Jump to content
A Note on Topic Titles – Be Clear & Descriptive!

ReeferMadness

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,953

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by ReeferMadness

  1. ReeferMadness
    Truly. You think a mendacious, narcissistic demagogue who uses racist and Islamophobic sentiments to rally people to his cause (with only vague notions of what that cause even is) would make one of the best Presidents ever? I'm trying to surmise your ranking criteria.
  2. ReeferMadness
    The US was founded on or has come to adopt a myriad of mythologies, none of which is more important than the great American dream. There has long been an underclass, mainly black, that has seen it for what it is but the vision has survived in the mainstream. The crash of 08 shook the dream and the failure of the Obama administration to deliver on the change agenda has caused people to look outside the mainstream for answers. I just saw The Big Short yesterday. I think that Americans have long understood that the financial system is corrupt but now they are starting to see a clear linkage between their personal tragedies and Wall Street wealth. The movie claimed that 6 million people lost their houses in the crash. The fact that people are turning to a mendacious demagogue like Trump in much larger numbers than Bernie Sanders is bizarre and worrisome. I truly believe that nobody knows what a President Trump would do, not even Trump himself. So, I guess what I'm saying is that it looks like our neighbor, a country that revels in its own greatness, the most heavily armed country on the planet, the country that, without any trace of irony, refers to its president as "the leader of the free world" (even as the rest of the planet routinely votes it the world's largest threat to world peace), is off its f*cking nut. You might be asking the wrong people. Our media is heavily concentrated in the hands of a very few people and are heavily influenced by your media. I would suggest reading the English press. I wish that I felt safely tucked up here. Anyone Canadian (or Mexican) who feels safer because they border the most heavily armed country in history (both state-wise and individually) needs to be taught history and critical thinking. There are lots of people who hope you folks discover sanity soon.
  3. ReeferMadness
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/justin-trudeau-president_us_56ec0adfe4b084c672200193?section=politics Americans are literally begging Justin Trudeau to run for president.
    1. rotary

      rotary

      The thought just gives me the heebie jeebies when I try to think of Trudeau's intellect in the same room with Trump's bombast.

  4. ReeferMadness
    Fossil fuel apologists like to claim that CO2 isn't a pollutant because it's "plant food". The contents of your septic system is also plant food. So, I'm sure Tim would have no objection to you just dumping it on his front lawn. Maybe he'd pay you for it.
  5. ReeferMadness
    It's a good point. Fossil fuel addicts (like other addicts) are in deep denial and don't acknowledge that the environmental and health costs that are not paid for by the cost of fossil fuels are, in fact subsidies. And as the IMF has pointed out, they are huge. Another subsidy probably won't even be recognized for years, perhaps decades. And that is the huge cleanup costs that will be required once the industry dies away. Suddenly, marginal wells will be completely unprofitable and many of the companies that own them will be bankrupt. Already, with the recent downturn, the industry is asking Ottawa for hundreds of millions of dollars to clean up old wells. And that isn't even the tip of the iceberg.
  6. ReeferMadness
    I love it when you guys start off like this - it means that me challenging your right wing mantras is getting under your skin. Prior to King Ralph, royalties were negotiated on a case by case basis, recognizing that, at the time, the tar sands were economically marginal because the technology was new. Lougheed wanted to manage the tar sands development carefully as an asset of the people. Lougheed did work with the industry but he was an advocate of a 'one project at a time' strategy. It was King Ralph who slashed the rate to 1% in the 90's and opened up the tar sands to an all comers approach. Of course, Klein was so clueless, that, during his drunken stupor when he was berating homeless people in a shelter he didn't know that some of them actually had full time jobs but couldn't afford to live on his minimum wage. So, Klein, being completely out of touch, couldn't be expected to understand or sympathize with the damage that his gold-rush mentality was causing to low wage earners in the province. And it was exactly this gold-rush mentality that Lougheed was criticizing. I wouldn't agree with Lougheed on everything but he was a far smarter and far wiser man than Klein could ever have hoped to be. Alberta lost its marbles when they voted Klein in. And all of Canada paid the price. And thanks for your condescending comments. They reflect well on you.
  7. ReeferMadness
    I lived a long time in Alberta and I am angry about what has happened there. I really don't give a flying crap what you think of me or what accusations you care to level. You don't know me - you just don't like what I have to say. Too bad. I express my views in strong terms. If you don't like it, move on. I also back up my views with a lot of facts and links. You whine and snivel about my posts but I notice that you don't dispute the fact that Klein lowered the royalty rates to 1% to allow the industry to pay off their capital costs with oil that was essentially free. Or that Peter Lougheed was very critical about what Klein did. There's a term for what you're doing - it's called projection.
  8. ReeferMadness
    Thank you for your bitter drive-by smear. Next time, some actual content would be appreciated. Alberta didn't throw it away, they gave it away - to the oil companies.The great giveaway started under King Ralph. He lowered royalties to 1% on tar sands until capital costs were paid for. And even after the oil companies pay all their costs with essentially free oil, the rates are still very low. Former Premier Peter Lougheed said much the same thing during an interview in 2006 - that royalties are too low and development too fast. Would you like to do a drive-by smear on him as well?
  9. ReeferMadness
    The feasibility of using battery power for local trucking has been proven. For longer distances and air travel, algal or seaweed biofuel is an option. The problem here isn't technological. And if fossil fuels were forced to carry the real cost of production and usage, it wouldn't be economic. The real problem is political. Fossil fuel companies have a lot of clout and and the recent economic disruption shows how perversely dependent the world has become on high oil prices. It's crazy. I see a lot of people feel threatened by the thought of dirty, toxic, dangerous fossil fuels being replaced by cleaner forms of energy. That's unfortunate but you're going to have to learn to deal with it.
  10. ReeferMadness
    I don't bother replying to you much because your stuff isn't worth reading, much less debunking. Here's a case in point. If you actually read the IMF report, you'd see the subsidies apply to all countries. And it's mostly health costs and climate change - not the pre-tax subsidies you're talking about. I didn't make my numbers up - they are IMF estimates. You've presented nothing in return but your own biased, poorly informed opinions. Go out and do some actual reading. There are lots of scientific studies out there that say that we can be moving much faster towards renewable power now. But they're all wasted on closed minds and people with a financial interest in fossil fuels. Alberta should have acted like a resource owner, not an industry cheerleader. Imagine you wake up one day and discover you are sitting on one of the world's largest diamond mines. The only problem is it's higher cost and more difficult to produce than most. If you're smart, you would make smart deals with selected companies to extract the most value. You would use the money to build your own diamond mining company so that you could extract maximum value and extract diamonds in a way that had minimum effect on your land. In short, you would maximize your own value over the long run. If you're stupid, short sighted and greedy, you would do what Alberta did - open up your land to anyone with money and let them pay for their startup costs with all the free diamonds they could carry. And then, after they paid for their capital costs with your diamonds, you would still let them keep most of the profits.
  11. ReeferMadness
    People (right wingers in particular) speak of the government as if it were a race of space creatures that descended and imposed a dictatorship. We live in a democracy so technically, we are the government. And that government creates a system of rules, order, infrastructure, healthy, educated people and other things that allow your business to operate and prosper. So, I hate to be the one to tell you this but your taxes are not some sort of forced charity, they are the price you pay to live in this society. And if they pain you that much, perhaps you should shop around for a better deal. And yes, when the government lowers your price below what others have to pay, you are being subsidized.
  12. ReeferMadness
    Yes. And the sidewalk will be easier to shovel if we just wait for the warm weather to melt most of the snow. If we wait for renewables to be cheaper than fossil fuels without the true costs included in the price, there will be not much left to tax. And the act of imposing taxation will kill what remains in short order. The modern story of fossil fuels (fracking, tar sands, deep ocean drilling, etc) is one of technological success wrapped inside of economic, democratic and policy failure. Future industries with a mindset to rape and pillage before preventive legislation can be enacted will take notice.
  13. ReeferMadness
    Things that are differentially taxed with a specific policy goal in mind (ie an RRSP to encourage retirement savings) are definitely subsidies.
  14. ReeferMadness
    This quibbling over accelerated depreciation is riveting stuff, really it is; but it's spit in the bucket. The IMF estimates that worldwide energy is subsidized to the tune of $5.3 trillion annually. The overwhelming majority of that subsidy can be attributed to fossil fuels; in the areas of pre-tax subsidies (like the one you're discussing), unfunded health costs and unfunded costs due to climate change. And the IMF doesn't even consider the fact that Alberta essentially gives oil away until the capital costs are paid. How do you like that for a sweet deal? Not only can they write down all my capital costs as they're incurred but they can also help themselves to all the free oil they want until the capital costs are fully paid for. And then, after the government has reimbursed their investment in the form of free oil, they still get to keep the vast majority of the profits. Sweet gig - for the oil companies.
  15. ReeferMadness
    When you're driving do you look ahead or behind you?
  16. ReeferMadness
    You're all making it sound too hard. It's easy. 1. Learn to speak in glib, trite, facile sound bites. 2. (most important step) Choose a party and move to a riding that always elects that party. 3. Ingratiate yourself with the local riding association. Hand out cash and free beer. Buy hookers if necessary. 4. Wait for incumbent to retire. If you think it will take too long, hire a private investigator to dig up scandal material and leak it to the press. If there is no scandal material, pay PI to make some up. 5. Run for office. If you've chosen your riding well, you won't have to show up for any debates and will only need to talk to friendly press. Hire security to ensure that only ass-kissing friendlies will show up at your rallies. Make a big show of ringing a few doorbells in areas of town that you know will support your party. Since you won't need a campaign manager, you can send me the money you save. Bitcoin, please.
  17. ReeferMadness

    Muslim terrorists have never poisoned an American city's water supply. But a Republican did.

    1. Show previous comments  11 more
  18. ReeferMadness
    This article (it's long but worth the read) explains the rise of Trump as an increase in authoritarianism on the part of American voters. If true, BC has things exactly backwards (as usual). It's not that Canadians are afraid of Trump, it's that Trump supporters are afraid of almost everything. ISIS, Iran, immigrants, gay marriage. And Trump is the symptom, not the cause.
  19. ReeferMadness
    You could send a letter but 24 Sussex is vacant for renovations at the moment. And I suspect that the current tenants at Rideau Cottage might understand something that seems to elude both you and the previous occupants of 24 Sussex. And that is it's just plain dumb to focus primarily on a single volatile commodity group, particularly when the value of that commodity group has just crashed and may be worth even less over the long term, and particularly when most of the worlds climate scientists blame those commodities for a situation which may imperil civilization.
  20. ReeferMadness
    Are you going to debate honestly or just make shit up? As I said specifically, the similarity between the rise of Trump and the rise of Hitler is in the way they used inflammatory rhetoric to scapegoat minority groups, the public reaction to that rhetoric and the way that commentators (and others like you) are downplaying it. That is not the same as Trump is like Hitler. And it's certainly not like comparing Sanders to Stalin. If you aren't able to appreciate the nuance, I can move on and have more intelligent discussions elsewhere. Yes, it would be exactly the same - providing you can provide clips of those two inciting crowds with inflammatory rhetoric. I'm sure you can, right? What he said is he would go well beyond waterboarding. He doesn't say what that is - I guess you'll just have to use your imagination. However, John McCain, who has actual experience on the receiving end of torture seems much wiser on the topic. And do you have evidence that Obama asked the military to deliberately target the families? If not, your comment is nothing more than a feeble attempt as misdirection. Here. Here. And here. Of course, you have a citation on this? I only ask because based on your other comments, you seem remarkably poorly informed on what Trump has actually said.
  21. ReeferMadness
    I think he's certainly capable of it - and much more. I just think he's erratic to the point of being unstable and I wouldn't predict what he's going to do. The world is going to go through some fundamental changes over the next generation - changes that will challenge our notions of wealth, economy employment and social community. What's happened to date is pretty tame compared with what's coming and based on our reactions to date, it won't be pretty. To me Trump is evidence of the fragility of democracy. We're so hard on honest politicians (people like Joe Clark, Preston Manning, Stephane Dion and Elizabeth May) that after a while, few of them bother. Many of the ones who remain are thick skinned egomaniacs and ideologues.
  22. ReeferMadness
    You think that because Sanders used the word 'revolution', he's a Stalinist? Does that mean that every advertising agency or company that describes is products or services as 'a revolution' or 'revolutionary' is also Stalinist? :rolleyes: C'mon. Walk it back. OK. So, I'll admit I haven't watched any debates and am getting most of my information second hand. But here are the things that Trump has been said to do: - advocate banning Muslims from entering the United States - advocate increase in torture - advocate war crimes (attacking the families of people who are accused of terrorism) - calling Mexican immigrants racists and criminals - tell his supporters to assault protesters at his rallies - various sexist comments to women - he claimed the wives 9/11 hijackers flew back to Saudi Arabia two days before the attacks (blatantly untrue; none of the hijackers had wives in the US) His supporters include known white supremacists I don't know anyone who has made any of those comparisons except you.
  23. ReeferMadness
    I don't think anyone can say with confidence what Trump would or wouldn't do. I'm not even sure Trump knows himself. He strikes me as someone with a tenuous grasp on truth and reality - ie the truth is whatever he claims it is at the time. I think that's part of his appeal. People are so frustrated and worried about the future,they'll listen to almost anything. During the cold war, Soviet citizens were told that their society was based on equality and justice; and that America was a corrupt land where evil capitalists exploited the workers and the world. Americans were fed the great American dream, told that anyone can be anything and that behind the iron curtain was the 'evil empire'. It was mostly propaganda on both sides held together with bits of truth. The difference is that the people behind the iron curtain knew they were being lied to and the system decayed from within. Reagan was awarded credit but at best, he accelerated the inevitable collapse by a few years. After 2 economic meltdowns (the dot com implosion around the turn of the century and the banking meltdown in 08) in which millions of 'ordinary people' were pushed into bankruptcy but the perpetrators came away richer than ever, Americans are finally questioning the system. And that's why they're looking to saviors like Sanders and Trump. Nobody can know for certain where things will go but these are potentially dangerous times. Yeah. Some of those now sneering at the Hitler comparison are maybe suffering from selective memory. There was a huge amount of comparison between Hitler and Saddam Hussein by right wing warmongers who looked for any excuse to invade Iraq.
  24. ReeferMadness
    The comparison made was not between Trump and Hitler, it was the similarity in the situation. Then, as now, we had someone making inflammatory statements about a group and being wildly popular as a result. Then, as now, we have people saying he doesn't really mean it and it's just politics. It's too soon to draw any further comparisons than that but intelligent people should sit up and take notice. And the GOP should do some soul-searching and figure out how it created this Frankenstein monster and how to contain it. It sounds stupid because it is stupid; not to mention insulting. Saying Sanders is like Stalin because he says he's a socialist is no different from saying Bloomberg is like Pinochet because they're both capitalists.
  25. ReeferMadness
    Yeah. I just got suspended for trolling - which is pretty much all he does.
×
×
  • Create New...