Leaderboard

Agreed...if it was a logical argument, Canada would have been attacked many times by now because "we deserve it", "had it coming", and "should have known better". Certainly more than Sweden.

And a ban on blazing new pipelines through a 1000 fish-bearing rivers...especially under Ottawa's mismanagement. Its been proven over and over again that mega-projects of this scope are incapable of coming anywhere near salmon habitat without wrecking it. Again...especially when it's done with a big government's blessing and oversight. Maybe if the pipeline boosters and their ilk could do something about the incompetence and mismanagement of official responsibilities in this god-forsaken country they wouldn't have such an uphill battle. Put a serious enough dent in the government's deplorable regulatory incompetence and I'd be quite open to the idea of even using nuclear power. Just for the record, I burn around 300 litres of fuel everyday at work. I'm also subject to mandatory monitoring for compliance, sometimes with cameras, black-box data/GPS recorders and even human observers (on my dime) to protect Canadian's interest in conserving a valuable public (albeit privatized) resource...like fish. The real trouble with boosters of large-scale industrial exploitation of natural resources is that they're also the biggest sycophants to power and wealth on the planet and will not lift a finger to truly promote real transparency and accountability at the top of the power/wealth pyramid. They never have and will only move in that direction kicking and screaming every inch of the way. Why exactly is that anyway? What the Hell's in it for them?

Liberal's making friends every where they go.....This does not surprise me , Canada can not even look after it's own soldiers.....but to take this stand on the inter national stage is stupid for the lack of a better word. I mean here was an opportunity to show some compassion, to the world for mere crumbs to our full annual Budget....and yet the liberals who have spent 30 bil in a blink of an eye has said NO to the small compensation of the gurkha guards at our own embassy....I wonder who is guarding the gates now... more an likely the locals, as they would be the cheapest bidder.....Wonder i secure the embassy is now.... http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/kabul-canada-gurkhas-1.4019840

I'll take your three expert's opinions that Iran isn't building nuclear weapons (et al) the respect they deserve. I wonder how many experts say the exact opposite of these three? More than a few...starting with Netanyahu...eh? It's a fallacy known as: the Law of Small Numbers that you're trying to foist upon me, here. Anyways...Sweden... I always admired the Cold War era S-Tank...turret-less...low...and designed specifically to fight Soviet tanks along forested roads. Sweden is full of those. I think they use a more Leopard II-ish type rig, now.

You didn't try to understand what I said at all. Carbon taxes themselves obviously will not stop climate change. Only new technology will. What carbon taxes CAN do is create an incentive in the market place to invest in those technologies. And yes... The break-throughs required to enter the next energy age COULD come from little old Canada. Again, you don't seem to understand the point of the taxes or what they are meant to do. They aren't MEANT to directly reduce our emissions. They are meant to encourage investment in technology.

The purpose of Carbon taxation is to create a market incentive by making companies internalize the costs of pollution. The hope is that creating an incentive for technologies that release no CO2, or less CO2 will increase investment in cleaner technologies and we are already seeing that. IF (and I realize its an if) a major breakthrough is made, then we could get off fossil fuels without much pain at all. Carbon taxes could make the difference between entering the next "energy age" 50 years from now instead of 200. If you think that the problem can NEVER be solved by technology then its understandable why you would be against incentives designed to increase R&D. I however firmly believe that technology will, so I support modest attempts to speed that up, which is what we are seeing. And CO2 is only one reason to get off fossil fuels. Energy costs have been rising and they are already an impediment to global economic growth. They are also very volatile because they are based too much on the price and availability of commodities instead of technology. I believe that at some point in the future energy will be virtual free... and I figure, the sooner the better. Plus... I didn't even notice when carbon taxes were implemented in BC. I don't feel like I'm suffering.

Thanks for that rousing vote of approval, Dalton McGuinty. And here we were wondering where you'd gotten to since you were run out of office... I don't think we really need to demonstrate how additional taxes damage an economy, do we, especially when the money is spent on nothing useful?

Thus my cobalt bomb musings...never again. It isn't science fiction...cobalt devices. Just unthinkable.

I'm in a townhouse, and natural gas comes in but I don't think running it to the hot water closet is going to be an option. Last time I checked a few years ago, on-demand electric for the whole house needed a 220 outlet, and I don't know if that's available in the hot water closet. I thought maybe a smaller hot water tank, with a point of use in the kitchen might be an option that would save electricity/money.

You decide. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Gurkha_Rifles

Did you watch the video? I think that as resources that contribute to climate change become more expensive, people will *choose* different solutions. Suggesting I want people to 'abandon' their homes is ridiculous, but perhaps if they decide to renovate, they would make more 'green' choices. I need to replace my hot water tank over the next year; I'd like to install an on-demand system, if possible, instead of heating and keeping hot 30 or 40 gals of water all the time, only heat the water I'm using 'right now'. Did you watch the video? What did you think? Did it help you understand how carbon pricing can make a difference and the different ways it can be implemented? I found it quite interesting; it was part of a 'recommended' series from work. I work with a BC Ministry which has to take the effects of climate change into account in their future planning.

That is the point, is it not? Reward those who generate the smaller carbon footprint the most. Nothing wrong with heating with natural gas, perhaps you need to look at doing it more efficiently. Forced air heating systems have a very wide range of efficiencies, and there is a huge variance in hot water production between different otherwise equivalent families. There are many cases where people have invested in proper insulation and better heating systems and cut their heating (and A/C) bills significantly. Finally put on a sweater in the evening when you are sitting around, that change alone can save hundreds if not thousands a year.

Totally untrue. People pay carbon taxes related to their generation of C02. If you ride public transit then you pay carbon taxes in your fare equal to you contribution to the C02 produced by the transit provider. The fact that they generate far less C02 per rider mile than your SUV is the whole point. If you live in an apartment building heated by natural gas then the carbon tax will be in the natural gas used. Yes, I think there should be some tax on electricity even if it is hydro generated as in BC because there is still a C02 footprint in building those generating stations, etc - over time that will transitioned in as new facilities are added; note that things like gas used by the utility trucks does get added to the electricity so operating costs are included. Wood is a renewable resource, so it is not unlocking carbon sequestered hundreds of millions of years ago.

I can only imagine the sh.t storm had Harper rigged nominations like this.

Wrong on all counts. Putting a price on carbon will improve the economy and decrease the cost of living and attract investment and job while reducing the rate of climate change. It is a win, win, win, win, win on all sides. You will notice that I have provided exactly the same substantiation to my claims as you.

Oh, so you have specific knowledge of some 300+ riding associations. Please provide a source for your claim that each riding association is different.

Whether it's a man-made phenomenon or a natural cycle it is still going to affect humans, so mitigation seems like a good idea to me. From BC Gov Website At some point in the past, the BC Gov also wrote this: However, it's not all bad. Climate change is already affecting fish, farmers and ranchers in BC, who are working on finding ways to mitigate those effects: Climate change effects on animal behavior have been noted since 2008, including this one: Regardless of whether you believe that climate change and global warming is natural or man-made, the fact is we are going to be affected; no doubt, whether the change is ultimately good or bad only history will tell - but what's coming is a sea change for humans. Our generation is just starting to feel the effects, but the ones after us are going to be getting the full brunt of it. Hiding your head in the sand and yelling "It's a leftist plot" is just dumb.

Dirty pool was also detected in the riding of Markham-Thornhill. When confronted, here is what Trudeau said. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tamil-canadians-shut-out-of-liberal-nomination-vote-in-toronto-area-riding/article34181632/ Pants on fire....

I keep finding points of agreement with you. But I do I think we're in the Elite seats, us Westerner types, along with Saudi Arabians and others from rich countries. Some lesser lights get coach, while Syrians and their ilk get the roof. Hope hell is what people expect for themselves.

That's pretty sexist, and we already have enough sex segregation as it is.

The Quran is hate speech? Do tell....

There are already Muslim Imams that are preaching hate in Canada. Kill all the filthy Jews one by one....etc. Deny it all you wish.

Lots of good comments. The U.S. always has been a tough negotiator on things like the lumber agreements. Canada and/or the U.S. have gone to the arbitrator on the lumber agreements. So I don't expect anything to change on that. I don't think we will see any major changes to NAFTA because it is a good deal for both countries as it is. There may be some slight tinkering. Canada has top negotiators ready. We have years of experience at it. Shouldn't be any big problems. I don't think Pence or any top officials will be involved themselves. They probably don't know much about it. It will be done by specialists in negotiating NAFTA.

Actually, Intel remains one of the world's leading producers of cutting edge semiconductors and many of their most advances fabs are in the US. While South Korean industry is impressive, many of the world's most advanced ships are built in the US. This is a common misconception. US manufacturing output has been on a continuous rise, it's never declined. While many US companies invest in overseas factories or third-party production, they've also continued to increase domestic manufacturing capabilities. The number of people employed in manufacturing has been reduced, but that's a result of improvements in processes and automation, not a reduction in manufacturing.

So why does the west and the EU cozy up to the Saudis? Even if you go with the fact that 9/11 was masterminded, but not really by Bin Laden but via connections from Saudi Arabia. Most of those hijackers were in fact Saudi nationals, but yet every other nation in the Middle East is paying for it by being destroyed.

Again: you're free to pretend that I wrote the Quran and am responsible for Islam's genocidal attitude towards the kafir. I expect nothing less of a defender of Islam.

Quran 5:33-34 continues from the "peaceful" 5:32... Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption [fasad] is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment, Except for those who return [repenting] before you apprehend them. And know that Allah is Forgiving and Merciful. ...so at least if you have a sudden revelation and join the cult, Allah will listen.

What's Surah 60 really about since you claim I cherry picked it. There are 13 verses. So...what is it about?

Actually a retelling of Gilgamesh's tale re: rafting down the Tigris with the animals. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilgamesh_flood_myth

Omar...one of Mohammad's Companions...very much a human. His claim was made after conquering Jerusalem in the Siege of 637 AD. Thus: Jerusalem = Third Most Holy Place In Islam Mohammad never set foot in Jerusalem...unless you believe Omar and that winged-beasts exist outside dreams.

The Quran 5:32 is often cited as the peaceful...non-compulsive...version of Islam's attitude towards all humanity. Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [Fasad done] in the land – it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one – it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors. So: murder is okay as long as it is done 'to save a soul' or to prevent/punish mischief (Fasad) upon the land. What is Fasad??: one might ask... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fasad

Why did you start a new topic when this has already been discussed?

Nor do you, but you sure do try. Clearly bothers the heck out of you that you can't refute my logic with your myths.

First off, you can't guarantee anything. So you would gladly pay for more for a military as long as it was under your personal control so you could guarantee it could do nothing. What absolute bullshit.

You're free to support Islam in its drive for supremacy over the kufar.

Don't worry... this was a small spill. Otherwise, bad things might have happened!

No, what people are waking up to is the reality that much of the economy works on industrial scale deceit, with the governments complicity.

Is Husky Oil paying for Lloydminster to tap into a new water supply after theirs was polluted by the oil spill? Or is this being paid for by taxpayers? http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/prince-albert-sask-could-have-new-water-supply-this-weekend-after-husky-oil-leak-1.3008173

The spill has reached 500km downstream. But don't worry... it's a small spill. A small spill that will take months of cleanup.

This coming from a climate change denier is a bit rich...

Its also a slick that is approximately 500,000 acres in area that will take months and maybe years to disperse. Pretty massive in context.

What really sounds funny is listening to people like you pipe up for fish on behalf of oil companies. I'm a fisherman so trust me the death of a fish is really not the end of the world for me. Putting the NEB in charge of the 1000 fish bearing watersheds between Alberta and it's saltwater port on the other hand is. Now go get lost.

Oily birds.... http://thestarphoenix.com/news/local-news/three-oiled-birds-pulled-from-pipeline-spill-site 2 days worth of clean water for the city... Then who knows.... Officials have no idea how much oil couldn't be cleaned up... Husky can't explain why the response took so long. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/husky-shuts-pipeline-indefinitely-after-saskatchewan-oil-spill/article31114030/ And this is a tiny spill.... But don't worry.... pipelines are safe.

Do something about these first then we'll talk about oil. That will be even more impossible without a mean to monitor the monitors. Tell you what, you get the NEB to prove its better at protecting fish habitat by getting them to do something about the sewage and farm waste. Don't forget mining waste, logging and urban development. Lord knows we've tried to get Ottawa to do its job better maybe Alberta can do better

BC's social responsibility to protect its environment trumps it's civil obligation to ensure higher profits for Alberta. Full stop.

Until such time as I see you insisting that oil companies be subjected to the degree of monitoring and preconditions that fishermen are you should take your assessment of their ethics and put them back where the sun doesn't shine.

I realize oil will flow but I'll insist on using existing corridors and resist any new ones that have to blaze their way through a 1000 fish bearing watersheds like Northern Gateway. As for oil tankers, I expect to see several hundred billion dollars placed in a spill clean-up account up front (repayable after the final shipment of Alberta's oil out of BC's ports).

They will be ignored. As the article you cited shows the consultation process is a sham - designed for the purpose of eliciting the kinds of responses far right crazies can hoot and crow over.

no - gasoline excise taxes are not carbon taxes... they are not based on per tonne of CO2 equivalent emissions... they are not, by design intent, aimed towards causing a reduction in CO2 emissions.

Wouldn't they just go back to calling it an excise tax?