Manitoba Provincial Election

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by Ozabald

Newfoundland no longer receives equalization.

Historically, per-capita, Newfoundland has received the most from equalisation payments, of all provinces.

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by thurmas

Results closer than pollsters had with popular vote 45 42. Had pcs had a more likeable leader they very well could have won it. To me the health promises by ndp were key. I hope they can get some transit improvements help with homelessness. I don't expect perfection.

Without question, the PC Government could have won the election with a better leader and campaign. I did not agree with spending $184 million to search the landfill, but putting it up on billboards was just tone-deaf and insensitive.

I think the change will be good for the province. Now Manitoba and Saskatchewan can debate as to which Premier has the most questionable past: Scott Moe (2 DUI charges, and killing a woman in an automobile accident by blowing through a stop sign), or Wab Kinew, who has a past that is well known.

[drew]

^ meh. I hope we can all get to the "what have you done for me lately" versus the "look what you did 20 years ago!" mentality.

[EdwardTH]

Originally Posted by BlackDog204

Without question, the PC Government could have won the election with a better leader and campaign. I did not agree with spending $184 million to search the landfill, but putting it up on billboards was just tone-deaf and insensitive.

I think the change will be good for the province. Now Manitoba and Saskatchewan can debate as to which Premier has the most questionable past: Scott Moe (2 DUI charges, and killing a woman in an automobile accident by blowing through a stop sign), or Wab Kinew, who has a past that is well known.

Yep, regardless of anyone's personal opinion on the landfill search, it's hard to campaign as the "tough on crime" party while also putting out ads specifically stating that you're not going to properly investigate a serial killer because it costs too much.

[EdwardTH]

People need to stop acting like being a have-not makes us some huge deadbeats because that’s just not accurate. Haves are provinces with above-average revenue per capita and have-nots are below average. Unless you expect the provincial gov’t to wave a magic wand and suddenly give us the massive resource riches that SK & AB have of course we’re gonna have lower numbers than they do. Being below-average because you don’t have the same resource gifts as other places, is not the same as being some hapless deadbeat who can’t pay your bills. But we’re all the same country so why would their resource dollars not help fund services around the country? That’s literally how all taxes work. You put all the money in a big pot and then you distribute it according to population, not according to who paid the most. Nobody gripes about “equalization” payments from Tuxedo to Elmwood, or from Toronto to Windsor.

[drew]

The equalization program is mostly funded thru personal federal income tax IIRC and if so it's not "costing" provinces a penny.

[wags_in_the_peg]

PC ran too much of a "far right" campaign, that what happens when Candace Bergen is behind some of it. I really think they need to appeal to the centrist voters, where traditional Liberals are. The Liberal party basically no longer exists with 1 seat, no leader, etc. I'm a Conservative supporter and definitely didn't agree with parts of that campaign

Lamont speech was one of real defeat, feel slightly bad for him, as he said he received great feedback on the debate but people dont always vote based on debate.

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by wags_in_the_peg

PC ran too much of a "far right" campaign, that what happens when Candace Bergen is behind some of it. I really think they need to appeal to the centrist voters, where traditional Liberals are. The Liberal party basically no longer exists with 1 seat, no leader, etc. I'm a Conservative supporter and definitely didn't agree with parts of that campaign

Lamont speech was one of real defeat, feel slightly bad for him, as he said he received great feedback on the debate but people dont always vote based on debate.

Hear you, long time con here but voted Liberal in protest over the dismal Stefanson!

People here have very short memories and will wish for a new govt. soon into the speNDP regime when their true incompetency starts to show!

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by BlackDog204

Without question, the PC Government could have won the election with a better leader and campaign. I did not agree with spending $184 million to search the landfill, but putting it up on billboards was just tone-deaf and insensitive.

I think the change will be good for the province. Now Manitoba and Saskatchewan can debate as to which Premier has the most questionable past: Scott Moe (2 DUI charges, and killing a woman in an automobile accident by blowing through a stop sign), or Wab Kinew, who has a past that is well known.

You nailed it, Stefanson and the Cons campaign was beyond terrible!

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by EdwardTH

People need to stop acting like being a have-not makes us some huge deadbeats because that’s just not accurate. Haves are provinces with above-average revenue per capita and have-nots are below average. Unless you expect the provincial gov’t to wave a magic wand and suddenly give us the massive resource riches that SK & AB have of course we’re gonna have lower numbers than they do. Being below-average because you don’t have the same resource gifts as other places, is not the same as being some hapless deadbeat who can’t pay your bills. But we’re all the same country so why would their resource dollars not help fund services around the country? That’s literally how all taxes work. You put all the money in a big pot and then you distribute it according to population, not according to who paid the most. Nobody gripes about “equalization” payments from Tuxedo to Elmwood, or from Toronto to Windsor.

Let me just put it this way, so that you may be able to emphasise with a province like Alberta.

Hypothetically, you and nine of your friends are required to contribute $50/month into a pool. The total amount of that pool is $500. As per agreement, friends who are struggling or having hardships can take money from the pool, until the pool itself reaches zero. This is done every month.

However, after years of contributing $50/month, and never being allowed to draw from the pool, while the same 3 or 4 friends habitually take more than they contribute to the pool in which you have never taken from, would eventually make anyone question why they continuously have to put in $50 while never being able to deduct from the pot.

If it were your friends or family doing this over a long period of time, it's human nature to become resentful at people who habitually take more than they contribute to the pool. Eventually one would question why they are contributing to a pool at all.

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by EdwardTH

Yep, regardless of anyone's personal opinion on the landfill search, it's hard to campaign as the "tough on crime" party while also putting out ads specifically stating that you're not going to properly investigate a serial killer because it costs too much.

It should be noted that it only cost $70 million dollars to sift through the entire Pickton property in Port Coquitlam, BC. Two dozen sets of women's remains were discovered. The landfill is much larger, and has many safety hazards which the pig farm did not.

Is there really a guarantee that both bodies will be recovered. In regards to the Serial killings in Vancouver 20 years ago, they called off the search after years of trying to recover as many as 60 bodies. I'm totally for recovering the remains of the two women, but not at any cost.

$184 million is too much, and could be put to better use for the living, who are struggling.

[Winnipegger]

Originally Posted by Ozabald

That’s quite the argument for equalization. And a province’s wealth has to do more than just oil and gas. Given the abundance of resources in MB and its geographical location in Canada, it should be a wealthy province; but it’s not. Why? What happened to the “Chicago of the North”?

Equalization makes a province lazy. Why bother making difficult choices with regards to spending and economic development when you can go cap and hand to Ottawa and receive a nice fat cheque.

What an uninformed take. Just because we have "resources", doesn't mean extracting those resources are worthwhile in the current global economic climate. Just because you have deposits of nickle or copper or lithium, it doesn't mean that mining them is profitable given the market price of the commodity and the costs associated with mining in northern Manitoba. If a company can extract lithium for $20/ton in South Africa and it costs $50/ton to extract in Manitoba, and the market price is expected to be $30/ton for the next 20 years, it's a no brainer as to where global corporations are going to set up extraction operations. Same thing goes for fresh water: there could be a fresh water shortage in the next 100 years, but doesn't mean Manitoba is missing out on some sort of economic boom despite having massive fresh water lakes.

You can't blame Manitobans or Manitoba governments for the prevailing prices for commodities that are dictated in a very global market, it's just beyond our control. Same thing goes for AB and SK: if oil prices fall and remain low, so too will investment and employment and royalties and taxes they get from their energy-based industries. Canada is a small open economy that is at the whims of the global market, and that's no person or organization's fault. To write of Manitobans as "lazy" because we aren't a "Chicago of the North" is stupid. Winnipeg was a mid-way shipping point in an pre-panama canal era where railways dominated transportation networks during a time when most goods in North America were sourced in North America. Things change, and most stuff we import is manufactured overseas and gets shipped to Vancouver or Montreal, and makes its way here by truck or train, but the versatile nature of highway networks means things can spread out more and be less reliant on less versatile rail networks.

As for equalization payments, you can't go "cap in hand" to Ottawa for a cheque. There is a defined formula established at the federal level that dictates who gets a payment and how much, it isn't negotiable.

People act like if only the Province or City could "elect someone with vision" that the entire economic context of this province could change. As if there is some lever on Broadway or Main street that some politician could pull that would just make the economy grow faster. News flash: there isn't. There is so much more nuance behind the economy and how political choices affect it. Not one single party, left, right, or centre, has a monopoly on "economic growth". Tax cuts have been proven to not stimulate the economy long term, and excessive government spending is also detrimental. What is proven to do the economy good though? A well educated/skilled labour force, easy access to global markets (transportation), and higher citizen satisfaction. These things are marginally and indirectly influenced by politicians, and so good governance involves trying to modify these parameters to allow the economy to grow better within the constraints of living in a small, isolated region subject to the effects of globalization.

Too many people put too much stock in what any one politician does or doesn't do, failing to realize the effects of their decisions on the economy at an aggregate level are typically pretty small. Yes, there may be a few one-off decisions that can have monumental impacts (flood way, free trade, tax cuts to bring in a mega business, improving transportation networks) but overall the every day impact is going to be marginal.

[Ozabald]

Originally Posted by Winnipegger

What an uninformed take. Just because we have "resources", doesn't mean extracting those resources are worthwhile in the current global economic climate. Just because you have deposits of nickle or copper or lithium, it doesn't mean that mining them is profitable given the market price of the commodity and the costs associated with mining in northern Manitoba. If a company can extract lithium for $20/ton in South Africa and it costs $50/ton to extract in Manitoba, and the market price is expected to be $30/ton for the next 20 years, it's a no brainer as to where global corporations are going to set up extraction operations. Same thing goes for fresh water: there could be a fresh water shortage in the next 100 years, but doesn't mean Manitoba is missing out on some sort of economic boom despite having massive fresh water lakes.

You can't blame Manitobans or Manitoba governments for the prevailing prices for commodities that are dictated in a very global market, it's just beyond our control. Same thing goes for AB and SK: if oil prices fall and remain low, so too will investment and employment and royalties and taxes they get from their energy-based industries. Canada is a small open economy that is at the whims of the global market, and that's no person or organization's fault. To write of Manitobans as "lazy" because we aren't a "Chicago of the North" is stupid. Winnipeg was a mid-way shipping point in an pre-panama canal era where railways dominated transportation networks during a time when most goods in North America were sourced in North America. Things change, and most stuff we import is manufactured overseas and gets shipped to Vancouver or Montreal, and makes its way here by truck or train, but the versatile nature of highway networks means things can spread out more and be less reliant on less versatile rail networks.

As for equalization payments, you can't go "cap in hand" to Ottawa for a cheque. There is a defined formula established at the federal level that dictates who gets a payment and how much, it isn't negotiable.

People act like if only the Province or City could "elect someone with vision" that the entire economic context of this province could change. As if there is some lever on Broadway or Main street that some politician could pull that would just make the economy grow faster. News flash: there isn't. There is so much more nuance behind the economy and how political choices affect it. Not one single party, left, right, or centre, has a monopoly on "economic growth". Tax cuts have been proven to not stimulate the economy long term, and excessive government spending is also detrimental. What is proven to do the economy good though? A well educated/skilled labour force, easy access to global markets (transportation), and higher citizen satisfaction. These things are marginally and indirectly influenced by politicians, and so good governance involves trying to modify these parameters to allow the economy to grow better within the constraints of living in a small, isolated region subject to the effects of globalization.

Too many people put too much stock in what any one politician does or doesn't do, failing to realize the effects of their decisions on the economy at an aggregate level are typically pretty small. Yes, there may be a few one-off decisions that can have monumental impacts (flood way, free trade, tax cuts to bring in a mega business, improving transportation networks) but overall the every day impact is going to be marginal.

The Panama Canal. Is that some historical folklore taught in Manitoba schools and it seems to be used as the excuse for Winnipeg's decline. Manitoba could be a transportation hub; but that's long been ceded to Alberta; particularly Calgary.

You may wish to re-read my comments. Did I call Manitobans lazy or even mention Manitoba - No! The comment is geared towards government of any have not province which do become lazy; knowing difficult decisions do not have to be made as there will be a pool of revenue from Ottawa; in Manitoba's case, $3.5B in FY 2023-24. Atlantic Canada is a case in point of how equalization and other programs have ended-up having a perverse impact. Newfoundland has finally shaken its dependence off equalization and the province is better for it. Manitoba and the Maritimes could do the same if they choose to make the hard decisions which may not be politically popular. It's telling you failed to mention two key resources where MB does well - hydro and agriculture. A question to ask is why MB is not leveraging its abundance of hydro power to attract industry?

[pspeid]

Originally Posted by Ozabald

A question to ask is why MB is not leveraging its abundance of hydro power to attract industry?

Answer:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manit...note-1.6981719

[Ozabald]

Originally Posted by pspeid

Answer:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manit...note-1.6981719

That's not encouraging.

Manitoba ranks 5th amongst provinces for Waterpower (ie: hydro) installed capacity at 5449 MW (which makes up 96% of MB's total electricity generation). The top-4 producing waterpower provinces are:

1. Quebec - 40853 MW (94%)
2. BC - 15955 MW (90%)
3. Ontario - 9161 MW (28%)
4. Newfoundland - 7618 MW (97%)

All figures from 2021. Source: waterpower.ca

[EdwardTH]

Originally Posted by BlackDog204

Let me just put it this way, so that you may be able to emphasise with a province like Alberta.

Hypothetically, you and nine of your friends are required to contribute $50/month into a pool. The total amount of that pool is $500. As per agreement, friends who are struggling or having hardships can take money from the pool, until the pool itself reaches zero. This is done every month.

However, after years of contributing $50/month, and never being allowed to draw from the pool, while the same 3 or 4 friends habitually take more than they contribute to the pool in which you have never taken from, would eventually make anyone question why they continuously have to put in $50 while never being able to deduct from the pot.

If it were your friends or family doing this over a long period of time, it's human nature to become resentful at people who habitually take more than they contribute to the pool. Eventually one would question why they are contributing to a pool at all.

Yeah, but that's still not really how it works. In this case the "pool" is federal tax revenues, and Alberta DOES get a large share of those revenues back, they just get a bit less than they put in, and have-not provinces get a bit more.

A better analogy would be: A group of 4 friends golf together every weekend. Green fees for the group are $200. 2 of the friends make great money and are very financially secure, thanks in large part to inheritances (ie - natural resources, not because they work harder or whatever). The other 2 friends work hard at important but underpaid jobs, let's say a transit driver and an EMS. They live paycheque-to-paycheque. The rich friends know the budget is tight for these two, and they enjoy their weekly round together and want it to continue, so they each agree to pay $60 and let the other guys pay $40.

Originally Posted by BlackDog204

It should be noted that it only cost $70 million dollars to sift through the entire Pickton property in Port Coquitlam, BC. Two dozen sets of women's remains were discovered. The landfill is much larger, and has many safety hazards which the pig farm did not.

Is there really a guarantee that both bodies will be recovered. In regards to the Serial killings in Vancouver 20 years ago, they called off the search after years of trying to recover as many as 60 bodies. I'm totally for recovering the remains of the two women, but not at any cost.

$184 million is too much, and could be put to better use for the living, who are struggling.

I'm not necessarily arguing that, just that it was stupid to put it on ads when they could have just left the issue alone.

[pspeid]

Originally Posted by EdwardTH

Yeah, but that's still not really how it works. In this case the "pool" is federal tax revenues, and Alberta DOES get a large share of those revenues back, they just get a bit less than they put in, and have-not provinces get a bit more.

A better analogy would be: A group of 4 friends golf together every weekend. Green fees for the group are $200. 2 of the friends make great money and are very financially secure, thanks in large part to inheritances (ie - natural resources, not because they work harder or whatever). The other 2 friends work hard at important but underpaid jobs, let's say a transit driver and an EMS. They live paycheque-to-paycheque. The rich friends know the budget is tight for these two, and they enjoy their weekly round together and want it to continue, so they each agree to pay $60 and let the other guys pay $40.

This is a good analogy, and I think a lot of Canadians feel this way. Unfortunately there's also a constituency who resents "their" money going to other provinces, no matter how needed it is or how much good it does.

For them I would suggest this analogy:

Guy buys a lottery ticket: "When I win, we ALL win. I'll share it with you guys".

Guy wins the lottery: " What? You want some of MY MONEY? Why don't you get a job?"

Wealth often inspires possessiveness, and great wealth even more so. The ticket buyer believes their good fortune was really a product of their virtue and industry, and the less fortunate members of the group are simply "lazy".

[Stormer]

Originally Posted by Ozabald

That's not encouraging.

Manitoba ranks 5th amongst provinces for Waterpower (ie: hydro) installed capacity at 5449 MW (which makes up 96% of MB's total electricity generation). The top-4 producing waterpower provinces are:

1. Quebec - 40853 MW (94%)
2. BC - 15955 MW (90%)
3. Ontario - 9161 MW (28%)
4. Newfoundland - 7618 MW (97%)

All figures from 2021. Source: waterpower.ca

This Hydro wealth needs to be part of the Equalization formula. It is becoming far more valuable than hydrocarbon wealth.

[blueandgoldguy]

Originally Posted by thurmas

I don't think I have ever seen a person so ill suited for politics as Stefanson she's not a strong campaigner and has zero people skills she's not the type who wants to shake hands kiss babies and shoot the breeze. she's much better suited as maybe a minister or campaign manager but not a leader.

She doesn't like dealing with the plebs.

[Ozabald]

Originally Posted by Stormer

This Hydro wealth needs to be part of the Equalization formula. It is becoming far more valuable than hydrocarbon wealth.

Agreed. The current equalization formula allows Quebec to exclude revenues from its hydro power. Not sure if that pertains as well to ON, BC and NL.