- Joined
- Jan 31, 2010
- Messages
- 31,645
- Reaction score
- 7,598
- Location
- Canada, Costa Rica
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
More scare tactics.
You guys all act like TransCanadian was making some huge corporate sacrifice bringing oil into the US. That's crap. They obviously saw a chance to make some big money going to Texas instead of British Columbia. They're not going to give up on those $$$ easily. The "going to China" line is just that, a line, and not much different than "Do you come here often?" as to it's hopeful outcome.
I'm not afeared - but many would look at your "misinformation" in that light, their worst fears realized.More "scare tactics"?
Why should you be scared?
The pipeline will not go ahead and some claim there are just a few jobs involved anyway.
Canada will do all right and the Americans will have what they want, which apparently is a pristine wilderness and further experiments with solar energy.
:roll: I'm not afeared - but many would look at your "misinformation" in that light, their worst fears realized.
"What? We lost that Canadian oil to China?!? That mean ol' Obama! Boo-hoo!"
I've seen no one make these claims and if I've submitted "misinformation"why not point it out? While it's true that I strongly believe Brarack Obama to be in way over his head, the fact is that he appears to have sufficient support of the American people to affect their energy policy well into the future.
Of course, we didn't lose it to China (and I doubt we will) but that's not important because truth in media of any kind vanished years ago. It's all about sensational headlines regardless of the meat of the story itself. And, well, if there really isn't any news then we'll take some old news out of the fridge and add some more spices to it.
Yes, it's probably all the fault of the media.
... if I've submitted "misinformation"why not point it out? [snip]
I saw no facts supporting that claim. I would call that misinformation, wouldn't you?The oil is going to China.
I've seen no one make these claims and if I've submitted "misinformation"why not point it out? While it's true that I strongly believe Brarack Obama to be in way over his head, the fact is that he appears to have sufficient support of the American people to affect their energy policy well into the future.
Yes, it's probably all the fault of the media.
Well.. yeah.. The media is painting this as a victory for the environmentalists but that's not completely true.
One of these issues is property rights. As The New York Times reported last month, TransCanada Corp., the Keystone’s builder, “has been threatening to confiscate private land from South Dakota to the Gulf of Mexico, and is already suing many who have refused to allow the Keystone XL pipeline on their property even though the controversial project has yet to receive federal approval.”
Keystone XL Pipeline Delay: Were Fears Of A
I saw no facts supporting that claim. I would call that misinformation, wouldn't you?
I saw no facts supporting that claim. I would call that misinformation, wouldn't you?
Perhaps, like the average rational, independent thinker, he believes in facts -- which were conspicuously absent in your post. Why?You don't believe the oil is going to China?I saw no facts supporting that claim. I would call that misinformation, wouldn't you?[...] The oil is going to China. [...]
Well.. yeah.. The media is painting this as a victory for the environmentalists but that's not completely true.
Perhaps, like the average rational, independent thinker, he believes in facts -- which were conspicuously absent in your post. Why?
Ultimately China is a better market for Canada than the US.... If TransCanada is going to spend 7 billion dollars.. they should build pipelines and refineries in Canada.
Everywhere is a potential market and every country can import according to their best price and advantage, as demonstrated by your examples.
Whatever TransCanada does is their business decision and I'll not attempt to second guess them.
The US shouldn't need to be "poised". Allowing more freedom in the marketplace wouldn't have necessitated this "poised" situation.
I don't care one way or another about the pipeline, but I do think its a short term fix .
Maybe. I recall Bill Clinton using much the same excuse when he was president about why drilling for oil wasn't necessary, that it would take toó long to get to the market. But of course doing nothing is always an option, and frequently the most risk free politically.
Everywhere is a potential market and every country can import according to their best price and advantage, as demonstrated by your examples.
Whatever TransCanada does is their business decision and I'll not attempt to second guess them.
The US shouldn't need to be "poised". Allowing more freedom in the marketplace wouldn't have necessitated this "poised" situation.
Maybe. I recall Bill Clinton using much the same excuse when he was president about why drilling for oil wasn't necessary, that it would take toó long to get to the market. But of course doing nothing is always an option, and frequently the most risk free politically.
TransCanada's objective is to take advantage of NAFTA and the Free Trade Zone.. that's simply about Tax avoidance and profits.
The reality is that 60 new deep water drilling permits have been issued for the Gulf of Mexico.. and US tar sands, shale oil and gas are making good progress.
TransCanada's objective is to take advantage of NAFTA and the Free Trade Zone.. that's simply about Tax avoidance and profits.
That sounds like a good company in which to invest. NAFTA was designed in order that companies, and people, take advantage of it. It would be counter productive if they didn't.
The reality is that 60 new deep water drilling permits have been issued for the Gulf of Mexico.. and US tar sands, shale oil and gas are making good progress.
That's good news.
That sounds like a good company in which to invest. NAFTA was designed in order that companies, and people, take advantage of it. It would be counter productive if they didn't.
That's good news.
The media.. and some Repulicans have muddied the water around this issue..
I think Americans can deal with the realities... without all the BS.
Well, whatever. It's too late now. The oil is going to China.
Rick Perry: Texans Are Baffled by the Keystone Decision - WSJ.com
The media.. and some Repulicans have muddied the water around this issue..
I think Americans can deal with the realities... without all the BS.
Go to google and put in Keystone XL, export pipeline..
There is NO shortage of information that this Canadian bitument will be refined and sold in foreign markets.
I certainly hope so. And of course I supported the open market concept and taking advantage of those markets. I don't quite get your point here.
Your first link is 7 months old and can therefore can prove nothing about the 1 month old Keystone XL pipeline decision/deferral.
Your second link is an editorial that is essentially a rehash of your original link, neither of which contains any facts about selling any 'Keystone XL' oil to China, as you claimed: The right wing penchant for failure in these debates is baffling.
We should be drilling our own oil.
Canada is not anything like an unstable Middle East, nor is it ruled by a whacky dictator like Venezuela.
This project is good for American jobs, for American oil security, and it would lower gas prices.
Go to google and put in Keystone XL, export pipeline..
There is NO shortage of information that this Canadian bitument will be refined and sold in foreign markets.
Just trying to sort facts from political accusations and BS.
Wonderful! And you're doing just a terrific job.
In fact, when it comes to jobs and the Keystone XL pipeline, the State Department estimated it would create only 20 permanent jobs and about 5-6,000 temporary construction jobs… not the hundred thousand jobs proponents of the tar sands pipeline have been citing.
I am just not keen on buying a pig in a poke... Better we know what were getting.
Motiva Refinery is fully staffed an operational NOW.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?