Canadian PM Looking to China After Obama Ignores Oil Deal

And yet another irrelevant deflection.

Your arguments are beginning to take on a "grasping at straws" nature.

We are not discussing the merits of Canada exploiting their natural resouces.

Canada will continue to provide jobs for their people, see economic opportunities, and improve the national situation for all.

The question is why our fool of a leader would shun thousands of jobs and a huge boost to our economy. Plain and simple.

 

Sure.

That's why Solyndra is doing so great these days.

 

A day late and a dollar short. If they introduced massive incentives now.......they might have a bubble of twenty year olds ready by 2032.

LOL Imagine a country full of 20 year olds..........

The bottom line being that China, India, and the U.S. all have some trials and tribulations in our future.

 

Comparative advantage doesn't spare a market from corruption.

 

No argument here, but I just am not as confident in our own future.

America certainly still has certain edges over a lot of the world. We do have some of the world's best infrastructure and a lot of the world's resources.

However, we seem to have some chronic problems in management. Our banking system, in particular, has a lot of the same corruption issues as what you would expect from a Third World country.

Also, our governmental integrity would seem to be headed in the Italy direction.

 

Private venture capital will be required to develop the technology. Without govt. subsidies, grants, loans and tax inducements, green energy is too risky for private venture capital to get involved.

If private venture capital gets involved there will be a headquarters and R&D operation, but not lots of jobs.

Green energy components in solar and wind that are manufactured in China cannot be deployed in America to collect energy. Such deployments require land which is the habitat of endangered species. That means years and years of litigation lies ahead.

 

I can't argue that. Our future outlook is murky due to positions taken similar to this by those who prioritize ideology over jobs, economy, and livelihoods.

The Obama has not been kind to the nation.

 

Saudi Arabia manufactures solar panels,

Solar water heating; Solar pool heating; Tubular day lighting; Photovoltaic systems; Street lights; Energy efficient appliances; Solar Cooker and many more...

 

I'll agree that ideology has been the source of our problems, but I'd put a greater blame on Reaganomics.

Since the 80s, our government has been owned by investment banking. What was once a small industry reserved for wealthy people who could take the risks has become an industry that exposes the entire economy to high risks.

Understandably, a lot of the world has taken note of this and has tried to somewhat distance itself from this approach.

America would be a much stabler country if we separated commercial and investment banking once again. Until we do, we're just ready for another big crash.

 

While some environmental litigation has gotten in the way, this hasn't stopped oil companies from investing in alternatives.

There is plenty of capital to go around here. Capital is one of the main things we have over the developing world -- at least in the private sector. Our public sector might be bankrupt, but our corporations still have plenty of funds.

 

The comparative advantage does not seem to be on our side when it comes to making solar panels.

That's why only Obama was willing to invest in it.

But not with his money of course.

 

Oil wasn't particularly profitable in the very beginning. Neither was the concept of having an infrastructure built around gas stations, highways, and internal combustion vehicles.

Nearly every major technological step requires at least a little bit of public investment.

 

Very true.. The first peak oil was whale oil and when it became outrageously expensive, people began paying attention to the possibilities of Kerosene.

 

I wen't back and looked for government investment in the oil companies during the period of 1870 to 1900 and didn't find any.

Nor did the government have any money invested in gas stations.

 

LOL It is astounding at the mixed messages the silly fool puts forth......

"We" have been too lazy..........and yet..... he essentially sends Canada to China.

 

Well, for starters, here's what they currently get.

http://priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/

I'll send you a link on the history of oil subsidization shortly.

 

The corporate sector has to produce profit on a short term basis or management is ousted. Green energy requires long term investments. Only the federal govt. can make such investments. Conservatives will block the federal govt. from doing so.

 

History

Petroleum byproducts have been used since ancient times as adhesives and water proofing agents. Over 2,000 years ago, Arabian scientists explored ways to distill petroleum into individual components that could be used for specialized purposes.

As new uses were discovered, demand for petroleum increased. Kerosene was discovered in 1853 by Abraham Gesner. A British physician, Gesner developed a process to extract the inflammable liquid from asphalt, a waxy petroleum mixture. The term kerosene is, in fact, derived from the Greek word for wax. Sometimes spelled kerosine or kerosiene, it is also called coal oil because of its asphalt origins.

Kerosene was an important commodity in the days before electric lighting and it was the first material to be chemically extracted on a large commercial scale. Mass refinement of kerosene and other petroleum products actually began in 1859 when oil was discovered in the United States. An entire industry evolved to develop oil drilling and purification techniques.

Kerosene continued to be the most important refinery product throughout the late 1890s and early 1900s. It was surpassed by gasoline in the 1920s with the increasing popularity of the internal combustion engine. Other uses were found for kerosene after the demise of oil lamps, and today it is primarily used in residential heating and as a fuel additive. http://www.madehow.com/Volume-7/Kerosene.html#ixzz1disyDvOK

The oil business started small .. almost like bootlegging operations.. a couple of farmers working a shallow rig, selling kerosene and burning off the gas.

Then John D Rockefeller got involved.

http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h957.html

 

Circle The White House. Greenpeace, ThinkProgress, DailyKos, MoveOn......are only a few of the environmental extremist groups hoping to piggyback the OWS movement in their bid to kill the Keystone XL pipeline a $7 billion project that would carry oil through 6 states to the Gulf coast refineries and creating thousands of non-government stimulus jobs in the process.

The Obama caved. No jobs.

 

He's not a drunk, he's not on drugs, he's not mis-informed. He is bound and determined to eradicate oil, gas, coal, and nuclear in this country. And he will do anything and everything to attain that goal.

What he is, is WRONG. We do not have a replacement source of energy for the current sources. Wind and solar will NEVER replace oil, gas, coal, and nuclear. Wind and solar are both too unreliable to stake our lives on, and short of some earth-shaking breakthrough, will never be an adequate source of energy. Solar power will work where there is sufficient sunshine, wind power will work where there is sufficient wind. Neither are reliable in most parts of the US. So to eliminate our current sources will do one thing, it will create chaos and misery for the bulk of Americans. And perhaps that's the aim. With chaos, the government can come in and "save" people, thus creating the tyranny we all have feared.

 

There must be a choice made to open up and use North American resources or to develop green energy despite the cost and uncertainty. The American people will have to make a choice, but they won't choose until they feel much more pain. So be it.

 

I agree but it shouldn't be reckless or for short term mega profits.

 

It shouldn't be at the expense of our economy, our jobs, our livelihoods or reckless short term ideological gains.

Our working citizens are more important than assuaging ideologues guilty conscience.

 

Its isn't about ideology at all.

The labor unions want the pipelines.. the landowners along the route don't and if you look at the route of the pipeline.. its strongly conservative and Republican.

 

No......the labor unions want the jobs. The local economies want the spending and economic boost, the municipalities want the tax revenues, the states want the indirect support jobs and tax revenues, the refineries want the excuse to increase refinery capacity and create jobs, and the nation wants the increased revenue.

You need to back up your blanket statement of landowners not not wanting the pipeline..........

Cornell Study Ties to Extremist Green Movement Exposed!

90 per cent of all affected landowners in Nebraska (including 95 per cent of the landowners in the Sandhills) have voluntarily agreed to allow the pipeline to cross their lands.