Alberta’s government seems to be sorely lacking in compassion
By Lethbridge Herald on August 30, 2025.
Editor,
Who among us would steal from their children’s piggy bank?
Is this an act that makes us, or our children better or wiser? Is it our pride that makes us brag that we are the richest resource province; yet we pay the lowest minimum wage to our coworkers and children?
Something is amiss in Alberta when we howl at the feds because we are required to help our less well-endowed cousins in other provinces.
What kind of religion is it that encourages NIMBY attitudes in our neighbours? Do we feel self-righteous huddled around our back yard barbecues wolfing down sirloins when we know there are many we banish from our lanes because they sleep in tents?
What kind of God is worshipped here, and what kind of Heaven do we expect to graduate to?
We Albertans have been known to cut taxes for the rich so we don’t have to show a huge surplus in our economy. Yet we insist there is no money to help other Canadians who have to boil drinking and wash water.
I personally have heard people brag about how our society has advanced from Charles Dicken’s days. Yet we hire people to harass the poor and hungry sleeping in our parks. Does it ease our conscience to hand them a plastic water bottle while we urge them to move on?
There used to be a statue in front of one of our hospitals showing Saint Micheal spearing a dragon. I wonder who that dragon was meant to represent?
Don Ryane
Lethbridge
12-11
One type of prominent religion in southern Alberta that, unfortunately, can “foster an ‘invisible hand’ of market logic that prioritizes corporate needs over individual well-being,” is capitalist Calvinism. Many of us raised in this right wing, corporate, capitalist culture have walked away from it. Some of us have joked that instead of a cross on the wall behind the pulpit, there should be a dollar sign.
great reply to a worthy letter
What has the true conservatives in my world so furious is the lack of compassion these Reformers and the idiots who support them show our children and grandchildren for the horrible financial mess they must face created by the Reformers. It hasn’t happened in Alaska or Norway and it wasn’t happening under Lougheed or Getty.
Danielle Smith got a standing ovation in Vermilion by mostly seniors we are told by promising to start kicking out our foreigners, Donald Trump style and promoting separation from Canada.
To prove how stupid she is, her and her education minister still believe that by removing books from libraries they are controlling pornography in schools, yet as our grandchildren point out they have cell phones and can access all the pornography they want anytime they want it and it’s a lot worse than anything you will find in any of those books. So are so stupid they are living in the past.
the old conservative adage of noblesse oblige was not perfect, but it sure was a much better perspective than the greed based approach of the neo-con and the neo-lib
Technology sure has changed, that’s for sure. For example, someone who was around in the 1950s would remember how you had a big TV set that you had to wait to warm up, so you could watch a program, and the image quality wasn’t great. My dad, who is 95, would have remembered that.
Even people, including those who were youngsters, and teenagers, back in the 1950s will tell you how they would talk about records they bought; such as for Hank Williams Sr., Elvis Presley, Jerry Lee Lewis, Chuck Berry, Carl Perkins, Connie Francis, or whomever. Now, there are devices that are so small, that can hold hundreds of songs. With the technology, such as smartphones and computers, kids can access anything, including music, and other things.
My dad, also remembered having an ice house on the farm, long ago. We don’t have that anymore.
The UCP sure are good at trying to fool people. Danielle Smith worked in the media, that’s why she sounds so convincing.
Now Danielle Smith wants to be a hero and replace our paper healthcare cards and waste a lot more of taxpayers money with plastic ones. Yet intelligent Albertans are questioning her motives. They don’t trust her not to include micro chips in these cards so you can tracked, do you?
There was an agenda item I read on a UCP AGM (don’t recall the year), whereby discussion would arise regarding re-issuing driver’s licences to include citizenship.
I suspect this rumbling over issuing new plastic healthcare cards has more to do with immigrants than tracking already insured Albertans, for the little good our provincial health care insurance currently does for us.
If one is concerned about “tracking”, we are constantly being surveilled every time we log onto the internet, use plastic to make a purchase, or carry a cell phone. sigh
This would open a whole new can of worms and they know it, or wouldn’t be doing it. They maybe able to track people who attend any NDP gathering or any other gatherings they maybe interested in. How do we know?
How do we know that the UCP aren’t recording anyone who opposes them at their one sided town halls, where the UCP pretends to listen to Albertans?
A perfect example of this is our divorced son who has custody of his children every other week. His ex-wife bought them cell phones so she could track what they were doing. When she found that they were having a lot more fun with him she tried to create problems for him, and his lawyer got it stopped and the tracking is no more.
while i am against tracking, that could already be done with our driver license. i agree fully that tracking is an issue, and our right to privacy has too long been usurped by the oligarchy to which we are increasingly beholden.
Of course the morons who support these Reformers won’t care they see nothings wrong with being cheated out of their money that’s how stupid they are, isn’t it?
In fact they defend their right to be screwed by these Reformers and no one is better at it than buckwheat. He’s their hero, isn’t he?
I used to know a senior (who has since passed away). He would have been around the same age as one of my uncles (who would be 97, if he were still around). He told me once that when he was a child in school the teacher told the Grade 1 class that one day there will be a camera up in the sky watching everything people do. The children laughed at their teacher. The person then said that what do we have now? This was in the 1990s. His teacher was right.
This isn’t just an Alberta problem. It is a global problem and disgrace.
The same trends we see here, where a few people are getting wealthier while everyone else is struggling to keep up, are happening all over the world.
The ultra rich are getting richer, and everyone else is getting poorer. It’s not a coincidence. It’s a fundamental part of the modern global economy that will enslave the vast majority of the population. The only thing that “might” stop it, is revolution.
You are absolutely right. And as long as you have ignorant people allowing it to happen you will always have this problem.
An 86 year man from Germany who was a former university professor certainly taught me a lot in 2003. He pointed out that 66% of all populations in the world are made up of easy to fool people and you can’t change them.
It’s how dictators become so powerful and why their leadership usually ends in bloody violence.
How else can you explain why rural Albertans continue to allow these Reformers to treat them like morons? While they have allowed this government to allow the oil industry to pollute their farmland with abandoned oil wells, and give them one of highest cost of living in Canada they can’t re-elect them fast enough and they believe every lie they feed them, where is the intelligence in that?
Blaming this on a particular provincial party in Alberta, ignores the elephant in the room.
Corporations prioritize year over year profit growth, leading to soaking people out of as much money as possible. For example, planned obsolescence, subscription only models without purchase options, unserviceable products, or outrageous prices for replacement parts, even when repair is an option. Governments often use similar tactics to increase their revenue from the middle class.
The ability of a single government to regulate these trends is very limited. A provincial government such as Albertas, has little power to influence these large scale corporate behaviors, and even a lone federal government faces significant challenges.
Increasing taxes on wealthy individuals in Canada would prompt them to relocate or utilize offshore accounts, if they aren’t doing so already. Similarly, if a federal government were to significantly raise taxes on corporations that make billions in profits, those businesses would likely leave Canada. This presents a challenge in ensuring that corporate profits contribute more to public welfare without discouraging businesses from operating within the country.
Those of us who had ties to the oil industry aren’t dumb enough to believe your comments.
How come Norway charges 78% taxes on their oil industry and still do, and Lougheed charged 35% on our oil production and 16% corporate taxes and there were no complaints.
Yet these fake conservatives, reformers , were dumb enough to destroy Lougheed’s oil royalties by 32% and corporate tax structure by 8% and put this province in financial ruin.
Lougheed’s energy minister Bill Dickie was a brother in-law of one of my uncles and I will never forget how disgusted our former conservative and social credit MLAs were with Klein and the fools who supported him.
This article proves how stupid they were:
“Royalties Down 32% Billions in Federal Revenue Lost”
I suggest you google it.
Oilmen have pointed out that there isn’t another oil rich area in the world that’s in the financial mess that Albertans are in thanks to these Reformers, and I certainly agree.
Using “dumb” to label people who disagree with you is dumb in of itself.
Your comparison to Lougheed’s time and Norway doesn’t work because it completely ignores how much things have changed.
Back in Lougheed’s day, his policies were implemented during a very unique time. The 1970s oil crisis gave resource-rich nations a huge advantage. The global economy wasn’t as connected then, and money didn’t move around as easily as it does today.
In Norway, the government pretty much owns and runs most of its oil industry through a state-owned company called Equinor. This means the government can tax profits at a much higher rate because they’re basically taxing themselves.
Those are just two examples of many that I could list, that show why constantly referencing Norway and Lougheed as a comparison to what’s occurring now, doesn’t make sense.
How is it changed when other oil rich areas including Newfoundland are receiving a lot more for their oil than Alberta is and why are we paying the highest prices for power, natural gas, property taxes, vehicle registration fees, vehicle insurance premiums, long term healthcare fees, driver license fees and liquor prices in Canada.
As a lawyer friend would say Ignoring the true facts doesn’t make anyone look very smart does it?
Making up stupid comments to try to convince yourself that we aren’t being screwed won’t impress anyone from the oil industry that I was involved with they know we are and what Alaska and Norway have accomplished proves it, whether you like it or not.
I have spent time in Alaska and Norway( I am of Norwegian decent,) on several occasions and talked to the people about what their oil wealth is doing for them and I know they are a lot better off than average Albertans.
Your arguments rely on fundamentally flawed comparisons and emotional appeals, rather than a detailed understanding of complex economic factors.
Rather than admit your perspective is at best incomplete, and at worst, completely flawed, you resort to personal attacks. It’s a sign that you have no desire for truth, but rather a stubborn commitment to a personal, deeply held narrative.
You dismiss objective facts and economic realities, choosing instead to double down on emotional arguments and flawed comparisons that feel correct to you, regardless of the evidence.
I have no desire for any further discussion with you.
One little thing that is different every oilman, lawyer, accountant, economist, banker, and former conservative and social credit MLA I have talked to over the years agrees with me.
You don’t think that Lougheed’s energy minister Bill Dickie, who was a brother in-law of one of my didn’t how badly Albertans are being screwed out of their money?
The American oilmen working in Alberta that I was involved with called Albertans the dumbest people on the planet for allowing it to happen, they knew what it will do to us.
How do you explain why every man, woman, and child in Alaska has received $52,000. In total annual oil dividend cheques since 1982 while Albertans got a pathetic $1,000. and Alaska still has $80 billion in their Savings Account for their children’s future. Yet Alberta produces twice as much oil as Alaska and Norway together. That’s how stupid Albertans are for allowing it to happen and all the excuses in the world can’t change it, can they?
I said I wasn’t going to discuss this any further with you, but I can’t resist pointing out yet another of your flawed comparisons.
Your comparison to the Alaska Permanent Fund, is a significant oversimplification of a highly complex economic issue. While Alaska does have a dividend program, and Alberta does not, this isn’t proof that Albertans are “dumb” or that the province’s resource management is a failure. There are fundamental differences between the two regions that you are ignoring.
First, the Alaska Permanent Fund is not a simple “one-to-one” comparison. The fund was created with the specific goal of converting a non-renewable resource into a perpetual financial asset for future generations. It’s a savings account. The dividend checks are only one part of a political choice that has its own trade-offs. For example, Alaska has one of the highest state-level sales tax rates in the U.S. and, due to its low population, the costs of governance per person are incredibly high. The state has faced a budget crisis for years, and the dividend program has been a constant source of political conflict. The system has its critics, who argue that the dividend payments have discouraged the development of other forms of taxation and a more diversified economy.
Second, the scale and nature of the two oil industries are vastly different. Alberta has a much larger and more complex oil and gas industry than Alaska. A significant portion of Alberta’s production comes from the oil sands, which requires enormous upfront capital investment and has higher operating costs compared to conventional oil in Alaska’s North Slope. Alberta’s royalty structure is designed to balance the province’s revenue needs with these high costs of production and is frequently adjusted to reflect changing economic conditions and technological advancements. A high royalty rate on a very high-cost industry could easily make projects financially unviable, leading to a loss of jobs and investment. This is the same dilemma that Lougheed’s policies also had to deal with, which is why the policies of the 1970s, during a global supply shock, cannot be simply replicated today.
Third, you must consider the role of royalties in the overall economy. While royalty revenue is a big part of Alberta’s budget, it’s not the only source of income. Unlike Alaska, Alberta’s government funds a broad range of public services, including healthcare, education, and infrastructure, which are far more extensive than those provided by the Alaskan state government. The revenue from oil royalties is used to pay for these services, and the cost of providing them is a major factor in the province’s financial situation. You cannot look at the “royalty rate” in isolation without considering what that revenue is used for. The argument isn’t about whether “we are being screwed,” but rather about how to best use a finite resource to benefit the population, and there are many different approaches.
Finally, relying on personal anecdotes and name calling is not a substitute for a reasoned economic analysis. While your conversations with various professionals are interesting, they are not verifiable data. The fact that different experts have different opinions is a testament to the complexity of the issue. To claim that a consensus exists among them, and that anyone who disagrees is “dumb,” is inaccurate. The reality is that there are many factors at play—global oil prices, market access, regulatory environments, and the costs of production.
Oil revenues in Alberta are so bad, because of these issues. In the early 1990s, the Alberta PCs lost Alberta $575 billion, after they permanently altered Peter Lougheed’s excellent oil royalty rate structure. In the early 1990s, the Alberta PCs gave away Alberta’s oil and most of the subsequent profits to foreign owned entities, leaving Alberta with crumbs. In the early 1990s, the Alberta PCs failed to properly come after oil companies in Alberta to remediate their messes, leaving Albertans with a mammoth bill of $260 billion to deal with this. The Alberta PCs blew $35 billion on a bitumen upgrader debacle.
The UCP blew well over $7 billion on a pipeline bet gone bad, including the still missing billions of dollars on loan guarantees. The UCP blew money on grants to the petrochemical industry in Alberta, including giving a $408 million grant to a pipeline company which never used the money for any meaningful purpose. The UCP blew billions of dollars trying to prop up the Alberta PCs $35 billion bitumen upgrader debacle. The UCP blew $20 billion on the R-Star debacle. The UCP lost Alberta hundreds of millions of dollars by forsaking collecting property taxes from the oil companies in Alberta, and now municipalities in Alberta must charge increased municipal property taxes. First Nations communities in northern Alberta are suing the UCP for their negligence with the tailings pond leaks.
In 2005, Peter Lougheed took a helicopter ride over Fort McMurray, and he said that the oil sands wasn’t being developed in a responsible manner. He was right.
This is not much of a legacy, is it?
Peter Lougheed was a great premier, and he had oil industry experience, prior to becoming a politician, so he knew that oil booms would not be around for an eternity.
excellent points. norway went as smart a route as there has been: basically. they maintained a majority ownership of all oil projects. dirtball sleazes that aligned with the king dirtball sleaze klein (pardon the name calling, but this is more printable than what i would say in conversation) created a convoluted system that was rigged to rob the public and ensure maximum theft of our resources.
I agree with you. You certainly know what you are talking about.
https://energynow.ca/2020/08/a-575-billion-missed-opportunity-haunts-canadas-oil-heartland/?amp
The Norwegian government created their wealth fund by emulating what Peter Lougheed did, to create the Heritage Savings Trust Fund.
Read my post about Norway.
The Norwegian government copied what Peter Lougheed did. Now, Norway has $1.2 trillion. We don’t, and I explained why.
the reference to norway is that alberta once had an approach that was closer to theirs, and then came the likes of raaaaalph.
i hate to look at us as mere consumers; however, and as much as i dislike our crony, oligarchical, monopolistic house of cards monetary system, we have a lot of power as consumers – moreso than as voters.
it is a simple reality: what we choose to buy outside of our needs we are buying into, supporting; what we do not buy outside of our needs we oppose. this applies to foods and products that are luxuries and more about ego and vanity. in a sentence, do not buy anything one does not absolutely need if it is a price gouge, comes from the abuse of people and other sentient creatures, is unsustainable and undermines the broader good and health of our planet. each of us has at least that much power, and it is significant.
Focusing on our power as consumers is a compelling way to reclaim some control. Spending habits are a form of silent protest or support.
I agree that it’s a significant power, but do you think it’s enough to reverse the trends I mentioned? For example, would the corporations not simply increase the gouging on the products and services we absolutely need?
you pose important concerns. it would not surprise that prices of needs might rise in such a scenario. marketing is now so insidiously sublime that consumers will have their pockets picked such that most will ever be low on spare change.
however, most of our energy consumption is due to wants, and energy consumption is a driver of our unsustainable approaches. thus, by forgoing more of our wants we would surely have a healthier, thriving living planet. given that govts are foremost concerned about sustaining our economy, any real and immediate action toward environmental sustainability will need to come from the consumer.
unfortunately, most of us prefer to fulfill wants to maximum excess, regardless of how choices adversely impact the planet. in fact, most will take on debt in their pursuit of wants.
thanks to your query, i must acknowledge that whatever potential power the consumer has is made moot because so few are willing to forgo wants based on compassion and social conscience. rather, most draw the line only where their access to cash and credit permit. while corps and the oligarchy have too much power, it seems fair to say the consumer poses more of a threat to the planet than the corps.