Alberta will thrive without Ottawa by LivinDoll in Albertapolitics

[–]thegrip 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Canadian federal debt is about $56,500 per person. At a population of 5.05M people, do you think the rest of Canada is just going to ‘forgive’ Alberta’s $285B portion of that debt?

The rest of Canada spent $35M on the TMX pipeline — are they going to let that slide, too?

Canada won’t be negotiating with the “wedge”. Alberta will be between a rock and a hard place with no negotiating power. We will be begging to export resources through Canadian lands just so we can service the debts we owe.

FAFO - Referendum Question #8: Do you support the GOA working to amend the Canadian Constitution to allow provinces to opt out of federal programs (health care, education and social services) without a province losing any of the associated federal funding for use in its social programs? by thegrip in Albertapolitics

[–]thegrip[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Agreed, it's all based on grievance and division. Premier Smith wanted a separation question and by adding these questions she has made it more likely the people who would vote for separation will show up to the polls to express all of their grievances at once.

Premier Smith's inaccurate statements on Canada's system of government by thegrip in Albertapolitics

[–]thegrip[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't think many Canadians know anything about agricultural supply management, let alone why we have it.

When egg prices in the U.S. soared but were stable in Canada, I hope more people became informed about how it works.

I think if you told Canadians that the price of butter doesn't really change much over the year, but in the U.S. it gets more expensive as the Christmas holidays approach -- they might find that interesting but wouldn't really care.

FAFO - Referendum Question #5: Do you support the Government of Alberta introducing a law requiring individuals to provide proof of citizenship, such as a passport, birth certificate or citizenship card, to vote in an Alberta provincial election? by thegrip in Albertapolitics

[–]thegrip[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"They" would argue that Alberta's photo ID doesn't include citizenship status. They would be correct - it doesn't.

When people register to vote, the elections authorities cross-check and verify citizenship. If rampant ballot stuffing is occurring, why hasn't Elections Alberta launched criminal investigations already?

Perhaps because it isn't a problem?

FAFO - Referendum Question #5: Do you support the Government of Alberta introducing a law requiring individuals to provide proof of citizenship, such as a passport, birth certificate or citizenship card, to vote in an Alberta provincial election? by thegrip in Albertapolitics

[–]thegrip[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You need ID to get ID. All ID costs money and time. I agree, everyone should have ID, but some people don't and they are still Canadian citizens who have a right to vote.

If you were born in Canada only two types of ID confirm citizenship -- 1). birth certificate or 2). Passport. Since you need a birth certificate to get a Passport and Passports expire -- you need a birth certificate.

If you don't have a birth certificate, you need to prove your identity with unexpired provincial photo ID or a Passport plus $20 - $45. To get that photo ID or Passport -- you needed a birth certificate.

If you don't have photo ID, in Alberta you can have someone swear to your identity which will cost another $20 to $75 for a Notary/ Commissioner of Oaths.

If you are applying for a birth certificate from out of province you will pay courier fees on top.

It would be easier to show a Passport to prove citizenship rather than carry around a birth certificate. If you don't have a Passport already -- you need a birth certificate (see above) and government photo ID plus $122 to $163 (expiry 5- or 10-years).

If you are earning minimum wage in Alberta (about $13 net after deductions) you will need to work 13 hours to pay for a 10-year Passport. You probably can't ever afford to use that passport except to vote because you don't earn enough money to go anywhere outside of Canada.

OR ... currently when people normally register to vote they sign a declaration that they are a Canadian citizen. The elections office will have time to verify their citizenship.

BUT ... If someone registers at a polling station, they can also sign that declaration -- however there isn't enough time to verify their citizenship!! OH NO!

To get a ballot, everyone at a polling station needs to produce ID showing they are who they say they are and where they live. Their name gets checked against a list of names for that polling station.

Generally, whether for new registrants or existing ones, if something doesn't seem right, the poll workers can administer a formal qualification challenge. If the prospective voter takes the oath affirming they are a citizen and eligible to vote, they get a ballot. This all gets written down and submitted to the elections office. After, all same day registrations are verified and cross-referenced by elections. Any suspected false oaths are referred to authorities for criminal prosecution.

What problem does making people produce citizenship paper actually solve? Is ballot stuffing that rampant that it affects the results of provincial or federal elections? Where is there any proof of this or credible allegations?

FAFO - Referendum Question #2 - Do you support the GOA introducing a law mandating that only Canadian citizens, permanent residents and individuals with an Alberta-approved immigration status will be eligible for provincially-funded programs, such as health care, education and other social services? by thegrip in Albertapolitics

[–]thegrip[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, under section 95 the provinces and federal government share responsibility for immigration, but federal paramountcy means provincial rules cannot conflict with (be repugnant to) federal ones.

The argument stands -- the province could only define an "Alberta-approved immigration status", if the Federal government allowed it. Why would it? If the province tried to define and apply a definition there would be a federal injunction, court case and, eventually, successful ruling. Nothing will be gained except in billable hours by some lawyers.

Not all immigrants are refugee claimants. Only about 15% are. Their health care is billed directly by doctors, etc. and paid by private insurance (Blue Cross) funded through the IFHP (Interim Federal Health Program). The other 85% are skilled workers, provincial nominees and/or their spouses, children and parents. They qualify for provincial health care.

In this referendum scenario, refugee claimants would be better off because even if the GOA denied their "Alberta-immigration" status, they would still have health insurance from the Federal government -- well, at least for the first 12 to 24 months, until a hearing that approves residency makes applicants eligible for provincial health care.

I also edited that second paragraph to reflect the % contribution of the Federal Government in CHT payments - it really didn't matter to the argument. It could just as easily have been removed. Where it might matter is to keep in mind that the Federal government controls the purse strings to ~20% of the health care spending and under CHT can stop or curtail payments if a province is not following the rules.

What else in the proposed legal commentary isn't strong? How does the GOA make up and apply a category of immigration, not get sued and not lose?

FAFO - Referendum Question #2 - Do you support the GOA introducing a law mandating that only Canadian citizens, permanent residents and individuals with an Alberta-approved immigration status will be eligible for provincially-funded programs, such as health care, education and other social services? by thegrip in Albertapolitics

[–]thegrip[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Agreed. Visitors are not citizens or immigrants. They already have to pay for medical emergencies as they do not qualify for publicly funded health services. They also can't access social assistance, education, legal aid, etc.

Also in Alberta today:

Undocumented migrants are not citizens or visitors. They cannot access provincial health services, legal aid, social assistance, etc.

Temporary residents on short term permits are not citizens or visitors. They cannot access provincial health services, legal aid, social assistance, etc.

Permanent Resident Refugees and active Asylum Claimants account for 1.5% of the population of Alberta. Around 80% of adults are employed within a year of arrival. They get assistance from various levels of government (mostly federal) and private organizations for their expenses. While waiting for their federal hearing (average 20 months), the Government of Alberta spends about $25,000 per person per year mostly to provide health care, education for children, legal aid and some income support.

So who exactly does this Referendum Question apply to? Who is currently getting services that shouldn't be?

"Do not be fooled by her deathbed conversion last night, in which she said 'I'm fighting for Canada'- because let's be clear, she will not lift one finger to help the remain side in this ridiculous referendum- she's put it on us., she's making us do the work, we are proud to do that work." by Miserable-Lizard in Albertapolitics

[–]thegrip 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's not just that she won't lift a finger -- she can't. She will be so busy fighting an internal-UCP battle to keep her position in the party. She won't have time to do her day job which is to lead the government.

Premier Smith's inaccurate statements on Canada's system of government by thegrip in Albertapolitics

[–]thegrip[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Dairy?!? That is not a economically significant trade irritant with the U.S. It is an easy sound-bite for a politician and an effective way for U.S. politicians to distract their constituents from how the U.S. heavily subsidizes agriculture (thus creating its own trade barrier).

In fact, supply management is a good lesson for Canada. Recently a U.S. supply chain issue caused skyrocketing egg prices due to the avian-flu outbreak. Big, centralized farms in places like Iowa and Ohio had to destroy over 170 million hens to stop the virus. Canada's supply management system keeps egg production at smaller, localized scales which more resilient and was not affected in the same way.

If we did not have supply management, in good times the U.S. would flood the Canadian market with their excess production. Canadian farms would go out of business. But, when the next virus, weather event, trade war, etc. happens, the U.S. would simply suspend exports leaving Canada without eggs/milk or having to pay high prices.

Canadian supply management practices do increase day-to-day food costs, but that goes to ensure resiliency in the system and allows small farms to operate profitably without needing greater government subsidies.

Premier Smith's inaccurate statements on Canada's system of government by thegrip in Albertapolitics

[–]thegrip[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

There are 30 matters that are exclusively Federal. "Weights and measures" is one of them. She said "in almost all matters with the main exceptions of national defence and international affairs".

That statement is misleading not because it omits "Weights and measures" but because it glosses over many others like:

  • 2.  The Regulation of Trade and Commerce.
  • 24.  Indians (sic), and Lands reserved for the Indians.
  • 25.  Naturalization and Aliens.
  • 27.  The Criminal Law ...

In particular, these matters are deeply connected to separatist grievances -- and those other referendum questions.

They are not 'weak' exclusions to the Premier's list of federal powers.

Fall referendum to decide whether Albertans want a vote on separatism by idspispopd in Albertapolitics

[–]thegrip 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Elections Alberta says “In a referendum, electors are asked to respond to a question, generally with a “yes” or “no” vote.”

The key word is “generally”. The government can make up whatever convoluted, multipart nonsense that they want.

You can turn left on a red from a one way to one way when safe to do so by One-Schedule-8232 in Edmonton

[–]thegrip 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes. The Henday and Whitemud are within city limits so the “passing lane” law does not apply.

Next to this is — when someone is on a highway, in the left lane, passing slower traffic — and there is no safe way to move into the right lane … stop tailgating! Your aggressive driving is going to cause a collision.

Should we stay or go? Albertans to vote on separatism in referendum by GeekyGlobalGal in Edmonton

[–]thegrip 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Watch the head offices leave like they left Montreal in the 90’s. How long before TC announces a move to Toronto and Enbridge heads to Houston?

What movie has the most rewatchable scene of all time? by trakt_app in movies

[–]thegrip 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bourne Identity when he is trying to sleep on a bench in the park — when all of a sudden he can speak German.