Not signed in (Sign In)

Welcome, Guest

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

Vanilla 1.1.3 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

    •  
      CommentAuthorzander
    • CommentTimeApr 29th 2008 edited
     
    Posted By: cancelbotThese are undoubtedly some good times for people in Alberta. However, the milk and honey being enjoyed in Wild Rose Country are, and will continue to be diluted by the continued influx of people from across the country. The marginal benefit from moving there will decline as costs go up and demand for labour goes down (although it's clearly not at that point yet). Also, the tremendous costs of developing infrastructure (not just roads, but hospitals, schools, social services, and all the mundane stuff that goes along with it) will put a damper on the party in a hurry.

    True, there are certainly downsides to the extreme growth Alberta has seen, and associated costs too.

    If you take the view that the government's economic goals do (or should) include the goal of maximizing wealth across the board, there is probably no more efficient way to do that than to provide tangible incentives for people to go to the source of said wealth, and work towards developing it even further.

    And that's how benefits accrue directly to the region where the natural resources are present (provided of course that the provincial government has the ability to meet the needs of this kind of growth).

    I agree that equalization is good. Important government-provided services like health care, education, etc. should be of a consistently high standard across the country. Indeed, that is the stated purpose of equalization. No one wants to see gold-plated hospital toilets in Calgary while people in New Brunswick make do with third-world style health care. However, it would ultimately be to everyone's detriment if royalties went to Ottawa and redistributed without regard for reinvesting it in areas where it would likely create even more wealth.

    All good points. But I think that one of the other issues here is that Alberta (and other provinces with access to high oil revenues) is able to reduce the amount of revenue they take in taxes, thus creating a semblance of inequality among provinces). By removing natural resources from the equation and accruing them nationally, the playing field between provinces could be levelled to a certain extent. Any advantage enjoyed by one jurisdiction would have to be made through smart policy decisions.

    •  
      CommentAuthorcancelbot
    • CommentTimeApr 29th 2008
     
    Moderator

    Posted By: zanderAll good points. But I think that one of the other issues here is that Alberta (and other provinces with access to high oil revenues) is able to reduce the amount of revenue they take in taxes, thus creating a semblance of inequality among provinces). By removing natural resources from the equation and accruing them nationally, the playing field between provinces could be levelled to a certain extent. Any advantage enjoyed by one jurisdiction would have to be made through smart policy decisions.



    Getting back to one of your earlier points, I acknowledge that under the current system, wealth tends accrue to the region. But what we can't lose sight of is the fact that many (probably most) of the people in that particular region (being Alberta) have roots elsewhere. The doors are wide open, and they have come to get a piece of the pie. In turn, their work helps, in some minute way, to realize Alberta's economic potential, and in turn Canada's economic potential, in a way that remaining in Quebec or Manitoba or wherever might not.

    I think the existing system of sharing the wealth is a pretty good one - it draws a reasonable compromise between a fully centralized system where the money goes to Ottawa (at risk of being used less efficiently), and one where all the money goes to Edmonton (which would neglect the needs of the rest of the country).

    Basically, under the existing system, you can be assured of a reasonably good quality of life no matter where in Canada you live, although you will have to be prepared to pay a price if you do not want to relocate to where market demand is highest.
    •  
      CommentAuthorzander
    • CommentTimeApr 29th 2008
     
    I do agree that Canada does benefit in a number of ways from Alberta's oil wealth. My issue is rooted in a belief that tangible benefits - such as oil revenues - are best accrued at a national level rather than at a local level. I see your points and agree on many of them. But I do believe that giving provinces control of natural resources revenues is not necessarily the best way to do it.
    •  
      CommentAuthorcancelbot
    • CommentTimeApr 29th 2008
     
    Moderator
    Fair enough. For the record I am not a steadfast defender of the existing system - I would certainly be open to a new way of dealing with equalization and resource revenues. I am simply leery about plans that would favour the province or federal government at the expense of the other.
  1.  
    This just in: I say implement a new winnipeg dot com tax on the oil companies-- for every dollar they earn in profit they give us a dollar. Now back to your regularly scheduled activities.
    •  
      CommentAuthorjim
    • CommentTimeApr 29th 2008
     
    I would like to see more time between the increase announcement and the pump going up, lets say in ground tank empty then when new gas put in the increase applies. Not overnight
    • CommentAuthorMonominto
    • CommentTimeApr 29th 2008
     
    Each and every time the crude oil prices go up, EVERYTHING else goes up, Food, Furniture, all of the consumables start going up right away.
    Our wages are not keeping up with the inflationary rates and greed of the oil cartels.
    My prediction is this: if the rates at the pumps keep going up like this, only the very rich will be able to afford to take vacations, go on road trips, go fishing, or to the lake on weekends.
    Do all of you want to be restricted even on how much you spend on food, simply because you HAVE to put gasoline in your gas tanks?
    Do you want to be told you CAN'T take that vacation, go to the lake, go camping, or any other activity just because your wages aren't enough to warrant that activity? Your own children will be stuck at home with you all summer, because the campground you sent them to last year aren't running their buses as a result of the cost of the fuel.
    Call your Member of Parliament, your Member of Legislative Assembly, but the living crud out of them. Keep calling them about the plundering of your wallets by the Oil Company's greed.
    Don't let up till you get results. YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO COMPLAIN!!
    • CommentAuthorMonominto
    • CommentTimeMay 14th 2008
     
    Yet another gouge to the pocket books, the prices are going up so fast, pretty soon, no one will be able to afford to travel to work!
    •  
      CommentAuthorzander
    • CommentTimeMay 14th 2008
     
    Posted By: MonomintoYet another gouge to the pocket books, the prices are going up so fast, pretty soon, no one will be able to afford to travel to work!

    Take the bus. My monthly pass costs the same as it always did (at least for now). ;)

    Thankful People: conceitedjerk
    • CommentAuthorMonominto
    • CommentTimeMay 14th 2008
     
    From where I live, zander, there is NO bus service, at all.
    •  
      CommentAuthorcancelbot
    • CommentTimeMay 15th 2008
     
    Moderator
    Posted By: MonomintoFrom where I live, zander, there is NO bus service, at all.


    Looks like you picked the wrong place to live!
    Thankful People: StBPegger
    •  
      CommentAuthorzander
    • CommentTimeMay 15th 2008
     
    Posted By: MonomintoFrom where I live, zander, there is NO bus service, at all.

    Then carpool with a neighbour, drive to a Park & Ride lot or sell your car and buy a more fuel-efficient one. There are other options.

    •  
      CommentAuthorjim
    • CommentTimeMay 15th 2008
     
    Yes there are find develop a source of propulsion not involving oil and watch Alberta go back to the cow patty farm yard it is. And the Arabs eat sand .
    • CommentAuthorMr. Nobody
    • CommentTimeMay 15th 2008
     
    find develop a source of propulsion not involving oil

    Japs and Tesla are making strides in battery. GM is making a push. My hope is that within 10 years electric cars will hit City's in a big way.

    U of M and Manitoba Hydro/Government of Manitoba/ Feds are falling short. These 4 should be leveraging everything they have to take a slice of that market which by all acoounts, North Americans are ready and willing to embrace.

    Ahhh ALberta, an oil slick away from being Winnipeg.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSputnik
    • CommentTimeMay 15th 2008
     
    Posted By: Mr. NobodyAhhh ALberta, an oil slick away from being Winnipeg.


    Define "oil slick".

    I guess thats assuming oil prices drop. Which would cause gas to go down in price resulting in less people caring about alternative energy sources (at least temporarily).

    That said. I moved to Calgary when oil was around $40/barrel and the province was still doing pretty good at that time. Natural gas is still king in Alberta so both would have to crash before Alberta would be in real trouble.
    •  
      CommentAuthorsmjpilot
    • CommentTimeMay 15th 2008
     
    Alberta has always been a great place to live.... that's why the dinosaurs that became Alberta's oil all chose to live there! Manitoba should have done something 65 million years ago to attract more dinosaur immigrants!!
  2.  
    Posted By: smjpilotAlberta has always been a great place to live.... that's why the dinosaurs that became Alberta's oil all chose to live there! Manitoba should have done something 65 million years ago to attract more dinosaur immigrants!!


    The NDP were in power at the time and its the same track record as we currently have with them trying to attract business to the province.
    Thankful People: smjpilot
    • CommentAuthorMr. Nobody
    • CommentTimeMay 15th 2008
     
    Sput, whats the buzz about imperial being denied the go ahead on their project ?
    •  
      CommentAuthorSputnik
    • CommentTimeMay 15th 2008 edited
     
    Not much more than what has already been reported in the media.

    Alberta fisheries wants more studies done to ensure the adjacent marshland will be protected.
    • CommentAuthorMonominto
    • CommentTimeMay 15th 2008
     
    I moved out to the bush to get away from "civilization" and live like a human being.
    I don't have sirens screaming through my windows , no noisy neighbours, no excessive carbon fumes clogging my lungs.

    ok, I'll just shut my mouth on the gas prices eh?

    One point though, for those who have enjoyed heading out camping this year, to various places like the Whiteshell, Nopiming, or even Bird's Hill and other places, the gas prices may curtail your travels a little, and the province has put up the rates both for getting into the parks, and staying in the campgrounds. Heck, even the OWNERS of cabins in those areas are going to have to pay for getting in to their own properties!

    All too soon, only the very rich will be able to even afford to "get away from it all"!

    Leaves the poor folk sitting at home huh?