Claudius

This is hilarious. Claudius and his "Hatred". lol. "Emotionally charged discussion". Oh sure. Nothing "East vs West" about this: lol! "Jobs that destroy your life!" Yep. Nothing emotionally charged about that! ....or this... ...or even this... Nice stereotyping.Closer to the truth MCC, you and a few others on the thread were happy to have a "West vs East" hatefest until someone chimed in on behalf of the West. Then suddenly even at 5 to 1 it wasn't fair or fun for you any more.

Well I fully recognize that it is the nature of a flame war such as the one between Waldo and I to make both participants look completely crazy even if it's not entirely true. Just sayin'.

Honestly not meaning any offense Bleeding Heart, but if you read what I said about the nature of the posts I'm talking about then it won't take you very long to find them. I feel vindicated. I'm not going to bother continuing with Waldo since it's pointless to argue with someone who only argues what they claim you say instead of what you do say, or who timidly refuse to address the point being made. I don't hold the same attitude for you as I've read some of your posts and they don't seem irrational or childish.

If you haven't been following the thread I can't help you, but then if you haven't been following the thread then its' contents arent' something that should concern you.

Waldo: As usual your post says nothing. Let me know when you can argue what was said instead of what you wish was said. Michael: The worst thing I said about the East or rather Ontario specifically is that they arrogantly believe they are more sophisticated and inherently smarter than those in the rest of the country, but especially the West, and especially Alberta; they have the arrogant belief that they somehow deserve to be in a position to tell the West what to do or to even run/govern it themselves. This attitude has evolved from a ethnic build up of non-English speaking Europeans during the turn of the century, who were considered rubes and backwater peasants by English Ontario. I've backed this up with articles from the time and I'm far from the only one who thinks this attitude continues to this day. Now I know it's not a nice thing to hear Micheal and yet..... Here we are: in a thread, started by someone from Ontario whose original point serves no purpose but to childishly jab at Alberta and babble a bunch of nonsense about how it's not such a great place to live after all even though it's obvious he's never been there; A thread littered posts from Waldo and MiddleClassCentralist, (Ontario poster), who are not economists or anything of the sort, who don't even understand the basics of land schemes for resource extraction, who can't even understand that 10% is bigger than 4%, running around arrogantly, ignorantly, pontificating like the Black Knight from The Holy Grail about how "Alberta can't economically manage itself properly". ...Wait it gets better.... We watch this attitude coming from Ontario posters, from Eastern posters, against the backdrop of Ontario tanking economically because they can't manage themselves properly; we get this against the backdrop of Quebec tanking because it can't manage itself properly, and against the backdrop of Alberta doing far and away better economically than any other province in the country....and it's been like that for 10 years or so now, not to mention the fact that Ontario has been building its' economy/infrastructure for 100 years longer than Alberta was in any position to do. It is within that reality that arrogant Ontarionians think they can babble nonsense about how Alberta isn't managing themselves properly. Like I say they think they have an inherent right, they think they are never wrong and that the 'orbiting colonies' need their "wise" guidance. Mostly the young ones do it out of jealously, but the young ones are the funniest. It really is a fascinating feat to watch, something like an Olympiad of Hypocrisy or Ignorant Arrogance, and honestly the nature of these replies have done nothing but prove my point for me.

Blah blah blah. It's like you think you have audience to play it up to. facts that destroy the contention that Canadian oil sands lands are being sold off to foreign companies he likes to call "stumbling". There's that juvenile dishonesty again Wow. You really can't read and you really don't know the definitions you're flinging around. The story you posted claimed foreign ownership, and I posted three links that show the land is not owned but leased, and now predictably you claim it wasn't relevant. Also now you think your point is still valid because you learned the phrase "production ownership", but what you're probably unaware of is that the production rights only last as long as the lease, so it is also a "production lease". No ownership. The point of the story you posted is to attempt to convince the reader that Canada or rather the oil sands land is being sold off to foreign countries. As in we no longer own it. This too is what you believe(d) because this was the expressed point of linking the story. Now that I've educated you to the fact that no foreign countries own any oil sands land, or the unlimited rights to the resources within, and to varying degree this is true all over the nation (each province has slightly different rules) you pretend this was never your point....leaving you with no point at all. Congrats. I've rarely seen someone paint themselves into a corner so well. Had nothing to do with "Harpers most recent actions", and you never pointed them out to me. Your claim is that this practice of leasing production land/rights to foreign companies starts with something Harper did and you are completely wrong. There's just no way around that, in fact it's laughable to suggest. I merely pointed that out. No "deflection" to it. Amusing the way you label a fact that kills our preposterous contention a "delection". The entire nation has practiced this for almost 80+ years. Oil, gas, lumber, mining. Foreign companies have been leasing these lands for resource extraction since WWII. You seriously think it starts with Harper? That you don't know this is hilarious, or that you do know it but can't admit it is typical. Unfortunately you still can't remember what you were arguing with this 25%/10% discrepancy. It's kind of pathetic to watch you display less retention than a sack of hammers, or perhaps this is just your deflection from the fact that I proved the inarguable, unquestionable fact that a population surge will affect infrastructure. It's as undeniable as 2 + 2 = 4 and after all that is what we were arguing about> It figures your fragile ego is sheltering you from this reality by erasing it from your memory.

Doesn't even make senese. I was never upset. That's just you arguing with the voices in your head again. Again this isn't what I said. Again either you can't read simple English or you're lying. I pointed out that this is the way it is in a vast number of countries who do oil and gas business with multinationals. Pretty simple really, which is why you can't argue on that basis. I also pointed out the inarguable differences in the cost of doing business in Canada as opposed to doing business in, for example, Nigeria. You don't have the intellect to understand this, or you don't have the honesty to admit the difference you suddenly you go off on a rant about how apparently I "don't care" about human rights abuses in Nigeria. Pretty pathetic. Nnnnnope. Not for anyone who understands English. First off it's not "Harpers actions", it's Trudeaus, Clarkes, Mulronys, Chretiens, Martins and Harpers. This much is plain for anyone honest, but I guess that discounts you.Secondly I do not "by default" (again you need to argue insinuations instead of what is plainly said) accept it simply because I explained it. Perhaps you can find an adult nearby to explain the difference to you. I tried to show you how if a doctor simply explained cancer to you this doesn't mean he's "pro-cancer", but apparently even this easy-to-understand explanation eludes you. Of course it's not that you don't understand, it's that you can't argue it so you need to make something up. There's that dishonesty of yours again. I'm not. Never did. Was never the topic. The topic was something else you couldn't continue to argue so now you resort to transparent game playing. See above. Oh wow look at that! Waldo finally admits he had a misconception about something and begs me not to explain it to him again. Very good Waldo. Blah blah blah. More transparent dishonest game playing. You're the one who changes the subject every time he gets into trouble and loses the debate. When someone makes a point that a population surge can affect infrastructure it's not a "significant error" if he guesses 25% increase and instead it was only 10%. I'm pretty sure even a 10-year-old can recognize that this doesn't discount the point, whereas you couldn't understand or admit the point for a dozen pages. Besides there's no end to the list of mistakes you've made on this thread which is why you're so over the edge and emotional. Again just let me know when you grow up enough to argue what is said and not what you conveniently insist someone is "insinuating".

Once again Waldo shows us he can't argue what was said, only occasionally what he wishes someone said. Not once in your own little rants do you ever address what was plainly said, instead you concoct something from your imagination and then go on ranting and insisting your opponent said something else, because if you had to address what they actually said you wouldn't be able to continue arguing. You can't argue that a population surge doesn't affect infrastructure so like a child you invent something I'm "insinuating" with this plain assertion. That makes you a liar, a brat and completely useless forum pollution. There is nothing...nothing...sweeter than illuminating a child like like yourself for what he is, especially when he's too arrogant or juvenile to see how silly he looks. Thanks! Almost as sweet as the inherent victory from coming back to see he can't reply with anything but more transparent juvenility. It's truly amusing to watch you prance around like a victorious puppy when all you've done is make a complete fool of yourself. I've never seen someone kick and cry so much just because they've run out of things to argue with. Let's illustrate your delusional illogical nature one more time. I point out how the multinational companies work and instead of addressing it (since you can't) you decide I'm "advocating" it: I didn't advocate it anywhere, I merely explained how it works for you. I suppose if a doctor explained to you how cancer operates you'd accuse him of being "pro-cancer". Also it's not surprising that the only qualifier you need to decide someone is conservative is the fact that they disagree with something totally brain dead that you've said. But then it's been established over and over again that you're not arguing with me but rather with whatever the voices in your head are saying. When you grow up and find the intelligence or courage to actually address and argue what someone plainly says instead of whatever demented concoction you stamp your feet and insist they're "insinuating", let me know.

LOL!! Again he sits here arguing with the voices in his head instead of what is plainly written. Nowhere do I say this, I merely point out the way it works. And this "policy" of allowing foreign companies to do business in the oil sands and elsewhere in Canada is hardly "Harpers policy", HAHAHAHAHA! But then we can't blame you for not knowing what happened before Harper since that was probably back when you were 8 years old. All over Canada, for the past 50 years or more, multinational companies have been doing business in every sector and in every province from oil and gas to lumber to mining. But whatever. Live in whatever dreamwolrd you need to live in, it's obvious your mind would break if you had to deal with reality, just as it's obvious it would break if you had to argue what people say rather than what you imagine or wish they would say.

Of course I have concerns in those areas but that's not the subject matter, the only reason I brought up Nigeria was to show the difference in the cost of doing business. That was pretty plain for anyone who can read and comprehend, so naturally this would not include you. You know this perfectly well but since you can't debate it and you can't act like an adult and you can't be honest you now go off rambling about something completely different because you can't face a simple point. bazinga! Why, I imagine those increased royalty revenues would go a long way to better managing the infrastructure requirements in Alberta - ya, think? My, my you're an angry little man aren't you? Yes I imagine it would, just as I'm certain a 2-3% population increase instead of a 10% population increase would take off the pressure. See that's the difference between you and I: I'm an intelligent adult who can handle the fact that there are multiple factors, and can be honest about it, whereas you aren't. Nope, you didn't read it at all. You don't read anything, practically speaking you're sitting here arguing against what you imagine other people are saying. That much has been evident throughout this entire conversation. Wrong. Hilarious. You don't even know what your own point was. Your point was the extreme profits not ownership and as I pointed out to you, as everyone who can read knows, these mutli-national companies do the very same business all over the globe. It wouldn't matter if it was Alberta or the U.K. the ownership and profit destinations would be the same. Everyone knows this but only a little dishonest child would argue it all day. Sure princess, right after you find the quote where I denied the Alberta government has any responsibility in the matter or that the infrastructure problems were someone else's fault. We all know you can't otherwise you would've. Nope. Never did once. Man it's insane how much you rely on lies. My point always was simply that a surge of population will put pressure on infrastructure - THAT'S IT, NOTHING MORE. That was the only point I was making about it and for 7 pages you couldn't read that properly. Still can't. By all means go find where I was laying blame elsewhere. It's not my fault you're a little child who can't understand plain English. I mean listen to your silly little self. I say, "The surge in population makes keeping up with infrastructure difficult", but what you read is "It's not Albertas fault! It' someone elses'". Like I say, you're not arguing with me, you're arguing with voices in your head apparently. no - until you accepted where the blame lie, until you quit whining about strawman, you implicitly were laying the blame elsewhere... Nope, we were arguing about population surges and the effect it has on infrastructure. "implicitly laying the blame elsewhere" he says, because he can't find a quote to back that nonsense up and because he's not honest or adult enough to admit a simple point. No I was not implying this, that would be the sound of the voices in your head apparently. Time and time again Waldo you prove to everyone you simply cannot handle arguing what people say, but instead must argue what you wish they said. If you can't argue what people say but instead must argue what you decide they're implying then your can't really argue at all can you? No, you can't. So shut up. And when you can't argue that point you started making up this crap about me laying blame elsewhere simply because I can understand a basic truism you apparently can't admit: that population affects infrastructure. That's it. Nothing more. You argued that for 10 pages and you'll probably argue it for ten more pages telling me what I'm really saying, LOL! You can't argue that so now you waste your time dancing around with this completely baseless accusation that I was laying blame elsewhere. No I wasn't and you know full well I wasn't or we all know you'd be right here with a quote from me that proves it. You know you're wrong, now you're relegated to stomping your feet and insisting your lie is true, like a little shallow useless child. Well you're either a liar or beyond stupid. I decided liar was less insulting. You're lying on this page like a brat telling me what I'm supposedly insinuating because you can't argue what I'm actually saying. That's called lying Waldo. That makes you a liar. You've been lying from the start and you're lying right now with this baloney accusation that I was laying the blame for Alberta's infrastructure on someone else. Nowhere do I do that. Over and over and over again I simply point out that an influx of population affects infrastructure and over and over and over you refuse to admit this inarguable fact and instead you play silly transparent games like telling me to forget what I actually said, and that what I'm "really doing" is laying the blame elsewhere. No I'm not, and I never once did. If you can't argue what people say then STFU. It's obvious you are the biggest child on this forum.

double post, sorry.

This is the way it is in nearly every non-nationalized oil and gas industry. There are foreign companies doing the same thing in the US, the middle east and all over Africa and the UK as well. It's pretty standard unless the country is communist or has nationalized the industry (and occasionally even then). Posting this as proof of something merely illuminates your lack of understanding of it, rather than proves anything. It certainly doesn't single out Alberta for anything nefarious.

Um yes it does. Nigeria charges no environmental clean up or reclamation and Alberta does. This factors into the overall cost of doing business in Alberta which is why the Alberta government has been touchy about raising the royalty rates - their intent was to remain competitive. This is really as simple as 2 + 2 = 4 but I'm not surprised you ahve a problem understanding it. Now my personal opinion is that they could raise them some more but that doesn't enter into your misinformed argument at all.

LOL!! I knew you wouldn't read it. Nope, you couldn't even do that. You didn';t read it and you have no idea what it's talking about. This is a wrong right off the hop and anyone who knows anything about crown land knows that not a square inch of land is owned by foreign interests. All land being mined or used for resource extraction in Canada is leased not owned. This is the reality. Saying that it is owned by foreigners makes good reading though. Conservation groups are always lying about this. They take advantage of the fact that officially they are referred to as land lease "sales" even though nothing is actually sold: http://www.albertaacts.ca/CitizensGuide/Oilsands Don't believe that one? Okay try this one: http://www.pembina.org/blog/381 Still don't believe it? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athabasca_oil_sands So we can add this "Alberta oil sands are sold to foreigners" as another misconception of yours showing that you don't know squat about the oil sands, royalties or anything else. Naturally the article you link to has nothing to do with royalties and doesn't mention them anywhere, nor does it counter anything I said about royalties, so one wonders why you bothered to link it. But then you're nothing more than a game player and a liar. You accused me suggesting that Alberta's infrastructure problems are to be blamed on Ontario, but of course I never ever said that. YOu accuse me of this 3-4 more times even though you know I never blamed another province or the country, I simply pointed out that any province that experiences a population surge will cause the province some infrastructure problems. Doesn't matter if it's Alberta or Ontario. After running around to look for where I supposedly blame someone else you finally realize I never did and you reply with: I never once said the Alberta doesn't government share some of the blame or responsibility, of course it does, but that doesn't change the fact that a population surge with affect anyones infrastructure. Also let me teach you a little about English: before one can admit something first they must deny it. That you remain unwilling to admit the obvious: that a population surge will affect infrastructure is thankfully meaningless since it's an inarguable fact, regardless of whether or not we're talking about alberta or ontario or any other province and regardless of whether or not you choose to believe it. Do these childish brain-dead rhetorical games work on other people on this forum? I await your nonsensical response which will doubtless be an attempt to simply insist that whatever I said "Is not!" or a complete mischaracterization of what I said in order to make it easier for you to argue with.

I didnt break this off, I answered your inquiry about royalties which led to environmental programs. Once more you show that you're completely unwilling to read what the other person is saying and then you blame them because you can't follow the stream of your own conversation. It's not a strawman Waldo it's called a conversation. You really need to look up strawman. Nope. You're the one without a clue about it, this much is obvious.

Anyways it's been fun Waldo but since your posts never amount to anything more than a smokescreen, lying about something I said, mischaracterizing something I said or simply stamping your feet and insisting the facts aren't the facts I'll leave you to your trolling. I seriously doubt you can intelligently respond to anything I've said without lies, game-playing, obscuration, smokescreens or some other form of childishness. You certainly haven't so far.

Yet another post that doesn't address anything. More squirming to avoid having to address a point. And no, stamping your feet insisting I am unhinged doesn't actually make it true, it's just another smokescreen for you to avoid addressing the points. Did you read this? http://andrewleach.c...royalty-primer/ nope. Did you read this? http://www.british-i...ton_policy.html Nope! You don't read anything. You just flame on and on like a troll-energizer bunny.

Oh and BTW royalty rates were raised back in 2007, however it's true that this rate amounts to about 1/2billion less than some study panels have recommended.

Try understanding this Waldo....I doubt however youll even bother to read it: http://andrewleach.ca/oilsands/your-oilsands-royalty-primer/ Maybe find an adult to explain this all to you Waldo. Simpletons blame everything on the "BigOil" bogeyman as though that answers everything. Intelligent people endeavour to understand instead of just relying on a simplistic scape-goat answer they can't even properly explain themselves. Since you have trouble understanding why a 10% population growth has more of an effect than a 4% population growth I don't hold out much hope for you understanding oil revenue royalty rates.

As usual your "counter argument" comes down to "Nah-uh! Is not! Because I say so!" Environmental protection costs are higher in Alberta than other parts of the world no matter how many times you scream "BS" and wages are also higher than many other places in the world no matter how many times you scream "BS". This isn't a strawman argument, it's the truth. Example: Royalites are lower in Alberta than Nigeria. However Nigeria pays it's workers $1/day and charges nothing for environmental cleanup. That you refuse to acknowledge this simple truth doesn't surprise me. Obviously that would depend how much you raise it by.

It's not a strawman. Environmental protection costs are higher in Alberta than other parts of the world no matter how many times you scream "BS" and wages are also higher than many other places in the world no matter how many times you scream "BS". This isn't a strawman argument, it's the truth.Example: Royalites are lower in Alberta than Nigeria. However Nigeria pays it's workers $1/day and charges nothing for environmental cleanup. That you need to be taken by the hand and have it slowly explained to you why this makes Nigeria more competitive if you don't keep the royalty rates lower doesn't surprise me. That you STILL cannot bring yourself to admit that a infrastructure will always be behind when there's a 10% population surge also doesn't surprise me./ You have done nothing Waldo except continually misrepresent what I say, continually lie about what I am asserting and continually ignore any proof brought forward. You are useless to debate with and I've already beat you so many times....

lol!Spoken like a real adult. What I said matters when you're lying about what I said.

More lying from the guy who can only lie since he can't debate worth a scratch.1. I never blamed Albertas infrastructure on anyone else. Youplay this braindead childish game where you accuse me of doing that again and again and when you finally read me when I say I never once blamed anyone else you produce this babble. I'm sure this passes for "witty" or "intelligent" in Toronto high schools but the rest of the world can see it for what it is. once again: the only point I ever made regarding Albertas infrastructure is that infrastructure will alway suffer with a population boom. That's all I ever said making the reply you blurt out above nothing more than disconnected childish games.

I just finished telling you why the royalty rates are low. You refuse to address this all you can do is scream "BS!" and ask me why again. You screaming BS doesn't mean anything. Do you or do you not understand the principle of remaining competitive? Yes? Then you understand why Alberta royalty rates will be lower than countries who do not charge escrows for environmental clean up or whose wages are astronomically lower than Alebrta's. Do I need to draw you a picture to help you understand this? This is very easy to understand and screaming "BS" and then throwing out the non-word BigOil doesn't change it.

Again your reading comprehension skills are as lacking as hour honesty.It was ALWAYS less than 5%, I just decided to round it off. Notice again you dance around with this meaningless tidbit instead of addressing the point you know you are wrong about: That Ontario's growth amounts to 2.5 times the amount of people Alberta has grown by doesn't mean anything when you decide to also factor in the fact that Ontario is 5.4 times Albertas population. Let's see if you ever grow enough guts to address this instead of just babbling and dancing around it.