Ayden Brock

[Ayden Brock @Mostlyhere22]

@darylcognito @AbJrogg @RiseOfAlberta Good one man, never heard that before, got anything constructive to add or what, that’s it?

[Ayden Brock @Mostlyhere22]

And who’s better? While we have glaring issues with the UCP they are still the better choice until new parties form.
Let’s see your research for these point, cause here’s mine.

• Wasteful spending: Alberta has had periods of high spending under both PC and UCP governments (especially during high oil revenue years). However, Alberta has historically run lower per-capita program spending than most provinces while maintaining strong outcomes in areas like education and certain health metrics. The bigger long-term issue has been volatility tied to resource revenue rather than consistent fiscal restraint.

• Privatized health: Canada’s healthcare system remains publicly funded and administered. Alberta has some private delivery options (e.g., surgical clinics), but core services are still single-payer. Wait times for specialists and elective procedures in Alberta have been a chronic issue under multiple governments, not unique to any one party.

• Privatized education: Alberta’s K-12 system is still overwhelmingly public. The province has allowed more charter schools and some private options than most provinces, and it has often ranked at or near the top in Canada on standardized testing (PISA and provincial assessments). Post-secondary has a mix of public universities and colleges.

• Privatized wealth: This is vague. Alberta has lower personal income taxes than most provinces and no provincial sales tax. It also has higher average incomes and lower unemployment in resource booms. Wealth concentration exists everywhere in Canada, but Alberta’s model has historically relied more on resource revenue and private sector growth than heavy redistribution.

[Ayden Brock @Mostlyhere22]

@TomjSmith2 @david_parker Do you mind telling me why that’s you viewpoint, and why our reputation will be damaged by this?

[Ayden Brock @Mostlyhere22]

You’re talking about the December 2025 during the official draw for the 2026 FIFA World Cup in Washington, right? Which the D.C. FIFA President Gianni Infantino created the award specifically for this occasion and presented it to Trump on stage.

Where Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum were also on stage with Trump because the three countries were co-hosting the 2026 World Cup.

Quick summary FIFA created and gave the Peace Prize to Trump, not Carney. Carney was simply standing next to him as one of the three leaders representing the host nations.

• It was presented as recognition of Trump’s role in helping secure peace deals or ceasefires (particularly referenced in relation to the Israel-Gaza situation at the time).

• Infantino publicly praised Trump and even suggested he deserved the Nobel Peace Prize.

• The award was widely seen as a diplomatic gesture by FIFA to maintain good relations with Trump, who has significant influence and had previously been critical of various international organizations.
Many observers viewed it as a somewhat political or self-serving move by FIFA rather than a traditional peace award.

[Ayden Brock @Mostlyhere22]

@CanadianRonin48 @FrontlinesTPUSA @CanadianRonin48 Hey big man, that all you got?Two comments then you block me.

[Ayden Brock @Mostlyhere22]

@CanadianRonin48 @FrontlinesTPUSA How about you get off your asses and take it then, if your so threatened by us potentially leaving, why don’t you hold your politicians you voted for Accountable and make them actually listen to your fellow countrymen’s grievances.

[Ayden Brock @Mostlyhere22]

While I agree with you on the Ai part, I can’t seem to find any cases to really support your claims on Pierre, whereas I’ve got plenty of cases, evidence, and sources to prove that the current Canadian state is mostly the Libs, Trudeau and Carney’s fault. Do you mind swapping info/sources?

• Poilievre has been a federal politician for over 20 years, mostly in opposition or as a backbencher/minister in Harper’s government (2013–2015). He has never controlled the Prime Minister’s Office or authorized large government spending on personal or delegation travel.
• The most common attacks on him are rhetorical or policy-based:
• Accusations of being too aggressive or divisive in language.
• Criticism of his stance on the carbon tax, immigration, or COVID measures.
• Some past associations or statements from his early career that opponents dredge up.
• These are not equivalent in scale or impact to a sitting Prime Minister spending nearly $200,000 on in-flight catering for three trips while telling Canadians to “make sacrifices.”

[Ayden Brock @Mostlyhere22]

The only people Carney has proven wrong is himself, the libs, and his voters.

. Multiple quarters of economic weakness (including flat/negative stretch)
• Statistics Canada, February 27, 2026: Q4 2025 real GDP contracted by 0.2% (annualized).
https://t.co/VfmaLEcf5C…
• Statistics Canada & Bank of Canada reports (Spring 2026): Q1 2026 GDP flat/unchanged or slightly negative in early estimates, confirming weakness over several quarters.
• C.D. Howe Institute and TD Economics (March–May 2026): Describe “recessionary period,” “slow-motion stagnation,” and multiple weak quarters.
2. Per-capita GDP has stagnated or declined relative to the U.S. and peers
• The Hub (March 20, 2026): Canada’s real GDP per capita fell to 71.4% of the U.S. level in 2024 (down from 83.1% in 2014).
https://t.co/sNWMq6vE15…
• World Bank / OECD data (2024–2025): Canada ranks 19th–38th among OECD countries in GDP per capita growth, lagging peers.
3. Real investment per worker is down sharply
• C.D. Howe Institute (2025): Business investment per worker has been falling since 2015; capital per worker is declining.
https://t.co/hwoMgH8mK4…
• Fraser Institute (2023–2025 updates): Per-worker business investment down ~20% since 2014 relative to the U.S.
4. Housing affordability is among the worst in the developed world
• RBC Housing Affordability Monitor (Q1 2026): Mortgage payment as % of income remains elevated (over 50% in many markets), far above historical norms.
• National Bank of Canada and other reports (2026): Canada has one of the worst affordability ratios among OECD countries.
5. National debt has doubled + trust in politicians ~24%
• Fraser Institute & Canadian Taxpayers Federation (2024–2026): Federal debt roughly doubled under the Liberals (from ~$616 billion pre-Trudeau to over $1.2 trillion).
• Environics / Leger / Proof polls (2025–early 2026): Trust in politicians generally 17–24%.
6. Military spending increased but still near bottom of NATO + heavy U.S. reliance
• NATO Secretary General Report (March 2026): Canada reached ~2% of GDP on defence spending, but historically ranked near the bottom; still heavily reliant on U.S. systems, NORAD integration, and procurement.
All claims are supported by official Statistics Canada data, think-tank analyses (Fraser Institute, C.D. Howe), and NATO reports.

[Ayden Brock @Mostlyhere22]

Supporting Analyses Using Broader Definition
• C.D. Howe Institute (multiple 2026 reports): Describes the economy as facing “trade uncertainty, structural pressures, and weak productivity,” with baseline growth projections as low as 0.4–0.5% in the near term and notes employment declines as a sign of underlying softness.
• Bank of Canada Monetary Policy Report (April 2026): Acknowledges slower growth, labour market cooling, and the need for adjustment, even while avoiding the word “recession.”
• Various economists (TD, RBC, National Bank) have described the period as a “slow-motion stagnation” or “recessionary period” with volatility persisting for 6–9+ months across indicators.

[Ayden Brock @Mostlyhere22]

You’re right to note the latest StatsCan revision — Q1 2026 real GDP that came in flat, so the strict technically the two consecutive negative quarters technical definition is not met right now.

But, even under the broader definition (C.D. Howe Institute / NBER-style, which looks at employment, real income, industrial production, and wholesale-retail sales over a longer period), the economy has shown significant, sustained weakness across multiple indicators for several quarters.
We’re seeing:
• Stagnant or declining per-capita GDP
• Weak employment growth (especially full-time jobs)
• Declining industrial production in key sectors
• Soft retail and wholesale sales
That broader picture still points to a recessionary period, even if one revised quarter is flat. The volatility and underlying softness have been visible for more than “a few months.”

[Ayden Brock @Mostlyhere22]

While you right about the official definition of a recession
• Broader definition (used by bodies like the C.D. Howe Institute or NBER-style analysis): Also considers employment, income, industrial production, and other indicators.
By the standard technical definition, Canada is currently in a recession. The chart clearly shows the last two (and likely three) quarters in negative territory.

[Ayden Brock @Mostlyhere22]

I decided to make a comparison between the Average Canadian family Travel spending to the last 3 PMs

Average Canadian Family of 4 (middle-class household, 2024–2026 dollars)
• Annual air travel + vacations: $1,500 – $3,500 (many families spend $0 in a given year; this is the upper-middle range for families who fly occasionally)

• One international family trip to Europe (flights + basic accommodation + food for 1 week): $8,000 – $12,000

• 10 years of total air travel and vacations: $15,000 – $35,000 (realistic range for families who take 1–2 international trips per decade)
PM In-Flight Catering Costs Only (not full trip costs)

• Stephen Harper (2006–2015): Generally lower. Entourages were smaller (25–40 people) and major international trips less frequent. Specific catering bills rarely exceeded $50,000–$80,000 per trip.

• Justin Trudeau (selected high-profile trips):
• One 6-day Indo-Pacific trip (2023): $190,000 – $223,000 on catering alone.
• Typical major European trip: $46,000 – $57,000 on catering.

• Mark Carney (first year in office, 2025–2026):
• Three specific European trips: $195,400 total on catering.
• Highest single trip (Rome): ≈ $94,000.

Annual Full International Travel Cost Context (including aircraft, security, staff, etc.)
• Stephen Harper: Generally under $1.5 million per year.

• Justin Trudeau (peak years): Routinely $2 – $3 million per year.

• Mark Carney (first partial year): Already on pace to match or exceed Trudeau’s spending.

[Ayden Brock @Mostlyhere22]

Your missing a couple thing on your chart, the chart only shows gross revenue collected from each province. It does not subtract federal spending that flows back (equalization, infrastructure, EI, health transfers, etc.).

Per capita contribution: Alberta’s population is only about 11.6% of Canada’s, despite that it contributes 11.7% of federal revenue.

Historical net flows: this chart is only a single-year snapshot.

[Ayden Brock @Mostlyhere22]

It’s still in the framework stage since Id like for people to point out issues or potential improvements but anyways here’s the summary.

(1) Summary in One Sentence
UBJ is a voluntary work-based alternative to traditional welfare that offers paid jobs and training instead of long-term cash payments, with the goal of reducing dependency while remaining budget-neutral over time.

(2) The Universal Basic Job (UBJ) is a proposed voluntary paid-job guarantee program for Alberta. Instead of long-term cash welfare, eligible people would be offered paid work combined with training and apprenticeships. It is designed as a welfare-to-work model rather than a traditional welfare program.

(3) Core Idea of UBJ is to shift the focus from paying people (passive income support) to instead pay people to work through government-supported jobs and training. It is meant to be budget-neutral by converting existing welfare spending into wages and productive work.

(4) Key Features
• Voluntary: People can choose to participate or stay on existing supports.
• Paid Work + Training: Participants receive real wages and skill development (including apprenticeships).
• Target Group: Primarily able-bodied or partially able individuals currently on income support programs who can work with the right supports.
• Provincial Control: Designed to operate under Alberta’s constitutional powers (s.92) as a made-in-Alberta solution.
• Budget-Neutral Goal: Aims to reduce long-term spending on passive benefits by moving people into employment.

(5) What Problems Does It Aim to Fix?
UBJ is proposed as a response to several issues with the current system:
• High long-term dependency on welfare programs
• Strong financial disincentives to work (high clawback rates)
• Rising costs of income support programs
• Limited success of existing welfare-to-work efforts
• The need for Alberta-specific solutions rather than relying on federal models

(6) What Would UBJ Replace or Reduce?
UBJ is intended to gradually replace or reduce reliance on:
• Alberta Works / Income Support (the main provincial welfare program)
• Portions of AISH for people whose disabilities still allow some level of work
• Long-term passive cash benefits in general
It would not replace supports for people with severe disabilities who cannot work, seniors’ benefits, or healthcare itself.

[Ayden Brock @Mostlyhere22]

@SJKennett @angelasmurfyone @ABDanielleSmith Agreed I’m slow at typing but I’ve actually got a fairly similar idea to mash the current systems plus more while keeping the Current stuff for people who legitimately need these services and with less strain maybe could be paid people who need it a livable income.

[Ayden Brock @Mostlyhere22]

Instead of assuming why not offer some substance. I’ve researched done extensive research on Albertan services such as Alberta works, AISH, EI, housing supports tied to welfare, food banks, General welfare and other Disability related topics-ups, and It can be done cheaper and provide more for Albertans. If you want I could go indepth about it,

[Ayden Brock @Mostlyhere22]

While I Agree with keeping AISH, there are a lot of drawbacks where these systems could be Improved. Here are some disadvantages of AISH to list

1. High Cost to Taxpayers
• AISH is one of the most expensive disability income programs in Canada.
• The program has seen significant cost growth due to rising caseloads and relatively high benefit rates.
• Critics argue that the current structure is financially unsustainable long-term, especially as Alberta’s population ages and more people qualify.

2. Strong Disincentives to Work
• High clawback rates: When recipients earn income, benefits are reduced sharply (often 75 cents or more on every dollar earned above a certain threshold).
• This creates a “welfare wall” where many people are financially better off staying on AISH than working part-time or taking lower-paying jobs.
• Critics say the program unintentionally discourages employment and independence for those who could work to some degree.

3. Long-Term Dependency
• A large portion of AISH recipients stay on the program for many years or for life.
• Some argue the program does not do enough to support people in transitioning to employment or other forms of income when their condition allows it.
• This contributes to steadily growing caseloads and ongoing budget pressure.

4. Generosity Relative to Other Provinces
• AISH benefit rates are significantly higher than most other Canadian disability support programs.
• Critics (including some fiscal conservatives) argue that Alberta’s program is overly generous compared to the rest of Canada, creating an uneven burden on Alberta taxpayers.

5. Treatment of Couples (Household Income Rules)
• When two disabled people live together, their benefits are often reduced because they are treated as one economic unit.
• This has been a major point of criticism (as seen in the infographic you shared). Some couples lose hundreds of dollars per month simply for being in a relationship.
• The same issue applies when one partner works — earnings can trigger large clawbacks for the household.

6. Fraud, Overpayments, and Eligibility Issues
• Like any large income support program, AISH has had cases of fraud, unreported income, and people receiving benefits they may not fully qualify for.
• There have been periodic concerns about the program’s ability to properly verify eligibility and recover overpayments.

7. Administrative Complexity and Delays
• The application and review process can be slow and bureaucratic.
• Some recipients and advocates complain about inconsistent decision-making and long wait times for approvals or appeals.

8. Interaction with Other Benefits
• Receiving AISH can sometimes reduce or eliminate eligibility for other supports (both provincial and federal).
• This can create complicated situations where people lose access to other forms of assistance.

9. Public and Political Backlash
• The relatively high cost and perceived generosity of AISH has made it a frequent target of criticism from taxpayers and some political parties.
• This has led to ongoing political pressure to reform or reduce the program (which is why the UCP introduced the changes the infographic was attacking).

10. Poverty Despite Relatively High Benefits
• Even with higher payments than most provinces, many AISH recipients still struggle financially because of the high costs associated with severe disabilities (housing, medications, transportation, attendant care, etc.).
• Some critics argue the program doesn’t fully address the real cost of living with a severe disability.

[Ayden Brock @Mostlyhere22]

Not to be a dick, but going off your logic here even if there was 100% FN support towards remaining in confederation they only make up 6.8 (FN 3.5%, Métis 3.1%, and etc .03%) of the total Albertan population. So just as you stated why should those 3-4 people over rule a petition an prolong a vote to our destination.

[Ayden Brock @Mostlyhere22]

I’ve been working on a couple ideas that would hopefully help move things along, I’ve so far made a UBJ draft that would also include a digital town hall to have citizen input and gov accountability, all using existing provincial funding, and with a bit more work it I’d like to make it applicable to the rest of Canada if a new confederation is achieved.