Canadian Federal Election 44 - Sep 2021

[Altair]

Equalization is paid for by taxpayers, not provinces. Federal and provincial taxpayers are approximately identical sets. If equalization ended and the federal government trimmed GST to match, it would leave some "tax points" for provinces, including AB, to use without raising net taxes on taxpayers. The argument that equalization does not come "from provinces" is true, but uninteresting and useless and obscures things which should be "seen" rather than "unseen".

Ending transfer schemes would aggravate regional economic imbalances; increasing regional imbalances would motivate migration of people from where their output (if any) is less productive to where it is more productive. I expect it would give a bigger boost to Canada's economic output than subsidized child care schemes. A rational person who thinks child care subsidies are a good idea because more people will be more productive should be wholly on board with ending equalization. But I doubt many of them are, because what's at stake is not reason, but rather emotion, partisanship, and a calculation purely of personal benefit.

Any rational person would also not want to reopen the constitution seeing how poorly it went the last two times Canada tried it, so removing equalization is not really going to happen.

 

[QV]

In October Alberta is holding a referendum with the following question: Should section 36(2) of the Constitution Act, 1982 – Parliament and the government of Canada’s commitment to the principle of making equalization payments – be removed from the constitution?

A 'yes' vote means Alberta will be asking the federal government and provinces to begin discussions for amending the constitution. I'm certain we can all be sure this won't go any further than Alberta's wishful thinking and that no discussions will ensue. But more importantly for Alberta this will be a bellwether on the possibility of secession in the future.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Any rational person would also not want to reopen the constitution seeing how poorly it went the last two times Canada tried it, so removing equalization is not really going to happen.

I don't care whether no true Scotsman would want to reopen the constitution; there are so many things that were never really going to happen until they happened. Canada has an unimpressive 1982 result and could stand reopening it.

 

[Altair]

In October Alberta is holding a referendum with the following question: Should section 36(2) of the Constitution Act, 1982 – Parliament and the government of Canada’s commitment to the principle of making equalization payments – be removed from the constitution?

A 'yes' vote means Alberta will be asking the federal government and provinces to begin discussions for amending the constitution. I'm certain we can all be sure this won't go any further than Alberta's wishful thinking and that no discussions will ensue. But more importantly for Alberta this will be a bellwether on the possibility of secession in the future.

I for one look forward to the Alberta Bloc in the house of commons.

 

[Altair]

I don't care whether no true Scotsman would want to reopen the constitution; there are so many things that were never really going to happen until they happened. Canada has an unimpressive 1982 result and could stand reopening it.

Yeah, but back in reality no federal party is going to open it up.

So any solutions going forward are going to involved 36(2) of the Constitution Act, aka, equalization.

 

[QV]

I for one look forward to the Alberta Bloc in the house of commons.

Don't hold your breath. The grievances in AB are far different than those in Quebec where having a "federal" party lobby another federal party for favors is working for them. However if there were a secession, you could still be very happy because the outcome would be the same; the LPC would rule the RoC perpetually.

 

[Brad Sallows]

As long as we're cruising fat, dumb, and happy, no-one is going to be looking for solutions to much of anything and the lack of initiative will have nothing to do with the Charter. Crisis will prompt discussion; discussion will prompt political realignment; political realignment will enable changing black-letter law. I fully expect "win the argument, then win the election" will apply. The argument will be won when people are scared. Recent events have demonstrated that people are easily scared, so I must remember not to be surprised if it happens sooner than I expect.

 

[Altair]

As long as we're cruising fat, dumb, and happy, no-one is going to be looking for solutions to much of anything and the lack of initiative will have nothing to do with the Charter. Crisis will prompt discussion; discussion will prompt political realignment; political realignment will enable changing black-letter law. I fully expect "win the argument, then win the election" will apply. The argument will be won when people are scared. Recent events have demonstrated that people are easily scared, so I must remember not to be surprised if it happens sooner than I expect.

I don't Canadians getting scared enough to have at least seven provinces that approve getting rid of equalization, or anything else really, representing at least 50% of Canada's population.

 

[Brad Sallows]

COVID scared enough shit out of enough Canadians so as lead to major economic damage. Foresee what you wish.

 

[ballz]

Is this true? Isn’t the source of the UCP manufactured debate stemming from an inability of Alberta to afford its current level of services?

You think the equalization debate is "UCP-manufactured?" They're literally trying to keep down those who just want to fully separate, of which there are many. The equalization debate has been going on long before the UCP existed.

No, that's not what it stems from. If it stems from anything, it's that Alberta pays into it in good faith, but then when there's a recession, Alberta doesn't just receive zero help, they receive active attempts by everyone else to stifle them.

Alberta would prefer to just get rid of the welfare trap. But, if you're going to have one, then it should be a fair formula. Not one that favours certain revenue sources over others as a way to deliberately favour certain provinces Not one that encourages some provinces to stay in the welfare trap, at the expense of those that actually do the work.

You whinged earlier in this thread about which provinces were running surpluses and which had deficits. Surely that should not be a relevant benchmark for equalization. Federally, all Canadians are taxed the same. Provincially, Alberta is taxed lower than every other province and that is Alberta’s choice.

A choice that seems to have to be contributing to the strongest economy, even now hmmm.... you might want to rethink the idea of taxing your way out of a recession.

I did not complain about Alberta running a deficit. It's fair unrealistic to think any government is going to run surpluses in perpetuity. Alberta's finances were managed very well, so much so that they've weathered the recent recessions and are still in far better financial shape than any other province. Like I said, Alberta doesn't need financial lessons from the people who they've been subsidizing for decades.

The UCP is not asking for the federal government to cut taxes for Albertans, it is asking the federal government to give more money to the provincial government. It is asking for federal tax revenue to subsidize the lowest provincial tax rate in the country to avoid cutting services because the province has decided it will not increase its own revenues.

When did Alberta ask for that? Other than pointing out the clearly unfair system.

Alberta clearly pays far more into the Federal government than it receives, so that other negative contributors can have gigantic public sectors that drain their own economies and live off the backs of Albertans. Trying to paint this as the Federal government subsidizing Alberta is just shameless.

Equalization is paid for by taxpayers, not provinces. Federal and provincial taxpayers are approximately identical sets. If equalization ended and the federal government trimmed GST to match, it would leave some "tax points" for provinces, including AB, to use without raising net taxes on taxpayers. The argument that equalization does not come "from provinces" is true, but uninteresting and useless and obscures things which should be "seen" rather than "unseen".

Yup. Like I said, it's a distinction without a difference. People just don't want to admit they are on the receiving end of the welfare scheme. Trust me folks, it's much more rewarding to stop faking it and to make your own way. Why anyone is trying to blindly hang on to provincial pride makes no sense to me. I get it, I came here from Newfoundland and at first it kinda hurts, but developing a sense of shame is healthy.

On another note, I'm actually in favour of a PST (and a corresponding decrease in income tax so that it's revenue neutral), but not for the same reasons as most of the posters on this thread which are RTFO'er.

 

[QV]

Equalization was never meant to subsidize large, populous and wealthy provinces like Quebec. It was meant to make sure places like PEI or NB had comparable core services because those places with low populations and low economic power couldn't do it to a comparable level as provinces such as AB, Ont, Que, and BC.

The present formula (which isn't enshrined in the constitution) allows the federal government to plunder Alberta to buy votes in Quebec.

If the provinces were negotiating confederation with the present day arrangements, there is no way any sensible Alberta government would agree to join.

 

[brihard]

Edit: hit enter by accident

 

[KevinB]

I'd just to toss a vote in the ring that IF Alberta wants to secede from Canada - currently there have been discussion about adding more States down here (PR and USVI) and making DC a State - so there is a opening...

Maybe we could get Alberta in trade a few of our annoying Liberal states

 

[dimsum]

I'd just to toss a vote in the ring that IF Alberta wants to secede from Canada - currently there have been discussion about adding more States down here (PR and USVI) and making DC a State - so there is a opening...

Maybe we could get Alberta in trade a few of our annoying Liberal states

like WA, OR, and CA?

Viva Cascadia!

Might as well get NY into the mix too!

 

[KevinB]

like WA, OR, and CA?

Viva Cascadia!

Might as well get NY into the mix too!

WA, NY - all of the people in California - sorry need to keep the land.

 

[QV]

I'd just to toss a vote in the ring that IF Alberta wants to secede from Canada - currently there have been discussion about adding more States down here (PR and USVI) and making DC a State - so there is a opening...

Maybe we could get Alberta in trade a few of our annoying Liberal states

Maybe it should be the United States of North America. The state of Mexico would need a bit of cleaning up, but think of how few land border agents you would need to guard that little sliver at the bottom. I can see the savings already!

 

[Altair]

WA, NY - all of the people in California - sorry need to keep the land.

I like this idea.

You get all the Albertans, we keep the land, we get all the Californians, you keep the land.

 

[KevinB]

Maybe it should be the United States of North America. The state of Mexico would need a bit of cleaning up, but think of how few land border agents you would need to guard that little sliver at the bottom. I can see the savings already!

Savings and Government never go hand in hand -- larger potential for misappropriation of funds...

 

[dimsum]

WA, NY - all of the people in California - sorry need to keep the land.

I had to chuckle a bit - that is an ironic comment the day before Canada's National Day for Truth and Reconciliation.

 

[QV]

Savings and Government never go hand in hand -- larger potential for misappropriation of funds...

Well, we'd roll three fed governments into one so we'd have 1/3 the scandals, at that level anyway.