Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 05-15-2019, 03:47 PM   #1661
you&me
Backup Goalie
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DiracSpike View Post
That would be the pragmatic solution, something that would actually help GLOBAL emissions for this GLOBAL problem. We displace coal across developing countries with our premium O&G, thus reducing emissions. We can take the massive windfall of actually being able to sell our resources at world prices and invest that in renewables, further subsidizing wind and solar, trying to find new technologies etc, thus lowering emissions. Two birds with one stone, all the while preserving solid high paying jobs that any country in the world would die to have in their tax base. It also allows our top level companies here to actually survive and continue delivering on lowering their own emissions while delivering value for all of us and sequestering carbon the whole time. CNRL has a sequestration project that i think is the second largest among oil companies in the world, takes the equivalent of 570,000 cars off the road. If May and Singh get their way that sequestration project is gone, benefits are gone, #### tonnes of money for transitioning gone. Emissions, global oil consumption? Effectively unchanged. It's beyond ridiculous, but I guess that's what plays on the far left these days, it truly frightens me.
I've read many articles and posts saying something to the effect of "we can take this windfall and invest in clean tech / renewables, etc"... But is there an actual plan or mechanism for that? (And don't say the carbon tax - ha!)

I'm a free market guy through-and-through, but I've wondered if having some sort of funding mechanism tied to O&G revenues could pacify some of the less extreme enviro-tards? This is super broad strokes, but what if there was something where X% of the price of oil above X$ had to be allocated to renewable R&D or some sort of government fund (god forbid!), in exchange for opening up pipeline construction and generally cutting the existing red tape... Or any renewable R&D $ spent by an O&G company is eligible to be taxed at -X%, allowing for an offset against "normal business"?

I say we get while the gettin's good, but have a sort of forced savings / investment plan for future tech... As mentioned, the engineering talent is already here. Ideally I'd like to see the funds earmarked for R&D stay within the O&G companies to help them transition to "Energy companies", in whatever form that might take...

Thoughts? Is there any chance this could not be bungled by a government? Or any chance the enviro crowd would buy-in?
you&me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2019, 03:54 PM   #1662
Locke
ness Monster
 
Locke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Income Tax Central
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by you&me View Post
I've read many articles and posts saying something to the effect of "we can take this windfall and invest in clean tech / renewables, etc"... But is there an actual plan or mechanism for that? (And don't say the carbon tax - ha!)

I'm a free market guy through-and-through, but I've wondered if having some sort of funding mechanism tied to O&G revenues could pacify some of the less extreme enviro-tards? This is super broad strokes, but what if there was something where X% of the price of oil above X$ had to be allocated to renewable R&D or some sort of government fund (god forbid!), in exchange for opening up pipeline construction and generally cutting the existing red tape... Or any renewable R&D $ spent by an O&G company is eligible to be taxed at -X%, allowing for an offset against "normal business"?

I say we get while the gettin's good, but have a sort of forced savings / investment plan for future tech... As mentioned, the engineering talent is already here. Ideally I'd like to see the funds earmarked for R&D stay within the O&G companies to help them transition to "Energy companies", in whatever form that might take...

Thoughts? Is there any chance this could not be bungled by a government? Or any chance the enviro crowd would buy-in?
I think the track record and progress that the Government and 'Enviro-Crowd' (I like that term) have to show for themselves indicates enough that they should be back-benched at best and ideally completely removed from the process entirely.

These people are either stupid or corrupt and either way, too dumb to know the difference.
__________________
- "Somebody may beat me, but they're going to have to bleed to do it."
- Steve Prefontaine
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
Locke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2019, 03:55 PM   #1663
Weitz
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by you&me View Post
I've read many articles and posts saying something to the effect of "we can take this windfall and invest in clean tech / renewables, etc"... But is there an actual plan or mechanism for that? (And don't say the carbon tax - ha!)

I'm a free market guy through-and-through, but I've wondered if having some sort of funding mechanism tied to O&G revenues could pacify some of the less extreme enviro-tards? This is super broad strokes, but what if there was something where X% of the price of oil above X$ had to be allocated to renewable R&D or some sort of government fund (god forbid!), in exchange for opening up pipeline construction and generally cutting the existing red tape... Or any renewable R&D $ spent by an O&G company is eligible to be taxed at -X%, allowing for an offset against "normal business"?

I say we get while the gettin's good, but have a sort of forced savings / investment plan for future tech... As mentioned, the engineering talent is already here. Ideally I'd like to see the funds earmarked for R&D stay within the O&G companies to help them transition to "Energy companies", in whatever form that might take...

Thoughts? Is there any chance this could not be bungled by a government? Or any chance the enviro crowd would buy-in?
I think you would have just as little chance of the O&G crowd buying in as you would the enviro crowd.
Weitz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2019, 04:04 PM   #1664
GGG
Franchise Player
 
GGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GordonBlue View Post
because it is wrong. disgusting and expected to be done by the Trump era Republicans. not in Canada.

there are not words strong enough to express my disgust for the liberal party of Canada.
We know that there is a problem where news that isn’t based in fact is being presented as factual. This is fundamentally different than news that is factual but the editorial surrounding it is skewed. Having some kind of vetting process of the credibility of a journalism entity is needed. If people can’t agree on the underlying objective facts their is no hope in people even discussing how to proceed.

Is it possible for government to create a framework where a third party could evaluate the truthiness of news and punditry. I think it is. Is this process open to abuse or even just the perception of partisanship? Absolutely.

However it is necessary we have had people in this thread post links to blatantly fake sources. People in this thread in general are smarter than average when it comes to caring about politics. In the past you had the news media as gate keepers to news. Now the entities that control access to media Facebook, Google, Twitter et al are abdicating that responsibility.

Edit: this list is just the government establishing the criteria for its previously announced news subsidy. The subsidy is problematic and has been discussed a lot previously, this really isn’t anything knew.

Last edited by GGG; 05-15-2019 at 04:08 PM.
GGG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2019, 04:13 PM   #1665
DiracSpike
Powerplay Quarterback
 
DiracSpike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: BELTLINE
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by you&me View Post
I've read many articles and posts saying something to the effect of "we can take this windfall and invest in clean tech / renewables, etc"... But is there an actual plan or mechanism for that? (And don't say the carbon tax - ha!)

I'm a free market guy through-and-through, but I've wondered if having some sort of funding mechanism tied to O&G revenues could pacify some of the less extreme enviro-tards? This is super broad strokes, but what if there was something where X% of the price of oil above X$ had to be allocated to renewable R&D or some sort of government fund (god forbid!), in exchange for opening up pipeline construction and generally cutting the existing red tape... Or any renewable R&D $ spent by an O&G company is eligible to be taxed at -X%, allowing for an offset against "normal business"?

I say we get while the gettin's good, but have a sort of forced savings / investment plan for future tech... As mentioned, the engineering talent is already here. Ideally I'd like to see the funds earmarked for R&D stay within the O&G companies to help them transition to "Energy companies", in whatever form that might take...

Thoughts? Is there any chance this could not be bungled by a government? Or any chance the enviro crowd would buy-in?
So the windfall I'm talking about being available for investing is in Government revenue. There would be increased government and industry revenue through being able to achieve world prices but company revenue should stay with those companies. They're some of the best at what they do, if they want to focus on their core business practice of producing O&G they should be left to it. There's no way in hell they'd go for having a percentage of revenues tied to renewables nor should they have to, they're already paying land rentals, corporate taxes, royalties, and a carbon tax. From my limited knowledge base it does seem a bit nebulous to try and define a percentage of incremental tax flowing to the Feds because of the realities of equalization and the fact that royalties are paid to the province, but government revenue would definitely go up from having investment flow back here and a strong O&G sector again. That increase in money could and probably should be partially used for renewables.

As for whether that would placate the enviro crowd, I doubt it. They're ideologues in the purest sense. It doesn't mean the other 80% of the Canadian population can't move towards common sense goals though.
DiracSpike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2019, 04:20 PM   #1666
CaptainCrunch
Norm!
 
CaptainCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Exp:
Default

If the government was just creating a list, that's fine its acceptable though I have concerns of the Government putting friendly to Liberal media sources on their list. Or picking winners and losers.

Attaching subsidies of any kind to this is almost like a reward system. Remember Telford telling JWR that they had journalists that would write opt ed pieces support the DPA agreements with SNC Lavalin. That already points to media manipulation

I mean sure put out a list of all of the fringe weirdo websites saying their full of crap. or the alt media. Or put out ads saying that what you read on facebook no matter which side it comes down on is likely crap.

But in my mind this goes too far towards attempted media control, and rewards.

We can say a lot about Harper and that he was a big old meany and didn't like the media. But he didn't interfere in the media or attempt to create almost like a Nixon List.

It will be really interesting to see who's on the "A" list.



And who gets tax breaks or subsidies.
__________________
There are brave men outside of our gates, lets go kill them
CaptainCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2019, 07:31 PM   #1667
CaptainCrunch
Norm!
 
CaptainCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Exp:
Default

Hopefully this is the first step to tossing Bill C-48 in the trash where it belongs


https://twitter.com/statuses/1128813240732004359


Unfortunately the Senate itself can still vote to pass it using the Neutral (Liberal) Senators
__________________
There are brave men outside of our gates, lets go kill them
CaptainCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to CaptainCrunch For This Useful Post:
Old 05-15-2019, 08:29 PM   #1668
Jacks
Franchise Player
 
Jacks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Exp:
Default

Had to laugh at this comment to that tweet
https://twitter.com/statuses/1128825126374453248
I don't think he realizes that Doug Black was indeed elected a Senator. Someone with a twitter account should tell him.
Jacks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2019, 09:07 PM   #1669
CaptainCrunch
Norm!
 
CaptainCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Exp:
Default

Glad to see that Justin is good at spending


https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ticle27507453/
__________________
There are brave men outside of our gates, lets go kill them
CaptainCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2019, 06:54 AM   #1670
Erick Estrada
Franchise Player
 
Erick Estrada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Fernando Valley
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch View Post
Glad to see that Justin is good at spending


https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ticle27507453/
One thing I always wondered about stuff like this is you have countries turning over billions of dollars in funding but who's handling it and who is monitoring just how much of that money actually makes its way into these emissions reducing projects? It's basically $2.5 billion of Canadian taxpayer money that has vanished as far as we know.
Erick Estrada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2019, 08:58 AM   #1671
CaptainCrunch
Norm!
 
CaptainCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Exp:
Default

The NDP and Liberals rush to the house with Motions around declaring Climate Change an Emergency.


This is the first step in defining what they see as their election strategies.


I can't help but feel that this is not going to work out well especially for Alberta


https://globalnews.ca/news/5280082/w...=%40globalnews


Oh and for McKenna this is all about



Quote:
“It’s signalling to the United States and signalling to other countries that we think climate change is an emergency and we have policies — maybe aspirational — but we have policies that we’re going to pursue,” Olive said.

No one is going to listen to us. Second isn't America leading the way on Carbon Reductions right now?
__________________
There are brave men outside of our gates, lets go kill them
CaptainCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2019, 09:14 AM   #1672
Ark2
Franchise Player
 
Ark2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick Estrada View Post
One thing I always wondered about stuff like this is you have countries turning over billions of dollars in funding but who's handling it and who is monitoring just how much of that money actually makes its way into these emissions reducing projects? It's basically $2.5 billion of Canadian taxpayer money that has vanished as far as we know.
None of that actually matters. All that matters is that our PM looks good on the international stage. Maybe this buys him a few more magazine cover photo shoots abroad. CANADA IS BACK!
Ark2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2019, 09:14 AM   #1673
you&me
Backup Goalie
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch View Post


Oh and for McKenna this is all about






No one is going to listen to us. Second isn't America leading the way on Carbon Reductions right now?

I find it incredibly sad that McKenna, Trudeau, et al think any other country in the world does anything but laugh at our climate policies while knee-capping our most valuable industries... Now I just need to figure out if it's naivety or stupidity...
you&me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2019, 09:29 AM   #1674
Ark2
Franchise Player
 
Ark2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch View Post
Second isn't America leading the way on Carbon Reductions right now?
Indeed they are. Trump has bungled their PR on this (no surprise there). So instead what you have are people villainizing the US for backing out of the Paris Climate agreement, despite the fact that they have reduced their emissions more than any other country in the world, and people praising China for being a part of the Paris Climate agreement, despite doing absolutely nothing to reduce their emissions until 2030 (assuming they actually do something then).

Canada suffers from unfair perception as well. We are scolded for being the highest per capita carbon emitters in the world, yet this stat lacks context. Canada is an incredibly large country that is sparsely populated. Canada also gets very cold for 3-9 months out of the year, and we are fortunate to be a developed nation. Put all that together and we are pretty unique when it comes to emitting carbon, but we only account for 1.6% of global emissions.

For the life of me, I can't understand why our politicians are so fixated on taking the lead on a low CO2 way of life. From a "save the planet" kind of perspective, we are absolutely meaningless. No one is looking to Canada to lead the way and it does not make one iota of difference from a temperature increase perspective if we bring our emissions to 0 or if we continue on at the rate we are currently on.
Ark2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2019, 09:34 AM   #1675
Ashasx
Franchise Player
 
Ashasx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Exp:
Default

Jesus Christ

12 Rules for Strife: NDP furious over House of Commons committee invitation for Jordan Peterson
Quote:
The NDP is objecting to an invitation Conservative MPs have extended to psychology professor and author Jordan B. Peterson to testify before the House of Commons justice committee, calling it “irresponsible and morally reprehensible.”

In a statement released Tuesday, NDP MP Tracey Ramsey said the Conservatives are “dangerously pandering to divisive politics instead of standing up for human rights.”

Despite the outcry, Peterson was scheduled to testify Thursday morning as the committee continues its ongoing study into online hate. The committee’s work on the issue came the wake of the Christchurch shootings in New Zealand, which targeted Muslims and killed 51 people.

Late Wednesday Peterson cancelled the appearance, citing a family emergency. It’s not clear when he can be rescheduled or if there will be time because the committee’s report is due in early June.

In an interview, Conservative MP Michael Cooper, one of the committee’s vice-chairs, said the NDP has been aware of the witness list for about a month and had ample opportunity to object to Peterson’s inclusion before it was finalized.

Cooper called the NDP’s statement an obvious effort to play politics, considering that it’s “only on the eve of the committee that the NDP is expressing their outrage.”
https://nationalpost.com/news/politi...ordan-peterson
Ashasx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2019, 09:51 AM   #1676
CaptainCrunch
Norm!
 
CaptainCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Exp:
Default

There's just not a lot to respect about the Federal NDP party. Their leader is a moron, you get a sense that with some of their better leaders and MP's leaving before the next election that the lunatics are taking over the party.


Watching Powerplay the other night, when the panel was talking about the Norman case and the NDP rep went on a bizarre tangent about shutting down Transmountain.


Its almost been fun watching the Liberal Government bombing downwards and bungling everything. But you get the sense heading into the next election under Singh that the NDP is going back to the old days of being an irrelevant party run by weirdo's with single seats in the house.
__________________
There are brave men outside of our gates, lets go kill them
CaptainCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2019, 10:11 AM   #1677
Dogbert
First Line Centre
 
Dogbert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashasx View Post
Jesus Christ

12 Rules for Strife: NDP furious over House of Commons committee invitation for Jordan Peterson

https://nationalpost.com/news/politi...ordan-peterson
What’s wrong with that? Jordan Peterson is a fascist piece of ####. His views and opinions shouldn’t be welcome in the House - or, for that matter, anywhere else.
Dogbert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2019, 10:15 AM   #1678
burn_this_city
Franchise Player
 
burn_this_city's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

I think fascist is a little strong, you seem like an authoritarian based on that take.
burn_this_city is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2019, 10:22 AM   #1679
rubecube
Franchise Player
 
rubecube's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Victoria
Exp:
Default

Yeah, I'm really not sure what Peterson adds to any debate or why he's being called but it sounds like the NDP had ample opportunity to dissent to his inclusion and chose to wait until it was politically expedient.
rubecube is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2019, 10:24 AM   #1680
Ashasx
Franchise Player
 
Ashasx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Exp:
Default

If you think Jordan Peterson is a fascist, then you are an absolute moron.

Disagree with him, hate him, but by no objective measure is he a fascist.
Ashasx is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Ashasx For This Useful Post:
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:38 AM.

Calgary Flames
2017-18




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2016