachers for some reason, no doubt influenced by dropping out himself in high school. 

The Wild Rosers would be wise not to merge with the PC's, Jason Kenney's vision be damned, but unless the Conservatives unite, they really are at somewhat of a loss. Many people still see the Wild Rose as too extreme, and some of their recent missteps, like Feminism is Cancer, aren't helping either. I know you see the NDP as toast, and they may well be, but with all the uncertainty from the Opposition and the potential turnaround in the economy, anything is possible.


----------



## Macfury

Oil prices are faltering. Alberta's economy might have improved without a socialist government, but all bets are off with Rachel governing this heavily.




Freddie_Biff said:


> Listen, I voted for Ralph back in '93 when he campaigned on the promise of 104,000 new jobs. He was very charismatic. He was funny. But he also had a hate-on for teachers for some reason, no doubt influenced by dropping out himself in high school.
> 
> The Wild Rosers would be wise not to merge with the PC's, Jason Kenney's vision be damned, but unless the Conservatives unite, they really are at somewhat of a loss. Many people still see the Wild Rose as too extreme, and some of their recent missteps, like Feminism is Cancer, aren't helping either. I know you see the NDP as toast, and they may well be, but with all the uncertainty from the Opposition and the potential turnaround in the economy, anything is possible.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Oil prices are faltering. Alberta's economy might have improved without a socialist government, but all bets are off with Rachel governing this heavily.



All bets are off? You mean you don't have as much faith in the right wing opposition parties as you used to have?


----------



## SINC

The NDP are heartless bastards:

Alberta carbon tax rebate outrage: Province demands cheques back from the dead |


----------



## SINC

Alberta's deputy premier and a shining example for a health minister calls the WR "sewer rats".

She ought to know there are no rats in Alberta.

Deputy premier apologizes for 'sewer rats' comment - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## FeXL

It's got nothing to do with right wing opposition parties.

Rachel & her cadre got elected as a protest vote. The exact same methodology will be her demise in 2 short years.

With WR currently polling nearly double what the commies are, a merger with the CINO's is not needed, nor required.



Freddie_Biff said:


> All bets are off? You mean you don't have as much faith in the right wing opposition parties as you used to have?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> It's got nothing to do with right wing opposition parties.
> 
> 
> 
> Rachel & her cadre got elected as a protest vote. The exact same methodology will be her demise in 2 short years.
> 
> 
> 
> With WR currently polling nearly double what the commies are, a merger with the CINO's is not needed, nor required.



Perhaps, but the WildRose are historically also known for shooting themselves in the foot at the worst possible time, with things like the "lake of fire" comment, the floor crossing by Danielle Smith and friends, the recent "feminism is cancer" controversy. They may be polling higher, but I'm not certain they would actually be fit to lead. It's the population that need to be persuaded, not just the PC faithful. I can see Brian Jean as next premier anytime over Jason Kenney, as he's living it and earning respect, having lost his house in Fort McMurray for example, and working in the trenches. But there are a lot of whack jobs who also call themselves Wild Rose supporters.


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> The NDP are heartless bastards:
> 
> Alberta carbon tax rebate outrage: Province demands cheques back from the dead |


Still trying to sort out if it's the CRA, Phoenix or the Non Democrats at fault. Still the arrogance of assessing a carbon tax on the cremation after demanding a return of the rebate is beyond words. 

I know it is not generally in any politicians vocabulary, but the minister responsible should use the phrase: "I am really sorry".

Then he should write checks on his personal bank account to cover the rebate returns until this mess is straightened out.


----------



## FeXL

Oh, don't worry. The standard has just been set...



Freddie_Biff said:


> ...but I'm not certain they would actually be fit to lead.


The general population already knows. It's why Red Rachel's numbers are in the toilet. Edmonchuck has & will always vote left. Calgary is beginning to figger it out and, with the slight resurgence in petroleum, Red Rachel's royalty increase may come into play just about the time the election looms on the horizon.




Freddie_Biff said:


> It's the population that need to be persuaded, not just the PC faithful.


I have difficulty envisioning that. Not saying it won't happen, I just...hesitate. I don't see Jean as a great or even a good leader. Frankly, barely adequate is what comes to mind.

That said, anybody but Red Rachel.



Freddie_Biff said:


> I can see Brian Jean as next premier...


----------



## Macfury

The NDP seems composed primarily of Gaia-worshiping, centrally-planned economy whack-jobs.Fitness to lead? The NDP has shown it doesn't have the stuff. It just bullies people into submission.




Freddie_Biff said:


> Perhaps, but the WildRose are historically also known for shooting themselves in the foot at the worst possible time, with things like the "lake of fire" comment, the floor crossing by Danielle Smith and friends, the recent "feminism is cancer" controversy. They may be polling higher, but I'm not certain they would actually be fit to lead. It's the population that need to be persuaded, not just the PC faithful. I can see Brian Jean as next premier anytime over Jason Kenney, as he's living it and earning respect, having lost his house in Fort McMurray for example, and working in the trenches. But there are a lot of whack jobs who also call themselves Wild Rose supporters.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Perhaps, but the WildRose are historically also known for shooting themselves in the foot at the worst possible time, with things like the "lake of fire" comment, the floor crossing by Danielle Smith and friends, the recent "feminism is cancer" controversy. They may be polling higher, but I'm not certain they would actually be fit to lead. It's the population that need to be persuaded, not just the PC faithful. I can see Brian Jean as next premier anytime over Jason Kenney, as he's living it and earning respect, having lost his house in Fort McMurray for example, and working in the trenches. But there are a lot of whack jobs who also call themselves Wild Rose supporters.


Good grief, the things you mention as issues for the WR, have been long since forgotten. The Smith episode was over two and a half years ago and long forgotten, ditto for the lake of fire and even the feminism and cancer comment. Both were minor 'blips' on Facebook which too many Dippers consider something of a valid media. That too is nothing but a joke. Much more remembered by voters is the carbon tax, bill 6, clawbacks of a lousy hundred bucks from dead folks families and a huge and still growing deficit. These and many more bad policies that are sticking in the brains of voters who are ready to pull the trigger on the Red Rachel crew at the very first opportunity. And oh yeah, not a single union member being asked to pitch in with even a temporary wage freeze.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> The NDP seems composed primarily of Gaia-worshiping, centrally-planned economy whack-jobs.Fitness to lead? The NDP has shown it doesn't have the stuff. It just bullies people into submission.



Yes, but I was talking specifically about the Wild Rose. You changed the subject.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Good grief, the things you mention as issues for the WR, have been long since forgotten. The Smith episode was over two and a half years ago and long forgotten, ditto for the lake of fire and even the feminism and cancer comment. Both were minor 'blips' on Facebook which too many Dippers consider something of a valid media. That too is nothing but a joke. Much more remembered by voters is the carbon tax, bill 6, clawbacks of a lousy hundred bucks from dead folks families and a huge and still growing deficit. These and many more bad policies that are sticking in the brains of voters who are ready to pull the trigger on the Red Rachel crew at the very first opportunity. And oh yeah, not a single union member being asked to pitch in with even a temporary wage freeze.



Hey buddy, my wages have been frozen for three out of the last four years. I have certainly "pitched in." But here you still criticize the NDP and criticize my criticisms of the Wild Rose and disorganization of both major parties on the right. What exactly do the WR or PC's have to offer beyond not being "Red Rachel"? A new government also needs a vision. I'd certainly like to hear what the WR has to offer beyond complaints.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Hey buddy, my wages have been frozen for three out of the last four years. I have certainly "pitched in." But here you still criticize the NDP and criticize my criticisms of the Wild Rose and disorganization of both major parties on the right. What exactly do the WR or PC's have to offer beyond not being "Red Rachel"? A new government also needs a vision. I'd certainly like to hear what the WR has to offer beyond complaints.


Man, going back to Redford would be like a spring breeze compared to Notley.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Man, going back to Redford would be like a spring breeze compared to Notley.



Not for me. And Prentice was about to make things even worse before he failed and bailed.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Man, going back to Redford would be like a spring breeze compared to Notley.


Queenie was just stupid. Red Rachel is malicious.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Queenie was just stupid. Red Rachel is malicious.


This is the difference. 

It takes only one term of office by clowns like Rae and Notley to scare voters away for a generation. Only difference between Ontario and Alberta is that after a few years nobody was proud of voting for Rae--the progs in Edmonton are still crowing about the plague they wrought on the province.


----------



## SINC

So, tonight the Dippers announce unprecedented spending on health and education that will plunge Alberta into a $71 BILLION dollar debt in less than three years. Pardon my French, but this is f--king offensive and they ought to be removed from office for stupidity. And still not a union member asked to participate in recovery by accepting a wage freeze.


----------



## eMacMan

eMacMan said:


> The NDP would probably be a very polarizing party anyways. Love em or hate em, no in-betweens. However Rachel has gone way out of her way to make things more so. The lack of transparency and consultation is blinding.
> 
> Latest example she set a review meeting on the Castle Wilderness draft, last Friday in Pincher Creek. Notified only one of the three local papers and that after press deadline. Too boot it was in the midst of a four day storm pattern, so you can bet the Flatlander Government Rep did not show up at all.


Wow as if that was not arrogant enough, they've doubled down. There is a presentation here tomorrow and once again they failed to inform the local paper before press time.

I say presentation because essentially they say; "This is what we are shoving this down your throats. We welcome your input but don't expect us to listen, and we are sorry if you found out in time to attend. That was never our intention."

Interestingly more than 150 local ATV users showed up for a demonstration last Saturday despite wicked weather conditions. Gonna bet this ploy will not keep them from finding out about the meeting and giving the Government stooge a vocal piece of their minds.


----------



## eMacMan

*Castle Wilderness Update*

Attended yesterdays presentation, here in the Crowsnest.

First had a quick talk with The Pass Herald Publisher/Editor/Owner. Once again she was not informed before press time of the meeting.

Talked to a couple of local ranchers and they are satisfied that the latest revision now protects established grazing rights.

There seems to be slight progress in the area of OHV/ATV use but still a lot of work needs to be done. Biggest issue is that the politico types are completely ignoring this group which certainly has some good ideas. They also are major contributors to our local economy. 

Talked to our mayor who pointed out a major difference between this and previous governments. In the past he had direct phone numbers to reach any MLA or cabinet minister if their committee or portfolio was related to the towns interests. Now he has to attempt to contact them through their constituency office. My own opinion here: This speaks volumes about the NDP indifference toward, or even hatred of, rural communities. 

There were many representatives from Stantec and Alberta Parks and all were more than eager to put together the best plan possible. 

MIA were the Committee members and Cabinet minister(s) who should be in direct contact, rather than viewing from a safe distance and through an environmentalist distortion filter. This was a repeat of other similar meetings.


----------



## eMacMan

Somewhat related to the previous post. Gained some insight into the PCs and Wild Rose difficulties in getting together. The PCs are fairly deep in debt whereas the Wild Rose has a healthy war fund. The parties cannot merge as the Wild Rose would not be able to retain that fund and the PCs would bring their debt along with them. 

Easiest scenario would involve PCs dissolving the party, then joining the Wild Rose. Still involves trying to put together a blended platform as the Wild Rose is mainly a rural based party and PCs orientation is towards the urban voter.

Best guess is if Rachel sees any signs of this sort of threat, she will call an early snap election then prolong the next sitting past the current four year cycle. Easy enough for her to repeal the restrictive legislation that would stand in the way.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

eMacMan said:


> Somewhat related to the previous post. Gained some insight into the PCs and Wild Rose difficulties in getting together. The PCs are fairly deep in debt whereas the Wild Rose has a healthy war fund. The parties cannot merge as the Wild Rose would not be able to retain that fund and the PCs would bring their debt along with them.
> 
> Easiest scenario would involve PCs dissolving the party, then joining the Wild Rose. Still involves trying to put together a blended platform as the Wild Rose is mainly a rural based party and PCs orientation is towards the urban voter.
> 
> Best guess is if Rachel sees any signs of this sort of threat, she will call an early snap election then prolong the next sitting past the current four year cycle. Easy enough for her to repeal the restrictive legislation that would stand in the way.




Strategically, this would be the best move for Rachel's party. Previous government didn't even bind themselves to that law, so why should the NDP? It would be one way to win the next election.


----------



## Macfury

eMacMan said:


> Best guess is if Rachel sees any signs of this sort of threat, she will call an early snap election then prolong the next sitting past the current four year cycle. Easy enough for her to repeal the restrictive legislation that would stand in the way.


That oil price rally that's supposed to make the budget balance itself isn't happening. Bring on a snap election!


----------



## SINC

Red RATchel's latest stupidity.


----------



## Macfury

Nice work Rachel! You're doing a great job!

Alberta PC candidate Kenney owes a debt of gratitude to Notley - The Globe and Mail



> Whether it was intended or not, the budget tabled this week by Premier Rachel Notley’s NDP government may have helped change the course of Alberta political history. It gave her opponents a huge stick with which to beat the New Democrats from now until the next election.
> 
> Budgets are always analyzed in terms of winners and losers, and in the case of this fiscal document, perhaps no one came out further ahead than Progressive Conservative leadership candidate Jason Kenney.
> 
> In fact, the budget dropped on Thursday may provide all the fuel Mr. Kenney needs to power the political movement he is trying to lead in the province.
> 
> ----------
> 
> After securing a victory this weekend, the hard work truly begins for Mr. Kenney. Winning the leadership of a once-grand party is one thing. Trying to build an entirely new political institution to replace it is something else entirely.
> 
> But luckily for him, he has Ms. Notley in his corner.
> 
> Perhaps no greater issue divides the right and left in Alberta than debt; conservatives are allergic to it (in theory) and progressives believe a little of it never hurt anyone. Except, by Alberta standards, the amount of debt Ms. Notley’s NDP is accumulating is almost breathtaking.
> 
> In her four short years in office, the Premier will have more than tripled the province’s debt; it is projected to be $71-billion by the time the next election rolls around in 2019 (from $19.9-billion when her government took office).


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Nice work Rachel! You're doing a great job!
> 
> 
> 
> Alberta PC candidate Kenney owes a debt of gratitude to Notley - The Globe and Mail



And vice-versa. There's a lot of right wingers who are not excited about Kenney's plan to torpedo the PC party.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> There's a lot of right wingers who are. It excited about Kenneth's plan to torpedo the PC party.


?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> ?



My bad. Faulty texting. No more drinking. For now.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> My bad. Faulty texting. No more drinking. For now.


Got it. I would think the people most likely to worry about Kenney torpedoing the party are centrists with no place to go--but that's just a guess.


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> Got it. I would think the people most likely to worry about Kenney torpedoing the party are centrists with no place to go--but that's just a guess.


Never viewed Kenney as a Centrist type. However if the PCs scrap the party and join the WR, I would expect at least some readjustment to the WR platform. Whether the changes would be sufficient to win over city voters is anybodies guess. 

However in two short years the Non Democrats have put themselves in the same spot enjoyed by the PCs. Even with the carbon tax they have managed to triple the deficit. 

Most Albertans have figured out that the light bulb program is a cruel practical joke. A chance for a bunch Rachel's Ontario buds to travel around the province staying in nice hotels, while almost all of the purchasing goes out of province. 

The writing is clearly on the wall for doubled or trebled electrical bills. Scrapping the most economical base generators in favour of much more costly and often less reliable alternatives is nothing short of madness. 

I see a chunk of the carbon tax is to be used to offset the damage to towns caused by the shutdown of coal power plants. Trouble is when you eliminate the jobs at the core of a towns economy you can't undue the damage unless you create a similar number of jobs at a similar pay level. Without those jobs, secondary jobs in schools and hospitals disappear as those crucial facilities are closed. At that point the remaining residents are trapped without services as their homes have devalued to near zero. A bad situation all around.


----------



## Macfury

In Ontario, these same nutbar policies resulted in massive hydro price increases--now to buy votes, that buffoon Wynne intends to cut prices by subsidizing rates with tax dollars again. We still pay.


----------



## SINC

Now that Kenney has been 'annointed' it remains to be seen if Albertans will buy into him as leader of the new Wildrose/PC combo. I seriously doubt that. I think it is entirely possible that Jean may very well lead a united right. He was here on the front lines during the fire crisis, lost his home and recently lost a son in Alberta while Kenney was flitting about in Ottawa. Albertans will relate to his involvement, his taking the NDP to task at every opportunity and his pain. Kenney, the Ottawa pretty boy, not so much.


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> Now that Kenney has been 'annointed' it remains to be seen if Albertans will buy into him as leader of the new Wildrose/PC combo. I seriously doubt that. I think it is entirely possible that Jean may very well lead a untied right. He was here on the front lines during the fire crisis, lost his home and recently lost a son in Alberta while Kenney was flitting about in Ottawa. Albertans will relate to his involvement, his taking the NDP to task at every opportunity and his pain. Kenney, the Ottawa pretty boy, not so much.


I doubt that the WR would welcome the PCs if it was at the cost of accepting Kenney as a leader. This may well be the sticking point that keeps the PC mired in their past as I believe Kenney is too ambitious to accept any position other than top dog.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Now that Kenney has been 'annointed' it remains to be seen if Albertans will buy into him as leader of the new Wildrose/PC combo. I seriously doubt that. I think it is entirely possible that Jean may very well lead a untied right. He was here on the front lines during the fire crisis, lost his home and recently lost a son in Alberta while Kenney was flitting about in Ottawa. Albertans will relate to his involvement, his taking the NDP to task at every opportunity and his pain. Kenney, the Ottawa pretty boy, not so much.



I agree that Jean is the more authentic leader, and I also agree with your comment about the "untied" right, although "unhinged" may be somewhat more accurate.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

eMacMan said:


> I doubt that the WR would welcome the PCs if it was at the cost of accepting Kenney as a leader. This may well be the sticking point that keeps the PC mired in their past as I believe Kenney is too ambitious to accept any position other than top dog.



Exactement. He should know from Prentice's experience that pride goeth before a fall.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> In Ontario, these same nutbar policies resulted in massive hydro price increases--now to buy votes, that buffoon Wynne intends to cut prices by subsidizing rates with tax dollars again. We still pay.



I agree the hydro situation in Ontario is bad, but that doesn't necessarily mean the decisions made in Alberta will follow suit. Let's say what happens if the price of oil and gas keeps rising. There does come a point where companies will do business if they can make a decent profit no matter who's in charge. A few good years and all this debt will disappear.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> I agree the hydro situation in Ontario is bad, but that doesn't necessarily mean the decisions made in Alberta will follow suit.


I think the laws of math are the same. Every decision Notley is making regarding electricity raises rates and they are the same decisions made by Ontario. How can such decisions make electricity affordable?



Freddie_Biff said:


> Let's say what happens if the price of oil and gas keeps rising. There does come a point where companies will do business if they can make a decent profit no matter who's in charge. A few good years and all this debt will disappear.


Notley's plan is to deliver the first balanced budget.. by 2023-24! Debt is projected at $71 billion by 2019, so no idea how much debt would be added to 2024.

All of these projections of massive debt are based on both new pipelines being built on time and a rosy prediction of oil rising to $68 a barrel by 2019. That view isn't shared by energy economists.

Oil would need to rise to $120 a barrel to touch that debt.


----------



## eMacMan

I should point out that under the watchful eye of the Non Democrats, Albertas credit rating has dropped from AAA to AA+ to AA. That's two drops in two years. 

Every time this rating drops the interest charges rise, Alberta debt rises, and Rothchilds everywhere salivate. Alberta taxpayers ultimately pay one way or another.

Unfortunately the mathematically retarded are incapable of understanding how much more this will cost Alberta over an extended period of time.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

eMacMan said:


> I should point out that under the watchful eye of the Non Democrats, Albertas credit rating has dropped from AAA to AA+ to AA. That's two drops in two years.
> 
> Every time this rating drops the interest charges rise, Alberta debt rises, and Rothchilds everywhere salivate. Alberta taxpayers ultimately pay one way or another.
> 
> Unfortunately the mathematically retarded are incapable of understanding how much more this will cost Alberta over an extended period of time.



The mathematically retarded also chose to avoid much needed infrastructure and maintenance two decades ago when it would have been considerably cheaper, thereby making the current generation have to pay the costs. The Klein Revolution ushered in the era of slash and burn tactics with no forethought as to who was going to pay the deferred costs decades later. Well, here we are. Perhaps Alberta should have saved more money for down the road when it actually had the chance. Instead, the Heritage Trust Fund is worth no more than but was in the 1980's, when it could have at least tripled in that time. Instead, Klein accessed it regularly to "balance the budget." Mathematically retarded indeed.


----------



## Macfury

How much more is the NDP spending on infrastructure and maintenance than the previous government?



Freddie_Biff said:


> The mathematically retarded also chose to avoid much needed infrastructure and maintenance two decades ago when it would have been considerably cheaper, thereby making the current generation have to pay the costs.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> How much more is the NDP spending on infrastructure and maintenance than the previous government?



When you consider the cost of inflation over twenty years, WELL more than it should have cost. Do you prefer deferring costs to future generations?


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> When you consider the cost of inflation over twenty years, WELL more than it should have cost. Do you prefer deferring costs to future generations?


Inflation has been very low over the past 20 years, but interest rates were much higher. Deferring it worked out rather well.

But again, if infrastructure spending was not sufficient previously, how much more has the NDP committed to it, and how is this creating crippling debt?


----------



## FeXL

Speaking of the mathematically retarded...

First off, the only reason you can even bitch about the HTF is because a conservative government created it. No provincial left of center leader has ever created anything like the HTF. This is purely an Alberta, right of center construct. A liberal government would have just p!$$ed it away...

Second, if Klein had not used the HTF to balance the budget, teacher cutbacks would have been 160% instead of just 40%. (Imagine the wailing about that...)

Third, I just checked. The HTF is currently worth $19.1 billion. That's considerably more than it was worth in the 80's. Close to double, if memory serves.

Fourth, what do you s'pose Red Rachel is going to balance the budget with? Unicorn farts? It sure as hell ain't going to be oil & gas royalties or carbon taxes...

Fifth, exactly what infrastructure in Alberta is suffering?



Freddie_Biff said:


> The mathematically retarded also chose to avoid much needed infrastructure and maintenance two decades ago when it would have been considerably cheaper, thereby making the current generation have to pay the costs. The Klein Revolution ushered in the era of slash and burn tactics with no forethought as to who was going to pay the deferred costs decades later. Well, here we are. Perhaps Alberta should have saved more money for down the road when it actually had the chance. Instead, the Heritage Trust Fund is worth no more than but was in the 1980's, when it could have at least tripled in that time. Instead, Klein accessed it regularly to "balance the budget." Mathematically retarded indeed.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Fifth, exactly what infrastructure in Alberta is suffering?


NDP supporters on this board appear to be just regurgitating talking points. There's no actual data to support the Pavlovian responses.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> NDP supporters on this board appear to be just regurgitating talking points. There's no actual data to support the Pavlovian responses.


Well, in the last 8 weeks I've been to Red Deer once, Calgary 4 times, Medicine Hat twice, Crowsnest Pass on the BC border once and within 5 miles of the Montana border a half dozen times.

Hiway 1 from Med Hat to Calgary is fine. Hiway 2 from Cardston to Red Deer is fine. Hiway 3 from Crowsnest Pass to Med Hat is fine. Hiway 4 from Milk River to Lethbridge is mostly OK, could use a resurface to fix expansion cracks in a few areas on the northbound outside lane but no potholes. Hiway 5 from Leth to Cardston is fine.

This list doesn't include a veritable host of secondary paved roads I've travelled recently that have been OK, nor a handful of gravel roads that could use a good grading from the winter weather but are otherwise fine.

Lethbridge, Medicine Hat & Calgary roads have mostly been good, a few potholes here & there. Red Deer is less good, with some of the industrial area streets & side streets requiring attention but that has been a perennial problem in Red Deer. It's always like that.

Haven't heard of any bridges collapsing anywhere in the province & haven't seen any closed anywhere.

You want to see crap highways, go to Saskatchewan. On the Trans-Canada, you can tell exactly where the border with Alberta ends. From multiple trips to Swift Current, Regina & Saskatoon in the last 12 months, it's obvious the next thing Brad Wall needs to address is infrastructure. Two years ago I came from northern Montana to Regina via Hiway 6 on the Hawg. The road was so rough it popped the latches on one of my saddlebag lids & threw it open. Pulled into Regina to fuel up, when I got off I saw the open saddlebag. Lucky I didn't lose anything.

Albera's current problem isn't infrastructure. It's Red Rachel, her damned NDP and Prog issues with basic math...


----------



## eMacMan

Hiway 22 from Lundbreck area past Chain Lakes, was in mediocre shape under the Conmen. It was getting nothing but band-aids. Same is true with the Dippers. The bridge over the Oldman got a lot of attention from the Conmen, and is still getting periodic repairs through the Dippers.

I will say the Volker-Stevins who do the plowing and routine maintenance on Hiway 3 and 22, generally do a great job.

The problem with 22 is periodic small collapses due to underground springs and a badly designed roadbed.


----------



## Freddie_Biff




----------



## Macfury

All the cool kids are voting for a raggy old lady socialist who makes everything more expensive!


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> All the cool kids are voting for a raggy old lady socialist who makes everything more expensive!


Yep, they sure are . . .


----------



## SINC

And not a single Dipper seems aware of it . . .


----------



## Macfury

SINC, they're aware of it--they simply don't care. Transforming voters into wards of the state is the service they provide.


----------



## Macfury

Shell's New Permian Play Profitable At $20 A Barrel | The Huffington Post

Oh boy! When oil hits $65 a barrel, Alberta can begin to pay off that enormous debt generated by Notley!


----------



## SINC

Notley the idiot.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Kenney the idiot. Some excellent points about the wanna-be contender for the throne. 



> Editorial: What is PC platform beyond unity?
> 
> Published on: March 22, 2017 | Last Updated: March 22, 2017 6:00 AM MDT
> Newly elected Alberta Progressive Conservative party Leader Jason Kenney speaks with news media outside the Federal Building in Edmonton on Monday March 20, 2017 after Kenney met with Alberta WIldrose party Leader Brian Jean. For a former political dynasty that ruled the province for four decades, Albertans suddenly know surprisingly little about the Progressive Conservative party.
> This strange, new unfamiliarity starts at the top with its new leader. People may recall Jason Kenney was a former MP and federal cabinet minister in the Harper government but ordinary Albertans can be forgiven for wondering just where he stands now that he’s on the provincial stage.
> 
> Sure, they know he wants to amalgamate the Tories with the rival Wildrose in a new conservative alliance to unseat the NDP government. It’s a popular stance he rode to an easy victory in the PC leadership race. The problem is, uniting the right is the only policy most Albertans have heard the new party leader articulate at any length.
> 
> For a leadership race that will likely transform Alberta politics, the months-long contest offered little debate on policies for the party platform. The spotlight focused on the question and logistics of unity while rarely straying into matters of policy substance.
> Albertans heard over and over that the party stands against the NDP. It left many wondering what does it stand for? What is Kenney’s vision for the province? Does he have one, beyond the scenario where the NDP loses the next election?
> 
> To abhor the direction Premier Rachel Notley is taking the province makes for political theatre, and Kenney masterfully plays the role of foil.
> 
> It’s a performance he repeated on the weekend when he vowed the party’s first act after winning the 2019 election would be to repeal the carbon tax and other policies. “We are going to work hard to repeal each element of the disastrous NDP legislative and regulatory record,” Kenney said.
> 
> What he failed to share were any ideas of his own to replace the NDP’s. Kenney is now a provincial politician, the leader of a major political party; he is no longer an outsider who has the luxury of sniping from afar or drive-by broadsides.
> 
> It’s worrying he is in no rush to seek a seat in a byelection. “My emphasis would be on building the united party,” Kenney told Calgary Herald columnist Don Braid.
> 
> “We have a competent team in the legislature that would hold the NDP to account.”
> 
> But Albertans also deserve to be able to hold Kenney himself to account. At the very least, they deserve to know what he stands for and how he would vote on proposed legislation. He speaks now for the party’s eight elected members and should take centre stage instead of directing from behind the curtain.
> 
> Local editorials are the consensus opinion of the Journal’s editorial board, comprising Mark Iype, Dave Breakenridge, Sarah O’Donnell, Bill Mah and David Evans.


http://edmontonjournal.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-what-is-pc-platform-beyond-unity


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

The province's economy is heading down the toilet under Notley. Just saying you will undo her disaster would be enough to get you elected. For the Journal to demand anything from Kenney at this point while Notley is driving the province to ruin is pretty funny.

How's that $65 oil coming along?


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> The province's economy is heading down the toilet under Notley. Just saying you will undo her disaster would be enough to get you elected. For the Journal to demand anything from Kenney at this point while Notley is driving the province to ruin is pretty funny.
> 
> How's that $65 oil coming along?


Not to mention that the vast majority of writers are NDP voters.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Not to mention that the vast majority of writers are NDP voters.


Yep. I think people have long since stopped caring what the "editorial board" thinks.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Not to mention that the vast majority of writers are NDP voters.



I'll bet you didn't even read it.


----------



## Macfury

Sure we did. Repealing every one of Notley's pieces of legislation would be enough of a platform!


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> I'll bet you didn't even read it.


I most certainly did. They call that propoganda now.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> I most certainly did. They call that propoganda now.



Because it doesn't reflect what you think is the truth? Sure. Must be propaganda then.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Because it doesn't reflect what you think is the truth? Sure. Must be propaganda then.


Really Frank? You admit you have no idea of the difference between 'truth' and 'editorial opinion'?

Really? And you teach children?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Really Frank? You admit you have no idea of the difference between 'truth' and 'editorial opinion'?
> 
> 
> 
> Really? And you teach children?



Can you explain to me which parts of her editorial opinion are inaccurate? Clearly you accept the editorial opinions of those you agree with. You just malign the others with which you don't agree. I teach children to read and think for themselves, clearly something you are still struggling with, if you can accept the Rebel Media as anywhere near truthful.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> I teach children to read and think for themselves....


How many of those kids come out thinking conservatively... for themselves?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> How many of those kids come out thinking conservatively... for themselves?



To tell the truth, Macfury, kids tend to parrot whatever they hear from their parents. Many have not actually tried thinking for themselves yet. And yes, there are many conservative-minded parents. I teach in Alberta, after all.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> To tell the truth, Macfury, kids tend to parrot whatever they hear from their parents. Many have not actually tried thinking for themselves yet. And yes, there are many conservative-minded parents. I teach in Alberta, after all.


Once you teach them to think for themselves. I mean.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> To tell the truth, Macfury, kids tend to parrot whatever they hear from their parents. Many have not actually tried thinking for themselves yet. And yes, there are many conservative-minded parents. I teach in Alberta, after all.


And thank goodness they do. It is our only hope to keep the Dippers out of Alberta in the years ahead.


----------



## FeXL

Quelle surprise! In order to have factual errors, an editorial must actually contain some facts. Your example falls somewhat short in that department. It's largely opinion with a few tarnished nuggets that are common knowledge. In fact, what was the point of the editorial? To inform readers that Kenney had just won the leadership? Woohoo! News-breaking stuff, that! Couldn't find that anywhere else in the same paper? Or was it to announce that Kenney couldn't answer their questions about policy platform for an election that's still two years away? The horror!

Not only that, but it echoes many of the self-same things Albertan's were asking about Red Rachel, _et al._ What, exactly, were many of her policies going into the election? Nobody knew because she didn't. Where was your indignation then?

Just because an editorial doesn't contain any factual errors doesn't mean it's not head-up-their-arse wrong...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Can you explain to me which parts of her editorial opinion are inaccurate?


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> And thank goodness they do. It is our only hope to keep the Dippers out of Alberta in the years ahead.


It's always shocking to me to see the cultural achievement of people living out their individual potential in a free society is constantly under fire from progressives who embrace tribalism/collectivism. It's Stone Age thinking.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Once you teach them to think for themselves. I mean.




Yes, you can be mean, but I take it in stride. Lots of people who have no idea what they're talking about can be unintentionally mean.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> And thank goodness they do. It is our only hope to keep the Dippers out of Alberta in the years ahead.



Out of Alberta? You're thinking of a ban now? How do you deport people who were born here? Better loosen that Tim foil hat a little, Don. It's cutting off your circulation.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Quelle surprise! In order to have factual errors, an editorial must actually contain some facts. Your example falls somewhat short in that department. It's largely opinion with a few tarnished nuggets that are common knowledge. In fact, what was the point of the editorial? To inform readers that Kenney had just won the leadership? Woohoo! News-breaking stuff, that! Couldn't find that anywhere else in the same paper? Or was it to announce that Kenney couldn't answer their questions about policy platform for an election that's still two years away? The horror!
> 
> 
> 
> Not only that, but it echoes many of the self-same things Albertan's were asking about Red Rachel, _et al._ What, exactly, were many of her policies going into the election? Nobody knew because she didn't. Where was your indignation then?
> 
> 
> 
> Just because an editorial doesn't contain any factual errors doesn't mean it's not head-up-their-arse wrong...



Rachel Notley was very clear on her party's policies going into the election. She was also the only adult at the debates and was clear without getting into mudslinging. You underestimate her all of the time, and it looks like you're going to do it again in 2019. Whatever. Put your money on Kenney then. Or Brian Jean. Or their planned hybrid mutant child. Good luck with that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Yes, you can be mean, but I take it in stride. Lots of people who have no idea what they're talking about can be unintentionally mean.


No, when I'm mean, it's intentional.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> No, when I'm mean, it's intentional.



I know. I was being sarcastic.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Brad Wall is no friend to Albertans. 



> Braid: Notley hints at retaliation after Wall's business raid
> 
> Published on: March 30, 2017 | Last Updated: March 30, 2017 7:12 PM MDT
> Albertans have been worried about a trade war lately — with the U.S., not Saskatchewan.
> But that’s what we might get, after Premier Brad Wall’s startling border-crossing raid.
> 
> Premier Rachel Notley accuses Wall of violating two trade agreements with his very specific invitation to Greg Fagerheim, CEO of Whitecap Resources Inc., to move the company’s head office and staff to Regina.
> 
> Notley is probably right. Article 12 of the New West Partnership, the four-province deal signed by Wall’s government in 2015, states that a province “may not directly or indirectly provide business subsidies that . . . entice or assist the relocation of an enterprise from another party (province.)”
> 
> But Wall argues that everything’s good because his government has no specific relocation program.
> 
> That doesn’t get him off the hook. He wrote a personal letter to Fagerheim offering relocation costs, and even corporate digs in a government office building “as a further incentive.”
> 
> Notley says: “We’ll be looking at the best way to respond to what is an apparent violation of the trade agreement.”
> 
> Saskatchewan’s move may also violate the national Agreement on Internal Trade, first signed in 1995 and often updated since.
> 
> Wall even offered to send a senior minister to Calgary, or even come himself, in hopes that Whitecap “will consider this invitation very seriously.”
> 
> He’s working around the spirit of these trade deals, if not the letter, in order to snatch a significant company from a recession-ridden city that has already lost scores of thousands of jobs.
> 
> Just as the city is struggling back to its feet, the next-door neighbour offers a kick in the pants.
> 
> Related
> 
> Alberta conservatives may want to reconsider their adulation of Brad Wall. He’s happy to take their donations and their praise, but there’s only one person he’s really interested in, the Saskatchewan voter.
> New PC leader Jason Kenney says jokingly that he gets a bit jealous when he sees Brad Wall for Premier signs on Alberta farm gates.
> 
> Asked for comment about Wall’s letter, Kenney replied with a masterpiece of deflection.
> 
> “I certainly hope that businesses opt to stay here in Alberta. That said, this disastrous NDP government — through tax hikes and excessive regulation — seems to be doing everything in its power to create a hostile environment for job-creators at the very time we need them most.”
> 
> The trade agreements call for quarreling parties to talk things through. There won’t be any formal consequence to Wall’s action. No need to militarize the rat patrol.
> 
> But Notley issues a couple of veiled threats that could actually mean something.
> “If I was a business owner that resides in a smaller market, say Saskatchewan, that depended on an agreement that gave me access to a bigger market, say Alberta, I would be very concerned by a leadership taking swings at the very trade agreement that gave my business access to that larger market.”
> 
> Wall’s letter, she says, “wasn’t the wisest approach . . . that’s a breach of a trade agreement. And that trade agreement actually supports operations that contribute to prosperity on both sides of the border.
> 
> “You don’t touch one without pulling a very large string.”
> 
> Notley doesn’t quite say Alberta could begin to exclude Saskatchewan from agreements that allow free movement of labour and goods.
> 
> But the hint of retaliation is there. Alberta, with an economy four times larger than Saskatchewan’s, could inflict heavy damage.
> 
> That’s not what Notley wants. Wall surely doesn’t either. But protectionism often starts with just such a provocation.
> 
> As for Wall, he continues to show that he’s a parochial leader, not a national one.
> 
> In Saskatchewan some people are wondering why he’d offer inducements to a Calgary oil company, when he’s cutting spending on things like education and advanced education, while raising the provincial sales tax and expanding its base.
> 
> A bit of advice for Alberta Conservatives: Find yourselves another hero.
> 
> Don Braid’s column appears regularly in the Herald
> 
> [email protected]
> 
> Twitter/DonBraid



http://calgaryherald.com/news/politics/braid-notley-hints-at-retaliation-after-walls-business-raid


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Why wouldn't Wall court dissatisfied Alberta companies? Let's blame Saskatchewan--couldn't be Notley that's making companies want to leave Alberta!


----------



## SINC

Any company that is fiscally responsible to their shareholders would do well to examine Wall's suggestion and compare operational costs in Saskatchewan versus the socialist agenda being foisted upon them by the Notley Dippers. They might be surprised how much better their return could be next door without carbon taxes, minimum wage skyrocketing and government interference in their day to day operations for starters.


----------



## Macfury

Don't remember Freddie complaining about Notley's tax on out-of-province craft beer that was killing Saskatchewan craft brewers.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Any company that is fiscally responsible to their shareholders would do well to examine Wall's suggestion and compare operational costs in Saskatchewan versus the socialist agenda being foisted upon them by the Notley Dippers. They might be surprised how much better their return could be next door without carbon taxes, minimum wage skyrocketing and government interference in their day to day operations for starters.



Wait a minute. Wall is the one raising provincial sales taxes while the Alberta PST stays the same: zero. Can't go much lower than that. I'm also going to go out on a limb here and suggest that nobody in the oil industry is working for minimum wage, so increasing it really makes no difference to billion-dollar profit industries. As for carbon taxes? Every province will have to pay them, either within the province or federally. Might as well keep the proceeds in the province, all things being equal. 

Can you explain what you mean by government interference in day to day operations?


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Can you explain what you mean by government interference in day to day operations?


I guess you have forgotten the 20% increase in corporate tax rates, up from 10 to 12 percent as a starter?

And yes I know you struggle with the math and think it is only two percent, but I digress.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> I guess you have forgotten the 20% increase in corporate tax rates, up from 10 to 12 percent as a starter?
> 
> 
> 
> And yes I know you struggle with the math and think it is only two percent, but I digress.



Yup, that increase from 10% to 12% is going to put a lot of companies out of business, especially when they were paying 15% with Klein, if memory serves.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Yup, that increase from 10% to 12% is going to put a lot of companies out of business, especially when they were paying 15% with Klein, if memory serves.


Out of business? They just do the calculation and move their head office, cutting Alberta nicely out of all corporate revenues.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Yup, that increase from 10% to 12% is going to put a lot of companies out of business, especially when they were paying 15% with Klein, if memory serves.


Well, Notley is working hard to drive business out of Alberta:

Premier Rachel Notley has made Alberta companies low-hanging fruit


----------



## SINC

Another brilliant move by the Notley Dippers. Will they ever learn?

Alberta borrowing more than $2B over four years to cover electricity losses | Calgary Herald


----------



## Macfury

When you're borrowing to cover program costs, you've already descended below dead bottom.

I hear Notley's rocking the public sector unions in Edmonton though!



SINC said:


> Another brilliant move by the Notley Dippers. Will they ever learn?
> 
> Alberta borrowing more than $2B over four years to cover electricity losses | Calgary Herald


----------



## SINC

Sadly, there is more trouble ahead. 

NDP shovelling money into green-energy money pit


----------



## SINC

Yep, more of the Notley good news for Albertans. An idiot at work in the form of Notley and Joe Ceci with ZERO background in any kind of finance. A social worker in charge of the provincial bank. No wonder we're screwed.


----------



## Macfury

Remember that those deficits are based on oil shooting up to $65 a barrel in the near term. They're at $50 and Shell says it can profitably produce shale oil in the Permian at $20. I'd bet the deficits will be far worse. Of course, Ceci and Notley will be out on their asses long before they can dig that deficit hole any deeper.


----------



## SINC

Another move in the NDP's plan to bankrupt Alberta.

NDP meddling draws concerns | Alberta | News | Edmonton Sun


----------



## Beej

SINC said:


> Another move in the NDP's plan to bankrupt Alberta.
> 
> NDP meddling draws concerns | Alberta | News | Edmonton Sun


That's very worrying. Quality independent institutions take time to develop, but can be ruined in one term.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Perhaps it's not the NDP so much as the cyclical nature of the industry that's making some oil workers cautious about returning. 










http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/business/oilpatch-employees-layoffs-hiring-1.4054555


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Perhaps it's not the NDP so much as the cyclical nature of the industry that's making some oil workers cautious about returning.


BWHAHAHAHAHAHA! :lmao:


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> BWHAHAHAHAHAHA! :lmao:


Yup. They could trust the industry if the industry could trust the government.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> BWHAHAHAHAHAHA! :lmao:



A predictably mature response.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> A predictably mature response.


Not the NDP? Good grief you cannot believe that, can you? Know anyone who worked in 'the patch'? Try asking them about the NDP.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Not the NDP? Good grief you cannot believe that, can you? Know anyone who worked in 'the patch'? Try asking them about the NDP.


Yep, they're not angry "at the industry." They're angry at the government that is destroying their livelihood and kicking the oilpatch while it's down. 

If I were running a business, I would pay Rachel Notley to "help" the competition in Alberta.

Meanwhile Gulf of Mexico oil becomes profitable at $50 per barrel:

Gulf Of Mexico Breakeven Falls Below $50 Per Barrel | OilPrice.com

Where's that $65 oil Ceci???


----------



## SINC

Here we go again with more union chit being shoved down the throats of Alberta business. The destruction of Alberta via union friendly Dippers continues.

*Deck is stacked against small business in workplace legislation review

Alberta Government Stifles Meaningful Consultation*



> The Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) today called into question the hasty and deeply-flawed consultation process the Alberta Government is using to overhaul the province’s workplace and labour laws.
> 
> The Alberta Government’s invite-only stakeholder meeting begins at 9 a.m. today in Calgary.
> 
> The Government is proposing to fundamentally modify Employment Standards and the Labour Relations Code by drastically altering the rules that govern workers’ and employers’ rights and responsibilities, as well as how unions are formed and certified.
> 
> “We understand the wish-lists from union bosses were pouring in even before the government’s consultation was publicly announced, giving organized labour an inside track,” said Amber Ruddy, Alberta Director for CFIB. “To give small business owners a fair shake, this government needs to slow down and listen to the serious concerns entrepreneurs’ will no doubt have about the impact on their businesses and livelihoods.”
> 
> Albertans have about 30 days to provide input on rules that have been in place for more than 30 years. A similar ongoing review in Ontario has taken more than two years to date and it is anticipated consultation with stakeholders and the public will continue for several more weeks.
> 
> “There are many flaws in how this consultation was designed by the Alberta Government, including the fact that their survey questions barely scratch the surface about what they plan to alter. Advice on the most controversial pieces of the legislation is outsourced to an expert hand-picked by the government. All of this creates the perception the government is deliberately manipulating the process to produce union-friendly outcomes,” added Ruddy.
> 
> CFIB urges the government to design a better process that will allow genuine and meaningful opportunity for business owners across the province to understand what is being proposed and express their concerns.
> 
> “Modernizing the workplace should mean bringing in more flexibility for employers to meet the needs of a growing economy, not mandating rigid new rules and requirements,” concluded Ruddy.


----------



## Macfury

It will all have to be overturned just as quickly when that fool is tossed out on her ass.


----------



## eMacMan

*Why I Distrust the Man-Made Global Warming Theory, Part IX*

_Normally this would reside in the Global Warming thread. A place all true believers avoid lest they come face to face with the reality of their beliefs. Posting it here because Notley's belief in global warming has resulted in a carbon tax and will no doubt lead to other extortionate programs. My entire critique is rather lengthy so I am presenting in byte sized bits._

Thought I had finished posting ACGW counter arguments here. Then I stubbed my toe on the latest claims regarding historic CO2 levels. My thoughts on this from the Global Warming Thread:
http://www.ehmac.ca/everything-else...authoritative-ghg-thread-671.html#post2461825



eMacMan said:


> Also interesting are the revisionist CO2 levels now showing at the local imaginemporium.
> 
> Up until a few years ago every study I read placed historical CO2 levels in the 300-360ppm range. Now claims are being made that over the past 800,000 years those levels have never risen above 280ppm and that was during the Medieval Warming Period. This claim is of course devastating to the ACGW cause. Current levels are claimed to be 400ppm and man is claimed to be 100% responsible for the difference.
> 
> Here's how the revised historic CO2 claims blow the ACGW theory out of the water. Despite the 30% increase in CO2, temperatures are still lower than during the Medieval Warming Period, sea levels are still 200mm lower than the peak of the MWP, and the Northwest Passage still is not open for business as it was during the MWP.
> 
> Clearly CO2 is failing miserably to live up to its billing as the primary climate driver.


----------



## SINC

Well, so far Red Rachel doesn't seem to be getting the message about her $15 minimum wage. Give it time and all min wage jobs will be gone.

Wendy's replacing workers with machines because of rising wage cost | The Independent


----------



## eMacMan

A cross post from the AGW thread
http://www.ehmac.ca/everything-else...authoritative-ghg-thread-672.html#post2469762



> On a number of occasions it has been noted that various agencies manipulate figures to make the ACGW narrative appear more accurate than the data would otherwise indicate.
> 
> Here is an example: I pulled this chart of our early April temps, from a weather site that habitually advances ACGW as reality. According to this chart highs and lows are running well above averages.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Having been there and seen the weather on those days, the chart seemed somewhat bogus. Thankfully I have been recording the normal highs and lows from my daily visits to the Environment Canada forecast. I have super imposed those on the original chart.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oops freed from the propaganda/manipulation factor, the highs are running a bit below norms and the lows are quite close to average.
> 
> It's easy to promote the ACGW cause if you don't let the facts get in the way.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Well, so far Red Rachel doesn't seem to be getting the message about her $15 minimum wage. Give it time and all min wage jobs will be gone.
> 
> 
> 
> Wendy's replacing workers with machines because of rising wage cost | The Independent



How does that statement even make sense? If all min wage jobs will be gone, then the jobs remaining will be paying higher than minimum wage.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> How does that statement even make sense? If all min wage jobs will be gone, then the jobs remaining will be paying higher than minimum wage.


Wrong. It makes perfect sense because those jobs will be replaced with robotics. Goodbye jobs for students, and all others that would normally earn minimum. Guess it is not just Knothead, but all Dippers who don't get it.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> How does that statement even make sense? If all min wage jobs will be gone, then the jobs remaining will be paying higher than minimum wage.


Further to SINC's comments--doesn't it matter to you how many of those jobs will be left? You said your kids are working as fast food workers part-time. What do you tell them the day they're let go and replaced with cash kiosks and robotic burger flippers?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Wrong. It makes perfect sense because those jobs will be replaced with robotics. Goodbye jobs for students, and all others that would normally earn minimum. Guess it is not just Knothead, but all Dippers who don't get it.



Right. So you believe the cost of building and staffing robots is less than hiring minimum wage workers. You've been reading too much science fiction, my friend. My daughter's McD's had these automated machines for customizing your burger. They got rid of them because they weren't that popular. Most customers would still rather talk to a person. Min wage jobs are safe.


----------



## Macfury

You're way behind the times. It's already happening. My local McDonald's has reduced the size of the order desk and replaced staff with two order kiosks. Har-Dee's in New York State sees the payback period for replacing a worker with a robot at two years.

As minimum-wage hikes become mandatory, Wendy's looks to expand self-service kiosks - Washington Times

https://www.forbes.com/sites/realsp...-self-service-kiosks-nationwide/#53e938214fbc



> As the labor union-backed Fight for $15 begins yet another nationwide strike on November 29, I have a simple message for the protest organizers and the reporters covering them: I told you so.
> 
> It brings me no joy to write these words. The push for a $15 starter wage has negatively impacted the career prospects of employees who were just getting started in the workforce while extinguishing the businesses that employed them. I wish it were not so. But it’s important to document these consequences, lest policymakers elsewhere decide that the $15 movement is worth embracing.





> Of course, not all businesses have the capital necessary to shift from full-service to self-service. And that brings me to my next correct prediction—that a $15 minimum wage would force many small businesses to lay off staff, seek less-costly locations, or close altogether.


Read the full article. Propping up wages to more than the value of the work is having a devastating effect on any jurisdiction that embraces it.




Freddie_Biff said:


> Right. So you believe the cost of building and staffing robots is less than hiring minimum wage workers. You've been reading too much science fiction, my friend. My daughter's McD's had these automated machines for customizing your burger. They got rid of them because they weren't that popular. Most customers would still rather talk to a person. Min wage jobs are safe.


So yes, the cost of doing it is less than the cost of hiring workers, specifically because of the minimum wage boost. It's starting largely with order takers losing their jobs, but the automated burger flipper is following closely behind. Worse, the people behind the $15 minimum wage movement were warned that this would be the result.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Perhaps you missed the part where I said McD's here tried it and abandoned it. We're ahead of the times, not behind. People prefer customer service ten times out of ten 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

I checked on the customized "Create Your Taste" automated systems in the Edmonto area. Perhaps the one restaurant where your daughter works did not like them, but there are 27 of them in the Edmonton area alone.




Freddie_Biff said:


> Right. So you believe the cost of building and staffing robots is less than hiring minimum wage workers. You've been reading too much science fiction, my friend. My daughter's McD's had these automated machines for customizing your burger. They got rid of them because they weren't that popular. Most customers would still rather talk to a person. Min wage jobs are safe.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Your point being? They still got rid of them because customers didn't like them or use them very much. You're tying to statistic your way to prove a point. I'm telling you based on the experience of someone who actually works in one of their busier restaurants. For minimum wage. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Your point being? They still got rid of them because customers didn't like them or use them very much. You're tying to statistic your way to prove a point. I'm telling you based on the experience of someone who actually works in *one of their busier restaurants*. For minimum wage.


Yep and within your post lies the truth. Only one. The overwhelming national trend is to use the robotic machines.

Been in a Home Depot lately? More auto checkouts than cashiers by far. Bye bye min wage jobs.


----------



## Macfury

You've shown me that one restaurant chose not to use them, while almost all of them did. So one Edmonton restaurant maintained the same amount of workers, while minimum wage laws led to the loss of at least 27 net McDonald's jobs city-wide.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Yep and within your post lies the truth. Only one. The overwhelming national trend is to use the robotic machines.
> 
> 
> 
> Been in a Home Depot lately? More auto checkouts than cashiers by far. Bye bye min wage jobs.



Robotic checkouts at Home Depot still have to be run by an overseer. When you place your order for a custom burger, someone still has to make it. You can still get them, but they'll cost you a little more. This disappearance of min wage jobs is just not happening the way you seem to fear.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> You've shown me that one restaurant chose not to use them, while almost all of them did. So one Edmonton restaurant maintained the same amount of workers, while minimum wage laws led to the loss of at least 27 net McDonald's jobs city-wide.



And where are you pulling that statistic from? McD's hires and fires all the time.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Robotic checkouts at Home Depot still have to be run by an overseer. When you place your order for a custom burger, someone still has to make it. You can still get them, but they'll cost you a little more. This disappearance of min wage jobs is just not happening the way you seem to fear.


Last counts:

At St. Albert Canadian Tire - 6 robo checkouts, one overseer.

At St. Albert Home Depot - 8 robo checkouts, one overseer.

At St. Albert Super Store - 12 robo checkouts, one overseer.

See a trend here Frank? That's 5, 7 and 11 min wage jobs gonzo by my count.

I could go on but surely now you get the trend, don'tcha?


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> And where are you pulling that statistic from? McD's hires and fires all the time.


They only get a kiosk when they can replace a worker. So minimum of 27 jobs lost. To minimum wage.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Last counts:
> 
> 
> 
> At St. Albert Canadian Tire - 6 robo checkouts, one overseer.
> 
> 
> 
> At St. Albert Home Depot - 8 robo checkouts, one overseer.
> 
> 
> 
> At St. Albert Super Store - 12 robo checkouts, one overseer.
> 
> 
> 
> See a trend here Frank? That's 5, 7 and 11 min wage jobs gonzo by my count.
> 
> 
> 
> I could go on but surely now you get the trend, don'tcha?



I certainly see the trend you describe, but Zi don't think it's driven by consumer demand. Corporate stinginess, perhaps, but not because consumers are clamouring for it. Most would prefer a human, and there's some back lash over these automated tellers. We shall see.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Last counts:
> 
> At St. Albert Canadian Tire - 6 robo checkouts, one overseer.
> 
> At St. Albert Home Depot - 8 robo checkouts, one overseer.
> 
> At St. Albert Super Store - 12 robo checkouts, one overseer.
> 
> See a trend here Frank? That's 5, 7 and 11 min wage jobs gonzo by my count.
> 
> I could go on but surely now you get the trend, don'tcha?



For many retail locations, it simply wasn't worth the investment in robotics prior to the minimum wage hike. Rachel Notley has made it worth their while.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> I...don't think it's driven by consumer demand. Corporate stinginess, perhaps, but not because consumers are clamouring for it. Most would prefer a human, and there's some back lash over these automated tellers. We shall see.


It's not driven by consumer demand. It's driven by higher minimum wages. And you don't need to wait and see--the only thing that's up in the air is how many more jobs will be lost to higher minimum wages.

Those who prefer humans will go elsewhere and pay more for food. Personally, it doesn't make a difference to me.


----------



## SINC

I would rather use the robo check outs than wait in line for the real person. The trend will gain more support as the tech improves, as it surely will.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> It's not driven by consumer demand. It's driven by higher minimum wages. And you don't need to wait and see--the only thing that's up in the air is how many more jobs will be lost to higher minimum wages.
> 
> 
> 
> Those who prefer humans will go elsewhere and pay more for food. Personally, it doesn't make a difference to me.



Somehow I think you've got the cart before the horse here. Kiosks and serve yourself counters have been in existence long before the NDP took over in Alberta. They've been around for close to ten years in some locations, back when the PC's were still governing, and long before the hikes to minimum wage. They would have come about regardless of changes to minimum wage. You seem to be under the delusion that min wage can stay at the same level indefinitely. It can't and it won't, so long as the cost of living keeps increasing. Alberta certainly got away with being the stingiest with min wage for the longest time; now it's among the top for min wage increases if not the leader nationally. Railing against the min wage increase is about like protesting a sudden spring snowfall. They're both inevitable. 

Here's a critique of self-serve checkouts from 2004, when Ralph Klein was still King of Ralph's World if memory serves. 

https://www.jimcarson.com/2004/home-depots-self-checkout-doesnt-work/


----------



## FeXL

And if they were affordable back in 2004 imagine how much more affordable they are with $15/hr min wages.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Here's a critique of self-serve checkouts from 2004, when Ralph Klein was still King of Ralph's World if memory serves.


----------



## FeXL

Yes, I do.

Which is why a lot of these self-order kiosks will eliminate many people who have little knowledge of the English language.

Twice in the last month my take-out orders at A&W have been wrong because the person not only at the order microphone but the person at the front window didn't understand, "No mayonnaise."

I don't care if A&W's meat uses no added hormones or whatever. I won't be going back to any of them ever again, unless I can use a self-order kiosk and even then, only as a last resort.

Kiosks couldn't be worse...



Freddie_Biff said:


> People prefer customer service ten times out of ten


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Somehow I think you've got the cart before the horse here. Kiosks and serve yourself counters have been in existence long before the NDP took over in Alberta. They've been around for close to ten years in some locations, back when the PC's were still governing, and long before the hikes to minimum wage.


They weren't just invented. They were only affordable then when they replaced a lot of paid labour. The higher minimum wage has made these machines much more affordable, so they've accelerated the elimination of these jobs by many years. 



Freddie_Biff said:


> You seem to be under the delusion that min wage can stay at the same level indefinitely. It can't and it won't, so long as the cost of living keeps increasing. Alberta certainly got away with being the stingiest with min wage for the longest time; now it's among the top for min wage increases if not the leader nationally.


I don't believe in a minimum wage at all. The automation scenario only becomes inevitable when there are minimum wages. You want one, you get the other. Soon, these people will be unemployed instead of earning lower wages. You'll have a high minimum wage rate in principle--and a lot of unemployed people who won't be earning it.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Railing against the min wage increase is about like protesting a sudden spring snowfall. They're both inevitable.


It's not inevitable. Many countries have no minimum wage rate.


----------



## Macfury

I have no preference for standing in line to speak to a human order taker, and I don't care who flips that frozen patty. I wish that humans could keep their jobs, but retrograde minimum wage policies won't allow that. Socialists love artificial wage policies more than they love employment.



FeXL said:


> Yes, I do.
> 
> Which is why a lot of these self-order kiosks will eliminate many people who have little knowledge of the English language.
> 
> Twice in the last month my take-out orders at A&W have been wrong because the person not only at the order microphone but the person at the front window didn't understand, "No mayonnaise."
> 
> I don't care if A&W's meat uses no added hormones or whatever. I won't be going back to any of them ever again, unless I can use a self-order kiosk and even then, only as a last resort.
> 
> Kiosks couldn't be worse...


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> I have no preference for standing in line to speak to a human order taker, and I don't care who flips that frozen patty.


No general preference here either. In many cases I prefer a kiosk, the same way I prefer ATMs or internet banking. In others the technology is as annoying as telephone banking.

The trend, however, is clear. And it seems to be accelerating. Kiosks used to be a novelty in stores. Now they are in every large store I go to, and some of the smaller ones. One of the local movie theatres has no "box office". Just a few kiosks or you can buy a ticket at the concession stand.

Politicians working to accelerate this change are playing with fire. It's happening fast enough on its own.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Beej said:


> No general preference here either. In many cases I prefer a kiosk, the same way I prefer ATMs or internet banking. In others the technology is as annoying as telephone banking.
> 
> 
> 
> The trend, however, is clear. And it seems to be accelerating. Kiosks used to be a novelty in stores. Now they are in every large store I go to, and some of the smaller ones. One of the local movie theatres has no "box office". Just a few kiosks or you can buy a ticket at the concession stand.
> 
> 
> 
> Politicians working to accelerate this change are playing with fire. It's happening fast enough on its own.



I have definitely noticed their increased use at movie theatres. True enough.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Socialists love artificial wage policies more than they love employment.


I believe that socialists love wage policy more because if unemployment goes up, that puts more people on the dole & consequently subservient to the gov't.

Control, control, control...


----------



## FeXL

Further on robots & AI taking over jobs...

Robots are now really stealing jobs as Japanese firm replaces staff with AI



> While a few years back the prospect of robots snatching jobs from humans might have seemed like a hackneyed plot twist from a cheap science fiction flick, this scenario actually turned into reality for the staff of Japanese insurance firm Fukoku Mutual Life.
> 
> The BBC reports the company has made an executive decision to lay off more than 30 employees and replace them with an artificial intelligence system that can calculate insurance payouts. With this move, Fukoku Mutual estimates it will increase productivity by an impressive 30 percent.
> 
> To give you some more context, the firm additionally expects to save approximately in $1.2 million (or 140 million yen) in expenses by swapping out its human workers with AI.


But it'll never happen in Albertistan...


----------



## FeXL

So, Red Rachel & her cronies are going to give _some_ of your money back. (Read: a tiny, itsy bit under the guise of Virtue Signalling: Man, are we doing you a favour!!! We're screwing you over for 4.5% of every drop of energy you use, in perpetuity, but look! Fifteen bucks off your programmable thermostat! As long as you buy it during our extended 6 week program...)

Instant rebates for energy-efficient products



> Point-of-sale rebates of up to $30 for items such as programmable thermostats, water-saving devices, smart power strips and heavy-duty timers will help Albertans save money while conserving energy. The rebates will be available at home improvement stores across the province.


Beauty! Now how about those of us who haven spent hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands, on energy saving upgrades (windows, insulation, etc.) over the course of the last 5 years or more?

Guess that doesn't fall into the massive, overly-generous 6 week program length.

What an f'ing joke.

Further:



> _ “Since February, more than one million Albertans have viewed the Energy Efficiency Alberta website, showing how eager Albertans are to embrace energy efficiency in their communities. They know Energy Efficiency Alberta programs will reduce their energy bills and provide them the tools they need to save money.”
> Monica Curtis, CEO, Energy Efficiency Alberta _​


Actually, I went there to LMAO at the insults to informed Albertans...


----------



## Macfury

The biggest joke is that reduced consumption does not save the system money--it will just raise rates to cover losses on energy sales. At best, you can push the costs onto poorer Albertans who can't afford energy gadgets and insulation upgrades. Hooray!


----------



## Macfury

Socialist Venezuela hikes the minimum wage... again. A winning strategy for Notley!

News from The Associated Press

*Venezuela's Maduro hikes minimum wage amid rising protests*


----------



## SINC

Notley ought to fire this waste of skin posing as working for Albertans.

Government oilsands co-chair goes to bat for anti-pipeline B.C. NDP | Edmonton Journal


----------



## Macfury

Not long before that government disappears beneath the waves and it place knows it no more, SINC. What a tragic waste of four years.



SINC said:


> Notley ought to fire this waste of skin posing as working for Albertans.
> 
> Government oilsands co-chair goes to bat for anti-pipeline B.C. NDP | Edmonton Journal


----------



## Beej

FeXL said:


> I believe that socialists love wage policy more because if unemployment goes up, that puts more people on the dole & consequently subservient to the gov't.


The more I've talked to supporters of a given policy, the less I see this as remotely accurate. Maybe there are some ideological puppet masters, but most people who I have encountered honestly believe in the policies they support. They handily expunge inconvenient evidence from their sphere of knowledge, but may hesitate when shown something clear and simple that is the opposite of what they believe.

The more ideologically driven people have "rules of thumb" on how to ignore counter claims (the source is bad is the most common rule; also not an inherently wrong filter, but usually overused). 

A core component is control in the, "why can't this problem be solved" sense. Government is easiest, at an individual level. The easy option is usually the popular one, as is the more comprehensive option. Let's get this out of way in one fell swoop, so to speak. OAS/GIS reforms in the 80s are a good example.

Not to ignore the number of people who directly benefit from a policy simply voting for something that benefits them. I interpreted your statement as applying more broadly.


----------



## Macfury

Beej said:


> The more I've talked to supporters of a given policy, the less I see this as remotely accurate. Maybe there are some ideological puppet masters, but most people who I have encountered honestly believe in the policies they support. They handily expunge inconvenient evidence from their sphere of knowledge, but may hesitate when shown something clear and simple that is the opposite of what they believe.


More importantly, they generally believe that government should be in charge of the policy that "fixes" the problem--and they are happy to create an agency full of staffers to control this aspect of people's lives.


----------



## Macfury

Congratulations to Alberta for having endured two years of the worst provincial leader in the province's history. It's a downhill ride now until this amateur hour ends.


----------



## SINC

There were a few Dippers on Facebook today that put up congratulatory post to the NDP for completing their first two years in government today.

What the majority of users responded was that it was also their last two years in power beginning today. Albertans can hardly wait to toss these socialists from office.


----------



## SINC

One fellow interviewed on TV told of two union members (big burly guys as he described them) who knocked on his door about 10:00 p.m. one night at his home and asked him to sign a card that he wanted a union at work. They told him all his co-workers had already signed cards. He felt intimidated and signed. Then when the mandatory secret ballot vote took place at work, the union was defeated by a four to one vote.

Now the NDP want to eliminate that secret ballot step in the labour act and just install unions with signed cards collected by the unions. That would give intimidation a leg up over democracy and allow union goons to run roughshod over workers.

This is wrong on so many levels and old friend Graham Hicks of the Edmonton Sun gets it in spades.



> *NDP labour position troubling*
> 
> It’s not like it’s unexpected.
> 
> Two years ago, Alberta shocked the nation by electing the province’s first ever left-of-centre, union-biased government.
> 
> That the Notley government hasn’t yet reformed and revised Alberta’s labour laws to conform with its views on workers’ rights, i.e. unionization, has purely been a matter of priority.
> 
> Here it comes, folks.
> 
> There’s nothing official, other than an innocuous workplace legislation review questionnaire on the Alberta Labour website.
> 
> But labour and business circles are abuzz with rumours that much, much more is about to come down the pike from this government.
> 
> Major labour law changes: Like an end to secret ballots for union certification, no more replacement workers during strikes and compulsory arbitration of some labour disputes.
> 
> The rumoured changes, depending on your point of view, could either give Alberta’s workers a better deal through unionization, or represent yet another blow to Alberta’s once-enviable business-friendly reputation.
> 
> Right now, union certification rules are two-step. A union must demonstrate that 40% of a company's workers want to vote for a union. A secret ballot follows. If 51% of the workers vote for a union, then a union it is.
> 
> The trade-union movement is lobbying to do away with the secret ballot. If a certain percentage of workers sign a union card or a union petition, then a union they’ll have.
> 
> Which goes against the very basic human right of a secret ballet, but this seems not to bother union leaders.
> 
> Once a union is established, union leaders are seeking binding arbitration, should contract negotiations break down.
> 
> The current legislation allows them simply to go on strike.
> 
> Unions say binding arbitration would be better for new members then the prospect of a prolonged strike.
> 
> The third big change: Unions want the NDs to ban the use of replacement workers during a strike.
> 
> In other words, making it impossible for a company to operate should unionized workers walk off the job.
> 
> Business groups are deeply concerned – not only about the rumoured changes, but about the uncertainty generated by the secrecy and lack of consultation surrounding possibly profound labour law changes.
> 
> If the rumours are true, it would appear the Notley government is more concerned with rewarding its union friends than with the basic human right to a secret ballot for union certification.
> 
> As the rule makers, governments balance the needs/desire of employers against the needs/desires of employees.
> 
> If businesses get too greedy, workers suffer. If unions get too greedy, business suffers.
> 
> In its zeal to represent the common man, the Notley government could well push entrepreneurs and businesses to look beyond Alberta, to set up shop in more business-friendly provinces like, ironically given their pasts, Saskatchewan and even British Columbia. Or head south of the border.
> 
> What’s most worrisome is the possibility the Notley government will be driven by ideology rather than common sense on labour issues - witness what has been done on the climate change front.
> 
> There's also an unspoken agenda. Should the Alberta New Democratic Party lose the next provincial election and return to its historical two to 16 seats (out of 87), it would naturally want to leave behind hard-to-reverse legislation for the causes it holds most dear.
> 
> Former New Zealand Minister of Finance Roger Douglas was once confronted by a livid trade unionist over sweeping financial reforms in that country in the ‘80s. To paraphrase his response: “Our government is against privilege in all its forms. You and your trade unions, sir, have become a privileged class.”


Hicks on Biz: Labour laws in play | Alberta | News | Edmonton Sun


----------



## SINC

Ah yes, hanging on by a thread with their own money. Members account for most of the cash flow. Says it all. No outside support.

https://www.scribd.com/document/347452740/the-alberta-ndp-s-top-100-donors-annotated


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> Ah yes, hanging on by a thread with their own money. Members account for most of the cash flow. Says it all. No outside support.
> 
> https://www.scribd.com/document/347452740/the-alberta-ndp-s-top-100-donors-annotated


FWIW I have never contributed to any political party. Furthermore I suspect that most of those who do expect a return on their investments.


----------



## Beej

SINC said:


> He felt intimidated and signed. Then when the mandatory secret ballot vote took place at work, the union was defeated by a four to one vote.


The secret ballot issue is one of many unions most damning goals. I get the basic ideological difference between open shop and closed shop. Trying to get rid of secret ballots is clearly a slimy power grab where those in power want the ability to hold their (potential) voters accountable to power, instead of the other way around.


----------



## SINC

More concern for Notley's debt. 

http://calgaryherald.com/news/politics/braid-as-the-ndp-turns-two-wildrose-forecasts-armageddon


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> More concern for Notley's debt.
> 
> Braid: As the NDP turns two, Wildrose forecasts Armageddon | Calgary Herald


Don Braid sounds like he's sad that the debt will deny Notley a second term in office.


----------



## eMacMan

I still find it very insulting that Rachel has hired Ontarians to go around exchanging and installing light bulbs. 

Why the insistence that the light bulb nazis enter your home and perform the swap? That will cost way more than whatever fraud it is supposedly intended to prevent.


----------



## SINC

eMacMan said:


> I still find it very insulting that Rachel has hired Ontarians to go around exchanging and installing light bulbs.
> 
> Why the insistence that the light bulb nazis enter your home and perform the swap? That will cost way more than whatever fraud it is supposedly intended to prevent.


Yep, the NDP are masters at launching legislation or programs that scream 'we'll never vote for them again'. They haven't got a clue.


----------



## Rps

SINC said:


> Yep, the NDP are masters at launching legislation or programs that scream 'we'll never vote for them again'. They haven't got a clue.


You mean you never heard of "many hands make light work"?


----------



## FeXL

No way in hell this is happening in our house. She can keep her f'ing light bulbs & her central Canadian henchmen can KMHUA...



eMacMan said:


> I still find it very insulting that Rachel has hired Ontarians to go around exchanging and installing light bulbs.


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> No way in hell this is happening in our house. She can keep her f'ing light bulbs & her central Canadian henchmen can KMHUA...


Nor ours. It is beyond comprehension that they would insist on exchanging the 4 light bulbs in my attics. At a total savings of less than a penny a year worth of electricity, imagine the stupidity of swapping out those bulbs.


----------



## Beej

eMacMan said:


> Nor ours. It is beyond comprehension that they would insist on exchanging the 4 light bulbs in my attics. At a total savings of less than a penny a year worth of electricity, imagine the stupidity of swapping out those bulbs.


That would be idiotic, although I have not experienced it. Just saw some discounted (questionable quality) LEDs at a checkout and bought two to try out. My longest use lights were already replaced, but the price made this feasible for a couple other lights.

Seems like an extremely wasteful program. Likely bad program design; would need to see their cost benefit analysis, and free rider assumption to verify.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

I hate LED's, particularly for their price, and I REALLY hate CFC's, so this is one issue on which I definitely do not follow the NDP's advice. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Beej said:


> Seems like an extremely wasteful program. Likely bad program design; would need to see their cost benefit analysis, and free rider assumption to verify.


"Their"? As in the NDP govt's cost benefit analysis? :yikes:

I would be literally gobsmacked to discover that one had even been prepared...


----------



## Beej

FeXL said:


> "Their"? As in the NDP govt's cost benefit analysis? :yikes:
> 
> I would be literally gobsmacked to discover that one had even been prepared...


Usually a government will point to some terrible analysis, as they do with film tax credits. Some "serious" looking document. Maybe the Alberta NDP transcended pretending to have a clue and know that their supporters simply think "LEDs are good". Promoting the technology over thinking about what gets accomplished per $ spent, and if it was a good deal. Solar freakin roadways!

I get that we disagree on whether the goal is worthy, but removing the bit where competent analysis finds the most cost effective way to accomplish the (not agreed upon) goal is where I end up voting similar to you.

If they're not going to to do it well and use a non-political body that can self correct (albeit slowly), then do not waste. It's a shadow political ad campaign.


----------



## SINC

I'm not sure just how much more Albertans can take of outsider NDP hacks being hired to represent us.

Now Knothead has hired former failed Manitoba premier Doer who Manitobans turfed from office to supposedly represent Albertans.

She is completely off her rocker and has no clue as to the deep hole she is digging for herself and her party. It is but another slap in the face to Albertans.

Alberta hires Gary Doer, former ambassador to U.S., to help in softwood lumber dispute - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## Beej

SINC said:


> Now Knothead has hired former failed Manitoba premier Doer who Manitobans turfed from office to supposedly represent Albertans.


He retired while still popular. Maybe you're thinking of Selinger?

I can see how yet another outsider adds to the insult, but Doer looks like a good pick to help out. Not sure why the feds didn't hire him.


----------



## SINC

Alberta going from bad to worse. Dippers continue borrow and spend policy. 

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/blo...on-has-deteriorated-by-68-billion-in-11-years


----------



## Macfury

Beej said:


> He retired while still popular. Maybe you're thinking of Selinger?
> 
> I can see how yet another outsider adds to the insult, but Doer looks like a good pick to help out. Not sure why the feds didn't hire him.


As a former US diplomat, I would says he's a likely choice for the position, though I don't know the logistics of having the province and the feds negotiating on a two-pronged basis. Is this typical?


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> I'm not sure just how much more Albertans can take of outsider NDP hacks being hired to represent us.
> 
> Now Knothead has hired former failed Manitoba premier Doer who Manitobans turfed from office to supposedly represent Albertans.
> 
> She is completely off her rocker and has no clue as to the deep hole she is digging for herself and her party. It is but another slap in the face to Albertans.
> 
> Alberta hires Gary Doer, former ambassador to U.S., to help in softwood lumber dispute - Edmonton - CBC News


It's déjà vu all over again. The Harpoon can tell her how this is gonna end. Maybe Rachel needs to visit with some of the Sioux elders on the Pine Ridge Reserve, and listen to what they have to say about the Treaty of Laramie. The one that gave the Black Hills to the Sioux forever. 

The truth is the US only abides by treaties when they benefit, otherwise the treaty in their eyes simply does not exist. However since the US is choosing to ignore treaties perhaps an export tax on Canadian natural gas going to the US is in order.


----------



## FeXL

Beej said:


> It's a shadow political ad campaign.


Living here doesn't make me an expert by any means so this is not a call to authority.

That said, from what I've seen of the smug fukcers, they simply do not have a clew. SINC has pointed to any of a number of personnel choices that does nothing but alienate Albertans even more. We managed to build quite a nice province over the course of the last century or so using people from with our boundaries. Why suddenly the need to outsource? Especially some of _what_ they're outsourcing. Eight months to review the oil royalty program when the private sector could have done it in less than one using extant data & reports. Their design, implementation & execution of Bill 6, the farm safety bill, was done entirely without input from the actual people in the trenches, the farmers. I'd bet large that the closest to a farm half the NDP cabinet has even been is driving by one on the highway. This goofy lightbulb thing, from start to Ontario-ans installing them, is nothing more than the thoughtless pushing of an agenda. There are a lot bigger fish to fry in this province than what stinking lightbulb I've got screwed into my basement cold room fixture that's only turned on for a few minutes a year. These are only a few examples illustrating the complete & utter incompetence of Red Rachel & Crew.

It appears that they just get a wild hair up their backsides & rush headlong into it, full tilt, ignoring any of the details until they get entangled by them & only then, reluctantly, do they pull back & take a second look.

"LED LIGHTBULBS!!! THAT SOUNDS GREEN!!! MY GAWD!!! LET'S HURRY & ORDER UP A TON OF 'EM & GIVE 'EM TO THE PEOPLE!!! WE'LL EVEN INSTALL THEM FOR 'EM!!! WHAT A BEAUTIFUL IDEA!!! WE'RE SAVING THE PLANET!!!" 

No thought to the logistics of the issue, no care for the cost, no idea as to the optics of having non-Albertans installing them, etc., etc., etc. Head down, ass up, blinkers on. We got a job to do! Damn those people who use those primitive incandescent bulbs in the dead of the winter to help heat their homes!!!

Handshakes & backslaps all around. Next!!! XX)XX)XX)

By then the damage is done & maybe, just maybe, you get some half-assed apology/admittance of stupidity like with Bill 6: "Yeah, we shoulda, woulda, coulda asked farmers for their input, we'll do better next time, blah, blah, blah..."

Yeah, it's gonna be a treat to see them dropping likes flies in two years. I relish looking forward to the stunned looks on their oblivious faces. Just like stateside in November...


----------



## CubaMark

So Saskatchewan is giving away millions of dollars to private companies to help them prepare Private-Public-Partnerships (P3) bids. P3s have been shown to be a disastrous path for government to follow, for example, in Nova Scotia with P3 built-and-operated schools. Lots of other examples of the stupidity of P3 ideology. 

That Brad Wall fella, sure looks like he's keeping tabs on taxpayer money, eh?

*SaskBuilds paying millions to companies for failed project bids* —Regina Leader-Post


----------



## Macfury

I don't see P3s as disastrous. Well structured, they provide a predictable cost structure for projects that might not otherwise be funded.

The money is provided to pre-selected companies to create government-mandated bids so detailed, that it costs the companies millions to prepare the documents. The money provided doesn't even cover the cost of the bid. Unless the government provides some money to the bidders, only one or two large companies could afford to bid, shutting out smaller players, who could be bankrupted simply by submitting a losing bid.


----------



## FeXL

FeXL said:


> No way in hell this is happening in our house. She can keep her f'ing light bulbs & her central Canadian henchmen can KMHUA...


Further to this, was in Crappy Tire this afternoon, they've got a boatload of Noma 60 watt equivalent 3000K (warm white) LED bulbs on sale for $0.99 after the rebate at the cashier. $5.49 regular, $3.99 on sale, $3.00 rebate. And no sign of Red Rachel's goons anywhere... 

Picked up a half dozen as an experiment. Probably put them in the attic & the cold room...


----------



## FeXL

So the US is giving away thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of millions of dollars to private companies in the search for renewable energy. Renewable Energy has been shown to be a disastrous path for government to follow, for example, everywhere with bird & bat choppers &, along with solar, unable to provide baseline power. Lots of other examples of the stupidity of Renewable Energy.

That Barry Soetoro fella, sure looks like he's keeping tabs on taxpayer money, eh?



CubaMark said:


> So Saskatchewan is giving away millions of dollars to private companies to help them prepare Private-Public-Partnerships (P3) bids. P3s have been shown to be a disastrous path for government to follow, for example, in Nova Scotia with P3 built-and-operated schools. Lots of other examples of the stupidity of P3 ideology.
> 
> That Brad Wall fella, sure looks like he's keeping tabs on taxpayer money, eh?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

One problem with LED bulbs is that they are missing part of the electromagnetic spectrum that regenerates your retina. No big deal in the short term, but over the long haul may be another story. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

Business is worried and they should be as Dippers try to ram union friendly labour laws through.



> CFIB shares concerns with Labour Minister about drastic employment rule overhaul
> 
> Edmonton, May 9, 2017 – Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) is in Edmonton today to provide Labour Minister Christina Gray with the perspective of small business about the review of Alberta’s labour laws that is currently underway.
> 
> At the top of the agenda was a discussion about a new CFIB survey of Alberta businesses. The survey received 800 responses and discussions with the Minister focused on the potential elimination of secret ballot voting for union certification, as well as potential changes to employment standards.
> 
> “Alberta’s small businesses are adapting to a new economic reality and it is crucial that government policy decisions support the small business community,” said Ruddy. “Mandating rigid new requirements does not facilitate the creation of a single new job. Entrepreneurs need flexible employment rules that align with the reality of the modern workplace.”


----------



## SINC

More grief courtesy of Knotley and the socialists. 

Government agency under investigation over controversial power deals | Calgary Herald


----------



## SINC

The inmates running the asylum method is still firmly in place. 

Alberta’s debt service costs set to double in just four years

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/blogs/alberta-s-debt-service-costs-set-to-double-in-just-four-years


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> The inmates running the asylum method is still firmly in place.
> 
> Alberta’s debt service costs set to double in just four years
> 
> https://www.fraserinstitute.org/blogs/alberta-s-debt-service-costs-set-to-double-in-just-four-years


For the most part I view the Fraser Institute as a less than reliable source of information. 

That said, it does appear that Alberta is paying about 3% interest to finance its debt. Given sufficiently greedy banksters and a sagging provincial credit rating, this could easily treble in a very short time frame. Coupled with the Rachel borrow ever more strategy, doubling the debt could easily increase the annual cost of financing to $6Billions$ not $2Billion$.


----------



## SINC

The putrid stench of the Alberta Dippers grows more rank every week. 

Alberta health minister dodges questions about her deputy's relationship with private foundation - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## FeXL

Keep yer cotton pickin' fingers off my HTF...

Hey, Freddie: You screamed blue murder that the HTF had been pillaged by the Conservatives. Where's your hue & cry now that Red Rachel's trying to gain complete control over it? With *unqualified* personell?

Kevin Libin: Tension keeps rising over Alberta’s Heritage Fund after another ambush of political tampering from Notley’s NDP



> Albertans will soon learn how far the provincial NDP’s neo-progressive politics will reshape the Heritage Fund — and other multi-billion-dollar public savings, scholarship, pension and emergency accounts — that until recently had been vigilantly kept at arm’s length from interference.


Related:



> *The NDP recently stripped out of the act regulating AIMCo any requirement that the agency’s directors have relevant financial, legal or board experience to qualify for overseeing the management of Albertans’ savings funds. It also granted Premier Rachel Notley’s cabinet the power to install its own handpicked people.*


M'bold.

Perfect...

Further:



> “These recent changes to the AIMCo regulation actually did come as a surprise to us and, frankly, not a welcome surprise,” the CEO said. And “we respectfully disagree that this (the NDP’s new process) is an improvement in our governance… This is something we don’t take lightly.” In just a few weeks, with new directors coming in under the Notley government’s new process, Albertans will find out just how serious this is getting.


----------



## Beej

An interesting Alberta poll from April.
https://www.scribd.com/document/346653673/Mainstreet-Alberta-April-2017#from_embed

On page five they show that Wildrose has a lead with 18-34 year olds. The same group seems tepid about either Jean or Kenney leading a united party.

The right wing party appears to have a plurality of young voters, and those voters may either block a merger, or raise up a third leadership candidate (such as Fildebrandt). This is going to be interesting.


----------



## SINC

Beej said:


> An interesting Alberta poll from April.
> https://www.scribd.com/document/346653673/Mainstreet-Alberta-April-2017#from_embed
> 
> On page five they show that Wildrose has a lead with 18-34 year olds. The same group seems tepid about either Jean or Kenney leading a united party.
> 
> The right wing party appears to have a plurality of young voters, and those voters may either block a merger, or raise up a third leadership candidate (such as Fildebrandt). This is going to be interesting.


There is so much resentment of the NDP party and even Notley herself that those above the age of 34 will also cast their votes for a united right no matter who leads it or what they call it. In fact it could be more accurately be called outright hatred, feeling run that strong.

If I had to predict election results, I would bet on the anti NDP vote to run as high as 70 percent of all Albertans and a thrashing at the polls for Notley and company.


----------



## FeXL

Beej said:


> On page five they show that Wildrose has a lead with 18-34 year olds. The same group seems tepid about either Jean or Kenney leading a united party.
> 
> The right wing party appears to have a plurality of young voters, and those voters may either block a merger, or raise up a third leadership candidate (such as Fildebrandt). This is going to be interesting.


I participated in a phone poll last month (may have even been this one). My responses, roughly speaking, were thus:

1. Don't like the merger. Even with some of the old school quitting, still far too many of the PC bastards around whose seats became far too comfortable in the last decade or so. WR was created by/for people who had become disillusioned with the PC's. The last thing I want is to be lumped back together with them again.

2. Don't like Brian Jean as a leader. Has about as much zing as a plate of wet noodles. Should be up in Red Rachel's face Every. Single. Day. about her crap and isn't. 

3. Care for Kenney even less. He appears to be walking on eggshells, reluctant to take an actual stand on anything for fear of offending anybody. You can't please everybody.

4. Red Rachel? 'Nuf said...

5. As an aside, one point the phone poll seemed to emphasize was whether Jean's & Kenney's experience as Fed's was an issue or not. It isn't for me.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> I participated in a phone poll last month (may have even been this one). My responses, roughly speaking, were thus:
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Don't like the merger. Even with some of the old school quitting, still far too many of the PC bastards around whose seats became far too comfortable in the last decade or so. WR was created by/for people who had become disillusioned with the PC's. The last thing I want is to be lumped back together with them again.
> 
> 
> 
> 2. Don't like Brian Jean as a leader. Has about as much zing as a plate of wet noodles. Should be up in Red Rachel's face Every. Single. Day. about her crap and isn't.
> 
> 
> 
> 3. Care for Kenney even less. He appears to be walking on eggshells, reluctant to take an actual stand on anything for fear of offending anybody. You can't please everybody.
> 
> 
> 
> 4. Red Rachel? 'Nuf said...
> 
> 
> 
> 5. As an aside, one point the phone poll seemed to emphasize was whether Jean's & Kenney's experience as Fed's was an issue or not. It isn't for me.



Sounds like you're more skeptical about the right wing parties than I thought. Talk about a dilemma, when no choice looks desirable. We need more parties on the right! Albertans want choice!


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Sounds like you're more skeptical about the right wing parties than I thought. Talk about a dilemma, when no choice looks desirable. We need more parties on the right! Albertans want choice!


There's no dilemma. Vote against the red and things will look up!


----------



## FeXL

1. I've been crystal clear in my disdain for the CINO PC's for years now. I never liked Queenie or Prentice. For that matter, Stelmach either, although I would be reluctant to call him CINO. He was just an idiot...

2. I've been a staunch supporter of WR for nearly the same period of time & will continue to vote for them in the next election, no matter how wet noodle-y the leader is. A leader can always be replaced.

3. If a merger is actually completed between WR & the PC's prior to the next election, I will hold my nose & vote for them for no other reason than ABR.

4. Red Rachel will go down as the first single term premiere in the history of this province to whatever party is on the political right. As SINC has noted, the only platform that will be required is to repeal everything she has done. Butter her. She's toast. I called it when she got elected. The honeymoon is long over & the only ones getting screwed are all the little people.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Sounds like you're more skeptical about the right wing parties than I thought.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> The honeymoon is long over & the only ones getting screwed are all the little people.


Only the public sector thinks of it as awesome sex.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Only the public sector thinks of it as awesome sex.


Exactly. The rest of us are getting it roughshod & dry.

However, a new 2 year contract has been ratified by Alberta teachers, with no pay increases unless other major public sector unions get them. Yeah, the bargaining unit still has to ratify it but with 78% support from the teachers, they likely will.

Guess Red Rachel's postponing until an election year. Then watch the manna fall from heaven. Maybe...

Funny, haven't heard the hue & cry from Freddie yet. That's gotta sting, 4.5% carbon tax for 3 years with zero pay increases (that's like, 13.5%!!!). Told him that there was no way in hell he'd ever get that money back from pay increases in this economy. 

Hey, Freddie, here's a great, big, fat "I told you so". You're going to limp out of Red Rachel's single term with less cash in your pocket than you did under the PC's. 

Tens of billions of dollars of debt & deficit & yer not getting a plugged nickel outta it. Not a sou. Where d'ya s'pose its going?

Howzit feel to be the kickapoo for the rest of the public sector in the province? Roughshod & dry? Still a believer? Miss Ralph yet? At least you were able to negotiate some of that back... beejacon

Hey, Freddie, you have a great day. Might wanna hit the ol' coffee klatch in the staff room this week. Talk some with yer fellow Rachel supporters, mebbe get a bulk buy on anal lube...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Funny, haven't heard the hue & cry from Freddie yet. That's gotta sting, 4.5% carbon tax for 3 years with zero pay increases (that's like, 13.5%!!!). Told him that there was no way in hell he'd ever get that money back from pay increases in this economy.


Freddie has made himself clear on the carbon tax. Clever Rachel is balancing the budget by taxing the hell out of citizens. A real leader!


----------



## Freddie_Biff

I support the decision the ATA has reached with the government on pay increases. The "me too" clause means we don't get shafted like we did under the Redford PC's, and a wage increase when so many Albertans are out of work would be bad optics at this time. I make a good wage, yes I'm falling behind with respect to the cost of living, but a job is better than no job ten times out of ten. Clearly some of you really don't know me at all. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

That's reasonable--but also what I expected.



Freddie_Biff said:


> I support the decision the ATA has reached with the government on pay increases. The "me too" clause means we don't get shafted like we did under the Redford PC's, and a wage increase when so many Albertans are out of work would be bad optics at this time. I make a good wage, yes I'm falling behind with respect to the cost of living, but a job is better than no job ten times out of ten. Clearly some of you really don't know me at all.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Ain't buying it, Freddie. Not a single word. This stings and you know it but you still can't find a harsh word for Red Rachel. The great supporters of unions the country over, the magnificent and magnanimous En Dee Pee, has hired 10's of thousands of union employees in our fair province over the last 2 years and, because of that, you don't get a red cent.

In the Klein years when everybody else was tightening their belts & asked to contribute to the economic health of the province, Alberta teachers were asked to do the same.

We've heard no end of p!$$ing & moaning from you on that. Where is the noblesse oblige for that era? What about those optics?

Your hypocrisy is stunning...



Freddie_Biff said:


> ...and a wage increase when so many Albertans are out of work would be bad optics at this time.


----------



## Macfury

I would say it wouldn't only be bad optics--it would also be wrong.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Ain't buying it, Freddie. Not a single word. This stings and you know it but you still can't find a harsh word for Red Rachel. The great supporters of unions the country over, the magnificent and magnanimous En Dee Pee, has hired 10's of thousands of union employees in our fair province over the last 2 years and, because of that, you don't get a red cent.
> 
> 
> 
> In the Klein years when everybody else was tightening their belts & asked to contribute to the economic health of the province, Alberta teachers were asked to do the same.
> 
> 
> 
> We've heard no end of p!$$ing & moaning from you on that. Where is the noblesse oblige for that era? What about those optics?
> 
> 
> 
> Your hypocrisy is stunning...




You don't have to buy it, FeXL. It's not your problem. I make a good wage; I've never complained about that. My complaint comes from seeing others get cost of living increases while we watched. That was the agreement foisted upon us by the precious Redford gov't whether we liked it or not. This one is better and ensures some kind of wage parity if other public sector wages increase. That's totally fair. Not sure why a lack of an increase bothers you so much.

As for hiring new employees? Hire away! Class size matters, and the only way to deal with that is by hiring more teachers. I have no problem with that. Again, you don't know me as well as you seem to think you do.


----------



## FeXL

I jes' luvs how you Progs learn how to respond by avoiding the actual issue being discussed. At no point did I mention Queenie. Talking about Klein.

This is precisely the same scenario: you were being asked to toe the line then as you are now. Then it was absolutely horrible. Now, it's hokay...



Freddie_Biff said:


> That was the agreement foisted upon us by the precious Redford gov't whether we liked it or not.


Don't bother me at all. Neither did the Klein years. I just know that there are a bunch of shell-shocked Prog teachers walking around lately...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Not sure why a lack of an increase bothers you so much.


She ain't hired many teachers. There's been no change in my lovely bride's district, as far as student/teacher ratios are concerned. Has there been one in yours? Nothing of significance, I'm willing to bet.

So, 50,000 new hires in the last two years and no teachers. We all know who is subsidizing their paycheques (<cough>health care, education<cough>). Wonder where they all went...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Class size matters, and the only way to deal with that is by hiring more teachers.


----------



## Macfury

"Class size" will soon be less relevant. Why have a half-assed teacher in North Bay teach your kids, when they can take lessons from the best teachers in the world via videolink? Parents who want the best will demand it. That won't replace human teachers but here will be a lower demand for them.


----------



## minstrel

MF, do you honestly think that most teenagers can be trusted to "take lessons from the best teachers in the world via video link" without constant supervision, just because their parents "will demand it"? Are you thinking this would be in the form of home schooling, or are you figuring schools will no longer require as many educators, so will just replace them with lesser trained supervisors of online instruction? I'm not picking a fight here, but after spending much of my working life teaching, I have an idea the value parents place on our daily supervision of their children.


----------



## Macfury

I believe the students will still need to be supervised and I don't believe the teenagers can be trusted--at least in North America. What I see happening is that with the proliferation of Internet connectivity, students all over the world will be watching these lessons and they will begin to collectively kick North American ass. Students in emerging economies will be hungry for this stuff to better themselves.

What I expect is that certain teachers and lessons taught via videolink/computer program will be persuasively better than what's being taught in the school. I can imagine 30% of lessons being provided this way. The best teachers will be kept on and will continue teaching subjects they're demonstrably great at. Video will never replace supervision, personal encouragement, mentoring and teaching subjects such as phys ed, music, and art. You might also have a program that's half videolink/computer studies, and half live teacher.

However, the key is that the online/videolink lessons must be demonstrably better than what kids are getting in terms of grades, retention and other solid metrics.

What do you think, minstrel?


minstrel said:


> MF, do you honestly think that most teenagers can be trusted to "take lessons from the best teachers in the world via video link" without constant supervision, just because their parents "will demand it"? Are you thinking this would be in the form of home schooling, or are you figuring schools will no longer require as many educators, so will just replace them with lesser trained supervisors of online instruction? I'm not picking a fight here, but after spending much of my working life teaching, I have an idea the value parents place on our daily supervision of their children.


----------



## FeXL

Ra-chel, Ra-chel, Ra-chel...

S&P Global Ratings downgrades Alberta’s credit rating



> Standard and Poor’s (S&P) Global Ratings has downgraded Alberta’s credit rating from “AA” status to an “A+.”
> 
> In a news release issued Friday afternoon, S&P said “continuing budgetary performance deterioration and growing debt” were behind the move.


Related:

S&P downgrades Alberta credit rating from AA to A+

So, let's recap:

1. Red Rachel took over the reins from the PC's in May, 2015, with Alberta's S&P credit rating at AAA.
2. S&P downgraded Alberta's credit rating in December, 2015 from AAA to AA+, _under Knotley_.
3. S&P downgraded Alberta's credit rating in May, 2016 from AA+ to AA, _under Knotley_.
4. S&P downgraded Alberta's credit rating in May, 2017 from AA to A+, two notches, _under Knotley_.
5. S&P predicts that Alberta's provincial debt will be $94 billion by 2020, >$20 billion more than what Red Rachel has predicted ($71 billion).
6. Nice work, Rachel. You have managed to drop our provincial credit rating 4 levels in just two short years (massively increasing interest payments on the backs of taxpayers). Not only that but your provincial debt predictions are off by more than 30%.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Nice work, Rachel. You have managed to drop our provincial credit rating 4 levels in just two short years (massively increasing interest payments on the backs of taxpayers). Not only that but your provincial debt predictions are off by more than 30%.


All a calculated risk on buying off enough off the populace/union members before the next election. They typical NDP reaction will be to slag the rating agency for failing to lovingly embrace her necessary socialist reforms. 

*Give me a "V"... give me a "E"... give me an "N"... give me a "E"... give me a "Z"...*


----------



## minstrel

I'm hoping MF's vision of future education is possible. I'm in agreement that a half-assed teacher anywhere does everyone a disservice. I'm not sure how engaging the lessons over video link can truly be however. If those lessons are being viewed by hundreds or thousands of students, I can't see how much useful student involvement can be expected.


----------



## Macfury

There's a teacher on YouTube who teaches math better than any teacher my kid has ever experienced. If you can take the best of these presentations and match them to solid e-learning programs, school boards would license the content. Class size is not important during that experience. Teachers could work with students who actually needed individual support afterward. 



minstrel said:


> I'm hoping MF's vision of future education is possible. I'm in aggreement that a half-assed teacher anywhere does everyone a disservice. I'm not sure how engaging the lessons over video link can truly be however. If those lessons are being viewed by hundreds or thousands of students, I can't see how much useful student involvement can be expected.


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> What I expect is that certain teachers and lessons taught via videolink/computer program will be persuasively better than what's being taught in the school.


This makes sense. The private schools will probably moved first to a model where some classes have "learning facilitators" to help students while they are watching the best teachers in the world. This could bring private school costs down to a level where the middle class will mass adopt.

One reaction to slow this down will be unions demanding that government change regulations to require certified teachers in every class. My guess is that it will work about as well as opposition to Uber, but stretched over a longer time period.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

minstrel said:


> I'm hoping MF's vision of future education is possible. I'm in aggreement that a half-assed teacher anywhere does everyone a disservice. I'm not sure how engaging the lessons over video link can truly be however. If those lessons are being viewed by hundreds or thousands of students, I can't see how much useful student involvement can be expected.



We already have this. It's called YouTube. Can be useful, but moreso with a real teacher in the room to help the students along. Kids these days tend to have very short attention spans.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Beej said:


> This makes sense. The private schools will probably moved first to a model where some classes have "learning facilitators" to help students while they are watching the best teachers in the world. This could bring private school costs down to a level where the middle class will mass adopt.
> 
> 
> 
> One reaction to slow this down will be unions demanding that government change regulations to require certified teachers in every class. My guess is that it will work about as well as opposition to Uber, but stretched over a longer time period.



The "best teachers in the world" are those you can interact with, ask questions, and discuss ideas and implications with. Teaching, or delivering content, is only half the job. How do the "best teachers in the word" provide feedback to individual students? The model is incredibly shortsighted.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> The "best teachers in the world" are those you can interact with, ask questions, and discuss ideas and implications with. Teaching, or delivering content, is only half the job. How do the "best teachers in the word" provide feedback to individual students? The model is incredibly shortsighted.


You didn't read my posts thoroughly.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> The "best teachers in the world" are those you can interact with, ask questions, and discuss ideas and implications with. Teaching, or delivering content, is only half the job. How do the "best teachers in the word" provide feedback to individual students? The model is incredibly shortsighted.


Sigh, if your posts here are indicitive of the best, our kids are in trouble.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Freddie_Biff said:


> The "best teachers in the world" are those you can interact with, ask questions, and discuss ideas and implications with. Teaching, or delivering content, is only half the job. How do the "best teachers in the word" provide feedback to individual students? The model is incredibly shortsighted.



I repeat the question: how do the "best teachers in the world" provide feedback to individual students?


----------



## Macfury

I've already answered it.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> I've already answered it.




By avoiding restating that in which you believe so strongly? Sure. That's convincing. Simple answer: they can't, not by YouTube video anyway. You've completely missed the point about the feedback loop. Anybody can put together a video.


----------



## minstrel

And unfortunately the conversation has changed from discussing the points to personal attacks. I'm not picking sides in the personal disagreements several members have here, but what point was served by your last post, Sinc? Although I may or may not agree with your sentiment, I just don't see how your last contribution was in any way helpful to the ongoing discussion.

My opinion on the original point: if we're only talking about displaying video lessons, with no student interaction, then yes we already have YouTube for that. And if "teachers could work with students who actually needed individual support afterward" we're still possibly stuck with a "half-assed teacher" in front of a group of students. I would be surprised if "instructional facilitators" would be any more capable of delivering individualized help than is already available from those "half-assed teachers".


----------



## Freddie_Biff

minstrel said:


> And unfortunately the conversation has changed from discussing the points to personal attacks. I'm not picking sides in the personal disagreements several members have here, but what point was served by your last post, Sinc? Although I may or may not agree with your sentiment, I just don't see how your last contribution was in any way helpful to the ongoing discussion.
> 
> 
> 
> My opinion on the original point: if we're only talking about displaying video lessons, with no student interaction, then yes we already have YouTube for that. And if "teachers could work with students who actually needed individual support afterward" we're still possibly stuck with a "half-assed teacher" in front of a group of students. I would be surprised if "instructional facilitators" would be any more capable of delivering individualized help than is already available from those "half-assed teachers".



Well put. Teachers' roles in the classroom have become much more than "deliverer of lessons." The demand today are incredible, and many teachers find themselves acting as surrogate parents and counsellors whether they want to or not. I would challenge anyone with such superficial criticism to try taking the place of one of these "half-assed" teachers for even one day to see what it's like.


----------



## Macfury

minstrel said:


> My opinion on the original point: if we're only talking about displaying video lessons, with no student interaction, then yes we already have YouTube for that. And if "teachers could work with students who actually needed individual support afterward" we're still possibly stuck with a "half-assed teacher" in front of a group of students. I would be surprised if "instructional facilitators" would be any more capable of delivering individualized help than is already available from those "half-assed teachers".


Minstrel: Not simply video lectures, but lectures attached to computer-based curricula with in-class support material. Here's a perfect example or a complete course curriculum with teacher back-up (and yes, the teacher might be half-assed--but he/she won't be screwing up the curriculum). Program is entirely free to any school:

https://code.org/educate/curriculum/middle-school

It's only going to become more sophisticated and the results will put heavy pressure on live staff.

Freddie: You may have to act as a very well paid nursemaid, but there are plenty of people waiting in the wings who will happily relieve you of that occupational angst and turmoil. I've watched teachers in my own system acting disgruntled over the pressures--then looking every bit like Wile E. Coyote trying to scramble back up the cliff when the school system asks them if they'd consider resigning.


----------



## eMacMan

Did not get much coverage, but Alberta's credit rating recently took another hit dropping to A+. It was AAA when Notley took over about 2 years ago. 

Coupled with the increased spending, that double drop is going to cost Albertans a healthy increase in debt servicing costs.


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> Did not get much coverage, but Alberta's credit rating recently took another hit dropping to A+.


See post 2665. We've already flamed her...


----------



## SINC

No idea what they are doing, but carrying on with the destruction of Alberta anyway.

Alberta credit downgrade shows NDP are bad managers

Sent from my iPhone not using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

They know they're done, so they're just salting the Earth on the way out.



SINC said:


> No idea what they are doing, but carrying on with the destruction of Alberta anyway.
> 
> Alberta credit downgrade shows NDP are bad managers
> 
> Sent from my iPhone not using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> No idea what they are doing, but carrying on with the destruction of Alberta anyway.


Ya know, I heard a lot of screeching from one of the resident Progs about how unqualified Trump was for office. I wonder what he thinks about the bang-up job all the unqualified EnDeePee idiots are doing...


----------



## FeXL

Just a few (snarky) comments on Red Rachel's plan to:



> stripped out of the act regulating AIMCo any requirement that the agency's directors have relevant financial, legal or board experience to qualify for overseeing the management of Albertans' savings funds. It also granted Premier Rachel Notley's cabinet the power to install its own handpicked people


Dead Rose Country

Just one:



> Great - teachers who have failed to teach a couple of generations how to read are now going to manage billions. Every simple decision these Bolsheviks make is political, intended to have resonance far beyond the day 2 years hence when their asses are kicked out of office. I have an NDP member and I'm still waiting to find the first person to admit they voted for him.


----------



## Macfury

> Every simple decision these Bolsheviks make is political, intended to have resonance far beyond the day 2 years hence when their asses are kicked out of office. I have an NDP member and I'm still waiting to find the first person to admit they voted for him.


During the hideous Bob Rae years, I found very few people who were willing to make that same admission. The intent was to punish Liberal David Peterson for calling an unnecessary election.


----------



## SINC

*Notley's attempt to win social licence for pipelines is a failure*



> Let’s face it, the NDP’s social licence scheme is a massive failure with far-reaching consequences for everyday Albertans.
> 
> Last year, Premier Rachel Notley made a very risky bet with Ottawa. She bet that if she imposed a massive new carbon tax on the Alberta people with no mandate to do so, she’d win so-called social licence from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his government. She lost.
> 
> Nearly a year later, we’re certainly worse for wear, while jurisdictions across North America scoop up the jobs and investment we’ve lost, thanks to the NDP’s risky play.
> 
> This was a big win for Ottawa on Alberta.
> 
> Ottawa is actually collecting GST on the carbon tax we pay (Wildrose warned the NDP about this tax-on-tax last year). Every time you fill up your vehicle or heat your home, you’re sending even more money to Ottawa because the carbon tax is itself taxable.
> 
> Ottawa just solidified the tanker ban on the British Columbia coast, which could significantly harm our energy industry, beyond what it has already suffered.
> 
> Ottawa continues to collect billions more out of our province through a broken equalization and transfer system than it gives back, even though our province is down on its luck.
> 
> And now, to add insult to injury, Ottawa is pondering yanking the National Energy Board out of Calgary and moving it to Ontario, simultaneously insulting our great city, and our world-class energy regulator.
> 
> Notley bet it all and lost. *She served Alberta up on a platter to Trudeau and his friends. She was badly outplayed by a slick Liberal with nice hair.*
> 
> The only perceived benefit of this social licence scam has been the approval of the Kinder Morgan pipeline expansion. Notley touts this accomplishment daily, as it’s one of her sparing achievements.
> 
> But that project is now under severe doubt, thanks to the efforts of the B.C. NDP and Greens, who’ve pledged to stop it by any means possible.
> 
> Industry hopes for this pipeline are fading fast on the heels of the B.C. election. And members of Notley’s own oilsands advisory group, such as Tzeporah Berman and Karen Mahon, are fundraising and working around the clock to ensure it never gets built.
> 
> Wildrose previously warned Notley about trafficking in these risky deals to obtain essential, nation-building projects such as energy pipelines. The facts and necessity of these projects could have compelled them to creation on their own. Now these approvals are stuck in a web of bad political gamesmanship.
> 
> The people of Alberta are suffering and Notley and the NDP are still chasing social licence. They don’t understand that real families are suffering, while they chase this fool’s gold.
> 
> They laugh in the legislature when we raise concerns about the record 100,000 Albertans on employment insurance, the double-digit unemployment, the 84,000 good, full-time jobs that were lost last year, and the major, international companies that are fleeing our province.
> 
> It’s time for the government to drop this notion of social licence and get back to work on attracting investment and creating jobs through common-sense policies.
> 
> So long as we’re stuck with this premier, we need her to have our backs, and stop worrying about what her fancy environmental friends or Prime Minister Justin Trudeau think.
> 
> Let’s take care of our own families, friends and communities, before we worry about taking care of anybody else’s.


http://calgaryherald.com/opinion/co...o-win-social-licence-for-pipelines-has-failed


----------



## Macfury

Freddie, you thought Notley's social license play was a pretty slick deal a few months back. Do you think she was outplayed?


----------



## SINC

*Rachel Notley’s NDP tricked Albertans into not noticing how drastic its new labour bill really is*



> The reviews are in on the Alberta NDP’s new labour bill and most critics agree … it’s not as outrageously terrible as expected. That’s apparently what passes for good news in the province these days, where a sort of Stockholm syndrome has sunk in. Albertans, having inadvisably stumbled into the clutches of four years of union-friendly, carbon-hostile, socialist-inspired NDP rule, now feel grateful when some blows their government delivers are less painful than usual.
> 
> “This could have been so much worse,” the Edmonton Sun’s right-wing columnist Lorne Gunter reassures readers. The opposition Wildrose party has mostly griped that Bill 17 is too big and needs to be broken up, and also that it seems unfair that dozens of NDP legislators with personal union ties — even the premier, Rachel Notley, is herself married to a union administrator — should be voting on a bill that directly impacts union power. Business groups so far merely say the bill is too far-reaching to assess. That’s presumably how the NDP likes it, since the government is racing to pass the bill before the legislature’s spring session ends.
> 
> And the bill, at more than 250 pages and tabled after just a few brief weeks of consultation with those affected, was designed to be too large for Albertans to quickly digest. It reaches into every nook and cranny of the provincial labour market, rewriting the entire rulebook to reflect the NDP’s anti-capitalist worldview.
> 
> There are hundreds of labour code amendments packed into the so-called “Fair and Family-Friendly Workplaces Act,” each sprung from the assumption that Alberta’s workplaces are unfair and unfriendly, requiring the beneficent hand of progressive regulation to protect employees from the exploitations of heartless bosses.
> 
> This in a province that last year, in its worst recession in a generation, still saw workers take home Canada’s largest weekly paycheques, and where, before oil crashed, bars, cafés, retail stores and restaurants gave away trips and other prizes to young people willing to take highly paid entry-level work, while nearby oilfields dangled six-figure salaries at high-school dropouts. Witness Alberta’s dark satanic mills.
> 
> Albertans might console themselves that the NDP restrained itself from its most radical impulses, no doubt still hopeful that it might yet recover enough popularity to survive into a second term. But the changes already mark some of the most pro-union, anti-business policies in the country.
> 
> The NDP insists that the “updates and improvements to Alberta’s labour legislation are long overdue,” noting that they haven’t been updated since 1988 when, as Labour Minister Christina Gray noted, Die Hard was still in theatres. That seems to strike most pundits as a good enough excuse to change it now, but that’s just lazy thinking. If workers’ rights were well protected back then, the passage of three decades won’t have eroded those rights any more than 45 years have eroded the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Twenty-nine years certainly hasn’t eroded the awesomeness of Die Hard one bit.


Kevin Libin: Rachel Notley’s NDP tricked Albertans into not noticing how drastic its new labour bill really is | Financial Post


----------



## Macfury

The person who trounces Notley will have to bring in a bulldozer to clean up. Thankfully, much easier to undo the BS than do it.


----------



## CubaMark

_Regardless of what happens in the next election, here's hoping that the NDP does some housecleaning in the provincial justice system. This is absolutely horrifying... taken place in 2015, though it's unclear if it was prior-to or post- the May 5th election which brought the NDP to power:_

*Alberta justice minister 'shocked, angry' with treatment of sex assault victim*

...a CBC report on a 28-year-old indigenous woman from central Alberta who was forced to spend five nights in the Edmonton Remand Centre during her testimony at a 2015 preliminary hearing for the man who attacked her.

The report says the woman had trouble focusing and answering questions, so the judge agreed with a Crown prosecutor's request to have her spend the weekend in the centre out of concern for her physical and mental state.

She was forced to testify about the June 2014 assault in Edmonton while she was shackled and handcuffed, and on at least two occasions she had to travel in the same prisoner van as her attacker.

The woman, whose name is protected under a publication ban, was killed in an unrelated shooting seven months after her testimony.

(Times-Colonist)​


----------



## FeXL

With due recognition of the valid issues in the article you cite, why is it that you only post about the sexual assaults of Canadian Native women?



CubaMark said:


> This is absolutely horrifying...


----------



## Macfury

I wouldn't tie that incident to the NDP policy either.


----------



## eMacMan

Sadly an election seldom if ever succeeds in flushing the crap out of the bureaucracy.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

CubaMark said:


> _Regardless of what happens in the next election, here's hoping that the NDP does some housecleaning in the provincial justice system. This is absolutely horrifying... taken place in 2015, though it's unclear if it was prior-to or post- the May 5th election which brought the NDP to power:_
> 
> 
> 
> *Alberta justice minister 'shocked, angry' with treatment of sex assault victim*
> 
> 
> 
> ...a CBC report on a 28-year-old indigenous woman from central Alberta who was forced to spend five nights in the Edmonton Remand Centre during her testimony at a 2015 preliminary hearing for the man who attacked her.
> 
> 
> 
> The report says the woman had trouble focusing and answering questions, so the judge agreed with a Crown prosecutor's request to have her spend the weekend in the centre out of concern for her physical and mental state.
> 
> 
> 
> She was forced to testify about the June 2014 assault in Edmonton while she was shackled and handcuffed, and on at least two occasions she had to travel in the same prisoner van as her attacker.
> 
> 
> 
> The woman, whose name is protected under a publication ban, was killed in an unrelated shooting seven months after her testimony.
> 
> 
> 
> (Times-Colonist)​



I was just reading about this this morning. The treatment of this woman is unfathomable. They shackled her and kept her in reman because she was a flight risk? Or because she is First Nations? The mind boggles.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> With due recognition of the valid issues in the article you cite, why is it that you only post about the sexual assaults of Canadian Native women?



Relevance of your question?


----------



## CubaMark

Freddie_Biff said:


> Relevance of your question?


I'm scratching my head too. The internal workings of FeXL's "mind" are a mystery....


----------



## Macfury

Most of your posts about sexual assault are also about aboriginal women. Is it wrong to ask why?



CubaMark said:


> I'm scratching my head too. The internal workings of FeXL's "mind" are a mystery....


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Most of your posts about sexual assault are also about aboriginal women. Is it wrong to ask why?


Thought it was pretty straightforward myself...


----------



## Freddie_Biff

CubaMark said:


> I'm scratching my head too. The internal workings of FeXL's "mind" are a mystery....




Pure deflection. Typical. I would be interested to see how anyone can possibly defend the treatment of this woman, the VICTIM of sexual assault. She was treated as though she were the perpetrator. I suspect ethnicity may have played a part. There seems to be widespread derision about aboriginal women and men in this country, similar to the derision about African-Americans in much of the USA.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Pure deflection. Typical. I would be interested to see how anyone can possibly defend the treatment of this woman, the VICTIM of sexual assault. She was treated as though she were the perpetrator. I suspect ethnicity may have played a part. There seems to be widespread derision about aboriginal women and men in this country, similar to the derision about African-Americans in much of the USA.


What the hell does that have to do with FeXL's question?


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> Most of your posts about sexual assault are also about aboriginal women. Is it wrong to ask why?


About whom do you feel I should be posting regarding sexual assault?

Did someone in ehMacland appoint me to the position of sexual assault roving reporter?

Is there something in my professional profile that would lead one to believe that this is my area of expertise?

Are you going to start demanding that FeXL also report on the white judeo-christian terrorists who have recently killed folks in the USA? Why aren't *you* doing so?

Seems like certain folks in here like to tell others what to do an awful lot of the time....


----------



## Macfury

Asking is not _telling_ or _ordering_. The rest of your post is posturing nonsense.



CubaMark said:


> About whom do you feel I should be posting regarding sexual assault?
> 
> Did someone in ehMacland appoint me to the position of sexual assault roving reporter?
> 
> Is there something in my professional profile that would lead one to believe that this is my area of expertise?
> 
> Are you going to start demanding that FeXL also report on the white judeo-christian terrorists who have recently killed folks in the USA? Why aren't *you* doing so?
> 
> Seems like certain folks in here like to tell others what to do an awful lot of the time....


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> Asking is not _telling_ or _ordering_. The rest of your post is posturing nonsense.


Don't skirt the question. 

*"About whom do you feel I should be posting regarding sexual assault?"*

You're the one complaining. I want clarification.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> What the hell does that have to do with FeXL's question?


What MF asked.


----------



## FeXL

Don't skirt the question.

Why native women? What axe are you grinding here?



CubaMark said:


> Don't skirt the question.


----------



## FeXL

BINGO!!!

I knew that was festering underneath...

Why? 'Cause there are a helluva lot more white or not judeo-christian victims at the hands of Islamists than the other way around.



CubaMark said:


> Are you going to start demanding that FeXL also report on the white judeo-christian terrorists who have recently killed folks in the USA?


----------



## CubaMark

Dude, you are operating on another plane of existence, obviously. I don't get your obsession with what I post, what I don't post, and your penchant for yelling BINGO at unusual moments.... Posting an article about the unjust treatment of a woman at the hands of the Alberta justice system somehow has become a cause celebre for you... I didn't even catch that she was aboriginal: I only noted that she was jailed to compel testimony and was forced to take prison transport in the same van as the man accused of assaulting her... why does her status as a native Canadian figure into this at all?

Methinks a few of your neurons have ceased to fire in the proper order.....


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> ...'Cause there are a helluva lot more white or not judeo-christian victims at the hands of Islamists than the other way around.


*Um. What?*

*The Numbers Don’t Lie: White Far-Right Terrorists Pose a Clear Danger to Us All*

Islamist terrorists are depicted as wild-eyed fanatics driven to kill by their religious faith or ideology, while far-right terrorists — be it the shooter of two Hindus in a bar in Kansas in February, or the killer of nine black worshippers in a church in Charleston, South Carolina, in 2015, or the murderer of six Sikh worshippers in a temple in Duffy’s own state of Wisconsin in 2012 — are almost always “mentally ill.” After the recent double murder in Oregon, it didn’t take long for Portland police spokesperson Pete Simpson to announce: “We don’t know if [the suspect] has mental health issues.” (Isn’t it weird how we Muslims seem somehow immune to “mental health issues”? Mashallah.)

** * **​
the numbers don’t lie — even if the Islamophobes do. “Since September 12, 2001,” noted a recent report prepared for Congress by the Government Accountability Office, “the number of fatalities caused by domestic violent extremists has ranged from 1 to 49 in a given year. … Fatalities resulting from attacks by far-right wing violent extremists have exceeded those caused by radical Islamist violent extremists in 10 of the 15 years, and were the same in 3 of the years since September 12, 2001.” Imagine that.

The report continues: “Of the 85 violent extremist incidents that resulted in death since September 12, 2001, far-right wing violent extremist groups were responsible for 62 (73 percent) while radical Islamist violent extremists were responsible for 23 (27 percent).” That’s a margin of almost three to one.

The report points out that “the total number of fatalities is about the same for far-right wing violent extremists and radical Islamist violent extremists over the approximately 15-year period,” with the latter edging out the former by 119 to 106. However, the report also acknowledges that “41 percent of the deaths attributable to radical Islamist violent extremists occurred in a single event — an attack at an Orlando, Florida night club in 2016.”
(The Intercept)​


----------



## FeXL

Nice try. The ninth word into _your very own quote_ is "indigenous".

How do you miss that? Do you even read the crap you post? Some journalist you must have made.

And you think my neurons aren't firing in the proper order? At least mine have not ceased to operate... XX)



CubaMark said:


> I didn't even catch that she was aboriginal:


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> How do you miss that? Do you even read the crap you post? Some journalist you must have made.


Oh, yes! Because the journalistic standard here at ehMac must be upheld to the nth degree!

I can point to some of your own still-unwithdrawn, un-_mea culpa_ed posts, if you'd like to waste a few hours.... 

:lmao:


----------



## FeXL

Deny, deny, deny.

It's a good thing you went into underwater basket weaving where you don't have to maintain any standards...



CubaMark said:


> Oh, yes! Because the journalistic standard here at ehMac must be upheld to the nth degree!


A few hours! More like a couple seconds. Anytime you want to compare, just let me know. I can list complete threads of your BS, let alone a handful of posts.



CubaMark said:


> I can point to some of your own still-unwithdrawn, un-_mea culpa_ed posts, if you'd like to waste a few hours....


----------



## FeXL

Yeah, Um What.

What a wunnerful little piece of propaganda you linked to. Thank you for your confirmation bias.

Just a few observations on the article, in no particular order:
1. You couldn't find an article from say, Iceland? Maybe Luxembourg? How about San Marino or the Vatican City? The author is talking US only. I'm talking worldwide. 
2. The author notes that Portland police asked if the killer had mental health issues and goes on to note that Muslims always seem to avoid that. Horse$hit. I've posted on these very boards how the left, MSM (but I repeat myself) regularly make the exact same observation about Muslim killers.
3. The author talks about "vile domestic terrorists". Fine. Where is his criticism of any of the vile murders committed by Muslims, domestic or otherwise?
4. Ooooooooo, white nationalists, all over the place. Scary...
5. What control does Trump have over who endorses him? It's not like he solicited support from the KKK. What other choice was there for Duke? Bill's Wife? <snort> Trump noted that he didn't want Duke's endorsement and had a guy wearing a t-shirt printed with "KKK endorses Trump" removed from one of his rallies.



CubaMark said:


> Um. What?


----------



## Beej

CubaMark said:


> The report points out that “the total number of fatalities is about the same for far-right wing violent extremists and radical Islamist violent extremists over the approximately 15-year period,”


Religion in the U.S.
Religion in America: U.S. Religious Data, Demographics and Statistics | Pew Research Center


----------



## FeXL

Ra-chel! Ra-chel! Ra-chel!

It's like Alberta is determined to be worse than Ontario



> The government of Premier Rachel Notley is building up debt so much faster and hurtling towards a “green” energy mess at least as bad that they make Ontario’s Libs look like paragons of fiscal rectitude.
> 
> There have been hints for a while of just what lousy fiscal managers the Alberta NDP are.
> 
> For instance, there were several years following the worldwide financial crisis of 2008-09 when Ontario’s provincial deficit was larger than the deficits of the other nine provinces combined.
> 
> Now that distinction belongs to Alberta’s NDP – and Alberta has less than a third of Ontario’s population. Indeed, this year the Notley government’s projected deficit of $10.3 billion will be four times larger than the deficits of all the other provinces put together.


More:



> From best to second-worst in one term of NDP government.


Yet many are still out there, asking, "What fiscal mismanagement?"


----------



## Macfury

If she wasn't so darned personable...


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> If she wasn't so darned personable...


That's the ticket!!!


----------



## SINC

Everybody gets it but the NDP . . .

Spring session of the Alberta Legislature was a disaster


----------



## 18m2

I live in fear with the impending NDP/Green government about to take control here in Lotus Land. To quote Dr. Phil ... " The best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour."


----------



## FeXL

18m2 said:


> I live in fear with the impending NDP/Green government about to take control here in Lotus Land. To quote Dr. Phil ... " The best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour."


In two short years Albertistan will rid itself of the albatross around our necks. The only thing that will remain will be the (extensive) piles of guano to clean up.

You poor sods...you're screwed.


----------



## Macfury

You've got another two weeks to see how this plays out. Hope they call another election.


----------



## FeXL

Vacant skyscrapers are an ‘albatross’ that Canada’s oil capital can’t shake off too soon



> But the expansion of Calgary’s commercial core, home to Canada’s second-largest concentration of head offices after Toronto, came to an abrupt halt when oil prices collapsed in late 2014. *The fallout worsened as new governments muscled in with policies to accelerate the transition to green energy.*


M'bold.

Ra-chel. Ra-chel. Ra-chel...


----------



## Macfury

I hear that she's going to start some folk festivals to boost the economy.



FeXL said:


> Vacant skyscrapers are an ‘albatross’ that Canada’s oil capital can’t shake off too soon
> 
> 
> 
> M'bold.
> 
> Ra-chel. Ra-chel. Ra-chel...


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Well, at least it's progress.


----------



## Macfury

The Beaverton is spreading itself way too thin. It's trying to be The Onion, but... maybe The Shallot?


----------



## FeXL

OK, before the Alberta Prog teacher on these boards gets his panties all twisted in a knot, this issue is one that started long before Red Rachel & her cadre of misfits got elected. Acknowledged.

That said, the reason I post the article below in this thread is because I'm not convinced that the proposed solution by our esteemed <snort> Education Minister is transparent enough, among other things.

David Staples: Math results show we must end two decades of educational malpractice



> Math education in Alberta has reached a new low. Our rate of math illiteracy has doubled for Grade 4 students since 2011, with our most vulnerable students hit hardest.
> 
> The latest results are part of a disturbing trend that has seen Alberta schools embrace an experimental method of teaching math in the past two decades while our students have sunk low on international tests.
> 
> Alberta students used to test well ahead of their Ontario counterparts but behind Quebec students. Alberta now ranks significantly behind both Ontario and Quebec and is not remotely close to top nations, such as Singapore, Japan, Northern Ireland and Russia.


OK. Why?



> *Many math professors and teachers blame the failing results on the pervasive influence of a new style of teaching math, known as “constructivism” or “discovery math.”*


M'bold.

Shtoopid, shtoopid, shtoopid. 'Nuf said.

More:



> Across western Canada for the past 20 years, the memorization of times tables and the teaching and diligent practice of standard arithmetic has been downplayed. Indeed, the conventional style of teaching math has been derided by discovery math advocates as “rote learning” and “drill and kill.”


I take great pride in knowing that my lovely bride, a math major, has continued to enforce the memorization of times tables in her grade 4 math class throughout the course of the madness of "constructivism" put forth by the Progressives within the Alberta PC party decades ago.

Now, my objections to Eggen's rewrite of the curriculum:



> If discovery math education profs and consultants dominate this latest curriculum rewrite like they did the 1996 and 2006 rewrites, *things will only get worse.*
> 
> *Eggen refuses to release the names of the current curriculum writers.* He says we can judge their work by the final result.
> 
> *That’s not even close to good enough.*


Exactly. The last thing our children need is another 20 year old failed math curriculum experiment.

Who is writing the curriculum, David? Why the secrecy? What (whom?) are you covering up?

Further:



> Eggen has created his own working group of math professors and experts to advise him, but they’re not actually writing the curriculum. To ensure this curriculum is sound, *Eggen should have this working group formally assess the new K-12 curriculum and, most crucially, make public their findings.*
> 
> We need certainty that the failed discovery math experiment is over.


M'bold.

Yep.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> OK, before the Alberta Prog teacher on these boards gets his panties all twisted in a knot, this issue is one that started long before Red Rachel & her cadre of misfits got elected. Acknowledged.
> 
> 
> 
> That said, the reason I post the article below in this thread is because I'm not convinced that the proposed solution by our esteemed <snort> Education Minister is transparent enough, among other things.
> 
> 
> 
> David Staples: Math results show we must end two decades of educational malpractice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK. Why?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> M'bold.
> 
> 
> 
> Shtoopid, shtoopid, shtoopid. 'Nuf said.
> 
> 
> 
> More:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I take great pride in knowing that my lovely bride, a math major, has continued to enforce the memorization of times tables in her grade 4 math class throughout the course of the madness of "constructivism" put forth by the Progressives within the Alberta PC party decades ago.
> 
> 
> 
> Now, my objections to Eggen's rewrite of the curriculum:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly. The last thing our children need is another 20 year old failed math curriculum experiment.
> 
> 
> 
> Who is writing the curriculum, David? Why the secrecy? What (whom?) are you covering up?
> 
> 
> 
> Further:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> M'bold.
> 
> 
> 
> Yep.



Uh huh. And which government was in charge of designing the curriculum for most of the last two decades, do you think? Why is the current government rewriting the curriculum, do you think? The term "obtuse" can refer to more than just triangles. "Discovery" math has been useless for many years, as any math teacher can tell you, but teachers don't design the curriculum. They just deliver it.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Uh huh. And which government was in charge of designing the curriculum for most of the last two decades, do you think? Why is the current government rewriting the curriculum, do you think? The term "obtuse" can refer to more than just triangles. "Discovery" math has been useless for many years, as any math teacher can tell you, but teachers don't design the curriculum. They just deliver it.


Did you not read the post?


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Did you not read the post?


Whoosh...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Whoosh...


Already on his hind legs and spraying ****...


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Did you not read the post?



Yup. Read it and lived it. The NDP gov't is trying to undo the damage that the PC Department of Education put into place over the last couple of decades, not the other way around. FeXL is talking out of his ass again, par for the course.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Yup. Read it and lived it. The NDP gov't is trying to undo the damage that the PC Department of Education put into place over the last couple of decades, not the other way around. FeXL is talking out of his ass again, par for the course.


There are no words...


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> There are no words...


I think it's fabulous. All it does is underscore, italicize & bold in large font red caps the wilful ignorance on display here on a daily basis.

And people wonder how Red Rachel got elected. This is precisely how: LIV.

Damn those Conservatives and their 40% cutbacks! It's much better to be screwed over by Red Rachel and _her_ 40% cutbacks. Because, _Progs_, man.

Common dog fukc has no place in politics. Ideology rules!!! 

You go, Freddie!!! :lmao::lmao::lmao:


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> I think it's fabulous. All it does is underscore, italicize & bold in large font red caps the wilful ignorance on display here on a daily basis.
> 
> 
> 
> And people wonder how Red Rachel got elected. This is precisely how: LIV.
> 
> 
> 
> Damn those Conservatives and their 40% cutbacks! It's much better to be screwed over by Red Rachel and _her_ 40% cutbacks. Because, _Progs_, man.
> 
> 
> 
> Common dog fukc has no place in politics. Ideology rules!!!
> 
> 
> 
> You go, Freddie!!! :lmao::lmao::lmao:



No offense, FeXL, but you are an idiot. Talk about low information voter. So you DON'T think that Alberta Education under the leadership of the PC Education Minister was responsible for dumbing down the math curriculum? And that the current gov't is rewriting the curriculum to undo that damage and emphasize the basics? You should really do your research, buddy.


----------



## FeXL

And you, in addition to fixing your sadly lacking math skills, need to take a remedial reading course & bone up on your comprehension skills.

Go back & slowly read my whole post, word for word, in addition to the linked article. Next, read your idiotic responses to that post. Then come talk to us again.

I weep for the children unfortunate enough to be your students. You're part of the problem, Freddie, not part of the solution.

Thank goodness you don't teach Math or LA.



Freddie_Biff said:


> You should really do your research, buddy.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> And you, in addition to fixing your sadly lacking math skills, need to take a remedial reading course & bone up on your comprehension skills.
> 
> 
> 
> Go back & slowly read my whole post, word for word, in addition to the linked article. Next, read your idiotic responses to that post. Then come talk to us again.
> 
> 
> 
> I weep for the children unfortunate enough to be your students. You're part of the problem, Freddie, not part of the solution.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank goodness you don't teach Math or LA.




Thank God I don't have to deal with you as a parent. You seem like a real winner. And no, I will invest no more time into understanding your posts than you give to mine. You are an asshole first and foremost, and there's absolutely nothing for me to gain from your bitterness. Have a nice fukcing evening.


----------



## Macfury

Here's the moment of cognitive dissonance, where a certain someone withdraws in a huff.


----------



## FeXL

If you taught my children I'd organize the parents & have your job.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Thank God I don't have to deal with you as a parent.


I am a winner! Get used to it.



Freddie_Biff said:


> You seem like a real winner.


Save clicking on your stupid meme farm, I read every single post you put up on the threads I visit on these boards. You would do well to do the same. It would save you a ton of public humiliation.

That's also why I can dispatch your bull$h!t on a regular basis.



Freddie_Biff said:


> And no, I will invest no more time into understanding your posts than you give to mine.


There's the Freddie I know & love! I know you've been lurking beneath this cheap, plastic facade of politeness that's been thinly covering your posts recently.

It's so _not_ you... 

'Sides, why would I be bitter? I just showed the world (again) how you are completely & utterly unable to read & comprehend the simplest of concepts.

You have a great day, Freddie! I have a day long appointment with a young lady who wishes to sport about nude in front of my camera.



Freddie_Biff said:


> You are an asshole first and foremost, and there's absolutely nothing for me to gain from your bitterness. Have a nice fukcing evening.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> If you taught my children I'd organize the parents & have your job.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am a winner! Get used to it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Save clicking on your stupid meme farm, I read every single post you put up on the threads I visit on these boards. You would do well to do the same. It would save you a ton of public humiliation.
> 
> 
> 
> That's also why I can dispatch your bull$h!t on a regular basis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's the Freddie I know & love! I know you've been lurking beneath this cheap, plastic facade of politeness that's been thinly covering your posts recently.
> 
> 
> 
> It's so _not_ you...
> 
> 
> 
> 'Sides, why would I be bitter? I just showed the world (again) how you are completely & utterly unable to read & comprehend the simplest of concepts.
> 
> 
> 
> You have a great day, Freddie! I have a day long appointment with a young lady who wishes to sport about nude in front of my camera.



Too much information in that last bit.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Here's the moment of cognitive dissonance, where a certain someone withdraws in a huff.




In your dreams, Pal. Just because someone does not respond to your constant need for attention immediately does not mean they have withdrawn. You should really take a look at your own MO.


----------



## Rps

Freddie_Biff said:


> , but teachers don't design the curriculum. They just deliver it.


Years ago when I was in a trade school we were told to never talk with our customers about sex, religion and politics......maybe we should have added education to that list ( and lately all the taboo topics seem to be components of education). Sadly, teacher's are only the messenger here. In Ontario we have had many changes in the curricula and all politically driven....teachers have protested on many occasions but they are seen as whiners.....yet the government has rolled out new curricula and the classes do not even have textbook for it. 

What amazes me is that what many argue as man's greatest achievement, landing on the moon and coming home, was effected by the one-room school system....rote learning. 

I used to work in a bank many years ago, a mechanized branch. Not one teller knew how to calculate interest....push a button and run a machine, yes....but actually calculate....not so much. 

What we have here I believe is a case of cultural literacy ( the what do you mean you don't know that moment ) mixed with political intentions. We are so focused on technology that we are forgetting to recognize the fundamentals that drive it. What good is pushing buttons for 3x3 if you don't know why the answer is 9. 

The real reason we lag in math as a nation is two fold I think, A: We only value answers not the reason why something is something. This is a foundation issue. Ask yourself how well built is a house if it has a poor foundation, and B: We have ( and this will cause a ruckus ) teachers who do not know who to teach math....I mean to make it visible, usable and, most importantly, meaningful to younger students.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> In your dreams, Pal. Just because someone does not respond to your constant need for attention immediately does not mean they have withdrawn. You should really take a look at your own MO.


You withdraw from arguments you are losing 100% of the time.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> The real reason we lag in math as a nation is two fold I think, A: We only value answers not the reason why something is something. This is a foundation issue. Ask yourself how well built is a house if it has a poor foundation, and B: We have ( and this will cause a ruckus ) teachers who do not know who to teach math....I mean to make it visible, usable and, most importantly, meaningful to younger students.


It's become disconcerting to see cashiers asking me why I am giving them $11.05 to pay for a purchase totaling $6.05. They would much rather have the machine tell them to provide two toonies and 95 cents in change.

Likewise, Google is not _your _memory. Just because you have a smartphone handy, doesn't mean you shouldn't learn the material yourself.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Rps said:


> Years ago when I was in a trade school we were told to never talk with our customers about sex, religion and politics......maybe we should have added education to that list ( and lately all the taboo topics seem to be components of education). Sadly, teacher's are only the messenger here. In Ontario we have had many changes in the curricula and all politically driven....teachers have protested on many occasions but they are seen as whiners.....yet the government has rolled out new curricula and the classes do not even have textbook for it.
> 
> 
> 
> What amazes me is that what many argue as man's greatest achievement, landing on the moon and coming home, was effected by the one-room school system....rote learning.
> 
> 
> 
> I used to work in a bank many years ago, a mechanized branch. Not one teller knew how to calculate interest....push a button and run a machine, yes....but actually calculate....not so much.
> 
> 
> 
> What we have here I believe is a case of cultural literacy ( the what do you mean you don't know that moment ) mixed with political intentions. We are so focused on technology that we are forgetting to recognize the fundamentals that drive it. What good is pushing buttons for 3x3 if you don't know why the answer is 9.
> 
> 
> 
> The real reason we lag in math as a nation is two fold I think, A: We only value answers not the reason why something is something. This is a foundation issue. Ask yourself how well built is a house if it has a poor foundation, and B: We have ( and this will cause a ruckus ) teachers who do not know who to teach math....I mean to make it visible, usable and, most importantly, meaningful to younger students.



I believe you have nailed it, sir. And the emphasis on write in classroom only forget about the creative side of writing drives me nuts with the current implementation of the English Language Arts curricula as well. It is so artificial, and the assumption Is that everyone is going to cheat.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> You withdraw from arguments you are losing 100% of the time.



Again, only your perception. If one chooses to withdraw from a pointless argument, you take it personally 100% of the time.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> It's become disconcerting to see cashiers asking me why I am giving them $11.05 to pay for a purchase totaling $6.05. They would much rather have the machine tell them to provide two toonies and 95 cents in change.
> 
> 
> 
> Likewise, Google is not _your _memory. Just because you have a smartphone handy, doesn't mean you shouldn't learn the material yourself.



What does that have to do with the way the PC gov't set up the curriculum over the last two decades?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

It's a direct response to rps' comments about declining skills. If you actually read the thread, you wouldn't be so confused.



Freddie_Biff said:


> What does that have to do with the way the PC gov't set up the curriculum over the last two decades?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Again, only your perception. If one chooses to withdraw from a pointless argument, you take it personally 100% of the time.


They must ALL become pointless to you once it becomes clear that you're failing to make a cogent point.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Freddie_Biff said:


> What does that have to do with the way the PC gov't set up the curriculum over the last two decades?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



So in other words you ignore questions just like anyone else does. You would notice this if you actually read the thread.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> They must ALL become pointless to you once it becomes clear that you're failing to make a cogent point.



The cogency doesn't matter if the listener is unwillingly to disengage from their unequivocal and omnipresent confirmation bias. Yup, that's you, Macfury.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> The cogency doesn't matter if the listener is unwillingly to disengage from their unequivocal and omnipresent confirmation bias. Yup, that's you, Macfury.


As I've said before, EhMacers such as Beej can change my opinion by offering thoughtful and forceful ideas, well presented. 

You write off to confirmation bias what can more easily be explained by your massive ego, coupled with intellectual laziness.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> So in other words you ignore questions just like anyone else does. You would notice this if you actually read the thread.


If you'd read the thread, you'd know rps was talking about his experience in Ontario.


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> If you'd read the thread, you'd know rps was talking about his experience in Ontario.


Not wishing to tread on this but, Frank, I was indeed talking about my experience here in Ontario. That said Frank your post at 2744, I would interpret as agreeing with me.....but so did MacFury, so you both agree but are fighting with each other.... as Dr. G states, Paix Mes Ami.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> Not wishing to tread on this but, Frank, I was indeed talking about my experience here in Ontario. That said Frank your post at 2744, I would interpret as agreeing with me.....but so did MacFury, so you both agree but are fighting with each other.... as Dr. G states, Paix Mes Ami.


I'm not even fighting. Freddie is simply grilling me about what your post has to do with the Alberta PCs.


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> I'm not even fighting. Freddie is simply grilling me about what your post has to do with the Alberta PCs.


Mea Culpa.....


----------



## FeXL

If they're all so pointless, why do you engage in them in the first place?

Interestingly, they only seem to become pointless once you have your butt handed to you in an even argument. Which, incidentally, is all the time.

Curious, idn't it...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Again, only your perception. If one chooses to withdraw from a pointless argument, you take it personally 100% of the time.


----------



## FeXL

The iron...



Freddie_Biff said:


> So in other words you ignore questions just like anyone else does.


----------



## FeXL

You mean, like your ideology disengages you from reality & common sense?



Freddie_Biff said:


> The cogency doesn't matter if the listener is unwillingly to disengage from their unequivocal and omnipresent confirmation bias.


----------



## FeXL

On top of all of this, you're a prude?

What's the issue with photographing nudes?



Freddie_Biff said:


> Too much information in that last bit.


----------



## Beej

Rps said:


> The real reason we lag in math as a nation is two fold I think, A: We only value answers not the reason why something is something. This is a foundation issue. Ask yourself how well built is a house if it has a poor foundation, and B: We have ( and this will cause a ruckus ) teachers who do not know who to teach math....I mean to make it visible, usable and, most importantly, meaningful to younger students.


These are great points. The second point is not something new, based on my experience in school. The first point seems based in natural human tendency, but is being reinforced by our communications technology and news media (former for quick snarky dismissals, latter for partisan "fact" checking and quick polite dismissals).

I would also add a third point that is also not new: cultural fear/reverence of math. Math is something only "smart people" are able to understand and use. If a movie wants to quickly impress upon the audience that a character is smart, that character usually does some math.

That said, I have noticed how a complete lack of math understanding + an advanced degree is a surprisingly good way to spot sufferers of Dunning-Kruger. beejacon


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Rps said:


> Not wishing to tread on this but, Frank, I was indeed talking about my experience here in Ontario. That said Frank your post at 2744, I would interpret as agreeing with me.....but so did MacFury, so you both agree but are fighting with each other.... as Dr. G states, Paix Mes Ami.



That won't do! Macfury and I are not allowed to agree on anything!


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> On top of all of this, you're a prude?
> 
> 
> 
> What's the issue with photographing nudes?




As long as they're 18 or older, nothing.


----------



## FeXL

Then why the comment? Just another CFP? Bumping up those post numbers?

Jeezuz...



Freddie_Biff said:


> As long as they're 18 or older, nothing.


----------



## FeXL

Beej said:


> That said, I have noticed how a complete lack of math understanding + an advanced degree is a surprisingly good way to spot sufferers of Dunning-Kruger. beejacon


<snort>

I wonder...


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Then why the comment? Just another CFP? Bumping up those post numbers?
> 
> 
> 
> Jeezuz...



Why do you care? Why are you offended?


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Why do you care? Why are you offended?


Are you doing a survey to fill out your troll score card?


----------



## FeXL

Because you responded with yet another CFP.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Why do you care?


I'm not. Just trying to figger out WTH the point was.

A better question was, why were you offended? Something struck a chord.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Why are you offended?


----------



## SINC

I see Red Rachel's approval rating has dropped to 28%. Imagine how low it will be in 23 more months of the Dippers assault on the people of Alberta.

Rachel Notley's popularity stagnates in pair of online polls


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> I see Red Rachel's approval rating has dropped to 28%. Imagine how low it will be in 23 more months of the Dippers assault on the people of Alberta.
> 
> Rachel Notley's popularity stagnates in pair of online polls


The "social license to build pipelines" that Freddie hailed as a brilliant piece of strategy has blown up big time. She's saddled the province with carbon taxes and hasn't secured a pipeline. I' not even sure who her constituency is supposed to be at this point other than unionized public employees.


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> The "social license to build pipelines" that Freddie hailed as a brilliant piece of strategy has blown up big time. She's saddled the province with carbon taxes and hasn't secured a pipeline. I' not even sure who her constituency is supposed to be at this point other than unionized public employees.


Pretty much just the Great Goreshippers. 

True environmentalists, have noted there is no difference in changes to mean sea level since 1900. That averaged 2mm/year between 1900 and 2000, and just a little less than that between 2000 and 2010. Because of the methodology of deriving MSL and the cyclical nature of weather, there can be no accurate figures post 2010.

They can also see the potential environmental damage from massive hydro projects, such as Site C next door in BC. Worse yet are proposed new Nuclear Fission power plants that have still not solved the problem of spent fuel, but are being pimped as carbon neutral. They've noted the mangled bodies of Eagles and Bats near those wonderful wind turbines. 

We've all seen the massive increases in power bills over in Ontario. We note that Rachel is following that same path.

In short, she's written her own political obituary, by dipping her pen in the blood of Albertans.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

There is hope in Calgary. 



















http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/business/calgary-three-years-after-oil-prices-started-to-drop-1.4169917


----------



## FeXL

Yeah. 'Cause they know in less than two years the EnDeePee will be relegated to the annals of Alberta's history.



Freddie_Biff said:


> There is hope in Calgary.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Yeah. 'Cause they know in less than two years the EnDeePee will be relegated to the annals of Alberta's history.


Yup. Who in their right mind would start a business in Alberta if they believed the NDP would be re-elected. Still, that was the grimmest "good news" update I've read in quite some time. Wouldn't you rather have a rollercoaster oil industry AND a lot of high tech startups at the same time.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Thanks, Rachel! 



> Number of Albertans on EI declines for 6th straight month
> 
> Total number of beneficiaries drops 3.8% to 79,200 in April, the lowest level the province has seen in a year
> 
> Calgary and Edmonton Skyline
> The number of people receiving EI payments was down in both Calgary and Edmonton and across Alberta, as a whole, in April, according to Statistics Canada. (Ed Middleton/CBC, Todd Garant/Facebook)
> About 3,200 fewer Albertans received Employment Insurance benefits in April than in March, marking the sixth consecutive monthly decline in the province.
> 
> The 3.8 per cent decline doesn't necessarily mean fewer people are unemployed, as not everyone who's out of work qualifies for EI and the benefits only last for so long.
> 
> Why Alberta still has the highest employment rate in the country, despite all the job losses
> But Statistics Canada says other data shows employment in the province has generally "trended upward since the autumn of 2016, following a downward trend that began in 2015."
> 
> The number of people receiving EI payments in Calgary, specifically, fell 2.5 per cent in April to 27,590.
> 
> In Edmonton, the number was down 3.9 per cent to 27,120.
> 
> This was the sixth consecutive monthly decline for the province.
> 
> At the same time, the number of EI claims submitted in Alberta in April was up by 4.7 per cent — on a seasonally adjusted basis.
> 
> The unadjusted numbers were down 1.8 per cent.
> 
> "The number of claims provides an indication of the number of people who could become beneficiaries," Statistics Canada said in a release.


http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/...nsurance-benefits-claims-april-2017-1.4172901


----------



## Macfury

Thanks, Rachel!



> *The 3.8 per cent decline doesn't necessarily mean fewer people are unemployed*, as not everyone who's out of work qualifies for EI and the benefits only last for so long.





> At the same time, *the number of EI claims submitted in Alberta in April was up by 4.7 per cen*t — on a seasonally adjusted basis.


----------



## SINC

Freddie avoids the use of ALL the facts whenever possible to show the Dippers in a false light.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Freddie avoids the use of ALL the facts whenever possible to show the Dippers in a false light.




Hey, buddy, I didn't write the article. Just trying to counterbalance all the bull**** you right wing nuts post.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Hey, buddy, I didn't write the article. Just trying to counterbalance all the bull**** you right wing nuts post.


It's inconceivable that someone would offer that article as evidence that the NDP was doing anything that Albertans might be happy about.


----------



## FeXL

Reading & comprehension, Freddie. Reading & comprehension.

Good you don't teach LA...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Thanks, Rachel!


----------



## FeXL

What bull**** has anybody here posted about Red Rachel, save yours?

Quotes & links, please.

If you are unable to back up your conjecture with examples, that's fine. We'll just chalk it up to another unsubstantiated, content-free, Prog rant.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Hey, buddy, I didn't write the article. Just trying to counterbalance all the bull**** you right wing nuts post.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> What bull**** has anybody here posted about Red Rachel, save yours?
> 
> Quotes & links, please.


I recall he praised her approach to the Fort Mac fire, but relented once that story turned sour for the NDP. He also praised her "social license" gambit for socking suffering Albertans with a carbon tax--for a pipeline that now will not be built. I suppose the economy _looks _ more diverse after she beat the energy industry down to size.


----------



## Rps

Freddie_Biff said:


> Hey, buddy, I didn't write the article. Just trying to counterbalance all the bull**** you right wing nuts post.


Frank, it has been years since I lived in Alberta, but from my perspective here in Windsor, Alberta is becoming Ontarionised by the incumbent government. This is not a good thing...... the fact is Alberta has had a pretty good run. But resource based economies run feast or famine. What makes for good Government many times is the luck of being in power when things are going well. The best governments are usually those who do little to disrupt the balance. Your current government has inherited a bad time to government, but a great time to show leadership. As I don't live there I can not say which is happening now.....but optics win elections and I think it would be wise for the government to change its lens.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> I recall he praised her approach to the Fort Mac fire...


That's just it. Every criticism on this thread I've levelled against Red Rachel has a legitimate foundation.

That's a Prog's interpretation of bull****?

Sounds more to me like sour grapes from somebody who can't win an argument on a level playing field.


----------



## eMacMan

Rps said:


> Frank, it has been years since I lived in Alberta, but from my perspective here in Windsor, Alberta is becoming Ontarionised by the incumbent government. This is not a good thing...... the fact is Alberta has had a pretty good run. But resource based economies run feast or famine. What makes for good Government many times is the luck of being in power when things are going well. The best governments are usually those who do little to disrupt the balance. Your current government has inherited a bad time to government, but a great time to show leadership. As I don't live there I can not say which is happening now.....but optics win elections and I think it would be wise for the government to change its lens.


A refreshingly excellent post. Sadly it will probably be lost in the crossfire of name calling.

That said, it seems that current oil prices are being kept very low as part of a western attack on Russia. Despite or perhaps because of all the collusion claims, Trump seems quite willing to continue down this path. Alberta as a somewhat innocent victim, needs to budget for the reality of continued low oil pricing. The current policy of budgeting on a prayer for the return of boom pricing is economic suicide.


----------



## FeXL

Rps said:


> As I don't live there I can not say which is happening now.....but optics win elections and I think it would be wise for the government to change its lens.


There is nothing, zero, nada, Rachel could do at this point to get the EnDeePee re-elected at this point.

She could write every breathing body in this province a cheque for $10,000 today & it still wouldn't be enough.

Between the Carbon Tax, Bill 6, her >$10 billion deficit for 2107 & her projected debt of $71 billion over the next 3 years (Which, under scrutiny, appears a helluva lot closer to $100 billion and is also based on a pie-in-the-sky WTI price of $55/bbl, which it hasn't hit since the budget was announced in March) & her complete & utter failure to do anything to kickstart the economy she is gone, gone, gone.

The only thing left will be the decades long cleanup & her legacy as the only single term premiere in the history of the province.

Oh, & the smile on my face, which is going to be _this_ wide —>


----------



## Rps

eMacMan, sad but true. In many cases governments rely on Deja Moo....... ( thinking you've heard the BS before.)


----------



## Rps

FeXL, from your perspective I think you are fixated on her becoming an "ex" premier, but voters have short memories.....Ontario and the Liberals would be a classic case here. Notley has time....not much but she does have some time. If things pick up you might be surprised. It is interesting that you mention that she could give everyone a cheque and it still wouldn't help......a surprisingly socialist view from you. Maybe if she billed everyone $10,000 you might agree to that more. At issue, as I see it from here, is that the predicament you province is in is due to a territorial battle by the right, not the NDP government. While the conservatives of Alberta were busy eating their young they forgot who elects them. What I still haven't been able to determine is whether the election of Notley was truly a protest vote or a disattachment from the conservative past. Bi-elections are always a good measure.....how has she done in that regard if you have had any?


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> If things pick up you might be surprised.


Things would have to pick up far beyond the level of punishment she has inflicted on Albertans. I would be *very* surprised.



Rps said:


> At issue, as I see it from here, is that the predicament you province is in is due to a territorial battle by the right, not the NDP government.


It's simply that Prentice was too progressive, not too far right. Having Wild Rose party members defect to a progressive party destroyed Wild Rose credibility for that election.




Rps said:


> Bi-elections are always a good measure.....how has she done in that regard if you have had any?


Notley lost both. One to PC, one to WR.


----------



## Rps

If she has lost two.......might be rough going forward for her.


----------



## FeXL

Rps said:


> FeXL, from your perspective I think you are fixated on her becoming an "ex" premier...


I am. I have a $40 bottle of bourbon barrelled Imperial Stout ageing in the cellar to celebrate with.  It's going to be a great day.



Rps said:


> ...but voters have short memories.....


In order to understand why Rachel will be a one term premier, you must first understand how she got there in the first place. MF has touched on these but I'll elaborate.

1) Prentice was an arrogant ass. Prior to the election he sent out a questionnaire to Albertans inquiring as to what they wanted for the province. Once the results were tabulated (which was largely for fiscal restraint in light of the economic turndown), he promptly ignored them & pushed for larger debt & deficit. Way to alienate your conservative base.

2) Many Albertans were already disenchanted by the PC's simply because many of them had become far too accustomed to the comfort of their chairs. They started believing their own rhetoric & never bothered listening to the voters who wanted the conservatives to show up at the election, not the progressives.

3a) WR was was capitalizing on the erstwhile PC supporters soured by the party's movement to the left. If Danielle Smith had not defected I truly believe she would have been premiere today. This will be seen as one of the biggest self-inflicted political gaffes in Alberta's history. 

3b) Shortly after Smith crossed the floor Prentice called an election. With WR in disarray from the defections, especially that of their leader, WR was scrambling not only to mount a campaign, but to elect a new leader. On top of this internal turmoil add the doubt seeded in supporters of the WR. Much of this doubt has never been overcome & I maintain at least some of that is because I don't believe Brian Jean is the right man to be leading WR. Many who were not hardcore WR supporters moved hard left to the NDP instead of slightly left to the PC's whom many felt had betrayed them by ignoring their solicited feedback. Even losing all this support and in the midst of party chaos, WR _still_ ended up with 21 seats.

Alberta is still largely a fiscally conservative province. We don't like debt or deficits. We recall that the budget was balanced as little as what, 12 years ago? As such, the the news of the NDP bringing down the _largest debt & deficit_ this province has ever seen did not rest well. It's not something that can be fixed in less than two years, nor hidden behind politi-speak. When we are paying billions of dollars a year on interest payments alone (compounded further because of our credit rating downgrades) this just rubs us raw. In addition there is significant evidence (I've posted it here before) that Rachel's debt numbers were nothing more than outright lies & may be as much as 50% higher—nearing _a hundred billion dollars!_ :yikes:

Alberta's economy is still largely resource driven. When oil, LPG, mining, forestry, etc., are doing well the province does well. Rachel has done nothing to stimulate the economy & has, in many ways, done the exact opposite. There is not enough space on these boards to describe the loathing most Albertans place on the Carbon Tax, especially from those who make their livings using comparatively large amounts of fuel: transportation & agriculture. The unionization of farm workers in a province that is largely anti-union is another strike. The fallout from the $15/hr minimum wage increase will be evident by the time the next election hits, burning her from both supporters (loss of jobs) & non (more expensive everything).

*To sum, the fiscal damage the NDP have wreaked upon this province is not something that can be fixed, covered up, disguised or otherwise adjusted (save up...) in the next 23 months.*

This will be Rachel's downfall.



Rps said:


> Ontario and the Liberals would be a classic case here.


Ontario is not typically a fiscally conservative province. It's not in their DNA like it is in Albertans.



Rps said:


> Notley has time....not much but she does have some time. If things pick up you might be surprised.


There would have to be some spec-fricken'-tacular oil pricing increases in order for her to even take a dent out of the numbers she's created. And even then, I don't believe she's got the self-control to not increase debt & deficit even more. She's got all her union supporters to buy off yet. No way. She's a Prog. Their minds simply do not work that way. More money = spend, spend, spend. To hell with the debt...



Rps said:


> It is interesting that you mention that she could give everyone a cheque and it still wouldn't help......a surprisingly socialist view from you.


I meant as a doomed to fail example of buying us off.



Rps said:


> Maybe if she billed everyone $10,000 you might agree to that more.


Ha!!! If only!!! She's already done that & then some: carbon tax, minimum wage increase, debt, interest payments and who knows what's coming down the pipeline. Just to name a few...



Rps said:


> At issue, as I see it from here, is that the predicament you province is in is due to a territorial battle by the right, not the NDP government.


The NDP were positioned nicely to take advantage of a perfect storm. No argument. That's one more reason why their re-election chances are near-zero. Albertans won't be tricked twice. We know how she got there. It won't happen again. Cooler heads will prevail.



Rps said:


> While the conservatives of Alberta were busy eating their young they forgot who elects them.


Definitely.



Rps said:


> What I still haven't been able to determine is whether the election of Notley was truly a protest vote or a disattachment from the conservative past.


Definitely the former.


----------



## Rps

FeXL, thank you for your detailed reply. Having lived in Alberta more than 40 years ago, I understand the view on debt.....they had it then as well.

I certainly agree with your point on Smith......don't know what she was drinking when she moved across, must have been the same Kool-Aid Cameron was drinking in the U.K. Not sure if Alberta can hand two "conservative" parties though.....and I'm not sure there is good enough leadership for an almagamation. This isn't like the Cons, PCs, Reform and Alliance merger Harper managed. Are the Liberals dead out there? I'm thinking the Greens are not very well received there as well. 

One would wonder if the polls at election time show the NDP slightly below the Leafs chances of winning the cup, would they consider a leadership change?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Rps said:


> FeXL, from your perspective I think you are fixated on her becoming an "ex" premier, but voters have short memories.....Ontario and the Liberals would be a classic case here. Notley has time....not much but she does have some time. If things pick up you might be surprised. It is interesting that you mention that she could give everyone a cheque and it still wouldn't help......a surprisingly socialist view from you. Maybe if she billed everyone $10,000 you might agree to that more. At issue, as I see it from here, is that the predicament you province is in is due to a territorial battle by the right, not the NDP government. While the conservatives of Alberta were busy eating their young they forgot who elects them. What I still haven't been able to determine is whether the election of Notley was truly a protest vote or a disattachment from the conservative past. Bi-elections are always a good measure.....how has she done in that regard if you have had any?




Good points, Rps. And forget the merging of the PC and WR—we need even more parties on the right! Albertans want choice!


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> I am. I have a $40 bottle of bourbon barrelled Imperial Stout ageing in the cellar to celebrate with.  It's going to be a great day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In order to understand why Rachel will be a one term premier, you must first understand how she got there in the first place. MF has touched on these but I'll elaborate.
> 
> 
> 
> 1) Prentice was an arrogant ass. Prior to the election he sent out a questionnaire to Albertans inquiring as to what they wanted for the province. Once the results were tabulated (which was largely for fiscal restraint in light of the economic turndown), he promptly ignored them & pushed for larger debt & deficit. Way to alienate your conservative base.
> 
> 
> 
> 2) Many Albertans were already disenchanted by the PC's simply because many of them had become far too accustomed to the comfort of their chairs. They started believing their own rhetoric & never bothered listening to the voters who wanted the conservatives to show up at the election, not the progressives.
> 
> 
> 
> 3a) WR was was capitalizing on the erstwhile PC supporters soured by the party's movement to the left. If Danielle Smith had not defected I truly believe she would have been premiere today. This will be seen as one of the biggest self-inflicted political gaffes in Alberta's history.
> 
> 
> 
> 3b) Shortly after Smith crossed the floor Prentice called an election. With WR in disarray from the defections, especially that of their leader, WR was scrambling not only to mount a campaign, but to elect a new leader. On top of this internal turmoil add the doubt seeded in supporters of the WR. Much of this doubt has never been overcome & I maintain at least some of that is because I don't believe Brian Jean is the right man to be leading WR. Many who were not hardcore WR supporters moved hard left to the NDP instead of slightly left to the PC's whom many felt had betrayed them by ignoring their solicited feedback. Even losing all this support and in the midst of party chaos, WR _still_ ended up with 21 seats.
> 
> 
> 
> Alberta is still largely a fiscally conservative province. We don't like debt or deficits. We recall that the budget was balanced as little as what, 12 years ago? As such, the the news of the NDP bringing down the _largest debt & deficit_ this province has ever seen did not rest well. It's not something that can be fixed in less than two years, nor hidden behind politi-speak. When we are paying billions of dollars a year on interest payments alone (compounded further because of our credit rating downgrades) this just rubs us raw. In addition there is significant evidence (I've posted it here before) that Rachel's debt numbers were nothing more than outright lies & may be as much as 50% higher—nearing _a hundred billion dollars!_ :yikes:
> 
> 
> 
> Alberta's economy is still largely resource driven. When oil, LPG, mining, forestry, etc., are doing well the province does well. Rachel has done nothing to stimulate the economy & has, in many ways, done the exact opposite. There is not enough space on these boards to describe the loathing most Albertans place on the Carbon Tax, especially from those who make their livings using comparatively large amounts of fuel: transportation & agriculture. The unionization of farm workers in a province that is largely anti-union is another strike. The fallout from the $15/hr minimum wage increase will be evident by the time the next election hits, burning her from both supporters (loss of jobs) & non (more expensive everything).
> 
> 
> 
> *To sum, the fiscal damage the NDP have wreaked upon this province is not something that can be fixed, covered up, disguised or otherwise adjusted (save up...) in the next 23 months.*
> 
> 
> 
> This will be Rachel's downfall.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ontario is not typically a fiscally conservative province. It's not in their DNA like it is in Albertans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There would have to be some spec-fricken'-tacular oil pricing increases in order for her to even take a dent out of the numbers she's created. And even then, I don't believe she's got the self-control to not increase debt & deficit even more. She's got all her union supporters to buy off yet. No way. She's a Prog. Their minds simply do not work that way. More money = spend, spend, spend. To hell with the debt...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I meant as a doomed to fail example of buying us off.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ha!!! If only!!! She's already done that & then some: carbon tax, minimum wage increase, debt, interest payments and who knows what's coming down the pipeline. Just to name a few...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The NDP were positioned nicely to take advantage of a perfect storm. No argument. That's one more reason why their re-election chances are near-zero. Albertans won't be tricked twice. We know how she got there. It won't happen again. Cooler heads will prevail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Definitely.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Definitely the former.




So despite all your rationalizations, what makes you think the Wild Rose and the Progressive Conservatives have changed even one iota? If they weren't good enough to lead in 2015, they still aren't good enough to lead now. They haven't even merged yet, FFS, plus there's the whole pissing contest about who will lead and with what vision. Nowhere near ready for prime time.


----------



## FeXL

Rps said:


> FeXL, thank you for your detailed reply. Having lived in Alberta more than 40 years ago, I understand the view on debt.....they had it then as well.


Welcome. Yes, it hasn't changed much.

To me, fiscally conservative is the first (and primary) achievement of a successful gov't.



Rps said:


> I certainly agree with your point on Smith......don't know what she was drinking when she moved across, must have been the same Kool-Aid Cameron was drinking in the U.K.


I can't imagine what Prentice offered her to bring her across the aisle. Even if it was her idea to call him first.



Rps said:


> Not sure if Alberta can hand two "conservative" parties though.....and I'm not sure there is good enough leadership for an almagamation. This isn't like the Cons, PCs, Reform and Alliance merger Harper managed. Are the Liberals dead out there? I'm thinking the Greens are not very well received there as well.


Although some of the PC dead wood has left, there are still far too many old schoolers around for me to feel comfortable endorsing them.

Frankly, I don't care for either leader and I don't like the idea of merging with the PC's, either. WR was started by people who were unhappy with the PC's in the first place. Last thing we need is to merge with the bastards & dilute the founding principles.

The Liberals have always been weak in rural & small town Alberta & more so since PET & NEP. The cities are where the left typically gets their vote from in Alberta. Historically it's always been Edmonton, government town & home of the unions.

Greens show even worse here.



Rps said:


> One would wonder if the polls at election time show the NDP slightly below the Leafs chances of winning the cup, would they consider a leadership change?


Dunno. Don't care. A leopard can't change its spots.


----------



## FeXL

_What_ rationalizations?

Quote the exact words, please.



Freddie_Biff said:


> So despite all your rationalizations...


_Where_ in that post did I said anything about WR & PC changing?

Quote the exact words, please.



Freddie_Biff said:


> ...what makes you think the Wild Rose and the Progressive Conservatives have changed even one iota?


_Where_ in that post did I said anything about WR not being good enough to lead?

Quote the exact words, please.



Freddie_Biff said:


> If they weren't good enough to lead in 2015, they still aren't good enough to lead now.


Good! I fail to see the problem.



Freddie_Biff said:


> They haven't even merged yet...


<snort> Oh, and Red Rachel was _so_ ready for prime time. Christ, it took her 8 months to conduct a petroleum royalty review and arrive at the conclusion there shouldn't be any change.

Half the beef cattle on the side of the road could have told her that very thing 24 hours into her mandate. In the mean time, how many oil producers left the province for richer pastures?

And now that she's on a roll, she's delivered us the biggest deficit & biggest debt this province has seen in its 112 year history. That's some show she's put on, Freddie! Woohoo!!! You go, girl!!!

Your grandchildren will be paying for this Charlie Foxtrot, Freddie, & you're so pig ignorant & blinded by ideology you can't even see it.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Nowhere near ready for prime time.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> If they weren't good enough to lead in 2015...


They actually were good enough to lead in 2015.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> They actually were good enough to lead in 2015.


Bingo!!!


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> _What_ rationalizations?
> 
> 
> 
> Quote the exact words, please.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Where_ in that post did I said anything about WR & PC changing?
> 
> 
> 
> Quote the exact words, please.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Where_ in that post did I said anything about WR not being good enough to lead?
> 
> 
> 
> Quote the exact words, please.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good! I fail to see the problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> <snort> Oh, and Red Rachel was _so_ ready for prime time. Christ, it took her 8 months to conduct a petroleum royalty review and arrive at the conclusion there shouldn't be any change.
> 
> 
> 
> Half the beef cattle on the side of the road could have told her that very thing 24 hours into her mandate. In the mean time, how many oil producers left the province for richer pastures?
> 
> 
> 
> And now that she's on a roll, she's delivered us the biggest deficit & biggest debt this province has seen in its 112 year history. That's some show she's put on, Freddie! Woohoo!!! You go, girl!!!
> 
> 
> 
> Your grandchildren will be paying for this Charlie Foxtrot, Freddie, & you're so pig ignorant & blinded by ideology you can't even see it.




You are the master of evasion. You must be very proud. When did I say I was blinded by ideology? Quote the exact words please. 

And then, once again, please explain how you see the next government forming. All I'm seeing is a big clusterfukc on the right which you seem to ignore.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> They actually were good enough to lead in 2015.



Apparently not. They couldn't even win an election.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Apparently not. They couldn't even win an election.


You asked if they were good enough to lead. You did not ask if the public was stupid enough to take a chance on the NDP.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> You asked if they were good enough to lead. You did not ask if the public was stupid enough to take a chance on the NDP.



They weren't good enough to lead. That's why they were voted out in May. And apparently neither were the WR good enough to lead. What exactly do you think has changed about these parties that makes them ready to lead now? I see a clusterfukc.


----------



## FeXL

I'm evading nothing. Answer the questions, Freddie.

You made 3 accusations. Provide evidence thereof.

Or sink even further into your pit of self-inflicted public humiliation.



Freddie_Biff said:


> You are the master of evasion.


You didn't. I did.



Freddie_Biff said:


> When did I say I was blinded by ideology? Quote the exact words please.


Asked, answered. 

That's all you would see. Blinder's, much?



Freddie_Biff said:


> And then, once again, please explain how you see the next government forming. All I'm seeing is a big clusterfukc on the right which you seem to ignore.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> They weren't good enough to lead. That's why they were voted out in May. And apparently neither were the WR good enough to lead.


Nothing needs to have changed about these parties to make them capable of leading. They were always good enough to lead. The NDP was never good enough to lead and has had a chance to demonstrate that to millions of Albertans.



Freddie_Biff said:


> I see a clusterfukc.


Apparently, you only see what you want to see. A victorious, progressive Rachel taxing Alberta to prosperity?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Nothing needs to have changed about these parties to make them capable of leading. They were always good enough to lead. The NDP was never good enough to lead and has had a chance to demonstrate that to millions of Albertans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you only see what you want to see. A victorious, progressive Rachel taxing Alberta to prosperity?




And yet, here they are, leading the government for over two years now. Your grasp of reality is bizarre, to say the least. The PC'S had their walking papers handed to them in 2015, and the WR clearly weren't up for the job, or Albertans would have voted for them. Regardless of your popularity polls, the NDP continue to govern and keep their election promises. You were wrong twice, big time, in 2015, both provincially in Alberta and nationally in Canada. Again, what makes you think the PC's and WR have changed enough to win people's confidence?


----------



## FeXL

<snort>

Just like Juthdin: Leading from behind.

:lmao::lmao::lmao:

Enjoy it, Freddie. Years down the road, when your grandchildren come to you teary-eyed because they don't have enough money to pay rent, put groceries on the table, keep the car running & cover utilities, you can lift your chin & proudly say, "I was part of that. I voted for them..."

Atta boy...

BTW, found those 3 quotes for me yet? I eagerly await your stunning reparte...



Freddie_Biff said:


> And yet, here they are, leading the government for over two years now.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> And yet, here they are, leading the government for over two years now. Your grasp of reality is bizarre, to say the least. The PC'S had their walking papers handed to them in 2015, and the WR clearly weren't up for the job, or Albertans would have voted for them.


The fact that Albertans elected the NDP does not mean that no other party had the ability to lead. Only that Albertans selected another party. Had the PCs doffed their progressivism, I have no doubt they would be in power today.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Regardless of your popularity polls, the NDP continue to govern and keep their election promises.


Why disregard their devastating polls? And its no surprise they're still here after two years--they get four. They're keeping some of their election promises and this is precisely why they will be trounced.



Freddie_Biff said:


> You were wrong twice, big time, in 2015, both provincially in Alberta and nationally in Canada.


I had no idea who would win the Canadian election or who would win the Alberta election, I was just hopeful that good sense would overcome primitive collectivism. 



Freddie_Biff said:


> Again, what makes you think the PC's and WR have changed enough to win people's confidence?


$50 on the line. Are you up for it?


----------



## Rps

MacFury are you betting that ether the PCs or WR will win..... I'd take that action.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> <snort>
> 
> 
> 
> Just like Juthdin: Leading from behind.
> 
> 
> 
> :lmao::lmao::lmao:
> 
> 
> 
> Enjoy it, Freddie. Years down the road, when your grandchildren come to you teary-eyed because they don't have enough money to pay rent, put groceries on the table, keep the car running & cover utilities, you can lift your chin & proudly say, "I was part of that. I voted for them..."
> 
> 
> 
> Atta boy...
> 
> 
> 
> BTW, found those 3 quotes for me yet? I eagerly await your stunning reparte...



Yup, I have your three quotes right here. But you're too demanding, so I'm not sure I want to share them. Also, do you like making fun of people with speech impediments? Because it's the only way I can understand your continued mockery of Justin Trudeau's lisp. It's quite immature of you.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> The fact that Albertans elected the NDP does not mean that no other party had the ability to lead. Only that Albertans selected another party. Had the PCs doffed their progressivism, I have no doubt they would be in power today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why disregard their devastating polls? And its no surprise they're still here after two years--they get four. They're keeping some of their election promises and this is precisely why they will be trounced.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I had no idea who would win the Canadian election or who would win the Alberta election, I was just hopeful that good sense would overcome primitive collectivism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> $50 on the line. Are you up for it?



I don't want your money. I want you to explain why you think the PC's or WR's have better leadership now than they did in 2015. In many ways, things have gotten worse, especially with Kenney at the helm. Nobody is fond of him, not even conservatives.


----------



## Rps

Freddie_Biff said:


> I don't want your money. I want you to explain why you think the PC's or WR's have better leadership now than they did in 2015. In many ways, things have gotten worse, especially with Kenney at the helm. Nobody is fond of him, not even conservatives.


Frank, forgive the intrusion, but I think it will be a case of "anybody but". It doesn't matter who has the better leadership as much as it isn't the current leadership. We saw something like this in Ontario. People simply said why not let them try.....the them were the NDP...who haven't been close to election since. The next election they were gone. I am sensing this will be the case here. As I said in a prior post timing is everything.


----------



## SINC

Rps said:


> Frank, forgive the intrusion, but I think it will be a case of "anybody but". It doesn't matter who has the better leadership as much as it isn't the current leadership.


This.

Albertans will vote anything but NDP in the next election. Watch it happen. The Dippers will be kicked out and never returned. :clap:


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> MacFury are you betting that ether the PCs or WR will win..... I'd take that action.


Just to be clear, you would win the $50 if NDP wins. I would win if the WR, PC or any party they form together wins.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Yup, I have your three quotes right here. But you're too demanding, so I'm not sure I want to share them. Also, do you like making fun of people with speech impediments? Because it's the only way I can understand your continued mockery of Justin Trudeau's lisp. It's quite immature of you.


Justin Trudeau does not have a lisp. Has the force of FeXL's will made you believe such a lisp exists?



Freddie_Biff said:


> I don't want your money. I want you to explain why you think the PC's or WR's have better leadership now than they did in 2015. In many ways, things have gotten worse, especially with Kenney at the helm. Nobody is fond of him, not even conservatives.


They don't need better leadership to rung against the NDP. They need someone to relieve Albertans of the punishments inflicted on them by the self-serving ideologues of the NDP.


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> Just to be clear, you would win the $50 if NDP wins. I would win if the WR, PC or any party they form together wins.


Okay, I get it. I, too, think the NDP won't win so I guess no bet.


----------



## FeXL

Freddie, you'd better put a bigger sock in your codpiece. 'Cause right now it looks empty... :lmao::lmao::lmao:



Freddie_Biff said:


> Yup, I have your three quotes right here.


BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
:lmao::lmao::lmao:



Freddie_Biff said:


> But you're too demanding, so I'm not sure I want to share them.


Juthdin's got a lithsp?  Kewl...

I must confess, I've never heard it between all his ah's & um's... 

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
:lmao::lmao::lmao:



Freddie_Biff said:


> Also, do you like making fun of people with speech impediments? Because it's the only way I can understand your continued mockery of Justin Trudeau's lisp. It's quite immature of you.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Has the force of FeXL's will made you believe such a lisp exists?


_"These are not the droids you're after..."_

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
:lmao::lmao::lmao:


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Justin Trudeau does not have a lisp. Has the force of FeXL's will made you believe such a lisp exists?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They don't need better leadership to rung against the NDP. They need someone to relieve Albertans of the punishments inflicted on them by the self-serving ideologues of the NDP.




Justin lisps on his S's. Always has. It's just not particularly mature too make fun of it. He also uh's a lot. That's just laziness. Anything else?


----------



## Rps

Freddie_Biff said:


> Justin lisps on his S's. Always has. It's just not particularly mature too make fun of it. He also uh's a lot. That's just laziness. Anything else?


I think he uses "uh" as a form of 'foot in mouth ' prevention....though it is not always affective.:lmao:


----------



## eMacMan

Freddie_Biff said:


> Justin lisps on his S's. Always has. It's just not particularly mature too make fun of it. ...


Making fun of it is truly an insult to any kid suffering a similar speech impediment. Imagine the indignity of being associated with Canada's chief politician. Such an association could scar a kid for life and should not be tolerated.

In the not too distant past I was guilty of equating various politicians to skunks, but received a cease and desist order, as such comparisons were highly insulting to skunks. It was pointed out to me that a skunks diet consists largely of vermin making them very useful critters. No one has ever accused any Canadian politician of doing anything useful!


----------



## FeXL

You mean, like joking about a certain US politician's skin colour?

Jes askin', hypocrite...



Freddie_Biff said:


> It's just not particularly mature too make fun of it.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Rps said:


> I think he uses "uh" as a form of 'foot in mouth ' prevention....though it is not always affective.:lmao:



Yes, it makes him sound hesitant or perhaps not fluent in English. But on the other hand, the guy has charisma and charm to spare, which works to his advantage especially on an international front.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> You mean, like joking about a certain US politician's skin colour?
> 
> 
> 
> Jes askin', hypocrite...




Touché. I should not make fun of President Tangerine's skin colour. Although I am concerned about his bilirubin count.


----------



## Beej

My two cents.

I don't like the use of Juthdin or Harpo or banksters, or orange etc. Fill your boots, and I have occasionally done so as well, but it detracts from the rest of the post. Points are being made, but the emphasis is not where you think it is. That language puts the emphasis on you, not your thoughts.

Calling the NDP dippers, or the Conservative cons is more grey area for me. Those seem to cross partisan lines while the above is more about partisan rhetoric.

You are now two cents richer.


----------



## Macfury

I think Dippers is used fondly as well.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Beej said:


> My two cents.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't like the use of Juthdin or Harpo or banksters, or orange etc. Fill your boots, and I have occasionally done so as well, but it detracts from the rest of the post. Points are being made, but the emphasis is not where you think it is. That language puts the emphasis on you, not your thoughts.
> 
> 
> 
> Calling the NDP dippers, or the Conservative cons is more grey area for me. Those seem to cross partisan lines while the above is more about partisan rhetoric.
> 
> 
> 
> You are now two cents richer.



Thanks for that, Beej.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Thanks for that, Beej.


Beej doesn't just mean that people should refer to the NDP as the NDP. He also wants you to stop comparing Trump to Hitler.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Beej doesn't just mean that people should refer to the NDP as the NDP. He also wants you to stop comparing Trump to Hitler.



Thanks again, Mr. Helper! I believe Beej is adult enough to explain himself quite clearly. I imagine your use of the term "snowflake" also falls within the realm of inflammatory language. Perhaps it would help is we all agreed to be less provocative. However, I can think of one person who would not agree to such restrictions. "We don't need no stink in' mods!"


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> We don't need no stink in' mods!"


Agreed!


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Agreed!


Two.


----------



## FeXL

<just shaking my head...>

You still don't get it, Freddie.

Stop posting bull****, stop being a hypocrite, stop making accusations that you can't back up, stop trolling and most of this would disappear on its own.

What part of this is so freaking difficult?



Freddie_Biff said:


> Perhaps it would help is we all agreed to be less provocative.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Agreed!




We don't; you do. Sarcasm is lost on far too many it seems.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> <just shaking my head...>
> 
> 
> 
> You still don't get it, Freddie.
> 
> 
> 
> Stop posting bull****, stop being a hypocrite, stop making accusations that you can't back up, stop trolling and most of this would disappear on its own.
> 
> 
> 
> What part of this is so freaking difficult?




And for you, my friend, since you don't get it at all....just stop.


----------



## Macfury

Feddie, you must have a massive ego, demanding that people not respond to your shatter-pated posts. When will you get over your aspirations to be the boss of EhMac?



Freddie_Biff said:


> And for you, my friend, since you don't get it at all....just stop.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Feddie, you must have a massive ego, demanding that people not respond to your shatter-pated posts. When will you get over your aspirations to be the boss of EhMac?


Yep. Apparently all of it was difficult. Sigh...


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Feddie, you must have a massive ego, demanding that people not respond to your shatter-pated posts. When will you get over your aspirations to be the boss of EhMac?




Who's Feddie?


----------



## Macfury

That's you Freddie, without an "r" in the water.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> That's you Freddie, without an "r" in the water.




OK, I think I get it, Mafry.


----------



## Macfury

I think I like _Macfuy_ better--give it a little French pronunciation.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> I think I like _Macfuy_ better--give it a little French pronunciation.


----------



## SINC

*So, the results to date are in and they show the devastation . . .

72% of Alberta businesses say $15 minimum wage has negative impacts

New data reveals impact of big minimum wage hikes on small business*



> Calgary, June 28, 2017 – New data released by the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) shows nearly three-quarters of Alberta business owners say there is a negative impact on their business from raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2018.
> 
> According to calculations by CFIB, a business with five employees faces an increase of $46,645 in labour costs over a two year period while a business with 20 employees would shell out $186,579 more over two years if they are able to maintain staffing levels.
> 
> “Thousands of dollars in higher labour cost without any change to the products or services being produced leaves hardworking entrepreneurs in the lurch. Where does the government think a small business owner is going to get that kind of money?” said Amber Ruddy, CFIB’s Director of Provincial Affairs for Alberta.
> 
> When asked, “What type of impact do you expect raising Alberta’s minimum wage rate to $15/hr by 2018 will have on your business?”
> 
> * 72 per cent said it would be negative (45 per cent very negative, 27 per cent somewhat negative)
> * 22 per cent said neutral
> * Two per cent said positive (one per cent very positive and one per cent somewhat positive)
> 
> “If becoming a small business owner is such an easy way to earn a living, I challenge anyone not satisfied with their current job to try their hand at entrepreneurship,” said Ruddy.
> 
> CFIB has long advocated for more effective poverty reductions measures including targeted tax relief and skills training for low income earners seeking advancement.
> 
> The control web accessed survey was conducted in January and February 2017 and received 1,077 responses from businesses across Alberta.
> 
> To arrange a media interview with Amber Ruddy, please call 1-866-444-9290 or email [email protected].
> 
> CFIB is Canada’s largest association of small- and medium-sized businesses with 109,000 members across every sector and region.
> What type of impact do you expect raising Alberta's minimum wage rate to $15/hr by 2018 will have on your business?
> 
> Source: CFIB, Alberta 2017 Pre-Budget Survey, January-February 2017, n= 1,077
> 
> 
> Minimum wage hikes result in big costs for small business. Costs per employee of Alberta minimum wage increases


----------



## Macfury

Continuing to unleash their agenda for failure on suffering Albertans. Well done!


----------



## SINC

Yep, the inmates running the asylum . . .

*Alberta $33 billion in debt with no clear plan to balance the books*



> The Alberta government is on track to balance the provincial budget — in six years … maybe.
> 
> That’s as definitive as Finance Minister Joe Ceci would get during a news conference Thursday when he released the government’s “annual report” containing the final audited figures for last year’s provincial budget.
> 
> Among those figures: a record $10.8-billion deficit; and the provincial government now $33 billion in debt.
> 
> (We’re also on track to run up a $10.3-billion deficit this year, $9.7 billion next year and $7.2 billion the year after. When you add up the string of yearly deficits, the government will have a total debt well over $60 billion in two years, just in time for the 2019 provincial election.)
> 
> But there is some good news. The recession seems to be over and Alberta will lead the country in economic growth this year.
> 
> There’s even some good news regarding those pesky deficits, according to Ceci.
> 
> “The deficit elimination plan remains on track,” he told reporters.
> 
> Excellent.
> 
> But … wait a minute.
> 
> Just what deficit elimination plan would that be?


http://edmontonjournal.com/news/pol...-debt-with-no-clear-plan-to-balance-the-books


----------



## Macfury

> $9.7 billion next year and $7.2 billion the year after.


Based on $55-a-barrrel oil... not $42.


----------



## eMacMan

The Dippers are really trying to cut costs. For the first time in many years the Alberta Tourism site on Highway 3 near the BC border did not serve up cake and hot dogs. 

Great way to celebrate the big 150!


----------



## Freddie_Biff

eMacMan said:


> The Dippers are really trying to cut costs. For the first time in many years the Alberta Tourism site on Highway 3 near the BC border did not serve up cake and hot dogs.
> 
> Great way to celebrate the big 150!




I'm annoyed at the no reminders about license and registration renewal. I did my license yesterday (after it expired in March) and registered three vehicles that expired a month ago.


----------



## eMacMan

Freddie_Biff said:


> I'm annoyed at the no reminders about license and registration renewal. I did my license yesterday (after it expired in March) and registered three vehicles that expired a month ago.


Yep my DL had been expired a week when I happened to watch a show where someone got pulled over with an expired license. Checked and sure enough. Thankfully it is now so common, that I did not have to redo the written test or take an eye test.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

eMacMan said:


> Yep my DL had been expired a week when I happened to watch a show where someone got pulled over with an expired license. Checked and sure enough. Thankfully it is now so common, that I did not have to redo the written test or take an eye test.



My wife checked. They give you a year for that anyway.


----------



## SINC

eMacMan said:


> Yep my DL had been expired a week when I happened to watch a show where someone got pulled over with an expired license. Checked and sure enough. Thankfully it is now so common, that I did not have to redo the written test or take an eye test.





Freddie_Biff said:


> I'm annoyed at the no reminders about license and registration renewal. I did my license yesterday (after it expired in March) and registered three vehicles that expired a month ago.


If you are 65 or over, the reminders remain in place so it is not an issue for us.

That noted, there is one very easy way to avoid your issues with reminders. Join the Alberta Motor Association and sign up for both reminders and they will notify you by email when your plates and license are about to expire.

Apparently the AMA knows far better that Notley and crew that this is and should be a vital service to Albertans. Just one more thing to undo when they are voted out of office in 22 short months.


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> If you are 65 or over, the reminders remain in place so it is not an issue for us.


My wife and I can both attest this is not so!


----------



## SINC

eMacMan said:


> My wife and I can both attest this is not so!


Whoops, the age is 70, not 65, my bad.

Here is a link on how you can register to have the reminders sent via email with a variety of methods.

https://www.alberta.ca/release.cfm?xID=4032031D7BDEF-DBCE-45A6-437DE8342707B186

In spite of the April 2017 finish date of the program in the link, my wife got her driver's license renewal notice in the mail last week and now has the paper version until the new one arrives in the mail and her birthday is not until August. I got reminders from both the government and AMA for all three vehicles last October as normal.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Whoops, the age is 70, not 65, my bad.
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a link on how you can register to have the reminders sent via email with a variety of methods.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.alberta.ca/release.cfm?xID=4032031D7BDEF-DBCE-45A6-437DE8342707B186
> 
> 
> 
> In spite of the April 2017 finish date of the program in the link, my wife got her driver's license renewal notice in the mail last week and now has the paper version until the new one arrives in the mail and her birthday is not until August. I got reminders from both the government and AMA for all three vehicles last October as normal.




Thanks for the link, Sinc. I wonder how much money they actually save by not sending out electronic reminders? It seems like something worth paying taxes for in my humble opinion. Better than having your vehicle impounded anyway.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Thanks for the link, Sinc. I wonder how much money they actually save by not sending out electronic reminders? It seems like something worth paying taxes for in my humble opinion. Better than having your vehicle impounded anyway.


If it's a requirement imposed by government, government should remind.


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> Whoops, the age is 70, not 65, my bad.
> 
> Here is a link on how you can register to have the reminders sent via email with a variety of methods.
> 
> https://www.alberta.ca/release.cfm?xID=4032031D7BDEF-DBCE-45A6-437DE8342707B186
> 
> In spite of the April 2017 finish date of the program in the link, my wife got her driver's license renewal notice in the mail last week and now has the paper version until the new one arrives in the mail and her birthday is not until August. I got reminders from both the government and AMA for all three vehicles last October as normal.


Zero chance of me giving my eMail addy to any government entity. God only knows how many SPAMinators would purchase it from whatever crop of crooks happens to be in power.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> If it's a requirement imposed by government, government should remind.




Again we agree. This is scary.


----------



## Dr.G.

Freddie_Biff said:


> Again we agree. This is scary.


----------



## SINC

eMacMan said:


> Zero chance of me giving my eMail addy to any government entity. God only knows how many SPAMinators would purchase it from whatever crop of crooks happens to be in power.


FWIW I routinely sign up for things like this from all levels of government and have NEVER ONCE received any spam from any source related to signing up with the municipality, the province or the feds. YMMV of course.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/13600790/story.html


----------



## Macfury

^^^^^^^^
Why in the Alberta NDP thread?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> ^^^^^^^^
> 
> Why in the Alberta NDP thread?



Read the article. All the way through. Alberta is still part of Canada, last I checked (Trudeau's gaffe notwithstanding).


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> ^^^^^^^^
> Why in the Alberta NDP thread?


Exactly. Doesn't belong here.


----------



## FeXL

Ra-chel. Ra-chel. Ra-chel. 

Money Credit rating agency downgrades Alberta's long-term outlook over debt



> Credit rating agency DBRS says its long-term outlook for Alberta’s finances is now negative.
> 
> With a $10.8-billion deficit recorded in 2016-17, Alberta’s credit rating with DBRS remains at AA (high), the agency said in a Friday press release.
> 
> Alberta earned the negative outlook by continuing to pile up debt, the release said.
> 
> “Moreover, *the Province has yet to provide a credible plan to restore balance.* While Alberta’s debt burden is low and the economy is showing signs of recovery, the fiscal plan demonstrates a lack of willingness to contain debt growth, which is likely to lead to a one-notch downgrade of the long-term ratings,” the agency’s statement said.


M'bold.

Same problems with time frames as the Royalty Review.

'Bout the same time she gets her butt handed to her in the next election (what is it, 22 months now?) she'll get it all figgered out.


----------



## Beej

From your link:



> The government’s plan is to reduce the deficit by nearly one third during the next three years, Ceci said.


1/3 in three years? That is weak. They note that growth is coming back, but are in no rush to eliminate deficits.


----------



## FeXL

Beej said:


> 1/3 in three years? That is weak. They note that growth is coming back, but are in no rush to eliminate deficits.


No argument.

Note that all 3 areas where Ceci quotes the economy is improving have zero to do with any of Red Rachel's policies and are actually recovering despite them.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> No argument.
> 
> Note that all 3 areas where Ceci quotes the economy is improving have zero to do with any of Red Rachel's policies and are actually recovering despite them.


Their scenaria depend on $55-a-barrel oil. Today, straddling $43.


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> Their scenaria depend on $55-a-barrel oil. Today, straddling $43.


At $55, I want them to be paying down the debt. Not going to happen, but I'll keep wanting.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Their scenaria depend on $55-a-barrel oil. Today, straddling $43.


Exactly. The last time it was $55 was before they made the budget announcement.

It will be interesting to see what effect Putin's agreement to limit production will have. Either way, don't think it'll help her re-election chances.

Wonder if Red Rachel dropped a dime: "Yo, Vlad. 'Sup? Loved that shirtless image of you paraded around on the internet riding that stallion. Can you send a signed copy? Yeah, the usual address. Thx. 

Hey, from one commie to another, was wondering if you wouldn't mind rolling petroleum production back, get that price up over $55/bbl. Da. Re-election chances are looking pretty slim here in less than two years, gotta buy off the unions & got no cash to do it with. Debt reduction? Nah, that's for next term <snort>. Sure would help out a lot. 

Thanks, tovarisch. Bu-bye..."


----------



## eMacMan

Interesting that we are a week into July and I have not seen hide nor hair of the second promised carbon tax rebate check.

Meanwhile we are spending about $50/month more for groceries this year. Not all carbon tax, but it certainly factors in.


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> Interesting that we are a week into July and I have not seen hide nor hair of the second promised carbon tax rebate check.


Don't you know it costs a lot to fly all those NDP MLA's into Cowtown for the Stampede?


----------



## FeXL

The only way from here is down. 

Exclusive Poll: Albertans disapprove of NDP’s management of economy



> A majority of Albertan’s don’t like the NDP’s hands on the province’s economic tiller, according to an exclusive ThinkHQ/Metro poll.
> 
> *Close to two thirds – 62 per cent – strongly or somewhat disapprove of how the NDP has managed the economy since taking office*, while only 33 per cent of poll respondents strongly or somewhat approve.
> 
> Marc Henry, president of ThinkHQ, calls the numbers dismal.


My bold.

Nah, nah, nah, nah, hey, hey, goom-bye...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> The only way from here is down.


She's diversifying what's left of the economy? She's building a pipeline that stops 30 miles short of the BC coast? Lots of options left for Crazy Red!


----------



## eMacMan

eMacMan said:


> Interesting that we are a week into July and I have not seen hide nor hair of the second promised carbon tax rebate check.
> 
> Meanwhile we are spending about $50/month more for groceries this year. Not all carbon tax, but it certainly factors in.


Well finally showed up today or rather half of it. They've pushed the other half back to October.

Fiscal mismanagement must be taking a pretty heavy toll.


----------



## SINC

Yep, we got a whopping $75. That'a about how much we paid last month.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Yep, we got a whopping $75. That'a about how much we paid last month.


Just think of all the virtue signalling, though!


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Yep, we got a whopping $75. That'a about how much we paid last month.


It just puts a huge and expensive union-rate government department between you and the money that was yours in the first place.


----------



## FeXL

I post this graphical analysis of failed Keynesian economic policy in the US on this thread merely to illustrate the folly of attempting to spend your way out of a recession, _Rachel_...

The FED, not very 'stimulating' at all

The key question here is thus:



> *What is a poor Keynesian to do when going into debt doesn't get one out of debt any more?*


Emphasis mine.

Answer: Lose the next election...


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Jason Kenney will save us money! If it works for staircases, it can work for anything! 









https://mobile.twitter.com/T8NTraynor/status/888446732387745798?s=04


----------



## Freddie_Biff




----------



## SINC

Jason Kenney is an NDP? Or did you get it in the wrong thread?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Jason Kenney is an NDP? Or did you get it in the wrong thread?




Alberta politics, my learned friend. Is there a better thread for this? I don't particularly feel like trashing the NDP, much to the thread-starter's chagrin, I imagine.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Alberta politics, my learned friend. Is there a better thread for this? I don't particularly feel like trashing the NDP, much to the thread-starter's chagrin, I imagine.


Not to worry, the new united right will trash her for us in just months now.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Not to worry, the new united right will trash her for us in just months now.




Months, eh? Ha ha! Like 24 months. 2 more YEARS my friend.


----------



## SINC

And you teach math? Since when is 22 months two years? And now this:

Gunter: Left's days are numbered | | Edmonton Sun


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> And you teach math? Since when is 22 months two years? And now this:
> 
> 
> 
> Gunter: Left's days are numbered | | Edmonton Sun




22 months rounds up to two years, not down to one year, my learned friend. They could also call the election later than May if they chose to.


----------



## Macfury

We aren't rounding.

Will be watching this election to see Notley's sour face when she's trounced.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> We aren't rounding.
> 
> 
> 
> Will be watching this election to see Notley's sour face when she's trounced.




And so you ignore once again the basic math error you and Don are strangely standing behind. Strange, but predictable .


----------



## Macfury

Imagine calling 22 month, "months." That SINC just doesn't get "Freddie-speak."


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Imagine calling 22 month, "months." That SINC just doesn't get "Freddie-speak."




Either way, they're only halfway through. It will get fun watching you squirm for the next two years.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Either way, they're only halfway through. It will get fun watching you squirm for the next two years.


I'm not squirming. Just feeling sorry for the Albertans who have had such a punishment as the NDP visited upon them. It's sad to see fifth columnists such as yourself cheering on the oppressors of your fellow citizens


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> 22 months rounds up to two years, not down to one year, my learned friend. They could also call the election later than May if they chose to.


First, you can't 'round up' time Freddie. The past is history and the future changes daily. It's 22 months, period.

As for your statement about the Dippers being able to call the election later than May, you are full of crap:



> *30th Alberta general election
> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia*
> 
> The 30th general election of Alberta, Canada, will elect members to the Legislative Assembly of Alberta.* It will take place on or before May 31, 2019.*
> 
> *The Election Act fixes the election to a three-month period, between March 1 and May 31 in the fourth calendar year after the preceding election day* which in this case was May 5, 2015. However, this does not affect the powers of the Lieutenant Governor to dissolve the Legislature before this period


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> As for your statement about the Dippers being able to call the election later than May, you are full of crap:


There you go again. Using facts in a war of opinions...


----------



## FeXL

Yep. More than halfway through. And what do we know about them?

(Not even addressing the complete & utter folly of the first 5 points [which, BTW, were _not_ in her campaign platform], merely noting the financial damage to taxpayers)

1) 4.5% carbon tax, increasing the cost of living for everybody, including teachers.
2) Unionizing farm labour, increasing the cost of living for everybody, including teachers.
3) $15/hr minimum wages, increasing the cost of living for everybody, including teachers.
4) Billions of dollars of debt, creating massive interest payments on the backs of taxpayers, including teachers.
5) Poor fiscal policy, creating multiple downgrades in the provincial credit rating with subsequent increases in interest rates, creating even higher payments on the backs of taxpayers, including teachers.

And, to top it off:
6) No salary increases for teachers for 4 straight years.

Now, let's go back to some observations from you:
1) Ralph cut our wages by 40%!
2) I support the EnDeePeeeeee!

It's painfully obvious to any sentient being on these boards that you are a complete & utter non-rational Prog ideologue.

Tell me, how much of your brain do you have to take leave of & put in the vegetable drawer of the refrigerator to form opinions like that? The objective, non-ideologue would say, getting screwed over is getting screwed over, no matter who is doing it & I don't like it one little bit from either side of the spectrum.

But that's not how you Progs think, is it? You think that getting screwed over worse by the left is somehow superior to being screwed over less by the right.

How twisted is that?

Enjoy the final months of the experiment with Prog politics in Alberta, Freddie. After 4 years with Red Rachel you will walk away with 10's of thousands of dollars less in your pocket than when the Conservatives were in power and a taxpaying legacy that will be passed on to your grandchildren. 

"Grandpa, why are my taxes so high?"

"Shut up & enjoy your Prog privilege, you ungrateful little twerp. I virtue-signalled on ehMac for 4 years just so you could pay those high taxes."

You should be proud...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Either way, they're only halfway through.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> First, you can't 'round up' time Freddie. The past is history and the future changes daily. It's 22 months, period.
> 
> 
> 
> As for your statement about the Dippers being able to call the election later than May, you are full of crap:




Still, much closer to two years than one, Don. Your math skills need some work. And for your info, there's never BEEN an election called on time according to the election "law" in Alberta. The last election was called a year early by your friend Jim Prentice, and there was no penalty given—except for the PC's having their asses handed to them after 44 years. Has the UCP actually changed anything?!


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Still, much closer to two years than one, Don. Your math skills need some work. And for your info, there's never BEEN an election called on time according to the election "law" in Alberta. The last election was called a year early by your friend Jim Prentice, and there was no penalty given—except for the PC's having their asses handed to them after 44 years. Has the UCP actually changed anything?!


To begin, there are no rules covering the calling of an early election, nor is there any penalty for calling an early election. 

And the UPC is 'in the process' of changing everything about government in Alberta, ending with handing Notley and the Dippers their collective butts.

And finally one year and 10 months and seven days is the proper term remaining. As I noted one cannot round up or down time.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> To begin, there are no rules covering the calling of an early election, nor is there any penalty for calling an early election.
> 
> 
> 
> And the UPC is 'in the process' of changing everything about government in Alberta, ending with handing Notley and the Dippers their collective butts.
> 
> 
> 
> And finally one year and 10 months and seven days is the proper term remaining. As I noted one cannot round up or down time.



Don, you just keep telling yourself whatever it takes to keep you happy. We wouldn't want you to become curmudgeonly and cranky do 
no good reason. And as far as Alberta is concerned, the Fixed Election Law is more like guidelines than actual rules.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Don, you just keep telling yourself whatever it takes to keep you happy. We wouldn't want you to become curmudgeonly and cranky do
> no good reason. And as far as Alberta is concerned, the Fixed Election Law is more like guidelines than actual rules.


I'll bet you that you can find three badly written websites that concur... maybe.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> I'll bet you that you can find three badly written websites that concur... maybe.




Ever seen Pirates? Methinks there's a reason you miss the inference.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Ever seen Pirates? Methinks there's a reason you miss the inference.


Of the Caribbean? Not my cup of grog. Yes, I missed the reference.


----------



## FeXL

Why do you argue this crap? It's pointless. It was just like you arguing over in another thread that "It hadn't happened in Canada, yet!" when you knew that it was merely a matter of time. It happened, you lost the argument. And for what? What did you gain?

As far as the election date, it doesn't matter when it is.

Rest assured Red Rachel is done as premiere of this fine province whenever the next election occurs. 

Period.

Think of it this way: the quicker she's outta here, the less money you lose.



Freddie_Biff said:


> And as far as Alberta is concerned, the Fixed Election Law is more like guidelines than actual rules.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Of the Caribbean? Not my cup of grog. Yes, I missed the reference.



It has to do with the Pirate's code, which Barbosa explains is more like guidelines than actual rules. A witty exchange in a fun escapist summertime movie. Your kids might enjoy it.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Why do you argue this crap? It's pointless. It was just like you arguing over in another thread that "It hadn't happened in Canada, yet!" when you knew that it was merely a matter of time. It happened, you lost the argument. And for what? What did you gain?
> 
> 
> 
> As far as the election date, it doesn't matter when it is.
> 
> 
> 
> Rest assured Red Rachel is done as premiere of this fine province whenever the next election occurs.
> 
> 
> 
> Period.
> 
> 
> 
> Think of it this way: the quicker she's outta here, the less money you lose.




Why do you care so much what I think. When she's done, she's done. But there's a hell of a lot more damage she can do in the meantime. I'm sure she's checking her little red book as we speak and asking herself, now what we can we do to make FeXL squirm today? 

I'm not seeing any wage increases, but my benefits are good, and like your lovely bride, I'm just happy I have a job. I certainly don't envy them oil patch private sector folk who were making money hand over firatva few short years ago, but are lucky to work for half their wage now if they work at all. And you can blame the industry for their own problems and not planning ahead, as much as you can blame their ex-PC friends who thought the gravy train would never stop. The only way the NDP has a hand in this is trying to clean up the mess after the last PC gravy train ended. They're investing in things like infrastructure and schools and health, which should never have been cut back in the first place.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> They're investing in things like infrastructure and schools and health...


Outside of NDP circles this is called "SPENDING."


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Outside of NDP circles this is called "SPENDING."



Only within PC circles (and I imagine now YouSeePee circles) is Education considered an expense and horse races considered an investment. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Actually, I don't care what you think.

Over the years you have shown yourself to be utterly shallow in that department. I just keep reading your crap for the entertainment factor & to see if you can plumb new depths.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Why do you care so much what I think.


And she will. I want her to take as much rope as she can possibly carry to election day.



Freddie_Biff said:


> But there's a hell of a lot more damage she can do in the meantime.


Doubt she has me in her book. Ain't left enuf, ain't union enuf, ain't dumb enuf. Don't qualify fer EnDeePee...

'Sides, I'm not squirming. I'm already freaking celebrating. Woohoo!!!



Freddie_Biff said:


> I'm sure she's checking her little red book as we speak and asking herself, now what we can we do to make FeXL squirm today?


Nope, yer not. You are realizing less cash in yer pocket now than under the PC's. Welcome to the orange state.



Freddie_Biff said:


> I'm not seeing any wage increases...


I have no idea WTH this even means, nor what possible connection it could have with Red Rachel.



Freddie_Biff said:


> And you can blame the industry for their own problems and not planning ahead, as much as you can blame their ex-PC friends who thought the gravy train would never stop.


For the last time, not a single body on these boards has blamed the NDP for oil price drops.

As far as them cleaning up the mess, question asked elsewhere multiple times by multiple people but seeing as you're being a dick about it there, same question here:

Exactly what has Red Rachel done to clean things up?

And, are you actually complaining about the PC's spending money? :yikes:



Freddie_Biff said:


> The only way the NDP has a hand in this is trying to clean up the mess after the last PC gravy train ended.


When/where were they cut back? And by how much? Be precise.



Freddie_Biff said:


> They're investing in things like infrastructure and schools and health, which should never have been cut back in the first place.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> And, are you actually complaining about the PC's spending money? :yikes:


The PCs were _investing _that money.


----------



## Macfury

Of course it's an expense. And in the modern era it has been an expense that increases without tangible results in improved educational outcomes. One-room school houses achieved far better outcomes in math, literacy and civics skills.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Only within PC circles (and I imagine now YouSeePee circles) is Education considered an expense and horse races considered an investment.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Actually, I don't care what you think.
> 
> 
> 
> Over the years you have shown yourself to be utterly shallow in that department. I just keep reading your crap for the entertainment factor & to see if you can plumb new depths.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And she will. I want her to take as much rope as she can possibly carry to election day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doubt she has me in her book. Ain't left enuf, ain't union enuf, ain't dumb enuf. Don't qualify fer EnDeePee...
> 
> 
> 
> 'Sides, I'm not squirming. I'm already freaking celebrating. Woohoo!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nope, yer not. You are realizing less cash in yer pocket now than under the PC's. Welcome to the orange state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea WTH this even means, nor what possible connection it could have with Red Rachel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For the last time, not a single body on these boards has blamed the NDP for oil price drops.
> 
> 
> 
> As far as them cleaning up the mess, question asked elsewhere multiple times by multiple people but seeing as you're being a dick about it there, same question here:
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly what has Red Rachel done to clean things up?
> 
> 
> 
> And, are you actually complaining about the PC's spending money? :yikes:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When/where were they cut back? And by how much? Be precise.




You really seem to be a bitter person. Perhaps you should chew your food more thoroughly. And get some sunshine.

And oddly, for a guy who claims he doesn't care what I think, you sure ask a lot of questions.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Of course it's an expense. And in the modern era it has been an expense that increases without tangible results in improved educational outcomes. One-room school houses achieved far better outcomes in math, literacy and civics skills.



Wrong again. Roads are an expense—ones that have to be maintained, but necessary. Horse races are a frivolous expense. Education is an investment if you do it right. Education can lead to a great work force overall. It is an investment in the future, and I'm proud to be helping to train future and current workers.

P.S. one room schoolhouses had a huge number of dropouts—but perhaps you have forgotten that fact.


----------



## Macfury

Wish education did lead to a great workforce overall. Instead, we are relying on the immigration system to import skilled workers necessary for a modern economy.

I don't consider any government spending an investment. They are all expenses, usually overpriced and badly managed. Occasionally they bear some fruit, but less fruit than if these expenses had been privately managed.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Wrong again. Roads are an expense—ones that have to be maintained, but necessary. Horse races are a frivolous expense. Education is an investment if you do it right. Education can lead to a great work force overall. It is an investment in the future, and I'm proud to be helping to train future and current workers.
> 
> P.S. one room schoolhouses had a huge number of dropouts—but perhaps you have forgotten that fact.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Wish education did lead to a great workforce overall. Instead, we are relying on the immigration system to import skilled workers necessary for a modern economy.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't consider any government spending an investment. They are all expenses, usually overpriced and badly managed. Occasionally they bear some fruit, but less fruit than if these expenses had been privately managed.




Boy are you a negative Nellie today. Fortunately for the rest of us, education provides the best insurance that future and current generations can continue to make our system profitable. Are you suggesting ignorance is preferable?


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Boy are you a negative Nellie today. Fortunately for the rest of us, education provides the best insurance that future and current generations can continue to make our system profitable. Are you suggesting ignorance is preferable?


Nothing against education. Everything against a bloated, inefficient education system run by government cronies who can't even provide the economy with the skilled workers it demands.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Nothing against education. Everything against a bloated, inefficient education system run by government cronies who can't even provide the economy with the skilled workers it demands.




Have you looked lately? There is an over abundance of skilled workers having to find other work to make do until the oil companies start thriving again. Which part of the "inefficient education system run by government cronies" needs to be improved, and if so how? Which skilled workers is the economy short on right now? Because I see too many workers in certain occupations, not too few. And from what you've said time and time again, it's not the government's job to choose the winners, job-wise, unless I've misunderstood you.


----------



## Macfury

If we have an overabundance of skilled workers, and an overabundance of unskilled workers then why do you support immigration?.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Have you looked lately? There is an over abundance of skilled workers having to find other work to make do until the oil companies start thriving again. Which part of the "inefficient education system run by government cronies" needs to be improved, and if so how? Which skilled workers is the economy short on right now? Because I see too many workers in certain occupations, not too few. And from what you've said time and time again, it's not the government's job to choose the winners, job-wise, unless I've misunderstood you.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> If we have an overabundance of skilled workers, and an overabundance of unskilled workers then why do you support immigration?.



You're changing the subject.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> You're changing the subject.


I'm not. If we truly have an oversupply of skilled workers thanks to our awesome education system, why do you want to bring more unskilled workers into the country?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> I'm not. If we truly have an oversupply of skilled workers thanks to our awesome education system, why do you want to bring more unskilled workers into the country?




Refugees from wartorn countries are a different subject. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

If these "refugees" come from wartorn countries, why do so many of them return for holidays?



Freddie_Biff said:


> Refugees from wartorn countries are a different subject.


----------



## FeXL

You need to go get more psychology training 'cause your role as Mr. Amateur Shrink is failing miserably... :lmao:

In addition, my food typically comes in 12 oz & 22 oz bottles, as well as 64 oz growlers & I have the best tan I've had in years.

So, now that we've dispensed with _your_ BS, how's about we get back to the burning issue:

Exactly what has Red Rachel done to clean things up?



Freddie_Biff said:


> You really seem to be a bitter person. Perhaps you should chew your food more thoroughly. And get some sunshine.


I don't care what you think. I'm just making sure you shore your argument with some facts.

Told you recently: I won't let BS go unchallenged. Your claim that Rachel has cleaned _anything_ up from previous admins is pure BS unless you can provide evidence to the contrary.



Freddie_Biff said:


> And oddly, for a guy who claims he doesn't care what I think, you sure ask a lot of questions.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> The PCs were _investing _that money.


Yeah, curious how that works, idn't it...


----------



## FeXL

For many, it certainly seems to be the norm...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Are you suggesting ignorance is preferable?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> You need to go get more psychology training 'cause your role as Mr. Amateur Shrink is failing miserably... :lmao:
> 
> 
> 
> In addition, my food typically comes in 12 oz & 22 oz bottles, as well as 64 oz growlers & I have the best tan I've had in years.
> 
> 
> 
> So, now that we've dispensed with _your_ BS, how's about we get back to the burning issue:
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly what has Red Rachel done to clean things up?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't care what you think. I'm just making sure you shore your argument with some facts.
> 
> 
> 
> Told you recently: I won't let BS go unchallenged. Your claim that Rachel has cleaned _anything_ up from previous admins is pure BS unless you can provide evidence to the contrary.




See other thread.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> For many, it certainly seems to be the norm...




Pot, meet kettle.


----------



## FeXL

Oooooo, that was witty...

This, coming from the guy who thinks (among other things), Rachel's smart 'cause she's 50 and Ralph cut his wages by 40%.

Where's that mirror, Freddie?

:lmao::lmao::lmao:



Freddie_Biff said:


> Pot, meet kettle.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Oooooo, that was witty...
> 
> 
> 
> This, coming from the guy who thinks (among other things), Rachel's smart 'cause she's 50 and Ralph cut his wages by 40%.
> 
> 
> 
> Where's that mirror, Freddie?
> 
> 
> 
> :lmao::lmao::lmao:




You may want to get off your arse and find some new material. You misquoted it in the first place, it was never that funny, and after the 69th tune it ain't gettin' any funnier. Jes' sayin'.


----------



## FeXL

Agreed. It was stupid then & remains so...



Freddie_Biff said:


> ...it was never that funny, and after the 69th tune it ain't gettin' any funnier. Jes' sayin'.


----------



## SINC

And for the benefit of those Dippers, especially in REDmonton, is how well all those EnDeePee programs they are bragging about are doing with real Albertans.

United Conservatives would win majority if Alberta election were held today: poll | Globalnews.ca



> It was only last week that the United Conservative Party (UCP) was recognized as the official opposition in Alberta and now, the results of a Mainstreet survey indicate the union between Alberta’s Progressive Conservatives and Wildrose Party members could prove to be worth the political gamble.
> 
> On Tuesday, Mainstreet published the results of a survey that gathered responses from 2,100 Albertans between July 27 and July 28, 2017. It found that if an election were held today, the UCP would unseat Rachel Notley’s government in spectacular fashion. The poll found 57 per cent of decided or leaning respondents said they would vote for the UCP compared to just 29 per cent for the New Democrats. Nine per cent said they would vote for the Alberta Party and four per cent said they would vote for the Alberta Liberals.


Can it get worse for the Knotleyheads in the next 22 month? You bet. Watch it happen.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> And for the benefit of those Dippers, especially in REDmonton, is how well all those EnDeePee programs they are bragging about are doing with real Albertans.
> 
> 
> 
> United Conservatives would win majority if Alberta election were held today: poll | Globalnews.ca
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can it get worse for the Knotleyheads in the next 22 month? You bet. Watch it happen.




Repeat post much?


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Repeat post much?


It is repeated in both threads so it would not be missed. It's important people realize this poll is a result before the party even has a leader. Once it has a leader, it will attract even more voters to help toss out the Dippers.


----------



## SINC

No surprise here.

*Alberta Government refuses to divulge cost of carbon tax administration

Heavily redacted documents obtained by CFIB show government knows cost, but refuses to disclose it*



> CALGARY, August 9, 2017 – The Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) today released heavily redacted documents obtained through Freedom of Information that clearly shows the Alberta government knows the annual cost to the province’s taxpayers of administering the carbon tax, but is refusing to disclose any details.
> 
> “This government has rolled out the carbon tax full steam ahead, but time and again avoids being transparent about the costs, including the impact on small business. Now we have clear evidence they know the cost to taxpayers to administer the new tax, but they are refusing to come clean as to what it is,” said Amber Ruddy, Alberta Director for CFIB.
> 
> The internal government documents obtained by the CFIB were so heavily redacted it is not possible to discern the estimated annual cost to government to manage the new tax which came into effect on January 1, 2017. The CFIB has filed a complaint with the Information and Privacy Commissioner about the lack of disclosure.
> 
> “The carbon tax is siphoning billions in new revenue out of the productive economy into government coffers. Albertans have the right to also know what the bureaucratic cost of this new tax is,” stated Ruddy.
> 
> The Freedom of Information (FOI) request was originally filed with Treasury Board and Finance on January 17, 2017 and asked for all documents that would show the estimated and projected annual costs to the Alberta Government to administer the carbon tax. This summer, after months of waiting, the Government released 14 pages out of 77 pages of available information related to the request, almost all of which was heavily redacted.
> 
> Copies of the FOI documentation that was released by the Government of Alberta can be found at: Alberta Government refuses to divulge carbon tax admin cost


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> No surprise here.
> 
> *Alberta Government refuses to divulge cost of carbon tax administration
> 
> Heavily redacted documents obtained by CFIB show government knows cost, but refuses to disclose it*


Sounds a lot like the nonsense that cost a lot of con-men their cushy jobs. The lack of transparency is a good indicator that a large percentage of those pork barrels are not making it to the reservations.


----------



## eMacMan

Not new but:
Notleys comments about walking to work or taking the bus, makes the Murray Smith sweater speech seem a little less arrogant.

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqbb9x2Qw5Q[/ame]


----------



## Macfury

> Notley was speaking at an Edmonton school a day after her NDP government delivered a budget that forecasts a $10.3-billion deficit, which puts Alberta on track to rack up $45 billion in debt by the end of the 2017-18 fiscal year.


This earns Notley the new nickname "45."


----------



## eMacMan

eMacMan said:


> Not new but:
> Notleys comments about walking to work or taking the bus, makes the Murray Smith sweater speech seem a little less arrogant.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqbb9x2Qw5Q


This may be one of those cases her redness inadvertently told a truth. The goal of their agenda is to force you and I to walk, while she and her cohorts ride around in big SUVs, safely cocooned against the six months of winter that Alberta delivers on an annual basis.


----------



## Macfury

They never intend to live by the rules they impose on their willing dupes.



eMacMan said:


> This may be one of those cases her redness inadvertently told a truth. The goal of their agenda is to force you and I to walk, while she and her cohorts ride around in big SUVs, safely cocooned against the six months of winter that Alberta delivers on an annual basis.


----------



## SINC

Jobs? Hardly!

Albert's job mirage: Why the province’s apparent economic victory isn’t what it appears to be | Financial Post


----------



## Macfury

Hiring government workers was never going to make the economy grow.



SINC said:


> Jobs? Hardly!
> 
> Albert's job mirage: Why the province’s apparent economic victory isn’t what it appears to be | Financial Post


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Jobs? Hardly!


Excellent read.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Hiring government workers was never going to make the economy grow.


It never does.


----------



## FeXL

So, Red Rachel is publicly thanking Muslins on their day of celebration, all while wearing a headscarf. I'm sure she's going to do the same for Hutterites wearing a bonnet, Mennonites wearing the black cap, Ukrainians wearing the kerchief, First Immigrants wearing an eagle feather (among dozens of other nationalities in this erstwhile great province), and have equally effusive praise for the wunnerful, wunnerful people of those communities & celebrate what they have brought to the province, as well.

Submission Rose Country



> Sharia Slave Alberta Premier Rachel Notley delivers a greeting on Eid ul-Adha & thanks HAMAS for its vital work


The comments nail it. Among others:



> Will she strip naked when addressing the Russian Dukabor's? How about wearing a chicken bone necklace when speaking to Haitians?





> I wonder if she went for the optional clit trim?





> Wonder if she'll do the same on the 21st for Rosh Hashanna?





> Surely this is a joke right? She really didn't go down on all fours like a dog did she? Is she going to do this for all cultures and religions, or just the ones that want to beat us and blow everyone up?





> Are we sure this isn't a joke, can she really be so stupid as to prostitute herself like this?





> I must have missed the Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost videos, where she tells the story of the birth & death of Christ and the birth of the church in equally respectful and affirming words, complete with appropriated garb. Anybody have the links?





> I think you get a nice letter and a handsome honorarium from the Saudis when you deep throat Islam in public.


----------



## SINC

Yep, that minimum wage bump is sure creating more jobs.

Dollarama testing self-checkout as it adjusts to minimum wage increases in several provinces, including Alberta | Alberta | News | Calgary Sun


----------



## SINC

Yep, that NDP minimum wage bump is sure creating more jobs.

Dollarama testing self-checkout as it adjusts to minimum wage increases in several provinces, including Alberta


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> Yep, that NDP minimum wage bump is sure creating more jobs.
> 
> Dollarama testing self-checkout as it adjusts to minimum wage increases in several provinces, including Alberta


Our local Wally World tried that. Abandoned the idea after about a year. May have had something to do with incessant door alarms as customers failed to de-activate anti-theft stickers. Possibly because the inventory counts showed a big bump in thefts.

Regardless I refused to use them. Partly because I saw too many customers at customer service seeking refunds after they were charged twice for the same item.


----------



## Freddie_Biff




----------



## Macfury

Actually, there was a significant school build under the PC brand over the past five to 10 years. I think Feehan has rocks in his head.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Actually, there was a significant school build under the PC brand over the past five to 10 years. I think Feehan has rocks in his head.




Clearly you don't follow what actually has happened in Alberta. This quote is right on the money.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Clearly you don't follow what actually has happened in Alberta. This quote is right on the money.


On the other hand, there are people who closely follow the real facts about the Alberta NDP, whose pants are currently on fire.



> *AB government manipulates release of analysis related to minimum wage hikes
> 
> Documents obtained by CFIB include results of flawed survey of business owners and heavily redacted review of impacts*
> 
> CALGARY, Sept 5th, 2017: With less than one month to go until the minimum wage goes up $1.40 to $13.60 per hour, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) today released documents showing the Alberta Government has conducted little meaningful economic analysis of the minimum wage hikes, and what it has done is either highly flawed or heavily redacted.
> 
> The documents obtained through Freedom of Information (FOI) contain two main parts. First, results from a May 2016 pilot survey of business owners about the first minimum wage increase uses questionable methodology and appears to deliberately downplay impacts by: (1) not asking any direct questions about minimum wage, and (2) steering respondents toward blaming the economic recession for their operating challenges.
> 
> The second is a multi-departmental review of economic and social indicators tracking the effects of each stage of minimum wage increases with analysis about what changes may mean. The report covers October 2015 to February 2016, with a focus on the first few months after the first staged increase in the minimum wage to $15 per hour. Any negative commentary and analysis in the review appears to have been redacted.
> 
> “The Alberta government seems to be doing everything it can to not only manipulate analysis to lead the public to a certain desired outcome, but also avoid releasing any kernel of information that may contradict their claims that big jumps in minimum wage are having little to no major impact on small businesses and somehow actually create jobs,” said Amber Ruddy, Alberta Director.
> 
> The CFIB has filed yet another complaint with the Information and Privacy Commissioner about the lack of disclosure.
> 
> “If this policy is effective, there should be nothing secretive about what went into the decision. It may be convenient to restrict any opposing points from being released, but anything short of full public scrutiny of the impact is unacceptable. It’s time to reverse this radical and reckless policy, even the BC government is open to being flexible with the timeline,” stated Ruddy.
> 
> The FOI request was originally filed with Alberta Labour in January 2017. It asked for all reports and analysis of Alberta’s labour market indicators following minimum wage hikes. In July, after months of waiting, the Government finally released the two flawed and heavily redacted reports referenced in this news release.
> 
> Copies of the FOI documentation that was released by the Government of Alberta can be found at: AB government manipulates release of analysis related to min


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> On the other hand, there are people who closely follow the real facts about the Alberta NDP, whose pants are currently on fire.


Yep. Conceal, redact & then lie about any actual facts that don't follow the narrative.

'Sokay, SINC. Less than 21 months from now & all she'll be is a bad memory following the worst one-night stand this province has ever seen. All we'll have to do is wash, bleach & disinfect the sheets... :lmao:


----------



## Macfury

The Alberta PC government built and opened:

18 schools in 2010;
10 schools in 2012; and
12 schools in 2014.


Meanwhile, back at Notley HQ:

New school construction sputters as money fails to get out the door | Alberta |

Three Calgary school projects may face delays | Calgary | News | Calgary Sun







Freddie_Biff said:


> Clearly you don't follow what actually has happened in Alberta. This quote is right on the money.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Meanwhile, back at Notley HQ:


There ya go again, ya heartless bastad. Using facts against an unarmed man...

:lmao::lmao::lmao:


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> The Alberta PC government built and opened:
> 
> 
> 
> 18 schools in 2010;
> 
> 10 schools in 2012; and
> 
> 12 schools in 2014.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meanwhile, back at Notley HQ:
> 
> 
> 
> New school construction sputters as money fails to get out the door | Alberta |
> 
> 
> 
> Three Calgary school projects may face delays | Calgary | News | Calgary Sun




Redford promised 200 in 2012.


----------



## FeXL

Freddie_Biff said:


> Redford promised 200 in 2012.


Redford was & continues to be an idiot. There is no need for 200 additional schools in the province. Plus, she was politically only slightly right of left of left Red Rachel. Plus, plus, politicians make all kinds of promises to get elected that they immediately break. Why are you only concerned about the ones coming from the alleged right?

Additional facts you conveniently & regularly overlook.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Redford was & continues to be an idiot. There is no need for 200 additional schools in the province. Plus, she was politically only slightly right of left of left Red Rachel. Plus, plus, politicians make all kinds of promises to get elected that they immediately break. Why are you only concerned about the ones coming from the alleged right?
> 
> 
> 
> Additional facts you conveniently & regularly overlook.




Redford was a Progressive Conservative. She was nominated to lead and did lead your people. She was elected by conservative minded Albertans. It was not the left who voted her in. Makes one question the judgement of conservative minded people, just as one questions the sincerity of the UCP today. Facts you conveniently and regularly also overlook.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie is going off half-cocked again. Redford promised in 2012 to build only 50 schools. The schools completed by the NDP to date are the tail end of those announced projects.



FeXL said:


> Redford was & continues to be an idiot. There is no need for 200 additional schools in the province.


----------



## Macfury

She led all Alberta Freddie. And she was still better than any of the detritus washed up on shore by NDP and Liberal leadership conventions. Didn't care for Redford, but I would beg her to come back to finish out Notley's disastrous term. Then again, I would think you could find a better premiere by putting down your finger at random on a name in the phone book.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Redford was a Progressive Conservative. She was nominated to lead and did lead your people. She was elected by conservative minded Albertans. It was not the left who voted her in. Makes one question the judgement of conservative minded people, just as one questions the sincerity of the UCP today. Facts you conveniently and regularly also overlook.


----------



## FeXL

Queenie was from the Progressive side of the PC herd. She was also an arrogant, conceited, self-centered ass.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Redford was a Progressive Conservative.


Again, "my" people? WTF?



Freddie_Biff said:


> She was nominated to lead and did lead your people.


She was elected by people who were too superficial to see through her bull$h!t, on both the right & left side of the spectrum. I was not one of them. I read her like the morning paper and immediately discarded her as such.



Freddie_Biff said:


> She was elected by conservative minded Albertans. It was not the left who voted her in.


Makes one question the judgement of all voters who do not take the time to examine thoroughly not only the people who are running for office but themselves, as well. 

QED, Red Rachel. They will both have something in common, though: single term premieres. One thing I can say about Queenie: at least she had the decency to step down when she was found out...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Makes one question the judgement of conservative minded people, just as one questions the sincerity of the UCP today.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> She led all Alberta Freddie. And she was still better than any of the detritus washed up on shore by NDP and Liberal leadership conventions. Didn't care for Redford, but I would beg her to come back to finish out Notley's disastrous term. Then again, I would think you could find a better premiere by putting down your finger at random on a name in the phone book.




Yeah it figures you would say that. What a hypocrite.


----------



## Macfury

How does the notion of hypocrisy apply to this situation? Redford was a better leader than Notley--and Redford was a disgrace.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Yeah it figures you would say that. What a hypocrite.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> How does the notion of hypocrisy apply to this situation? Redford was a better leader than Notley--and Redford was a disgrace.



How is she a better leader when her own party revolted against her? Say what you will about Rachel Notley, but she definitely has the support of her party behind her.


----------



## Macfury

It demonstrates the superiority of the PC party--they knew when to dump Redford, and she was a better premiere than Notley. The NDP party is united in their belief in the most unworkable ideas selected from the ash heap of the 20th century--not surprised she has their unequivocal support. Hope they continue to support Notley so they can all be flushed down the toilet simultaneously.



Freddie_Biff said:


> How is she a better leader when her own party revolted against her? Say what you will about Rachel Notley, but she definitely has the support of her party behind her.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> It demonstrates the superiority of the PC party--they knew when to dump Redford, and she was a better premiere than Notley. The NDP party is united in their belief in the most unworkable ideas selected from the ash heap of the 20th century--not surprised she has their unequivocal support. Hope they continue to support Notley so they can all be flushed down the toilet simultaneously.




Weak argument. Perhaps your weakest yet.


----------



## FeXL

D'uh. To start, because she didn't plunge the province into 11 figures of debt & deficit? :greedy::greedy::greedy:

Explain that one to your children & grandchildren as they pay it off, Freddie...



Freddie_Biff said:


> How is she a better leader...


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Hope they continue to support Notley so they can all be flushed down the toilet simultaneously.


The sewage plants of the province will be overloaded with erstwhile Prog MP's the day after the election.


----------



## Macfury

That's your weakest argument yet, FeXL--it's just money after all!



FeXL said:


> D'uh. To start, because she didn't plunge the province into 11 figures of debt & deficit? :greedy::greedy::greedy:
> 
> Explain that one to your children & grandchildren as they pay it off, Freddie...


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> That's your weakest argument yet, FeXL--it's just money after all!


Ah knows. And ah'm sorry...


----------



## FeXL

Interesting.

Jason Kenney proposes drastic cut to Alberta’s per capita spending, balanced budget in 3 years 



> United Conservative Party (UCP) leadership candidate Jason Kenney says if he wins the next election, he can balance the budget in three years.
> 
> During a question and answer session on Facebook Tuesday, Kenney said his formula is based on reigning in operating spending and cutting the amount of money spent on each Albertan to match levels in British Columbia.
> 
> “We would have to exercise a period of sustained restraint in spending in order to get us down more or less to British Columbia per-capita spending over time,” said Kenney in response to a viewer question.
> 
> “B.C. spends about 20 per cent less than Alberta per capita,” he said.


You know your province's finances are bad when BringCash is utilized as a better measuring stick...

More:



> But Premier Rachel Notley, cautioned that Kenney’s plan comes with drastic consequences.
> 
> Speaking at a media event Wednesday at NAIT, Notley called Kenney’s plan “heartless, reckless and mean-spirited.”


Damn those mean conservatives!

Well Rachel, here's the situation. Nobody running on the right is going to lose any votes from the left by calling a spade a spade. So, to whomever wins the leadership, just go it it...

Further:



> “It would cause nothing but chaos and instability,” said Notley. “And it would absolutely stop dead in its tracks, the economic recovery that our government is proud to be leading right now.”


As opposed to the chaos, instability & outright craziness of the current crop of Progs? I'll take my chances...


----------



## SINC

Yep, right on . . .


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> You know your province's finances are bad when BringCash is utilized as a better measuring stick...


Those crazy people in the UCP. They say they want is to bring sanity, accountability and fiscal stability to government. But what's their platform?


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Yep, right on . . .


Nails it.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> But what's their platform?


Platform? :yikes:

Well, we...ah...thought that...well, seeing as...um...the EnDeePee, ah...didn't, um, actually...er...have...um, ah...one...that is...um...a _platform_...er, we, um, wouldn't, ah...need, um, one...er, either.

(whew...)


----------



## Macfury

If the NDP had the guts they would have explained it: more top-down control, less freedom, higher taxes, creation of a wealthy ruling class, monstrous debt.

Too bad that that those dictatorial fascists in the UCP want to reverse all of this progress.



FeXL said:


> Platform? :yikes:
> 
> Well, we...ah...thought that...well, seeing as...um...the EnDeePee, ah...didn't, um, actually...er...have...um, ah...one...that is...um...a _platform_...er, we, um, wouldn't, ah...need, um, one...er, either.
> 
> (whew...)


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> If the NDP had the guts they would have explained it: more top-down control, less freedom, higher taxes, creation of a wealthy ruling class, monstrous debt.


But what about all the folkfests & virtue signalling? :love2:


----------



## eMacMan

A worthwhile read on how the greenie weenie approach is hammering those on the low-end of the fiscal spectrum. Things like shutting down coal power plants and expanding wind and solar. 

Anyone who is not a victim of any of the various new maths could figure this out for themselves.

EDITORIAL: Study shows high cost of 'clean power' in Colorado | Colorado Springs Gazette, News



> Colorado leads the country in renewable energy standards that force electric utilities to replace coal-fired plants with solar and wind. Voters statewide enacted higher renewable standards in 2004. Since then, the Legislature has three times raised the minimal percentage of "renewable" kilowatts produced by cooperatives and investor-owned utilities.
> 
> During that time, the report shows, electric rates throughout Colorado have increased an average of 62.1 percent. Median household incomes, which pay these costs, have increased by only 4 percent. The rate hikes are nearly double the cumulative rate of inflation.
> 
> A 62.1 percent increase in the electric bill doesn't exact serious pain on upscale households in Denver, Boulder, Aspen, Colorado Springs or other communities that heavily influence Colorado energy policies.
> 
> The report found the highest economic quintile of households spend about 5 percent of after-tax income on home energy. The lowest economic quintile of households on average spend 22 percent of after-tax incomes on energy. Some low-end households pay up to 30 percent of household income to public utilities.
> 
> Colorado's soaring electric rates cause low-income families to live with bare cupboards and disconnected utilities. In the worst cases, higher utility bills lead to evictions and foreclosures.


----------



## FeXL

Only gay children? In a little over two years Red Rachel has implemented policies which will harm every single man, woman & child in the province, FFS!!!

Alberta Premier Rachel Notley says United Conservatives are determined to bring harm to gay children



> *Alberta Premier Rachel Notley says the opposition United Conservatives are determined to wreak havoc on working families* and bring harm to gay children.
> 
> Notley made the comments in a fiery campaign-style speech to party faithful today at a meeting of the Alberta NDP provincial council.
> 
> She says voters face a critical choice in the next election that will reverberate for generations, and says it will be won not in the media but on the doorsteps, coffees shops and online.


Bold mine.

Again, the iron...


----------



## FeXL

And so it starts...

Calgary MLA Karen McPherson quits NDP caucus to sit as Independent



> The Alberta politics merry-go-round continued to spin Wednesday as a Calgary MLA announced she would leave the NDP government caucus to sit as an Independent.
> 
> Karen McPherson, elected in 2015 under the NDP banner in Calgary-Mackay-Nose Hill, said she’s concerned that provincial politics have become too polarized between left and right, and “we are missing the middle.”


Missing a veritable plethora of things by the look of it.

An old saying about rats & sinking ships comes to mind. 

Above all, save yourself. 

Hopefully voters will see through it.


----------



## SINC

FeXL said:


> And so it starts...
> 
> An old saying about rats & sinking ships comes to mind.


.


----------



## FeXL

Mentioned elsewhere that I've seen/heard a resurgence in talks about Alberta/Western Canadian separation lately. The article linked below is from a couple of threads on Saskatchewan separation that came up yesterday. It's somewhat dated, prior to the UCP.

Talks about separation a bit, transfer payments, etc. Interesting read.

How to unite the right while wrecking the Alberta NDP - and Trudeau


----------



## FeXL

I post this here largely because Nenshi's arrogance & leftist politics remind me of Red Rachel's.

Nenshi warns about 'racists, haters' trying to influence Calgary election online



> As Nenshi’s comments sparked heated discussion on social media Monday, a political scientist said it comes down to how you felt about the incumbent mayor to begin with.
> 
> “There are very polarized views and it all depends on where you were previously sitting,” said Mount Royal University professor Duane Bratt.
> 
> “Those that supported Nenshi are going, ‘Oh my God, look at what is happening to our city, we need to come out and support Naheed Nenshi in the election,’ and those that don’t like Nenshi, and have never have liked Nenshi, are supporting the Smith campaign, *see this guy as desperate, he’s pulling out the race card at the end of a race.*”


A lefty pulling out the race card? :yikes:

Nah...

Related:

Vote for Nenshi or you are a bad white person!



> Juliet Burgess is a charter member of Calgary’s loony left. She has mostly been active with the Green Party but has popped up commenting on news items throughout social media and has been lively in activist circles.
> 
> Burgess put out the call on Facebook yesterday stating “White people, this is a call to us all.” as she essentially labelled everybody who is considering voting for anybody but Nenshi to be as Trump supporters.
> 
> When questioned about this call out to white folks, Burgess doubled down on her lunacy with the statement below:
> 
> *So Burgess feels that all white people are naturally racist. Yup. Just by being born, if you are white you are automatically a racist.*


If I could vote in a Calgary election the last person I'd cast for is Nenshi. And it ain't got nuttin' to do with his skin colour or his religion. It would have everything to do with:



> Its OK to despise Nenshi’s terrible management of city council. Its OK to oppose his chronic arrogance. Its OK to question the massive tax hikes since he became mayor. Its OK to think he was a fool for defaming a local philanthropist only to get sued for it and lose. Its OK to be extremely concerned about how Nenshi has alienated business during such an tough economic time.


I'll call it now: Nenshi is going to get his butt handed to him on on a silver platter come Monday.


----------



## FeXL

Hey, Freddie: Time to bone up on yer Arabic.

Alberta to offer Arabic bilingual program in schools across province next September



> The Alberta government will be offering an Arabic language curriculum across the province next year.
> 
> Alberta Education is working to develop the bilingual program with Edmonton Public Schools, one of a few districts in the province that provides the option.


Nope. No Sharia here...

More:



> Education Minister David Eggen says the government recognizes the economic and academic benefits of proficiency in more than one language.


<snort>


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Hey, Freddie: Time to bone up on yer Arabic.
> 
> 
> 
> Alberta to offer Arabic bilingual program in schools across province next September
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. No Sharia here...
> 
> 
> 
> More:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> <snort>




Snort away. There has been an Arabic program in Edmonton Public Schools for well over twenty years. My mom used to work at one before she retired.


----------



## FeXL

Good. You can be our translator then.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Snort away. There has been an Arabic program in Edmonton Public Schools for well over twenty years. My mom used to work at one before she retired.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Good. You can be our translator then.



The students and staff all spoke very good English in addition to the Arabic program. My mom taught the English part. Very nice kids. No future terrorists to speak of.


----------



## SINC

No surprise here. Yup.

*Whoever wins Alberta UCP leadership contest likely on ‘path to premier’s office’: poll*

https://globalnews.ca/news/3798342/...utm_source=GlobalEdmonton&utm_medium=Facebook


----------



## Macfury

As I've said before, you could pick a name from the phone book to do a better job than Notley. I've never seen someone destroy their political capital with such abandon.


----------



## FeXL

Varcoe: Federal budget watchdog says Alberta's fiscal policy unsustainable

First, from the department of the blindingly obvious:



> News flash: Alberta’s financial policies are “not sustainable” over the long term.


Well, d'uh.

Next:



> That blunt assessment doesn’t come from partisan opposition critics, number-crunching economists or opinionated busybodies like myself who have warned the Notley government of a budget snowball headed toward the province.


A budget _snowball_. That was rather...polite. More like an avalanche...

And:



> Essentially, Alberta is spending way too much money on programs while collecting far too little revenue to cover the shortfall.


Now, for those of us on the right, that statement sets (& has been setting off for some time now) warning bells all over the place.

However, for Red Rachel, I'm sure all that does is justify her next move, higher taxes to pay for all the virtue signalling & folkfests.

More:



> “PBO estimates that permanent tax increases, or spending reductions, amounting to 4.6 per cent of provincial GDP ($14.1 billion in current dollars) would be required to achieve fiscal sustainability.”
> 
> *In simple language, Alberta would need to permanently increase its tax burden by 25 per cent or slash program spending by 20 per cent — or implement a combination of the two to the tune of $14 billion — to become financially sustainable.*


M'bold.

Do you see Red Rachel cutting spending by 20%? Me, neither...

Further:



> “This is definitely a huge challenge for Alberta,” said Mostafa Askari, assistant Parliamentary Budget Officer.
> 
> “That doesn’t mean the only solution in Alberta is (to) tax more. I think it has to come from both sides. *There has to be recognition that the situation is not sustainable. So something has to be done.*”


M'bold.

Don't worry. In 19 months there will be a sea change in Alberta. Trust me...


----------



## Macfury

Always telling to see progs like Notley demanding "sustainability" from ridiculously expensive (minimal) energy projects--but never in the budget.


----------



## FeXL

Fine. That's your opinion, Rachel. And you are certainly entitled to it.

Rachel Notley says Quebec’s face-veil ban ‘smacks of Islamophobia’



> Alberta’s premier says Quebec legislation that bans people from providing or receiving public services with their faces covered represents a “sad day for Canada.”


More:



> Bill 62 has been criticized for targeting Muslim women.


Really. And why hasn't Islam been criticized for forcing women to wear face & body coverings in the first place? 

And, while we're asking pointed questions, tell me what nearly a hundred billion dollars in debt & deficit in a single term smacks of?


----------



## eMacMan

From almost a year ago, then very belatedly a follow-up.
Four-year-old Alberta girl dies and two years later it's still politics, turf pr
Serenity's death ruled 'not criminal in nature,' say RCMP | Alberta | News | Edm
Of course no charges against the bums whose job it was to protect the little gal. No changes in the system either. Hey what's three years to an abused kid?


----------



## FeXL

Can't be caught criticizing her boss now, can she?

Notley says federal NDP pipeline opposition is irrelevant



> Premier Rachel Notley said Friday that opposition to pipelines by the newly elected leader of the federal NDP has little bearing on the ongoing debate over the projects.
> 
> Jagmeet Singh made a campaign-style swing through Vancouver, where he reiterated that he is against both the expansion of Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain line to the Pacific Coast and TransCanada’s recently shelved Energy East project.
> 
> Speaking to reporters in Calgary, Notley — whose Alberta NDP government has backed both pipelines — noted Trans Mountain has already been approved by the federal government and suggested she wouldn’t lose much sleep over Singh’s position.


----------



## FeXL

Hey, Rachel, how 'bouts we let the public decide what to do with their own dollars. Say, in about 18 months or so...

Alberta premier Rachel Notley says Catholic school sex-ed plan won't ever be taught



> Alberta Premier Rachel Notley says an alternative sex education curriculum being crafted by Catholic school officials will never be taught if it arrives as previously advertised.
> 
> In an interview with The Canadian Press, Notley says the health and well-being of students comes first.
> 
> “*Nowhere do the rights of religious freedom extend to that person’s right to somehow attack or hurt others* — and that’s what’s happening here,” Notley said Tuesday.


You mean, f'rinstance, like Islam...



> “We will not use public dollars to have sexual health programs that *deny science, that deny evidence*, and that deny human rights.


What "science" we be talkin' 'bout here? Exactly what "evidence"?


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> Always telling to see progs like Notley demanding "sustainability" from ridiculously expensive (minimal) energy projects--but never in the budget.


It would be great to see balanced budgets become top of mind again for voters, but I guess that was a 90s thing. Out of fashion nowadays.


----------



## SINC

Just a reminder, in case you have forgotten. The Dippers will increase the carbon tax by a whopping 50 percent on January 1, 2018. Just one more reason to deep six these commies.


----------



## Macfury

That carbon tax is twe reason that all of these pipelines are finally being built... oh wait.



SINC said:


> Just a reminder, in case you have forgotten. The Dippers will increase the carbon tax by a whopping 50 percent on January 1, 2018. Just one more reason to deep six these commies.


----------



## Rps

To be honest I haven’t followed the UCP leadership race, so, I’m asking those who live in Alberta who do you think will win, and , will that person be the next Premier? Just wondering if one of the candidates would stand up better to Notley than the others.


----------



## SINC

Rps said:


> To be honest I haven’t followed the UCP leadership race, so, I’m asking those who live in Alberta who do you think will win, and , will that person be the next Premier? Just wondering if one of the candidates would stand up better to Notley than the others.


Poll after poll in recent years (not months) have shown that it really makes no difference who is elected the new leader of the UCP. Every. Single. Poll. Has shown whoever it is would be elected premier. The people of this province detest the NDP and the mistake they made in electing them.


----------



## Rps

Well with oil at almost $54 a barrel, if it continues to rise do you think she could recover since her policies, at least to me, seemed based on a steady resource price.....which didn’t happen, but I guess the question is if oil continues to rise will she have enough time? Here in Ontario Wynne is around 17% in the polls, but she does have some time.


----------



## SINC

Nope, not a chance. She will be soundly defeated in May of 2019. Watch it happen.


----------



## FeXL

Rps said:


> Well with oil at almost $54 a barrel, if it continues to rise do you think she could recover since her policies, at least to me, seemed based on a steady resource price.....which didn’t happen, but I guess the question is if oil continues to rise will she have enough time? Here in Ontario Wynne is around 17% in the polls, but she does have some time.


Know what happen if oil prices keep rising over the next 18 months?

Red Rachel spends even more. She simply cannot help herself. She has unions to buy off before the election...


----------



## Macfury

Oil is supposed to be rising to $68 a barrel under Ceci's assumption, and output must rise 50 per cent by 2020 to get anywhere near to government fiscal sanity. Futures markets currently predict $60 for 2020. All the while, their nutty domestic policies are designed to reduce the consumption of oil and gas, while their corporate tax policies encourage producers to go elsewhere.


----------



## eMacMan

Am I correct that Rachel knuckled under, and nothing was done about the insanity of twice annual time changes?


----------



## Macfury

eMacMan said:


> Am I correct that Rachel knuckled under, and nothing was done about the insanity of twice annual time changes?


I want it permanently left at the DST setting. I prefer dark mornings, lighter evenings.


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> I want it permanently left at the DST setting. I prefer dark mornings, lighter evenings.


I don't care which way they go, but really want to see an end to switching out every 6 months.


----------



## FeXL

Bell: Catholics outraged while NDP ignore reality



> On Monday, Eggen still says the following of Catholic school superintendents: “They were taking some exception with teaching consent and that’s just not on.”
> 
> The above sentence is not true. They were not taking exception.
> 
> Catholic schools teach consent before sex as the bare minimum. They also teach the importance of sex within marriage.
> 
> “We support teaching about legal consent,” says a sex-ed document sent many months ago by Catholic school superintendents to the NDP government.
> 
> “Legal consent is important,” it says.
> 
> “Consent is always necessary,” it also says.
> 
> But, adds the document, Catholics believe sexual relationships aren’t based only on “ongoing consent and pleasure.” That’s where the document mentions marriage.
> 
> Catholics believe in MORE than consent. Hope the NDP caught those capital letters.


Doubt it...


----------



## FeXL

Alberta premier accuses male MLAs of ‘mansplaining’ and ‘hepeating’ over pipelines



> Gender and vocabulary are clashing on the floor of the Alberta legislature.
> 
> Premier Rachel Notley, one day after accusing a male opponent of “mansplaining,” is calling out another for “hepeating.”


And what do you call "basic stupidity", Rachel?


----------



## FeXL

Imagine the hue & cry from the left if a gay Muslim couple was refused?

Canadian province blocks Christian couple from adopting children



> _An evangelical Christian couple have filed a court application alleging the province discriminated against them based on their religious beliefs by rejecting their application to adopt a child.
> 
> The Edmonton couple — whose are identified only by initials in court documents — allege an initial recommendation they be allowed to adopt was revoked after “interference” by the Ministry of Children’s Services, and that they were told their religious beliefs related to gender and sexuality were contrary to the “official position of the Alberta government.”_​


Can you imagine the horrible future these poor youngsters would face at the hands of <gasp> evangelical Christians? :yikes:


----------



## FeXL

Of course they are. And what could possibly go wrong? Everybody gets high & votes the NDP back in?

Alberta NDP open to conversation on decriminalizing possession of hard drugs



> Alberta’s NDP government has no position on decriminalizing hard drugs but is open to the conversation around the issue, associate health minister Brandy Payne said Monday.
> 
> As Ottawa moves toward legalizing recreational cannabis next year, recently elected federal NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh has called for the decriminalization of personal possession of all drugs to help combat the escalating problems with opioids.


Perhaps one of you genius' can take the time to explain to me just how legalizing opioids will help with the opioid problem.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Perhaps one of you genius' can take the time to explain to me just how legalizing opioids will help with the opioid problem.


Selling them at the corner store will provide revenue for addiction treatment programs?


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Selling them at the corner store will provide revenue for addiction treatment programs?


Yeah, that's the ticket!


----------



## FeXL

Alberta NDP's coal relief program a lose-lose proposition



> On Friday, the Notley government announced its final transition program for Albertans who work at coal-fired power plants. It is, in a word, pathetic.
> 
> The plan might be okay for workers nearing retirement. But it does little to ensure that younger workers will be able to find suitable jobs to replace the well-paying powerplant work they’re doing now.


More:



> The irony is, the New Democrats refuse to make any cuts at all in the public-sector workforce to help reduce their mega-deficits. As Finance Minister Joe Ceci is fond of saying, the government “will not balance the budget by putting more working people on the unemployment line.”
> 
> But if you work in an industry the stands in the way of the NDP’s “green energy” dreams, they have no problem at all putting you out of work.


Further:



> The NDP have paid utilities over $2 billion to close their 18 coal-fired plants early, all to prevent the emissions from just 5,800 megawatts of electricity generation a year.
> 
> But while we are closing down 5,800 megawatts forever, the Chinese are adding 52,000 megawatts of new coal plants a year on top of the 1 million megawatts they already have.


Well, the NDP have never been accused of being overly bright...


----------



## SINC

Finally someone is stepping up to challenge Notley's GSA laws that remove parental care and control over their minor children.

Rights advocate threatens lawsuit over proposed Alberta law on gay-straight alliances - Calgary - CBC News


----------



## Macfury

It's what socialists do. Their sterile form of government command-and-control is just so much better than actual families.


----------



## SINC

This ought to be required reading for Notley and the Alberta NDP:

France ran out of money last Tuesday — and within days, so will the rest of Europe | Ottawa Citizen


----------



## Macfury

Notely only dreams of being more like Greece or Venezuela.


----------



## SINC

Does Red Rachel's pot driving legislation work?

Tests for pot-impaired driving flawed, substance abuse expert says - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## SINC

Finally some sense on the Eskimo team name and from the Inuit themselves.

'We have far more pressing issues,' says Inuk who backs Edmonton Eskimos name - North - CBC News


----------



## Rps

SINC said:


> Finally some sense on the Eskimo team name and from the Inuit themselves.
> 
> 'We have far more pressing issues,' says Inuk who backs Edmonton Eskimos name - North - CBC News


While they are at it, might as well get rid of The Redskins, The Indians, The Braves.....RedBlacks ( racial overtones ) The Canucks, The Devils, The Blackhawks. And nothing says basketball like The Pelicans.


----------



## Macfury

There are some descendants of Pirates and Buccaneers who are also very sad.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Finally some sense on the Eskimo team name and from the Inuit themselves.


Related:

And St-Ignace in Huronia...



> ...will be renamed... "Big Missionary Stew"...
> 
> _To prevent him from speaking more, *they cut off his tongue, and both his upper and lower lips*. After that, they set themselves to strip the flesh from his legs, thighs, and arms, to the very bone; and then *put it to roast before his eyes, inorder to eat it.*_​


Links' bold.


----------



## FeXL

Another dope...

Alberta To Control Online Pot Sales, But Private Operators Allowed To Sell Weed In Stores



> The Alberta government plans to control the online sale of legalized marijuana but will leave over-the-counter sales to private operators.
> 
> Justice Minister Kathleen Ganley introduced the rules in proposed legislation Thursday, but details on how sales would work have yet to be determined.
> 
> "*This is a major shift for our province and one that has to be made very quickly with a lot of complex questions*," said Ganley.


M'bold.

No $h!t. Like, over the next 18 months afore yer butts get tossed out?



> "We believe this plan represents what the majority of Albertans want to see."


How's about we have us a little referendum & find out what Albertans _really_ want?


----------



## SINC

FeXL said:


> How's about we have us a little referendum & find out what Albertans _really_ want?


Easy.

Get rid of the NDP or better known as the Notley Dope People who continue to ruin Alberta.

Most people can hardly wait.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Easy.
> 
> Get rid of the NDP or better known as the Notley Dope People who continue to ruin Alberta.
> 
> Most people can hardly wait.


Actually ran across someone a couple weeks back who admitted to my face he had voted for Red Rachel. Asked him if he'd repeat the mistake. And I quote, "Not a chance."


----------



## FeXL

Corbella: Death of another iconic restaurant a sign of bad times in Calgary



> Another iconic downtown Calgary restaurant is closing its doors and in so doing is opening a wider window into understanding just how tough things are for many small businesses in the city’s downtown.
> 
> On Friday night, Catch & the Oyster Bar served its last dreamy bowl of New England clam chowder and its last plate of wonton-crusted tempura prawns. For an establishment that was voted Canada’s best overall restaurant in 2010, it’s a big fall from the heady days of tough-to-get reservations and waiting lists.


More:



> “I learned so much here,” adds Drinkwalter, who works at Blink, another high-end restaurant less than half a block west of Catch, which is close to other formerly renowned Calgary restaurants that have recently closed down, including Divino, which was successful for 33 years; The Belvedere, which was around for 19 years; the Trib Steakhouse and Rush Ocean Prime, to name just a few.


Further:



> Clayton Morgan, owner of The Belvedere, which closed on Oct. 21, says it’s not just the empty office towers that forced him to shut down.
> 
> “It’s death by a thousand paper cuts,” complains Morgan, whose restaurant changed fine dining in Calgary.
> 
> “Economics 101 says during hard economic times governments shouldn’t raise taxes. But no, every level of government — the city, the province and the feds — have hiked our taxes and other things,” adds Morgan.
> 
> “Beer taxes, liquor taxes, the carbon tax, business taxes, for the privilege of operating a business in this city, the hike in the minimum wage we could handle, but then *Rachel Notley mandates that on Jan. 1, holiday pay is going up by 25 per cent*,” explains Morgan.
> 
> Restaurant owners are also hit with new rules that forbid employers or employees to bank hours for a day off in lieu. Now if a waiter works overtime, they must be paid, time-and-a-half, rather than get extra time off later.
> 
> “It’s nickel and dime, nickel and dime at the very worst of times,” says Morgan, who is sad for his staff who have yet to find work. “*These people in power are bozos, they have no clue what’s going on out here and the pain they’re causing. They just keep on socking it to us.*”


M'bold.

NDP's raison d'etre...


----------



## Macfury

Even reading this stuff, the resident Notley fan-boys would remain unmoved. Who cares about small business?



FeXL said:


> Corbella: Death of another iconic restaurant a sign of bad times in Calgary
> 
> 
> 
> More:
> 
> 
> 
> Further:
> 
> 
> 
> M'bold.
> 
> NDP's raison d'etre...


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Who cares about small business?


Damn few of Rachel's unionized supporters. As long as they've got their latté server with the man bun...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Damn few of Rachel's unionized supporters. As long as they've got their latté server with the man bun...


And if government employees you, to hell with the peons..


----------



## FeXL

Thank you, Red Rachel...


----------



## Macfury

Notley and Trudeau have both stated that Canadians want to dig deeper to help them achieve their personal prog goals. Merry Christmas!


----------



## CubaMark

*Starting with 'eastern bastards' remark, Notley wins over Calgary business crowd*









Alberta Premier Rachel Notley received an icy reception, left, when she addressed the Calgary Chamber in 2015. 
Two years later, Notley was all smiles as she earned a standing ovation at the end of her speech to the same group. (CBC)​
Alberta Premier Rachel Notley received an icy reception, left, when she addressed the Calgary Chamber in 2015. Two years later, Notley was all smiles as she earned a standing ovation at the end of her speech to the same group. (CBC)

Two years after struggling through a speech in front of an awkwardly silent business crowd, Rachel Notley stood before the Calgary Chamber again on Friday and opened with a joke.

"I spent the earlier part of the week out in Ontario — you know, the home of those eastern bastards," Alberta's NDP premier said.

She paused briefly for the laughter and carried on.

* * *​
"I am, of course, referring to those soon-to-be-trampled Toronto Argonauts."

The Calgary Stampeders take on the Argos for the Grey Cup on Sunday, and the premier's football reference drew the first round of applause from the audience during her 33-minute speech.

There would be 11 more, including a standing ovation at the end.​(CBC)​


----------



## Macfury

Kind of reminds me of the prisoners cheering the warden when he announces he's offering them a steak dinner. Of course they're going to applaud a promise to actually build the economy over the few months she has left. 

Hope she carries this warm memory to her political grave!


----------



## Freddie_Biff

CubaMark said:


> *Starting with 'eastern bastards' remark, Notley wins over Calgary business crowd*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Alberta Premier Rachel Notley received an icy reception, left, when she addressed the Calgary Chamber in 2015.
> 
> Two years later, Notley was all smiles as she earned a standing ovation at the end of her speech to the same group. (CBC)​
> 
> 
> Alberta Premier Rachel Notley received an icy reception, left, when she addressed the Calgary Chamber in 2015. Two years later, Notley was all smiles as she earned a standing ovation at the end of her speech to the same group. (CBC)
> 
> 
> 
> Two years after struggling through a speech in front of an awkwardly silent business crowd, Rachel Notley stood before the Calgary Chamber again on Friday and opened with a joke.
> 
> 
> 
> "I spent the earlier part of the week out in Ontario — you know, the home of those eastern bastards," Alberta's NDP premier said.
> 
> 
> 
> She paused briefly for the laughter and carried on.
> 
> 
> 
> * * *​
> 
> 
> "I am, of course, referring to those soon-to-be-trampled Toronto Argonauts."
> 
> 
> 
> The Calgary Stampeders take on the Argos for the Grey Cup on Sunday, and the premier's football reference drew the first round of applause from the audience during her 33-minute speech.
> 
> 
> 
> There would be 11 more, including a standing ovation at the end.​
> (CBC)​



About time.


----------



## Macfury

About time for what? The pipeline that Notley got "social license" to build by indenturing Albertans with a carbon tax?


----------



## FeXL

Woohoo!!!

Alberta's credit rating cut after confirming $10.3-billion deficit, $42-billion debt



> Alberta has been hit with another credit downgrade one day after it confirmed it remains on track for a $10.3-billion budget deficit this year.
> 
> The credit rating agency DBRS say it has downgraded Alberta‘s long-term debt rating to AA from AA (high) and has adjusted or maintained other ratings indicators on a negative trend.
> 
> The agency said the downgrade reflects the high operating deficits and Alberta’s rapidly accumulating debt, which is pegged to surpass $42 billion by the spring.


More:



> Finance Minister Joe Ceci, responding to the downgrade, says Alberta still has the strongest debt-to-GDP ratio among provinces and the province’s credit rating remains among the highest in Canada.


Kewl. So, for a country whose finances are overall in the toilet, Red Rachel & the NDP are the top turd. Not bad for 2-1/2 years of power.

Ra-chel, Ra-chel, Ra-chel...

Related:

City of Calgary plummets from A- to D+ on fiscal report card



> Calgary registered the largest year-over-year decline in budget clarity — dropping from a grade of A- in 2016 to D+ in 2017 — in the latest edition of a C.D. Howe Institute study that grades the financial reports of Canadian cities.


----------



## eMacMan

To be fair this is a Calgary Board of Education issue, but the massive quantity of buzz words spewing out of Lisa Davis' mouth is a pretty good indicator that she has no clue as to how to address the issue.

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local...ults-oversteps-teacher-boundaries-critics-say


----------



## eMacMan

Every once in a while Rachel does have a reasonably good idea.

Thomson: After targeting ‘big money’ in elections, NDP now aims at ‘dark money’ | Calgary Herald

However there is little doubt that this will hit the Untied Conmen harder than the New Dumbocrats.


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> Every once in a while Rachel does have a reasonably good idea.


Wake me up when that happens.



eMacMan said:


> However there is little doubt that this will hit the Untied Conmen harder than the New Dumbocrats.


Precisely. Which is why it's suddenly become an issue for Red Rachel. It's UNFAAAAAAIR!!!


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Precisely. Which is why it's suddenly become an issue for Red Rachel. It's UNFAAAAAAIR!!!


Even if this passes a constitutional smell test, Rachel is still out.


----------



## SINC

Yep, pretty much:

GUNTER: Alberta Advantage is dead and buried | Edmonton Sun


----------



## Macfury

The NDP spent a LOT of money over the past three years. Now _THAT_'s good governance. _(At least that's what another EhMAc member says.)_



SINC said:


> Yep, pretty much:
> 
> GUNTER: Alberta Advantage is dead and buried | Edmonton Sun


----------



## eMacMan

Only the NDP could figure out a way to fail at marketing and taxing Cannabis.
New cannabis deal an improvement but legal pot won't be a revenue generator, Alberta finance minister predicts - Edmonton - CBC Newshttps://ca.news.yahoo.com/cannabis-deal-better-original-50-000358702.html



> But Ceci said he expects legal cannabis overall will cost the province money.
> 
> "Nobody is thinking about this as a revenue generator line," he said. "We're thinking of it more as a responsible treatment to a federal decision to legalize cannabis on July 1."


----------



## Macfury

The NDP relies on stoned voters among its core constituency.



eMacMan said:


> Only the NDP could figure out a way to fail at marketing and taxing Cannabis.
> New cannabis deal an improvement but legal pot won't be a revenue generator, Alberta finance minister predicts - Edmonton - CBC Newshttps://ca.news.yahoo.com/cannabis-deal-better-original-50-000358702.html


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> The NDP relies on stoned voters among its core constituency.


"'ere!!!"


----------



## FeXL

Didn't even know this was on today.

Braid: Calgary-Lougheed, the little byelection with huge impact



> The Calgary-Lougheed byelection set for Thursday looks like a typical Jason Kenney political lab, sterilized and sealed, the ideal test run of the UCP leader’s master plan for Alberta.
> 
> There he is, the sole conservative candidate with an audience. The options to the right of him (Alberta Advantage, Reform Party of Alberta, the inevitably appalling Larry Heather) are electorally meaningless.
> 
> Meanwhile, the centre-left is splitting itself between the NDP candidate, Phillip van der Merwe, and Liberal Leader David Khan, whose campaign is surprisingly energetic and effective.


So, Freddie, any bets? Speaking of which, you still owe me "all the rice in China" from the last one you lost...


----------



## FeXL

Woohoo!!!

Kenney cruises to victory in Calgary-Lougheed byelection



> The United Conservative Party leader was the heavy favourite in the race — triggered by the resignation of UCP MLA Dave Rodney to make way for Kenney — and unofficial results showed the former federal cabinet minister with 71.5 per cent of the vote and a nearly 6,000-vote lead over the NDP’s Phillip van der Merwe.


Step one accomplished.

Next!


----------



## Macfury

Must be one cluster-fest tonight! Congratulations Alberta!



FeXL said:


> Woohoo!!!
> 
> Kenney cruises to victory in Calgary-Lougheed byelection
> 
> 
> 
> Step one accomplished.
> 
> Next!


----------



## SINC

Step one in the outright rejection of the NDP and all it stands for.


----------



## Macfury

Isn't it time for another listing of Notley's debt programs to show what "good governance" is all about?


----------



## SINC

Would that not be a waste of time considering all her programs will be gone in about 18 months?


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Would that not be a waste of time considering all her programs will be gone in about 18 months?


It would be a good list of what got Alberta into crushing debt. But as you know, crushing debt is good governance.


----------



## Rps

SINC said:


> Step one in the outright rejection of the NDP and all it stands for.


Sinc, isn’t this the 3rd seat lost to the NDP in Calgary? Just wondering on the population spread in Alberta....it used to be 1/3 lived in Calgary, 1/3 lived in Edmonton 1/3 lived everywhere else. Here in Ontario the Liberals took Toronto and much of the GTA, so they got in....is Calgary becoming Alberta’s Toronto? If that is the case the NDP are in serious trouble.


----------



## SINC

Edmonton is commonly called Redmonton because it is full of unionized NDP supporters and if they keep any seats, it will be there. The Dippers will go down in flames everywhere else in Alberta. In seriuos trouble? You bet. They are the most hated politicians ever.


----------



## FeXL

Nelson: Small businesses keep getting punched in the mouth



> In Alberta’s case, we’re getting a glimpse past the rhetoric of how carbon taxes and minimum wage hikes will provide nothing other than the sheer delight of living in a fair and fulsome land.
> 
> Now you can’t blame a politician for trying, and there’s a case for attempting to cut emissions through the stick of higher prices. While, in the case of Alberta’s minimum wage, who can begrudge those on the bottom of the pay scale getting a dollar or two extra each hour?
> 
> But what if this strategy doesn’t work? What if it actually hurts the very people that proponents of these measures were genuinely attempting to help in the first place? What then?


Um...yer screwed?


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> ..and there’s a case for attempting to cut emissions through the stick of higher prices...


There's a case to be made for the mechanism, but not the goal.



FeXL said:


> What if it actually hurts the very people that proponents of these measures were genuinely attempting to help in the first place? What then?


The minimum wage hikes were intended to help the unions, so I think they're quite happy.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> The minimum wage hikes were intended to help the unions, so I think they're quite happy.


Do you really think there's a unionized employee in the province whose not already making far more than $15/hr?

In _1988_ I was park ranger for a local provincial park as a summer job whilst in university. Base wage, minus shift differential, was well over $12/hr. That's 30 years ago...

I'd be way surprised.


----------



## Macfury

No. Many of them have base wages indexed to minimum wage.



FeXL said:


> Do you really think there's a unionized employee in the province whose not already making far more than $15/hr?
> 
> In _1988_ I was park ranger for a local provincial park as a summer job whilst in university. Base wage, minus shift differential, was well over $12/hr. That's 30 years ago...
> 
> I'd be way surprised.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> No. Many of them have base wages indexed to minimum wage.


Right. Gotcha.


----------



## FeXL

Alberta’s small businesses chafe under new labour laws



> Small-business advocates in Alberta are raising concerns about new provincial employment standards that take effect on Jan. 1, rules they say will bring added costs and regulatory burdens to businesses.


Ra-chel. Ra-chel. Ra-chel...


----------



## Macfury

Hey, she's always making new laws. *THIS* is great governance!


FeXL said:


> Alberta’s small businesses chafe under new labour laws
> 
> 
> 
> Ra-chel. Ra-chel. Ra-chel...


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> Hey, she's always making new laws. *THIS* is great governance!


Not for much longer it isn't. The countdown is on.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Not for much longer it isn't. The countdown is on.


Kind of miss Freddie's pitiful mewlings about Rachel's "stealth" popularity.


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> Kind of miss Freddie's pitiful mewlings about Rachel's "stealth" popularity.


Even they have seen the light and her popularity has declined to such a low, one never hears a peep from supporters any more. Come to think of it, what supporters?


----------



## Macfury

17 months or less until Alberta's provincial NDP nightmare ends.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> 17 months or less until Alberta's provincial NDP nightmare ends.



Or gets renewed for another four years. Don't count on Kenney to save your ass.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Or gets renewed for another four years. Don't count on Kenney to save your ass.


I'm counting on Kenney!


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Or gets renewed for another four years. Don't count on Kenney to save your ass.


You're kidding right? You're so out of touch with reality that you don't meet three out of four Albertans in everyday life who detest the NDP and Notley? They who say they will never vote NDP ever again? Wow.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> I'm counting on Kenney!




Yeah, I imagine you would. Good luck with that.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> You're kidding right? You're so out of touch with reality that you don't meet three out of four Albertans in everyday life who detest the NDP and Notley? They who say they will never vote NDP ever again? Wow.




But Kenney? Seriously man. Be careful what you wish for.


----------



## FeXL

What could Kenney do worse that Red Rachel already hasn't?

Save a 40% reduction in teacher's wages? :lmao:

Be specific...



Freddie_Biff said:


> But Kenney? Seriously man. Be careful what you wish for.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> But Kenney? Seriously man. Be careful what you wish for.


Repealing the carbon tax alone would pour millions into the economy. It is the single most regressive and unecessary tax ever foisted on Albertans. It has no benefit to us whatsoever.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Seems the NDP are not doing so terrible after all. 

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/calgary/alberta-economy-conference-board-canada-1.4414153


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Seems the NDP are not doing so terrible after all.
> 
> Alberta's economy to grow at blistering 6.7% pace this year, says Conference Board of Canada - Calgary - CBC News


Yep, all financed by debt. Massive debt. Forgot about that little detail did we?


----------



## SINC

SINC said:


> Yep, all financed by debt. Massive debt. Forgot about that little detail did we?


Think of it this way. Go to the bank and borrow a million bucks. Spend it all on stocks. Declare yourself rich and leave the debt repayment to your grandchildren. NDP money management 101.


----------



## Macfury

SINC, the figure is reflective of the bad place that the Alberta economy has been in for more than two years. It's not growth, it's just the rest of the continent dragging it toward some level of normalcy. 

Freddie did not read to the end of the article--or may have hoped nobody else did:



> The "booming growth" in 2017 comes after two years of economic contraction, and the Conference Board cautions that Alberta won't keep up that pace next year.


----------



## SINC

A Bank of Canada report. 

60,000 jobs will be lost because of increases in minimum wages. 

Of course Notley and crew will spin this differently. 

Minimum wage hikes could cost Canada's economy 60,000 jobs this year - Business - CBC News


----------



## Macfury

The NDP uses the minimum wage as though it were a social program. As long as everything looks good this week, who cares what happens next month?



SINC said:


> A Bank of Canada report.
> 
> 60,000 jobs will be lost because of increases in minimum wages.
> 
> Of course Notley and crew will spin this differently.
> 
> Minimum wage hikes could cost Canada's economy 60,000 jobs this year - Business - CBC News


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> A Bank of Canada report.
> 
> 60,000 jobs will be lost because of increases in minimum wages.
> 
> Of course Notley and crew will spin this differently.


Ran across that earlier but was looking for a link besides MotherCorpse.

Hey, all they have to do is roll a fattie & chill. Juthdin & Red Rachel will take care of 'em...


----------



## SINC

So far out of it she just doesn't know.

*Notley fires back and faces fire in return*

Notley slams Kenney, Wall and an eatery at a stop in Calgary


----------



## Rps

SINC said:


> A Bank of Canada report.
> 
> 60,000 jobs will be lost because of increases in minimum wages.
> 
> Of course Notley and crew will spin this differently.
> 
> Minimum wage hikes could cost Canada's economy 60,000 jobs this year - Business - CBC News


Let’s be fair Sinc, the model indicated that there are a number of forecasts from 30,000 to 130,000 job losses in the near term. However in the long run the BofC and others estimate a benefit. What is at issue here I believe is the speed in which the raise was created. Clearly the youth will be hurt, but here in Windsor there are a large number of adults making minimum or near minimum.....unless you work for the City or Chrysler you are in the lower wage segment.


----------



## FeXL

Rps said:


> However in the long run the BofC and others estimate a benefit.


I've posted any number of articles on these boards noting the $15/hr minimum wage hike put into _actual practice_ has cost jobs, raised consumer prices & even closed businesses down.

Frankly, I'll take that real world experience over idle speculation from some fat cat sitting in a board office getting paid 6 or 7 figures a year.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> Let’s be fair Sinc, the model indicated that there are a number of forecasts from 30,000 to 130,000 job losses in the near term. However in the long run the BofC and others estimate a benefit. What is at issue here I believe is the speed in which the raise was created. Clearly the youth will be hurt, but here in Windsor there are a large number of adults making minimum or near minimum.....unless you work for the City or Chrysler you are in the lower wage segment.


If that brings prosperity, why not goose the rate another 50 per cent?


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> If that brings prosperity, why not goose the rate another 50 per cent?


Just like shopping for camshafts. If a little bit works, more must be better & too much is just about right.


----------



## SINC

Yep, so true. 

NDP ‘experts’ leading us astray | Edmonton Sun


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Yep, so true.


Too polite by half...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Too polite by half...


Union experts disagree!


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Union experts disagree!


Union experts can kiss my hairy, unwashed backside... :lmao:


----------



## SINC

Yup and a two to one UCP lead will only get worse for the Dippers as the election nears.

Latest poll shows UCP ‘would easily win’ Alberta election now

https://globalnews.ca/news/3984862/poll-ucp-win-alberta-election-politics/


----------



## Macfury

I am just waiting to see that sour look on Notley's face come election day.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> I am just waiting to see that sour look on Notley's face come election day.


Think there'll be a difference from the one she _always_ carries around?


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Yup and a two to one UCP lead will only get worse for the Dippers as the election nears.
> 
> Latest poll shows UCP ‘would easily win’ Alberta election now


From your linked article:



> "...We are missing the personality of the premier..."


Nope. I've had a bellyful of her "personality", thankyouverymuch. If she hibernated until election time before she arose to see her shadow, few Albertans would miss her...


----------



## Macfury

A cup of poutine has more personality.


----------



## eMacMan

Looks like Rachel is so enamored with Hiliary she has suffered brain damage. If there is one Hiliary trait she should never emulate, it would be deleting eMails. 

Ontario gas plant scandal investigator retained in deleted email probe | Calgary Herald



> According to documents obtained by Postmedia, Alberta’s privacy commissioner has enlisted the help of two investigators at Wortzmans, a Toronto-based firm specializing in e-Discovery and information governance.
> 
> Company founder Susan Wortzman and data engineering and analytics director Chuck Rothman will assist Alberta’s assistant information and privacy commissioner LeRoy Brower in his investigation.
> 
> .......
> 
> Alberta information and privacy commissioner Jill Clayton launched her office’s investigation in October. It centres around sparse inboxes and sent email folders belonging to top staffers in Premier Rachel Notley’s office, and internal ministry programs encouraging staff to reduce the number of emails in their system.
> 
> The issue was unearthed by the official Opposition when it asked for numbers of managerial and director government email records in 2016. After requesting similar information a few months later, it found 800,000 emails across government departments had since been deleted.


----------



## SINC

*B.C. NDP is well on the way to defeating Alberta NDP*



> With the stroke of a pen in British Columbia, Alberta’s New Democrats have descended from deep trouble to grave political crisis.
> 
> Their great hope of a smashing political win — construction of the Kinder Morgan pipeline — is stymied yet again by the people Premier Rachel Notley used to call friends.
> 
> Alberta’s provincial election is set for spring of 2019. Notley needs that pipeline under final unhindered construction well before then, with no roadblocks ahead.
> 
> On Tuesday, B.C. Premier John Horgan’s NDP government announced rules that would effectively ban expanded bitumen shipments off the coast. This could become permanent, pending a scientific safety study whose results we can already guess.
> 
> B.C. is effectively declaring Kinder Morgan to be uneconomic. The goal — stated by NDP-affiliated B.C. interest groups — is to force the company to cancel the project. They even raise the spectre of Kinder Morgan completing the expansion, and then finding itself forbidden to turn on the tap.
> 
> 
> Notley said Tuesday she knew B.C. was about to announce some kind of review, but had no idea this ban would be part of it. She attacked the action as illegal, unconstitutional and contrary to trade pacts.
> 
> Notley went on to say: “I’m not pulling any punches. This is bad for British Columbia, this is bad for Alberta, this is bad for Canada.” She called the move “political game-playing and political theatre.”


More:

Braid: B.C. NDP is well on the way to defeating Alberta NDP | Calgary Herald


----------



## Macfury

Unbelievable that Notley thinks her anti-business attitude is somehow of a better quality than the anti-business attitude of her socialist comrades in BC.


----------



## FeXL

Further on hanging onto your seat...

Alberta suspends electricity talks with B.C. over pipeline fight



> The Alberta government is suspending talks on the purchase of electricity from British Columbia — a measure Premier Rachel Notley cast as the first step in the fight against B.C.'s recent moves to block the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion.
> 
> "We're prepared to do what it takes to get this pipeline built — whatever it takes," she told a news conference Thursday after speaking with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on the phone.
> 
> Ms. Notley said B.C. stands to miss out on $500-million a year if the electricity negotiations fall apart.


If I didn't think this wasn't anything more than political grandstanding, I'd say Red Rachel had actually grown a spine. Amazing the depths you plumb to save your political career.

I jes' luvs Juthdin's responses during this interview:

Oh, Shiny Prime Minister!



> uh...ah...ah...uh...<sputter>...ah...uh...


The comments are priceless, especially this one:



> Years ago (for 25 years) I judged 4-H public speaking. He would not have got past the club speak-offs.


I participated in 4H speakoffs. Got to provincial level & finished second in the senior division in the province. I agree with the above sentiment entirely. What an embarrassment to the country...


----------



## Beej

FeXL said:


> If I didn't think this wasn't anything more than political grandstanding, I'd say Red Rachel had actually grown a spine. Amazing the depths you plumb to save your political career.


Start small: If the government has land or mobile phone contracts with Telus, now would be a good time to look at the alternatives. Just for diversity's sake.

Then eventually start evaluating existing pipeline capacity...if they think more is bad, then maybe less is good in their eyes, and Alberta can help them out.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/opinion/the-road-ahead-ian-brodie-opinion-ndp-rachel-notley-1.4515387


----------



## SINC

Not gonna happen. Not even close.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Not gonna happen. Not even close.


The part that made me laugh out loud:



> The party has some big political assets, some strong cards to play. The most important of which, is Premier Rachel Notley.


What's that writer been smoking?


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> What's that writer been smoking?


Dunno 'bout the smokin', but I do know the writer has never ventured into an Alberta pub or coffee shop and heard what people are saying about the NDP. Not only will they be toast, they will be burnt toast. 

From the link:



> The next provincial election is more than a year away — two if the NDP pushes the election timetable into 2020. That's plenty of time for the NDP to recover in the polls and affections of Albertans.


As for his ramblings about them delaying an election into 2020, I guess he does not know about Alberta's term law.


----------



## Macfury

I guess Freddie didn't read the article before posting. Certainly he would not have let that error pass.




SINC said:


> Dunno 'bout the smokin', but I do know the writer has never ventured into an Alberta pub or coffee shop and heard what people are saying about the NDP. Not only will they be toast, they will be burnt toast.
> 
> From the link:
> 
> 
> 
> As for his ramblings about them delaying an election into 2020, I guess he does not know about Alberta's term law.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Dunno 'bout the smokin', but I do know the writer has never ventured into an Alberta pub or coffee shop and heard what people are saying about the NDP. Not only will they be toast, they will be burnt toast.
> 
> 
> 
> From the link:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As for his ramblings about them delaying an election into 2020, I guess he does not know about Alberta's term law.




You mean the "term law" that the PC's themselves broke when Jim Prentice called the election a year early? You mean that "term law"? What were the consequences for breaking it again?


----------



## Macfury

A massive defeat. Same thing would happen to Notley.



Freddie_Biff said:


> What were the consequences for breaking it again?


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> You mean the "term law" that the PC's themselves broke when Jim Prentice called the election a year early? You mean that "term law"? What were the consequences for breaking it again?


There is no law against calling an early election. The law governs maximum term length only. Do try and keep up.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> There is no law against calling an early election. The law governs maximum term length only. Do try and keep up.




Are you certain? Seems to me the purpose was to have a predictably timed election every four years. Prentice botched it the first opportunity after the law came into effect. And what is the penalty if an election is called outside of this fixed election date?


----------



## Macfury

Freddie sez: "Vote Rachel in 2020."


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Freddie sez: "Vote Rachel in 2020."




Can you not be an ass? If you're going to quote someone, quote accurately. I don't give a rat's ass who you or your pals vote for, buddy. Your myopia regarding seeing actual progress made by political entities you don't like gets boring.


----------



## Macfury

There has been no progress, Freddie. Just more laws and taxes.Notley's NDP creates wealth like a tick creates blood. It will soon pass.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> There has been no progress, Freddie.


Well, let's not jump to conclusions. Perhaps Freddie would regale us with a quick synopsis of all that so-called NDP "progress".

While he's busy compiling that list, perhaps he could illustrate how well he has managed his own political myopia & expound a bit on Trump's successes.

Freddie?


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Well, let's not jump to conclusions. Perhaps Freddie would regale us with a quick synopsis of all that so-called NDP "progress".


There was a list of draconian laws and taxes posted a while back that was supposed to represent progress. Not hearing much about the "social capital" that Notley brilliantly earned to build the derailed BC pipeline by imposing a painful carbon tax on Albertans. How's that working out for ya?


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> There was a list of draconian laws and taxes posted a while back that was supposed to represent progress.


I'm sure they produced even more outstanding "progress" since then.



Macfury said:


> Not hearing much about the "social capital" that Notley brilliantly earned to build the derailed BC pipeline by imposing a painful carbon tax on Albertans. How's that working out for ya?


Workin' like a damn! We've been pumping cash into Red Rachel's retirement fund left, right & center.


----------



## 18m2

I found this article on a maritime web site and it discusses the increase in oil production by the US. I find the following suspicious and wonder if one of Alberta's blue eyes sheiks would care to comment?

Why is Canada importing crude from the US?



> Much of the increased flow will go to China, the world’s top importer and, since November, *the largest buyer of U.S. crude other than Canada*.


The article starts off saying how the US is selling crude below the world price and that, most likely, will have a negative effect on Alberta's plan to make money shipping bitumen to China.

Gulf Coast Shipping Boom: U.S. Oil Exports Pour Into Worldwide Markets â€“ gCaptain


----------



## Macfury

In some parts of Canada, it's cheaper to buy imports than domestic. The US buys from one province and sells to another. The retrograde economic ideas of people like Notley are also adding to the cost of domestic crude, tipping the balance to US imports.



18m2 said:


> I found this article on a maritime web site and it discusses the increase in oil production by the US. I find the following suspicious and wonder if one of Alberta's blue eyes sheiks would care to comment?
> 
> Why is Canada importing crude from the US?
> 
> 
> 
> The article starts off saying how the US is selling crude below the world price and that, most likely, will have a negative effect on Alberta's plan to make money shipping bitumen to China.
> 
> Gulf Coast Shipping Boom: U.S. Oil Exports Pour Into Worldwide Markets – gCaptain


----------



## FeXL

In fairness, this began under the PC's. However, as usual, Red Rachel shoves the knife in.

Southeast Rancher Hung Out To Dry By Government: Letter to the Editor



> In December, Alberta Environment and Parks (AEP) sent out letters advising Albertans that water license applications submitted over 15 years ago were being closed and water access related to those applications revoked. Southeast rancher Aaron Brower, whose ranch has been operated by his family for generations, was one of the recipients of the letters. Mr. Brower was told his application filed in 2001 by his father was being closed because the application was deemed incomplete and his traditional access to this public asset was cancelled.
> 
> To claim that a form filed with the government over 15 years ago has only now been deemed incomplete, therefore causing his file to be closed is outrageous. Mr. Brower made several attempts to have the issue resolved with the AEP in good faith, but AEP soundly refused forcing Mr. Brower to proceed with a time consuming and costly appeal to the Environmental Appeals Board.


I've known some of the Brower's for years. Decent, grass roots, salt of the earth type of people. Good folk.


----------



## FeXL

Let's talk Red Rachel's carbon tax some.



> Here’s an Alberta dairy farmer’s monthly gas bill. Carbon tax = $311.65, plus GST. For a tax the NDP hid from voters, and that they plan to raise by 67%, in this case to $520.


----------



## SINC

FeXL said:


> Let's talk Red Rachel's carbon tax some.


Yes, let's shall we? My usually reliable sources have tipped me off to a story breaking soon. It seems that after ordering the shutdown of our coal fired power plants, the province sees power shortages often during peak periods of demand. And since the windmills and solar can't meet the extra demand, the NDP have come up with a unique solution to the problem.

Yep, they buy the extra power we need from the state of Montana. Coal. Fired. Plant. Power. Keeping American workers employed while our own coal fired workers were all laid off.

And oh yeah, its cheaper 'cause there's no carbon tax on that power either.

Dirty lying bastids, the whole bunch of them.


----------



## Macfury

Reminds me of Toronto's NDP mayor David Miller who advocated to "keep Ontario clean" by exporting the city's trash to Michigan... by rail.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> It seems that after ordering the shutdown of our coal fired power plants, the province sees power shortages often during peak periods of demand. And since the windmills and solar can't meet the extra demand...


Related:

The Beast From the East



> The UK has closed most of its coal-fired power generation. The 11 GW that remain have been running eye balls out all week, day and night. It has been windy, and wind has put in a strong performance, that is until the wind drops. Solar panels are buried in snow. And yesterday the UK grid operator announced we were about to run out of gas. What a mess!


UK weather: Big freeze death toll could rise above 2,000 as it emerges Met Office warned ministers a month ago



> The death toll from Britain's big freeze could rise to more than 2,000, as it emerged the Met Office had warned ministers a month ago about the cold snap.
> 
> The number of people who have died in cold homes in the UK might reach 100 per day this winter, a charity warned in an analysis of Office for National Statistics figures.
> 
> Monday will be the first day back at work for many, after snow caused four days of transport mayhem and the coldest start to spring in five years brought about from the so-called "Beast from the East" Siberian weather front.





SINC said:


> Dirty lying bastids, the whole bunch of them.


No argument...


----------



## Macfury

More people die from cold than heat every year, but that's an unpopular narrative.


----------



## SINC

For those interested in ridding ourselves of the Notley NDP government, I have introduced a handy countdown to their demise clock on my website which can be seen live here: St. Albert's Place


----------



## Macfury

It would be nice if this could be an App for my iPhone, SINC!


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> For those interested in ridding ourselves of the Notley NDP government, I have introduced a handy countdown to their demise clock on my website which can be seen live here: St. Albert's Place


BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

:lmao::lmao::lmao:

Freddy'll be checking that daily to see how many more days of Prog rule he has left...


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> It would be nice if this could be an App for my iPhone, SINC!


If I only knew how, I would make one. Anyone know how?


----------



## Rps

SINC said:


> Yes, let's shall we? My usually reliable sources have tipped me off to a story breaking soon. It seems that after ordering the shutdown of our coal fired power plants, the province sees power shortages often during peak periods of demand. And since the windmills and solar can't meet the extra demand, the NDP have come up with a unique solution to the problem.
> 
> Yep, they buy the extra power we need from the state of Montana. Coal. Fired. Plant. Power. Keeping American workers employed while our own coal fired workers were all laid off.
> 
> And oh yeah, its cheaper 'cause there's no carbon tax on that power either.
> 
> Dirty lying bastids, the whole bunch of them.


What’s interesting, and I’m sure MacFury can vouch for this, that Ontario recently bought a coal generating plant in the Northwest U.S.....it might be related to the Montana plant.... curious and hypocritical as well.


----------



## eMacMan

Sorry Rachel, it may sound good in a sound bite aimed at the Edmonton NDP base but those of us living in or near rural Alberta recognize total BS when we hear it.
Alberta NDP promises beefed up funding in fight against rural crime | Calgary Herald


> Flanked by police vehicles and law enforcement officers at the RCMP Air Services Hanger at Edmonton International Airport, Justice Minister Kathleen Ganley announced a seven-point rural crime “action plan” that includes funding for 39 news officers, 40 civilian staff and 10 Crown prosecutors focused on rural crime.
> 
> “Some communities in rural Alberta are experiencing the highest property crime rates they’ve seen in five years. Like many Albertans, this spike in criminal activity worries me,” Ganley said.


For starters you can stop encouraging the scum. The way to do that is to not charge those property owners who defend their property, and come down hard on the real miscreants. So he winged a thieving meth-head. Imagine how much better off the province would be had he aimed for the chest or head, instead of sparing the scumball's life.

Rural residents rally for man charged with shooting at suspected thief | Calgary Herald



> OKOTOKS — More than 150 people gathered outside the courthouse on Friday morning to support a man charged with shooting at trespassers on his property.
> 
> Residents of rural communities across southern Alberta attended the rally, some holding signs and shouting slogans such as “broken system” and “charge the criminals.”
> 
> “It doesn’t matter if you’re a rural person, a city person – it’s property rights,” said Rod Hertz, who attended the rally. “You have to defend yourself, you should have the right to defend yourself.”
> 
> Edouard Maurice woke up early Feb. 24 to find two suspected trespassers rummaging through vehicles on his property.
> 
> Shots were fired and Ryan Watson was taken to hospital with a gunshot wound to his arm. He was charged with trespassing by night, theft under $5,000 from a motor vehicle, possession of methamphetamine and failure to comply with probation.
> 
> Maurice was charged with aggravated assault, pointing a firearm and careless use of a firearm – charges locals say aren’t fair.


----------



## Beej

Pipeline politics
Braid: Notley drops the biggest threat â€“ choking off oil to B.C. | Calgary Herald


> First, she mentioned “restriction of supply.” She said the Lower Mainland “has high sensitivity to supply changes there.”
> 
> And then: “a brief interruption in the Burnaby refinery now has resulted in gas in the Lower Mainland peaking to about $1.50 a litre, and is expected to peak at about $1.60 before those slowdowns in the refiners are finished.
> 
> “That’s just the way it is. So you see it is an area that is more sensitive to supply issues, and fairly small changes.”


Good. There have been enough concessions (by industry) to play nice.


----------



## Macfury

It's smart strategy on Notley's part. I only wish she actually supported the industry instead of valuing it to backstop her insane spending spree.



Beej said:


> Pipeline politics
> Braid: Notley drops the biggest threat – choking off oil to B.C. | Calgary Herald
> 
> 
> Good. There have been enough concessions (by industry) to play nice.


----------



## SINC

Beej said:


> Good. There have been enough concessions (by industry) to play nice.


While the move is a good one, Albertans should remember this was a classic move by former premier Peter Lougheed that Notley 'borrowed' from a Conservative handbook years ago in response to Pierre Trudeau's NEP.

It is also without any doubt a ploy by Notley and the NDP to enhance their chances of being re-elected next spring. That part of the plan will not work though. Albertans will toss the NDP party out the window, given the chance. Edmontonians? Not so much, it's a union town.


----------



## chasMac

She is attempting to preserve an industry so she can regulate and tax it out of existence. I hope voters will be aware of this.


----------



## Macfury

chasMac said:


> She is attempting to preserve an industry so she can regulate and tax it out of existence. I hope voters will be aware of this.


Yep. The oil industry is a handy prop in her re-election opera. 

Nice to see you back.


----------



## SINC

Fitting and appropriate.


----------



## Rps

SINC said:


> Fitting and appropriate.


Sinc, is the current population of Alberta still in 3rds.....1/3 in Edmonton, 1/3 in Calgary and 1/3 everywhere else? That said if so, the provincial Liberals took the GTA to a majority here. Can the NDP parlay various strongholds or are they toast. It looks like the Liberals here are losing the GTA so I think we can say goodbye to Wynne....is there no way Notley could recover?


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Fitting and appropriate.


BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

:lmao::lmao::lmao:


----------



## FeXL

Rps said:


> Sinc, is the current population of Alberta still in 3rds.....1/3 in Edmonton, 1/3 in Calgary and 1/3 everywhere else? That said if so, the provincial Liberals took the GTA to a majority here. Can the NDP parlay various strongholds or are they toast. It looks like the Liberals here are losing the GTA so I think we can say goodbye to Wynne....is there no way Notley could recover?


Rps, Alberta's population is a bit over 4 million. Edmonton ~1 million, Calgary just over 1 million. Dead Beer is around 100,000, Lethbridge just under. According to this page, urban/rural split is 81%/19%.

The reason Red Rachel rec'd so many votes last election was largely "anybody but PC" and "Can we trust Wildrose?". No way she garners that kind of support next election. Can Edmonchuk carry her to another win on their own? Nope. Things is, there are clusters of Progs here & there who will support her.

I believe she will lose support in Leth & Calgary and by anybody in Edmonchuk who is not an ideolog. Rurally she had very little support and after this disastrous term, she will have even less.


----------



## SINC

And this won't help her:

Rachel Notley’s former chief of staff investigated by privacy commissioner | Edmonton Journal


----------



## SINC

Notley's utter failure continues. 

NP View: Rachel Notley made mistake of believing in the federal Liberals’ ‘social licence’ | National Post


----------



## SINC

The spending continues and the debt is massive.

Alberta betting on pipelines to balance budget - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## Macfury

Ouch! Can even EhMac's local NDP supporters be happy with that trainwreck of a budget? 



> Titled "A Recovery Built to Last," the budget forecasts a reduction in the annual deficit each year until it reaches a $700-million surplus by 2023-24.


"A structural deficit built to last."


----------



## FeXL

Further on the Prog rot.

Dead Rose Country



> It's going to take a long time for Premier Kenney to dig out of this mess.
> 
> _*The province will pay nearly $2 billion in annual interest on today's debt, estimated at $54 billion in the new budget year. By 2021, the annual interest charge will be $2.9 billion as debt hits $77 billion.*
> 
> The budget doesn't show an interest calculation for 2023-24, when debt will be $96 billion.
> 
> But you can bet that by then, this province will be paying $5 billion a year.
> 
> *Even now, it's clear the government is borrowing money to pay interest on money it has already borrowed. And the books also show the province has not been repaying any principal.*_​


Comments very relevant.

It's gonna be sweet watching Red Rachel's ass getting bounced out of the legislature all the way down that long flight of steps...


----------



## SINC

Yep, a guy with no financial background grinding us into the dirt.

Alberta budget 'a pipeline dream,' credit-rating agency says - Edmonton - CBC News


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Yep, a guy with no financial background grinding us into the dirt.
> 
> Alberta budget 'a pipeline dream,' credit-rating agency says - Edmonton - CBC News


The weird part:



> The agency said it sees "no willingness" on the government's part to raise taxes, despite "ample capacity."


Plenty of willingness--just fear of being decimated in the election is stopping them, after acting on their "willingness" far too often in the previous years.


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> The weird part:
> 
> 
> 
> Plenty of willingness--just fear of being decimated in the election is stopping them, after acting on their "willingness" far too often in the previous years.


Fear of being? Good grief they are done in the 2019 election. Done like a dinner, done. I don't talk to anyone who will support them outside of government union employees and we all know why unions support them. (Only non union government employees have had their wages frozen.)


----------



## SINC

The wrecking ball continues. 

Alberta’s 2018 budget—a breathtaking exercise in complacency

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/blogs/alberta-s-2018-budget-a-breathtaking-exercise-in-complacency


----------



## FeXL

Sure do...

The numbers are in - Canadians really, really hate their premiers



> Six Canadian premiers have approval ratings lower than Donald Trump, according to a new poll released by the Angus Reid Institute.
> 
> The U.S. president, who famously broke records for low approval in his inaugural year, currently has a 40 per cent approval rating. By contrast, at least 50 per cent of Canadian premiers cannot claim approval ratings of more than one third.


I jes' luvs who they pick as the standard to be judged by.

Good ol' Red Rachel, down in the sewer where she belongs...


----------



## 18m2

The longer a politician is in power the worse their diaper smells. 

Horgan for example is pretty new and after Crusty Clark even out dog could garner support. Check back next year and see where he stands, that is, if the Greens haven't torpedoed his boat by then.


----------



## FeXL

Too little, too late.

Alberta declares 'definitive victory' on Trans Mountain appeal in federal court



> Alberta Premier Rachel Notley is calling a recent court decision on the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project a definitive victory.
> 
> The Federal Court of Appeal on Friday dismissed the B.C. government's bid to challenge a National Energy Board ruling that allows Kinder Morgan Canada to bypass local bylaws during construction of the pipeline expansion which would triple the amount of crude flowing from Alberta to a port facility in Burnaby, B.C.
> 
> The court also ordered B.C. to pay the legal costs.
> 
> "Another victory for our economy. Another victory for our climate plan. Another victory for the pipeline and another victory for all Albertans and all Canadians," Notley said Monday at an unrelated transit announcement.


Crow all you want, Red Rachel. Ain't gonna help you in a little over a year...


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Too little, too late.
> 
> 
> 
> Alberta declares 'definitive victory' on Trans Mountain appeal in federal court
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Crow all you want, Red Rachel. Ain't gonna help you in a little over a year...




Waa waa waa. You really hate it when she succeeds. Jealousy, perhaps?


----------



## FeXL

Freddie, this is the first time Red Rachel has succeeded at anything even remotely close to beneficial for the majority of Albertans, instead of pandering to special interest groups in the pursuit of re-election. Over 2-1/2 years can be written off as $h!t. I've never discounted a blind squirrel finding a nut every so often.



Freddie_Biff said:


> You really hate it when she succeeds.


Yeppers. You nailed it. $100 billion worth of provincial debt jealousy...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Jealousy, perhaps?


----------



## Macfury

Nothing wrong with a minor court victory. Only question is, when does construction begin? Oh wait, it isn't beginning, because BC has years of government hurdles place ahead of the project. Jason Kenney may get it built.



FeXL said:


> Too little, too late.
> 
> Alberta declares 'definitive victory' on Trans Mountain appeal in federal court
> 
> 
> 
> Crow all you want, Red Rachel. Ain't gonna help you in a little over a year...


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Nothing wrong with a minor court victory. Only question is, when does construction begin? Oh wait, it isn't beginning, because BC has years of government hurdles place ahead of the project. Jason Kenney may get it built.



You underestimate the number of people are not fans of Jason Kenney.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> You underestimate the number of people are not fans of Jason Kenney.


Not to worry Freddie, there are more than enough to dump Rachel and her Dippers. Watch it happen.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> You underestimate the number of people are not fans of Jason Kenney.


I can see how it might feel that way if you're working for the Board of Education, but I've taken a couple of trips to your town recently and I don't see Rachel coming back.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> I can see how it might feel that way if you're working for the Board of Education, but I've taken a couple of trips to your town recently and I don't see Rachel coming back.




Well then I still have one year to rub it in your faces how the socialist party beat the **** out of the conservative parties in the last Alberta election. Just givin' 'er, Rachel!


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Well then I still have one year to rub it in your faces how the socialist party beat the **** out of the conservative parties in the last Alberta election. Just givin' 'er, Rachel!


It was a great gift to Alberta to let them see how a socialist party can turn a "have" province into a "have-not" in just a few short years.


----------



## SINC

Rub what in our faces? The fact that she is done like a dinner?

Check out our handy dandy countdown to freedom from Notley clock, link to live clock below.


----------



## Macfury

Just looking forward to seeing that sour-grape face as she loses power. Someone with an ounce of political savvy would have have realized that her election was accidental and govern reasonably for a few years to build trust. 

Instead, she acts like someone taking a dump in a public park, forcing out every last ounce of excrement before she gets booted off the property by security.


----------



## SINC

So how incredibly stupid must you be to give the weed sales online contract to a US firm in Ohio?

U.S.-based company wins contract to develop and manage Alberta site for online weed sales | CBC News


----------



## SINC

Nails it!


----------



## FeXL

So who d'ya think they're gonna vote for?

Red Rachel again?

I'm not a huge fan of Kenney and I dislike the fact that WR merged with the bastards but the only thing between the Alberta people and another $100 billion of debt and even more 10's of billions in interest payments is...Kenny!



Freddie_Biff said:


> You underestimate the number of people are not fans of Jason Kenney.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> It was a great gift to Alberta to let them see how a socialist party can turn a "have" province into a "have-not" in just a few short years.


Yep. Lesson learned.

Some people just have to put their hand on the burner to see if it's hot...


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> So how incredibly stupid must you be to give the weed sales online contract to a US firm in Ohio?


I just hope it takes as long and is as ridden with issues as Barry's Obamacare website...


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> So how incredibly stupid must you be to give the weed sales online contract to a US firm in Ohio?
> 
> U.S.-based company wins contract to develop and manage Alberta site for online weed sales | CBC News


Only Notley could figure out a way to lose money selling weed.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> So who d'ya think they're gonna vote for?
> 
> 
> 
> Red Rachel again?
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not a huge fan of Kenney and I dislike the fact that WR merged with the bastards but the only thing between the Alberta people and another $100 billion of debt and even more 10's of billions in interest payments is...Kenny!




That's quite a glowing endorsement.


----------



## FeXL

Call it what you want. Rachel got in because it was "Anybody but the Conservatives". This time, it's "Anybody but Rachel".

Say sayonara to Alberta's only one term premier in history, Freddie. All those additional NDP taxes, surcharges, interest payments on uncontrolled debt, etc., & not a red cent added to your salary. How's it feel to be played as a sucker by the Progs? Going to be nice going back to a politically right premiere under whom you can get a raise, no?



Freddie_Biff said:


> That's quite a glowing endorsement.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Call it what you want. Rachel got in because it was "Anybody but the Conservatives". This time, it's "Anybody but Rachel".
> 
> 
> 
> Say sayonara to Alberta's only one term premier in history, Freddie. All those additional NDP taxes, surcharges, interest payments on uncontrolled debt, etc., & not a red cent added to your salary. How's it feel to be played as a sucker by the Progs? Going to be nice going back to a politically right premiere under whom you can get a raise, no?



Uh, no. The PC's were the ones that cut my salary in the first place, remember? And your beloved Allison Redford started the salary freezes starting in 2012, while her own cabinet received huge increases. At least Notley has increased funding to build schools, something that's been neglected since the Klein days.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> At least Notley has increased funding to build schools, something that's been neglected since the Klein days.


That's nonsense. Many schools were built prior to Notley--18 in the last few years before she was elected.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Uh, no. The PC's were the ones that cut my salary in the first place, remember? And your beloved Allison Redford started the salary freezes starting in 2012, while her own cabinet received huge increases. At least Notley has increased funding to build schools, something that's been neglected since the Klein days.


Ah, yes, now I recall. That was yer famous 40% cut, right?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Ah, yes, now I recall. That was yer famous 40% cut, right?



Hey Don, quick: what's 5 x 8? You shouldn't even need a calculator.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Hey Don, quick: what's 5 x 8? You shouldn't even need a calculator.


YOu just cannot admit yer wrong, can you?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> YOu just cannot admit yer wrong, can you?




And apparently you can't do simple arithmetic.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> And apparently you can't do simple arithmetic.


I can do it very well and correctly. You in no way took a 40% wage cut and any teacher who claims such a thing is not qualified to teach math.


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> I can do it very well and correctly. You in no way took a 40% wage cut and any teacher who claims such a thing is not qualified to teach math.


Obvious that he is using the New Math. Old geezers like us cannot hope to figure out how it works, for the simple reason that modern logic is far too complex for those of us raised thinking that a straight line is the shortest distance between two points.


----------



## SINC

Any search online on the subject will show the wage cut was correctly reported as 5%:

http://www.cappa.ca/images/resources/OgataMouseThatRoared-CAPPA Final.pdf


----------



## FeXL

Why, yes. Yes, they were. And, as has been pointed out to you many times, that measly temporary 5% is going to seem like a raise when the fallout from Red Rachel's economic disaster (not limited to, but including her much vaunted carbon tax) is ultimately tallied.



Freddie_Biff said:


> The PC's were the ones that cut my salary in the first place, remember?


Queenie? Beloved by moi? You obviously haven't been paying attention. The last Alberta premiere I approved of was Klein. The rest have all been Red Torys. Queenie was only beloved by the left. She was about as conservative as you & Knothead.



Freddie_Biff said:


> And your beloved Allison Redford started the salary freezes starting in 2012, while her own cabinet received huge increases.


What MF said.

In addition, while I can't say anything about your neck of the woods, there isn't a school that I can think of south of Calgary that has not received or isn't currently in the process of, massive upgrades in the last dozen or so years. Long before the Progs came to power...



Freddie_Biff said:


> At least Notley has increased funding to build schools, something that's been neglected since the Klein days.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> I can do it very well and correctly. You in no way took a 40% wage cut and any teacher who claims such a thing is not qualified to teach math.




Hey Don, answer the question: what's 5 x 8?


----------



## FeXL

Hey, Freddie, quick: what's a 5% salary cut over the course of 8 years?

Quite simply, 5%. No more & no less. And, if memory serves, it didn't last all 8 years anyways.

Ploughed ground, Freddie. Ploughed ground.

Next you'll be telling us that 10% and one percentage point are the same, too. For a teacher, you have an incredibly short lesson recall...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Hey Don, quick: what's 5 x 8? You shouldn't even need a calculator.


----------



## FeXL

Hey Freddie, quick: what's 1 x 4?

The length of Red Rachel's term as premiere.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

<snort> I kill me...

:lmao::lmao::lmao:



Freddie_Biff said:


> Hey Don, quick: what's 5 x 8? You shouldn't even need a calculator.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Hey, Freddie, quick: what's a 5% salary cut over the course of 8 years?
> 
> 
> 
> Quite simply, 5%. No more & no less. And, if memory serves, it didn't last all 8 years anyways.
> 
> 
> 
> Ploughed ground, Freddie. Ploughed ground.
> 
> 
> 
> Next you'll be telling us that 10% and one percentage point are the same, too. For a teacher, you have an incredibly short lesson recall...




And still, you can't answer a simple question: what's 5 x 8?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Hey Freddie, quick: what's 1 x 4?
> 
> 
> 
> The length of Red Rachel's term as premiere.
> 
> 
> 
> BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
> 
> 
> 
> <snort> I kill me...
> 
> 
> 
> :lmao::lmao::lmao:




It's been great fun watching you squirm for the past three years though. Hard to believe I have at least one more year of this enjoyment left.


----------



## Macfury

I don't think anyone's squirming. It's just a shame to see such needless damage done to inoculate Alberta against electing another socialist government.



Freddie_Biff said:


> It's been great fun watching you squirm for the past three years though. Hard to believe I have at least one more year of this enjoyment left.


----------



## SINC

No discrimination here. No siree. Law is for perhaps a few hundred people and screw the rest. Clock is ticking louder every day for these NDP imbeciles. 

Alberta to exempt turban-wearing Sikhs from motorcycle helmet laws | Calgary Herald


----------



## FeXL

Squirming? Hell, I've been celebrating her downfall since the day she got elected, Freddie!



Freddie_Biff said:


> It's been great fun watching you squirm for the past three years though. Hard to believe I have at least one more year of this enjoyment left.


----------



## FeXL

Freddie, it's still only 5%.

Asked. Answered.



Freddie_Biff said:


> And still, you can't answer a simple question: what's 5 x 8?


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> Freddie, it's still only 5%.
> 
> Asked. Answered.


Freddie if your salary before the cut was $10,000/year, and after the cut was 9,500/year, and 8 years later was $9,500/year; then your salary cut was 5%. Yeah I know you get paid more than $10,000/year but I was keeping it simple knowing you are mathematically challenged. 

So unless your salary was $6,000/year after 8 years, your claim of a 40% pay cut is nothing but Union propaganda. A number dreamed up by the union to obfuscate salary negotiations. Like the propaganda generated by Herr Goebbels, Pravda, CNN or Fox, your union propaganda is 100% (maybe 95%) BS.


----------



## Macfury

I would give them a one-time 1% increase in pay before freezing wages permanently. Over the next 40 years, that would be a 40% pay increase. 



eMacMan said:


> Freddie if your salary before the cut was $10,000/year, and after the cut was 9,500/year, and 8 years later was $9,500/year; then your salary cut was 5%. Yeah I know you get paid more than $10,000/year but I was keeping it simple knowing you are mathematically challenged.
> 
> So unless your salary was $6,000/year after 8 years, your claim of a 40% pay cut is nothing but Union propaganda. A number dreamed up by the union to obfuscate salary negotiations. Like the propaganda generated by Herr Goebbels, Pravda, CNN or Fox, your union propaganda is 100% (maybe 95%) BS.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Freddie, it's still only 5%.
> 
> 
> 
> Asked. Answered.




5 x 8 = 5? Interesting this new math you're using.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

eMacMan said:


> Freddie if your salary before the cut was $10,000/year, and after the cut was 9,500/year, and 8 years later was $9,500/year; then your salary cut was 5%. Yeah I know you get paid more than $10,000/year but I was keeping it simple knowing you are mathematically challenged.
> 
> So unless your salary was $6,000/year after 8 years, your claim of a 40% pay cut is nothing but Union propaganda. A number dreamed up by the union to obfuscate salary negotiations. Like the propaganda generated by Herr Goebbels, Pravda, CNN or Fox, your union propaganda is 100% (maybe 95%) BS.




Wrong again. The cut was supposed to be a temporary one, until the books were balanced. Well guess what? The books were balanced after one year, at which time Klein's gov't started showing surpluses, year after year. Those surpluses came out of the pockets of me and my fellow public sector employees. Why do you think we got 14% awarded in arbitration eight years later? BECAUSE THEY TOOK MORE THAN THE 5% THEY SAID THEY WOULD, THAT'S WHY. It was not supposed to be 5% in perpetuity. That's what you fail to grasp.


----------



## SINC

And what you fail to grasp is that it was a sinlge, one time 5% cut in the first year. It was never cut again in any subsequent year. 5%. That was it and it has absoutlely nothing to do with whatever arbitiration was awared eight years later. Simple math.


----------



## FeXL

So, I want to start with this: Helmet Laws Suck. Ain't no fan & the second I go past Canadian customs heading south into Montana, my bucket's in the tourpack.

Curiously, in 37 years of riding in helmet free states (10's of thousands of miles), I've never caused an accident by not wearing a helmet nor have I ever been involved in one. And don't give me this garbage about insurance. Cigarette smokers, much? 

You wanna wear one? Fine. That's your choice. As should be mine to _not_ wear one.

That said, politicians kowtowing to special interest groups and making exceptions for them is pure, unadulterated, bull$h!t. Just like the Queen's Horsemen & their accommodating uniform changes.

SINC, as to your observation about affecting a few hunnert people province-wide, in all the years I've been riding, all the rallys I've attended across a number of states & provinces, all the dozens of toy runs I've rode in, I can't recall seeing a single East Indian on a motorcycle, Sikh or not.

Time to start designing, marketing & selling headrags resembling turbans...



SINC said:


> No discrimination here. No siree. Law is for perhaps a few hundred people and screw the rest. Clock is ticking louder every day for these NDP imbeciles.


----------



## FeXL

It's more accurate than yours...



Freddie_Biff said:


> 5 x 8 = 5? Interesting this new math you're using.


----------



## FeXL

Wah. :-(

And Red Rachel's fukcing carbon tax is coming out of the pockets of me & my fellow Albertans. You got 14% compensation. We got fukced...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Those surpluses came out of the pockets of me and my fellow public sector employees


----------



## eMacMan

Freddie_Biff said:


> Wrong again. The cut was supposed to be a temporary one, until the books were balanced. Well guess what? The books were balanced after one year, at which time Klein's gov't started showing surpluses, year after year. Those surpluses came out of the pockets of me and my fellow public sector employees. Why do you think we got 14% awarded in arbitration eight years later? BECAUSE THEY TOOK MORE THAN THE 5% THEY SAID THEY WOULD, THAT'S WHY. It was not supposed to be 5% in perpetuity. That's what you fail to grasp.


Perhaps but you still fall only 5% short of where you claim you should be. So your 40% figure is still union propaganda BS. Just like Goebbels, Pravda, CNN and Fox...... 

Like the NDP you are mathematically deficient. Notice I am being politically correct by not using the term retarded, which would certainly apply.


----------



## 18m2

FeXL said:


> That said, politicians kowtowing to special interest groups and making exceptions for them is pure, unadulterated, bull$h!t. Just like the Queen's Horsemen & their accommodating uniform changes.


BC accommodated the Sikh riders quite a few years ago, not sure exactly when. I do not know of and have not seen any news reports of head injuries to Sikh riders who are not wearing helmets. I've seen a few on the road, mostly on crotch rockets.

I fail to understand if it's not a safety issue for Sikhs then why is it a safety requirement for non-Sikhs.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> And what you fail to grasp is that it was a sinlge, one time 5% cut in the first year. It was never cut again in any subsequent year. 5%. That was it and it has absoutlely nothing to do with whatever arbitiration was awared eight years later. Simple math.




Nope. 5% cut eight years in a row. It was not a one time cut. I can't believe how you can't understand this. If it was a one time cut, the original amount would have been restored in the second and subsequent years.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> It's more accurate than yours...




Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

eMacMan said:


> Perhaps but you still fall only 5% short of where you claim you should be. So your 40% figure is still union propaganda BS. Just like Goebbels, Pravda, CNN and Fox......
> 
> Like the NDP you are mathematically deficient. Notice I am being politically correct by not using the term retarded, which would certainly apply.




I said, in case you missed it (which obviously you did) that had that 5% over eight years all been deducted in the first year, it would have been equivalent to a 40% wage cut IN THAT FIRST YEAR. I was looking at how much money was cut long term to see the results of the "Klein Revolution." He had promised to restore wages once the budget was balanced. He didn't do that. It took a court-ordered arbitration to do that, and the government lost. There are far too many people on this board who are deliberately obtuse.


----------



## Macfury

Just like a 2% increase in 1991 is equivalent to a 54% increase!


----------



## eMacMan

Freddie_Biff said:


> I said, in case you missed it (which obviously you did) that had that 5% over eight years all been deducted in the first year, it would have been equivalent to a 40% wage cut IN THAT FIRST YEAR. I was looking at how much money was cut long term to see the results of the "Klein Revolution." He had promised to restore wages once the budget was balanced. He didn't do that. It took a court-ordered arbitration to do that, and the government lost. There are far too many people on this board who are deliberately obtuse.


Again deliberately misleading. You only "lost" 5% in that and subsequent years. That 40% only has meaning if negotiating with mathematical imbeciles. It has no real world meaning. It ranks with the concept of science by consensus in terms of being absurd and obscene.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Nope. 5% cut eight years in a row. It was not a one time cut. I can't believe how you can't understand this. If it was a one time cut, the original amount would have been restored in the second and subsequent years.


Nope, cut 5% in year one. How much more did they cut after that? Zero. One. Time. 5%. Cut.

Eight years later you still made just 5% less than you originally did.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Just like a 2% increase in 1991 is equivalent to a 54% increase!



Don't be an idiot, Macfury. You really need to study the history of collective agreement negotiations in Alberta in the 1990's.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

eMacMan said:


> Again deliberately misleading. You only "lost" 5% in that and subsequent years. That 40% only has meaning if negotiating with mathematical imbeciles. It has no real world meaning. It ranks with the concept of science by consensus in terms of being absurd and obscene.



So how do you think the Association came up with the numbers for how much the government owed? The ATA was asking for a (conservative) 28% to make up for lost wages after eight years, and the government offered zero. The arbitrator split the difference and awarded 14%. I don't think you're using the word "imbecile" correctly.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Nope, cut 5% in year one. How much more did they cut after that? Zero. One. Time. 5%. Cut.
> 
> 
> 
> Eight years later you still made just 5% less than you originally did.




That's the point, Don. The government promised that the original wages would be restored once the books were balanced ie. the 5% would be returned. You seem to keep forgetting that rather salient detail, or perhaps you were unaware. The 5% cut was not supposed to be in perpetuity. But go ahead and believe what you want to believe if it makes you feel better.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> So how do you think the Association came up with the numbers for how much the government owed?


I'm sure their explanation would be as good as yours.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> That's the point, Don. The government promised that the original wages would be restored once the books were balanced ie. the 5% would be returned. You seem to keep forgetting that rather salient detail, or perhaps you were unaware. The 5% cut was not supposed to be in perpetuity. But go ahead and believe what you want to believe if it makes you feel better.


You're right, I did not know that Frank. But I stand by the fact it was a one time 5% cut and not one percentile more.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> You're right, I did not know that Frank. But I stand by the fact it was a one time 5% cut and not one percentile more.




If you view it that way, it certainly appears to minimize the loss. Which is exactly what Klein's people were hoping for. I can't say that a wage freeze over several consecutive years is any better, but it's better than not having a job at all.


----------



## FeXL

If you view it as 40% it certainly appears to maximize the loss! Which is exactly what the union was hoping for!

Jeezuz, Freddie. Give your head a shake...

Nobody properly schooled in math on the planet would either use, or buy into, your BS 40% argument. Why belittle yourself by continuing to push this narrative? You look like a fool.



Freddie_Biff said:


> If you view it that way, it certainly appears to minimize the loss. Which is exactly what Klein's people were hoping for.


----------



## FeXL

Colby Cosh: A tax grab after all? Alberta's NDP gives ground on carbon pricing



> Alberta’s New Democratic government introduced its 2018-19 budget last week, and it is likely to be a pivotal moment for the grand and indubitably noble cause of democratic socialism, or social democracy, or whatever we’re calling it now, in Alberta. Our next provincial election is supposed to happen, by statute, next spring — “on or before” May 31. If that is how things pan out, the New Democrats will get to introduce, and in theory run behind, an election budget. *But in the meantime, a full year of campaigning will have taken place, and will have been conducted on the basis of last week’s budget.*


Bold mine.

The absolute worst (best?  ) thing Red Rachel could campaign on is last week's budget. There aren't nearly as many lefties in Alberta willing to be bought with their own money in Alberta as there are in Ontario.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> If you view it as 40% it certainly appears to maximize the loss! Which is exactly what the union was hoping for!
> 
> 
> 
> Jeezuz, Freddie. Give your head a shake...
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody properly schooled in math on the planet would either use, or buy into, your BS 40% argument. Why belittle yourself by continuing to push this narrative? You look like a fool.



Because that's exactly what the arbitration board did. Are they fools too?


----------



## eMacMan

Freddie_Biff said:


> So how do you think the Association came up with the numbers for how much the government owed? The ATA was asking for a (conservative) 28% to make up for lost wages after eight years, and the government offered zero. The arbitrator split the difference and awarded 14%. I don't think you're using the word "imbecile" correctly.





Freddie_Biff said:


> That's the point, Don. The government promised that the original wages would be restored once the books were balanced ie. the 5% would be returned. You seem to keep forgetting that rather salient detail, or perhaps you were unaware. The 5% cut was not supposed to be in perpetuity. But go ahead and believe what you want to believe if it makes you feel better.


You fail to specify if that 14% was a one time cash settlement or a wage hike. If the latter I would suggest that you broke about even over the length of a typical contract, 28% would have been beyond excessive.

FWIW it was incredibly idiotic for the government to approve personal salary hikes while cutting civil service wages. Also fairly typical of all polieticians.


----------



## FeXL

I'll consider that a rhetorical question...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Because that's exactly what the arbitration board did. Are they fools too?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

eMacMan said:


> You fail to specify if that 14% was a one time cash settlement or a wage hike. If the latter I would suggest that you broke about even over the length of a typical contract, 28% would have been beyond excessive.
> 
> FWIW it was incredibly idiotic for the government to approve personal salary hikes while cutting civil service wages. Also fairly typical of all polieticians.




I remember before that 5% civil service wage cut the government had voted themselves a 30% wage increase, so they netted about 25% to the good. Highway robbery indeed. Our 14% increase was not a one time payout; it was an actual salary increase on the grid. That was a good year. Pissed off old Ralphie something fierce too.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Because that's exactly what the arbitration board did. Are they fools too?


Yup.


----------



## FeXL

Ah, the compassionate, intellectual, lyin' left...

Canadian Government Official Mocks Parkland Shooting Survivor. Twitter Unleashes Fury.



> On Saturday, a Canadian government official mocked a student at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School who survived last month's shooting, calling him "so fragile!"
> 
> Max Fawcett, an official with the Government of Alberta, responded to a tweet from student Kyle Kashuv, writing: "Cuckservatives are the best. So fragile!"


More:



> Fawcett's initial response was to claim that he didn't know that Kyle Kashuv was a Parkland student, tweeting: "Okay -- didn't realize that was a Parkland student. He's welcome to boycott any darn thing he likes."
> 
> A review of Fawcett's Twitter account indicates that he does, in fact, know who Kashuv is because he has retweeted tweets from other accounts that attacked him and listed he was a Parkland survivor...


C'mon, Freddie. You subscribe to blind obeisance. Defend this magnificent example of Progressivism...


----------



## 18m2

I know some of you will refuse to accept the credibility of this CRED post but having spent some time in Norway I can attest to how well the Norwegians have managed their oil industry as opposed to Alberta and Canada.



> Where is Canada’s comparable bounty you ask, which produces twice as much oil as Norway? Alberta is in debt and has a deficit. As of September 1, 2014, the debt has climbed to over $10.6 billion. Schein says that former Alberta premier Peter Lougheed made a positive move when he set up the Heritage Savings Trust Fund in Alberta in 1976 to save and invest some of the oil revenues. 30% of oil royalties were supposed to be added yearly to this fund, but unfortunately it was only active for little more than a decade – after 1987 no new royalty revenue was added into the fund and governments of Alberta have regularly raided the savings trust fund. When Lougheed left office in 1985, it had $16 billion and all these years later, as of June 2014, it has $17.5 billion, a far cry away from the Norway fund that has $905 billion. Alberta is taking from the fund and not adding to it without plans for the future, and it’s a non-renewable resource.


{url]http://credbc.ca/norways-oil-gas-policy/[/url]


----------



## Macfury

Alberta should not have pissed away its heritage fund, but the only way you could make Alberta like Norway is to pass massive tax increases. That way, taxes cover every politician's wildest dreams for current account spending and the oil money can be stashed away.




18m2 said:


> I know some of you will refuse to accept the credibility of this CRED post but having spent some time in Norway I can attest to how well the Norwegians have managed their oil industry as opposed to Alberta and Canada.
> 
> 
> 
> {url]http://credbc.ca/norways-oil-gas-policy/[/url]


----------



## CubaMark

*Alberta oil and gas methane emissions grossly under-reported*

A new, peer-reviewed scientific study shows that oil and gas methane emissions were 15 times higher than what the industry reported in the Red Deer production area in Alberta.

his latest study on methane emissions in the oil and gas industry in Alberta comes at a time when Ottawa and Alberta are both preparing regulations, and the two governments must determine which ones will apply to the oil and gas producers in the province.

To add to the problem, the Globe and Mail is reporting that Premier Rachel Notley doesn't really want to adopt any methane rules for fear this would provoke an outcry from the already embattled petroleum industry.

The new paper, “Methane Emissions from oil and gas production sites in Alberta, Canada” was published in Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene on March 22, 2018, and complements the study published in October 2017, and another recently published paper led by Aerodyne Research that measured methane emissions at Cold Heavy Oil Production with Sands sites.

Basically, all the studies, along with research from the David Suzuki Foundation, show very clearly that measured emissions are much higher than the emission figures being reported to the Alberta Energy Regulator.










The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), which has worked with the governments of Canada and the U.S. on formulating methane regulations, says, "On average, measured gas wells wasted 3 percent of the gas they produce – a much larger leak rate than industry reports."

Canadian oil and gas production sites were also shown to have a methane problem as bad as the United States. “The more we measure, the more clearly we see that reported emissions severely underestimate the extent of the methane problem,” said Dr. Daniel Zavala-Araiza, lead author and international scientist with Environmental Defense Fund.

“Empirical measurements help improve our understanding of the patterns and characteristics of oil and gas methane emissions and are useful input for making methane mitigation regulations more effective.”

(Digital Journal)​


----------



## Macfury

You understand that Digital Journal is an aggregator for user-submitted content and that Elementa is an "open-access" journal that requires authors to pay for the article's inclusion? These are publishing outlets of last resort.



CubaMark said:


> *Alberta oil and gas methane emissions grossly under-reported*


----------



## SINC

CubaMark said:


> Basically, all the studies, along with research from the David Suzuki Foundation, show very clearly that measured emissions are much higher than the emission figures being reported to the Alberta Energy Regulator.


This quote says everything one needs to know about the cred of the article. Suzuki is the biggest outright farce involved in all things environmental while polluting the world as he jets around telling people to do a he says, not as he does.


----------



## FeXL

To add to what MF & SINC have already pointed out...

1) Why is this here instead of the GHG thread, where it belongs?
2) When did you suddenly start believing in peer review? If you truly have experienced some sort of "awakening" come on over to the GHG thread & gitcher self an eddication.
3) There is no such things as the "anthropocene". It's a construct by Prog warmist fanatics who refuse to believe in actual peer reviewed papers. Publishing a paper in a "journal" titled that carries about as much water with me as if I had sent you a link to something published in the "Alt-Right Journal of Truth" or some such. Ranks right alongside with Suzuki's <snort> "objectivity".
4) Getting into the paper, first off, they allude to the "climatic effects of this powerful GHG". What evidence do they have to support this conjecture?
5) They openly admit that 20% of the 60 *older* (Are there different standards for older sites?) sites measured (that'd be 12 sites for you mathematically challenged Progs) made 75% of the emissions. So, it's not like all 60 sites were spewing methane into the atmosphere. In addition, a fairly easy fix, no?
6) What produces the other ~1/2 of the methane?
7) There's a lot of surface water in the Red Deer area, in the form of ponds, lakes, water in ditches, etc. In other words, sources of dead & rotting material that would generate methane on their own. If these samples were being taken from as far away as 1500 metres, what measures were taken to ensure that the well samples were not contaminated by natural methane?
8) "_Although the loss rates are potentially high, this is largely an effect of the small gas production volumes at most sites in the region. Thus, one needs to be cautious in directly comparing the loss rates in the Red Deer region to those observed in other regions with different production characteristics (and in particular, those with lower ratios of oil to gas wells)._" Huh. Not so scary, after all.
9) If you haven't already, I invite you to go to the paper & read "Implications" near the bottom of the paper. It continues with the "not so scary" theme noted above.
10) What is truly, grossly under-reported, is Prog ignorance of the topic...



CubaMark said:


> Alberta oil and gas methane emissions grossly under-reported


----------



## 18m2

Cows make methane too. 

Lots and lots.


----------



## SINC

You can almost hear the mason's hammer chipping away at the NDP's election tombstone, can't ya?


----------



## SINC

Just in case you don't get to my website every day, here's a little feel good post from a couple of seconds ago. And in a couple of weeks when that first figure 4 changes to a 3, it will be even better.


----------



## Macfury

Even Freddie will be happier when he remembers what it was like to live as a free man, instead of a vassal of the Notley regime.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Even Freddie will be happier when he remembers what it was like to live as a free man, instead of a vassal of the Notley regime.




Again, you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Make no assumptions that you know anything about me.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff: International Man of Mystery!



Freddie_Biff said:


> Again, you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Make no assumptions that you know anything about me.


----------



## FeXL

So, Freddie, have a coupla questions for ya: Do you support Red Rachel's efforts to get the KM pipeline pushed through? Why or why not? Where were you on Energy East & Trans Mountain?


----------



## SINC

A new poll released by CBC today showed 53% of decided voters would vote UCP while only 29% would vote NDP. It's gonna be a slaughter at all the polls for Notley in about 375 days.

United Conservative Party on track to win big in Alberta, says poll | CBC News


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> A new poll released by CBC today showed 53% of decided voters would vote UCP while only 29% would vote NDP. It's gonna be a slaughter at all the polls for Notley in about 375 days.
> 
> 
> 
> United Conservative Party on track to win big in Alberta, says poll | CBC News



I wouldn't count on that, Don.


----------



## Rps

Hi Ford, two things here....and I know that I’m an outsider as I live in Ontario... first polls are selective and generally biased by the sponsor this early in the mix. Most people do not give an actual account of who they would vote for.....I’ve even found this with exit polls on Election Day. What you need to look for is movement. Take our Ontario election. Everyone has Wynne going down big time, but here polls jumped 13 points after her budget.

Second, 24 points is a huge deficit which may not be easily over come in a year...but she has time and it depends on how well things turn into the land of milk and honey....but my two cents worth, I don’t think she can recover. Albertans have always been concerned about debt load.....that I don’t think she will recover from.


----------



## SINC

Only Wretched Notley would hire scum like this to work for Albertans.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> I wouldn't count on that, Don.


These are two entirely different polls, and this CBC poll had massive coverage. I would think this second on is closer to reality, but it doesn't represent a drop in support--just a more accurate sample. 

Either way, Rachel's goose is cooked. Even $100 oil wouldn't help her escape from the debt hole she's dug for herself.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> I wouldn't count on that, Don.


You sound like Perry Como.





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> You sound like Perry Como.


I suspect that for a progressive Albertan, it would be better to die at a ripe old age while Notley is in office, than to realize you will never see the NDP in power again in your lifetime.

From the CBC poll results:



> The party is most popular among public sector and unionized workers.


----------



## SINC

More on that CBC poll. Snort!

The Alberta NDP is probably toast but here's how they could give themselves a fighting chance | CBC News


----------



## Freddie_Biff




----------



## SINC

^^^

Suck on this Freddie. Wretched Notley seems to be missing from the list. 

*Premier Wall still Canada’s most popular premier: poll*
https://globalnews.ca/news/3769823/premier-wall-still-canadas-most-popular-premier-poll/

Brad Wall still most popular premier in Canada: Angus Reid survey | CBC News

Outgoing Sask. Premier Brad Wall Remains Most Popular Premier in Canada

*And Now This:*
Sask. Premier Scott Moe Most Popular Leader in Canada: Angus Reid Poll


----------



## Macfury

SINC, I'm not even sure why Freddie put that photo and comment together. Just another lazy ass post.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Suck on this Freddie. Wretched Notley seems to be missing from the list.


Denial. Not just a river in Egypt anymore...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Denial. Not just a river in Egypt anymore...


I hear the public sector will be voting for Notley.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> I hear the public sector will be voting for Notley.


Some. Maybe even most. Certainly not all. And definitely not enough votes to carry her through the next election.

And that little fact, along with a 3 foot flame, must really burn Freddie's ass... 

Nah, nah, nah-nah, hey-hey, goombye...


----------



## Macfury

Not much action in Freddie's "clusterXXXX' thread these days as the UCP steamrollers on to victory. I will agree with him on one point: Notley passed a lot of laws. Short-lived laws, but who's timing them?



FeXL said:


> Some. Maybe even most. Certainly not all. And definitely not enough votes to carry her through the next election.
> 
> And that little fact, along with a 3 foot flame, must really burn Freddie's ass...
> 
> Nah, nah, nah-nah, hey-hey, goombye...


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Short-lived laws, but who's timing them?


Moi... beejacon


----------



## FeXL

Notley's electricity plans will shock Albertans with high prices



> On Monday, a room of about 100 members of the Calgary West Rotary club heard alarming information put forward by Todd Beasley, one of the organizers of a group called Albertans for Affordable Electricity.
> 
> ...
> 
> *Beasley says Notley’s benign-sounding Climate Leadership Act must be stopped, otherwise Albertans can expect to see a three-fold increase at best and at worst a seven-to-10 times increase in our monthly power bills.*
> 
> “What the provincial government is proposing with this legislation is the wholesale change to our electricity grid . . . that will technically, economically and environmentally devastate this province for generations to come,” Beasley told the gathering at the Grey Eagle Resort and Casino.


Bold mine.

Just one more reason.

Hey, Freddie, those numbers sound reasonable to you?

More:



> Beasley wants Albertans to show some of their own backbone and contact McCuaig-Boyd and let her know that you want her to stop the shock that’s coming unless the government plan is halted.


----------



## Macfury

Suffering peasants are of no concern to Notley. The public sector will vote itself pay increases to compensate.



FeXL said:


> Notley's electricity plans will shock Albertans with high prices
> 
> 
> 
> Bold mine.
> 
> Just one more reason.
> 
> Hey, Freddie, those numbers sound reasonable to you?
> 
> More:


----------



## SINC

Yep, nails it.


----------



## Macfury

Who needs an economy, when you can borrow cash like it's going out of style?


----------



## SINC

Just how much are Notley and her NDP Minsters hated? And some people still think they can be re-elected?

"A wake-up call': Documents detail litany of threats against Premier Rachel Notley | CBC News


----------



## Freddie_Biff

May 5, 2015—a day that still warms my heart. This pic was a TV screen shot that showed pretty clearly the new direction Albertans wanted to take.


----------



## SINC

Yep, and it will be a REAL treat to post the results this time around that will be a very different story with Wretched's arse tossed out. Notley better duck and I canardly wait.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Yep, and it will be a REAL treat to post the results this time around that will be a very different story with Wretched's arse tossed out. Notley better duck and I canardly wait.



In the meantime, I still have a year to gloat about your terribly wrong predictions last time.


----------



## Macfury

Gloating about that is like watching somebody who accidentally cuts themselves and laughing because they now have sepsis.

However, you can only gloat if you had the guts to make a prediction--have you found the EhMac post where you did that yet?

Feel like recording your prediction for Alberta's next "change in direction" here?



Freddie_Biff said:


> In the meantime, I still have a year to gloat about your terribly wrong predictions last time.


----------



## SINC

Relax MF. He knows exactly what is going to happen.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Relax MF. He knows exactly what is going to happen.



And I don't doubt that the UCP will win. However, I still believe Jason Kenney is an idiot and Albertans will regret their choice before long if they return the conservatives to power. People have short memories apparently.


----------



## Macfury

They have memories long enough to remember that times were better before the NDP regime took power.



Freddie_Biff said:


> And I don't doubt that the UCP will win. However, I still believe Jason Kenney is an idiot and Albertans will regret their choice before long if they return the conservatives to power. People have short memories apparently.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> They have memories long enough to remember that times were better before the NDP regime took power.




Uh huh. Times were also worse. But of course you wouldn't remember that because you're not an Albertan, as much as you seem to wish you were.


----------



## Macfury

Small businesspeople I know are really suffering under this regime, getting sucker punched from one month to the next. I've been to Calgary and really liked it. But I'll need to see solid proof that no creature like Notley will ever crawl out from under a rock again to visit such malfeasance on the province before I'll consider a move. Over the last 40 years I've never seen anything near as bad as this.


----------



## FeXL

When? Be specific.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Times were also worse.


So, what's the thrust here? Nobody who doesn't live in Alberta can be informed about Alberta? Is that it?



Freddie_Biff said:


> But of course you wouldn't remember that because you're not an Albertan, as much as you seem to wish you were.


----------



## SINC

"Until Notley and The NDP Are Gone"

https://www.tickcounter.com/countdo...idget&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=widget


----------



## Macfury

I don't live in Venezuela either, but I can see how people like Notley can destroy an oil-rich economy.



FeXL said:


> So, what's the thrust here? Nobody who doesn't live in Alberta can be informed about Alberta? Is that it?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> I don't live in Venezuela either, but I can see how people like Notley can destroy an oil-rich economy.



Yup. And you're still convinced it seems that Alberta's misfortunes had nothing to do with the drop in oil prices worldwide. You give the NDP gov't far too much credit for affecting circumstances beyond their control.


----------



## Macfury

Venezuela remains a stern example of the way in which "progressive" policies can destroy an oil-rich economy. That has nothing to do with prices.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Yup. And you're still convinced it seems that Alberta's misfortunes had nothing to do with the drop in oil prices worldwide. You give the NDP gov't far too much credit for affecting circumstances beyond their control.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Venezuela remains a stern example of the way in which "progressive" policies can destroy an oil-rich economy. That has nothing to do with prices.



It also has nothing to do with Alberta. Off-topic much?


----------



## Macfury

Under Notley, Alberta is taking the same path as Venezuela did under Chavez.



Freddie_Biff said:


> It also has nothing to do with Alberta. Off-topic much?


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> Under Notley, Alberta is taking the same path as Venezuela did under Chavez.


Not to mention the very same path as Wynne's Ontario with electricity pricing, another disaster waiting to happen if not corrected and soon. NDP are blind to the real market and the consequences that Alberta faces, shutting down all the coal plants far too soon.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Under Notley, Alberta is taking the same path as Venezuela did under Chavez.




Perhaps you can explain. Saying it's so just isn't all that persuasive. And I still say you're off-topic.


----------



## FeXL

The iron...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Perhaps you can explain. Saying it's so just isn't all that persuasive.


----------



## FeXL

What Alberta misfortunes relating to oil prices has anybody tried to pin on Red Rachel?

Be specific.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Yup. And you're still convinced it seems that Alberta's misfortunes had nothing to do with the drop in oil prices worldwide. You give the NDP gov't far too much credit for affecting circumstances beyond their control.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> I don't live in Venezuela either, but I can see how people like Notley can destroy an oil-rich economy.


Precisely.


----------



## Macfury

Chavez expanded the welfare state, goosed minimum wages, expanded the size and scope of government, exercised greater control of the oil industry, failed to facilitate modernizing of oil infrastructure by driving private industry out of the sector, reduced investment in the country's non-conventional oil sector (the Orinoco) by taking a harsh stand with international energy companies, and drowned Venezuela in debt. Notley is a fellow traveler.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Perhaps you can explain. Saying it's so just isn't all that persuasive. And I still say you're off-topic.


----------



## SINC

"Until Notley and The NDP Are Gone"

https://www.tickcounter.com/countdo...idget&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=widget


----------



## FeXL

OK, so, Bill 12 has passed. It may be the only piece of legislation cribbed together by Red Rachel I'll ever even remotely approve of.

Here's a bit of info from about a month ago:

Alberta government should be pumped about using Bill 12



> The B.C. political echo chamber is so loud, it appears they can’t hear themselves when they speak.
> 
> Alberta announced Monday it was to introduce a law allowing it to dictate what gets shipped out of the province through its pipelines.
> 
> Bill 12, the Preserving Canada’s Economic Prosperity Act, is the latest escalation in a long-running fight over the construction of the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project between Edmonton and Burnaby, B.C.


From the same time period, below is a hit piece from the coast on Bill 12. 

Caution: Prog hypocrisy at it's finest. Read the appeals to federal jurisdiction, all the while completely ignoring them during their own protests. Enjoy the "tar sands" & "dirty" & "filthy" oil descriptors, all the while the hypocritical author reaps the benefits of them every minute of every day. Listen to him p!$$ & moan about aboriginal rights, all the while ignoring the fact that many actually want to reap the financial benefits from the pipeline. Also note that he says nothing about closing down the existing pipeline. If he truly was against Alberta's petrocarbons, he'd address the fact that 300,000 barrels of bitumen arrive safely in Burnaby every single day in the already extant pipeline. Curious he doesn't want that one turned off, idn't it?

I could read about 3 paragraphs before I felt the gorge rising in my throat. Be forewarned. It'll make ya wanna hurl in technicolour.

There’s dumb, and there’s Alberta dumb—and Rachel Notley’s Bill 12 is both


----------



## Macfury

Man, that guy is foaming at the mouth. You'd think it was someone from the NDP writing that instead of a BC Liberal.



FeXL said:


> OK, so, Bill 12 has passed. It may be the only piece of legislation cribbed together by Red Rachel I'll ever even remotely approve of.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Man, that guy is foaming at the mouth. You'd think it was someone from the NDP writing that instead of a BC Liberal.


If that's the typical mindset out there, gasoline needs to go to $5/litre...


----------



## SINC

Here's some encouraging Facebook poll results for Alberta voters. A stunning rejection of the NDP.


----------



## Rps

SINC said:


> Here's some encouraging Facebook poll results for Alberta voters. A stunning rejection of the NDP.


Okay, I will acknowledge that I don’t live in Alberta, so here is my take on the NDP in Alberta.......first, they’re NDP. But that said much of Notley’s revenue side appears to be out for her control. And much, I think, of that lies in the hands of the federal Liberals.

The Libs , in a classic case of all your eggs in one basket, eliminated any other possibility of shipment other than the KM. No Northern Gateway, no Energy East, and virtually banned tanker shipments from B.C. to make matters worse, they gave the First Nations control over movement through, I might add, disputed terriory...both geographic and philosophical..... then find, with absolute shock, the FN rejected KM.....the feds risk management on this issue is as dumb and incompetent and the Ontario Liberals handling of Hydro.


----------



## Macfury

Oil aside, Notley would be toast. She doesn't think like the majority of Albertans or understand the province's culture. She's the voice of entitled elites, academics, agitators and public sector employees.



Rps said:


> Okay, I will acknowledge that I don’t live in Alberta, so here is my take on the NDP in Alberta.......first, they’re NDP. But that said much of Notley’s revenue side appears to be out for her control. And much, I think, of that lies in the hands of the federal Liberals.
> 
> The Libs , in a classic case of all your eggs in one basket, eliminated any other possibility of shipment other than the KM. No Northern Gateway, no Energy East, and virtually banned tanker shipments from B.C. to make matters worse, they gave the First Nations control over movement through, I might add, disputed terriory...both geographic and philosophical..... then find, with absolute shock, the FN rejected KM.....the feds risk management on this issue is as dumb and incompetent and the Ontario Liberals handling of Hydro.


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> Oil aside, Notley would be toast. She doesn't think like the majority of Albertans or understand the province's culture. She's the voice of entitled elites, academics, agitators and public sector employees.


Oh, you mean like Peter Lougheed? Now I’ve done it, opened a new can of worms...:lmao::lmao:


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> Oh, you mean like Peter Lougheed? Now I’ve done it, opened a new can of worms...:lmao::lmao:


I don't even get it....


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> I don't even get it....


If you think Notley is the voice of entitled elites, academics and such...check out Peter’s legacy.


----------



## SINC

Notley's undoing has nothing to do with the oil patch or the price of crude. It has everything to do with her management of the economy, the double barrelled carbon tax on home heating, electricity and gas. The closing of coal fired power plants that were among the cleanest in the world far before their time with no alternate plan in place to retain cheap energy prices. Add to that union tactics forced on family farms, overboard policies for the LGBTQ community, removing the rights of parents to know and control their children while in school and the list grows every week she touches another bad policy that is out of step with the thinking and beliefs of normal Albertans. That is why she will be toast. Don't blame oil pricing for her demise or pipelines either. Trouble is the Alberta NDP haven't a clue that they are SO FAR out of step with Albertans.


----------



## Macfury

You'd have to lay out a case for it. I don't see it.



Rps said:


> If you think Notley is the voice of entitled elites, academics and such...check out Peter’s legacy.


----------



## Rps

SINC said:


> Notley's undoing has nothing to do with the oil patch or the price of crude. It has everything to do with her management of the economy, the double barrelled carbon tax on home heating, electricity and gas. The closing of coal fired power plants that were among the cleanest in the world far before their time with no alternate plan in place to retain cheap energy prices. Add to that union tactics forced on family farms, overboard policies for the LGBTQ community, removing the rights of parents to know and control their children while in school and the list grows every week she touches another bad policy that is out of step with the thinking and beliefs of normal Albertans. That is why she will be toast. Don't blame oil pricing for her demise or pipelines either. Trouble is the Alberta NDP haven't a clue that they are SO FAR out of step with Albertans.


In other words.....they’re NDP! Again, the feds are contributors......the Liberals ideology is driving some of your observations... I do agree there appears to be a critical mass to dump her.....much like Wynne here in Ontario. I think Notley, much like the federal NDP, didn’t see that their numbers were a protest vote, they actually thought they WON the mandate.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> ...Notley, much like the federal NDP, didn’t see that their numbers were a protest vote, they actually thought they WON the mandate.


I think they _did_ see it as a protest vote and did as much as they could to overrun the province with their bankrupt ideology before they were run out of office on a rail.


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> I think they _did_ see it as a protest vote and did as much as they could to overrun the province with their bankrupt ideology before they were run out of office on a rail.


I don’t know if I buy that, the first rule of government is to maintain being elected. I think they actually thought they won by policy......but I really have to agree with Sinc, they were out of step the first day they were in office. That said, she did come in at a bad time for a cheque book government. Also, I think Alberta is changing..it is becoming Ontarianised...... she is just in the wrong province.


----------



## SINC

Ah yes, not unexpected by this dishonest NDP bunch. 

NDP rehires ex-staffer who is subject of investigation by privacy commissioner | Edmonton Journal


----------



## SINC

Well, here's some good news, less than a year to go now. Tick . . . tick . . . tick . . .

https://www.tickcounter.com/countdo...idget&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=widget


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> Ah yes, not unexpected by this dishonest NDP bunch.
> 
> NDP rehires ex-staffer who is subject of investigation by privacy commissioner | Edmonton Journal


FWIW That face could be used a caricature for a stereotypical political/financial crook. I have no idea whether or not he is a crook, just saying if I was on a jury I would be awfully tempted to let that mug sway my opinion.


----------



## SINC

And now more stupidity from Notley's Nuts to further deter business in the province.

*Alberta is not prepared for major new workplace rule changes

84% of AB businesses haven’t heard of new safety rules; penalties for non-compliance start Friday*



> CALGARY, May 30th, 2018 – According to a new survey of Alberta business owners, 84 per cent say they have not received adequate information about the new occupational health and safety (OHS) rules and are not familiar with how it will impact their business. Major OHS changes are slated to come into effect Friday, June 1st, 2018.
> 
> “Entrepreneurs are caught off guard and not in a position to enact new mandatory rules. Government bulletins and guidelines were slow to be developed. Some materials are ‘coming any day now’ and others were posted this week, yet Occupational Health and Safety officers will be able to issue tickets on changes that most business owners haven’t even heard of,” said Amber Ruddy Alberta Director for CFIB.
> 
> Due to the uncertainty this creates, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) is calling for a six month delay on the implementation of these mandatory new rules.
> 
> The legislation focuses on prescriptive processes and a series of mandatory workplace safety initiatives, removing flexibility for small business owners. Designated safety representatives, training, and harassment & violence policies and in some cases committees are becoming mandatory. The labour department is still working on the information and materials with some scheduled to be delivered in the coming weeks and months.
> 
> When asked, should the province provide free accessible and easy to understandable resources to help business comply, 91 per cent agree. In advance of the new policies, it is essential the province take serious steps to make all resources available.
> 
> Ensuring workers are not subject to nor participate in workplace harassment or violence is a given. However, employers may be surprised and ill equipped to learn their obligations now include advising workers of treatment options if suffering from psychological illness, including providing workers with wages during treatment.
> 
> “It would be reasonable to delay the implementation of changes to the code until the government has the materials ready and job creators have time to adapt their current practices. The Alberta government needs to put themselves in the shoes of small business owners and attempt to understand the realities of running a small firm,” said Ruddy.
> 
> The May 2018 survey findings are based on 837 CFIB member responses to a controlled-access web survey.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> And now more stupidity from Notley's Nuts to further deter business in the province.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *"The Alberta government needs to put themselves in the shoes of small business owners and attempt to understand the realities of running a small firm,” said Ruddy.*​
Click to expand...

Progs aren't exactly known for their grasp on reality...


----------



## SINC

FeXL said:


> Progs aren't exactly known for their grasp on reality...


Yeah, I noticed. NDP supporters online still think they will win the Alberta election next year. *Riiiiiiigggggghhhhhhhtttttt!*


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> And now more stupidity from Notley's Nuts to further deter business in the province.
> 
> *Alberta is not prepared for major new workplace rule changes
> 
> 84% of AB businesses haven’t heard of new safety rules; penalties for non-compliance start Friday*


One of the joys of this one is that we will now be forced to pre-pay gasoline purchases. A royal PIA if you want to fill your gas tank. Not to mention a lot of extra work for retailers.

Pretend reason: One death and a couple of injuries when clerks tried to prevent driveoffs. The reason they tried to prevent the driveoffs is that management would take it out of their paychecks. A better answer: Fine managers who expect their minimum wage employees to double as cops. Fine them big time if an employee is hurt or killed doing so. I worked retail a few times and it was drilled into me that management did not want anyone injured trying to prevent a robbery, had it been otherwise I would never have worked for them.

If stations want to insist on pre-pay at their operation that's fine, but they better be prepared to pump the gas for me to offset the inconvenience. Otherwise let me deal with a service station that wants my business.

BTW the real reason for pre-pay: To force more people into using plastic. Wanna bet the Rothchilds and Rockefeller families may have put that inane solution in Red Rachaels ear?


----------



## 18m2

British Columbia requires pre-pay for fuel purchases. Not sure how many years ago it was implemented but its easy. When I pay with cash I give the attendant a $50 note, they dial it into the machine and it dispenses $50 worth of fuel.


----------



## Macfury

That is less easy than pay-at-pump. Why should people expect their experience to be less good?



18m2 said:


> British Columbia requires pre-pay for fuel purchases. Not sure how many years ago it was implemented but its easy. When I pay with cash I give the attendant a $50 note, they dial it into the machine and it dispenses $50 worth of fuel.


----------



## eMacMan

18m2 said:


> British Columbia requires pre-pay for fuel purchases. Not sure how many years ago it was implemented but its easy. When I pay with cash I give the attendant a $50 note, they dial it into the machine and it dispenses $50 worth of fuel.


Which is fine until you actually want to fill the tank, which I always do. At that point it becomes two trips to pay for it. Irritating for me and extra work for the retailer. As I said there is a far more intelligent solution.


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> One of the joys of this one is that we will now be forced to pre-pay gasoline purchases. A royal PIA if you want to fill your gas tank. Not to mention a lot of extra work for retailers.


I can't remember the last time I was at a gas pump that wasn't prepay in Albertistan. Locally, it's been at least 3 years. You guys must be the last holdouts in the province.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> I can't remember the last time I was at a gas pump that wasn't prepay in Albertistan. Locally, it's been at least 3 years. You guys must be the last holdouts in the province.




On this we agree. Pre-pay is pretty much standard everywhere I go.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> I can't remember the last time I was at a gas pump that wasn't prepay in Albertistan. Locally, it's been at least 3 years. You guys must be the last holdouts in the province.


Interesting. In Toronto there are only a very few pre-pay pumps. Usually the last row of pumps away from the office on a large lot.


----------



## SINC

18m2 said:


> British Columbia requires pre-pay for fuel purchases. Not sure how many years ago it was implemented but its easy. When I pay with cash I give the attendant a $50 note, they dial it into the machine and it dispenses $50 worth of fuel.


I never put in some gas, I always fill the tank. Now I go in and give the cashier $80 cash. Then I go back out and fill up. Then I go back in and the cashier gives me cash in change, depending on how many litres it takes. Stupid and a waste of my time and theirs.


----------



## Rps

What, none of you use a gas card?


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> I can't remember the last time I was at a gas pump that wasn't prepay in Albertistan. Locally, it's been at least 3 years. You guys must be the last holdouts in the province.


Never had a problem in the Bridge. Other locations Co-op was a good choice as they pump for you. Usually I just paid when they were finished. Once in a while would go inside and wait as they pumped, then paid.

I've gotten rather cantankerous when I have no choice but to pre-pay. Calculate the minimum and pump that, then pump a loonie at a time till its full.


----------



## eMacMan

Rps said:


> What, none of you use a gas card?


That is of course the reason they forced pre-pay. Anything to further line the Rothchild vaults. 

I don't like banksters enough to give them a stipend every time a make a purchase.


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> I never put in some gas, I always fill the tank. Now I go in and give the cashier $80 cash. Then I go back out and fill up. Then I go back in and the cashier gives me cash in change, depending on how many litres it takes. Stupid and a waste of my time and theirs.


Exactly a waste of two peoples time and energy. Can see this costing the knothead even more votes than she has already squandered via the carbon tax.


----------



## 18m2

eMacMan said:


> Which is fine until you actually want to fill the tank, which I always do. At that point it becomes two trips to pay for it. Irritating for me and extra work for the retailer. As I said there is a far more intelligent solution.


Sorry, I neglected to add, I work part time driving an F550 with a dump box and when the truck needs fuel I pay cash and the owner reimburse me. I don't see any value in filling the truck. I can easily make my 2-3 deliveries on $50 and the Coop is right across the highway from the yard.

For my own vehicles I use a credit card.


----------



## FeXL

Hey, Freddie, read an article in the Calgary Sun today about Red Rachel cutting back school administrator's salaries. 67 of 71 salaries in the province were getting cut, saving a <snort> whopping $1.5 million.

Question 1: How do you feel about that?
Question 2: Do you think teacher's salaries are next?

The article went on to note that Red Rachel had managed to cut a <snort> whopping $22.5 million from public service administration salaries across a coupla different areas in the last coupla months.

Question 3: How many times does $22.5 million in election year posturing gozinta $53 billion in debt?

Jes' askin'...


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Hey, Freddie, read an article in the Calgary Sun today about Red Rachel cutting back school administrator's salaries. 67 of 71 salaries in the province were getting cut, saving a <snort> whopping $1.5 million.
> 
> 
> 
> Question 1: How do you feel about that?
> 
> Question 2: Do you think teacher's salaries are next?
> 
> 
> 
> The article went on to note that Red Rachel had managed to cut a <snort> whopping $22.5 million from public service administration salaries across a coupla different areas in the last coupla months.
> 
> 
> 
> Question 3: How many times does $22.5 million in election year posturing gozinta $53 billion in debt?
> 
> 
> 
> Jes' askin'...




Superintendent's salaries have been increasing exorbitantly for a long time, so I'm completely in favour of the cap they want to impose. Will that affect teachers? I doubt it. We've had our wages frozen for a long time. She knows teachers are a big part of her fan base.


----------



## Macfury

Once those caps go through, the superintendent's will also favour whatever happens to teachers.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Once those caps go through, the superintendent's will also favour whatever happens to teachers.




Maybe, but it's irrelevant, since the superintendents don't vote on collective agreements. Trustee salaries aren't affected.


----------



## Rps

Freddie_Biff said:


> Maybe, but it's irrelevant, since the superintendents don't vote on collective agreements. Trustee salaries aren't affected.


Lucky I’m not the Preem! I would have only one school board thus eliminating the massive duplication in admin and, as I’m not sure what trustee get paid out there, their costs as well.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Maybe, but it's irrelevant, since the superintendents don't vote on collective agreements. Trustee salaries aren't affected.


Yep. Neither do you vote on their salaries.


----------



## FeXL

Curious, Freddie, that you didn't address question 3...


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Rps said:


> Lucky I’m not the Preem! I would have only one school board thus eliminating the massive duplication in admin and, as I’m not sure what trustee get paid out there, their costs as well.




Trustees tend to make an honorarium more than a living wage, but they hire the superintendent and approve his or her pay. Joan Carr in Edmonton Catholic is the highest paid in the province with $426,824 in total compensation. Teachers top out at close to $100,000 with six years of education and ten years of experience. Under the new proposal, Joan Carr would make $260,000 and as high as $275,000 with ministerial approval. I think that's about fair.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Curious, Freddie, that you didn't address question 3...



It seemed like a loaded question. I don't answer those ones. It's also interesting how you don't have a response yet to my answer to your first two questions.


----------



## Macfury

They're all busting taxpayers' butts.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Trustees tend to make an honorarium more than a living wage, but they hire the superintendent and approve his or her pay. Joan Carr in Edmonton Catholic is the highest paid in the province with $426,824 in total compensation. Teachers top out at close to $100,000 with six years of education and ten years of experience. Under the new proposal, Joan Carr would make $260,000 and as high as $275,000 with ministerial approval. I think that's about fair.


----------



## FeXL

Course not.

'Cause you know as well as I that every time she bends over to pick up a penny, thousand dollar bills float past her head.

All this is, is CYA pre-campaign posturing to disguise the fact that Red Rachel will have put us into nearly $100 billion worth of debt & deficit by the time the election rolls around.



Freddie_Biff said:


> It seemed like a loaded question. I don't answer those ones.


What kind of a response do you want? An "'Atta boy" for finally answering a question? A participation trophy? WTF?



Freddie_Biff said:


> It's also interesting how you don't have a response yet to my answer to your first two questions.


----------



## eMacMan

The Ontario debacle will almost certainly be repeated in Alberta. 

The Knothead has inflamed a sizeable portion of the population. Carbon Tax was just a beginning. The knothead could have easily offset the impact by abolishing all the gouge fees on our energy bills. Instead we also have Albertans on the hook to pay for high tension power lines into BC to sell surplus wind power. Why on earth is that cost not being passed along to the end user, instead of being foisted onto Albertans?

Now there is the pre-pay at the pump. If you think it bothers some customers, you should talk to retailers who have literally seen their work load doubled. Tragedy here is there was a far better solution. Big time fines for any operation who expects employees to double as cops. No more clerks injured or killed trying to stop a drive-off. Add in another, hefty fines for drive-offs. Say $500, and the cops get $400 of that. With that change you can be sure once the cops have the license# they will apprehend the crooks. Toss in impoundment of the vehicle if restitution and fine payment is not prompt. I guarantee drive-offs will drop to pretty much zero.

Then there is the incredibly irresponsible debt management. The castle fiasco......

I have little to zero love for Kenney and the Conmen. Even so I see a big time majority coming for the Conmen and their Illustrous Potentate.


----------



## FeXL

Alberta government staff to take day course on Indigenous history, culture



> A three-year program to help government staff better understand Indigenous culture and history is to start in Alberta next week.
> 
> Richard Feehan, the Indigenous relations minister, said 27,000 provincial government employees will each attend a six-hour session that includes talks with elders, films and group exercises.
> 
> The direct cost of the project is $2.7 million. It is to begin with employees from the Children's Services and Justice departments.


More:



> Gerald Cunningham, president of the Metis Settlements General Council, said it's critical to build bridges and broaden understanding with government.
> 
> "Knowledge is a very important step on the path towards cultural understanding and reconciliation," said Cunningham.
> 
> *"We get left out of a lot of the (government program) funding stream because of that lack of knowledge."*


Bold mine.

Oh. So it's not _really_ about educating the unwashed...


----------



## SINC

The good news continues!


----------



## SINC

Yep, and Notley wants Alberta to follow Ontario's lead. She is an idiot.

*$312 Billion: Green Energy Makes Ontario the Most Debt-Ridden Province on Earth*

https://pjmedia.com/trending/312-bi...tario-the-most-debt-ridden-province-on-earth/


----------



## FeXL

No argument.

Related, with Ford telling The Eyebrow what he can do with his carbon tax, the next federal election could be an interesting one.

Red Rachel will be gone by then & so will Albertistan's carbon tax. Now, The Eyebrow doesn't care about Alberta/Sask so he'll bend us over, dry, any chance he can get & not lose much.

However, he can't afford to lose many seats in Liberal-ridden Ontario. Ford says the cap & trade is gone, saving taxpayers money. If The Eyebrow forces that back onto Ontario taxpayers, he will lose much support. It's a perfect storm.

With Alberta, Saskatchewan & Ontario united against the carbon tax... 

Ford's election was not only timely provincially, but it will throw a monkey wrench into Liberal policy for the next federal election , too.

Grab the popcorn...


----------



## FeXL

Talks are just starting with the union regarding teacher's salaries. This outta be interesting.

Red Rachel can't be so naive to think she's going to get re-elected, can she? So, what does she do? 

Hit the wall at 100 mph and give the teachers a big raise aimed at offsetting all the costs you've foisted onto them over the last 3.5 years in the hopes of buying votes? 

Or, tuck tail & run, slinking out the side door like the parasites they are?

More popcorn, please...


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Talks are just starting with the union regarding teacher's salaries. This outta be interesting.
> 
> 
> 
> Red Rachel can't be so naive to think she's going to get re-elected, can she? So, what does she do?
> 
> 
> 
> Hit the wall at 100 mph and give the teachers a big raise aimed at offsetting all the costs you've foisted onto them over the last 3.5 years in the hopes of buying votes?
> 
> 
> 
> Or, tuck tail & run, slinking out the side door like the parasites they are?
> 
> 
> 
> More popcorn, please...



You should talk to your SO once in a while. Teacher salaries are determined by collective agreements, not the timing of elections. But you must already know that.


----------



## FeXL

I'm sorry. Did you speak?

Thought not...



Freddie_Biff said:


> You should talk to your SO once in a while. Teacher salaries are determined by collective agreements, not the timing of elections. But you must already know that.


----------



## Macfury

He's addicted to responding to your bullying posts. 



FeXL said:


> I'm sorry. Did you speak?
> 
> Thought not...


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> He's addicted to responding to your bullying posts.


Yeah. I feel so bad...

:lmao::lmao::lmao:

The most offensive part of the whole post was referring to my lovely bride as an SO...


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Yeah. I feel so bad...
> 
> 
> 
> :lmao::lmao::lmao:
> 
> 
> 
> The most offensive part of the whole post was referring to my lovely bride as an SO...




I couldn’t remember if you’re married or not. She’s not significant to you?


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> I couldn’t remember if you’re married or not. She’s not significant to you?


Jesus Frank, why do you continue to hurl insults? And you claim to be a teacher of Alberta's children? Sad indeed. Grow up.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Jesus Frank, why do you continue to hurl insults? And you claim to be a teacher of Alberta's children? Sad indeed. Grow up.




What’s your problem, Don? Forget to take your multi-vitamins? I honestly couldn’t remember if he was married, so I used SO-significant other. And finally, what business is it of yours? Jay-zuz.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> What’s your problem, Don? Forget to take your multi-vitamins? I honestly couldn’t remember if he was married, so I used SO-significant other. And finally, what business is it of yours? Jay-zuz.


Did you hear the whoosh when my comment went right over your head? 

It wasn't the SO comment you made, it was this: "She’s not significant to you?"


----------



## FeXL

Couple months old but still relevant.

Notley's tough talk on Trans Mountain not enough to save Alberta



> The Notley government has spent three years doing everything it can to ruin Alberta’s economy.
> 
> It has imposed – and then raised – an unwanted carbon tax. It has risked reducing development of the oilsands by imposing a hard cap on emissions. It has raised taxes on energy companies, cozied up to the federal Liberals and accelerated the shut down of every one of our coal-fired power plants at a tremendous cost to Alberta taxpayers and coal communities.
> 
> *And in the process of paying for this, the NDP are on a path to rack up nearly $100 billion in debt.*


More:



> *If you are an NDP MLA, you might want to dust off your resume. You’ll probably be needing another job after next year’s election.*


All bold mine.

Definitely. :clap::clap::clap:


----------



## SINC

Notley, much like the federal NDP, didn’t see that their numbers in the last election were a protest vote, they actually thought they WON the mandate. But not to worry, she will find that out in the election next spring.


----------



## SINC

The UCP won both Alberta by-elections last night by an overwhelming majority with 65% of the vote in the north and 81% in central.

https://edmontonjournal.com/news/local-news/united-conservatives-win-alberta-byelections

Didja get the message yet Rachel?

The NDP are doomed in the spring.


----------



## eMacMan

Another view on safe injection sites, based on direct observations. It is a Facebook posting but you should be able to close the dialog box and read it without having to log in to Facebook.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?....258381724209124.58736.100001118947187&type=3

I would hope he also posted this in the Lethbridge Herald.


----------



## eMacMan

I've been laid up for the last month, so yesterday was my first encounter with the Knotheads pre-pay policy.

Intended to gas up at the Pincher Shell and let the attendant pump while I waited inside. Prices were enough higher there that we came home and gassed up here. Some real differences. Normally I would not have to wait for a pump to come free. Not now, that took 3 minutes. Wife went in and waited another 2 minutes before she could pre-pay more than we needed. Then the pump would not switch on and that took 2 more minutes to sort out. Once I was filled up it took another 2 minutes for her to get our change. IOW an extra 7 minutes to fill up the tank and pay.

The real kicker was the guy who used his card at the pump. He too had to guess how much and was $3 over. His receipt showed his guess, not the amount he put in the tank. He wasted a couple of minutes only to be told that his bill would be correct and there was nothing the station could do about the incorrect receipt.

This was a dumb idea from the get-go. All that was needed was $5000 fines for stations that expect their cashiers to act as security officers. That along with $500 fines + reimbursement for drive offs would have ensured the safety of workers and eliminated drive-offs. The cops would be more than happy to track down no pays, if they got half of that $500 fine.


----------



## Macfury

Idiots micromanaging the lives of idiots--and inconveniencing the lives of intelligent citizens.



eMacMan said:


> I've been laid up for the last month, so yesterday was my first encounter with the Knotheads pre-pay policy.


----------



## SINC

The NDP continue to wreck Alberta. They have to be stopped.

This is absurd.

*In new social studies curriculum, there's no such things as Albertans*

https://edmontonjournal.com/news/lo...curriculum-theres-no-such-things-as-albertans


----------



## Macfury

I think I heard Freddie speaking out against this nonsense the other day.



SINC said:


> The NDP continue to wreck Alberta. They have to be stopped.
> 
> This is absurd.
> 
> *In new social studies curriculum, there's no such things as Albertans*
> 
> https://edmontonjournal.com/news/lo...curriculum-theres-no-such-things-as-albertans


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> I think I heard Freddie speaking out against this nonsense the other day.


Freddie being critical of Red Rachel policy? :yikes:


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Freddie being critical of Red Rachel policy? :yikes:


Guess I was mistaken!


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Guess I was mistaken!




I’d think you’d be used to that feeling by now.


----------



## Macfury

Is my face red?



Freddie_Biff said:


> I’d think you’d be used to that feeling by now.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Guess I was mistaken!


Freddie thinks that $100 million/$10 million in debt/deficit with nothing to show for it save a couple tens of thousands of freshly minted Prog voters is a feature, not a bug!

In mere months he will find out all that money pi$$ed away didn't buy Red Rachel & cadre enough votes for re-election & the only thing left will be their fiscal mismanagement legacy & his duty (and the duty of his children, and his grandchildren, and his great-grandchildren) to pay it all back. 

I'm sure they won't be resentful at all.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Freddie thinks that $100 million/$10 million in debt/deficit with nothing to show for it save a couple tens of thousands of freshly minted Prog voters is a feature, not a bug!
> 
> In mere months he will find out all that money pi$$ed away didn't buy Red Rachel & cadre enough votes for re-election & the only thing left will be their fiscal mismanagement legacy & his duty (and the duty of his children, and his grandchildren, and his great-grandchildren) to pay it all back.
> 
> I'm sure they won't be resentful at all.


For some members of the public service, going billions into debt would be worth it as long as they see an extra nickel on their weekly paycheque.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Freddie thinks that $100 million/$10 million in debt/deficit with nothing to show for it save a couple tens of thousands of freshly minted Prog voters is a feature, not a bug!
> 
> 
> 
> In mere months he will find out all that money pi$$ed away didn't buy Red Rachel & cadre enough votes for re-election & the only thing left will be their fiscal mismanagement legacy & his duty (and the duty of his children, and his grandchildren, and his great-grandchildren) to pay it all back.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure they won't be resentful at all.



Why don’t you stop speaking on Freddie’s behalf? You don’t know him very well at all. I thought you were going to attempt to be civil. That includes talking behind someone’s back.


----------



## Macfury

I recall FeXL promising to be civil if you got off your lazy ass to back up your assertions. When did you initiate that sea change?


----------



## FeXL

It's not an assumption on my part.

You've noted on these very boards your unequivocal support of the NDP. I believe the quote was, "I support the NDP". No codicils, no "ifs, ands or buts", no exceptions.

That is all.

If you have criticisms of Red Rachel to air, please, feel free. I'm all ears. I'd be more than happy to to discuss them with you & find out your support for her, like most of us, is _something_ less than 100%.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Why don’t you stop speaking on Freddie’s behalf? You don’t know him very well at all.


I'm not talking behind someone's back. It's all here on the screen, right in front of you. And, in a very civil tone, thankyouverymuch.



Freddie_Biff said:


> I thought you were going to attempt to be civil. That includes talking behind someone’s back.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> It's not an assumption on my part.
> 
> 
> 
> You've noted on these very boards your unequivocal support of the NDP. I believe the quote was, "I support the NDP". No codicils, no "ifs, ands or buts", no exceptions.
> 
> 
> 
> That is all.
> 
> 
> 
> If you have criticisms of Red Rachel to air, please, feel free. I'm all ears. I'd be more than happy to to discuss them with you & find out your support for her, like most of us, is _something_ less than 100%.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not talking behind someone's back. It's all here on the screen, right in front of you. And, in a very civil tone, thankyouverymuch.



Yup. You still don’t get it. Not surprised.


----------



## Macfury

Why should he have have any criticism of Red Rachel, FeXL? She's watering his trough.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> I recall FeXL promising to be civil if you got off your lazy ass to back up your assertions. When did you initiate that sea change?




Perhaps you should mind your own business, Mr. Helper.


----------



## Macfury

So sorry about that Freddie--I guess your private messages to FeXL were accidentally posted on the public part of the forum. 



Freddie_Biff said:


> Perhaps you should mind your own business, Mr. Helper.


----------



## FeXL

No, I don't. That's why I'm asking. 

Us non-Progs aren't mind readers.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Yup. You still don’t get it. Not surprised.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> So sorry about that Freddie--I guess your private messages to FeXL were accidentally posted on the public part of the forum.




Every time a poster responds to another poster is not an invitation for you to respond on their behalf. I know the pack mentality is part of your MO but you really could be making a bigger effort to change.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> No, I don't. That's why I'm asking.
> 
> 
> 
> Us non-Progs aren't mind readers.




I have criticisms of some of Rachel’s methods too, but there’s no point in sharing them with you. You’d declare victory and do a little dance. You have enough vitriole allnon your own. Anyway, it’s been more fun watching you Cons squirm for the last three years, and I get to enjoy at least one more year of that.


----------



## FeXL

To change what?



Freddie_Biff said:


> I know the pack mentality is part of your MO but you really could be making a bigger effort to change.


----------



## FeXL

What's this? A crack in the facade?

Her methodology is all you can be critical of? Then we have nothing to talk about anyway.



Freddie_Biff said:


> I have criticisms of some of Rachel’s methods too, but there’s no point in sharing them with you.


I'm saving the victory dance for late next spring.



Freddie_Biff said:


> You’d declare victory and do a little dance.


Squirm? I've been celebrating for nearly 3-1/2 years! Enjoy away. I am.

I have a nice bottle of bourbon barrelled 14.7% Imperial Stout that will have aged 4 years in the cellar by then (Note the irony in the description. I thought it appropriate.), I recently purchased a nice, smooth $25 Cohiba cigar that's sitting in my humidor and I'm going to purchase the thickest, most marbled rib steak I can find the week of the election. Then, on the night of, I'm going to break out all three, light up the fire pit in the backyard & enjoy them in order.

BTW, you have < 1 year. That's "less than" for you mathematically challenged readers.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Anyway, it’s been more fun watching you Cons squirm for the last three years, and I get to enjoy at least one more year of that.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> To change what?




Again, message to Macfury, answered by FeXL. You guys are like a two/headed dog.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> I have criticisms of some of Rachel’s methods too, but there’s no point in sharing them with you. You’d declare victory and do a little dance. You have enough vitriole allnon your own. Anyway, it’s been more fun watching you Cons squirm for the last three years, and I get to enjoy at least one more year of that.


The more that Rachel does, the bigger the backlash is going to be. She may as well keep going whole hog so people can get a taste of what Venezuela started out like.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Every time a poster responds to another poster is not an invitation for you to respond on their behalf. I know the pack mentality is part of your MO but you really could be making a bigger effort to change.


There aren't enough people on EhMac to form a pack!



Freddie_Biff said:


> Again, message to Macfury, answered by FeXL. You guys are like a two/headed dog.


Why not just two dogs?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> There aren't enough people on EhMac to form a pack!
> 
> 
> 
> Why not just two dogs?



Agreed about the ghost town this place is. 

Two heads because they are most prominent (or the two of you have the most spare time). Once in a while a third head may pop up, but you are the two that tend to answer questions meant for the other head. I could have said the other end, but that wouldn’t have been very civil. Why not two dogs? Prolly because you don’t act like you’re two separate beings, capable of independent thought. So a Cerberus of sorts it is.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> I have criticisms of some of Rachel’s methods too, but there’s no point in sharing them with you. You’d declare victory and do a little dance. You have enough vitriole allnon your own. Anyway, it’s been more fun watching you Cons squirm for the last three years, and I get to enjoy at least one more year of that.


No you don't. Less than 10 months now.


----------



## FeXL

Looking for clarification.

Are you saying that no one can respond to another post if it wasn't specifically directed at them?

Is that rule #27.2.4.9 in the Prog's Freedom of Speech manual?

Dream on.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Again, message to Macfury, answered by FeXL. You guys are like a two/headed dog.


----------



## Macfury

I don't think anyone has ever accused me of having a lot of spare time! EhMac is the little window in the corner of a monitor array that gives me a chance to have fun every so often. FeXL and I are far less in agreement than you think--but we respect each other's efforts to defend our positions.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Agreed about the ghost town this place is.
> 
> Two heads because they are most prominent (or the two of you have the most spare time). Once in a while a third head may pop up, but you are the two that tend to answer questions meant for the other head. I could have said the other end, but that wouldn’t have been very civil. Why not two dogs? Prolly because you don’t act like you’re two separate beings, capable of independent thought. So a Cerberus of sorts it is.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> No you don't. Less than 10 months now.



Thanks for letting me know what I think. The arrogance, Don—not your best feature.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Looking for clarification.
> 
> 
> 
> Are you saying that no one can respond to another post if it wasn't specifically directed at them?
> 
> 
> 
> Is that rule #27.2.4.9 in the Prog's Freedom of Speech manual?
> 
> 
> 
> Dream on.



Ever seen a Cerberus?


----------



## FeXL

You first:



> Are you saying that no one can respond to another post if it wasn't specifically directed at them?





Freddie_Biff said:


> Ever seen a Cerberus?


----------



## eMacMan

Not saying this is impossible, however if you do the math this works out to 250Kms/day for 320 days a year. At least 800 hours of driving as even on the highway maintaining a 100KPH average is nearly impossible. You can drive faster than that, but there are always towns and bad roads to slow you down in places.

Seems to me this is a simple issue to address. When I was in business for myself I maintained a mileage log. Recorded starting and ending odometer readings for every business related trip and the purpose of that trip. Took less than a minute each time. Living in rural areas you do rack up the miles, and a log like that is crucial if the taxman chooses to audit your claim. If she can drive 150 minutes a day she can spend an extra minute or two properly logging it.

https://calgaryherald.com/news/poli...nses/wcm/4bea9cbf-dc6d-4853-a7bf-15eed6a29855



> New Democrat MLA Jessica Littlewood will be reimbursed $34,800 from government coffers after racking up mileage while driving around her constituency east of Edmonton.
> 
> The member for Fort Saskatchewan-Vegreville claimed mileage expenses for 80,000 kilometres in her personal vehicle in 2017-18, nearly 30,000 kilometres more than any other MLA.
> 
> United Conservative Party MLAs Nathan Cooper and Drew Barnes, members for Olds-Didsbury-Three Hills and Cypress-Medicine Hat, were the next in line, claiming around 50,000 kilometres in personal vehicle mileage, according to expense forms.
> ...
> The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is concerned with the way mileage claims are made, said Alberta director Colin Craig. MLAs can claim fuel expenses and minor maintenance for personal vehicles on top of mileage.
> 
> “What we’ve advocated for is to bring their expense rules in line with the private sector, and just giving MLAs the straight-up per kilometre reimbursement, instead of allowing them to be reimbursed for gas receipts,” he said, adding the current system allows for double dipping. “The rules should be changed.”


No mention as to whether she also claimed gas receipts, but if she drives the typical NDP SUV guzzler that could easily add $20,000 to the tab.


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> Seems to me this is a simple issue to address. When I was in business for myself I maintained a mileage log. Recorded starting and ending odometer readings for every business related trip and the purpose of that trip. Took less than a minute each time.


I have an app on my cell phone (Road Trip) that helps with this. Record start/end odometer, whether the trip was for business or personal, gas fillings with odometer readings, repairs, maintenance. End of the year the data is downloaded to my desktop computer, I have a spreadsheet set up that calculates what percentage of km over the year was personal & what was business, apply the ratio to all costs including fuel, service & repairs, print off a copy & send it in with my income tax.

As you note, the log takes less than a minute to fill out, end of year takes about a half hour.

Mebbe these politicians aren't bright enough to run something that complex. :lmao:


----------



## Freddie_Biff

eMacMan said:


> Not saying this is impossible, however if you do the math this works out to 250Kms/day for 320 days a year. At least 800 hours of driving as even on the highway maintaining a 100KPH average is nearly impossible. You can drive faster than that, but there are always towns and bad roads to slow you down in places.
> 
> Seems to me this is a simple issue to address. When I was in business for myself I maintained a mileage log. Recorded starting and ending odometer readings for every business related trip and the purpose of that trip. Took less than a minute each time. Living in rural areas you do rack up the miles, and a log like that is crucial if the taxman chooses to audit your claim. If she can drive 150 minutes a day she can spend an extra minute or two properly logging it.
> 
> https://calgaryherald.com/news/poli...nses/wcm/4bea9cbf-dc6d-4853-a7bf-15eed6a29855
> 
> 
> 
> No mention as to whether she also claimed gas receipts, but if she drives the typical NDP SUV guzzler that could easily add $20,000 to the tab.




Honest to God, your reading comprehension needs improvement. I write a comment specifically for MacFury; you answer. I wrote a comment specifically for you; MacFury answers. It’s childish. That’s why the two of you are a Cerberus. It’s a perfectly apt description. A general comment that’s not directed to anyone is fair game for anyone. It’s like you missed those lessons on the etiquette of discussion or something.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> I have an app on my cell phone (Road Trip) that helps with this. Record start/end odometer, whether the trip was for business or personal, gas fillings with odometer readings, repairs, maintenance. End of the year the data is downloaded to my desktop computer, I have a spreadsheet set up that calculates what percentage of km over the year was personal & what was business, apply the ratio to all costs including fuel, service & repairs, print off a copy & send it in with my income tax.
> 
> 
> 
> As you note, the log takes less than a minute to fill out, end of year takes about a half hour.
> 
> 
> 
> Mebbe these politicians aren't bright enough to run something that complex. :lmao:



Maybe some commenters aren’t bright enough to figure out that she’s already done that step in submitting her expense forms.


----------



## FeXL

Maybe some commenters are suspicious that she might be lying about her vehicle expenses.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Maybe some commenters aren’t bright enough to figure out that she’s already done that step in submitting her expense forms.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Maybe some commenters are suspicious that she might be lying about her vehicle expenses.



Maybe some commenters get their panties in a bunch about anything prog-related.


----------



## Macfury

Must be a tough life for His Majesty--obliquely addressing one person and being answered by another.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Must be a tough life for His Majesty--obliquely addressing one person and being answered by another.




No different than fighting off a pack of dogs nipping at my heels.


----------



## Macfury

When did you ever put up a fight? Would be interesting to see.



Freddie_Biff said:


> No different than fighting off a pack of dogs nipping at my heels.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> When did you ever put up a fight? Would be interesting to see.



I think the dogs are the more salient part of that analogy.


----------



## eMacMan

eMacMan said:


> Not saying this is impossible, however if you do the math this works out to 250Kms/day for 320 days a year. At least 800 hours of driving as even on the highway maintaining a 100KPH average is nearly impossible. You can drive faster than that, but there are always towns and bad roads to slow you down in places.
> 
> Seems to me this is a simple issue to address. When I was in business for myself I maintained a mileage log. Recorded starting and ending odometer readings for every business related trip and the purpose of that trip. Took less than a minute each time. Living in rural areas you do rack up the miles, and a log like that is crucial if the taxman chooses to audit your claim. If she can drive 150 minutes a day she can spend an extra minute or two properly logging it.
> 
> https://calgaryherald.com/news/poli...nses/wcm/4bea9cbf-dc6d-4853-a7bf-15eed6a29855
> 
> 
> 
> No mention as to whether she also claimed gas receipts, but if she drives the typical NDP SUV guzzler that could easily add $20,000 to the tab.


Which was quoted and replied to thusly:


Freddie_Biff said:


> Honest to God, your reading comprehension needs improvement. I write a comment specifically for MacFury; you answer. I wrote a comment specifically for you; MacFury answers. It’s childish. That’s why the two of you are a Cerberus. It’s a perfectly apt description. A general comment that’s not directed to anyone is fair game for anyone. It’s like you missed those lessons on the etiquette of discussion or something.


Freddie I would love to see the twisted logic that you used to arrive at that response to my post about mileage claims. I know the simple math I posited is way beyond your New Math handicap, and may well have confused you. Still there is seemingly no rational connection.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

eMacMan said:


> Which was quoted and replied to thusly:
> 
> 
> Freddie I would love to see the twisted logic that you used to arrive at that response to my post about mileage claims. I know the simple math I posited is way beyond your New Math handicap, and may well have confused you. Still there is seemingly no rational connection.



Sorry. I was responding to a different question from a different poster. Didn’t mean to confuse you.


----------



## FeXL

I seem to recall there was a UCP name or two in that same list. Second & third, as I recall. Did you even bothe... 

Silly FeXL. Of course he didn't read it. Linked articles are far too dull & boring, remember? Erroneous, crappy memes are what Freddie uses!

Care to swing again, Freddie? You're already at two strikes.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Maybe some commenters get their panties in a bunch about anything prog-related.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Must be a tough life for His Majesty--obliquely addressing one person and being answered by another.


Definitely throws his game off, having to pay attention to two posters at the same time.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> When did you ever put up a fight? Would be interesting to see.


I'd pay good money...


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Definitely throws his game off, having to pay attention to two posters at the same time.




The Cerberus barks again.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Definitely throws his game off, having to pay attention to two posters at the same time.


If it's not one person posting, it's another!


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> *I seem to recall there was a UCP name or two in that same list. Second & third, as I recall.* Did you even bothe...
> 
> Silly FeXL. Of course he didn't read it. Linked articles are far too dull & boring, remember? Erroneous, crappy memes are what Freddie uses!
> 
> Care to swing again, Freddie? You're already at two strikes.



Yep both were up around 50,000 Kms. If I were an auditor I would certainly want to see their logs as well.

Had a rancher/photographer/logger friend who showed close to 50,000Kms on his tax return. As I recall the auditor asked him for verification. He produced the log, the auditor spent about 30 minutes confirming the math for the past 3 years, and added about a dollar to his deduction for a minor math error on one years return.

It is possible in a rural area but deserves close scrutiny.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> If it's not one person posting, it's another!


I'm sooo confused! 

I just don't understand!!! :---(

Save yourself, Freddie, Put us on ignore. The whole damn blog, for that matter. You never know what kind of scary creature can jump up out of the dark & go, "Boogoda, boogoda!!!".


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> Yep both were up around 50,000 Kms. If I were an auditor I would certainly want to see their logs as well.


Me, too.

We put 35K on the 'Burb last year. Most I've ever put on a vehicle in one year, ever. Multiple trips to Edmonton/Sherwood Park, nearly weekly trips to Calgary for 6 months, two trips to Seattle including one with a loop up to Langley, BC, a trip out to Spokane, a half dozen to Kalispell & back, one to Cody, WY. We drove that thing everywhere.

I can _almost_ understand 50K but I'd still take a look.

80K? There'd better be some pretty skookum documentation backing up that claim. She notes she drove 500k on July 1 alone. Fine. What about the other 79,500?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> I'm sooo confused!
> 
> 
> 
> I just don't understand!!! :---(
> 
> 
> 
> Save yourself, Freddie, Put us on ignore. The whole damn blog, for that matter. You never know what kind of scary creature can jump up out of the dark & go, "Boogoda, boogoda!!!".



Once an asshole, always an asshole. And one with two heads that barks too. Woof!


----------



## FeXL

There we go! There's the Freddie I know & love. I knew he was lurking, just beneath the thin veneer, that facade of civility.

BTW, don't you mean "assoholic"?



Freddie_Biff said:


> Once an asshole, always an asshole. And one with two heads that barks too. Woof!


----------



## Macfury

Hours of being civil, all thrown away in a single misplaced tirade.



FeXL said:


> There we go! There's the Freddie I know & love. I knew he was lurking, just beneath the thin veneer, that facade of civility.
> 
> BTW, don't you mean "assoholic"?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> There we go! There's the Freddie I know & love. I knew he was lurking, just beneath the thin veneer, that facade of civility.
> 
> 
> 
> BTW, don't you mean "assoholic"?




You know you are. Why try to deny it?


----------



## Macfury

Oooh.... that's gotta hurt!


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Oooh.... that's gotta hurt!


Yep. Definitely left a mark. Ouch. Down here, on my foot. 

Wait, that's not my foot. Oh... 

It's a kitty treat that the Hairball missed from last night. _Beside_ my foot...


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Have truck. Will drive. Read and learn. 

 https://m.facebook.com/notes/jessi...ville/have-truck-will-drive/2171851016421243/


----------



## Macfury

Thankfully, Jessica Littlewood probably won't have to worry about submitting mileage claims after the next election.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Have truck. Will drive. Read and learn.
> 
> https://m.facebook.com/notes/jessi...ville/have-truck-will-drive/2171851016421243/


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Thankfully, Jessica Littlewood probably won't have to worry about submitting mileage claims after the next election.




A very mature response. She provided a well-worded and mature response to criticism, and that’s the best you can come up with? Pitiful.


----------



## Macfury

I've got no beef about her mileage claims--only her dreadful policies.



Freddie_Biff said:


> A very mature response. She provided a well-worded and mature response to criticism, and that’s the best you can come up with? Pitiful.


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> I've got no beef about her mileage claims--only her dreadful policies.


If her claims are legit, I have no issue either. It is a rural riding, just a return trip to Walmart can be over 100Kms.

'Course she could have just posted a copy of her mileage log for one month. That would have assured everyone that she does drive that much and that she has solid documentation to back it up.


----------



## SINC

You do all realize that in order to cover 80,000 km in a year she would have to have driven 220 km every single day including every day she sat in the legislature? If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck . . .

She is a liar cause that is just not possible in a riding roughly 100 x 80 km. Fairy tales anyone?


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> You do all realize that in order to cover 80,000 km in a year she would have to have driven 220 km every single day including every day she sat in the legislature? If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck . . .
> 
> She is a liar cause that is just not possible in a riding roughly 100 x 80 km. Fairy tales anyone?


Yep that is why I originally posted it. Still I do live in a rural area and know how quickly it can add up. As I said anyone who deducts or receives compensation for mileage should keep and be willing to show a detailed log, not just submit the max at the end of the year.


----------



## eMacMan

So let's take another look at how that mandatory pre-pay is working out here in AB.

Was alone in the mini-van so stopped at the Shell in Pincher Creek, as they pump for you.

Told the guy at the pump to use the slowest setting as otherwise it would cut out early. Went in gave the attendant a $100, received a receipt. Once it was filled got my change and another receipt for the correct amount. When I got to the van received a third receipt from the pumper giving amount and liters.

Got in drove off and the gauge came up to about 7/8ths of a tank. Obviously my instructions were ignored. Went down the road and pumped in another 7 liters. Receipt before and after pumping. Not sure how five paper receipts fits into Rachel's red/green agenda and having to do two tries to fill the tank is certainly not an efficient use of my time.

Other vehicle a couple of days ago gassed up in Lundbreck. Been doing business there for years. Before pre-pay she had a handful of drive-offs annually. She has old style pumps that cannot be programmed to cut out after $xx have been pumped. After the change people were pre-paying and if they went a couple of dollars over just driving off, so now she holds drivers licenses hostage. Wanted mine even though I am a regular customer and my wife was waiting inside for change. Compromised by leaving my wallet and drivers license with my wife while I pumped. So much for saving a step by using two people. tptptptp Not going back there until that drivers license lunacy is dropped.


----------



## SINC

More meddling in favour of union workers coming from Red Rachel:

*The Alberta government is meddling with workers’ compensation*

https://canadianfederationofindepen...EF23F30FEDED/E73D59592B07FA39A7F290B8E8FDC6A0


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> More meddling in favour of union workers coming from Red Rachel:
> 
> *The Alberta government is meddling with workers’ compensation*
> 
> https://canadianfederationofindepen...EF23F30FEDED/E73D59592B07FA39A7F290B8E8FDC6A0


Bahhh! Independent businesses are just an inconvenience to the rulers of Alberzuela.

Will raise a glass to the province when this meddlesome kook gets dumped by the voters.


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> More meddling in favour of union workers coming from Red Rachel:
> 
> *The Alberta government is meddling with workers’ compensation*
> 
> https://canadianfederationofindepen...EF23F30FEDED/E73D59592B07FA39A7F290B8E8FDC6A0


Trust the NDP to mess with the one part of the system that does not need changing. 

A far bigger issue from an employee point of view is the hoops they have to jump through to make a claim. That does need to be changed, as way too many seriously injured on the job have been unable to collect or had their claims delayed by years.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> More meddling in favour of union workers coming from Red Rachel:


Interesting. Wasn't aware of the "rebate".

That said, am aware of the more you use WC, the higher your rates go.

Worked in a couple production facilities (factories) over the years, a modular home plant & a trailer mfg business.

One of the more common injuries in the modular home plant was punctures from a brad nailer, narrow crown stapler or nail gun. By & large (as long as there were no broken bones), the line foreman would simply remove the staple or nail, throw on some iodine or such, bandage up the injury & send the worker back to the line. After the shift was done they'd head to the doctor for a tetanus shot if it had been too long since the last one.

No mollycoddling a boo-boo, little lost time, no WCB claim, no rate increase.


----------



## SINC

Here's some really good news; less than 300 days til we get rid of the NDP and Notley in Alberta.

https://www.tickcounter.com/countdo...idget&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=widget


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> You do all realize that in order to cover 80,000 km in a year she would have to have driven 220 km every single day including every day she sat in the legislature? If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck . . .
> 
> She is a liar cause that is just not possible in a riding roughly 100 x 80 km. Fairy tales anyone?





eMacMan said:


> Yep that is why I originally posted it. Still I do live in a rural area and know how quickly it can add up. As I said anyone who deducts or receives compensation for mileage should keep and be willing to show a detailed log, not just submit the max at the end of the year.


Turns out she also turned in $6100 in gas receipts. That works out at around 7¢/KM less than half of what her Suburban would guzzle. Since this woman seems unlikely to pass up a chance to gouge the taxpayer, it seems likely her real work related mileage was under 40,000 Kms. Still high but at least believable. 

Why on earth are they allowed to double dip like that, and let's publish her mileage logs. The ones she does not have to keep or show.

https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/columnists/craig-cabinet-and-mla-vehicle-expense-rules-need-reform


----------



## Macfury

I see Western Crude has been as low as $38/bbl this week. Freddie, you were counting on Rachel's promises of oil above $70 to save her sorry ass.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> I see Western Crude has been as low as $38/bbl this week. Freddie, you were counting on Rachel's promises of oil above $70 to save her sorry ass.



It comes and goes, amigo. Funny, but I haven’t noticed the price at the pump coming down anytime soon. Somebody’s gouging.


----------



## eMacMan

Freddie_Biff said:


> It comes and goes, amigo. Funny, but I haven’t noticed the price at the pump coming down anytime soon. Somebody’s gouging.


Yep it's called Carbon Tax Fallout. 

"Big Red said we need to charge more, so more we shall charge"


----------



## Freddie_Biff

eMacMan said:


> Yep it's called Carbon Tax Fallout.
> 
> "Big Red said we need to charge more, so more we shall charge"




The carbon tax makes up for a few cents per litre, maybe a nickel. That doesn’t explain why prices are north of $1.30 a litre.


----------



## Macfury

The gas being sold was refined from oil purchased at a higher price. Increased summer demand raises prices as well. Carbon tax creates a new basement for gas prices.



Freddie_Biff said:


> The carbon tax makes up for a few cents per litre, maybe a nickel. That doesn’t explain why prices are north of $1.30 a litre.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> The gas being sold was refined from oil purchased at a higher price. Increased summer demand raises prices as well. Carbon tax creates a new basement for gas prices.



I think gas companies like to raise prices and blame it on the carbon tax, because they know there are suckers who will fall for it.


----------



## eMacMan

Freddie_Biff said:


> I think gas companies like to raise prices and blame it on the carbon tax, because they know there are suckers who will fall for it.


Thing is the purpose of the Carbon Tax is to overprice fuels, and hopefully force those at the low end of the fiscal spectrum out of their homes. Better yet if they starve to death.

Are the oil companies gouging? Of course they are but by Red's established definition, they are gouging with good green intent.


----------



## Macfury

Just like suckers such as yourself fell for the carbon tax. As eMacMan says, Notley made a virtue out of raising the price of fuel, so the result should be no surprise. 



Freddie_Biff said:


> I think gas companies like to raise prices and blame it on the carbon tax, because they know there are suckers who will fall for it.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Just like suckers such as yourself fell for the carbon tax. As eMacMan says, Notley made a virtue out of raising the price of fuel, so the result should be no surprise.



Then there are the suckers such as yourself who are fine with oil companies cranking the price as high as they want because you’ll still blame it on the carbon tax.


----------



## Macfury

Any company has the right to charge what people are willing to pay for a product, just as you sell your services to the highest bidder. During an oil glut, gasoline has been as low as 99 cents here. I only blame the government in Alberta for the 7 cents a litre it charges in carbon tax, which never changes, regardless of supply and demand. I also blame the government for insisting that high fuel prices are virtuous.




Freddie_Biff said:


> Then there are the suckers such as yourself who are fine with oil companies cranking the price as high as they want because you’ll still blame it on the carbon tax.


----------



## SINC

Well, good luck with that business people.

*Small business owners urge AB government to freeze minimum wage*

More than half of entrepreneurs report reducing and/or eliminating plans to hire young workers

Calgary, August 15, 2018 – New findings from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) show local business owners want the Alberta government to take action to preserve jobs. Eighty-nine per cent of Alberta business owners surveyed urge the provincial government to freeze minimum wage at current levels ($13.60/hr).

In addition, local business owners report already making huge changes to their business operations as the province moves towards a $15 minimum wage by October 1, 2018:

• 55 per cent have reduced or eliminated plans to hire new/additional workers
• 52 per cent have reduced or eliminated plans to hire young workers
• 46 per cent have raised prices
• 43 per cent have reduced overall staffing hours
• 42 per cent have reduced the number of employees

More at the link.

https://canadianfederationofindepen...EF23F30FEDED/E73D59592B07FA39A7F290B8E8FDC6A0


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> • 55 per cent have reduced or eliminated plans to hire new/additional workers
> • 46 per cent have raised prices


We've had to implement both of these.


----------



## CubaMark

SINC said:


> Well, good luck with that business people.
> 
> *Small business owners urge AB government to freeze minimum wage*
> 
> More than half of entrepreneurs report reducing and/or eliminating plans to hire young workers


_We can play duelling news articles all day long if you'd like..._

*No, Ontario's Minimum Wage Hike Didn't Kill Jobs. Here's The Proof.*

Many experts predicted that Ontario's hefty minimum wage hike to $14 an hour at the start of this year would harm the province's job creation.

TD Bank issued a study suggesting the move could cost the province some 90,000 jobs. Industry group Restaurants Canada warned the wage hike, along with other labour law reforms, would put 185,000 jobs at risk, including 17,000 in food services.

Some employers seemed to get downright nasty to their workers in the wake of the wage hike. Take, for instance, reports of some Tim Hortons franchisees cutting paid breaks and benefits for workers.

But six months later, there is no sign of the wage hike having negatively impacted job creation in Ontario. The province added some 60,000 jobs in July (though many of those were in the public sector) and its unemployment rate fell to 5.4 per cent, according to Statistics Canada data — the lowest rate in 18 years.

"While Ontario's minimum wage increase had the expected effect of lifting Canada's average wage growth this year, the advertised negative impact on employment is less apparent," National Bank of Canada economist Krishen Rangasamy wrote in a client note.

"Employers seem reluctant to part with their now more expensive workers perhaps due to reported labour shortages," Rangasamy added, "although the persistence of strong sales and profits could also explain the resilience of employment."

Indeed, there are labour shortages all across Canada's economy these days.

The Canadian Federation of Independent Business reports there were nearly 400,000 jobs in Canada that had been unfilled for four months or more in the second quarter of this year. Ontario accounts for nearly 155,000 of those vacant jobs.

The 3.1-per-cent job vacancy rate is the highest since the CFIB started tracking these numbers in 2004.

(HuffPo)​


----------



## FeXL

Let's. Why don't you go back & address the many posts I've made on the utter failure of the Seattle $15/hr minimum wage fiasco?



CubaMark said:


> We can play duelling news articles all day long if you'd like...


----------



## Macfury

Sure, but your dueling news article banjo is missing a few strings. The "expert" is not studying the net loss of hours and jobs, but instead overlooking the effects of the Donald Trump and Doug Ford economies.



CubaMark said:


> _We can play duelling news articles all day long if you'd like..._


----------



## SINC

More socialism at work. What to expect if Alberta re-elects the NDP:

*Donkey herds are dwindling as hungry Venezuelans slaughter them for food*

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/venezuela/article215644840.html


----------



## Macfury

Chavez did everything that Notley aspires to do... and still the NDP promises a different outcome.



SINC said:


> More socialism at work. What to expect if Alberta re-elects the NDP:
> 
> *Donkey herds are dwindling as hungry Venezuelans slaughter them for food*
> 
> https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/venezuela/article215644840.html


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> More socialism at work. What to expect if Alberta re-elects the NDP:
> 
> 
> 
> *Donkey herds are dwindling as hungry Venezuelans slaughter them for food*
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/venezuela/article215644840.html




Interesting. You’re actually contemplating the NDP being re-elected. I thought you said their defeat was a sure thing.


----------



## FeXL

It is.

Just throwing into sharp relief a worst case scenario.



Freddie_Biff said:


> I thought you said their defeat was a sure thing.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Interesting. You’re actually contemplating the NDP being re-elected. I thought you said their defeat was a sure thing.


Whooooosh again! FeXL got it though.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Whooooosh again! FeXL got it though.



Not much of a whoosh, Don. Just s poorly written statement.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Interesting. You’re actually contemplating the NDP being re-elected. I thought you said their defeat was a sure thing.


Predicting what might happen if they were re-elected is not the same as believing they might be re-elected.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Not much of a whoosh, Don. Just s poorly written statement.


You mean that one in red, Frank?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> You mean that one in red, Frank?




It’s all black and white on my phone, Don. Why do you assume every user is sitting at a computer just because you are?


----------



## Macfury

He just assumed you were using a decent app.



Freddie_Biff said:


> It’s all black and white on my phone, Don. Why do you assume every user is sitting at a computer just because you are?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> He just assumed you were using a decent app.




It is a decent app. What are you implying, Mr. Helper?


----------



## Macfury

That your app is indecent!


----------



## FeXL

And this is a poorly spelled one...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Just s poorly written statement.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> And this is a poorly spelled one...




Thank you, Mr. Helper number 2. It happens sometimes.


----------



## FeXL

Why, yes. Yes, it does.

Which is precisely why you've no room to be critical of another's "poorly written statement".

Wanna criticize an argument? Fine. Post your own empirical evidence & argue away. But if yer gonna become a grammar & spelling Nazi, bugger off.



Freddie_Biff said:


> It happens sometimes.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Why, yes. Yes, it does.
> 
> 
> 
> Which is precisely why you've no room to be critical of another's "poorly written statement".
> 
> 
> 
> Wanna criticize an argument? Fine. Post your own empirical evidence & argue away. But if yer gonna become a grammar & spelling Nazi, bugger off.



Thank you, Mr. Moderator.


----------



## Macfury

Are you nominating him?



Freddie_Biff said:


> Thank you, Mr. Moderator.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Are you nominating him?




I thought you weren’t in favour of moderators. Do you like them now?


----------



## Macfury

What would make you think I supported them now?



Freddie_Biff said:


> I thought you weren’t in favour of moderators. Do you like them now?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> What would make you think I supported them now?




Why would you advocate for your friend to be one?


----------



## Macfury

I don't want anyone to be a moderator--that's for juveniles. 

Just asking if you were nominating him. (But I suspect that, if nominated, FeXL would not serve.)



Freddie_Biff said:


> Why would you advocate for your friend to be one?


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> (But I suspect that, if nominated, FeXL would not serve.)


You surmise correctly, good sir.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> It’s all black and white on my phone, Don. Why do you assume every user is sitting at a computer just because you are?


A black and white phone, Frank. Still using your flip phone ard you? Cut the crap. Any modern phone shows identical colours to any computer.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Uh huh. Whoosh indeed.


----------



## Macfury

This is nicer:


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> This is nicer:




Except that I never highlighted anything in red. I like my screen better.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Uh huh. Whoosh indeed.


Ah, now I see, black and white by choice with that tap app thing. Or AKA how to disable yer phone's capabilities 101.


----------



## Macfury

Of course you didn't. You were unable to see that Don highlighted text in red. 



Freddie_Biff said:


> Except that I never highlighted anything in red. I like my screen better.


----------



## SINC

The truth about Alberta's minimum wage and that's just Calgary.

*Rising minimum wage blamed as 25,700 jobs vanish in Calgary's service sector*

https://calgaryherald.com/news/loca...-25700-jobs-vanish-in-calgarys-service-sector


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> The truth about Alberta's minimum wage and that's just Calgary.
> 
> 
> 
> *Rising minimum wage blamed as 25,700 jobs vanish in Calgary's service sector*
> 
> 
> 
> https://calgaryherald.com/news/loca...-25700-jobs-vanish-in-calgarys-service-sector



"Hosts and servers are the only staff earning minimum wage, but Echino said the same raise percentages have been applied to all staff as minimum wage has increased in recent years."

Maybe that's the problem. Don't blame it all on the minimum wage.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> "Hosts and servers are the only staff earning minimum wage, but Echino said the same raise percentages have been applied to all staff as minimum wage has increased in recent years."
> 
> Maybe that's the problem. Don't blame it all on the minimum wage.


That is pure bull. If the minimum raise had not been tampered with by the Dippers one of those jobs would have been llst. Blame the minimum wage fully 100%.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> That is pure bull. If the minimum raise had not been tampered with by the Dippers one of those jobs would have been llst. Blame the minimum wage fully 100%.




It’s a quote straight from the article you linked to. If it’s pure bull, then apparently you posted pure bull.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie, he's saying that they have to raise the wages of some staff members, because they refuse to work at the same rate as unskilled minimum wage workers. What's your solution--fire them and hire more unskilled workers?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Freddie, he's saying that they have to raise the wages of some staff members, because they refuse to work at the same rate as unskilled minimum wage workers. What's your solution--fire them and hire more unskilled workers?



Most places I know of raised the minimum wage but all the others. I’ve certainly seen no wage increase in several years, but I’m not crying about it. You have to start somewhere, and raising the minimum wage was a wise choice, whiners notwithstanding.


----------



## Macfury

Once you realize that one of the big drivers of minimum wage increases are large corporations. They want to drive smaller competitors and family-owned businesses into bankruptcy. Those who can barely make it cut staff and hours. Only the large companies can afford kiosks and automated services, so they bounce back quickly.

I certainly won't refer to people who have lost their jobs and businesses as "whiners." 

One problem with progs is that they want their wrongheaded policies to be judged on intentions, not outcome.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Most places I know of raised the minimum wage but all the others. I’ve certainly seen no wage increase in several years, but I’m not crying about it. You have to start somewhere, and raising the minimum wage was a wise choice, whiners notwithstanding.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Once you realize that one of the big drivers of minimum wage increases are large corporations. They want to drive smaller competitors and family-owned businesses into bankruptcy. Those who can barely make it cut staff and hours. Only the large companies can afford kiosks and automated services, so they bounce back quickly.
> 
> I certainly won't refer to people who have lost their jobs and businesses as "whiners."
> 
> One problem with progs is that they want their wrongheaded policies to be judged on intentions, not outcome.


You're right; "whiners" is too harsh, but I was referring more to the ideologues than the actual workers. i will agree that job losses for anyone is a bad outcome, but so is gouging your lowest paid workers by not raising their wages. They had been held down artificially for a very long time and it was about time for some compensation. Raising the minimum wage versus workers losing jobs is always a tough balancing act.


----------



## Macfury

The people who will suffer most are the truly unskilled. An introductory wage rate would have allowed employers to take a chance on them.

Fallout for me is that I've severely curtailed my spending on outside food since Ontario's hikes. For example I used to buy a couple of pizzas for supper once a week, but the noticeable price increases have cut that that back to two to three times a month. 



Freddie_Biff said:


> You're right; "whiners" is too harsh, but I was referring more to the ideologues than the actual workers. i will agree that job losses for anyone is a bad outcome, but so is gouging your lowest paid workers by not raising their wages. They had been held down artificially for a very long time and it was about time for some compensation. Raising the minimum wage versus workers losing jobs is always a tough balancing act.


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> The people who will suffer most are the truly unskilled. An introductory wage rate would have allowed employers to take a chance on them.
> 
> Fallout for me is that I've severely curtailed my spending on outside food since Ontario's hikes. For example I used to buy a couple of pizzas for supper once a week, but the noticeable price increases have cut that that back to two to three times a month.


It even affected my friendly bartender, a single woman of about 50. Four of us used to gather to play a game of crib four days a week at our neighbourhood pub. We used to have one beer during the three set games and one more when we finished. Beer was $3.90 and we all gave her $10 so she got $8.80 in tips each day. Then the minimum wage was raised, Notley's $1.25 a litre beer tax as well added to protect Alberta craft brews and beer went up to $5.40 to cover it. Now we all cut back to one beer and give her $6 each for a tip total now of $2.40.

My bet is that her raise does not cover the $6.40 less in tips for the 90 minutes we spend there.

And there you have but one of the multitude of ways such drastic minimum wage increases have backfired for working folks.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> The people who will suffer most are the truly unskilled. An introductory wage rate would have allowed employers to take a chance on them.
> 
> 
> 
> Fallout for me is that I've severely curtailed my spending on outside food since Ontario's hikes. For example I used to buy a couple of pizzas for supper once a week, but the noticeable price increases have cut that that back to two to three times a month.



Probably a wiser investment for you in the long run anyway!


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> It even affected my friendly bartender, a single woman of about 50. Four of us used to gather to play a game of crib four days a week at our neighbourhood pub. We used to have one beer during the three set games and one more when we finished. Beer was $3.90 and we all gave her $10 so she got $8.80 in tips each day. Then the minimum wage was raised, Notley's $1.25 a litre beer tax as well added to protect Alberta craft brews and beer went up to $5.40 to cover it. Now we all cut back to one beer and give her $6 each for a tip total now of $2.40.
> 
> My bet is that her raise does not cover the $6.40 less in tips for the 90 minutes we spend there.
> 
> And there you have but one of the multitude of ways such drastic minimum wage increases have backfired for working folks.


Why wouldn't you become a more careful tipper? The government has already ordered the employer to give them the tip, not matter how poor the service.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> It even affected my friendly bartender, a single woman of about 50. Four of us used to gather to play a game of crib four days a week at our neighbourhood pub. We used to have one beer during the three set games and one more when we finished. Beer was $3.90 and we all gave her $10 so she got $8.80 in tips each day. Then the minimum wage was raised, Notley's $1.25 a litre beer tax as well added to protect Alberta craft brews and beer went up to $5.40 to cover it. Now we all cut back to one beer and give her $6 each for a tip total now of $2.40.
> 
> 
> 
> My bet is that her raise does not cover the $6.40 less in tips for the 90 minutes we spend there.
> 
> 
> 
> And there you have but one of the multitude of ways such drastic minimum wage increases have backfired for working folks.




Yes, but it's not your bartender's fault you decided to cheap out on tips.


----------



## Macfury

They're tipping less because they're ordering less. But you might say that this is great as well--drinking is bad for you! Anyway, this Venezuelan experiment will will end shortly.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Yes, but it's not your bartender's fault you decided to cheap out on tips.


----------



## Macfury

The pizza restaurant owner does not agree. He's lost dozens of regular customers since the wage hikes, and a large number of those who still buy have cut their orders and order frequency.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Probably a wiser investment for you in the long run anyway!


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> The pizza restaurant owner does not agree. He's lost dozens of regular customers since the wage hikes, and a large number of those who still buy have cut their orders and order frequency.



That may be, but regular old inflation can also explain the increase in prices. What person in their right mind expects prices to stay stagnant forever? If the price is too high, people won’t buy. If the price is too low, the business owner gets lots of customers but won’t stay in business for too long. It’s always a balancing act. An increase in wages is just a fact of life. Just hope yours matches the rate of inflation, or else you’re hooped.


----------



## Macfury

The increases in prices followed exactly on the heels of the increases in minimum wage. Prior to that, the prices had been pretty much stable for the prior three to four years--which is what one would expect when inflation is almost flat. The price is now too high and--as the owner says--fewer people are buying. 

Don't confuse real cost inflation with the fallout of misguided government policy.




Freddie_Biff said:


> That may be, but regular old inflation can also explain the increase in prices. What person in their right mind expects prices to stay stagnant forever? If the price is too high, people won’t buy. If the price is too low, the business owner gets lots of customers but won’t stay in business for too long. It’s always a balancing act. An increase in wages is just a fact of life. Just hope yours matches the rate of inflation, or else you’re hooped.


----------



## Macfury

Venezuela has completed another progressive reform--it hiked the minimum wage by 3,000 per cent. Soon, every Venezuelan will be rich, rich I tell you!


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Just hope yours matches the rate of inflation, or else you’re hooped.


Every Canadian senior living on CPP and OAP has received increases of less than $1 a month for years now. OAP this year increased 0.57 cents per month. We are all hooped and continue to be each passing year. Not to mention the insult of a raise of that amount.


----------



## FeXL

20%, 30%, 40% in a matter of years?

Unlikely, unless you're in that socialist utopia, Venezuela..



Freddie_Biff said:


> That may be, but regular old inflation can also explain the increase in prices.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> 20%, 30%, 40% in a matter of years?
> 
> 
> 
> Unlikely, unless you're in that socialist utopia, Venezuela..



Yeah, that’s definitely more than normal. 2 or 3 % a year seems more within range.


----------



## Macfury

Places I frequent had food price increases of 15 to 25% following the minimum wage hike. 

On the other side, my son has a summer job where he has a senior position, His wages were cut so that they could afford the entry level pay of new employees.


----------



## SINC

Rachel's numbers not as rosy as she claims.

https://business.financialpost.com/opinion/matthew-lau-albertas-job-mirage


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> Rachel's numbers not as rosy as she claims.
> 
> https://business.financialpost.com/opinion/matthew-lau-albertas-job-mirage


Rachel's a polytician. Watch her lips, if they're moving she is probably lying.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Say what you want, but Rachel and the NDP have done far more to get a pipeline to tidewater approved than Jason Kenney federally or the Alberta PC party has done.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Say what you want, but Rachel and the NDP have done far more to get a pipeline to tidewater approved than Jason Kenney federally or the Alberta PC party has done.


Sorry, don't buy that claim.

Cite one single court case won, in favour of Trans Mountain, launched by Rachel and the NDP. Any one at all.


----------



## Macfury

Rachel had a deathbed conversion to pipelines after seeding her government with anti-oil activists and an anti-business attitude. She couldn't even half-fix the destruction she caused.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Say what you want, but Rachel and the NDP have done far more to get a pipeline to tidewater approved than Jason Kenney federally or the Alberta PC party has done.


----------



## FeXL

Details?



Freddie_Biff said:


> Say what you want, but Rachel and the NDP have done far more to get a pipeline to tidewater approved than Jason Kenney federally or the Alberta PC party has done.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Details?


That winning smile counts for a lot.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> That winning smile counts for a lot.


Blechhhh...

I'm sure it does, to some.


----------



## FeXL

Tone Deaf



> Edmonton Mill Woods MP and Minister of Natural Resources, Liberal Amarjeet Sohi on twitter:
> 
> _THREAD: I hope those who truly care will keep an open mind to see what we are doing to support the energy sector & get our resources to global markets. Projects approved & supported by our gov’t are creating thousands of jobs & increasing pipeline capacity. #cdnpoli #ableg #yeg https://t.co/0j752Kjt7J
> 
> — Amarjeet Sohi (@SohiAmarjeet) August 17, 2018_​


BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHABAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHABAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHABAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHABAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHABAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHABAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHABAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHABAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHABAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHABAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHABAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHABAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHABAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHABAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHABAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHABAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHABAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHABAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHABAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHABAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!

:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Can you say “shallow”?


----------



## Macfury

Yes--that was one shallow tweet!


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Refer to post #3473.


----------



## FeXL

_That post_ contains more sincerity, truth & reality to it than any 10 posts on the subject by the much vaunted Amarjeet Sohi.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Refer to post #3473.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> _That post_ contains more sincerity, truth & reality to it than any 10 posts on the subject by the much vaunted Amarjeet Sohi.




Yes, I imagine you would think that.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Say what you want, but Rachel and the NDP have done far more to get a pipeline to tidewater approved than Jason Kenney federally or the Alberta PC party has done.





SINC said:


> Sorry, don't buy that claim.
> 
> Cite one single court case won, in favour of Trans Mountain, launched by Rachel and the NDP. Any one at all.


Hmmm, still waiting for you to point out that one court case Freddie. C'mon, just one.


----------



## Macfury

From the _Calgary Herald_--who understands the depth and breadth of the NDP government's failure:

https://calgaryherald.com/news/poli...ment/wcm/877e7daa-00c8-4daf-89a5-d5b93d1d0000



> A stunned, nay, devastated Alberta government is staying silent for now, _*perhaps wondering how its candidates can run election campaigns from the fetal position*_.
> ...
> 
> The Trans Mountain pipeline expansion could go ahead one day, just not now or for months to come.
> 
> *Notley needed pipe in the ground by the spring of next year to coincide with the provincial election.
> 
> Without the pipeline project, the only thing being buried next spring just might be the NDP government.*


----------



## 18m2

I think that is unfair. Notley's government might end up with collateral damage but the real ownership of this mess is the federal Liberals and before them the Conservatives.

Especially the Liberals.


----------



## Macfury

It's not unfair, because Notley crafteg a lot of harmful policy, including the carbon tax, predicated on the idea that she was buying social license to build a pipeline. 



18m2 said:


> I think that is unfair. Notley's government might end up with collateral damage but the real ownership of this mess is the federal Liberals and before them the Conservatives.
> 
> Especially the Liberals.


----------



## SINC

Albertans will show the country just how unfair the NDP and Notley have been to us in just nine months. She will be soundly rejected in the next election.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> From the _Calgary Herald_--who understands the depth and breadth of the NDP government's failure:


Na-na-na-nah, hey-ey, goombye. :clap:

Hey, Freddie! Any quick words of support while the Alberta NDP dance to their death knell?


----------



## FeXL

C'mon, Freddie! _Somebody_ out there in Prog land must have put a positive spin on this somewhere.

Share!


----------



## Macfury

Notley's petty outrage is hilarious! Get me that pipeline before the election!!!!!!!

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/can...to-raise-albertas-carbon-tax-following-court/



> Alberta Premier Rachel Notley is withdrawing her support for Ottawa’s national climate change strategy in the wake of a court decision overturning approval of the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion, scrapping plans to raise the province’s carbon tax in 2021 and 2022.
> 
> In a televised speech on Thursday evening, Ms. Notley said the Trudeau government should call an emergency session of Parliament. The Alberta Premier is also calling on the federal government to appeal the Trans Mountain case to the Supreme Court of Canada.
> 
> “Alberta has done everything right and we have been let down,” the Premier said. “It’s a crisis."
> 
> *The move means Alberta will now not move ahead to raise the province’s current carbon tax of $30 a tonne to $40 a tonne by 2021, or to $50 a tonne in 2022, as per the federal climate change plan schedule. *


We'll keep the carbon tax, but we won't raise it until we get a pipeline? I wouldn't be grandstanding at the poker table with that lousy hand.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Notley's petty outrage is hilarious! Get me that pipeline before the election!!!!!!!
> 
> _“Alberta has done everything right and we have been let down,” the Premier said. “It’s a crisis."_


The only crisis here is her re-election chances.

Guess Freddie's gonna get his raise after all. At this point, there is nothing Red Rachel can do to save herself. May as well give all the public servants a salary increase, too...


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> Notley's petty outrage is hilarious! Get me that pipeline before the election!!!!!!!
> https://www.theglobeandmail.com/can...to-raise-albertas-carbon-tax-following-court/
> 
> We'll keep the carbon tax, but we won't raise it until we get a pipeline? I wouldn't be grandstanding at the poker table with that lousy hand.


At the very least she should have shelved the Carbon Tax, at least until the pipeline is flowing. That would have sent Ottawa a much clearer message, and probably killed the Carbon Tax at least in my lifetime.

To be clear I would happily go along with the carbon tax if she would force the abolishment of the gouge fees that come with my utility bills. A couple of examples. My July gas bill was $33. Three dollars of that was for natural gas the rest was privatization gouge fees. Electric bill is always at least double the retail cost of the electricity. The remainder is those gouge fees, including $7+/month to pay for high tension wires running through my back yard to ship wind power to BC and Montana. If they want it so much let them pay for the damned wires.


----------



## SINC

Yep, her failure to axe the carbon tax will defeat her at the polls this spring.


----------



## SINC

Been a while since we looked at this link. Got to say it looks better every time I see it!

https://www.tickcounter.com/countdo...idget&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=widget


----------



## Macfury

That's pretty sweet. Alberta will feel sweet relief following an effective NDP enema.

Still amazed that she went full leftoid instead of pretending to be reasonable for the last four years. I assume this is because she already knew she was a one-termer and simply wanted to be the busiest li'l wrecking ball she could be.



SINC said:


> Been a while since we looked at this link. Got to say it looks better every time I see it!
> 
> https://www.tickcounter.com/countdo...idget&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=widget


----------



## eMacMan

https://calgaryherald.com/news/loca...h-schedule-changes-and-challenging-bell-times
Long article and tucked away down near the bottom is this little gem:


> Much of the challenge, says Lisa Davis, trustee for Wards 6 and 7, is the annual $3-million in carbon tax levied by the province, forcing the CBE to cut bus service.
> 
> “I know there are families still struggling with changes in bell times and busing. Busing is one area where we can’t absorb increasing costs without cutting service. It’s extremely difficult to stand in front of a single parent and tell her that we are reducing service to pay for increased fuel costs. We will continue to work with the province to strive for long-term solutions.”


Yep that carbon tax is kicking the Calgary Board of Education in the Gonads! Of course that $3 Million gets multiplied several times over when you factor in the cost of heating all those schools.


----------



## Macfury

Even calling this "fuel costs" is a bit of a joke. This is "NDP cost" and has nothing to do with fuel.



eMacMan said:


> https://calgaryherald.com/news/loca...h-schedule-changes-and-challenging-bell-times
> Long article and tucked away down near the bottom is this little gem:
> Yep that carbon tax is kicking the Calgary Board of Education in the Gonads! Of course that $3 Million gets multiplied several times over when you factor in the cost of heating all those schools.


----------



## SINC

Well, Justin Turdeau is visiting Edmonton today, venturing into enemy territory. 

He is scheduled to meet with our enraged premier Red Rachel whose ire is raised and she will promptly beat on him with another wet noodle from her arsenal of getting the Trans Mountain pipeline built folder.

And of course the CBC will be on hand to continue the propaganda for Turdeau.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Well, Justin Turdreau is visiting Edmonton today, venturing into enemy territory.
> 
> He is scheduled to meet with our enraged premier Red Rachel whose ire is raised and she will promptly beat on him with another wet noodle from her arsenal of getting the Trans Mountain pipeline built folder.
> 
> And of course the CBC will be on hand to continue the propaganda for Turdreau.


<snort>

Rachel's _ire_. What a transparent crock... :lmao:


----------



## eMacMan

https://calgaryherald.com/news/poli...isit/wcm/b8e2c48d-92ed-4976-90b0-d559a856a3a5

The headline pipeline implies construction will resume in weeks. Pretty deceptive. That is actually the preparing to commence to thrash phase, at the end of which Ottawa will announce an actual or perhaps make-believe timeline.


----------



## FeXL

At this point, what difference would it make? Petroleum investment in Canada is leaving or has already left on the fast train to the US & elsewhere. Investors won't be returning soon, even if (by some act of God, er, I mean Trudles) TM ever gets off the ground.

Red Rachel's gone in a few short months & Albertistan can get to cleaning house & fixing the TGF that's been her reign.

Na, na, nah. Hey-ey, goombye. :clap:


----------



## Macfury

Notley must be terribly conflicted, realizing her one hope for votes requires progress on the pipeline, while secretly thanking Gaia that no more of the devil's black brew is being pumped from the ground.


----------



## SINC

Now really folks, does this surprise anyone?

*NDP coddling civil servants while the private sector bleeds*

https://edmontonsun.com/opinion/col...ivil-servants-while-the-private-sector-bleeds


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Now really folks, does this surprise anyone?


Nope.


----------



## Macfury

Notley's policies hard at work:

Maduro's huge salary increases force 40% percent of Venezuelan stores to close | International | fltimes.com

Minimum wage increases bring wealth!


----------



## FeXL

A note to the Alberta Teachers’ Association: Expel anti-pipeline activist Tzeporah Berman



> The Alberta Teachers’ Association should give its collective head a shake and lose that speaking invitation to anti-pipeline activist Tzeporah Berman.
> 
> *Not because of what she believes, but because of how she acts.
> 
> Like many other activists, Berman is willing to flout the law no matter what the courts say about approvals or injunctions.*
> 
> That makes her a terrible example for both teachers and students.


Nails it.


----------



## SINC

An interesting look at greenies in Alberta:

Environmentalism is fascism


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> An interesting look at greenies in Alberta:


Just...Wow. "What a tangled web we weave..."

Ton of information. Bookmarked.

Thx for the link.


----------



## SINC

An opinion in the local paper hits the mark.


*Commentary
Evisceration of the Alberta Advantage continues unencumbered
By Chris Nelson Sep 19, 2018*



> Drip, drip, drip. No, that’s not the sound of glaciers melting but instead is the disturbing noise emanating from the relentless evisceration of what once was proudly called “The Alberta Advantage.”
> 
> That singular phrase emerged back in the Ralph Klein years due to a combination of fairly stringently- imposed governmental cutbacks allied to a somewhat unexpected boom in the natural gas price – a commodity that’s been in the dumpster for so long many folks forget it, not oil, was once the prime driver of provincial resource revenues.
> 
> That seems a long time ago: When the then-premier held up one of those daft, make-believe gigantic cheques and announced our debt was paid in full.
> 
> After that it was more a matter of salting money away in various governmental cubbyholes, as the Alberta boom appeared to be never-ending. Meanwhile, all sorts of financial ring-fencing went on – balanced budget legislation, for example – to ensure we never again ended adrift in the debtors’ soup where we had found ourselves in those spendthrift “pave every secondary highway” years of Don Getty’s government.
> 
> The initial cracks were showing during the final years of the weary Tories before the combination of another lurch downward in oil prices coincided with the election of the province’s first NDP government. Those cracks suddenly widened to sinkhole proportions, which is where we sit today: sadly sinking.
> 
> One of the major planks in that Alberta Advantage was the tiny amount of interest we were paying as a province. All that remained of the debt back then were some residual bond issues that would be easily retired from current revenues when they came due.
> 
> So, 10 years ago the provincial government was shelling out about $60 a year per Albertan in interest payments – that’s proverbial chickenfeed, unless you happen to possess some exceedingly greedy hens.
> 
> Back then, according to the numbers crunched by those over at the Fraser Institute, other provinces were shelling out a heck of a lot more per resident, from $520 in B.C. to over a grand apiece in Quebec and Newfoundland.
> 
> Ah, but that was then. This, sadly, is now.
> 
> In three years, given current spending projections, we will be paying more per person than the people to the west of us, and, 12 months after that sad event, we’ll overtake our neighbours to the east.
> 
> Yes, in a few more years still, at this current rate of spending, we will join the people of Newfoundland and Quebec in paying out more than a thousand dollars a year per Albertan in interest payments. That’s an absolute disgrace.
> 
> Instead we see Captain Blithely Unaware, that person being Finance Minister Joe Ceci, proudly declare at one of these excruciating quarterly updates we are only borrowing $7.8 billion this year instead of the budgeted $8,800,000,000. Hey, it looks a bit more daunting written out in full don’t you think?
> 
> Glory be. Let Handel’s Messiah play from coast to coast to coast. Less than eight billion bucks is cause for celebration? Well, let’s party, hearty folks.
> 
> Joe also said we’re on track – sorry, but I then imagine a scene from those old silent movies of the damsel tied to such a railway line – to balance the budget by 2024.
> 
> Hey Joe: drip, drip and yet another drip. That’s time melting away. Soon we won’t have to listen to such piffle.


https://www.stalbertgazette.com/art...rta-advantage-continues-unencumbered-20180919


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> An opinion in the local paper hits the mark.


Too polite by half...


----------



## SINC

Yep, in spades:

*The enemies of Alberta's energy industry are running the province*

https://calgaryherald.com/news/loca...rtas-energy-industry-are-running-the-province


----------



## Macfury

Freddie says he wants more of it!



SINC said:


> Yep, in spades:
> 
> *The enemies of Alberta's energy industry are running the province*
> 
> https://calgaryherald.com/news/loca...rtas-energy-industry-are-running-the-province


----------



## Macfury

When this Alberta nightmare is over, Rachel will say she did her best--and I believe her! This is the NDP at its best.


----------



## SINC

Insanity.

Alberta to pay three power companies $1.36 billion to shut their coal-fired plants early

https://business.financialpost.com/...ies-as-part-of-plan-to-shut-down-plants-early


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Insanity.
> 
> Alberta to pay three power companies $1.36 billion to shut their coal-fired plants early
> 
> https://business.financialpost.com/...ies-as-part-of-plan-to-shut-down-plants-early


The price has gone up because she knows her ass is getting kicked out of office shortly.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Insanity.
> 
> Alberta to pay three power companies $1.36 billion to shut their coal-fired plants early


While the rest of the planet is embracing and investing in coal.

Nobody ever accused Red Rachel of being overly bright...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Nobody ever accused Red Rachel of being overly bright...


Well, one person at EhMac did...


----------



## SINC

Notleys demise continues. 

As conservatives surge, Notley loses allies one by one

https://edmontonjournal.com/news/po...Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1538569534


----------



## Freddie_Biff

There are many good things which some people are determined to deny.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> There are many good things which some people are determined to deny.


Notice Red Rachel fails to mention bad things like the mountain of debt your children and grandchildren will be burdoned with paying. Can't wait to vote out these NDP parasites at the public purse.


----------



## Freddie_Biff




----------



## Macfury

Notley edited that report rather crudely:



> Alberta is the job growth leader again, with employment up 2.4% y/y in September. In fact, that increase is the best since January 2015, *when the economy was just tipping into recession. That said, the jobless rate is sticking around 7% (likely as people are drawn back into the labour force), while wage growth is still tame—there is no return to boom-time conditions yet in these parts*.


Alberta is the job growth leader because it is lagging the other provinces in recovery!


----------



## Macfury

Don't let Jason kill union jobs begs the AFL!



Freddie_Biff said:


>


----------



## FeXL

That's precisely _one_ thing, Freddie. Where is the balance of this voluminous list?

And, _and_, there is scant evidence that anything Red Rachel has done has contributed to said rise.

You (rightfully) note that the drop in jobs 3-4 years ago was not her fault. How can you now claim that the rebound is to her credit?



Freddie_Biff said:


> There are many good things which some people are determined to deny.


----------



## SINC

Further proof that Red Rachel is doomed when her own union buddies admit she really is doomed.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Further proof that Red Rachel is doomed when her own union buddies admit she really is doomed.


With a message like that, you would think they were trying to drum up support for the UCP.


----------



## eMacMan

Something I think Rachel has lost sight of is that it was a protest vote that brought her to power. Albertans with good reason felt it was time to give the bums the bum's rush, and did just that. What it was not was a license to stab Albertans in the back, with runaway spending and a carbon tax to boot.

I also believe the conmen have deluded themselves into believing that an untied con party will solve all their ills.

Albertans tasted blood when they gave the conmen the boot. They will taste it again when the NDP bites the dust. If the conmen do not govern responsibly it could happen for a third time in a row.


----------



## Macfury

eMacMan said:


> Something I think Rachel has lost sight of is that it was a protest vote that brought her to power. Albertans with good reason felt it was time to give the bums the bum's rush, and did just that. What it was not was a license to stab Albertans in the back, with runaway spending and a carbon tax to boot.


I think they did not lose sight of it. They knew it was a protest vote and conspired to tip the province as far as they could to socialism in the few months available to them.


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> I think they did not lose sight of it. They knew it was a protest vote and conspired to tip the province as far as they could to socialism in the few months available to them.


It will be interesting to see how far back a new government can tip us. Hopefully upright?


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> I think they did not lose sight of it. They knew it was a protest vote...


I have serious difficulty believing any of them are that cognizant. I seriously think they thought that Alberta, as a whole, had moved that far left.

As a perfect example, look at Freddie. _To this day_ he's still in denial about the real reason the commies got elected.


----------



## SINC

*Premier Notley has a warped view of economic recovery in Alberta*



> In August, Premier Rachel Notley tweeted enthusiastically about Alberta’s economic recovery: “As things continue to look up, we have another sign more Albertans are beginning to feel the recovery. This summer, Alberta restaurants set a new record for sales. That’s good news for those enjoying time out, the business owners and Albertans looking for work.”
> 
> And back in July, she said her “Stampede barometer” told her Alberta’s economic storms are passing. While there’s work to be done to ensure all Albertans share in that change in barometric pressure, “things are looking up.”
> 
> Fast-forward to October and one has to wonder about the premier’s spatial relations, if she thinks that things are “looking up” for Alberta. Yes, some economic indicators have returned to the pre oil-price crash levels, but things are hardly looking peachy.
> 
> As a study by the Fraser Institute found, what’s actually looking up are the earnings and growth in jobs for the public sector—not the private sector. In The Illusion of Alberta’s Job Recovery, researchers showed that in fact, for Alberta’s private sector, things are looking rather down.
> 
> For example, since 2014 government employment in Alberta increased by 21.5 per cent while private-sector employment (excluding the self-employed) fell by 3.0 per cent. As a result, the government sector’s share of total employment (again, excluding self-employed) increased from 19.5 per cent to 23.2 per cent—a level not seen in the province since 1994.
> 
> Crucially, contrary to popular opinion, this is not solely due to the drop in oil and gas prices. In neighbouring Saskatchewan, for example, growth in the government sector has been far slower, despite the same oil-price depression. Saskatchewan increased its government-sector employment by just 2.1 per cent from July 2014 to May 2018—one-tenth of Alberta’s government-sector employment growth rate over the same period.
> 
> And just last month, a report released by TD Bank indicated it could be another two years before the Alberta job market fully recovers. TD deputy chief economist Derek Burleton said the regrowth is not bringing back the same high-paying jobs that existed before the dive in oil prices. “Employment is back to where it was pre-recession, but a lot of the jobs are self-employment, more of a freelance type,” he said. “Employers are kind of slow to bring back hiring and part of that does reflect the lackluster investment outlook over the next couple of years.”
> 
> Finally, in August business reporter Mario Toneguzzi reported that Alberta’s office vacancy rate of 23.5 per cent is the highest in Canada, a slight improvement from the record 26.4 per cent of 2017, but a long way from Edmonton’s rate of 14 per cent, Canada’s overall average vacancy rate of 11.5 per cent, and much higher than Toronto’s 2.2 per cent.
> 
> Premier Notley naturally wants to focus on the bright spots and downplay the dark spots in Alberta’s economy, but she’d be better off not “looking up” so much. Rather she should look down at a list of measures and strategies she can deploy to reduce Alberta’s regulatory burden, restore Alberta’s tax advantage, and help foster genuine economic recovery in the


https://www.fraserinstitute.org/art...a-warped-view-of-economic-recovery-in-alberta


----------



## eMacMan

Wow Rachael has achieved at least one of her goals. 

Made a trip over to Fernie yesterday and gas prices were 4¢/Liter cheaper than in the Crowsnest Pass. Second trip in a row! Absolutely unheard of since the Greenie Weenie types took control of our neighbour's legislature.

Now a lot of Fernie, Elkford and Sparwood residents drive over to Alberta to shop at Walmart in Pincher Creek. Better prices and no PST. So if you are making a couple of hundred in purchases the PST you would have paid, pays for the gas. As a bonus they would stop here and fill the tank on those big thirsty SUVs or pick-ups and save a bit on gas as well. Now that latter saving has evaporated, if they come at all they will try to limp back to BC on the gas they have. The pre-pay scam that Rachel foisted on our gas stations means even if they are on empty they will put in just enough to get over to Fernie rather than gassing up here. 

Making it worse the scenery and recreational opportunities means many Pass residents make the trip to Fernie on a regular basis. Then there are Calgary and Lethbridge residents heading over to Fernie for weekend skiing. They would gas up here knowing the prices were higher next door. Now since the price is cheaper in BC guess where they will gas up? 

Stacked together that's a triple whammy of money flowing out of rather than into the Crowsnest Pass. If her goal was to further cripple our local economy she has indeed achieved it.


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> Made a trip over to Fernie yesterday and Gas prices were 4¢/Liter cheaper than in the Crowsnest Pass.


Definitely a first.

Haven't been out in your neck of the woods in some time. What are gas prices?

This fall ours peaked around $1.349. Had some recent reductions down to around $1.269. Was in Med Hat on the weekend, *$1.149!* :yikes:

But there's no, zero, collusion in gasoline pricing.

While there, we experienced your favorite bugaboo. Fuelled up at the westernmost gas station as you're leaving the city. It's a smaller place, a Tempo. Sign on the pumps, "Must Prepay...", yadda, yadda, yadda. Most of the time I don't care because I use a credit card. However, this place hasn't updated their pumps to credit card pay yet.

I head in, ask the attendant what she wants, she notes that, "credit card, keys, sunglasses, whatever" can be left at the counter. I left my credit card there, went back outside, fuelled up, came back inside, paid & collected my credit card. 

I noted to her that maybe it was time to join the 21st century & update the pumps. She replied, "We don't sell enough gas to justify the cost."

Now, I have no idea whether her observation is true or not but the likelihood of me returning to that station is slim. Is it a big deal? Nope. But it is a matter of convenience and my time. I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks that way.

If they updated their pumps to accept credit cards, maybe they'd sell more gas. Jes' sayin'...

On a side note, I'm not one of these people who typically fuels up, then goes inside & gets a lottery ticket, a soft drink, bags of chips & a piece of beef jerky. However, I occasionally grabbed a sports drink or some such. I've stopped doing that as I'd need to process a second credit card transaction for a couple bucks (I rarely carry cash), which I think is ridiculous.

While stopping drive-aways at the pumps, I know prepay has cost business inside the stores.


----------



## Macfury

Gas was $1.23 a litre in Toronto the other day. Notley has made gas more expensive in Alberta than Ontario--that's quite an achievement!


----------



## eMacMan

In the Pass yesterday prices were 129.9. Fernie was 125.9.

When I travel I look for Co-ops as I know they will pump for me. Then the guy at the pumps makes two trips to the cashier and gives me two receipts. Meanwhile the chances of me buying any snacks is reduced to zero.

Thankfully I look at it as a chance to relax rather than a pit stop. Nowadays it takes about twice as long to accomplish a fill-up as compared to pre-Rachael days.

Annie at Lundbreck station really irritated me. She insists not only on pre-pay but leaving your drivers license. That even though my wife was standing there waiting for the change and I have been dealing with her for more than 10 years. Needless to say, I have not back!


----------



## Macfury

eMacMan said:


> In the Pass yesterday prices were 129.9. Fernie was 125.9.
> 
> When I travel I look for Co-ops as I know they will pump for me. Then the guy at the pumps makes two trips and gives me two receipts. Meanwhile the chances of me buying any snacks is reduced to zero.


Another win for Progressives!


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> Fernie was 125.9.


Holy hell!

That's less than Lethbridge!!! 

Congrats, Red Rachel!


----------



## Rps

Okay, I accept that the NDP were a protest vote, but really ...as an Easterner, how can a government whose province makes its money on resources support a carbon tax? I just don’t see how that approach will work for them.....when everyone else is trying to make their jurisdictions more profitiable this approach by the NDP.....and driven by the Liberals federally, makes little sense.


----------



## FeXL

Rps said:


> Okay, I accept that the NDP were a protest vote, but really ...as an Easterner, how can a government whose province makes its money on resources support a carbon tax? I just don’t see how that approach will work for them.....when everyone else is trying to make their jurisdictions more profitiable this approach by the NDP.....and driven by the Liberals federally, makes little sense.


If you expect politicians of _any_ stripe (especially the NDP) to form logical policy you will die a sad, bitter, angry, disappointed & resentful person.

Politicians form policy to get themselves re-elected. Period. It don't have to make sense.

Sorry...

Red Rachel thought that, by supporting the federal carbon tax, The Dope would actually support Alberta's bid to build a pipeline or two. She figgered she could sell the carbon tax to Albertan's by showing everyone how she had managed to get a pipeline at least started by election time: something for her party coffers, something for the taxpayers. (As it turned out, she went on a spending spree anyway, sans oil revenue.)

When that fell through, she was left hanging. Why d'ya s'pose she made that supersonic trip to Ottawa immediately after Juthdin more or less announced there was no way in hell Alberta was ever going to get a pipeline?

She knew then what others of us have known since the day she got elected: The Alberta EnDeePee are done. Single termers. For the first time in our province's history.

Butter 'em. She's toast...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> She knew then what others of us have known since the day she got elected: The Alberta EnDeePee are done. Single termers. For the first time in our province's history.


And as Freddie is fond of saying, once a provincial party in Albert a is turfed, it remains turfed. Albertans chose the NDP as their protest vote because they couldn't stomach the provincial Liberals--but at least they finished the NDP off forever.


----------



## SINC

Rps said:


> Okay, I accept that the NDP were a protest vote, but really ...as an Easterner, how can a government whose province makes its money on resources support a carbon tax? I just don’t see how that approach will work for them.....when everyone else is trying to make their jurisdictions more profitiable this approach by the NDP.....and driven by the Liberals federally, makes little sense.


Well, stay tuned and you will see yet another protest vote, only this time it will be protesting the destruction of our way of life by the NDP that will be the driving force. These dummies have absolutely no idea of the harm they have done and the debt they have laden us and our grandchildren with, given the outright stupidity of all areas they have changed.

Their philosophy is so broken and has done much real harm to Albertans. And the worst part is they have no idea what they have wrought. They have governed like it was Ottawa or Toronto, not Alberta. Stick a fork in 'em, they're done.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Well, stay tuned and you will see yet another protest vote, only this time it will be protesting the destruction of our way of life by the NDP that will be the driving force. These dummies have absolutely no idea of the harm they have done and the debt they have laden us and our grandchildren with, given the outright stupidity of all areas they have changed.
> 
> Their philosophy is so broken and has done much real harm to Albertans. And the worst part is they have no idea what they have wrought. They have governed like it was Ottawa or Toronto, not Alberta. Stick a fork in 'em, they're done.


SINC I think they know what they've done. People give the NDP too much credit--they're schemers, not dreamers.


----------



## SINC

A Halloween scare!


----------



## SINC

Nails it!


----------



## dona83

Didn't realize there was an Alberta NDP thread here, with 354 pages! I haven't been around much.


----------



## Beej

dona83 said:


> Didn't realize there was an Alberta NDP thread here, with 354 pages! I haven't been around much.


It's a bit like a compendium of fan commentary. Very angry fans.


----------



## Macfury

dona83 said:


> Didn't realize there was an Alberta NDP thread here, with 354 pages! I haven't been around much.


You made it 355!


----------



## FeXL

dona83 said:


> Didn't realize there was an Alberta NDP thread here, with 354 pages! I haven't been around much.


Come next spring the bottom will fall out of the thread, save intermittent posts disparaging Red Rachel's legacy...


----------



## eMacMan

Putting this here as it is a golden opportunity for the NDP to do one useful thing before they are booted from office. But it would be very unwise for anyone to hold their breath in anticipation.

https://calgaryherald.com/news/cana...er-4/wcm/4eaaa0e1-398f-4ec6-80e4-3acb5cf1a73d


> *It depresses us*
> The cold and darkness of a Canadian winter is depressing in any case. But the effect of daylight saving time is to take a slow darkening process and transform it into a violent one-day plunge. A Danish-American research team published a study showing that the rate of diagnosed depression cases shows a marked uptick in the weeks after the “fall back” clock change. The data, obtained by analyzing 185,419 depression diagnoses in Denmark’s Central Psychiatric Research Register, found that depression cases spiked by as much as eight per cent in early November.


----------



## SINC

eMacMan said:


> Putting this here as it is a golden opportunity for the NDP to do one useful thing before they are booted from office. But it would be very unwise for anyone to hold their breath in anticipation.
> 
> https://calgaryherald.com/news/cana...er-4/wcm/4eaaa0e1-398f-4ec6-80e4-3acb5cf1a73d


Nope, won't happen. They tried that a couple years back and then rejected the idea. Big mistake as it may have been the only positive thing they would have done. Now it would be too little too late. They are gonna lose big time come May.


----------



## SINC

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/ndp-alberta-mla-robyn-luff-legislature-1.4892787

The real truth about Notley's control.

The good news is that she will no longer be in control of Alberta in about 200 days now.


----------



## SINC

A result of Notley's governance? Most within and hour or so of here.

https://www.macleans.ca/canadas-most-dangerous-places-2019/


----------



## Macfury

I think Notley should be Tweeting about these new records. However, there's still a lot of work to do for the people of Alberta.


----------



## SINC

Excelent read from the Edmonton Sun:

*Hicks on Biz: Alberta doesn't need wind farms*



> By GRAHAM HICKS
> 
> I have been to a wind farm, watched the blades on 80-metre-tall wind turbines turn lazily in the late-February sun.
> 
> In a very gentle 5.4 km/h wind, 16 megawatts (MW) of electricity were being generated — wind converted to electricity at each tower, fed through underground cables to a substation, then fed into the provincial power grid.
> 
> In that lazy wind at Capital Power’s Halkirk Wind Farm about 30 kilometres east of Stettler, 83 towers each generated 230 kilowatts (kW) of power ‑ enough to perhaps power my neighbourhood at that very moment.
> 
> Halkirk is impressive — the 83 wind turbines scattered across 60 square kilometres of working farmland are so quiet (at least in low winds), so grey, so clean against the blue sky — dotting the landscape around the village of Halkirk like ghostly sentinels.
> 
> 
> The technology and know-how are all imported. The global wind-farm company Vestas Wind Systems, headquartered in Denmark, manufactures, assembles, maintains and now operates the Halkirk wind farm on behalf of Capital Power.
> 
> There’s no Canadian technology here, no Canadian manufacturing, no Canadian brains at work. The turbines were built at Vestas’ plant in Colorado.
> 
> The operation is seamlessly automated — sensors adjust the turbine blades in real time to maximize the efficiency of extracting energy from wind. The entire on-site Halkirk operation is run by eight technicians and three managers. Sensors can detect the presence of flocks of birds or bats. The turbines will automatically brake to a stop, (just as they shut down when winds are too strong) until the birds/bats pass.
> 
> When the wind is blowing, wind turbines are fine — operationally, they are now cost-competitive with state-of-the-art coal and gas-fired generating plants.
> 
> When the wind is blowing: Until the battery industry can competitively produce megawatt storage, wind turbines produce no power, nada, nothing, when becalmed.
> 
> In gross generalities, wind power from 37 wind farms currently provide nine pe cent of Alberta’s electricity needs — when the wind blows.
> 
> But when there’s no wind, those rotten, horrible, pollution-spewing, fossil-fuel burning electricity plants must be able to power up to meet the heating, cooling and all other energy needs of Alberta industry and residents.
> 
> Here’s the thing.
> 
> Start with this premise: Who cares what the source of our electricity is — wind, solar, hydro, coal, gas, cow manure — if that source, or mix of sources, meets the HIGHEST OF ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS AT THE CHEAPEST OF COSTS!!!
> 
> Canada’s commitment to the 2015 Paris Agreement is to cut our greenhouse-gas emissions by 30 per cent from 2005 levels, by 2030.
> 
> In 2005, about 75 per cent of Alberta’s electricity came from coal plants without current environmental controls.
> 
> Natural gas releases 60 per cent less pollution and greenhouse gases than does untreated coal. And today’s new, state-of-the-art coal-fired electricity plants — like the seven-year-old Keephills 3 power plant — also release 60 per cent less pollution and greenhouse gases than they did in 2005.
> 
> By upgrading technology at modern coal plants, and/or converting coal plants to natural gas, Alberta can more than do its part to meet Canada’s Paris Agreement commitment!
> 
> There’s no need for imported wind turbines, no need for massive solar farms, no need for the billions being spent by the Notley government to act on its ill-conceived notion that all fossil fuels are bad (unless exported elsewhere).
> 
> There’s a desperate need for Alberta not to be so caught up in such environmental fads.
> 
> There’s a desperate need for this province to champion natural gas and cleaned-up coal as practical solutions to global climate change!
> 
> This is Alberta’s rightful place in the new environmental order — using our expertise, our immense natural resources (there’s enough economically retrievable natural gas under our soil to last for centuries), our own processing, our own manufacturing and our own workers, to champion the greening of coal, natural gas and oil as SOLUTIONS to lowering CO2 emissions world-wide.
> 
> No Alberta utility company publicly so advocates. Their job is to earn a return for shareholders within existing and future environmental regulations and government whim. If the politicians want wind farms, the utility companies will build wind farms — or have foreigners do it for them — as long as increased costs can be passed on to the end-user.
> 
> But in private, off-the-record conversations, most utility executives agree whole-heartedly with the logic of the argument presented above.
> 
> Wind farms are sexy. But Alberta already has an obvious, cheaper, made-in-Alberta solution with a ton of benefits for this province, that nobody in the current provincial, federal or even municipal governments wants to hear.
> 
> My only hope is for a Jason Kenney-led change in Alberta’s government in 2019. Kenney has shown himself to be a common-sense leader who understands that Alberta’s carbon-based resources and environmental responsibility are not only compatible, but crucial to the economic well-being of this province.


https://edmontonsun.com/opinion/columnists/hicks-on-biz-alberta-doesnt-need-wind-farms


----------



## SINC

The stupidity is astounding with Red Rachel.

*Alberta doubles petrochemical upgrading money to $2.1 billion amid tough economic reports*



> EDMONTON—Rachel Notley’s government is doubling its financial support for petrochemical upgrading and hopes that it helps diversify the province’s energy sector amid reports that fiscally, Alberta isn’t doing so well.
> 
> Premier Rachel Notley announced Tuesday that the total investment into petrochemical upgrading will reach $2.1 billion and hopes the added investment will fuel job growth as well.


https://www.thestar.com/edmonton/20...pgrading-money-to-21-billion-notley-says.html


----------



## SINC

More wrongs won't make a right for Notley.

*Notley's newfound support for Alberta oil a desperate attempt at re-election*



> On Monday, Alberta Premier Rachel Notley called reporters together to announce she had appointed a three-person task force to “work with energy sector experts and CEOs to develop short- and medium-term solutions for closing the gap” between world oil prices and the price of Western Canadian Select.
> 
> It’s nice our premier finally seems fully committed to our energy industry and to getting Alberta oil and bitumen to market. Too bad her newfound commitment has all the feel of a deathbed conversion.
> 
> Her government is desperate for money and even more desperate to win re-election next spring. So now they sound like the most pro-energy of the old pro-energy Tories.
> 
> But voters need to remember that it has been Notley’s policies that largely landed Alberta in this mess in the first place.
> 
> For instance, West Texas Intermediate was selling for around $57 US a barrel on Monday, while Western Canadian Select was fetching under $15 US. In her announcement Monday, Notley blamed this gap on “Canada’s decades-long failure to build new pipelines.”
> 
> But Notley herself has been largely anti-pipeline for years, even during her time as premier. Yes she has been a cheerleader for Trans Mountain for the last 12 months, but she openly opposed Northern Gateway and let it be known she didn’t really care for Keystone XL.
> 
> And when, last year, the federal government orchestrated the cancellation of Energy East, Notley merely said that was “unfortunate.” She cautioned Albertans not to blame Ottawa or Quebec, even though those two governments were most responsible for the cancellation.
> 
> So, Madam Premier, if you think the failure to build pipelines is behind Alberta’s current economic woes, take a look in the mirror.
> 
> Moreover, the premier is following exactly the same failed strategy with her new price-gap task force as she followed with her Oil Sands Advisory Group.
> 
> You may remember Notley thought it would be a good idea to appoint both oil execs and raving environmentalists to her oilsands panel. Her theory was that it would convince eco-activists Alberta was serious about saving the planet, so they would stop opposing pipelines and oilsands development.
> 
> But this so-called “social license” approach has been a colossal failure.
> 
> Notley couldn’t even convince the two most-prominent activists on her own panel to stop fighting Alberta pipelines. Karen Mahon, the national director of Stand.earth – while still on Notley’s advisory group – vowed Trans Mountain “will never be built.” She promised to fight it “in the streets” and “in the forest.” And led a national campaign to raise money for a lawsuit against the pipeline.
> 
> And Tzeporah Berman, of course, was a vocal critic of Trans Mountain while an advisor to Notley and has continued to criticize our oil industry, including at an Alberta Teachers’ Association conference last month.
> 
> You might think Notley would be a little wiser with her choices this time. But, nope.
> 
> Among the three advisors she has chosen this time is Brian Topp, her Ontario-based former chief of staff.
> 
> Topp was one of the architects of the horribly unsuccessful “social license” strategy. Moreover, while he was a candidate himself for the leadership of the federal NDP, Topp made shutting down the oilsands one of his chief policies.
> 
> In a column he wrote in Toronto’s Globe and Mail, Topp scoffed at the idea that there could be such a thing as “ethical oil.” He implied all oil was unethical by comparing the idea of ethical oil to the idea of “ethical landmines.”
> 
> And Topp has called for a ban on all fossil fuel vehicles in cities.
> 
> So with appointees like that, Notley’s announcement on Monday proves nothing in her thinking has really changed.


https://edmontonsun.com/opinion/col...lberta-oil-a-desperate-attempt-at-re-election


----------



## Macfury

How's that diversification going Freddie?

The Edmonton toilet needs a good flushing.


----------



## SINC

Another nail in Notley's coffin. Protecting her bad MLAs.

*Political harassment policies released in wake of complaints*



> The NDP has disclosed its policy on harassment in the wake of revelations two NDP MLAs and one UCP MLA have been investigated following workplace complaints.
> 
> In the case of the NDP the two complaints involved sexual misconduct, but the party is doubling down on its promise not to release the MLA’s identities.
> 
> It boils down to confidentiality, which comprises a clause in the NDP policy.
> 
> The policy says only those people necessary to the investigation will be made aware of the complaint, and they are required to keep the matter confidential. Failure to do so “may result in disciplinary action,” the policy reads.
> 
> “We’re being very open about how seriously we take these concerns, and allegations and that we did the appropriate followup,” deputy premier Sarah Hoffman said on her way into cabinet.


https://edmontonjournal.com/news/po...sment-policies-released-in-wake-of-complaints


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Another nail in Notley's coffin. Protecting her bad MLAs.


Gawd, she looks haggard in that photo. Lines, wrinkles, turkey neck.

Compared to that, I look like a million bucks. And I'm older!


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Compared to that, I look like a million bucks. And I'm older!


 I think being a prog just sucks the life essence out of a person prematurely. Their choice.


----------



## SINC

Edmonton Journal: Keith Gerein: Alarming report shows Alberta positioned for slow-moving fiscal disaster

http://edmontonjournal.com/news/pol...ta-positioned-for-slow-moving-fiscal-disaster

An election cannot come soon enough.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Edmonton Journal: Keith Gerein: Alarming report shows Alberta positioned for slow-moving fiscal disaster
> 
> http://edmontonjournal.com/news/pol...ta-positioned-for-slow-moving-fiscal-disaster
> 
> An election cannot come soon enough.


Don't fire Notely so soon--she says there are more people that still need her help.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Edmonton Journal: Keith Gerein: Alarming report shows Alberta positioned for slow-moving fiscal disaster


I could do without his climate change prognostications. There is no need nor place for that BS in an economic report.


----------



## SINC

Spend, spend,spend. 

Edmonton Journal: Premier Rachel Notley unveils carbon tax break for drilling companies

http://edmontonjournal.com/pmn/news...nies/wcm/7e2f72a2-d035-4299-b10a-7a584a5aea28


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Spend, spend,spend.
> 
> Edmonton Journal: Premier Rachel Notley unveils carbon tax break for drilling companies
> 
> http://edmontonjournal.com/pmn/news...nies/wcm/7e2f72a2-d035-4299-b10a-7a584a5aea28





> Notley later criticized Wednesday’s federal fiscal report for underplaying Western Canada’s oil price crisis, blamed on insufficient pipeline capacity to take away a glut of crude trapped in Alberta.


Crocodile tears from someone who set out to undermine the energy industry from Day One.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Crocodile tears from someone who set out to undermine the energy industry from Day One.


Precisely. Nothing quite like a good, ol' fashioned, deathbed conversion.

Too f'ing little, too f'ing late, Rachel.


----------



## FeXL

The arrogance of these fukcers is stunning...

AB Deplorables



> Do you live in Alberta and don’t support what the Notley NDP has done to your province? Then, according to David Eggen, the man responsible for deciding how Alberta children are taught, you’re not capable of “critical thinking”:
> 
> _ Eggen — the man responsible for shaping what our children must learn in Alberta schools — responded this way, as shown in the official legislative Hansard record: *“Critical thinking is a very important part of being a member of a modern society. I know that the members opposite don’t like critical thinking because once people learn it, then they will be less likely to vote for the UCP.”*_​
> It’s unbecoming of any politician in the legislature to be so crass, but when it’s the governing party, which has a majority, it’s particularly disturbing to see such antipathy directed not just at members opposite but the population at large.
> 
> *It’s most fascinating to hear a Leftist call others as incapable of critical thinking. And this, not from any run of the mill Man of the Left, but from a senior minister of one of the most incompetent provincial governments in recent memory.* How much more damage would the Alberta NDP have to do before they would throw in the towel and say, “We finally admit, we don’t have any damn clue what we’re doing so we’re going to let those who do govern our province”?!?


Bold mine...

Man, am I going to enjoy that beer, that steak & that cigar come May...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Man, am I going to enjoy that beer, that steak & that cigar come May...


Just keep doing what isn't working until it works, eh? There's critical thinking for you.

Freddie says that no party in Alberta ever returns to power following an electoral defeat.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Just keep doing what isn't working until it works, eh? There's critical thinking for you.
> 
> 
> 
> Freddie says that no party in Alberta ever returns to power following an electoral defeat.




Yup. That includes your PC friends. Hell, they had to merge with another party just to get another shot at the big prize. And by the way it’s true not just ‘cause Freddie said it; it’s true because it’s a fact. The NDP are only the fifth party to ever rule Alberta.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Crocodile tears from someone who set out to undermine the energy industry from Day One.




Mm-hmm. Because the drop in oil prices is entirely caused by Alberta’s NDP government. Tell me, O wise one, how would the situation be any different today had the PC’s or Wildrose been elected instead?


----------



## Macfury

Take a look at the Alberta discount on Western Canadian Select... it's at $15 a barrel. It's obscene and well below market price, and Notely is responsible for much of this discount.

The difference is all about access to markets and refineries. Notley started her regime on an anti-oil platform by hiring ant-oil lobbyists and activists to staff her government. She wasted years opposing TransMountain and Keystone until her recent deathbed conversion. She failed to support Energy East or protest its cancellation.

Add to that her corporate tax increases and her carbon tax which disproportionately punishes small producers. Then there's the huge layer of uncertainty surrounding what she might or might not do that has discouraged investment in Alberta energy--but not other provinces.

Now she's hiring more anti-oil/pipeline types to try to fix the problem before the election.

Do you want more?



Freddie_Biff said:


> Mm-hmm. Because the drop in oil prices is entirely caused by Alberta’s NDP government. Tell me, O wise one, how would the situation be any different today had the PC’s or Wildrose been elected instead?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Take a look at the Alberta discount on Western Canadian Select... it's at $15 a barrel. It's obscene and well below market price, and Notely is responsible for much of this discount.
> 
> 
> 
> The difference is all about access to markets and refineries. Notley started her regime on an anti-oil platform by hiring ant-oil lobbyists and activists to staff her government. She wasted years opposing TransMountain and Keystone until her recent deathbed conversion. She failed to support Energy East or protest its cancellation.
> 
> 
> 
> Add to that her corporate tax increases and her carbon tax which disproportionately punishes small producers. Then there's the huge layer of uncertainty surrounding what she might or might not do that has discouraged investment in Alberta energy--but not other provinces.
> 
> 
> 
> Now she's hiring more anti-oil/pipeline types to try to fix the problem before the election.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you want more?



Fair enough. Her pre-Premier anti-oil stance certainly hasn’t helped. However, I think you’re giving her far too much credit (or blame) for the price of oil. I believe we’d be looking at the same price today no matter who was in charge. I think your friend Trump and his nationalistic buy American stance has had a much greater impact on the price of oil in Canada and Alberta to be honest.

It sure is convenient to blame Notley though.


----------



## Macfury

Trump wanted to build Keystone as well. The world price of oil can't be controlled inside the province, but that significant discount could be controlled--by relentlessly promoting pipelines. Might she have failed if she had given it everything she had? Possibly. But then I wouldn't be blaming her for doing little to nothing either.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Fair enough. Her pre-Premier anti-oil stance certainly hasn’t helped. However, I think you’re giving her far too much credit (or blame) for the price of oil. I believe we’d be looking at the same price today no matter who was in charge. I think your friend Trump and his nationalistic buy American stance has had a much greater impact on the price of oil in Canada and Alberta to be honest.
> 
> It sure is convenient to blame Notley though.


----------



## SINC

Putting words in their mouths?

*NDP MLAs given scripted responses if asked about sexual misconduct allegations*



> Alberta NDP backbenchers have been given scripted responses to provide if asked by reporters about sexual misconduct allegations against two of their caucus colleagues, CBC News has learned.
> 
> The script, written by the premier's director of issues management, Jeremy Nolais, was contained in an email the NDP caucus accidentally sent to CBC News Thursday morning.
> 
> It outlines how government MLAs are to respond to reporters' questions on "McPherson," a reference to Alberta Party MLA Karen McPherson, a former member of the NDP caucus who has asked Speaker Bob Wanner for an investigation into whether the complaints were handled properly.
> 
> On Monday, the Calgary-Mackay-Nose Hill MLA asked Wanner to review the NDP's internal investigations to see if they were sufficient.


More at the link.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmo...ripts-sexual-misconduct-allegations-1.4916964


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> Putting words in their mouths?
> 
> *NDP MLAs given scripted responses if asked about sexual misconduct allegations*
> 
> 
> 
> More at the link.
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmo...ripts-sexual-misconduct-allegations-1.4916964





Shades of the Harpoon and his Conmen there. Nothing will infuriate a voter more than a talking point response from an MP or an MLA.


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> Nothing will infuriate a voter more than a talking point response from an MP or an MLA.


Only if said voter is non-Prog...


----------



## SINC

The education minister is imposing his personal beliefs on Albertans via our schools. Did I mention he is also an insulting arsehole?

*Corbella: A lesson in insults by the NDP in Alberta's legislature*

https://calgaryherald.com/news/loca...in-insults-by-the-ndp-in-albertas-legislature


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> The education minister is imposing his personal beliefs on Albertans via our schools. Did I mention he is also an insulting arsehole?
> 
> 
> 
> *Corbella: A lesson in insults by the NDP in Alberta's legislature*
> 
> 
> 
> https://calgaryherald.com/news/loca...in-insults-by-the-ndp-in-albertas-legislature




You’re describing someone else as being an insulting arsehole? Oh, the iron...


----------



## Macfury

Don't worry Freddie... nobody is coming for your crown.



Freddie_Biff said:


> You’re describing someone else as being an insulting arsehole? Oh, the iron...


----------



## SINC

Actually what I am describing is the former Education minister come May. Watch the Cons undo most of his handiwork.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Actually what I am describing is the former Education minister come May. Watch the Cons undo most of his handiwork.




They well may, it wouldn’t surprise me. But what Mr. Eggen said was not wrong. In 2015 Albertans came out of their long stupor temporarily. Now it’s like the UCP will be hypnotizing the masses once again. Why? Because people want to believe what they want to believe, certainly not the truth.


----------



## Macfury

It _was_ wrong and the dire results of NDP policies show the results of their peculiar kind of "truth" and "thinking." Like _Animal Farm_, socialists offer short term pain... for long term pain.



Freddie_Biff said:


> They well may, it wouldn’t surprise me. But what Mr. Eggen said was not wrong. In 2015 Albertans came out of their long stupor temporarily. Now it’s like the UCP will be hypnotizing the masses once again. Why? Because people want to believe what they want to believe, certainly not the truth.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Like _Animal Farm_, socialists offer short term pain... for long term pain.


_Animal Farm_ was supposed to be a warning, not a template.


----------



## SINC

She's out of her friggin' mind!

*Alberta may go it alone to buy trains to move more crude – premier*

https://boereport.com/2018/11/22/alberta-may-go-it-alone-to-buy-trains-to-move-more-crude-premier/


----------



## 18m2

Read the article.

A lot of misinformation out there. No wonder people are confused about the best path to fixing the issues surrounding Alberta's problems.

https://albertapolitics.ca/2018/11/...ould-go-suck-a-lemon-they-probably-soon-will/


----------



## FeXL

18m2 said:


> A lot of misinformation out there.


There certainly is:



> Never mind that Mr. Trudeau has actually had the federal government purchase a pipeline *so the government of Canada can expand it, and appears to be doing his damnedest to make that happen*...


Bold mine.

Pure. Unmitigated. Bull$h!t...

And that's just a start.


----------



## SINC

18m2 said:


> Read the article.
> 
> A lot of misinformation out there. No wonder people are confused about the best path to fixing the issues surrounding Alberta's problems.
> 
> https://albertapolitics.ca/2018/11/...ould-go-suck-a-lemon-they-probably-soon-will/


I know Alberta Politics author David Climenhaga very well, he lives here in the same city. He is a dyed in the wool union journalist who lost multiple attempts at the Calgary Herald to unionize their newsroom years back. He is currently the general manager of the Alberta Nurses Union and is a life long, die hard NDPer.

What he writes is totally biased and not to be assumed to be the entire story. As an Albertan I see nothing in that drivel that I agree with or believe.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

18m2 said:


> Read the article.
> 
> 
> 
> A lot of misinformation out there. No wonder people are confused about the best path to fixing the issues surrounding Alberta's problems.
> 
> 
> 
> https://albertapolitics.ca/2018/11/...ould-go-suck-a-lemon-they-probably-soon-will/



Thank you for an article that shows the other side of the equation for a change. The cons around here are not going to like it, but why would they? And the points about the Con federal government under the careful and watchful eye of Minister Jason Kenney not getting any pipelines to tidewater built is spot on. Truth hurts.


----------



## Macfury

18m2 said:


> Read the article.
> 
> A lot of misinformation out there. No wonder people are confused about the best path to fixing the issues surrounding Alberta's problems.
> 
> https://albertapolitics.ca/2018/11/...ould-go-suck-a-lemon-they-probably-soon-will/


If I explained why that article is nonsense, would it be worthwhile to you?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> If I explained why that article is nonsense, would it be worthwhile to you?




Do you think people appreciate it when you tell them why you think they’re wrong? Whatever happened to just live and let live? People don’t have to agree with you.


----------



## FeXL

Freddie, most of that article is pure & utter bull$h!t. If that is truly representative of the "other side of the equation" then the other side ain't got SFA.

For once in your miserable life read something with a critical eye.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Thank you for an article that shows the other side of the equation for a change.


This is likely the only thing in the article that is anywhere close to the truth. And yes, it does f'ing hurt. Just like not defunding the CBC & leaving open senator positions for Prinz Dummkopf to fill.

FWIW, I never cared much for Kenney as a fed but he's head, shoulders & ass above Red Rachel. I'll hold my nose & vote for the bastard.



Freddie_Biff said:


> And the points about the Con federal government under the careful and watchful eye of Minister Jason Kenney not getting any pipelines to tidewater built is spot on. Truth hurts.


----------



## FeXL

Don't care. If a person has an open mind he/she/it shouldn't be offended when the error of their ways is pointed out. Frankly, society is doing them a service.

It's always hilarious to see how informed criticism or a well presented argument on these boards is received. And people call me bigoted...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Do you think people appreciate it when you tell them why you think they’re wrong?


What your asking many of us to do, Freddie, is to just let people live ignorant & uninformed lives. That's simply not in my makeup. Hell, call it a character flaw if you like. I don't care.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Whatever happened to just live and let live?


No, they don't. But they should at least be informed on the topic. The rampant ignorance that many people show not only on these boards but in meatspace clearly throws into sharp relief the fact that they don't have an f'ing clue.



Freddie_Biff said:


> People don’t have to agree with you.


----------



## Beej

Looks like a good opportunity to fact check / innuendo check the article.


----------



## Macfury

I imagine you don't like it one bit. But allowing gross misinformation to flourish has nothing to do with "live and let live."



Freddie_Biff said:


> Do you think people appreciate it when you tell them why you think they’re wrong? Whatever happened to just live and let live? People don’t have to agree with you.


----------



## SINC

Yep, but she didn't need his help to go down in flames. Thing is, he's next come October.

*EDITORIAL: Trudeau throws climate pal Notley under the bus*

https://edmontonsun.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-trudeau-throws-climate-pal-notley-under-the-bus


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> I imagine you don't like it one bit. But allowing gross misinformation to flourish has nothing to do with "live and let live."




It’s sad that you think you have a monopoly on the truth. You have an opinion, a very stubborn one, but nothing more.


----------



## Macfury

The article is factually incorrect. This is not a matter of opinion. 



Freddie_Biff said:


> It’s sad that you think you have a monopoly on the truth. You have an opinion, a very stubborn one, but nothing more.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> The article is factually incorrect. This is not a matter of opinion.




Yes, that’s your opinion. Fact is not fact just because you declare it is. Get over yourself.


----------



## Macfury

Just because you live in a world of half-truth and fantasy doesn't mean that facts don't exist. And I can take that half-assed article apart with fact, not opinion.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Yes, that’s your opinion. Fact is not fact just because you declare it is. Get over yourself.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Just because you live in a world of half-truth and fantasy doesn't mean that facts don't exist. And I can take that half-assed article apart with fact, not opinion.




That’s right. You have no idea how to just let things be. Sad, really.


----------



## Macfury

When it comes to the half-truths and outright misinformation you disseminate, I won't "let things be." Sad that you try to get away with it. Now get over yourself and stop mewling about getting caught so often.



Freddie_Biff said:


> That’s right. You have no idea how to just let things be. Sad, really.


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> When it comes to the half-truths and outright misinformation you disseminate, I won't "let things be." Sad that you try to get away with it. Now get over yourself and stop mewling about getting caught so often.


Bingo! 

Anything Climenhaga writes is either a good thing (in his opinion) that the Alberta NDP have done or bad things people are saying about the Alberta NDP and why they are wrong because it really is a good thing (in his opinion).


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Bingo!
> 
> 
> 
> Anything Climenhaga writes is either a good thing (in his opinion) that the Alberta NDP have done or bad things people are saying about the Alberta NDP and why they are wrong because it really is a good thing (in his opinion).




And why does it bother you so much that someone has a different opinion than you do? What makes Climenhaga wrong andnyou right from your point of view?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> When it comes to the half-truths and outright misinformation you disseminate, I won't "let things be." Sad that you try to get away with it. Now get over yourself and stop mewling about getting caught so often.




You are not known for your objectivity, Macfury. People do not look to you as an authority on political matters. Your views are biased and your arguments are not persuasive.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> And why does it bother you so much that someone has a different opinion than you do? What makes Climenhaga wrong andnyou right from your point of view?


Simple. When a Conservative (or any other) government makes a mistake, I am quick to state what is wrong and why. I do not die on the sword with them like Climenhaga does trying to defend their stupidity.


----------



## Macfury

My arguments are not designed to be persuasive. They're designed to identify the propagators of unmitigated nonsense. You can't likely be cured--you're a late-stage prog--but warning signs need to be placed around the septic material you leave behind.



Freddie_Biff said:


> You are not known for your objectivity, Macfury. People do not look to you as an authority on political matters. Your views are biased and your arguments are not persuasive.


----------



## FeXL

Freddie, informed or otherwise, everybody is indeed entitled to their own opinion. 

However, nobody is entitled to their own facts. Facts need to stand up to scrutiny. There are damn few actual "facts" in that article. It is mostly uninformed opinion (or outright lies, I s'pose...).

That's what makes Climenhaga wrong.



Freddie_Biff said:


> And why does it bother you so much that someone has a different opinion than you do? What makes Climenhaga wrong andnyou right from your point of view?


----------



## FeXL

I don't normally read the local rag but I ran across this on Sat while waiting for a burger.

Federal fiscal update panned by frustrated oilpatch, Premier Rachel Notley



> Albertans dealing with steep discount prices for oil produced in the province expressed frustration Thursday with Ottawa’s fiscal update that they say offered little acknowledgment of pain being felt in the oilpatch.
> 
> But Finance Minister Bill Morneau said in Ottawa the federal government is aware of the “acute issue” of a glut of oil in Alberta that exceeds export pipeline and rail capacity and pledged to be “relentlessly focused” on long-term solutions.


Good ol' Porno Wille, lying through his teeth. Again.

More:



> “There are a lot of folks here who would be forgiven for saying, ‘Gee, *if there were this kind of economic crisis going on in the manufacturing sector in Ontario, we’re pretty sure it would make its way into the first two paragraphs of the fiscal update*.’ Yet it didn’t find its way into the first two paragraphs,” [Notley] told reporters.


M'bold.

You mean, like this one: 

Trudeau 'deeply disappointed' in GM Oshawa closure, *promises help for workers*

Bold mine.

Nice. Guess there are still Lib voters in the Oshawa area. Ain't none out here in Albertistan.

Further:



> Notley announced Thursday her government would add oil and gas drilling to a list of trade-exposed industries exempt from the province’s carbon tax, a move expected to provide $750,000 to $1.5 million per year in relief for the drilling industry.


So, it's not really about "pollution" or "Globull Warming" or the next Prog cause du jour. It's all about money...


----------



## SINC

*Mark Milke: Rachel Notley dumped Alberta's beer freedom and gave taxpayers a hangover*



> Book excerpt: _*In ending Alberta’s come-one, come-all free-trade approach to beer producers, the NDP government sought to remedy a non-existent problem.*_
> 
> Ralph Klein and Rachel Notley both inherited a fiscal mess when they became premiers of Alberta 23 years apart. In his new book, Ralph vs. Rachel: A Tale of Two Alberta Premiers, author Mark Milke looks at how both used the crisis to wrench Alberta in a new direction — Klein by slashing spending and taxes; Notley by imposing higher taxes, strict climate rules and activist government — and the stark difference in the outcomes. In this first of two excerpts, Milke examines how Notley’s NDP turned Klein’s free-market approach to liquor sales on its head, and stuck Alberta taxpayers with a hangover.


More at the link.

https://business.financialpost.com/...Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1543326883


----------



## SINC

The pot continues to boil.

*Rural Alberta leaders criticize NDP ministers, policies as attacking Christian faith*



> NDP policies were slammed as attacks on Christian faith by political leaders from rural Alberta attending a fall convention in Edmonton Thursday.
> 
> At a Rural Municipalities of Alberta association forum with provincial ministers, Josh Knelson, reeve of Mackenzie County, told Education Minister David Eggen he takes the threat of withholding funding from private faith-based schools "very personally."
> 
> "I feel that it's an attack on Christianity and all faith-based believers," Knelson said. "And to be quite frank, you scare me."


Eggen scares me too.

More at the link.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmo...rs-policies-christian-faith-1.4917177?cmp=rss


----------



## Macfury

Having failed to provide even the most rudimentary support for pipeline projects, Notley is now calling for oil production cuts as the last tactic in a battle she lost long ago.


----------



## SINC

Here is a little tidbit. A nugget of information from Alberta about the likely results of the upcoming election.

Guess which riding Freddie lives in? Yep, you guessed right!


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Here is a little tidbit. A nugget of information from Alberta about the likely results of the upcoming election.
> 
> 
> 
> Guess which riding Freddie lives in? Yep, you guessed right!




And your point is? Obviously, Alberta is and almost always has been a conservative place. Big whoop. How will that solve Alberta’s oil price problem?


----------



## Macfury

Now that Rachel has landlocked the province's oil, it certainly won't be easy. But that;s a made-in-NDP problem, not an Alberta problem.



Freddie_Biff said:


> And your point is? Obviously, Alberta is and almost always has been a conservative place. Big whoop. How will that solve Alberta’s oil price problem?


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> How will that solve Alberta’s oil price problem?


By getting rid of the NDP.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> By getting rid of the NDP.




And the getting oil to market problem remains.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> And the getting oil to market problem remains.


I knew you would have that opinion because you think like the NDP. What you don't see, is that with a new government in place, with the will and experience, it will then be solved.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> I knew you would have that opinion because you think like the NDP. What you don't see, is that with a new government in place, with the will and experience, it will then be solved.



How? The market will magically correct itself? That sounds like magical thinking.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Now that Rachel has landlocked the province's oil...


I just wanted to thank Red Rachel & The Dope for one thing. Locally, the price of fuel dropped to $1.099 yesterday...


----------



## Macfury

It was magical thinking to believe that an anti-oil government could get the product to market.



Freddie_Biff said:


> How? The market will magically correct itself? That sounds like magical thinking.


----------



## FeXL

Freddie, Alberta's current oil market is the product of leftist policy: NDP, Liberal, Green.

Lose those restrictions, our oil price goes up.



Freddie_Biff said:


> How? The market will magically correct itself? That sounds like magical thinking.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> How? The market will magically correct itself? That sounds like magical thinking.


Oh, there are many ways, solidly based on experience, thanks to Jason Kenney. 

After a couple of decades experience as a minister in the inner circles and cabinet of a ruling Conservative government, he will have a multitude of knowledge and contacts to assist him in getting oil to market is but one example.

Just how much experience does Rachel have in the federal system? Yeah, that's right, zero, none and nada.

And one other thing where Kenney holds another ace. He has never surrounded himself and/or appointed anti-oil members of his inner circle to a consulting position like Rachel has done time and again.


----------



## FeXL

Maths is hard for Progs.

Dead Rose Country



> 6 Comments
> 
> Brian Zinchuk: Notley’s $350 million doesn’t come close to buying 7,000 rail cars and 80 locomotives
> 
> _ My math shows, on the low end, a price tag of $945 million for new rail cars alone. Coupled with ~$309 million for locomotives, and you come in at $1.254 billion. At the high end, it would be $1.484 billion for cars, totalling $1.793 billion including locomotives. Either way, it’s a heck of a lot more than the $350 million announced. Unless she’s leasing, Notley’s $350 million is only one-third to one-fifth of the money required to buy all these new trains, and no consideration has been given to staffing or operational costs._​
> Math is hard.


That said, I have questions:
1) Why would we purchase locomotives? Shouldn't that be CN's/CP's/Whomever's responsibility?
2) Why would we be concerned about staffing or operational costs? Shouldn't that be CN's/CP's/Whomever's responsibility?
3) Red Rachel isn't really considering purchasing Alberta gov't locomotives & staffing them with Alberta gov't employees, is she?

:yikes:


----------



## Rps

Freddie_Biff said:


> And the getting oil to market problem remains.


Oil is a rough business here in Canada. First the Feds killed to pipelines moving oil East...they were banking on the TransMountain. How did that work out for them.

The real issue (some might say crime) is that Canadian oil is sold at a discount to our brothers south of the border......and with no other way to get it to another market reasonably or efficiently Alberta is snookered. And, yes, you can blame the NDP....but in reality they had little option.....it has always been the Feds ( Cons or Libs ) who screwed this up. Sooooooo You can say the current Feds are using “baseless” policies.....Ontario is loosing manufacturing (it’s base), Alberta is stymied with their oil ( their base), B.C. , which is resource rich has to watch for whales, and the only province who is really winning is Quebec........but that is a baseless argument.


----------



## SINC

Looks like the NDP gay straight alliance law may be in a bit of trouble this time around.

If they lose this one, they are dead in the water. And they need to lose this one for the sake of Albert parents. It is a bad law made by one man, David Eggen and he needs to be removed pronto.

*Corbella: Some alarming revelations about two GSAs at Alberta Court of Appeal*



> Some shocking revelations were exposed Monday at the Alberta Court of Appeal in Calgary regarding the lack of reasonable parameters governing gay straight alliance clubs at Alberta schools.
> 
> Jay Cameron, a lawyer with the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) and the appellant in this case, revealed evidence that shows children in one GSA were taken off school grounds by an adult “facilitator” who is not a staff member at the school and doesn’t even have children attending the school.
> 
> The facilitator took children to the facilitator’s home and to other schools with GSAs, driving them in a personal vehicle without the parents’ consent or knowledge. As is mandated under the Alberta government’s Bill 24, it is against the law to inform parents of their child’s involvement in a GSA.
> 
> You don’t have to be an applicant in this case to be alarmed by such revelations.


Details at the link.

https://calgaryherald.com/news/loca...lations-about-gsas-at-alberta-court-of-appeal


----------



## SINC

More troubling GSA issues.

*Corbella: Court of Appeal hearing gets conflicting views of GSA rules*



> Numerous principals and teachers who attended an Alberta Court of Appeal hearing say inaccurate information about the rules governing gay-straight alliances was made by the attorney representing the Alberta government.
> 
> Twenty-six Alberta religious schools are appealing a June 27 ruling by Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Johanna Kubik, who dismissed a bid by the schools to delay implementation of the provincial government’s Bill 24 until they could launch a constitutional challenge to the legislation.
> 
> During the hearing, Crown attorney Kristan McLeod told the three justices that the only thing schools are not allowed to share with parents is who is attending a GSA — a club that must be established at a school should a student request one.
> 
> “There is not secrecy around the establishment of GSAs,” McLeod told justices Frederica Schutz, Bruce McDonald and Dawn Pentelechuk in a courtroom packed with about 60 people inside and another 60 watching proceedings outside the courtroom.
> 
> “Parents are allowed to find out about which activities their GSAs are engaging in,” said McLeod.
> 
> “Schools and teachers are allowed to control what those activities are. There needs to be parental notification about any off-school activities, whether there needs to be vetting of any materials being distributed, what the activities are. The only thing that is not allowed to be disclosed is whether or not a child is attending a GSA,” added McLeod.


More at the link.

https://calgaryherald.com/news/loca...rovides-bad-info-at-court-of-appeal-into-gsas


----------



## SINC

Yeah, this will sure help the NDP get re-elected in Alberta. 

*'Love is love': Alberta cabinet minister makes history with same-sex marriage*

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmo...-marriage-1.4933538?cmp=news-digests-edmonton


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Yeah, this will sure help the NDP get re-elected in Alberta.
> 
> 
> 
> *'Love is love': Alberta cabinet minister makes history with same-sex marriage*
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmo...-marriage-1.4933538?cmp=news-digests-edmonton



Why do you care?


----------



## FeXL

About Red Rachel getting re-elected? Have you missed the last 3-1/2 years? 



Freddie_Biff said:


> Why do you care?


----------



## Macfury

Why do you care that he cares?



Freddie_Biff said:


> Why do you care?


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Why do you care?


I don't care one way or the other.

I am simply pointing out that in my opinion, this very public exposure will cost the NDP votes from the more ******* Albertans and believe me, there are many of those in our province.

It is called 'shooting yourself in the foot' in political circles. Again. Or is that still?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> About Red Rachel getting re-elected? Have you missed the last 3-1/2 years?




Did you even read Don’s post?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> I don't care one way or the other.
> 
> 
> 
> I am simply pointing out that in my opinion, this very public exposure will cost the NDP votes from the more ******* Albertans and believe me, there are many of those in our province.
> 
> 
> 
> It is called 'shooting yourself in the foot' in political circles. Again. Or is that still?




Because Rachel is officiating at a gay wedding. That’s sad.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Because Rachel is officiating at a gay wedding. That’s sad.


Didn't state that it was not.

Just stating the obvious to people who think it will have no effect on the election. It will, like it or not.


----------



## Macfury

Soon, she won't be officiating at anything. That's happy!



Freddie_Biff said:


> Because Rachel is officiating at a gay wedding. That’s sad.


----------



## FeXL

Quite.

My question to you stands.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Did you even read Don’s post?


----------



## SINC

Kevin gets it! Good thing there are people around to help guide this helpless excuse for a premier. Of course it is far too late, as she will be wasted in May's election.

*You have to do something, Ms. Notley – here’s a four-point plan for Alberta*

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/rep...+Media&utm_campaign=Shared+Web+Article+Links#


----------



## SINC

I don't think this is a surprise to anyone when fully half the voter support will go to the UCP and that is huge.

*The Pollcast: Rachel Notley's re-election hopes look grim*

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/pollcast-henry-alberta-1.4935165?cmp=news-digests-edmonton


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> The Pollcast: Rachel Notley's re-election hopes look grim


Hey, Mothercorpse! Welcome to 2015... XX)


----------



## Freddie_Biff

It’s fun to watch you guys STILL squirming three and a half years later.


----------



## FeXL

Squirming?

Freddie, we're already celebrating! :clap:



Freddie_Biff said:


> It’s fun to watch you guys STILL squirming three and a half years later.


----------



## FeXL

Further on Alberta gas prices.

Talked to a friend who was in Medicine Hat Wednesday. Regular gas: $1.009/l.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Squirming?
> 
> Freddie, we're already celebrating! :clap:


Exactly--done deal! The fun is in watching the Alberta NDP's death twitches.


----------



## SINC

FeXL said:


> Further on Alberta gas prices.
> 
> Talked to a friend who was in Medicine Hat Wednesday. Regular gas: $1.009/l.


?????

It's been 89.9 here for a week now.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> ?????
> 
> It's been 89.9 here for a week now.




We always seem to get fukced on gas prices. In Leth it's been $1.099 for about a week.


----------



## Macfury

Thanks to Doug Ford, gas is cheaper here than where you are FeXL. It's gone below a buck at some stations.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Thanks to Doug Ford, gas is cheaper here than where you are FeXL. It's gone below a buck at some stations.




Why thanks to Doug Ford? What has he done to affect gas prices?


----------



## Macfury

He pulled Ontario out of the carbon trading market.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Why thanks to Doug Ford? What has he done to affect gas prices?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> He pulled Ontario out of the carbon trading market.



Temporarily. Big deal. You’ll make it up on the back end.


----------



## Macfury

?



Freddie_Biff said:


> Temporarily. Big deal. You’ll make it up on the back end.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> ?




The carbon tax relief plan will not last forever. Soon you’ll have to ante up like everyone else.


----------



## FeXL

Come May, you can bet your sweet patootie Alberta ain't gonna being ante-ing up, either...



Freddie_Biff said:


> The carbon tax relief plan will not last forever. Soon you’ll have to ante up like everyone else.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Come May, you can bet your sweet patootie Alberta ain't gonna being ante-ing up, either...




Uh huh. So you’d rather have Ottawa make the decision about how much carbon tax we should pay and how?


----------



## FeXL

Both levels of gov't can shove their carbon taxes where the sun don't shine. Fewer & fewer people are buying into this whole Globull Warming BS, especially after listening to a single dose of Climate Barbie.

And with what, 2/3rds of the population of Canada living in provinces with premieres against a carbon tax, Trudles is going to push this in court?

Na-na-na-nah. Hey-hey-ey. Goombye...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Uh huh. So you’d rather have Ottawa make the decision about how much carbon tax we should pay and how?


----------



## Macfury

The carbon market is not a carbon tax. It just acts like one. And it is never coming back.



Freddie_Biff said:


> The carbon tax relief plan will not last forever. Soon you’ll have to ante up like everyone else.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> And with what, 2/3rds of the population of Canada living in provinces with premieres against a carbon tax, Trudles is going to push this in court?


Yeah, I think this is a non-starter.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Yeah, I think this is a non-starter.


I purely hope he's that stupid.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

On that topic of informing parents if their child is involved in a GSA at school....










 https://www.gaystarnews.com/articl...dropping-him-on-his-head-10-times/#gs.ScMTOcw


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> On that topic of informing parents if their child is involved in a GSA at school....


Yeah, stuff happens. 

People get killed in car accidents too, but funny thing, some government minister has yet to ban them.

People get killed in crosswalks too, but funny thing, some government minister has yet to ban them.

Kids get killed on their bicycles too, but funny thing, some government minister has yet to ban them.

I could go on, but you likely get the point by now.

Thing is that parents know exactly what their kids are doing except in David Eggens world.

Had they known the kid was about to join, they might have forbidden him from doing so instead of killing him. Do ya think?


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Do ya think?


No, he doesn't...


----------



## Macfury

You're seriously implying that the policy is designed to stop parents from murdering their children? 



Freddie_Biff said:


> On that topic of informing parents if their child is involved in a GSA at school....


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Yeah, stuff happens.
> 
> 
> 
> People get killed in car accidents too, but funny thing, some government minister has yet to ban them.
> 
> 
> 
> People get killed in crosswalks too, but funny thing, some government minister has yet to ban them.
> 
> 
> 
> Kids get killed on their bicycles too, but funny thing, some government minister has yet to ban them.
> 
> 
> 
> I could go on, but you likely get the point by now.
> 
> 
> 
> Thing is that parents know exactly what their kids are doing except in David Eggens world.
> 
> 
> 
> Had they known the kid was about to join, they might have forbidden him from doing so instead of killing him. Do ya think?



This is a pathetic reply to a serious issue. I should have known you’d be someone who doesn’t understand why GSA’s are important. Apparently a father killing their child for being gay isn’t enough.


----------



## Macfury

No GSA would have saved that child and it's really quite appalling that you would use that tragedy as a prop.



Freddie_Biff said:


> This is a pathetic reply to a serious issue. I should have known you’d be someone who doesn’t understand why GSA’s are important. Apparently a father killing their child for being gay isn’t enough.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> This is a pathetic reply to a serious issue. I should have known you’d be someone who doesn’t understand why GSA’s are important. Apparently, a father killing their child for being gay isn’t enough.


Mountains ► Molehills.

Using a one in a million event that will never be seen again as justification for trampling on the rights of parents by a government minister is asinine. At least my examples can and do happen regularly.

And to insinuate it happened in Alberta due to a GSA is an outright lie and relieves you of all credibility by posting it.

To claim I don't understand, when the main issue is parental rights went swoooosh over your head, further weakened your attempt.


----------



## CubaMark

SINC said:


> ....Using a one in a million event that will never be seen again as justification for trampling on the rights of parents by a government minister is asinine...


With all due respect, No. Particularly among socially-conservative communities, there are very real dangers to gay adolescents who face ostracism and abuse both psychological and physical from their own parents. That you are not gay, and have never been in the position of a gay youth who knows that his/her nature is abhorred by their family, means you are unlikely to appreciate the absolute terror that the situation represents. There must be balance, yes. But as UCP leader Jason Kenney said a year ago:

_...parents of students in GSAs shouldn’t be automatically notified.

But he said there could be some cases where the decision should rest with principals, teachers or guidance counsellors.

“Highly trained teachers, principals and school counsellors can exercise their best judgement to know when or if it’s appropriate to bring parents in,” he said.

“There are circumstances where it’s totally inappropriate for parents to be informed and circumstances where it’s entirely appropriate for them to help their kids when they’re going through a challenging time.”_
(Calgary Herald)​


----------



## SINC

CubaMark said:


> With all due respect, No. Particularly among socially-conservative communities, there are very real dangers to gay adolescents who face ostracism and abuse both psychological and physical from their own parents. That you are not gay, and have never been in the position of a gay youth who knows that his/her nature is abhorred by their family, means you are unlikely to appreciate the absolute terror that the situation represents. There must be balance, yes. But as UCP leader Jason Kenney said a year ago:
> 
> _...parents of students in GSAs shouldn’t be automatically notified.
> 
> But he said there could be some cases where the decision should rest with principals, teachers or guidance counsellors.
> 
> “Highly trained teachers, principals and school counsellors can exercise their best judgement to know when or if it’s appropriate to bring parents in,” he said.
> 
> “There are circumstances where it’s totally inappropriate for parents to be informed and circumstances where it’s entirely appropriate for them to help their kids when they’re going through a challenging time.”_
> (Calgary Herald)​


The shoe is on the wrong foot for the rights of 99% of parents. If professionals are so good at judgement, their only role should be to withhold information to parents *if the danger you fear is presen*t, not the other way around. Abusing the rights of the many for the will of the few is just wrong.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> The shoe is on the wrong foot for the rights of 99% of parents. If professionals are so good at judgement, their only role should be to withhold information to parents *if the danger you fear is presen*t, not the other way around. Abusing the rights of the many for the will of the few is just wrong.


Progs like CubaMark and Freddie essentially turn normal interaction on its ass by inventing extreme cases then trying to build a series of crazy upended new protocols around them to assuage their internalized guilt. If you put these characters in charge of things, you'd need a personal protocol officer just to navigate the minefield of their politburo-style pronouncements.


----------



## FeXL

I'm sorry, is that a Call to Authority (a logical fallacy)? It certainly sounds like a Call to Authority to me. Does anybody else think that sounds like a Call to Authority?



CubaMark said:


> That you are not gay, and have never been in the position of a gay youth who knows that his/her nature is abhorred by their family, means you are unlikely to appreciate the absolute terror that the situation represents.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> I'm sorry, is that a Call to Authority (a logical fallacy)? It certainly sounds like a Call to Authority to me. Does anybody else think that sounds like a Call to Authority?


I think it stinks of the fallacy of an "Appeal to Identity."


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> I think it stinks of the fallacy of an "Appeal to Identity."


I took it to mean that since I am not gay, I do not have the capacity to even remotely understand the impact of the policy *on all parents*. I beg to differ that in spite of being straight, I do in fact have the capacity to consider an issue and form an opinion.

I tire of the constant catering to tiny minorities in every facet of society to appease one cabinet minister/party/advocate or about a single-digit percentage, of the people involved.

And to argue that this is a very real threat in substantial numbers that all students are in peril is plain ridiculous. They most certainly are not. I have known dozens of parents of gay children over the years, who while admittedly disappointed with the sexuality of their child, continue to love and support them in spite of their differences.


----------



## SINC

Is anyone surprised? Certainly not a single soul I know.

*Alberta anger boils over, poll says NDP in big trouble*



> Now it is truly the winter of our discontent.
> 
> And there is no relief. Only discontent unanswered, discontent unaddressed, grievances ignored and tossed aside.
> 
> Alberta, the chumps of Confederation. Others take our money and crap on us while doing everything they can to stop us making the money they take.
> 
> It is pretty close to the definition of insanity. It is also today’s Canada.
> 
> We complain. We sound off. We yell. We scream. We howl the outrage. Some of us take to the streets. Some talk of calling it quits on this country.
> 
> We search for leaders. Preferably those who will not bend the knee to the likes of Justin Trudeau.


More at the link.

https://calgarysun.com/opinion/columnists/bell-alberta-anger-boils-over-poll-says-ndp-in-big-trouble


----------



## FeXL

Dead Rose Country



> _ Premier Rachel Notley’s NDP government argues it has done plenty to object to Bill C-69.
> 
> The facts state otherwise. _​
> She was always faking it.


More:



> _On Wednesday afternoon, federal Bill C-69 passed second reading in the Senate by a vote of 56-29.
> 
> The response from the Alberta government on this troubling news?
> 
> Crickets. Deafening silence. Inaction on an epic scale._


Again, comments nail it.


----------



## eMacMan

Gonna toss this one out there without a lot of comment.

https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/c...d-a-conversation-on-one-alberta-school-system

Should be noted that Cardston, Alberta is 80% Mormon. Should they have their own separate school system? One where the roll of Brigham Young in the Mountain Meadows Massacre is totally white washed?

How about the Blood reserve right next door?


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> Gonna toss this one out there without a lot of comment.


The article notes that there are communities of 2500 with 3 different school systems in Alberta. There probably are. The question is, how many towns? In my experience, damn few. This is by far the exception & not the rule.

The article also notes that savings of ~$250 million could be realized by amalgamating districts. A few quick observations, in no order:
1: In a budget of $8 billion, that's little more than a rounding error.
2: Does that $250 million savings take into account all the retirement funds that those teachers who do not wish to be amalgamated will require?
3: Who gets to decide who keeps their job & who doesn't?
4: Does this decision to amalgamate also include the Hutterian education system? Why or why not?
5: Often these small towns that are mentioned have very small class sizes. What's the draw in going from say, 15 kids to 30 or more? The dubious benefits of having a Sociology 10 option? Pulease...



eMacMan said:


> Should be noted that Cardston, Alberta is 80% Mormon. Should they have their own separate school system? One where the roll of Brigham Young in the Mountain Meadows Massacre is totally white washed?


You don't learn about that anyways...


----------



## SINC

Smith: Alberta needs a firewall, the sooner the better

https://edmontonjournal.com/opinion...tter/wcm/4caed71a-06c1-41ff-8463-c2a6d9def1b0


----------



## Macfury

Notley's minimum wage policies, fully realized. Venezuela is trying to create wealth through minimum wage increases:



> Venezuela, a failing socialist state, has gifted its people with the sixth minimum wage hike in one year. The 150% increase last week won’t help too much because inflation is up to 1.7 million percent.


Sultan Knish: Socialism Can Kill You, But It Won't Bury You


----------



## FeXL

_The_ Danielle Smith? The floor crosser?

If so, pretty difficult for me to take anything she says without a ton of salt...



SINC said:


> Smith: Alberta needs a firewall, the sooner the better


----------



## SINC

*Notley's late (and little) holiday gift for Alberta*

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/notleys-late-and-little-holiday-gift-for-alberta


----------



## Rps

SINC said:


> *Notley's late (and little) holiday gift for Alberta*
> 
> https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/notleys-late-and-little-holiday-gift-for-alberta


Sinc, when do you think the writ will drop...March or May? When I lived in Bowmanville we often say what we called the 416/905 split. Toronto vs the GTA.... When I lived in Alberta it was very conservatively based politically. What is it now...NDP in Edmonton and conservatives everywhere else?


----------



## SINC

Rps said:


> Sinc, when do you think the writ will drop...March or May? When I lived in Bowmanville we often say what we called the 416/905 split. Toronto vs the GTA.... When I lived in Alberta it was very conservatively based politically. What is it now...NDP in Edmonton and conservatives everywhere else?


Well Rp, given the rats are beginning to leave the sinking ship, it is entirely possible Notley will pull the trigger early before any more bad news is levelled against her government. That is the second or third NDP MLA from Calgary to declare they will not run, and that spells trouble for the NDP. Notley may win a few seats in Edmonton, all in union based ridings, but will very likely be shut out in the balance of Alberta ridings.

*Calgary NDP MLA Stephanie McLean resigns after being absent for fall session*



> Former Alberta cabinet minister Stephanie McLean has resigned, after previously saying she wouldn't seek re-election.
> 
> Premier Rachel Notley posted on Facebook just before 10 p.m. Wednesday that she's received notice the Calgary-Varsity MLA had resigned from her position.
> 
> "We wish Stephanie and her family all the best in their future endeavours," Notley wrote.
> 
> In May, McLean said that she wouldn't be seeking re-election, saying she planned to pursue her law practice instead. McLean was formerly minister for the status of women and Service Alberta.
> 
> In a statement, McLean told CBC News her resignation was effective immediately and that she is pursuing a job offer with a law firm.
> 
> McLean was on leave for the entire fall session, the speaker's office confirmed to Radio-Canada in November.
> 
> The legislature wrapped its final sitting of 2018 in December, and it's not yet known if the current legislature will hold another sitting before the spring election.
> 
> McLean made history as the first MLA in the province to give birth while holding office.


See Notley's announcement at the link:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/mclean-resigns-ndp-mla-1.4964299


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> That is the second or third NDP MLA from Calgary to declare they will not run, and that spells trouble for the NDP.


The trough is closing and they know it.


----------



## SINC

Soon now, very soon . . .


----------



## SINC

If anyone has any doubts about the outcome of the Alberta election in May, wonder no more. This FB poll of over 3500 Albertans pretty much tells the tale.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> If anyone has any doubts about the outcome of the Alberta election in May, wonder no more. This FB poll of over 3500 Albertans pretty much tells the tale.


Oh, Freddie has doubts.

He's convinced that the new ATA salary negotiations are going to convert millions of voters over to Red Rachel. :love2:


----------



## Freddie_Biff

FeXL said:


> Oh, Freddie has doubts.
> 
> He's convinced that the new ATA salary negotiations are going to convert millions of voters over to Red Rachel. :love2:


It is ignorant to explain a fellow poster's views especially when you have no idea what you are talking about.


----------



## FeXL

It's not rocket surgery, Freddie: "I support the NDP". Remember that statement? Or have you forgotten that, too?

What's _really_ ignorant is to think that the EnDeePee in Alberta wouldn't destroy our economy in precisely the same fashion as they've done in every other province they've ever been elected.

Congratulations, Freddie! You're complicit in spending your grandchildren's paycheque.



Freddie_Biff said:


> It is ignorant to explain a fellow poster's views especially when you have no idea what you are talking about.


----------



## eMacMan

A sad loss for this part of the world. For those who want to know how environmental conservation should be approached, these two articles are worth reading. 

https://albertaviews.ca/part-1-trib...j-05q4kfT4oY5gg7MaAhzIMrW5LxoWHZFai9BF26my2MA

https://albertaviews.ca/part-2-tribute-charlie-russell/

Key to it is that those who know and love an area should have the reins when it comes to conservation. Not outside environmentalists. Too bad the NDP consistently fails to take this approach, as illustrated by this link:
https://calgaryherald.com/pmn/news-...plan/wcm/c17af528-6e37-4a2d-a470-f6bba81bbe71
-
I've attended such meetings regarding the Castle area screw-up. I can assure you that the only threat came in the form of questions that the government representatives did not want to answer or even have on record.


----------



## FeXL

Further on cancelled meetings from alleged bullying & threats that Shannon Phillips has given zero evidence of.

Alberta’s NDP: Home to Canada’s Biggest Snowflakes



> The Calgary Herald’s Licia Corbella reports on how Alberta NDP Environment Minister Shannon Phillips is using alleged reports of “inflamed rhetoric and inaccurate statements made by some organizations and individuals on social media” as an excuse to cancel public meetings about the proposed Bighorn Wildland Provincial Park. Translation: “Some people were mean to me so now I’m going to have my party without them!”
> 
> _ When told that United Conservative MLA for the massive area, Jason Nixon, called the cancellation of the meetings “arbitrary,” Phillips said: “The safety of Albertans and conversations with the RCMP are never arbitrary.”
> 
> It’s odd though. Const. Mike Hibbs, the media relations officer for Alberta’s RCMP K Division’s southern district, said Monday that he hadn’t heard of any threats.
> 
> “I’m not aware of anything — of any threats at all,” said Hibbs.
> 
> Nixon, MLA for Rimbey-Rocky Mountain House-Sundre, says he spoke with many RCMP contacts over the weekend and again on Monday and none of them were aware of any threats of any kind.
> 
> “The RCMP in my communities didn’t know what I was asking about; they never heard about any threats and they certainly didn’t ask for meetings to be shut down,” explained Nixon, who attended a rally in Drayton Valley Monday night that was hastily organized by community representatives to replace the cancelled information session scheduled for the conference centre there.
> 
> *“I’m not going to call her a liar, but she needs to back up what she said because her actions insult all the citizens of these communities — good solid citizens who just want to ask some reasonable questions about provincial plans about our home,” said Nixon.*_​


Bold mine.

Comments salient, especially these:



> Philips wrote the Alberta Federation of Labours energy policy. She was opposed to the O&G industry long before she became an MLA or cab minister. She is an inflexible ideologue who wont be listening to ‘the people’ on any issue.
> 
> I think Philips isn’t telling the truth here. She has nothing to support her allegations other than saying threats were made. Perhaps the bureaucrats who run the meetings were scared by some perceived menacing look or maybe a certain phrase that made their **** all loose and runny (as an old rancher buddy of mine would say).
> 
> I’ve had the good fortune to attend public meetings where bare knuckle politics were on display. Nothing wrong with that but for Philips to cancel public consultation because allegedly someone is afraid and then provide no evidence what so ever of any threat is cowardice. Since when do politicians not have to face the people and consult on changes that affect their lives?


And



> If you can’t intimidate your opponents, accuse them of intimidating you. That’s a tactic right out of Mein Kamph.


----------



## SINC

*Alberta environment minister can't spin herself out of her own tangled web*

Personal friend of Mike Hudema, environmental guy. Yeah, it fits. Lies and Liars does too.

https://nationalpost.com/news/local...Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1547136745


----------



## SINC

Have a listen as you watch this Rebel Media video describing what the Notley government is doing to Rebel Media. Regardless of what you might think about Ezra Levant, this is incredible!





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## FeXL

Some text on the above.

HELP: Rachel Notley is coming to kill The Rebel!



> Rachel Notley and the NDP government of Alberta have finally made their move against The Rebel. They are prosecuting us for what we have said about them.
> 
> They're using an enforcer, Melanie Malchuk, who used to work for the Alberta Human Rights Commission, the censors who prosecuted Ezra years ago for publishing the Danish cartoons of Mohammed. They have given her a special contract to lead the investigation against us.
> 
> *Notley wants to shut down The Rebel before the 2019 election* — she knows The Rebel has been their most effective critics, and the NDP will do anything to silence us.


Links' bold.


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> Some text on the above.
> 
> HELP: Rachel Notley is coming to kill The Rebel!
> 
> Links' bold.


Ezra is about as reliable as Shannon Phillips. That said, if it weren't for these sort of NDP blunders most Albertans would be blissfully unaware of the very existence of Ezra and The Rebel.

If someone wants to spout off bigotry be it anti-Muslim, homophobic, or anti-Zionist, I am fine with it. The alternative of a muzzled press is far worse, especially when you consider that those exercising the control are pretty much the dregs of society, ie. the politically connected.


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> The alternative of a muzzled press is far worse, especially when you consider that those exercising the control are pretty much the dregs of society, ie. the politically connected.


I pretty much expect little to no comment from the Progs on this, save some scathing "Good, he deserves it" shot.

That said, can you imagine the hue & cry from the left if, say, Harper had done the same thing to MotherCorpse? Every post-modern, progressive, feminist SoyBoi in the country would have his pillow out, loaded for latte, mascara streaks running down his Girlette-shaven cheeks...

They support this kind of nonsense quietly, tacitly or not, in the hopes that the crocodile will eat them last.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> They support this kind of nonsense quietly, tacitly or not, in the hopes that the crocodile will eat them last.


At least that the crocodile will protect their feeeeel-ings and cut them a small cheque.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> ...and cut them a small cheque.


Which will promptly be eaten up by a payroll tax increase, or by the _real_ cost of a carbon tax, or by an increased sin tax, or, or, or...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Which will promptly be eaten up by a payroll tax increase, or by the _real_ cost of a carbon tax, or by an increased sin tax, or, or, or...


As long as the NDP voter thinks the cheque is coming out of someone else's pocket, they'll wag their tails and quiver with gratitude. Nothing is quite so tasty as somebody else's biscuit.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Nothing is quite so tasty as somebody else's biscuit.


Ah. I've heard tell. An experience for the rest of us to be devoutly wished for.

I'm tired of the bastards wrestling my biscuits out of my hands to feed those too ideologically lazy to feed themselves...


----------



## 18m2

No One Should Feel Sorry For Alberta ... Article in the Globe & Mail

BUT, who has the balls to do the dirty deed?

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/no-one-should-feel-sorry-for-alberta/article36782945/


----------



## FeXL

18m2 said:


> No One Should Feel Sorry For Alberta ... Article in the Globe & Mail
> 
> BUT, who has the balls to do the dirty deed?


I've never read anything penned by Gary Mason before but he's an f'ing economic idiot. Is he next in line for the NDP school of economics, by any chance? Leave it to the Grope & Flail...

The takeaway here is that, in order to balance the profligate NDP budget, we should tax our way out of it? Precisely how far down that endless spiral (Spend—>Tax—>Spend—>Tax—>Spend—>Tax—>Spend—>Tax—>Spend—>Tax—>Spend—>Tax—>Spend—>Tax—>Spend—>Tax—>Spend—>Tax—>Spend—>Tax—>Spend—>Tax—>Spend—>Tax—>Spend—>Tax—>_ad infinitum_) do we go?

Pulease...

There's a whole ton of other BS in that article that needs addressing but I'll keep it at that.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> I've never read anything penned by Gary Mason before but he's an f'ing economic idiot. Is he next in line for the NDP school of economics, by any chance? Leave it to the Grope & Flail...


That's shockingly inept. Got a deficit? Just take the money away from people who spend it on themselves! A zero-sum game! Also completely ignores the fact that Aberta's growth is greater now, because it fell further under Notley, and that much of it is revving the engine on gas the province can't pay for.


----------



## SINC

18m2 said:


> No One Should Feel Sorry For Alberta ... Article in the Globe & Mail
> 
> BUT, who has the balls to do the dirty deed?
> 
> https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/no-one-should-feel-sorry-for-alberta/article36782945/


That guy has no clue about Alberta, nor the damage Notley has done to us.


----------



## SINC

*An Alberta mother's call to action: When parents lose rights, children are endangered*

https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/c...n-parents-lose-rights-children-are-endangered

Eggen is the most dangerous man ever to have some control of education in Alberta.


----------



## SINC

*NDP in poor electoral health*

Are they ever!

https://edmontonsun.com/opinion/columnists/gunter-ndp-in-poor-electoral-health


----------



## SINC

*Bizarre accusation against Kenney points to ugly campaign ahead*

NDP slinging dirt. Imagine that. Especially when they are neck deep in the dirt they have spread on Albertans since 2015. It is going to be a spectacular defeat indeed.

https://calgaryherald.com/news/loca...ness-to-grow-along-with-a-later-election-call


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Eggen is the most dangerous man ever to have some control of education in Alberta.


It's going to be saweet to see him gone in a matter of a few short months... :clap::clap::clap:


----------



## SINC

FeXL said:


> It's going to be saweet to see him gone in a matter of a few short months... :clap::clap::clap:


Yep and it will happen:


----------



## Macfury

Good grief... even Redmonton!


----------



## SINC

Full out campaigning on the public dime and I quote:* "Notley also vowed not to introduce health care premiums, and sales and payroll taxes if she is re-elected."*

*Notley raises spectre of Klein-style cuts under UCP government*

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmo....4991278?cmp=newsletter-news-digests-edmonton

She needs to call an election NOW!


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Full out campaigning on the public dime and I quote:* "Notley also vowed not to introduce health care premiums, and sales and payroll taxes if she is re-elected."*
> 
> *Notley raises spectre of Klein-style cuts under UCP government*
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmo....4991278?cmp=newsletter-news-digests-edmonton
> 
> She needs to call an election NOW!





> Premier Rachel Notley warned Thursday that if Jason Kenney forms government, he would freeze public-sector spending, hurting Edmonton the way Ralph Klein did in the 1990s.


And the problem with this is?



> In her speech, she hearkened back what many consider a dark time in Edmonton's history — when the Klein government slashed thousands of public sector jobs in order to eliminate the deficit.
> 
> Notley could have made the decision to do the same when oil prices collapsed after she took office in 2015. But she told the audience that she chose not to.
> 
> "I knew that we couldn't make the mistakes of the past and take an axe to the very things that support a strong Edmonton and a strong province," she told the crowd.


Alberta's strength is picking its citizens' pockets? A strong Edmonton is built on wealth confiscated from others? If so, Edmonton has no real wealth.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Alberta's strength is picking its citizens' pockets? A strong Edmonton is built on wealth confiscated from others? If so, Edmonton has no real wealth.


The private sector lost somewhere around 100,000 jobs.

That's about what I'd like to see culled from the public sector in Redmonton... :clap:


----------



## SINC

*EDITORIAL: Notley attacks on Klein era a strange campaign tactic*

https://edmontonsun.com/opinion/edi...ttacks-on-klein-era-a-strange-campaign-tactic


----------



## SINC

This is why Education minister David Eggen needs to be removed.



> THE TOO OFTEN QUOTED, KRISTOPHER WELLS
> 
> In Alberta, it now seems that every time something comes up regarding an LGBT issue, Kristopher Wells pops up as the go to expert; always against parents, and always on the side of “progress” Let’s look at what Kristopher Wells means by progress.
> 
> Wells is a professor, and a confidant of Alberta’s Education Minister, David Eggen. About three years ago, Mr. Eggen engaged Wells to supervise the construction and launch of Alberta Education’s Gay Straight Alliance, or GSA, website. For several months no one paid attention, but then, Edmonton mother, Theresa Ng who is now with Parents for Choice, decided to have a look.
> 
> Ms. Ng found numerous links from the GSA website to sexually explicit sites. If you haven’t already, it’s very important that you follow the link. You need to be aware of these sites, included the one that gave instructions on “25 sex positions you can try at home”, and another on how to give oral sex. For 5 years and up?!
> 
> Kris WellsWhen confronted with absolute proof of the links – Theresa Ng had presciently taken screenshots of the linked websites – the links were removed. But then Kristopher Wells took to social media to denounce Ms. Ng for being “hysterical” and “sensationalist.” Are you serious? In what demented world is a mother being hysterical by objecting to explicitly sexual content being provided, unbeknownst to her, to her children?


More at the link.

https://iwuz.me/2019/01/11/the-too-often-quoted-kristopher-wells/


----------



## FeXL

And even more campaigning tactics.

NDP offering industry executives a slice of taxpayer pie



> Of course, “industry” is interested in the New Democrats’ idea to build a new oil refinery in Alberta or expand an existing one. The NDP government has been sloshing taxpayer dollars around like slop at a hog trough – and the pigs are lining up to get some.


The curious thing about all the "new refinery" narrative is that we _still_ don't have the pipeline capacity to move the product, whether it's crude, bitumen or gasoline.


----------



## FeXL

Further on Red Rachel's legacy.

Harm Promotion



> [The province of Alberta] has committed $200,000 to create a team tasked with reducing crime while monitoring the city’s only safe drug consumption site.
> 
> Health Minister Sarah Hoffman made the announcement just hours after a report from police showing the crime rate in the Beltline has skyrocketed near the Safeworks Harm Reduction Program, located inside the Sheldon M. Chumir Health Centre.
> 
> Hoffman said the grant to Calgary’s Alpha House Society is to create a Downtown Outreach Addictions Partnership (DOAP) team “assigned to the downtown core and specifically watching the perimeter of the Chumir and surrounding neighbourhoods.”​
> “Downtown core”? I have a better solution. Move these things into the gated communities of the elites who created them and spend the money on buses.


From the first comment:



> Every City in North Ameria that has tried this utter Stupidity, faces indentical results…crime goes up, streets are littered with hundrds of used needle and often, dead users.


Yeppers.


----------



## SINC

Curling in small-town Alberta.


----------



## SINC

Why the NDP has to go.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Why the NDP has to go.


Related the the above, earlier in the week I was treated to a recorded message on our land line from the exalted Joe Ceci. He was asking Albertans to call up on a certain date & be part of a public discussion about the budget.

I may just call up a coupla MLA offices (his, Red Rachel's, Shannon Phillips, Eggen's, the more arrogant ones) and tell them not to make too many plans post May...


----------



## SINC

FeXL said:


> Related the the above, earlier in the week I was treated to a recorded message on our land line from the exalted Joe Ceci. He was asking Albertans to call up on a certain date & be part of a public discussion about the budget.
> 
> I may just call up a coupla MLA offices (his, Red Rachel's, Shannon Phillips, Eggen's, the more arrogant ones) and tell them not to make too many plans post May...


I got the same call. Just hung up. Waste of time considering the election result to come.


----------



## SINC

Just one more Red Rachel failure to pound another nail in the NDP coffin.

*Alberta's oil cuts backfire as crude-by-rail shipments collapse*

https://edmontonjournal.com/commodi...b329de?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#


----------



## Rps

SINC said:


> I got the same call. Just hung up. Waste of time considering the election result to come.


Sinc, I haven’t been following the polls lately....where do the NDP stand, about the same as the National NDP in Quebec, which is around 8%.


----------



## SINC

Rps said:


> Sinc, I haven’t been following the polls lately....where do the NDP stand, about the same as the National NDP in Quebec, which is around 8%.


last poll about the end of last month had NDP about 27% to UCP at 52% for a 25 point lead.


----------



## SINC

Although that may change now that Rebel Media has uncovered this:

*Notley cabinet minister refuses to pay spousal support, addicted to drugs, had affair with fellow MLA*

https://www.therebel.media/exclusive-notley-cabinet-minister-court-documents-drugs-mla-affair

No wonder Red Rachel refused to release the names earlier. And more importantly, why is her senior admin staff member involved in the details of the court documents by attending certain procedures?

Now most folks do not have much use for Rebel Media, but this is based on court documents they obtained and is still developing. 

The NDP admitted months ago that two of their MLAs were reprimanded for sexual behaviour but refused to name them. That hurt Notley's openess claim and now it looks like having a druggie for a minister won't much help. I always wondered why that guy's eyes looked like they were bugging out of his head.


----------



## Rps

SINC said:


> last poll about the end of last month had NDP about 27% to UCP at 52% for a 25 point lead.


Ouch! So are the knives out for Notley? Usually when you are that far behind the parties think about eating their young. I’m thinking it would take a colossal event for her to muster even a minority hold ......so it will be a drag out to the last possible day for the writ to drop.....Federal NDP are no where, Liberals in Alberta......sorry I forgot it’s Alberta.....so, where does that leave the Federal Cons? Will they ground work for the UCP or are they on their own?


----------



## SINC

Rps said:


> Ouch! So are the knives out for Notley? Usually when you are that far behind the parties think about eating their young. I’m thinking it would take a colossal event for her to muster even a minority hold ......so it will be a drag out to the last possible day for the writ to drop.....Federal NDP are no where, Liberals in Alberta......sorry I forgot it’s Alberta.....so, where does that leave the Federal Cons? Will they ground work for the UCP or are they on their own?


Here is a link to that last poll I was thinking about:

https://www.mainstreetresearch.ca/ucp-lead-over-ndp-notleys-approval-ratings-improve/


----------



## SINC

SINC said:


> Although that may change now that Rebel Media has uncovered this:
> 
> *Notley cabinet minister refuses to pay spousal support, addicted to drugs, had affair with fellow MLA*
> 
> https://www.therebel.media/exclusive-notley-cabinet-minister-court-documents-drugs-mla-affair
> 
> No wonder Red Rachel refused to release the names earlier. And more importantly, why is her senior admin staff member involved in the details of the court documents by attending certain procedures?
> 
> Now most folks do not have much use for Rebel Media, but this is based on court documents they obtained and is still developing.
> 
> The NDP admitted months ago that two of their MLAs were reprimanded for sexual behaviour but refused to name them. That hurt Notley's openess claim and now it looks like having a druggie for a minister won't much help. I always wondered why that guy's eyes looked like they were bugging out of his head.


So, not a single MSM outlet tonight on the news mentioned this story. Does that tell you anything? Surely if I was aware of it, they had to be. Not one TV station, radio station nor newspaper had any mention.

The sad sorry state of government bought media is such a shame.

Any real media had over five hours to confirm or deny the Rebel accusations. All of them refused to even investigate to see the court documents and either confirm or deny the story to be real or not. Apparently they have deemed it fake news by ignoring it.

Is this what media has deteriorated to in Canada now?


----------



## Freddie_Biff




----------



## Macfury

Ouch! Freddie, please go back to your old meme sources!


----------



## eMacMan

Freddie, if all Rachel has going for her is that she is not Jason Kennie, she is going to take a pounding in this election. 

That worked for her last time because the conmen had really screwed up. Now however she has been in office for four years. It's her record that will carry or destroy her. Judging by your meme there is no hope for her.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

eMacMan said:


> Freddie, if all Rachel has going for her is that she is not Jason Kennie, she is going to take a pounding in this election.
> 
> That worked for her last time because the conmen had really screwed up. Now however she has been in office for four years. It's her record that will carry or destroy her. Judging by your meme there is no hope for her.




Funny, but the meme doesn’t mention Rachel Notley even once, last I checked, yet that’s all you talk about. Interesting.


----------



## Macfury

Notley and the NDP will never win again. Not even once. Interesting.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Funny, but the meme doesn’t mention Rachel Notley even once, last I checked, yet that’s all you talk about. Interesting.


----------



## Rps

Sinc, I read the Rebel article and, while interesting, not sure how I would handle the story . At best, the Rebel admitted it was speculation on who and what. If you were the editor of the Edmonton Sun, say, what would you have done. That said, if the mainstream did follow it and found nothing what would they publish? If Notley’s threads are unraveling, which some history has shown, that is the story, and that is what I even see here in the news. But you live there and see the coverage....so I defer to your point.


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> Notley and the NDP will never win again. Not even once. Interesting.


Does she have one more shot or do you think the party will dump her after the election. If she loses by a 1/3 I can’t see them keeping her........ask Wynne who didn’t.


----------



## SINC

Rps said:


> Sinc, I read the Rebel article and, while interesting, not sure how I would handle the story . At best, the Rebel admitted it was speculation on who and what. If you were the editor of the Edmonton Sun, say, what would you have done. That said, if the mainstream did follow it and found nothing what would they publish? If Notley’s threads are unraveling, which some history has shown, that is the story, and that is what I even see here in the news. But you live there and see the coverage....so I defer to your point.


If I were the current editor of the Edmonton Sun, I would have had a reporter all over this report by Rebel Media to see if it was fact or fiction. If it was fact, I would have run the story front page with further details including an attempt to get a comment from the parties involved, including Notley.

On the other hand if it could not be confirmed I would have published a story on the allegations being made by Rebel Media and finally, if it was debunked, I would have run a reference to the Rebel Media accusations under the headline, 'Don't Believe Everything You Read'.

Ignoring a report from someone you mistrust, does not help in any manner when Facebook and Twitter are carrying it.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> Does she have one more shot or do you think the party will dump her after the election. If she loses by a 1/3 I can’t see them keeping her........ask Wynne who didn’t.


When the PCs imploded, Freddie pointed out that no party that loses in Alberta has ever regained power, which is why I am reminding him of that prediction. I guess he imagined a long socialist dynasty.

The Alberta NDP has largely become a Notley personality cult. The party hasn't even bothered to groom any replacements. Even Albertans like her relatively well, even though they hate her party and its destructive policies. 

It would be difficult to run a government as badly as Notley has, so I imagine the UCP will have 8 years before it faces any serious challenges. If I were the NDP I would keep Notley as the face of the party for awhile, then work harder to develop new leadership in the interim.


----------



## SINC

Rps said:


> Does she have one more shot or do you think the party will dump her after the election. If she loses by a 1/3 I can’t see them keeping her........ask Wynne who didn’t.


I know you did not ask me, but consider this. If Singh loses the Burnaby byelection and thus the federal NDP leadership, and Notley loses power in Alberta, I am inclined to think Notley might be conscripted to lead the federal NDP in the fall election as a much more acceptable to all leader than a lame duck Singh. She would make a leader with as much or more credibility and national recognition as anyone else capable of the job in the very short time frame the NDP would have to get their poop together for an October election.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> I know you did not ask me, but consider this. If Singh loses the Brunaby byelection and thus the federal NDP leadership, and Notely loses power in Alberta, I might be inclined to think Notley might be conscripted to lead the federal NDP in the fall election as a much more acceptable to all. She would make a leader with as much or more credibility and national recognition as anyone else capable of the job in the very short time frame the NDP would have to get their poop together for an October election.


Interesting thought. Singh was a bizarre choice for NDP leader, given the baggage of his previous political activities, lack of ability to connect with Canadians and extreme socialist leanings. His inability to raise money for the party also hasn't helped.


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> When the PCs imploded, Freddie pointed out that no party that loses in Alberta has ever regained power, which is why I am reminding him of that prediction. I guess he imagined a long socialist dynasty.
> 
> The Alberta NDP has largely become a Notley personality cult. The party hasn't even bothered to groom any replacements. Even Albertans like her relatively well, even though they hate her party and its destructive policies.
> 
> It would be difficult to run a government as badly as Notley has, so I imagine the UCP will have 8 years before it faces any serious challenges. If I were the NDP I would keep Notley as the face of the party for awhile, then work harder to develop new leadership in the interim.


Hmmmm....you think that’s why the NDP in Ontario haven’t gotten rid of AH?


----------



## Rps

Sinc, I can see that....but Federally Masse would be my choice instead of Singh..... I think Singh might squeeze through in B.C. Over the pipeline issue...but I hear he is not well known.....and I hate parachuted candidates....it would have been better to have him run in Windsor West. He also hasn’t united the party....or learn it’s policies it seems.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> Hmmmm....you think that’s why the NDP in Ontario haven’t gotten rid of AH?


Yes. I think a lot of the parties suffer from an unwillingness or inability to promote from within. Not easy to do in the U.S. system, where anyone can run for president, but avoidable here.


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> Yes. I think a lot of the parties suffer from an unwillingness or inability to promote from within. Not easy to do in the U.S. system, where anyone can run for president, but avoidable here.


I agree. To me Trudeau Senior had one of the best cabinets, I think 3 PMs came from it. After that only one or two members worth mentioning in all the rest. If parties had a hard term limit we might see a change....


----------



## SINC

Rps said:


> Sinc, I can see that....but Federally Masse would be my choice instead of Singh..... I think Singh might squeeze through in B.C. Over the pipeline issue...but I hear he is not well known.....and I hate parachuted candidates....it would have been better to have him run in Windsor West. He also hasn’t united the party....or learn it’s policies it seems.


I cannot agree that Singh might sneak through. An east indian descent candidate, from outside the riding running in a predominately Chinese Canadian riding and a Liberal candidate who is 'one of their own' to beat? Not likely at all IMHO.


----------



## 18m2

Even though Burnaby South is not THE "pipeline riding" the issues resonates with a lot of people in the community and will have an impact on their choice to vote against the Liberals. 

My friend, who lives in Burnaby South and is a second generation Chinese, said he would likely not bother voting because he doesn't like any of the options.


----------



## CubaMark

*Three new solar electricity facilities in Alberta contracted at lower cost than natural gas*

Three new solar electricity facilities to be built in south eastern Alberta (Canada) have been selected through a competitive process to supply the Government of Alberta with 55 per cent of their annual electricity needs. The facilities will be built near Hays, Tilley, and Jenner, by Canadian Solar with Conklin Métis Local #193 as 50-percent equity owners.
​
The Government of Alberta’s operations have been powered 100 per cent with wind electricity since 2007. Upon the expiration of some of these contracts, they have been renewed to switch from wind to solar energy. The average contract pricing will be $0.048 per kilowatt hour (3.6 cents/kWh USD), which is less than the average historical wholesale power pool price paid to natural gas-fired electricity in the province in years 2008 – 2018.

“The conversation about solar energy has long been fixated on its price competitiveness with fossil fuels,” said John Gorman, CanSIA President & CEO. “Today’s announcement demonstrates that low cost solar energy has arrived as a mainstream option in Alberta. The conversation should next focus on how to optimize an all-of-the-above strategy for developing the province’s renewable and non-renewable resources.”

“This price discovery is monumental for the solar industry in Canada” said Patrick Bateman, CanSIA Director of Policy & Market Development. “At less than five cents per kilowatt hour, this solar electricity has a cost that is less than that of natural gas. 

* * *​
Alberta receives more hours of sunshine than Miami, Florida in the summer months. Alberta’s electricity supply is most strained in summer when high temperatures increase the resistance of the distribution and transmission systems, and reduce the efficiency of cooling thermal power plants. For this reason, solar facilities sited near to electricity demand improves overall grid efficiency. Supply shortages are atypical in Alberta in winter when solar energy is least available.

(Cansia)​


----------



## FeXL

Hello, Hypocrite.

What would the price actually be without taxpayer funded rebates, subsidies, etc., etc., etc.?

In addition, how much power are they to get in the winter under overcast skies when the panels are under 8" of snow and there's less than 8 hours of sunlight/day? Like say, the current conditions?

And, _and_, are they going to run a power line from Tilley all the way up to Edmonchuk, just to make sure that nobody else uses this much-vaunted solar panel electricity?

In addition, I call an official bull$h!t on their claim to have been 100% powered by bird choppers since '07. No way in hell.

BTW, just one more reason to get rid of the fukcers come May...



CubaMark said:


> Blah, blah, blah...


----------



## Macfury

It's like the eco-dupes in Ontario, who buy their allotment of energy from some outfit called Bullfrog Power. Their homes use any old electricity, but because the Bullfrogs generate some power elsewhere, they pay way more for it.



FeXL said:


> In addition, I call an official bull$h!t on their claim to have been 100% powered by bird choppers since '07. No way in hell.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> It's like the eco-dupes in Ontario, who buy their allotment of energy from some outfit called Bullfrog Power. Their homes use any old electricity, but because the Bullfrogs generate some power elsewhere, they pay way more for it.


Yeah, we gots Bull$h!t Power out here, too.

I find it hilarious that there are so many people/businesses/gov't departments who all claim to be on Bull$h!t Power, or Bird Chopper Power, or Solar Panel Power or some such BS (which, if you added all the virtue signallers up, would be a massive amount of electricity every year), yet, if you read the actual output of wind & solar in the province, it's single digits.


----------



## Macfury

I dug into your story and the $3.9 million savings were to replace expensive WIND power contracts.:lmao::lmao:

Likewise, this was not a competitive bid for electricity. Only solar companies were allowed to apply.




> The Alberta government says the contract will save $3.9 million annually, *replacing expiring wind power contract*s and supplying approximately 55 per cent of annual electrical needs.


https://www.fortmcmurraytoday.com/n...er-with-canadian-solar-on-new-energy-projects




CubaMark said:


> *Three new solar electricity facilities in Alberta contracted at lower cost than natural gas*
> 
> Three new solar electricity facilities to be built in south eastern Alberta (Canada) have been selected through a competitive process to supply the Government of Alberta with 55 per cent of their annual electricity needs. The facilities will be built near Hays, Tilley, and Jenner, by Canadian Solar with Conklin Métis Local #193 as 50-percent equity owners.​


​


----------



## SINC

Still not a word from any MSM in Alberta on the cabinet minister and MLA involved in the court trial uncovered by Rebel Media. I am mystified by their silence or who is paying them to be silent?


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Still not a word from any MSM in Alberta on the cabinet minister and MLA involved in the court trial uncovered by Rebel Media. I am mystified by their silence or who is paying them to be silent?


Coverage = credence.

Can't have that...


----------



## SINC

*There's a big loophole in Notley's argument*



> That one solitary word, uttered by our premier, succinctly embodies this current government’s basic, core belief that employers are cunning, greedy, untrustworthy people.
> 
> The word emanating from Rachel Notley’s lips was “loophole” – describing her views about the future actions of bosses if the government allows younger workers to be exempted from the somewhat onerous minimum wage strictures her government put in place across Alberta.
> 
> She was responding to the suggestion that perhaps the current $15-an-hour benchmark could be lowered in certain circumstances, such as teenage workers or restaurant servers as a few other jurisdictions in Canada have allowed.
> 
> The idea, though not an original one in this country, was put forward by Jason Kenney, her opponent in the rapidly approaching provincial election.


More at the link.

https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/c...tofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#


----------



## SINC

*NDP's Made in Alberta ads are partisan and an abuse of public money, expert says*



> The Alberta NDP government's ubiquitous Made in Alberta radio and TV ads are partisan and an abuse of public money, an expert in political communications says.
> 
> The ads have appeared on radio and TV in the province for several weeks. Earlier this month, the Official Opposition United Conservative Party issued a news release calling on the NDP to stop using taxpayers' money for political propaganda.
> 
> CBC News provided the ads to Jonathan Rose, an associate professor in the department of political studies at Queen's University.
> 
> "I think [the UCP] are right that the Made in Alberta ads are partisan," Rose said. "What [the NDP] do is conflate the party's own partisan interests with that of the government."
> 
> Rose said a "litmus" test to determine if government ads are essential is if the ads provide useful information that compels a particular behaviour — for example, ads that warn the public to file their tax returns on time or be careful to not start forest fires would be considered essential, and a proper use of taxpayers' money.
> 
> 'Feel-good' ads are 'non-essential'
> 
> Rose said the Made in Alberta campaign is clearly "non-essential" because they are simply "feel-good" ads.


More at the link.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/made-in-alberta-partisan-abuse-taxpayers-money-1.5022163


----------



## SINC

Dumb, dumb, dumb. Thank goodness she will be gone in a couple of months now.

*Why Rachel Notley's crude-by-rail plan is risky and possibly unnecessary*

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/notley-cn-cp-1.5025055?cmp=newsletter-news-digests-edmonton


----------



## SINC

The NDP 'Minister of Lies' strikes again.

Minister Phillips caught spinning tall tales about Bighorn consultations again



> When it comes to the Bighorn park proposal, Alberta Environment Minister Shannon Phillips continues to struggle with the facts.
> 
> She clearly hasn’t learned her lesson from last month’s fiasco, when opposition MLAs and members of the public called on Phillips to resign from cabinet after she was caught in her own web of untruths regarding why she cancelled public meetings about the NDP government’s plans to create four parks, four recreation areas and two public land-use zones in the vast wilderness region.
> 
> Now, Indigenous leaders in the area say the minister’s claim that she met with the Sunchild First Nation last week is not true.
> 
> First, a refresher. The Bighorn controversy started Jan. 5, when Phillips released a three-page statement saying she was cancelling scheduled public hearings in the area following “allegations of bullying, abuse and concerns over personal safety.”
> 
> The next day she told reporters: “In conversation with both my senior officials and the RCMP, it was determined that at this point we can’t necessarily guarantee the safety of the public.”


More at the link.

https://calgaryherald.com/news/loca...-tall-tales-about-bighorn-consultations-again


----------



## SINC

Yeah, Notley used a hospital to campaign, but it won't help her win.

Opposition accuses Alberta premier of breaking rules with event at hospital

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/oppos...eaking-rules-with-event-at-hospital-1.4310811


----------



## SINC

More on that hospital visit. 

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/co...Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1551128416


----------



## SINC

*NDP government appoints an 'enemy' to the Alberta Energy Regulator*



> Alberta’s NDP government has done it again — it has appointed an enemy of Alberta’s oil and gas industry to oversee it, regulate it and advise on it.
> 
> Ed Whittingham — the former executive director of the Pembina Institute from 2011 to 2017 — was appointed to a five-year, part-time, $76,500 per year directorship at Alberta’s Energy Regulator (AER), with an additional $750 for each day he participates in meetings with the organization, which is tasked with ensuring “the safe, efficient, orderly, and environmentally responsible development of oil, oilsands, natural gas, and coal resources over their entire life cycle.”
> 
> Whittingham’s appointment is TzeporahBerman 2.0 — only worse.
> 
> According to Vivian Krause, the Vancouver-based researcher who has followed the money trail and uncovered the concerted foreign Tar Sands Campaign to keep Alberta’s oil from reaching tide-water, Pembina has accepted almost $8 million of foreign funding from U.S. foundations — groups such as the Tides Foundation, the Hewlett Foundation, the Oak Foundation, and other U.S. organizations under the auspices of the Tar Sands Campaign, which had the stated aim of “landlocking” Alberta’s oilsands by preventing any pipelines from being built.


https://calgaryherald.com/news/loca...Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1551787438


----------



## SINC

*Alberta’s economy remains very sick and the NDP’s medicine isn’t working*

Throwing money at politically favoured sectors is not spurring growth



> There was some good news for Albertans in the provincial NDP government’s recent fiscal update. The official deficit (which ignores capital spending in excess of depreciation) is expected to be $6.9 billion for 2018–19 — which is $1.4 billion lower than forecasted by the 2018 budget. The reason is improving resource revenues and personal tax revenue. With 44,000 jobs added in the province last year, the economic prospects might even look like they’re brightening.
> 
> Digging behind numbers, though, it’s clear the province is not out of the woods. Provincial debt will climb to $96 billion after running deficits for so many years. Financial debt net of assets is piling up rapidly — $8.8 billion, or a 40-per-cent increase this year alone. Debt-servicing costs are expected to total $1.9 billion in 2018–19, more than the operating expenditures of most individual government departments including Justice, Children Services, Seniors and Housing. And the picture gets grimmer with interest expenses doubling over the next four years, when the NDP expects it will balance the budget in 2023.


https://business.financialpost.com/...Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1551796078


----------



## SINC

*Jason Kenney’s tax-cut plan could remake Alberta (and maybe Canada)*

_Kenney is building a new political platform based on good, solid free-market ideas_



> In the heat of various economic wildfires raging in Alberta, some have suggested the province is a potential hotbed of separatism. Albexit, some call it. Getting out of Canada, they say, may be the only solution for a province whose resource core is being throttled by the federal government and given the finger by the provinces. A new Angus Reid poll found that 50 per cent of Albertans would support secession from the rest of Canada.
> 
> Here’s a better idea. Maybe the rest of Canada might soon consider moving to Alberta where United Conservative Party (UCP) Leader Jason Kenney is building a new political platform based on some good, solid free-market ideas.
> 
> In a media and political climate seemingly filled with anti-corporate rage, class-warfare rhetoric, Green New Deals, rising energy taxes and continuing calls for more government spending, Kenney on Monday rolled out a radical economic idea: slash corporate taxes.


https://business.financialpost.com/...Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1551795043


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> *Jason Kenney’s tax-cut plan could remake Alberta (and maybe Canada)*


With all respect due to Terence Corcoran, no.

Circling around the fringe of a country whereby all we'll ever be is an f'ing milch cow for the rest of the country has long lost its lustre.

Secession is the only way out of this downward spiral.

Screw the Laurentian Elite...


----------



## CubaMark

*UCP leader Jason Kenney tweet backfires as #BetterOffWithRachel trends*

By all accounts, it was meant to be an easy question to predict the answers to in a province suffering from a sluggish economy and unemployment in the energy sector: Are you better off today than you were four years ago?

But what happened was quite the opposite.

Alberta opposition United Conservative Party leader Jason Kenney tweeted that query on Friday, following up with, “For so many Alberta families the answer is clearly ‘no’. We can’t afford not to take bold action to bring jobs and investment back to Alberta.”









(Twitter)

The tweet prompted more than 600 replies as of Monday morning. Instead of agreements and vitriol, the overwhelming response was from people saying they were, in fact, better off — which led to the Canada-wide top trending hashtag #BetterOffWithRachel.

* * *

Some of the most-engaged responses included comments about a reduction in poverty, $25-per-day daycare, higher minimum wage improving quality of life for low-income workers, more support for LGBTQ2+ people, and few scandals involving the NDP government.

At the same time, other people commented on Alberta’s poor economy amid the low price of oil.

READ MORE: Alberta Election Fact Check — UCP says NDP hid carbon tax from Albertans in 2015

On Twitter, one person said, “The recession was not the NDP’s fault, and it’s not in the UPC’s power to end it.”

(GlobalNews)​
*EDIT:* _Apologies to Freddie_Biff - wasn't my intention to steal your post. I didn't see the "cluster...." thread until after I had posted this._


----------



## FeXL

Hello, Bigot.

As MF noted in his response to Freddie, 600 anguished cries from Progs who are about to lose their goddess means SFA in the real world.

There are hundreds of thousands of Albertans who are going to oust the commies come May. The only thing remaining of Red Rachel & the Alberta EnDeePee will be a bad memory and the $100,000,000,000 of debt & deficit left as their legacy to Alberta's grandchildren & great-grandchildren. Even the carbon tax will be repealed.

It's going to be a banner day. :clap::clap::clap:



CubaMark said:


> Blah, blah-blah-blah, blah...


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> *NDP government appoints an 'enemy' to the Alberta Energy Regulator*
> 
> 
> 
> https://calgaryherald.com/news/loca...Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1551787438


That appointment will be good for a few months.


----------



## SINC

*Notley's anti-business talk is a clanger in Calgary*

https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/c...Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1552054152


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> Hello, Bigot.
> 
> As MF noted in his response to Freddie, 600 anguished cries from Progs who are about to lose their goddess means SFA in the real world.
> 
> There are hundreds of thousands of Albertans who are going to oust the commies come May. The only thing remaining of Red Rachel & the Alberta EnDeePee will be a bad memory and the $100,000,000,000 of debt & deficit left as their legacy to Alberta's grandchildren & great-grandchildren. Even the carbon tax will be repealed.
> 
> It's going to be a banner day. :clap::clap::clap:


Not buying into Jason and his conmen promising to repeal the Carbon Tax. I think it will be more along the lines of the Harpoon's repeal of the GST. He will symbolically slash it by about one third claiming the rest is needed to help address the deficit. He will however eliminate the carbon tax rebate checks to make sure those in the low and mid portion of the fiscal spectrum are fully impacted.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> *Notley's anti-business talk is a clanger in Calgary*


Good read.


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> Not buying into Jason and his conmen promising to repeal the Carbon Tax.


Well, then I hope he enjoys his short but illustrious career as a provincial politician.

This isn't a hill worth dying on. However, it's certainly a hill worth getting rid of a premiere for.


----------



## FeXL

Dead Rose Country



> Licia Corbella;
> 
> The circumstances surrounding the appointment of anti-Alberta oil activist Ed Whittingham to the Alberta Energy Regulator are even more troubling than initially believed.
> 
> Whittingham, the former executive director of the Pembina Institute from 2011 to 2017, was appointed to the five-year, part-time, quasi-judicial AER board on Feb. 12 by Alberta Energy Minister Marg McCuaig-Boyd.
> 
> As a board member, Whittingham is one of the bosses of the AER’s interim president and CEO, Gordon Lambert. The problem with that is Whittingham and Lambert are co-founders and business partners of Academy for Sustainable Innovation (ASI).
> 
> If that sounds overly cosy, it is.​


More:



> *“Of all the people who qualify to be a director here, they pick someone who has opposed absolutely every pipeline, every oil and gas project, even LNG, and to top it all off he is responsible for assessing and evaluating his buddy and business partner? Honestly, I don’t get it.”*


Bold mine.

Again, gold in those comments.


----------



## SINC

Couldn't happen to a better bunch of socialist twits.

*Poll indicates the NDP will 'get clobbered' in the coming Alberta election*



> A poll by Lethbridge College shows that the United Conservative Party is expected to garner 57.8 per cent of the vote — a majority government — while the Alberta New Democratic Party lags far behind at 23.2 per cent.


https://calgaryherald.com/news/loca...-get-clobbered-in-the-coming-alberta-election


----------



## Macfury

From the article above:


> Statistics Canada’s latest jobs numbers released Friday aren’t likely to help the NDP over the next few weeks, either. The percentage of Albertans unemployed climbed again in February to 7.3 per cent — which is higher than Nova Scotia. The news is even worse in Calgary, where 7.6 per cent of workers are unemployed, the highest rate of any city in Canada. NDP policies of raising taxes and spooking businesses has been a disaster for Alberta.


I remember Freddie crowing about the Alberta economy under Notley.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Couldn't happen to a better bunch of socialist twits.


Not bad for "_The Clusterf**k on the Right_"... :lmao:


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Not bad for "_The Clusterf**k on the Right_"... :lmao:


_The Clusterf**k on the Right_ that's about to crush the NDP, the carbon tax and Freddie's prog dreams.


----------



## SINC

Notley's stupidity shows loud and clear yet again.

*Appointment of anti-oil activist to the AER board now includes a conflict of interest*



> The circumstances surrounding the appointment of anti-Alberta oil activist Ed Whittingham to the Alberta Energy Regulator are even more troubling than initially believed.
> 
> Whittingham, the former executive director of the Pembina Institute from 2011 to 2017, was appointed to the five-year, part-time, quasi-judicial AER board on Feb. 12 by Alberta Energy Minister Marg McCuaig-Boyd.
> 
> As a board member, Whittingham is one of the bosses of the AER’s interim president and CEO, Gordon Lambert. The problem with that is Whittingham and Lambert are co-founders and business partners of Academy for Sustainable Innovation (ASI).
> 
> If that sounds overly cosy, it is.
> 
> As an AER media relations person stated in an email: “AER directors are part-time members of a governance board who . . . approve regulatory changes and set performance expectations for our organization and CEO.”


https://calgaryherald.com/news/loca...aer-board-now-includes-a-conflict-of-interest


----------



## FeXL

What's this? Gov't taking over previously privatized tasks & falling short?

Shocka...

Great Moments In Moral Panic



> Unexpectedly!
> 
> Some city registries say wait times for driver testing have increased significantly since the province took over driver examinations from the private sector March 1.
> 
> * And some in the industry say the changes have also abruptly stripped them of their livelihoods, with the province taking over the work and outsourcing some of it.*
> 
> Last year, in response to the Humboldt Broncos bus crash, the province passed legislation creating mandatory truck training requirements while also reversing the 1993 privatization of all driver testing.
> 
> The latter move was in response to complaints over the high cost and service quality, and even criminality, said Alberta Transportation officials.
> 
> *But a canvass of several registries in Calgary that arrange the tests, including those for regular Class 5 licences, revealed frustration among staff who said customers could wait weeks to take a road exam, when before March 1 it would be done the same day.*​
> The truck driver responsible for the Humboldt bus crash didn’t blow through that stop sign because he “lacked training”.


Bold mine.

I wonder if Justa Turd will be making a speech about all these jobs lost in Alberta...


----------



## SINC

This from an English language Quebec weekly. If so, Notley better drop her writ pronto if she wants to avoid two elections at once.

*Trudeau likely to call early May federal election*



> Is Justin Trudeau really relaxing in Florida this week to recharge his batteries and forget about the SNC Lavalin scandal? Or is he getting ready to hit the road for a re-election campaign?


Trudeau likely to call early May federal election | Cohen Confidential With Mike Cohen | thesuburban.com


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Deja vu.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> This from an English language Quebec weekly. If so, Notley better drop her writ pronto if she wants to avoid two elections at once.


I hope Justa Turd calls an early election, while this SNC Lavalin TGF is still fresh in everyone's mind.

SOOOOOUUUUUIIIIEEEE!!!


----------



## SINC

.


----------



## SINC

Another Red Rachel parting gift?

*Alberta's power market changes could add $1.4B in costs for consumers*

https://calgaryherald.com/business/...Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1552439948


----------



## Macfury

It's just power SINC--the NDP will eliminate it eventually if re-elected.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> It's just power SINC--the NDP will eliminate it eventually if re-elected.


Yep. There's always candles. It's what all socialists used after electricity. Ask Venezuelans...


----------



## Dr.G.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/can...N5Vy1ZH_GSciR4BWWMNTDU8i9fDs-4ZkyZPT9Lyqa_OHk


----------



## FeXL

Dr.G. said:


> https://www.theglobeandmail.com/can...N5Vy1ZH_GSciR4BWWMNTDU8i9fDs-4ZkyZPT9Lyqa_OHk


Woohoo!

One month & the bitch is gone!!!

Time to bring the celebratory beer up from the celler, put it in the fridge, check the Cuban cigar in the humidor & start scoping out that rib steak!

Freddie: Got that crying towel laundered?


----------



## FeXL

SINC: Time to move that EnDeePee clock ahead for Freddie.


----------



## Rps

SINC said:


> This from an English language Quebec weekly. If so, Notley better drop her writ pronto if she wants to avoid two elections at once.
> 
> *Trudeau likely to call early May federal election*
> 
> 
> 
> Trudeau likely to call early May federal election | Cohen Confidential With Mike Cohen | thesuburban.com


Say Sinc, when do you think Notley will drop the writ...soon or hang on until the very last day?

As for this story on Trudeau...hmmmmmm not sure if I agree, but with the Norman case on the horizon it might make sense .... but historically mild weather elections do not fair well voter wise.

Mea Culpa, I should have read the post from Dr. G first. So Notley has until the 16th...I’m wondering what the number is in Alberta for party status and will she retain that.


----------



## Macfury

I guess it's easier to choose the day you're wiped off the political map instead of having it forced on you. Things must be getting a heck of a lot worse if Notley thinks a couple of weeks are going to help her.


----------



## KC4

Alberta Election called for April 16th. Less than a month away! 
YAY!


----------



## Macfury

KC4 said:


> Alberta Election called for April 16th. Less than a month away!
> YAY!


Are you excited because you simply love election days, or... ?


----------



## FeXL

Red Rose Country

Nuttin' but comments.

Good readin' all across, but these two stood out for me:



> Gee, who to vote for, the anti-oil/resource sector Premier,or whoever is the Leader of the UCP come April 16th?
> 
> Boot the f***ing socialists to oblivion!


And:



> MAGA!


MAGA, indeed.

Getting rid of the commies is the first step in the correct direction. 

Next up? Adios, Canuckistan!


----------



## Beej

For quick updates on election sliming, nothing beats twitter.

https://twitter.com/hashtag/ableg?f=tweets&vertical=news&lang=en

So many angry idiots.


----------



## FeXL

Beej said:


> So many angry idiots.


Such a complete & callous disregard for reality...


----------



## eMacMan

Was wondering why the Knothead did not hold on until May. Then it occurred to me. April 16 is just a few days after those Carbon Tax ripoff rebate checks land in our mail boxes.

Guess she's hoping the voter will realize that if the ripoff is trashed, those checks will also go down the tubes. She must also be hoping the February gas bill will no longer be sitting on their desks, as a reminder as to how much that tax can cost us.

Personally I think it more likely that Kenny and the Conmen will suddenly realize that they can't afford big tax cuts for their wealthy buds if they also kill the ripoff tax. Result Carbon tax cut by 1/3rd and rebates flushed. The Harpoon sort of set the precedent with the GST, although he did not kill the rebates. 

My prediction is that whomever wins the people of the province will lose.


----------



## FeXL

So, I link the article not for the patently obvious statement of Notley being on the skids, but for the narrative given by the pollster.

Ford and Notley struggle for approval, Moe soars



> [DART Insight CEO John] Wright added that the most reliable group of voters is the one that is most annoyed with the [Notley] government.
> 
> “*She’s come long way. She’s managed to convince a lot of people that her social programs work for them and also that she’s a good representative for the people of Alberta because she fought Ottawa*,” Wright said.


:yikes:

Are we talking the same province here, John? 'Cause I get the distinct impression you don't have a clew what you're talking about.

She was elected on a protest vote and her numbers have done nothing but steadily dwindle to where they now reside, somewhere near the sewer.

And, "fought Ottawa"? Only an ideologically blind, rampant Prog supporter would delude himself into thinking that anything Red Rachel did during her entire term was a fight against Ottawa. If anything, she aided & abetted the bastards.


----------



## Macfury

The fight with Ottawa? They were hugging each other until Trudeau hung her out to dry. Any fool could see that was going to happen anyway.


----------



## eMacMan

Looks like the Knothead is determined to commit political suicide. This little last minute gem is almost certain to push the uncommitted voter right into the arms of the Untied Conmen. I think most Albertans are now well aware that Rachel tends to under budget by roughly a factor of ten so this is a very expensive proposal indeed.

https://calgaryherald.com/news/politics/braid-ndp-child-care-plan-shows-vast-gap-with-ucp-policy



> Rachel Notley’s party has made more than $2 billion in local promises in the past couple of weeks.
> 
> This one’s another whopper — a plan for virtually universal Alberta child care capped at $25 a day, along with the creation of 13,000 new child care spaces.
> 
> The NDP has been working up to this with a pilot project that now covers 7,300 of the 62,000 spaces in the province.
> 
> The full deal was always likely to be one of the NDP’s biggest campaign promises. And here it is.
> 
> Notley says the subsidy program would cost $60 million the first year.
> By the time it’s fully ramped up in 2023-24, annual spending would be $500 million. Full cost over the five-year period is $1.5 billion.


----------



## SINC

*Solberg: Let me explain why Albertans should choose Mr. Kenney*



> The 28-day job interview to be the Premier of Alberta and chief negotiator with the federal government is now in full flight.
> 
> Voters get to choose between the four-year reality of the New Democratic Party, led by Rachel Notley, and the vision proposed by the United Conservative Party, headed by Jason Kenney.
> 
> Let me explain why Albertans should choose Mr. Kenney.
> 
> But first, let me lay my cards on the table. I have no role in the overall UCP campaign, paid or unpaid, though I do have a son who is part of the UCP campaign, however, I have never hidden my conservative leanings. I lay them bare here.
> 
> I have known Jason Kenney for 25 years. For much of that time, we served together in Ottawa as members of parliament, first in opposition and then in government.
> 
> He is perhaps the most capable MP and cabinet minister I've ever known, and he has become an exceptional leader.
> 
> How many other people could run for the leadership of the Progressive Conservative Party on a platform of merging with the Wildrose Party, then win the leadership in a romp, then convince Wildrose to merge, then win the leadership of the merged party and win a seat in the legislature, all in under two years?
> 
> I doubt that it has a parallel in Canadian political history.
> 
> He brings a work ethic to the table that would win the respect of a rig-hand just getting off a 12-hour shift.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calg....5072501?cmp=newsletter-news-digests-edmonton


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Solberg: Let me explain why Albertans should choose Mr. Kenney


That entire sermon could have been reduced to, "Why Kenney? _Not_ Red Rachel."

The differences are stark & obvious. No further sales pitch is required.

Na-na, nah, nah. Hey-ey-ey, goombye.. :lmao::clap:


----------



## Freddie_Biff

A view from the other side



> Not all Hatters are UCP fans, Mr. Mayor
> 
> By Letter to the Editor on March 27, 2019.
> 
> Driving home from work on March 21, I was delighted to hear that CBC Radio was on location at Inspire CafÃ in our city. Then Mayor Ted Clugston came on and completely misrepresented a large portion of our city’s residents.
> 
> No Ted, we do not all support the United Conservative Party with its greedy agenda to put more money into the pockets of the wealthy few. We do not all support an agenda that says we have to choose between the environment and our economy. We do not all support a political party that is xenophobic, homophobic, and angry. We do not all support a government that wants to slash funds to public education and privatize health care. Some of us still do have generosity, compassion, hope, and a vision for the prosperity and sustainability of our planet, and a promising future for our children and grandchildren. We are not all consumed by our own sense of greed and entitlement. It was not Mayor Clugston’s place to suggest that all Medicine Hatters are made of this fabric.
> 
> Additionally, to suggest that our province has suffered under the wise leadership of the NDP is preposterous. Not only did Notley steer us safely through a complete economic mess left by the Progressive Conservative governments (in the face of a downward spin in world energy prices), she saved jobs and diversified our economy. Look at Medicine Hat alone with its booming new businesses: Aurora Cannabis, the bitcoin cryptocurrency plant, Atlantis Research Labs, a possible helium liquefaction facility, various new breweries, and (in direct credit to the hard work of MLA Bob Wanner) the Bluenergy Solarwind and other alternative energy initiatives in and around Medicine Hat – yes the same ones that the UCP threatens to defund if in power.
> 
> Finally, the 21st century will need citizens who are creative and critical thinkers in order to compete in the global economy, and through Notley’s leadership, a brilliant new curriculum has been designed. UCP Leader Jason Kenney threatens to slash this in favour of old boring factory style indoctrination.
> 
> So no Mr. Clugston. Not all Medicine Hatters are looking forward to the disaster that awaits if the UCP takes over. Some of us are proud that Alberta finally has a responsible government with a vision to protect the planet, diversify our economy, build pipelines to get our oil to market, save jobs, educate our young, and care for our sick.
> 
> Gwendoline Dirk
> 
> Medicine Hat


----------



## Freddie_Biff

A view from the other side



> Not all Hatters are UCP fans, Mr. Mayor
> 
> By Letter to the Editor on March 27, 2019.
> 
> Driving home from work on March 21, I was delighted to hear that CBC Radio was on location at Inspire CafÃ in our city. Then Mayor Ted Clugston came on and completely misrepresented a large portion of our city’s residents.
> 
> No Ted, we do not all support the United Conservative Party with its greedy agenda to put more money into the pockets of the wealthy few. We do not all support an agenda that says we have to choose between the environment and our economy. We do not all support a political party that is xenophobic, homophobic, and angry. We do not all support a government that wants to slash funds to public education and privatize health care. Some of us still do have generosity, compassion, hope, and a vision for the prosperity and sustainability of our planet, and a promising future for our children and grandchildren. We are not all consumed by our own sense of greed and entitlement. It was not Mayor Clugston’s place to suggest that all Medicine Hatters are made of this fabric.
> 
> Additionally, to suggest that our province has suffered under the wise leadership of the NDP is preposterous. Not only did Notley steer us safely through a complete economic mess left by the Progressive Conservative governments (in the face of a downward spin in world energy prices), she saved jobs and diversified our economy. Look at Medicine Hat alone with its booming new businesses: Aurora Cannabis, the bitcoin cryptocurrency plant, Atlantis Research Labs, a possible helium liquefaction facility, various new breweries, and (in direct credit to the hard work of MLA Bob Wanner) the Bluenergy Solarwind and other alternative energy initiatives in and around Medicine Hat – yes the same ones that the UCP threatens to defund if in power.
> 
> Finally, the 21st century will need citizens who are creative and critical thinkers in order to compete in the global economy, and through Notley’s leadership, a brilliant new curriculum has been designed. UCP Leader Jason Kenney threatens to slash this in favour of old boring factory style indoctrination.
> 
> So no Mr. Clugston. Not all Medicine Hatters are looking forward to the disaster that awaits if the UCP takes over. Some of us are proud that Alberta finally has a responsible government with a vision to protect the planet, diversify our economy, build pipelines to get our oil to market, save jobs, educate our young, and care for our sick.
> 
> Gwendoline Dirk
> 
> Medicine Hat



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Rps

Okay, so last time I looked there were 5 parties vying for votes in Alberta....and to be honest two I never heard of and, well, you can forget about the Liberals in Alberta. That said, even with 3 parties split across the total votes that means 33% +1. I am sure I saw a pol with Notley running at 38%....which statistically she has a chance......realistically I don’t see the NDP winning. Any up dates on the latest pols?


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> A view from the other side
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk





Freddie_Biff said:


> A view from the other side
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Much like trying to vote twice, posting twice will not help the NDP either. Their work is done in Alberta.


----------



## SINC

Rps said:


> Okay, so last time I looked there were 5 parties vying for votes in Alberta....and to be honest two I never heard of and, well, you can forget about the Liberals in Alberta. That said, even with 3 parties split across the total votes that means 33% +1. I am sure I saw a pol with Notley running at 38%....which statistically she has a chance......realistically I don’t see the NDP winning. Any up dates on the latest pols?


Poll by Mainstreet taken March 19/19.



> 21 March 2019 (Ottawa, ON) – The gap between the NDP and the UCP is now 14 points – down ten points from January – but it is Jason Kenney’s party that is in the lead as the Alberta election gets under way.
> 
> Those are the findings from Mainstreet Research’s latest UltraPoll, a conglomeration of ten provincial polls. The poll surveyed 1160 Albertans on March 19, 2019. The poll has a margin of error of +/- 2.88% and is accurate 19 times out of 20.
> 
> “The NDP have posted very significant gains since January as the Kamikaze scandal has pushed some Albertans away from the UCP,” said Quito Maggi, President and CEO of Mainstreet Research.
> 
> Among decided and leaning voters, the UCP with Jason Kenney as leader have 50.7% (-1.6% from Mainstreet’s January poll), while the NDP led by Rachel Notley have 37.8% (+9.3%). The Alberta Party led by Stephen Mandel have 4.3% (-3.4%), and the Alberta Liberal Party with David Khan at the helm have 2.8% (+0.9%).
> 
> “Rachel Notley begins this election by taking the first necessary steps to beat the UCP,” added Maggi. “The NDP have taken support away from the Liberals, Alberta Party, and Greens, and have taken the lead among women, voters between the age of 18 to 34, and in Edmonton.”
> 
> “But to win in April the NDP need to eat into UCP support, which has been stable for months,” he added.
> 
> The poll also asked about the favourability ratings of five of the party leaders and found that Notley has a -9.4% net favourability rating while Kenney has a -3.5% rating.
> 
> “It is in the favourability ratings where we see that Jason Kenney is the weak spot for the UCP, as this is the first time that we see Kenney have a negative rating in over a year,” added Maggi. “In January the gap between Notley and Kenney’s favourability ratings was 19%, and now it stands at just under 6%.”
> 
> The poll also found that former Wildrose Alliance leader Brian Jean had the highest net favourability rating, coming in at +20.9%.
> 
> “It is interesting to see that Jean’s favourability ratings are significantly higher than that of Kenney and Notley as he was the target in the UCP leadership race if the Kamikaze allegations are true,” Maggi concluded.


----------



## Macfury

That person is going to be really unhappy following the election--perhaps even in their own riding!

The writer is a public sector teacher, so not surprised at the viewpoint.



Freddie_Biff said:


> A view from the other side


----------



## 18m2

I'm an outsider in spite of growing up in Calgary and living in St Albert for a decade. If I were to vote in the upcoming Alberta election I'd probably pass out from holding my nose during the voting process. 

I'm not a fan of either leader.

The following graphics are from Angus Reid (March 26) suggests Notley has some support. What's missing is where the other 60% goes.


----------



## Macfury

There are some people who like Notley on a personal level, but would never vote for the NDP.


----------



## SINC

Boy oh boy, Notley is now scraping the bottom of the barrel with this attack ad. This outta pizz off every. Catholic in the province. 

https://edmontonsun.com/opinion/col...mother-teresa-is-safe-from-ndp-attack-tactics


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Boy oh boy, Notley is now scraping the bottom of the barrel with this attack ad. This outta pizz off every. Catholic in the province.
> 
> 
> 
> https://edmontonsun.com/opinion/col...mother-teresa-is-safe-from-ndp-attack-tactics




Slow news day.


----------



## FeXL

Quoth the guy who can't find anything real to criticize POTUS for...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Slow news day.


----------



## FeXL

Hey, Freddie, here's another "slow news day" item.

Identities of NDP MLAs accused of sexual misconduct will be kept secret to protect complainants, Notley says



> Alberta NDP Leader Rachel Notley reiterated Friday that the party will not release the names of two members accused of sexual misconduct in order to protect the privacy of the complainants.
> 
> The premier’s office announced last November that two sitting MLAs had been accused of sexual misconduct since 2015, in incidents that happened outside the workplace.


Curious you haven't been screaming blue murder about this like, say, you would have been if they'd have been UCP...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Hey, Freddie, here's another "slow news day" item.
> 
> Identities of NDP MLAs accused of sexual misconduct will be kept secret to protect complainants, Notley says
> 
> 
> 
> Curious you haven't been screaming blue murder about this like, say, you would have been if they'd have been UCP...


To use Freddie logic--with so much effort to cover up sexual misconduct going on around Notley, it's clear that she's pimping government workers. All we need is the evidence.


----------



## Rps

Hi Sinc, I’ve been reading some of Kenney’s Policy statements. Some are plain fiction, such as the referendum on equalisation payments, to his corporate tax cuts.....when you have deficits it is hard to justify. His repeal of the education act, as is here in Ontario is sure to divide many.

I haven’t read about any of his candidates having brain dead moments....but that will come I’m sure. What I am curious about is Alberta and pols don’t play well ......with two weeks to go do you see any UCP landmines...... policy historically is split between rural and urban in my experience.

Just wondering if Edmonton could put the NDPin as a minority government?


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> To use Freddie logic--with so much effort to cover up sexual misconduct going on around Notley, it's clear that she's pimping government workers. All we need is the evidence.


Yep. Throw her ass in jail. You just _know_ the evidence is coming.


----------



## SINC

Rps said:


> Hi Sinc, I’ve been reading some of Kenney’s Policy statements. Some are plain fiction, such as the referendum on equalisation payments, to his corporate tax cuts.....when you have deficits it is hard to justify. His repeal of the education act, as is here in Ontario is sure to divide many.
> 
> I haven’t read about any of his candidates having brain dead moments....but that will come I’m sure. What I am curious about is Alberta and pols don’t play well ......with two weeks to go do you see any UCP landmines...... policy historically is split between rural and urban in my experience.
> 
> Just wondering if Edmonton could put the NDP in as a minority government?


Well Rp, there are 26 seats in Calgary and 20 seats in Edmonton of a province-wide total of 87 seats.

It is a foregone conclusion that rural Alberta will be swept by the UCP which gives them a 41 seat head start if that holds true.

If I had to guess, I would think the NDP would win big with union support and government-employed voters in Edmonton and would give them say, 17 of those seats.

That leaves Calgary as the city that will swing the balance of power and I would expect voters there not to support the NDP as their economy is in the tank and Notley has done little for them over the past four years. I would be surprised to see the NDP win any more than six of those seats leaving them optimistically with only a possible 37 seats and nowhere near a minority government even if they are that fortunate in Cowtown.

The key will be how many of the remaining 20 seats in Calgary the UCP can claim there. If they win them all, which is unlikely with the Alberta Party expected to take perhaps as many as eight seats province-wide, that would leave the UCP with as many as 58 seats and a solid majority.

Unless I am misreading the mood of the electorate, there is little chance of another NDP government in Alberta, now or ever.

As for the UCP platform, I think it is not even a blip on the radar of the majority of Alberta voters. What I hear and see right across the province is an attitude of 'I don't care what the UCP platform is or what their history is'. The resounding sound most commonly heard is, 'we must rid ourselves of the NDP at all costs' and if that comes with some risk in electing the UCP, it simply does not matter to the average Albertan with a score to settle with Notley. Voters see the UCP as their only hope of ousting the NDP as the fringe parties just do not have the kind of support to defeat Notley. It is far too fractured.

Allow me to go out on a limb and predict the result:

UCP 56 seats
NDP 22 seats
ABP 7 seats
Others 2

We shall see how close I come to the actual results in just a couple of weeks now.


----------



## FeXL

Rps said:


> Just wondering if Edmonton could put the NDPin as a minority government?


Nope. Not enough seats.

FWIW, in the Leth area I've seen a few campaign signs up for 1 Liberal candidate & just read about another yesterday, a few signs up for a single NDP candidate, fewer yet signs up for Alberta Independence Party (separatists) and a veritable sea of blue UCP signs for at least two candidates.


----------



## Rps

Sinc, essentially a protest vote then. Time will tell.


----------



## SINC

Rps said:


> Sinc, essentially a protest vote then. Time will tell.


Yep, the NDP were elected on a protest vote and will be tossed in the very same manner.


----------



## Beej

SINC said:


> Allow me to go out on a limb and predict the result:
> 
> UCP 56 seats
> NDP 22 seats
> ABP 7 seats
> Others 2
> 
> We shall see how close I come to the actual results in just a couple of weeks now.


The UCP is doing a good job of helping the NDP. Unless Kenney is very good at public debates, I expect the NDP to over-perform early polls. Here is my best guess, and we'll see who gets it closest.

UCP 48
NDP 35
ABP 2
Others 2


----------



## FeXL

Rps said:


> Sinc, essentially a protest vote then. Time will tell.


It's a punishment vote. Whether or not that translates to/from a protest vote I don't know.

Punishment for billions of $$$ of deficit & nearly $100 billion of debt. Punishment for not only rolling over on the carbon tax but for the hypocrisy displayed last fall by exempting small gas & oil drillers. Punishment for complete & total inaction to stimulate Alberta's economy. Punishment for unionizing Alberta farm workers. Punishment for not getting petroleum pipelines moving. Punishment for needlessly hiring 10's of thousands of unionized gov't workers. Punishment for her hare-brained scheme to purchase rail tankers to transport petroleum. Punishment for covering up the names of NDP MP's accused of sexual assault. Punishment for hiring known green activists in key areas of her gov't. Punishment for her sad excuse of a delayed royalty review. Punishment for $15/hr minimum wages. Punishment for attacking Rebel Media (Seriously? You've no bigger fish to fry?). Punishment for de-privatizing driving examinations.

Punishment for a complete & utter TGF of a political term.


----------



## SINC

Beej said:


> The UCP is doing a good job of helping the NDP. Unless Kenney is very good at public debates, I expect the NDP to over-perform early polls. Here is my best guess, and we'll see who gets it closest.
> 
> UCP 48
> NDP 35
> ABP 2
> Others 2


Thanks for the contest Beej. I hope more chime in with guesses to make a bit of a test in predicting election results and as a tune-up for the fall federal election. A cold one to you if you're closer than me next time we meet for a beer as we once did. Still Stella?


----------



## Beej

SINC said:


> A cold one to you if you're closer than me next time we meet for a beer as we once did. Still Stella?


Same to you. Stella still works.


----------



## SINC

The latest NDP attempt at re-election. When you know you can't win, resort to using UCP colours and no mention of your party to hope Albertans are stupid and will vote NDP by mistake? Friggin deceitful and desperate is all I can say.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> The latest NDP attempt at re-election. When you know you can't win, resort to using UCP colours and no mention of your party to hope Albertans are stupid and will vote NDP by mistake? Friggin deceitful and desperate is all I can say.


Interesting, the Lethbridge-East sign. Hers was one of the few signs I'd seen earlier in the week in NDP orange.

Reminds me of the governor race in Montana last summer. No party affiliation mentioned on the Dem candidate's signs.

F'ing low lifes...


----------



## Macfury

My shot:

UCP 59
NDP 24
ABP 3
Others 1

Freddie, give it try. You have a better feel for Edmonton.


----------



## Rps

Okay, I’ll play.....

UCP 58
NDP 26
ABP. 2
Other 1


----------



## SINC

Yep, this in spades!

*Alberta needs Scrooge more than Santa Notley*



> Watching this Alberta election campaign unfold I feel like a kid again, anxiously counting down the days with Christmas on the horizon.
> 
> Time moved so slowly then, but some impatience was relieved by the annual Advent calendar; its little chocolate treat nicely nestled behind those beckoning daily doors. (Invariably, the Dec. 25 door would remain unopened, forgotten because that particular morning much bigger, better delights were on offer.)
> 
> Of course, those tiny morsels back then cost less than a penny. Not so today in this election campaign. Heck, the treats our premier loves unveiling with a flamboyant flourish, while opening her own version of the daily door, start around the hundred-million-buck mark.
> 
> Yet people lap it up. This from the lips of someone whose government, in four years, has overspent by almost $40 billion. Does anyone in Alberta still think in terms of financial incomings and outgoings?
> 
> But don’t expect any thought of frugality or a shade of fiscal embarrassment to cross the premier’s noggin during this daily promise to pile on even more debt. Quite the opposite: Rachel Notley’s in her element.
> 
> Every day there she is, beaming for the cameras in some fresh locale somewhere in Alberta, promising a new road here, a health clinic there, perhaps a new school to be built, or maybe $25-a-day child care, all atop a billion bucks to stop Calgary flooding again.
> 
> No one seems to ask: how do we afford this?


More at the link.

https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/c...Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1554119994


----------



## SINC

One lie after another with deception as a goal being debunked and hurting Notley. Good!


----------



## Rps

Sinc, read an article the other day which said that Notley’s platform and worldview was akin to that of Peter Lougheed and that Kenney’s was more like Ralph Klein’s.....was wondering ....was this a fair comparison?


----------



## SINC

Rps said:


> Sinc, read an article the other day which said that Notley’s platform and worldview was akin to that of Peter Lougheed and that Kenney’s was more like Ralph Klein’s.....was wondering ....was this a fair comparison?


I would hesitate to compare any NDPer to Peter Lougheed. Most Conservative's would consider that an insult. Likewise comparing Kenney to Klein is also a stretch. While there might be some minor comparisons, neither of them come near to a full comparison to either former premier.

I knew Ralph Klein personally from serving as one of five-member committee on the recycling of newsprint back in the eighties. He is the furthest thing I know from being even remotely like Jason Kenney, in either policy or personality. Ralph was a typical Albertan roughneck, neither Notely nor Kenney are even close.


----------



## FeXL

Rps said:


> Sinc, read an article the other day which said that Notley’s platform and worldview was akin to that of Peter Lougheed and that Kenney’s was more like Ralph Klein’s.....was wondering ....was this a fair comparison?


Rps, that's an insult to both Lougheed & Klein.


----------



## Rps

FeXL said:


> Rps, that's an insult to both Lougheed & Klein.


FeXL, if I recall the Lougheed era correctly he spent money like it was going out of style...we would have called that economic stimulus today, something Notley is accused of often. Klein seemed more open for the business crowd.....much like Kenney.


----------



## FeXL

Rps said:


> FeXL, if I recall the Lougheed era correctly he spent money like it was going out of style...we would have called that economic stimulus today, something Notley is accused of often. Klein seemed more open for the business crowd.....much like Kenney.


Yes, Lougheed did spend money but only money that we had. There is no Lougheed equivalent to the $100 billion+ debt/deficit balance of today's commies. Interestingly enough, in many ways, he was more business friendly than Klein: Heritage Savings Trust Fund, the purchase of Pacific Western Airlines, the creation of the Alberta Energy Company, Vencap, the Alberta Housing Corporation & the Alberta Opportunity Company.

Klein was more blue collar & his attitude & policies reflected that.

They were both, in their own way, great for this province, despite what you may hear from the occasional whiny teacher. Were they perfect? Nope. But they came closer than anybody has before or since. And, Red Rachel has been about as far away from perfect as any Alberta politician ever has.


----------



## Beej

FeXL said:


> Interestingly enough, in many ways, he was more business friendly than Klein: Heritage Savings Trust Fund, the purchase of Pacific Western Airlines, the creation of the Alberta Energy Company, Vencap, the Alberta Housing Corporation & the Alberta Opportunity Company.


I'm only familiar with a couple of those examples, but the statement is useful to distinguish different (economic) political views. If labels are helpful, I would call this populist-conservative.

For example, I wouldn't say AEC or the early Heritage fund were business friendly. If ehmacers are interested, I think going through our views on a couple of these could be a helpful discussion.


----------



## Beej

Analysis of the UCP and NDP fiscal platforms.

Spoiler: Vote now, find out the real plan later.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/opinion-fiscal-plans-ndp-ucp-1.5079158



> Regardless of which party wins, it seems Albertans are in for a sustained period of spending restraint. But only one party admits it.


I'll add that lots more debt is an option, or just hope for significantly higher oil prices.


----------



## SINC

This is not an official poll by any means, but when over 3,000 folks respond on Facebook with this result, it surely has to indicate just how much trouble Notley is in trying to retain power.


----------



## FeXL

Further info on UCP policy.

A Fair Deal for Alberta



> “The Trudeau-Notley alliance has failed Alberta,” said United Conservative Leader Jason Kenney. “And it’s why we need to stand up and fight for a fair deal, a new deal, for Alberta in the Canadian federation.”


While I echo his sentiment, the only way Alberta gets a fair deal is _outside of Canadian federation_...


----------



## SINC

If there is anyone left who actually thinks the NDP can win in Alberta, this CBC poll dashes all hope with under 12 days to go in the campaign. And Redmonton had better change their votes if they want any government support from the new government.


----------



## Rps

Sinc, it looks to me that Calgary is the battle ground. If the NDP can keep Edmonton and say pickup 1/2 it’s past Calgary votes it’s in. But that is an awfully tough 1/2 to pickup.


----------



## FeXL

As with all things MotherCorpse related, I have huge trust issues with the veracity of this poll data.

I'd be willing to bet the spread is at least half again as large as they indicate.

Edmonchuk may go Commie once again. Calgary? Not a chance.


----------



## SINC

FeXL said:


> As with all things MotherCorpse related, I have huge trust issues with the veracity of this poll data.
> 
> I'd be willing to bet the spread is at least half again as large as they indicate.
> 
> Edmonchuk may go Commie once again. Calgary? Not a chance.


338 poll is not that much different than CBC.


----------



## SINC

Rps said:


> Sinc, it looks to me that Calgary is the battle ground. If the NDP can keep Edmonton and say pickup 1/2 it’s past Calgary votes it’s in. But that is an awfully tough 1/2 to pickup.


The NDP are dead as far as winning any seats in Calgary. The economy has been hit so hard by their reckless policies that the cloud of NDP hatred hanging over Calgary can be seen from Edmonton. Not. A. Chance. They cannot win Calgary.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> Sinc, it looks to me that Calgary is the battle ground. If the NDP can keep Edmonton and say pickup 1/2 it’s past Calgary votes it’s in. But that is an awfully tough 1/2 to pickup.


Man, Rps, you almost seem wistful...


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> 338 poll is not that much different than CBC.


Interesting. Thx.


----------



## eMacMan

Regardless of how you vote, I think this graph is probably dead on.


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> Man, Rps, you almost seem wistful...


MacFury, I’ve been around enough pols to know it’s who you don’t know that will kill you. Staunch UCP and NDP you can never change so you ignore them...it’s the ether vote you need to find. Many times pols get inaccurate info due to selection process or people just pissed off their night was interrupted. Alberta is in 3rds...Calgary, Edmonton, and the rest. Not saying the NDP have a chance but Calgary is the key here. Sinc probably is right about how Calgary will go. But if I ran the NDP’s campaign I would promise Calgary anything to get their votes......much like Toronto in Ontario election.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> But if I ran the NDP’s campaign I would promise Calgary anything to get their votes......much like Toronto in Ontario election.


If you vote NDP, we'll stop beating you over the head for a year or so?


----------



## FeXL

Rps said:


> But if I ran the NDP’s campaign I would promise Calgary anything to get their votes...


Most Calgarians are smart enough to know that being bought off with their own tax dollars is a dead end street.


----------



## Beej

Didn't notice any big moments in the debate for the NDP or UCP. The Liberal came off better than the Alberta Party guy.

Did anyone else watch the debate?


----------



## SINC

Yep, I did. You pretty much nailed it in my opinion. 'Cept for one thing. Notley's continued 'smirking' after she responded to a Kenney raised issue. Way over confident or nervous twitch 'cause she knew she was toast?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Beej said:


> Didn't notice any big moments in the debate for the NDP or UCP. The Liberal came off better than the Alberta Party guy.
> 
> 
> 
> Did anyone else watch the debate?




I sort of watched it. It was on in the background. It struck me how much I haven’t been really paying attention to the Liberal or Alberta Party candidates. I don’t think Notley hit a homerun like she did four years ago with Prentice. Those were magic times. I have deep concerns with Kenney’s plans for education among other things. The guy is still an idiot. And a prick.


----------



## SINC

Bell ringer:

Notley needed KO, couldn't even get a win

https://calgarysun.com/opinion/colu...Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1554432737


----------



## FeXL

Beej said:


> Didn't notice any big moments in the debate for the NDP or UCP. The Liberal came off better than the Alberta Party guy.
> 
> Did anyone else watch the debate?


I caught bits & pieces. Frankly, wan't impressed with any of it/them.


----------



## SINC

The accidental government of Rachel Notley is doomed in Calgary and tips the scales in favour of the UCP despite all the gaffes and leadership issues. It has become very obvious that Albertans want rid of the NDP at any cost. The hatred for the NDP remains strong with less than 10 days left until election day.

*Calgary: Support for UCP remains solid, unwavering despite controversies*

From the story:



> Data scientist John Santos of Janet Brown Opinion Research says many UCP supporters are most likely uncomfortable with the controversial statements and comments made by Kiryakos, Ford and Smith.
> 
> He says they feel so strongly about taking Alberta back from what they consider the NDP's "accidental government" that they're willing "to overlook a lot of things."
> 
> "There is this sense of wanting to take Alberta back, they are not just the natural governing party of Alberta, but they ought to be the natural governing party of Alberta," he said.
> 
> "I wouldn't underestimate how strong that is of a motivator for people. They view this as their province and they are ready to do what is necessary to take it back and their supporters are willing to overlook a lot of things in order to take it back," said Santos.


Much more at the link.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calg....5083745?cmp=newsletter-news-digests-edmonton


----------



## SINC

Wow, what a candidate.

*NDP's McGrath sits atop list of scary candidates*



> With all the news of “scary” candidates, the candidate I am most afraid of in this election is Anne McGrath.
> 
> Who’s she? She’s the NDP candidate in Calgary-Varsity, though you’d never know it from her literature. It’s emblazoned with the colours of the Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta, blue with a slight tinge of orange. She’s endorsed by the Firefighters of Alberta, a group you might associate with the conservatives because of Bill Smith, a former firefighter who ran for Calgary mayor in 2017.
> 
> But McGrath is actually running for the NDP. And in 1984 she ran for the Communist Party of Canada as a 26-year-old education student at the University of Alberta.


More at the link.

https://edmontonjournal.com/opinion...eeze/wcm/0011b0b3-9802-4706-beab-5e4d68a49de6


----------



## Macfury

As I see more UCP policies, I like the party a little less. But it has not changed my desire to see them flush the toilet on the NDP by one iota.


----------



## 18m2

Same here.

I don't believe anyone could have done a better job with the oil and gas troubles than Notley.


----------



## FeXL

18m2 said:


> I don't believe anyone could have done a better job with the oil and gas troubles than Notley.


Perhaps, perhaps not.

At the very least the optics of her hiring people who are anti-petroleum (as opposed to pro) was terrible.

Second, was it wilful ignorance or naivete that led her to believe that The Dope was just going to give her a free pass on pipelines when she instituted the carbon tax, no conditions attached?

Three, rail car petroleum transportation? Serious? This smacks of political desperation after The Dope turned down your pipeline, Rachel. If she had thought even a split second about 2 above, there would be no need to make it look like she was actually doing something in 3.

Four, I firmly believe that if we had people with classical Alberta "can-do" free market attitudes governing us for the past 4 years instead of these sit-on-yer-ass-the-gov't-will-provide-everything socialist jokers we'd be far better off & in less debt & deficit than we are now. We may not have a pipeline in the works but we'd be a helluva lot closer to it.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> As I see more UCP policies, I like the party a little less.


They're certainly not fabulous. 



Macfury said:


> But it has not changed my desire to see them flush the toilet on the NDP by one iota.


Agreed.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> As I see more UCP policies, I like the party a little less. But it has not changed my desire to see them flush the toilet on the NDP by one iota.




You’re saying more about yourself here than either political party. You’d vote for a bad choice if you wanted to make a point.


----------



## Macfury

That's what I think Alberta voters did to elect Notley. Big mistake.

I'd vote for a party I don't agree with 100% to eliminate a party whose policies I support none of the time.



Freddie_Biff said:


> You’re saying more about yourself here than either political party. You’d vote for a bad choice if you wanted to make a point.


----------



## 18m2

FeXL said:


> Perhaps, perhaps not.


The decision to proceed with any pipeline was not Notley's to make. The jurisdiction was the federal government's and they screwed it up right from the time Harper was in control and the approval process simple never got fixed by the Liberals in spite of their pre-election claims they were going to fix the process. The court finished it off by deciding the approval was flawed.

Here we are today with no clear path forward.

Is all this crap Notley's fault? I don't think so.

The liberals fault? Damn right.

The Conservative fault? Yup.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

18m2 said:


> The decision to proceed with any pipeline was not Notley's to make. The jurisdiction was the federal government's and they screwed it up right from the time Harper was in control and the approval process simple never got fixed by the Liberals in spite of their pre-election claims they were going to fix the process. The court finished it off by deciding the approval was flawed.
> 
> 
> 
> Here we are today with no clear path forward.
> 
> 
> 
> Is all this crap Notley's fault? I don't think so.
> 
> 
> 
> The liberals fault? Damn right.
> 
> 
> 
> The Conservative fault? Yup.




Boy, it sure is a good thing somebody started this thread so we could blame everything on the Alberta NDP, hey?


----------



## Macfury

Since Notley started her term of office with an anti-oil policy, we'll never know. She staffed her government with anti-pipeline and anti-oil activists. She fiddled and diddled, then decided that the best way forward was a carbon tax. Perhaps somebody else could have done as badly as she did, but nobody should have expected her to succeed with that sort of strategy. 



18m2 said:


> The decision to proceed with any pipeline was not Notley's to make. The jurisdiction was the federal government's and they screwed it up right from the time Harper was in control and the approval process simple never got fixed by the Liberals in spite of their pre-election claims they were going to fix the process. The court finished it off by deciding the approval was flawed.
> 
> Here we are today with no clear path forward.
> 
> Is all this crap Notley's fault? I don't think so.
> 
> The liberals fault? Damn right.
> 
> The Conservative fault? Yup.


----------



## Macfury

We probably won't need the thread much in a couple of days.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Boy, it sure is a good thing somebody started this thread so we could blame everything on the Alberta NDP, hey?


----------



## FeXL

18m2 said:


> Here we are today with no clear path forward.


Oh, the path is quite clear: secession.

As always, the problem is finding a politician with the intestinal fortitude to carry it through.



18m2 said:


> Is all this crap Notley's fault? I don't think so.


All what crap?

I've never blamed a successor for a predecessor's legacy. I always, however, hold the successor to account. How have you handled the hand you were dealt? How have you addressed the problems? What solutions have you devised & implemented? _What have you done?_

By all reasonable measures, Red Rachel has completely, utterly & entirely failed to address not only the pipeline issue, but petroleum as a whole in this province. She's done nothing but succour the Feds & court anti-oil hacks from day one.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Since Notley started her term of office with an anti-oil policy, we'll never know. She staffed her government with anti-pipeline and anti-oil activists. She fiddled and diddled, then decided that the best way forward was a carbon tax. Perhaps somebody else could have done as badly as she did, but nobody should have expected her to succeed with that sort of strategy.


Precisely. Red Rachel was anti-oil right from the get go.

Her death bed "conversion", if you could call it that, came when she realized two things:
1) Oil provides a ton of revenue for socialists to spend;
2) She ain't getting re-elected without making it look like she's at least doing something to address the problem.


----------



## SINC

There was never any doubt, but this certainly reaffirms it!

*New poll predicts UCP forms majority government with 67 seats*



> Last week’s leaders debate did little to sway the majority of Albertans ahead of the provincial election, according to a new poll calling for a landslide United Conservative win on April 16.
> 
> Forum Research surveyed 1,132 Alberta voters following Thursday’s televised debate and found some 55 per cent of the electorate are in support of Jason Kenney’s United Conservative Party forming the next provincial government.
> 
> The poll found just 32 per cent of voters are in favour of incumbent Premier Rachel Notley and the New Democrats hanging on to the legislature for another term. Only seven per cent said they’ll cast ballots for the Alberta Party, while a slim one per cent plan to vote for the Alberta Liberals.
> 
> Those results would see a United Conservative Party form a majority government with 67 seats. The NDP would serve as official Opposition with 18 seats, while both the Liberals and Alberta Party would each secure only one seat.


https://calgaryherald.com/news/loca...Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1554727081


----------



## SINC

A leaked memo today showed that Internal UCP polling shows NDP leading in just eleven seats across Alberta. This could be worse than thought for the NDPers.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> A leaked memo today showed that Internal UCP polling shows NDP leading in just eleven seats across Alberta. This could be worse than thought for the NDPers.


Edmonton?


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> Edmonton?


My UPC deep throat says eight of them in Edmonton, three in the Edmonton suburbs.


----------



## Macfury

Government teat-sucking Edmonton.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Government teat-sucking Edmonton.


No surprise in the provincial gov't seat.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> No surprise in the provincial gov't seat.


It makes it clear why government workers were once prevented from voting.


----------



## SINC

Don't threaten to do it. Just do it!

*Kenney says if premier, he'd enact turn-off-the-taps legislation at first cabinet meeting*

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calg....5089297?cmp=newsletter-news-digests-edmonton


----------



## SINC

And scary? Think about this.


----------



## SINC

*New poll predicts UCP majority*



> Those results would see a United Conservative Party form a majority government with 67 seats. The NDP would serve as official Opposition with 18 seats, while both the Liberals and Alberta Party would each secure only one seat.


https://calgarysun.com/news/local-n...Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1554737376


----------



## Macfury

I'm a little uncomfortable with a 49-seat UCP majority. It puts the NDP too close to power.


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> I'm a little uncomfortable with a 49-seat UCP majority. It puts the NDP too close to power.


Personally I think that anymore than a one or two seat majority, is a surefire guarantee of a corrupt government. Certainly more than one of the previous conman governments illustrated that very point, as has the Knothead.

Kenney has put in enough time at the federal level, that I am pretty sure he has learned all the tricks and loopholes.


----------



## FeXL

So, with a week to go before Albertans give Red Rachel the shoe, the Lethbridge & area landscape is still dotted with a sea of blue UCP signs, a number of NDP orange signs (more so in Lethbridge proper), the odd blue NDP/Fire Fighter sign, actually a fair amount of red Liberal signs (again, in Lethbridge), a few Alberta Party signs & the occasional Alberta Independence Party (AIP) sign.

I'm a little disappointed in the latter. I would have liked to see far more exposure for them. It'll be interesting to see how many votes they can garner.

One Term Rachel!!!


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> I'm a little uncomfortable with a 49-seat UCP majority. It puts the NDP too close to power.


I agree. The only fitting end to this 4 year TGF would be for them to have so few seats they'd lose official party status.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> One Term Rachel!!!


As Freddie noted, once a party is turfed from provincial office in Alberta, it never returns to power!


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> As Freddie noted, once a party is turfed from provincial office in Alberta, it never returns to power!


'Tis a consummation devoutly to be wished...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> 'Tis a consummation devoutly to be wished...


There will be no joy in E-Town...
For Notley has struck out...


----------



## eMacMan

Today the carbon tax rebate checks arrived. They represent Notleys only hope to hold onto any seats outside of Edmonchuk.

This one will present Kenney with a huge dilemma. He can discontinue the carbon tax and by implication the rebates, however thanks to the Dishonorable Trudeau, the carbon tax will continue, but with no funds available to Kenney to continue the rebate.

I stick by my original theory that Kenney will slash about a third from the carbon tax and use that as an excuse to discontinue the rebates. He will claim he needs the rest to help balance the budget, and to dodge Ottawa digging its paws even deeper into Albertan pockets. However he deals with this you can bet that those Albertans on the lower rungs of the ladder will be the poorer for it.

FWIW I have no answer, the Carbon Tax should be shelved, but it is largely now out of Alberta hands. I suspect if Notley had said point blank: "No Pipeline, no Carbon Tax", the Dishonorable Trudeau might not have introduced it at the federal level.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> There will be no joy in E-Town...
> For Notley has struck out...


Whaddya s'pose she's going to have for her last supper?

A little cold crow served alongside her kale salad, served up shortly after her tofu, bean sprout & alfalfa soup? Finished off with a double soy latte and two (count em!) scoops of plain, boring, vanilla ice cream?


----------



## SINC

They're coming for ya Red Rachel.

*Elections Alberta says a whopping 140,000 Albertans cast a ballot on Day 1 of advance polling*

https://globalnews.ca/news/5149622/...?utm_medium=Facebook&utm_source=GlobalCalgary


----------



## Beej

The third way in Alberta's election (a fourth way is in the background).


----------



## SINC

Yup.


----------



## SINC

Brad Wall on Notley and it ain't pretty: “I just think they decided the only path to victory is won through the mud.”

*Brad Wall, the vote and the real Rachel Notley*



> Brad Wall, the still-popular former Saskatchewan premier, isn’t mincing his words. He’s not that kind of guy.
> 
> He’s talking truth to power.
> 
> That’s a good thing, a very good thing, especially when this brutal election campaign enters its eleventh hour.
> 
> And speaking of the soul-destroying ballot battle and the NDP strategy of character assassinating United Conservative leader Jason Kenney, Wall the veteran campaigner knows the game.
> 
> “I just think they decided the only path to victory is won through the mud.”
> 
> Wall sees their muddying the waters as a way of riling up the NDP faithful but not a winning game plan.
> 
> “The NDP are kind of desperate, looking around for something they can say every day that will change the subject from the economy or from their track record,” he says.
> 
> Wall figures they can’t do much else but run hard on the social media trail of candidates and go after Kenney every which way they can.
> 
> He figures the Notley NDP were also probably worried the election campaign would be all about what they’ve said and done in the past.
> 
> This is where we get to the guts of the matter. Remember, Wall was premier of Saskatchewan while Notley was premier of this province.
> 
> He’s seen her around the table of premiers. He knows more than we know.
> 
> Brad, start your engine. What do you have to say to Albertans as they wade through the mud? What’s the real story?
> 
> “The premier’s record on pipelines, which I can attest to personally, is not one of support, I can promise you that.
> 
> “That’s what I saw first hand.”
> 
> Keep ‘er comin’.
> 
> “They don’t like the energy sector,” Wall says of the Notley NDP.
> 
> “Deep down where they live they were protesting only a handful of years ago against the sector that pays the bills in this province and for so much of the country.”
> 
> Wall remembers the exact day Notley announced the carbon tax she never campaigned on in the last election.
> 
> “The premier basically says those who criticize our industry, they’re right. Maybe it is dirty oil,” recalls Wall.
> 
> “So we’re going to tax ourselves. We’re going to charge this indulgence for our sins and maybe get some sort of social licence.”
> 
> How about Notley on the Keystone XL pipeline? Missing in action.
> 
> What about the Northern Gateway pipeline?
> 
> “She walked away from demanding the federal government continue on with it.”
> 
> Wall says Notley gave Ottawa complete cover for their exit.
> 
> He sensed from the get-go Notley was not comfortable with the oil and gas industry.
> 
> He was shocked she was “sort of muted on the energy issues.”
> 
> “I just got the sense she sort of felt apologetic for Alberta.”
> 
> But Notley insists she loves the oilpatch.
> 
> “It’s a dusty road, that Damascus road,” says Wall.
> 
> “It sounds to me like a conversion that is more about trying to win an election.”
> 
> Then there’s a further indictment. Trudeau.
> 
> “Here’s what I saw,” says Wall.
> 
> “The premier was a very reliable ally of the prime minister at every turn.”
> 
> He tells a story. Wall pitched Trudeau to cough up cash so oilpatch workers could get back on the job cleaning up abandoned oil and gas wells.
> 
> Trudeau turned Wall down flat. Notley wasn’t interested in Wall’s idea. She didn’t back Wall.
> 
> “She had more leverage to get a program like that out of Trudeau than I did,” says Wall.
> 
> He believes the carbon-taxing Notley had the opportunity to use leverage to get Northern Gateway done or the program for unemployed workers or both.
> 
> Why didn’t she do it?
> 
> “I think, frankly, out of deference to Justin Trudeau.”
> 
> Ouch.
> 
> Wall says he has a “high degree of respect” for the premier. He says she is “exceedingly intelligent” and a “very effective communicator.”
> 
> But for him it’s been painful watching what’s happening in Alberta from next door in Saskatchewan.
> 
> He admits he’s cheering for change. He thinks if there is change there will be some hope jobs will be at the top of every meeting’s agenda.
> 
> If Notley wins …
> 
> “If four years become eight years and if I was living in this province, I wouldn’t bet my future on it.”
> 
> These days, Wall advises companies, comes to Calgary often and still is a Riders fan.
> 
> We talk about old-school country music and his 1973 Cadillac Eldorado convertible, previously owned by Waylon Jennings.
> 
> “More ashtrays than seat belts, 500 cubic inches and my own personal carbon footprint.”
> 
> I said he didn’t mince words.


https://thestarphoenix.com/opinion/...Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1555098021


----------



## SINC

This in spades.

*If the NDP loses Alberta, they'd better pray Notley sticks around*



> CALGARY — For the past three-and-a-half weeks, Rachel Notley has been campaigning like she’s the leader of Alberta’s Opposition and not the premier. Her election campaign has focused relentlessly on attacking the political record of her rival — the actual Opposition leader — Jason Kenney, formerly of the federal Harper Conservative government, rather than running on her own government’s record. That’s understandable given that, after four years of intense economic suffering in the province, it ain’t much of a record to run on.
> 
> But if, when votes are tallied on Tuesday night, Kenney’s United Conservative Party ends up winning, as is widely expected, Notley may just end up being the best opposition leader the province has had in a generation.
> 
> If so, Alberta NDPers can only hope against hope that she agrees to stick around. Because, if she doesn’t, their party is very likely to sink back into the politically irrelevant obscurity that Notley rescued it from.


https://business.financialpost.com/...Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1555109022


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Brad Wall on Notley and it ain't pretty: “I just think they decided the only path to victory is won through the mud.”


Excellent read.


----------



## Beej

Early voting is set to pass 600,000 for the election.
https://www.elections.ab.ca/current-election-information/unofficial-advance-poll-turnout/

For a comparison, in the recent Ontario election, with over triple Alberta's population, early voting was about 800,000.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/advance-voting-ontario-1.4692174


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Kenney is not your saviour. 



> We’re Oil Sands Workers and We Aren’t Buying What Kenney’s Selling
> 
> Alberta is better off with Notley’s energy policies. Here’s why.
> 
> By Kim Conway Yesterday | TheTyee.ca
> In the dying days of the Alberta election campaign, we think it’s urgent that voters know what we know as frontline oil sands workers.
> 
> In particular, we think Albertans deserve to know that many people within Alberta’s biggest oil sands companies — including top executives — are worried that United Conservative Party leader Jason Kenney represents a threat to the future of our industry.
> 
> With that in mind, we are calling on oil sands company executives, our bosses, to share with voters what they’ve been saying to their employees and investors; namely that the province’s oil sands industry would be better off with Rachel Notley’s energy policies.
> 
> Our assertion that Notley would be better for the oil sands may come as a surprise to some people — but it shouldn’t.
> 
> The big oil sands companies helped craft the Notley government’s Climate Leadership Plan — not because they’re a bunch of wild-eyed socialists or tree-huggers, but because they understand that the industry must decarbonize to survive in a changing world.
> 
> The Climate Leadership Plan, unveiled in late 2015, has helped Alberta oil sands companies reduce their emissions faster and more economically than the policies of the old PC government. UCP leader Kenney wants to revive those outdated policies, which would have the effect of rewarding environmental laggards and punishing the top performers.
> 
> Given the fracking boom and oil glut in the United States, everyone understands that the future of our industry depends on getting into new markets in China and India. But both of those countries are introducing tough new carbon pricing systems.
> 
> The only way to get into those markets and become a player on the world stage is to reduce emissions. That’s what people like outgoing Suncor CEO Steve Williams mean when they say we need to become ‘carbon competitive.’
> 
> Kenney’s approach of ignoring what our potential customers really want is a recipe for being left behind, in terms of both investment and jobs. To put it bluntly: Jason Kenney just doesn’t get it. And we’ll all pay the price for his ignorance.
> 
> In fact, we would go so far as to say that someone with Kenney’s weak grasp of what’s really happening in global energy markets is simply unfit to govern an oil-producing province like Alberta at this time of profound change.
> 
> Kenney is also unfit to oversee Alberta’s oil economy because his promise to scrap Alberta’s current climate policies might actually lead the federal government to rescind its approval of the Trans Mountain Pipeline (which was approved explicitly because of the Notley government’s climate policies), and because he has no serious plans to diversify the Alberta economy.
> 
> In contrast, the NDP has been rolling out the boldest oil and gas diversification strategy that Alberta has seen since the days of Peter Lougheed. The Notley government’s “Made in Alberta” strategy has already attracted $13 billion in private-sector investment and led to the creation of thousands of jobs.
> 
> Once fully implemented, the plan will create 70,000 jobs over the next 10 years and attract $75 billion in new investments in petrochemicals, refining and upgrading.
> 
> The bottom line is that Notley has a clear and comprehensive plan for dealing with the rapidly changing global oil and gas landscape. It starts with rail and pipelines to get our products to market.
> 
> It continues with policies that support companies that are reducing emissions to gain a competitive advantage in an increasingly carbon-constrained world.
> 
> And it culminates in a bold and visionary plan to diversify our economy both within and beyond oil and gas — so we don’t continue with the risky strategy of having all of our economic eggs in one basket.
> 
> Kenney, on the other hand, just has hot air and anger.
> 
> So, if voters are thinking about holding their noses and voting for Kenney “because of the economy,” we urge them to think again.
> 
> It’s Notley who has the right diagnosis and the right prescription. And it’s Kenney who’s selling snake oil. [Tyee]
> 
> Read more: Energy, Labour + Industry


 https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2019/04..._content=041219-4&utm_campaign=editorial-0419


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> This in spades.


While I agree with your observation, most of the balance of the article sounds like it was written by some sycophantic socialist.



> Notley is already a very different leader than the one who readily admitted she was surprised to find herself elected premier in 2015...


As I've noted before, death bed conversion.



> She spent the past four years gradually replacing the socialist idealism she espoused in opposition...


Where? When?



> ...with a more realistic understanding of investor economics and the importance of energy exports to the livelihoods of average Albertans.


As I've noted before, a means to fund her socialist ideal.



> ...and regretting her opposition to the Northern Gateway pipeline,


See above.



> Even today, even after her many serious missteps, her personal popularity numbers among Alberta voters are higher than Kenney’s and her disapproval is lower...


'Cause Kenney has a somewhat questionable history as a Fed.



> ...a lot of CBC listeners elsewhere in the country, where the economy and their livelihoods aren’t mostly dependent on fossil fuels, probably see a progressive and palatable climate plan.


If "a lot of CBC listeners" approve of Red Rachel, you can bet your sweet patootie she's as commie as they come.



> It was almost certainly her firm leadership and discipline that kept the party from being dragged completely into Bernie Sanders territory...


Sure. But _why_? Until she got re-elected for a second term & _really_ screwed Albertans?



> ...virtually guaranteeing it a return to political irrelevance in the province.


Count on it...


----------



## FeXL

Neither was Red Rachel.

In addition, the article is so full of half-truths, misdirection & FUD as to be complete & utter BS...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Kenney is not your saviour.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Kenney is not your saviour.


The Tyee?

:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:

Meanwhile, 545,000 Albertans have already voted and by the time the advance polls close tonight, it could be over 700,000. I wonder why the rush to vote?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> The Tyee?
> 
> 
> 
> :lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:
> 
> 
> 
> Meanwhile, 545,000 Albertans have already voted and by the time the advance polls close tonight, it could be over 700,000. I wonder why the rush to vote?




Pretty weak rebuttal. Got anything to say about the actual substance of the article? Why, for example, are the oil sands workers against Kenney’s plans?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

S’more on Rachel’s leadership. 



> Opinion: Rachel Notley has led like Lougheed
> 
> By Allan A. Warrack
> Originally Published: Apr 13, 2019
> 
> Like most Albertans, I care deeply about the fate of my province.
> 
> That’s why I ran for office back in 1971. As part of Peter Lougheed’s Progressive Conservative Party, I was swept into the legislature during a season of massive political change. We knocked off a Social Credit dynasty that was in power longer than I had been alive.
> 
> It was exhilarating. I felt numb.
> 
> As a 34-year-old, I was one of the youngest members of premier Lougheed’s first cabinet. I was proud to serve with him for two terms, stepping down in 1979 to give priority to my family and to launch an academic career. The experience showed me that politics can and should include younger citizens, which is why I always encourage young people to step up.
> 
> I became the rookie MLA for Three Hills nearly 48 years ago. Of the 22 members of Lougheed’s cabinet, I am now one of just seven survivors. I have closely watched how succeeding premiers have governed. Few have enjoyed the public support of the Lougheed era, or the practical successes that came under his leadership.
> 
> As a rule, I don’t speak ill of premiers who are no longer alive. I am first to say that governing is an extremely tough job. But nobody has come close until Rachel Notley. She is the best premier of Alberta since Peter Lougheed.
> 
> I served in the legislature with her hard-working father, Grant Notley, but never met his daughter. Yet I have watched her govern in a very familiar way. In one politician, I see aspects of Grant Notley and Peter Lougheed.
> 
> Why was the Lougheed era a success? It certainly wasn’t magic. Albertans were fortunate to have a premier passionate about good public governance. We were progressive, but not in the sense many now hear in that word. We were conservative, but not in the sense that people now hear.
> 
> Pundits claimed we were a fluke. We were not and we proved it. I’ve heard the same kind of rhetoric aimed at Rachel Notley over the past four years. She has proven herself a capable, deserving leader.
> 
> In an era of divisiveness and polarization, Alberta needs someone who will do more than stoke anger and pit people against each other.
> 
> We need a premier who looks out to the streets, not just the corporate office towers. We need a premier for rural and urban Alberta, regardless of where support may be strongest.
> 
> We need a premier for north and south, because Alberta is one province.
> 
> Over the past year, I’ve seen an opposition pitting Calgary against Edmonton. Both cities need a big-city governance form. Both need to co-operate to get through these difficult times. We cannot chart a better way forward by stoking regional resentments.
> 
> I was born in Calgary but grew to support the Edmonton Oilers. This year, Albertans could re-elect an Edmontonian who will support the Flames. There are far worse fates.
> 
> Notley has done many things I had hoped to see. She has remained compassionate without sacrificing a pragmatic concern for the energy economy that drives the province.
> 
> She has tried for good governance. She has revised divisive legislation to meet the needs of all Albertans. She has avoided continuous cabinet shuffles. She’s avoided any real scandal, a rarity in a world of increasing scrutiny.
> 
> The next legislature will be the first in half a century without a Progressive Conservative. It is truly the end of an era. But the party name I once ran under no longer means what it once did. A province is more than a colour scheme. No party owns the legislature. It is for the people to decide the way forward. And it was no accident that Alberta elected Rachel Notley.
> 
> Like most Albertans, I care deeply about the fate of my province. I’m proud to back a great leader who has showed she believes the same.
> 
> Allan A Warrack is a professor of business emeritus at the University of Alberta, a former Progressive Conservative MLA and cabinet minister.
> 
> Read the feature rich experience


 https://edmontonjournal.com/opinio...d-like-lougheed/amp?__twitter_impression=true


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Oil Sands workers are not against Kenney. One unionized lab technician writing for the Tyee is.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Pretty weak rebuttal. Got anything to say about the actual substance of the article? Why, for example, are the oil sands workers against Kenney’s plans?


----------



## 18m2

From an Angus Reid poll ...

Young and more educated favour the NDP while older and less educated favour the UCP. Kinda makes me wonder if the situation will be better or worse in 2 year time. I suspect there will be little improvement.


----------



## Macfury

I think there are some very "progressive" PCs who are still hurting over the fact that their big government dreams are no longer welcome. Notley's government bloat has made Warrack nostalgic for that failed model. He should definitely vote NDP (probably has been for years).



Freddie_Biff said:


> S’more on Rachel’s leadership.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

18m2 said:


> From an Angus Reid poll ...
> 
> 
> 
> Young and more educated favour the NDP while older and less educated favour the UCP. Kinda makes me wonder if the situation will be better or worse in 2 year time. I suspect there will be little improvement.




That certainly tells a lot.


----------



## Macfury

What? That the failure of Alberta's teachers has created enough "undereducated" people to decisively drive Notley from office?



Freddie_Biff said:


> That certainly tells a lot.


----------



## Macfury

I don't see that university education has imparted most degree holders with any significant intelligence. Neither do most university curricula require significant intelligence to complete. It has more to do with indoctrination by Marxist professors.



18m2 said:


> From an Angus Reid poll ...
> 
> Young and more educated favour the NDP while older and less educated favour the UCP. Kinda makes me wonder if the situation will be better or worse in 2 year time. I suspect there will be little improvement.


----------



## FeXL

Yeah, I do:

Save a large quantity of malodorous, brown, fecal substance, there is none...

BTW, Freddie, while I appreciate you attempting to justify your political leanings, scouring the intertoobs for articles praising Red Rachel ain't gonna change the fact that in a few short days Albera will be rid of the albatross in any meaningful capacity _forever_.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Got anything to say about the actual substance of the article?


----------



## FeXL

Well, he's certainly entitled to his opinion.



> She is the best premier of Alberta since Peter Lougheed.


Bull. $h!t...



Freddie_Biff said:


> S’more on Rachel’s leadership.


----------



## FeXL

While we're calling BS on Rachel's alleged support for the oil industry...

Rachel Notley, the Rockefellers and Alberta's landlocked oil



> So far, I have not found any record of Notley saying anything against the brazen involvement in the election by groups whose explicit goal, landlocking Alberta crude, is squarely against her province’s economic interests. *Notley is turning a blind eye, or she knows about it and doesn’t care. Or worse yet, she consents.*


Bold mine.


----------



## SINC

Advance polls now closed with over 696,000 Albertans casting their ballots. An unprecedented number which is over 26 percent of eligible voters. Goodbye Notley.


----------



## FeXL

18m2 said:


> I suspect there will be little improvement.


Define improvement.


----------



## FeXL

Tell me once again about all the positive things that Red Rachel's EnDeePee policy have done for Alberta's economy...

Corbella: Hoping I don't feel nauseous again on election night



> Very quickly, however, the NDP government disabused me of my cautious optimism. One of its first acts was to change the Power Purchase Arrangements in an effort to incentivize more sustainable electricity to be built in the province. It was done in such a destructive, ideological, ill-advised and incompetent way that Greg Clark, the Alberta Party incumbent, calls it the “NDP government’s single biggest scandal,” that has cost Alberta taxpayers more than $2 billion while getting nothing in return.


More:



> Damage to the confidence of the oilpatch in the stability of the investment climate of Alberta was compounded again by Notley when she announced her carbon tax, even though she never campaigned on this “tax on everything.” More layoffs followed, not just in the oilpatch but across every sector of the economy.
> 
> When asked recently how much carbon emissions have decreased as a result of the carbon tax, Notley looked stunned by the question and said she didn’t know.
> 
> *Recently, the Sailer brothers in Lethbridge revealed that their 40-year-old family business, Southland Trailers, spends $7,000 a month on the carbon tax. That’s money they said they could be spending reinvesting in their business, improving productivity and hiring more staff.*


I once worked for Southland Trailers, when the father still ran it.

Further:



> But, it’s not just what the NDP did wrong that has been destructive to Alberta, it’s also what it failed to do right that has caused untold damage. Since Feb. 8, 2018, when the feds introduced Bill C-69, Notley and her ministers said and did virtually nothing to oppose the “no-more-pipelines law.” They also said and did virtually nothing on Bill C-48, the law that will ban Alberta oil from being moved by tanker on B.C.’s north coast, (but will allow all other oil to move up and down that coast.)
> 
> To say that the NDP has been negligent on both of these files would be a gross understatement. Notley’s inaction on these key files, in my view, is reason enough for her to lose any right to run the province.
> 
> Perhaps the most damaging thing of all, however, was how Notley — who said Alberta was “the embarrassing cousin” of Confederation — never objected to Trudeau unilaterally killing the $7.9-billion Northern Gateway pipeline that had been approved by the NEB after a gruelling $500-million regulatory process and was passed by the Harper Conservative government in the House of Commons. Notley never supported that pipeline and Shannon Phillips, her environment minister, actively protested against it.
> 
> Notley and her comrades also never kicked up a fuss when the Energy East pipeline was killed because of Trudeau moving the goalposts on the no-brainer project that would have provided Eastern Canada with Alberta oil, lessening its reliance on OPEC oil.


----------



## Macfury

That's "leadership" — Freddie style.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Damage to the confidence of the oilpatch in the stability of the investment climate of Alberta was compounded again by Notley when she announced her carbon tax, even though she never campaigned on this “tax on everything.” More layoffs followed, not just in the oilpatch but across every sector of the economy.


But Freddie says that one unionized oilpatch lab worker writing in _the Tyee_ wants Notley to be re-elected.


----------



## 18m2

FeXL said:


> Define improvement.


The fortunes of the Alberta oil and gas industry are totally dependant of the federal government and not on whichever party is in power in Alberta. For that reason I can't see how a change in government is going to improve the prospects. Once the decision is made to begin construction on some pipelines then its going to take several years, perhaps even longer than the UCP's governing mandate before serious volumes of oil begins to move.

I only hope for Alberta's sake the market for high sulphur content heavy oil is still there.


----------



## FeXL

18m2 said:


> The fortunes of the Alberta oil and gas industry are totally dependant of the federal government and not on whichever party is in power in Alberta. For that reason I can't see how a change in government is going to improve the prospects. Once the decision is made to begin construction on some pipelines then its going to take several years, perhaps even longer than the UCP's governing mandate before serious volumes of oil begins to move.
> 
> I only hope for Alberta's sake the market for high sulphur content heavy oil is still there.


Got it. Thx.

I was having difficulty understanding what you ment by improvement, at least in regards to educated voters.


----------



## Macfury

SINC, can you update your election timer here again?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Something I came across in my newsfeed. Worth considering before voting on Tuesday. 

If you’re still convinced that the “accidental NDP government is destroying Alberta “ .....

Here’s what Alberta’s NDP has done in 4 short years. 

1. Banned corporate and union donations to political parties. (2015)
2. Began building a new Cancer Treatment Centre in Calgary at the Foothills Hospital.
3. Increased funding to education to ensure 12,000 new students had teachers in the 2015/16 school year. (2015)
4. Raised taxes on corporations and the wealthy, while maintaining Alberta as lowest taxed province in Canada. (2015)
5. Scrapped the PC Health Care tax. (2015)
6. Raised the minimum wage by $2 ($2.50 for liquor servers), in 2015, and raised it annually since, up to $15 per hour in the fall of 2018. (2015).
7. Created a Ministry for the Status of Women. (2015)
8. Cabinet members instructed to make plans to implement the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. (2015)
9. Began construction to finalize the Calgary ring road by 2021.
10. Apologized for Alberta's role in residential schools. (2015)
11. Joined the call for a public inquiry into the missing and murdered Aboriginal women. (2015)
12. Cancelled a major privatization of hospital lab services in Edmonton. Brought that service in house under Alberta Health Services.
13. Took menthol cigarettes off store shelves.
14. Froze tuition rates (2015).
15. Funded health care to prevent the layoff of thousands of health care workers as planned by the Prentice Conservative government. (2015)
16. Hired Former Bank of Canada Governor David Dodge to develop a plan to catch up on infrastructure projects.
17. Launched and completed mental health care review, appointed David Swann as co-chair.
18. Launched and completed a review of Alberta’s energy royalties.
19. Cancelled the closure of the Calgary Young Offenders Centre as planned by the Conservatives.
20. Created Castle Provincial Park.
21. Announced millions in funding for green transportation projects in Edmonton and Calgary
22. Gave farm workers full legal workplace protection (health and safety, WCB, employment standards, labour standards). (2015)
23. Added gender identity and gender expression to the list of prohibited grounds for discrimination in the human rights code.
24. Implemented a ban on door to door electricity sales.
25. Scrapped coal power early, improving the health of hundreds of Albertans with asthma and other breathing problems, and reducing the amount of greenhouse gases emitted in Alberta by 16%.
26. Took big money out of politics by lowering campaign donation limits from $30,000 per person to $4,000. (2016)
27. Put limits on how much political parties and candidates can spend during campaigns. (2016)
28. Put a cap on power prices so they cannot rise too much.
29. The climate leadership plan was credited with federal government approval of two pipelines.
30. Introduced a dental fee guide to lower the cost of dental services.
31. Brought back the STEP program to create jobs for students.
32. Expanded health care/hospital services in Sylvan Lake. The new ambulatory Care Centre is open 16 hours a day, including weekends and evenings.
33. Started a loan program for seniors to make home renovations allowing them to stay in their homes longer.
34. Lowered small business taxes from 3% to 2%.
35. Using funds from carbon levy for a wide variety of programs to diversify Alberta’s economy, create jobs, and add value to our resources.
36. Lowered school fees by 25%. 
37. Introduced a school nutrition program in every school district.
38. Introduced and expanded a $25/day child care program.
39. Building a new court house in Red Deer.
40. Funding a new emergency room for the Misericordia Hospital in Edmonton.
41. Introduced programs and standards and increased funding for the training of service dogs.
42. Building a new bridge from Edmonton to Fort Saskatchewan.
43. Invested money into Fresh Start recovery homes, creating 46 new addiction recovery spaces in Calgary.
44. Approved 24 new school projects in Budget 2017.
45. A $200 million increase for home care to create new spaces, part of Budget 2017.
46. Budget 2017: $100 million to improve drinking water in First Nations communities.
47. Secured $6 billion in new investment in Alberta through royalty credits.
48. Protected the voluntary blood donation system by banning paid plasma programs.
49. Extended hours for cancer treatment at Tom Baker Centre and Cross Cancer Institute.
50. Created 35 new crown prosecutor positions and 30 new court clerk positions to address court backlogs.
51. Removed the time limits for victims to file lawsuits against their sexual assaulter so victims can proceed when they are ready.
52. Cut salaries and eliminated bonuses at Alberta’s Agencies Boards and Commissions. Some of the salaries were in excess of $500,000/year and included perks like golf club memberships. Capped severance at 12 months.
53. Gave academic workers the right to strike.
54. Created new funding for school playgrounds so parents no longer have to fund raise to have them at their local school.
55. Introduced first contract arbitration for workers trying to get a union.
56. Brought in card check certification, meaning no need for a vote if 65% or more employees at a worksite sign union cards, making it easier to join a union.
57. Gave employment arbitrators the direction to look at national jurisprudence when making awards.
58. Extended rights for employment leaves to take full advantage of EI rules without losing their jobs. Compassionate care leave extended from 8 weeks to 27, with eligibility for that leave reduced to 90 days from 1 year of employment.
59. Removed restrictions on secondary picketing.
60. Gave the Labour Relations Board the ability to impose union certification when employers engage in unfair labour practices.
61. Removed the minimum wage exemption that allowed employers to pay less than minimum wage to workers with disabilities.
62. Reduced bus fees for K-12 students taking public transit by as much as $500/year.
63. Reorganized (and decreased) caseloads for social workers dealing with family crisis matters.
64. Approved $750K to improve health outcomes for Calgary’s homeless.
65. Approved $1.7M for maintenance of homeless facilities in Edmonton.
66. Added 16 new mental health beds to Royal Alex Hospital. (June 2017)
67. Opened mental health clinic for children in Edmonton. (June 2017)
68. Added $26m for mental health services at post secondary campuses.
69. $75M for classroom supports as part of teacher’s contract negotiations.
70. Announced Alberta's first housing strategy, using $1.2 billion over five years to build 4,000 units of affordable housing.
71. Funding for Calgary green line LRT project from Alberta’s Climate Leadership fund.
72. Education initiative to combat rise of racism.
73. Covered cost of abortion pill so it is free to all women who need it.
74. Changed rules to make it easier for restaurants and cafes to open outdoor patio space.
75. Created subsidies to local craft beer makers to promote Alberta based industry and the jobs that come with it.
76. Created an independent agency to deliver energy savings across Alberta.
77. Passed Alberta's first Renewable Energy Law to triple Alberta's use of renewables by 2030. On track to exceed that goal.
78. Over $40 million for solar programs for homes, businesses, First Nations, municipalities and farms.
79. $20 million to install lifts on ambulance vehicles to reduce injuries to paramedics.
80. Kananaskis Park improvements to trails, campsites and other amenities.
81. Converted a loan for Edmonton’s Valley Line LRT into a grant, using funds from the Climate Leadership fund.
82. Opened up the process of applying to serve on Alberta’s Agencies, Boards and Commissions so it is easier for all Albertans to take part, not just the privileged few.
83. Opened a farmer’s market on the Legislature grounds.
84. Created “Four Directions Financial” with ATB and Boyle St Community services to give banking services to homeless and vulnerable Albertans, (and act as an alternative to pay day loan companies). (Sept 2017)
85. New rules to protect people buying condominiums ensuring that buyers have full knowledge of condo fees and allowing government to investigate and issue fines when developers break the rules. (October 2017).
86. Named a government building after First Nations Activist Muriel Stanley Venne, the first time a govt building in Alberta has been named for an aboriginal person. (October 2017)
87. Enhanced curriculum to teach Alberta students about the history of Canada’s aboriginal peoples, and the legacy of residential schools.
88. Created a $40 million transition fund for coal workers to replace income, retrain, and placement in other positions. (Nov 2017).
89. Toured Canada promoting the building of the Kinder Morgan pipeline and Alberta’s energy industry.
90. Tightened rules around Gay Straight Alliances in schools so kids can join them without being outed before they are ready. (2017)
91. Tightened rules on ‘dark money’ and ‘big money’ in Alberta politics, making it harder for Political Action Committees to bring big money from other countries to influence our elections. (Dec 2017)
92. Banned ticket scalping bots which buy up event tickets before consumers got a chance to buy them. (Dec 2017)
93. Made long overdue changes to health and safety rules to ensure workplace safety committees and a range of other improvements.
94. Overhauled the WCB to ensure workers get better treatment and better payouts.
95. Cut the travel and hospitality budget from $27.6 million to $3.8 million.
96. Alberta was the fastest growing provincial economy in 2017.
97. Further expanded the $25/day childcare to 100 centers, adding 4,500 spaces. (Dec 2017). And another 6,000 spaces. (April 2018)
98. Created a power system that generated the lowest cost clean power in Canada, and assured a 20 year price of 3.7/kilowatt power, cheaper than most coal power.
99. Passed a law to protect teenagers from harm caused by artificial tanning.
100. Launched a process to engage with survivors of the ‘sixties scoop’ to develop and craft a meaningful apology. And delivered that apology in the Alberta Legislature with a promise to continue working to make amends to the victims and heal the wounds of the past. (2018)


----------



## Freddie_Biff

(Confinued)

101. Funded a job training program for indigenous women to give them skills as heavy equipment operators.
102. Building a new neonatal care unit in St. Albert.
103. Made it easier for firefighters to claim Workers’ Compensation for ovarian & cervical cancer.
104. Launched a review of programs serving disabled Albertans.
105. Provided $1.2 million grant to the Zebra Child Protection Centre to provide support and counselling to children who have survived physical and sexual abuse.
106. Provided $81 million to farmers from the Carbon Levy to transition to lower energy and energy efficient equipment. (2018)
107. Building the new Willow Square facility in Fort McMurray providing 144 spaces for seniors care. (2018)
108. Made Red Deer College a degree granting University, so local residents don’t have to go away to school. (2018)
109. Made Grande Prairie College a degree granting University, so local residents don’t have to go away to school. (2018)
110. Made Alberta College of Art and Design a degree granting University, so local residents don’t have to go away to school. (2018)
111. Created 3,000 new post-secondary technology spaces to support emerging industries. (2018)
112. 38% increase to Legal Aid funding. 
113. Changes to make it easier to qualify for AISH (assured income for the severely handicapped) without bleeding applicant’s financial assets. (2018)
114. Investing $1 billion into partial upgrading programs to diversify Alberta’s energy sector. (2018)
115. Program to generate up to $6 billion in private investment in natural gas processing. (2018)
116. 20 new schools announced as part of budget 2018.
117. New park and ride facility in St. Albert. (2018)
118. $1.9 million in new funding to create new spaces for women and children fleeing family violence. (2018)
119. New Tourism Growth innovation fund to support and expand Alberta’s tourism offerings. (2018)
120. Changes to the Lobbyists Act to increase transparency. (2018)
121. Supervised consumption site to open at Royal Alex Hospital. (2018)
122. Replacement school for Camrose. (2018)
123. Funding to improve Northern and Southern Jubilee Auditoriums. (2018)
124. New Legislation to give continuing care residents and families more input into their living facilities. (2018)
125. Program to increase renewable energy to create over 7,000 jobs by 2030. (2018)
126. Local Food Act introduced to raise the profile of local food industry. (2018)
127. “Bubble Zone” legislation to prevent protests at abortion clinics. (2018)
128. Phasing out obscene salaries among post-secondary executives. (2018)
129. Funding for home energy efficiency programs so homeowners don’t have to put money down to make their homes greener. (2018)
130. $43 million in funding (with Federal govt) to buy 40 electric buses for Edmonton. (2018)
131. Contributed $2.5 million to rebuild the Roxy Theatre in Edmonton. (2018)
132. Over $200 million invested to reduce methane gas emissions, which have a climate change impact 25% higher than carbon dioxide. (2018)
133. Proclaimed May to be “Sexual Violence Awareness Month.” (2018)
134. Added consent to the curriculum of students from Kindergarten to Grade 12. (2018)
EDITS/ADDITIONS: I’ll add more as I become aware of them.
135. Added $5 million to support mental health support programs in K-12 schools. (2018)
136. $70 million, taken from the Climate Leadership fund, to support nine projects aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 4.1 million tonnes annually. (2018)
137. Implemented home builder licencing to help consumers distinguish good builders from bad. (2017)
138. Passed ‘Safer Spaces’ legislation allowing Albertans suffering from domestic violence to break a lease and flee their homes. This helped over 400 people in the first year after it was passed. (2016)
139. Introduced the Alberta Child Tax benefit giving families with children earning under $41,000 per year access to funds to assist them with raising kids out of poverty. (2015)
140. Eliminated the $1,000 fee for the Green Certificate program, an agriculture apprenticeship program. Enrolment jumped with the fee elimination. 
141. Invested $10 million in additional funding to combat rural crime by hiring 39 more police officers, 40 more civilian staff, and 10 additional Crown prosecutors. (2018)
142. Approved the creation of Alberta’s first applied degree in animation and visual effects at Red Deer College. (2018)
143. Redeveloped the maternity care unit at Peter Lougheed Hospital, adding 60 new care spaces. (2018)
144. Created the world’s largest protected boreal forest in Northen Alberta, preserving 67,000 square km of park space, an area almost as large as New Brunswick. (2018)
145. Forced insurance companies to extend their deadlines by one year for claims made in relation to the Fort McMurray wildfire. (2018)
146. Invested $3 million into capital upgrades at Castle Park to create more trails, campsites and access to vast wilderness. (2018)
147. Contributed $2 million toward the rebuilding of the Stanley Milner Library in Edmonton. (2018)
148. Opened a permanent dialysis treatment centre in Lac La Biche, where for years patients had previously been receiving treatment in a bus in the parking lot. (2018)
149. Produced a “Best Practices Guide” for police investigating and dealing with cases of sexual assault and sexual violence to better support victims and bring instigators to justice. (2018)
150. Reached a historic agreement selling land to the Métis Nation of Alberta, who previously leased the 9 acre parcel of land, so the Nation can build a new community centre. (2018)
151. Created a new, province-wide phone line to call to either report abuse or for support for victims of abuse. (2018).
152. Negotiated an agreement with doctors that included no wage increases for two years, while saving $95 million in health care costs. Eighty-nine percent of doctors voted to approve the deal. (2018)
153. Improved safety for employees of gas stations and convenience stores by making it law that drivers pay before filling their gas tanks. As part of this move, regulations around cash handling, video monitoring and timed safety locks were also improved. Energy companies, police chiefs and labour groups all applauded the move. (2018)
154. Built and opened an assisted living facility in northwest Calgary to house 45 limited mobility residents. (2018)
155. Introduced guidelines for the wages of school superintendents to bring wages and benefits into line with the rest of the public service. The move puts $1.5 million back into the classroom. (2018)
156. Funded “WiseGuyz,” a program that educates 300 Calgary junior high school boys about gender violence and tolerance. Schools with the program have reported reduced violence rates and a noticeable change in school culture and tolerance. (2018)
157. Declared, for the first time, June to be “Philippine Heritage Month.” Alberta has the second highest Philipino-Canadian population in the country. (2018)
158. Redesigned drivers’ licences to make them more secure, cut down on fraud and ID theft, and save over $1 million annually. (2018)
159. Started a free summer music series at McDougall centre in Calgary to showcase Alberta musicians over lunch hours in downtown Calgary. (2018)
160. Invested almost $5 million to improve Athabasca University’s digital learning environment and upgrade existing IT infrastructure. (2018)
161. Provided a $1.25 million grant to Children’s Autism Services of Edmonton allowing them to expand its services to 200 additional families across Northern Alberta. (2018)
161. Added “x” as a gender option on official documents like drivers’ licences for Albertans who do not identify as solely male or female. (2018)
162. Opened new opioid dependency clinics in Bonnyville, Fort McMurray and High Prairie to treat up to 600 new patients annually. (2018)
163. Passed the Energy Diversification Act to provide a combination of royalty credits, grants and loan guarantees designed to encourage energy diversification, like petrochemicals and partial upgrading. (2018)
164. Invested $10 million in local flood resilience programs and equipment. (2018)
165. Extended bar hours during the World Cup. (2018)
166. Expanding capacity on the southwest portion of the Anthony Henday Drive. (2018)
167. Developed an action plan to combat racism in Alberta including launching a new hate crimes police unit, improvements to school curriculum, and help for workers getting foreign credentials recognised. (2018)
168. As part of the path to reconciliation, all public employees will take a one day training course to learn the history and unique needs of Alberta’s Aboriginal population. (2018)
169. Signed an agreement with the four Maskwacîs Cree Nations to outline the role of the government providing education to the community. (2018)
170. Sent letters to employers who owe workers unpaid wages demanding settlement and outlining their options to do so. (2018)
171. Increased funding due to demand from $35 million to $50 million for a program that assists Indigenous communities, organizations and companies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through renewable energy, energy audits, and training for low emissions energy projects. 
172. Intensive Indigenous training for Childrens’ Services staff about the impacts and legacy of colonialism, residential schools and the Sixties Scoop. The training provides managers, supervisors, caseworkers, and other staff the awareness and cultural understanding to serve Indigenous children, youth and families. (2018)
173. Implementing recommendations from Minister’s Panel on Child Intervention, including immediate additional funding of over $4 million, to improve kinship care assessments, suicide prevention and increased mental health and addictions services. (2018).
174. Removed barriers for refugees to get drivers’ licences - so they can find work easier, and settle into Alberta life more quickly. (2018)
175. Added 400 new teaching and support positions in K-12 for the 2017-2018 school year.
176. Reversed Conservative cuts to Program Unit Funding (PUF) for school children with disabilities. The program is essential for young children to provide staff for early intervention and make sure they get the best education possible. (2015)
177. Started a $2 million grant program to support community initiatives that raise awareness and understanding of racism and its impacts on Albertans. (2018)
178. Funding (with other levels of government) the completion of Calgary’s Airport Trail in the city’s NW quadrant.
179. Alberta will co-lead a federal pilot project to help military families settle into new communities when they are re-assigned. (2018)
180. Simplified the forms and process to apply for Assured Income for the Severely Handicapped (AISH), to make it easier for Albertans to receive benefits. (2018)
181. Increased funding to assist people with disabilities to complete post-secondary degrees. (2018)
182. Joined other provinces in recognizing military drivers’ credentials so members of the forces don’t have to be re-tested for a commercial licence. (2015)
183. Alberta retail sales hit a new record in May of 2018. Highest ever recorded in history.
184. A new, $3.5 billion petrochemical plant is being built north east of Edmonton, Alberta's Petrochemical Diversification Program is credited by the builders as the reason for this and other developments to add value to our energy products and diversify the province’s economy.
185. The Conference Board of Canada named Alberta “a prime Province for growth in private sector investment in 2019.”
186. Alberta exports are up to the highest level since 2014, with large increases in both the energy and non-energy sectors.
187. Updated the policy on use of the Alberta Legislature grounds allowing for more and bigger festivals and other events on the space.
188. Offered up to $70 million in incentives to companies who develop technologies to reduce emissions caused by biotechnology, electricity and/or transportation. (2018)
EDITS, ADDED SEPT 2, 2018
189. Reduced restrictions on patio rules for restaurants and bars, creating more outdoor entertainment spaces. 
190.Expanded funds to create additional post-secondary spaces for students at two additional campuses.
191. Created an organization to assist Indigenous entrepreneurs create tourism based businesses.
192. Created a pilot project for rural bus service in southern Alberta, filling routes left when Greyhound cancelled service. 
193. Announced a new hospital wing for Medicine Hat.
194. Created Legacy Regional Park, preserving 73 acres for recreational use in Lethbridge.
195. Expanded mental health services at the Calgary Counselling Centre.
196. Reduced hunting fees for seniors.
197. Adding new and refurbished exhibits at Heritage Park in Calgary.
198. First government to celebrate August as Pakastani Heritage Month.
199. Added 400 post secondary spaces in technology programs.
200. Concluded bargaining with all major public sector groups without job action, lockouts, or forced settlements. All agreements were agreed by both parties.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

(Continued)

201. Improved 911 standards to deliver consistent service in all communities across the province.
202. Between May 2017 and May 2018, average weekly earnings went up up by 3.2%. Employment went up 1.7%, active oil rigs up 6.7%, merchandise exports up 11%, wholesale trade up 7.9%, retail sales up by 2.5%.
203. Alberta will fully fund access to PrEP drugs, which have a 99% effective rate at preventing HIV infection.
EDITS: ADDED Oct 30, 2018
204. Nearly 32,000 K-12 students started the 2018-19 school year in new or revitalized schools.
205. Announced a replacement for Ben Calf Robe School, Edmonton Catholic’s school with a focus on teaching Indigenous students. (2018) 
206. Celebrated the opening of Suncor’s Fort Hills project, putting 1,400 people to work on a continuing basis. Fort Hills is expected to generate $8 billion in royalty revenue to the province over the life of the project. (2018)
207. Celebrated Nexen’s $400 million investment in the oil sands at its Long Lake South West project. Because the project requires less steam and natural gas per barrel, Long Lake will achive a 20% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions intensity by 2025.
208. Expanded the University of Calgary school of veterinary medicine, adding 80 new spaces. (2018)
209. Added 400 tech seats at post-secondary institutions at the start of the 2018-19 school year.
210. Created and funded the “Aging Well” program, supporting initiatives to keep seniors in their homes and engaged in their communities. (2018)
211. Broke ground on a new campus for Northern Lake College, serving 225 students in High Prairie.
212. Expanded the post-production pilot project to provide permanent grant funds to film and technology projects, further diversifying Alberta’s economy. (2018.)
213. Expanded the school nutrition program to feed 30,000 students daily.
214. Expanded funding for programs designed to create employment for Albertans with disabilities. (2018)
215. Alberta has put out requests for proposals for green power projects to provide 55% of the province’s electricity needs. This smashes the previous target of 30% by 2030. (2018)
216. Opening a new 24/7 mental health clinic at the Royal Alex hospital in Edmonton. (2018)
217. Building 85 units of seniors housing in the Crowsnest Pass. (2018)
218. Building 240 units of affordable housing in the Londenderry community of Edmonton. (2018)
219. New K-4 curriculum is nearly complete, after an exhaustive consultative process that received over 70,000 submissions. The curriculum has not been updated in 30 years. (2018)
220. A $70 million increase to Legal Aid to ensure all Albertans get access to the justice system when they need it, regardless of their finances.
221. Loosened liquor rules allowing bars and restaurants to infuse alcoholic products with spices, herbs and fruits, as well as create house-aged products. (2018)
222. After decades without a treaty, Alberta joined with the federal government to sign a deal with the Lubicon Lake Band. (2018)
223. Introduced truth in advertising rules for the auto industry, mandating that consumers must be told the full history of the vehicle they are purchasing. These are the rules Jason 
Kenney promised to scrap in exchange for political donations from the used car dealers. (2018)
224. Alberta proclaimed its first Islamic Heritage Month, commemorating the contribution of Islamic Albertans, who have been here since 19th century. (2018)
225. Created the Jim Prentice conservation corridor in the Crowsnest Pass, protecting a 5 km long corridor and honouring a former Premier with a passion for conservation. (2018).
226. Put rules in place to prevent tuition increases that are higher than the cost of living. (2018)
227. Created an Advocate for Persons with Disabilities to assist disabled Albertans resolve issues, find supports and promote inclusion. (2018)
228. Increasing penalties for health professionals who are engage in sexual abuse of patients, including a loss of licence to practice. (2018)
229. Upgraded training and licencing of truck drivers to improve highway safety. (2018)
230. Brought driver testing in-house to improve safety and accountability. (2018)
EDITS ADDED NOV 9th, 2018
231. Gave aboriginal communities a formal role in child protection court proceedings. (2018)
232. Took further action to take big money out of politics by banning corporate and union donations to municipal political candidates, and lowering donation limits to $4,000 per year. (2018)
233. Increased rates for AISH, Income Support and Seniors Benefits for the first time since 2012. Also introduced legislation to automatically tie those benefits to inflation in future years. (2018)
234. Invested $3 million toward a ‘one-stop shopping’ service in Edmonton for Veterans to access government programs and services. (2018).
ADDED NOV 30, 2018
235. Told private schools that refuse to allow Gay Straight Alliances to students who request them that they must comply with the law or lose public funding. (2018).
236. Created the first Indigenous Languages in Education grant in Canada, funding programs that assist and promote Indigenous Language Education in schools. (2018)
237. Added access to mental health supports for 2,000 more youth in Southern Alberta. (2018).
238. Alberta became the first province to implement “Jordan’s Principle” with respect to indigenous children in foster care. The principle simply put ensures children who need care get it right away, regardless of which government should be funding it. (2018)
239. Appointed a team of envoys to consult with the energy sector and make recommendations to deal with the high gap in the price of oil costing the Canadian economy $80 million per day. (2018)
240. Doubled existing support for new upgrading and refining programs in place for our energy resources. The new supports will create 15,500 jobs during construction and 1,000 jobs once operational. (2018)
241. Legislated limits to future tuition increases, keeping them to within the cost of living. (2018).
242. Doubled loan limits to livestock providers for loans allowing farmers to invest in new stock. (2018)
243. Gave nurses the ability to prescribe drugs and order x-rays, which will reduce wait times and cost to the taxpayer. (2018)
244. Protected Bighorn Country in central Alberta as a mix of parks and public lands. (2018)
245. Launched a trade challenge to gain access to other provincial markets on behalf of Alberta’s small breweries. (2019)
246. Introduced regulations for counselling professionals and addictions treatment facilities. (2018)
247. Purchasing new rail cars and locomotives to get our energy products to the coast. (2018)
248. Opened the Fair Practices Office to give injured workers assistance in advocating for themselves through the WCB. (2018)
249. Using $15 million from the Climate Leadership Fund to install solar panels at K-12 schools across the province. (2018)
250. Finalized a funding agreement between Alberta and the two largest cities to provide stable, predictable funding. (2018)
251. Banned the mandatory wearing of high heels at workplaces across the province. Because, duh. (2018)
EDITS Added Dec 11, 2018
252. Passed a short term reduction in oil production to deal with the surplus of supply and the effect it had on prices. Brought the differential (the difference between what Alberta oil sells at and West Texas) from $50 a barrel down to under $15, the lowest in years. (2018)
253. Funded the Elizabeth Fry Society program to create legal support for sexual violence survivors. (2018)
254. Provided $2.2 million to the Blood Tribe to open a safe withdrawal site to treat addicts. (2018)
255. Invested $29 million to hire 90 more paramedics and purchase 17 new ambulances across Alberta. Also hired new staff to address mental health issues among paramedics. (2018)
256. Built safe accommodations in Lethbridge for 42 people suffering from opioid and other addictions to help them access treatment and support programs. (2018).
257. Seeking industry interest in a new refinery to process more of our energy resources here in Alberta. (2018) 
EDITED Feb 28, 2019
258. After twenty-five years of child-poverty rates staying the same, the child poverty rate was cut in half between 2015-2017, during a recession, giving Alberta the lowest child poverty rate in Canada.


----------



## Macfury

Passing red tape regulations, taxing people and businesses and handing out government largesse are not achievements. I look at a lot of those items and I'm astonished that anyone would see them as positive, let alone achievements. 

If this is what she's running on, time for Notley to go.


----------



## SINC

Welcome to the day before a Notley/NDP free Alberta. We can then begin to undo the mess they have left. As Freddie pointed out, we have much work to do.


----------



## Rps

Most of my family lives in Alberta, transplanted years ago, but Albertans just the same. What I have gleaned from my discussions and visits there ( this includes my time living in Edmonton many many years ago ) is that two things inform Albertans votes....debt reduction ( read being debt free as a province ) and jobs. Basically the political dynamic of the province is that simple....Notley has failed to meet those two cultural priorities ..... granted she inherited the throne during a bad time but voters do not care....it’s what have you done for me lately; to many it’s higher debt and fewer jobs.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Welcome to the day before a Notley/NDP free Alberta. We can then begin to undo the mess they have left. As Freddie pointed out, we have much work to do.




You know, Don, it’s not “Notley/NDP Free” if they form the opposition. You’ve been drinking your own bath water again.


----------



## Macfury

Will Albertans be free of them? No. Even though they'll be impotent and irrelevant, the NDP's starkly perverse ideas will still be on display to remind voters why they dumped Notley in the first place. However, Albertans will certainly be free of the NDP's terrible governance.



Freddie_Biff said:


> You know, Don, it’s not “Notley/NDP Free” if they form the opposition. You’ve been drinking your own bath water again.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> ...to many it’s higher debt and fewer jobs.


I think rank-and-file Albertans are also alarmed by how many government jobs Notley has created. She's feathering the public sector nest while citizens suffer.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Passing red tape regulations, taxing people and businesses and handing out government largesse are not achievements. I look at a lot of those items and I'm astonished that anyone would see them as positive, let alone achievements.


At least a third of that list is nothing more than pure fluff. Extended bar hours during World Cup? This is worth putting on the record as some sort of "accomplishment"? Who gives a fukc? 

For something really noteworthy they omitted "taking a regular crap so they didn't all explode"!



Macfury said:


> If this is what she's running on, time for Notley to go.


Agreed.

There's a ton of legitimate criticism that can be levelled at Freddie's list of "accomplishments". However, I wanted to address #219 in particular:



> New K-4 curriculum is nearly complete, after an exhaustive consultative process that received over 70,000 submissions. The curriculum has not been updated in 30 years.


Pure. Unadulterated. Horse$h!t.

1). My lovely bride has been teaching for 30 years. Her math curriculum has received at least 3 significant updates over that period of time.

2). Yes, K-4 is currently being updated. However, there are no, zero, resources listed in the update. The narrative goes that, with so many resources available online, it is now incumbent upon the teachers themselves to create or find worksheets, texts, etc. for each subject they teach & apply them. My lovely bride teaches 8 different subjects in any given year. How much extra, unpaid time will it take to search out & create resources for each subject? Realistically, after a year of using these resources, the entire list will have to be revisited & additions, deletions, corrections & changes will need to be implemented. 

The narrative continues that teachers can use 70-80% of their existing resources for the new update, which immediately begs the next question: If so, how much of a curriculum update did Red Rachel actually accomplish?

3). We've heard some talk about the possibility of the local education boards putting together lists of resources for their teachers. This is all well & fine until you ask the same question: Just who is going to do the work? More people will have to be hired to deal with this, costing even more money.

Now, I don't have the time or inclination to address all 258 of Freddie's EnDeePee "accomplishments". However, you can rest assured that there are damn few that will withstand scrutiny without a codicil or 6.


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> I think rank-and-file Albertans are also alarmed by how many government jobs Notley has created. She's feathering the public sector nest while citizens suffer.


There are many, and you are probably included in that list, that believe government jobs are simply a redistribution of wealth....not income producing as much as debt increases.....the value stream strikes again I’m afraid.


----------



## Rps

Freddie_Biff said:


> You know, Don, it’s not “Notley/NDP Free” if they form the opposition. You’ve been drinking your own bath water again.


Frank, if the NDP are in a minority position there is little opposition....just look at the Federal Liberals.


----------



## FeXL

Rps said:


> There are many, and you are probably included in that list, that believe government jobs are simply a redistribution of wealth....not income producing as much as debt increases.....the value stream strikes again I’m afraid.


Question is, were the 50 thousand public employees she hired needed? And, what have we received for our money?

I haven't seen an improvement in my provincial level services. As a matter of fact, the yearly service of mailing me a vehicle registration renewal form was cancelled under Knotley. I've posted about this next one before but the wait time for driver's exams has significantly increased. Leave it to the public sector. 

Major ordeals? Nope. But these are merely two simple examples of services getting worse under Red Rachel instead of improving.


----------



## SINC

Caught in the act?

The RCMP Must Investigate Potential Collusion Between Alberta NDP & Foreign Enemies Of The Oil Industry

https://www.spencerfernando.com/201...erta-ndp-foreign-enemies-of-the-oil-industry/


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Rps said:


> Frank, if the NDP are in a minority position there is little opposition....just look at the Federal Liberals.



Don keeps harping that they are “gone”...when in reality they’re not going anywhere, win or lose. The UCP is in opposition but we certainly feel their presence....like a sliver under your toenail.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> There are many, and you are probably included in that list, that believe government jobs are simply a redistribution of wealth....not income producing as much as debt increases.....the value stream strikes again I’m afraid.


My favourite saying on the matter; "Government creates wealth, like a tick creates blood."


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> At least a third of that list is nothing more than pure fluff. Extended bar hours during World Cup? This is worth putting on the record as some sort of "accomplishment"?


This is like padding a list of daily personal accomplishments with such items as:
* prepared food 
* ate
* used napkin to wipe mouth
* went to bathroom
* washed hands
* washed dishes
* had a nap

The person who compiled that NDP list of non-achievements probably put in more work than Notley herself.


----------



## Macfury

Under_ your_ toenail. As it should be. 

A salve to everyone else.



Freddie_Biff said:


> Don keeps harping that they are “gone”...when in reality they’re not going anywhere, win or lose. The UCP is in opposition but we certainly feel their presence....like a sliver under your toenail.


----------



## eMacMan

I notice the Castle Provincial Park made her top 20. Those of us who live in the area would call it one of her top 5 disasters.

The area had an established long term plan put together with input from all concerned parties, ranchers, loggers, hunters, fishermen, environmentalists, kayakers, ATVers and snowmobilers. More importantly it was working for all parties. Notley scrapped all of that and replaced it with a plan that really only considered the greenie weenie point of view. 

The minister responsible Shannon Phillips was so ashamed of it, she failed to show for any of the so-called consultations held in this area. Instead she sent the RCMP to represent her.


----------



## eMacMan

Then there is #25 closing the coal power stations. These were away from major centers and for the most part very clean emission wise, so little health benefits accrued. However It has resulted in higher power bills, which will only get worse unless a similarly economical base power supply is brought on line to replace them. 

Again definitely one of her top 5 disasters, but still behind the carbon tax.


----------



## Macfury

eMacMan said:


> I notice the Castle Provincial Park made her top 20. Those of us who live in the area would call it one of her top 5 disasters.
> 
> The area had an established long term plan put together with input from all concerned parties, ranchers, loggers, hunters, fishermen, environmentalists, kayakers, ATVers and snowmobilers. More importantly it was working for all parties. Notley scrapped all of that and replaced it with a plan that really only considered the greenie weenie point of view.
> 
> The minister responsible Shannon Phillips was so ashamed of it, she failed to show for any of the so-called consultations held in this area. Instead she sent the RCMP to represent her.





eMacMan said:


> Then there is #25 closing the coal power stations. These were away from major centers and for the most part very clean emission wise, so little health benefits accrued. However It has resulted in higher power bills, which will only get worse unless a similarly economical base power supply is brought on line to replace them.
> 
> Again definitely one of her top 5 disasters, but still behind the carbon tax.


Agreed. But in the fevered imagination of the NDP and its lackeys, these are crowning achievements.


----------



## SINC

Well, well, the NDP gets caught again!

*Ex-energy executive’s website and affidavit drops niggling NDP scandal into middle of Alberta election*



> CALGARY — As websites go, it doesn’t stand out. Unlike the polished, visually appealing sites the governing NDP and opposition UCP have launched to attack each other in recent weeks, this one has the black-and-white esthetic of a Windows 95 text document. However bland and antiquated its look, though, it inserts a set of damning allegations into the middle of this Alberta election campaign.
> 
> The site, not-so-artfully named after the person running it, was launched earlier this month by lawyer and former power executive Robert Hemstock, who is currently suing the Alberta government, Deputy Premier Sarah Hoffman and NDP Premier Rachel Notley’s top spokesperson Cheryl Oates for defamation. It breaks down in lawyerly detail what Hemstock considers to be a series of mistakes the NDP government made as it changed the rules governing the province’s deregulated electricity market — moves he claims cost Alberta power consumers $2 billion, a niggling scandal of the NDP’s first term.
> 
> Hemstock filed the defamation suit in July 2018, based on events dating as far back as 2015, when Notley’s New Democrats were elected. The website went live after he filed a new affidavit on March 29.
> 
> He launched the suit because he believes the government unfairly blamed him for a series of contract cancellations in the power market in 2015 and 2016, based on a clause he helped negotiate into those contracts in 2000.
> 
> He launched the website because he wants to “expose” the details of the controversial episode, and because he believes the public doesn’t understand how or why those cancelled contracts ended up saddling consumers “with an estimated $2 billion in unnecessary costs” — and how the province could have avoided those mistakes in order to save Albertans money.
> 
> Both the suit and the website also appear to be an attempt by Hemstock to clear his name.
> 
> “It’s also about how our elected representatives in the Alberta Government used their position of power and access to taxpayer funds to attempt to achieve their political objective of avoiding accountability,” the website charges.
> 
> Hemstock declined to comment on the site because his defamation suit is still before the court but the affidavit filed March 29 contains a new allegation that the government has not provided all the documents requested in the case.
> 
> “That a decision was made to defame me, by implicating me as the cause of the loss of approximately $2 billion to electricity consumers, with no records showing how that decision was arrived at discloses the defendants have not discharged their obligation to provide all relevant material records,” Hemstock states in the affidavit.
> 
> “I’m not aware of anything new being filed, but because the matter is before the courts we won’t be commenting,” said Oates, who was Notley’s communications director before the writ dropped and is working on the NDP campaign.


More at the link.

https://calgaryherald.com/news/hems...ment/wcm/b659b63e-36c1-45be-acda-432b07ad3449


----------



## eMacMan

BTW Rachel's claim that she capped power rates at 3.7¢/KWH means zilch, given the ever upward spiral of the assorted gouge fees that make up well over half of many folks electrical bill.

Just one example is that $7.75 monthly charge to build new high tension lines into Southwestern BC to carry our surplus wind energy, the 10-15% of the time we have a surplus. If BC really wants our green wind energy, let them pay for the lines.


----------



## eMacMan

https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/columnists/nelson-notley-dances-with-the-one-who-brought-her



> Well, if you’re going down to defeat anyhow, then dancing with the one that brought you is as effective an election strategy as any other, I suppose.
> 
> Maybe that’s why, in the dying days of this provincial campaign, Premier Rachel Notley once again put her faith and Alberta’s economic future into the furtive hands of a Liberal government in Ottawa.
> 
> Talking about the poisoned chalice this pipeline issue has turned into during her four-year reign as premier she doubled down and declared that even now, after all that has passed, she trusted Justin Trudeau’s government.
> 
> “I feel confident that it is going to happen,” she said, referring to the endlessly delayed Trans Mountain pipeline expansion that’s supposed to boost exports of Albertan crude to the West Coast.





> Somehow, after all the double-dealing the Grits have engaged in and the dreadful economic consequences for Calgary in particular, Notley still professes faith that what Ottawa vaguely suggests will in fact transpire.
> 
> It won’t. The Liberals have no need of Alberta seats but they’d like a few in Metro Vancouver and a heck of a lot more in Quebec. So will they risk annoying the environmental crowd six months before a federal election in which their chances of getting one Alberta MP are akin to the Oilers’ hopes of Stanley Cup glory? Nope. For sure, pipeline building might start afterwards, but not before.
> 
> The premier — at least for another day — still doesn’t get that. Or maybe at this late hour, she can’t bring herself to admit the truth — that she was played from the start, cajoled into imposing a carbon tax on her own province without anything in return other than a nice shout-out from then U.S. president Barrack Obama on his farewell visit to Ottawa.


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/columnists/nelson-notley-dances-with-the-one-who-brought-her


It's difficult to believe that someone who is allegedly intelligent enough to be a lawyer can also be so naive...


----------



## Beej

From late March, the predictions Sinc and I made.

*Sinc*
UCP 56 seats
NDP 22 seats
ABP 7 seats
Others 2

*Beej*
UCP 48
NDP 35
ABP 2
Others 2

Two ehmacers enter tomorrow (and the next week or so, depending on how long vote counting takes), one ehmacer leaves with free beer. beejacon


----------



## Macfury

rps and I also threw our forecasts into the contest right away:

*Macfury*
UCP 59
NDP 24
ABP 3
Others 1

*Rps*
UCP 58
NDP 26
ABP. 2
Other 1


----------



## Macfury

I think this was Freddie's projection:


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> rps and I also threw our forecasts into the contest right away:
> 
> *Macfury*
> UCP 59
> NDP 24
> ABP 3
> Others 1
> 
> *Rps*
> UCP 58
> NDP 26
> ABP. 2
> Other 1


I missed that. What day were the predictions posted?


----------



## Macfury

Beej said:


> I missed that. What day were the predictions posted?


March 31 for me. rps on April 1.


----------



## eMacMan

I have trouble visualizing the NDP taking more than 20 seats. Would like to see the ADP and/or the Independence types pick up at least a few.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> I think this was Freddie's projection:




Yup, still an arsehole, Macfury. At least some things never change.


----------



## SINC

*It's Election Day In Alberta*


----------



## SINC

*Canada’s ‘economic civil war’ centre stage as Albertans take anger against the east to polls*



> For a guy who says one of his fondest memories as a Canadian was watching the Quebec separatist movement fail at the ballot box in 1995, Brett Wilson sure talks a lot about his own province seceding.
> 
> The entrepreneur, investor and philanthropist has been bringing up the idea of the western provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan dropping out of the country with increasing frequency. He sees separation as a potential remedy for moves by the federal government and other provinces — carbon taxes, the cancellation of a pipeline to the Pacific, the obstruction of a pipeline to the Atlantic — that he says amount to “economic civil war.”
> 
> “I remember celebrating when the Bloc Quebecois failed because I love my Canada,” he said in an interview, referring to the federal party that advocated Quebec’s secession. “That’s why I describe myself as a frustrated nationalist, not in any way a separatist.”
> 
> But Wilson, who was born in North Battleford, Saskatchewan and made his fortune in Calgary through ventures like investment bank FirstEnergy Capital Corp., added: “It’s real easy for Alberta and Saskatchewan to feel like they’re being pushed out of confederation.”
> 
> Wilson — an occasional panelist on “Dragon’s Den” — isn’t alone in that thinking. It’s become a major undertone in Alberta’s provincial election this week and could determine the future of Canada’s energy industry.


More at the link.

https://calgaryherald.com/news/econ...Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1555369020


----------



## Macfury

Adapting a well-known meme:


----------



## eMacMan

Dropping this into the NDP thread partly since they are so gung-ho to promote a trans agenda in schools, but also because new threads are pretty much invisible to anyone who does not log in.

For the record my opinion is that the young lass handled (kneeded) it perfectly. It's the boys who should have been expelled.

https://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Boys-stormed-a-girls-bathroom-to-protest-A-13768031.php



> The plot to storm the girls' bathroom started with a Snapchat message and ended with a knee to the crotch.
> 
> It all went down at North Pole High School in North Pole, Alaska - a small, Christmas-loving city just southeast of Fairbanks - on the morning of April 4. The Snap at issue: a student transitioning from female to male posted a selfie from the boys' bathroom.
> 
> Some boys at the high school who saw the selfie, however, were angry, and decided they would walk into the girls' bathroom to take their own Snapchat selfie "as a form of protest," Fairbanks North Star Borough School District Superintendent Karen Gaborik told The Washington Post.
> 
> But they would not get far.
> 
> The first boy to enter the girls' room was met by a girl ― who kneed him in the groin. With that, the "protest" was over.
> 
> And now the girl has been expelled, her family told The Post.


Incidentally my humble suggestion is that Freddie and anyone else who believes promoting trans-sexuality in schools is a great idea, should stand behind those beliefs with their wallets. Double down on their school taxes. Let them pay for a third set of washrooms in schools. We would then have boys, girls, and 'too dumb to figure it out' washrooms.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

eMacMan said:


> Dropping this into the NDP thread partly since they are so gung-ho to promote a trans agenda in schools, but also because new threads are pretty much invisible to anyone who does not log in.
> 
> For the record my opinion is that the young lass handled (kneeded) it perfectly. It's the boys who should have been expelled.
> 
> https://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Boys-stormed-a-girls-bathroom-to-protest-A-13768031.php
> 
> 
> 
> Incidentally my humble suggestion is that Freddie and anyone else who believes promoting trans-sexuality in schools is a great idea, should stand behind those beliefs with their wallets. Double down on their school taxes. Let them pay for a third set of washrooms in schools. We would then have boys, girls, and 'too dumb to figure it out' washrooms.




God, you are ignorant. Please stop telling me what it is you think I believe. It’s like me saying “for eMacMan and any other Nazis out there...”


----------



## FeXL

I'm sorry. Did I miss something? 

I've parsed eMacMan's post a number of times & I don't see a single instance anywhere of him calling you a name anywhere, let alone anything as offensive as _Nazi_.

Just because Red Rachel is going to get her ass handed to her today, Freddie, doesn't mean you have to take it out on everyone else...



Freddie_Biff said:


> It’s like me saying “for eMacMan and any other Nazis out there...”


----------



## SINC

A little something to take Freddie's mind off eMacMan. Meanwhile we will take care of this problem at the polls today.

*Credit rating agencies blast Alberta budget, warn of ballooning debt*



> CALGARY – Credit rating agencies blasted Alberta’s rising debt and continued deficits Friday, and said the government’s plan to bring the budget back to balance hinges on a dramatic oil price recovery.
> 
> While Moody’s Investor Service did not immediately downgrade the province’s credit, the ratings agency issued a release Friday showing it was reviewing the province’s credit profile following the NDP government’s budget announcement.
> 
> The fiscal plan demonstrates a lack of willingness to contain debt growth.
> 
> “Alberta’s rapidly rising debt burden, protracted deficits and above-inflation expense growth continue to put significant pressure on its rating,” Moody’s assistant vice-president Adam Hardi said in the release.


Much more at the link.

https://business.financialpost.com/...albertas-debt-and-recovery-hopes-based-on-oil


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Just because Red Rachel is going to get her ass handed to her today, Freddie, doesn't mean you have to take it out on everyone else...


The "Cluster**** on the Right" has captured the hearts and votes of Albertans and supporters of the NDP are going out of their ever-loving minds. They had a taste of power through a once-in-a-lifetime protest vote and can't believe Notley is out on her ass forever after having demonstrated such "leadership." The Bob Rae NDP government in Ontario happened a long time ago, but the province still remembers what it was like.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> A little something to take Freddie's mind off eMacMan. Meanwhile we will take care of this problem at the polls today.


From your link:



> Premier Rachel Notley said Friday she knows Albertans are worried about the growing size of the debt, but said it is “absolutely manageable.”


Why, yes. Yes, it is. And we're going to show her precisely how Albertans manage their economy... :lmao:


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Premier Rachel Notley said Friday she knows Albertans are worried about the growing size of the debt, but said it is “absolutely manageable.”


I'll give Notley an A+ rating for chutzpah.


----------



## eMacMan

> Premier Rachel Notley said Friday she knows Albertans are worried about the growing size of the debt, but said it is “absolutely manageable.”


And one of the reasons she is getting the boot to the tush is that she has shown zero interest in doing so.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> I'll give Notley an A+ rating for chutzpah.


Is it, though?

Or is it simply wilful ignorance combined with a healthy dose of denial?

I can't decide.


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> And one of the reasons she is getting the boot to the tush is that she has shown zero interest in doing so.


Yeppers. Dump a spender into the premiership of fiscally conservative Alberta & your political career is not long for this world. It's why Knotley got elected in the first place & why Kenney needs to be real careful over the next 4 years.


----------



## eMacMan

Freddie_Biff said:


> God, you are ignorant. Please stop telling me what it is you think I believe. It’s like me saying “for eMacMan and any other Nazis out there...”


Wow Freddie there are times it seems like you are willing to go hundreds of miles out of your way to take offense. and to hell with all the CO2 you expend in the process.

Now if you've gone and done a Trudeau Two Face, since you berated Sinc and I for refusing to refer to a he as a she, you should be able to pass that information along in a reasonably courteous manner. Hey you could even apologize for the earlier unwarranted attacks. Nothing wrong with a flip flop as long as you are willing to own it. 

Turning your back on the darkside does surprise me however, as Notley considers forcing the transgender agenda down schools' throats as one of her crowing achievements, morever you included it in her list of achievements without any disclaimers.


----------



## Macfury

eMacMan said:


> ...morever you included it in her list of achievements without any disclaimers.


Is it possible that Freddie never read the items on the list, which originated on Facebook and was simply copied here.


----------



## Macfury

Notley quote:



> “*We have a path to victory*, we know the areas that we can win and we know that there are enough of them that we could still win a majority government,” she said in a Friday interview in Canmore.


The Alberta NDP has invented time travel??


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Is it possible that Freddie never read the items on the list, which originated on Facebook and was simply copied here.


Very. Matter of fact, I would almost guarantee it.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> The Alberta NDP has invented time travel??


TruDope...


----------



## Macfury

Notley is in desperation mode. She "fought every day for the pipeline." Love the responses on her Twitter feed:


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Notley is in desperation mode. She "fought every day for the pipeline." Love the responses on her Twitter feed:


Haggard, lying bitch...


----------



## Macfury

Bet she's taken up smoking again today.


----------



## Freddie_Biff




----------



## FeXL

Hey, Freddie, the rib steak's on the grille, the beer's in the glass, the Cohiba's waiting in the humidor.

How are you celebrating Rachel's demise?


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


>


Who or what the hell is Caillou?


----------



## SINC

A final Alberta election poll released today three hours ago.



> Forum Research Survey is the last poll released ahead of the election.
> With Albertans heading to the polls today, Forum Research has released the final opinion poll of the campaign.
> Here are the key results:
> UCP – 50.6%
> NDP – 34.6%
> Alberta Party – 10.9%
> Liberals – 2.2%
> Other – 1.7%
> Based on those popular vote numbers, Forum projects 67 seats for the United Conservative Party, putting them well above the number of seats needed for a majority.


----------



## Macfury

Caillou is a horrible bald cartoon character from France. And I hate him.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Caillou is a horrible bald cartoon character from France. And I hate him.




Then we do have something in common after all! LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Well, congrats, UCP backers. Looks like you were right.


----------



## SINC

Kenney declared winner 36 minutes after polls closed with triple the seats of Notley.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Kenney declared winner 36 minutes after polls closed with triple the seats of Notley.




61 vs. 26 equals triple? I think your math skills may be worse than mine, Don.


----------



## SINC

UCP 62
NDP 25

No seats for any other party.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> 61 vs. 26 equals triple? I think your math skills may be worse than mine, Don.


Duh. At the time I made the post it was 60 vs 20.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Duh. At the time I made the post it was 60 vs 20.




Duh. Perhaps you should have stated that.


----------



## Macfury

I think I win the beer for my prediction, though rps is close as well.



> *Sinc*
> UCP 56 seats
> NDP 22 seats
> ABP 7 seats
> Others 2
> *
> Beej*
> UCP 48
> NDP 35
> ABP 2
> Others 2
> 
> *Macfury*
> UCP 59
> NDP 24
> ABP 3
> Others 1
> 
> *Rps*
> UCP 58
> NDP 26
> ABP 2
> Other 1


----------



## Macfury

Merci!



Freddie_Biff said:


> Well, congrats, UCP backers. Looks like you were right.


----------



## SINC

Unofficial results to date but could change once advance poll results are finalized. Official updated results from Elections Alberta here:

https://www.abvote.ca/2019/results?...cLViWR3Ad3NpGjAnlN8I8TPKy2tizEHPPIxn2Ye_tb_jA


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> I think I win the beer for my prediction, though rps is close as well.


Congrats to all of you. Glad I was wrong, but disappointed that there is no viable third party.

Sinc: I owe you a couple beers at your local next time I'm in town.


----------



## Rps

MacFury, good call...I think you are the closest. I personally do not like majority governments ....little control if you will....just look at the Federal Liberals and their ability to effect change which does not recognise those who are ideologically different. While the NDP got the keys at a bad time their biggest failure is that Albertans didn’t think they were worthy of being in opposition in a minority government.


----------



## Rps

Sinc, where did the NDP get their seats? Is this an Edmonton vs the rest of Alberta split?


----------



## Beej

Progressive activists, having learned nothing, stick with "everybody who disagrees with us is hateful and uncaring" as their core message.

https://edmonton.citynews.ca/video/2019/04/16/citynews-panel-has-strong-reaction-to-ucp-win/

Sort of like angrily yelling, "love trumps hate", as they do in the U.S.


----------



## FeXL

MAGA!!!

:clap::clap::clap:


----------



## SINC

Rps said:


> Sinc, where did the NDP get their seats? Is this an Edmonton vs the rest of Alberta split?


A,most all their seats came in Edmonton and area suburbs and a couple in Calgary. Sadly they won my riding which is really bad for us. That little orange blob is Edmonton in the map below, ditto for the even smaller bit in Calgary.

See results poll by poll here:

https://www.abvote.ca/2019/results?...cLViWR3Ad3NpGjAnlN8I8TPKy2tizEHPPIxn2Ye_tb_jA


----------



## FeXL

Rps said:


> ...Albertans didn’t think they were worthy of being in opposition in a minority government.


In 4 years they did nothing to earn that privilege...


----------



## SINC

I am still mystified why brain dead Lethbridge re-elected Shannon Phillips, an anti-oil Greenpeace loving activist.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Rps said:


> Sinc, where did the NDP get their seats? Is this an Edmonton vs the rest of Alberta split?




Yes.


----------



## SINC

Edmonton and St. Albert will be shortchanged at the cabinet table big time with a UCP government. They have voted themselves right out of the picture. Incredibly stupid move when polls predicted a UCP win 99% to 1%.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> I am still mystified why brain dead Lethbridge re-elected Shannon Phillips, an anti-oil Greenpeace loving activist.


'Cause a ton of Progs live in west Lethbridge...

It's a squeaker. Last I heard she won by 377 votes. Recount?


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> I am still mystified why brain dead Lethbridge re-elected Shannon Pillips, an anti-oil Greenpeace loving activist.


Sorry to see Shannon re-elected as well. She was well aware that her Castle plan was a total fiasco. So much so, that she refused to even show her face at the mis-labeled 'public consultations'. 

Worse, I doubt that Kenney will go back to the intelligent plan that was in place before Shannon botched it. No money in this corner of the province and therefore no interest from the crooks in charge.


----------



## Macfury

Beej said:


> Progressive activists, having learned nothing, stick with "everybody who disagrees with us is hateful and uncaring" as their core message.
> 
> https://edmonton.citynews.ca/video/2019/04/16/citynews-panel-has-strong-reaction-to-ucp-win/
> 
> Sort of like angrily yelling, "love trumps hate", as they do in the U.S.


Can't even stop chewing gum while she spouts her disrespect.


----------



## SINC

Well, there is now hope for a trifecta. Wynne and Notley gone, one to go come October.


----------



## FeXL

If the details in this article are anywhere near accurate, it's no damn wonder Rachel lost.

After Alberta’s election, ‘nothing good to come’



> *Hoping to replicate the last-minute electoral shift of 2012, in which the Wildrose Party’s near-certain victory seemed scuttled by the now infamous revelation that two of its candidates made homophobic and racist remarks*, Rachel Notley’s party relied on a stream of damaging leaks about candidates and nominees from the UCP.


Wildrose did not lose the election because of "homophobic and racist remarks". They lost because Smith crossed the floor.

Period.

And, _and_, if Notley built her entire campaign based on that assumption & focussed almost singularly on slinging mud at the UCP...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Wildrose did not lose the election because of "homophobic and racist remarks". They lost because Smith crossed the floor.


That's some revisionism! Smith would have won the next election if she hadn't crossed. At the same time, it was good that she revealed herself to Albertans before they got too invested in her.


----------



## SINC

Hmmm, maybe?


----------



## SINC

David Climenhaga is a dyed in the wool card-carrying NDPer who writes a daily online column called Alberta Politics. Today he wrote in part, the following which would seem to hint from an NDP insider that Notley will quit politics very soon. That should be the final nail in the coffin of the Alberta NDP, never to return to this province.



> Meanwhile, in Edmonton (where your blogger was) Rachel Notley was coming to terms with a new role as Opposition leader of a caucus reduced by more than half. Her remarks were gracious, at times mildly defiant, and she vowed to lead an effective Opposition – which she will, *if she sticks around.*
> 
> I know the thought of anything else is unthinkable to many in her party, but it’s not much fun to be an ex-premier in the same old Legislature, so *I don’t think we can rule out a significant change of scene for Alberta’s first NDP premier within a few weeks or months.*
> 
> “We have fundamentally changed the politics of this province forever,” Ms. Notley averred. “Governing in Alberta should never ever again be a divine right, but always an earned privilege.” All true, but cold comfort to New Democrats, now concentrated in their Edmonton redoubt.


Full column at the link.

https://albertapolitics.ca/2019/04/...s-ucp-sounds-like-man-with-his-eye-on-ottawa/


----------



## Freddie_Biff




----------



## eMacMan

I know mud slinging is currently a popular political weapon. However when Rachel decided to go that route, it was evident that she felt her record would not only fail to get her re-elected but was really her worst enemy.

I am sorry that more people did not vote for the Independence Party. While I think that independence is not really the answer, the rest of their platform was better by a mile than either of the 2 main stream crooks.


----------



## Freddie_Biff




----------



## Macfury

I can't even imagine a province that didn't think the Notley train had just about slammed into a brick wall at full tilt. What is it about Doug Ford's Ontario that wouldn't be an improvement?


----------



## Beej

FeXL said:


> Wildrose did not lose the election because of "homophobic and racist remarks". They lost because Smith crossed the floor.
> 
> Period.


The article is referring to the 2012 election.


----------



## SINC

Jeez Freddie, this is the Alberta NDP thread. Nothing to do with Doug Ford. Not even remotely similar.


----------



## Macfury

Beej said:


> The article is referring to the 2012 election.


WildRose did OK in that election. Did someone expect them to win?


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> WildRose did OK in that election. Did someone expect them to win?


They lead in the polls for weeks, then dropped to second in the final vote.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Alberta_general_election#Opinion_polls

Note that last poll. This is referred to as the "lake of fire" incident.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Jeez Freddie, this is the Alberta NDP thread. Nothing to do with Doug Ford. Not even remotely similar.




Get over yourself, Don. It’s been the hotbed of Alberta politics for the last four years. If you don’t like my posts, don’t read ‘em.


----------



## Macfury

Beej said:


> They lead in the polls for weeks, then dropped to second in the final vote.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Alberta_general_election#Opinion_polls
> 
> Note that last poll. This is referred to as the "lake of fire" incident.


The last poll is often where people have a change of heart anyway as they head to vote.


----------



## FeXL

Speaking of lying polls...

Post Alberta Election Analysis



> 1. The Pollsters – They didn’t miss by their margin of error. *The[y] missed by the margin of Liar.* It is scandalous how biased they were. One poll I saw in the final week said the gap was 8%. It was 22%. And there was no last-minute swing. The undecideds were low and there was no “Lake of Fire” reversal.


I listened to the news reports re: poll numbers on the radio & I talked to different people & I saw the campaign signs & I thought, "there's no damn way it's this close".

It wasn't & those of us who were prescient enough to cut through the BS knew it.

Regarding polls, I was contacted on our land line with a message from some polling company the night before the election and, instead of asking questions on the phone, I was directed to a website. Halfway through the addy I hung up. My actions speak for themselves.

The rest of the analysis is worth a read.


----------



## Macfury

Throughout these last miserable four years, Notley, Freddie and other NDP supporters here have warned us that the Alberta NDP is not responsible for oil prices. And we agreed. So following her historic drubbing, Notley issues this pearl:



> “I will say it’s been about 36 hours since Mr. Kenney has been elected. We’ve seen Quebec double down on their position on the Energy East pipeline. We’ve seen B.C. double down on their support for Bill C-48. Now we have a delay with the pipeline.”


All Kenney's fault. 

First class, Rachel.


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> Throughout these last miserable four years, Notley, Freddie and other NDP supporters here have warned us that the Alberta NDP is not responsible for oil prices. And we agreed. So following her historic drubbing, Notley issues this pearl:
> 
> 
> 
> All Kenney's fault.
> 
> First class, Rachel.


Turn the taps off on the BC bastards. Time to kick ass.


----------



## eMacMan

Pretty much sums it up. Somewhere-time around 9/11, I figured out that when someone tells me to be afraid, the fear mongerer is a generally a much bigger threat than whichever boogeyman they are trying to use to control me.


https://calgaryherald.com/news/loca...ed-on-notley-and-will-backfire-on-trudeau-too




> he Alberta NDP ran a disgraceful, cynical campaign of attempted character assassination against United Conservative Party candidates who were called every name in the book, including white supremacists.
> 
> More than 70 per cent of eligible Alberta voters cast a ballot in this election; 55.2 per cent of them voted for the UCP and just 32 per cent for Rachel Notley’s NDP — making her government the first in the province’s 114-year history to govern for a single term. Of the 87 seats up for grabs, the UCP nabbed 63 and the NDP 24, according to unofficial results.
> 
> Besides the outcome of the election that stands as a repudiation of Notley’s campaign strategy, perhaps the best example of how vilifying one’s opponent can boomerang comes from what happened to UCP candidate Kaycee Madu, who won in the riding of Edmonton-South West against the NDP’s John Archer. In 2015, that seat was won by a different NDP candidate with 53 per cent of the vote.
> 
> Madu was defamed as a white supremacist sympathizer by Archer in a Press Progress story after Madu posted a photo of himself on his Facebook page with a campaign sign on a lawn that said “StopNotley.com,” which had a small logo from The Rebel media organization in the right top corner.


----------



## Beej

eMacMan said:


> Pretty much sums it up. Somewhere-time around 9/11, I figured out that when someone tells me to be afraid, the fear mongerer is a generally a much bigger threat than whichever boogeyman they are trying to use to control me.
> 
> 
> https://calgaryherald.com/news/loca...ed-on-notley-and-will-backfire-on-trudeau-too


From the article:


> “My opponent is praising The Rebel,” Archer tweeted. “This is not who we are, Alberta. I call on my opponent (Madu) to apologize.”


NDP and NDP supporter's unhinged reaction to all things Rebel was quite a sight. Online, they seemed to take it for granted that they could just point to Rebel references and yell "baaaaaaad" to win political points and support. The reaction was so automatic and over-the-top that, as seen in this case, they were easy to goad into public displays of idiocy.

A preview for October's election, although Scheer is likely to cower. Kenney gave Rebel a desk at the election night party. :lmao:


----------



## FeXL

This will go over well.



> Deron Bilous says if a few thousand more per month in taxes cause you to go out of business, then maybe look at your business plan or management of your company.
> UCP MLAs are going to have a field day with that one.
> 
> — Catherine Griwkowsky (@CGriwkowsky) June 5, 2019​


So, who TF is Deron Bilous, you ask?

He was Red Rachel's _economic development and trade minister_.

Unbelievable.

From the comments:



> Be nice if we could just not give these asshats pensions at all.
> 
> But how about we make their pensions a small business franchaise.
> 
> They can then pay their employees above minimum wage, pay more for politically correct supplies (i.e., “locally sourced”, or “fair trade” or whatever nonsense they use).
> 
> What they make in profit after they get to keep.


Love it!


----------



## SINC

FeXL said:


> This will go over well.
> 
> So, who TF is Deron Bilous, you ask?
> 
> He was Red Rachel's _economic development and trade minister_.
> 
> Unbelievable./QUOTE]
> 
> He was also one of two cabinet ministers rumoured to be guilty of sexual misconduct. Red Rachel withheld the names of the two from the public for three years and even now refuses to identify them. Wasn't he also declared a drug addict by his wife in divorce proceedings as well?


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> He was also one of two cabinet ministers rumoured to be guilty of sexual misconduct. Red Rachel withheld the names of the two from the public for three years and even now refuses to identify them. Wasn't he also declared a drug addict by his wife in divorce proceedings as well?


I'd heard the first but not the second.

Interestingly, Edmonchukians just elected him for the _third_ time. I guess he's corrupt enough...


----------



## SINC

FeXL said:


> I'd heard the first but not the second.
> 
> Interestingly, Edmonchukians just elected him for the _third_ time. I guess he's corrupt enough...


https://www.therebel.media/exclusive-notley-cabinet-minister-court-documents-drugs-mla-affair


----------



## FeXL

I post this here because Red Rachel & her cadre of Commies did nothing, zero, to fix the problem.

Tax revolt erupts as Calgary businesses fed up with city hall



> A curious thing has happened to Calgary’s business community this spring as companies have faced massive property tax increases.
> 
> They have discovered a new, more aggressive voice.
> 
> Today, business operators and entrepreneurs across the city are demanding to be heard by city council.
> 
> “No one has held council to account until now,” said Kristi Stuart of Barre Belle Inc., who is helping to organize a rally outside city hall on Monday.
> 
> “We are going to come together, support one another and show them we mean business.”
> 
> Small business owners and operators like Stuart are now speaking up, exasperated by a colossal property tax shift triggered by the devaluation of downtown office towers.


----------



## FeXL

Further fallout from Red Rachel's TGF.

Big Rock Brewery Announces Layoffs Due To Increase in Provincial Beer Tax



> Big Rock Brewery has announced that it is undertaking “significant cost-cutting measures, including reductions to the Corporation’s workforce,” with Alberta’s provincial beer tax being blamed for the move.
> 
> According to a press release:
> 
> _ The 104% increase in the net Alberta beer mark-up (provincial tax) imposed on Big Rock by the previous Government of Alberta in late 2018 *(being a 160% increase since 2016)* has forced the Corporation’s senior management to take immediate cost-cutting measures as the increase in the tax on Big Rock’s beer in Alberta has eroded the profitability achieved by Big Rock in 2018._​


Bold mine.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Further fallout from Red Rachel's TGF.
> 
> Big Rock Brewery Announces Layoffs Due To Increase in Provincial Beer Tax


The gift that keeps on giving. But at least they never handed out earplugs while they were destroying the economy.


----------



## FeXL

Oh please, oh please, oh please...

Rachel Notley intends to run for premier in 2023, with the aim of getting Alberta ‘back on track’



> In the past five years, Rachel Notley has gone from third-party leader, to government leader to opposition leader, but says she will try again for Alberta’s top job in 2023.
> 
> The reason, she says, grows from the steady drip of broken promises, half-truths, no-truths, gaslighting and self-dealing from Premier Jason Kenney and the governing United Conservatives.


If for no other reason than to hand her her ass on a platter just once more. :lmao:


----------

