Alberta budget

[01RedDX]

.

[dirtsniffer]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

really? what's preventing a government from deciding a PST on their own without a referendum?

AB government can't introduce any tax without a referendum as far as I know. That's why Notley was always preaching 'carbon levy'

[pheoxs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That's just it, for all the screaming about all the "insane, out-of-control spending" the NDP was doing, they've brought absolutely nothing new or creative, just target the most vulnerable - teachers, disabled people, low income families and create a lot of uncertainty around things like future electricity rates and the effects of de-indexing programs.
Make it look tame and work in a few insidious provisions in there that many people won't understand and don't implement any common sense consumption tax/AHS fee that everyone could contribute to.
Nothing about replacing the film production credit as current projects wrap up this year with nothing new lined up. So those jobs are going away soon, as are many of the microbreweries.

Don’t forget messing with infrastructure projects. They aren’t cutting funding for our green line but they are delaying the funding schedule to later years to kick the can down the road. Which probably means it’ll be delayed and cost more in the end to build

[A790]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Getting their AISH benefits getting capped must suck.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It does suck for my sister in law, who has been struggling with illness and chronic pain. AISH is the only thing that keeps her afloat, and she isn't exactly living lavishly. Last year she gave up her dog because she couldn't afford him. It's not like people like her are abusing the system.

I can't imagine why you guys think it's funny to pick on some of the most vulnerable people in our society.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm not on board with making fun of AISH recipients.

No kidding.

[Twin_Cam_Turbo]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It does suck for my sister in law, who has been struggling with illness and chronic pain. AISH is the only thing that keeps her afloat, and she isn't exactly living lavishly. Last year she gave up her dog because she couldn't afford him. It's not like people like her are abusing the system.

I can't imagine why you guys think it's funny to pick on some of the most vulnerable people in our society.



No kidding.

I’ll post this again, you can also go back and read my original comment Rage2 referred to.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don’t think raj was trying to poke fun at AISH recipients. More so people who are bad with money.

My uncles has been in AISH since he was 18 and it’s a very small amount of money.

[finboy]

Can someone clarify, with pulling back the city charters, does that also repeal the ability for cities to set their own speed limits? Iirc that was a component of the city charter when it was brought in.

If that is the case, totally worth any other crap parts of the budget for me.

[rage2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I’ll post this again, you can also go back and read my original comment Rage2 referred to.

Specifically, those bad with money are retarded.

Sorry, am I allowed to say retarded? Do people just read the headlines? I have no idea what's going on.

[A790]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I’ll post this again, you can also go back and read my original comment Rage2 referred to.

My bad. I didn't read that far down. #learnedalesson

[Xtrema]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Can someone clarify, with pulling back the city charters, does that also repeal the ability for cities to set their own speed limits? Iirc that was a component of the city charter when it was brought in.

If that is the case, totally worth any other crap parts of the budget for me.

If that's the case, that's a positive.

Just came back from Spain and they are surprising less nanny state as I thought. There is a million different way you could sue if the same city design is brought into US/Canada but they just take personal responsibility to not screw up.

[kertejud2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Can someone clarify, with pulling back the city charters, does that also repeal the ability for cities to set their own speed limits? Iirc that was a component of the city charter when it was brought in.

If that is the case, totally worth any other crap parts of the budget for me.

There seems to be some confusion as to whether the Charters themselves were repealed, or just the Fiscal Framework Act. The Act is the funding, so they're pulling that, but they also campaigned on not repealing the Charters themselves, so if it's just the Fiscal Framework, they'd be technically keeping that campaign promise. If it is just the framework and the rest of the Charters stay, then the provisions allowing the speed limit changes apply as well.

However the most important thing to remember is that the Charter isn't what gave the power to change speed limits or not. Only to do it in a more fiscally responsible manner. They absolutely can still change speed limits, it will just cost more to do if they wanted to go down that road.

[finboy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There seems to be some confusion as to whether the Charters themselves were repealed, or just the Fiscal Framework Act. The Act is the funding, so they're pulling that, but they also campaigned on not repealing the Charters themselves, so if it's just the Fiscal Framework, they'd be technically keeping that campaign promise. If it is just the framework and the rest of the Charters stay, then the provisions allowing the speed limit changes apply as well.

However the most important thing to remember is that the Charter isn't what gave the power to change speed limits or not. Only to do it in a more fiscally responsible manner. They absolutely can still change speed limits, it will just cost more to do if they wanted to go down that road.

The I suppose our best hope is that the city is too broke to implement the pet project

[Buster]

TIL: AISH benefits are insufficient to pay for dogfood.

bbiab, I'm going to look under the couch cushions, someone told me that there was $20 billion in provincial revenue missing.

[A790]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

TIL: AISH benefits are insufficient to pay for dogfood.

Owning a dog is a $60ish/mo expense, at least. When you only make $1,550/mo, ya, that $60 matters.

[kertejud2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The I suppose our best hope is that the city is too broke to implement the pet project

With the pain that will be coming to property tax payers in the next few years to help make up for provincial cuts, a few million for speed limit signs will be the least of people's worries.

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Owning a dog is a $60ish/mo expense, at least. When you only make $1,550/mo, ya, that $60 matters.

If someone can live while on AISH, but they can't afford dog food while on AISH, then it seems to me they probably got the new number about right.

[kertejud2]

In a very progressive move, the 5% cut to post-secondary isn't a flat cut across the board. While the U of A and U of C can handle more than 5% cut because they have the 'fiscal capacity' to do so, religious universities like Ambrose and St. Mary's don't have to lose any CAG funding.

[dirtsniffer]

Did you leave out ambrose and medicine hat college because they didn't fit your sensationalised headline?

[kertejud2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Did you leave out ambrose and medicine hat college because they didn't fit your sensationalised headline?

I left them out because they do lose some funding, as small as it is. I also didn't include Grant McEwan and BVC as places that got a bigger than 5% hit as well you're not crying about.

I specifically mentioned Ambrose as a religious school that isn't losing any funding at all.

[dirtsniffer]

shit I need to work on my chirping. I meant to say Concordia.

I'm not crying at all. I absolutely do not care that private post secondaries are losing some funding.

[tonytiger55]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

In a very progressive move, the 5% cut to post-secondary isn't a flat cut across the board. While the U of A and U of C can handle more than 5% cut because they have the 'fiscal capacity' to do so, religious universities like Ambrose and St. Mary's don't have to lose any CAG funding.

Fucking good. Then maybe the dumb asses that run these institutions (cough cough SAIT) will realize they need to evaluate some of the dumb entry criteria and make the institutions more efficient. They don't recognize a University Degree from England, including a college certificate being the equivalent of high school because it was not written that it was done in English (from England).
If the schools are not prepared to modernize their entry criteria to the modern era. Cut the grants.

This is fantastic news.