Keystone XL vs. Trudeau's NEP?
View Single Post
03-23-2013, 09:41 AM
Join Date: Jun 2009
Originally Posted by
I know Ontario was a have province and as a result didn't need any assistance. That is great! I hope Ontario becomes a have province in the hear future.
What I don't get is why Alberta should have been helping a province with a healthy economy.
Keep in mind that while Ontario is a 'have not' province, it is still a net contributor to the equalization program. In other words, Ontario paid more to it than they got back. The terminology can be very misleading. EVERYONE pays into equalilzation, according to their GDP. The difference is some provinces get cash back.
What I don't know, is if you pay into equalization based on your GDP or your GDP per capita. Either way ontario is still a net contributor, but in the former case they'd be the largest contributor while Alberta would be third, behind Quebec + ON. Anyone know if this is the case?
Given that Ontario was paying more than it was getting back, and possibly(?) paying the most of all provinces, why is it not Ontario helping Ontario but Alberta helping Ontario as you've suggested?
Just some food for thought.
And as to why the payments exist in the first place, healthcare is a provincial responsibility but the financial levers rest with the feds. As Canadians, we are entitled to healthcare in any province we choose to live in, and thus the federal government mandates minimum national standards each provinces social services must meet.
EQ payments are a way of making sure as a Canadian, the social services you enjoy ANYWHERE in the country are reflective of the nation's wealth, and not subjected to provincial disparities.
Where the system falls off the rails for me, is that they money has no strings attached to it, and the provinces aren't mandated to spend the money in any certain way, although Im still in favour of the program. Anyone know when this change came about? Was it always that way? Wetcoaster?
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by jgravessimcoe