what isn't appreciated from Alberta is the constant push to keep things just as they are! its never ending! big oil good, any other ideas bad! big oil distorts economies and politics. its done so in Canada and its doubly done so at the focus point, Alberta.
no, i've pointed out repeatedly here how Alberta's distorted view of the world means that there is no room for any kind of change, no need to put money away for a rainy day, no need to diversify the economy... like all Albertans are somehow in love with boom and bust. like thats a good thing! and so they got Jason, who immediately dropped any funding for the tech sector and any other diversification! because conservative politics in Alberta is just another name for big oil. and big oil wants to keep themselves as the only game in town.
and now it seems Canada is going to have to bail out what is supposed to be the richest province in the country!? are you shitting me? where is all that big oil money that got made? oh right, it got funneled out of the country!
so now that Alberta oil is worthless... do you think that Albertans might think this?
As the world oil price plunges, it's time for Alberta to think outside the oilpatch
over the dead bodies of big oil and the PCP!
BC produces plenty of it own nat gas to heat my home and 100% of our own electricity via hydro to light my home. So there will be no freezing in the dark. Such a stupid old saying from a stupid old premier. Feel free to turn off the taps, west coast US refineries will be happy to fill the void. The lower oil prices go, the less leverage Alberta has. I’m thinking now wouldn’t be a great time to cut off a key customer. Unless of course Alberta has so many other customers banging down the door. Somehow I doubt it.Yeah or maybe Alberta should have the right to turn off the taps literally and physically.As the late Mr Klein said "let them freeze in the dark".
SR
How is your hero Greta doing these days? Haven’t heard much from her lately. Maybe she’s working on a cure for the corona virus. Truth is she’s irrelevant, much like everything you post.The economic reality is that if there was demand for Alberta's bitumen there would be value and unfortunately Alberta's bitumen is approaching negative value and without storage, they are already having to pay to dispose of it. So listen to Greta, and save yourselves some money, stop producing it!
And you should thank god for Trudeau's handout!
Wow! Economic reality is that both demand and supply work in tandem to determine prices. Yes, due to this pandemic, demand has/will decline as large chunks of the world's economy gears down. This is further exasperated by the "dick swinging" contest between Saudi and Russia (that's affecting the supply side of the equation). The problem with the oil industry in Canada (specifically Alberta b/c most of the oil is in Alberta) is not an economics problem, it is a political problem - Alberta company's want to ship it to new customers (i.e. ship it to other countries that want to buy crude). Alberta can't to this without access to the ocean - and the BC government doesn't want anymore crude/bitumen traveling through it's province. That's it. Alberta doesn't want a handout, they want to be able to compete for global customers - that's it. Maybe they can compete and maybe they can't - they just want a chance to compete is all. If they fail - I'm sure you'll celebrate. And if the succeed - I'm sure you'll complain. So, before you make wild assumptions about "there's no demand for it" - keep in mind that's really unknown, because at present, exports of oil/bitumen pretty much goes to one place: the US.The economic reality is that if there was demand for Alberta's bitumen there would be value and unfortunately Alberta's bitumen is approaching negative value and without storage, they are already having to pay to dispose of it. So listen to Greta, and save yourselves some money, stop producing it!
And you should thank god for Trudeau's handout!
Just shows how petty some people are (not mentioning any names) I reply in kind to those type of posts.I find it sad that during these trying times, when we're supposed to be helping each other, people are busy putting others down.
Even worse, finding joy in others misery.
Sorry mate, not to sling mud, but clearly your knowledge of the oil industry starts and ends at the price at the pump that you see. Hate to break it to you, but those Washington State refineries (I think there are 4 or 5 within 100 miles of the Canada/US border), they are close to the border not so they can supply British Columbian's but rather it is to be closer to the crude supplies from Alaska and Alberta. Historically Alaska provided most of the crude for Washington state refineries, Alberta provides about 20% of what they want/need to buy. Also, less than 20% of what Washington state refines is exported to BC (I think it's even lower than that, probably less than 15%). Washington state cares about supplying domestic (US) needs, BC is literally an afterthought as far as Washington state refineries are concerned. Contrary to what you may believe, BC ain't buttering Washington refineries' bread!Feel free to turn off the taps, west coast US refineries will be happy to fill the void. The lower oil prices go, the less leverage Alberta has. I’m thinking now wouldn’t be a great time to cut off a key customer. Unless of course Alberta has so many other customers banging down the door. Somehow I doubt it.
Nice succinct take on things but that being said you miss a salient fact.What you miss is that since 2004 Canada and more specifically Alberta and it's oilsands have been a target by the Tarsands Campaign.It is literally an initiative to land lock the oilsands in place as well as work against development of physical infrastructure for expansion of the oilsands.This campaign has been conducted by the Tides Foundation which has poured hundreds of millions from the USA into Canadian special interest groups like Greenpeace/Forest Ethic/The Dogwood Initiative etc etc.With the specific purpose to stall the oilsands as that is what they see as the biggest oilspill on the planet and Alberta is cleaning it up.Donors to the Tides Foundation include the HP Foundation as well as the Bill/Melinda Gates Foundation and the list goes on and on of the rich and well to do.Wow! Economic reality is that both demand and supply work in tandem to determine prices. Yes, due to this pandemic, demand has/will decline as large chunks of the world's economy gears down. This is further exasperated by the "dick swinging" contest between Saudi and Russia (that's affecting the supply side of the equation). The problem with the oil industry in Canada (specifically Alberta b/c most of the oil is in Alberta) is not an economics problem, it is a political problem - Alberta company's want to ship it to new customers (i.e. ship it to other countries that want to buy crude). Alberta can't to this without access to the ocean - and the BC government doesn't want anymore crude/bitumen traveling through it's province. That's it. Alberta doesn't want a handout, they want to be able to compete for global customers - that's it. Maybe they can compete and maybe they can't - they just want a chance to compete is all. If they fail - I'm sure you'll celebrate. And if the succeed - I'm sure you'll complain. So, before you make wild assumptions about "there's no demand for it" - keep in mind that's really unknown, because at present, exports of oil/bitumen pretty much goes to one place: the US.
Here's a perhaps different (and hopefully) illuminating way to look at this current political problem. One of the largest industries in BC is real estate/construction (some might say fueled by money laundering). Imagine BC brings in all it's cement/concrete/steel from Ontario. Now, let's say (pick a province) MB, SK, AB basically says "no, we don't want all this cement/concrete/steel coming through our province!" It's a silly example, but I suspect alot of British Columbians would be screaming "bloody murder" because some other province is seriously and materially affecting the BC economy.
All those on the board that malign the oilsands and think Greta is so wonderful have been duped but are too dumb to realize it.Nice succinct take on things but that being said you miss a salient fact.What you miss is that since 2004 Canada and more specifically Alberta and it's oilsands have been a target by the Tarsands Campaign.It is literally an initiative to land lock the oilsands in place as well as work against development of physical infrastructure for expansion of the oilsands.This campaign has been conducted by the Tides Foundation which has poured hundreds of millions from the USA into Canadian special interest groups like Greenpeace/Forest Ethic/The Dogwood Initiative etc etc.With the specific purpose to stall the oilsands as that is what they see as the biggest oilspill on the planet and Alberta is cleaning it up.Donors to the Tides Foundation include the HP Foundation as well as the Bill/Melinda Gates Foundation and the list goes on and on of the rich and well to do.
When you have 50 enviro zealots show up for a nice brekky and get handed a $1000 plastic kayak from Costco as well as safety gear and then form a "blockade" against an oil tanker when you are also getting paid to do so you are a fucking hypocrite.Also at play are the endless lawsuits etc in the court system as in Lawfare as the Tides Foundation also loves the spend money on the legal system in Canada through it's means of doing so.
Alberta has been under siege by Foreign Interests for 16 years.Greta Thunberg was the last stab at Alberta yet most if not all dont even ask themselves the easy question of who is bankrolling her?Who is paying for hotel rooms and food?Not to mention all of the other incidental costs.Truth be told the Northern Gateway/Trans mountain/Energy East/Line 9/Keystone XL pipelines should have been proposed in 1999 when Alberta was just starting to simmer again when oil was at $20 a barrel and there was no Canadian discount.All of the pipelines would have gotten built and with no pushback for the most part.No enviro crazy paid protesters and no assholish Lawfare funded from the USA.
THIS Albertan does not want a fucking hand out.....I want a hand up and an equal place at the table.Canada should be an energy self reliant country.There should be no importation of Foreign energy into Canada.If you think Canada is better off by importing oil from the unethical Saudi Regime then for the East I say you are nuts.Alberta should be supplying ALL of Canada with oil.Why import it if you produce it?
The biggest driver of this agenda has been of course that pathetic issue of "Climate Change" though it has not been spoken about in the media nor featured by the media for almost a month because a real crisis has suddenly got in the way with the actual realistic very near term of impact.....yeah it is very tough to blather on about something that might impact the world say 1000 years from now rather than a fast acting/spreading virus that is highly contagious.Which at the same same has had such a dramatic/immediate effect it is also kicking the shit the world economy real hard which would be the same effect if ALL signatories enacted and put into practice ALL comittments under the Paris Accord...just sayin on the last point.
SR
The really sad thing is how badly the Oilsands have been maligned over the last 16 years with the slander of "dirty oil" which has been the propaganda of the environmental movement that has been fed money from the Tides Foundation.None of the "woke" bullshit like "feminism" etc as they are not pouring in that money into say Saudi Arabia which as a country has a horrible human rights record and pretty much no rights for women at all.All those on the board that malign the oilsands and think Greta is so wonderful have been duped but are too dumb to realize it.
I lived in Alberta. I have lived in Vancouver for the last 35 years. Who do you mean by “you” should thank god? Or are you using the term “you” in the same sense you would criticize Don Cherry for using “you people”?The economic reality is that if there was demand for Alberta's bitumen there would be value and unfortunately Alberta's bitumen is approaching negative value and without storage, they are already having to pay to dispose of it. So listen to Greta, and save yourselves some money, stop producing it!
And you should thank god for Trudeau's handout!
I lived in Alberta. I have lived in Vancouver for the last 35 years. Who do you mean by “you” should thank god? Or are you using the term “you” in the same sense you would criticize Don Cherry for using “you people”?
And about Greta, it always amazes me that those who are so consistent in the message that the science is settled and we should listen to the scientists are championing an autistic teenager who doesn’t even attend school.
Um, I believe in philosophy, this is called a non sequiter, meaning you've made a jump in your argument that is illogical. Just because someone who is not a scientist (e.g. Greta) advocates a valid scientific proposition (e.g. climate change), does not mean the valid science is invalid because of the person advocating it - or the person who advocates on behalf of the advocate is not a scientist. For example, if someone, who is say mentally challenged, said that the acceleration due to gravity is 9.8 metres per second per second, you could question the intelligence of the person who quoted the formula, but to question the validity of the fact itself is not logical.I lived in Alberta. I have lived in Vancouver for the last 35 years. Who do you mean by “you” should thank god? Or are you using the term “you” in the same sense you would criticize Don Cherry for using “you people”?
And about Greta, it always amazes me that those who are so consistent in the message that the science is settled and we should listen to the scientists are championing an autistic teenager who doesn’t even attend school.
Haha. The woke have arisen! Praise Saint Greta! Btw If you had read the post I was responding to you would have realized there was no non sequitur. But sometimes you faux intellectuals just can’t help but display your superior morality, intelligence and “progressivism”Um, I believe in philosophy, this is called a non sequitur, meaning you've made a jump in your argument that is illogical. Just because someone who is not a scientist (e.g. Greta) advocates a valid scientific proposition (e.g. climate change), does not mean the valid science is invalid because of the person advocating it - or the person who advocates on behalf of the advocate is not a scientist. For example, if someone, who is say mentally challenged, said that the acceleration due to gravity is 9.8 metres per second per second, you could question the intelligence of the person who quoted the formula, but to question the validity of the fact itself is not logical.
And whether she is autistic or goes to school has very little to do with intelligence. Here's shortlist of high school dropouts:
Albert Einstein
Arnold Schwarzenegger
Richard Branson
Quentin Tarantino
George Carlin
Charles Dickens
Ray Kroc
John D Rockerfeller
Benjamin Franklin
Jay Z
Marlon Brando
John Travolta
Frank Sinatra
David Bowie
Prince
Curt Cobain
Walt Disney
Being a high-school dropout certainly does not mean you will be accomplished, but neither does being a high-school dropout mean that one is unintelligent. Another non-sequiter in your argument.
And while we're on the topic, here is a list of folks who are autistic or on the spectrum:
Charles Darwin
Albert Einstein
Bobby Fischer
Bill Gates
Thomas Jefferson
Steve Jobs
Alfred Kinsey
Nikola Tesla
Sir Isaac Newton
Andy Warhol
James Joyce
Again, being autistic does not preclude intelligence. In fact, as you can see, some of the most accomplished people in history were on the spectrum. In fact you could say it is an ingredient in very advanced intelligence.
And finally, I will point out that you committed one of the basest logical fallacies in disparaging Ms Thunberg: an ad hominem argument. That is, in the absence of a logical argument, you resort to insulting someone's character. Kind of telling someone can't be right because she's a woman, or a ni**er, or a ch**k, or a p*ki.
Again, in the absence of providing anything of substance to support what you’re trying to advocate, you resort to insults. I’m neither an intellectual, nor a faux-intellectual, just an ordinary person trying to point out some shortcomings in your method of engaging. If you’re firing blanks, name calling is always effective. It's the playbook for bullies throughout history: if you cannot stand on the merits of you arguments resort to bullying. Well played, Quarantined. What other invective have you in store for me? maybe you’d like to call me a f*g or a h*mo. Oh I have it ... a liberal. Oooooh, that’s a good one. How about, “ you probably voted for Trudeau.” LolHaha. The woke have arisen! Praise Saint Greta! Btw If you had read the post I was responding to you would have realized there was no non sequitur. But sometimes you faux intellectuals just can’t help but display your superior morality, intelligence and “progressivism”
I loved this though:”I believe in philosophy...” That really impressed me.
Condescension is what I expected.Again, in the absence of providing anything of substance to support what you’re trying to advocate, you resort to insults. I’m neither an intellectual, nor a faux-intellectual, just an ordinary person trying to point out some shortcomings in your method of engaging. If you’re firing blanks, name calling is always effective. Its the playbook for bullies throughout history: if you cannot stand on the merits of you arguments resort to bullying. Well played, Quarantined.
A philosopher and a historian. I’m impressed.It’s hardly condescension. I’m merely reacting to your name-calling and pointing out that it has been used throughout history as a means to silence an entire spectrum of speakers. I mean you no ill will. I am as human and fallible as you and look at my shortcomings daily (and there are many). But that does not preclude me from pointing out posts that I feel are unwarranted or unjust. In fact, failing to do so would make me at some level complicit.
Did they even have high schools when Ben Franklin was a teenager? I’m somewhat doubtful of that.Um, I believe in philosophy, this is called a non sequitur, meaning you've made a jump in your argument that is illogical. Just because someone who is not a scientist (e.g. Greta) advocates a valid scientific proposition (e.g. climate change), does not mean the valid science is invalid because of the person advocating it - or the person who advocates on behalf of the advocate is not a scientist. For example, if someone, who is say mentally challenged, said that the acceleration due to gravity is 9.8 metres per second per second, you could question the intelligence of the person who quoted the formula, but to question the validity of the fact itself is not logical.
And whether she is autistic or goes to school has very little to do with intelligence. Here's shortlist of high school dropouts:
Albert Einstein
Arnold Schwarzenegger
Richard Branson
Quentin Tarantino
George Carlin
Charles Dickens
Ray Kroc
John D Rockerfeller
Benjamin Franklin
Jay Z
Marlon Brando
John Travolta
Frank Sinatra
David Bowie
Prince
Curt Cobain
Walt Disney
Being a high-school dropout certainly does not mean you will be accomplished, but neither does being a high-school dropout mean that one is unintelligent. Another non-sequiter in your argument.
And while we're on the topic, here is a list of folks who are autistic or on the spectrum:
Charles Darwin
Albert Einstein
Bobby Fischer
Bill Gates
Thomas Jefferson
Steve Jobs
Alfred Kinsey
Nikola Tesla
Sir Isaac Newton
Andy Warhol
James Joyce
Again, being autistic does not preclude intelligence. In fact, as you can see, some of the most accomplished people in history were on the spectrum. In fact you could say it is an ingredient in very advanced intelligence.
And finally, I will point out that you committed one of the basest logical fallacies in disparaging Ms Thunberg: an ad hominem argument. That is, in the absence of a logical argument, you resort to insulting someone's character. Kind of lie telling someone she can't be right because she's a woman, or a ni**er, or a ch**k, or a p*ki.
