Tweet
This thread is a classic! 
-
-
RedFred, do you have any light to shed on the situation?
We seem to be going nowhere.
"The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "Comment
-
Yes. You are totally wrong Asher!
BC has a far better quality of life than Alberta.
But aren't you supposed to create a new thread after a couple hundred posts?Comment
-
Not the quality of life thing, the transfer payment thing.
And the post limit is 500 now, IIRC.
Do you like my sig?
"The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "Comment
-
Okay Asher, let's try your theory using actual numbers. This will show how mistaken you are.
Now I know this may be difficult for you to follow, but try to keep up. This is quite simple. Afterall, it is your calculation model.Originally posted by Asher
2 provinces contributed that $10.7B in transfer payments, right? Alberta and Ontario.
Alberta has a population of 3,064,200
Ontario has a population of 11,874,400
Now, estimating from the graph on the page, it looks like Ontario is what, $300 per capita above the standard?
Now, estimating from the graph on the page, it looks like Alberta is what, $2500 per capita above the standard?
For Ontario's contribution: 11,874,400 people * $300 each = $3,562,320,000.
For Alberta's contribution: 3,064,200 people * $2500 each = $7,660,500,000.
Grand total: $11,222,820,000
Now, tell me if that's not damn close to $10,700,000,000, considering the margin of error when using estimates from the graph?
Are these all coincidences, Tingkai?
Your theory is that the fiscal capability of Alberta and Ontario (the "have" provinces) that is above the standard rate represents money that is transferred to have-not provinces. This is of course completely wrong and the following math provides additional proof.
In 1999-2000, equalization payments equaled $9.644 billion.
The fiscal capacity of Ontario was $476 per person above the standard level, population 11,874,400
The fiscal capacity of Alberta was $2,686 per person above the standard level, population 3,064,200
In that year, British Columbia was a "have" province (the right-wing government there has since pushed the province into a "have-not")
The fiscal capacity of B.C. was $119 per person above the standard level, population 4, 028,100
Now look what happens when we multiply the above dollar figures and population using Asher's theory.
Ont: $476 x 11,874,400 = $5.65 billion
Alta: $2,686 x 3,064,200 = $8.23 billion
B.C.: $119 x 4,028.100 = 0.479 billion
Total = $14.359 billion
Now surely you're not going to suggest that $14.36 billion is close to $9.644 billion in equalization payments. Then again, you never cease to amaze me.
The reason for the discrepancy is because the fiscal capacity reflects potential provincial government revenues. It does not represent actual transfers between governments.
In other words, Asher you are wrong.
Data was taken from:
Note: this page takes a long time to download, once it has click on link for ¡§A breakdown of Equalization entitlements¡¨
Then you should be able to figure out your mistake. But what do I know. I only have a BA in economics.Originally posted by Asher
And don't you dare tell me to take Canadian economics courses -- I just took a year of them with more to come next year.Golfing since 67Comment
-
Well, quickly looking at it now I can tell you that at least one of the population numbers is wrong (Alberta didn't have 3M people in 1999, let alone 3.064M).Originally posted by Tingkai
In 1999-2000, equalization payments equaled $9.644 billion.
The fiscal capacity of Ontario was $476 per person above the standard level, population 11,874,400
The fiscal capacity of Alberta was $2,686 per person above the standard level, population 3,064,200
In that year, British Columbia was a "have" province (the right-wing government there has since pushed the province into a "have-not")
The fiscal capacity of B.C. was $119 per person above the standard level, population 4, 028,100
Now look what happens when we multiply the above dollar figures and population using Asher's theory.
Ont: $476 x 11,874,400 = $5.65 billion
Alta: $2,686 x 3,064,200 = $8.23 billion
B.C.: $119 x 4,028.100 = 0.479 billion
Total = $14.359 billion
Now surely you're not going to suggest that $14.36 billion is close to $9.644 billion in equalization payments. Then again, you never cease to amaze me.
Tomorrow I will look and see where else missteps may have been taken.
Perhaps this has to do with my figures coming from Finance Canada's website, and yours coming from somewhere in the United Arab Emirates?
Okay, so please, you've yet to actually show how much each province contributes. I've not seen that at all, and if the charts and graphs I've seen are any indicator, Alberta still contributes FAR more per capita, and most likely more in NET terms as well.The reason for the discrepancy is because the fiscal capacity reflects potential provincial government revenues. It does not represent actual transfers between governments.
In other words, Asher you are wrong.
If you've got a BA in Economics, I'd love to know what university it's from, considering the quote you've made in my sig...Then you should be able to figure out your mistake. But what do I know. I only have a BA in economics.
Edit: And I believe a discrepancy in numbers may occur because the standard is calculated based only on 5 provinces, not all of them. But I still don't see how they get the magic number on where to take the money from to give to the "have not" provinces.
Could you quit dancing around it and come out and say:
- How much of the total was given by every province
- How those figures were obtained.
Otherwise it's pointless dancing around hoops exercising voodoo."The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "Comment
- How much of the total was given by every province
-
Some fascinating figures from the site you linked to, Tingkai.
Net equalization entitelements per capita from:
Personal Income Tax:
Alberta: -$295
Ontario: -$289
Corporate Income Tax:
Alberta: -$174
Ontario: -$67
Capital taxes:
Alberta: -$56
Ontario: -$23
Sales taxes:
Alberta: -$291
Ontario: -$43
Fuel/automobiles:
Alberta: -$140
Ontario: -$11
Alcohol:
Alberta: -$15
Ontario: -$2
Logging:
Alberta: -$19
Ontario: +$36
Oil and Natural Gas:
Alberta: -$1,450
Ontario: +$47
Gee, I think I'm starting to see a trend...
It looks like I was incorrect in my methodology in proving this, but I no longer need to prove it anyway since your links prove it for me. Quite clearly, Alberta sacrifices far more per capita than any other province in Canada. Maybe even total, but the damned site is so slow it hasn't loaded all of the different parts where it dings Alberta for money.
Last edited by Asher; June 4, 2002, 05:13."The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "Comment
-
You're pretty close. It's actually a University of Alberta website, but don't blame them. They probably can't get enough funding from Klein to buy proper computers.Originally posted by Asher
Tomorrow I will look and see where else missteps may have been taken. Perhaps this has to do with my figures coming from Finance Canada's website, and yours coming from somewhere in the United Arab Emirates?
Golfing since 67Comment
-
You still don't get that the joke is on you.Originally posted by Asher
If you've got a BA in Economics, I'd love to know what university it's from, considering the quote you've made in my sig...
I slag Alberta and you include it in your sig.
Ahh, you just removed your defence. What a shame. It made the slag even better.Golfing since 67Comment
-
No, it's not a University of Alberta website. The UofA doesn't have its own country code ".ua"Originally posted by Tingkai
You're pretty close. It's actually a University of Alberta website, but don't blame them. They probably can't get enough funding from Klein to buy proper computers.
As Albertans we think highly of ourselves, but not that highly.
Try going to www.culip.com.ua
Obviously not a University of Alberta site.
ANYWAY, the site finished loading.
Net equalization payments per Capita for:
Alberta: $-2,686 (Isn't this strikingly similar to my original figure?)
Ontario: $-476
Total:
Alberta: $7,949,217,000
Ontario: $5,484,805,200
Note that this includes your income tax stuff from before too. It would seem to me that Alberta is shouldering most of the equalization payments, both in total numbers and in per capita numbers."The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "Comment
-
No, the joke isn't on me.Originally posted by Tingkai
You still don't get that the joke is on you.
I slag Alberta and you include it in your sig.
Ahh, you just removed your defence. What a shame. It made the slag even better.
I put it in my sig because it looks like you're serious when you say it. It's very typical for the NDP actually.
"The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "Comment
-
Mea Culpa.Originally posted by Asher
Try going to www.culip.com.ua
Obviously not a University of Alberta site.
I made my post after seeing the address for CULIP (Canada Ukraine Legislative & Intergovernmental Project)
CULIP, CIUS, University of Alberta
450 Athabasca Hall, Edmonton, AB
T6G 2E8
But a quick check on google shows that .ua stands for Ukraine.
As I said, my mistake. (some of us know how to admit that we're wrong.)
Golfing since 67Comment
-
So from these figures, is it true or is it not that Alberta shoulders the most burden from equalization payments?
I'm seeing the per capita figure, then multiplying them by the capita, and getting a total.
Am I right in thinking that both of these figures give us that answer? In which bother figures are bigger for Alberta?
Or am I missing some magical formula that transforms these numbers into being much larger for Ontario? (This wouldn't entirely surprise me -- Canada's government never was one of functionality and common sense)"The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "Comment
-
The simple answer is no.Originally posted by Asher
So from these figures, is it true or is it not that Alberta shoulders the most burden from equalization payments?
You're driving me up the wall on this one Asher. What is the problem. Normally you display a fair amount of intelligence, but on this topic you¡¦re being as thick as a brick.
The numbers you cited reflect potential revenue levels for provincial government. It indicates that the Alberta provincial government could collect $291 per capita in sales tax above the standard rate IF it had a provincial sales tax.
The numbers you cite do not, repeat do not, indicate how much Albertans pay to the federal government! It clearly does not represent ¡§net equalization payments.¡¨ If it did then why do the Alberta, BC and Ontario numbers add up to $14 billion when equalization payments are only $9 billion.
This is proof that you have misread the graph.Golfing since 67Comment
-
I'm still really confused.
If the sites mention that, for example, Newfoundland has a net transfer to their province of $1B, and they also say Alberta has a net transfer from the province of $8B, why are they saying that if it's not true?
I thought the concept behind the equalization is it looked at the theoretical numbers from that graph, and allocates the money from those "have" provinces which are above the standard to the "have not" provinces, thereby making them relatively equal.
So by looking at the charts and data, Alberta's negative numbers in terms of transfer are always far greater than Ontario's.
Therefore I would conclude that Alberta is getting potential money transferred away from Alberta into the "have not" provinces.
How come you still haven't cited any real sources showing the real numbers taken from each province's revenue streams to show how they make up for equalization payments?
If what I'm saying is wrong, perhaps they should label the words correctly they're using, because I'm using what is typically standard vocabulary and interpreting it from there. And why is it so damn difficult for them to come right out and say where the money comes from?"The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "Comment
Comment