The "LOLCANADA" thread...again
So what's new?
I've noticed the Liberals are now ahead in all major polls and Trudeau hasn't even started to campaign yet...i'd be shocked if they lost the election now.
Just shows just how incompetent Conservatives are.
Lol. Buddy. You just caught red handed repeating CPC lies.
How embarrassing.
But instead of just fessing up, you tried to
1) ignore that you lied
2) said it isn't a lie if you "believe" the lie
3) try to pretend that other people are lying in the most ridiculous ways
Lol. Any bad economic metric that happens, gotta just blame the carbon tax!
What jokes.
Huh? You just claimed the carbon tax greatest effect is wealth transfer from rich to poor (not saving the planet). Did that happen under the carbon tax?
I think it's a fantastic thing a family might be able to buy a healthier supper today because gas was cheaper rather than waiting for the quarterly rebate or whatever.
Huh? You just claimed the carbon tax greatest effect is wealth transfer from rich to poor (not saving the planet). Did that happen under the carbon tax?
I think it's a fantastic thing a family might be able to buy a healthier supper today because gas was cheaper rather than waiting for the quarterly rebate or whatever.
lmao my buddy can’t read. I said it’s “biggest effect on wealth” is rich to poor wealth transfer not that wealth transfer is bigger than its primary effect on carbon reduction.
What an embarrassing reading fail.
And top it off, you then confuse something have an effect on wealth with it somehow magically solving ALL problems affecting wealth like housing etc.
What an embarrassing logic fail.
And to top that off, you still seem so dazed and confused as to think that removing something THAT IS REBATED back is suddenly going to make it more affordable to afford healthy food.
What an embarrassing propaganda fail.
Trump literally thinks a trade deficit requires a retaliatory tariff. fun times
Canada has been on a decline even under Harper . Even if we increase our emissions it will have no effect on the overall climate issue as China and India are increasing at rates no one can deny
Hers the fact if Canada had zero emissions it would do nothing to the climate change problem as is the fact if they increased marginally.
Must be great to believe all the justification lies you tell yourself to feel good ain’t it .
You didn’t disprove anything I said .
Canada emission will surely go up with that carbon tax gone .
Now u can believe it won’t changed anything for the world and it’s ok .
But it will definitely not reduce our gas emission .
He campaigned on trade deficits being a "subsidy" and now hes implementing retaliatory tariffs to claw back the "subsidy"
Hes obviously very wrong, but hes consistently wrong, at least
Canada needs to get the message to Trump on some US billboards.
Canada has a population of about 40 million and imports around 300 Billion from the US each year.
The US has a population has a population of 340 million and only buys about 450 billion from Canada.
On a per capita basis Canada is subsidizing the US a ridiculous amount of money. This needs to stop.
Its fine he took on the entire world instead of just Canada this time. Trump math. imagine considering factors like weath and population in your "trade deficit"
A country has low wealth for the average citizen with very few people . One man discovers oil. Now us is exporting alost zerodollars because the country is too poor to buy luxury American goods. But america buys all its oil for 1 billion dollars. Now that country is being tariffed 50% and the us can no longer afford its oil so americas enemies buy all the oil for half price.
This is trump trade logic. He completely ignores factors like this and just tarrifs based on disparity of trade. Ignoring the fact his country is full of rich people who want to buy alot of stuff and these countrys make 1/6th the income on average and can't afford to buy American goods
Must be great to believe all the justification lies you tell yourself to feel good ain’t it .
You didn’t disprove anything I said .
Canada emission will surely go up with that carbon tax gone .
Now u can believe it won’t changed anything for the world and it’s ok .
But it will definitely not reduce our gas emission .
You have no idea if emissions will go up
You still will have the industrial side of the tax if the liberals win
Emissions were falling under Harper
Did the carbon tax reduce the amount of gas bought or people heating their homes ? NO
you seem to believe that if we lower our emissions the sky will be blue over Canada , No forest Fires in Canada and White Christmases forever. Sadly that is a lie
Though common sense says if your population grows you will emit more carbon
Now that there is no consumer carbon tax Im not going to turn up my heat or drive more . I am just going to save more
Looks like lozen is desperately trying to run away from his egregious lie yesterday and try to move on to other attack lines.
Utterly shameful.
When you are caught lying red-handed, just fess up and THEN move on. Your #1 criticism of Trudeau has always been that you (usually falsely) allege a series of lies. But if you are the lying liar from liarville liarvannia, then you just look like a lying hypocrite.
Looks like lozen is desperately trying to run away from his egregious lie yesterday and try to move on to other attack lines.
Utterly shameful.
When you are caught lying red-handed, just fess up and THEN move on. Your #1 criticism of Trudeau has always been that you (usually falsely) allege a series of lies. But if you are the lying liar from liarville liarvannia, then you just look like a lying hypocrite.
Ok Yes it does not say NO NEW PIPELINES but everyone knows what its intentions were
Even though Teck followed all the rules under Bill C69 the Liberals would not approve their project.
Ok Yes it does not say NO NEW PIPELINES but everyone knows what its intentions were
Even though Teck followed all the rules under Bill C69 the Liberals would not approve their project.
Can we be honest about this though?
They didn't deny the project (but they did drag their feet on the decision). Part of the issue, and the reason that Teck ultimately pulled out, was the volatility and uncertainty of oil prices. The project was not an economic slam dunk and was meeting serious resistance from other important stakeholders.
Now I can understand why an economy first stakeholder with a vested interest in the AB O&G sector would be annoyed by this. Because I am one too.
I'm in full agreement that we need to push more large scale economic projects through and need to sort out making it happen. But don't be disingenuous that the government just "hates us" and wants to "repress us". It might surprise you but even the liberal government wants investment, large scale projects, and a thriving economy. They also want a healthy environment, respect for Indigenous rights, and a balance of input from all stakeholders.
Industry and government need to do a better job of selling how these projects actually positively impact the public good. Right now the legacy of resource extraction among much of the public is one of temporary jobs, making a few people rich, and then expensive environmental and clean up bills left to be paid by the public. It's not the government's fault that these industries have a public image problem. Figure out solutions that aren't just raging at the government for representing the populace.
Can we be honest about this though?
They didn't deny the project (but they did drag their feet on the decision). Part of the issue, and the reason that Teck ultimately pulled out, was the volatility and uncertainty of oil prices. The project was not an economic slam dunk and was meeting serious resistance from other important stakeholders.
Now I can understand why an economy first stakeholder with a vested interest in the AB O&G sector would be annoyed by this. Because I am one too.
I'm in full
No Justin kept kicking the decision down the road till they just quit. At the time oil had dropped but earlier when it could have been approved Oil wasn't as bad
From a CBC article as well
The Liberals are on both the winning and losing sides of the Teck decision. In the loss column, another company has turfed a major project on their watch. The investment climate in Canada's energy sector was already bad; this won't help.
On top of that, the sector is wrestling with the uncertainty caused by the rail blockades in support of Indigenous communities protesting the Coastal GasLink pipeline in B.C. and the delays to the Trans Mountain expansion pipeline.
Canada's reputation in the energy sector is being harmed with every project that gets cancelled, said energy analyst Doug Matthews, based in Canmore, Alta.
Kenney promises new law to protect 'critical infrastructure' after Teck Frontier withdrawal
He pointed to the cancelling of Enbridge's Northern Gateway pipeline project in 2016 and TC Energy's Energy East pipeline in 2017 as just two recent examples.
Even if the country finds a way to reconcile its environmental goals with its energy ambitions, it could take between three and five years before investors want to spend their money here again, according to Matthews.
Did you read the article you posted? It literally says what I said...
Ok Yes it does not say NO NEW PIPELINES but everyone knows what its intentions were
Even though Teck followed all the rules under Bill C69 the Liberals would not approve their project.
STOP LYING.
Stop it!
It's just that easy. When you urge to lie bubbles up in you and you just desperately want to lie.....don't!
There is absolutely nothing at all explicit or implicit or secretly imagined or written in C69 that blocks pipelines. A total and utter lie. Remember how Carney SUPPORTED building new pipeline in the very same interview in which he also supported the review process of C69? It's just a complete lie that C69 means "no new pipelines". And trudeau finished building transmountain pipeline to completion! Stop lying!
What it means is you have to do indigenous consultation (which is required by law), and a process for environmental and economic review. That's a good thing. Major projects SHOULD have reviews. Heck, part of the goal of C69 was to speed up and bring together many disparate review processes that formed the old patchwork effect of project reviews in Canada. One can of course have a legitimate policy debate about tweaking the law or improving it, but to LIE and say it is equivalent to "no new pipelines" and this is the secret intention is just a total and utter lie.
Stop lying!
Stop trying to justify your lies by imagining counterfactuals about the teck project!
Its fine he took on the entire world instead of just Canada this time. Trump math. imagine considering factors like weath and population in your "trade deficit"
A country has low wealth for the average citizen with very few people . One man discovers oil. Now us is exporting alost zerodollars because the country is too poor to buy luxury American goods. But america buys all its oil for 1 billion dollars. Now that country is being tariffed 50% and the us can no longer afford its oil so americas e
Not sure what's worse in all of this. The ridiculous math involved or the lack of logic behind the simple thinking ''trade deficit is bad''.
Yes I get that it does but you failed to mention that the Liberals kicking the can further back and back allowed for Oil prices to slide Imagine if they approved it in a timely manner they may have started the project
The project was one of the first under the new bill and was approved through the assessment phase in July 2019 with the acknowledgement that it was ultimately in the public interest but it would have serious environmental impacts. The cabinet was expected to make a final decision in February 2020. Teck withdrew in January citing that the juice wasn't worth the squeeze.
I'm not clear why you think that the liberals are at fault for oil price fluctuations over several months affecting their business decisions. This would only be positive information to make informed decisions...
The only real issue with the timelines here is that Teck first submitted their proposals in 2012 and then had to reboot their proposals in 2016 under the new bill legislation. That created a 7 year assessment timeline which just doesn't work in these scenarios. The 3 year timeline under the new bill is still too long but it was also one of the first projects to go through it. Capturing this assessment and stakeholder input is essential but should be streamlined to max 1 year which has been happening. It also came to the conclusion you wanted and recommended it....
So with all that said, you are left with 2 points of criticism:
1) 7 years was too long for the assessment phase. Part of the reason for this was the government trying to fix the problems with the new bill but it negatively affected this specific project. There needs to be tighter timelines negotiated with all stakeholders. This work is ongoing and has been constantly improving. The Libs do try to be truly democratic but may need to force the issue here with some stakeholders...
2) Would the cabinet have approved it? You are suggesting they wouldn't even though this was only a ~6 month timeline that they sat debating on it. A lot of political pressure on both sides of this one.
I guess there is a 3rd point?
HERP DERPA DERPA NO PIPELINES LIBS HATE THEIR CITIZENS HERPA DERPA
The project was one of the first under the new bill and was approved through the assessment phase in July 2019 with the acknowledgement that it was ultimately in the public interest but it would have serious environmental impacts. The cabinet was expected to make a final decision in February 2020. Teck withdrew in January citing that the juice wasn't worth the squeeze.
I'm not clear why you think that the liberals are at fault for oil price fluctuations over several months affecting their busine
I was more referring to this. Also I find it so hypocritical we have no concern for our energy sources that are manufactured or brought in off shore and those countries standards in the name of climate change which Canada overall will have zero impact
I was more referring to this. Also I find it so hypocritical we have no concern for our energy sources that are manufactured or brought in off shore and those countries standards in the name of climate change which Canada overall will have zero impact
But that is completely disingenuous as well. The environmental impact assessments look at 2 things:
1) Biggest focus is on local environmental impacts. Making sure that local communities and stakeholders are appropriately consulted, that nothing too valuable or sensitive will be adversely affected, and that all reasonable mitigation techniques are in place. We are not a country like Russia, we don't have a centralized authoritarian government that can freely override obligations like the duty to consult, stewardship of the land and public resources etc. It is overwhelmingly about the local impacts on Canadians.
2) Secondary is our commitments and obligations to global efforts to combat climate change. You can note that the assessment process in the Teck example concluded that it was going to have negative impacts, but was going to be worth it. The government's lack of immediate endorsement was due to 3 remaining issues:
a) commitment to fighting climate change and our desire to stay true to our multilateral agreements and
b) popular pro-environmental public sentiment among the voting base
c) significant national and specific stakeholder protesting over related projects (e.g. coastal gaslink pipeline)
So all you're really left with here is that you think that the government's leadership by example and commitment to multilateral efforts to combat climate change were ultimately naive. And let's be clear, they never issued a judgement on this case, they just were clearly conflicted by it.
But that is completely disingenuous as well. The environmental impact assessments look at 2 things:
1) Biggest focus is on local environmental impacts. Making sure that local communities and stakeholders are appropriately consulted, that nothing too valuable or sensitive will be adversely affected, and that all reasonable mitigation techniques are in place. We are not a country like Russia, we don't have a centralized authoritarian government that can freely override obligations like the duty to
Please the Liberal government were the biggest hypocrites around. Do you know how much US coal is shipped through Vancouver ports? how much damage is done to the environment in other countries for solar panels and Lithium batteries for electric cars
Heck if they truely believed everyone should drive an electric car they would allow Chinese electric cars in Canada
My personal opinion is drill baby drill or dig dig baby dig . That is why ill vote Conservative
Please the Liberal government were the biggest hypocrites around. Do you know how much US coal is shipped through Vancouver ports? how much damage is done to the environment in other countries for solar panels and Lithium batteries for electric cars
Heck if they truely believed everyone should drive an electric car they would allow Chinese electric cars in Canada
My personal opinion is drill baby drill or dig dig baby dig . That is why ill vote Conservative
Yes, we've established that you don't understand things and are going to make your decisions based off that lack of comprehension
Yes, we've established that you don't understand things and are going to make your decisions based off that lack of comprehension
Please enlighten me and tell me how I lack the comprehension on whom I am voting for. Your saying I should trust a party that lies to me and believe a new leader who was all for the carbon tax and all fossil fuels and all of a sudden doesn't believe what he has been saying and writing in his own book
