cannuck

By George HE GOT IT. I suppose you had no awareness of the Crow Rates - that removed the opportunity for all value added processing from this economy - strictly for the benefit of ON? Further: if you hadn't noticed from many posts: the CWB held monopoly over only Western farmers. The West is sick of being to productive piggy bank for a parasitic East (and many, do I EVER include Quebec in that one!!!!!!)

I agree, allowing child molesters to walk among us is horrible, and government complacency to not want to "rock the boat" is reprehensible beyond tolerance. Everyone from that religion needs to be driven out of Canada. So, I guess all the Catholic cult members need to leave NOW. (or did you forget about Mount Cashel - and every other orphange and residential school they ran for decades????)

I am not very tolerant of the pro-wheat board position, and I say there is no "plus" as per my explanation. The good reason for its monopoly played out. The rest of its existence was strictly for the purpose of the central government continuing to screw the West using Marxist version of central control (but not having to bother with taking title to the land - didn't need to do that when they had control of the means of production. As CF pointed out: it this was such a great idea, why was the ROC left to have free markets??? The answers were: they didn't produce diddly squat (relative to SK/MB/AB in that order) and they had enough votes so as not to want to foment opposition.

No need to pull the wool over your eyes when your head is firmly planted in your rectum. Cities in general, and Eastern cities in particular, have been and no doubt will continue to be totally ignorant regarding the ag economy and history of the West. Nobody in such places gave a flying purple frick about the CWB or the Crow Rate because you already had all of the value added jobs that came from processing Western grains (and selling them back to us as finished goods) and you really did not understand what the Wheat Board was, what it did and why it did so. To fill in only one of the tiny blanks, it came about to ensure grain supplies for the troops in WWI and became dromant in 1920. It once more popped up as a VOLUNTARY government grain trader in the 30s as farmers in depression era wanted (needed) more income than grain buyers were paying, so some turned to the taxpayer to bail them out. In 1943 it once more gained monopoly status to ensure adequate supplies to allied troops in Europe/UK. Its sole purpose became pointless with cessation of hostilities. Yet, the monopoly continued for the next 60 years. I will repeat: unless you believe we need a Marxist economy, there were NO "good" points to the CWB. None. Nada. If you want someone to blow smoke up your ass, call the commies at the NDP and Liberal Party and they will tell you what a wonderful idea it is for them to control every aspect of your life and business - and I am sure you will feel satisfied with such a broad spectrum of "information".

Anyone and everyone in academia (at least those who are not brain dead) is quite aware of how bias is expressed in what is published. Further, once you remove the peer review process, that vast majority of "studies" are primarily intended to lend credence to a specific theory. It is the human condition: same reason as innocent people get locked up for crimes they did not commit: once a theory is postulated, all efforts get directed towards proving that thesis while facts and ultimately the truth become discounted or totally ignored.

If you put tax dollars into the government's hands, it is redistributed according the privilege granted by government and bureaucracies to those who are most effective at lobbying or provide most expedient political advantage to the party in power. Only the physical marketplace is effective at distributing value equitably.

I wish I had a pat answer. Business in Canada, very much as in the USA, has swung from making things to looking how to score as much money as one can. We are emulating a failing model. This is because you can make a LOT more money speculating on an asset, equity or commodity than you could ever earn by adding any value. Worse, we encourage that behaviour by giving speculative gains a free ride on the tax system - further penalizing business from going back to being business. R&D is a function of making product or bettering product quality. Since we can score Warren Buffet or Bill Gates hits by simply giving ourselves massive stock options from the company, and run that stock value through the roof by kissing up to Wall/Bay Street, why would you want the fuss of actually having to MAKE something? What the heck, we can just send a copy of a competitor's product over the China, and they weill send us back one with our name on it and the mavens of the Street will be thrilled to death that we have a new product and up our stock value some more.

WCS is heavy sour, and as such is discounted from what sweet light fetches. What you don't see from the cheap seats is that the wellhead price is far different from the NYMEX futures quotation (that is for WTI sitting in a tank in Cushing OK).. We like to single out Canada as being screwed over by the Democrats blocking the last link in the pipeline to get WCS into Cushing and on to the Gulf Coast refineries (that are all set up for Venezuelan heavy sour that no longer comes there), but if you watch the posted price for Wyoming Heavy Sour, for instance, it is even lower than WCS. The ones really getting screwed are the independent producers of places such as NW Alberta where $115 WTI meant $55 at the wellhead for Rainbow. Not just the lack of a pipeline to the South, but the HUGE increase in production in Ft. McMurray by majors who can dominate shipping available just pulled the rug out from underneath the little guys (with big lifting costs as well). The reason we really NEED high crude oil prices is that they facilitate development of alternatives, which, at this stage of the game, could not come anywhere near the volume or price required to work. However, high enough crude oil prices will drive alternatives, especially renewables to a place where they can compete. Right now, the basics are that $100 oil made all kinds of things possible that made no sense at $50, so a lot of $$ and science went into things such as very long horizontals and 30, 40 or even 50 stage fracs that increased production dramatically in the US, as well as more conventional production being brought on line elsewhere. The long run of high prices had resource countries (Canada being one) hooked on $100. When Russia tipped the scale by invading Ukraine (yes, that really is what they did by proxy) and ISO funded themselves by oil sales, down went the price by design (KSA pumping more). To compensate, Russia, Nigeria, Venezuela, etc. also upped their exports to try to sustain revenue that they needed to satisfy budgets written on $100 a bbl. That further depresses the price from actual market supply/demand pressures. Those weaker economies (led by the US for different reasons) softened demand for China, so their purchases went down (as did the US due to shale production) so the demand side is long term weaker. No reason to believe there is any relief in sight.

What it takes to pay the CEO ts is another issue altogether, and I doubt has anything at all to do with cash reserves being held. A CEO of a PUBLICLY TRADED company can do this with a billion in the bank or a nickel. The problem is that we give a free ride to speculative gains, while taxing the crap out of dividends and real earnings. As a result, money is used to speculate on the stock value instead of earn profit from operations. As a result, corporate governance has shifted to people from the world of finance, not business. Hedge funds insurance funds, pension funds, etc. make their money not by investing in IPOs or POs (the only money that actually makes it into corporate hands) but merely trading the equities, commodities and derivatives. This allows them to bring in buckets of cash without adding any value and creating any wealth (merely redistribution), and that gives them large stock positions in public companies. They in turn appoint "finance friendly" directors, who hire "finance friendly" execs - all of whom then rob the shareholders blind with stock option plans and ridiculous compensation packages. You are right on the money: it is out of control because it really means stealing from minority shareholders. In some other countries, very large companies are run by people who make a small increment of the income of their average employee. Even in North America, if you want to see a model of good management and fairness to shareholders - the CEO of Costco makes IIRC 10x the lowest paid employee's income. So PLEASE, don't someone tell me that the corporate boardroom and exec office is filled with supermen who are worth millions a year. They are nothing but employees. and deserve no more than reasonable compensation. If they want stock in the company, they need to be forced to BUY it with real cash of their own. This is one of the key components of the North American economy crashing into the dirt. People running companies should be there to serve the shareholder and customer, not themselves (or their cronies at the bank)

There was a precedent for lowering tax rates and increasing corporate investment, and that was Ireland. When they dropped the rate to 10%, it was so much better than Europe - but still gave companies full access to the Euro market - that they rushed by the hundreds into Ireland and turned the moribund economy around overnight. Everyone else seems to have just accepted the Irish experience as a general rule. HOWEVER: to just assume that Canadian corporate savings/reserves are the RESULT of lower tax payment is extremely flawed reasoning. Believe it or not, taxation is not what companies are in business for, and they actually have to operate from with what they believe is the best interests of shareholders within the marketplace that exists, as well as plan for strategic opportunities (that means need cash)

This is a discussion we have around the dinner table many Sundays. One of my kids spent a years in academia, and was the ONLY anglophone of all of the grad students in her department (English is her second language, but what we speak at home). Since everything in the academic world is published in English, she had to review literally everything written. Her rather well informed opinion was that most Asian grads or postdocs were very focused on their particular thesis, but generally had very little knowledge and understanding of the supporting or related disciplines, science and technology. Further, there is a trend in all of North America to simply discard most Chinese applicants out of hand, as EVERY one comes with perfect marks and perfect references - that very, very few ever live up to when they start work. A lot of really good candidates are passed over for those purely practical reasons. You might get a hundred duds to every winner. I have had business in both India and China for many years, and can offer this: We don't understand Chinese culture because I most often hear the comment that "you know they are lying when their lips are moving". Thing is, Chinese is a contextual language, and what is written or said today could have a completely different meaning when read or repeated tomorrow. There are not enough characters in Chinese, and no rules to make new ones to meet today's needs. As a result, when you sign a contract in China (in English) we have the expectation that it will be followed to the letter. BUT, it will not. The result is what rules everything, and the method to get there matters little. If you say you need a mill certificate for XXXX grade steel to make a part, you will get the required mill cert. Doesn't mean the steel ever came from that mill or it was made according to YOUR instruction or any industry standard, it just means you will get what THEY BELIEVE you asked for. Quite a few airplanes have fallen out of the sky in the USA because of Chinese (= counterfeit) parts creeping into the system. India is a bit of a different story. I can never seem to understand why they lie so much, but they do. I sometimes feel that when they get here, there is someone passing out paperwork at the dock as he says: 'Taxi driver, quicky mart clerk, doctor, engineer - no matter they all come from the same university, same course.' I know that doesn't sound fair, but once you have had to put money, time and reputation on the line doing business with them, you will quickly come to the same conclusion. Sad part is: there are some extremely well educated and capable people in and from India. Problem is, they will all claim to be that same person. Once you start working IN India, you will find a culture based so much on privilege, corruption and deceit you would think you were in Ottawa. Example from a different part of the immigration pipelline: I once had a safety inspection expire on a semi while I was in Ontario, and to get the equipment back home, needed to renew. Went to a cousin's friend's shop, and had work done. Next time this happened, I went back and was told - "Sorry, i have only 5 mechanics and over the next 5 days, I need to do 50 gravel trucks. Will squeeze yours in if I can." I came back the following weekend, where the (Polish immigrant) business owner was filling out a huge stack of paperwork. He said something to me I will never forget. "Look, Mr. Cannuck, I'm having 50 different trucks, and 50 different drivers this week, but only ONE driving license." This has become such a problem that Indian drivers are the laughing stock of the entire trucking industry in North America and source of disproportionate number of accidents.. BUT: what we don't realize is that in India, those guys are working for $100 a month, and over here they can make 15 - 20x as much - making their family at home very well off. They will do just about anything for anyone to earn that kind of cash. AND: do you really think they are paying tax on this money? Yeah, right. If you believe that, I have some marvelous deals on beach front property on Ellesmere Island I can sell you. I can tell a million stories about Nigeria, South Africa, Eastern Europe, Russia, Venezuela and so on being no better. Add to that the culture of extremely violent crime in dealing with some Carribean, Chinese and Russian immigration, and the plot thickens. Although he may not have made his point elegantly, Argus is right. Do we really want this version of diversity integrated into our culture? The upside, as someone already posted, is that this dillutes a great deal with second generation, but by then the damage has already been done.

There were no pluses to the CWB unless you believe we should be a Marxist economy. Government has NO FRIGGING BUSINESS IN BUSINESS. Every time they do so, they screw up royally, screw up markets and make the whole thing a platform for politicians and bureaucrats to skim cash out of the system and use the business for political purposes. OUTLIER cases! This was the entire movement that brought down the CWB, it was no "outlier" case. I can tell that you live in a city without looking at your sig. Canada seen from the depths of Hog Town seems to start Ajax and end at Burlington. I should probably explain: dependent urban populations are the main driving force that swings politics to the left. I find it particularly troublesome that the country in which I live is so determined to become another Greece. Socialized public services work extremely well - socialized business is a 100% guarantee of failure. We need to learn that (and when I say this, I speak as well to Mr. Harper and his cronies - who pretend to be conservative, but have little idea what that actually means).

No, I have not noticed any change in the taste of bread, nor has my food scientist daughter reported any change to that commodity at all. Some of the posters (a long time ago) seemed to think the wheat board owned the whole infrastructure, it had 7 elevators and a couple of port terminals (there are mor than a THOUSAND elevators in Western Canada). Pure BS. Most elevators were owned by private companies, as were most of the lakers, terminals, rail cars, etc. The $17 Bn figure is the "goodwill" that the die-hard socialists claim in a ridiculous lawsuit that did not get off of the ground. If you (obviously mostly city folk) think the Wheat Board was a good deal, maybe you should know what it was really like. If a prairie farmer (note: this was just as the Crow Rate part of how Ottawa did its level best for decades to screw the West out of having any value added business) took some of the wheat that he grew on his farm, milled it in the garage and took it into the kitchen and baked some bread to feed his family - he had committed and offence for which he could be jailed. Think that is not possible? Well, a SK farmer named Andy McMechan grew some seven row barley, as he also did on his US farm. The same government financed his farm and demanded a payment, but our dear government would not call a quota for seven row barley, so the CWB would not pay him for his crop. Being as his back was against the wall, Andy took his barley down to his other farm in the US and sold it there. When he came back, Canada Customs (as it was then called) seized his tractor/trailer unit, but Andy simply climbed in and drove home. He was charged with an offense under the customs act based on violating what the crown claimed was anther offense under the Wheat Board Act. Well, to begin with, you can not be charged with an offense under one act for an offense that occurred under another act. But, let's not let silly things such as the law get in the way. (http://www.farmersforjustice.com/) To make a very long story short: it was clearly proved in court that the wheat board act was extended in '51 or '52 (I can't remember which) to include oats and barley, but by order in council (that expires in one year). That order in council was never re-issued - thus every transaction done for wheat and barley ever since was invalid. Further, the OIC was for pooling and licensing for export, it did not EVER include the section of the act under which penalties were covered. In his summation, Mr. Justice Ross Whimmer said that: " I can find nothing whatsoever that would compel a farmer to seek a license to export his barley under the Wheat Board Act" - but went on to convict and jail Mr. McMechan for violation of a customs charge that was based on an action that he had ruled was not illegal at all. If you ever think we have rule of law in this country, think again. The Wheat Board was right in the middle of this kind of complete disregard for due process, justice, citizen's and human rights - cheered on by none other than leader of the pack: Ralph Goodale. The infrastructure to trade all kinds of grain have been in place forever. Wheat is no longer a big crop out here (thanks to the endless screw ups of the CWB - who were essentially in business to rob prairie farmers without offending farmers in vote rich BC, ON and PQ to prop up the rail lobby and longshoremen. Yes, the Marxist farmers just LOVED the CWB, but few others had any real tolerance for the BS. HOWEVER: reality is that the far left types were mostly hobby farmers and had a LOT of CWB votes, but by the time this was playing out, anyone who was genuinely in the farm business out here was farming several SECTIONS - with only one vote. The CWB would have been burried long before if Goodale and friends had not blocked the one acre, one vote proposal. THAT would have been representative democracy, not the the one man, one vote that prolonged the agony while Ottawa continued to play politics of food (yet another story).

As I guess I implied, but maybe need to be more specific with: not that long ago gasoline in US averages were around $4 and today with oil at about half that price, the price is averaging about $2 a gallon. If you are asking from a Canadian perspective: the tax bite is much larger, so the refinery cost of crude oil contribution is much smaller - thus the price change is not as significant. Couple that with the fact that most refineries were losing their shirts on $100 oil, so they will have to make that back up now when there is some profit potential. When they get squeezed, the first thing to cut is maintenance budgets, so when prices go back up, you have to replace the value you "mined" from the equipment in days of low margin. BTW: this is exactly what oil and gas producers do as well - run the field into the ground when prices collapse and hope you can survive until they go up before the whole field crashes on you. As for speculating on what the price will be: NOBODY can predict that, but enough talk from the brokers and analysists could well make that a self-fulfilling prophecy for NYMEX WTI futures. Since that is far, far below KSA's lifting costs (and Nigeria, and Venzuela, and Canada and the USA), I can't see that happening at all.- but I can still remember the sting of $10 wellhead for sweet light and $2 wellhead for heavy sour just 13 years ago. So I should never say never.

The problem I see it is that individuals have no great trouble rising to intellectual heights someone above primal instincts. BUT: to fully understand human behaviour, you have to accept the Sex, Pride, Greed and Fear will ultimately rule all when collectivism takes over. It is not that 7Bn people are 7Bn x smarter than any one, but more like 1/7Bn as intelligent as a mob.

At one point in time, the NDP government of Saskatchewan made it illegal to wear Spandex in a bar. If you ever wonder how idiotic, intolerant and out of control the NDP can get, there's a good example. Geez, I can't wait to live in my very own Greece.

I hear your criticism, and agree, but you declined to suggest the solution. My personal belief after years of involvement with the partisan mechanisms is that political parties should not be allowed at all in any truly representative form of government. Partisanship is exactly what facilitates rule-by-special-interest. While the function of government should be to govern, regulate and enforce, we have expanded that to meddle very deeply in the economic affairs of the nation - resulting in a network of old boys clubs that dispense privilege to the extent of affecting change and control over every detail of our lives.

Yes, the banks who trade comodites and run those prices up and down do not directly connect the two, but you want to believe that the refineries that have to process the crude have to deal with the fact that the two are very directly connected in trying to run their business. There are a few reasons there has not been a new refinery built in the USA since 1976 and majors sold off many and many more were simply shut down over the last 10 years.

Only to some extent. Most oil and gas producers have backed away from refining as much as the can - because it is very hard to earn a buck vs. what they can do with the same capital just selling crude. Also, the environmental risks are massive (take a look at the fiasco of the Hess/PDVSA Hovensa refinery in the USVI for example). There are literally tens of thousands of oil and gas producers on this continent, and about 160 refineries with maybe 100 owners - so in no way do producers all own refineries. Just put it a bit into perspective (there are simply rough proportions - ignoring the tax contribution that varies with region). In the US (where it really matters) around Y2K light sweet crude at the wellhead was about $10 a bbl, whereas gasoline sold for $1 a gallon. When refineries were REALLY getting clobbered, crude was over $100 and gasoline at the pumps was $4. I didn't hear anyone complaining that Yanks should be shelling out $10 a gallon to keep the refineries on same level as 15 years ago. So today that $46 WTI is really $40 at the wellhead, and gasoline is about $2/gal and you think this is some kind of windfall????

The petty annoyances of having to run a business kept me away, but I did do a quick read through this growing thread. My takeaway so far is that some portion of the posters seem to still think there is something special in tax treatment for a business owner. Primarily the dividend tax rate. Well, last time I asked my accountant (I know literally NOTHING of taxation other than I have to pay it and do what I am told to stay legal - that is why I pay accountants) that same exemption is available to ALL taxpayers. The envy expressed over a business owner being able to avail oneself of such an advantage is NOT unique to business owners, small or large. So just put your money into a real business that pays a dividend - that's what we have done, that is what you can do. Then, there is the issue of playing tax dodge with corporate expenditures. Do you really think I have the time to waste on nickel and diming the taxman????? If so, you have no idea what it is like to be in a business that actually DOES something rather than fill in tax forms and otherwise shift ink blots. I/we could only avail ourselves of this "great" advantage by cheating and risking wasting a bunch more time with audits - worse yet having some jackass employee of another agency sticking their nose into my/our business. I will not even open an envelope from a government agency of any kind because it will not make me any money, make my products or services any better but most of all allow me to concentrate on what I do - which is run the business. BTW: I have a template for the ultimate definition of what "fairness" is for legislation, regulation and ultimately taxation. When I once asked Sir Roger Douglas how he managed to reconcile his very conservative policies required to save his country from collapse with the fact he was the Minister of a Labour government, he replied with four of the most intelligent and well chosen words I have ever heard: "we simply removed privilege". THAT, IMHO, is what a flat tax system would do - except of course for the whole issue of wealth re-distribution rather than wealth creation. It is also the test I apply to ANY law, regulation or policy. As we govern now, the whole massive mess is in the full time business of granting privilege - at a cost of billions per month to the taxpayer. The other big deal about an ultra simple tax system (I believe I could write all of the rules on a single sheet of legal size paper) is that it would eliminate the vast majority of the massive business (it is far more than a cottage industry) that plays tax accounting gains for business large and small. That massive amount of service is creating no wealth, and contributing to the structure of business that encourages nothing but wealth re-distribution as a means to accumulating wealth, rather than wealth creation. Take a tax accountant out of his office and put a tool in his hands and he converts to a productive part of the economy, not another part of the parasitic service industry.

I wish it was just a simple as everyone seems to want it to be. It is not. Small business itself (assuming incorporated) pays tax at the small business tax rate...so far, so good. BUT: if the business owner takes any money out of that business (which is pretty much essential) he or she will pay income tax at the same rate as anyone else on that income. There are no doubt some small enterprises that rack up some deductible expenses in the name of the business that are really for personal benefit, but that is what CRA will find when they audit. I have been a "small business" for most of my life, and I can assure you that there is no free ride. Personal income is personal income, regardless of who pays you. As to the Calgary study: I am sure you can find a "study" from academia that will support just about anything you postulate. From my experience, the result of ANY study is merely the product of the bias with which it was conceived and written. The vast majority of EVERYTHING I have ever read concludes that small business is the largest creator of new employment. Other than some rare exceptions, to get to the big business stage, it usually begins with a small business. I guess Trudeau - who I doubt has ever signed the front side of a paycheque - borne with the silver spoon, etc - is so far away from knowing what it takes to start and run a business I can understand why he wishes to invoke the politics of envy in his desperate struggle to be noticed. That being said, where there ARE some very big loopholes is for business that creates little or no wealth to use the rules to pay next to no tax at all. The money "made" from speculative gains has always received preferential treatment in most Western tax systems. When you think about it, a speculative gain simply makes one investor a winner while another is a loser. Instead of beating up on the most productive part of the economy, what kind of idiot would give a pass to activity that creates no wealth at all? The answer is: almost every country gives a capital gain a free ride. Dividends, on the other hand, often get double taxation applied. Our little break for the first $50k sounds like a gift, but the income that EARNED the money to be distributed by dividend has already been taxed. Not all dividend income comes from productive work, but the problem is when you give a break to speculation and ALWAYS tax creation of wealth, you drive the investment side of economic activity away from Main Street and onto Bay Street. I used to have the mantra of "one tax, flat tax" and eliminate ANY exemptions as a goal. However, I have come to realize that this should apply only to wealth that has been created (add value to a resource or deliver service in support of same). But, watching Wall Street destroy the largest economy in the world after dismantling the protective legislation that kept its greed somewhat contained, I have come to believe EVERY speculative/capital gain should be taxed at 99% on day one, 95% on month one, and decreasing to nominal tax rate over a span of 5 years. Then, NEVER tax a dividend (as virtually all will be paid from actual operating profits - as investment will go towards real business instead of stock scams, real estate inflation, etc.) Everything else should get taxed at flat rate with some kind of basic exemption on the first $10k or whatever.

I guess I have found where "the line" is, and managed to step over it, so I will re-post edited version: Yes, $46 WTI today is a b1tch, but people seem to forget that that price a mere 15 years ago was $12 +/- = $10 at the wellhead for sweet light and as low as $2 for heavy sour. The people who are hurting are the small independents who have very high cost of producing mature fields, and the huge mass of johnny-come-lately investors sucked into very high cost shale plays. To put the Canadian side into perspective: we are far more damaged by OBAMA blocking the pipeline for Ft. Mac oil to flow to Cushing than anything else. When oil was well over $100, typical wellhead prices for Rainbow blend were around $55. The big boys in the oil sands are not juniors, they are majors in it for the long haul. They can weather out as many years of whatever price. Break even on operating cost is a lot lower than you might think - and their capital is mostly patient. These are strategic investments, not Wall Street flash-in-the-pan crap. Still, it hurst us as an exporting nation at a time when we really can't afford it. The US real world is another story. Production peaked at around 11mm bbls/day just before the 73 crash. It had slipped down under 7mm until Haliburton learned to frac very long horizontals in shale, and now is back up over 10mm. Unfortunately, consumption over that same period went up just a little to nearly 20mm a day, so one way or another, the US has to import a LOT of oil. While they have NOT reached anything near self-sufficiency, they have reduced their imports a fair bit with shale boom. The reason to really screw up the market probably has a lot to do with the DEMOCRAT lack of favour with big oil, or maybe the opposite for their support of the newcomers sticking their money into shales. Bottom line here is that while some of the new production is very expensive, there is a lot of oil coming out of the ground at historic average costs - probably close to today's wellhead values. So, big oil can wait this one out too. Saudi is NOT the ultra-low cost producer they once were. While their rates of production are quite flexible, their lifting costs are much higher these days since most of their fields are mature and in secondary or tertiary recovery. They are also a country who's revenue is very largely dependent upon crude oil exports (less so refined product, as they really only started exporting on a large scale a few years ago). That's the background. Now for the scoop: The Du....DEMOCRATS can crap on oil by dumping prices and looking like heros to their voter base for bringing back lower fuel prices, achieve their laudable goal to de-fund both Russia and ISO and come out not too bad overall. Saudi is very much co-operating with the US as they are still the driving force behind OPEC. Not only do they burn other OPEC members badly (such as Nigeria and Venezuela), it will cost them valuable political capital within OPEC to do so. It also slashes their own revenues. Much more so than the US (a net importer) the Saudis are paying a very big price to help out the US (and the rest of the world IMHO) in this case. They deserve our respect and gratitude. And: for Harper to be selling military transport to them: more power to him (and us). Anything we export to an ally with value added is a big deal - and if it means keeping some of the details quiet - what's the harm. If it was YOUR job he earned by kissing up to KSA, I doubt you would be screaming foul for him agreeing to their terms (that cost us nothing to comply). Also: it truly amazes me that he pulled this off as his government has been a lot more of a slave to Tel Aviv than anywhere else.

With that I can strongly agree. Population is the very thing that puts our sustainability in question. Worse yet, cities are little more than a$$hole factories these days.

It is not the "oil lobby" that is preventing you from investing in your own solution (I hope you don't expect me to do it for you). The problem is the greed and profligate waste of energy of our typical Western life style. If you think this is such a good idea, why haven't you done it? We have a cabin in the mountains that is WAY off grid, and if you want to do so, the technology as you mentioned IS there. We use a combination of solar and wind, store it in glass jar cell lead acid batteries and have all of the comforts of home - just with minimal energy waste in the process. BUT: don't for one minute think this is cheap. It would be a tiny fraction of the cost if we could just plug in - but if we weren't "inspired" by the costs, we wouldn't have devised the strategies and equipment to be sufficiently energy efficient.

Having been kind of busy trying to earn a living the last few months, haven't checked in here. So, I actually read through this ENTIRE thread in one sitting. My takeaway? Other than a few posts starting around 263, there has been zero discussion of any issues that are fundamentally key to the future of this (or any other) country. I am one of those people who has been pretty deep into the partisan scene, and long ago realized that it is a dead end in a big way. Doesn't matter WHAT party you stuff into office, we have a system of rule-by-special-interest that defeats the interests of the people the day cabinet is sworn in. Representative government is the ONLY way (outside of a benevolent dictatorship) to reverse this problem. Instead of substance, our campaigners are fronting the usual bunch of relatively insignificant diversionary policy issues, all just to get into the chair and dance to the tune of their masters. The use of "tommy" is inappropriate, I agree. This moniker belongs exclusively to "Tommy the Commie" who has rightfully earned his place in history. Of course, the fact that after embracing the Regina Manifesto and seeing much of its rhetoric turn into reality in this country, he went into his "retirement" job as a director of Husky Oil, so we can clearly see how the new party should have been called "New Hypocrites". Worth noting in the 300+ area, the question of NDP and unions comes up, few ever remembering that the NDP IS a trade union (formally the amalgamation of the CCF and the CLC). Now, while speaking of Tommy the Commie, it is pretty important to remember that the person who moved this country further to the left than any other in history carried a Communist party card when he studied at the Sorbonne. Thusly, I am confused when someone today tries to tell me there is any difference between the Drivel Party and the New Hypocrites. Sliding over the the "right", the usual Nazi BS got thrown around. How curious it is to be applied to the National Socialist Party, that was a genuine Labour party to the core. It does, however, serve well to demonstrate how far wrong ANY philosophy can go if the people let it. So does that make a Harper Conservative some kind of good thing? Well, nobody in that caucus would know a genuine conservative if one bit him (or her) on the arse. So, conservatism (implying the righteous right) is some kind of solution? If you look South of the 40th from whence the archetypical "right" emanates, instead of some kind of genuine democratic process, we see instead a very deep version of aforementioned rule-by-special-interest. AND: the flavour of the century is to ensconce Casino Capitalism as the de facto religion of the economic West. Until the incredibly ignorant populace, led by incredibly ignorant academia can get their head around such things as truly representative government (devoid of partisan power, if not representation), and learn that an economy hasn't got a hope in hell of sustaining when the vast majority of activity is purely speculative and almost totally devoid of creation of any wealth, we are doomed to argue endlessly and pointlessly about the silly things that really make little difference in anything come every Federal election. Now you have guessed it: I really don't want to vote for ANY of the choices we have in any partisan way. I will simply try to determine which candidate in my riding seems most honest and able to represent my interests in Ottawa. THAT is what IMHO any and all politicians should be required and restricted to doing. You don't want to know what I think of oil sands, child care and a bunch of the other crap, because it sure as hell won't give anyone here the warm fuzzies.