69cat

In a thread about white racist cops shooting black men and how race is a prime motivator it is interesting to note the police officer in the Castile shooting was not white therefore removing the racist component. However it is reported Castile was pulled over for investigation as he was thought to resemble someone wanted for armed robbery. Being that the suspect and Castile are both black this is apparently a police issue as Castile is being racially profiled. https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/07/08/confirmed-philando-castile-was-an-armed-robbery-suspect-false-media-narrative-now-driving-cop-killings/ As others have said, wait for the facts to come in. But the police are muzzled as their facts must be kept for the investigation so that leaves all the others to make claims like white racist cop and outstanding black citizen with permitted weapon. No, dont wait for facts. Just spread a lot of speculation and accusations until 12 law enforcement officers are gunned down.

Another antiquated idea is having the possibility of consequences after being caught performing an illegal act.

Dont know how far you want to look msj for an article that you do not consider a conspiracy based source. While i find zero-hedge pessimistic i do find over the years that there are many articles there that are based on fact and reality. Whether or not we choose to accept them as such does not make the article conspiracy or non-conspiracy based. Here is another one that you can pre-determine whether it is a conspiracy based website. http://internationalbanker.com/banking/banking-rebuilding-system-bail-policy/ Of note in the above link is the fact that we have not heard much discussion of bail-in bonds as pondered by the G20 meetings but we have heard much about new legal structure so is it conspiracy thinking to beleive the bail-in bond idea has not received much traction but an alternative legal structure has, and if so who are the creditors that the G20 discussions are seeking out if not bond holders? "Whether there is a need to have specific bail-inable bonds or a new legal structure to permit a bail-in element of debt structuring will be discussed, while leaders put together a bail-in operation designed to bring stability and economic freedom to the global financial system."

Scribblet, perhaps not a great link but some info to consider. https://pressfortruth.ca/top-stories/what-bail-means-why-you-shouldnt-hold-your-money-big-five-banks/ I do beleive a depositor in excess of $100,000 will be part of the bail in. I do not see it being any other way. Why else would one write legislation that would otherwise essentially say the banks owners are responsible for the bank. Perhaps in this messed up banking world it is otherwise possible for the owners to walk away. My guess is that bank owners will have away around the bail-in laws anyway, if your asset is a bank and it is bankrupt then what do you have to invest? The reality is that if bail-in is triggered then things are very bad and as the article notes, our insured deposits will likely cease to exist anyway. Of note in the article is the origin of the bail-in structure, it is not a Conservative or Liberal agenda and articles labelling it as such should be skipped.

Good to know that in less than six years the GFC is already considered no big deal. It will make things much easier if Canadas economy really tanks in the next few years as it seems such an occurrence will essentially be a non-event when put in histotical context and we can be confident the Liberals wont go to the trough of tax payer money to inject it into the econony in such an event. Frankly i dont beleive this but certainly am left with this impression based on reading here so i can have some degree of optimism that there is no chance the deficit will increase beyond projections no matter what transpires.

Agree with a lot of what you said dre about the budget discussion regarding partisan attacks and a meaningful discussion. I do get very tired of talk about debt/gdp ratio and more spending is ok, Keynesian Economics, the entire world is doing it etc. I dont care what the world is doing, what i care about is wasting $25B for nothing, and that the next government in power will add more to the deficit, and why not? Debt/gdp ratio is an arbitrary target number easily changed. So what if $25B becomes $50B in interest as it will be someone elses bill to deal with the next decade. I think people should be more fiscally responsible so as to not saddle my kids with debt that they did not ask for. To me that is responsible stewardship. The environmentalists demand it from our government but fiscal stewardship is meaningless. I agree Canada economy is not great, but what the Liberals announced is going to have next to no impact on that fact. People can dress it up how they want. The reality is that if Canada hits another key juncture like the GFC (which others are quick to point out as a bump in the road) then it would be in conjunction with other global issues. So if the GFC was a minor bump then the next will either be a minor bump or a huge one, in any case todays deficit spending will do nothing to prevent or avert it but if the government needs to go to the well for a huge cash injection then we are that much further behind to begin with. This budget tells me they expect everything will be AOK and have no plan if we hit a major recession that the world monetary policies may have set in motion since the GFC. If things get bad then hunkering down now is better than later. Lets hope it is all Sunny, but then why the deficits.

I didnt delve into anything beyond this article but does not sound like anything as changed. As i understand it, laws were changed in the last few years in US and Canada to enact the bail in policy. In Canada we are insured of our savings up to $100,000 if a bank fails. Anything over that is taken by the bank and converted to shares, if the bank survives then you have a share with some value, if the bank still fails then you have nothing. Banks love to borrow money that have no backing of so this is a concern. Particularly for US residents as there are many smaller banks making riskier investments in such things as junior oil companies during peak times. People can dress the new deficit up how ever they want but the reality is the government is borrowing and spending more money than it takes in and therefore we will continue to piss away billions of dollars on interest rather than converting those dollars into something tangible. As dre points out, we see this problem with individuals borrowing and spending because interest is cheap so no better time to do so. This is what drives the economy and is why interest rates are where they are - this is by design. However to show concern for individual indebtness but give a passing mark to the government (federal and provincial) for doing the same is questionable. Yes consumers are in debt and it concerns me. Also our government is taking on more debt without a repayment plan so this concerns me as much as consumer fiscal plans.

Regarding charger connectors, they are common place. 250A at 4160v 3 phase in a plug about 6" diameter and connected with multistrand conductor (look up "5/15kv jumper cable" if interested) is used everywhere in mines. A potash mine will have thousands of connectors in the 600v to 4160v range. Here is one manufacturer http://www.smsconnectors.com/high_voltage.htm I dont think 5 minute charging is practical. One hour would be fine and you need to adapt your schedule/lifestyle accordingly. If it is a road side stop then grab a coffee. The idea of these electric cars are that you are knowingly driving 120 km that day while the cars range is 200 km. If you need to travel further than expected then you use the road side charger or drive a hybrid instead of 100% EV if it is going to be necessary to wait one hour to routinely charge your vehicle.

Series hybrid is the answer, i came across a bmw unit a few months ago that looked like the right idea. An electric motor drives the vehicle via the battery pack for a range of 160 km. A generator charges the battery when needed to extend range and can therefore be used to provide heating that would otherwise shorten your range in the winter. To go a step further one would need a storage battery at home you can charge with solar panels when at work during daytime so that at night you can plug your vehicle into this stored energy to charge your car. Electric cars dont help matters much if you plug in at night and have the electric utility generating power from natural gas, you may as well run natural gas in your car and skip the carbon footprint of manufacturing a hybrid. And then you need solar panels to run your house also otherwise one could argue why bother charging a battery during the day to charge your car off solar yet run your house off electricity from the utility. And so you start thinking about the area that solar panels should occupy on a urban house and it gets rather complicated. But on the farm i have room to spare and can consider these possibilities.

Thanks Bonam, had no idea what rates were like south of the border. Though it looks like i would be buying quite a bit at your 12.9 c/kwh rate as in winter i have quite a bit of my bill over 16 kwh/day, probably another 200 kwh/day at the higher rate. Electric boiler and winter heating drives that.

Whats a typical total kwh cost for people on here? Lots of talk on TOU and not factoring in delivery charges and such. Got my quarterly power bill and i am at 14.2 cents per kwh all in. Took the total paid (including taxes) to settle the bill and divide by kwh used during the billing period.

What part of spending in relation to revenues requires explaination? You take in $1000 and have $1500 of tasks you want to invest in so you decide which of those get $1000 and drop the others. And better yet, when debt is 66% of gdp you go so far as to spend $900 and put $100 toward debt. Does one explain further that as you borrow to spend money now because you dont want to cut then you have no rational reason to ever stop using that ideology. This is correct yes? Borrow and spend when times are good, borrow and spend when times are mediocre, borrow and spend when times are bad - this is an accurate summary. So you bring up 2010 to 2014, it is your position that you DO NOT borrow and spend when times are bad. And so when the Libs and NDP threatened overthrow of the government in the really bad years you omitted because they demanded far more spending then they must have been way out of line then but now the Liberals are dead on target to borrow and spend because stimulus is not needed. And so we remind our selves of the Great Financial Crisis, if only it was a well enough known event to warrant remembering in history like the Great Depression, but actually it does have a name and Canada came through it well enough for Trudeau to say that because the CPC managed the country well the Libs are in a position to borrow and spend. So call it what it is, borrowing and spending because you are incapable of making decisions on where your income should be spent. So tell me smallc, what economic conditions do you see being ripe for paying down debt and with no need to decide how funds are split? Since my position makes little sense lets hear yours.

The media needs to get that memo and stop using the term 'stimulus'. Because dropping that term is correct, and by doing so it simply becomes an issue of the government prioritizing its spending. Since stimulus is not required then 'infrastructure deficit' spending is balanced by cutting spending in other areas. No need to run deficits for a problem that does not exist. Now if the government is simply going to borrow and spend money because it does not want to cut anywhere then say it as such and quit using the term 'stimulus'.

Lucky thing inflation rate dropped to 1.4% in Feb, down from 1.9% in Jan and stopping the rising trend. Bank of Canada targets 2% rate so things like high gas or lower $Can dollar would push inflation higher and BofC would be looking to boost interest rates to cool the economy to lower inflation while the government is running deficits to boost the economy. Looks like in todays world inflation rate is no longer an indicator of need for government stimulus.

In Sask i am 12.6 cents/kwh for residential with a $29.19 basic monthly charge. No delivery charges or time of use or other such rates. Industrial customers are slightly less but are charged around $14/kva each month their peak demand is over 50 kva so this is comparable to a delivery charge.