Author Topic: The Wreck of BC  (Read 4946 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline waldo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4241
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #765 on: April 19, 2018, 01:35:47 pm »
A national strategy would have included an energy east pipeline. No?

good on ya! Good for you in reversing your position on the NEP... and relinquishing any further issuance of false/misleading statements concerning the goals/intents of the NEP. Good on ya man, good on ya!

Offline wilber

  • Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6509
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #766 on: April 19, 2018, 02:11:19 pm »
good on ya! Good for you in reversing your position on the NEP... and relinquishing any further issuance of false/misleading statements concerning the goals/intents of the NEP. Good on ya man, good on ya!

So where was the plan to build a pipeline east and refine Canadian oil for Canadian consumption instead of taxing Alberta’s oil in order to buy foreign oil?
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline cybercoma

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2733
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #767 on: April 19, 2018, 02:16:43 pm »
So why do you think it is OK for individual provinces to block other provinces from getting their products to foreign markets?\
Why do you assume that I do?

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #768 on: April 19, 2018, 02:19:14 pm »
So where was the plan to build a pipeline east and refine Canadian oil for Canadian consumption instead of taxing Alberta’s oil in order to buy foreign oil?

The nationalization of the industry (goal was 50% by 1990) was to allow for projects to ensure Canada self sufficiency. Compare Canada to Norway, they both had similar idea and Norway did extremely well but Alberta screwed Canada and we sold out to foreign companies that buy tarsands oil at 15% discount.
Like Like x 1 Winner Winner x 1 Dumb Dumb x 1 View List

Offline cybercoma

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2733
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #769 on: April 19, 2018, 02:21:10 pm »
If we're a confederacy which shares in resources then individual provinces should not be permitted to block the export of those resources given the profits go to all of Canada.
Find a safe way to get it there, where the province, rather than industry, won't have to pay to clean up the inevitable environmental disasters. Asking BC to take on all the risks, while Alberta reaps the bulk of the benefits is not fair terms.

Offline wilber

  • Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6509
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #770 on: April 19, 2018, 02:53:59 pm »
The nationalization of the industry (goal was 50% by 1990) was to allow for projects to ensure Canada self sufficiency. Compare Canada to Norway, they both had similar idea and Norway did extremely well but Alberta screwed Canada and we sold out to foreign companies that buy tarsands oil at 15% discount.

So where was the plan to get Canadian oil east instead of taxing Alberta’s resources to feed eastern Canada’s foreign oil addiction. Show me.

Alberta has no alternative to selling to the US at a discount because BC and Central Canada block their access to any other markets and Central Canada would rather pay world price to some of the armpits of the world than buy it from Canadians.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #771 on: April 19, 2018, 03:04:59 pm »
So where was the plan to get Canadian oil east

What the frig do you think energy self sufficiency means?

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #772 on: April 19, 2018, 03:13:46 pm »
Find a safe way to get it there, where the province, rather than industry, won't have to pay to clean up the inevitable environmental disasters. Asking BC to take on all the risks, while Alberta reaps the bulk of the benefits is not fair terms.
We are either a country or not. There is no BC coastline - it is a Canadian coastline and if BC is fine with putting the Canadian coastline at risk in order to expand shipping through port of Vancouver, international coal shipments and LNG then there is really no argument that transport of Alberta oil is a significant additional risk.
Dumb Dumb x 1 View List

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #773 on: April 19, 2018, 03:15:56 pm »
coal shipments and LNG

Are a bizillion times less dangerous to the coastline than dilbit.
Agree Agree x 2 View List

Offline wilber

  • Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6509
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #774 on: April 19, 2018, 03:34:30 pm »
What the frig do you think energy self sufficiency means?

Show me the friggin plan.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #775 on: April 19, 2018, 03:44:27 pm »
Show me the friggin plan.

You are 35 years too late.
Funny Funny x 1 View List

Offline wilber

  • Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6509
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #776 on: April 19, 2018, 04:07:28 pm »
You are 35 years too late.

Ya, there never was one.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline wilber

  • Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6509
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #777 on: April 19, 2018, 05:12:00 pm »
you've finally read it! Great... I expect that should dispense with any more of your nonsensical statements about the relative equality of federal expenditures. Since you're the one having trouble understanding the Equalization Program and where it actually positions in terms of overall federal expenditures, you need to, as you say, "explain what it is". Please proceed Governor!

Listen there is a formula for equalization and you know it. Other federal expenditures that are not mandatory are at the discretion of the federal government, they can be a whole bunch, they can be nothing or something in between. Are you claiming the federal government makes up for what Alberta gives up in equalization by other means, over and above what it does for other provinces? If so, cite.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #778 on: April 19, 2018, 05:53:21 pm »
Are a bizillion times less dangerous to the coastline than dilbit.
The only fuel spills have been from non-oil related ships. An actual fuel spill does a bazillion times more damage than a hypothetical one.

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #779 on: April 19, 2018, 06:08:22 pm »
The only fuel spills have been from non-oil related ships.

? are you talking about port of Vancouver here

Currently about 1% of the ships visiting the port of Vancouver transport crude oil, the KM expansion will increase that to over 10%