Hydraboss

I think this would actually be a very reasonable solution. That said, in addition to us spending the $8 billion, I think Alberta should restrict it's payments in all way, shape and form to net zero. We get back what we put in. The money no longer sent east will be put into provincial green initiatives. We'll have the cleanest industry on the planet (spending about $15 billion per year on it), still be competitive in exports, with the added bonus of cutting off the ROC from our welfare donations. We'll pay our share (national defence, debt, etc) but not a red cent to the ROC under equalization. THEN we can afford the possibility of an International Greenhouse Gas Guilt and Blackmail Scam (IGGG-BS) quite easily. We'll just charge the ROC more for their oil and gas. Simple. Good idea.

Danielle Smith (through the party) could make a public announcement that in place of mandatory by-elections taking place if an MLA crosses the floor, that the WRA is going to hold annual (or whatever) mass by-elections on XXX date each year that there is a floor-crossing. Picture this: John Smith of the PC's decides to move to the WRA. He can make the switch, but within 12 months (or six months or 3 months - whatever the WRA decides to put into party policy) he must face the electors in his riding. This would encourage John to come out publicly and say why he's going to run for the WRA and give the PC's some amount of time to find a suitable replacement to run against him. John has an advantage in that he is the incumbent and the voters elected him previously. But John also has disadvantages in that there will be a segment that is angry because he crossed, and those people that vote the party (as everyone seems to think about Albertans) instead of the candidate will just vote for the new PC guy. Overall, it becomes a pretty fair fight and John had better be doing a good job or he'll be turfed. I'd love to see it.

Uh...ya sure. It's about time the feds did something to earn the billions upon billions we have and continue to send to them to support their needy children. Actually, yes...we are all enjoying this stuff. How are you enjoying the Alberta Handouts you get? How's it feel to be on Alberta Welfare? How are you with us sending back your kids, husbands, uncles, etc now that we don't need them for the moment? How's it feel to know that Alberta pays far, far more to the welfare state of Canada than it will ever receive? How does it feel to know that every time someone says "Canada's oil and gas reserves" that they really mean "Alberta's oil and gas reserves" and that the rest of the world knows it too? How's it feel to know that there's a growing number of people in Alberta that TRULY DON"T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT THE REST OF CANADA ANYMORE? How do you like the fact that Albertan's can bitch about the Heritage Trust Fund and whether or not it's growing, knowing that you are from a welfare province? Just wondering.

Well, if says it's so, it must be so. Who else could know more about the Alberta oilsands?

So then they should set a date....say May 1/10....and announce that all WRA MLA's that cross from other parties will run in simultaneous by-elections. That gives them an excuse to use with the Alberta public, a certain amount of shared costs, and since the next provincial election is about two years away - the new WRA MLA's could use their victories (if any) to beat the PC's and Eddie over the head. If let's say five or six members crossed and most or all of them won their by-elections by landslides (Albertans don't tend to vote a little in any direction), Eddie may even be forced to step down. THEN we'd finally have a horse race!

Unless of course he finds a non-separatist, CANADIAN with an even hotter ass.

Are you actually trying to take yourself seriously? This idea is something that even Oleg would consider in the realm of acid-droppers. Do you understand ANYTHING about the oil and gas industry? At all?

It was part of the constitution of the Alberta Alliance where most of us came from, but the new WRA site doesn't list it anymore. Go figure.

I cannot express enough how much I disapprove of this slimy move. If the WRA wanted to show up as legitimate in the eyes of the right wing, they would have INSISTED that these two step down and run as WRA candidates in by-elections. They have been my party of choice for years (Alberta Alliance), but they just fell down a few notches in my estimations. Danielle has already begun to explain away why the party broke it's own constitution but will never be able to account for it. Got too greedy too fast. She should do the honorable thing and insist that, even as WRA MLA's, they now announce they are stepping down to run in by-elections. And she better do it soon or she'll be no better than the bus driver.

Wrong. And wrong. I agree. That's why I don't buy my TV's or clothes there. (The TV thing is pretty specific, so only ask if you actually want to know.) However, the second XBOX 360, games, etc I bought there are EXACTLY the same as the ones I bought at Future Shop. The Shimano fishing gear I bought there is IDENTICAL to the items at The Fishin Hole but for around 70% of the price. Same with both Minn Kota electric motors. Pedigree dog food (canned and dry) is waaaayy less coin for exactly the same product. Try and buy Tide for high efficiency units at Walmart and at Safeway and see what happens (almost 50% less at Wally World). You are aware that "big shopping malls" started going out at the end of the 80's, right? They now put up these "commons" where ten billion stores in one billion little strip malls spread out over 6 or 8 city blocks with every one of them having their own little parking lot, etc. Funny thing though, they're never built until at least one of the big box stores goes in first. Usually a Home Depot and/or Walmart (at least in Alberta). One questions for you: Do you shop at a Safeway, Loblaws, IGA, etc or do you go to a butcher, a baker, a farmer's market for vegetables, etc? You are aware that the aforementioned stores are "grocery stores" and really put the small independants out of business, right?

I am fine playing my part in causing misery for others. Do I like the "misery" part? No, but I will not be guilted into cowering. Someone, please prove I'm causing misery. The other posters on the board? Who cares? They will either agree, disagree, complain, report, bitch, moan or make self-righteous statements (as you tend to). I won't lose a moment's sleep over it. You post as though I should actually care. This is a political board where pretty much everyone is anonymous, so why would yours or anyone else's opinion give me any cause to change my attitude? Does the honesty of my post piss you off or just shock you because you would never dream of being that blatant? I work for my money, and I am entitled to spend it however the fuck I see fit. I am entitled to my entitlements. Thanks Jean. Do I let both my trucks run even if I don't intend to drive them? Sometimes. My company truck sits on the road in front of my house because my boat with the two-stroke motor sits on one half of my driveway (you should see THAT son-of-a-bitch smoke when it's started!!) and I can't plug it in. If I don't let it run for a while every couple of days while I'm on vacation, I have to boost it. Sorry, but suck it up. I live in the richest province in Canada...Alberta. I probably (?) work more hours in a week than a hell of a lot of people work in a month. I have had to be away from my family for weeks at a time for my job. Am I complaining? No, but I make more money than most and that EARNS me the right to spend it. Incidentally, I also give more to our local version of Santas Anonymous every year than most families SPEND on Christmas every year. I'm not looking for an "atta boy" or any other reaction for that matter, but understand that CURRENTLY, the Alberta oil patch pays for me to pay for that. If you don't like the "tar sands", I don't fucking care. It supplies my family with a very comfortable life. Good enough for me. You seem to be fairly intelligent. Would you like to PM me your resume and I'll see if I know anyone that has an opening for a "self-righteous, left wing, over judgemental, enviromentally-concerned, quasi-political blogger? Shell or BP might be looking. Let me know.

This thread was fun to read for a while, but now I think it's time for me to follow other posters who have come to the conclusion that it has lost any point it may have had. A few points before I go: It amazes me how this point-counter point conversation has really been nothing more than "who can Google faster". One side presents "evidence" that is in question worldwide as to it's authenticity since the whole ClimateGate bullshit. Junk science. The other side runs back and forth contesting the junk science as well as possible considering it is thrown with such speed that it makes you feel as though you're playing singles tennis against 20 opponents. The "CO2 Bad" crowd maintains their rabid...and I do mean RABID...defence of a bunch of "scientists" that have been caught with their hands in the "I want another grant" cookie jar. Then they turn around and attack anyone taking an opposing view as supporters/shills for energy companies. Hypocrisy at it's finest. No one seems to want to broach the truism that is - who the hell cares if the planet warms a couple of degrees? "Oh! But millions will be displaced because they live near sea level!!!" So? These are the same people that keep getting wiped out by tsunamis and hurricanes each year BECAUSE THEY LIVE NEAR SEA LEVEL. "Oh! But millions will starve in third world nations because it will be too hot for crops to grow!!!" So? They were singing "Feed the World" over 25 years ago BECAUSE MILLIONS STARVE IN THIRD WORLD NATIONS BECAUSE IT IS TOO HOT FOR CROPS TO GROW. Not my problem and not your problem. "What will we do will the displaced millions?" Who cares. Again, not my problem. There are lots of bad things that happen every year on this planet. We help those we can, and we have telethons that nobody watches for those we can't. We send billions in cash (and prizes!) to alleviate our "guilt" and to get those infernal images off our televisions for another 6-12 months. People starve in this country and yet we send much needed cash to a bunch of third world cesspools. But it's okay; we feel better for a while. "CO2 emissions from the oilsands will kill the planet!" And???? Alberta has a ton of oil, as does Saskatchewan. Guess what? We're going to continue producing "the black plague" from it for many, many years to come. Why? Because someone needs to supply what you need for your VW microbus to drive to all of those protests. And to supply base stock to make that computer you're typing on. And to make that "environmentally friendly, eco-safe" refillable water bottle you're always lugging around. Do you feel globally guilty? Don't. We'll take the blame on the world stage and it won't interrupt our sleep at night. Globally, one fact has always been true and always will be. Money rules the world. We have it, poor countries don't (hence the word "poor".) That means that we can get away with pretty much anything we want and don't have to answer for it. I, for one, like it that way. So that leaves two items to contend with: Blame and guilt. We'll take the blame, and you ClimateGate guys take the guilt part. That way we're all happy. I have some shopping left to do, and it's -25C right now so I'm going to go outside and let one of my V8 domestic trucks idle for probably 45 minutes (maybe I'll start both for fun - company gas you know). When they're warm, I will drive, in 4 wheel drive, to a bunch of stores across my little town and spend way too much buying stuff I know people don't really need. But it'll make me and them happy, so I'm going to do it. Then tonight, I will drink beer and my family and I will play "Do They Know It's Christmas" from youtube and I'll remind my 11 and 12 year olds that there are people in poor countries that don't have enough to eat this Christmas. We'll all feel bad, and then I'll have another beer. Merry Christmas to all of you. Especially you, ClimateGate Twins.

Uhm...BC, unless this is your kind of lifestyle you may want to consider leaving. I've said I'm okay with the whole "civil union" thing, but three is pushing it. P.s. - Waldo, if it stings....see a doc. They have creams and such now.

Oh, but we did fine in the Times Before Stelmach. We know better than anyone the effects that energy prices have on our province and we have done admirably well despite the various crashes since the NEP. Then we go and elect a too-far liberal left wing Idiot named Eddie (the most excellent Deputy Minister of Agriculture - or at least that's what he should have been). You can go on as much as you'd like about oil prices, but the fact remains that we have always survived and prospered regardless of prices. We had pretty damn good financial management prior to The Idiot. Even Ralph the Drunk was a major advantage (at least in his first two terms).

Perhaps the have-not provinces should consider the possibility that their welfare cheques and finances sink or float based solely on the price of oil.

That Trendlines crap must be the biggest spoof "research" group around! Love the "2012 Projections". Ha!.

How about "the recently deceased"? Sounds good to me.

Not true. I'm in favor of gay marriage as long as both chicks are hot. As for two men....it's just disgusting, but I don't have a problem with civil unions. Marriage is for straight people.

So why is everyone so down on the Alberta oil sands? It consumes the international debate when it only accounts for a tiny amount of the world's CO2. Climate change The production of bitumen and synthetic crude oil emits more greenhouse gas (GHG) than the production of conventional crude oil, and has been identified as the largest contributor to GHG emissions growth in Canada, as it accounts for 40 million tonnes of CO2 emissions per year.[59] Environment Canada claims the oil sands make up 5% of Canada's greenhouse gas emissions, or 0.1% of global greenhouse gas emissions. It predicts the oil sands will grow to make up 8% of Canada's greenhouse gas emissions by 2015.[60] Environmentalists argue that the availability of more oil for the world made possible by oil sands production in itself raises global emissions of CO2. Oil sands So by 2015, the oil sands will account for a whopping 8% of Canada's 2% which equals.....0.16% of world CO2 emissions. Wow. Staggering.

Ted is no angel and no savior. This I know. But you are correct that things need to return to normal. Albertans making more cash than the rest of Canada, spending more than the rest of Canada, with a brighter future than the rest of Canada.......and supporting the rest of Canada. That being said, look at what Eddie the Idiot has done to this province. Screwed up the oilpatch, cut funding for the handicapped, cutting funding for education, the "health superboard", etc, etc. Just yesterday the poll results were released that show him to have the lowest approval rating in the country.....14%. From 43% in Jan 09 to 14% now. Unheard of to drop that much that fast. To get 14%, you have to be hated by pretty much every group in existence.

"Probably"?? You do know that plastic is a petroleum byproduct, right? That phone you answered today, yep, plastic. The water bottle you just drank from....plastic. The "environmentally friendly" micro car you bought (yes, even the hybrid)....you'll never guess!!!....made in large part from plastic. Ever fly on a jet? Anywhere? Know what they burn??? Kerosene. Wanna guess where that comes from? Ever heard of a little place called Copenhagen? Kyoto maybe? As for consequences, ya, I'll live with them. In front of one of my big screens or while driving one of my two V8 trucks. Hope it doesn't keep me up at night........

Morris, I think you meant to say "retarded". Just trying to help.

You're typing on a computer made from "dirty energy". Why don't you go buy one of those new computers with the circuit boards that are made of hemp or wind energy? We have an abundance of oil and coal. Please tell me what other "clean" energy sources we have that can supply our energy needs. Are nations like Brazil being forced to pay money to Africa because they're cutting down rainforests?

Actually I'm saying that simple calculations like yours don't demonstrate a damn thing. We produce oil and gas in this country. We export boatloads of it to places that don't produce it for themselves (directly and/or indirectly) but still use it, and yet we never hear about how some village in Brazil is involved in clear cutting 1000 acres a month (or whatever) of rainforest that does just as much damage to the environment/CO2 numbers as our oilsands. I think we're being held to much, much HIGHER standards than some "barefoot, wild squirrel hunting, never seen a machine, backwards nations".

Yup it probably does as long as the math includes all of the populations of barefoot, wild squirrel hunting, never seen a machine, backwards nations on the planet. I wonder what percentage of non-hydrocarbon producing nations still use these same fossil fuels? If it makes you feel better, I'm pretty sure Canada eats less than 0.5% of the wild boars consumed on the planet or and clear cuts less than 0.5% of the rainforests on Earth.