Husky spills 200k litres of crude into river

[Rue]

On ‎2016‎-‎07‎-‎30 at 3:34 PM, jacee said:

99%

.

Hang on. I always disagree with Eye on virtually everything and you on this but to  point. Look he said the economy only benefis one group and you say 1%.

With due respect economic networks benefit specific cells, or entities or cliques, or interest groups. The profit to these cells or entities is misleading. We have this image of some old white man who makes all the money in these companies. Not quite so.

It is perfectly true the world is run by corporate networks of mega nationals that control market places and fix prices. China is the most vivid example of a country that uses its communist party and monopolized control of all business to undervalue its yen to assure it can flood Western markets with cheap inferior goods using predatory pricing.

Its done in 30 years or so since the fall of Mao Tse Tung and then Chou En Lai what people thought impossible, conquer the world through predatory pricing schemes an d using its vast never ending source of cheap slave labour to spew out imitation goods.

Its true in China less than 2% of the population direcly is said to make wealth from it and live a wealthy lifestyle.

For the rest of us, yes, most of us work for others even when we think we are independent and banks and governments pretty much are subordinated to the demands of a world market that is controlled by cliques. Sure.

However you forget ripple effect. Even in a world where the rich get richer or what we are really saying the invisible elite, the power behind the power, gets richer and more and more of us become serfs to their networks.

Its true but it doesn't mean there is zero benefit to anyone else.

The same businesses that generate profit, pay charities and employ and pay millions who then spend their money to create spin off businesses and so on.

Its naïve to think business simply profits some fat white guy. In fact today the elitists are often not white.

I think there is somewhat of a myth as to the cliques or so called iluminati behide it all. I think people exaggerate it and blow it to a bigger sinister elite clique than it is. Its more like thousands of competing cliques with intricate layers of inter-connected exchange and mutual dependency and ever changing alliances.

Business operates no differently than war. It has designated cells that fight for control and they continually form alliances, break down the alliances and form new alliances.

I mean we can adapt this naïve commie left wing pink idea still taught at universities that the masses are out in the cold but the fact is if you want to do that then you will have to acknowledge human nature and the fact that in every human society studied, we have yet to see a society where there are no packs (cliques) led by Alpha males.

We are primates. Of course we are lead by Alpha males. If you want to pretend there is something inherently wrong in that and it is some immoral scheme concocted by one eyed shape shifting Zionist Draco Vampire Mason like creatures its cool. Many people believe that. All I am saying is we are apes and just because we no longer use our knuckles when we walk doesn't mean we still don't live in packs with alpha males.

Al that said Jacee its never good when crude oil is spilled. It causes such horrible eco damage yes. The problem though is, Husky Oil is a Canadian business. It employs Canadians. Its not evil. It employs many Canadians. Look I think we should ween ourselves off oil now. Natural gas I have no problems with given I make so much. But yah fossel fuel I'd like to see us get away from in favour of solar, hydro, wind (not Wynne's wind crao).

I think we have the technology to build homes that could with water, sun and building materials be completely self-sustaining with energy and water. We are ont he cusp of  hydrogen cell technology that will move cars without pollution.

We can build windmills into homes not the stupid towers you see. There's all kinds of things we can do and do not.

Is that because big mega nationals stop us?

I think its a complex combination of people who vote in short sighted politicians who just think in 3 year bites of time and what it will take to get re-elected, yes some short sighted executives, but mostly apathetic people.

I point back to me, you we individuals and say if we don't want large business running everything we have choices. We have always had choices as consumers. Nothing stops us from doing our research and buying intelligently and engaging in specific practices-nothing but apathy.

That said, I agree with you and Eye that certain mega nationals have too much condensed power to control certain legislation yes.

When it comes to energy, its a constant struggle of what people want now, for what happens to the planet if we don't do without certain things now, we demand and take for granted.

[cannuck]

Rue:  totally excellent post.   In a perfect world, EVERYONE gets lifted up along the economic ladder by corporate success (in China, this is extremely true.   They didn't get to be the second largest economy on the planet and now the LARGEST private automobile market by only 1 or 2% of the people being wealthy - they are developing a HUGE middle class).

Not to want to stray too far OT, but what is missing in your post and to 99.99% of observers and policy makers is the problem of distribution of wealth.   The ``1%`` are not racking up their billions by participating in the orgy of production coming from the mass of `slave labour`out there, they are simply redistributing wealth in an endless rotation of speculative transactions that create no wealth.   The solution is dead simple:  tax the crap out of speculative gain and thus re-direct virtually all investment/financial activity into funding productive enterprise - that CREATES wealth.   THAT is how you drag the masses along with economic growth.

[?Impact]

3 hours ago, cannuck said:

funding productive enterprise - that CREATES wealth.

Can you give examples? Please do not confuse wealth with money. Money is simply an accounting method that we confuse with wealth because we reward those who accumulate the most of it.

[cannuck]

3 hours ago, ?Impact said:

Can you give examples? Please do not confuse wealth with money. Money is simply an accounting method that we confuse with wealth because we reward those who accumulate the most of it.

Simple:  the only way you can create wealth is by adding value to a resource or delivering a service in support of that.   ANYTHING else you do is just wealth re-distribution.   The problem with a speculative gain is that when the accounting value of an asset (real or imagined) is increase speculatively and then realized, someone needs more money to fulfill the gain - thus increase in the money supply to cover.   Since money (currency and accounts) is a direct liability to the taxpayer, ANY increase in that supply that is not due to wealth that has been created should be returned to the taxpayer in the form of taxation.

Some examples:  building a house and making a profit on doing so constitutes wealth that was created.   Re-selling that house for a profit is purely redistribution of existing money.    Placing an IPO into a business moves resources from one place to another - no wealth created - yet.  When that company earns money by making something or doing something useful and productive, wealth has been created - and you can see that on their P&L and balance sheet.   When their public stock is traded, no wealth is created, but the book value (real value of the asset) moves from one to the other. l If it trades at a higher value than book (i.e. if "market" value is higher) no wealth is created or lost - as the company book value is not in any way affected.   If that trade represents a profit, it is purely inflationary and speculative - should be taxed 99% on day one, 95% on year one, and declining 5% per year until parity with nominal tax rate.

Edited March 17, 2017 by cannuck