563 replies to this topic

[nagel]

I don't mind being the laughing stock with the surplus vs the province with such an insane aversion to sales taxes they would rather rattle off $7-10 billion deficits each year.

[G-Man]

^ Agree. Things are going pretty well on this side of the border. With Alberta as a foil especially if they have a right wing government it will actually make it less likely that we will come to agreements with them on much.

[rjag]

I don't mind being the laughing stock with the surplus vs the province with such an insane aversion to sales taxes they would rather rattle off $7-10 billion deficits each year.

 

BC is adding $400million per month to the debt, so they can claim a surplus but they have committed more than $12million per day of new borrowing to pay for their promises, that eventually will have to be paid back by our taxes.

 

Not saying they are any better or worse than the last crowd, but you might be drinking the surplus kool-aid

[jonny]

The thing about sovereign debt is it never has to be repaid. They just roll that over into new bonds when it's due.

[Victoria Watcher]

word is kenney won the televised debate tonight.

[jonny]

BC's court filings (sworn affidavits) in the Bill 12 "turn of the taps" battle have confirmed that BC would be crippled within a matter of hours should the supply of crude oil and refined products down the Trans Mountain pipeline be restricted at all. 80+% of BC's petroleum based fuel comes from Alberta. 

 

Vancouver Island gas stations would begin to run out of fuel within 48 hours. 

 

The Parkland Burnaby refinery is currently operating at just over 80% capacity due to crude supply constraints (i.e. the existing pipeline is full). Apparently the refinery cannot operate safely at below 80% capacity. 

[tjv]

The question I have is the Trans Mountain pipeline is federally owned and the feds do no have to listen to the provinces in anyway.  So go ahead Alberta try to fine the federal government, they will have the paper shredder ready

 

So where is Trudeau in all of this?  Oh right, fast asleep as usual.  Can't wait to get rid of this clown in October

[tjv]

Fact-checking Jason Kenney: Is B.C.'s pipeline opposition to blame for high gas prices?

https://www.cbc.ca/n...ta-bc-1.5119370

 

Its an interesting article and worth reading.  Also confirms that the additional capacity for the new pipeline isn't destined for BC.

[Mike K.]

Tread carefully here. The CBC has an extreme bias on this issue and their coverage of pipeline-related news is driven by an agenda. Note that they cite a five-year-old study to supplant their narrative, and the individuals they quote further support the author's angle. A balanced news piece would have had someone opine on the matter from the opposite side of the aisle.

[vortoozo]

The same argument has been made in other news sources. I think I saw a Global article with the same conclusion the other day.

[Mike K.]

Whatever the case may be, a game of 'fact-check' is rubbish when it's a one-sided spin piece.

According to Trans Mountain, however, almost all of the additional capacity from the expansion project is already spoken for, and it's not going to B.C.

 

"Thirteen shippers have made long-term commitments for roughly 80 per cent of the capacity on the expanded pipeline. We expect the majority of the expansion capacity will be for export," the pipeline company said in an email.

 

Well no kidding, Sherlock. Thank you for making that shocking revelation, CBC, that BC can't utilize the full capacity offered by the pipeline and 80% will contain export product.

 

So what's next in line? A big news piece blocking all of that prairie grain earmarked for export because BC can't eat it all, and therefore the supply should be greatly curtailed? Geez Louise.

[jonny]

Fact-checking Jason Kenney: Is B.C.'s pipeline opposition to blame for high gas prices?

https://www.cbc.ca/n...ta-bc-1.5119370

 

Its an interesting article and worth reading.  Also confirms that the additional capacity for the new pipeline isn't destined for BC.

 

 

1. Approx 20% of line 1's capacity is used up transporting heavy crude for export

2. The expansion project includes a 50k bpd expansion of line 1, which is the existing line that transports gasoline, diesel, other refined products, light crude and heavy crude

3. If BC was smart, BC would have said hey if you guarantee that line 1 will only be used to transport refined fuels like gasoline, diesel and propane for domestic consumption and light crude to be refined in Burnaby and Washington, on top of the revenue sharing agreements that have already been made, we'll stop impeding the expansion. That would all but guarantee a steady supply until we transition away from fossil fuels and incremental revenue for BC. 

[Mike K.]

It would, but I doubt Weaver would have been happy if Horgan came up with a compromise, and Horgan’s supporters who stood behind him when he campaigned on killing Site C and stopping the pipeline would be unimpressed.

[RFS]

Andrew Weaver on Global News Radio suggested that British Columbians struggling with high gas prices should take out home equity loans to buy electric cars.  Understandably he has faced significant blowback over the comments and apparently will be going back on the radio to address it

[Mike K.]

So Weaver was and is against Site C, but he wants us all to transition to electric cars.

[jonny]

Great idea, Dr. 

 

Thing is, we would need to buy every single electric vehicle ever made in the history of the world (around 3 million). 

[lanforod]

And also, is he planning to give a home with equity to everyone who doesn't have one?

[DustMagnet]

Maybe Horgan should take the money he plans (planned?) to offer relief from high gas prices with and spin that into a better rebate on EVs.

[Benezet]

Whatever the case may be, a game of 'fact-check' is rubbish when it's a one-sided spin piece.
...
Well no kidding, Sherlock...

With all due respect, why not present some credible evidence and expert knowledge that refutes the “spin piece” in question, instead of just being sarcastic?

[Mike K.]

With all due respect, that wouldn’t change anything.

The CBC is a biased media conglomerate funded by the taxpayer. They have a duty to all Canadians and not just their politically aligned base. It’s a crying shame that we even have to have this conversation.