• kent_eh
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why?

    So they can gut the fund in a few years and send out the next iteration of “Ralph Bucks” when they need a boost in the polls?

    • grteOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 year ago

      So they can invest Alberta pension dollars heavily into O and G companies rather than the more balanced approach CPP goes for.

    • Windex007@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Seems fitting that “whoopsie babies” conceived after a night funded by cashing Ralph bucks are now able to vote.

      You know you’re getting old when you bring up policy LITERALLY a lifetime ago.

      • kent_eh
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You know you’re getting old when you bring up policy LITERALLY a lifetime ago.

        Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it…

        • Windex007@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I mean, the context was that we had just finished becoming the first and only debt free province in the country (or state), we had built a Norwegian style heritage fund, and had a large budget surplus. In that moment, and as long as Klein was the premiere, the financial health of this province was on an absolutely incredible track. Again, think Norway.

          Post-Klein, the PCs happily plunged us back into debt, and then re-wrote the laws governing the heritage fund so they could plunder it.

          It’s so bizarre to me that anyone would frame Ralph bucks as trying to buy political clout. There was essentially none left to buy, the PCs already had it all.

          I recall visiting the legislature that year. The PCs majority was so huge they had to re-arrange how the MLAs sat because it was never really conceived in the building design that there would be such a lop-sided representation.

          Like, there are a ton of reasons to roast the UCP, they bear no resemblance to the Klein PCs. There are also a ton of reasons to roast the Klein PCs… but the idea that they were trying to buy votes is a extremely bad take.

          I think you’re right that if you don’t remember history, you’re doomed to repeat it, but I think every so often we actually need to validate that the history hat we “think” we remember is the history that “actually was”, and I’m concerned about the radical disconnect between the two.