Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 4 of 29 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 422
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    North Shore
    Posts
    11,988
    Quote Originally Posted by Bramaca View Post
    NDP isnít as taboo in the prairies as you make them out to be. They win seats here and in general are more of an option than the Liberals

    Which is weird because the NDP is left of the Liberals. The Green Party, ironically, is the closest to the CPC policy wise

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    36,041
    Quote Originally Posted by nastynice View Post
    Its still.going to go in that direction.
    We really don't know what technology is going to replace oil in many uses, and certainly scarcity is going to drive some investment in new technology, but it will also drive the price and value of all oil left up.

    Right now the 2nd best solution for super-cargo ships is nuclear and the world REALLY doesn't want drunken sea captains driving nuclear reactors around 24x7.

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Rogers Centre
    Posts
    24,727
    Quote Originally Posted by Bramaca View Post
    NDP isnít as taboo in the prairies as you make them out to be. They win seats here and in general are more of an option than the Liberals
    Where abouts in the Prairies? I can believe that to be true for Alberta and Manitoba.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    36,041
    Quote Originally Posted by MRSpock View Post
    If the world continued at the rate we're at right now, we'd be looking at another 50 years worth of oil. And that's not including many unproven resources that are probably useable. If we stick to the plan many major countries will have reduced their emission by half (although we should be aiming higher).

    I'm sorry but the math doesn't make sense at all that we "need" this oil. We don't. We NEED to push toward clean alternatives everywhere. Even if we continue with our plan, we're looking at billions dying from lack of water and food shortages. People moving closer together and fighting for limited resources.

    I'd rather Mad Max stay a movie.

    It's amazing to me how people don't take this seriously though. And I'm not even pointing the finger at you. GOP don't believe in it and Dems don't take it seriously.

    Billions will die in your lifetime. If not yours than your kids lifetime.

    We won't need to travel around the world because everyone will be living off of a coastal region in order to have fresh food and clean water. Countries will be abandoned from the heat.

    By 2050 Australia is expected to have 3000-5000 deaths form heat alone.

    Again this is just big oil companies trying to get the dirty oil sold before it becomes unsellable. **** that.
    Energy is the top way for people to move out of poverty and right now the main way that is happening is increasing oil consumption all over the world. Oil use isn't going to stay where it is, it's going to continue to climb.

    And I wasn't saying it was an immediate need.

    I was watching the movie The American President the other day and the 2nd story lines in that movie are how critical fossil fuel reduction was to our future and gun control. 26 years later and nothing has really changed other than there being considerably more guns and considerably more fossil fuel consumption.

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    36,041
    Fixing global warming is not a domestic issue that can be flipped on like a switch. We have programs pushing technology and production that way very hard already. So hard there is a real chance that the infrastructure won't be able to handle the demand for electric cars very soon.

    What we need to be doing is sending US companies and US money to the worst poorest parts of the world now to get them reliable free electricity that is green. It's much cheaper to put it in where there is nothing in place and the adoption will be 100%.

    China is the top polluter now and they are building thousands of coal power plants (which is within their agreement with the Paris Climate accord), and is still using horrible for the environment cement at record numbers, as well as strip mining natural resources for industry at record levels with little practical care for the environment.

    Unfortunately we can't do anything about China, but we can help the rest of the third world get energy but if we don't act now they will get their energy dirty or China will provide it.

    Of course our political system is not built on long range planning, and no short range plan is going to work to get us where we need.

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,165
    Quote Originally Posted by Kenny Powders View Post
    Which is weird because the NDP is left of the Liberals. The Green Party, ironically, is the closest to the CPC policy wise
    Quote Originally Posted by R. Johnson#3 View Post
    Where abouts in the Prairies? I can believe that to be true for Alberta and Manitoba.
    NDP is from the west. There are plenty of left wing people out here. The biggest issue here is how much a party caters to Ontario and Quebec. The Liberals do that more than anyone which is why theyíve never been well liked out this way.

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Rogers Centre
    Posts
    24,727
    Quote Originally Posted by Bramaca View Post
    NDP is from the west. There are plenty of left wing people out here. The biggest issue here is how much a party caters to Ontario and Quebec. The Liberals do that more than anyone which is why theyíve never been well liked out this way.
    I'm aware of that. I was honestly just making a joke about the oil workers in the prairies. They definitely do cater to Ontario (I live in Toronto) but they lost basically all of their ridings over the last 2 federal elections. It's been bleak for the NDP inToronto since Jack Layton's passing. I actually grew up in the riding that Jack Layton started off as a councillor in.
    Quote Originally Posted by ChongInc. View Post
    Facts can be hypothetical.

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    37,229
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    We really don't know what technology is going to replace oil in many uses, and certainly scarcity is going to drive some investment in new technology, but it will also drive the price and value of all oil left up.

    Right now the 2nd best solution for super-cargo ships is nuclear and the world REALLY doesn't want drunken sea captains driving nuclear reactors around 24x7.
    I feel confident that whatever technology develops it will be based on sun energy. Harnessing is a non issue, storage is. I expect things to go in that direction.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
    RAIDERS, SHARKS, WARRIORS

    "i don't believe in mysteries but still i pray for my sister, when speaking to the higher power that listens, to the lifeless vision of freedom everytime we're imprisoned, to the righteous victims of people of a higher position" - planet asia, old timer thoughts

    "God is Universal he is the Ruler Universal" - gangstarr (rip guru), robbin hood theory

    "don't gain the world and lose your soul, wisdom is better than silver and gold" - bob marley, zion train

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    1,232
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Energy is the top way for people to move out of poverty and right now the main way that is happening is increasing oil consumption all over the world. Oil use isn't going to stay where it is, it's going to continue to climb.

    And I wasn't saying it was an immediate need.

    I was watching the movie The American President the other day and the 2nd story lines in that movie are how critical fossil fuel reduction was to our future and gun control. 26 years later and nothing has really changed other than there being considerably more guns and considerably more fossil fuel consumption.
    Mainly because of energy companies constantly buying research and burying it. We should be so much further already in our developments of these technologies. But the political pull of these companies have driven us to the point where we have to make massive change in order to avoid again.. BILLIONS of people dying.

    Explain to me how this pipeline is going to "help people move out of poverty".

    Can you also tell me what you think of global warming? Do you believe that these threats are imminent that I'm talking about?

    How is the economy going to handle the Keys going under water. States like California becoming unlivable in 70% of it. Water/food shortages. Massive hurricanes that happen multiple times a year.

    I just don't understand what you think the solution is to all this.

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    38,161
    Good to see that ole Liberal Scoots championing the Liberal position here.

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    36,041
    Quote Originally Posted by nastynice View Post
    I feel confident that whatever technology develops it will be based on sun energy. Harnessing is a non issue, storage is. I expect things to go in that direction.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
    You think super cargo ships will sail on solar power? Pretty sure they would have to be miles across to gather enough energy to do so. There is only so much energy hitting the surface of the earth.

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    36,041
    Quote Originally Posted by MRSpock View Post
    Mainly because of energy companies constantly buying research and burying it. We should be so much further already in our developments of these technologies. But the political pull of these companies have driven us to the point where we have to make massive change in order to avoid again.. BILLIONS of people dying.

    Explain to me how this pipeline is going to "help people move out of poverty".

    Can you also tell me what you think of global warming? Do you believe that these threats are imminent that I'm talking about?

    How is the economy going to handle the Keys going under water. States like California becoming unlivable in 70% of it. Water/food shortages. Massive hurricanes that happen multiple times a year.

    I just don't understand what you think the solution is to all this.
    A good battery is the main killer technology and I'm fairly sure that technology hasn't been buried.

    I wasn't talking about the pipeline in regards to poverty, but fossil fuel consumption in general and the environmental debate which was the basis for the argument of getting rid of the pipeline was to save the planet.

    What if 50% of the money coming from the pipeline had to be invested in green energy in the third world? Would you be for it then?

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    36,041
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Good to see that ole Liberal Scoots championing the Liberal position here.
    I don't think it's a partisan issue. I just don't think it's cut and dried that pipeline = bad.

    And I've told you before that while ultra liberal in some areas I'm centrist or conservative in others. I'm for UBI but against big government. I'm for abortion rights but against gun control. I'm for drug legalization and not imprisoning non-violent criminals but for a secure border.

    It turns out not everyone is one thing or another.
    Last edited by Scoots; 01-23-2021 at 11:48 PM.

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    38,161
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    I don't think it's a partisan issue. I just don't think it's cut and dried that pipeline = bad.
    I donít think itís cut and dried the pipeline is bad either, but itís definitely been a partisan issue.

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    1,232
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    A good battery is the main killer technology and I'm fairly sure that technology hasn't been buried.

    I wasn't talking about the pipeline in regards to poverty, but fossil fuel consumption in general and the environmental debate which was the basis for the argument of getting rid of the pipeline was to save the planet.

    What if 50% of the money coming from the pipeline had to be invested in green energy in the third world? Would you be for it then?
    That is such a loaded question lol. And no.

    And it would never be 50% of the money. It would be 50% of the profits. Which then a lot of the profits would be hidden by corporations like they do already to avoid taxes. But no. It's making a deal with the devil. It's an untrustworthy deal, and it is wrong morally and ethically.

    Can you answer my question? Do you believe in the science regarding global warming and the imminent danger in the next 50 years?

Page 4 of 29 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •