Why are we running a Deficit in Alberta? Expected to grow next year.

[Toma]

What are the "Excuses"??

So we have near record oil sands production, and growing.
High oil prices
easily profitable gas prices.

But services getting cut, and running ever increasing Debt, and provincial deficit.

Ok, so tell me why this is happening, while services cut back, social funding cut.... we have to deal with inflation, lagging infrastructure, a housing bubble....

Lets hear the Excuses for these conservatives.

Go!

[16hypen3sp]

You want to know why Alberta is going in the hole?

Because people got scared and voted for the same shit that started this downward spiral years ago.

I hate what the conservatives have become... they are pretty much Liberal.

Klein was the last great true conservative and if he was still around, I'd vote for him.

Albertans have only themselves to blame over this fiasco.

Redford's putting us in the red and taking nice trips on our dime.

Complacency at its finest.

[ZenOps]

Print print print, consume consume consume.

Production is nothing compared to consumption. Must get the US to 1/10th of a barrel of oil/day (31 million barrels per day) Must get 47 million people on foodstamps and morbidly obese.

Must get US to $60,000 debt per person for 311 million people.

Why bother to save when you can just do what Donald Trump does, and put all your bankruptcy losses on someone else (IE: The stupid people who lent you the money) Donald Trump for Prez!

[sabad66]

Not so sure about "easily profitable" gas prices. I'd say it's more like "barely profitable"

[Type_S1]

1) welfare programs and supporting useless people (drug addicts, alcoholics, homeless, etc.)
2) supporting native people
3) supporting activist groups that oppose the only reason Alberta makes money
4) unions
5) overpaid and overstuffed government employees
6)funding/ grants for arts programs and other useless programs at universities
7)mismanagement of funds on the city level (think blue Nenshi ring, nenshi-lanes, etc.)
8) shipping $$ back east (Quebec, the maritimes) to support the lazy useless people out there


Could keep going....it's just mismanaged from top to bottom. Need someone who will come in and do massive internal layoffs, enforce accountability in the government and cut programs that do not add to the bottom line. Any $ spent on a welfare program that puts the government in further debt is an ill spent $.

[benyl]

There is an oil price differential.

I think Alberta oil only gets 60 cents on the dollar of west Texas oil. Alberta has a transportation problem too. Why do you think keystone and northern gateway is always in the news?

[hampstor]

An oil price differential has always been there in some form - I honestly think bad budgeting, which set an unrealistic expectation on the price oil, is probably the biggest issue.

The other factors were say-whatever-it-takes-to-get-reelected election promises and an unachievable election budget that set unrealistic expectations.

lol @Type_S1. His posts are always good humor.

Edit: If you expect to get a big bonus and a big raise and spend it before you get it, you're going to have a bad time.

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by Type_S1
1) welfare programs and supporting useless people (drug addicts, alcoholics, homeless, etc.)
2) supporting native people
3) supporting activist groups that oppose the only reason Alberta makes money
4) unions
5) overpaid and overstuffed government employees
6)funding/ grants for arts programs and other useless programs at universities
7)mismanagement of funds on the city level (think blue Nenshi ring, nenshi-lanes, etc.)
8) shipping $$ back east (Quebec, the maritimes) to support the lazy useless people out there.

:clap:

[Feruk]

Originally posted by Type_S1
Need someone who will come in and do massive internal layoffs, enforce accountability in the government and cut programs that do not add to the bottom line. Any $ spent on a welfare program that puts the government in further debt is an ill spent $.

Alberta isn't a business, the goal isn't to only run programs that add to the bottom line. The goal is to spend less than you make.

While I agree in principal with you on welfare, it doesn't work in reality. Your money can either pay someone $12K a year in welfare or $100K a year for their jail cell. I'd much rather that my tax dollars help than put people in a situation where the only alternative is stealing.

As for the list you quoted, these are just tiny drops in the bucket. The big costs are health care and infrastructure. But I definitely agree that someone's gotta come into these two with a hatchet and start slashing.


Originally posted by benyl
I think Alberta oil only gets 60 cents on the dollar of west Texas oil. Alberta gas a transportation problem too. Why do you think keystone and northern gateway is always in the news?
It's pretty much in line now on the light stuff and not too far off on the heavier stuff. The last couple years this was a major issue though. The problem is more the government budgeting on an unrealistic oil/gas price.

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by 16hypen3sp

Because people got scared and voted for the same shit that started this downward spiral years ago.
.....
Klein was the last great true conservative and if he was still around, I'd vote for him.


Klein started the spiral. He ignored infrastructure needs all to pay off Alberta's debt as part of his "legacy". And now wer're paying triple the price to get that infrastructure done.

And who the hell pays down a 1% loan, when you can be earning 10x that by investing for the future?

[DeleriousZ]

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/01/11/oil-fund-norway-millionaires_n_4576887.html

Just move to norway, lol.

[01RedDX]

.

[codetrap]

Originally posted by Type_S1
1) welfare programs and supporting useless people (drug addicts, alcoholics, homeless, etc.)
2) supporting native people
3) supporting activist groups that oppose the only reason Alberta makes money
4) unions
5) overpaid and overstuffed government employees
6)funding/ grants for arts programs and other useless programs at universities
7)mismanagement of funds on the city level (think blue Nenshi ring, nenshi-lanes, etc.)
8) shipping $$ back east (Quebec, the maritimes) to support the lazy useless people out there


Could keep going....it's just mismanaged from top to bottom. Need someone who will come in and do massive internal layoffs, enforce accountability in the government and cut programs that do not add to the bottom line. Any $ spent on a welfare program that puts the government in further debt is an ill spent $.

1) Paid for Federally. NOT Provincially.. also VERY overfunded at the moment.
2) Paid for Federally, NOT Provincially.
3) Paid for Federally, NOT Provincially.
4) Not sure what you mean on this one.. which Union?
5) Can't argue on this one..
6) Depends on where the money come from.
7) May be a minor contributing factor, but doesn't account for the vast majority of Provincial Overspending.
8) Transfer Payments... hehe.. can't really help them unfortunately, and they're not the reason.

I'd personally look at AHS. $17.1 Billion a year. 45% of Alberta's Budget every year. $1.9 Million per hour... In something that big, there HAS to be efficiencies to be found, without cutting services.

http://www.health.alberta.ca/about/health-funding.html

[sputnik]

Originally posted by codetrap
8) Transfer Payments... hehe.. can't really help them unfortunately, and they're not the reason.

Transfer payments are also FEDERAL funds.

Alberta would have no access to this money regardless.

[Type_S1]

^ all of 1,2&3 Are paid for on a provincial level to some extent.

Like I said I could keep going on and on. AHS...union. The union is a massive part of the problem. Another massive problem is the money wasted on homeless, addicts, natives, etc. who do not add to the bottom line. Without all these people leeching on the health system you would be able to find a lot of free $$.

Allow Privatization of some medical services would also help massively. Rich people can pay cold hard cash to get medical services relieving AHS of the burden and saving $$.

[Tik-Tok]

You know what's also a massive leach?

Safety rules.

The amount of shit workers aren't allowed to do anymore, or have to wait for someone else to do, because some BS OH&S rules is ever increasing, and ever retarded. That's what makes what should be a 2 week job, into a 6 week job, and is what makes everything triple the price it should be.

[CapnCrunch]

I understand that running a government is probably a lot more complicated than anyone here can even grasp, but f*ck me, some of the decisions they make are borderline stupid.

Just for an example, watching when and where they decide to build new schools and how large to make them is just insane.

[smokedog]

Originally posted by DeleriousZ
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/01/11/oil-fund-norway-millionaires_n_4576887.html

Just move to norway, lol.

I have a question - In Alberta, who owns the tar sands? Is it private-owned or state-owned? & concerning Norway, who own's the oil production? Is it state or private?

Thanks

[JRSC00LUDE]

Originally posted by smokedog


I have a question - In Alberta, who owns the tar sands? Is it private-owned or state-owned? & concerning Norway, who own's the oil production? Is it state or private?

Thanks

Is that a trick question Mr. Young, what "tar" sands?

[EM2FTL]

Happy to see people discussing actual provincial issues for once, good on you OP.

Feruk's post nails it though, well said.

[GTS4tw]

Originally posted by Type_S1
^ all of 1,2&3 Are paid for on a provincial level to some extent.

Like I said I could keep going on and on. AHS...union. The union is a massive part of the problem. Another massive problem is the money wasted on homeless, addicts, natives, etc. who do not add to the bottom line. Without all these people leeching on the health system you would be able to find a lot of free $$.

Allow Privatization of some medical services would also help massively. Rich people can pay cold hard cash to get medical services relieving AHS of the burden and saving $$.

So whats your huge solution to addiction? homelessness? You should go public! People have been trying to solve those problems for 10,000 years with no success, and here you have had it all along!

[clem24]

Originally posted by DeleriousZ
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/01/11/oil-fund-norway-millionaires_n_4576887.html

Just move to norway, lol.

We'd probably do just as good if we collected 25% tax on goods and 15% on food. Just sayin'.

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by GTS4tw


So whats your huge solution to addiction? homelessness? You should go public! People have been trying to solve those problems for 10,000 years with no success, and here you have had it all along!

You're an adult and you make decisions. If you make a decision to be be a crack addict, why should everyone else work and pay to support you?

[Arash Boodagh]

Australian Politician Exposes Agenda 21 and New World Order!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrdmjBAX0E0

[JRSC00LUDE]

^
My ignore list guess is.......Big bad oil? NWO? Jews?

:rolleyes:

[GTS4tw]

Originally posted by Seth1968


You're an adult and you make decisions. If you make a decision to be be a crack addict, why should everyone else work and pay to support you?

I agree, so what do you do with the crack addicts?

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by GTS4tw


I agree, so what do you do with the crack addicts?

You let them smoke crack. And when they die, you give them a burial and call it a day :dunno:

The funny thing about addiction is it still is a choice. A really tough choice? Absolutely. But still just a choice.

[gretz]

Originally posted by JRSC00LUDE
^
My ignore list guess is.......Big bad oil? NWO? Jews?

:rolleyes:

NWO... damn you are good

It's a video I'm not going to watch, it could be about jews and oil though... i'd say 3 for 3 lol

[Feruk]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1
You let them smoke crack. And when they die, you give them a burial and call it a day :dunno:

The funny thing about addiction is it still is a choice. A really tough choice? Absolutely. But still just a choice.
I'm guessing before they die they'll try to rob you for bread and crack money. I don't like it.

[16hypen3sp]

The funny thing is some people actually believe that a Lib or NDP government would be a better solution.

Now that is comedy.:rofl:

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by Feruk

I'm guessing before they die they'll try to rob you for bread and crack money. I don't like it.

All you are doing is guessing. Most crack addicts aren't going to do more than shuffle in your general direction and try not to fall.

Shitty people are shitty people, doesn't matter if they are an addict or not. I've never met a person who is an addict (and I've met a few) who didn't have some sort of shitty, undesirable to be around personality that overall just made them a crappy human being. Partially because addiction is SO much more than just "I MUST HAVE THIS!"

Edit-
Oh, and do you know what that undesirable trait is? Selfishness. Addicts are always selfish people. And they were that way before the drugs, even if people who knew them can't admit it. People are shitty judges of character and are easily fooled by a slick smile and some witty banter.

[JRSC00LUDE]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


All you are doing is guessing. Most crack addicts aren't going to do more than shuffle in your general direction and try not to fall.



Disagree. I've known a few in my day and, while they may be that way when high, when they're not they need to get the cash. They'll steal anyone's anything, including yours, and can be incredibly violent while trying to do so.

EDIT - Except for Rob Ford. :nut:

[EM2FTL]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


All you are doing is guessing. Most crack addicts aren't going to do more than shuffle in your general direction and try not to fall.


So incredibly far off base. Feruk already posted why we intervene instead of doing nothing - the costs incurred when these people commit a crime, injure themselves or someone else (utilizing both emergency services and hospital) , cause property damage, etc. etc. are exponentially higher than the costs incurred in successful interventions. If you can actually get them off the street and contributing to society the savings are even greater.

I think the policy you'd be better off supporting would be exile to a remote island where they must organize into factions and then battle for our entertainment.

[smokedog]

Originally posted by JRSC00LUDE


Is that a trick question Mr. Young, what "tar" sands?

It's not a trick question. I'm not educated on the issue. The original question was:

In Alberta, who owns the oil sands? Is it private-owned or state-owned? & concerning Norway, who own's the oil production? Is it state or private?

Thank you

[ipeefreely]

Originally posted by smokedog


It's not a trick question. I'm not educated on the issue. The original question was:

In Alberta, who owns the oil sands? Is it private-owned or state-owned? & concerning Norway, who own's the oil production? Is it state or private?

Thank you
This (http://www.energy.alberta.ca/LandAccess/pdfs/OSAagreeStats.pdf) and This (https://www.google.ca) may help you Good Sir! :)

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by EM2FTL


the costs incurred

Bullshit. If the programs WORKED, I would agree. But they don't (ok, they do, but on an extremely limited scale). But guess what? Nobody actually collects the data to see how many people actively fall back into their old lifestyle once they get their addiction under control. Because that would make sense amirite? Hell, just trying to find relapse data was painful on google. And anytime you find it, they compare it to "relapsing" on asthma treatment... what the fuck is this bullshit?

The perfect system, one where in order to win, you only have to prove for a split second that someone stayed sober. After that, they are just another number you can add to the list again when they relapse and you "help" them again! And as an added bonus, they have the BEST statistical dataset to work with... those that want help! Says nothing about the millions of drug users who LIKE and WANT their addictions and the drugs they use.

http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e98/hitempguy/relapserate_zps3b7750b5.jpg


Point is, the money is just a straw man argument. They could put that cash towards things that would actually help society, rather than helping people that don't want help.

[DeleriousZ]

Sounds like they need the Ayahuasca treatment. From what I hear that's got a pretty good relapse rate with hard drugs after undergoing 'treatment'

[EM2FTL]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


Bullshit. If the programs WORKED, I would agree. But they don't (ok, they do, but on an extremely limited scale). But guess what? Nobody actually collects the data to see how many people actively fall back into their old lifestyle once they get their addiction under control. Because that would make sense amirite? Hell, just trying to find relapse data was painful on google. And anytime you find it, they compare it to "relapsing" on asthma treatment... what the fuck is this bullshit?

The perfect system, one where in order to win, you only have to prove for a split second that someone stayed sober. After that, they are just another number you can add to the list again when they relapse and you "help" them again! And as an added bonus, they have the BEST statistical dataset to work with... those that want help! Says nothing about the millions of drug users who LIKE and WANT their addictions and the drugs they use.

[bar chart.jpg]

Point is, the money is just a straw man argument. They could put that cash towards things that would actually help society, rather than helping people that don't want help.

I literally lol'd when I read "finding data was painful on google". Would it be reasonable for me to think that I could find relevant datasets for the type of work you do (I forget what that is specifically, something to do with research/innovation in a technical field?) on google? And that I could do your job based on what I can google? Somehow I doubt this... so why on earth do you think your abysmal understanding of these issues is enough to solve the problem? Jesus christ my friend, people have devoted their entire lives to this issue without solving it... maybe, just MAYBE, it's a little more complex then you can comprehend.

Nobody actually collects drug relapse data? There are plenty of longitudinal studies out there, but i'm not sure why you're focusing on that. All homeless people do not have a drug problem, and drug problems aren't limited to the poor either. I'm getting a headache just trying to understand where you're coming from.

How is the money argument a straw man? The cost savings from providing social programs focused on prevention vs. reactive policies i'm highlighting are very real, and I have no idea what alternative you're proposing. Are you suggesting that we just leave these people on the street, where they'll act all docile and die quietly in the gutter?

Seriously, re-think my remote island exile suggestion.. because following your logic it's the only solution that would work.

[GTS4tw]

Originally posted by EM2FTL


I literally lol'd when I read "finding data was painful on google". Would it be reasonable for me to think that I could find relevant datasets for the type of work you do (I forget what that is specifically, something to do with research/innovation in a technical field?) on google? And that I could do your job based on what I can google? Somehow I doubt this... so why on earth do you think your abysmal understanding of these issues is enough to solve the problem? Jesus christ my friend, people have devoted their entire lives to this issue without solving it... maybe, just MAYBE, it's a little more complex then you can comprehend.

Nobody actually collects drug relapse data? There are plenty of longitudinal studies out there, but i'm not sure why you're focusing on that. All homeless people do not have a drug problem, and drug problems aren't limited to the poor either. I'm getting a headache just trying to understand where you're coming from.

How is the money argument a straw man? The cost savings from providing social programs focused on prevention vs. reactive policies i'm highlighting are very real, and I have no idea what alternative you're proposing. Are you suggesting that we just leave these people on the street, where they'll act all docile and die quietly in the gutter?

Seriously, re-think my remote island exile suggestion.. because following your logic it's the only solution that would work.


You are arguing with a wall. But this is an awesome post!

[faiz999]

Originally posted by benyl
There is an oil price differential.

I think Alberta oil only gets 60 cents on the dollar of west Texas oil. Alberta has a transportation problem too. Why do you think keystone and northern gateway is always in the news?

[EM2FTL]

Originally posted by GTS4tw



You are arguing with a wall. But this is an awesome post!

It seems you were correct, kind of disappointed I get called out with "bullshit" and then Hitemp bails on the debate when I actually put some thought into a reply. Maybe he's off googling a cure for cancer or something.

Anyways, bumping this for some direct evidence on the economic side of the argument:

http://boingboing.net/2014/01/22/fighting-homelessness-by-givin.html



Utah started a pilot program that took 17 people in Salt Lake City who had spent an average of 25 years on the street and put them in apartments. Caseworkers were assigned to help them become self-sufficient, but there were no strings attached – if they failed, the participants still had a place to live.

The “Housing First” program’s goal was to end chronic homelessness in Utah within 10 years. Through 2012, it had helped reduce the 2,000 people in that category when it began by 74 percent. Lloyd Pendleton, director of Utah’s Homeless Task Force, said the state is on track to meet its goal by 2015, and become the first state in the nation to do so.

...There’s no question that providing housing for the homeless is the right thing to do, for humanitarian reasons. But it also makes economic sense, so cities can spend less money and still help more people. In 2005, Utah did a study that found the average annual cost for emergency services and jail time for each chronically homeless person was $16,670. The cost to house them and provide case management services was only $11,000 per person.

[GTS4tw]

Originally posted by EM2FTL


It seems you were correct, kind of disappointed I get called out with "bullshit" and then Hitemp bails on the debate when I actually put some thought into a reply. Maybe he's off googling a cure for cancer or something.

Anyways, bumping this for some direct evidence on the economic side of the argument:

http://boingboing.net/2014/01/22/fighting-homelessness-by-givin.html



I could tell by your post that you would get no intelligent replies. People want to argue with people dumber than them, not have a real discussion.

[M.alex]

Originally posted by EM2FTL

Seriously, re-think my remote island exile suggestion.. because following your logic it's the only solution that would work.

Why not gather them up and ship them up to Ft. Mac instead and force them to work on the oilsands?

That would be a win/win because the drug abuse problems up there would not increase any worse than they are now, and companies could stop worrying about useless crap like OH&S and would only need to pay these guys cents an hour to do what they're paying uneducated people right now hundreds of dollars and hour to do.

[Hallowed_point]

Originally posted by EM2FTL


It seems you were correct, kind of disappointed I get called out with "bullshit" and then Hitemp bails on the debate when I actually put some thought into a reply. Maybe he's off googling a cure for cancer or something.

Anyways, bumping this for some direct evidence on the economic side of the argument:

http://boingboing.net/2014/01/22/fighting-homelessness-by-givin.html



It's sad that more people can't crunch the numbers and have a light bulb moment with this. No matter what your stance is on homeless people & drug addictions you'd have to have rocks for brains to argue with dollars and cents savings on providing housing :confused: Great post EM2FTL..it didn't fall on deaf ears for me!

[J-D]

Originally posted by Hallowed_point


It's sad that more people can't crunch the numbers and have a light bulb moment with this. No matter what your stance is on homeless people & drug addictions you'd have to have rocks for brains to argue with dollars and cents savings on providing housing :confused: Great post EM2FTL..it didn't fall on deaf ears for me!

I think a lot of it is just mindset. If you took the time to get an education, have a decent job, work hard... only to throw away most of your income towards a place to live downtown... and then the city just goes and gives free downtown housing out to homeless dudes :poosie:

[Hallowed_point]

Originally posted by J-D
I think a lot of it is just mindset. If you took the time to get an education, have a decent job, work hard... only to throw away most of your income towards a place to live downtown... and then the city just goes and gives free downtown housing out to homeless dudes :poosie:

I did/do all of those things. It's looking at the big picture. It's not about what's fair. It's about what makes sense economically. I'd rather spend less money through taxes on putting said homeless dude in a house rather than paying even more for homeless dude to sit in a jail cell.

People are going to do what they're going to do regardless of what we think about it. The states especially cannot afford to keep throwing money at ever increasing prison and policing costs relating to homelessness.

[Toma]

Originally posted by 16hypen3sp
The funny thing is some people actually believe that a Lib or NDP government would be a better solution.

Now that is comedy.:rofl:

Well, there's a general rule. If you try something and it fails, you try something else.

Anyone could fo better than the monkeys in power.

So, I'd love to give someone else a shot. Hard to do worse.

[Hallowed_point]

Originally posted by Tik-Tok
Klein started the spiral. He ignored infrastructure needs all to pay off Alberta's debt as part of his "legacy". And now wer're paying triple the price to get that infrastructure done.

And who the hell pays down a 1% loan, when you can be earning 10x that by investing for the future?

I agree. I don't view Ralph Klein as some "hero mayor/premier" as most of Calgarians romanticize him to be. We are paying for his legacy now, that's for sure.

[Toma]

Originally posted by Hallowed_point


I agree. I don't view Ralph Klein as some "hero mayor" as most of Calgarians romanticize him to be. We are paying for his legacy now, that's for sure.

I served the guy beers a few times in my very early youth. His appeal was that he was an ordinary Joe. Thats was his problem. Lol.

But that was his legacy. Budget cuts. Demolishing health care and hospitals.

The last 'conservative' premiere we had that actually stood for the ideals the party now pretends it upholds was Lougheed.

[cancer man]

Originally posted by Toma


I served the guy beers a few times in my very early youth. His appeal was that he was an ordinary Joe. Thats was his problem. Lol.

But that was his legacy. Budget cuts. Demolishing health care and hospitals.

The last 'conservative' premiere we had that actually stood for the ideals the party now pretends it upholds was Lougheed.

Alberta is losing 11 million dollars a day.

[EM2FTL]

Originally posted by M.alex


Why not gather them up and ship them up to Ft. Mac instead and force them to work on the oilsands?

That would be a win/win because the drug abuse problems up there would not increase any worse than they are now, and companies could stop worrying about useless crap like OH&S and would only need to pay these guys cents an hour to do what they're paying uneducated people right now hundreds of dollars and hour to do.


You're thinking small potatoes though - slave labour isn't going to help anyone's bottom line much when people start dying and destroying equipment. It might be tougher to draw from certain foreign investors if we went that direction too, plus it's a terrible PR play when we're trying to clean up the oil sands image.

No... what we'd need is a high production value reality show, think of Battle Royale as the template (Japanese movie, if you haven't seen it you are missing out) only this time it's with career offenders. We could use something like California's 'three strikes' law only with ours, you get shipped out to the island. We could probably get worldwide viewership for this thing, the possibilities for profit with a global brand built on real faction-based violence are huge.

[Hallowed_point]

Originally posted by EM2FTL



You're thinking small potatoes though - slave labour isn't going to help anyone's bottom line much when people start dying and destroying equipment. It might be tougher to draw from certain foreign investors if we went that direction too, plus it's a terrible PR play when we're trying to clean up the oil sands image.

No... what we'd need is a high production value reality show, think of Battle Royale as the template (Japanese movie, if you haven't seen it you are missing out) only this time it's with career offenders. We could use something like California's 'three strikes' law only with ours, you get shipped out to the island. We could probably get worldwide viewership for this thing, the possibilities for profit with a global brand built on real faction-based violence are huge.