[stackghost]

>like the British Empire treated it colony Canada, so does the country treats us

This persecution complex seems bizarre. The only entities exploiting Alberta are the oil companies who offshore billions of dollars in profits. Instead of growing their sovereign wealth fund the way Norway does, Albertans allowed themselves to be exploited.

Edit: I see now that when I wrote "created a fund like Norway" it was taken as implying Alberta didn't have a fund, when what I meant was "created one that is similar to Norway's fund". Edited for clarity.

[dismalaf]

1. Alberta has a wealth fund.

2. The amount Alberta has sent in equalization payments would have allowed us to have a far larger wealth fund than Norway has.

Also, you are aware that, no matter who exploits the oil, the Alberta government receives royalties from it, right?

Also, most of the foreign companies have joint ventures with Canadian entities and a lot of the money does stay within Canada and Alberta.

And even with all the equalization Alberta has sent, we're still the richest province by far. We just know we could be much richer still...

[stackghost]

>Alberta has a wealth fund.

Since the 70s, yes, and it's minuscule because the oil companies socialize the risks and privatize the profits, less some token royalties. Norway's was established in the 90s and is multiple orders of magnitude larger, because they don't allow big oil to fuck them over.

>The amount Alberta has sent in equalization payments would have allowed us to have a far larger wealth fund than Norway has.

You are being fed a narrative.

Equalization payments are taken from federal tax revenues. Every Canadian pays taxes according to the same graduated tax rate schedule, whether Albertan or not.

Alberta does not "pay into" equalization payments. Provinces do not "send money to other provinces". That's simply not how the program works.

[jgon]

Equally, you are being fed a narrative. Yes, yes, every Canadian pays into federal taxes that are then dispersed amongst provinces to give a relatively "equal" standard of living, hence the term equilization payments. But why does Alberta consistently send far more money than it receives? Just what is it that allows Albertans to pay so much more in taxes? And of course that doesn't even get into how the equalization formula is created and applied, what sorts of things are factored into a province's "fiscal capacity" and what things get factored out, and whether those parts of the formula could be slanted to benefit certain provinces more than others. Of course at this point you'd probably deflect and say that the current equalization formula was put in place by the Harper government because you think that I must support the conservatives and this is some sort of gotcha.

The bottom line is that since the big oil and gas discoveries of the 60s Alberta has sent roughly 300 billion more to the federal government than it has received in return. This is of course part of being a province in a country, instead of a country itself like Norway is. And of course there has been mismanagement of the Heritage Fund, so Alberta is not blameless here. But the oft repeated talking point that Alberta doesn't actually really contribute disproportionately to the country is completely false. Why doesn't Alberta have a wealth fund on par with Norway? Because that money has instead been used to help fund hospitals, roads, schools and more across the rest of the country. I think that's a pretty good investment and I'm not upset about that, but I am upset when people don't even see that and choose instead to recycle a bunch of trite talking points that are basically lying by omission.

[stackghost]

>But why does Alberta consistently send far more money than it receives?

The Province of Alberta sends no money at all. What part of this is so hard to understand?

I live in BC, and we also are considered a "have" province, and we also do not send any money.

The money comes from the Federal Government. It was never provincial money to begin with. It's tax money that is paid directly to the federal government by Canadians, and businesses. It does not come "from Alberta" or "from BC".

>Just what is it that allows Albertans to pay so much more in taxes?

Every single Canadian is subject to the exact same Federal Tax schedule. If you and I were in the same income tax bracket, we'd pay the exact same rate.

If Albertans are "paying more in taxes" (doubtful), then that's Danielle's problem. But not a single cent of provincial tax revenue gets put into Equalization payments.

[jgon]

I'll try one last reply in the hopes that you're not just playing willfully ignorant here. Alberta doesn't send money but "Albertans" do. Sorry for not being insanely pedantic with my terminology. Critically the federal government then dispenses money to provinces, so even if we want to be clever about the source of money, when it comes back it goes to geographically bounded provincial coffers, not the pockets of citizens. When people say that "Alberta" sends money, they mean that Albertans pay money to the federal government and then federal government spends that money elsewhere. And those borders matter when that money is being spent. I send money to the federal government and the federal government does not spend money in the geographical area where it would impact me. I'm happy that a person in Manitoba gets a new hospital, but that doesn't actually improve my life directly. So when people say that Alberta sends money to other provinces, that's what they mean. That provinces are able to create things for their citizens that they would not be able to fund otherwise because they received money from other geographic locations. The net in-out transfer is the bottom line. The people of alberta send X billion dollars to the federal government every year and the federal government sends X-10 billion dollars back to the provincial government, because that 10 billion is going to other provinces. This isn't rocket science unless you're trying hard to misunderstand.

The point about Albertans paying more is that they have higher incomes, so they are subject to progressive taxation (same as everyone, you'd don't need to reply thinking you've made a clever point). A combination of oil and gas revenue and a relatively business positive environment have made it possible for Albertans to pay more in taxes because they earn more. This is a good thing, but the point of contention comes out of the fact that there is no incentive for other provinces to try and improve their "fiscal capacity" when they can instead backfill their lack of revenue on the backs of the provinces, like BC, that are net contributors. If other provinces were faced with the having to cut services, or figure out how to improve their economies, they might undertake the work of improving their economy. But instead they can defer the hard choices and let Alberta, and BC provide that revenue.

At the end of the day I do just fine as an Albertan. One day oil and gas will be less important worldwide and Alberta will have to adapt. Luckily our economy is already more diversified than say, BC, which relies on real estate for a bigger proportion of its GDP. Better hope that trading houses back and forth continues to be a productive way to structure an economy. And even more importantly, once oil and gas subsides and Alberta can no longer provide per capita incomes ~15-20% higher than the rest of Canada what does the equalization formula look like then? I think that a lot of provinces are going to suddenly find out that they were taking things for granted and the money tap just isn't there any more. We'll see what happens at that point I guess, I feel pretty confident that Alberta will be fine, and hopefully it will force the rest of Canada to make some painful choices that will be better for the country in the long-term. But its going to suck in the short-term.

[stackghost]

>When people say that "Alberta" sends money, they mean that Albertans pay money to the federal government and then federal government spends that money elsewhere.

I don't actually think most people mean this when they say it.

But hey, sounds like we both are on the same page, and I'm glad we agree that Alberta as an entity doesn't pay equalization payments.

It sounds like you have a problem with federal spending, and you're far from alone in that regard.

> Of course at this point you'd probably deflect and say that the current equalization formula was put in place by the Harper government because you think that I must support the conservatives and this is some sort of gotcha.

>you'd don't need to reply thinking you've made a clever point

>Better hope that trading houses back and forth continues to be a productive way to structure an economy.

These little jabs you keep putting in aren't helping your case. They just make you seem like a jerk.

[dismalaf]

> Alberta does not "pay into" equalization payments. Provinces do not "send money to other provinces". That's simply not how the program works.

You're being pedantic.

Income from Alberta workers gets taxed and sent to other provinces or citizens living in other provinces via various federal programs. If we were a separate country, all that money would stay in Alberta.

Splitting hairs over the precise "how" doesn't change the fact it's money siphoned out of Alberta to other provinces.

[stackghost]

>Income from Alberta workers gets taxed and sent to other provinces or citizens living in other provinces via various federal programs. If we were a separate country, all that money would stay in Alberta.

And you'd be incurring lots of new expenses like border controls, national security, etc. The last estimates I saw were that the total equalization payments attributable to Alberta were about a tenth of the cost of federal government services provided to Alberta.

That is to say Albertan taxpayers would be on the hook for an additional 25 billion dollars annually, or so.

>Splitting hairs over the precise "how" doesn't change the fact it's money siphoned out of Alberta to other provinces.

It's not pedantic, you're just factually incorrect. It's money that all Canadians already pay to the government (because it's money from federal income tax). There's no line item in the Alberta budget for "equalization payments".

If we deleted the entire Equalization Program tomorrow, we'd all still be paying the same taxes.

[dismalaf]

Since you don't seem to want to write in good faith here (or maybe you just don't understand, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt), from the horse's mouth:

https://www.canada.ca/en/department-finance/programs/federal...

And federal transfers:

https://www.canada.ca/en/department-finance/programs/federal...

If you really don't understand why Alberta pays more per capita, it's simple. We have more net taxpayers paying more federal taxes per capita.

[stackghost]

From the link you posted:

>Provincial governments make no contributions to the Equalization program.

And:

>All Canadians are subject to the same federal income tax system and its progressive rate structure, regardless of where they live.

These both directly support my argument. I will make no further replies.

[jeromegv]

> If we were a separate country, all that money would stay in Alberta.

Yes. But you’d have to pay for your own border, army, customs, etc, etc.

By that logic every single province could separate, become a country, and then what? Is that supposed to be more cost efficient? Would the economy and free market between each province better? Would Alberta oil be worth the same price without having pipelines going through every province?

And then, why not have Calgary separate from Alberta. After all money from Calgary pays for roads in Edmonton and smaller towns. Surely we don’t want money leaving Calgary, if Calgary was independent, Calgary could keep its own money and not have their money “siphoned out”.

[dismalaf]

> Yes. But you’d have to pay for your own border, army, customs, etc, etc.

And? $45 billion of the Federal government's revenues come from Alberta. Another poster put the estimate of all these things at $26 billion. Sounds like an amazing deal.

> After all money from Calgary pays for roads in Edmonton and smaller towns

Municipal funds pay for roads, generally speaking. Provincial grants are only if it's proven that the road is essential infrastructure for the benefit of the whole province. The Federal government also gives grants from time to time.

[jpalawaga]

alberta could also have had a wealth fund if it didn't have 0% sales tax, didn't do things like ralphbucks, etc.

norway and alberta take fundamentally different approaches to how they see the government and taxation. don't blame the federal government by saying individuals paying income tax somehow exempts the province from smart financial stewardship.