1  2  Next

I like the seven points, Me3. Which political party would incorporate them into their platform?<br /> <br /> I guess the Christian Heritage Party of Canada would be the only one. These are the Christian values Canada was built upon.

   

Title of thread changed. Like I told badsector me3, Vive is about inclusiveness, not dividing Canada. Most of the people who run Vive are Albertans, so calling us 'greedy rednecks' doesn't make us happy.<br /> <br /> You of course realize, if politicians adopted your points, the Bloc Quebecois would be moot. Which is why I like them.<br /> <br /> I guess the constitution gets thrown out the window everytime Quebec wants a bigger piece of the pie. And Ontario is good with that. Will other provinces agree that their natural resource revenues will be included in equalization? Or does the East just covet our happy accident of nature?

   

[QUOTE]Title of thread changed. Like I told badsector me3, Vive is about inclusiveness, not dividing Canada. Most of the people who run Vive are Albertans, so calling us 'greedy rednecks' doesn't make us happy.<br /> [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Dr. Caleb. Alberta's refusal to share its wealth doesn't make the rest of Canada happy. We in Ontario struggle to balance the books and get the worst services in this country because we have to support everyone else. Our largest industry is manufacturing and last year Ontario lost 58,000 manufacturing jobs, thanks to globalism. The same time Alberta is rolling in dough, thanks to your natural resources. You say "Vive is about inclusiveness, not dividing Canada" yet you seem to have no problem with this "it's ours and ours only" attitude. FYI, it's not Alberta's oil, it's Canada's. It's not yours, it's ours. Learn to share of leave!<br /> <br /> Btw, the oil will run out in a few decades. What will ALberta do after that? Come to Ottawa knocking? It makes me, hardworking Ontario taxpayer rather angry.<br /> <br /> One more thing: please register my protest for the misleading name you gave to this website. The use of French language is misleading because it implies tolerance and liberalism. In my opinion the name "over yonder" would be more appropriate. Please think about it.<br /> <br /> Thank you.

   

<br /> >>>I guess the constitution gets thrown out the window everytime Quebec wants a bigger piece of the pie. And Ontario is good with that. <br /> Ontario is NOT GOOD with that, as the Ontario Premier has stated as of late.<br /> <br /> Recall that Dalton McGuinty has raised the issue of the $20 BILLION, or thereabouts, that Ontario contributes but gets nothing for in return from the Feds.<br /> <br /> During the last economic depression, early to mid 1990's, Ontario was a have-not province by the criterion used by the federal government at that time. Guess where the other have-not provinces got their money from???<br /> <br /> Wonder what will happen during the next economic downturn predicted to begin sometime next year? Will Ontario again keep quiet while its pockets are being picked? This issue may just be the Ontario liberal governments election platform!<br /> <br /> H.F. Wolff

   

[QUOTE BY= badsector] <br /> Dr. Caleb. Alberta's refusal to share its wealth doesn't make the rest of Canada happy. We in Ontario struggle to balance the books and get the worst services in this country because we have to support everyone else. <br /> [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> So, Albertans contributing more per capita to confederation than any other province, is not sharing? 10 years of cuts to balance the books isn't struggling? And we are called 'greedy rednecks' when we ask that the rest of confederation (Quebec) balance their books and possibly cut services to do so, before they dig deeper in our pockets. And Ontairo doesn't have to support Alberta.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= badsector] <br /> Our largest industry is manufacturing and last year Ontario lost 58,000 manufacturing jobs, thanks to globalism. The same time Alberta is rolling in dough, thanks to your natural resources. <br /> [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Alberta is to blame for globalization now? That's a new one. No one seemed to care with the first NEP came into force, and Alberta's economy tanked. Now you want to turn us back into a have-not province with NEP-II, and you say it's all our fault.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= badsector] <br /> You say "Vive is about inclusiveness, not dividing Canada" yet you seem to have no problem with this "it's ours and ours only" attitude. FYI, it's not Alberta's oil, it's Canada's. It's not yours, it's ours. Learn to share of leave!<br /> [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Now, where did I say that? And no, resources are provincial. It's in the Constitution.<br /> <br /> I personally have no problem at all that my hard work contributes to Canada. I don't mind if I have to give a little more sweat if that what the rest of the country needs. But just like HRDC scandals, the gun registry, and provinces running defecit budgets, I get upset when my hard work is flushed down an oubliette.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= badsector] <br /> Btw, the oil will run out in a few decades. What will ALberta do after that? Come to Ottawa knocking? It makes me, hardworking Ontario taxpayer rather angry.<br /> [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Exactally. If we don't use our surpluses to grow other industries because we have to pay for Quebec's defecits, my grandchildren will live in a have-not province.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= badsector] <br /> One more thing: please register my protest for the misleading name you gave to this website. The use of French language is misleading because it implies tolerance and liberalism. In my opinion the name "over yonder" would be more appropriate. Please think about it.<br /> <br /> Thank you.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> I didn't name Vive. And we are very tolerant, except when it comes to personal attacks. Please register our own protest with the appropriate authorities.<br /> <br /> If I seem hostile, then consider we have this same conversation everytime the price of oil rises and Canadians see Alberta as their personal piggy bank. I've lived here most of my life, good times and bad. And it's during the bad we seem to be the rest of Canada's annoying little brother, and during the good; the sibling you borrow money from to get you to next payday.

   

[QUOTE]Alberta is to blame for globalization now? That's a new one.[/QUOTE]<br /> Dr. Caleb, could you stick to reality please? I never blamed Alberta for globalization. My point was that Ontario is barely a have province anymore, as a result of globalization, yet we contribute $20 billion to Canada every year. It's ridiculous!<br /> <br /> [QUOTE]No one seemed to care with the first NEP came into force, and Alberta's economy tanked. Now you want to turn us back into a have-not province with NEP-II, and you say it's all our fault.[/QUOTE]<br /> Alberta'a economy didn't tank because of NEP, it's just a lying propaganda your conservative masters slushed down your throat. Alberta's oil industry started up because of the oil crises of the 70s. However, after a while the Arabs realized that they shot themselves in the foot and the embargo hurt them too. The World cut back its oil consumption and looked for alternative oil sources. This is where Alberta came in. When the oil embargo ended, oil prices dropped and ALberta's oil industry was no longer economically viable, hence it slowed down for a while. It would have happened without NEP too. You should do yourself a favour and clear your mind of this anti-Eastie propaganda, it is used to blind you and manipulate you.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE]And no, resources are provincial. It's in the Constitution.[/QUOTE]<br /> Show me WHERE it says in the Constitution that oil revenues must not be included in equalization. I am waiting.<br /> <br /> Something else. The topic is that ALberta now wants to completely walk away from Canada and keep all of its money. Well... I am all for that. However, if Alberta walks, they must also give up the right to participate in Canada's elections. You can't have it both ways.

   

[QUOTE BY= badsector]<br /> Alberta'a economy didn't tank because of NEP, it's just a lying propaganda your conservative masters slushed down your throat. Alberta's oil industry started up because of the oil crises of the 70s. However, after a while the Arabs realized that they shot themselves in the foot and the embargo hurt them too. The World cut back its oil consumption and looked for alternative oil sources. This is where Alberta came in. [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Alberta came in 15 years later? No. Sorry. Incorrect. Speaking of propaganda brainwashing. The oil crisis of the 70's led to the NEP of the 90's? Good luck trying to prove that theory.<br /> <br /> Whereas, the reality is quite clear. Rightly or wrongly, Alberta's economy is based on increasing investment. If investment stops, our economy stops. When Trudeau decided that the resources of one and only one province needed to be controlled, and the price of oil was set by him, not the market - investment in Alberta's oil patch stopped. And all the 'trickle down' effects meant that everyting that depended on oilfield investment also stopped.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= badsector]<br /> When the oil embargo ended, oil prices dropped and ALberta's oil industry was no longer economically viable, hence it slowed down for a while. It would have happened without NEP too. You should do yourself a favour and clear your mind of this anti-Eastie propaganda, it is used to blind you and manipulate you.<br /> [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Speaking of being blindd and manipulated, I suggest you look up what the NEP actually did to Alberta, and then you'll see why it represents such a blight to us.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= badsector]<br /> Show me WHERE it says in the Constitution that oil revenues must not be included in equalization. I am waiting.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> <a href='http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&Params=A1SEC827183'>Linkie</a> See, that wasn't so hard.<br /> <br /> While you're there looking up that natural resources are provincial responsibilities, show me where one province should be treated differently than the other 9 when it comes to including natural resource revenue in equalization. Oh! Wait!! Equalization isn't part of the constitution, is it? <br /> <br /> That's what we call the 'Red Herring'. Thought you could send me on a 'snipe hunt', eh!<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= badsector]<br /> Something else. The topic is that ALberta now wants to completely walk away from Canada and keep all of its money. Well... I am all for that. However, if Alberta walks, they must also give up the right to participate in Canada's elections. You can't have it both ways.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Once again you show you don't read the articles, and just use your jerking knee to determine what you perceive the topic to be.<br /> <br /> The article is about: if the Feds decide to re-write the federal equalization formula so that Alberta's resources (and NO OTHER PROVINCES RESOURCES) are included in the formula, the Alberta will opt out of the Federal equalization system.<br /> <br /> In other words, another NEP Jr.

   

[QUOTE]It is as a consequence of these rights that Alberta grants oil and gas leases and receives oil and gas royalties; that Manitoba can develop vast hydroelectric power resources to sell in the US; and that Saskatchewan controls uranium and potash reserves of worldwide significance. [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Dr. Caleb, are you telling me you don't understand the difference between ownership and equalization? The document you linked says Alberta owns the oil but it's a different topic all together. What I want from you is a document that says that oil revenue must be excluded from equalization and Alberta must not share its oil revenue with the rest of Canada. You said it was in the Constitution so I assume you can provide a link to it.

   

[QUOTE BY= badsector]<br /> Dr. Caleb, are you telling me you don't understand the difference between ownership and equalization? [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> No, that's what the voices are telling you. I'm saying for equalization to be changed for one province, and not the other 9 is unfair. And if you look deeper, you'll find Alberta doesn't cut a cheque to the Feds, so including Albertas resources in equalization calculations means the Feds will provide *less* value of service to Albertans (unless Albertans stop paying income tax and GST). That will force the Feds to *boost* equalization to other provinces (since the average of British Columbia + Saskatchewan + Manitoba + Ontario + Quebec will fall), which will come out of everyone's pockets. Even yours. <br /> <br /> The Province of Alberta will not suffer one thin dime, and the average taxpayer will be sending more $ to the have-not provinces.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= badsector]<br /> The document you linked says Alberta owns the oil but it's a different topic all together. [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> No, it's the same topic. Who owns BC's forestry, or Saskatchewan's mineral wealth?<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= badsector]<br /> What I want from you is a document that says that oil revenue must be excluded from equalization and Alberta must not share its oil revenue with the rest of Canada. You said it was in the Constitution so I assume you can provide a link to it.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> What you want is a red herring. I said resource rights are in the constituton, and provided a link to that relevant portion of the constiution.

   

The real issue is whether Alberta (and likely Newfoundland) will get special treatment. They shouldn't. If equalization is based on a province's wealth, then that should include natural resources. That includes Quebec's hydro-electricity too.<br /> <br /> Ralph is demanding special treatment. <br /> <br /> The interesting thing is where this puts "Firewall" Harper though. It looks like he's abandoning his base for a few seats in Quebec. I remember the last time the federal Conservatives chose that path...we got a whole new party. <br /> <br /> How is Harper's flip-flop playing in Alberta?

   

[QUOTE BY= Reverend Blair]<br /> How is Harper's flip-flop playing in Alberta? [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Like a fish out of water. His announcement of a Senate appointee to be a cabinet minister is not offset by his recent talk about a triple E senate. He does not walk the walk.<br /> <br /> I can hear the chants of 'We want back in!' like the anthem at an Oilers game.

   

Let someone go into one of the Kline government's welfare office ,plead poverty then say" I don't think you should count that billion dollar bank acount I have, as that would be unfair" and see if the Kline government is willing to practise the warped logic it preaches.Not likely. What a hippocrite. Non renewable nergy should be nationalised. Are there many countries where it isn't federal jurisdiction.The feds expropriated the ocean floor off the BC coast from the province so they could test nuclear weapons there.Lets do the same with Alberta's oil.<br /> Thank god we'll soon be rid of Kline.<br /> Brent

   

I don't see what the big deal is. Klein doesn't want to have oil and gas revenues in the equalization formula. If it is, Albertans pay more. We already pay more than Ontarians per capita. Thus, Klein is just looking out for the people he serves. <br /> Alberta has indeed been a recipient of payments, but we've contributed plenty since we've become a have province. Would it really be fair to pay more then? Though, you know, if we were to include all resources, as someone here was mentioning, then perhaps Quebec could pay some more as well from its hydroelectricity.<br /> <br /> As for the nationalizing oil post. Why? Why must we nationalize the oil industry, just when Alberta's oil gets involved? I'm in support for certain government owned-and-operated programs, like equalization and healthcare, but nationalizing an industry? Please, just bug off of Alberta's oil.

   

[QUOTE BY= Armageddon] I don't see what the big deal is. Klein doesn't want to have oil and gas revenues in the equalization formula. If it is, Albertans pay more. We already pay more than Ontarians per capita. Thus, Klein is just looking out for the people he serves. <br /> Alberta has indeed been a recipient of payments, but we've contributed plenty since we've become a have province. Would it really be fair to pay more then? Though, you know, if we were to include all resources, as someone here was mentioning, then perhaps Quebec could pay some more as well from its hydroelectricity.<br /> <br /> As for the nationalizing oil post. Why? Why must we nationalize the oil industry, just when Alberta's oil gets involved? I'm in support for certain government owned-and-operated programs, like equalization and healthcare, but nationalizing an industry? Please, just bug off of Alberta's oil.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Nationalizing oil would actually benefit all CANADIANS. When Pierre Trudeau did it,it was poorly done and and poorly defended. Every country with lots of oil has it nationalized like Norway, Mexico,Venezuela and Bolivia is now nationalizing there gas industry so that it benefits the PEOPLE. While we have no National Energy Program the United States has one with OUR OIL!!! Now doesn't that make sense.<img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/rolleyes.gif' alt='Rolling Eyes'> <br /> <br /> But since your from Alberta it doesn't surprise me why you have a mentality of me me me first everyone else second. You should start asking yourself why ALberta sells its oil to United States cheaper then Alaska? Why on earth doesn't Ralph Klein sell it at the same price Alaska is selling it to America? Because America put inside NAFTA that Canada isn't allowed to sell oil to America any higher then it charges Canadians. Our pathetic politicians agreed to this and didn't even view it as a threat to sovereignty. Wouldn't it be nice if we were out of NAFTA and could actually as an independent country choose who we want to sell oil too and at choose the price?<br /> <br /> <br /> I also agree that Quebec should share it hydro industry it doesn't have to be run by the government but money of resources all across Canada should go to Ottawa and Ottawa gives it back to the provinces per capita.

   

[QUOTE BY= Dr Caleb] [QUOTE BY= Reverend Blair]<br /> How is Harper's flip-flop playing in Alberta? [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Like a fish out of water. His announcement of a Senate appointee to be a cabinet minister is not offset by his recent talk about a triple E senate. He does not walk the walk.<br /> <br /> I can hear the chants of 'We want back in!' like the anthem at an Oilers game.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> He'll never get the Triple E senate done. He'll have to open up the Constitution and get the provinces to agree to it. It would be fun to watch but it would likely be disastrous for Canada and would never succeed. I doubt Harper will try it unless he gets a majority.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE]Non renewable nergy should be nationalised. Are there many countries where it isn't federal jurisdiction.The feds expropriated the ocean floor off the BC coast from the province so they could test nuclear weapons there.Lets do the same with Alberta's oil.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Back to the constitution again. Provinces own their natural resources. Trying to change that is political suicide because the provinces would never agree to it. <br /> <br /> Trudeau's NEP was basically a bit of trade legislation, with Canadian oil being used in Canada first at a cheaper rate, which the feds do control.<br /> <br /> The NEP also played a very real role in Alberta's wealth today. Without it, the oil sands wouldn't have been developed. The oil companies would just be starting to think about developing them now. People forget that when they complain about the NEP.

   

1  2  Next