The issue is that you’d rather buy oil from theocrats and dictators than allow your fellow Canadians to sell it to you. Better yet, how about a reverse NEP where you have to buy Canadian first?.. crickets… Figured.
Yes, the NEP was problematic with “Alberta [being] the sole overall net contributor to the federal government, and all other provinces enjoyed being net recipients [from '80 - '85]”, (and got repealed a little too slowly by Mulroney), but the reason Canada imports oil instead of getting it from Alberta is because it costs refiners less to import foreign oil than to use domestic product, taking into account transportation restraints and processing capability.
More here.
Welcome back from the pages of the National Post. I see you have adopted their technique: If you don’t embrace Alberta’s every stupid decision, and you don’t blame Trudeau for everything, then you MUST want to “buy oil from theocrats and dictators”
Impeccable logic. Bravo.
How about you go away for another 5 months and do a little more practice? Perhaps get some tips from Kenney’s “War Room”
A fabulous plan to increase energy costs for all of Canada, brought to you by the Party of People Who Whine About Trudeau Every Time Gas Goes Up By Five Cents.
Well, it has the benefit of funneling money into the pockets of the international oil companies, as they extract Alberta heavy oil at costs higher than the market will pay.
Welfare and subsidies for corporations are the important things here.
The big economic news today was about a 26 billion dollar investment in Alberta and it wasn’t in the oil sector: $26B Rogers plan to buy Calgary-based Shaw would create Canada's 2nd-biggest telecom | CBC News
(full discloure, I work for one of these companies)
It seems a bit silly to call this a 26B investment in Alberta. it’s a 26B purchase of stock. From the existing stockholders who’re all over Canada and the rest of the world. No new money is to be spent in Alberta creating any economic value.
The do say they intend to spend 3.5B on 5G and improving rural high speed access. Across “western Canada”, whatever that specifically means.
The fact they’re offering $40 for shares that yesterday were trading for $24 says the whole thing is mostly financial jiggery pokery, not building a business.
Not only is it not an “investment in Alberta,” it’s just a straight attempt to reduce the already near non-existent level of competition in the Canadian telecom market. Most likely it would result in the loss of a lot of management-level jobs in Alberta, though I’m sure Rogers has promised that won’t happen. Rogers also doesn’t give two shits about improving access to high speed internet in rural areas. They care about taking Freedom Mobile (Shaw’s wireless offering) out of the game so they only have to “compete” against Bell and Telus.
Hopefully the regulators take a dim view of this.
We met a guy from the Edmonton area at a resort a year or two ago and he was the most foul mouthed, racist redneck you’d want to meet. He basically mother-----'d Trudeau the whole time. I know he doesn’t represent all Albertans, but any American that thinks all Canadians are these overly-polite, liberal, far-sighted types that look down at Americans for our racial problems (and just about every Canadian I’ve met is very very nice), you’d be wrong.
I’d be the first to admit that there are far too many Albertans living up to the racist redneck stereotype that people have of Albertans. 
On the plus side, though, Rachel Notley and the NDP have taken the lead from the UCP and Jason Kenney. 
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/ndp-ucp-jason-kenney-rachel-notley-angus-reid-institute-1.5946706
One would hope that having actually elected the NDP the last time round before going back the the Cons, at least some of the voters will be sensible enough to actually see how the NDP was doing a better job.
Wow, taking a look at the numbers in one of those charts: in the Cons’ core issues of energy and the economy, they’re heavily weighted with negatives, 65% and 66% negative. If they can’t even get over 50% on their core issues, they’ve got real problems.
And Deficit/spending is even worse! 70% negative!
Wow.
Well, wait until Kenney ramps up his “War Room” that is creating plans how to attack anyone who dares criticize his government’s decisions. All on the taxpayer dime, of course.
It’ll be interesting to see who the United Conservative Party blames in the runup to the next election. (prediction: It will start with “Tru” and end with “deau”)
Maybe some, but I don’t have a lot of hope. The overarching theme of our last provincial election here was flat-out lies about Rachel Notley and the NDP, and the majority of voters believing them. 
Apparently last election, Notley singlehandedly caused a precipitous drop in the world price of oil. And she also failed to diversify Alberta’s economy from 1971 to 2014.
The government of the day is almost always blamed for the economy and Alberta’s did get hammered. The interesting thing is that the natural governing party 
stepped back into power and has done as badly or worse. That has to make a number of campaign attacks a little less effective.
I know, right? She’s a serious overachiever. 
I sense you’re being sarcastic, but it’s an objective fact that Rachel Notley really didn’t diversify Alberta’s economy from 1971 to 2014.
I’ll grant that she did have help with dropping the price of oil.
I’ve met a lot of people from Alberta who I liked. Few of them were foul-mouthed or overtly redneck. Most had unkind words about Canada’s energy policies, but so do people in a lot of other provinces. Some had unkind words for Trudeau (pere et fils) and Quebec. I also know a number of people in BC who do not have a highly positive view of their provincial neighbours.
Still, I wish Albertans well. They need to diversify their economy. In terms of historical injustice, like Newfoundlanders and Acadians - they are there. They have some cause for anger. But it is limited, and they need to let some of these historic grievances go. Even maybe talk about provincial taxes at some point. There are plenty of people with extreme views in my province but they do not represent mainstream opinion. Nor do some Albertan politicians or controversial people. Canadians are not all that different from province to province.
Indeed. It’s also an objective fact that Rachel Notley did not cause the 1929 stock market crash.
The point is, she and her government were loudly blamed for economic events that they had no hand in creating, and in fact had been snowballing for a great many years before her party took power. But many folks had no problem blaming her for things in the most idiotic way.