Environment, oilsands

[nicky10013]

From Whom ? From the Liberals who do the exact same thing ? From NDP who will likely never hold federal power ?

Of course they criticize because that's their job. Luckily, we here at MLW don't believe everything we read.

The Liberals didn't do the exact same thing. Lloyd Axworthy was a huge proponent of opening up trade with authoritarian states due to the reasons I stated.

[Michael Hardner]

The Liberals didn't do the exact same thing. Lloyd Axworthy was a huge proponent of opening up trade with authoritarian states due to the reasons I stated.

So you're saying the liberals are worse ? Ok.

[eyeball]

The more money the people make, the less they have to worry about the every day struggles of putting food on the table and the more they can worry about their political rights. It also opens up their economies. Look at China.

The less money the people make, the more they have to worry about the every day struggles of putting food on the table and the less they can worry about their political rights. It also shuts down their economies. Look at Canada.

Harper complained the opposition is causing market uncertainty by making trouble over the proroguing of Parliament. I'm quite certain China's dictators would agree that democracy is not all that good for the economy.

The more we engage in the market with countries like China the more we become like them.

[nicky10013]

So you're saying the liberals are worse ? Ok.

For supporting the growth of democracy? If that's being worse then please let me know what's being better.

[Alta4ever]

All citizens are equal. That's the whole point of all the programs. Equal opportunities and equal outcomes.

Pure Fantasy. Human nature flies in the face of this.

[ZenOps]

It is a valid point - that a dictatorship usually is better for the economy in general during a recession.

But, even so - a Dictatorship must be a working dictatorship to be of use to the populace. As far as I know - The government could be eating ice cream and sitting on the couch right now.

Edited January 12, 2010 by ZenOps

[Jerry J. Fortin]

It is a valid point - that a dictatorship usually is better for the economy in general during a recession.

But, even so - a Dictatorship must be a working dictatorship to be of use to the populace. As far as I know - The government could be eating ice cream and sitting on the couch right now.

We can tell you they are not "working" for the benefit of the people right now. That they may be working for their own or their parties benefit is a given, but ours?

[Michael Hardner]

For supporting the growth of democracy? If that's being worse then please let me know what's being better.

Ok - what are you talking about then ?

Harper trades with China, Martin traded with China.

How are the Liberals better, or even different ?

I'm confused, as are voters.

[Smallc]

Pure Fantasy. Human nature flies in the face of this.

Good for human nature. I'm talking about Canada. All Canadians have the same opportunities and receive the same services no matter where they are in the country.

Edited January 13, 2010 by Smallc

[bush_cheney2004]

Good for human nature. I'm talking about Canada. All Canadians have the same opportunities and receive the same services no matter where they are in the country.

Now...or in the future? This certainly is not the case today.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Now...or in the future? This certainly is not the case today.

Albertas biggest domestic oil company, Suncor, is on track to produce one million barrels per day by 2020. Now that is only one company, there are many more as everyone knows. Do the math, you have to figure that in ten years the price will go up, but just use todays numbers and you get 80 million dollars a day, or what ....29 billion plus a year in revenues? Even at a 10% profit margin that is 2.9 billion.

The total of all oil sands efforts should yield 5 times that much production by 2020. So what we are talking about here is well over 100 billion dollars a year of revenues just out of the oil sands. Now does anybody really think that the tree huggers can stop that money from being made. How many pensions are invested in the patch? How many stockholders own shares in the 150 plus companies involved up there?

Include into this the royalties and tax revenues received by the government of Alberta and the impact of those revenues on the citizens. Now tell me something folks, does anyone really think there are very damned many Alberta citizens that do not want to go whole hog on this development?

Here is the deal, the oil is only a small part of the equation in Alberta. There is natural gas and sour gas out the waazoo here. All of these raw materials have lots and lots of little by-products, things like sulphur and propane and quite literally dozens of other little benefits. What this province needs is a lot more refining capacity, and a lot more pipeline capacity. Alberta should OWN the plastic industry in Canada, period. Yet these things take time, lots of it. The original investors here were for the most part American, but Bay Street always were heavy players. Lots of money made in Alberta does not stay here, way too much for the likings of most Albertans but that is the way things are. That is changing with Suncor, they bought out Petro-Can and now have some retail outlets for finished products. That is a little trend folks need to remember. We are getting smarter over here.

[nicky10013]

Ok - what are you talking about then ?

Harper trades with China, Martin traded with China.

How are the Liberals better, or even different ?

I'm confused, as are voters.

No, Harper scolds on Human Rights and China pulls back, hurting our trade.

[Michael Hardner]

No, Harper scolds on Human Rights and China pulls back, hurting our trade.

I see, you're saying that continued trade is a better way to ensure that change comes to China then.

[nicky10013]

I see, you're saying that continued trade is a better way to ensure that change comes to China then.

Bingo.

[ToadBrother]

Here is the deal, the oil is only a small part of the equation in Alberta. There is natural gas and sour gas out the waazoo here. All of these raw materials have lots and lots of little by-products, things like sulphur and propane and quite literally dozens of other little benefits. What this province needs is a lot more refining capacity, and a lot more pipeline capacity. Alberta should OWN the plastic industry in Canada, period. Yet these things take time, lots of it. The original investors here were for the most part American, but Bay Street always were heavy players. Lots of money made in Alberta does not stay here, way too much for the likings of most Albertans but that is the way things are. That is changing with Suncor, they bought out Petro-Can and now have some retail outlets for finished products. That is a little trend folks need to remember. We are getting smarter over here.

This is a big problem with most oil-producing jurisdictions. The problem is that guys like China can do even basic manufacturing a lot cheaper, so it would be a tough sell to investors. But I agree, unless you want to be like Dubai, just barfing money out on ludicrous things with little notion of how, in the long-term, all those petro-dollars are going to be of a benefit, you need to find ways to capitalize on the oil further.

[ZenOps]

I see, you're saying that continued trade is a better way to ensure that change comes to China then.

+1

There is no better way to bring about positive change - than to make sure everyone is productive and making tons of money.

[fellowtraveller]

All citizens are equal. That's the whole point of all the programs. Equal opportunities and equal outcomes.

If I am equal to a citizen of another province, then why aren't my skills, education and experience transferrable there? Say I'm a teacher in Alberta, certidfied and with a Masters degree in same. Why can't I do my job elsewhere? If I wish to make cheese in Alberta, why can't I sell if freely and openly anywhere I please in Canada?

No, there are many, many examples of this, degrees of equality based on place of residence.

So no, we are not a country of individual citizens with equal rights anywhere in the country. We are of have become a loosely knit union of regions/provinces, each attempting to get the largest slice of the pie.

[fellowtraveller]

I see, you're saying that continued trade is a better way to ensure that change comes to China then.

Sooner or later, those folks building millions of 58" LCD Tvs shipped elsewhere are going to want one themselves........and will want the means to buy one and the house to put it in. Change is inevitable there.

[nicky10013]

If I am equal to a citizen of another province, then why aren't my skills, education and experience transferrable there? Say I'm a teacher in Alberta, certidfied and with a Masters degree in same. Why can't I do my job elsewhere? If I wish to make cheese in Alberta, why can't I sell if freely and openly anywhere I please in Canada?

No, there are many, many examples of this, degrees of equality based on place of residence.

So no, we are not a country of individual citizens with equal rights anywhere in the country. We are of have become a loosely knit union of regions/provinces, each attempting to get the largest slice of the pie.

Teaching is transferable. You might have to apply for a license but you wouldn't have to go back to school to get another degree just to teach here.

[eyeball]

Harper scolds on Human Rights and China pulls back, hurting our trade.

By the same token, the more we trade with China the more our rights, democracy and environment are hurt.

[Michael Hardner]

Sooner or later, those folks building millions of 58" LCD Tvs shipped elsewhere are going to want one themselves........and will want the means to buy one and the house to put it in. Change is inevitable there.

Sure, except that's not the change we're talking about so much is it ? Aren't we speaking more of democratic change and so forth ?

[ToadBrother]

Sure, except that's not the change we're talking about so much is it ? Aren't we speaking more of democratic change and so forth ?

Well, China is the great experiment. The Chinese economic planners clearly want to create a middle class that does not aspire to political power, in other words, to defy what historians and economists in the West have long felt was the impetus behind key events like the English Civil War, the Glorious Revolution, the American War of Independence and the French Revolution.

Maybe they can. If they can govern well enough, maintain the economic trajectory, deliver more and more people into the middle class via centralized policies while encouraging free enterprise, maybe they can skip the the revolutionary eras that struck the European world and saw the aristocracy collapse in the face of middle class aspirations.

If they can, well then all the claims that regularizing trade with China will liberalize China is bunk. But I wonder, can an upwardly mobile middle class be created that isn't at some point going to say "We need you to justify your decisions"?

[Michael Hardner]

If they can, well then all the claims that regularizing trade with China will liberalize China is bunk. But I wonder, can an upwardly mobile middle class be created that isn't at some point going to say "We need you to justify your decisions"?

Maybe. Canada sure doesn't require that the government justifies all of its decisions. The Ontario government has been largely given a 'pass' over delivery of services, and Ontarians excused Liberals provincially and federally for debacles such as eHealth, Sponsorship Scandal, and the gun registry.

[ZenOps]

Well, China is the great experiment. The Chinese economic planners clearly want to create a middle class that does not aspire to political power, in other words, to defy what historians and economists in the West have long felt was the impetus behind key events like the English Civil War, the Glorious Revolution, the American War of Independence and the French Revolution.

Maybe they can. If they can govern well enough, maintain the economic trajectory, deliver more and more people into the middle class via centralized policies while encouraging free enterprise, maybe they can skip the the revolutionary eras that struck the European world and saw the aristocracy collapse in the face of middle class aspirations.

If they can, well then all the claims that regularizing trade with China will liberalize China is bunk. But I wonder, can an upwardly mobile middle class be created that isn't at some point going to say "We need you to justify your decisions"?

Well put.

The optimist in me - says it can be done. Just like how Canada can potentially completely break away from Britain somehow and yet still be friends and have functioning and productive working relationships.

An entire nation of a billion citizens - is about to hit lower middle class... Is the world ready? I'm not sure, but if it can be done without anybody blowing up anything - it could be time for China's first renaissance.

[nicky10013]

Well, China is the great experiment. The Chinese economic planners clearly want to create a middle class that does not aspire to political power, in other words, to defy what historians and economists in the West have long felt was the impetus behind key events like the English Civil War, the Glorious Revolution, the American War of Independence and the French Revolution.

Maybe they can. If they can govern well enough, maintain the economic trajectory, deliver more and more people into the middle class via centralized policies while encouraging free enterprise, maybe they can skip the the revolutionary eras that struck the European world and saw the aristocracy collapse in the face of middle class aspirations.

If they can, well then all the claims that regularizing trade with China will liberalize China is bunk. But I wonder, can an upwardly mobile middle class be created that isn't at some point going to say "We need you to justify your decisions"?

They may try to do it but they just can't. The more Chinese are delivered to the middle class, the more unstable the domestic chinese political situation has become. The Tibet uprising in 2008, the earthquake of last year. The brother of one of my old professors is the Ambassador to China and during the cleanup to last year's earthquake my professors brother commented that the people were actually blaming the government which in China used to never happen but has become an all too frequent occurence.

Don't get me wrong. China won't democratize probably for another 10-20 years. Democracy is slow and filled with instability. It's a fluid process. There could be more massacres, economic turmoil which could threaten growth and ultimately the project of democratization itself. Be that as it may, the signs are hopeful.

I recommend reading "The J Curve: A new reason why nations rise and fall" by Ian Bremmer. Great read.

Edited January 14, 2010 by nicky10013