Home | About | Donate

Trudeau Touts Trump's Support for KXL

Justin "Slick Willy’ Trudeau.

1 Like

Justin Trudeau is a Clinton Liberal.

2 Likes

Yes he will screw everybody and everything, but he will look great while he’s doing it! And that is all that matters.

2 Likes

Justin is out of his depth. He is betraying his fathers political wisdom and legacy along with Canadian environmental protection - another politician in thrall to big-money and power influence - like Obama as many here noted.
I met Margaret and the Trudeau kids at Palenque, Mexico on their state visit in 1976, when Pierre & family also went to Cuba. I was hanging at the Palenque ruins, checking-out the local pastures and markets, and was at the ruins sitting with Margaret & kids on a bench, sharing fresh fruit from the market, while Pierre was being regaled by a Mayan priest - never met him - great day.

Trudeau - the big con of Con-lite dressed up as progressive, responsible and accountable!

It is good to hear back, when I find myself ranting.

The older I get, the more I realize what I don’t know.

The Mark Twain saying - It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so. – applies to me, I’m sure.

Regarding the energy Industry, I have experienced the valuable uses of non conventional power: Ranchers that are focusing their efforts on sustainable production (to the extent that is possible) use solar powered pumps and electrical fences. Farmers use small wind turbines for use in powering grain conditioning systems. As we know, lots of people who live off the grid use a combination of some sort. Geothermal heating has great potential. I believe at some point, a critical mass of both knowledge and then technology will allow these systems to NOT be alternate but mainstream.

Regarding research, a very interesting radio show guest on CBC is studying the placing of material, can’t remember which Calcium molecule, in the stratosphere to effect reflection of suns rays and reduce heating of surface of earth.

On polarization of points of view, I experienced this in my work for SK Agriculture. The saying goes: If you have 2 farmers having coffee, you have at least three opinions and no unanimity.

On working with Native Canadians, I am a firm believer in negotiation and inclusion. It is the route to larger society inclusion on a mass level. Many individual Indian people that I know are part of the larger society - -and it is noticeable that their attitude toward any form of government outside of their crown land boundary is one of critique at a societal level and not just only what is good for their ethnic group.

I certainly cannot as a Canadian be other than a free trader. We have a large Ag base and few people. We have to produce efficiently and sell it to others.

Regarding pipelines and related matters - - it is a choice between pipe and train car. If we do not extract our resource, SOMEONE ELSE WILL, so ‘leave it in the ground’ is not an option - - at this point.

Perhaps a subject of a bit more admonishment from folks who are focused on renewable energy, I believe research into Nuclear is a viable activity. Saskatchewan’s main University has had what’s called a ‘slow poke’ nuclear reactor for decades.

I appreciated the chance to reply. Always enjoy conversations that are from folks who have well thought out ideas and who can write a full sentence relatively free of those jargon acronyms that have crept into our common parlance.

I’m also glad I’m wide awake while writing this!!

Dave Whitehead, North Battleford Saskatchewan

Thanks so much for replying, Roger.

Phil Ochs - - fantastic - - if your purpose was to allow one to laugh at the label “Liberal” that I gave myself, you/he succeeded. Of course I suspect I’m way broader and reasoned than that !

Yes, I’m not a robot - - you’re getting an email from a Canadian human. I’m even thinking I will, instead of putting a man

cave sign on my garage, use anthro language ; Mammalia homo sapiens resides within. Coffee’s excellent.

but no, not callous - - more a subscriber to the Bjorn Lomborg stance what are the mitigations we can perform. What will tax payers tolerate.

I might say that during the election in your glorious country ( meant in a good way) I became interested in some of the ideas Bernie had. Interestingly, back in May 2016, as we prepared to leave Iceland, we had a conversation with a fellow about my age who was on Bernie’s committee. he gave us some good insights, and prepared us for what the methodology was for the election of that orange haired fellow. My interpretation of Bernie’s ideas on NAFTA gave me pause, but much of the other ideas were potential winners. There is a generation coming that may be able to work to realize those ideas.

As you may know, it is necessary for Canadians to stay knowledgeable about all policies and events in America because we are very connected to you and when the USA sneezes, we metaphorically catch pneumonia. It appears NOT to be the same however going the other direction. On balance though, we are good neighbours.

On oil - - if not pipelines then it will most certainly be rail.

The pipeline thing in more detail - - when our current prime minister was elected, I was not unhappy (unlike some of my redneck neighbours), but the NDP premier of Alberta
agreed to a carbon tax and to shutting down coal powered electricity, and then, 6 months later - - he agreed to the Kinder Morgan pipeline, the Line 3 pipeline and recently to Keystone XL, I though wow this little so-called socialist woman impressed him!

I still view oil as a finite technology, but I seem engender more rhetorical splendour (yours is mild comparatively) when I state that I support research into the nuclear option.

Solar and wind are becoming mature technology on farms in Saskatchewan, especially livestock farms.

I’m out of gas!

Thanks again for your reply. I learned much. I have made my choices and you yours and we both wants good things for our grandchildren.

Dave Whitehead
North Battleford, Saskatchewan.

1 Like

Until a couple of years ago, when Harper changed the law, political parties received a dollar for every vote to use for their campaigns… That law was a good start towards the more progressive election financing policies you mention.

And to take off from your comment, it’s not even that Trudeau makes promises to the power elites, he’s simply one of them. He grew up in a wealthy (not billionaire wealthy, but still…) and politically connected bubble and it wouldn’t occur to him to do anything but service his friends…

1 Like

Too rich. Thanks for peeing metaphorically on my inbox!!

On Trudeau - - - He’s a work in progress and has many factions to deal with. On the prairies, even women don’t like him, even with his shirt off - - go figure. Ahhh polarization.

Alberta just happens to be a growth area and he (Trudeau) could get himself unelected next time if he doesn’t boost the economy. If Alberta is prosperous, Quebec is able to fund social programs. Alberta is likely NOT to have any transfer payment in 2018, as Saskatchewan. This will make entitled Quebecois howl, while rejecting a pipeline via an already existing route to an already existing refinery. I am by the way, much in favour of government regulating this industry.

dave Whitehead
North Battleford SK

1 Like

In the last two months, solar power became the cheapest form of power generation. Alberta has a wealth of sunlight. Solar power technology is no longer in an infant state, but efficient, effective and easily implementable. There is no reason, except greed, not to employ solar power in Alberta, for internal and external use. The oil money that Trudeau, Harper, the mainstream media, and others matter-of-factly talk about accounts for a mere 3% of Canadian revenue - and that was before the recent downturn in the price of oil - it’s nothing like as significant to the economy as is commonly presumed. Oil production - and the related jobs - could easily be replaced by solar and other green alternatives which - given the paltry royalties Alberta collects on oil - would also be more lucrative for the economy. You don’t even need to get into the most dire issues of environmental destruction, etc.

Love it! (and good coffee).

It’s a complex problem (lots of interrelationships) to be sure. As for the economics: one major problem is that in our current economic paradigms, policies are based on an assumption that a free market exists (it doesn’t but to explain why would take an even longer explanation), and that it is self-adjusting towards optimal outcomes. As complexity science (I’m a student of this, not an expert in this or in economics) teaches, the problems of many human systems (such as “the economy” are often the result of inadequate (insufficient, or untimely) feedback. Unlike a simple system, say, your home heating system, where there’s an input (gas, propane, electric, whatever) and a control (thermostat) that gives rather quick feedback into the system so as to make adjustments and reasonably maintain stasis, markets and political systems (and the living systems of which they’re part) don’t function so neatly.

That’s because, for one thing, there are so many interdependent factors aren’t addressed in the marketplace, for example, but are for all purpose “externalities”. Pollution / toxic results of any kind has almost always been that kind of externalized “side effect”. While they are real costs (in terms of human health, life, the loco-regional environment, the global biosphere), those costs are neither acknowledged nor accounted for in the extraction, production, distribution or consumption of products.

The most basic example might be that a glue factory (or a fracking operation) moves next door to you. The products sell; but in the production your air quality is degraded/ unhealthy, the noise & lights at night keep you up, etc. In some places, there are regulations (e.g. zoning codes) that might protect you (though, only to an extent, esp. when you’re talking about minerals extraction), and as my libertarian friends would respond when challenged by this, “you can sue”. However, the burden of proof in the latter action falls to you; one must prove harm - a difficult thing. For example, to link the asthma, cancer or other disease of your spouse, or your kid to such an activity is nearly impossible in a legal setting. In any case, the impacts of the commercial activities are not addressed but externalized to other times/places/people; and so there is no reflection of the actual impact in the market place.

Such lack of timely/sufficient feedback skews the marketplace (and political policies); leading to the perpetuation of bad choices (fossil fuels extraction/use, highway-dependent land uses, waste), and disincentives for making necessary adaptive changes (such as to renewable energy sources, increased fuel efficiency, etc.)

This is also related to “what the taxpayers will allow”: Without proper feedback loops (e.g. information about the results of choices, and fair pricing for goods and services that reflect their actual full costs), voters (taxpayers) will certainly make choices that in the long run harm their own interests.

Of course the latter (political systems, which represent a kind of control system) are also grossly distorted by the intrusion of commercial capital into both its electoral and policy-formation aspects. That capital is used to actually override the feedback and control systems, by distorting information (propaganda) limiting feedback (selective reporting).

It will therefore take a correction of the money-politics link, public education, and full capture / market reflection of actual costs currently externalized, to address these issues. In the meantime, the worst thing we can do is continue throwing gas on the flames that are heating up the globe and leading to chaos within all systems.

I’m not sure. One thing appears clear: the pipelines represent a more economical (higher profit) means of getting the oil to (foreign) markets. That it can be transported at a lower cost (and more profitably) means that (coupled with the externalization of real public costs), market price will be lower compared to other options, and the incentives will be strengthened for keeping that commodity in extraction (until exhaustion, at least) and use.

That’s where and why all the public pressure comes in and is necessary. Resistance to enabling infrastructure is one of the few paths extant for addressing climate change, given the political dynamics. It also of course secondarily helps raise the issue, which is largely ignored by main stream media (MSM…though I share your dislike of constantly-popping up and overused acronyms), given that they, too, are under the strong influence of concentrated capital.

I appreciate your thoughtful exchange. Though I too appreciate the brevity and succinctly sharp style of some of the contributors, these are complex topics deserving of the time to read, think and write with more elaboration.

But I have to get back to my many awaiting “improvements” at home, here on the Colorado Front Range.

1 Like

Another spawn of the filthy rich about to stab an entire electorate in the back…
Favours.
Who do you owe?

Making the argument it “good for the economy” is a non starter. Slavery was also “good for the economy”.

Ths environment is not just a Canadain issue. It is an issue that affects people the world over and in particular the poorer countries. People from other countries have every right to oppose what happens in Canada with its energy poilcy just as Canadians have a right to oppose what happens in Sub Saharan Africa to the elephants. Would you suggest Canada lift its ban on imports of raw ivory and encourage more of it goes on because this provides money to people in Africa?

Human rights and environmental concerns should not end at a Countries borders. The Capitalist investor class freely moves its money and ideas and products across borders and the working class in Canda had best come around to the understanding that we are all in this together when it comes to opposing the “investor class” and its plundering of all that is around us.

I welcome and support people in China, just as example, protesting the import of dirty Canadian oil just as I supported peoples in Europe demanding the EU boycott timber from Canada’s old growth forests.

Did you have disappointing encounter with Trudeau?

Trudeau, another Elitist piece of crap! I’d love to know how much the payoffs, kick-backs, and financial “donations” to political funds the oil/gas industry has to make to ensure politicians in both Canada and the U. S. are acquiescent.

Good Day SuspiraDeProfundis

I took a while to respond to your forthright email.

Note my personal opinions in brown.

Thanking you,

Dave Whitehead
North Battleford Saskatchewan, Canada eh!