Chrétien to step down

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by notyoueither
I'll call you a twot. I'll do it to your face, and to anybody else who wants to talk about it

That's classic. You ran away crying like a little boy to CG, a place that I don't visit, to attack me behind my back. Now you're trying to do the fake macho routine.

Of course it is easy to trash people when they're not there to correct your mistakes and slander.

Originally posted by notyoueither
Let's see, this one's enlightening:

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=52061

My the way you dance through arguments to maintain your predjudices, it is remarkable.

So you put up a link to an old thread. And your point is?

Originally posted by notyoueither
This thread is really interesting Tingkai. Which is it? We don't matter, or we're the cause of all the problems?

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=51884

When JC says something that pisses off Albertans, it doesn't matter too much, because as you have told us so often, the Liberals don't care about Alberta and they don't need Albertan votes.

Is this too difficult for you to figure out? It is really quite simple. The statement is made in context of Alta's tradition of always voting conservative. If a region always votes conservative, then there is no incentive for a Liberal leader to worry about how these people feel. If the Liberals are nice to Alta, Alta votes conservative. If the Liberals screw Alta, Alta votes conservative. Add into this the Western whine about how their votes don't count and you have the final bit of context. So it doesn't matter too much to JC if he pisses off Albertans. Simple, eh.

Nothing in this indicates bigotry, although it does say something about your grasp on basic politics.

Originally posted by notyoueither
You had some interesting things to say about the CNR and how the West still needs to pay for the rail road that we've paid for a hundred times by now.

I don't recall saying anything about the CNR. So it is rather hard to discuss this point. (And why you have chosen to mention something that you only vaguely remember make no sense). But anyways, I have probably made comments about the CPR and how Albertans routinely forget that it was people in the east who financed it.

Originally posted by notyoueither
Now, you've had some fun with Asher. Guess what? Asher ain't around much any more. But you're still trying to b!tch slap a region for some reason. Well, guess what? Some people are sick of it.

Hold on a second. I've haven't mentioned Asher in this thread, except to comment on the fact that he has been silent and that he's trashing me at CG.

As for bi!tchslapping a region, that's a pretty funny image. And of course it only happens to Western Canadians. Never happens to the Americans, or the Europeans, or any other region of the world.

If you try to perpetuate the myth about the West being downtrodden by the East, then people are bound to disagree.

Westerners routinely complain that they're being screwed by the east and how they have no political power. The fact that I disagree with this belief doesn't make me a bigot.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Loif
Well I find the Liberals insulting. How many times do they think they can screw us over before they get thrown out? It'll never happen I guess.

They've been doing it for as long as I can remember, except of course during the 80s when the Conservatives were screwing us over big time.

[notyoueither]

So now you whine? Interesting.

It's a real b!tch when every important issue of fact you spew in a thread is proven to be crap, isn't it?

[Tingkai]

NYE: you're boring. Simplying saying something doesn't make it true. You've repeatedly called me a bigot, yet you provide no facts to support your claim. Now you're trying to claim that everything I write is false, even though you know that's not true. And you've done nothing but throw out unoriginal insults.

You really need to work on doing a better job as a troll.

Later days.

[notyoueither]

lol. You are offended by the suggestion you whine?

How many cack ups in facts have you admitted so far in this thread?

You fall back too readily on the 'you're a troller' ploy.

I am calling you what you have demonstrated to me you are. The facts of why I think so are strewn though this thread and others I linked to. If you don't like it, maybe you should examine why I would think so.

[Loif]

Thanks for the link NYI. I am now beginning to understand Tingkai's inferiority complex regarding Albertans.

[Jon Miller]

I love canadian threads

Jon Miller

[blackice]

Yes most of them spew out incorrect information, no information at all or the classic your a twot arguement.

[notyoueither]

We aim to please Jon. It's the only polite thing to do.

blackice. You mentioned the NEP as protecting Canada's resources from American control. Well, actually it was just the oil and gas, but anyway... Do you know what it did that was so harmful to the economy of Alberta (and Saskatchewan to a lesser extent)?

[blackice]

Both the Feds and the Provicial governments were to blame for the harm to the Alberta economy, during NEP.

What you do not hear Alberta's talking about is during the 1960s, the Government of Canada's National Oil Policy had propped up western oil producers by setting the domestic price (west of the Ottawa Valley) above the world price.

When oil prices had been falling, Ontario had been forced to subsidize the West, and, as Trudeau put it,

"now that prices are going sky-high, the shoe should be on the other foot and we should share in the opposite direction.

"This argument decisively refutes the regional criticism of the NEP's low domestic price. And you not hear Easteners continue this mantra, unlike the West's it's mine *uckoff the lot of you.

Now all we hear is Albertans whinning about equalization payments "we pay more than most provinces and we do not want to". Or why give the East Coast the same deal we had, we do not want to subsidize thier oil industry like the rest did ours.

Do you see somewhat where Taki is coming from now?

But nooooooooo

"let the Eastern bastards freeze in the dark"

Is all we heard. In 1979 82% 14 foriegn controlled firms accounted for 82% of Canada's output. By 1984 41% was Canadian owned.

Nep until Mulroney was a success, had the Lougheed government grabbed the ball and run with it rather than whinning for political clout and shutting down wells.

The American grip on thier economy would have been minimalized. It was the Americans who pulled out of the investment sector then and they had all the tools we had none.

One of Alberta's fastest growing exports now is the "tools" to do it. The oil sands projects and the power generating plants to make them run were subsidized and partially paid for by the people of Canada. We now get distain and the finger... Your welcome....

The NEP gave Canada an edge at the time in the manufacturing sector and most likely contributes to our firm standing today. Alberta is just now getting it and starting to create a climate for investment and manufacturing plants.

Btw what Tredeau did was just an extention of the Diefenbaker and Gordon policies. He just had the balls and the industries backing to do it. This had been going on well before Trudeau where was Alberta then?

This reality they do not teach out west, then came Malroney and his cronies...

Incidently I was in Alberta at the time, I took an "i'm an Albertan and I am mad as hell" sticker and applied it to Trudeau's limo bumper.

[notyoueither]

Well, that was all very interesting, but...

Alberta (most of us) has never had a problem with the concept of sharing by sending more money out of the province than we get. Otherwise we would be long gone by now. You see, we (mostly) do remember what it was like to be a have not province and to go through tough times. Many of us value Canada highly and have no problem contributing to keep it working.

But as for the NEP, there is a lot of b*ll sh!t flying around about it, both here and elsewhere. Here's a few things I know about it.

The NEP did many things. Some good, some so-so, and one thing that contributed greatly to devestating our economy.

Petro-Can was a good thing. The government kick started a major player in oil and gas development that was Canadian owed. No problem with that.

The government encouraged exploration in areas outside of the West. Great! The more oil and gas, the better.

There were most likely other, good things done by the NEP. The problem with it was the well head tax. With a stroke, the federal government intruded on provincial jurisdiction.

Cheaper oil for all Canadians? No problem. Base the discount on market prices and the cost to explore, develop and produce. That's not what happened.

What happened is there was a hefty tax on production that was inflexible. When the price cratered, the tax stayed. Estimates of the amount of money sucked out of Alberta's coffers vary from $50 to $100 billion dollars. But that's only government money. The real damage was much worse.

Much of our oil is expensive to produce. Oil companies are not going to explore for oil that is not going to be cost effective to sell years down the road. They are not going to drill if conditions do not favour it. They'd rather stop, and wait til conditions are better. In some cases, expensive wells get capped. Beyond costs, all companies have severe aversions to conditions where it appears that arbitrary acts by governments will decimate the value of their investments.

The devestation was the disruption to the exploration and drilling activity. That is where most of the jobs are. There, and the development of the tar sands. That's where the average Albertans got hammered. When the oil companies packed up and stopped exploring and drilling and expanding the tar sands. That's what we remember. The lost jobs, the failed businesses, and the mortgage foreclosures.

The federal government didn't care. They were getting their loot from the existing wells pumping oil. When the severe effects began, did that government ease off? No.

It took an unlikely political alliance between the West and Quebec which led to a change of governenment and then the thing was repealed.

Here is a good link that mentions other factors in our economy coming unwound. Significantly, it mentions the severe effects of the NEP on average Albertans. I don't think any large oil company execs ever lost their homes. Many of the smaller ones were wiped out though.

http://www.canoe.ca/CNEWSTrudeauNews/01001_trudeau5-cp.html

So what is the price of being a happy camper in confederation blackice? Should we be happy that our economy was devestated by an arbitrary act by a government headed by a man who actually flipped us the bird? Let me (and us) know the answer. Some of us are interested in knowing whether there is a future for us in this country or not. If it could, or did happen again, we'd most like say good bye.

[blackice]

"Interesting" it's history something you are obviously trying to dismiss. I guess the bottom line is the picture is bigger than the "me" senario I keep reading. And continue to...

If you dig further into it you may find the typical Alberta retoric you keep repeating is just that. It seems you simply ignore the facts and continue with the retoric.

Why did Alberta not create a manufacturing sector to replace the American made tools with the billions it was recieving by way of oil and subsities?

Why did the Alberta government not invest the money back into the oil sector then?

Why did the Alberta government not subsidize the Canadian business owners?

Why did the Alberta government shut down oil wells that were producing and in thier own words "As a protest"

Lot's of why's any answers? Look the the Alberta governments at the time. The economy at the time too, what would have happened to the country as a whole had he not done this? Remeber it is not just Alberta at the time ALL Canadians were losing jobs and businesses not just Albertans. There is that big picture you do not want to accept again.

Let's face it even at the time Alberta oil was being sold at world prices other than in Canada, exploration and drilling continued with Canadian funds. It was the Albertans that stopped it and the Americans not the Canadian government.

Let's face it 50 to 100 billion was a friggin drop in the hat compared to what was being brought in let alone what was paid out by the rest of the country to Alberta during the 60's.

I may add in tax money not oil money...

That old sob story being taught out there simply does not add up.

As far as goodbye good ridence, lets see how far your oil goes paying for healthcare, defence, roads etc... You know the big picture not the I'm taking my ball and going home one.

[blackice]

You give me a link to a Klien article how pathetic can you get...

Save it for the next generation of Albertans I prefer to read the truth...

[blackice]

Highlights of Government Support for Energy Investments Through the Tax System

1. During the 1950s and 1960s, the oil and gas industry enjoyed stable, favourable treatment by the federal tax system. Capital expenses were classified either as intangible, such as the costs of geological work and drilling for exploration and development, or as tangible, such as the purchase of equipment and buildings. For tax purposes, companies could write off intangible expenses in the year they were incurred. They could write off tangible expenses over several years using the capital cost allowance rules in the Income Tax Act. They could also fully deduct the royalties paid to the provinces for the use of energy resources in calculating their federal income taxes.

2. One of the most important provisions affecting the industry was percentage depletion. For the operator of an oil and gas well, percentage depletion was equal to 33 1/3 percent of the oil and gas production profits from the well; for other companies that had an interest in the well, it was 25 percent. This tax deduction, designed to encourage exploration, was in addition to the actual expenses that companies incurred and could be claimed even if they had not spent any money on exploration and development. In effect, the deduction meant that companies paid taxes at a reduced rate.

3. In 1974, the federal government made several changes to the tax system:

It divided exploration and development expenses into two groups. Exploration expenses (money spent looking for new resources) could still be written off for tax purposes in the year they were incurred. Development expenses (money spent bringing known resources into production) were added to a pool and the maximum amount companies could write off each year was 30 percent of the balance in the pool.
Companies could no longer deduct provincial royalty payments when calculating federal corporate income taxes. Instead, the government imposed a lower tax rate, which was replaced in 1976 with a deductible resource allowance (explained in Appendix C).
The concept of earned depletion replaced percentage depletion. Depletion was no longer an automatic deduction; companies had to spend money on exploration and development to "earn" a deduction.

4. In 1977, the federal government introduced "superdepletion", a larger deduction that would apply for three years. In addition to the regular deduction for earned depletion, companies would "earn" an additional depletion allowance of 66 2/3 percent for exploration expenses above $5 million per well. This allowance applied only to very expensive wells, such as those drilled in the Beaufort Sea. The combination of depletion and superdepletion resulted in a 200 percent write-off for tax purposes for eligible expenses above $5 million per well. For example, if a company spent $6 million to drill one well, it could deduct about $8.7 million when calculating its federal income taxes (that is, the $6 million actually spent, $2 million in earned depletion and about $0.7 million in superdepletion).

5. The National Energy Program in 1980 brought other changes to the tax regime for energy:

It imposed the petroleum and gas revenue tax (PGRT) to fund the new Petroleum Incentives Program (PIP) and to stop the erosion of the federal tax base resulting from the generous incentives for exploration.
A system of cash payments under the new PIP replaced earned depletion as an incentive to explore for oil and gas, particularly by Canadians. These grants varied between exploration and development and among regions, and were higher for firms with higher degrees of Canadian ownership. However, earned depletion was retained for the costs of enhanced oil recovery equipment and oil sands equipment.
The federal government phased out PIP grants and the PGRT after the Western Accord was signed in 1985. In 1987, tax reform lowered most corporate income tax rates but changed a number of deductions and allowances to broaden the income base on which taxes were calculated.

6. Less dramatic changes followed in the early 1990s and more attention was paid to renewable energy and energy efficiency. In 1992, the government eliminated the excise tax on ethanol and methanol in blended fuels, mainly gasoline. In 1994, it reduced the accelerated write-offs for tax purposes for renewable energy equipment that produces electricity and heat but expanded the range of energy equipment eligible for the revised write-offs.

7. In 1996, the federal government made some major changes for non-renewable energy investments:

It clarified and tightened the income tax rules for calculating the resource allowance and changed the rules for flow-through shares to restrict them to more risky expenses.
The rules for joint exploration corporations, which had been in place since 1962, were terminated. The rules were designed to help companies pool their resources to explore for and develop oil and gas and minerals, but the government determined that they were being used mainly to reduce taxes on the sale of resource properties.
The rules for accelerated write-offs for new mines and major mine expansions, including oil sands, were expanded to allow more costs to qualify for the accelerated write-offs.
Tangible capital expenses for oil sands in situ projects (those that use drilling techniques) could be written off in the same way as expenses for oil sands projects that employ surface mining techniques. Before 1996, these expenses were written off using the tax rules for oil and gas. As a result of the change, they could be written off using the more generous tax rules for mining.

8. Also in 1996, the government made changes to encourage investments in renewable energy. It removed some restrictions from the specified energy property rules in order to allow more companies to claim the accelerated write-offs for investments in renewable energy that produces electricity or heat. It introduced the concept of Canadian renewable and conservation expenses, which let companies immediately write off expenses incurred to develop renewable energy projects. Finally, it allowed companies to pass these expenses to shareholders who bought flow-through shares.

9. In 1999, the government announced that it would begin phasing in an extension of the seven percent tax credit for manufacturing and processing to companies that produce, for sale, electrical energy or steam used in generating electricity. This extension will be available to companies that use renewable and non-renewable energy sources. The February 2000 Budget announced that this extension would include all steam produced for sale.

http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/domino/reports.nsf/html/c003ab_e.html

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Loif
Thanks for the link NYI. I am now beginning to understand Tingkai's inferiority complex regarding Albertans.

Talk about ego. What would an Albertan have that anyone would create jealousy among others? The only thing I can think of easy access to some of the most beautiful wilderness in the world (I don't know why the Apolytoners in Alberta are on the web when they could be out enjoying life). If this is what you are talking about then I'll plead guilty.

But lets look at what Alberta lacks:
1) Decent NHL hockey teams;
2) Culture (sorry folks, the Stampede don't count), such as, decent art facilities, famous writers, artists;
3) World class universities;
4) ; and
5) A diverse economy.

What Alberta has, and it can keep:
1) Wannbe cowboys;
2) People who own 4x4s, but never leave the city;
3) The Stampede;
4) Ralph Klein, Preston Manning, the Reformers, CAers, or whatever they're calling themselves these days.
5) Asher (and I only write that because I know that he is reading this, and problably fuming at the mouth, but that's what you get when you get yourself banned.)