Jump to content

Conservative Leadership September 10th


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

I'm not sure what the issue is with the carbon tax. The purpose is to get people to lower emissions. It is like the GST. It is a voluntary tax. You reduce your tax burden by consuming less. The alternative is rationing. As we saw in the Second World War, rationing works, but it is expensive and draconian. That is where we are headed though.

The other alternative is to throw your decendents into the oven and put it on broil. Actually, they will die of thirst before that.

We are from a nation that has invented the phone, penicillin, and the Canadian arm, we invented tactics for a war that are still being used today after more than 100 years, and many more. And Carbon taxes are the best we could come up with...and if that is not lacking in imagination, then the government promises to give you back more than you put into it...And here is the rub, gas prices are higher now than at any time in history, or carbon prices could account for... and we are still driving like the taxes did not make a difference. 

Sorry Queen your explanation of voluntary taxes had my coffee come out of my nose... deep down they are all voluntary are they not don't like your income tax bracket stop making so much, don't like GST stop buying stuff, don't like taxes on your tires stop buying tires... 

Here is an alternative, lets invest in a new source of energy, new batteries for cars, nuclear power, let's do something, anything except tax the shit out of me, and then pretend to give it all back, and not do a damn thing about climate change. a lot of people drive a great distance to and from work every day, buying fossil fuels is not a choice right now, I live in the country, and in the winter due to the amount of snowfall i need a 4x4 truck, to get to work, or use a holiday, I only get 20 holidays a year, and last year we had 30 snow days...If I don't get to work I don't get paid...I know tough shit, your problem...We just spent 450 billion dollars on a pandemic in one year, why can't we spend the same amount and fix climate change... ya I know crazy shit right...Just turn the oven on now and get it over with. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

If climate change is a real threat, it’s mostly out of our hands.  Carbon taxes do nothing but add to the cost of living.  We have no choice but to use energy to exist.  Carbon taxes are existence taxes.  You can’t prove the extent of human made climate change and the amount of greenhouse gases already in the atmosphere have charted our course for the next century.  Painting everything white reflects more heat back into space.  Forests absorb CO2, so intensive tree-planting helps.  Green tech simply cannot supply our energy needs.  Nuclear can help.  Carbon taxes are stupid.  

There is no "if." 

To get people on board, we have to minimize the sacrifice. The Amazon rain forest is the "lungs of the earth." It is vanishing. The other factor is photo plankton in the oceans that is dying off due to acidification. The addition heat we have now is melting the permafrost, releasing all that methane that has been locked up for thousands of years.

Nuclear power is the only energy source available that can meet the needs of the planet. If we start now building lots of nuclear power plants around the world, we have a better chance of turning this around. The thing we have to face is that we need to stop emitting carbon, not for a few years or even a few centuries. This is literally a long term project over millennia. We can never allow what we have done over the last 250 years to ever happen again. We also need to reduce the population to under 1.5 billion, and never let it get back up. 

If we are successful in transitioning away from burning oil, we may be able to conserve it for an extra few centuries and try to find an alternative viable lubrication source.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

There is no "if." 

To get people on board, we have to minimize the sacrifice. The Amazon rain forest is the "lungs of the earth." It is vanishing. The other factor is photo plankton in the oceans that is dying off due to acidification. The addition heat we have now is melting the permafrost, releasing all that methane that has been locked up for thousands of years.

Nuclear power is the only energy source available that can meet the needs of the planet. If we start now building lots of nuclear power plants around the world, we have a better chance of turning this around. The thing we have to face is that we need to stop emitting carbon, not for a few years or even a few centuries. This is literally a long term project over millennia. We can never allow what we have done over the last 250 years to ever happen again. We also need to reduce the population to under 1.5 billion, and never let it get back up. 

If we are successful in transitioning away from burning oil, we may be able to conserve it for an extra few centuries and try to find an alternative viable lubrication source.

But you’re talking about pollution when you talk about a lot of underwater life such as coral.  Acidity and greenhouse gases are different issues.  Anyway, sure, nuclear can help.  With regard to population, it’s naturally going to drop precipitously once all the boomers die.  We flatten then decline in the 2050’s.  Countries will be scrambling to grow their populations.  See, this is the twisted evil central planning holding sway now: Crush people financially by making travel expensive, drive up the cost of housing to make people live in tiny cells, make them all work from home in the metaverse.  This is the kind of dystopian vision that is now literally destroying people’s finances and mental health.  Sure, make life unaffordable so they have fewer kids.  Make kids’ bodies and social skills atrophy on computers to cut greenhouse gas emissions and keep people “safe”.  It’s sick.  Get these lunatics out of our governments.  Get our governments away from these sick international elite organizations that want the masses to make sacrifices so the super rich can do as they like.

The climate scare is the next excuse to enslave humanity. The pandemic provided a huge opportunity to implement unprecedented controls over populations.  The elderly like you are supremely naive to what’s unfolded.  You think it was all about protecting you.  Well among the so called protective policies many measures have been pushed that have damaged people.

Carbon taxes are a total scam.  They add to our cost of living and give us the false sense that we’re preventing our doom, a doom that may itself be fiction and out of our control. The fix for human-made climate change is a much longer term move that will unfold through incremental technology and demographic changes that should be natural as people adapt.

Countries that push through costly climate action programs are the new slave nations.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of whether climate change is real or not, a massive shift to nuclear power around the world will allow us to extend petroleun reserves for more centuries, because when there is no longer viable supplies of lubricating oil, nothing moves. No electricity, no vehicles, no trains, only sailing ships...we return to the dark ages. The same applies to coal and iron. Why the rush to burn up our coal and oil now? These resources belong to future generations too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

We will not run out of oil anytime in the foreseeable future.  There are huge untapped reserves all over the world.  We can switch to synthetic if things get tight. 

Switching away from coal/oil for cars and electricity is a pretty obvious necessity over the coming years.  We just have to make sure that we don't let special interests rape us like the Ontario Liberals allowed with the Green Energy shift or whatever it was called years ago, which sent billions to Samsung etc and resulted in negligible amounts of actual power being generated.  There's no secret as to why Doug Ford resoundingly won this year's election.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Moonbox said:

We will not run out of oil anytime in the foreseeable future.  There are huge untapped reserves all over the world.  We can switch to synthetic if things get tight. 

Switching away from coal/oil for cars and electricity is a pretty obvious necessity over the coming years.  We just have to make sure that we don't let special interests rape us like the Ontario Liberals allowed with the Green Energy shift or whatever it was called years ago, which sent billions to Samsung etc and resulted in negligible amounts of actual power being generated.  There's no secret as to why Doug Ford resoundingly won this year's election.   

I agree with some of this, but keep in mind that EVs are not green unless the source of their electricity is also green.  If it’s about reducing greenhouse gas emissions for you, then nuclear is probably the answer, but that energy infrastructure will take decades to build.  Carbon taxes are just adding to our cost of living.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/21/2022 at 10:34 PM, Zeitgeist said:

I agree with some of this, but keep in mind that EVs are not green unless the source of their electricity is also green.  If it’s about reducing greenhouse gas emissions for you, then nuclear is probably the answer, but that energy infrastructure will take decades to build.  Carbon taxes are just adding to our cost of living.

Unless you're burning coal/coke, the EV's are still probably greener.  I don't really know for sure but I have to assume that power generation to grid-scale is more efficient than a vehicle's ICE, even if you account for transmission and then battery production.  You're right though.  They're probably a marginal improvement unless the batteries are being fueled by renewables or nuclear or something. 

That's why it kills me to see activists protesting so hard against nuclear when it really is the viable clean solution we have today.  The new builds and refurbishments are expensive and they're always overrunning on cost, but if we embraced it we'd probably end up with the proper skills and infrastructure to expand capacity efficiently and on budget.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

That's why it kills me to see activists protesting so hard against nuclear when it really is the viable clean solution we have today.

I agree but unfortunately the public's inability to trust the government is just too great to overcome to allow the widespread development of nuclear power. The government would literally have to resort to force to do it.  We're in a very very bad place because of this absence of trust.  Distrust really is the biggest hurdle we have in front of us.  All of our political energy needs to be focussed on that before anything else because nothing else is possible without it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Unless you're burning coal/coke, the EV's are still probably greener.  I don't really know for sure but I have to assume that power generation to grid-scale is more efficient than a vehicle's ICE, even if you account for transmission and then battery production.  You're right though.  They're probably a marginal improvement unless the batteries are being fueled by renewables or nuclear or something. 

That's why it kills me to see activists protesting so hard against nuclear when it really is the viable clean solution we have today.  The new builds and refurbishments are expensive and they're always overrunning on cost, but if we embraced it we'd probably end up with the proper skills and infrastructure to expand capacity efficiently and on budget.   

The big problem is that the carbon taxes are levied when there are no realistic options for most people but to drive their existing combustion engine vehicles.  An EV with a viable range/battery starts at about $50,000.  The power source for most of that electricity in the northeast US is coal and gas.  The big lie in Ontario is that, though we removed our coal plants, we buy US dirty energy at peak periods.  Our green power is heavily subsidized and powers a minuscule load.

Carbon taxes are an ineffectual plan because we just supply our fuel with world supply and most other countries that are major energy producers pay no such taxes and are now maximizing production at a high price.

We can build better communities and incorporate green tech and small-scale nuclear at the building code and planning level without crushing consumers.

Biden may temporarily remove ALL gas taxes.   There are no carbon taxes in the US from the Feds.  Canadian consumers are getting fleeced at the pumps.  Our oil sector is burdened by heavy regulations and costs.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jack9000 said:

Looking more and more likely Pierre will be the winner .my questions is with recent over turn of roe vs Wade in USA will he now change his views and bring it up once elected . 

Pierre Poilievre was asked outright his stance on abortion by Roy Green on his talk show.

PP's answer was 'if elected' PM, there would be no legislation to hinder a woman's choice to terminate her pregnancy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Pierre Poilievre was asked outright his stance on abortion by Roy Green on his talk show.

PP's answer was 'if elected' PM, there would be no legislation to hinder a woman's choice to terminate her pregnancy.

Yeah he’s pulled a Harper on that, basically not making it an issue.  Pierre is playing it savvy.  That’s his big indulgence.  On all other issues he’ll have the social conservatives on board. Pierre will play up the freedom and free markets and keep the Alberta energy sector on board.

Ford in Ontario is wisely playing the Red Tory centrist card.  Pierre has the Quebec-Toronto Laurention BC woke-green challenge.  Harper faced similar challenges but Pierre has a French name and he likes talking to ordinary people.  Folksy plays well, especially with a good economic message.  I think he’s got a good shot.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Pierre Poilievre was asked outright his stance on abortion by Roy Green on his talk show.

PP's answer was 'if elected' PM, there would be no legislation to hinder a woman's choice to terminate her pregnancy.

Hopefully he sticks to that 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I received an email from Mr. Poilievre's campaign saying he is against the influence of the World Economic Forum. I'll bet that came as a big surprise to John Baird, co-chair of the Poilievre campaign and probably caused former Prime Minister Harper to choke on his coffee. How many other supporters Of Mr. Poilievre are frequent participants in the WEF?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Poilievre is painting himself, and the party, into shrinking corner. He has made so many appeals that appeal to the wingnut faction of the party with his "Pay-as-you-Go" law, that would triple taxes, building pipelines across BC running roughshod over the BC government, politicizing the Bank of Canada, and the bitcoin fantasy. He may win the leadership, but he is going to have to backtrack on every promise if he does. Ask Erin O'Toole how that worked. If he does backtrack, he will lose the next federal election. If he doesn't backtrack, he will destroy the CPC. Jagmeet Singh can start planning to move into Stornaway and Prime Minister Trudeau will be PM until 2029. For any one else out there with a CPC membership intending to vote for a new leader, remember, a vote for Mr. Poilievre is a vote for Trudeau.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Mr. Poilievre is painting himself, and the party, into shrinking corner. He has made so many appeals that appeal to the wingnut faction of the party with his "Pay-as-you-Go" law, that would triple taxes, building pipelines across BC running roughshod over the BC government, politicizing the Bank of Canada, and the bitcoin fantasy. He may win the leadership, but he is going to have to backtrack on every promise if he does. Ask Erin O'Toole how that worked. If he does backtrack, he will lose the next federal election. If he doesn't backtrack, he will destroy the CPC. Jagmeet Singh can start planning to move into Stornaway and Prime Minister Trudeau will be PM until 2029. For any one else out there with a CPC membership intending to vote for a new leader, remember, a vote for Mr. Poilievre is a vote for Trudeau.

Conservatives are currently ahead of Liberals in the polls under a scenario where Poilievre is leader.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Conservatives are currently ahead of Liberals in the polls under a scenario where Poilievre is leader.  

How does that translate into the seat count? I haven't seen that poll. 

He is going to have to break a lot of promises. How is he going to fire the Governor of the BofC? How is he going to fund the Pay as You Go law while increasing the Defence budget to comply with our NATO commitment? He wants to fix healthcare, but removing the public health orders inspite of the looming fall wave of covid, while it's pay as you go. Where is the money coming from? Bitcoin? 

I've been receiving a steady flow of emails from his campaign and he is either grossly naive, or a scammer like Preston Manning's Socreds. 

I was wrong when I said there was no way Mt. Trump could defeat Secretary Clinton, so I guess I could be wrong when I say Mr. Poilievre would not win a federal election. But I sure wouldn't put any money on his chances. I saw what happened to Mr. O'Toole in the last election. I was supporting him but when a leader flip flops, it is not a winning strategy. To me, Pierre is a cynical con man. His camping commercial was funny though. ?

Edited by Queenmandy85
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

How does that translate into the seat count? I haven't seen that poll. 

He is going to have to break a lot of promises. How is he going to fire the Governor of the BofC? How is he going to fund the Pay as You Go law while increasing the Defence budget to comply with our NATO commitment? He wants to fix healthcare, but removing the public health orders inspite of the looming fall wave of covid, while it's pay as you go. Where is the money coming from? Bitcoin? 

I've been receiving a steady flow of emails from his campaign and he is either grossly naive, or a scammer like Preston Manning's Socreds. 

I was wrong when I said there was no way Mt. Trump could defeat Secretary Clinton, so I guess I could be wrong when I say Mr. Poilievre would not win a federal election. But I sure wouldn't put any money on his chances. I saw what happened to Mr. O'Toole in the last election. I was supporting him but when a leader flip flops, it is not a winning strategy. To me, Pierre is a cynical con man. His camping commercial was funny though. ?

He needs to remain clearly conservative.  People are sick of phoneys, especially green-woke suck-ups.   When the media pushes him, he’ll need to stick to the script on Trudeau’s failures.  Many of us hope he can remove the stakeholder capitalist Yellen types.  Our BofC governor, Governor General, head of RCMP, and many others have been installed as Liberal green-woke internationalist puppets.  I never want to hear our BofC governor spew climate change nonsense or other leftist drivel again.  Worry about inflation and that’s it!

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Climate change is the most dangerous issue we have faced in modern times. There was a cooling in Europe which caused the collapse of the western Roman Empire and led to the dark ages. That was minor to what we are facing. The response will need international co-operation beyond what we have ever seen

Inflation is nothing. There was a time when I was working for a major bank and writing mortgages for 12 and 13%. When I was hired as a Peace Officer in 1982, we were in the final year of our contract and we got a 13% raise. Inflation today is pretty mild. This is the time to take advantage of higher interest rates. Start buying GIC's and max out your tax free savings accout contributions. 

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

He needs to remain clearly conservative.

You say that but in the same paragraph, you insult the Queen's representative. That is not the view a Conservative can have. That is a Whig or socialst view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Climate change is the most dangerous issue we have faced in modern times. There was a cooling in Europe which caused the collapse of the western Roman Empire and led to the dark ages. That was minor to what we are facing. The response will need international co-operation beyond what we have ever seen

Inflation is nothing. There was a time when I was working for a major bank and writing mortgages for 12 and 13%. When I was hired as a Peace Officer in 1982, we were in the final year of our contract and we got a 13% raise. Inflation today is pretty mild. This is the time to take advantage of higher interest rates. Start buying GIC's and max out your tax free savings accout contributions. 

You say that but in the same paragraph, you insult the Queen's representative. That is not the view a Conservative can have. That is a Whig or socialst view.

It’s not about political party loyalty but what’s right.  $80,000 meals for her staff on a flight?  No

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

It’s not about political party loyalty but what’s right.  $80,000 meals for her staff on a flight?  No

She didn't organize the menu. Blame the Canadian Forces. It was their choice and she had no input in the matter. You are giving out the NDP repubilcan line. The GG represents the Crown. 

Happy Dominion Day.?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

She didn't organize the menu. Blame the Canadian Forces. It was their choice and she had no input in the matter. You are giving out the NDP repubilcan line. The GG represents the Crown. 

Happy Dominion Day.?

What a ridiculously mismanaged country of overspending, overbearing communists.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/30/2022 at 9:32 AM, Queenmandy85 said:

 The GG represents the Crown. 

Happy Dominion Day.?

agreed

no expense spared for the Viceroy

it's not about the person, it's all about the office

Victoria Regina Imperatrix

pomp & circumstance is entirely in order

Edited by Dougie93
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...