Unioinist asked: And yes, I fully understand why the home of Irving would see a lot of "non-partisan" Energy East support, just as I understand the same phenomenon in Alberta. The question is, why? Is it just "please, I want a good-paying job"?
Caissa answers: Yes. It's about a strong NB economy.
No jobs on a dead planet.
Unioinist asked: And yes, I fully understand why the home of Irving would see a lot of "non-partisan" Energy East support, just as I understand the same phenomenon in Alberta. The question is, why? Is it just "please, I want a good-paying job"?
Caissa answers: Yes. It's about a strong NB economy.
Meanwhile, we Quebecers won't host a pipeline to feed Mr. Irving's refineries, and we're not eager to see another 47 people killed to strengthen that economy either.
We need to find other ways. And if the "left" and the "right" and the Notleys and the Kenneys are united in the quest for a "strong economy", then no one will be even looking for other ways.
Our planet's epitaph will be: "They closed their eyes in unity."
Ultimately, the constitutional issues over pipeline jurisdiction will be resolved by the SCC.
My concern about oil development is the threat to water. As I have said before.
It is beautiful how people take things completely out of context.
My main beef with Suzuki has always been that he is a zoologist and worked in genetics, but we have to conform to his opinions on the environment because reasons. If he was an ecologist or had a stronger academic background in environmental studies I'd take his opinions a little more seriously. He has always given me the impression of the being the kind of person who would fart in a crowded elevator, and then expect everyone to love the smell because hey, it's from David Suzuki!!!!
Alberta historically solved their budget issues by expanding the oil and gas industry. Poulation doubling? Build another megaproject north of Ft McMurray!! Budget trending towrds the red? Build another megaproject up north of Ft McMurray!! It was a pretty terrible short term plan in a lot of ways but it always worked in the past, at least until recently.
All the Alberta budgets and annual reports and whatnot are available online, it's actually kind of scary just how little revenue appears to come in from oil and gas. 2016-17 annual report, 41.4 billion dollars in total revenue, only 656 million from oil and gas royalties. Somewhere in the 4.3 billion from corporate taxes ought to be a big chunk from the o & g industry, but I haven't been able to dig down and see just how much, probably just not finding the right reports or the right sections of the reports I did find. Presumably workers in the o & g industry make up a chunk of the personal income tax revenue as well, but exactly how much I don't know.
Anyways, the Alberta oil and gas industry may not be the huge part of our provincial income that people seem to think it is, probably in large part due to the stupid short-sighted decisions made by previous PC governments that would make sweetheart deals with multinational corporations to build that next big megaproject north of Ft McMurray that would help keep us in the black.
"Provincial Premier advocates on behalf of important industry" OMFG so right wing!
Anyone who seriously thinks the Alberta NDP is as right wing as the Alberta Progressive Conservatives, the Wild Rose or the new UCP really doesn't have a good understanding of current Alberta provincial politics.
My main beef with Suzuki has always been that he is a zoologist and worked in genetics, but we have to conform to his opinions on the environment because reasons. If he was an ecologist or had a stronger academic background in environmental studies I'd take his opinions a little more seriously. He has always given me the impression of the being the kind of person who would fart in a crowded elevator, and then expect everyone to love the smell because hey, it's from David Suzuki!!!!
Alberta historically solved their budget issues by expanding the oil and gas industry. Poulation doubling? Build another megaproject north of Ft McMurray!! Budget trending towrds the red? Build another megaproject up north of Ft McMurray!! It was a pretty terrible short term plan in a lot of ways but it always worked in the past, at least until recently.
All the Alberta budgets and annual reports and whatnot are available online, it's actually kind of scary just how little revenue appears to come in from oil and gas. 2016-17 annual report, 41.4 billion dollars in total revenue, only 656 million from oil and gas royalties. Somewhere in the 4.3 billion from corporate taxes ought to be a big chunk from the o & g industry, but I haven't been able to dig down and see just how much, probably just not finding the right reports or the right sections of the reports I did find. Presumably workers in the o & g industry make up a chunk of the personal income tax revenue as well, but exactly how much I don't know.
Anyways, the Alberta oil and gas industry may not be the huge part of our provincial income that people seem to think it is, probably in large part due to the stupid short-sighted decisions made by previous PC governments that would make sweetheart deals with multinational corporations to build that next big megaproject north of Ft McMurray that would help keep us in the black.
"Provincial Premier advocates on behalf of important industry" OMFG so right wing!
Anyone who seriously thinks the Alberta NDP is as right wing as the Alberta Progressive Conservatives, the Wild Rose or the new UCP really doesn't have a good understanding of current Alberta provincial politics.
An excellent real post based on facts and financial analysis for a good cause. We need to see more of this!
It does seem dismal that they are only getting $600m or so in oil royalties, and $4 B in corporate taxes. This is 12% of $33 billion. So Alberta has made $33 billion in corporate profit off of gasoline sales to the rest of Canada, not to mention the gross profit, which is used to pay executive and worker salaries, out of which $22 billion went back to Ottawa in income taxes, as they so often complain. It seems like that is an $11 billion net profit, and much more in gross profit, which keeps Alberta's lights on.
Indeed, if one looks at the low royalty rates it makes the question even more pressing of why the Alberta government would allow companies to just scrape this stuff up, drain existing resources to process it, and ship it away for profit while leaving the waste behind for us to clean up.
It isn't like it is benefitting many people here at all. So why did the federal government decide to do this?
And that $33B or whatever it is isn't Alberta's profit, it is oil company profit.
And for those who think it is just Alberta, the main dynamic is at the federal level, it involves national and international investors, and it is a race to the bottom.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/canada-energy-policy-1.4505852
http://www.baystreet.ca/commodities/1692/Oil-and-Gas-Investments-Leaving...
And from last year. Canada Pension Plan sinking $1B into U.S. oil, in addition to the $4.5B they have invested, primarily in western Canadian Oil.
https://ca.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idCAKBN19J1R4-OCADN
This is our pension money being used to bankroll this dying venture.
Indeed, if one looks at the low royalty rates it makes the question even more pressing of why the Alberta government would allow companies to just scrape this stuff up, drain existing resources to process it, and ship it away for profit while leaving the waste behind for us to clean up.
It isn't like it is benefitting many people here at all. So why did the federal government decide to do this?
And that $33B or whatever it is isn't Alberta's profit, it is oil company profit.
Money in, money out. If they want to let their resources drain down to net profit of the oil companies, that is not our problem. They could have taxed it properly, and many other things. The net benefit went to Calgary head offices, which are in Alberta.
Progressive17
My point isn't that they aren't complicit. It is that it isn't really in their best interest because the ones who are really making the money are the companies. So why are they pushing so hard for it?
Because it seems like the oil industry has threatened to completely shut down. That is what I am reading.
Well they are certainly spinning it as something they need, and deals like the TPP also seem contingent on it as well.
Check this out. Capital spending in oil and gas has dropped 47 percent since 2014, and one of the things they are blaming is the U.S. So that is part of what they are using to push it
https://www.canadasoilsands.ca/en/explore-topics/economic-contribution
And the stick is that Kinder Morgan could sue Canada if this is not rammed through:
http://business.financialpost.com/opinion/terence-corcoran-ottawas-next-...
I think it's because if we try the old "approve another megaproject in northern Alberta" trick, all we can currently do is sell it to the Americans at a steep discount, and even then the pipeline capacity isn't there as far as I know.
We made a lot of sweetheart deals in the past. "OK, your royalty rate is 1% (or whatever it was) until you pay off your initial capital investment, then the royalty rates will go up". Under that regime, who is going to pay off their initial investment? I sure wouldn't. I'd milk that advantage for as long as I possibly could.
Basically, it's why Norway is sitting on a big bag of cash while Alberta doesn't have nearly as much to show for it.
I personally believe it's the end of the line for major developments in Alberta. The pipelines would help open up new markets to us, aside from that the biggest threat to the Alberta oil and gas industry would be oil prices crashing again.
The US is consuming 7 billion barrels a year and only seem to have a reserve of 36. I don't know if they will have anything in a decade, although if the price rises they may find more. The Royal Bank of Canada has been in business for 200 years. Do you think it is going anywhere? The oil under the ground in Alberta sure isn't either. Why are they so impatient to make a loonie now, when they could maybe make a fin later? They should be patient. Good things come to those who wait. I can see that stuff going over $200, and if they had a decent royalty regime the bucks would flow.
The race is to sell into a necessarily declining market. 1$ now might become $5 in a decade but the $4 will be some sort of carbon pricing, not margin.
Suzuki: A house on the water in Point Grey, another property in Toronto, another one in Australia, and another one on Quadra Island. Point Grey? Loaded! A house in Toronto! Loaded! To fly to Australia and back (first class probably) that is a good 25,000 km, which is the permanent destruction of 5 square metres of Arctic sea ice. Not for the whole plane. Just for him. If he really cared about the planet, he would never fly in an airplane again.
Suzuki is also very quiet on the subject of foreign funding of his Foundation. Millions have gone into it.
I don't think even Warren Buffet needs 4 houses. I sure don't! I don't even want one!
Charlatan.
So you're getting this from Ezra Levant, then? Because that's the main source of that information that I could find.
Here's some clarification from a more reliable source:
“I’ve had critics all my life,” says Suzuki. “But I certainly think the intensity and vileness of the personal attacks has changed.” Levant, who is a trained lawyer with a great deal of personal experience with Canada’s libel laws, has been careful to make most of his allegations technically factual, Suzuki says, but they’re a contorted version of the truth. The house in Vancouver was purchased for $145,000 in 1975 with a loan from Suzuki’s in-laws. For years, he and Cullis lived in the basement and rented out the top floor in order to afford it. Later on, they added a second storey and her parents moved in. Suzuki’s mother-in-law, now 95, still lives above them. “It’s not like it was an investment. It’s the crazy escalation of house prices,” he says.
As for the charge about the island, it took some digging for Suzuki to figure out what Levant was talking about. In 1986, after winning a $100,000 achievement award from the Royal Bank, he and his wife bought 10 acres on Quadra Island as a getaway property. It was part of a much larger parcel that was being subdivided. As it turns out, one of the other buyers made their purchase through a family business, a Calgary company that once delivered home heating oil, but now exists in name only.
Similarly, Suzuki allows that there is a shred of truth to the story about his Montreal talk. Presented with an offer from the college to use students from its police training course as security, his assistant wrote an email saying Suzuki preferred a more low-key approach, and noting that he regularly travels with a female assistant who clears a path through crowds by politely asking people to move aside. His appearance fee—not just for the speech, but a full day of fundraising activities for John Abbott—was about $10,000 less than has been reported, and came out of the pocket of a well-to-do Montreal supporter, not from the college’s end.
http://www.macleans.ca/society/life/the-nature-of-david-suzuki/
Here's the thing - the man is the face of one of the few science documentary outlets in the country, and one that garners a well-established and sizeable audience. He's well-compensated for that. He writes books that sell well. There's money in that, too. So what? He's given back a fuckuvalot more than most people working in similar capacities.
Farley Mowat, for example, had a net worth of about $10 million when he died. That has no bearing on his work as a naturalist and environmental advocate.
Poverty cred is meaningless.
Be that as it may, I hope he takes the bus and not the plane from Vancouver to Calgary to take his prize.
My main beef with Suzuki has always been that he is a zoologist and worked in genetics, but we have to conform to his opinions on the environment because reasons.
Well, in the same way that Mr. Dressup was the Canadian Mr. Rogers, Suzuki is the Canadian "Bill Nye the Science Guy". To be fair, part of it is that a not small part of the population thinks "Scientist" is a job title, referring to people who know all about biology, chemistry, physics, astronomy and medicine.
Anyway, nobody's going to question his cred if he opposes a pipeline -- we pretty much expect that of him.
If, on the other hand, he'd said "I see no problem with this proposed pipeline, as a scientist", people would literally be phoning his alma mater demanding proof of his B.Sc.
I'm just personally glad he never decided to add metallurgy to his wheelhouse in order to comment on 9/11 (unlike other biologist types, similarly enjoying the confusion between their actual specialty and generic "scientists" who can pontificate on anything that seems like "science").
Be that as it may, I hope he takes the bus and not the plane from Vancouver to Calgary to take his prize.
And I hope you grow up someday, too.
Not holding my breath, mind.
Magoo wrote:
Well, in the same way that Mr. Dressup was the Canadian Mr. Rogers
Bit of an historical aside, but Fred Rogers and Ernie Coombs actually moved up to Canada together to produce a kids' show on CBC, and Fred went home after a few years but Ernie stayed(or at least continued to work) in Canada.
And I wouldn't quite call Mr. Dressup, as it eventually evolved, the Canadian Mr. Rogers, as the focus of the two shows was somewhat different. Dressup was more fun things to do around the house, whereas Rogers dealt more with emotions and whatnot.
Be that as it may, I hope he takes the bus and not the plane from Vancouver to Calgary to take his prize.
pretty sure it's the UoA Edmonton not Calgary.
Ezra is not a real good source ya know.
your harlot stuff is whacked too.
And I wouldn't quite call Mr. Dressup, as it eventually evolved, the Canadian Mr. Rogers, as the focus of the two shows was somewhat different. Dressup was more fun things to do around the house, whereas Rogers dealt more with emotions and whatnot.
Fair enough. I grew up in a border town (Sarnia) so I got both Canadian and U.S. television. I kind of liked both of them, but Gord help me, I think I liked Captain Kangaroo best of all. A military man (smh)!!
On the other hand, I think I tilted 55% to 45% in terms of "Oopsie the Clown" versus "Bozo the Clown".
I don't fly and I don't drive, because I think it is wrong to do so. I think if you burn carbon to that extent, you don't have much right to preach to people about the planet. If you own a place in Toronto and Vancouver, you are going to fly a lot. No matter how little you paid for them, or whether you inherited them or not. Because of my lifestyle, the planet provides what I need for the whole year, not just up to July or August like most people.
Put your money where your mouth is, David Suzuki.
These are up at the U of A. Hopefully most of those who see them will get the point.
And that interview this morning with Brett Wilson:
http://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/the-current-for-april-26-2018-1.46361...
Wow, thanks for both these items, Smith. And yes, with all due respect to the objectivity and intelligence of U of A students and faculty, I do hope they read the whole poster before going out to win themselves a bounty.
For those who prefer to scan and read, here's the full transcript of The Current's episode where Brett Wilson was interviewed - including where Anna Maria Tremonti asked him about his tweet: "Do we still hang for treason?"
Magoo wrote:
Fair enough. I grew up in a border town (Sarnia) so I got both Canadian and U.S. television. I kind of liked both of them, but Gord help me, I think I liked Captain Kangaroo best of all. A military man (smh)!!
According to the book linked below, Bob Keeshan was a hard-drinking loudmouth who liked to take his writers to the bar after tapings and berate them for their alleged shortcomings. Keeshan made the mistake of pulling this stunt immediately after some of his writers had been contacted by the fledgling Children's Television Workshop, and they took this as a prompt to sign on with Sesame Street the next day.
We also got American TV in Edmonton, so I too grew up with Rogers and the Captain. The funny thing is, I don't think I have any memories of actually enjoying them, just of thinking that they were babyish by the time I had reached the age where one is conscious of being older than other kids. My mom does say that seeing Mr. Rogers go to a doctor's office one day helped me feel less afraid of my own trips to the clinic.
I am trying to determine how Captain Kangaroo and Sesame St. have anything to do with the objections to the academic honours to be placed on the environmental sacred cow David Suzuki by an Alberta university. Surely The Beverly Hillbillies would be more relevant.
We also got American TV in Edmonton, so I too grew up with Rogers and the Captain. The funny thing is, I don't think I have any memories of actually enjoying them, just of thinking that they were babyish by the time I had reached the age where one is conscious of being older than other kids.
I had my own tiny b/w TV when I was young, and could watch whatever I wanted, and I think I watched Polka Dot Door almost until my voice broke. :)
And this will always be a bit embarrassing, but maybe some might like a laugh? I was in my 20's when someone pointed out how one of the young hosts of Polka Dot Door would always mysteriously disappear just before Polkaroo appeared. LOL! I thought I was being savvy by noticing the screen door "vent" in his neck that the human obviously looked/breathed through, but I'd never connected the dots on Brad having to "go do something" and Brad being inside the Polkaroo suit. SMH!
Please, friends, stop the diversions from an important topic. Maybe give some comments on academic freedom, on the environment, on the role of politicians when their puny self-interest comes in conflict with doing what's good for the future of humanity and the planet. Please.
I don’t agree with her position on KM but Rachel sure is on on fire this week. It looks like she has gained about 15% on Kenney in the polls that came out today and now this:
Atlantic Canada needs a Notley
http://www.capebretonpost.com/business/adrian-white-atlantic-canada-needs-a-notley-205305/
https://globalnews.ca/news/4169937/alberta-ndp-ucp-approval-gap-poll/
I don’t agree with her position on KM but Rachel sure is on on fire this week. It looks like she has gained about 15% on Kenney in the polls that came out today and now this:
Atlantic Canada needs a Notley
http://www.capebretonpost.com/business/adrian-white-atlantic-canada-needs-a-notley-205305/
I wholeheartedly support Rachel Notley for Prime Minister. Now that she has consolidated her creds with the foreign oil billionaires, Canada could soon replace Saudi Arabia, the U.S., and Russia as the world's largest oil producer. We would all be rich. Plus, she's a dyed-in-the-wool socialist and cares deeply about the environment. And Suzuki could be extradited to, somewhere. It's a win-win-win-win-win!
the thread title is bs.
that's my input.
i am so happy she is climbing in the polls. life in AB is becoming somewhat tolerable.
under Kenney it will be worse than ever before.
i give a rats ass about Suzuki getting another phoney degree.
i care about real people trying to live.
Thanks quizzical
This is just another one of Unionist’s hates the NDP threads
This is just another one of Unionist’s hates the NDP threads
Correct. But my love for you burns bright, despite everything. I want to have your babies. Can you check your schedule please? Then text me.
Thanks quizzical
This is just another one of Unionist’s hates the NDP threads
Hold on a sec. I hope Notley gets in again too, but that doesn't mean I support her trying to push this pipeline through, or the tactics she is using to do it.
And it certainly doesn't mean I support the bashing of the University of Alberta and pileon against David Suzuki because he correctly points out the dangers of climate change generally, and the tar sands in particular.
This is not just a "slam the NDP" issue.
This is not just a "slam the NDP" issue.
Really? I thought everything was about what party you loyally support like a blind brainless robot. You're going to undermine NorthReport's very foundation of existence if you carry on with such sensible comments.
It's my party, right or wrong!!! Especially wrong!!!!!!! Yeah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Unionist spends his time bashing the NDP whether it is this thread, his previous attack Notley thread, or his comments in that stupid right out of the right-wing media bashing Singh gun control thread. That’s his prerogative but let’s get a grip it’s a minor miracle we have an NDP government in Alberta and he is doing his best to destroy that.
I am determined to destroy the NDP government in Alberta, and to have NorthReport's babies. I have no opinions. I am a professional troll. And lover. I can multitask. If you agree, please sign the petition - just need another 2, 947 signatures!
You are putting Notley in the same category as Kenney just look at the title of this thread
Thanks but no thanks
You are putting Notley in the same category as Kenney just look at the title of this thread
Thanks but no thanks
You're right, my bad. Fixed it. Thanks for pointing that out!
Suzuki helped elect Gordan Campbell so I don't have much use for him. However university's regularly give honourary degrees to people I don't like.
Please, friends, stop the diversions from an important topic. Maybe give some comments on academic freedom, on the environment, on the role of politicians when their puny self-interest comes in conflict with doing what's good for the future of humanity and the planet. Please.
Fair enough. I think the U of A is welcome to give an honourary degree to whomever they wish, though that may impact their donation revenue, which has already taken a hit from this. It seems like a bit of a stretch to honour a man who has called for the incarceration of a good number of your institution’s graduates...but hey, I'm not a university president, so I'm not paid the big bucks to decide these things.
I am an Albertan by birth (and raisin'), though I went to great universities (i.e. not in this country) so I don't really care what the U of A does beyond the obvious indignation I feel as an Albertan. I'm honestly not sure what Susuki has done to receive his large number of honourary degrees (this makes 30 or so?), but clearly other institutions have been suckered before, including the University of Calgary, which already gave him an honourary degree.
Frankly, I'm not sure what the honour is for. Surely not for his actual field of genetics or zoology, since he's laughed at by professors in those fields. So maybe for his environmental activism, which I assume most U of A science and engineering grads would scoff at. I certainly would find that a bit humorous, since any number of actual U of A graduates have likely reduced our GHG emissions by more than say, (how should we measure this?)…several Susukis over their careers without being bestowed the honourary degree.
Universities give honorary degrees all the time. The only time it is ever an issue isn't because of qualification(they are honorary after all); it is because some people have something against the recipient. What is Suzuki's transgression? His work against climate change and his opposition to the tar sands and to this pipeline. It's no secret, and he has been called a traitor for that very reason. So these claims about credentials don't fool anyone and I'm not sure why anyone would bother to pretend it is about something other than what it is.
why do they? it's not like they mean sfa.
especially when a person has dozens it means even less.
My point is that this isn't whether or not a person "qualifies". It is because some are pissed off that he is receiving this honour because of the work he has done.
Symbolics Uber Alles!
This thread isn't about whether Suzuki deserves an honorary degree - whatever that means anyway - or whether he's a wonderful guy. It's about a huge reactionary right-wing onslaught in response, and the Premier weighing in by saying she wouldn't have given him one either, that it's a "polarizing" decision, etc. When was the last time Notley commented unfavourably about an honorary degree award (correct, never)? The reason she did so is exactly what Smith has said above. I'll put it my way. She has turned into a shill for the oil billionaires, because she figures that's how to hang on to power.
