If you drive....

MJP, if you have a car, or take the bus, it does make sense that Alberta tar sands oil flows to Burnaby. It has to come from somewhere.

We have USAF B52 flights

We have USAF B52 flights over our heads every day, sometimes a dozen, practicing to kill thousands, or even millions, in the name of "freedom", of course, the same crap millions of Germans and Russians have died for in WW2.

During the time we can see one of those 50 year old murder machines, they're using enough fuel to power my truck, tractors and small engines for 5 years. During one single training mission, one of those planes waste enough to supply the lifetime fuel use of whole families.

We also have hundreds of millions commuting to jobs they could do at home, or in their own communities wasting incredible amounts of machinery and fuel. But it jacks up the phoney GDP, so its OK.

We have 100,000 ocean freighters carrying products that used to be and could be made locally, only so that the middlemen corporate mafia can exploit both ends and control the markets.

We also have millions forced off their lands and into mega cities, vastly increasing the energy/resource/water use demands of each single person.

Then we have mills and production systems
where the 50 hp of 100 workers have been replaced with 1,000 hp. of automated machinery, to "save" and "become more efficient and competitive", so a small percentage can get filthy rich.

And these are the fraudulent causes where this oil is demanded for, not for any legitimate, or logical use.

Ed Deak.

Good point, Ed

The US military is the fifth largest consumer of oil in the world, depending on who you ask. An hour of F-16 time can fuel an SUV for a year.

And I am going to the Pentagon and tell them to stop such silliness right now!

Only to you...

But a $4 billion pipeline is an entirely different animal. Wrote the Skywalker.

And yours, jilenium00, is the real point that needs to be taken out of all these wingnut assumptions loosely thrown hither and yon by the likes of the skywalker and the snitty person, as if they were in possession of the absolute truth. It is only the likes of these wackjobs to whom the money is the most important measure of all things-, and that is what really comes through every word the utter.

They are these US Empire Loyalists of whom we talk here from time to time, with their heels dug in, refusing to see the value of national and community self-reliance and self-sufficiency over third world-like dependency on the corporatate global "unfree market" and the US Empire that dominates it. (Or has until recently, when it, the US, is beginning to look more and more like all the other defunct empires of history, for whom the cost in blood and treasure finally exceeds the benefits of foreign empire-, finally collapsing under the weight of their own over-reach.)

Over reach and over development...

I was reading or watching a Geographic type article, ohhh several weeks ago now, where it was said that the US only has left, 4% of its original forest cover that was in place at contact. That is the measure of its own greed driven over population and development, why it is engaged in its latest Empire drive for global domination, and what its intentions are for us, as well as the rest of the world it seeks to dominate. It is increasingly runniung out of its own resource base, especially but not only oil, and it now has its covetous eye and armed terrorist state forces cast upon everyone elses, including ours.

It wants now, to stick a long pipeline straw directly into our oil sands, and suck it dry, while Alberta and the rest of the country snoozes and loses its own future supply need guarantee.

Read these guys like skywalker and snitty person very carefully. Their intent is really not very difficult to discern amidst the snitty sarcasm and loose us of biased quotes and facts, and self-serving assumptions about the inherent selfishness of folks.

Canis...

Using your logic, the Kinder Morgan oil pipeline into Burnaby should be "shut-off" 'cause it contains "tar sands oil". That's reasonable!

You still don't seem to "get it". A $4 billion injection into BC's northern economy is no small kick in the rear end.

Everyone on this site seems to want more money for social services, more money for health care, more money for education... you name it.

And more money will not flow into government coffers to provide additonal funds for these services if, for example, a $4 billion pipeline development in northern BC is prevented due to other government's inaction on a very servious matter in another jurisdiction.

And then there are the northern employment opportunities.

Don't cut off your nose to spite your face.

You seem to want a socialist utopia worker's paradise. That's a fool's world. Welcome to the real world.

Who really controls our world

For those who have not yet seen this online video it is fiction based on truth.

Cheers.

http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/

Priorities

If Campbell woke up today with an extra 5 billion we all know he'd put it into tax cuts.

Flaherty would put it into debt reduction and use the interest savings for tax cuts.

What it boils down to is that neither believes in good social programs so they languish while they figure out how to erode public services even more with creeping privatization.

Pipeline

How many long term jobs would be created and taxes paid by refining and controlling our own oil instead of shipping our crude to a foreign state. Why are you right wingnuts so pro foreign state instead of being concerned about keeping jobs in Canada and controlling OUR OIL instead of giving it away!

Reminds me of the idiots that were all for having the ferries built offshore by B.C. Ferries which is now thanks to gordo run by a foreigner! Or shipping raw logs out of country while our friends and neighbours are losing their jobs and hope.

For example.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080516.wmackenzie17/BNStory/energy/

Cheers.

I get it...

Actually, I do get it. Read Sharingisgood above for starters.

I am not against either the development or utilization of oil resources, anymore than I am trees or any other resource-, though there are these troubling issues of over population and over development, especially primarily for export, as would aany commodity export dependent, quasi third world country, which this country in many important development regards is . What I am especially against however, at least until we have better determined our own national needs looking into the future, in the age of peak oil especially, is their over development/exploitation and "raw", as in unrefined shipment out of country, especially to serve a primary US market need.

What you do not get, with your "capitalist-centric so-called free market paradise" view of the world, is that this raw commodity export dependency state of overall economic being we are in, which while it goes on does provide "some" capital flow, much of which winds up back in the US anyway as repatriated profits of dominant US corporations in Canada, intra company charges and benefits etc., short circuits our own secondary development need in such even as refineries, and contributes to our continued state of dependency on the US and global markets especially, with their own interests sets that are not the same as our own.

Alberta needs to be reined in, and any other region of the country acting as though it was all alone in the country, and made to fit into the larger national need and economic development picture. But especially we need to first do our own national energy needs study in the context of peak oil realities, which you continue to insist on ignoring, along with your wingnut pals, taking into account future generations as well as ourselves. All of which also has to take into account the needs of the environment in which we and our children and children's children will have to live, while at the same time, considering how we are going to get maximum processing/development benefit out of what we think we can still export in trade for other things we need, rather than simply, for example, shipping raw crude. This shipping of raw materials state of dependency we are in, in order to buy back finished products often produced from them, is, over the long haul, a deficit sum mugs game, wherein we are no more that slot players in Reno, where the odds favour the Corporate House.

Continued next post...

I get it 2...

From Previous Post...

Instead, for a more full and rounded national development strategy that is responsible also for the husbanding of our natural resources and environment, for example, rather than wholesale, raw export shipments to the US or anywhere else, we need to focus first on our own economic self-sufficiency development needs. That's the real direction wherein lies the real high grade, high end benefits and jobs, and returns for our nation and people, and the future.

Though I know in this more immediate, short term, next quarter bottom line view as is more the concern of you folks locked into your capitalist so-called "free market" paradise and immediate cash returns preoccupations, that seems an awful far out and unreal way to look at the needs of the community and the country, I suggest to you that it is really yourselves who are living in a Fantasyland-, and it is unsustainable much longer.

Mention any degree of self

Mention any degree of self sufficiency to miseducated and brainwashed economists, or politicians in the pockets of the corporate mafia and they'll fall down screaming with foaming convulsions.

Yet, the highest degree of self sufficiency from the individual to the family, etc. levels is the main and most important solution to the world's problems, especially when it comes to environmental protection, food and health.

As far the monetary investment and debt figures are concerned, they mean nothing. Especially the debt figures.

The US Federal Reserve is a privately owned institution, but the main reason for the establishment of Canada's national bank was to keep money creation in the hands of government and to permit the borrowing of interest free loans by all levels of government. So, what happened?

Yet, because all monies are legal, public properties, in either case, governments borrow back their own monies then pay huge interests on the money they already own.

The biggest and best racket in history.

Apart from so called "foreign investment", which is outright fraud. A foreign bank "creates" capital from the air to take over the resources and properties of other nations and then milk the recipient county dry.

Is is so difficult to understand that foreign investment brings nothing to a country, especially to the wealthiest country on Earth, called Canada? Its only purpose is to rob us blind with a small loan of imaginary money.

When you have resources you have capital and need no carpetbaggers to steal it from you. This is an old and long established business law, covered up by so called "economists" and bought and paid for politicians. Like the braindead Socred/ Reform Party that now governs Canada under a variety of other names

Ed Deak.

Lol miseducated and brainwashed

economists, works for me.

Cheers.

Always good...

Always good to read ya Ed. :-)

Frank - Priorities

Yep, interesting topic... From an NDP press release...

“Gordon Campbell’s talk about his ‘vision’ for the B.C. Place for the next 25 years is simply not credible when his record shows he ignored all warnings about it in the last two years. Once again, Gordon Campbell’s arrogance and lack of transparency is hurting public interest,” said Bains.

So much for priorities.

http://nid-17529.newsdetail.bcndp.ca/

Priorities

And your priority would have been to wrap the poor in that BC Place umbrella and ship them to Ontario?

I've lived under the NDP most of my life, I'll take them over the Socred/Liberals anytime.

Campbell priorities

Flip flop....
http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=8a15d9ce-99a1-4908-97bf-ba34aa961d5d

You might also remember this:

Olga Ilich, who was then the tourism minister, offered this reassurance.

"Apparently the roof is expected to last another 15 to 20 years if it's maintained properly in its current state," she told the house.

She also confirmed that it costs more than $300,000 a year to maintain the roof.

quote from the minister's statement, as recorded here -
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2007/01/05/bc-dome.html

On January 5 2007....

How soon they forget!

I welcome respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West

Yeah...

But the roof replacement... a retractable roof for BC Place... is expected to come in around $200 million+ from figures widely quoted by the media and the NDP is not opposed to that.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2008/05/15/bc-bc-place-roof.html

Luke

For now, but if we had a media that said "200 million for a roof while we have 8 hour waits in emergency rooms..." etc enough people would then be able to connect the dots and get mad about it and then the NDP would change their mind.

I think the dots might still

I think the dots might still get connected once this hits the tourism industry after what forestry is going thru, this might hit a little closer to home for gordo.

Travel to Canada hit record lows, a lot of small communities depend on tourism as well as major centres like Vancouver and Victoria.

http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2008/05/20/travel.html

Cheers.

ursus...

The figures havn't been released border specific provincially, but similar past provincial results have shown that only the Douglas border crossing in BC has held its own across Canada.

BTW, on that same note, YVR passenger traffic is up ~10% this year over last year.

http://www.yvr.ca/pdf/authority/statistics/March_2008_Traffic_Update.pdf

Different story back east though.

Luke S

Snert put it well :

"As usual there is more energy wasted trying to stop something than ensuring that it is done properly."

And if our vaunted industrialists - with all their expertise - gave a shit about anything but themselves and their money, they would have forseen the mess they're creating in the Tar Sands, and would not continue until they've solved the problems.

And as L Skywalker notes, it IS all about money : (hiliting his)

"Everyone on this site seems to want more money for social services, more money for health care, more money for education... you name it.

Sure it's all about money, Luke. Every time Frank, for example, brings up a social value, you always reply with a monetary argument, whether it is pro or con. Money is your touchstone, your God.

And so this leads directly to the most telling of all the arguments you consistently refuse to acknowledge - that no matter how large the "surpluses" your neocon gov'ts accrue, they never go into correcting the cutbacks in the Social Services they've already instituted.

Yup, we're sure pretty "greedy" alright. Can you just imagine the preposterousness of thinking a high-quality education should be affordable to most people?

I find it hard to understand where Frank gets the patience to deal with your continuously circular argumentation, with absolutely nothing ever being resolved.

quote of the week - Me2

Well said, Me2! May God have mercy on his numbered bank account.

It's only money!

Seems like Frank has now been joined by ME2 and Sharing is Good in supporting the type of government that is oblivious to balancing a public, government budget. Money for programmes should be spent even if there's not enough coming in, according to them, and if it has be borrowed with the debt left to our grandchildren, then so be it.

Deficit spending by governments results in lower debt ratings. Debt charges are then higher due to raised interest rates, which further reduce the funds for government services and infrastructure. This all leads to a lower valued currency.

Surprising to read these people supporting the practices of the Bush administration in the USA.

All monies "created" by the

All monies "created" by the banks from the air are deficit spending, because the amounts immediately become a public debts, demanding conversion into realities, like resources, etc.

The banks "create" the monies, but it is society, through governments that is responsible for the maintenance of the value of that imaginary money through convertibility.

"Creating" capital to take over the resources of other peoples and even of countries, it is outright fraud.

When will people wake up to the fact that all "investments" are public debts.

Of course, investments are necessary for economic survival, but not the present crime wave of investments for destruction,
collectivization and enslavement with the perceived power of imaginary capital.

Ed Deak.

realisticman

Rewriting history? The NDP record when it comes to budgets in BC, Sask and Manitoba is actually better than your Socreds/Conservatives/Liberals across this country.

Again, the debts of this country were run up by Conservative and Liberal governments, not the NDP.

Provincially the Liberals have been spending far more money than the NDP ever did and the repayments are spread over decades into the future. Meanwhile the management of social spending dollars has been so incompetent that we are getting worse results. I would think you'd like to see those dollars spent better but I guess not.

Tell that to the governments that cut taxes and put themselves back into deficit territory. Such as what the provincial Libs did in their first term and the federal Conservatives are doing now.

Last time I checked, he's not an NDPer either.

MSM

Looks like the media are up to their old tricks, I looked at a times colonist and they have a story on p21 about griffiths running for the lieberals and another guy running for the ndp in the same riding, a new one in the west end.

If you look at the pictures they did the same thing to the ndp guy they pulled on Mel Hertig, griffiths photo is well exposed and he is looking into the camera.

The ndp guy is looking up with heavy overhead shadows making his eyes look sunken and deep, his neck is in shadow, the Hannibal Lecter look, very sinister!

Talk about blatent bias, well thats it for me I won't be reading a times colonist for a few more years, kinda funny actually as my wife was talking about getting that paper again as she had heard they were playing nice, kinda unbiased. NOT!!!

Cheers.

Times Colonist

Didn't mention that it is today's paper, Wednesday the 21st of May.

Cheers.

though the topic is the tar sands...

Luke is talks about Douglas border crossing and YVR traffic: Yes that traffic is up, but is the increase from Canadians using the airport and border crossing as their jumping off place to the US, Central America, the South Pacific and Asia? I ask, because, the last report completed by Tourism BC shows that international traffic to BC as a destination is down. Canadians staying in BC hotels is up. Perhaps it is Albertan Tar Sand workers are visiting BC in search of a breath of fresh air.

From the Tourism BC: Annual Report 2006-2007:

http://www.tourismbc.com/pdf/Annual%20Report%20WEB%20Version.pdf

Whatever the reason for the distraction away from the topic, we had better take care of our province, or we will have no one wanting to visit.

No clean water and unhealthy forests = no salmon. No salmon = decline in fishing and hunting tourists. Even the eco-tourists will stay away if there are no bears, eagles, and orcas. All of these animals are dependent upon the salmon.

typos - apologies

A thousand apologies for my typos in my writing above. I was distracted and clicked send before I should have.

Ban the Fishing

Sharing and others are right. BC salmon must be saved.

A ban on fishing should be instituted until sufficient numbers of fish return.

Obviously the reasons for reduced numbers are many and contributing factors are possibly thousands of miles away.

Can we have all party support for a ban?

Unrealisticman spins his wheels...

Obviously the reasons for reduced numbers are many and contributing factors are possibly thousands of miles away.

Stop the spin for your wingnut pals in Victoria, unrealisticman.

First, the primary culprit is more likely right here in BC, in those fish farm license that "all parties" to capitalism have issued and which are infesting salmon with sea lice. Additionally, we have historical logging practises in BC and over urban and population development which has been allowed to destroy habitat. Then, of course, there is the more simple over fishing which has been allowed, in addition to other more "global" warming, over fishing, habitat loss and pollution elements.

You guys are always looking elsewhere, outside of the capitalist "free market, endless growth dynamic that is driving all these global systems as well,finally fatally poisoning the planet, its oceans and spawning bed stream waterways etc.

There are, of course, many elements at work here, the majority of which are likely close to home, starting with the very capitalist socio-economic "unfree market" system.

We should jump right on it, as I have been saying over your opposition here fore a very long time now. (Unless, of course, unless you are finally coming around to the hard left point of view. :-) lol.

Coyote Barks, again

Sorry Canis, I was trying to be impartial.

(By the way, I don't know anyone in Victoria. Been there a few times. Liked the bitter at Swan's.)

Close down the logging industry, if you wish. Fine with me. Carole James, someone on the hard left, as he calls it blames logging practices; are you listening?

Over urban too, you say, Canis. OK no more immigration, is that it? How so? A moat at the city gates? Or a guard hut at the border? Perhaps instead of sprawl we should densify? What say you?

On a related thread:

You say I'm spinning my wheels. I was trying to be objective and compassionate, regarding the salmon, you understand. Too bad if sockeye salmon extinction is the result of ageing lefties scratching their facial hair and squabbling over climate change blame, a few up-coast fish farms and - number one cause of it all - Capitalism in general.

Will you write a folk song when they're gone? "My sockeyey's gone and she 'ain't comin' back no more, no more."

Logging practices

are not helping the increase in water temperatures, I would think they are a major factor in warming when you actually go out and look at what was once a forested valley turned into a clear cut, no shade lots of siltation weeds growing in the slower waters.

Have you ever been in a clear cut rm if so you would know what I am talking about. If not go have a look for yourself there are valleys out there that have no old growth left at all just one big tree farm licence.

Cheers.

realisticman

I think the down turn in u.s. fortunes might get a few of you righties up here, then you will be up the creek no fish to eat food won't be affordable since it is being hauled from the u.s. and china with many or most of the local ranchers and farmers priced out of the market!

Most of the good top soil in the lower mainland is under concrete now but hey what a party while it lasted eh!

Cheers.

RMan

So achieving a balanced budget and reducing debt are the Holy Grail of neocon gov'ts, RMan? Hence your statement :

"Seems like Frank has now been joined by ME2 and Sharing is Good in supporting the type of government that is oblivious to balancing a public, government budget. Money for programmes should be spent even if there's not enough coming in, according to them, and if it has be borrowed with the debt left to our grandchildren, then so be it."

OK, so if we "save" money by not spending it on social programmes, and "accidentally" run up a huge surplus, shouldn't this be a golden opportunity to pay down the debt, rather than giving most of it to your Corporate buddies via tax breaks?

And if you keep doing this year after year, shouldn't that say something about your extractive attitude toward the middle-income taxpayer who is now your primary source of tax dollars?

And if you know that this tax-base is slowly and progressively shrinking, isn't that a deliberate betrayal of your primary supporters?

Bah!! It's a waste of time arguing ethical considerations with neocons.

ME2...

Certainly was/is the holy grail of New Democrat governments in Manitoba/Saskatchewan.

SK's Romanow sold off crown corp.s and closed hopsitals to balance the budget and reduce debt.

Nah, it couldn't be. Could it?

Haven't ya checked BC public accounts over the last few years to see the pay-down in public debt?

Well, at least the credit rating agencies have.

And if you know that this tax-base is slowly and progressively shrinking, isn't that a deliberate betrayal of your primary supporters?

And did you know that those 28 separate tax increases that Harcourt introduced in 1991 have since been eliminated?

Bahhh... It's a waste of time talkin' economics with the hard left.

Luke

No it wasn't.

In the aftermath of Grant Devine's ruining the provincial economy. By the way, do you know which hospitals those were?

Haven't you checked the "contractural obligations" column? Craig McInnes of the Sun wasn't impressed by that 55 billion number.

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/columnists/story.html?id=be4c05c2-444b-4624-afbb-fb98ac8b799e

debt

Will McMartin, The Tyee:

The Liberals have reduced that to $30.374 billion, as of fiscal 2007. As they should.

Perhaps a short excerpt

From the Craig McInnes piece in the Sun is in order.[Emphasis mine - if it needs saying]

Under the heading 25.(d) -- Contractual Obligations -- the report noted the total this year for internal government and Crown corporations and agencies this year was $55,232, not that different from the Starbucks bill except for the bit of small type at the top of the table that noted that the figures were in millions of dollars.

Looking back at last year's Public Accounts, I found the comparable figure to be $27,586, again with the note that it was in millions.

What does that mean? It means that in the past fiscal year alone the provincial government and its various affiliates added more than $27 billion in bills that will come due for taxpayers in coming years, bringing the total future obligation to more than $55 billion.

Surely that's a mistake, I thought. That is more than the entire provincial budget for a year. It's more than the total provincial debt has ever been.

Well, after conferring with provincial officials, I discovered there had been a mistake, not in this year's report but in the report last year.

The true figure for the previous year was $34 billion, so the increase was just over $21 billion, still an astonishing number.

This is only the second year the finance ministry has included contractual obligations in it annual assessment of the state of the province's finances.

What they show is the effect of the Liberal government's determination to turn to the private sector to provide services and facilities that in the past were provided by government.

They show that while using private sector capital to build hospitals, roads and electrical generating facilities means that government can reduce its debt, taxpayers still get stuck with the bill. It just gets put into another pocket.

So often the defenders of Campbell are not really up to date with their figures.

Why is that?

It would be unfair, I suppose, to suggest that some (if not all of them) are in the same sleazy business as the Public Affairs Bureau.

I welcome respectful comments to my posts here at Tyee.

G West

Frank...

From the Auditor-General, March, 2008:

Examples are leases of buildings and equipment, contracts for services such as payroll, and various P3 (public-private partnership) agreements government has entered into.

And prior to that, inclusive of the 1990's, governments did not disclose their future contractual obligations.

Leases for buildings and equipment, highways maintentance contracts, annual subsidies to BC Ferries, BC Hydro IPPs... you name it... yes even under the NDP.

At least provincial accounts is now more transparent over the very long term.

Future contractual obligations:

2008: $5.4 billion
2009: $3.367 billion
2010: $3.148 billion
2011: $3.066 billion
2012: $3.119 billion

Source: BC Auditor General, Report on the 2006/2007 Public Accounts, March, 2008;

http://www.bcauditor.com/auditorgeneral.htm

And the majority of that appears to relate to transporation, crown corps., and health operating contracts.

GWest

Who really wants government building hospitals and infrastructure? Leave that to the builders, that's what they do. It's to be expected that they be paid for doing it.

NB - taxpayers still get stuck with the bill.

Did you miss that part of the article?

Why do you suppose the Campbell forces are so reluctant to acknowledge the true state of the province's finances? Why hide the debt of crown corporations or pretend that the Ferries and other crowns are private businesses? - They're not as long as we’re on the hook when they screw up - and they're being run really badly - witness the Lottery corporation and its money laundering functionality.

Worse, apparently than the mess in Ontario – why do you suppose organized crime feels so at home here?

Unfortunately, when the government believes that money is the only important thing then everything, even honesty and truth, begins to have a price.

I welcome respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West

Realisticman

I have no problem with letting people who know what they're doing do what they do best.

What I can't understand is how this bunch manages to screw up so badly at things like the Richmond skating oval and the Convention centre expansion - not to mention Abbottsford Hospital and several other efforts including the Canada Line.

I don't even mind paying them 'fairly' to do it - but I don't want the government moving into phoney P3 partnerships that are really designed to do little more than reward their friends today and charge the bills to my kids 20 years down the road.

That seems to be the Campbell philosophy - much like the same one that allows them to say they won't expand gambling ...then do it; that they won't sell BC Rail ...then sell it (to a single bidder) and that the will make sensible 'business' decisions and then buy ships from Germany.

The problem is that the people who support this government refuse to look at the whole picture, the real facts and the problems that this government had created.

Why is that?

Would it be unfair to say that anything goes as long as the right folks are getting a payoff - 'cause that's certainly the way it looks to me.

I welcome respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West

People Running From Their Own Shadows...

The Good Ol' Days - 1990's:

And Economic Genius:

Paul Calder, a public finance analyst with CBRS, had said only two months ago he did not think he would have to downgrade B.C. this year "unless we see something absolutely horrific." Ms. MacPhail's plan to add $2.7 billion to the taxpayer-supported debt this year fit that bill.

"I was truly not expecting to touch the credit rating for a while," Mr. Calder says now. "But generally, the entire budget we saw as moving in the wrong direction. The idea of spending your way out of economic troubles is somewhat misplaced."

And politically attractive:

And some more accounting genius:

Yep, can't wait to return to them wonder years.

http://www.axionet.com/bcreport/web/990419f.html

Realisticman...and you too Luke Skywalker

Realisticman, that response makes no sense in the context of what you quoted.

And for you Luke:

"Future contractual obligations:"

It is possible that MacInnes is a Red and trying to undermine public confidence but to me it looks like he simply thinks debt by another name should still be called debt.

Thus the quote "taxpayers still get stuck with the bill. It just gets put into another pocket."

I always invite respectful comments to my posts here at Tyee.

G West

And, I should have added, just for you Luke Skywalker

Ah, good old BC Report. Required reading for the far-right I assume. Still always attacking social spending eh? Bothers you to see money being spent on health and social services that much? Don't worry, Campbell has no intention of helping people.

Perhaps your reading material choices could stand a little freshening up my friend.

I invite respectful comments to my posts here at Tyee,

G West

BC Social Spending - 2001 and 2007 Compared

Fiscal Year ending March 31, 2001 and 2007:

Health:

2001 - $8.985 billion;
2007 - $13.253 billion;

Education:

2001 - $6.436 billion;
2007 - $9.774 billion;

Social Services:

2001 - $3.263 billion;
2007 - $2.892 billion;

Likely due to dramatic drop in unemployment rates and welfare employables now in work force;

Couldn't have anything to do with the clawback

in welfare and the client cut-off could it?

What was the rate of increase of spending on public schools as opposed to private schools?

Have you been in a university classroom lately?

I'd suggest you take a little trip and see how bad things are getting in certain parts of UBC or SFU. I think you'll also find that the 'smartest' minister of all, Murray Coell, actually promised $x plus an increment for post secondary institutions and delivered less than he promised this year. Guess you haven't got a circular on that one yet.

In the light of the fees Neufeld is crowing about receiving for gas leases and drilling rights today I think that's pathetic. Considering this thread is supposed to be about the oil industry and the tar sands I can't understand why anyone would want to discuss the wide range of topics you seem to be interested in my friend.

I think we've seen and read all the 'talking points' already.

I wonder how the Bureau of Public Affairs will be spinning that?

I welcome respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West

Ohhh Geee West....

And the NDP seems to want to get rid of natural gas credits:

That's net of the value of the credits, which tallied at about $250 million -- Robertson's "subsidies."

But it is hard to see the $250 million as any kind of loss to the provincial treasury.

Cool!

http://www.dogwoodinitiative.org/newsstories/ndpCriticHeadsVpalmeronoilandgassubidies/view?searchterm=gregor

And this article is about stopping a $4 billion pipeline investment in northern BC.

Cool!

And many people here wonder where the province receives its revenues to continue to fund increased social program spending. 'Cause they just don't "get it".

Although I'd really rather talk about the Tar Sands

And the fact that a medical investigation has (or will soon be beginning) into the health of the First Nations people downstream along the Athabasca, I must point out a couple of very quick points about my friend Luke's recent information.

I haven't checked precisely but I believe the numbers he posted are absolutes, not inflation adjusted and certainly not per-capita.

He also doesn't like to mention closed schools, increased time travelling by bus for some rural kids, the loss of librarians and special needs teachers or the failure of the Campbell government to come even close to matching its commitment on earthquake remediation.

As for health, the federal Conservatives gave Campbell more money than the Paul Martin Liberals gave the NDP and the BC Liberals have simply turned around and wasted it. Outcomes have not gotten better - in fact, in many jurisdictions (as evidenced by the travelling road show on health from last year) they have been seriously degraded.

I welcome respectful comments to my posts here at Tyee.

Especially ones that address the speeches from Washington yesterday which remarked about the 'dirty' nature of the oil they're importing from Canada.

Now that was interesting - probably didn't make the papers in Calgary!

But it will, if these guys have anything to do with it:
http://www.dogwoodinitiative.org/bulletins/truth-hurts

G West.

The name is G West

I've told you this before. Does that come with the press kit?

You know the bit where, when you're running out of things to say you start to call people names?

I've just checked that little offensive button again.

Please read the comment code of conduct.

I welcome respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West

Another Record BC Gas Rights Haul...

The province raised $441 million in the monthly auction of oil and gas rights in the sale Wednesday. That was a record for one month, and more than a third of the total for the entire previous fiscal year, setting another record.

The province's energy minister said new gas discoveries in northeastern B.C. are helping to fuel the bidding for drilling licenses.

http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2008/05/22/bc-gas-rights-windfall.html#socialcomments

You're a little late on that one Luke Skywalker

look back up the thread, it was mentioned over an hour ago - guess the Bureau was a little late with their talking points today - BC is in a race with the Alberta to find rock bottom all right.

Not that there's anything to cheer about there - we've known for a decade that was all the CEO was interested in anyway.

I'm surprised he lets Neufeld handle the announcements though - he usually likes to handle that kind of thing himself - like his spandex excursion for cancer with Lance Armstrong last fall. But then, unlike Elayne Brenzinger, I guess Neufeld doesn't talk back.

By the way, have you been following the course of the debate about the TILMA in British Columbia's municipalities?

I invite respectful comments to my posts here at Tyee.

G West

Google Earth for tar sands

Go to Google Earth

fly to: Athabasca Tar Sands.

Look around there and then you can go about

25 KM north to find the Syncrude tar sands.

These and other tar sand mining processes are close to (if not right on) the Athabasca River.

Ohhh Geee West....

BC receives $441 million in May's monthly sale of gas rights, while Manitoba's New Democrats also held its monthly crown sale of crown oil and gas rights in its May, 2008, which netted $1.5 miilion.

Gary Doer would love to have received BC's windfall into Manitoba's coffers.

Especially when its related to relatively clean burning natural gas.

http://www.gov.mb.ca/stem/petroleum/landinfo/may_2008_results.html

Obviously a new political party needs to be invented for you since you are against everything. :)

Lets wait till the next pipeline

Lets wait till the next pipeline bursts - or an LNG tanker runs aground in the Inside Passage - then we'll talk about clean burning gas - ok!

Nothing this government receives is anything but a windfall for Campbell's friends.

We've already dealt with that - instead of putting funds into areas where people are hurting the ceo premier is into retractable roofs, roads to nowhere and silly games.

Things get worse for working people while the GDP increases - now why do I have to explain again why that's not a reasonable picture - and to boot we have a total debt of how much?

All I want is a little honesty from the people who support the current bunch.

I welcome respectful comments to my posts at Tyee. Just keep using that address and I'll keep punching the offensive button.

G West

hey luke

You forgot to mention a few important points about the ndp years for example the asian meltdown which hurt forestry, the transfer payments being withheld by a liberal in Ottawa because the ndp passed a law to prevent out of Province people from collecting welfare for six months.

You know the people klein and harris were giving one way tickets to b.c. to collect welfare, oil and gas prices were very low and Alberta was hurting, in fact a lot of them were coming here to low ball local workers. You can thank klein, harris, and martin for that one. Around 10 Billion in transfer payments withheld?

Don't forget the pulpmill built in indonesia that the Ottawa Liberals helped fund with our tax dollars, a mill that helped kill the B.C. mills.

The ndp did screw up but they didn't sell our railroad under questionable circumstance leading to a raid on the ledge and what I suspect is one of the longest run ups to an actual court case in our history, and a ndp premier got tossed over a deck? With surprise surprise a canwest news crew showing up with the cops?

Your fiscal hero on the other hand has realized windfall revenues from oil and gas which he has squandered on a tax break for the rich, a tax break that has benefited me btw but I would have preffered he didn't attack working people and the poor as viscously as he did.

Oh yes lets not forget how he gave the fast cats to the washington group out of colorado for pennies on the dollar after turning down Alstroms offer?

So how did the washington group get such a good deal on our ferries, where are they now and will they be running them in local waters at some time in the future?

The cynic in me thinks that someone got paid a lot of money to make these deals go down the way they did!

Lots of questions that will probably never get answered, how someone can defend gordo is beyond me unless you are getting paid to spin.

The man should have stepped down when he got caught driving while pissed drunk! The media would have been all over the ndp if one of them got caught like that, can you imagine the outcry.

Cheers.

Labour policies have dramatic influence on wage gap

Interesting read over at http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/editorial/story.html?id=4952dab6-b337-42b9-b872-5b338ef3f212

The results of the 2006 census on income were recently published and produced screaming headlines about the enormous wage decline in Canada over the past 25 years. The income gap between rich and poor is widening, immigrant incomes are plummeting and young people entering the labour market are earning less than their parents a generation ago

In British Columbia, the median real wage dropped 11.3 per cent from 1980, the steepest slide for any province. Statistics Canada officials were at a loss to explain why B.C. had such a huge drop in income, although various analysts said it was a result of a shift away from industrial employment towards service-sector jobs, an increase in new immigrants in the workforce and rising inter-provincial migration.

Something else needs to be considered: Deliberate government changes in labour policy. Soon after the current government was elected in 2001, it proceeded with initiatives to improve "flexibility" in the labour market. The most dramatic event was the mass firing of hospital support staff (8,000 laundry, cleaning and food service workers) who were disproportionately women of colour, older and immigrants.

This was the first time in Canada that a government had completely overturned a properly negotiated collective agreement. "Flexibility" in this case meant reversing all of the equal pay gains that health support workers had won through the collective bargaining process over 20 years. These workers initially made $17 per hour. Those who remained in the public sector had their wages reduced by 15 per cent, and those whose work was privatized worked for as little as $10 per hour. Too many lost work altogether.

Changes in the Employment Standards Act since 2002 are responsible for the deterioration of working conditions. Employment standards are important because they provide minimum levels for wages and working conditions. The main changes in the act related to decreased enforcement of the law, removal of whole groups of workers from the law's protection, and specific regulatory changes affecting all workers.

Enforcement was affected by budget cuts to the Employment Standards Branch that resulted in a one-third reduction in staff, a cut in branch offices throughout the province from 17 to nine, and the elimination of routine workplace inspections. But most significant was the shift from having a complaint dealt with by a person to the introduction of a "self-help kit." The result was stunning: Complaints dropped 46 per cent the first year and 61 per cent over the following three years. This is not because employers began behaving better, but because it is so much harder for workers to file complaints.

Part II

Whole groups of workers have been excluded altogether from most of the protections of employment standards. This includes all workers in trade unions, or about 34 per cent of all workers in the province. Other workers excluded from major protections are long-haul truck drivers, oil and gas field workers, foster parents and farm workers.

Most seriously affected by the changes in standards are young workers and immigrants. B.C. was the first jurisdiction in the industrialized world to deregulate child labour and allow children as young as 12 to be employed for up to four hours on a school day to a maximum of 20 hours a week, and during non-school periods for up to 35 hours a week. There are no longer prohibitions on work that is inappropriate for children (such as using power tools and selling door-to-door). B.C. also pioneered the "first job" minimum wage of $6 an hour for the first 500 hours of work, giving the province the lowest wage for new workers in Canada. But many in this category are immigrant women with considerable work experience who find themselves confined to $6 an hour and too often do not leave this wage category when the qualifying period is up. The experience of young workers can be dismal as well since many appear to lose their jobs when the 500 hours are over.

OTHER CHANGES AFFECTING ALL WORKERS INCLUDE:

- Complicated "overtime averaging" rules that allow people to work 12 hour days for seven straight days;

- Changes to the Labour Code making it harder to obtain union representation;

- An ability for "voluntary" agreements to forgo legal rights to overtime pay;

- The ability to be called-out for work for as little as two hours a shift.

With a high demand for workers, low unemployment and an economy that has been rapidly expanding in this century, B.C. should be a good place to work. It has a poor record for workers' wages and working conditions mainly because the government has deliberately lowered the working standards.

Marjorie Griffin Cohen is professor of political science and women's studies at Simon Fraser University.

© The Vancouver Sun 2008

ursus...

Harcourt came into government during October, 1991 and the change in government was welcomed by most BC'ers, including myself, after the Vander Zalm so-con years and all of the scandals.

At least the economy hummed along during the Vander Zalm years commencing October, 1986.

Remember Bill Clinton's phrase in 1992 "It's the economy, stupid!", which certainly resonated with his public?

Harcourt gets in and thereafter raises 28 separate taxes, under his finance minister Glen Clark, resulting in BC being one of the most taxed jurisdictions in North America, both personally and in terms of business.

The economy continued OK until circa '93 and thereafter business and consumer confidence hit lows until the government left power in 2001.

Housing starts flatlined... housing prices flatlined... high unemployment rates... people leaving the province... you name it.

Did I mention a doubling of the provincial debt?

There have been a few years when the economy has been in the tank during each of the '50's, '60's, '70's, and '80's... but for the majority of the NDP administration?

Remember Glen Clark?

Many of those watching were furious that Mr. Clark would send such hostile signals at a time so few want do business in this province.

Private-sector investment in B.C. has dropped in each of the last three years, and is expected to be lower this year than it was in 1992.

In the other nine provinces, on the other hand, investment has risen. "In my travels, I have never once seen the leader of a government attack business [like Mr. Clark]," said Jim Shepard, chairman of Finning International Inc., one of those multinational corporations the premier loves to hate. "Not even in Poland."

http://www.axionet.com/bcreport/web/990419f.html

Whomever wants to defend that period be my guest.

By the time 2001 comes around, a top of mind issue with BC'ers was the economy with 71% agreeing it would get stronger under the Liberals with 10% stating in the negative.

http://www.mustelgroup.com/pr/20010622.htm

And whomever thinks that that BC wants to give up record low unemployment rates, economic prosperity, and government surpluses for another social experiment should wake up and smell the coffee.

Until the BC NDP has a leader akin to Manitoba's Gary Doer, with similar policies, and has a majority of former BC NDP premier Dan Millers within their ranks... well... just read the tea leaves.

B.C. Report

I don't read that rag and never will, enough said I know where you are coming from, so are you paid to come on here and spin for gordo, I post on here because I think gordon campbell is the worst premier we have ever had in the history of the province?

Most of the people I have met who read and quote that crap are way out in right field and cannot be reasoned with, they are the kind who think its ok to pollute and destroy the planet because Jesus is coming and they are his chosen ones!

I think the story about labour says it all for your pal gordo.

Cheers.

Speaking of Alberta.......

....the CD Howe Institute has strongly suggested that Alberta should be putting away somw $4500/Albertan/year, in anticipation of the oil running out (sort of like what Norway does).

That comes to about $15 billion a year....ha ha ha ha ha! (whatever happened to the Heritage Fund anyway?)

ursus...

Oh come on...

And Glen Clark was the best?? lol

I don't like "Gordo" like most people and and I'm a centrist small "l" liberal.

Nope... lol... most posters on here are wayyyyyyyy out in left field and think Harcourt and other centrist New Democrats are right-wing. ;)

Debt

Like I said your pal gordo has been handed a windfall with the oil and gas revenue along with a few crown assets he has been selling to his friends at firesale prices, and the feds gave him a lot of money unlike when the ndp were in power, the taxpayers in b.c. got screwed by chretian and martin!

It will be interesting to see what happens now that forestry towns are dying and Albertans are doing all the work in the oil and gas fields up north, there will be a lot of pissed off northerners, no one has been complaining because logging has kept anyone who wants to work busy but that has changed.

There are worse things then taxes, I don't mind paying taxes it is what they are doing with them that pisses me off and what they seem to be doing with them lately is taking care of their rich friends and corporations, or dirty deals like coleman giving that land to the company his brother works for.

Cheers.

Left wing

Actually I grew up in a socred household and voted for them until after bill bennet got in and voted conservative until after mulroney got in the first time, sad to say I actually voted for that puke, once. Still annoys me when I think I actually went for their b.s., just once and only once!

There was a book written about the socreds called breach of promise and it was a breach of promise along with a lot of lies and corruption, insiders taking care of themselves and their developer friends. Kinda like whats going on now isn't it!

Cheers.

Fun thread...

This has been a fun thread to read, actually. Especially with stuff like this to read from our way out there in right field, small "l" liberal, Skywalker

)

Which is patent crap, of course. I, and maybe one or two others, are the only "wayyyyyy out in left field" posters here. Hmmmm, come to think of it, and I do think Harcourt and the NDP generally is "right wing", relative to where I am-, and have been most of my life. :-) lol

That said, I find myself generally able to work with "most" NDPers of more moderate 'suasion, ehhhh, and even "libs", which you fuquing ain't Goosey-Loose Luke.

Ursus, loved your stuff here, man.

I'd be here more, but I'm busier than a kitty covering poop trying to train this scared shitless "abused" former 9 year old thoroughbred race horse. (15.3 hands at the withers.) And I've got until the snow flies to do it, or ship 'er to the dog food plant in Alberta. Which ain't gonna happen.

I'm on her back, we're riding together in the round pen, next the big arena, and she's coming along just fine-, after nearly killing me more than once. :-) lol She's my retirement project.

These right wingnuts like Luke, despite his protestations to the contrary, don't hold a candle to most of you folks, even you NDPers. ROFLMAO

I'm trying out some Smirnoff's. The Russian "Stolichnaya" is way better. It has more "flavour heft".

Tyee observation...

Sad, ain't it? what has happened to the "wild" fishery. Save for the odd spawning bed like this here, all we have are these "tame/domesticated" Tyee fish, that almost nobody reads. :-)

Canis - you're my kind of lefty

Thank you posting here, at the Tyee, Canis Latrans. I don't think I enjoy reading anyone more than I do your posts. You add a great deal of colour to the various shades of grey that are often found in the comments, and are one of the reasons I keep coming back. The hard right is invariably back and white, though: to them it is always about the money - their money!

Of course, Frank, BC Mary, Lynn, Peter Dimitrov, G West, ME2, all the various types of bears, Ed Deak and a large number of others are worthy of mention. I even like reading the Tyee articles.

Perhaps a Tyee staffer will put together an article entitled: "The best of comments by readers".

Aarh, the Sport of Kings

Thoroughbreds are used mainly for racing, but are also bred for other riding disciplines, such as show jumping, combined training, dressage, polo, and fox hunting.

Modern racing traces its roots back to the 12th century. Knights of the British Empire imported Arabic horses upon their return from the Crusades. In the years that followed, hundreds of Arab stallions were crossbred with English mares to give the most desirable combination of speed and endurance. This breed of horse became known, after its evolution, as the Thoroughbred and of course the nobility were leaders in staging competitions between two superior Thoroughbred horses for private wagers, as a diversion.

And the necessity, often, of a humane clean-up afterward

Dear Realisticman,
Perhaps you missed this part of Canis Latrans story:

I'd be here more, but I'm busier than a kitty covering poop trying to train this scared shitless "abused" former 9 year old thoroughbred race horse. (15.3 hands at the withers.) And I've got until the snow flies to do it, or ship 'er to the dog food plant in Alberta. Which ain't gonna happen.

The race business and the wagering component that goes along with it is still, in my view, little more than a venal diversion for the indolent 'nobility' of a modern age that is, in its own way as corrupt as the era which created the breed in the first place. Perhaps worse because today the capacity to free the poor from the cycle of grinding poverty is within the easy reach of the wealthy nations of the west – both in their own countries AND around the world.

That there are a few individuals like Canis with the character to spend the necessary time to prevent at least one of these poor creatures from ending up on the scrap heap where human beings are all too willing to relegate the poor and the homeless and the disadvantaged is something to cheer about....but not too hard. And certainly not too long.

There are far too many examples like this around for much sustained cheering:

http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/story.html?id=438b07ba-51c1-43bc-8bdd-2e9cc97359cf

I welcome respectful comments on my posts at Tyee.

G West

And now, perhaps, we can get back to the Tar Sands

http://www.economist.com/world/la/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10853957

Don't often quote the Economist...this is one time it may be useful.

I welcome respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West

Give 'em a good kick

Dear Westie, I'm sure that similarly on the other side of the political spectrum there are still some dedicated, to paraphrase Canis, 'wayyyyyy out in right field' capitalists active in soccer too.

Good to see that you're keeping up your reading of The Economist. Excellent writing there.

Once again

The topic is the Tar Sands.

As for your footballer's slang, the use of the label 'Westie' kind of dates you.

The name is G West, kindly use it - I'll be ticking the 'offensive' button every time you don't.

I appreciate respectful comments relevant to my posts here at Tyee.

G West.

And since the subject is the Tar Sands;

the extensive damage they are doing to the people of the area, not to mention Canada's reputation, I'll submit another document for consideration.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/19/the_new_dirty_energy/

Note particularly the end of this short excerpt:
(quote)
Environmentalists see this as a growing disaster. The oil in oil sands is not easily separated out, and the immense amounts of heat required are usually generated with natural gas, giving the oil-sands industry a greenhouse gas footprint much larger than the traditional oil business -- estimates range from 40 percent more to five times the emissions. The process also uses enormous amounts of water: a study by the Pembina Insitute, a Canadian environmental watchdog organization, found that, depending on the method of extraction, every barrel of oil produced requires 2.5 to 4 barrels of water, all of which is then rendered too polluted to return to the water supply. And most oil-sands operations are mines, not steam wells like the MacKay project, making them very disruptive to surrounding ecosystems.

A few firms in the United States and China are trying to use new technology to make the process economically competitive with oil, but again, the environmental costs are high. The favored coal liquefaction method today requires first turning solid coal into a gas at very high temperatures; combined, the production and consumption of coal-derived diesel releases roughly twice as much carbon into the atmosphere as traditional oil -- though various research efforts are underway to capture these emissions. It also uses more than a dozen barrels of water per barrel of fuel produced, according to a recent Department of Energy study. And coal mining takes a toll on landscapes and animal habitats.

The lesson for policy makers is that economics alone won't help solve the world's greenhouse-gas problems. The markets care about money, not the environment, so the most important alternatives to oil will be the biggest and cheapest, not the greenest.

What's needed, say many clean energy advocates, isn't just high oil prices, but high carbon prices. If fuels were taxed on their carbon content, climate change would be priced into the economics of energy production.

"If you have a carbon tax, or some other concerted carbon policy," says Mike Jackson, an energy analyst with Stanford University's Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, "then high oil prices drive industry toward clean technologies."

Otherwise, he says, "you're just going to see more people building these wacky projects that are a disaster for the environment."
(quote)
Sadly, the kind of idiotic carbon tax the ceo premier has opted for won't do a thing to solve the problem. Especially given the cudly relationship he's adopted with the major polluter to the east.

I welcome respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West

Don't forget that the Harper

Don't forget that the Harper gang recently signed a treaty with the US, permitting their armed forces to enter Canada...by invitation, or in the case of various other "threats", without any public input, or even a Parliamentary vote, to the best of my knowledge.

The generals are already serving with the US army all over, including in Iraq, and dreaming of making it permanent.

Which means that if there's any attempt by any Canadian government to curb. or stop the oil sands disaster, Canada, or at least Alberta will be invaded and occupied on the pretext of "disaster". Or even on the invitation of the Alberta government.

The B52s over our heads must be fueled somehow to "protect democracy and freedom".

Ed Deak.

Back in the muck

Did you see that Canis? If your polo practice can tear you away, Westerly Garth wants us to catch up on our Economist and Boston Globe reading and stick to the geological story.

Realisticman

I've just flagged another of your posts as offensive.

Please read the commenting code of conduct.

G West