Financial Post: Alberta to bleed 31,800 jobs by end of year in oil price carnage

[waldo]

The tard-o-path strikes again.

Here's the deal Einstein, the facts are such that Equalization is sourced from Federal Taxes collected nationally. The 'program' then distributes capital on a preferential basis in order to provide a level playing field to all jurisdictions for the purpose of having 'equal ' services available throughout. That said, those funds do originate in a specific province and may, or may not, make it back to where it was paid in order to support those common services.

With this theoretical basis of knowledge, ALL provinces should have a semblance of equality like $7/day daycare available, not just Quebec... Goes to show that some Provinces are a little more equal than others, eh?

and here my understanding was that provinces were not subject to federal 'direction' in terms of how they choose to apply equalization payments received... just how did you arrive at your misconception? As the quite liberal dispenser of the 'tard label', I thought you were going to... learn me... educate me... correct me!

why, this following statement of yours reads like you're in a position to dispense sum learnin's!!! Is there anything you've just stated that does that... that actually presumes to go up against and... educate/correct me on something I said? :mrgreen:

"You would do well to understand how equalization works, where the money is generated and how it is 'equally' (definitely the wrong word) distributed back to the provinces."
​

Nonetheless, thanks for submitting the bleeding heart leftie article engineered to justify the existence of welfare Provinces... Had a good laugh at the logic

huh! Ah, yes... another, as you say, "tard" (that would be YOU), who can't help himself in taking a basic informative non-partisan article and attaching "bleeding heart leftie" to it. Again, I believe this is now the 4th time I've repeated the following... somehow, for some reason, you found your way to labeling the article, but you couldn't manage to speak to/challenge any particular points made within the article! What a, as you say, "tard you are"! :mrgreen:

feel free to take that linked article I posted, challenge particular point(s) relative to your understanding of equalization/transfer and provide your sourced countering claim/statements. Will you do so... or will you simply bluster, insult and distract/deflect?
​

 

[taxslave]

Equalization Questions and Misconceptions

One of the common misconceptions is that equalization is entirely paid for by the so-called “have provinces”, notably Alberta.

It isn’t uncommon to see comments on blogs or online media stories calling for Alberta to “pull out” the equalization program, or about how other provinces are spending the money they get from Alberta via transfer payments from that province.

Provinces keep all the money they raise from resources and all their other tax bases. No provincial government funds go to support equalization. There is no special “equalization tax” or levy paid to the federal government by richer provinces such as Alberta, and even if the equalization program were cancelled tomorrow, this would not affect how much money the federal government collects from individuals and businesses in the forms of taxes, duties, etc. This can’t be stressed enough: no province “pays into equalization” – all individual taxpayers and businesses pay into the federal government’s general revenue fund, from which equalization is just one of many programs funded. So in answer to questions such as, how much money does Alberta transfer to Quebec or how much money does Alberta pay to equalization, the answer is simply “$0.00″. No province transfers any money to any other province. Individuals and corporations transfer money to the federal government.​

so... it appears El Capitan is all bluster, insult and distract/deflect! And here the guy tried to come off as if he actually knew something about equalization/transfer payments. Go figure!

So now you have proved you have zero knowledge of how taxes work. Maybe you should ask your parents instead of extracting partial articles you don't understand from the internet. Fact is people in have provinces contribute to the have not provinces via unequal redistribution of federal taxes. Taxes that could be lowered if not for the politically motivated tax and vote buying.

uhhh... Global bank Macquarie ...... projects 60,000 lost jobs, 69-cent loonie

The Canadian economy is about to flatline, according to the research arm of major global bank Macquarie.

In some of the most bearish commentary on Canada coming from a major financial institution, Macquarie analyst David Doyle turns to history for a look at what to expect from a major collapse in oil prices.

His report points out that, in 1986, following the last supplyside driven crash in oil prices, Canadian economic growth decelerated from 5 per cent to zero.

What's more, the Canadian economy was buoyed by three tailwinds that won't be around this time: more momentum in the labour market heading into the shock, a pick-up in housing starts and residential mortgage credit growth and an expansion in consumer credit growth.

Mr. Doyle writes that in the first half of this year, "there is a possibility of a technical recession" - back-to-back quarters in which GDP declines.
​

What were interest rates in 1986? What was the economic situation in the rest of the world? Why were we making so much money in 1986 that I expanded both my equipment fleet and labour force? Yhy do you have so much problem with things that happened before you were born?

 

[JLM]

What were interest rates in 1986?

I took out a mortgage in 1985 and interest rate was around 12% - mind you the principle was only $40,000.

 

[waldo]

So now you have proved you have zero knowledge of how taxes work. Maybe you should ask your parents instead of extracting partial articles you don't understand from the internet. Fact is people in have provinces contribute to the have not provinces via unequal redistribution of federal taxes. Taxes that could be lowered if not for the politically motivated tax and vote buying.

oh my! Another poor floundering effort from taxi! Take your time taxi... read the following... go slow!

Provinces keep all the money they raise from resources and all their other tax bases. No provincial government funds go to support equalization. There is no special “equalization tax” or levy paid to the federal government by richer provinces such as Alberta, and even if the equalization program were cancelled tomorrow, this would not affect how much money the federal government collects from individuals and businesses in the forms of taxes, duties, etc. This can’t be stressed enough: no province “pays into equalization” – all individual taxpayers and businesses pay into the federal government’s general revenue fund, from which equalization is just one of many programs funded. So in answer to questions such as, how much money does Alberta transfer to Quebec or how much money does Alberta pay to equalization, the answer is simply “$0.00″. No province transfers any money to any other province. Individuals and corporations transfer money to the federal government.
​

remember, the topic/discussion was equalization. Take your time taxi! If you feel it warranted, certainly bring forward more current data than the following:

​

damn, look at that taxi... Quebec individuals/businesses taxed to the tune of ~$40 billion... and the province of Quebec only received ~$8 billion in equalization! And look at the (former) have Ontario province... ~$85 billion and nought returned in equalization.

oh wait now, taxi... you're wanting to jump off the equalization topic/discussion and, as you say, speak to, apparently, "unequal distribution of federal taxes". Taxi, why are you distracting from the topic at hand? :mrgreen: Now taxi, I have those (revenue versus distribution) numbers for 2009; however, I'm not sure I want to steal your thunder here... or do I, hey taxi? Typical blowhards, like you, spout off but never manage to actually put forward specifics/details to really attempt to make/reinforce their point(s). How about you taxi... how about you step-up here, hey? I'll let you wiggle for a few insult and distract/deflect posts that you'll invariably follow up here with you. C'mon taxi... sure you can!

 

[taxslave]

I took out a mortgage in 1985 and interest rate was around 12% - mind you the principle was only $40,000.

I was paying somewhat more than that on equipment loans and you would have to add another zero to the principle.

oh my! Another poor floundering effort from taxi! Take your time taxi... read the following... go slow!

Provinces keep all the money they raise from resources and all their other tax bases. No provincial government funds go to support equalization. There is no special “equalization tax” or levy paid to the federal government by richer provinces such as Alberta, and even if the equalization program were cancelled tomorrow, this would not affect how much money the federal government collects from individuals and businesses in the forms of taxes, duties, etc. This can’t be stressed enough: no province “pays into equalization” – all individual taxpayers and businesses pay into the federal government’s general revenue fund, from which equalization is just one of many programs funded. So in answer to questions such as, how much money does Alberta transfer to Quebec or how much money does Alberta pay to equalization, the answer is simply “$0.00″. No province transfers any money to any other province. Individuals and corporations transfer money to the federal government.
​

remember, the topic/discussion was equalization. Take your time taxi! If you feel it warranted, certainly bring forward more current data than the following:

​

damn, look at that taxi... Quebec individuals/businesses taxed to the tune of ~$40 billion... and the province of Quebec only received ~$8 billion in equalization! And look at the (former) have Ontario province... ~$85 billion and nought returned in equalization.

oh wait now, taxi... you're wanting to jump off the equalization topic/discussion and, as you say, speak to, apparently, "unequal distribution of federal taxes". Taxi, why are you distracting from the topic at hand? :mrgreen: Now taxi, I have those (revenue versus distribution) numbers for 2009; however, I'm not sure I want to steal your thunder here... or do I, hey taxi? Typical blowhards, like you, spout off but never manage to actually put forward specifics/details to really attempt to make/reinforce their point(s). How about you taxi... how about you step-up here, hey? I'll let you wiggle for a few insult and distract/deflect posts that you'll invariably follow up here with you. C'mon taxi... sure you can!

Still have no clue what you are reading do you? Is there any subject that you C&P that you understand?

 

[petros]

He doesn't get it at all.

 

[taxslave]

I was paying somewhat more than that on equipment loans and you would have to add another zero to the principle.



Still have no clue what you are reading do you? Is there any subject that you C&P that you understand?

Your own chart proves my point just you are too dense to understand what you post. BC payed 27+ billion in and received ZIP NADA ZEROi n return. Is that simple enough for you or are you going to pretend the facts that you posted are not reliable?

 

[waldo]

Still have no clue what you are reading do you? Is there any subject that you C&P that you understand?

as I said, I expected you to follow-up with insult/distract/deflect! Well done taxi, well done! Again, for some reason you chose to distract away from the topic/discussion at hand... equalization. If you think I have, as you say, "no clue", in that regard, don't hesitate to actually state specific(s) and provide your countering statements/claims. Since you're nothing but a blowhard, you clearly won't touch this. Equally, in regards your purposeful distraction to a different topic, your described "unequal distribution of federal taxes", I've put the challenge before you. Your choice: continue to reinforce your blowhardiness or step-up! :mrgreen:

 

[petros]

What is with the zeros In column 3?

 

[waldo]

Your own chart proves my point just you are too dense to understand what you post. BC payed 27+ billion in and received ZIP NADA ZEROi n return. Is that simple enough for you or are you going to pretend the facts that you posted are not reliable?

oh my! Yet another taxi "own goal". Your personal view of equalization doesn't speak to the mechanics of the program proper... or the prior discussion focus. But more pointedly, since you took it upon yourself to distract away from the topic of equalization, proper... you spoke of an "unequal distribution of federal taxes"... here are the 2009 BC related figures:

BC Federal Revenues Collected $mn 27,221
BC Federal Expenditures $mn 27,232
Difference $mn -11
​

oh my taxi!!! BC received $11 million dollars more than collected!

yet another taxi OWN GOAL! :mrgreen:

 

[petros]

What's with the zeros?

 

[captain morgan]

Still have no clue what you are reading do you? Is there any subject that you C&P that you understand?

It's pointless dealing with an individual that not only is unable to fathom the issues and material at hand, but is also arrogant enough that they are unable to admit defeat... Case in point, Machu Picchu

He truly is an idiot of epic proportions

 

[taxslave]

What's with the zeros?

They don't exist in waldo's belief system. If he acknowledged the ZEROS he would have to acknowledge that he is wrong yet again. Although by now he should be used to it.

It's pointless dealing with an individual that not only is unable to fathom the issues and material at hand, but is also arrogant enough that they are unable to admit defeat... Case in point, Machu Picchu

He truly is an idiot of epic proportions

I keep wondering if there will be an end to it but apparently he likes being proven wrong by his own cute little graphs. Either that or he is truly stupid as he acts.

Or perhaps he believes in the politicians mottos:
A lie is as good as the truth if you can get someone to believe it

Bull$hit beats brains.

 

[skookumchuck]

Interesting, and telling, the fact that waldo is not a business person, just a political person. Tells us everything.

 

[captain morgan]

Interesting, and telling, the fact that waldo is not a business person, just a political person. Tells us everything.

Sad isn't it... Someone foolish and stupid enough to believe that they can legislate nature.

 

[CDNBear]

In his defence, his wife is a doctor and likely takes care of all their household finances.

 

[captain morgan]

Wife?... I would have thought Mom

 

[CDNBear]

Wife?... I would have thought Mom

He claims it's his wife. Although there could be some Freudian stuff in play.

 

[MHz]

In his defence, his wife is a doctor and likely takes care of all their household finances.

Does that mean the rumor that there was a Mrs. Frankenstein is not just a rumor?

He claims it's his wife. Although there could be some Freudian stuff in play.

Check Halloween costume stores in his area, see if any Nurses uniforms are sent to his special address.

 

[JLM]

In his defence, his wife is a doctor and likely takes care of all their household finances.

Didn't we have someone else here in that same situation? (Or was it someone else?)