Official (Alberta) Oil Discussion Thread

[Locke]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Nationalize them, the last thing the government should do is run companies, they're barely competent enough to run a province or a city or a country.

If you nationalize Bombardier it becomes a make work project with 10x the employees, no incentive to make a profit, and it suddenly can't design a jet that doesn't cost a billion bucks a copy and can't compete on the world scale so the government blows a bunch of cash buying them.

If a business can't fix itself, look at its model and adjust it, then its time for it to die.

One of the big shareholder concerns with Bombardier is that outside of Air Canada buying some, their jets aren't cost competitive and they have no sales in the pipeline because other companies can do it better and cheaper then they can.

That's not viable.

I dont disagree on any particular point but we have predominantly Socialist Governments in power both Provincially and Federally, and thats fine, but its time to stop half-assing this.

If a company comes to you for money you have to make a choice. There is no sense in giving a company money, and we are giving, we're not getting this money back, if it isnt going to fix their problem and ergo the public's problem.

These Governments have been elected to solve our problems right? They're going to take care of it. So its time to get to it.

So either Nationalize the company and operate it as suits the Government's needs or leave them be to whatever their fate may be.

Sure, a Nationalized company is going to suck, but its what the majority asked for via elections.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Canada isn't Canada anymore, its a confederation with a disinterested concept.

We're not a country as much as a collection of thinly separated fiefdoms.

Lets face facts, this province (alberta) is unimportant to the rest of the country unless we're pumping money to the governments and providing mass employment for provinces with bad economies.

Alberta is as important as its population warrants. Probably moreso, considering, the money and business clout here. Calgary is in the national news far more than Winnipeg, Hamilton, and Quebec City put together. Should each individual Albertan have more say in Canada than each individual Quebecer, just because we live in a province with a smaller population?

Personally, I'm a lot more put out the huge disparity in voting power that rural Albertans have over urban Albertans, and the consequent transfer of money out the cities and into rural Alberta to buy votes there.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by polak

You guys want to separate and become a landlocked state with zero means of independently getting our products to the coast?

That seems backwards?

You're forgetting that international trade is easier than intraprovincial, which is also backwards.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Alberta is as important as its population warrants. Probably moreso, considering, the money and business clout here. Calgary is in the national news far more than Winnipeg, Hamilton, and Quebec City put together. Should each individual Albertan have more say in Canada than each individual Quebecer, just because we live in a province with a smaller population?

Personally, I'm a lot more put out the huge disparity in voting power that rural Albertans have over urban Albertans, and the consequent transfer of money out the cities and into rural Alberta to buy votes there.

There's a difference between talking about clout because of seat size and having a government treat a region with disdain.

Or making the playing field unequal because of voter support for the party in power.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Locke

I dont disagree on any particular point but we have predominantly Socialist Governments in power both Provincially and Federally, and thats fine, but its time to stop half-assing this.

If a company comes to you for money you have to make a choice. There is no sense in giving a company money, and we are giving, we're not getting this money back, if it isnt going to fix their problem and ergo the public's problem.

These Governments have been elected to solve our problems right? They're going to take care of it. So its time to get to it.

So either Nationalize the company and operate it as suits the Government's needs or leave them be to whatever their fate may be.

Sure, a Nationalized company is going to suck, but its what the majority asked for via elections.

The easiest fix them is to go away from the concept of bailouts and call it a loan. Make them sign a commitment to pay the money back and all the assets go to the government if the company goes under. You can set below market interest rates. But the government basically owns your stuff until you pay it off.



Just like with the provinces, make it any kind of bailout a limited time measure. You have 3 years to turn it around.

No more gift dollars, its stupid and its allowed provinces to squander and spend stupidly.

[Fuzz]

I think the federal Bombardier bailout is supposed to include an equity stake, like they did with the auto manufacturers. Pretty sure the provincial one was no strings attached. Not that Bombardier shares will ever be worth selling...

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I think the federal Bombardier bailout is supposed to include an equity stake, like they did with the auto manufacturers. Pretty sure the provincial one was no strings attached. Not that Bombardier shares will ever be worth selling...

I think you have it backwards, the provincial bail out had 49.5% stake in the C series production line. With the Feds there's no equity stake.

[Fuzz]

That's possible. I was listening to CBC while PUMPIN' FREAKIN' IRON so may have been a little light headed.

[Kavvy]

I sorta understand bailouts, I don't understand bailouts without equality stakes.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Kavvy

I sorta understand bailouts, I don't understand bailouts without equality stakes.

It makes total sense until it doesnt. Governments want to save companies and jobs for appearance's sake but dont want to be involved in running businesses that are outside of their core competencies.

But they never get the money back. It isnt a loan and buying shares is worthless if the companies suck and their share prices just keep going down.

[PaperBagger'14]

Originally Posted by polak

You guys want to separate and become a landlocked state with zero means of independently getting our products to the coast?

That seems backwards? Unless we can take BC or Sask and MB with us, separation seems like a bad idea.

Luckily with a new upcoming American election we may have a thoroughfare immediately to our south. I'm against becoming American but us separating from Canada and getting in bed with the States would seem to make sense.

[Kavvy]

Originally Posted by Locke

It makes total sense until it doesnt. Governments want to save companies and jobs for appearance's sake but dont want to be involved in running businesses that are outside of their core competencies.

But they never get the money back. It isnt a loan and buying shares is worthless if the companies suck and their share prices just keep going down.

I thought we made a profit off our GM stock?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14

Luckily with a new upcoming American election we may have a thoroughfare immediately to our south.

What "thoroughfare"?

Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14

I'm against becoming American but us separating from Canada and getting in bed with the States would seem to make sense.

We bitch and moan about Quebec all the time, but when times get tough (due to the fault of nobody in Canada), we sure turn into a bunch of whiners ourselves.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

We bitch and moan about Quebec all the time, but when times get tough (due to the fault of nobody in Canada), we sure turn into a bunch of whiners ourselves.

So what?

Yeah, so far having the 'stiff upper lip' and 'shutting up and getting to work' has worked out real well.

Whiners?

Sorry man but at the moment the whiners are winning. What is being stoic getting us? Pride?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Locke

So what?

Yeah, so far having the 'stiff upper lip' and 'shutting up and getting to work' has worked out real well.

Whiners?

Sorry man but at the moment the whiners are winning. What is being stoic getting us? Pride?

Well I guess if you think whining is a good thing, and acting like the petulant babies we usually scorn (for good reason) is going to make everything hunky dory, then have at 'er.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Well I guess if you think whining is a good thing, and acting like the petulant babies we usually scorn (for good reason) is going to make everything hunky dory, then have at 'er.

Okay, so pride.

Good luck feeding your kids with pride.

[PaperBagger'14]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

What "thoroughfare"?



We bitch and moan about Quebec all the time, but when times get tough (due to the fault of nobody in Canada), we sure turn into a bunch of whiners ourselves.

The possibility of either building our own pipeline on American soil or tying onto existing ones as there seems to be a hub around the Billings area. Yeah Alberta is finally making noise on the federal level, I've voiced my ideas, but if you are calling other people's ideas "whining" then your comment serves even less purpose.

[polak]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

What "thoroughfare"?



We bitch and moan about Quebec all the time, but when times get tough (due to the fault of nobody in Canada), we sure turn into a bunch of whiners ourselves.

Except Canada seems to have turned it's back on us considering they won't let us build a pipeline to support the industry that's been keeping this country afloat for decades.

[CaptainCrunch]

As I watched the house of commons debate on the news last night.

Rona Ambrose basically stated, the 250 mil was a nice start but you're doing nothing else for a province in trouble.

Trudeau basically stood up and said that this cash proved that the Liberals were Alberta's best friend. But he has nothing else to ad.

I think the possibility is that he's thrown us a quarter, we should be extremely grateful for that, but don't expect anything else.

The key issues which is the extension of EI benefits, cash for jobs programs and showing support for pipelines ain't going to happen.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

As I watched the house of commons debate on the news last night.

Rona Ambrose basically stated, the 250 mil was a nice start but you're doing nothing else for a province in trouble.

Trudeau basically stood up and said that this cash proved that the Liberals were Alberta's best friend. But he has nothing else to ad.

I think the possibility is that he's thrown us a quarter, we should be extremely grateful for that, but don't expect anything else.

The key issues which is the extension of EI benefits, cash for jobs programs and showing support for pipelines ain't going to happen.

In all honesty the first place I heard of the idea of extending the EI benefits was from Trudeau? I thought that was their plan in all of this?

I don't really know what the federal government can and should do here. Like the infrastructure spend they have planned is significant as far as I can tell and I don't really know what a cash for jobs program would entail?