Author Topic: The Wreck of BC  (Read 9972 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline waldo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8715
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #855 on: April 22, 2018, 11:30:24 am »
Rex Murphy has a way with words.

a kindred blowhard spirit of yours - clearly! A lot of words to simply say unlawful actions have recourse/consequences...  ;D

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5033
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #856 on: April 22, 2018, 12:08:15 pm »
geezaz! Although it doesn't pertain to your initial statement I'm replying to, I purposely left in your "complete moron" comment... it's quite germane to your own statement! Pipelines don't get built in a matter of weeks - ya think! At the moment U.S. imports (based on shale oil extraction) have displaced some of the traditional foreign import sources - the long(er) term viability of shale reserves suggests the time is ripe for that pipeline (notwithstanding the level of existing foreign (non U.S.) imports):



(thanks for further cementing your acceptance of Canadian subservience  ;D)

Energy East was dropped because there just wasn't a strong business case for it.  Ultimately the subservience here is to economics.

But, suppose there were some national body that said "you know what? We want to build this anyway.  It will reduce use of Middle East oil, reduce tanker traffic, and prepare us for some point in the future where foreign oil becomes unreliable." 

That wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing.  Ms Notley raised the prospect of going into the pipeline business if Kinder-Morgan pulls the pin. Mr Trudeau seemed interested as well.  Perhaps some consortium of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and/or the Federal Government could work together to build needed pipelines even if industry isn't interested.   Alberta did this once before-- the Alberta Energy Company was founded by the Alberta government to develop natural gas resources in the province. Half the shares were sold to the public, it was very popular at the time-- a province-building venture that people were apparently very excited about. I recall that dad was the proud owner of some small number of AEC shares (allegedly bought with beer money.)  That turned out to be a pretty big success-- later on the government sold its remaining stake in AEC to the public, and a few years and a few mergers later AEC had turned into Encana.   Maybe the pipeline difficulties could be addressed in a similar manner.


But supposing the plan to build Energy East were put forward by a federal government-led group, rather than a private company.  Would that make it any more popular?  I suggest it wouldn't.  Hundreds of First Nations groups between Alberta and Quebec hate the project.  Dozens of Quebec mayors, including the mayor of Montreal, had pledged to go to war against the project. Quebec voters hate the project, so politicians opposed it as well (as they should in a representative democracy.)

I don't think the federal government would have the guts to push for a pipeline if it was Quebec, rather than BC, standing in the way.  If it were Quebec rather than BC, the attempt to assert federal authority would just be fuel for Quebec sovereigntists and I don't think that's a bear that any federal politician wants to poke.

 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City

Offline waldo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8715
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #857 on: April 22, 2018, 12:28:01 pm »
I don't think the federal government would have the guts to push for a pipeline if it was Quebec, rather than BC, standing in the way.  If it were Quebec rather than BC, the attempt to assert federal authority would just be fuel for Quebec sovereigntists and I don't think that's a bear that any federal politician wants to poke.

which ultimately should have been the takeaway from my pointing out your multiple faux pas concerning NEP... I'm shocked you haven't acknowledged those yet - shocked I tells ya! The takeaway that the, as I stated, NEP presented an avenue toward natural infrastructure opportunities well in advance of today's well organized anti-pipeline forces... in which, western producers would have had access to a national market these past many decades, would have positioned Canada for control of its own resources, wouldn't have allowed Canada to relinquish resource sovereignty to the U.S., etc..

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5033
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #858 on: April 22, 2018, 12:47:09 pm »
which ultimately should have been the takeaway from my pointing out your multiple faux pas concerning NEP... I'm shocked you haven't acknowledged those yet - shocked I tells ya! The takeaway that the, as I stated, NEP presented an avenue toward natural infrastructure opportunities well in advance of today's well organized anti-pipeline forces...

The NEP didn't have a plan to build pipelines. As mentioned, it was based on the assumption that oil reserves would be found elsewhere rather than expanding capacity from Alberta.

And the idea that all the pipelines we needed could have been built already before anti-pipeline forces were organized enough to oppose it is wishful thinking, because needs always change. Kinder-Morgan 1 was all the trans-mountain pipeline we needed... until it wasn't.

in which, western producers would have had access to a national market these past many decades, would have positioned Canada for control of its own resources, wouldn't have allowed Canada to relinquish resource sovereignty to the U.S., etc..

There might have been noble aims, but it was badly executed. Choking the goose that lays the golden egg is always a bad plan, no matter how lofty your intentions.

 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City

Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8563
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #859 on: April 22, 2018, 12:55:29 pm »
a kindred blowhard spirit of yours - clearly! A lot of words to simply say unlawful actions have recourse/consequences...  ;D

I used to enjoy listening to Rex when he hosted X Country and then I started reading some his columns in the Post and some of his rants on CBC TV and how wildly they differed. He should introduce himself as Rex Murphy, "I'm schizophrenic, and so am I"

Offline waldo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8715
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #860 on: April 22, 2018, 01:01:12 pm »
The NEP didn't have a plan to build pipelines. As mentioned, it was based on the assumption that oil reserves would be found elsewhere rather than expanding capacity from Alberta.

And the idea that all the pipelines we needed could have been built already before anti-pipeline forces were organized enough to oppose it is wishful thinking, because needs always change. Kinder-Morgan 1 was all the trans-mountain pipeline we needed... until it wasn't.

There might have been noble aims, but it was badly executed. Choking the goose that lays the golden egg is always a bad plan, no matter how lofty your intentions.

please stop your self-serving revisionism and showcasing you haven't a clue concerning NEP. Notwithstanding western whining undercut anything NEP could have accomplished, it was Petro-Canada's revenue stream that was to target foreign companies... to expand Canada's supply... to promote self-sufficiency. You keep nattering on about an emphasis on higher-risk "frontier" exploration - clearly you haven't quite grasped yet just how entrenched foreign/U.S. multi-nationals were in Alberta (as say compared to offshore or NWT). Petro-Canada was ultimately intended to provide a continuous guaranteed revenue stream to the federal treasury as a corporation controlling pipelines, refineries, and retail... you know... the things foreign/U.S. multi-nationals had a lock on!

Offline wilber

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9121
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #861 on: April 22, 2018, 01:10:40 pm »
a kindred blowhard spirit of yours - clearly! A lot of words to simply say unlawful actions have recourse/consequences...  ;D

Talk about pot calling kettle. :D
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline waldo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8715
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #862 on: April 22, 2018, 01:19:55 pm »
Talk about pot calling kettle. :D

no - the waldo is certainly not Rex-Murphy/Argus verbose... I mean, c'mon - I come straight at your typical nonsense in this particular subject regard.


Offline wilber

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9121
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #863 on: April 22, 2018, 01:31:28 pm »
no - the waldo is certainly not Rex-Murphy/Argus verbose... I mean, c'mon - I come straight at your typical nonsense in this particular subject regard.

I certainly can’t match your opinion of yourself.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5033
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #864 on: April 22, 2018, 01:55:52 pm »
please stop your self-serving revisionism and showcasing you haven't a clue concerning NEP.
The revisionism is that the NEP was a great plan that would have addressed all of the issues we're now facing.  Revisionism and wishful thinking are trying to turn it into something it wasn't and wasn't even intended to be.

Notwithstanding western whining undercut anything NEP could have accomplished,

The NEP ran for years without regard for the whining. Suggesting that the whining somehow impeded the NEP is funny and dumb.

it was Petro-Canada's revenue stream that was to target foreign companies... to expand Canada's supply... to promote self-sufficiency.

Petro-Canada was envisioned primarily with consumers in mind. As a safeguard against price collusion and gauging, and as a way to ensure that Canadian consumers would have access to oil and gas even if American companies pulled back supply in times of shortage, as happened in the 1970s.   It was never viewed as the revenue stream to fund the NEP's objectives.    The money came, mostly, from taxes imposed on producers of "old oil", and on exports of oil out of Canada.

You keep nattering on about an emphasis on higher-risk "frontier" exploration - clearly you haven't quite grasped yet just how entrenched foreign/U.S. multi-nationals were in Alberta (as say compared to offshore or NWT). Petro-Canada was ultimately intended to provide a continuous guaranteed revenue stream to the federal treasury as a corporation controlling pipelines, refineries, and retail... you know... the things foreign/U.S. multi-nationals had a lock on!

The bulk of revenue was intended to come from taxes on producers, not Petro-Canada.  The notion was that heavily taxing Alberta production would incentivize exploration for "new oil" while also incentivizing foreign producers to sell off their Alberta operations to Canadian owners or to the federal government.  Instead they just managed to disincentivize Alberta production.

The failure of the NEP isn't because of whining, it's because they punished the industry and because they never did find all this offshore and northern oil that they had anticipated would make all the pain worthwhile.


 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #865 on: April 22, 2018, 04:32:36 pm »
Rex Murphy has a way with words.

Why, because all he does is insult people that are taking a stand? Would he say the same thing about civil rights activists, or those who opposed the Vietname war? Perhaps in the 60's he would, but looking back on history if he did that today he would be exposed for the vile  person that he is.

Offline waldo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8715
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #866 on: April 22, 2018, 05:03:41 pm »
The revisionism is

YOURS!

c'mon, for western whining & alienation sake, as is your typical way (earlier), you made all these bullshyte statements about the NEP... predicated upon your big-time failure in confusing gas versus oil pipelines!  ;D How does one take you serious after that bonehead play... that you still haven't acknowledged!  ;D Try to recover - start by providing the cite I asked you for earlier... for good measure add another to cover this latest reply's worth of... revisionism you're spinning, hey!


Offline SirJohn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5801
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #867 on: April 22, 2018, 07:24:27 pm »
Why, because all he does is insult people that are taking a stand?

No, because he mocks fanatics.

I can understand why that would make YOU indignant.
"When liberals insist that only fascists will defend borders then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals won't do." David Frum

Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8563
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #868 on: April 22, 2018, 08:18:39 pm »
No, because he mocks fanatics.

I can understand why that would make YOU indignant.

Unfortunately because his attempts at mockery are so schizo he comes off sounding like a fanatic. Too bad, he used to be interesting to listen to.

Offline Squidward von Squidderson

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5630
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #869 on: April 22, 2018, 08:22:39 pm »
Rex has turned into an angry old man who doesn’t want the world to change and doesn’t understand why the change is good. 

“What’s wrong with pollution???  I grew up with pollution and it never killed me.”
Like Like x 2 View List