Because Alberta (some) prefer ethics above corruption....and that is also why it will eventually change back....
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
N.E.P.
Collapse
Logging in...
Welcome to Agriville! You need to login to post messages in the Agriville chat forums. Please login below.
X
-
First off comparing Alberta to Norway is difficult as one is a sovereign country and set its own policies. During the period of the NEP the federal government in 2004 adjusted dollars extracted at the highest point over 12000 per capita per year. Also during the period from 1980 to 1985 Alberta was the sole net contributor to the confederation, all other provinces were net beneficiaries. Plus the NEP lowered the price received for oil in Alberta. It is estimated the NEP cost Alberta at least 50 billion with estimates as high as 100 billion.
The other interesting aspect was that the federal Liberals predicted deficits in the 11 to 14 billion range based on their predicted increase of oil and gas revenues from the NEP. Instead production didn't materialize and they had close to 30 billion dollar deficits. Riders, you need to realize increasing taxes doesn't always increase revenue because those targeted by the tax may view them as unfair and move their business elsewhere. Premier Notley and our new Prime Minister could learn a lot from history if they are willing, my guess is they are not!!!
Comment
-
So who is going to get the blame for the downturn now? Should we blame Harper or the Alberta Conservatives for their crappy energy policy?
Norway took their oil profits which belonged to all Norwegians and invested in a way to reduce the inflationary effect of the high oil prices and keep production costs lower. Peter Loughheed was in favour of a more controlled development and didn't like to see the boom take over.
The oil does not belong to oil companies, it belongs to Albertans and the other provinces. It is up to Albertans and all Canadians to decide what we do with our resources as it affects all of us.
As a consumer we all paid a huge cost for high oil prices. I want some of that back. The best way to get it back is collect higher royalties on behalf of taxpayers.
Harper also talked about getting Canada off oil dependence by 2100. So are the tar sands a resource that will have much value if we have better cleaner forms of energy in 2100? We are moving to cleaner energy sources very quickly.
Norway took control of their resource. They created alot of jobs and have a very high standard of living with low unemployment. They knew it was a finite resource. They didn't give it away as we do in Canada with low royalties.
Comment
-
Sven, Olgie , why don't you move to Norway? I hear you can go to school the rest of your life, free
Comment
-
I don't think recreational pot is legal in any part of Scandinavia. The gangs in chuckchuck's utopia make a fortune off of it.
This just in: Tommy Chong returning to Canada to be Deputy Minister of Health and Reefer Affairs for new Government.
Comment
-
Braveheart,
Colorado Law enforcement was asked about crime since recreational Weed has been legal. No Difference one way or the other was the answer on crime in Colorado. The weed utopia is in the mind of those in a dream world... not based in reality. Production of weed will be subject to underground markets and marketing... which will all be illegal... so in the real world... nothing actually changes... drug testing increases... high driving increases... under age consumption increases... and the booze industry and taxes decrease.. leading to a tax benefit of net minimal impact on gov. revenue.
And BC will need to increase their transfer payments for weed production revenues...
It is said that 5 percent of Canadians use weed... one of the highest consumption levels in the world.
So the shift will be away from booze to weed?
NEP... Carbon taxes... Weed taxes... Electrical taxes... GST increases... Justin could well make his dad look like a good manager... in comparison to the plan today.
Comment
- Reply to this Thread
- Return to Topic List
Comment