DougB
Senior Member
Barely and during a downcycle for the SK economy
|
|
|
Calgary & Alberta Economy
- Thread starter Oddball
- Start date
darwink
Senior Member
Yeah.
Things like this are irritants in every federal state. Impossible to find a perfect way to do it. I doubt Alberta would be happy if the feds started dictating natural resource policy to Quebec.
You can play around with equalization here: https://financesofthenation.ca/equalization/ , even play around with changing electricity prices.
DougB
Senior Member
Solution would be some combination of:
- reducing federal taxes and allowing the provinces to raise their taxes to compensate, with the Feds cutting per capita transfers by the same dollar total
- something similar to Australia that sets a floor on the percentage of federal receipts collected in a province that must be transferred back or spent in that province
darwink
Senior Member
I don’t think the two points you raise are compatible in the Canadian context as the second necessitates more federal spending while the first necessitates less. Since federal receipts in Canada includes EI, OAS, GIS different demographics can swing the results and do. In Australia big states vary by 20% max while Western Australia is doing its own thing. Australia has federal equivalents to Alberta Works (welfare) and AISH (disability pension).
In Australia ~80% of government revenue is federal. In Canada, it is in the low 40s. Canada used to be more like Australia, in the 1940s, and proposed being exactly like it in the late 30s.
You might not realize that the Australian system may as a sound bite sound better to you, but it was rejected in Canada as being even more generous to have not provinces. The floor you talk about is a backstop to very low payments to Western Australia.
I have the feeling you would like the very high floor for rich provinces (in Australia 75% of GST revenues and importantly only GST revenues) but not the restrictions of Australia (one GST rate imposed nationwide with no choices for higher, lower, or no state/provincial GST).
In Australia the system results in HUGE differences in grants between areas, their equalization system. Tasmania’s transfer of GST revenue per capita is more than 240% of Western Australia’s, even after the floor. South Australia and Queensland, 190%.
I think it is a ‘hear a bit, assume grass is much greener’. Despite what is contemporary Canadian discourse, Canada’s system was set up to limit benefits while ensuring a political crisis didn’t reemerge of needing to alleviate the symptoms of depression level poverty in less well off provinces (and the extremely less well off new province of Newfoundland). Australia’s system is much more generous, which at least partially accounts for less variation between the states GDP per capita wise.
DougB
Senior Member
I am thinking that the floor would also be a de facto ceiling on payments to allegedly have not provinces. In Canada, for example, keeping 80% of federal receipts in Alberta would been lowering federal spending in Quebec.
I don't see how the ability of individual provinces/states to raise their own revenue is relevant.
I don't see how the ability of individual provinces/states to raise their own revenue is relevant.
darwink
Senior Member
Unfortuantely, Alberta doesn't have a dry dock to build new ice breakers at, but Quebec does. Doing so widely would also be horrendously inefficient. Do we want to fire New Brunswickers at New Brunswick wages and hire Albertans at Alberta wages to do the same job? Their pay would need to go up.
Since OAS and GIS are included, it would also cause death spirals. As the population aged, the feds would have to pull back other spending, direct and indirect, leading the province to get poorer, faster, which would accelerate everything even more. You'd end up violating the initial goal: saving money by not having people from poor places moving on mass to rich places to receive substantially better services. Imagine if cancer care was just way way better in Alberta and Ontario and BC. Like live 2 years more on average better. Would people not move? The rich province ends up paying more to care for new residents than they would have if equalization had just continued to exist.
Also, the results could be: change very little besides moving where military bases are. I doubt that would make people too happy.
In the end, Quebec isn't the big recipient. If your motivation is bad Quebec, just realize Manitoba will take a bigger hit, and the Atlantic the most.
Just noticed this recently opened vertical faming facility in Calgary. Timing is perfect for this, I hope it goes well for them.
www.calgaryeconomicdevelopment.com
Calgary’s agtech scene grows with $52M GoodLeaf Farms investment | Calgary Economic
Agtech is emerging as a sector of limitless opportunities in Calgary. One of the largest vertical farm companies in Canada, GoodLeaf Farms, recently announced the opening of its $52 million facility in the Calgary region.
www.calgaryeconomicdevelopment.com
AJX
Active Member
There’s another local vertical farm in the SE. Deep Water Farms.
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
This will be important to track in a tariff world.
Calgary is the hottest place in Alberta to make a deal, according to year-end findings from the Canadian Venture Capital and Private Equity Association (CVCA).
New numbers released from the association showed that of the 84 deals representing $698 million, 63 of those and $630 million were for Calgary firms.
“It’s huge, right? We saw 100 million more than last year, which is fantastic. I think you’re going to see even more of that,” said Brad Parry, CEO of Calgary Economic Development.
“What’s really interesting for me is that Calgary had one less deal in Vancouver last year. We did 63 deals, Vancouver only did 64.
Legal software firm Clio was the majority of Vancouver’s $2.28 billion in investment during the year, at $1.24 billion. Calgary’s largest deal by comparison was a $100 million investment by China’s Tencent into NEO Financial.
That trend of seeing more funding flow to Calgary startups was in contrast to the national trend, as noted by CVCA in their report.
livewirecalgary.com
Calgary is the hottest place in Alberta to make a deal, according to year-end findings from the Canadian Venture Capital and Private Equity Association (CVCA).
New numbers released from the association showed that of the 84 deals representing $698 million, 63 of those and $630 million were for Calgary firms.
“It’s huge, right? We saw 100 million more than last year, which is fantastic. I think you’re going to see even more of that,” said Brad Parry, CEO of Calgary Economic Development.
“What’s really interesting for me is that Calgary had one less deal in Vancouver last year. We did 63 deals, Vancouver only did 64.
Legal software firm Clio was the majority of Vancouver’s $2.28 billion in investment during the year, at $1.24 billion. Calgary’s largest deal by comparison was a $100 million investment by China’s Tencent into NEO Financial.
That trend of seeing more funding flow to Calgary startups was in contrast to the national trend, as noted by CVCA in their report.
Calgary saw major growth in venture capital deals in 2024 - LiveWire Calgary
Calgary is the hottest place in Alberta to make a venture capital deal, according to 2024 year end findings from the CVCA.
livewirecalgary.com
Must be a slow news day. Calgary has taken the vast majority of Alberta’s venture capital money for years.
Still good to see it hasn’t slowed.
Still good to see it hasn’t slowed.
Rollerstud98
Active Member
Big news for Rocky View County.
discoverairdrie.com
Rocky View County secures $7B Prairie Economic Gateway deal
Rocky View County and the City of Calgary have approved the Prairie Economic Gateway agreement, projected to generate more than $7 billion in economic activity and create over 30,000 jobs across the region in the next 10 to 12 years. Rocky View County Council formally approved the agreement on...
discoverairdrie.com
Canada wants new oil pipelines to avoid Trump tariffs; nobody wants to build them
Nothing that we probably don't already know.
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
I mean the government does own a pipeline company... haha. Or wait they just own the pipeline.
Last edited:
darwink
Senior Member
They own the company.
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
Well hell, what are we waiting for? Hold on to that thing and lets take care of business.