Norway vs Alberta: one got rich. One got played.

[Dr Strangelove]

Norway's Success: By treating oil wealth as a generational inheritance, Norway established a sovereign wealth fund that now holds roughly $2.2 trillion USD in assets (as of mid-2026). Their model relies on high taxation of petroleum profits (78% marginal rate), significant state ownership of the industry (e.g., in Equinor), and a disciplined strategy of saving and globally investing a large portion of resource revenues.
Alberta's Struggle: Despite creating the Alberta Heritage Savings Trust Fund in 1976—which Norway actually modeled its own approach after—Alberta failed to maintain the same level of commitment. The fund is currently valued at approximately $31.9 billion CAD (as of late 2025). The video argues that successive governments treated resource royalties like a "paycheck" to be spent rather than an investment to be preserved, eventually stopping systematic contributions almost entirely by 1987 (1:55 - 3:16).
Key Takeaways
Policy Choices: The video emphasizes that this is not a story about the geological lottery, as Alberta was highly successful in attracting industry investment. Instead, it is a story of political choices regarding royalty frameworks, savings discipline, and how public resources are managed (4:31 - 5:24).
The Gap: The disparity between Alberta's $32 billion fund and Norway's $2 trillion fund cannot be explained simply by their different structures (province vs. country) or populations; it reflects decades of divergent fiscal strategies (7:37 - 8:01).
Environmental Legacy: The video notes a critical irony: while Alberta collected less wealth, the public remains on the hook for massive environmental liabilities, such as orphaned wells and cleanup obligations (5:25 - 5:48).
Ultimately, the video concludes that resource wealth alone does not guarantee long-term prosperity—effective long-term decision-making and the courage to save for future generations are the deciding factors.


To be a conservative is to be anti-Canadian.