Damn NDP Killing the Economy in Alberta

[Quarter Mile'r]

Not all private companies offer sick days. Consider yourself lucky if you get any.



So, if you get a raise from the NDP in power, you are making close to minimum wage. Try the flip side for all those private companies paying these wages, who now will face a huge percentage increase in wage costs. Many will not be able to raise their prices accordingly to cover this forced increase in costs.

Well that's what it's all about isn't it? The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
Until you have a shake up in gov't once every 16 years like in our case and then maybe...........just maybe.........some
of the wealth will be returned to those who feed the greater gov't coffers with money called our working mans taxes.

Personally I doubt the NDP will raise the minimum wage. I do believe they are a little more restrained in that avenue
than before. If they do I again doubt it will go to the talked about 15 bucks an hour like in our friend storm R's calgary.




......................QM'r

 

[LM987]

I strongly agree you should be paid for what your are worth.
I feel sorry for Tim Horton's employees making minimum, or close to minimum wages, and they work their asses off. But if those wages go up 20% or more, that is a huge kick to those private owners of those stores. Will their head office raise prices? Doubt it.

Not all business owners are "getting richer", many would be better off working for someone else,as they usually have company debts to pay, rent increases, utilities increasing.....

Even Timmies owners, some do well, others are financing their operations.

Reprinting an oldie, but so so true.

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for lunch and the bill for all ten comes to $100.

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men ate lunch in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball.

"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily lunch by $20.00." So lunch for the ten men would now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But what about the other six men? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to eat his lunch.

So the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% off).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% off).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% off).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% off).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% off).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% off).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to eat lunch for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare the amount they got off.

The sixth man said, "I only got $1 off out of the $20 while the tenth man got $10 off!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only got $1 off, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"

"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 off, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and told him they they were angry that he got so much off while they each got very little.

The next day the tenth man didn't show up for lunch, so the nine sat down and had their lunchs without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money amongst all of them for even half of the bill!

And that is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the largest benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start eating overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.

For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

 

[apl16]

What a silly thing to say.Hell today I delivered 4 flats of boxes to a very nice bistro in downtown Calgary.It was a bugger of a delivery and I had to use a 4 wheel flatdeck to get them from my vehicle to the establishment.Got them delivered and I commented how nice the place was and how I had never been there before.The reply I got was "the boxes are for moving as our last day is Saturday because we are going out of business".The NDP minimum wage increase to $15 an hour combined with 30,000 less people downtown each day 5 days a week when they had jobs and went out for lunch cant possibly be the result of bistro's such as this going out of business could it?

The only jobs the NDP "creates" are government jobs that are given to cronies and the legislation they pass no matter which Province they are in charge of hurts the people they purport to "help" it also initiates anger towards the people that are on the lowest rung on the proverbial ladder as it wipes out the time they have put in.A specific example I will use is when the NDP in Alberta announced the $15 minimum wage.I asked a couple of gals who work at the 7-11 where I stop in each morning for a cup of coffee on the way to work.Both of them have been there for 7+ years and have gotten lousy raises over the years but are now making just over $15 an hour.I asked them how they would feel about a newly hired employee getting the same wage as them or near it after their 7+ years and they were vehemently pissed off.I asked them if they could demand a raise or even ask for one and the answer was a flat out NO.Tis a different story for the Public Sector Union workers though who will say "before minimum wage was $15 I was making $24 so now I want $27.....if the lowest of the low wage slaves get a raise as mandated by our Socialist Government I want one too"......and then of course the same Public Sector Union members want their yearly indexed to inflation raises year over year after the fact.

Back when people got treated like shit by management.Had an arm lost due to a work place accident.....or maybe got caught in a coal mine cave in etc that was the need for unions because people got fucked over.Now it is the unions that are fucking over the tax payers and holding a knife to their collective throats.

Yup. Everyone should get $5/hr and no benefits. Another twit trying to drag everyone down instead making things better. As posted by apl16

Did I say that?Did I infer that?I firmly believe you should get paid according to your effort.I have worked a lot of shitty jobs in my life time and I can guarantee I entered the workforce long before you did.I have been doing what I am doing for 20 years now and I bust my ass 12 hours a day.I have not had a "sick day" in 19 years because if I dont work I dont make money.At the same time is some fucking idiot who only remembers his own name because he wears a name tag at Walmart as a greeter be paid $15 an hour because of a Socialist agenda to drive up Union wages.....I dont fucking think so.

SR

Hmmmm..... perhaps you should have changed jobs 19 years ago?

 

[apl16]

I strongly agree you should be paid for what your are worth.
I feel sorry for Tim Horton's employees making minimum, or close to minimum wages, and they work their asses off. But if those wages go up 20% or more, that is a huge kick to those private owners of those stores. Will their head office raise prices? Doubt it.

Not all business owners are "getting richer", many would be better off working for someone else,as they usually have company debts to pay, rent increases, utilities increasing.....

Even Timmies owners, some do well, others are financing their operations.

Reprinting an oldie, but so so true.

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for lunch and the bill for all ten comes to $100.

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men ate lunch in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball.

"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily lunch by $20.00." So lunch for the ten men would now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But what about the other six men? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to eat his lunch.

So the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% off).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% off).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% off).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% off).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% off).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% off).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to eat lunch for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare the amount they got off.

The sixth man said, "I only got $1 off out of the $20 while the tenth man got $10 off!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only got $1 off, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"

"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 off, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and told him they they were angry that he got so much off while they each got very little.

The next day the tenth man didn't show up for lunch, so the nine sat down and had their lunchs without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money amongst all of them for even half of the bill!

And that is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the largest benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start eating overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.

For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

If you can't afford to pay your people a decent wage, maybe your business plan is not well thought out. I've had a small business with up to 6 employees. I'd be embarrassed to pay them less than $20/hr.

 

[storm rider]

I strongly agree you should be paid for what your are worth.
I feel sorry for Tim Horton's employees making minimum, or close to minimum wages, and they work their asses off. But if those wages go up 20% or more, that is a huge kick to those private owners of those stores. Will their head office raise prices? Doubt it.

Not all business owners are "getting richer", many would be better off working for someone else,as they usually have company debts to pay, rent increases, utilities increasing.....

Even Timmies owners, some do well, others are financing their operations.

Reprinting an oldie, but so so true.

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for lunch and the bill for all ten comes to $100.

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men ate lunch in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball.

"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily lunch by $20.00." So lunch for the ten men would now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But what about the other six men? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to eat his lunch.

So the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% off).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% off).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% off).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% off).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% off).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% off).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to eat lunch for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare the amount they got off.

The sixth man said, "I only got $1 off out of the $20 while the tenth man got $10 off!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only got $1 off, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"

"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 off, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and told him they they were angry that he got so much off while they each got very little.

The next day the tenth man didn't show up for lunch, so the nine sat down and had their lunchs without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money amongst all of them for even half of the bill!

And that is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the largest benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start eating overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.

For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

I like your comparison.....filthy Socialists wont like it though.

Hmmmm..... perhaps you should have changed jobs 19 years ago?

Best paying and the most enjoyable job I have ever had and I have no regrets.

As much as I know some of you don't like Storm Rider and his strong opinions, some of what he says is the truth. Alberta could support the civil service when it was booming. Money did grow on trees and there wasn't issues with expansion (as it was needed). But now they're entering year 4 of low oil prices. You can hold off a year or so for layoffs seeing if the downturn is temporary. This time it's not. This is not 2009.

So what do you do? If you continue the way they're going they'll have the largest per capita deficit and debt in the country. If you cut and axe everything well the citizens suffer. But the root cause of the problem is the tax system and how it's managed. You can't fund stable services in a economy where the revenue is prone to wild swings. You need to recreate the tax system and use resource revenues as the icing on the cake. Alberta needs a PST BUT..in boom times when there is a huge surplus citizens need to be "rebated" based on income & taxes paid. This way services are funded in tough times & in good times people get thousands back at the end of the year. The surplus gets returned to the people that funded it.

The best law that Ralph Klein passed was that if a Provincial Sales Tax was proposed via legislation is that it MUST pass via a VOTE by Albertans.If the NDP want to subvert that by changing the existing legislation it is akin to shooting yourself in the head with a large caliber hand gun.Albertans dont need or want the sufferance/pain of a PST....but the tax and spend more bureaucrats want one.I have said it once and I will say it again.Alberta does not have a funding problem it has a spending problem and the worst line cost item is the BLOATED government bureaucracy that got pumped up after Ralph Klein left office as well as the pandering to the public sector unions under Stelmach but most especially under the Red Queen Redford who pandered to the Alberta Teachers Association in her leadership bid and then bailed out the ATA's pension plan with 2 BILLION in tax payers money.If the ATA's pension plan was so good and solid why the fuck did it need a 2 BILLION infusion of tax payer money?It is because defined benefit pension plans that public sector unions get are not sustainable as people are living longer and collecting those indexed to inflation pensions longer.There is not a single private sector company in all of Canada that offers a "defined benefit pension" though if a person is lucky enough to work for a company that offers a pension plan like companies such as CP Rail/CN Rail/Teck Resources and others that pension plan is "defined contribution" and it matches to a max amount money paid by workers by the companies and it places no burdens upon tax payers......just as it should be.

Got say it again since a lot of people just dont get it.......Socialism is the philosophy of failure,the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy.It's inherent nature is the equal sharing of misery....Sir Winston Churchill.

SR

 

[sevenofnine]

everyone wants to blame the ndp

its more of a world situation then local, price of oil and gas,
and that has nothing to do with ndp,
nobody wants our fucking oil, its dirty, and they can get it cheaper.
the writing is on the wall for the oil industry,, so many jurisdictions are banning the internal combustion engine, by 2030 2040 entire blocks of the world will be running electric cars.
just killed any mega projects and pipelines.

not the ndp,s fault.

were also pricing our self out of the market place,
we want forty bucks an hour plus rich benefits so we can just whine and complain and phone in sick and or go on stress leave,
fucking replace us all with robots, or lay us off and replace us with an immigrant for 15

 

[storm rider]

I strongly agree you should be paid for what your are worth.
I feel sorry for Tim Horton's employees making minimum, or close to minimum wages, and they work their asses off. But if those wages go up 20% or more, that is a huge kick to those private owners of those stores. Will their head office raise prices? Doubt it.

Not all business owners are "getting richer", many would be better off working for someone else,as they usually have company debts to pay, rent increases, utilities increasing.....

Even Timmies owners, some do well, others are financing their operations.

Reprinting an oldie, but so so true.

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for lunch and the bill for all ten comes to $100.

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men ate lunch in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball.

"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily lunch by $20.00." So lunch for the ten men would now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But what about the other six men? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to eat his lunch.

So the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% off).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% off).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% off).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% off).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% off).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% off).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to eat lunch for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare the amount they got off.

The sixth man said, "I only got $1 off out of the $20 while the tenth man got $10 off!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only got $1 off, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"

"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 off, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and told him they they were angry that he got so much off while they each got very little.

The next day the tenth man didn't show up for lunch, so the nine sat down and had their lunchs without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money amongst all of them for even half of the bill!

And that is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the largest benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start eating overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.

For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

Hmmmm..... perhaps you should have changed jobs 19 years ago?

As much as I know some of you don't like Storm Rider and his strong opinions, some of what he says is the truth. Alberta could support the civil service when it was booming. Money did grow on trees and there wasn't issues with expansion (as it was needed). But now they're entering year 4 of low oil prices. You can hold off a year or so for layoffs seeing if the downturn is temporary. This time it's not. This is not 2009.

So what do you do? If you continue the way they're going they'll have the largest per capita deficit and debt in the country. If you cut and axe everything well the citizens suffer. But the root cause of the problem is the tax system and how it's managed. You can't fund stable services in a economy where the revenue is prone to wild swings. You need to recreate the tax system and use resource revenues as the icing on the cake. Alberta needs a PST BUT..in boom times when there is a huge surplus citizens need to be "rebated" based on income & taxes paid. This way services are funded in tough times & in good times people get thousands back at the end of the year. The surplus gets returned to the people that funded it.

everyone wants to blame the ndp

its more of a world situation then local, price of oil and gas,
and that has nothing to do with ndp,
nobody wants our fucking oil, its dirty, and they can get it cheaper.
the writing is on the wall for the oil industry,, so many jurisdictions are banning the internal combustion engine, by 2030 2040 entire blocks of the world will be running electric cars.
just killed any mega projects and pipelines.

not the ndp,s fault.

were also pricing our self out of the market place,
we want forty bucks an hour plus rich benefits so we can just whine and complain and phone in sick and or go on stress leave,
fucking replace us all with robots, or lay us off and replace us with an immigrant for 15

Wow....just wow.....you have added nothing and at the same time completely dumbed down the coversation in general.Why dont you go back to CAF and proletize about feeling touchy and feely about prostitutes because you are trapped in a loveless marriage Jasper and at the same time how you lack the balls to getting a divorce.

Kind of hard I will say but I am sick of this milk-sop.

SR