I find it convenient that MAGA can also stand for Make Alberta Great Again. Makes the rest of the similarities in their positions easier to discern.
Again, can’t argue the facts, so resort to marginalization.
FFS, quoting myself.. 
So if I understand you correctly, you’re saying if you can’t argue the facts, resort to marginalization.
‘Gibbering fuckwits’, ‘Maga’, ‘Alberta = wackjob US states’. All within 10 posts.
All negative. No positive reasons why Alberta should stay part of a country that looks so poorly on us. Makes me wonder why you want us to stay… Oh yes, the money.
You want me to praise the book banning? Shall I praise other pointless right-wing propaganda as well?
I said the 17% that wanted to join the US was “Likely the happy fiefdom for a number of gibbering fuckwits that make reference to themselves as living flesh and blood sentient-men and look for fringes on flags”
I mean you rarely seem to read deeply any of these posts so I’m not surprised by it - reassuring in a odd way.
As the thread is primarily focused on independence of Alberta, I’m not sure what this has to do with that argument. Maybe you are saying you are for us separating because we are so ‘different’ from real Canadian’s and their values. Or maybe you are implying that we need Canada because without it we’d turn into some Handmaiden’s tale hellhole without you protecting us.
So, I shouldn’t take this straw man argument as a form of delegitimization? What was your meaning then? Does the whole somehow negate the ‘gibbering fuckwits’? You seem to imply that 17% of Albertans see themselves as sovereign citizens or conspiracy nuts.
I mean you rarely seem to read deeply any of these posts so I’m not surprised by it - reassuring in a odd way.
You write veiled insults while not responding to my arguments in any constructive manner.
That 17% would want to join the US and not remain connected to you should be a concern to you. That 29% would vote to separate today is not a small number and again should be of concern. That people are frustrated with the fiscal imbalance, the targeted regulations that seem to only affect one province, the regional alienation that is more than just people upset at not getting a party elected and has been ongoing since we’ve joined confederation.
That’s 15% fewer than voted NDP (44%) in the last provincial election. In a real vote, not a poll. So obviously you should take the NDP’s position half again more seriously than that of separatists.
The difference, of course, is that people are actively promoting the NDP and they have a leader to deliver a consistent message.
I said you misrepresented me - which you did. I then pointed out how and you’ve cleverly managed to miss it again. Keep up that valiant struggle.
Serious question: many Brexiteers made similar arguments for leaving the EU - stop money going to Brussels, get out from under the thumb of regulations, etc. The actual outcome has been negative:
Alberta is vastly more dependent on Canada for its prosperity than the UK was dependent on the EU, and yet going it alone is costing the UK dearly. Now granted, someone interested in sovereignty might think it worth the cost - such economic arguments don’t have much impact on serious Quebec separatists, for example - but your arguments in favour of independence are almost exclusively economic. What makes you think that Alberta won’t take a massive economic hit by isolating itself?
I’m not sure where you get the idea that Alberta is vastly more dependent on Canada? How so? Canada is very dependent on Alberta. Who is going to give Quebec $14B a year if not us?
Most trade is North-South 78%. While some trade will likely drop off east-west, not sending money east will likely make up for that. Given that from 1961 to 2018 Alberta gave ~$3700per person per year to Canada than it received back, that is quite a bit of money that can be used to get a country up and running properly.
Ah, so you just don’t believe that Alberta’s economy is completely intertwined with the rest of the country. Got it.
“We send the EU 350 million a week. Let’s fund NHS instead. Vote Leave.”
You honestly don’t see the similarities?
Do you believe that trade will stop just because it leaves? Why would that happen?
Of course it won’t stop completely. But trade will face increased barriers because it will be crossing an international border. A free trade agreement with Canada is likely but not guaranteed. With the US, at the moment who the fuck knows, but the current administration is actively hostile to low trade barriers. And trade with anyone else will have to transit Canada or the US. That’s the sort of thing that leads to decreased economic growth or even contraction, because suddenly there’s a bit of extra friction in every transaction. Those frictions won’t go away, so that will be a long-term drag on the Albertan economy.
Now of course, you’ll be able to drop taxes somewhat from the current combined prov/fed rate, which should ameliorate that drag to sum extent. Enough to actually make you better off? I doubt anyone can know.
What I do know is that the math is a lot more complicated than your simple comparison of federal taxes submitted vs federal expenditures in Alberta, and none of those complications will be in your favour. On top of the trade friction, you’ll lose economies of scale in delivering government services, and in the longer run as the world moves away from fossil fuels, your primary trade good will lose value.
- The goal is not economic isolation, but fiscal autonomy. There is no reason to not trade. Border or not. There are already trade barriers within Canada that force trade north-south not only in Alberta.
- There is a large amount of funding that moves east that could be used to alleviate the lack of efficiency that a centralized provider should be able to accomplish. But who thinks federal government is efficient rather than bloated at this point? Those jobs to replace the federal workers would be within Alberta as well.
- The world is moving towards less fossil fuel usage. Agreed. But that is happening with or without Alberta within Canada. I believe wholeheartedly that if Alberta becomes a net receiver, we will see the equalization program scrapped. Alberta won’t be supported by the east because, and you can see it in this very thread, the derision of our values. Being independent gives us control on how to develop our resources responsibly and on how to diversify to avoid the inevitable replacement of fossil fuels.
- You are correct that the math isn’t everything, but it is not nothing, either. But with more say on our economy, resource development, environmental priorities, and diversification, we can alleviate much of the friction.
At the moment our hands are tied, we have little voice in a government that actively works against our needs, and caters to where it gets votes from. e.g. the fuel oil tax relief in NB that didn’t apply to AB and Sask who primarily use natural gas.
You’ve stated before that Alberta wouldn’t receive equalization if it were to qualify, based on no evidence besides your persecution complex. I assure you that Alberta absolutely would receive equalization. In fact, it did when the system was initially set up. At that time it was entirely the east supporting the west and maritimes.
It’s sheer lunacy to think that an independent Alberta wouldn’t face increased trade friction resulting in economic drag.
The fuel oil tax relief was indeed bullshit, I’ll give you that one.
Alberta (nor Saskatchewan) hasn’t received any equalization since 1965. All other provinces have. 60 years. For Alberta to receive equalization, how far do you think we’d have to drop and how bad off would Canada need to be at that point? Yeah, we won’t receive anything.
It’s sheer lunacy to think that an independent Alberta wouldn’t face increased trade friction resulting in economic drag. It’s sheer lunacy to think that an independent Alberta wouldn’t face increased trade friction resulting in economic drag.
I’m not saying there wouldn’t be friction. But as most of our trade is with the US, I don’t see any issue with that. If they are worried about trade inequality, then we buy huge swaths of industry and move it north to diversify.
As to Canada, look at a map. Yes, Alberta is landlocked, but notice it sits smack between BC and the rest of Canada. Alberta is BC’s largest trading partner in Canada trailing off to insignificance once it passes Manitoba. What do you think will happen to BC if Alberta goes? How will any goods between the east and west happen without having reasonable trade agreements with Alberta? Go through the US? Thought that was the point of Elbows up and all that crap to not depend on them.