Travisty
Active Member
Only way I see a tower being built on this scale in the short term is if a Bernie Sanders or Warren wins the election, and the energy investments move back to Alberta.
|
|
|
- Thread starter Travisty
- Start date
O
October
Guest
What makes you think that? Not to be rude i'm just curious tbh.
Travisty
Active Member
Sanders is a self described socialist and not "business friendly" and the markets will react. There will be fear if he comes to office and capital and investments will leave the US. Taxes on all US corporations will go up. He is promoting the 'Green New Deal' which will halt the current energy sector and fracking. List goes on. I feel that Canada and Calgary will be a big beneficiary of capital with production decreasing and oil prices rising. Personal politics or beliefs aside, just from an economic perspective.Just my take
Last edited:
maestro
Senior Member
Oh, operator
Sanders wants to rapidly turn the most profitable contributors in the US economy into not for profits. This shift requires extreme patience and coordination without completely annihilating the US economy. Unfortunately, he is a bull in a china store
Sanders wants to rapidly turn the most profitable contributors in the US economy into not for profits. This shift requires extreme patience and coordination without completely annihilating the US economy. Unfortunately, he is a bull in a china store
Last edited:
O
October
Guest
So what you're saying is if he (or her) wins this fall it could possibly be good for business in Calgary?
Chinook Arch
Active Member
I don't know if there would be enough of an effect for it to benefit Canada. If Sanders decided to put the screws on fraccing, it might do so, but Obama didn't seem interested in taking that on, not sure Sanders would either. If Sanders got in and was radical right off the start, whop knows, maybe it would affect the markets enough to help out position.
JonnyCanuck
Senior Member
Even if Sanders is the candidate, he has to get elected first ... no easy task with his radical agenda. Plus, he probably needs the Senate to go Democrat, and the Democrats to maintain the House, to get his policies passed into law. Sanders doesn't even call himself a Democrat.It remains to be seen whether the majority of Democrat Congressman and Senators are on the same page as he is. A president can only do so much on his/her own without having Congress on side.
Last edited:
Travisty
Active Member
Agreed. There are a lot of variables in play and we are a long way away from Election day. Super Tuesday will give a decent perspective and a cleaer idea on whom the candidate may be.In regards to Chinooks post, Obama was a major candidate to increase oil production in the US to get away from foreign (Saudi) oil dependence. He ran on that platfrom and did it. That has become forgotten in today's world. Sanders has pubicly announced he would ban fracking. An executive order will make this easier regardless on congressional approval. Sanders' agenda is indeed a revolution and will take time if/when/ever it comes into fruition, Calgary will benefit in the interim.Probally not the right forum in the Oxford disucssion, but nonetheless it is an interesting one.
Last edited:
Mountain Man
Senior Member
Unless Bernie promises to build pipelines, no effect at all.
Cowtown
Senior Member
Bernie did say he would ban fracking. That is a big part of the U.S. oil production these days. If the U.S. became an importer again, it could mean a price bump for Canada no?
potatopizzafan
Active Member
most definitely, if he actually banned fracking, which would be hard to do, the price of oil, overall, would skyrocket. The boom of US fracking is the primary reason for current low oil prices. But its starting to show cracks anyways, there is only so much cheaply accessible oil in these fields, and their production will likely taper off soon
Chinook Arch
Active Member
Fraccing and Shale Oil. Either way, neither seem like they will be economical over a long haul.
gsunnyg
Senior Member
We're forgetting one thing though, Bernie needs the Senate to pass his bills and he doesn't seem like the president to use Excutive orders. He may be able to compromise in a few areas such as a deadlines for fracking to end. He will most likely try to get the corporate tax cuts reversed and could possible succeed. Overall, Bernie is very good for Alberta but you can also bet that the Keystone pipeline will most likely be dead. This makes it even more dire that we get Trans Mountain built.
Bernie is a good guy at heart and although some of his policies will do damage to the American and global economy, he will still likely accomplish a lot of success in areas like Medicare for all (if it gets passed that is). I respect political views from both sides whether they're democratically socialist or fiscally conservative. Both sides have great ideas to pick from, what I don't appreciate is clueless idiots getting elected which is why Im more eager to see Justin Trudeau given the boot. Only then will I see the light at the end of this long tunnel for Alberta.
Bernie is a good guy at heart and although some of his policies will do damage to the American and global economy, he will still likely accomplish a lot of success in areas like Medicare for all (if it gets passed that is). I respect political views from both sides whether they're democratically socialist or fiscally conservative. Both sides have great ideas to pick from, what I don't appreciate is clueless idiots getting elected which is why Im more eager to see Justin Trudeau given the boot. Only then will I see the light at the end of this long tunnel for Alberta.
heightjunkie
Active Member
Trump took the cat out of the bag with this one, and he didn't even really need to. No way a democrat president doesn't just executive order everything they can with the precedent set.
That's actually the most dangerous thing to come out of this presidency- a more unfettered US executive going forward creates instability election to election. The orwell in me says that we should expect to see political parties use this as a central reason to increase term limits dramatically within the next 20 years.
JonnyCanuck
Senior Member
Actually Obama was keen on executive orders particularly when it came to the environment or limiting development of natural resources. He could not find common ground with Congress so he felt compelled to use executive order. He still depended on Congress for spending.
Trump's mission when he came in to office was to reverse everything Obama did whether it was good for people, business, the environment ... or not.
If Bernie, were he president, was not getting anywhere with Congress on his environmental issues, there is every reason to believe he would put executive orders in place to limit development by corporations, ban fracking and offshore drilling etc. His grandiose spending plans ... Medicare for All, free college/university tuition, Green New Deal would have to approved by Congress however.
Trump's mission when he came in to office was to reverse everything Obama did whether it was good for people, business, the environment ... or not.
If Bernie, were he president, was not getting anywhere with Congress on his environmental issues, there is every reason to believe he would put executive orders in place to limit development by corporations, ban fracking and offshore drilling etc. His grandiose spending plans ... Medicare for All, free college/university tuition, Green New Deal would have to approved by Congress however.
Last edited: