This is now very little ability to disagree with the Left

[taxme]

35 minutes ago, Argus said:

No. And Taxme IS in my ignore list so I wouldn't have seen his posts.

I really could care less if I were on your ignore list. But only those wimps and cowards will run away from wanting to debate, discuss, and argue with others here whom they do not like, and thus they are put on their crybaby ignore list. why are they here anyway? I am not afraid to debate, discuss or argue with anyone here, and I will never put anyone here on an ignore list. I am here to talk to anyone here who wants to talk to me. I am not here to run away from talking to anyone here. I wonder if I am on the teacher's ignore list? Aw well, what more can one expect from those crybaby losers. 

Edited June 16, 2020 by taxme

[taxme]

19 minutes ago, marcus said:

I'm not. Far from it.

I find that very hard to believe. But hey!! 

[Charles Anthony]

Folks,  

Stop the personal banter.  None of you are the topic of discussion in this thread.  

If you all want to talk about eachother, do so downstairs in the Clubs section.  

[marcus]

20 minutes ago, Argus said:

I always get suspicious when people use an odd time frame. Forty months? That's a time frame designed to support his point.

When information does not support your narrative, you become suspicious. Of course. 

20 minutes ago, Argus said:

In truth, no one can point to anything Trudeau has done to improve the economy. His actions have instead been designed to discourage the resource economy, while increasing taxes on everyone else.

Increase taxes? I would love to see your numbers.

What you probably don't know, when comparing Harper and Trudeau:

For 2014-2015 — the last full fiscal year of Stephen Harper's government — tax revenue as a share of GDP was 11.5 per cent.

For 2018-2019 — after nearly four full years of Justin Trudeau's government — tax revenue as a share of GDP is projected to be 12.7 per cent. 

---

It's absolutely the right decision to wean ourselves away from oil and continue to nurture our technology sector. 

Look at the price of oil. A price that will not recover to an amount where oil sands can be profitable. 

20 minutes ago, Argus said:

Canada's economy expanded due to American expansion, which is the norm for us. I might add that our unemployment rate was considerably higher than the US rate.

Your absolutism that Trudeau cannot do anything right prevents you from having credibility. The economy is obviously doing well, but you're going to credit that to anything but Trudeau. This is how you weaken your credibility. There are many variables involved when assessing why the economy improved under Trudeau. If Canada had continued to make oil and natural resources as its focal point, our economy would not be as good as it is now.

20 minutes ago, Argus said:

Shitloads of government spending will do that for you. But as debt mounts we're looking at a very uncertain future.

There are different economic models. Some believe that spending by the government will rejuvenates the economy. Sort of like what Harper did after the financial market meltdown. Harper came out of the recession better than any other Western government. Why? Because of two major reasons: 1) A strong banking sector, and 2) Spending

The debt that you keep screaming about is not much different than what Harper accumulated:

20 minutes ago, Argus said:

Stability? Meaning they're doing anything useful. In past years most of my stocks were Canadian. The last year or so I've found almost nothing in Canada worth investing in. The TXS has not exactly impressed.

Look outside of energy, airline and pot.

Look at healthcare and banking.

20 minutes ago, Argus said:

No, more like transitioning to a country living on borrowed money. Technology juggernaut? Seriously? If that were the case we wouldn't have to underpay workers in our technology sector in order to compete. We underpay them so much compared to what the US pays that we have to import thousands of third world workers while ours flood south to work in the US technology sector.

That's a superficial comment.

I help companies (tech/energy/trades) who want to hire foreign workers. I also assist foreign companies who want to open offices in Canada, which has increased in numbers towards the end of Harper's time in Canada.  

A large number of tech workers and engineers in the U.S. are from India, Pakistan and Iran. They are foreign workers. So why are they getting paid higher than Canadians? Your idea that this salary difference is because of foreign workers does not add up.

The salary difference between the U.S. and Canada is less in average and that gap has been present for over 2 decades. However, the gap is quickly becoming less and less. The reason for the high salaries in the U.S. is due to the competition between tech companies in silicon valley and other locations. Canada is starting to experience that as well. Tech specialists are in high demand and that is driving up the salaries.

Another important factor for you to understand to potentially remove your misconceptions and the misinformation you are unknowingly/knowingly spreading: If a Canadian company wants to higher a foreign worker, the salary they pay the worker must meet the median average salary for that position.

 

 

 

[marcus]

47 minutes ago, taxme said:

I find that very hard to believe. But hey!! 

That's okay. I'm not here to be validated by you.

[Army Guy]

1 hour ago, marcus said:

The economy has not been this good in Canada for some time. Not only that, but Trudeau has moved Canada away from being a petrol economy, where the biggest factor for the worth of our dollar was the price of oil, towards technology.

 

Behind the robust health are data showing Canada transitioning to a technology juggernaut from a country defined by its dependence on fossil fuels. While the government continues to subsidize coal, gas and oil, which account for 77% of the nation's energy needs, the correlation between the price of oil and Canadian stocks has all but disappeared since Trudeau became prime minister, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The traditional interdependence of stocks and oil prevailed during the 10 years preceding his election.

 

All of which helps make the economy stronger and technology the fastest-growing Canadian industry. While Canada's GDP has grown 8% since 2015, its semiconductor business has expanded 11%; electronic products, 27%; computer systems 23%, and information technology, 36%, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.
 

Technology is driving the job market, too. While prices for oil, gas and coal averaged well below the decade's highs -- providing little incentive for expansion -- Canada's unemployment rate declined 1.8 percentage points in the 40 months since 2016, faster than the 1.3 percentage point pace for the U.S. over the same period and the steepest drop since May 2001, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

 

I'm not a "Liberal Supporter". I also have issues with Trudeau. However, I don't function on absolutism, like some people on this forum. Where nothing Trudeau does is okay or good. Where everything Trudeau has done has been 100% wrong. I give credit where credit is due and overall, Trudeau has made good economic choices. 

Id be curious to see how much of our GDP comes from the oil industry, and how much of our current GDP comes from the tech sector....and how did Justin make this happen , has he brought together policies that has reinforced tech industry, provided incentives to make this happen , or are we just crediting Justin as he happens to be PM....And by Justin moving us away from oil industry, would you say his policies and party commitments have helped with the fall of oil, or increased it's contributions to the country....and why can't we be invested in both ?

I don't think everything Justin has touched he has destroyed and I personal think that Freeland has been behind most of Justins success, if anything I think Justin has damaged the liberal brand  more than make it shine, and on top of all that when it comes to his opponents, they just did not have what it took to smash Justin. even with the majority of the vote...

Justin could have had dozens of successes if he had kept his promises during the first campaign, or the second...and yet the bils he did spend most of it was not to keep promises.... like you said the economy has grown 8 %, on top of what he added to the deficit...  

[Argus]

54 minutes ago, marcus said:

When information does not support your narrative, you become suspicious. Of course. 

So why do YOU suppose he chose 40 months? Not four years. But 40 months.

Quote

For 2014-2015 — the last full fiscal year of Stephen Harper's government — tax revenue as a share of GDP was 11.5 per cent.

For 2018-2019 — after nearly four full years of Justin Trudeau's government — tax revenue as a share of GDP is projected to be 12.7 per cent. 

Simple math would say that is more than 10% increase in taxes.

Quote

It's absolutely the right decision to wean ourselves away from oil and continue to nurture our technology sector. 

We have oil and gas available to be developed and sold. We have NO particular advantage in technology. In fact, we have weaknesses over all others. Third world countries have cheaper wages. The US and EU have greater population bases.

Quote

Look at the price of oil. A price that will not recover to an amount where oil sands can be profitable. 

It's funny that the oil companies don't agree. If the government didn't impose ten year delays on development and make it almost impossible to run pipelines through to the coasts the oil and gas sector would do just fine.

Quote

Your absolutism that Trudeau cannot do anything right prevents you from having credibility.

Your inability to point to what he's done right which you believe has advanced the economy robs you of any.

Quote

The economy is obviously doing well, but you're going to credit that to anything but Trudeau.

The economy was doing well, but not well enough to fund any of our governments, for some reason, all of whom are running big deficits.

Quote

There are different economic models. Some believe that spending by the government will rejuvenates the economy. Sort of like what Harper did after the financial market meltdown.

Obviously pouring government money into the economy spurs the economy. Harper did it in an emergency. Trudeau is doing it as a matter of course, to buy popularity. If we can't balance the budget when times are good, then when CAN we? The problem is if we don't we wind up becoming Greece.

Quote

Harper came out of the recession better than any other Western government. Why? Because of two major reasons: 1) A strong banking sector, and 2) Spending

You forgot 3) The oil and gas sector.

Quote

The debt that you keep screaming about is not much different than what Harper accumulated:

And once again, Harper's deficits were in the midst of what was, until now, the worst recession in memory. Trudeau's deficits are in boom years.

Quote

Look outside of energy, airline and pot.

Have been. Nothing much there. A few tech companies, and that's about it.

Quote

Look at healthcare and banking.

We have no healthcare sector. And our banking sector has been moribund for quite some time.

Quote

I help companies (tech/energy/trades) who want to hire foreign workers. I also assist foreign companies who want to open offices in Canada, which has increased in numbers towards the end of Harper's time in Canada.  

Funny how it always seems to turn out that those people who screech about how immigration, ever higher immigration, turn out to be making a living off immigration.
Two thirds of our software graduates flee south to the bigger paycheques. We replace them with cheap Indians and Chinese.

Quote

Another important factor for you to understand to potentially remove your misconceptions and the misinformation you are unknowingly/knowingly spreading: If a Canadian company wants to higher a foreign worker, the salary they pay the worker must meet the median average salary for that position.

Which is kept artificially low by the flood of foreign workers. I'm a Capitalist. I don't like artificially deflating salaries, even if it SOME people profit off it.

Canada’s best and brightest computer engineering graduates are leaving for jobs in Silicon Valley at alarmingly high rates, fuelling a worse “brain drain” than the mass exodus by Canadian doctors two decades ago, according to a new study.

The study, led by Zachary Spicer, a senior associate with the Munk School of Global Affairs’ Innovation Policy Lab at University of Toronto, found one-in-four recent science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) graduates from three of the country’s top universities – University of Waterloo, University of British Columbia and U of T – were working outside Canada.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/technology/article-canada-facing-brain-drain-as-young-tech-talent-leaves-for-silicon/

 

 

https://planetweb.ca/news/toronto-tech-salaries-grew-7-last-year-still-fall-way-behind-us/

Edited June 16, 2020 by Argus

[Argus]

44 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

Id be curious to see how much of our GDP comes from the oil industry, and how much of our current GDP comes from the tech sector....

• In 2018, Canada’s energy sector directly employed more than 282,000 people and indirectly supported over 550,500 jobs
• Canada’s energy sector accounts for over 10% of nominal Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
• Government revenues from energy were $14.1 billion in 2017

https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/science-data/data-analysis/energy-data-analysis/energy-and-economy/20062

The ICT sector makes a substantial contribution to Canada’s GDP. In 2018, the sector’s GDP was $86.6 billion (in 2012 constant dollars), and accounted for 4.5% of national GDP.

https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/ict-tic.nsf/eng/h_it07229.html

[Nefarious Banana]

11 minutes ago, Argus said:

• In 2018, Canada’s energy sector directly employed more than 282,000 people and indirectly supported over 550,500 jobs
• Canada’s energy sector accounts for over 10% of nominal Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
• Government revenues from energy were $14.1 billion in 2017
• The ICT sector makes a substantial contribution to Canada’s GDP. In 2018, the sector’s GDP was $86.6 billion (in 2012 constant dollars), and accounted for 4.5% of national GDP.

 

Canada sits on the third largest oil reserves in the world . . . . we import 1,000,000,000 (one billion) barrels of oil annually.  Anyone 'cost-out' the price of the imported vs employment/ savings using our own reserves?

[marcus]

6 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

Id be curious to see how much of our GDP comes from the oil industry, and how much of our current GDP comes from the tech sector....and how did Justin make this happen , has he brought together policies that has reinforced tech industry, provided incentives to make this happen , or are we just crediting Justin as he happens to be PM....And by Justin moving us away from oil industry, would you say his policies and party commitments have helped with the fall of oil, or increased it's contributions to the country....and why can't we be invested in both ?

I don't think everything Justin has touched he has destroyed and I personal think that Freeland has been behind most of Justins success, if anything I think Justin has damaged the liberal brand  more than make it shine, and on top of all that when it comes to his opponents, they just did not have what it took to smash Justin. even with the majority of the vote...

Justin could have had dozens of successes if he had kept his promises during the first campaign, or the second...and yet the bils he did spend most of it was not to keep promises.... like you said the economy has grown 8 %, on top of what he added to the deficit...  

I'll leave it up to you to look at the percentages for GDP. Historically, natural resources has been a large part of our GDP, but has been declining. We need to continue to promote technology, agrifood and other sustainable and emerging industries.

The tech industry employs double the number of workers in oil+gas.

The improvement for the tech industry is not something that Trudeau can take full credit for. Provincial policies, like for example, BC Provincial Nominee Program has a tech program, where it encourages growth in the tech sector has helped boost BCs economy. You also have factors like U.S.' poorly run immigration programs, that pushes U.S. tech companies to want to find a better place to do business as a factor. The reality is that Western countries are battling over international skilled workers in the tech industry. Canada's improved immigration system gives Canada an advantage over most other countries and that has increased the number of international companies expanding into Canada.

Toronto and Vancouver have become tech hubs in North America. The healthy economy, a robust immigration system, a high standard of living and municipal tax incentives have created a positive atmosphere. In downtown Vancouver, energy sector companies are leaving in droves. Mostly because of low oil prices. Their office leases are being taken over by tech companies. Many of them local companies, like Hootsuite and  

[Army Guy]

56 minutes ago, marcus said:

I'll leave it up to you to look at the percentages for GDP. Historically, natural resources has been a large part of our GDP, but has been declining. We need to continue to promote technology, agrifood and other sustainable and emerging industries.

The tech industry employs double the number of workers in oil+gas.

The improvement for the tech industry is not something that Trudeau can take full credit for. Provincial policies, like for example, BC Provincial Nominee Program has a tech program, where it encourages growth in the tech sector has helped boost BCs economy. You also have factors like U.S.' poorly run immigration programs, that pushes U.S. tech companies to want to find a better place to do business as a factor. The reality is that Western countries are battling over international skilled workers in the tech industry. Canada's improved immigration system gives Canada an advantage over most other countries and that has increased the number of international companies expanding into Canada.

Toronto and Vancouver have become tech hubs in North America. The healthy economy, a robust immigration system, a high standard of living and municipal tax incentives have created a positive atmosphere. In downtown Vancouver, energy sector companies are leaving in droves. Mostly because of low oil prices. Their office leases are being taken over by tech companies. Many of them local companies, like Hootsuite and  

Oil and gas 5.6 of our total GDP in 2018,  , it employs 0.9 % of Canadas work force....

https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/science-data/data-analysis/energy-data-analysis/energy-and-economy/20062

Tech industry which covers a vast area,

4.5 % of total GDP, But it does employ 3.5 % of Canada's work force

https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/ict-tic.nsf/eng/h_it07229.html

As of 2018 the oil and gas sector contributed more to our GDP than the large tech sector, how ever the tech sector employed almost 4 times the people.

I could not find any updated data for 2020 or 2019, one could only guess that the percentage of GDP has shrunk in both cases, and you could make a case that the tech sector has over taken the oil and gas sector with the condition of todays market, but i'd also like to note that oil and gas market are being on flooded on purpose to drive the price down by several countries OPEC for one, and Russia the next, and this can not last forever, they are after all losing money in this war of oil as well...prices will bounce back, how far is anyone s guess....

We have already established that the provinces are largely reasonable for the tech industry gains. One would think the feds could have done more or even matched the provinces contributions , but that is not the case. What is the case is Justin has passed bills and policies that wraps the oil and gas sector in a ball of red tape, how ever the largest contributor for this slow down is special interest groups first nations, and climate change folks. why would we want to cut off this source of revenue when it is going to take 20 to 30 years to find a replacement for fossil fuels...we are not talking a few bil dollars here we are talking hundreds of bils. that alone would rate a second glance....would it not.

Sorry Argus , I did not know you had already answered 

Edited June 17, 2020 by Army Guy

[WestCanMan]

3 hours ago, Army Guy said:

Id be curious to see how much of our GDP comes from the oil industry, and how much of our current GDP comes from the tech sector....and how did Justin make this happen , has he brought together policies that has reinforced tech industry, provided incentives to make this happen , or are we just crediting Justin as he happens to be PM....And by Justin moving us away from oil industry, would you say his policies and party commitments have helped with the fall of oil, or increased it's contributions to the country....and why can't we be invested in both ?

I don't think everything Justin has touched he has destroyed and I personal think that Freeland has been behind most of Justins success, if anything I think Justin has damaged the liberal brand  more than make it shine, and on top of all that when it comes to his opponents, they just did not have what it took to smash Justin. even with the majority of the vote...

Justin could have had dozens of successes if he had kept his promises during the first campaign, or the second...and yet the bils he did spend most of it was not to keep promises.... like you said the economy has grown 8 %, on top of what he added to the deficit...  

GDP is largely a useless stat.

If Justin Trudeau pays someone $10K to have his butt waxed for a meeting with the minister of agriculture from Djibouti it counts towards the GDP.

If you get your hair cut or get your nails done - GDP.

There are lots of things factored into the GDP which don't help our country to prop up our dollar so that we can afford to import things from other countries. 

The last time I checked, oil and gas account for 23-25% of our nation's exports, and the next closest thing, at about 13%, is the heavily-subsidized auto sector. 

The Greens and NDP say that we will start manufacturing green energy items and tech to replace the money from oil lol, it's just bullshit. We will never be able to compete with Asian and African countries where parents and teens all work full time to share a condo with 3 other families. Well, hopefully we won't. 

 

[Moonbox]

14 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

GDP is largely a useless stat.

If Justin Trudeau pays someone $10K to have his butt waxed for a meeting with the minister of agriculture from Djibouti it counts towards the GDP.

If you get your hair cut or get your nails done - GDP.

It's not a useless stat at all, and your gross oversimplification demonstrates you don't really understand it.  

Justin's $10,000 butt-waxing pays for the butt-wax shop's two staff, which allows them to buy their groceries and pay their bills for the month.  Not only that, but it allows the owner to cover his commercial rent and buy his butt-wax supplies, which in turn supports the butt-wax supplier, who himself has suppliers, staff and bills to pay.  One simple transaction has a ripple effect and leads to that $10,000 being spent over and over and over again in different places, and each time the government gets a percentage as tax revenue, which they in turn can use to fund infrastructure projects or...whatever. 

It's not really for you or me to decide what transactions are valuable to the economy.  All that matters is that there's perceived value and that money exchanges hands as a result.  The more times that $10,000 turns over and exchanges hands in the economy, the better.  It means more people are keeping busy and finding ways to feed their families . 

 

[Army Guy]

18 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

GDP is largely a useless stat.

If Justin Trudeau pays someone $10K to have his butt waxed for a meeting with the minister of agriculture from Djibouti it counts towards the GDP.

If you get your hair cut or get your nails done - GDP.

There are lots of things factored into the GDP which don't help our country to prop up our dollar so that we can afford to import things from other countries. 

The last time I checked, oil and gas account for 23-25% of our nation's exports, and the next closest thing, at about 13%, is the heavily-subsidized auto sector. 

The Greens and NDP say that we will start manufacturing green energy items and tech to replace the money from oil lol, it's just bullshit. We will never be able to compete with Asian and African countries where parents and teens all work full time to share a condo with 3 other families. Well, hopefully we won't. 

 

Regardless of what stats you use , oil and gas sector still provides a significate source of revenue for this nation, one that should not be ignored or simply brushed aside because of climate change, even the tech sector has estimated 20 to 30 years before a replacement for fossil fuels can be found....the other point was Justin and his crew have not really done anything to promote any sector really, he has damaged oil and gas by some of his policies...

So I'm still not sure on what positives Justin has done that deliberately boosted our economy while he was in power ? 

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, Moonbox said:

It's not a useless stat at all, and your gross oversimplification demonstrates you don't really understand it.  

Justin's $10,000 butt-waxing pays for the butt-wax shop's two staff, which allows them to buy their groceries and pay their bills for the month.  Not only that, but it allows the owner to cover his commercial rent and buy his butt-wax supplies, which in turn supports the butt-wax supplier, who himself has suppliers, staff and bills to pay.  One simple transaction has a ripple effect and leads to that $10,000 being spent over and over and over again in different places, and each time the government gets a percentage as tax revenue, which they in turn can use to fund infrastructure projects or...whatever. 

It's not really for you or me to decide what transactions are valuable to the economy.  All that matters is that there's perceived value and that money exchanges hands as a result.  The more times that $10,000 turns over and exchanges hands in the economy, the better.  It means more people are keeping busy and finding ways to feed their families . 

It's useless in the sense that a nation could have $200 trillion in GDP but if it's all in the local sex trade, and no foreigners engage in that activity [brining in their money] then that nation won't be contributing anything to the global economy and they won't be able to convince South Koreans to send them any cars. If that nation exports $10B worth of goods and brings in another $10B for tourism then they will have some leverage to bring in commodities from foreign countries. 

Much in the same way, you and your family could work all 40 hrs a week cleaning and renovating your house and fixing your cars and doing personal grooming, that doesn't convince the Hyundai dealership to give you a car. You'll need to be taking part in the local economy to provide something of worth in order to get money. 

There's a big difference between jobs in mining, agriculture, forestry, oil & gas industries, etc, compared to nail technicians, teachers, policemen, hairdressers, etc. 

[Argus]

3 hours ago, Moonbox said:

It's not a useless stat at all, and your gross oversimplification demonstrates you don't really understand it.  

Justin's $10,000 butt-waxing pays for the butt-wax shop's two staff, which allows them to buy their groceries and pay their bills for the month.  Not only that, but it allows the owner to cover his commercial rent and buy his butt-wax supplies, which in turn supports the butt-wax supplier, who himself has suppliers, staff and bills to pay.  One simple transaction has a ripple effect and leads to that $10,000 being spent over and over and over again in different places, and each time the government gets a percentage as tax revenue, which they in turn can use to fund infrastructure projects or...whatever. 

It's not really for you or me to decide what transactions are valuable to the economy.  All that matters is that there's perceived value and that money exchanges hands as a result.  The more times that $10,000 turns over and exchanges hands in the economy, the better.  It means more people are keeping busy and finding ways to feed their families . 

 

The problem comes when it's all being done on borrowed money.

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, Argus said:

The problem comes when it's all being done on borrowed money.

Well, there's never been shortage of suckers before - what makes this can so special that it can't be punted down the road with all rest?

[marcus]

On 6/16/2020 at 2:56 PM, Nefarious Banana said:

Canada sits on the third largest oil reserves in the world . . . . we import 1,000,000,000 (one billion) barrels of oil annually.  Anyone 'cost-out' the price of the imported vs employment/ savings using our own reserves?

We have, what is referred to, as dirty oil. The cost of extracting sand oil is not worth the investment, unless oil is above $45. RIght now, it sits under $40. I've looked into why we're importing petro, instead of investing and refining our own and the conclusion I came to was that it costs too much for us to do this. Oil and Petro is being done at a much lower price by countries abroad. 

There are other factors involved as well. People like Argus want to blame Trudeau, because that's how they function, however, oil companies started pulling out of the Canadian market well before Trudeau came to power and well before the plunge in oil prices. 

Environmental issues aside, oil is a bad investment.

Have a look at this, when you get a chance.

Edited June 18, 2020 by marcus

[marcus]

4 hours ago, Argus said:

The problem comes when it's all being done on borrowed money.

Paul Martin (Liberal) reduced the national debt by $90 billion and left a budgetary surplus of $14 billion. Harper's (Conservative) six deficits added $150 billion to the national debt.

 

[Army Guy]

51 minutes ago, marcus said:

We have, what is referred to, as dirty oil. The cost of extracting sand oil is not worth the investment, unless oil is above $45. RIght now, it sits under $40. I've looked into why we're importing petro, instead of investing and refining our own and the conclusion I came to was that it costs too much for us to do this. Oil and Petro is being done at a much lower price by countries abroad. 

There are other factors involved as well. People like Argus want to blame Trudeau, because that's how they function, however, oil companies started pulling out of the Canadian market well before Trudeau came to power and well before the plunge in oil prices. 

Environmental issues aside, oil is a bad investment.

Have a look at this, when you get a chance.

Last time I checked Canada's oil reserves include more than just oil sands oil, hence why the prairie province have so many oil pump stations all over the place, not to mention the massive field off NFLD, and the massive natural gas field off NS....

And yes retrieving oil out of the sand is an expensive process, and like as already been mentioned oil is being pushed down in price not because the lack of customers, but 2 oil giants having a pissing contest and flooding the market....they are losing money on this deal as well, and it will not last forever....and nobody knows for sure what oil is going to look like in 1 or 10 years from now...

Are you telling us that Justins bills and policies have not hurt the oil and gas sector, that is new restrictions on infra structure makes it easier or harder to get things built....and yes companies are pulling out of oil and gas , because there is little money to be made right now with this oil flooding going on, among other things....they will be back when there is money to be made.

What has the liberal government done to turn that industry around, please don't mention buying a pipe line....

If oil is a bad investment why is it still one of the largest contributors to our economy....shit even coal is still contributing  

 

[Argus]

14 hours ago, marcus said:

There are other factors involved as well. People like Argus want to blame Trudeau, because that's how they function, however, oil companies started pulling out of the Canadian market well before Trudeau came to power and well before the plunge in oil prices.

Not all Canadian oil is oil sands oil. And it hasn't been only oil the government has been hostile to, but natural gas, mining and forestry. This government has thrown up every roadblock it can find in the way of continuing resource development.

[Argus]

14 hours ago, marcus said:

Paul Martin (Liberal) reduced the national debt by $90 billion and left a budgetary surplus of $14 billion. Harper's (Conservative) six deficits added $150 billion to the national debt.

 

This is the kind of smarmy dishonesty I've come to expect from the radical left. Martin reduced the debt because Chretien wouldn't let him spend any money. Like Trudeau, Chretien regarded government money as a party resource to be used to win elections. Given the division among the opposition, particularly the vote splitting among conservatives, he saw no reason to spend what he regarded as HIS party's ammunition. He also ruled during boom years, unlike Harper, who faced the worst recession in generations. Complaining about him running up a deficit then, at the shrill insistence by all opposition parties, is flatly dishonest.

[Moonbox]

19 hours ago, Argus said:

The problem comes when it's all being done on borrowed money.

Absolutely, and that's been a problem that policymakers have just pretended didn't exist from 2015 onward.  It's not that the problem didn't exist before, but 2015 seems to be the point where governments decided to stop worrying about debt and long-term economics and kick the can down the road.  Why deal with today's problems now, when someone else can deal with a much bigger problem 5-15 years down the road?  

[marcus]

22 hours ago, Army Guy said:

Last time I checked Canada's oil reserves include more than just oil sands oil, hence why the prairie province have so many oil pump stations all over the place, not to mention the massive field off NFLD, and the massive natural gas field off NS....

And yes retrieving oil out of the sand is an expensive process, and like as already been mentioned oil is being pushed down in price not because the lack of customers, but 2 oil giants having a pissing contest and flooding the market....they are losing money on this deal as well, and it will not last forever....and nobody knows for sure what oil is going to look like in 1 or 10 years from now...

Are you telling us that Justins bills and policies have not hurt the oil and gas sector, that is new restrictions on infra structure makes it easier or harder to get things built....and yes companies are pulling out of oil and gas , because there is little money to be made right now with this oil flooding going on, among other things....they will be back when there is money to be made.

Trudeau is a fencesitter. He's not like his father or Chrétien. Two guys with big personalities who were combative and "stuck to their guns". Trudeau seized on Harper's unpopularity and managed to win votes from both the Cons and a weak NDP. At the end, Trudeau rejected some oil projects and fought for others. In BC, the left are not happy with Trudeau. In AB, the right are not happy with Trudeau. 

I think it's important to share that I have only voted once for the Liberals and that was in 2004 for Paul Martin. I'm not a supporter of Trudeau, and at the same time, I'm not a fan of the absolutism that some people here push for; Where Trudeau is responsible for everything that they deem as negative and at the same time, say that Trudeau is not responsible for anything positive that has happened during his tenure. 

Quote

What has the liberal government done to turn that industry around, please don't mention buying a pipe line....

His policies have not been any different than Harper's policies when it comes to the energy sector. If an industry is dying and is seen as no longer sustainable, why should they survive on government handouts or preferential treatment just so we can milk a few last drops from a dying cow?

Harper was also not able to get an approval on a new pipeline through BC and he had many years to do it. Personally, I am happy that neither parties could get it through. Trudeau knew it wasn't going to happen, so in order to please the left, he promised to not push for a new line. Instead, he approved Kinder Morgan, despite the resistance from the Left. 

Quote

If oil is a bad investment why is it still one of the largest contributors to our economy....shit even coal is still contributing  

Nothing changes with a flip of a switch. The transition is already happening and it will take time. We already have more jobs in the clean energy sector, when compared to the fossil fuel industry. Why not continue the trend? People in the oil+gas and people from the car manufacturing industries should adapt and train themselves in the emerging markets. It's much easier than complaining. Leave the complaining to the billionaires who are whining about not receiving as much government handouts that has been given to them for so long. 

By the way, the flippening and increase in jobs in the clean sector was already happening during the Harper years.

 

Edited June 19, 2020 by marcus

[marcus]

1 hour ago, Argus said:

This is the kind of smarmy dishonesty I've come to expect.....

.... unlike Harper, who faced the worst recession in generations. Complaining about him running up a deficit then, at the shrill insistence by all opposition parties, is flatly dishonest.

The "worst recession in generations", or the "Global Financial Crisis" happened in 2008-09. Harper was in power from 2006 to 2015, where he ran a deficit every single year. Thank you for showing an example of swarmy dishonesty.