[Freakinoldguy]

fifeboy fifeboy:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

fifeboy fifeboy:

Let the FOG of hate lift from your mind guy. All you have given me is a list of WEXIT talking points. Trudeau this and Trudeau that. Apart from the fact the wee laddie has put more effort into one pipeline being built in his first term than we saw for the previous eleven years, what has he really done? He even lost support from his base by supporting said pipeline.
And just as an after thought... wouldn't we already have pipelines to the east if Bigga Bigga Daddy's NEP had gone through? Just ask'n for a friend.

Sorry but, I'll only start listening to your advice if and when Trudeau the lesser stops playing tribal with politics with Canadians and builds at least one pipeline. Until then it's all deflection from the fact that Trudeau and the SCoC have cost Alberta more jobs during his tenure than any other province in the country. Harper may not have gotten it built either but at least he laid the groundwork and was actively working towards it being built.

Trudeau has listened to and acted on EVERY complaint put forward by the BC NDP, the BC Greens, the Natives and anyone else who wants the pipeline stopped. But the people he hasn't listened to are the people of Alberta and Saskatchewan who are now unemployed because of his indecision and catering to anti pipeline people. FFS the guy even bought a pipeline from Kinder Morgan for more than it was worth so he could make it look like he was going to push it through. Unfortunately for us that was just more smoke and mirrors from the PM's office. Now we have a pipeline that will never be twinned and are stuck with one that sends all our oil to the US for refining.

What's really annoying is the fact that everytime the gov't follows the rules and gets approval to build a pipeline another special interest group like the "hereditary chiefs" pops up, moves the goal posts and sits back to watch Trudeau go into his stammering placating mode which basically stops the pipelines dead in it's tracks.

So, at some point Mr. Trudeau's going to have to either stop catering to these well paid protest groups or grow a pair, come out and admit that despite the built in excuses these above mentioned special interest groups have afforded him he and Gerald Butts don't really want any pipelines built. And that's what's really rankling people.

And, if Wexit's talking points and complaints shouldn't be considered wounds then you're missing their point all together. So, until the pipelines are built and people in Western Canada start working again, my hate for Trudeau and his divide and conquer tactics will remain.

Tribal politics? You mean like Steve telling the Atlantic provinces they have a welfare mentality?
Jobs??? Saskatchewan (which is what I spoke of in my post) has the third lowest unemployment rate in the country.) What???... not good enough for you

Antipipeline people? you do realize these people, rightly or wrongly, appear to make up a majority of Canadians. Go figure.

Natives, greens, reds, blues etc, blocking the building of pipe??? Actually, its the courts that dun it. Do you expect the government of Canada to go against a court ruling? Breaking news... Supreme Court dismisses B.C's bid to save bill blocking TM project Only Native land claims now. NEP

Wexit talking points? These guys are as whiny as gays complaining not enough people show up for a pride parade. Their real desire is to leave the country and join the USA where they think they will finally be free. Fuck them!

And it all goes to I hate Trudeau because of the NEP! Oh and papa T gave poor old us the finger. Billy Smith gave me the finger back in fifth grade. I don't still hate him.

I'm sorry but your claim that Canadians don't support pipelines is inaccurate to say the least and just because you don't support them doesn't mean the rest of us don't either.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4180482/majo ... psos-poll/

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/three-in- ... -1.4719584

And yes, I do expect a gov't to go against a "court ruling" when it hurts the country as a whole. Ever hear of the "not withstanding clause" because it's still available to be used to reign in the idiocy of institutions like the Supreme Court.

$1:

Section 33 of the Charter
In Canada’s constitutional system of government, the judicial branch interprets whether the government’s actions are within the rules and norms of the Constitution. If a court finds that a government has broken a constitutional rule or norm, it can force the government to change its actions. However, Section 33 of the Charter can bypass a court’s ruling. It declares:

Parliament or the legislature of a province may expressly declare in an Act of Parliament or of the legislature, as the case may be, that the Act or a provision thereof shall operate notwithstanding a provision included in section 2 or sections 7 to 15 of this Charter.

This means that elected governments (federal, provincial or territorial) can declare a law or action to continue in force “notwithstanding” — meaning “in spite of” — and therefore in violation of a Charter right.

https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/ ... ing-clause

But, if you're happy living in a country where the judicial system is your ruling party then feel free to stick with "the courts made him do it" rhetoric. Otherwise you'll have to face the fact that Trudeau Sr used the "repatriation of the BNA" to enact a system that ensures the country is run by lawyers and the duly elected officials are nothing more than window dressing who, on occasion are allowed to pass laws and statutes but only if the courts agree.

As for unemployment in Saskatchewan there might be reasons it's so low and here's one.

https://leaderpost.com/news/local-news/ ... -giving-up


I realise that this isn't a 2019 post but the reasons for a drop in the Sask stats may just indicate that people are now living on welfare after having exhausted their benefits or moved out of the province like countless thousands have done before them. But let's forget Saskatchewan for a moment because they really didn't get their Northern oil industry up an running before the current PM shut it down with his refusal to put Canada first and ignore the special interest groups.

So how's Alberta's unemployment situation? My guess is that if the oil patch was still running it would be alot better than this.

https://economicdashboard.alberta.ca/Unemployment

And, what Trudeau Sr did with the NEP is minor compared to what his ethically challenged progeny has done to the economy of Alberta and by extension Canada. So, using the NEP as an excuse to dismiss the people of Alberta as complainers is alot like blaming the victims of a plane crash for the actions of a lunatic missile battery commander.

[fifeboy]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

o

I'm sorry but your claim that Canadians don't support pipelines is inaccurate to say the least and just because you don't support them doesn't mean the rest of us don't either.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4180482/majo ... psos-poll/

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/three-in- ... -1.4719584

Ok, I can see what you say there, but these polls show a wide range results. They range from 3/5 to 53%. Point taken. AND, if you would check, I have said in the past that I support pipelines because they are the least risky means of getting oil to markets. I do, however, support moving to a less oil dependent economy.

FOG FOG:

And yes, I do expect a gov't to go against a "court ruling" when it hurts the country as a whole. Ever hear of the "not withstanding clause" because it's still available to be used to reign in the idiocy of institutions like the Supreme Court.

$1:

Section 33 of the Charter
In Canada’s constitutional system of government, the judicial branch interprets whether the government’s actions are within the rules and norms of the Constitution. If a court finds that a government has broken a constitutional rule or norm, it can force the government to change its actions. However, Section 33 of the Charter can bypass a court’s ruling. It declares:

Parliament or the legislature of a province may expressly declare in an Act of Parliament or of the legislature, as the case may be, that the Act or a provision thereof shall operate notwithstanding a provision included in section 2 or sections 7 to 15 of this Charter.

This means that elected governments (federal, provincial or territorial) can declare a law or action to continue in force “notwithstanding” — meaning “in spite of” — and therefore in violation of a Charter right.

https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/ ... ing-clause

Ha! Really, you want Parliament to have the final say on everything. Even when you don't agree with their actions? So, I would think you would have no objections if one of the United States were to ban firearms! There is a Constitution in western Democracy for a reason. Think about it dude.

FOG FOG:

But, if you're happy living in a country where the judicial system is your ruling party then feel free to stick with "the courts made him do it" rhetoric. Otherwise you'll have to face the fact that Trudeau Sr used the "repatriation of the BNA" to enact a system that ensures the country is run by lawyers and the duly elected officials are nothing more than window dressing who, on occasion are allowed to pass laws and statutes but only if the courts agree.

If your question is "do you want a country ruled by law". Well, yes I do.

FOG FOG:

As for unemployment in Saskatchewan there might be reasons it's so low and here's one.

https://leaderpost.com/news/local-news/ ... -giving-up


I realise that this isn't a 2019 post but the reasons for a drop in the Sask stats may just indicate that people are now living on welfare after having exhausted their benefits or moved out of the province like countless thousands have done before them. But let's forget Saskatchewan for a moment because they really didn't get their Northern oil industry up an running before the current PM shut it down with his refusal to put Canada first and ignore the special interest groups.

So how's Alberta's unemployment situation? My guess is that if the oil patch was still running it would be alot better than this.

https://economicdashboard.alberta.ca/Unemployment

And, what Trudeau Sr did with the NEP is minor compared to what his ethically challenged progeny has done to the economy of Alberta and by extension Canada. So, using the NEP as an excuse to dismiss the people of Alberta as complainers is alot like blaming the victims of a plane crash for the actions of a lunatic missile battery commander.

Saskatchewan is doing just fine. Most welfare recipients are doing that because they don't want jobs. I don't know anyone without a job. This is in a time when potash and uranium prices are down.
I have said it before, Alberta has relied on the oil industry way too long. Being spendthrift with your money when you are flush and whining when income dries up in a cyclic economy is a bad they taught us about in grade 10 economics.

[fifeboy]

PluggyRug PluggyRug:

Sorry meant C-48 and C-69. C-71 is also a dumb move and you wonder why our lying PM comes under so much criticism.

More on the 69 stupidity....
https://business.financialpost.com/dian ... stops-cold

Already spoken on C-69
C-48--- Well, who wants to attempt to preserve Pacific Coast waters, well not you it seems.

[Freakinoldguy]

fifeboy fifeboy:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

o

I'm sorry but your claim that Canadians don't support pipelines is inaccurate to say the least and just because you don't support them doesn't mean the rest of us don't either.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4180482/majo ... psos-poll/

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/three-in- ... -1.4719584

Ok, I can see what you say there, but these polls show a wide range results. They range from 3/5 to 53%. Point taken. AND, if you would check, I have said in the past that I support pipelines because they are the least risky means of getting oil to markets. I do, however, support moving to a less oil dependent economy.

FOG FOG:

And yes, I do expect a gov't to go against a "court ruling" when it hurts the country as a whole. Ever hear of the "not withstanding clause" because it's still available to be used to reign in the idiocy of institutions like the Supreme Court.

$1:

Section 33 of the Charter
In Canada’s constitutional system of government, the judicial branch interprets whether the government’s actions are within the rules and norms of the Constitution. If a court finds that a government has broken a constitutional rule or norm, it can force the government to change its actions. However, Section 33 of the Charter can bypass a court’s ruling. It declares:

Parliament or the legislature of a province may expressly declare in an Act of Parliament or of the legislature, as the case may be, that the Act or a provision thereof shall operate notwithstanding a provision included in section 2 or sections 7 to 15 of this Charter.

This means that elected governments (federal, provincial or territorial) can declare a law or action to continue in force “notwithstanding” — meaning “in spite of” — and therefore in violation of a Charter right.

https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/ ... ing-clause

Ha! Really, you want Parliament to have the final say on everything. Even when you don't agree with their actions? So, I would think you would have no objections if one of the United States were to ban firearms! There is a Constitution in western Democracy for a reason. Think about it dude.

FOG FOG:

But, if you're happy living in a country where the judicial system is your ruling party then feel free to stick with "the courts made him do it" rhetoric. Otherwise you'll have to face the fact that Trudeau Sr used the "repatriation of the BNA" to enact a system that ensures the country is run by lawyers and the duly elected officials are nothing more than window dressing who, on occasion are allowed to pass laws and statutes but only if the courts agree.

If your question is "do you want a country ruled by law". Well, yes I do.

FOG FOG:

As for unemployment in Saskatchewan there might be reasons it's so low and here's one.

https://leaderpost.com/news/local-news/ ... -giving-up


I realise that this isn't a 2019 post but the reasons for a drop in the Sask stats may just indicate that people are now living on welfare after having exhausted their benefits or moved out of the province like countless thousands have done before them. But let's forget Saskatchewan for a moment because they really didn't get their Northern oil industry up an running before the current PM shut it down with his refusal to put Canada first and ignore the special interest groups.

So how's Alberta's unemployment situation? My guess is that if the oil patch was still running it would be alot better than this.

https://economicdashboard.alberta.ca/Unemployment

And, what Trudeau Sr did with the NEP is minor compared to what his ethically challenged progeny has done to the economy of Alberta and by extension Canada. So, using the NEP as an excuse to dismiss the people of Alberta as complainers is alot like blaming the victims of a plane crash for the actions of a lunatic missile battery commander.

Saskatchewan is doing just fine. Most welfare recipients are doing that because they don't want jobs. I don't know anyone without a job. This is in a time when potash and uranium prices are down.
I have said it before, Alberta has relied on the oil industry way too long. Being spendthrift with your money when you are flush and whining when income dries up in a cyclic economy is a bad they taught us about in grade 10 economics.

If you support pipelines then what the fuck are we arguing about.

The problem with Alberta isn't the fact that they should have diversified it's the fact that the timeline for that diversification is being imposed upon them with potentially serious consequences for not only their province but Canada as a whole. Especially since we're a resource based economy no matter what the city folk tell you.

Oh and BTW when I was still living in Sask, back in the 60's while everybody was leaving the province for greener pastures (see Alberta and BC) my dad and I had a talk about the future economic outlook in Saskatchewan.

Back then he told me that at some point in the near future the province would boom and I of course having seen pretty much everybody I knew leaving didn't believe him. He said the potash and oil industries would explode by the late 70's.

So for Sask it's definitely nice to see that his predictions were right even if his timeline wasn't.

[fifeboy]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

If you support pipelines then what the fuck are we arguing about.

What we are arguing about is your, and a lot of Albertans blaming Trudeau/ Ontario/Québec/ ROC on your provinces economic problems and ignore yourselves, your government, the Saud, oil prices etch. on what's happening. Do you really think, at current oil prices, that tarsand oil will make a killing on the market.

I was always told, as a kid, to look to yourself before assigning blame on others.

FOG FOG:

The problem with Alberta isn't the fact that they should have diversified it's the fact that the timeline for that diversification is being imposed upon them with potentially serious consequences for not only their province but Canada as a whole. Especially since we're a resource based economy no matter what the city folk tell you.

Oh and BTW when I was still living in Sask, back in the 60's while everybody was leaving the province for greener pastures (see Alberta and BC) my dad and I had a talk about the future economic outlook in Saskatchewan.

Back then he told me that at some point in the near future the province would boom and I of course having seen pretty much everybody I knew leaving didn't believe him. He said the potash and oil industries would explode by the late 70's.

So for Sask it's definitely nice to see that his predictions were right even if his timeline wasn't.

You forgot that Sask is a more communal community.

[Thanos]

I imagine if Alberta had saved that money instead of spending doing irresponsible things like, say, building a modern system of living that includes health care, education, infrastructure, emergency services, seniors services, welfare, and a dozen other things that are the absolute responsibility of a provincial government to provide we'd still be vilified. Except we'd be cursed in this instance for being cheapskates instead of the spendthrifts we allegedly are. Damn Albertans, why don't they do some spending instead of living in a third-world backwater! Why don't they grab a clue and run their place as terrifically/efficiently, and responsibly as we in BC/SK/MN/ON/QC/NB/NS/PEI/NFLD do? Can't they see how smart the rest of us are??!?!?!?!?

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Alberta, and Albertans, will never win in this country. Not monetarily and not even as being treated like we're actually members of the goddamn family. We'll always be the laughing stock that gets the pointing fingers aimed at us, no matter what and no matter what about.

[Freakinoldguy]

fifeboy fifeboy:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

If you support pipelines then what the fuck are we arguing about.

What we are arguing about is your, and a lot of Albertans blaming Trudeau/ Ontario/Québec/ ROC on your provinces economic problems and ignore yourselves, your government, the Saud, oil prices etch. on what's happening. Do you really think, at current oil prices, that tarsand oil will make a killing on the market.

I was always told, as a kid, to look to yourself before assigning blame on others.

FOG FOG:

The problem with Alberta isn't the fact that they should have diversified it's the fact that the timeline for that diversification is being imposed upon them with potentially serious consequences for not only their province but Canada as a whole. Especially since we're a resource based economy no matter what the city folk tell you.

Oh and BTW when I was still living in Sask, back in the 60's while everybody was leaving the province for greener pastures (see Alberta and BC) my dad and I had a talk about the future economic outlook in Saskatchewan.

Back then he told me that at some point in the near future the province would boom and I of course having seen pretty much everybody I knew leaving didn't believe him. He said the potash and oil industries would explode by the late 70's.

So for Sask it's definitely nice to see that his predictions were right even if his timeline wasn't.

You forgot that Sask is a more communal community.

Yes you're right, there are alot of factors in why our pipelines haven't been built but you can't keep claiming that Trudeau and his gov't have nothing to do with the stagnation of our oil industry. He may not be the entire cause of the problem but he's a major part of it and all you have to do is look at Bill's C48 and C69 because they're shining examples of his gov'ts lack of commitment in getting Canadian oil to foreign markets.

But, for some reason it always becomes about the Albertans and any other Canadians who don't ascribe to the left's shell game about stopping our oil because they're the real problem here not the current Liberal Gov't.

Maybe we can get clarification about how the Canadian oil industry should work by asking the Saudi's how they like having the ability to sell their oil carbon tax free to a country that's jam packed full of the stuff but can't get it to market to compete with them.

Besides, all these complainers should just STFU about no pipelines being built, pipelines being cancelled and some provinces economic downturns because, obviously that's not an issue to our gov't which must mean, that everything is really fine out west and the Premiers of Sask and Alberta are just picking on poor little Justin because of the sins of the father.

[Thanos]

Justin's politer than his father. That's the only significant difference between them. He's caused as much damage to Alberta, if not more, through both policy and indifference. He's only sending the troops out here to do damage control because someone told him that the anger was real and that Wexit could get very serious if economic conditions keep getting worse.

[Freakinoldguy]

Thanos Thanos:

Justin's politer than his father. That's the only significant difference between them. He's caused as much damage to Alberta, if not more, through both policy and indifference. He's only sending the troops out here to do damage control because someone told him that the anger was real and that Wexit could get very serious if economic conditions keep getting worse.

He's caused much more damage than his father ever could or did. At least his daddy didn't have some ex WWF President "advising" him on the oil industry which, when you think about it is a bit of an oxymoron.

It's just unfortunate that Butt's advice nearly destroyed Ontario's ability to produce electricity and now he's convinced the lesser to do the same thing to our countries oil industry.