Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 301 to 314 of 314

Thread: Alberta provincial budget - 2016

  1. #301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaerdo View Post
    I will call it what it is, and that is not a PST. I realize that you badly want it to be a PST to use as fodder against the NDP, but that just isn't the case. It is literally not a PST no matter how you try to argue it.

    Why don't you focus on the real issues with their plan? For instance the rebate. I'm sure there will also be flaws with how they spend grant money. Why not look at that? Why the obsessive focus on painting this as a PST?
    It is a sales tax. And Alberta hasn't been without sales taxes. What in the end is labelled a broad based sales tax like a conventional PST is a matter of semantics and historical convention. (Take the GST, many products are exempt so it is a broad based sales tax but not as broad as it could be.)

    However, adding in another sales tax, another layer of taxation provides a new revenue stream to government. (I think it's much needed.) How that revenue stream will evolve over time, only time will tell. Mission creep is almost guaranteed. Maybe someday people will say, hey, this works well after all, so lets roll it in with a lot of other sales taxes and call it a PST, or a psst! (Provincial sin sales tax!). "Psst, wanna buy some untaxed contraband..."

    Right now I'd say it's far from a generic broad based pst except it does in a very minor way hit on a broad based product of consumption but it's not directly hitting all products and there are some avenues to avoid completely paying it. (Still, like with the GST, people can avoid it when buying their food. So the GST has likely reduced consumption of undesirable and hence, taxed food consumption in favour of non-taxed foods. )
    Last edited by KC; 25-04-2016 at 11:03 AM.

  2. #302

    Default

    Mulroney says Energy East 'a nation-building opportunity' for Trudeau.
    http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/mulro...deau-1.2872504

    Have to agree with Mulroney on this one. Getting these pipelines built should be looked on as nation building. Like the railway it will bring prosperity to all the provinces. Trudeau should take charge and get this done instead of waffling and holding meetings about it. All talk no action = nothing.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  3. #303

    Default

    Oh well, I guess here's some action.

    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/enbri...080/story.html

    Enbridge Inc.’s Northern Gateway pipeline may get a new lease on life as the Canadian government wavers on a planned tanker moratorium that was previously thought to spell the end for the project.
    Officials are weighing what types of petroleum products may be exempt from any moratorium, and whether certain tankers could be allowed, according to people familiar with the matter, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the talks are private.
    Prime Minister Justin Trudeau pledged in November to “formalize a moratorium on crude oil tanker traffic” on British Columbia’s northern coast. But cabinet ministers are noncommittal on its precise implications, while federals officials have regularly declined to comment on Northern Gateway’s prospects.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  4. #304
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,796

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    ^If you think that the carbon levy is all going towards 'green stuff' then I have ocean front property in Arizona to sell you.
    It's all smoke and mirrors with a dash of bull chit. They think the general public is too brain dead to catch on.
    Agreed. "General revenues". That's where all dollars collected by government go. There will be no special bank account for collections from this tax. As to all the green stuff, there is no money for that when you are running a massive deficit just to keep everyone who is paid by government, directly or indirectly, employed.
    A "carbon tax" is a wolf in sheep's clothing and is most likely going towards helping to pay down the Provincial debt load and NDP campain promises. All under title of "climate change." Funny how Notley hasn't said anything about the Heritage trust fund in this budget.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  5. #305
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    2,591

    Default

    Go read the budget, envaneo. The levy is fully expended under the climate leadership plan. Not one cent goes to the debt load.

    Try actually reading up on things before you decide to lie about them.

  6. #306

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post
    Funny how Notley hasn't said anything about the Heritage trust fund in this budget.
    It is funny isn't it? We keep hearing about how the PC's squandered our wealth, should have created a fund as big as Norways, etc. etc., and now we have a left wing government, they are not only not building up the fund, they are actually going the opposite direction of wracking up the debt (even with all these extra taxes), making the creation of a huge fund even more impossible than it ever was (given how much of our wealth is shared with out neighbors in Canada). Oh well... who would have guessed that an NDP would be tax and spend (and spend again, and again, and borrow, and spend...)?
    Last edited by moahunter; 25-04-2016 at 01:17 PM.

  7. #307
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,796

    Default

    Your too an intelligent person to be so naive. This tax grab will go into "General revenue." You don't think that a % of this wont go towards other things? Does this tax grab have any oversight mechanics in it? How transparent is this carbon tax? Hmm, I wonder.

    I don't lie, I may have opinions and most people can tell th difference.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  8. #308
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,796

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post
    Funny how Notley hasn't said anything about the Heritage trust fund in this budget.
    It is funny isn't it? We keep hearing about how the PC's squandered our wealth, should have created a fund as big as Norways, etc. etc., and now we have a left wing government, they are not only not building up the fund, they are actually going the opposite direction of wracking up the debt (even with all these extra taxes), making the creation of a huge fund even more impossible than it ever was (given how much of our wealth is shared with out neighbors in Canada). Oh well... who would have guessed that an NDP would be tax and spend (and spend again, and again, and borrow, and spend...)?
    In total agreement. Its part of the NDP playbook to tax and spend. That's what happened in Saskatchewan before Brad Wall. I did some fundraising for him as well but that's another story Jim Prentice had a good plan and Alberta was debt free even with low energy prices. Notice how Notley took Jim's $35B job creation plan? Even Jim wanted to take Alberta off the oil boom & bust cycle, without a carbon and pst tax.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  9. #309

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post

    In total agreement. Its part of the NDP playbook to tax and spend. That's what happened in Saskatchewan before Brad Wall. I did some fundraising for him as well but that's another story Jim Prentice had a good plan and Alberta was debt free even with low energy prices. Notice how Notley took Jim's $35B job creation plan? Even Jim wanted to take Alberta off the oil boom & bust cycle, without a carbon and pst tax.
    Prentice showed his true colours on Election Night. What a shameful display.

  10. #310
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,354

    Thumbs down

    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post
    Funny how Notley hasn't said anything about the Heritage trust fund in this budget.
    It is funny isn't it? We keep hearing about how the PC's squandered our wealth, should have created a fund as big as Norways, etc. etc., and now we have a left wing government, they are not only not building up the fund, they are actually going the opposite direction of wracking up the debt (even with all these extra taxes), making the creation of a huge fund even more impossible than it ever was (given how much of our wealth is shared with out neighbors in Canada). Oh well... who would have guessed that an NDP would be tax and spend (and spend again, and again, and borrow, and spend...)?
    In total agreement. Its part of the NDP playbook to tax and spend. That's what happened in Saskatchewan before Brad Wall. I did some fundraising for him as well but that's another story Jim Prentice had a good plan and Alberta was debt free even with low energy prices. Notice how Notley took Jim's $35B job creation plan? Even Jim wanted to take Alberta off the oil boom & bust cycle, without a carbon and pst tax.
    I wish he had, I get the distinct impression the Libs on yet another retreat aren't listening to Notley at all.

  11. #311
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    2,591

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post
    Your too an intelligent person to be so naive. This tax grab will go into "General revenue." You don't think that a % of this wont go towards other things? Does this tax grab have any oversight mechanics in it? How transparent is this carbon tax? Hmm, I wonder.

    I don't lie, I may have opinions and most people can tell th difference.

    Such claims are speculative and unsubstantiated. You can't criticize a policy based on what the government "might do" in the future. This year it is fully expended with new programs. For the next 5 years it is budgeted to be fully expended with new programs.

    How can you criticize it based on speculative reasoning that is not reflected by the fiscal plans or real budgeting?

    As it stands, claiming that the levy will go to a slush fund is a lie. That is not how it is budgeted, and that is not how the plans hold it will be budgeted in the future. So yes, you do lie.

  12. #312

    Default

    Jaerdo, you are not being fair to envaneo. He is explicitly stating that that is his opinion.

    You might ask why many Albertans don't buy government's "fully expensed" carbon tax claim. Well, as you know government is struggling to keep the lights on. They have operational deficit and while this is a low interest rate period, the cost of provincial borrowing is just keep going up. Today, another agency downgraded our rating. So it is a legitimate concern. Can government afford to expense all the revenue it earns, or it has to dip into those fully expensed budget items. Those budget items are "plan"s. In the word of Mike Tyson, everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the face.

    As you say, only time can confirm. In the meantime most of us remain concerned.
    Last edited by FamilyMan; 25-04-2016 at 06:10 PM.

  13. #313

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post
    Your too an intelligent person to be so naive. This tax grab will go into "General revenue." You don't think that a % of this wont go towards other things? Does this tax grab have any oversight mechanics in it? How transparent is this carbon tax? Hmm, I wonder.

    I don't lie, I may have opinions and most people can tell th difference.
    We all need to start stating the timing behind our expectations. This year? Next year?

    Long term, without the introduction of a "pst", I wouldn't be surprised at a GR allocation - first explained away as necessary to promote other progressive developments...

    The Progressive Conservatives did the very same thing with the royalties that were originally to be dedicated to building a major heritage fund.

    It happened with income tax.

    In the states the billions in tobacco money (tobacco bonds) started going towards all kinds of weird things.

    Globally, carbon taxes are easy introductions during periods of low oil prices. Governments everywhere have taken on truly massive indebtedness and so sin taxes are always easy to introduce and escalate the rate on over time. Burning carbon is now a sin.



    "In November 1998, the tobacco industry and 46 states reached what is known as the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement (four states reached separate settlements). ... In return, the tobacco companies agreed to make annual payments, in perpetuity, to the states to fund anti-smoking campaigns and public health programs. The industry guaranteed a minimum of $206 billion over the first 25 years.

    While a requirement that the states use these funds as intended was not written into the agreement, it was anticipated that they would do so.

    Only a small fraction of the money has gone to tobacco prevention. Instead, the states have used the windfall for various and unrelated expenditures. In Alaska, ... shipping docks. In Niagara County, ...public golf course’s sprinkler system, ... a county jail and an office building. And in North Carolina, in the ultimate irony, $42 million of the settlement funds actually went to ...

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/07/op...-bad.html?_r=0
    Last edited by KC; 25-04-2016 at 06:37 PM.

  14. #314

    Default

    Only relevant in terms of the impact of falling oil prices, but Alberta isn't alone in debt downgrades...




    Saudis Heed an Oil Warning From History - Bloomberg Gadfly



    Exxon hit an important milestone this week, and hit it quite hard: It lost its triple-A credit rating for the first time since the Great Depression.


    This isn't a problem in terms of Exxon's ability to fund itself. Double-AA plus is still excellent; and as you can see, it'll be a while before anyone takes away Exxon's credit card:




    http:/www.bloomberg.com/gadfly/articles/2016-04-29/exxon-earnings-its-reputation-keeps-weakening


    Sent from my iPad

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •