Where's Alberta's bailouts?

[rugatika]

So the other thread got me thinking...where's our bailout package?

Given that Alberta has been paying more than our fair share for the past several decades to confederation, including several bailouts for GM, Dodge, and Bombardier (over and over and over again)...maybe it's time for Alberta to recoup some of that money to keep people employed here.

I say it's time for Trudeau to make amends for all the billions of dollars that his papa and all the PM's down the line have taken and do for Alberta what Alberta has always done for the ROC. We're bleeding thousands of jobs...pass the teat.


TIC of course.

[curtz]

The only thing the East wants from Alberta is money, now that were broke not sure who there going to bleed dry.

[mooseknuckle]

wish in one hand, s#@t in the other. let us know which fills up first!!

[colin455]

Doesn't our current status mean we will be receiving Equalization Payments from all those down east that suckled off Alberta's oil teat tor decades?
If Québec can afford $1+Billion dollars to bailout bombardier, their suckling days are done. They should be made to live on their own income from now on.

[TBD]

Originally Posted by colin455

Doesn't our current status mean we will be receiving Equalization Payments from all those down east that suckled off Alberta's oil teat tor decades?
If Québec can afford $1+Billion dollars to bailout bombardier, their suckling days are done. They should be made to live on their own income from now on.

but I'm afraid the political class here has gotten use to campaigning and going on to WIN with deficit spending economic plans ...

started last year with liberals in NS - next was ON and recently our Federal liberals ...

I think we're in a race now to the bottom ...

and the east will be looking to the west for the $$ bucks they'll require to stay solvent, starting with the extra funding they'll need for their bankrupt pension programs.

I'm afraid whether AB is in deficit or not - guaranteed we'll be sending more tax dollars to Ottawa then get returned !

TBD

PS ... sucks when you live in a country that holds 2/3 of the population within (2) provinces -- neither of which you call home !

[Trap Shy]

Hope ya all got big tits because I don't see the sucking ending any time soon

[histyle]

Transfer payments need to end immediately. It is this re-distribution of wealth that makes us a quasi-socialist nation, even if no Canadian would ever admit to it if asked. A very smart lady once said 'The trouble with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money". The trouble is that most voters only think in the near future, which makes socialism very appealing.

Free stuff trumps freedom....

[Wild&Free]

Originally Posted by histyle

Transfer payments need to end immediately. It is this re-distribution of wealth that makes us a quasi-socialist nation, even if no Canadian would ever admit to it if asked. A very smart lady once said 'The trouble with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money". The trouble is that most voters only think in the near future, which makes socialism very appealing.

Free stuff trumps freedom....

That very smart lady was a neo liberal, and neo liberal policies have failed on several occasions and brought about some of the most severe depressions in contemporary history.

[Bushmaster]

You guys are SOOO negative ! I'm sure as we sit here discussing this that the fine folks of Quebec are just trying to figure out how many zeros to put on the cheque !!

[histyle]

Originally Posted by Wild&Free

That very smart lady was a neo liberal, and neo liberal policies have failed on several occasions and brought about some of the most severe depressions in contemporary history.

I suppose that makes Ronal Reagan a "neo-liberal" as well? You know, birds of a feather...

[Wild&Free]

Originally Posted by histyle

I suppose that makes Ronal Reagan a "neo-liberal" as well? You know, birds of a feather...

He was actually. look it up.

[histyle]

Originally Posted by Wild&Free

He was actually. look it up.

He definitely started out as a liberal/democrat, however he was a very prolific writer stating and defending his positions on why he changed into a conservative/republican. The only policy while he was president that anyone could call liberal was amnesty. And only because he was hoodwinked by the dems who said that they would secure the border, which didn't happen. He also wrote that the amnesty bill was his greatest regret while in office.

[Wild&Free]

Originally Posted by histyle

He definitely started out as a liberal/democrat, however he was a very prolific writer stating and defending his positions on why he changed into a conservative/republican. The only policy while he was president that anyone could call liberal was amnesty. And only because he was hoodwinked by the dems who said that they would secure the border, which didn't happen. He also wrote that the amnesty bill was his greatest regret while in office.

Neo liberalism is an economic position, not a social position. most conservatives are liberal in economic matters but conservative on social matters.

[rugatika]

Neo-liberalism, as far I can tell from the reading I have done is a term used/taken over in relatively recent times by left wing activists to outline a new liberal economic return to Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations" or Milton Friedman's Free to Choose theories taken to the extreme and attempt to make the case that we are trying to implement some sort of out of control capitalist economies...no government control or regulation at all, and a complete disintegration of social welfare and unions.

No offence to Wild and Free, but after reading several articles on neo-liberalism it started to read like a bunch of 9/11 truther/1% killer types that believe the corporations are trying to take over the world. (maybe they are... lookout!)

Here's one of the shorter definitions I could find.
http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.ca...explained.html

Basically, without the theft of the term by left wing blog sites, in it's more benign usage, it describes a return to less government intrusion into the day to day economic transactions of people and corporations.

In the last two decades, according to the Boas and Gans-Morse study of 148 journal articles, neoliberalism is almost never defined but used in several senses to describe ideology, economic theory, development theory, or economic reform policy. It has largely become a term of condemnation employed by critics. And it now suggests a market fundamentalism closer to the laissez-faire principles of the "paleoliberals" than to the ideas of the original neoliberals who attended the colloquium. This leaves some controversy as to the precise meaning of the term and its usefulness as a descriptor in the social sciences, especially as the number of different kinds of market economies have proliferated in recent years. In the book Neoliberalism: A Very Short Introduction, published by Oxford University Press (2010), the authors argue that neoliberalism is "anchored in the principles of the free-market economics."

[histyle]

Originally Posted by Wild&Free

Neo liberalism is an economic position, not a social position. most conservatives are liberal in economic matters but conservative on social matters.

So cutting taxes, and easing government regulations should be considered a "neo-liberal" position?

[Kim473]

Western provinces will never get any bail outs. Eastern canada are $ suckers. They will let everyone believe that they are giving us lots. Give $10 but take $100

[Dacotensis]

Originally Posted by mooseknuckle

wish in one hand, s#@t in the other. let us know which fills up first!!

Dad, is that you?

Heard it so much when I was young

[Wild&Free]

Originally Posted by rugatika

Neo-liberalism, as far I can tell from the reading I have done is a term used/taken over in relatively recent times by left wing activists to outline a new liberal economic return to Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations" or Milton Friedman's Free to Choose theories taken to the extreme and attempt to make the case that we are trying to implement some sort of out of control capitalist economies...no government control or regulation at all, and a complete disintegration of social welfare and unions.

No offence to Wild and Free, but after reading several articles on neo-liberalism it started to read like a bunch of 9/11 truther/1% killer types that believe the corporations are trying to take over the world. (maybe they are... lookout!)

Here's one of the shorter definitions I could find.
http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.ca...explained.html

Basically, without the theft of the term by left wing blog sites, in it's more benign usage, it describes a return to less government intrusion into the day to day economic transactions of people and corporations.

In the last two decades, according to the Boas and Gans-Morse study of 148 journal articles, neoliberalism is almost never defined but used in several senses to describe ideology, economic theory, development theory, or economic reform policy. It has largely become a term of condemnation employed by critics. And it now suggests a market fundamentalism closer to the laissez-faire principles of the "paleoliberals" than to the ideas of the original neoliberals who attended the colloquium. This leaves some controversy as to the precise meaning of the term and its usefulness as a descriptor in the social sciences, especially as the number of different kinds of market economies have proliferated in recent years. In the book Neoliberalism: A Very Short Introduction, published by Oxford University Press (2010), the authors argue that neoliberalism is "anchored in the principles of the free-market economics."

No offense taken, though the personal flourish of conspiracy theory should not detract from the observable facts that the policies implimented through this thinking have lead to causing more harm then benefit to a majority of people in the jurisdictions it has been implemented in.