I am Groot Posted February 10 Author Report Posted February 10 2 hours ago, 500channelsurfer said: Is it possible the Carney Liberals are seeking trade deals to maintain port capacities at or near their limits due to expected decrease of their use in trade with the US? Our trade with the US travels almost entirely by truck and train. Quote "A civilization is not destroyed by wicked men; it is destroyed by weak men who cannot defend what is good.” — G. K. Chesterton
I am Groot Posted February 10 Author Report Posted February 10 5 hours ago, eyeball said: Recent Major Expansions: Yes, they're recent expansions and we're still at capacity. 5 hours ago, eyeball said: rans Mountain Expansion (Operational May 2024): While a separate pipeline project, it significantly increased crude oil export capacity through the port's Westridge Marine Terminal. The TMP allows us to export 16% of our oil to someone other than the US. That's all. 5 hours ago, eyeball said: Ongoing & Future Projects: Roberts Bank Terminal 2: This massive project—which would involve building a new man-made island—received federal and provincial environmental approval in 2023. Construction is currently anticipated to begin in 2028, with the terminal opening in the mid-2030s. So in ten years we'll have more port capacity. Although it's almost certainly going to be behind schedule because all o ur major projects are. 5 hours ago, eyeball said: Deltaport Expansion Berth Four (DP4): This proposal by terminal operator GCT is currently undergoing environmental assessment and aims to further increase container capacity at the Roberts Bank site. So even further behind. You don't fly around the world to make trade deals when you can't possibly fulfil them for at least a decade. 5 hours ago, eyeball said: While the land is federally owned, the actual cargo terminals are leased to and operated by companies like DP World or PSA International. Don't these bear any responsibility for the inefficiency and poor productivity of our ports? I mean I get it the government has a lot to do with things...look at the state of our old fishing ports after all. My understanding is the unions won't allow it, and the BC NDP and federal liberals back the union. I'm not entirely committed to that and don't profess expertise in this area. I'm just going from what I've been reading. Quote "A civilization is not destroyed by wicked men; it is destroyed by weak men who cannot defend what is good.” — G. K. Chesterton
eyeball Posted February 10 Report Posted February 10 17 minutes ago, I am Groot said: My understanding is the unions won't allow it, and the BC NDP and federal liberals back the union. I'm not entirely committed to that and don't profess expertise in this area. I'm just going from what I've been reading. Well it is the left after all so...what more do you need to know? Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
August1991 Posted February 10 Report Posted February 10 11 hours ago, suds said: What we've failed to do in the past is now coming back to haunt us. Canada is a resource rich country full of the kinds of resources most of the rest of the world is scrambling for more than ever. Yet we have no plans to extract the resources out of the earth or the infrastructure to get them to market. ... Well stated. Quote
eyeball Posted February 10 Report Posted February 10 (edited) 11 hours ago, suds said: What we've failed to do in the past is now coming back to haunt us. Canada is a resource rich country full of the kinds of resources most of the rest of the world is scrambling for more than ever. Yet we have no plans to extract the resources out of the earth or the infrastructure to get them to market. There's another side to this that needs to be considered. The longer we don't despoil our environment the more it retains its value. The more conservative we are with our resources the longer they'll sustain us into the future. When trees aren't being cut down they're only growing bigger. We're always hearing people singing the blues about China's market dominance in critical minerals. That's largely because they didn't give a shit about the environmental damage mining and especially refining these cause. Labour standards, especially wages were also a fraction of what they are here and a lot of other countries who've been more cautious about unleashing everything in sight as fast and wide as they possibly can. There's a lot to be said for having kept a foot on the brake pedal as opposed to having stomped on the gas. Don't get me wrong, we shouldn't let our love of nature blind us to the needs of our fellow man but at the same time we need to be careful not to fall to deeply in love with money. Edited February 10 by eyeball Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Nationalist Posted February 10 Report Posted February 10 2 hours ago, eyeball said: There's another side to this that needs to be considered. The longer we don't despoil our environment the more it retains its value. The more conservative we are with our resources the longer they'll sustain us into the future. When trees aren't being cut down they're only growing bigger. We're always hearing people singing the blues about China's market dominance in critical minerals. That's largely because they didn't give a shit about the environmental damage mining and especially refining these cause. Labour standards, especially wages were also a fraction of what they are here and a lot of other countries who've been more cautious about unleashing everything in sight as fast and wide as they possibly can. There's a lot to be said for having kept a foot on the brake pedal as opposed to having stomped on the gas. Don't get me wrong, we shouldn't let our love of nature blind us to the needs of our fellow man but at the same time we need to be careful not to fall to deeply in love with money. So you propose Canada sit on its natural resources? Lol...you just gave to be destructive...dont you. 2 1 Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
eyeball Posted February 10 Report Posted February 10 (edited) 8 hours ago, Nationalist said: So you propose Canada sit on its natural resources? Lol...you just gave to be destructive...dont you. Nope, I just don't think a balls out unleashed exploitation of our natural resources is the way to go. We should be more conservative about it, especially in light of their increasing scarcity. One of the biggest traps we could fall into is how scarcity makes things more valuable. You see it in fishing. As the number and size of fish go down the price goes up and fishermen along with their industry and it's managers who still see as much money and wealth being realized as always don't see the trap until it's too late. It's hard to convince yourself that what you're doing is wrong or self-destructive when your livelihood depends on it. Edited February 10 by eyeball Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
CdnFox Posted February 10 Report Posted February 10 30 minutes ago, eyeball said: Nope, I just don't think a balls out unleashed exploitation of our natural resources is the way to go. We should be more conservative about it, especially in light of their increasing scarcity. That was the plan for the last 11 years and it hasn't worked out terribly well 1 1 Quote "That which doesn't kill me... Had better start running."
Nationalist Posted February 10 Report Posted February 10 28 minutes ago, eyeball said: Nope, I just don't think a balls out unleashed exploitation of our natural resources is the way to go. We should be more conservative about it, especially in light of their increasing scarcity. One of the biggest traps we could fall into is how scarcity makes things more valuable. You see it in fishing. As the number and size of fish go down the price goes up and fishermen along with their industry and it's managers who still see as much money and wealth being realized as always don't see the trap until it's too late. It's hard to convince yourself that what you're doing is wrong or self-destructive when your livelihood depends on it. So impose suffering now to save for the future? Ya know...I think you're full of it. You just cant help being destructive. 1 Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
eyeball Posted February 10 Report Posted February 10 3 minutes ago, Nationalist said: So impose suffering now to save for the future? Sounds downright conservative doesn't it? 5 minutes ago, Nationalist said: Ya know...I think you're full of it. You just cant help being destructive. Care to tell me how we go balls out unleashed without wrecking anything and leaving enough for the future? 1 Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
CdnFox Posted February 10 Report Posted February 10 3 hours ago, Nationalist said: So impose suffering now to save for the future? It's pretty much the left's religion 3 hours ago, eyeball said: Sounds downright conservative doesn't it? Doesn't sound remotely conservative. Conservatives building create now to improve the future. Only liberals think that impoverishing people now will improve the future, it just makes the future poor Quote Care to tell me how we go balls out unleashed without wrecking anything and leaving enough for the future? Sure it's very simple. You remove the resources, you sell them to people who are going to buy them from someone anyway, you use the money and time to transition to newer technology as it becomes available and you don't try and force technology that isn't ready down people's throats Not complex. 1 1 Quote "That which doesn't kill me... Had better start running."
Nationalist Posted February 10 Report Posted February 10 (edited) 3 hours ago, eyeball said: Sounds downright conservative doesn't it? No. It sounds dumb. 3 hours ago, eyeball said: Care to tell me how we go balls out unleashed without wrecking anything and leaving enough for the future? Wrecking anything? Like what? A bog? There's plenty of resources eyeball. Many of them, like farming and forestry, are quite replaceable or renewable. Fossil fuels will be our energy solution for quite a while. But man will develop substitutes and eventually we'll replace the technology. But the replacement must be large scale and reliable! Not windmills and mirrors. You need to promote these industries...not chain them up with counter productive regulations. Canada "could" be a self sustaining, prosperous country. But these dumb ideas of saving...or worse, trying to halt or block production, are destructive and just plain mean. Edited February 10 by Nationalist Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
eyeball Posted February 10 Report Posted February 10 8 minutes ago, CdnFox said: You remove the resources, you sell them to people who are going to buy them from someone anyway... I've been given to understand the world is scrambling to find the resources it needs. That should tell you they're becoming scarce but you want to remove them and... 12 minutes ago, CdnFox said: ...use the money and time to transition to newer technology as it becomes available Why is the world scrambling where resources are getting scarce? What happened to the money and time they acquired when their resources were removed? Why haven't they made the transition? 1 Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Moonbox Posted February 10 Report Posted February 10 On 2/9/2026 at 9:11 AM, I am Groot said: The critique is that he's flying around everywhere and meeting with other nations for no purpose other than pantomime, playacting, performative posturizing. As critique goes, it's about useless as it comes...you might call it pantomine and performative posturing. Building and improving export terminals is a worthy goal. Establishing and growing export markets should spurr investment in them. Seems like a pretty simple concept. Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
ironstone Posted February 10 Report Posted February 10 Major projects in the last ten years>>>legal challenges>>environmental reviews>>>indigenous consent>>>planning and community consent>>cost overruns>>>more regulatory approvals>>>more legal challenges>>> Is it any wonder that big investors choose to leave Canada? 1 Quote Beware the Brookfield industrial complex...
eyeball Posted February 10 Report Posted February 10 14 minutes ago, ironstone said: Major projects in the last ten years>>>legal challenges>>environmental reviews>>>indigenous consent>>>planning and community consent>>cost overruns>>>more regulatory approvals>>>more legal challenges>>> Is it any wonder that big investors choose to leave Canada? Kinda makes you pine for the sort of basic dictatorship that gets things done doesn't it? Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
CdnFox Posted February 10 Report Posted February 10 (edited) 51 minutes ago, Moonbox said: As critique goes, it's about useless as it comes...you might call it pantomine and performative posturing. I would absolutely call him flying around the world's pantomime and performative posturing. You're dead on the money. Quote Building and improving export terminals is a worthy goal. Establishing and growing export markets should spurr investment in them. Seems like a pretty simple concept. Except he hasn't. What he has done is spent $100,000 a flight on food for himself in a couple of people. He's promoted his own brand I made contacts but he hasn't brought anything back for Canada. Andy sold our auto sector out to the Chinese. Pantomime and performative. As you say Edit racking up a pretty good bill for hotels too it would seem Carney spent over $772K on in-flight catering and hotels last year | National Post Edited February 10 by CdnFox 1 Quote "That which doesn't kill me... Had better start running."
I am Groot Posted February 11 Author Report Posted February 11 4 hours ago, Moonbox said: Building and improving export terminals is a worthy goal. Establishing and growing export markets should spurr investment in them. Seems like a pretty simple concept. Simple-minded. The ports are already at or near capacity. That should already have spurred investment in them if the Liberals had cared a damn over the last ten years. But they didn't. And it will take a minimum of a decade to even start construction once a plan is developed. What the hell good is 'growing export markets' if your ports are too overloaded to export!? Quote "A civilization is not destroyed by wicked men; it is destroyed by weak men who cannot defend what is good.” — G. K. Chesterton
CdnFox Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 18 hours ago, I am Groot said: Simple-minded. The ports are already at or near capacity. That should already have spurred investment in them if the Liberals had cared a damn over the last ten years. But they didn't. And it will take a minimum of a decade to even start construction once a plan is developed. What the hell good is 'growing export markets' if your ports are too overloaded to export!? Exactly. And the reason that they didn't attract civilian money was because of the regulatory environments that prevent the harvesting and sale of the goods it would pass through the ports as well as interfering with the construction of the ports itself. Right now the business case has to be so amazingly stunningly incredibly unrealistically good in Canada to justify spending that kind of money that nobody is interested. Businesses have come right out and said it and plain language There is no resolving this unless governments get out of the way, and not only that but the industries have to be convinced that they're going to stay out of the way. That we aren't going to see someone else elected two years later who will shut everything down again 1 1 Quote "That which doesn't kill me... Had better start running."
Recommended Posts
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.