Potential for the Liberal government to fall in a matter of weeks.

[Gaétan]

7 minutes ago, Shady said:

Just tell me which subsidies in Canada you're referring to.

Total support: $29.6 billion CAD in direct subsidies and public financing.

Oil and gas subsidies in Canada climb to $29.6B, report finds - Business in Vancouver

Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion: $21 billion CAD in federal financing, making it the largest single subsidy item.

Oil and gas subsidies in Canada climb to $29.6B, report finds - Business in Vancouver

Export Development Canada (EDC): $7.5 billion CAD in public financing through this Crown corporation.

Oil and gas subsidies in Canada climb to $29.6B, report finds - Business in Vancouver

Forms of support: Includes direct subsidies, tax breaks, loan guarantees, and government-backed financing.

The running list of Federal Fossil Fuel Subsidies in Canada in 2024 - Environmental Defence

Transparency issues: Many subsidies are difficult to track due to lack of public reporting and undisclosed federal tax deductions.

The running list of Federal Fossil Fuel Subsidies in Canada in 2024 - Environmental Defence

Criticism: Environmental groups argue these subsidies contradict Canada’s climate commitments and divert funds from public services like healthcare.

The running list of Federal Fossil Fuel Subsidies in Canada in 2024 - Environmental Defence

[Shady]

32 minutes ago, Gaétan said:

Ya but this revenue inevitably comes out of our pockets one way or another. Their revenue is an expense for us. You pay for the gas, you pay for the subsidies, you pay the taxes on the product, you pay for the damage caused by pollution—you just keep paying.

No it doesn't.  It comes from the sale of oil and gas.  You don't know what you're talking.

[Shady]

40 minutes ago, Gaétan said:

Total support: $29.6 billion CAD in direct subsidies and public financing.

Oil and gas subsidies in Canada climb to $29.6B, report finds - Business in Vancouver

Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion: $21 billion CAD in federal financing, making it the largest single subsidy item.

Oil and gas subsidies in Canada climb to $29.6B, report finds - Business in Vancouver

Export Development Canada (EDC): $7.5 billion CAD in public financing through this Crown corporation.

Oil and gas subsidies in Canada climb to $29.6B, report finds - Business in Vancouver

Forms of support: Includes direct subsidies, tax breaks, loan guarantees, and government-backed financing.

The running list of Federal Fossil Fuel Subsidies in Canada in 2024 - Environmental Defence

Transparency issues: Many subsidies are difficult to track due to lack of public reporting and undisclosed federal tax deductions.

The running list of Federal Fossil Fuel Subsidies in Canada in 2024 - Environmental Defence

Criticism: Environmental groups argue these subsidies contradict Canada’s climate commitments and divert funds from public services like healthcare.

The running list of Federal Fossil Fuel Subsidies in Canada in 2024 - Environmental Defence

Yes, we know that the Liberal government badly messed up on the trans mountain pipeline and ended up having to buy it.  Regardless, any subsidies do not come even close to the amount of revenue generated.  All you have to do is look at the revvenue other countries generate from it as well.

[Gaétan]

23 minutes ago, Shady said:

Yes, we know that the Liberal government badly messed up on the trans mountain pipeline and ended up having to buy it.  Regardless, any subsidies do not come even close to the amount of revenue generated.  All you have to do is look at the revvenue other countries generate from it as well.

Yes, but the revenue comes from our pockets. It's something you pay a lot for, but the return — if any — is minimal. It's like investing one dollar and getting ten cents back.

[Shady]

33 minutes ago, Gaétan said:

Yes, but the revenue comes from our pockets. It's something you pay a lot for, but the return — if any — is minimal. It's like investing one dollar and getting ten cents back.

No, the revenue comes from the taxes of the sale of oil and gas.  You don't know what you're talking about.  

[CdnFox]

6 hours ago, Gaétan said:

Ya but this revenue inevitably comes out of our pockets one way or another. Their revenue is an expense for us. You pay for the gas, you pay for the subsidies, you pay the taxes on the product, you pay for the damage caused by pollution—you just keep paying.

You could say the same for food. Or housing. Or literally anything else

It's a ridiculous argument. We trade money for services and goods that we need in order to live. Yes, we give the government money for fuel but we're damn glad to have the opportunity to do that in the middle of winter when it's freezing.

I don't think you understand how money works or economies

4 hours ago, Shady said:

No, the revenue comes from the taxes of the sale of oil and gas.  You don't know what you're talking about.  

He's arguing that because we buy oil and gas somehow the oil and gas industry is an expense and not a benefit. He is clearly insane

[Legato]

5 hours ago, Gaétan said:

Yes, but the revenue comes from our pockets. It's something you pay a lot for, but the return — if any — is minimal. It's like investing one dollar and getting ten cents back.

Please take some of that revenue that comes out of your pocket and put it in mine. You can keep the 10c.

Thank you.

[Gaétan]

15 hours ago, CdnFox said:

You could say the same for food. Or housing. Or literally anything else

It's a ridiculous argument. We trade money for services and goods that we need in order to live. Yes, we give the government money for fuel but we're damn glad to have the opportunity to do that in the middle of winter when it's freezing.

I don't think you understand how money works or economies

He's arguing that because we buy oil and gas somehow the oil and gas industry is an expense and not a benefit. He is clearly insane

You say that money is made from oil, but that's impossible—except for the shareholders of the company. That's a different issue from saying we need it. We could be investing in hydrogen instead, because oil is destroying the environment.  It leads to serious health issues — and those come with a heavy price tag.

While exact numbers for oil alone are harder to isolate, estimates suggest:

Millions of deaths annually are linked to fossil fuel air pollution.

Oil combustion in vehicles and industry is a major contributor to urban PM2.5.

Refinery emissions and spills add to local health burdens, especially in low-income regions.

Oil Spills - Our World in Data

Mortality and global health estimates

Air pollution from fossil fuels, including oil, is responsible for an estimated 8.7 million premature deaths globally each year, according to peer-reviewed studies. These deaths are primarily linked to cardiovascular and respiratory diseases caused by fine particulate matter (PM2.5) emitted during oil combustion and refining.

Which Offers Greater Techno-Economic Potential: Oil or Hydrogen Production from Light Oil Reservoirs?

FullText.pdf

these.pdf

Economic Analysis and Comparison of Hydrogen Production Routes Based on Different Methods | SpringerLink

Edited October 30, 2025 by Gaétan

[Shady]

Canada is a sinking ship.

 

[eyeball]

9 minutes ago, Shady said:

Canada is a sinking ship.

In the same vortex the rest of the world has been circling for years now. I wonder where it drains to?

I hope I live long enough to see. Aren't you curious too?

 

[SpankyMcFarland]

I think the Liberals would benefit if the other parties bring their government down. Canadians are in no mood for another election and would punish those who caused it. When a deal with the Americans has taken shape there will be lots to discuss about how Canada’s economy is run but not now. 

Edited October 30, 2025 by SpankyMcFarland

[Shady]

5 minutes ago, eyeball said:

In the same vortex the rest of the world has been circling for years now. I wonder where it drains to?

I hope I live long enough to see. Aren't you curious too?

 

Ours, like many other western countries is a choice.  It doesn’t have to be.

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, Gaétan said:

You say that money is made from oil, but that's impossible—except for the shareholders of the company. That's a different issue from saying we need it. We could be investing in hydrogen instead, because oil is destroying the environment.  It leads to serious health issues — and those come with a heavy price tag.

While exact numbers for oil alone are harder to isolate, estimates suggest:

Millions of deaths annually are linked to fossil fuel air pollution.

Oil combustion in vehicles and industry is a major contributor to urban PM2.5.

Refinery emissions and spills add to local health burdens, especially in low-income regions.

Oil Spills - Our World in Data

Mortality and global health estimates

Air pollution from fossil fuels, including oil, is responsible for an estimated 8.7 million premature deaths globally each year, according to peer-reviewed studies. These deaths are primarily linked to cardiovascular and respiratory diseases caused by fine particulate matter (PM2.5) emitted during oil combustion and refining.

Which Offers Greater Techno-Economic Potential: Oil or Hydrogen Production from Light Oil Reservoirs?

FullText.pdf

these.pdf

Economic Analysis and Comparison of Hydrogen Production Routes Based on Different Methods | SpringerLink

No it's not impossible. That's a dumb thing to say

Money is made from oil in the same way that money is made from food, or selling clothing, or providing services.

Specifically as far as the government's concerned money is made from oil by taxing the companies and the employees who are paid to run the oil company. This is the same as everything else

And the number of people who would die if we didn't have oil would be vastly higher than the number of people who died from climate change. Without electricity, without heat, without the ability to transport goods our population would plummet. Want proof? Go look at the population before we invented all that stuff. About 10% of all of the people who have ever lived in our history are alive today and that's a result of having oil and electricity and transportation

Maybe someday we'll find something to replace it but there's no doubt it saves Tens if not hundreds of thousands of lives for every life it costs

Stop being a child

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, Shady said:

Ours, like many other western countries is a choice.  It doesn’t have to be.

It didn't have to be. We made choices long ago that people knew full well would lead to an increasingly dysfunctional, surreal and above all else unsustainable world. We were talking about this decades ago in these very same forums we're still in today.

Its like climate change will be, where adaptation, survival and lurching from political crisis to economic crisis etc can't really be called options they'll be more like hurdles that just keep getting bigger.

[Gaétan]

38 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

No it's not impossible. That's a dumb thing to say

Money is made from oil in the same way that money is made from food, or selling clothing, or providing services.

Specifically as far as the government's concerned money is made from oil by taxing the companies and the employees who are paid to run the oil company. This is the same as everything else

And the number of people who would die if we didn't have oil would be vastly higher than the number of people who died from climate change. Without electricity, without heat, without the ability to transport goods our population would plummet. Want proof? Go look at the population before we invented all that stuff. About 10% of all of the people who have ever lived in our history are alive today and that's a result of having oil and electricity and transportation

Maybe someday we'll find something to replace it but there's no doubt it saves Tens if not hundreds of thousands of lives for every life it costs

Stop being a child

I don’t want to waste my time responding to people paid by agencies to make conservatives look good. Yes, there are royalties on oil extraction, but those come from consumers who pay for the product—so the only real beneficiaries are the shareholders of oil companies. And on top of paying for the product, you also pay taxes, subsidies to oil companies, health costs, and environmental degradation costs. When you take everything into account—including the cost of burying people who died from health problems caused by oil—you’d be better off using hydrogen instead. We can replace oil as an energy source with hydrogen, which is inexhaustible, and studies show that in the long run, it’s more economical.

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, Gaétan said:

I don’t want to waste my time responding to people paid by agencies to make conservatives look good. 

I'm sure Jenni Byrne will be very sorry to learn you won't be calling her  

2 hours ago, Gaétan said:

Yes, there are royalties on oil extraction, but those come from consumers who pay for the product

And yes farmers make money on growing food, but that comes from people who buy and eat food. 

What's your point?  The whole idea of producing something is that people who need it will buy it. 

Like... that's how the entire system works and it works well.  People produce something, other people who need it buy it, and the gov't collects taxes on the income. 

So what's your point?

2 hours ago, Gaétan said:

And on top of paying for the product, you also pay taxes, subsidies to oil companies, health costs, and environmental degradation costs

There are no subsidies. People misuse the word. 

And as for the rest, yes, again that's true of literally every product out there. Including food. 

But without food people die.  Without oil and the electricity and heat and transport it provides, people die. 
So it's a  price people are prepared to pay. 

There is no difference between that and anything else. 

2 hours ago, Gaétan said:

We can replace oil as an energy source with hydrogen,

No, we can't. We do not have the technology yet to replace oil. We have enough technology to reduce our dependence on it, to minimize its use, but we absolutely do not have the ability at this time to replace oil as our energy source

Someday, maybe. There's a lot of people working on solutions.

But right now, no.

[herbie]

[CdnFox]

35 minutes ago, herbie said:

Poilievre certainly as you guys petrified    

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

There are no subsidies. People misuse the word. 

Call it welfare then. Or is it like tariff and tax, two completely different things?

[Gaétan]

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

I'm sure Jenni Byrne will be very sorry to learn you won't be calling her  

And yes farmers make money on growing food, but that comes from people who buy and eat food. 

What's your point?  The whole idea of producing something is that people who need it will buy it. 

Like... that's how the entire system works and it works well.  People produce something, other people who need it buy it, and the gov't collects taxes on the income. 

So what's your point?

There are no subsidies. People misuse the word. 

And as for the rest, yes, again that's true of literally every product out there. Including food. 

But without food people die.  Without oil and the electricity and heat and transport it provides, people die. 
So it's a  price people are prepared to pay. 

There is no difference between that and anything else. 

No, we can't. We do not have the technology yet to replace oil. We have enough technology to reduce our dependence on it, to minimize its use, but we absolutely do not have the ability at this time to replace oil as our energy source

Someday, maybe. There's a lot of people working on solutions.

But right now, no.

Substituting oil with hydrogen, not a question of possibility, but of economic and systemic readiness.

Your conservatives are corrupted by the oil industry, and when they retire, they'll work as lobbyists for the arms industry. In the meantime, they enjoy seeing Palestinians killed.

 

Edited October 31, 2025 by Gaétan

[Gaétan]

6 hours ago, herbie said:

The Liberals and the Conservatives are rats who have invaded the old House of Commons

[blackbird]

On 10/29/2025 at 10:23 AM, Gaétan said:

The oil industry represents nothing but expenses for the people.

Subventions à l’industrie pétrolière | Le Canada (un peu) moins fou | La Presse

 

You don't read the correct sources.  There is lots of false information out there.  Why do you ignore facts?  You don't seem to believe the oil industry contributes billions of dollars to the Canadian economy.  What kind of alt reality do you live in?  Your postings don't make sense at all.  I reply, not because you will listen.  I know you won't.  I reply so others reading your nonsense don't accidentally believe you.  

The oil industry in Alberta creates thousands of jobs and brings in billions of dollars in royalties and taxes.  

How do you think Alberta has been so rich and provides billions of dollars to Quebec in equalization payments?  Where do you think that money comes from?   The oil industry.

Edited October 31, 2025 by blackbird

[Barquentine]

13 hours ago, CdnFox said:

No, we can't. We do not have the technology yet to replace oil. We have enough technology to reduce our dependence on it, to minimize its use, but we absolutely do not have the ability at this time to replace oil as our energy source

Someday, maybe. There's a lot of people working on solutions.

But right now, no.

Not maybe. Definitely. As the efficiency grows and the costs tumble, renewables and and nuclear etc...will replace fossils. Not years but a few decades.

 

[Shady]

1 hour ago, Barquentine said:

Not maybe. Definitely. As the efficiency grows and the costs tumble, renewables and and nuclear etc...will replace fossils. Not years but a few decades.

 

Cool.  That's in a few decades.  Stop trying to unnaturally kill the oil and gas industry.

[Legato]

1 hour ago, Barquentine said:

Not maybe. Definitely. As the efficiency grows and the costs tumble, renewables and and nuclear etc...will replace fossils. Not years but a few decades.

 

Few=x⁹