House Passes Keystone Legislation; goes to Senate

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by JP5, Nov 14, 2014.

  1. BroncoBilly

    BroncoBilly Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2004
    Messages:
    29,824
    Likes Received:
    355
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Well you should know liberals don't drive cars or heat their homes with oil. They get their energy from the sun as they form a circle and hold hands. :smile:

    In these tough times with little to no work, I can't imagine anyone being opposed to this pipeline, but as we can all see by this thread, Guber was right, Obama did create some very stupid Americans
     
  2. Louisiana75

    Louisiana75 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2011
    Messages:
    11,363
    Likes Received:
    11,580
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Sounds like most of you libs have never stepped from behind your laptop in your cubicles to see what real construction jobs are like. My husband is a pipeline welder. These projects are anything but part time, more like 6 or 7 - 12's and needs a lot of different skilled workers to complete each section. These are also usually higher paying jobs which can easily support families, which in turn (and I know this will shock some libs) will be put back into the economy. So, thousand of high paying jobs, some that will last years to permanent, for a product that is still required for so many products worldwide. So unless the democrats have 100 million acres somewhere full of windmills and solar panels, we need to do this.
     
  3. markrc99

    markrc99 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2009
    Messages:
    653
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    18
    JP5 wrote: “This will put many people to work and create a lot of side-line businesses to support them. And what better deal than to have a partnership in energy production than with our Canadian friends. Screw the Middle East!!!”

    Other than restating industry’s claims, what assurances can you offer for any of that? I see, not necessary, the word of big oil is enough? This was the part of your article that I found to be of interest:
    Seems odd the democrat from Louisiana is “championing” this project when the thing doesn’t even go there. Regarding the pipeline, Cornell University has done a study & finds industry’s claims, dubious.
    If TransCanada is so sure of their claims why don’t they guarantee them? Let them guarantee all those jobs by being legally bound to provide them! They claim this pipeline will help aid energy security. If not designated for domestic consumption, how exactly? Is that another one of their promises? Hey, that’s great! Just… put it in writing, okay? Lower prices to boot? OMG, fantastic! Okay, so here’s the contract we’re to negotiate and what is the below market price range you’re willing to guarantee exactly? This next one here means you’re willing to accept accountability. That you’re fully liable should there be a spill. Now, this last one binds you to cooperate fully with investigators should a spill occur, providing complete & unfettered access.

    Excuse me? No, this doesn’t finalize a deal. We want to make sure you’ll be a good corporate neighbor. We need to check into reports of you threatening & bullying landowners into signing easements. Is it true that you didn’t deliver on promised tax revenue in the state of Nebraska? You are currently exempt from property taxes for 10 years in Kansas & is this the sort of corporate welfare you expect from say, the state of Texas?
     
  4. Louisiana75

    Louisiana75 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2011
    Messages:
    11,363
    Likes Received:
    11,580
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female


    Not odd at all, Louisiana has a lot of people who work in the oil and pipeline business.
     
  5. vino909

    vino909 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2014
    Messages:
    4,634
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    They should change the name of the bill to be more accurate. Perhaps " Bill to blatantly try to save Landrieu's ass".
     
  6. markrc99

    markrc99 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2009
    Messages:
    653
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Louisiana 75 wrote: “Not odd at all, Louisiana has a lot of people who work in the oil and pipeline business.”

    Right, & it certainly makes more sense than say, a representative from the state of Maine pushing this project. But not more so than from somebody representing Texas or any of the other states. But your point does tend to corroborate Cornell’s contention that:

    “Jobs will be temporary and between 85-90% of the people hired to do the work will be non-local or from out of state.”
     
  7. Louisiana75

    Louisiana75 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2011
    Messages:
    11,363
    Likes Received:
    11,580
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Most pipeline workers travel for work. It would be almost impossible for the pipeline locations to be able to fill all the skilled positions from locals only. Many of the pipelines run through some very rural areas. Then, as one "station" is completed, the workers move down the line, so they do not stay in one location the entire time. That's perfectly normal. But all in all, it's still jobs, high paying jobs, no matter where the residents are from, so what does that really matter? And as for all those referring to them being temporary, it's still years for a couple hundred thousand, but the maintenance work is constant and will always require tens of thousands to be working on it at some point, at all times.
     
  8. Riot

    Riot New Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2013
    Messages:
    7,637
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Here in houma La. there's a lot of companies that will be building the pipes. X raying the pipes. Truckers and wielders.
     
  9. Louisiana75

    Louisiana75 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2011
    Messages:
    11,363
    Likes Received:
    11,580
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    I was just about to point out the same thing, the job benefits and economic boom far extends from just the pipeline location itself.
     
  10. rkhames

    rkhames Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2013
    Messages:
    5,227
    Likes Received:
    1,285
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Dogface, maybe you haven't bought recently, but that so called dirty oil has already lowered prices. Actually, OPEC is already blaming Obama for lowering oil costs.

    This bill the GOP passed is the 9th such bill. The other eight are sitting on Harry Reid's desk collecting dust. Will, Reid get the message sent by the recent elections, or will he continue to play the obstructionist. If the Democrats in the Senate do their job, will Obama veto it. This is the perfect occasion for the Democrats to prove that they can work with the GOP. I am betting that after six years of having things they will put a stop to the bill. Then we will know once and for all, which party are the obstructionists.
     
  11. markrc99

    markrc99 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2009
    Messages:
    653
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Louisiana 75 wrote: “But all in all, it's still jobs, high paying jobs, no matter where the residents are from, so what does that really matter? And as for all those referring to them being temporary, it's still years for a couple hundred thousand…”

    I understand that a pipeline is not unlike a highway or a railroad, many workers will have that job from start to finish. And they claim there’ll be other non-construction jobs. I also can see the representative from LA voting for it. But not out in front of it, less than 5 years after the BP spill. In a Maine town near where I grew up, they build the country’s destroyers. But if the company (BIW) had contaminated the river and the drinking water, adversely affected the local economy, had reneged on paying their taxes, hadn’t cleaned up their mess, I mean, there’s no way Susan Collins could save her seat by campaigning for some other firm in a neighboring state to get those defense contracts so that some Maine-based iron workers could go there to get a job. Ha-ha!… Well, election rigging can go on anywhere, but here, straight up, that would be the dumbest f’n thing she could do. Wow.

    As for all the promised jobs, all TransCanada has to do is guarantee them & be held to account if they don’t deliver. You’re so sure, JP5 is so sure, TransCanada’s so sure… everybody’s so f’n sure. Great...sign right here! And sign off on everything else, like a responsible corporation would do! Oh, yeah, the answer is absolutely no! Takes a real genius to figure out why.
     
  12. Riot

    Riot New Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2013
    Messages:
    7,637
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Obama won't sign the pipeline because the liberal elite warren Buffett is making millions moving the oil in trains. Obama can't allow him to lose money after the donation he gave to Obama
     
  13. Grizz

    Grizz New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Messages:
    4,787
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes.

    No. Then again, that isn't transporting toxic tar sands.

    And you should stop trying to equate the transportation of these tar sands, which have massive effects on the environment from beginning to end with shipping regular crude or refined products through the pipelines:

    The Keystone XL pipeline would have transported toxic tar sands from under Canada’s Boreal forest 2,000 miles to the Gulf of Mexico to be refined and exported. Approving the pipeline would bring increased production of one of the dirtiest, most polluting forms of oil over the coming decades.

    Tar sands oil is not only difficult, costly and energy-intensive to produce but also dirtier and more corrosive than conventional oil. Leaks and spills threaten rivers, aquifers and communities all along the route.


    And you thought that was GOOD for the environment?
     
  14. Louisiana75

    Louisiana75 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2011
    Messages:
    11,363
    Likes Received:
    11,580
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    The BP oil spill was a disaster, no doubt. With any industry, there will always be things like this that can and will happen. Is that your basis for not building the Keystone pipeline? You act as if oil pipelines are so bad, but do you drive a car, use any plastic materials, even use public transportation, etc.?
     
  15. Louisiana75

    Louisiana75 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2011
    Messages:
    11,363
    Likes Received:
    11,580
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    You are questioning the jobs? How else would a pipeline across the country be built if it weren't for worker hired to do the work and manufacturers to supply the materials? I'm confused on this one, how could they not deliver the jobs and build the pipeline?
     
  16. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Tar sands are mined and processed to generate oil similar to oil pumped from conventional oil wells. Tar sand oil is already pumped through pipelines in the US. The pipeline that Obama won't build just finishes the pipeline from Kansas.

    [​IMG]
     
  17. Grizz

    Grizz New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Messages:
    4,787
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    0
    :eyepopping: I suggest you click on the link I included with the post you responded to. There seems to be quite a bit of difference between what is pumped and processed from a conventional oil and tar sands, particularly the toxic and corrosive parts.
     
  18. flyboy56

    flyboy56 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2013
    Messages:
    15,337
    Likes Received:
    5,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Coal is dead to which country? The US, maybe. Certainly not China. They are enjoying our cheap coal subsidized by US taxpayers. Something liberals don't like to talk about.
     
  19. flyboy56

    flyboy56 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2013
    Messages:
    15,337
    Likes Received:
    5,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    If the Alaskan pipeline hasn't had a major oil leak why would the Keystone pipeline be any different? You have no statistics to back up your claim so you are fear mongering something that has not happened. There is a much greater chance of an oil spill using truck, trains and ships. The oil will get transported. The question is which method is the safest?
     
  20. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Hate to tell you this but regular oil is toxic too. Why not finish the pipeline since it is already pumped 1/2 way through the US?
     
  21. flyboy56

    flyboy56 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2013
    Messages:
    15,337
    Likes Received:
    5,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Deep water oil drilling is far riskier than transporting oil via a pipeline. You can't even compare the two. As for the jobs the pipeline will provide, anyone will tell you it is better to have a temporary, good paying job than no job at all. Construction work is usually temporary. But even if only a few hundred get a permanent job after it is built it is still better than having no one get a job.
     
  22. TomFitz

    TomFitz Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2013
    Messages:
    40,409
    Likes Received:
    15,894
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And what happens to those jobs once the pipeline is built?

    The right wing meme that Keystone will be a great jobs creator was always myth. Once the pipeline is completed, most of those jobs disappear, a factor which is conventiently absent from any conservative discussion of the project.

    Not only that, but the oil industy has largely found other ways to move heavy tar sands oil to refinaries in Texas.

    Add that to falling prices all over the world, and we'll soon be seeing shutdowns in the tar sands region as production costs fall to or below the market price.

    Keystone is irrelevant now in the real world.

    http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/harold-hamm-keystone-irrelevant-112905.html?hp=r1_3
     
  23. TomFitz

    TomFitz Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2013
    Messages:
    40,409
    Likes Received:
    15,894
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Actually, spills on the Alaska pipeline are rather common.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/18/us-oil-alaska-spill-idUSTRE76H0VA20110718
     
  24. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    I believe this bill should be tied to an amendment, to cease and desist denying and disparaging labor from unemployment compensation in any at-will employment State, simply for being unemployed.
     
  25. Riot

    Riot New Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2013
    Messages:
    7,637
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Warren buffet is already transporting this toxic oil already by train through America now!! I guess it's ok for a liberal to make millions with pollutants just not anyone else
     

Share This Page