And the election is called!
The NDP called the election. 27 days left until the big day.
I find myself unsure of where I will personally put my voting power. There's no such thing as a perfect party, a perfect leader, a perfect MLA.
I've only got 4 options in my riding:
First, Bill 6. That was the big first move on the NDP part. They received a HUGE backlash from the farming community for not actually communicating and talking with them extensively first. The NDP acted like authoritarian parents who "know what's best" and made changes. Except that's not the government's role. The government is supposed to represent the people, not make rules for the people without properly consulting them. It apparently took 2 years of consultation to really get things fleshed out after they announced the Bill, and most on both sides are mostly okay with everything. There are still issues with how this information is getting to farmers. The government decided to put everything online. Only in English. So, these farmers are just supposed to know to go online to get all of the information--even if they're Amish or Mennonite (um, no internet! little English!). It's just one example of this NDP government having a goal, being determined to accomplish it, yet not think about the bigger picture consequences. One might say that their first attempt at governing explains part of why they messed up with this so much, but they really didn't learn.
They still insisted on going ahead with the Carbon Tax and the extensive minimum wage increase--during a recession. Has the Carbon Tax improved our habits and the environment at all?? Not as far as I can tell. What it's done is increased inflation and allowed the government to use our tax dollars for what they decided to do with it. Which, to be fair, was good stuff, but they did it from my money and your money. Let's not pretend this is actually about the environment and the climate when it's really just a way to tax everybody to be able to fund their pet projects, money that really could have done elsewhere given the debt, recession...
As for the minimum wage increase, it made a lot of businesses struggle even more. And many workers felt the unfairness of it. Here's an example of a young family member: She started at minimum wage at a restaurant before the NDP came in. She worked hard, earned a raise, then another. And then the minimum wage went up and she wasn't making any more money than the newbies who had to start out at the base wage. And not only that, she became another minimum wage statistic. I don't remember the full details, but after the first or second minimum wage hike, she was basically told that although she was an excellent worker, she would not be able to be given the raise she normally would have received because the restaurant (a chain, btw, not some independent thing) was struggling after having to give even all the newbies wage increases. This restaurant had to cut back on staff to try to stay afloat. It's still struggling. Plenty of economists will say that you don't raise minimum wage that quickly, and when you do raise the minimum wage, you definitely don't raise it significantly during a recession. Again, the NDP's ideology comes first. Regardless of the bigger picture.
The bigger picture is this:
Before the minimum wage hike, the percentage of people actually getting minimum wage in the province was very low. It's still really low. The reality is that this wage increase is not making some marked change in poverty in the province. Here's one example: from April 2014-March 2015, the percentage of employees in the province on minimum wage was 2.2% (according to this). That's it: 2.2%. (Meanwhile, poverty level was at about 10%, most of which are AboAbout half of those workers were youth. Only 1.5% of those minimum wage workers were single parents with at least one child at home. That means 0.03% of workers at that time were single parents trying to live off minimum wage.
Alberta's poverty rate is the 2nd lowest in the country (after the Yukon according to this). Minimum wage isn't actually the cause of poverty and isn't the most effective means of counteracting poverty. The goal shouldn't be for people to live off minimum wage; the goal should be to have programs and means in place to go beyond minimum wage work or require businesses to provide fair compensation after a minimum period of time working somewhere. But, let's remember, this is the NDP. The most socialist of all the big parties. Lots of decisions made over the past years have been to bring more equality into wages. Or, at least, to not let those who are making more on government dime be able to make more, not even to counteract inflation. Alberta's inflation rate was the highest in the country last October. (See here.) From what I can tell, it has stayed pretty consistently high around the 3% rate for the past few years. I suspect part of that rate is due to the minimum wage increase, as well as the carbon tax, although I haven't found any articles to defend these suspicions.
Raising minimum wage now means there are more workers receiving minimum wage. 6.4% as of last March. This is a good thing? Really? How many of those people are now minimum wage because they'd earned a raise that basically got absorbed into the wage hike? How long will it be until they can get a raise and go beyond minimum wage?
I've gone off on a bit of a tangent. It wasn't my original intention to go on about why I'm not voting NDP, although these are starting points. I'm not saying everything the NDP has done is wrong, I'm just saying I see too many decisions in the past 4 years done out of ideology and goals without thinking about the bigger picture and what the people actually want. This is still a democracy.
Back to my original point of not being sure what to do.
I thought I would be voting UCP. Even though I really dislike Jason Kenney. I was very dismayed when he won the leadership.
And yet, I've personally met the UCP candidate in my riding and I do like her and think she would bring some valuable things to the plate because of her background. But she kind of represents Kenney. And what he says he'll do. And the more I hear, the less I'm in agreement with the UCP.
That leaves me with Liberal and Alberta. I had somewhat considered voting Liberal, went to have a look at their page and saw as the first thing David Kahn's ridiculous outrage at the NDP not insisting that seclusion rooms be banned immediately. Again, someone not thinking of the bigger picture: these schools and teachers and administrators currently using seclusion rooms (usually) out of a need for safety for themselves or other students are supposed to do what, exactly, instead? New policies, new education need to be put in place for the sake of all involved. The whole reason seclusion rooms exist and are used is because they don't know of a better way to deal with certain behaviours. If you ban seclusion rooms right away, then you're very likely setting up scenarios where staff will get hurt, children will get pinned down and hurt, other children may get hurt... And there's also the reality that the Liberals are very much an "only public education" kind of party, and while they won't get rid of other options, they really don't support them. How a party looks at education is huge to me, although if that were the only issue and the rest looked really good, I'd probably be okay with them.
The Alberta Party is interesting. It's different. It's more centrist--and strives to be so. I have to say I kind of like the look of them. Mandel is a business guy. Seems to me Edmonton was pretty happy with him as mayor and the bulk of the decision he made. He's got an understanding of bigger picture things--which is perhaps why he's on my acceptable list. Yes, there was the issue with filing things late, but dang, I'm guilty of that myself and therefore can't hold that against him. (And to be banned from running for 5 years? Oy. Seems like overkill.) He's not looking to completely get rid of the Carbon Tax, but does want to get rid of a good chunk of it. Again, centrist. Not having us flip flop just because we'd be getting rid of a government we didn't like. And, what a concept (sarcasm intended): use funds from the Carbon Tax to offset the debt, NOT to fund new programs or jobs.
So, I guess that's where I'm leaning at the moment. Lots to learn in the next few weeks. If you have things to share about any of the parties, I'm all ears (as long as it's in respectful language!).
I find myself unsure of where I will personally put my voting power. There's no such thing as a perfect party, a perfect leader, a perfect MLA.
I've only got 4 options in my riding:
- NDP
- UCP
- Liberal Party
- Alberta Party
First, Bill 6. That was the big first move on the NDP part. They received a HUGE backlash from the farming community for not actually communicating and talking with them extensively first. The NDP acted like authoritarian parents who "know what's best" and made changes. Except that's not the government's role. The government is supposed to represent the people, not make rules for the people without properly consulting them. It apparently took 2 years of consultation to really get things fleshed out after they announced the Bill, and most on both sides are mostly okay with everything. There are still issues with how this information is getting to farmers. The government decided to put everything online. Only in English. So, these farmers are just supposed to know to go online to get all of the information--even if they're Amish or Mennonite (um, no internet! little English!). It's just one example of this NDP government having a goal, being determined to accomplish it, yet not think about the bigger picture consequences. One might say that their first attempt at governing explains part of why they messed up with this so much, but they really didn't learn.
They still insisted on going ahead with the Carbon Tax and the extensive minimum wage increase--during a recession. Has the Carbon Tax improved our habits and the environment at all?? Not as far as I can tell. What it's done is increased inflation and allowed the government to use our tax dollars for what they decided to do with it. Which, to be fair, was good stuff, but they did it from my money and your money. Let's not pretend this is actually about the environment and the climate when it's really just a way to tax everybody to be able to fund their pet projects, money that really could have done elsewhere given the debt, recession...
As for the minimum wage increase, it made a lot of businesses struggle even more. And many workers felt the unfairness of it. Here's an example of a young family member: She started at minimum wage at a restaurant before the NDP came in. She worked hard, earned a raise, then another. And then the minimum wage went up and she wasn't making any more money than the newbies who had to start out at the base wage. And not only that, she became another minimum wage statistic. I don't remember the full details, but after the first or second minimum wage hike, she was basically told that although she was an excellent worker, she would not be able to be given the raise she normally would have received because the restaurant (a chain, btw, not some independent thing) was struggling after having to give even all the newbies wage increases. This restaurant had to cut back on staff to try to stay afloat. It's still struggling. Plenty of economists will say that you don't raise minimum wage that quickly, and when you do raise the minimum wage, you definitely don't raise it significantly during a recession. Again, the NDP's ideology comes first. Regardless of the bigger picture.
The bigger picture is this:
Before the minimum wage hike, the percentage of people actually getting minimum wage in the province was very low. It's still really low. The reality is that this wage increase is not making some marked change in poverty in the province. Here's one example: from April 2014-March 2015, the percentage of employees in the province on minimum wage was 2.2% (according to this). That's it: 2.2%. (Meanwhile, poverty level was at about 10%, most of which are AboAbout half of those workers were youth. Only 1.5% of those minimum wage workers were single parents with at least one child at home. That means 0.03% of workers at that time were single parents trying to live off minimum wage.
Alberta's poverty rate is the 2nd lowest in the country (after the Yukon according to this). Minimum wage isn't actually the cause of poverty and isn't the most effective means of counteracting poverty. The goal shouldn't be for people to live off minimum wage; the goal should be to have programs and means in place to go beyond minimum wage work or require businesses to provide fair compensation after a minimum period of time working somewhere. But, let's remember, this is the NDP. The most socialist of all the big parties. Lots of decisions made over the past years have been to bring more equality into wages. Or, at least, to not let those who are making more on government dime be able to make more, not even to counteract inflation. Alberta's inflation rate was the highest in the country last October. (See here.) From what I can tell, it has stayed pretty consistently high around the 3% rate for the past few years. I suspect part of that rate is due to the minimum wage increase, as well as the carbon tax, although I haven't found any articles to defend these suspicions.
Raising minimum wage now means there are more workers receiving minimum wage. 6.4% as of last March. This is a good thing? Really? How many of those people are now minimum wage because they'd earned a raise that basically got absorbed into the wage hike? How long will it be until they can get a raise and go beyond minimum wage?
I've gone off on a bit of a tangent. It wasn't my original intention to go on about why I'm not voting NDP, although these are starting points. I'm not saying everything the NDP has done is wrong, I'm just saying I see too many decisions in the past 4 years done out of ideology and goals without thinking about the bigger picture and what the people actually want. This is still a democracy.
Back to my original point of not being sure what to do.
I thought I would be voting UCP. Even though I really dislike Jason Kenney. I was very dismayed when he won the leadership.
And yet, I've personally met the UCP candidate in my riding and I do like her and think she would bring some valuable things to the plate because of her background. But she kind of represents Kenney. And what he says he'll do. And the more I hear, the less I'm in agreement with the UCP.
That leaves me with Liberal and Alberta. I had somewhat considered voting Liberal, went to have a look at their page and saw as the first thing David Kahn's ridiculous outrage at the NDP not insisting that seclusion rooms be banned immediately. Again, someone not thinking of the bigger picture: these schools and teachers and administrators currently using seclusion rooms (usually) out of a need for safety for themselves or other students are supposed to do what, exactly, instead? New policies, new education need to be put in place for the sake of all involved. The whole reason seclusion rooms exist and are used is because they don't know of a better way to deal with certain behaviours. If you ban seclusion rooms right away, then you're very likely setting up scenarios where staff will get hurt, children will get pinned down and hurt, other children may get hurt... And there's also the reality that the Liberals are very much an "only public education" kind of party, and while they won't get rid of other options, they really don't support them. How a party looks at education is huge to me, although if that were the only issue and the rest looked really good, I'd probably be okay with them.
The Alberta Party is interesting. It's different. It's more centrist--and strives to be so. I have to say I kind of like the look of them. Mandel is a business guy. Seems to me Edmonton was pretty happy with him as mayor and the bulk of the decision he made. He's got an understanding of bigger picture things--which is perhaps why he's on my acceptable list. Yes, there was the issue with filing things late, but dang, I'm guilty of that myself and therefore can't hold that against him. (And to be banned from running for 5 years? Oy. Seems like overkill.) He's not looking to completely get rid of the Carbon Tax, but does want to get rid of a good chunk of it. Again, centrist. Not having us flip flop just because we'd be getting rid of a government we didn't like. And, what a concept (sarcasm intended): use funds from the Carbon Tax to offset the debt, NOT to fund new programs or jobs.
So, I guess that's where I'm leaning at the moment. Lots to learn in the next few weeks. If you have things to share about any of the parties, I'm all ears (as long as it's in respectful language!).
Comments
Post a Comment