Federal Election Called for Oct 19, 2015

[Mr.Coffee]

I think there's no doubt that if other countries lived their lives like we do, the earth would be in for a world of hurt. Interesting debate to me but I see merit in both sides of the argument as to whether or not Canada can do more or has a reason its' emissions are high per capita.

[SebC]

Global warming is arguably good for Canada. If we're going to give up our interests, we should be doing so at a bargaining table in exchange for other interests - not doing so unilaterally.

[Canuck-Hater]

Originally Posted by nik-

yay. More independently wealthy people weighing in on politics!

So because they are wealthy they shouldn't have an opinion at all? That seems logical...

[nik-]

That's pretty much exactly what I said. You are insanely astute.

Those people live in a different reality than average people do. "Where has my democracy gone?" Uhh what? What does that even mean? What country are they living in? 40% of the popular vote was fine when it was the Liberals getting governments on it, but Harper does it and now democracy in Canada is dead apparently. People who complain about this on both sides are dumb.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by starseed

I could not watch the debate tonight, so I was reading a reddit comment stream. There were a lot more comments about how Trudeau was dominating Mulcair in certain segments and generally performing much better, and Harper was managing to defend the attacks on him. They do post-debate straw polls, which are usually fairly even, with Mulcair usually getting the edge.

However, tonight it had Trudeau winning the debate with 70+% of the votes.

Is there an archive of the debate somewhere? Was Trudeau as bad as CP seems to think?

I thought Trudeau did well and more to the point exceeded expectations on this file, which is generally thought to be his weakest. Harper continues to own this subject but not as decisively as I'm sure they would like. Relative to expectations I'd say Trudeau won.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by edslunch

I thought Trudeau did well and more to the point exceeded expectations on this file, which is generally thought to be his weakest. Harper continues to own this subject but not as decisively as I'm sure they would like. Relative to expectations I'd say Trudeau won.

I find it interesting that much of Trudeau's 'success' seems to have been in regard to expectations.
The CPC did such a great job with the 'not ready' crap that it has kind of backfired on them, as Justin continues to exceed the low bar.

[corporatejay]

Blue Rodeo played many private parties for oil & gas companies during the boom times. Hopefully they'll put their money where their mouths are and return it all.

[CaptainCrunch]

At the end of the day, it might not be enough for Trudeau, if I was looking at it, the Cons have recovered nicely from a bad start to this election, and you could argue that the Libs and NDP have failed to do a lot of damage to the governing party.

Trudeau's bar is really low, he's done better then that, but he just strikes me as a puffy cloud of vague and vaper.

Mulcair has frankly bungled this election, and outside of some nice back and forths with Trudeau, didn't accomplish much last night at all. I honestly think that barring a miracle last minute charge that the whole Orange Crush thing is pretty much dead and this is now a two horse race to a minority government.

I think that Mulcair has campaigned himself out of a job.

[Jimmy Stang]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Blue Rodeo played many private parties for oil & gas companies during the boom times. Hopefully they'll put their money where their mouths are and return it all.

Why? The song is a critique of Harper, not the oil and gas industry. Nearly all of the points raised don't have anything at all to do with oil and gas.

[GGG]

GHG emissions would be much better measured if the consumer of the product was responsible for all the emissions not the producer. Its also the only real way to allow capitalism to fix the issue.

Give everyone in Canada a carbon allowance, allow governments to tax that carbon allowance for their emissions, when you pay for something you pay for the cost of the good in dollars and cost of the good in emissions. Individuals would be allowed to sell their surplus emissions to others. The key is that the citizens of a country own the right to pollute not industry. All cap and trade does is make industry rich. In a model where citizens own emissions the citizens are encouraged to change purchasing habits which is really what drives production.

It also negates any large scale economic damage to us as a producing nation as our exports are only taxed by jurisdictions that also impose taxes are their citizens. And it imposes taxes on imports based on the carbon intensity of the produced product.

It would raise costs on everything we consume but when someone asks for carbon trading that is really what they are asking for. But it would never be politically sellable because instead of attacking boogyman industries from outside the voting block it increases the price of food for everyone.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by transplant99

You and this per capita nonsense....over and over.

It means nothing...nadda....nil...zero.

We live in a cold climate over a vast area of land. OF COURSE our output will be higher than others.

But beyond all that....Trudeau is just a parrot of talking points and this is but another one.

Does anyone truly believe that a 2% contributor o this global issue is the one country everyone is frustrated with and mad at? Anyone with any ability to think critically and apply common sense knows the answer, and it ain't what Pierre JR. is espousing.

On the plus side, at least you are no longer denying the impact humans are having on the environment.

[jammies]

On the one hand, many people complain that politicians are short-sighted and only think about the near future and what can get them elected right now. On the other hand, now that politicians are trying to make GHG and climate change an issue, many people don't want to take drastic action because they are short-sighted and only worry about the near future.

Any party that said they would be pushing nuclear to meet our energy needs would get my vote regardless of their other policies. That's what is missing, there's plenty of talk about carbon taxes and punitive measures to curb emissions, but it is right to wonder how exactly this will accomplish anything other than be a drag on the economy. Someone willing to take on the eco-religionists and point out that ALL power technologies involve risk and pollution, and that a proper implementation of nuclear trades a bit of risk for massive savings in pollution would be refreshing.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

Why? The song is a critique of Harper, not the oil and gas industry. Nearly all of the points raised don't have anything at all to do with oil and gas.

Sorry, that comment wasn't really directed at the video, just more their general "anti-oil" position.

I find them to be hypocrites.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Sorry, that comment wasn't really directed at the video, just more their general "anti-oil" position.

I find them to be hypocrites.

So you take all attacks on Harper to be 'anti-oil'?

Revealing.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

So you take all attacks on Harper to be 'anti-oil'?

Revealing.

I would say that there are quite a few anti-oil positions that were present in the video - most notably when they state that they don't want any pipelines. There are so many of those talking points that sound nice in the thirty second sound clips, but that really hold little to more often no weight when they are actually held up to any scrutiny.

As for the debates, I think that one of the areas that Trudeau is doing a good job in realizing is that the average voter doesn't pay attention of the entire debate but rather watches snippets and makes their decision on that. Trudeau has good statements of piss and vinegar but with little actual substance behind them but the style is well suited for the twitter users and people who share short videos on youtube and facebook. Longer answers with increased critical thought are rarely as popular.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

So you take all attacks on Harper to be 'anti-oil'?

Revealing.

Reading comprehension can also be revealing.
Perhaps you should reread what you quoted?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Blue Rodeo played many private parties for oil & gas companies during the boom times. Hopefully they'll put their money where their mouths are and return it all.

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Sorry, that comment wasn't really directed at the video, just more their general "anti-oil" position.

I find them to be hypocrites.

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Reading comprehension can also be revealing.
Perhaps you should reread what you quoted?

Reading comprehension working just fine, thank you.

[Zarley]

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

As for the debates, I think that one of the areas that Trudeau is doing a good job in realizing is that the average voter doesn't pay attention of the entire debate but rather watches snippets and makes their decision on that. Trudeau has good statements of piss and vinegar but with little actual substance behind them but the style is well suited for the twitter users and people who share short videos on youtube and facebook. Longer answers with increased critical thought are rarely as popular.

I agree. Having watched the debate in full, I thought that Harper brought the most well reasoned and substantive points to the discussion, followed by Mulcair.

You could really tell that Trudeau was going for the sound bite as he didn't participate as much in the conversation that was occuring.

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Reading comprehension working just fine, thank you.

It would appear that's not the case.

[Ozy_Flame]

Now this is something I can get on board with:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cana...tion-1.3248391

Trudeau said the Liberals would invest $200 million per year over the next three years in what the party is calling a "new innovation agenda." The money would support technology incubators — companies that provide startups and entrepreneurs with the practical and logistical support they need to focus on developing their products — and research facilities and financing for small businesses looking to grow.

According to Trudeau, the funds would help create a network between technology startups, government and academic institutions — similar to those already in place in countries like Germany and the United States — that would help create an environment that encourages growth and promotes Canadian innovation on a global scale.

[2Stonedbirds]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Well, that is of course a complicated question that has legitimately generated much debate. However, it seems to be a bit of a moving of the goalposts for the purposes of this debate. Unless of course you are conceding that Canada's climate change record is a legitimate election issue?

I'm asking what you feel is the standard to which we should be held by. Kyoto accord, Copenhagen accord, or something else? Curious what you feel is the acceptable standard of c02 reduction in this country. Keeping in mind that we are a cold climate country, large, and have a economy that is mainly based on natural resources, including oil production.

Impeccable?! The only developed states with worse emissions records than Canada are:

Qatar;
Kuwait;
Brunei;
UAE;
Luxembourg;
Australia;
United States;
Saudi Arabia.

Now when we compare our greenhouse gas output to these countries, do we also not consider what a large portion of their economy is?

I'm genuinely interested in how you feel we can achieve a acceptable standard of emissions controls that is effective yet doesn't hurt one of our largest industries to the point of turning us into a have not country.

Also, what can we do to curb the amount of pollution caused by large shipping vessels? They make up a staggering amount of worldwide pollution.