Results 1 to 36 of 36

Thread: 2019 Provincial Election - Rural vs Urban

  1. #1
    Forum Administrator *
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,608
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default 2019 Provincial Election - Rural vs Urban

    With the 2019 election call, it is time to stop with the conversations pre election, and get down to debating actual platforms announced, or issues with the topic itself that parties can address. This thread will deal with Rural vs Urban.
    Ow

  2. #2
    Forum Administrator *
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,608
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    To start this one, I am going to quote the post from another thread that inspired this topic.

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    At a quick glance apx 2/3 of Alberta’s ridings are now urban, by contrast in the 70’s it was apx 2/3 of the ridings were rural.

    Only 16 percent of our population lives in a rural area.

    This is why the UPC was upset when 3 more rural ridings were removed and reconfigured into the cities. It weakens the strength of their traditional base.
    Will this new split have a bearing on the outcome?

    While this is the topic I chose to start this thread, that does not mean that topics like economic development, population loss, etc are excluded. Feel free to discuss more.
    Ow

  3. #3
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    11,266

    Default

    Smaller cities like Grande Prairie and Medicine Hat include a lot of rural residents. I think the UCP could have an advantage there.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  4. #4

    Default

    Actually they donít. Those ridings are now basically the city limits.

    https://www.elections.ab.ca/resources/2019-boundary-maps/
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 21-03-2019 at 08:06 AM.

  5. #5
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Westmount
    Posts
    3,481

    Default

    Not uniformly. How closely have you looked at the map? If you glanced at it, you'd see that Medicine Hat is cracked in half between two districts now: Cypress-Medicine Hat and Brooks-Medicine Hat. There is no longer a single "urban" Medicine Hat riding. https://www.elections.ab.ca/wp-conte..._PUBLISHED.pdf

    Fort McMurray is split into two rural-urban ridings: Fort McMurray-Wood Buffalo and Fort McMurray-Lac La Biche.

    Conversely, there is now a more "urban" and compact Grande Prairie riding. This is new. But Grande Prairie-Wapiti, which contains a lot of rural areas, still exists.
    ďSon, one day this will be an iconic structure shaping Edmontonís skyline.Ē

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JamesL View Post
    Not uniformly. How closely have you looked at the map? If you glanced at it, you'd see that Medicine Hat is cracked in half between two districts now: Cypress-Medicine Hat and Brooks-Medicine Hat. There is no longer a single "urban" Medicine Hat riding. https://www.elections.ab.ca/wp-conte..._PUBLISHED.pdf

    Fort McMurray is split into two rural-urban ridings: Fort McMurray-Wood Buffalo and Fort McMurray-Lac La Biche.

    Conversely, there is now a more "urban" and compact Grande Prairie riding. This is new. But Grande Prairie-Wapiti, which contains a lot of rural areas, still exists.
    You are correct but the those communities cracked in two are mostly within the city limits. Fort Mac and the Hat are the glaring exception as they are part of 2 huge ridings. However whatís north of fort Mac, industry, forest and aboriginal communities. A population that the NDP has worked with for a long time and a demographic that has been known to support the NDP.

    Regardless. Itís not like the 80ís where any party can simply ignore the urban demographic. Our demographic change has been widespread and our population growth, especially in the urban centres, has forever changed the path to power for any political party.
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 21-03-2019 at 11:00 AM.

  7. #7
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    14,044
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    I don't think anyone ever ignored the urban vote. The population as a whole is changing, even in the rural centres.

    The key here is the economy more than anything else, and rural AB is fighting mad.
    President and CEO - Edmonton Airshow. Soon to rebrand to something global.

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RichardS View Post
    I don't think anyone ever ignored the urban vote. The population as a whole is changing, even in the rural centres.

    The key here is the economy more than anything else, and rural AB is fighting mad.
    This thread was started because people were claiming/implied that the UCP will sweep Calgary which they clearly wonít and that they can afford to simply shun Edmonton like was preformed in the past. Iím arguing thatís simply no longer an option.

  9. #9
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    14,044
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    No need to get defensive. I saw the original thread referenced, and while some may say that Calgary is in the bag, even the UPC doesn't think so.

    ...and this thread is about all rural v urban. How about utility infrastructure and how urban AB just doesn't give a damn about rural devastation if their needs for a $20 cup of mocha choka bullcrap can be fulfilled...or the evisceration of any white collar jobs in rural municipalities as Edmonton gets political patronage federally and jobs are moved there... there are many topics...

    ...and shunning Edmonton won't happen. It actually really didn't for the most part outside one term under Klein...and we can trace a lot of our perceived isolation to our own political silliness wihtin Edmonton. 20 years ago, I was on the Edmonton is belittled bandwagon. After working within the system for some time, a lot of our problems are self-inflicted vs a province ignoring us.
    President and CEO - Edmonton Airshow. Soon to rebrand to something global.

  10. #10

    Default

    Iím not defensive. Iím having a conversation.

  11. #11

    Default

    I find it interesting that you paint the urban ridings as enttitiled when the urban ridings face many similar infrastructure issues on top of the majority of the provinces social issues.

    Itís rural ridings that for the longest time had entitlement. Their votes varied more weight, they were over represented if we look at the subject from the sole lense of population and in a handful of cases this still rings true.

    I have relatives, who are rural, who complain about all the taxes they pay (property tax) and the total lack of services they receive. I donít know what they expect. A paved road for them and their 12 neighbours speed out over 7km? Garbage pickup? 24 hour Snow plowing....

    The rural population canít suck and blow at the same time.

    I grew up in one of the rural areas (Stettler) of the Provence that hasnít experienced population growth and is expected to see population decrease. Despite their hardships they are still doing pretty well, they have seen new civic buildings built, infustructure refurbishment.... I can tell you itís a stark difference from the Ohio rural area that my sister lives in. Thatís hardship, however itís not a fair comparison.
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 21-03-2019 at 11:24 AM.

  12. #12
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,384

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RichardS View Post
    No need to get defensive. I saw the original thread referenced, and while some may say that Calgary is in the bag, even the UPC doesn't think so.
    ...
    emphasis added.

    this one is important to remember because calgary is notorious for results not matching the polls and that happens for good reason. calgary has largest percentage of any city in the country of ex-pats from other countries - predominantly american - who are seamlessly embedded in the community and who respond to polls but who aren't entitled to vote. of those entitled to vote, their makeup is a lot closer to edmonton - and a lot closer to the rest of the country for that matter - than they're credited with.

    as i've previously noted elsewhere, much of the electorate in calgary and edmonton and elsewhere in the province has spent large portions of their lives in jurisdictions with ndp governments like bc, saskatchewan, manitoba, and ontario and, while they may not completely agree with all of the ndp's underlying principles, they know by experience - and so should most albertans after the last four years - that doesn't mean that they have horns and tails and it doesn't mean that they are on balance incapable of providing good government.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  13. #13

    Default

    And the population of the ridings ranges from 27,000 for Lesser Slave Lake to 53,000 for Bonnyville-Cold Lake-St. Paul.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert...oral_districts

    Why should a vote in one riding be worth nearly twice as much in another?

  14. #14

    Default

    Constitutional right to representation and access to govt. If a riding is too large (physically) there is a legal argument to be made that a citizens right to access their govt is hampered or possibly being affected for partisan reasons.

    Itís a classic law debate one that I have heard brought up over and over again. I suspect some additudes will change as the population who believes access means being able to walk into a physical office and talk to someone dies and or becomes disinterested in politics.
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 21-03-2019 at 11:49 AM.

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RichardS View Post
    or the evisceration of any white collar jobs in rural municipalities as Edmonton gets political patronage federally and jobs are moved there
    Yeah, the "belittle Edmonton" sheen has worn right off of you.

    There's a reason that the government jobs are in the larger cities and that's because it's where the people are. What was the good, solid reason that Mazinkowski moved the immigration office to Vegreville. It's couldn't be because it was in his riding now, could it? Forget about putting something where it makes the most sense. Everyone knows that government jobs are all about filling the trough in your riding.

    National Portrait Gallery? As soon as Harper saw that it wasn't going to Calgary, he cancelled the project.

  16. #16

    Default

    Further to the above we could also just increase the number of ridings. Something that was not done for decades, requires a change in law via the leg and was done by Stelmac to avoid the points raised above. Regardless of adding more or continued reallocation of seats. Alberta will continue to change, grow and become more and more urban.

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    Constitutional right to representation and access to govt. If a riding is too large (physically) there is a legal argument to be made that a citizens right to access their govt is hampered or possibly being affected for partisan reasons.

    It’s a classic law debate one that I have brought up over and over again. I suspect some additudes will change as the population who believes access means being able to walk into a physical office and talk to someone dies and or becomes disinterested in politics.
    There's ways around that. For instance, financing more riding offices in various areas. An urban riding could get away with one. A rural area may need two or more. There's no reason to give them more political power simply because they live in a sparsely populated area.

    If every riding had the same population as the lowest population one, we'd need ~159 ridings. If they were all the size of the largest, we'd have ~81.

  18. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    Constitutional right to representation and access to govt. If a riding is too large (physically) there is a legal argument to be made that a citizens right to access their govt is hampered or possibly being affected for partisan reasons.

    It’s a classic law debate one that I have brought up over and over again. I suspect some additudes will change as the population who believes access means being able to walk into a physical office and talk to someone dies and or becomes disinterested in politics.
    There's ways around that. For instance, financing more riding offices in various areas. An urban riding could get away with one. A rural area may need two or more. There's no reason to give them more political power simply because they live in a sparsely populated area.

    If every riding had the same population as the lowest population one, we'd need ~159 ridings. If they were all the size of the largest, we'd have ~81.
    I have no good answer depends on what you want to interpret access to govt as, is it an office or is it the ability to have your MLA at your church spaghetti dinner?

    Again these legal questions get asked and debated frequently. The truth is in the grey middle someplace.

    The last election riding rejig did a fairly good
    Job. It did itís best to balance size while making population more even across the province. It also did a decent job of keeping communities whole. Do you remember when large chunks of Edmonton were sectioned off into large mostly rural ridings whoís population outnumbered and overshadowed Our communities wants and needs... I do.

  19. #19
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,384

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    And the population of the ridings ranges from 27,000 for Lesser Slave Lake to 53,000 for Bonnyville-Cold Lake-St. Paul.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert...oral_districts

    Why should a vote in one riding be worth nearly twice as much in another?
    maybe because that's not the only measure? from the electoral boundaries commission report:

    "Lesser Slave Lake It is recommended that the boundaries of the electoral division of Lesser Slave Lake be as shown on Map 69, resulting in a population of 27,818, 41% below provincial average population size. The status of Lesser Slave Lake as a s. 15(2) constituency is discussed in the section of this report entitled ďResponses to Specific Questions for Public InputĒ and in the general discussion on s. 15(2) status. The Commission recommends that Lesser Slave Lake continue to enjoy special s. 15(2) status, allowing it to have a population up to 50% below provincial average population size. It is recommended that the boundaries of this electoral division be adjusted to add the Calling Lake reserve, now located in the northwest corner of the existing adjacent electoral division of Athabasca-Sturgeon-Redwater. This adjustment would satisfy the request of members of the Calling Lake reserve, who note that they share a common community of interest with the significant numbers of indigenous people residing in the constituency of Lesser Slave Lake. This constituency would remain the only constituency within the province where a majority of the population is indigenous."

    it's not only a question of "what a vote is worth", it's a question of any albertan's access to his mla and, conversely, any mla's access to all of his constituents. even with the lower population in the lesser slave lake riding, it remains a riding with no centralized urban or town areas so the opportunity for albertans in the riding to meet is limited and the physical size of the riding makes it difficult and time consuming for the mla to provide them with the same access that an urban constituent takes for granted. despite the riding size, there are many similarities in community makeup and community needs across the riding.

    on balance, it's not as inherently unfair to constituents in the rest of the province as you make it out to be.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  20. #20

    Default

    But land doesn't get a vote. People do. And yes, some adjustments must be made for large, rural ridings. That said, it's entirely possible for people to meet the MLA if necessary. There's airports all over the province. They can schedule meetings. Or they can call their local office. Most times, people don't need to meet with the MLA themselves. That's why they have riding offices where trained people can help them with their concerns. Calling Lake has an airport that's 4 km from the band office.

    The MLA can even do a town hall meeting via a video link. There's numerous ways to meet that were not available just a few years ago. Having someone's vote be worth twice what yours is is the anthesis of representative democracy.

  21. #21
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,384

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RichardS View Post
    or the evisceration of any white collar jobs in rural municipalities as Edmonton gets political patronage federally and jobs are moved there
    Yeah, the "belittle Edmonton" sheen has worn right off of you.

    There's a reason that the government jobs are in the larger cities and that's because it's where the people are. What was the good, solid reason that Mazinkowski moved the immigration office to Vegreville. It's couldn't be because it was in his riding now, could it? Forget about putting something where it makes the most sense. Everyone knows that government jobs are all about filling the trough in your riding.

    National Portrait Gallery? As soon as Harper saw that it wasn't going to Calgary, he cancelled the project.
    it's time you retired some of your drums, particularly those that are just outright fairy tales...

    the national portrait gallery wasn't cancelled because it wasn't going to calgary, it was cancelled because at the end of the day the establishment - in this case led by the ndp's nathan cullen - decided that it would never be located outside of the national capital region (ottawa and gatineau).

    to ensure that the national portrait gallery never moved, they actually disbanded the collection so it isn't even available anymore to relocate. the collection is now just part of our national archives and no longer available for public viewing anywhere (except for the occasional pieces that will tour to other galleries including the aga) unless you can arrange to get security clearance to visit their warehouse in gateneau.

    it was actually quite bold of harper's government to even contemplate having a national anything other than in our nation's capital as there are only two in the entire country - the national holocaust museum in winnipeg which had so much private funding the feds couldn't turn it down and the bluenose in nova scotia (which i'm sure would be in ottawa if they could find water with enough depth). the st. roch in vancouver is an rcmp vessel but the museum in which she is the star exhibit is not a national one although it received some federal funding.

    not that much of this has anything to do with an upcoming alberta provincial election but keep on carrying on.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  22. #22
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,384

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    But land doesn't get a vote. People do. And yes, some adjustments must be made for large, rural ridings. That said, it's entirely possible for people to meet the MLA if necessary. There's airports all over the province. They can schedule meetings. Or they can call their local office. Most times, people don't need to meet with the MLA themselves. That's why they have riding offices where trained people can help them with their concerns. Calling Lake has an airport that's 4 km from the band office.

    The MLA can even do a town hall meeting via a video link. There's numerous ways to meet that were not available just a few years ago. Having someone's vote be worth twice what yours is is the anthesis of representative democracy.
    maybe you should spend a week travelling from band to band in the lesser slave riding and actually look at what is and isn't available to those constituents before you so glibly say what you do. a town hall meeting via a video link? airports all over the place? do you need to take an airplane ride in the middle of winter to meet your mla or visit his office? and do you think having to pay for that is appropriate equal representation?
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  23. #23

    Default

    I have travelled extensively in not only northern Alberta as well as all three territories. I am well aware of the distances and facilities that are available. And none of that refutes the fact that a vote in some ridings is worth twice what it is in another. "Everyone is equal but some are more equal than others." as they say.

    A setup for doing a video link can be carried in a bag the size of a carry on. Should the MLA be expected to visit every remote cabin, regardless of the distance to the nearest town? Aren't they permitted representation as well?

    The fact of the matter is that population growth is much more towards urban ridings and there's not a whole lot that can change that. But sure, let's support people that are in favour of cutting programs and facilities in the cities, such as the Super Lab, even though it will also help them. Or, as an option, let's build the Super Lab in Fort Vermillion.

    Or, we could just let the MLAs of the remote areas vote twice if we go for equal sizes. That would work out about the same too, right?
    Last edited by kkozoriz; 21-03-2019 at 01:32 PM.

  24. #24
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,384

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    I have travelled extensively in not only northern Alberta as well as all three territories. I am well aware of the distances and facilities that are available. And none of that refutes the fact that a vote in some ridings is worth twice what it is in another. "Everyone is equal but some are more equal than others." as they say.

    A setup for doing a video link can be carried in a bag the size of a carry on. Should the MLA be expected to visit every remote cabin, regardless of the distance to the nearest town? Aren't they permitted representation as well?

    The fact of the matter is that population growth is much more towards urban ridings and there's not a whole lot that can change that. But sure, let's support people that are in favour of cutting programs and facilities in the cities, such as the Super Lab, even though it will also help them. Or, as an option, let's build the Super Lab in Fort Vermillion.

    Or, we could just let the MLAs of the remote areas vote twice if we go for equal sizes. That would work out about the same too, right?
    isn't it tiring moving the goalposts and setting up the straw men all the time?

    firstly, what is a vote for and what is a vote worth? a vote is intended to ensure that we all have appropriate representation in government. is our system perfect? maybe not, but it's about as good or better than just about any other jurisdiction on the planet.

    when you say "a vote in some ridings is worth twice what it is in another" and equate that to "everyone is equal but some are more equal than others", it's cute (in the same endless cat videos on the internet might be considered cute) but it's wrong. even if all ridings had exactly the same number of voters and everyone voted, would those whose chosen candidates were defeated be able to say "our vote didn't count"? what if the margin was 51/49 vs 75/25? if one riding had a 60% turnout and another a 30% turnout, would those in the riding with a higher turnout be able to say "our votes counted less"?

    at the end of the day, the system is intended to provide each riding with one individual to represent them in government (or in opposition which can be just as valuable to the system without being detrimental to the riding).

    a setup for doing a video link can be carried in a bag the size of a carry on? so what? that mla does his constituents no good broadcasting a video link that can't be viewed by the majority of those in his riding does it? should the mla be expected to visit every remote cabin regardless of the distance to the nearest town? no more than an mla is expected to visit every home or apartment or condo in an urban riding. but those in every home or apartment or condo in an urban riding still enjoy access to their mla and their mla's office - and to mla's in adjacent ridings for that matter - and that access simply doesn't exist to anywhere near the same level in large rural ridings.

    the fact of the matter is that we all deserve representation in the legislature that represents us and that is accessible to us. minimizing or even eliminating that in some mindless quest for an equal number of voters per riding is foolhardy and not particularly democratic. if that's what you want, the only way to accomplish it would be to have a single province wide riding in which everyone would vote for their top 87 candidates on a province wide slate. that would make sure that all votes would be "equal" whether they were cast or not. but i'm pretty sure you wouldn't end up with a more representative legislature or more equitable representation within it for every voter or for every region.

    as for what this has to do with the super-lab being completed or cut, i don't recall any objections to the super-lab coming from lesser slave lake but i do recall some from the middle of some of our urban centres so you might want to be a bit more self-critical of which straw men you throw out where.

    as for having some mla's vote twice... really? do you really think that's what this discussion is about? do you really think that that would provide those in remote areas with better access to their mla or better representation of their interests to their mla after halving the potential of their having any contact or influence on his voting?
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  25. #25

    Default

    Having fewer people elect an MLA is like having them vote twice. Imagine you have 1,000,000 people, equally divided between dense urban and sparse rural. Because the rural people live in larger areas, they are assigned 20 districts of 25,000 each. Those in the urban setting, eager to help out the rural folks, are assigned 10 districts of 50,000 each. Now, the urban folks tend to vote for party A and those in the rural areas are more party Z folks. Come election time, the legislature is composed of 20 Z MLAs and 10 A MLAs. By your reasoning, this is not only acceptable but desired.

    As I have said, I'm all for providing additional funding for representatives of large areas to assist them in dealing with the challenges of such a district. However, that doesn't mean that their vote should count more than the folks in the denser areas.

    And I am not calling for all districts to be exactly equal. For one thing, that's not possible. There will always be some variance. But having the variance be equal to the size of the smallest riding is unfair. Or is "one person, one vote" unfair?

    If the people in a certain riding decide not to vote then they have nobody to blame for the lack of voice in the process other than themselves. When the decision is made that it will take twice as many of them to elect a representative is not something that they have power over, even if 100% of the voters turn out. You could have 26,000 people vote for one party and still lose in a large riding. If 26,000 voted for a certain party in a smaller riding, it would be a blowout. So this group of 26,000 get the representation that they desire while the others do not. How is that nor treating one group differently than the other?

    I'd say that they ridings should vary by no more than 10% in either direction from the average. You could still have a riding that's significantly smaller than another one but it wouldn't be half as many people getting exactly the same say in government.

  26. #26
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    11,266

    Default

    I think there was legislation, making Slave Lake and Area a special case. I would have to think that travel is treacherous (case in point, Grant Notley). Also, the MLA from Fort Saskatchewan-Vegreville maxxed out allowable travel mileage.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  27. #27

    Default

    Highway 2 can also be treacherous. Case in point, Manmeet Bhullar.

  28. #28
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    14,044
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    I have travelled extensively in not only northern Alberta as well as all three territories. I am well aware of the distances and facilities that are available. And none of that refutes the fact that a vote in some ridings is worth twice what it is in another. "Everyone is equal but some are more equal than others." as they say.
    (…)
    isn't it tiring moving the goalposts and setting up the straw men all the time?

    (…)
    You know the answer kcantor. It can't be. The redirection, misdirection, and trying to echo chamber you into looking like you're the zealot while KK is the hero is a constant thread - regardless of how the evidence speaks. Plus, it always circles back to the main theme - bash conservatives or people KK thinks are.

    Example...

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz

    Quote Originally Posted by RichardS
    or the evisceration of any white collar jobs in rural municipalities as Edmonton gets political patronage federally and jobs are moved there
    Yeah, the "belittle Edmonton" sheen has worn right off of you.

    There's a reason that the government jobs are in the larger cities and that's because it's where the people are. What was the good, solid reason that Mazinkowski moved the immigration office to Vegreville. It's couldn't be because it was in his riding now, could it? Forget about putting something where it makes the most sense. Everyone knows that government jobs are all about filling the trough in your riding.

    National Portrait Gallery? As soon as Harper saw that it wasn't going to Calgary, he cancelled the project.

    a) KK has, from the veil of anonymity, often attacked my character and my work with absolutely offside and factless accusations, like above. KK takes advantage that I am public with my support and actions, often trying to misrepresent what I say in an attempt to paint me as some "military industrial complex" jingoistic slavish ghoul.

    ...totally, or more than likely, CONVENIENTLY forgets that I was not in favour of the original Maz patronage appointment back in the late 1980's, but now that it is 201x and Veg has the infrastructure to keep this, no more or no less than Edmonton, removing it is just as stupid. ...completely omits the point of tech, but later says a large rural riding can be served by videoconferencing...but Veg can't use IT to continue a 20+ year office that really needs no public interaction?

    b)it ALWAYS circles back to Harper or Trump. Every thread. Blame someone else. Circles it back to only PC/Conservative patronage, omits any Liberal/NDP/Green patronage which is the hallmark of what I have to fight to get jobs BACK to Edmonton...or all the work I am doing Federally to get Edmonton and region back onto a stage where this investment changes from "Why Edmonton?" to "Why not Edmonton?"

    ...belittle Edmonton my a**. Come out from behind the veil KK and show me what you're actually doing to help this city...I'd like to see you match me dollar for dollar, hour for hour... I'm trying to get net new here, vs pillaging our neighbours in a time where their very survival is in question...
    President and CEO - Edmonton Airshow. Soon to rebrand to something global.

  29. #29

    Default

    Oh right, I forgot to check your C2E postings from the late 1980s.

    Their very survival? Really? What, someone is calling in airstrikes or something? The population has been moving into the cities for decades. Literally, over a century. And if you are so in favour of the survival of Vegreville, why were you opposed to it then? I guess that the pillaging was OK then.

    harper shuts down Veterans affairs offices. "Fiscally prudent thing to do" the Cons say. Trudeau reopens the same offices "WASTE! Patronage!"

  30. #30

    Default

    was it kkozoriz that apologized on another thread to you Richard or was it another poster? You'd think they'd settle down after getting destroyed like that.

  31. #31
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,384

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Oh right, I forgot to check your C2E postings from the late 1980s.

    Their very survival? Really? What, someone is calling in airstrikes or something? The population has been moving into the cities for decades. Literally, over a century. And if you are so in favour of the survival of Vegreville, why were you opposed to it then? I guess that the pillaging was OK then.

    harper shuts down Veterans affairs offices. "Fiscally prudent thing to do" the Cons say. Trudeau reopens the same offices "WASTE! Patronage!"
    i guess moving the goalposts and setting up the straw men over and over isn't as tiring as i thought.

    or maybe it's just a recreational pastime like cycling or running where you need to keep working through the pain without caring about the damage you cause releasing the endorphins you get addicted to.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  32. #32

    Default

    I'm just wondering if his opposition to moving the office to Vegreville has changed now and what provincial offices he'd like to see moved out of the city to Whitecourt or Westlock. Or should the feds be the only ones worried enough to move offices to remote communities?

  33. #33
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    14,044
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    To quote me

    I'm trying to get net new here, vs pillaging our neighbours
    .

    Nice trap question KK. Yes, it goes both ways. I am not trying to pillage Edmonton for the sake of Edson either. It is a globe KK.

    But since you used a set up trap...yes, those jeans do make you look *insert self conscious issue here*.

    My comments on Veg are in a 2016 thread here on C2E. The centre moved in 1988. ...was there for 20-ish years and became a key employer. Tech changed. If the appointment was announced today, it would have to be justified just like any other. If Vegriville got it out of merit, especially since the world is not 1988 tech wise, I'd be happy. If it was a patronage appointment with no real assessments done, I'd pooh pooh it on that basis. If I was mayor of a receiving municipality, I would thank my lucky stars, admit my lucky stars, then do everything I could to turn the patronage appointment into something we could say we've earned to keep.

    I do have a much longer response, pointing out each one of your hypocritical issues in this thread...like simple to set up videoconferencing from a carry on yet a 20 year centre needs to move because IT couldn't help...to there's an airport in every town (but no air service or infrastructure to have it, or it means everyone needs a small bush plane)...to double speak on driving distances...to no solutions but misdirections...to yet another circle back to blame Tory X...kcantor already took care of the National Art Gallery...deflecting the real economic survival issues of rural centres with your bombastic airstrike hyperbole...how I am actually utilizing funding sources like Western Diversification to get a solution that satisfies both rural and urban... how we should look to smaller centres to be urban and not just Edmongary...getting secondary processing industries back into the community... etc... You know, real rural issues.

    You'll come back with an attitude of fait d'acompli, let them die...let them eat (beef) cake. They should know this is coming.

    Oh, I forgot, you put out the ridiculous strawdog of the SuperLab to Fort Vermillion instead of any real solutions...and for the record, I am for it moving to its new Edmonton location....

    ...but it's time for you to come clean as I tire of your round and round. I offered you a chance to be honourable...to match me dollar for dollar...hour for hour. You didn't accept. You could even PM me! You'd think a political plant like yourself who has travelled as extensively as you proclaim would eviscerate me on that challenge!

    ...guess not. Oh right...an airport in every place...but the Feds can't ping Veg on our SuperNet.
    President and CEO - Edmonton Airshow. Soon to rebrand to something global.

  34. #34

    Default

    I didn't say that there was an airport or even an airstrip at every little town, just that there's a large number o them in places that people in the cities might be surprised are there.

    OK, net new here. Who do you want to pillage? Just Ottawa or are small towns in Ontario and Quebec fair game? What about Manitoba? BC? Should we move DND headquarters to Waiwright? Or would that be too long a flight back to Ottawa (yet somehow a flight within Alberta is like trekking across Antartica by dogsled).

    How about we put government offices where they're most efficient and have the lowest cost to the taxpayers? You know, where they makse sense to put them instead of turning them into make work policies for small towns. If moving to Vegreville was wrong in your opinion in the 1980's because Mazinkowski wanted to pick up some votes, why is it suddenly imperative that we do even more now?

    And I'm not going to get into a dick measuring contest with you over who has done more for this or that or who has spend more money. I've volunteered since I was in junior high to numerous causes and also regularly donated to various groups. We all support our chosen causes in the way we feel is best. I do admit freely that you've done a lot but that's because you're quite public about it. And I'm not saying that being open about is is a bad thing. That's entirely up to you. You've got to do what works best for you, just like I do what I feel is best.

  35. #35

    Default

    Letís just be honest. They couldnít find the people they needed largely because no one wanted to move to Vergerville.

  36. #36
    Forum Administrator *
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,608
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Election over. Thread closed.
    Ow

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
  •