Federal Government Approves Kinder Morgan and Line 3
- Thread starter Ringo
- Start date
- Status
Looks like the District of Kitimat beat Christy to it:
Attachments
This should be easy Eastmon: "raw" bitumen verses "finished", refined products; "raw" logs verses "finished" lumber, etc. Common denominator in BC: "China".
No, no,no..
This should - AGAIN - be an easy one to understand Eastmon. I thought it was about: "Jobs, jobs, jobs". If we sent out raw stuff to buy it back again finished - how does that help us support our own workers? It should go out finished - or forget it! Right??
Eastmon
There are two distinct but tightly related economic terms: Value Added Product and Gross Domestic Productivity (GDP). Those economies that are capable of acquiring relatively cheap resources and turn them into processed/manufactured products generate higher GDP. GDP is measured per capita (head/person) and is a standard indicator of life quality and economic prosperity. Countries like Japan, South Korea and Sweden are major importers of natural resources but have the highest GDP and quality of life in the world. Economies that rely on extracting and selling "raw" resources, are doomed to live in sh*%t and will pretty much leave nothing for their next generation to chew on. It's that plain basic and black & white.
There are two distinct but tightly related economic terms: Value Added Product and Gross Domestic Productivity (GDP). Those economies that are capable of acquiring relatively cheap resources and turn them into processed/manufactured products generate higher GDP. GDP is measured per capita (head/person) and is a standard indicator of life quality and economic prosperity. Countries like Japan, South Korea and Sweden are major importers of natural resources but have the highest GDP and quality of life in the world. Economies that rely on extracting and selling "raw" resources, are doomed to live in sh*%t and will pretty much leave nothing for their next generation to chew on. It's that plain basic and black & white.
Why are you saying this?
My point was people protesting Canada being able to ship a product and the benefits the industry provides. The countries your talking about have innovated ways to get around a lack of natural resource. Canada isn't in that boat.
triplenickel
Well-Known Member
Like it or not all of our potential customers for these raws have excess refining capacity and aren't interested in buying anything else. Wanna guess what they'll do if they don't get it from us? Not buy it isn't the answer.
ziggy
Well-Known Member
That seems like the short-sighted view that all our previous governments have taken. I think we need to shift to the value added market from simply supplying raw material. Remember when Japan wanted all our coal? We (government)built roads, rail lines, mines and a port to facilitate getting our product to them. Next thing we know there is a glut of coal and we are subsidising the now discounted product! Literally paying them to take it.
Natural resources are finite. They can only play suppliers off against each other for so long. Remember how OPEC started? If the country ever got its crap together and started to say " we'll sell you lumber, but if you want logs, look elsewhere" we'd be better off as a nation.
It wouldn't be easy to change,and who knows if it's even possible with the free trade deals we signed, but let's be honest, we export jobs with the raw materials! As a nation we seem to be interested in the quick buck, rather than the longtime game.
In the short term resource customers can go elsewhere. But by doing this they will eventually drive up prices and deplete availability, making our resources even more valuable when they come back. And they will come back.
Funny how we own a finite supply of resources that the world needs, yet they get to call the shots? OPEC was a great example of what resource producers could accomplish when they said "enoughs enough".
Natural resources are finite. They can only play suppliers off against each other for so long. Remember how OPEC started? If the country ever got its crap together and started to say " we'll sell you lumber, but if you want logs, look elsewhere" we'd be better off as a nation.
It wouldn't be easy to change,and who knows if it's even possible with the free trade deals we signed, but let's be honest, we export jobs with the raw materials! As a nation we seem to be interested in the quick buck, rather than the longtime game.
In the short term resource customers can go elsewhere. But by doing this they will eventually drive up prices and deplete availability, making our resources even more valuable when they come back. And they will come back.
Funny how we own a finite supply of resources that the world needs, yet they get to call the shots? OPEC was a great example of what resource producers could accomplish when they said "enoughs enough".
Nobody - including the Chinese HAVE TO buy anything. However, there is always a market for petrochemicals. AND - given the size of the burgeoning Chinese population - they want our petrochemicals - which is why Chinese companies have pushed for trade deals that benefit them, and bought into the tar sands and into Trudeau's $1500/plate fund-raising dinners:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/grenier-trudeau-fundraising-1.3866479
https://www.pressprogress.ca/justin..._fundraising_dinner_with_chinese_billionaires
http://thetyee.ca/News/2016/11/29/Trudeau-Hot-Seat-Cash-Access/
That's why there has been such a push for the Chinese to keep getting raw products - they want the jobs for their own people - not here. Then that backroom "deal" is then sold to Canadians as: "jobs, jobs, jobs!!". Loosing many Canadian jobs in the refining process is never mentioned - nor is the lack of revenues back to take care of the mess our kids will inherit. Norway does thing very differently. So should we.
Another thing commonly not mentioned - this is NOT a renewable resource. It's a one shot deal. The only reason we have oil and other petrochemicals (according to one theory) - is that it took several million years after the Carboniferous Period for the bacteria and fungi to develop that could digest lignin in plant cells - by that time the 295+ million year old plants were already buried and slowly being converted into carbon compounds. However it happened - it is obvious that once those reserves are gone - it is all gone forever- and we need to be strategic in what we do with what is left today.
And it isn't going "bad" sitting in the ground, neither. So - this "gold rush" mentality is horribly mistaken and misplaced - and irresponsible.
Well said Ziggy!
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/grenier-trudeau-fundraising-1.3866479
https://www.pressprogress.ca/justin..._fundraising_dinner_with_chinese_billionaires
http://thetyee.ca/News/2016/11/29/Trudeau-Hot-Seat-Cash-Access/
That's why there has been such a push for the Chinese to keep getting raw products - they want the jobs for their own people - not here. Then that backroom "deal" is then sold to Canadians as: "jobs, jobs, jobs!!". Loosing many Canadian jobs in the refining process is never mentioned - nor is the lack of revenues back to take care of the mess our kids will inherit. Norway does thing very differently. So should we.
Another thing commonly not mentioned - this is NOT a renewable resource. It's a one shot deal. The only reason we have oil and other petrochemicals (according to one theory) - is that it took several million years after the Carboniferous Period for the bacteria and fungi to develop that could digest lignin in plant cells - by that time the 295+ million year old plants were already buried and slowly being converted into carbon compounds. However it happened - it is obvious that once those reserves are gone - it is all gone forever- and we need to be strategic in what we do with what is left today.
And it isn't going "bad" sitting in the ground, neither. So - this "gold rush" mentality is horribly mistaken and misplaced - and irresponsible.
Well said Ziggy!
Last edited:
Optimism and anger as industry and environmentalists react to pipeline approvals
Industry celebrates Line 3 and Trans Mountain decisions, Greenpeace predicts 'Standing Rock-type protests'
By Drew Anderson, CBC News Posted: Nov 29, 2016 8:53 PM MT
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-reactoin-pipeline-approvals-1.3873811
Industry celebrates Line 3 and Trans Mountain decisions, Greenpeace predicts 'Standing Rock-type protests'
By Drew Anderson, CBC News Posted: Nov 29, 2016 8:53 PM MT
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-reactoin-pipeline-approvals-1.3873811
'Consistent'? Or a 'sham' that 'betrayed British Columbians'? MPs weigh in on Trans Mountain
NDP, Liberal and Green MPs weigh in on approval of Trans Mountain expansion
By Liam Britten, CBC News Posted: Nov 29, 2016 8:14 PM P
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/kinder-morgan-trans-mountain-1.3873874
NDP, Liberal and Green MPs weigh in on approval of Trans Mountain expansion
By Liam Britten, CBC News Posted: Nov 29, 2016 8:14 PM P
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/kinder-morgan-trans-mountain-1.3873874
Analysis
Courting controversy: Pipeline legal battle just beginning
Canadian courts will have ultimate say on controversial pipeline projects
By Jason Proctor, CBC News Posted: Nov 30, 2016 2:00 AM PT
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/trans-mountain-enbridge-courts-1.3873552
Courting controversy: Pipeline legal battle just beginning
Canadian courts will have ultimate say on controversial pipeline projects
By Jason Proctor, CBC News Posted: Nov 30, 2016 2:00 AM PT
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/trans-mountain-enbridge-courts-1.3873552
They are all good, well known points. But I don't see why anyone would be against it still.
We are still supporting a vital industry!
Of course we want to refine it too, but no doubt you would find a way to resist that as well. By the way, EVERY country tries to negotiate trade deals that benefit them, it's just up to the local reps to get the best deal they can. The Chinese are so far ahead of our guys in making deals, it's embarassing.
I'm challenging the mindset that seems to run wild here that is against anything to do with oil.
Everyone wants to complain, but no one provides any solutions.
It's these irrational decisions being made that offer lip service to liberals, but don't solve anything. Close down a coal fired power plant because it's dirty, but leave the meat packing plant down the road open, when it creates more emissions. Pure madness.
Now why in the world would anyone start a business here in Canada if they had to ability to open up down south?
We are still supporting a vital industry!
Of course we want to refine it too, but no doubt you would find a way to resist that as well. By the way, EVERY country tries to negotiate trade deals that benefit them, it's just up to the local reps to get the best deal they can. The Chinese are so far ahead of our guys in making deals, it's embarassing.
I'm challenging the mindset that seems to run wild here that is against anything to do with oil.
Everyone wants to complain, but no one provides any solutions.
It's these irrational decisions being made that offer lip service to liberals, but don't solve anything. Close down a coal fired power plant because it's dirty, but leave the meat packing plant down the road open, when it creates more emissions. Pure madness.
Now why in the world would anyone start a business here in Canada if they had to ability to open up down south?
ziggy
Well-Known Member
Why start a business here? Well, if it was a requirement to have access to raw materials, or at least receive preferential access to them, that might be a motivator.
Why close down a coal fired plant, but leave open a meat packing plant? Well no one eats coal, although I guess we could all become vegetarians.
I guess it comes down to choices and options. Are the options to avoid the use of coal perceived to be less arduous to the public than becoming vegetarian? I'M guessing yes
I don't think anyone expects 100% solutions, but that's not a good reason to disregard any solutio Does it have to be all or nothing? Seems to me if that's the case nothing will ever change.
Why close down a coal fired plant, but leave open a meat packing plant? Well no one eats coal, although I guess we could all become vegetarians.
I guess it comes down to choices and options. Are the options to avoid the use of coal perceived to be less arduous to the public than becoming vegetarian? I'M guessing yes
I don't think anyone expects 100% solutions, but that's not a good reason to disregard any solutio Does it have to be all or nothing? Seems to me if that's the case nothing will ever change.
Actually the lawyers and bankers negotiating trade deals and presiding over back room trade disputes are very much NOT representatives, Eastmon. That's the real issue. They are not accountable to an electorate or anyone - and nobody voted in a leader on the basis that they were going to abrogate our governance systems and oversight in a trade deal - but they did anyways without asking the electorate if they wanted their governance severely handicapped. In another time - they might be classed as traitors.
I believe the main reason Trump got so many votes in the states because he was able to tap into that frustration and rage and sense of betrayal felt by those affected workers - who were obviously lied to about the benefits of these trade deals.
The Chinese aren't just "better" - they are better at being corrupt with our leadership behind closed doors - an inexcusable and likely illegal situation. It's not ok and not acceptable. Governance and business decisions need to be separated and kept apart. It's called a "conflict of interest" - maybe even corruption.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
