News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 11K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 43K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 6.6K     0 
I really doubt they care so greatly where the oil comes from, but if that is the case in a couple of years that anger they whipped up about inflation will come back and bite them so hard.
 
David A said:
I really doubt they care so greatly where the oil comes from, but if that is the case in a couple of years that anger they whipped up about inflation will come back and bite them so hard.
Click to expand...
The American oil lobby paid $60M to the GOP in this campaign. They care.
 
Of course US politics involves a ridiculous amount of fundraising and spending so that sounds like a lot, but when you consider the $1.09 billion Trump raised that is not that a big amount of the total.

And for all the Democrats talk years ago, there hasn't been that much constraint on the US oil industry, especially after the Russian invasion of Ukraine disrupted oil markets. They have mostly been doing what they want already.
 
David A said:
Of course US politics involves a ridiculous amount of fundraising and spending so that sounds like a lot, but when you consider the $1.09 billion Trump raised that is not that a big amount of the total.

And for all the Democrats talk years ago, there hasn't been that much constraint on the US oil industry, especially after the Russian invasion of Ukraine disrupted oil markets. They have mostly been doing what they want already.
Click to expand...
That was during the campaign alone. One lobby group accounting for 5.5% of fundraising is staggering - and they continue their spending each year as fundraising from other sources drops off. And you also have a domestic drilling advocate named the head of the EPA and US-based O&G CEO appointed as Energy Secretary.

I'm not sure how plugged in you are to the industry, but south of the border while it relies on subsidy to be competitive, they're far from hitting production capacity. Those lobby payments are intended to get a massive return, and US taxpayers are about to pay for a boom that will redistribute cash from the citizens to the energy corps on a grand scale.
 
Whattagame said:
That was during the campaign alone. One lobby group accounting for 5.5% of fundraising is staggering - and they continue their spending each year as fundraising from other sources drops off. And you also have a domestic drilling advocate named the head of the EPA and US-based O&G CEO appointed as Energy Secretary.

I'm not sure how plugged in you are to the industry, but south of the border while it relies on subsidy to be competitive, they're far from hitting production capacity. Those lobby payments are intended to get a massive return, and US taxpayers are about to pay for a boom that will redistribute cash from the citizens to the energy corps on a grand scale.
Click to expand...
Languishing oil prices will put an end to any desire to increase production greatly now, except for those who want to repeat the financial disaster of past over expansion.

But I think those ones are mostly out of business and their assets have been taken over by companies that are more sensible.
 
David A said:
Their plan to get elected was to whip up anger against the incumbents about inflation (declining), unemployment (low by historical standards) and immigration (a law to restrict it they declined to support) and they succeeded.

Now that they soon will be the incumbents, the last thing they want is noticeably rising gas prices while they are in power. US voters would really not like that. Most likely the anger will be whipped up against immigrants or China.
Click to expand...
Funny how this is mirrored here. Shocked I say.. Our discounting of our oil is down. now that Transmountain is operating. so we are actually getting a better price. You'd think trump would want our oil at a cheaper rate.
 
A bit of a sensationalist interpretation.
  • AHS wait times are long.
  • The Canada Health act stipulates that patients can't pay for services.
  • People leave the province to pay for faster care.
An actual summary. This speech had other, more contentious points, but I don't see what LaGrange is saying in this clip that could be interpreted maliciously.
 
policyenthusiast said:
A bit of a sensationalist interpretation.
  • AHS wait times are long.
  • The Canada Health act stipulates that patients can't pay for services.
  • People leave the province to pay for faster care.
An actual summary. This speech had other, more contentious points, but I don't see what LaGrange is saying in this clip that could be interpreted maliciously.
Click to expand...
Malicious may not be the right word… Disingenuous perhaps?

There are not enough doctors, nurses, anesthesiologists etc. There may in fact be enough OR’s - just not enough people to utilize them as they could operate 24/7 off there were enough people in the system to address the current patient load.

Those leaving the Province to pay for faster care are actually also doing their bit to shorten the wait times for those still here.

Suggesting the Canada Health Act is responsible for that is a complete deflection of provincial responsibility to the citizens of this province to provide adequate public health within the province.
 
kcantor said:
Malicious may not be the right word… Disingenuous perhaps?

There are not enough doctors, nurses, anesthesiologists etc. There may in fact be enough OR’s - just not enough people to utilize them as they could operate 24/7 off there were enough people in the system to address the current patient load.

Those leaving the Province to pay for faster care are actually also doing their bit to shorten the wait times for those still here.

Suggesting the Canada Health Act is responsible for that is a complete deflection of provincial responsibility to the citizens of this province to provide adequate public health within the province.
Click to expand...
I realize the current Premier likes to blame the Feds for almost every problem that exists. But I recall several times over the last few years the Premiers asking the Feds for more money and getting it to fix the problems with heath care.

Yet somehow, the problems still persist. So at some point doesn't the province have to accept responsibility for what actually is their responsibility and has been all along?
 
Not sure if this belongs under municipal or provincial politics…
IMG_2602.jpeg
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top