darwink
Senior Member
I've posted on the other one now too.
|
|
|
- Thread starter Surrealplaces
- Start date
Cowtown
Senior Member
Not that I love the NDP, but it's more and more looking like a vote for them. The latest comment about the Cancer centre being a fancy box makes me wonder if the UCP has any clue about what's going on these days.
darwink
Senior Member
There does seem to be a lack of understanding that infrastructure to do advanced thing costs a lot, and that infrastructure designed to last 50 years costs a lot. And that staff aren't selfless warrior monks who will live on salaries far below the private sector.
The Toronto park stairs problem writ large. http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/toront...-cost-more-than-10k-city-councillor-1.3523946
The Toronto park stairs problem writ large. http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/toront...-cost-more-than-10k-city-councillor-1.3523946
Oddball
Senior Member
And yet they get full defined benefit pensions and had their jobs explicitly protected by the government in the last downturn. It sounds to me like there's a risk reward trade off to be had when it comes to their compensation. They didn't face the same risks, they don't deserve the same rewards.
darwink
Senior Member
Yeah, and they are already paid less. "In 2013, private sector average weekly earnings in Alberta were 26% higher than the national private sector average. In provincial public administration, average earnings in Alberta were 12% above the national average for provincial public administration employees"
And contribute 16% of their before tax income to pensions.
So yeah, there is a risk reward thing. But the average provincial public sector worker in this province already had a number of years of 0% while the economy was growing (due to government revenue/economic growth mismatch from earlier this decade), and is looking at 2-3 more years of zeros.
Is it better? Really depends on the stage of your life - being forced to save really takes a big knock out of take home during years of household formation (mortgages, kids, student loans), but pays off a bit in the end. Certainly I would rather RRSP with match - can end up with a better result investing less since don't have to support those that only contributed 4% decades ago (which no government can undo). Not having a threat of job loss does have value.
A huge chunk of provincial spending is for front line compensation for jobs that don't scale at all.
Just for information, starting in 2014-15 the province started reporting its full time equivalents including all of their delegated staff, but not counting doctors. Here are the tables, the first one is Prentice's budget that was never past, and you can see things like how the government has hired 1,805 more teachers:
And contribute 16% of their before tax income to pensions.
So yeah, there is a risk reward thing. But the average provincial public sector worker in this province already had a number of years of 0% while the economy was growing (due to government revenue/economic growth mismatch from earlier this decade), and is looking at 2-3 more years of zeros.
Is it better? Really depends on the stage of your life - being forced to save really takes a big knock out of take home during years of household formation (mortgages, kids, student loans), but pays off a bit in the end. Certainly I would rather RRSP with match - can end up with a better result investing less since don't have to support those that only contributed 4% decades ago (which no government can undo). Not having a threat of job loss does have value.
A huge chunk of provincial spending is for front line compensation for jobs that don't scale at all.
Just for information, starting in 2014-15 the province started reporting its full time equivalents including all of their delegated staff, but not counting doctors. Here are the tables, the first one is Prentice's budget that was never past, and you can see things like how the government has hired 1,805 more teachers:
Attachments
MichaelS
Senior Member
While the method/style of raising the issue could certainly use improvement, my understanding is the MLA was simply questioning why the low-bid for the project wasn't chosen, as opposed to the accepted bid that was approximately $200 million higher. I am not sure if that is true, but it is a valid question to ask. It probably has a valid answer as well, being that price wasn't the only criteria when selecting the proponent. I would like to see that conversation take place though, rather than what has taken place.
That's my understanding also. I haven't read into all the details, but it seems like the way the question was asked was an issue. It definitely can't hurt to question it, if it's $200 million higher than the next bid.
Silence&Motion
Senior Member
RE: LGBT issues, prior to moving to this city I always figured Calgary's reputation as a redneck city was pure fiction. I trusted the demographics over the stereotypes: ethnically diverse, wealthy, and educated. This is a recipe for a socially progressive city.
For the most part, that is true. However, I hear over and over again from gays and lesbians that they do not feel comfortable being "out" in public and many experience routine verbal harassment. I heard from a gay Calgarian who now lives in Toronto that he can finally walk down the sidewalk holding hands with his boyfriend - but he would never do that in Calgary.
This is not some fringe or superficial issue in comparison with "serious" things like the employment rate. Both relate to the underlying issue of how secure people feel in their everyday lives.
Anyway, I think politics matters greatly in establishing social norms that translate to life on the street. The UCP/Kenney has continually grandstanded on GSAs calling them "sex clubs" and perpetuating the idea that LGBT people are deviant perverts that need to be kept away from "decent" families (i.e. the people who appear in the recent Andrew Scheer commercial). When these politicians win power, it legitimizes their views and gives social license to anyone who feels the need to yell an epithet every time they see a same-sex couple holding hands on the street.
For the most part, that is true. However, I hear over and over again from gays and lesbians that they do not feel comfortable being "out" in public and many experience routine verbal harassment. I heard from a gay Calgarian who now lives in Toronto that he can finally walk down the sidewalk holding hands with his boyfriend - but he would never do that in Calgary.
This is not some fringe or superficial issue in comparison with "serious" things like the employment rate. Both relate to the underlying issue of how secure people feel in their everyday lives.
Anyway, I think politics matters greatly in establishing social norms that translate to life on the street. The UCP/Kenney has continually grandstanded on GSAs calling them "sex clubs" and perpetuating the idea that LGBT people are deviant perverts that need to be kept away from "decent" families (i.e. the people who appear in the recent Andrew Scheer commercial). When these politicians win power, it legitimizes their views and gives social license to anyone who feels the need to yell an epithet every time they see a same-sex couple holding hands on the street.
UrbanWarrior
Senior Member
I agree with all of that, man. However, anecdotally, as a gay man I've held my ex's hand in public in Calgary, Lethbridge, Drumheller... wherever the heck I want. There may be an aspect of fear, but I'm not really afraid to do it, I'm more afraid of the ramifications from what I'd do to someone if they harassed my partner. I've been here 5.5 years. I understand my situation is probably different than most as he and I are both 220 lbs and bearded, but the point is, things aren't gonna change unless we make them change. I'm not afraid to show affection to the man I care about anywhere, no matter who's around. People like Jason Kenney almost make me want to do it more so I can spite them 
I'm not gay myself, but have friends that are....The UPC's whole stance on the GSA, etc... really bugs me. I don't think they get that it's 2017.
Social Justice
Active Member
Can someone explain to me what a Gay/Straight Alliance is in schools? And why is it being talked so much in the legislative?
googspecial
Active Member
As I understand it - GSA is a group of LGBT+s and "Straight Allies" get together as a support group for those who might be out already, questioning their place on a sexual spectrum, straight kids of gay parents etc. Whether that support is for those who are bullied (at school or at home) or figuring out how to come out or depending on the ages of those in the group, sexual health that might not necessarily be taught in the regular curriculum (another contentious topic apparently). I hate to use the term "safe space" as it is usually just turns into a reason for social conservatives ironically rage that their way of life is threatened (it's not). But it is essentially a safe space for those who might not get the opportunity to have this sort of discourse, particularly at home. That's why it's problematic for the UCP to take a position of notifying parents if their kids join. Which, is actually pretty ridiculous if you think about it. I doubt there are any other clubs which kids might join and notify the parents for.. Chess club, math club, travel, dance, second language, whatever...
I agree that this has taken up too much time in the media and legislature, but it really really highlights the homophobic history of Jason Kenney and some of the conservatives in this province. Kenney has a long history of homophobic stances, as well as racism and xenophobia, and spreading false facts. Unfortunately, government and governing is more than just about the economy. Social issues are just as important for a freer society, and shouldn't take the back burner just because there's an economic slump.
I agree that this has taken up too much time in the media and legislature, but it really really highlights the homophobic history of Jason Kenney and some of the conservatives in this province. Kenney has a long history of homophobic stances, as well as racism and xenophobia, and spreading false facts. Unfortunately, government and governing is more than just about the economy. Social issues are just as important for a freer society, and shouldn't take the back burner just because there's an economic slump.
Social Justice
Active Member
Ahhh, gotcha! I think I get it, thanks for educating me. I think I can see where the conflict arises.
On one side: You could have a student that is gay and comes from a bible thumping home and does not feel supported and/or has questions about alternative lifestyles. Therefore, the GSA provides a "safespace' for them.
On the other side: You could have parents that would prefer to talk/educate their kids about sexuality than allow the government to have authority over the matter.
And of course the politicians and media make it a wedge issue to campaign for more votes. Hell, if I had kids I think it would be my responsibility as a parent to talk to them about about sexuality, reproduction, STD's and their lifestyle choices whether they're gay or straight.
Also, my only problem with "Safe Spaces" is the explicit exclusion of people based on race, gender and sexuality. In my opinion this explicit exclusion is not conducive to social integration. I've heard in some American colleges there are separate lunch rooms for black students and non-black students because black student associations wanted to create a "Safe Space". I bet the KKK heard of the separate lunch rooms and said "Great!"
Myself not being gay, or having gay parents, etc... I'm probably not the best person to comment on whether GSA's are good or bad. The thing that bugs me about the UPC standpoint, is I just don't trust a guy like Jason Kenney when it comes to this kind of stuff.
UrbanWarrior
Senior Member
What it comes down to is that Jason Kenney literally wants to ruin the lives of thousands of LGBT kids in this province by outing them to their parents, and that is completely unacceptable. There is no need for GSAs if they provide nothing but further hardship for the children who desperately need them. I was one of those children 12 years ago.