|
bunnyofdoom posted:Actually, for those contests, we even include a pay by volunteering for a lifetime of spam option. Of course I already get that spam from the Libs and NDP so I guess it's closer to free for me. Better than the goofy "holiday sales" ads at least.
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 18:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 22:43 |
|
|
BGrifter posted:Of course I already get that spam from the Libs and NDP so I guess it's closer to free for me. Hey, just send us an email saying unsub and we'll take you off.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 19:00
|
|
|
bunnyofdoom posted:Hey, just send us an email saying unsub and we'll take you off. But then I'd miss out on letters personally thanking me for making Justin Trudeau leader of the LPC. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 19:05
|
|
|
Eej posted:I don't know why but I'm getting a kick out of the comments section this time. Very entertaining. I had no idea that the National Post is part of the liberal-owned, left wing biased media, or that Conrad Black is a liberal.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 00:21
|
|
|
The National Post is mad at Christy Clark for doing charity work and raising her son.quote:Premier Christy Clark is taking some personal time with her oft-mentioned 12-year-old, reports the Vancouver Sun, and will “close out 2013 building a school in the poor African country of Kenya.” Ms. Clark says she wants her son to learn how to help people who have very little. That’s admirable and kind, and one hopes the experience benefits everyone involved. This is basically the least objectionable part of the Christy Clark experience, but point taken, the BCLs basically don't do anything if they can help it and they probably should get around to doing something (if you ignore those huge five-year public sector union deals, which you probably shouldn't). So, uh, what does the NP have in mind? quote:What must happen now is action on the responsible and productive management of B.C.’s abundant natural resources and the province’s unique geography.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 02:05
|
|
|
To be fair, while working to build a school in Africa is admirable and all, I am not sure if it's something the Premier is supposed to be doing in her position.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 02:31
|
|
|
OSI bean dip posted:To be fair, while working to build a school in Africa is admirable and all, I am not sure if it's something the Premier is supposed to be doing in her position. B) Can you see any news organization complaining about a male politician doing charity work with his child?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 03:01
|
|
|
They're just still mad at her for not being all gung-ho on pipelines during the election.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 03:58
|
|
|
Speaking of Conrad Black, this loving article  http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/12/21/conrad-black-the-toronto-stars-ideological-shakedown-operation/ quote:I recall that [Rosie DiManno] threatened to jump off Christie Blatchford’s roof if I didn’t hire her, and I said that “That would be an over-reaction.” And when someone else said she wanted to show if she could fly, I said “So jump.” But it doesn’t much matter, and is no basis on which to embitter relations for 13 years. (My clearer memory of that party is of another female journalist who offered me sexual intercourse in exchange for an interview, an offer I declined with thanks and a commendation for her enterprise.)  quote:Mr. Dale was traduced, but he was not defamed, by Mr. Ford’s comments; and no one said anything about pedophilia except the Star and its allies. Ford’s cascade of apologies has brought all those who have opined on this subject to the same place. quote:“And what of the city’s top bankers?” he asked. Has Honderich taken complete leave of his senses? Are the country’s big banks to wade into this squalid municipal fracas? This is pretty wingy, not unlike Rosie threatening, under the influence of a joint, to jump off the roof of Christie Blatchford’s house 13 years ago if I didn’t raid her away from Honderich. quote:Honderich concluded his article: “Just imagine if the mayor of New York, Chicago, or Boston had acted like Rob Ford. Can you ever envision the leaders of those cities remaining so silent?” Not since a Star reporter misstated the number of graven presidential images on Mount Rushmore in an article about me 21 years ago, have I felt such an irresistible urge to refresh the Star’s official memory of a few historic facts. quote:It won’t fly — any of it. The mayor has been administratively competent but a behavioral embarrassment. the Star’s attempted coup was a failure, and the hare-brained effort to dragoon civic leaders, bankers and advertisers into the plot backfired. Rosie’s column of reply to me on Monday was so feeble, I take it as an olive branch in the last gasp of the Star’s failed attempt to purge the city’s elected mayor without any due process. I offer some resolutions for 2014. Is there anyone further up his own rear end? (That said, it is pretty sketchy for The Star to write a bunch of public figures in Toronto and tell them that they'll be put on record if they decide not to publicly denounce Rob Ford…)
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 04:05
|
|
|
THC posted:They're just still mad at her for not being all gung-ho on pipelines during the election. Yes, yes. Everyone's frothing at the bit for pipelines, and the environmentalists who are always Certainly In The Right are beset on all sides by the tyranny of evil men. We've heard it before. Of course, maybe not everyone's out to get you, and it's actually decent policy. That's possible too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 04:07
|
|
|
The unique geography of being between Alberta and the Pacific Ocean.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 04:12
|
|
|
colonel_korn posted:
That column reads as if the spirit of a 16 year old debutante is constantly oscillating between that and a the ghost of a robber baron during the guilded age.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 04:39
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Yes, yes. Everyone's frothing at the bit for pipelines, and the environmentalists who are always Certainly In The Right are beset on all sides by the tyranny of evil men. We've heard it before. Of course, maybe not everyone's out to get you, and it's actually decent policy. That's possible too. That certainly touched a nerve.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 04:43
|
|
|
That pipeline is less popular than herpes in BC. Even the Conservative faithful I know in the province don't want it. It's one of the few issues on which the Okanagan splits from the Albertan Conservative hive mind.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 04:47
|
|
|
"But it's good policy," sputtered the oil worker, as he reached for his e-cigarette.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 04:54
|
|
|
This sounds like a fun game. "But it's good policy," screamed the rig pig, dusting the cocaine from his nose. "But it's good policy," yelled the pipeline engineer, inventing the euphemism 'waste water'.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 05:27
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Yes, yes. Everyone's frothing at the bit for pipelines, and the environmentalists who are always Certainly In The Right are beset on all sides by the tyranny of evil men. We've heard it before. Of course, maybe not everyone's out to get you, and it's actually decent policy. That's possible too. 'Boo hoo, someone doesn't want to extend the oil industry's ability to run roughshod all over the country. They must be a terrible poopyhead who won't listen to the responsible oil companies that we should love and trust, like BP and Exxon.' Get hosed, PT6A.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 06:15
|
|
|
Oh boy, I do so like it when this topic descends to "who can make the most sarcastic strawman".
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 06:23
|
|
|
SoggyBobcat posted:Oh boy, I do so like it when this topic descends to "who can make the most sarcastic strawman". A pox on both your houses! The truth is in the middle! I watch south park everyday! Environmentalists as bad as oil companies!
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 06:25
|
|
|
Ceciltron posted:A pox on both your houses! The truth is in the middle! I watch south park everyday! Environmentalists as bad as oil companies! 6/10 You can do better.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 06:44
|
|
|
SoggyBobcat posted:Oh boy, I do so like it when this topic descends to "who can make the most sarcastic strawman".
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 07:01
|
|
|
No one in BC has to look at the trainloads of oil that are making life worse for farmers who can't ship this year's bumper crop to market. Yes the pipeline's a risk, but a smarter government would see the improvement that could be made by raising taxes on oil companies and spending that money on risk mitigation. At the right tax increase there's a system that makes everyone better off compared to no pipeline - Alberta farmers and oil companies, First Nations landowners, and the aquifers in B.C. This government's inability to use tax increases as a tool makes the choice a forced one, between no pipeline or a pipeline that gives a gain to Albertans and a big risk to British Columbia.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 07:09
|
|
|
Bleu posted:This sounds like a fun game. "But it's good policy," said the resident of the railroad town that wasn't blown up a mistake involving trains carrying petroleum. "But it's good policy," said the resident of the town downstream from the place a tanker truck would've driven off the road into the river (see: this year's Lemon Creek incident for what can happen). This is fun. By all means, charge oil companies for risk mitigation and every cent of damage that actually occurs, but pipelines are still safer and more economically feasible than other alternatives.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 07:30
|
|
|
You know what's even safer than a pipeline? Not shipping any bitumen to Asia at all, ever.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 07:42
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Yes, yes. Everyone's frothing at the bit for pipelines, and the environmentalists who are always Certainly In The Right are beset on all sides by the tyranny of evil men. We've heard it before. Of course, maybe not everyone's out to get you, and it's actually decent policy. That's possible too. Well, I only alluded to it in my post, but yes, the rest of the article is about how mad the National Post is that Christy didn't push for the pipelines, including bringing out the "b-b-but it's in Canada's best interest" line that a) isn't THAT relevant to Christy, since she's the BC Premier and not the Canadian Prime Minister and b) would NEVER, EVER get used by the National Post against, say, Alberta. I don't agree with Alison Redford but I at least get why she's pro-oil development, it would be nice if some of these people (like Bruce Hutchinson, allegedly the National Post's BC writer) maybe tried to figure out why Christy still won't play ball. It's not like it's a secret. AATREK CURES KIDS posted:No one in BC has to look at the trainloads of oil that are making life worse for farmers who can't ship this year's bumper crop to market. Yes the pipeline's a risk, but a smarter government would see the improvement that could be made by raising taxes on oil companies and spending that money on risk mitigation. At the right tax increase there's a system that makes everyone better off compared to no pipeline - Alberta farmers and oil companies, First Nations landowners, and the aquifers in B.C. This government's inability to use tax increases as a tool makes the choice a forced one, between no pipeline or a pipeline that gives a gain to Albertans and a big risk to British Columbia. By "this government" do you mean federal or provincial? Because a tax hike to insure the province in case Alberta's pipeline goes blooey is probably not going to fly (remember how well their last big tax policy change went). MikeSevigny fucked around with this message at 07:54 on Dec 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 07:47
|
|
|
eXXon posted:You know what's even safer than a pipeline? Not shipping any bitumen to Asia at all, ever. This. Has the oil industry even been a net gain for Canada? I've heard it's given us a major case of dutch disease and simply moved empployment from relatively clean Ontario manufacturing to some of the world's most environmentally horrific jobs in Alberta. If it was nationalized and managed like the Norwegians I'd be a lot more trustful of pipelines and willing to accept some risks, but other than a few basic and fairly temporary jobs what the hell is the point? What's in it for me, or anyone not directly employed by the oil industry? And what's the plan for when it runs out, or prices fluctuate and suddenly the sands aren't worth it anymore? I don't trust private industry to distribute the wealth to anyone but them selves. I don't trust the government to regulate the oil industry because they are so closely allied with the above. I don't trust the world economy for this to be anything more than a temporary boom that will have nothing but vast destroyed swaths of land and a bunch of unemployed people in Alberta to show for it. It isn't just the pipeline its self, it's who owns it, it's who's taking the vast majority of the profit, and who's safety and regulatory track record we're looking at. A well managed national oil industry with a great track record for safety and long term planning is something I could trust. The Canadian oil industry is not something I have any trust in no matter how many expensive commercials the government pays for.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 07:58
|
|
|
SoggyBobcat posted:Oh boy, I do so like it when this topic descends to "who can make the most sarcastic strawman".  This actually might be a good time for me to interject that there's some great discussion over in the Sub-Saharan Africa thread about the consequences to a country of a largely resource-based economy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 09:20
|
|
|
eXXon posted:You know what's even safer than a pipeline? Not shipping any bitumen to Asia at all, ever. Do you propose outlawing oil extraction, or actively driving out oil companies? As long as they're around, they'll be trying to make money. Companies are predictable; they try to make as much money each quarter without worrying about human impact. Right now the companies are going to try shipping oil out of Alberta by whatever means they have, and in light of the Lac-Mégantic disaster I think the pipeline can be safer than the railways they're using now. The cure for Dutch disease is making the oil companies work for us by nationalizing, provincializing, or heavily taxing resource extraction profits and investing the money in permanent jobs. An incoherent roadblocking strategy is a band-aid over the pipeline problem without addressing the fact that oil companies are making money and the main beneficiaries are in Texas rather than Alberta. The jobs here are now are great, but the jobs won't be here in 50 years unless there's a better plan to keep oil profits invested in Alberta. I just don't see blocking the pipeline as part of any coherent strategy to make things better here in Alberta, since it could be a way to improve safety and profitability, and the pipeline plus a tax increase is an improvement over no pipeline. It's hard to say whether cancelling the pipeline or allowing it with no tax increase is worse, since it's basically a choice between screwing Alberta farmers or B.C. fishers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 10:09
|
|
|
AATREK CURES KIDS posted:... government ... raising taxes ... and spending that money on ... If you think this will happen, you do not understand Alberta politics.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 11:02
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Baronjutter posted:This. Has the oil industry even been a net gain for Canada? I've heard it's given us a major case of dutch disease and simply moved empployment from relatively clean Ontario manufacturing to some of the world's most environmentally horrific jobs in Alberta.      
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 14:14
|
|
|
AATREK CURES KIDS posted:Right now the companies are going to try shipping oil out of Alberta by whatever means they have, and in light of the Lac-Mégantic disaster I think the pipeline can be safer than the railways they're using now.  Well then I guess it's a good thing that catastrophe happened exactly when it did, because otherwise how would we be able to talk about the way this proposed pipeline will improve on all that awful dangerous rail travel?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 15:01
|
|
|
AATREK CURES KIDS posted:Do you propose outlawing oil extraction, or actively driving out oil companies? As long as they're around, they'll be trying to make money. Companies are predictable; they try to make as much money each quarter without worrying about human impact. Right now the companies are going to try shipping oil out of Alberta by whatever means they have, and in light of the Lac-Mégantic disaster I think the pipeline can be safer than the railways they're using now. What's your strategy, exactly? You say a pipeline plus a rational re-distribution scheme of oil production is the optimal outcome, but how are you going to accomplish that? By giving the oil companies precisely what they want in exchange for nothing while running interference to your left? How are you going to get re-distributive concessions in exchange for the pipeline without blocking it first?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 15:07
|
|
|
AATREK CURES KIDS posted:Do you propose outlawing oil extraction, or actively driving out oil companies? As long as they're around, they'll be trying to make money. Companies are predictable; they try to make as much money each quarter without worrying about human impact. Right now the companies are going to try shipping oil out of Alberta by whatever means they have, and in light of the Lac-Mégantic disaster I think the pipeline can be safer than the railways they're using now. Alberta's already got boatloads of money, if you already can't handle it then what on earth makes you think the revenues from the pipeline would be invested more wisely? Not even getting into the weird conflation of "building a pipeline" and "heavily taxing the oil industry" as if one happening makes the other more likely.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 16:52
|
|
|
AATREK CURES KIDS posted:Do you propose outlawing oil extraction, or actively driving out oil companies? As long as they're around, they'll be trying to make money. Companies are predictable; they try to make as much money each quarter without worrying about human impact. Right now the companies are going to try shipping oil out of Alberta by whatever means they have, and in light of the Lac-Mégantic disaster I think the pipeline can be safer than the railways they're using now. I don't think it's hard to say at all. Even the Keystone pipeline is less of a terrible idea than Northern Gateway. And since there is no plan to nationalize or tax oil companies more heavily, roadblocking is not incoherent at all, it's the sensible solution. Like has been said umpteen times, the bitumen doesn't have to flow as quickly as possible, or even at all if it's not a net benefit to the country. Throwing your hands up and saying 'well, the oil has to get out somehow, we might as well build a pipeline since it's safest!' is much the same as constantly expanding road capacity because, well, those cars have to drive somewhere, ignoring the fact that doing so just gets more and more cars on the road.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 16:59
|
|
|
But the oil is trapped down there waiting to get out. We can't just let it suffer. Won't somebody think of the poor oils?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 17:40
|
|
|
Maybe we should look for alternative strategies? *gets punched in the face and thrown off the Ambassador Bridge*
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 18:46
|
|
|
Helsing posted:graphs Has this mostly been a result of globalization, or the development of the oil industry in general? Or have they been concomitant (e.g., as more and more manufacturing flees to China/India/Vietnam, we make up for the relative national deficit via the development of natural resources)?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 18:47
|
|
|
Vermain posted:Has this mostly been a result of globalization, or the development of the oil industry in general? Or have they been concomitant (e.g., as more and more manufacturing flees to China/India/Vietnam, we make up for the relative national deficit via the development of natural resources)? Manufacturing as a percent GDP and workforce has been decreasing in first world countries as both globalization and automation displaces workers and reduces prices. It actually parallels quite closely with what happened with agriculture when mechanization was introduced. Productivity went up, prices decreased and the workforce shrunk. Automation has been playing a much larger role in the shrinking manufacturing sector than people like to give it credit for.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 19:32
|
|
|
The Northern Gateway project wouldn't even really address any issues with present safety concerns. Remember that its being built to take advantage of future expansions in the market in Asia. It's not like without this pipeline here won't be any markets for bitumen at all. The idea that this is some choice between building the pipeline or rail really doesn't apply in this case, especially since the bitumen probably wouldn't be shipped west anyway without the initial creation of the infrastructure to create the market in the first place.
Political Whores fucked around with this message at 19:39 on Dec 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 19:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 22:43 |
|
|
The pipeline is a poo poo idea because the company building it has shown they are extremely incompetent at a)not causing leaks and b)actually stopping the leaks WHEN the thing starts sprouting leaks everywhere it's gonna destroy a ton of wildlife, watersheds and jobs, pretty much forever. That's not even getting into what would happen if one of the oil tankers hit something And yeah, the pipeline is amazingly unpopular here in BC, even in conservative areas. I really think that the issue (and Cullen) are behind the fed NDPs rise in the province Alctel fucked around with this message at 20:42 on Dec 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 20:40
|
|
