Quote:
Originally Posted by flamesfever
Environmental extremists seem to be short of common sense e.g. Guilbeault's sudden change from net 2035 to 2050, when he heard that Carney was coming aboard.
Another example of environmental short sightedness was Butt's Green Energy program in Ontario where they handed out contracts to farmers who built solar panels at $ .85 a kilowatt for 20 years. The cost of power got so high that some people had to choose between eating and staying warm.
|
Do you eve have the faintest understanding of what the word extremist means?
Those are examples of management decisions that were not good, but they are not examples of blockading coal powerplants, blowing up pipelines, chaining themselves to trees... the word extremism means something, and Poilievre's loose association with facts when it comes to naming his political opponents reactions don't change those facts. Those guys are not extremists, and jumping to that characterization as a way to deflect from needing to argue their policies on the merits gives up the game, you don't think there is a merit based argument, it is just fear of change and cherry picked data. You know that $0.85/kwh solar was a bad deal, but you also know that in Alberta in particular solar is the cheapest possible form of new energy installation and you are deflecting from that.
Also think even calling them extremists in itself is not the attack you think it is, sometime extreme action is required. If Canadians en-mass decided to blockade Trumps access to Kananaskis, that would be the actions of extremists, but I think there is an argument that it would a sensible choice for people to make.