Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #551  
Old 11-07-2019, 10:16 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,615
There's no real question or drama: Liberals will announce their new cabinet in a couple weeks and they have ruled out a coalition. Minority government.
  #552  
Old 11-07-2019, 10:30 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uzi View Post
Of course it is easier to break things. It doesn't mean you can't fix them. There are technologies that can remove carbon from the atmosphere existing today. Are they efficient? Not enough to justify their use. If we developed fusion, then they are much more likely to be workable. So, solve that problem and we potentially solve many more at the same time.
Seriously? If we develop fusion things will work out fine? So to make you happy, we need oil prices to skyrocket so we can extract all that cash from under Alberta THEN we start economically feasible carbon removal technology and cold fusion and fix all the problems? Oy vey.
  #553  
Old 11-07-2019, 10:52 AM
Rysto is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepKillBeep View Post
However, I see recently that we might have a new political party. Alberta is forming the Wexit party as a counter to the BQ. I really hope this happens. It should drain off all the remaining extremists in the CPoC who haven't already fled to the PPC, and perhaps leave the CPoC to become a real national conservative party like we used to have.
A Western analogue to the Bloc would be a goddamned disaster for Canada. It could render the country permanently ungovernable.

Last edited by Rysto; 11-07-2019 at 10:53 AM.
  #554  
Old 11-07-2019, 11:52 AM
BeepKillBeep is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,762
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rysto View Post
A Western analogue to the Bloc would be a goddamned disaster for Canada. It could render the country permanently ungovernable.
Maybe, although I don't think so. I think we would end up with minority coalition governments, and that would be fine.

However, even if true, then if the country becomes ungovernable then maybe the country shouldn't exist. Or needs an entirely new framework. Certainly, people have a right to form a new political party. I would rather Canada cease to exist then to prevent people from forming a new political party (with some reasonable exclusions, I don't think a Nazi party or an equivalent should be permitted).

I don't think a Wexit party will get the kind of support the Wexiters think it will. For one thing, the founders are alt-right conspiracy theorists. And sure they'll attract the alt-right conspiracy theorists, but the CPoC would be better off without them anyway. They'd probably have a level of support roughly equal to the PPC.
  #555  
Old 11-07-2019, 12:18 PM
Gorsnak is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Saskaboom
Posts: 9,413
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rysto View Post
A Western analogue to the Bloc would be a goddamned disaster for Canada. It could render the country permanently ungovernable.
Only if it actually started winning seats. I suspect it would actually draw about as many votes as the PPC did.
  #556  
Old 11-07-2019, 01:03 PM
Grey is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 6,821
Oh Trudeau plans to have his cabinet sworn in by the 20th of November.
__________________
"When they discover the centre of the universe, a lot of people will be disappointed to discover they are not it." : Bernard Bailey
  #557  
Old 11-07-2019, 05:06 PM
orcenio is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: NCR
Posts: 2,244
Wexit is a farce. If it was a real political ideology it would be active during Conservative rule and not merely exist as a right-wing reaction to the Tories losing an election. If you are basing your "wining conditions" on times when Conservatives lose the house, you'll always be SOL when they win.

Last edited by orcenio; 11-07-2019 at 05:09 PM.
  #558  
Old 11-07-2019, 05:34 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 28,286
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcenio View Post
Wexit is a farce. If itwas a real political ideology it would be active during Conservative rule and not merely exist as a right-wing reaction to the Tories losing an election. If you are basing your "wining conditions" on times when Conservatives lose the house, you'll always be SOL when they win.
Wexit pretty much exists exactly where conservatives have been winning elections.

I think western separation would be extremely hard to achieve. You will know that the movement has actual clout if you see the leaders of Saskatchewan and Alberta making serious plans to take over the pension plans of the citizens and to stand up provincial police forces to replace the RCMP, along with other means of decoupling from federal control.

I think there is a good chance that provincial leaders will start talking about that, but not because they are seriously considering leaving. Instead, they'll pander to the base with that talk, and use it as leverage against Ottawa.

That said, if Trudeau is serious about doubling down on energy restrictions and climate change policies, he may force the West's hand. There aren't a lot of places that would stand still for having their wealth forcibly kept from them.

What do you think would happen if Trudeau ordered Quebec's cement plants to shut down (Cement manufacture is a major contributor to CO2 emissions), and it cost the province tens of thousands of jobs, impoverished entire communities, and threw the province back into massive deficits? And for the sake of argument, imagine that Quebec's cement profits had required them to send a few billion dollars per year to the west, which wasn't running deficits and had the strongest economies in Canada? And that even though Ottawa destroyed the industry that generated those profits, it demanded that the billions still be paid while the province's economy spirals down?

Because that's the situation Alberta is in. Since the election we lost two more major energy companies, along with a few thousand more jobs, citing the difficulties of doing energy business in the province.

Jason Kenney has promised that if we don't get action from Ottawa to remove the roadblocks placed in front of our oil industry, he'll put equalization to a referendum in the province. While only about a third of Albertans are in favor of separation, more than half want the equalization referendum, which suggests it would actually pass.

If it did, I imagine the rift between wast and west would get markedly worse. Quebec hates us now - I can imagine how they'd feel if they didn't get billions of dollars in Alberta taxes per year in equalization.

This is the kind of thing that actually could break up Canada over time. And that would be worse for the east than it would be for the west.

Last edited by Sam Stone; 11-07-2019 at 05:37 PM.
  #559  
Old 11-07-2019, 06:42 PM
orcenio is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: NCR
Posts: 2,244
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
Wexit pretty much exists exactly where conservatives have been winning elections.
And yet Western alienation becomes a non-issue whenever the Tories take Parliament hill. That's just pure sour grapes, not an independence movement. Wexiters cry bloody murder up until the day the Conservatives win and get to set the National agenda. That's why it's a perennial farce. There no political aspirations beyond run-of-the-mill right wing reactionary politics.
  #560  
Old 11-07-2019, 09:53 PM
Uzi is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 5,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gorsnak View Post
If we develop fusion the oil patch is completely done for. Be careful what you wish for.
I don't give a shit about the oil industry. I do care about leaving money in the ground when it is viable to get it out. When we no longer have a need, or someone is no longer willing to pay for buggy whips, we move on. The difference here is that others are telling people to stop producing a currently viable product, a product being produced globally by other countries, and also being used by those telling us to stop doing it, with no offer of compensation in lieu of.
  #561  
Old 11-07-2019, 09:58 PM
Uzi is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 5,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
Seriously? If we develop fusion things will work out fine?
If we develop a sustainable and cheap alternative to fossil fuels then it solves the issue with climate change. And if it is cheap enough we can use the energy to extract carbon from the atmosphere and potentially reverse the current damage. What is so unimaginable about that?
  #562  
Old 11-07-2019, 10:16 PM
DWMarch is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Nanaimo, BC
Posts: 2,146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uzi View Post
I don't give a shit about the oil industry. I do care about leaving money in the ground when it is viable to get it out. When we no longer have a need, or someone is no longer willing to pay for buggy whips, we move on. The difference here is that others are telling people to stop producing a currently viable product, a product being produced globally by other countries, and also being used by those telling us to stop doing it, with no offer of compensation in lieu of.
I don't think it's viable. I don't know (or care) what the politics of the source of this material are but they lay the situation out pretty starkly in terms of straight logistics. Alberta oil is dirty (literally, as in laden with toxic chemicals that must be removed), expensive to refine and takes longer to be shipped in smaller quantities. See here for details:
https://www.nationalobserver.com/201...-oil-expansion
  #563  
Old 11-07-2019, 10:29 PM
Dr_Paprika is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: South of Toronto, Canada
Posts: 4,080
Under Harper, no one mentioned western alienation. But times were good and Harper is Western.

Alberta has some cause for anger since Trudeau favours the Laurentian axis of Ontario and Atlantic and Quebec gets a degree of preferential treatment.

Alberta made decisions to keep tax rates low and could have done a better job of diversifying its economy.

The equalization system is a mess.

I understand Western alienation but don’t think Wexit is likely, feasible or all that popular, grumbling aside. I also doubt Texas is going anywhere.
__________________
"A noble spirit embiggens the smallest man"
  #564  
Old 11-07-2019, 11:11 PM
Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: my Herkimer Battle Jitney
Posts: 86,251
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
There's no real question or drama: Liberals will announce their new cabinet in a couple weeks and they have ruled out a coalition. Minority government.
OK, thanks!
  #565  
Old 11-08-2019, 12:11 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uzi View Post
If we develop a sustainable and cheap alternative to fossil fuels then it solves the issue with climate change. And if it is cheap enough we can use the energy to extract carbon from the atmosphere and potentially reverse the current damage. What is so unimaginable about that?
It's completely imaginable. We both just imagined it! But fusion has been the illusive dream for decades. Doesn't seem like a super great "Plan A",
  #566  
Old 11-08-2019, 12:22 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,615
If we're shooting for the moon technology wise, how about we just create an algae that turns Bitumen into rechargeable batteries?


Last edited by CarnalK; 11-08-2019 at 12:23 AM.
  #567  
Old 11-08-2019, 02:44 AM
Uzi is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 5,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWMarch View Post
I don't think it's viable.
How about we let those who want to extract it make the business case for if is viable, for them, to do so? 2.8M bbl/d of production (2017) is going somewhere to someone who wants it. https://www.alberta.ca/oil-sands-fac...tatistics.aspx
  #568  
Old 11-08-2019, 02:52 AM
Uzi is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 5,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
It's completely imaginable. We both just imagined it! But fusion has been the illusive dream for decades. Doesn't seem like a super great "Plan A",
Well, think how long it will take if we don't invest in making it work.
  #569  
Old 11-08-2019, 08:07 AM
BeepKillBeep is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,762
Some of the recent comments really highlight some of the problems.

1. The so-called attack on Alberta's energy industry is, in part, the fault of Alberta. They've had plenty of time to diversify their industry, except ...

2. Unfortunately, a fair number of people want to address climate change, buuuuuuuuuut only if it isn't going to cost them anything. This leads to exactly what I was talking about earlier. Everybody pointing elsewhere, and nothing happening.

3. I want to reiterate that inaction on climate change will cause permanent damage to many of Earth's ecosystems. That's bad; however,

4. If you don't give a flying fig about ecosystems, one can only hope that you care about human beings. And climate change will kill tens to hundreds of millions of humans between 2030 and 2050. On the low end. Let me put it another way. The low end estimate is for a number of human deaths equal to two World Wars IIs. Now, if you don't care about human lives, then there's nothing more to be said.

5. Let's say you don't give a flying fig about the humans that will die, because most of them won't be in North America or Western Europe. People don't just starve to death because we in the West say "Sorry, we're not giving up anything, so would you kindly just die." No, starving people react, and they react violently. A lack of food has been the driver behind many of history's political instabilities. Political instablity leads to conflict. E.g. Syria (did you know that Syria civil war is in part due to climate change?) And here's the thing about small conflicts. They have a tendency of attracting the global powers who have an interest in that region of the world. E.g. Syria. Now Syria did not become a trigger point for anything bigger, but the more times you roll the dice, the more likely you are to come up with snakes eyes (or for D&D players, a 1). These small regional conflicts can spin out of control and engulf the globe. See World War I. The rising climate crisis is going to see an increase in regional conflicts, mass migrations, and mass starvation. A scale of human misery never before seen on this planet. And while the direct effects may never reach us, you can sure as heck be guaranteed that the indirect effects from global instablity will. People don't just die because we say so.

6. Uzi, science doesn't work that way. One of the projects on which I am collaborating is finding a genome modification for a single species of plant such that it will absorb more carbon as it grows. I just recently started on this project, but they've been working on it for six years. They think they're getting closer, perhaps another 2-4 years of work. But even if they make the discovery, then it will be another at least another four years before it could be deployed in a wide-scale fashion. Fusion technology has been 10 years away now for about 70 years. You cannot count on a miracle cure being found. It is great to hope, and I certainly hope a technological solution is found, because it is increasingly obvious that we're simply not going to do anything. Burning all of the oil for economic gain and then hoping we can undo the damage before it is too late (note, it is practically already too late to avoid the minimal damage that will be caused by climate change, i.e. the 1.5C global increase is virtually impossible to attain) is not realistic.

Last edited by BeepKillBeep; 11-08-2019 at 08:10 AM.
  #570  
Old 11-08-2019, 12:24 PM
RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 41,803
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepKillBeep View Post
Some of the recent comments really highlight some of the problems.

1. The so-called attack on Alberta's energy industry is, in part, the fault of Alberta. They've had plenty of time to diversify their industry, except ...
"Diversify their industry" is meaningless twaddle. The economy is what it is, asking the government to guess how it should "diversify" is a terrible idea, and the money will flow to wherever it makes sense for it to flow unless the government gets in the way. The government should let the oil industry produce oil. By all means charge a carbon tax - that is by far the best wayto handle climate change, though Canada really can't do this on its own - and offset it with tax cuts elsewhere, but the weird hostility to the oil industry should end.

If Alberta's economy diversifies, then it will. It will do so one way or another as the market dictates.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #571  
Old 11-08-2019, 03:12 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 28,286
Well, here's a modest proposal if you 'give a flying fig' about climate change and are willing to pay a price for it: End equalization, and share in the pain Alberta is facing. And if Alberta continues to slide, perhaps the people of Quebec could start sending a few billion our way, under the same equalization concept.

I mean, because if Alberta leaves Canada and ramps up its oil production, that will hurt the planet. So if you care about the planet, perhaps it's time to share in the cost of saving it.
  #572  
Old 11-08-2019, 03:18 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,615
Alberta leaving Canada and ramping up its oil production is not in any way a realistic thing to be concerned about.
  #573  
Old 11-08-2019, 03:24 PM
Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: my Herkimer Battle Jitney
Posts: 86,251
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
It's completely imaginable. We both just imagined it! But fusion has been the illusive dream for decades....
Fusion power, it's been said, is just twenty years away, and always will be.
  #574  
Old 11-08-2019, 04:25 PM
BeepKillBeep is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,762
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
Well, here's a modest proposal if you 'give a flying fig' about climate change and are willing to pay a price for it: End equalization, and share in the pain Alberta is facing. And if Alberta continues to slide, perhaps the people of Quebec could start sending a few billion our way, under the same equalization concept.

I mean, because if Alberta leaves Canada and ramps up its oil production, that will hurt the planet. So if you care about the planet, perhaps it's time to share in the cost of saving it.
That's fine with me,
  #575  
Old 11-08-2019, 04:41 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,615
I don't know if ending equalization is a good idea. As long as P.E.I is part of Canada, I want them to be able to afford some minimum standards. There are probably a number of changes to equalization that I could agree with Albertans on though, I bet.
  #576  
Old 11-08-2019, 04:51 PM
BeepKillBeep is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,762
I would agree to ending equalization if Alberta's economy is no longer strong enough to support it. Addressing climate change shouldn't be Alberta's burden. It has to be global (well, mainly industrialized countries). Everybody has to take a bit of a hit. So, if Alberta agrees to big reductions over time in extracting oil, and their economy cannot sustain equalization, then equalization should end. And if that makes Alberta a have not province, then they should receive equalization payments from whomever the have provinces are at that point.

Of course, there's the reality that we cannot simply cut out 7% of the National GDP overnight. Even if that were necessary, it still wouldn't be realistic. But we should make every reasonable effort to reduce our economic dependence on the export and/or refinement of fossil fuels. And as in my previous sentence, that should not be Alberta's burden, that should be Canada's burden.
  #577  
Old 11-08-2019, 04:57 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 28,286
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
Alberta leaving Canada and ramping up its oil production is not in any way a realistic thing to be concerned about.
The world is full of crazy things today we weren't remotely concerned about happening just a few years ago. I wouldn't bet on it happening either, but I wouldn't rule it out.
  #578  
Old 11-08-2019, 04:59 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,615
Is this a regional thing? "End equalization" in Alberta means Alberta is no longer a "have" province?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
The world is full of crazy things today we weren't remotely concerned about happening just a few years ago. I wouldn't bet on it happening either, but I wouldn't rule it out.
I will rule it out. Being a smaller landlocked country won't help Alberta oil exports nor induce them to ramp up production.

Last edited by CarnalK; 11-08-2019 at 05:03 PM.
  #579  
Old 11-08-2019, 05:08 PM
BeepKillBeep is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,762
I have no idea if Alberta would still be a have province or not because this whole thing is too hypothetical. There's too many questions that are unanswered. How much will Alberta reduce oil extraction? Over what period of time? Etc.

All I'm saying is that it seems clear to me that if Alberta's economy is reduced, then the equalization payments should be modified accordingly up to and including ending them if necessary. Climate change action is not Alberta's burden alone. We've all benefited from Alberta's oil industry, we all have to pay a price.

Last edited by BeepKillBeep; 11-08-2019 at 05:09 PM.
  #580  
Old 11-08-2019, 05:12 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 28,286
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
I don't know if ending equalization is a good idea. As long as P.E.I is part of Canada, I want them to be able to afford some minimum standards. There are probably a number of changes to equalization that I could agree with Albertans on though, I bet.
One of the perverse incentives in equalization is that it's partly based on how high your provincial taxes are. So a province can raise taxes to give the people some benefit, and that automatically boosts their equalization. So people in Quebec get $125/mo daycare, paid for by Albertans who pay $700-1000/mo for the same daycare.

So the more you tax and spend, the more money the rest of Canada has to pay you. It doesn't matter if you are doing the taxing and spending to give your province's people services that other provinces can't afford. Equalization wax 'supposed' to make sure that provinces had equal social programs and services, but in practice it has been gamed by provinces like Quebec, which has more services like cheap daycare than most provinces, and is running a 4 billion dollar surplus, but will still receive the bulk of equalization payments because of their high taxes.

Alberta could lower our equalization payments by simply instituting a provincial sales tax, then giving everyone in Alberta free stuff with the money. That wouldn't be good for Alberta or Canada, but the equalization system rewards that kind of behaviour.
  #581  
Old 11-08-2019, 05:17 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,615
Well, institute a provincial sales tax and buy yourselves a free pipeline. Win-win.
  #582  
Old 11-08-2019, 05:27 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 28,286
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
Well, institute a provincial sales tax and buy yourselves a free pipeline. Win-win.
You mean a pipeline that could not be built because of endless lawsuits and blocking by other provinces? Maybe we could build a big circular one that allows us to pump our oil around Alberta.

Last edited by Sam Stone; 11-08-2019 at 05:27 PM.
  #583  
Old 11-08-2019, 05:30 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
You mean a pipeline that could not be built because of endless lawsuits and blocking by other provinces? Maybe we could build a big circular one that allows us to pump our oil around Alberta.
Circular I guess. What's the Wexit Party's plan?
  #584  
Old 11-08-2019, 05:56 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 28,286
I have no idea. I doubt if they have one. I didn't even know they were a thing until last week.

As I said, I'll believe the west is serious about separation when I see governments building actual firewalls like provincial police and retirement programs like Quebec has. Until then, it's all hot air and blather.

I do know that an equalization system that rewards provinces for taxing and spending is not healthy. It should be the other way around - if you offer more government services than other provinces, you have to pay equalization to them. Then we'd actually be rewarding fiscal responsibility.
  #585  
Old 11-08-2019, 11:59 PM
Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: my Herkimer Battle Jitney
Posts: 86,251
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
You mean a pipeline that could not be built because of endless lawsuits and blocking by other provinces? Maybe we could build a big circular one that allows us to pump our oil around Alberta.
You could always advertise it as a petroleum supercollider.
  #586  
Old 11-09-2019, 09:50 AM
Rysto is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,203
Ending equalization is an utterly terrible and unworkable idea. Equalization has a sound and very important basis in economic theory: models predict that a region with a shared currency but no transfer payments from wealthier areas to poorer areas will be economically unstable. We saw a dramatic demonstration of that during the Greek crisis several years ago, in which the Greek economy was being crushed in part due to being part of the Eurozone without corresponding transfer payments to make up for it.

If we want to talk about tweaking the formula, that's certainly fair game. Sam's point about tax rates seems to be a good one, although I would caution that the devil is always in the details here and they may be a good reason for how the current system treats tax rates; I'd want to see some real economists weigh in before I formed an opinion.
  #587  
Old 11-10-2019, 11:49 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
I have no idea. I doubt if they have one. I didn't even know they were a thing until last week.

As I said, I'll believe the west is serious about separation when I see governments building actual firewalls like provincial police and retirement programs like Quebec has. Until then, it's all hot air and blather.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...nada-1.5353186
Quote:
Speaking Saturday during a keynote address to close the Manning Conference in Red Deer, Alberta, Premier Jason Kenney laid out measures that will be explored as part of what's being called the Fair Deal Panel.

He announced initiatives that include creating a provincial police force, establishing a formal provincial constitution and opting out of federal cost-sharing programs.

The panel will also study the possibility of withdrawing from the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) in favour of an Alberta-based alternative.
Though, I still think it's hot air.
  #588  
Old 11-10-2019, 04:23 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 28,286
Me too. It's easy to say that stuff, and maybe even useful as a kind of early bargaining position to see where everyone stands. Actually doing something that radical is another matter.

However, if Alberta slides too much more, or Trudeau's 'enhanced focus on climate change' in the second term puts more restrictions on Alberta's economy, who knows?

For example, if Alberta seriously threatens equalization, Quebec will go nuts. And Quebec is Trudeau's seat of power. He would have to at least placate them in some way. If whatever he chose to do to calm down Quebec put even more burdens on the west, you will see support for western separation jump.

At the same time, if Quebec thought it was going to lose its equalization payments, support for separation there will rise. That in turn could legitimize the West's separation plans.

Do I think this is likely? Nope. But I think it's one of the possible outcomes if things start to go sideways. Another global recession would add a huge amount of stress. That's when shit happens.

Last edited by Sam Stone; 11-10-2019 at 04:24 PM.
  #589  
Old 11-10-2019, 05:44 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
Me too. It's easy to say that stuff, and maybe even useful as a kind of early bargaining position to see where everyone stands. Actually doing something that radical is another matter.

However, if Alberta slides too much more, or Trudeau's 'enhanced focus on climate change' in the second term puts more restrictions on Alberta's economy, who knows?

For example, if Alberta seriously threatens equalization, Quebec will go nuts. And Quebec is Trudeau's seat of power. He would have to at least placate them in some way. If whatever he chose to do to calm down Quebec put even more burdens on the west, you will see support for western separation jump.

At the same time, if Quebec thought it was going to lose its equalization payments, support for separation there will rise. That in turn could legitimize the West's separation plans.

Do I think this is likely? Nope. But I think it's one of the possible outcomes if things start to go sideways. Another global recession would add a huge amount of stress. That's when shit happens.
It's also an easy little thing for Westerners to focus in Quebec but the Liberals won more seats in Toronto than all of Quebec. You fool yourself into thinking that the Liberals are the Quebec party and miss the beam in your eye.
  #590  
Old 11-12-2019, 11:45 AM
Hypnagogic Jerk is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Rouyn-Noranda, Québec
Posts: 3,201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
As I said, I'll believe the west is serious about separation when I see governments building actual firewalls like provincial police and retirement programs like Quebec has. Until then, it's all hot air and blather.
Right now I don't want to discuss equalization or whether, as Sam Stone claims in this post, "Quebec hates [Alberta] now" (FWIW, I don't hate Alberta.) However, I do want some clarification on the above. Why would Alberta establishing a provincial police force and its own pension fund suggest that it's getting serious about separating from Canada? Those are powers that Canadian provinces do have and can very easily decide to exercise. Same with establishing an income tax collecting agency (although I suppose Alberta's income tax is simple enough that they figure it's not worth doing) and taking control of part of their own immigration policy. So why, in Albertan political discourse, would these things suggest separatism?
__________________
The Liberal Party has brought us on the edge of a precipice.
With the Social Credit, we shall step forward.
  #591  
Old 11-12-2019, 12:42 PM
Northern Piper is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: The snow is back, dammit!
Posts: 29,953
Just by way of comment, the significance of the tax proposal is that currently, the provincial income taxes in the province that rely on CRA for collection are closely tied to the federal income tax rules , with some additional tax deductions from the provincial tax. The argument for cutting loose from the CRA is that it would give a province greater freedom to define its own income tax system (eg a province might want to try a flat tax, or might institute more taxation brackets to make their tax more progressive, and so on.)

Whether that greater autonomy in setting one’s own tax system is worth instituting an entirely separate administrative and collection system is an interesting policy question. Since the end of WWII, Quebec has taken the position that it is worth it. The other nine provinces have been content to stick with the federal system.
__________________
"I don't like to make plans for the day. If I do, that's when words like 'premeditated' start getting thrown around in the courtroom."
  #592  
Old 11-12-2019, 01:43 PM
Grey is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 6,821
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
For example, if Alberta seriously threatens equalization, Quebec will go nuts. And Quebec is Trudeau's seat of power. He would have to at least placate them in some way. If whatever he chose to do to calm down Quebec put even more burdens on the west, you will see support for western separation jump.
This isn't even wrong.
__________________
"When they discover the centre of the universe, a lot of people will be disappointed to discover they are not it." : Bernard Bailey
  #593  
Old 11-13-2019, 05:24 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 28,286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hypnagogic Jerk View Post
Right now I don't want to discuss equalization or whether, as Sam Stone claims in this post, "Quebec hates [Alberta] now" (FWIW, I don't hate Alberta.) However, I do want some clarification on the above. Why would Alberta establishing a provincial police force and its own pension fund suggest that it's getting serious about separating from Canada? Those are powers that Canadian provinces do have and can very easily decide to exercise. Same with establishing an income tax collecting agency (although I suppose Alberta's income tax is simple enough that they figure it's not worth doing) and taking control of part of their own immigration policy. So why, in Albertan political discourse, would these things suggest separatism?
These programs are currently run from Ottawa. Tax money goes from individuals directly to the federal government, which then disburses payments to the provinces. Canadians have their retirement program in the hands of the federal government.

So the thinking (by Quebec first) is that before you can credibly threaten separation, these programs need to be run by the provincial government so that it could separate from the federal government without causing huge amounts of dislocation. It also prevents the federal government from negotiating from a hardball position by threatening to cut off or reduce these services and payments unless we play along.

The 'firewall' concept has been around since Quebec did it. I'm surprised you hadn't heard of this.
  #594  
Old 11-13-2019, 07:26 PM
Hypnagogic Jerk is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Rouyn-Noranda, Québec
Posts: 3,201
So are you just saying that taking control of these programs would be a necessary condition before starting to talk about separation, but not a sufficient one? In this case, then yes, that's probably something they should do before they start talking about separation. I interpreted you as saying that it would in itself suggest that the Alberta government is getting serious about separating from Canada, which I don't think follows.
  #595  
Old 11-14-2019, 11:25 AM
Grey is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 6,821
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
These programs are currently run from Ottawa. Tax money goes from individuals directly to the federal government, which then disburses payments to the provinces. Canadians have their retirement program in the hands of the federal government.

So the thinking (by Quebec first) is that before you can credibly threaten separation, these programs need to be run by the provincial government so that it could separate from the federal government without causing huge amounts of dislocation. It also prevents the federal government from negotiating from a hardball position by threatening to cut off or reduce these services and payments unless we play along.

The 'firewall' concept has been around since Quebec did it. I'm surprised you hadn't heard of this.
Your understanding of Union National and Liberal party policies in the mid 60's is remarkable. Consider the emerging Quiet Revolution and the desire by the province to fund economical growth outside of agriculture. The Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec which managed the plan used it, initially, to invest in Quebec companies. The opportunity to use the savings from a province containing 30% of the country's population was not a necessary step to separation - it was an opportunity for a government to get some money.
__________________
"When they discover the centre of the universe, a lot of people will be disappointed to discover they are not it." : Bernard Bailey
  #596  
Old 11-14-2019, 12:02 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 28,286
It's not a 'necessary' step. It simply makes it easier to negotiate separation, and decreases the amount of change required if you do separate.
  #597  
Old 11-14-2019, 12:05 PM
Grey is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 6,821
Except you specifically said it was a step taken "before you can credibly threaten separation". At no point in the past 40 years has the future of the country hung in balance due to some sort of leverage the QPP provides to Quebec.

I mean it's not as nonsensical as "threatening" to have a provincial police force; knock yourself out. I assume extricating the province from the the contract to 2032 winds up costing something but it makes a lot of sense for a province with sufficient tax room to have their own police force.
__________________
"When they discover the centre of the universe, a lot of people will be disappointed to discover they are not it." : Bernard Bailey

Last edited by Grey; 11-14-2019 at 12:07 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:37 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017