Alberta adds 20,000 full-time jobs in March

[captain morgan]

You do understand I am talking about personal debt, not provincial debt.

...and yes, BC has the highest personal debt load with Alberta running up second. But your stats are off from what I was talking about.

Average household debt in Alberta $36,223

Average household debt in BC $38,619

source

I see, you were talking of you personally... Well, for me, other than a credit card, I have no debt whatsoever.

That said, we all have our share of the provincial debt (by the by, those numbers don't include unfunded liabilities) - looks like your original statement remains incorrect

Lastly, any analysis of the debt scenario really needs to incorporate GDP into the mix.

 

[B00Mer]

I see, you were talking of you personally... Well, for me, other than a credit card, I have no debt whatsoever.

I don't have debt.. zero, zilch..

That said, we all have our share of the provincial debt (by the by, those numbers don't include unfunded liabilities) - looks like your original statement remains incorrect

Quit being a tard..

Do something productive and watch some free Movies..

https://yesmovies.to/

 

[captain morgan]

Clearly you don't have any inkling about economics.

... Can't say I'm surprised

 

[B00Mer]

Clearly you don't have any inkling about economics.

... Can't say I'm surprised

 

[captain morgan]

This must be a picture of you as both characters... One of 'em has no intelligence and showcases it by opening their mouth and the other wouldn't understand it anyways.

Boomer to a 'T'

 

[Nick Danger]

1. Shrink the size of gvt
2. Curtail public spending where it can be done with minimal impact
3. Ease the burden on small business' in order to help them retain workers
4. Don't even think about fukking with the royalty rates or LMR program until such time that the industry can safely absorb those costs
5. Don't punish people for succeeding through the tax system - try and encourage more success stories.
6. Encourage more investment in the province by not increasing tax rates and expensive regulatory conditions

Well put. Your suggestions carry a facade of thoughtfulness, yet are sufficiently vague enough to defy close analysis. But let's have a go anyways:


1. Staffing levels or service levels? A little of both perhaps? Government cutbacks were a favorite of the conservative regime for years, effectively bringing the health and education systems to the point where a considerable influx of funding was required to keep to minimum standards. What areas are you proposing to reduce?
2. As above.
3. Small business is important to any economy, but in Alberta most of the small business services the larger corporate players, who are invoking serious cost-cutting measures themselves. How would you "ease the burden on small business" in this light?
4. Business is business and will always be as such. The major players in Alberta are not going broke, nor are they even in remote danger of doing so, but it is good corporate policy to cry to the media everytime government asks for more money. Check share prices and profitability for outfits like Suncor or CNRL, who are leaving a wake of unclaimed reclamation projects behind them. Also the number of abandoned wells that haven't been properly decommissioned and the cost involved in rectifying that is staggering. Conveniently the paperwork on ownership and lease obligations has changed sufficiently to let those who are responsible to start clean somewhere else. Take a guess as to who is going to get stuck with that bill. Don't fool yourself into thinking the industry is in tough shape. They're doing quite well despite the price crash, they're just doing at the expense of the taxpayer, small business and the workers.
5. Point unclear, can't comment.
6. I see what you're suggesting, but the "Alberta is open for business" message has to be tempered with a healthy dose of corporate responsibility. The profit motive is ever-present, and the corporate world is not particularly long on ethical fibre. Alberta has a responsibility to its resident to ensure that public resources are handled properly, and that those who figure they can simply roll in and fill their pockets and leave need to adjust their perspective. That's what the conservatives have done for decades and it's left things in a mess. Have a look at some of the Nordic countries, Norway in particular, who new the value of their resources and acted accordingly. The investors will return, are returning in fact, in response to oil prices and not government policy. Taxes are part of doing business. If an extra two percent of your profits going to the government is going to break the bank, then maybe you're in the wrong business.

 

[B00Mer]

This must be a picture of you as both characters... One of 'em has no intelligence and showcases it by opening their mouth and the other wouldn't understand it anyways.

Boomer to a 'T'

What are you, a teenager in school.. seriously. That response had to have been the gayest teeny bopper reply ever in the history of CC.

 

[MHz]

Luckily Calgary does not represent Alberta. This is closer to the real deal.

 

[captain morgan]

[/LIST]
Well put. Your suggestions carry a facade of thoughtfulness, yet are sufficiently vague enough to defy close analysis. But let's have a go anyways:


1. Staffing levels or service levels? A little of both perhaps? Government cutbacks were a favorite of the conservative regime for years, effectively bringing the health and education systems to the point where a considerable influx of funding was required to keep to minimum standards. What areas are you proposing to reduce?
2. As above.
3. Small business is important to any economy, but in Alberta most of the small business services the larger corporate players, who are invoking serious cost-cutting measures themselves. How would you "ease the burden on small business" in this light?
4. Business is business and will always be as such. The major players in Alberta are not going broke, nor are they even in remote danger of doing so, but it is good corporate policy to cry to the media everytime government asks for more money. Check share prices and profitability for outfits like Suncor or CNRL, who are leaving a wake of unclaimed reclamation projects behind them. Also the number of abandoned wells that haven't been properly decommissioned and the cost involved in rectifying that is staggering. Conveniently the paperwork on ownership and lease obligations has changed sufficiently to let those who are responsible to start clean somewhere else. Take a guess as to who is going to get stuck with that bill. Don't fool yourself into thinking the industry is in tough shape. They're doing quite well despite the price crash, they're just doing at the expense of the taxpayer, small business and the workers.
5. Point unclear, can't comment.
6. I see what you're suggesting, but the "Alberta is open for business" message has to be tempered with a healthy dose of corporate responsibility. The profit motive is ever-present, and the corporate world is not particularly long on ethical fibre. Alberta has a responsibility to its resident to ensure that public resources are handled properly, and that those who figure they can simply roll in and fill their pockets and leave need to adjust their perspective. That's what the conservatives have done for decades and it's left things in a mess. Have a look at some of the Nordic countries, Norway in particular, who new the value of their resources and acted accordingly. The investors will return, are returning in fact, in response to oil prices and not government policy. Taxes are part of doing business. If an extra two percent of your profits going to the government is going to break the bank, then maybe you're in the wrong business.

You have written lots of words but have said very little.

The comments about corporate responsibility (and presumably their glad acceptance of being fleeced through the tax and regulatory systems) is nothing shy of the philosophy that has landed so many NorAm jurisdictions into deep debt and (in a number of cases) bankruptcy.

Rather than waste much time rebutting each point, I'll suggest the following; Reliance on gvt as the end-all-be-all and source of wealth for a robust economy is a failed ideal.

Apply your personal metrics all you like, in the end, gvt revenues are fully dependent on the health and profitability of a private sector... All of the ideological rants will not change this.

 

[Nick Danger]

Apply your personal metrics all you like, in the end, gvt revenues are fully dependent on the health and profitability of a private sector... All of the ideological rants will not change this.

True enough, but another constant in the business world is that the bottom line is everything. Businesses are in it for themselves and no one else. If the government doesn't think about getting the taxpayers their share, who does?

 

[petros]

All from a leftward propaganda site. It is a fact that BC has the best economy in Canada. The reason? WE have a good government that works on sound economic principles , not political dogma like the ndp.

small L liberals

 

[taxslave]

20,000 jobs created, 100,000 jobs lost.. :lol:

Alberta shed almost 25,000 jobs in January

That would be 100 000 real jobs lost and 20 000 government jobs created.

 

[petros]

That would be 100 000 real jobs lost and 20 000 government jobs created.

Uh uh. The "patch" is picking up steam. Season starts in July. See what it's like in 12 weeks.

 

[B00Mer]

That would be 100 000 real jobs lost and 20 000 government jobs created.

Yeah exactly.

Uh uh. The "patch" is picking up steam. Season starts in July. See what it's like in 12 weeks.

 

[captain morgan]

True enough, but another constant in the business world is that the bottom line is everything. Businesses are in it for themselves and no one else.

No different than your actions in running your own life or household.

If the government doesn't think about getting the taxpayers their share, who does?

I love the fuzzy and non-quantifiable comment about share... It's an ever changing and constantly moving target that seems to only increase... More interestingly, you seem to believe that those individuals and corps that make more money than you should pay a greater % share towards the common good... Kinda defies the entire principle of equality or share to begin with, doesn't it?

This is the exact logic that has landed your province in having far higher ticket prices in addition to an extra 7% in the form of PST.

 

[MHz]

How many refugees before we have to add a Social worker??

 

[Nick Danger]

I love the fuzzy and non-quantifiable comment about share... It's an ever changing and constantly moving target that seems to only increase... More interestingly, you seem to believe that those individuals and corps that make more money than you should pay a greater % share towards the common good... Kinda defies the entire principle of equality or share to begin with, doesn't it?

So you would continue with the Conservative strategy of the last few decades then? Just give big business whatever they want and when they come asking for more you give that to them too? Are you so blind that you can't see where that line of thinking has brought Alberta?

 

[pgs]

True enough, but another constant in the business world is that the bottom line is everything. Businesses are in it for themselves and no one else. If the government doesn't think about getting the taxpayers their share, who does?

If a business does not make a profit they have no need for employees . Without employees , who is left to pay taxes to support all the government employees and services ?

 

[Nick Danger]

If a business does not make a profit they have no need for employees . Without employees , who is left to pay taxes to support all the government employees and services ?

Corporate taxes are based on profit, if there are no profits then there is no tax payable. The idea in Alberta is that the resource itself is owned by the citizens of that province, and is being made available for corporations to exploit for their own profit. As long as profits are being made should not those pocketing the dough be expecting to return some of that money to the owners of the resource? Major players in the oil & gas sector ( Suncor and CNRL are two fine examples) have managed to remain profitable throughout the price crisis through improvements in efficiency and capacity, and cutting costs of labour and supplies. Make no mistake, corporate allegiance is to their shareholders. The government and employees are just another operating expense, and any feigned responsibility to those people on the part of the corporation is just window dressing and playing to the cameras.

I'm okay with some level of wage cutbacks, it's no secret that the money being made in the oilsands was exorbitant, and the sustainability of wages at that level was a risky bet at best. If you look at suppliers and employees as part of the industry as a whole, then by all means they should share in the downtimes as well as the gravy times. But where do you draw the line between realistic cost cutting and financial opportunism in bolstering profits at the expense of the workers, and by extension the owners of said public resource? Are you okay with laying off existing employees and replacing them with TFWs? Are you okay with extending working hours to the point where accident rates climb? Precarious employment is becoming a way of life in that sector these days, "job security" is just a pretty thought when it becomes apparent that most of the jobs up there are simply numbers on a balance sheet, subject to "adjustment" as conditions require.

In short, the so-called "Alberta Advantage" has bred a sense of entitlement among corporate operators to the point where they like to see themselves as indispensable to Alberta's future. That's a dangerous situation especially when you consider the precarious nature of the industry itself.

I'm not saying the corporations should be taxed to the point of non-profitability, but the idea that the taxpayers actually owe them anything is just plain wrong.

 

[captain morgan]

So you would continue with the Conservative strategy of the last few decades then? Just give big business whatever they want and when they come asking for more you give that to them too? Are you so blind that you can't see where that line of thinking has brought Alberta?

You seem to be proud as to how that Conservative strategy served you with respect to you having no debt... What on earth makes you believe that it isn't workable for gubmint?

Corporate taxes are based on profit, if there are no profits then there is no tax payable.

Except for payroll taxes, licenses, fees business tax and a myriad of other costs

The idea in Alberta is that the resource itself is owned by the citizens of that province,

The citizens of the Province have agreed to lease the opportunity to 3rd partiesfor a royalty in addition to bennies of employment, taxes, fees, etc.

As long as profits are being made should not those pocketing the dough be expecting to return some of that money to the owners of the resource?

What a remarkably ridiculous statement and shallow comment

Go back to the Provincial debt references and you can extrapolate on what ROIs Albertans (and all Cdns via Equalization) have received over the years.

Major players in the oil & gas sector ( Suncor and CNRL are two fine examples) have managed to remain profitable throughout the price crisis through improvements in efficiency and capacity, and cutting costs of labour and supplies. Make no mistake, corporate allegiance is to their shareholders. The government and employees are just another operating expense, and any feigned responsibility to those people on the part of the corporation is just window dressing and playing to the cameras.

The 2 above companies have and are risking 10's of billions of dollars in order to generate those profits. You act as if there is no risk or exposure whatsoever

If you look at suppliers and employees as part of the industry as a whole, then by all means they should share in the downtimes as well as the gravy times.

How about the public sector?.. Shouldn't they too share in the down times?

In short, the so-called "Alberta Advantage" has bred a sense of entitlement among corporate operators.

Entitled to what exactly?... More taxes?

I'm not saying the corporations should be taxed to the point of non-profitability, but the idea that the taxpayers actually owe them anything is just plain wrong.

That's exactly what you're saying when you refer to their share of the costs