How do you think Brookfield is performing right now?

It will be Carbon Tax 2.0

Conman Carney's Clean Fuels Standard could increase the price of fuel by 17 cents a litre. The same as the old consumer caarbon tax.

Quote from: Herman on August 27, 2025, 06:08:11 PMIt's bullshit.

Much media hype about Mark Carney signing a "Joint Declaration of Intent" with Germany.
What does it mean? Nothing.
Read the fine print: "This JDI (Joint Declaration of Intent) is not legally binding and does not create any financial commitment."
All show business.

There is virtually no chance of a new liquefied natural gas facility getting built and exporting energy to Europe in the next five years and Mr. Carney knows that.

Seems there is a business case for selling Canadian liquefied natural gas to Europe after all.

The Mark Carney government, unlike the Justin Trudeau government before it, said this week that it is willing to consider — possibly, maybe down the road, in the medium term — selling LNG to Europe.

Right now, a lot of Canadian natural gas is being exported to Europe, it's just being exported through the United States, which seized on this opportunity while we decided to be "green" and take a pass. And so Canadian natural gas is sold to the United States at a discount and then sold to the Europeans by the Americans at a premium.

The Carney Liberals are still saying many of the right things, as they have done for months, but they haven't delivered yet.

On that front, and whether they will deliver on all of this, we are still at the wait and see stage of this relationship.

Quote from: Thiel on August 27, 2025, 01:53:35 PMMr. Carney's new pact with Germany to provide critical minerals and more energy is good for the national economy. However, it is unlikely to achieve its full potential because of Liberal deference to Quebec. It's also not a commitment.

It's bullshit.

Much media hype about Mark Carney signing a "Joint Declaration of Intent" with Germany.
What does it mean? Nothing.
Read the fine print: "This JDI (Joint Declaration of Intent) is not legally binding and does not create any financial commitment."
All show business.

The United States Department of Energy recently published a report, which essentially summarizes the U.S. government's rejection of the 30-year-old, United Nations-centric, climate-alarmed consensus worldview. This has many implications for Canada.

The report also, not surprisingly, diverges from the UN-climate-alarmed consensus idea that the solution to climate change risk is global greenhouse gas (GHG) emission suppression. Rather, when it comes to policy, the report comes down firmly on the idea of adaptation to potential climate disruptions, regardless of cause: "Technological advances such as improved weather forecasting and early warning systems" have substantially reduced losses from extreme weather events. Better building codes, flood defences and disaster response mechanisms have lowered economic losses relative to GDP. Further, heat-related mortality risk has dropped substantially due to adaptive measures including the adoption of air conditioning (which relies on a robust economy) and the availability of affordable energy. "U.S. mortality risks... even under extreme warming scenarios are not projected to increase if people are able to undertake adaptive responses."

What does this mean for Canada?

First, one must assume that it portends a continued U.S. movement away from GHG mitigation efforts and programs involving direct emission suppression from sources such as power plants, manufacturing facilities, vehicles, commercial and residential buildings, and so forth.

It will also likely mean less intrusive efforts to suppress GHG emissions indirectly with various energy efficiency standards, agricultural practises and the mandated replacement of GHG-emission power production with lower/less-GHG emitting wind and solar technologies. Oh, and once again, the much-ballyhooed transition from internal combustion transportation to electric vehicles is likely to take it in the neck, at least in the U.S. for the next four years.

Again, what does this mean for Canada? In a nutshell, it means the U.S. will cut a fairly large amount of spending on GHG suppression measures while Canada (Carney government, et al) plans to increase such spending. And the U.S. will also cut spending—and consumer costs—for electric vehicles while Canada will increase both.

Because virtually all of the U.S. focus is about lowering the costs of energy and the technologies that use it—and energy is the foundational input of developed economies—all of that will likely make the U.S. more economically competitive, from the individual to the firm, compared to Canada.

The more Canada elbows up and doubles down on joining the UN's GHG-suppression regime, the less competitive Canada will make itself compared to the U.S., which—Trump's tariffs and current politics notwithstanding—remains the most relevant touchstone for whether or not Canadian policies are economically rational.

Mr. Carney's new pact with Germany to provide critical minerals and more energy is good for the national economy. However, it is unlikely to achieve its full potential because of Liberal deference to Quebec. It's also not a commitment.

Canadian cities keep electing cunts like this.

Look at Hamilton. It really aint that much different than any other big city in Canada.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbLHGeLuly8

Quote from: DKG on August 21, 2025, 08:23:59 PMOntario has traditionally been the economic engine of Canada. But, the largest province that generates something like forty percent of the nation's econonomic output is in trouble due to systemic problems.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWbiQl_RKcg

I think the Trump tariffs had a lot do with it DKG DKG

But we in the West have decided to help our Ontario Brothers and Sisters in need.

After all, we are all Canadians. We need to stick together.

Trump has caused havoc everywhere else in the world too.

It's not really Ontario's fault that they find themselves in this predicament.

Ontario has traditionally been the economic engine of Canada. But, the largest province that generates something like forty percent of the nation's econonomic output is in trouble due to systemic problems.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWbiQl_RKcg

Quote from: Herman on August 21, 2025, 07:09:35 PMChina is turning to Australia to secure canola supplies, dealing a fresh blow to Canada's $43.7-billion industry just days after Beijing imposed punishing tariffs on Canadian canola.

And Conman Carney does nothing while the country he doesn't even live in is getting economically raped.

We have a federal government on auto pilot.

China is turning to Australia to secure canola supplies, dealing a fresh blow to Canada's $43.7-billion industry just days after Beijing imposed punishing tariffs on Canadian canola.

And Conman Carney does nothing while the country he doesn't even live in is getting economically raped.