Alberta following Texas

[dmlfarmer]

This isn't about social values ( except to a very small irrelevant minority who do more harm than good for the cause), it is about financial survival.

And no, farmers will never have any more power. It's not 1900 any more.

Financial Survival??? Albertans such as yourself, pay exactly the same federal tax rates as citizens in every other province. You are not penalized by paying a greater percentage of your income to the feds as anyone else making the same amount of income from another province. It is true incomes are higher in Alberta so more people are in a higher tax bracket than from other provinces so the amount the feds collect is higher from Alberta but that does not mean everyone in Alberta is facing financial survvival issues. In fact in order to pay at a higher tax bracket you have to earn more so your financial health would be better than people from other provinces. Oh, and by the way isn't it true there is no sales tax in Alberta that people in most other provinces have to pay so Albertan's pay less in other taxes.

And equalization comes from tax revenue, collected from all Canadians again at the same tax rates. There is no additional equalization tax that Albertans or businesses pay.

So you claim that westerners are facing financial survival issues unless they seperate when in fact they have higher incomes than any eastern provinces really falls flat!

[flea beetle]

Notice some disparity?

[furrowtickler]

It’s unbelievable how some still support this as it is
It’s sickening how much Quebec bleeds off the rest of the country

[jazz]

dml, equalization is gamed on two fronts.

One is whats included in the revenue calcs. Hydro out, oil in.

Secondly its rigged socialism vs capitalism. Quebec and maritimes govt taxes hard and delivers govt programs to the people and then relys on the feds to provide bailouts and cash injections to its private sector thus raising its taxable income base.

AB relys on lower taxation to incentivize investment into its capital intensive industry - energy and then has to use more private services for its people and the by product is a less taxed populace.

Maybe when Lougheed signed Ab on, there was more intent for the govt to play a role in oil extraction. back then Petrocanada was around and Syncude was given a lot of money to get the sands going. But a couple oil crashes later changed all that.

Ab can tip it all back away from Quebec by changing its entire economic ideology by creating made in AB investment vehicles for its people and main industry but in doing so Ab may have to abandon its capitalistic nature to cut Quebec off at the knees.

[furrowtickler]

Is it not simply an overtaxed area that results in lower incomes feeding off others ? ....... hmmmm .
Coming to the west soon
Except there is no where else to feed from ...

[dmlfarmer]

No question some provinces pay more and some provinces get more because of equalization. That is the whole purpose of equalization transfer, to ensure the is the fiscal capacity for citizens in all provinces to get equal services. Those provinces that end up paying have a larger capacity to earn tax revenue. Those that get more have less opportunity to earn. But the point I made is equalization payments come from general revenue which is funded by every Canadian taxed at the very same progressive tax rate.

Is there a problem with the formula for determining the ability to earn revenues. Absolutely. Jazz is right, Quebec hydro should be included in the formula. Is there a problem with determining the need. Probably. Personally I think equalization payments should be targeted rather than allowing provinces to determine itself how to spend equalization funding but that is not how the formula was drawn up. Is Quebec the biggest winner, maybe in terms of total dollars but on a per capita basis PEI benefits the most from equalization.

What most people have forgotten, or perhaps prefer to ignore is the formula which is now used to set equalization transfers was introduced in 2007 by the Harper Conservatives and modified in 2009 by the same government, a government in which Jason Kenney was a cabinet minister. The formula calls for renewal every 5 years and the Liberals have reapproved the Conservative formula without changes twice. So what you are blaming on Trudeau is actually a Conservative plan.

[flea beetle]

No question some provinces pay more and some provinces get more because of equalization. That is the whole purpose of equalization transfer, to ensure the is the fiscal capacity for citizens in all provinces to get equal services. Those provinces that end up paying have a larger capacity to earn tax revenue. Those that get more have less opportunity to earn. But the point I made is equalization payments come from general revenue which is funded by every Canadian taxed at the very same progressive tax rate.

Is there a problem with the formula for determining the ability to earn revenues. Absolutely. Jazz is right, Quebec hydro should be included in the formula. Is there a problem with determining the need. Probably. Personally I think equalization payments should be targeted rather than allowing provinces to determine itself how to spend equalization funding but that is not how the formula was drawn up. Is Quebec the biggest winner, maybe in terms of total dollars but on a per capita basis PEI benefits the most from equalization.

What most people have forgotten, or perhaps prefer to ignore is the formula which is now used to set equalization transfers was introduced in 2007 by the Harper Conservatives and modified in 2009 by the same government, a government in which Jason Kenney was a cabinet minister. The formula calls for renewal every 5 years and the Liberals have reapproved the Conservative formula without changes twice. So what you are blaming on Trudeau is actually a Conservative plan.

Liberal or Conservative, the system is flawed and yet they keep voting to renew it. That means that they both view the west as a cash cow and nothing more. Time for this cow to jump the fence.

[TOM4CWB]

Is it not simply an overtaxed area that results in lower incomes feeding off others ? ....... hmmmm .
Coming to the west soon
Except there is no where else to feed from ...

Furrowt...

This is interesting from the Wall Street Journal...


WSJ Opinion: Democrats Will Ruin the Climate


0:00 / 3:592:36
WSJ Opinion: Democrats Will Ruin the Climate

Wonder Land: Democrats have wrecked the cities and the border. Why would climate policy be any different? Images: Zuma Press/Getty Images Composite: Mark Kelly

By Daniel Henninger
Aug. 11, 2021 6:16 pm ET

"Notwithstanding that we are passing the 18th month of a global Covid-19 pandemic that has killed 4.3 million people and crushed national economies, the United Nations decided that what the world needs just now is more bad news, as summarized by the New York Times : “The new report leaves no doubt that humans are responsible for global warming, concluding that essentially all of the rise in global average temperatures since the 19th century has been driven by nations burning fossil fuels, clearing forests and loading the atmosphere with greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane that trap heat.” What’s more, the report says climatic destruction is going to get worse no matter what we do. I do sometimes wonder what it would be like to be alive when the world ends.

The U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change even includes an interactive atlas depicting that global warming’s ruin will be everywhere, meaning there’s nowhere to hide. Now what?

My short answer: Don’t put the Democrats in charge of Noah’s Ark. It will sink.

If only for the sake of discussion, let’s stipulate the U.N.’s climate report may be right that warming is a problem. One still may pose a practical political question: Instead of mitigating the world’s climate challenge, what evidence exists that these progressive advocates—Democratic politicians or affiliated scientists—would do anything other than make it worse if we put them in charge of the solutions?

The currently observable reality is that progressives, who have now captured the Democratic Party at all levels of government, don’t seem able to run anything anymore—not cities, not Covid, not a national border. Why would letting them run climate policy be different?"

TO READ THE FULL STORY
https://www.wsj.com/articles/democrats-ruin-climate-border-security-immigration-violent-crime-ipcc-report-united-nations-progressives-11628711174?mod=hp_opin_pos_3

Cheers!

P.S...

Kind of humorous.... Chuck/Aggie think only us "Religious Dino's" on Agriville 'spew' this invective... and that we are the only ones that have 'missed the boat' so to speak..... Don’t put the Democrats in charge of Noah’s Ark. It will sink. applies equally to the Liberals in Canada!!! Hard to beat that logic! Cheers x 2!!

[furrowtickler]

Hmmmm .... who is spreading misinformation..

[furrowtickler]

Thought this appropriate as well