this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2023
37 points (93.0% liked)

Canada

7185 readers
362 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Universities


πŸ’΅ Finance / Shopping


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A report commissioned by the Alberta government says the province would be entitled to more than half the assets of the Canada Pension Plan - $334 billion - if it were to exit the national retirement savings program in 2027.

top 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Apollonius_Cone@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago

Alberta is entitled to jack squat except a gigantic environmental clean up bill.

[–] 44razorsedge@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)

LOL. She's so full of shit it's not even funny anymore. This made in AB bullshit has to end; the citizens of the province can't possibly be stupid enough to swallow this load of spew. Can they?

[–] Phil_in_here@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

Oh, we are definitely a strong 40% that dumb.

It's just a shame the other 60% can't agree that maybe the least evil party might be the best way forward.

[–] undercrust@lemmy.ca 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Can't wait for another round of the entire country ridiculing this bullshit that our AM Radio Host premier is pulling out of her ass. Always fun to be the butt of jokes.

I can't wait to see the report the federal government comes up instead.

[–] Thrillhouse@lemmy.ca 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

She’s such a fucking ghoul.

I don’t believe for a second that a) this won’t be used to invest in oil and gas b) she won’t kick the management of this to her buddies’ private companies so she can benefit personally.

Remember, the conservatives always want to privatize public services and assets to benefit their friends. Reference: GREENBELT.

[–] MrFlagg@lemmy.ca -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

offtopic but the greenbelt is not a public asset. Its owned by private citizens mostly.

[–] prodigalsorcerer@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's a public asset in the sense that its existence helps the rest of the province with things like groundwater, flood control, and air quality. It's also a potential source of food/agriculture for the province, though that part is just private enterprise and not guaranteed.

[–] Rocket@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

If we use that definition, as unusual as it is, then there is no way to privatize said asset. It will always be a public asset no matter what. That does not align with the original comment.

[–] prodigalsorcerer@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Not really. Land being removed from the Greenbelt would allow it to be developed and paved over, minimizing it's worth in all of those aspects.

[–] Rocket@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

There is no change in hands in what you describe. It would still be the same public asset, even if the public saw its transformation into something new.

[–] prodigalsorcerer@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Who owns it doesn't matter. What matters is that it isn't paved or developed. Pavement and digging basements reduce the land's ability to absorb water, which can cause flooding and reduce groundwater availability in surrounding areas.

[–] Rocket@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Who owns it does matter when talking about privatization. Your definition of a public asset has no way to transfer ownership. It will forever and always be a public asset.

[–] prodigalsorcerer@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

It's only a public asset as long as it's untouched (i.e. not paved or developed). The Greenbelt laws keep it that way.

Think of the Rocky Mountains as a public asset. I don't know who owns them, but that doesn't matter. They are a public asset as long as they exist, but if someone is allowed to flatten them, or carve the faces of dead prime ministers into them, they are no longer an asset to the public. Both of those are much more difficult to do than it is to build a house or a parking lot, so I'm not terribly worried about that scenario unfolding, but it's the same idea, just bigger.

[–] Rocket@lemmy.ca 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

In other words, Alberta has become so poor, the only way it thinks it can survive is to pillage federal assets.

Maybe it's time to pull up your bootstraps, Alberta?

[–] investorsexchange@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 year ago

As an Albertan, I want to stick with CPP. If our government tries this, Calgary and Edmonton might have to separate from Alberta to rejoin Canada.

[–] Grant_M@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 year ago

Please, Alberta -- stop with these far right conspiracy theorists.

Alberta says that Alberta gets more than half of the cake if it leaves the party early

[–] grte@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Absolute insanity. Alberta is currently governed essentially by oil companies. This is their attempt to steal half of Canada's pension fund which will then be invested directly into their own industry. Blatant theft.

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

My comissioned report says I can take the BBQ sauce and wine back home when I leave the Ottawa cookout

[–] Backspacecentury@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I read another article that said the half number comes from the idea that Alberta had never contributed to CPP and had their own plan since the sixties, when in reality, if you were to calculate how much they would be β€œowed” would be closer to 20%. Still a large number, but the way this report will be pushed on the Albertan populace to try to push a yes vote on a referendum is so underhanded and classless. Which, of course, is exactly what everyone had to expect from the physical embodiment of ignorance that is Danielle Smith.

[–] Dearche@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago

And with the declining importance of oil, along with the lack of infrastructure and economic buildup because they didn't tax that oil revenue properly over the decades, if they really went independent on this, if anything, all retirees would be fucked over the next decade.

Honestly, I bet that the number they came up with was simply based on theoretical contributions according to the profits made on oil without actually looking at the contributions themselves.

[–] Pxtl@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 year ago

Also a pony. And a car. And a ponycar.

[–] Pazuzu@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 year ago

Hmm kind of annoying they say that and then the article, or more likely the third party that came to these conclusions didn't give any evidence to support that claim. Not surprising.

[–] aDuckk@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Biggest heist in Canadian history?

[–] Grant_M@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago
[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago

Sounds impartial, that one.

Alberta makes up just under 12% of the population. Best offer? 12% of the CCP.