Comments by "Neolithic Transit Revolution" (@neolithictransitrevolution427) on "The Globe and Mail" channel.

  1. I used to be against Supply Management. It is in fact a cartel that raises prices. But it achieves a lot, that would be very difficult to achieve without it. Right now, it should be very clear why it is important to ensure domestic supply of core food items. Can we really risk depending on our trade partners, frankly the US, to control our food supply when they are willing to weapoize trade? But more than that, it protects small farms. Maybe it doesn't generate the worlds most efficient output. But what is the cost of that? How many rural towns depend on the strong middle class farmers who are protected by supply management, and what is the cost of these towns failing. Im not an animal rights activist, but I don't want to see the 10 thousand cow factories we see in the US. In Canada cows go to pasture. They are able to leave a building and concrete stall. There is a value to knowing there was a level of ethics. And just like we are seeing with avian flue, that protects against disease. More, small farms, mean outbreaks don't destroy production. Its better for the environment, look at the the massive manure waste coming out of us factory farms, smaller operations allow manure to be spread evenly over a field. Look at the health aspect. The antibotics that the cows need to avoid disease. The hormons they are given in the States. I don't want that in my milk. Supply management protects consumers, protects the farmers, and protects the animals. I don't want to have a hand full of factory farms producing chemical laiden milk while rural communities fall apart for milk that costs a few cents less a liter.
    26
  2. If we were serious about diversifying, we would be doing it. Canada owns a pipeline company, which just finished building a pipeline, with logistics and trained staff and skilled labour and contractors all sitting on their hands. Work should be starting on adding pumping stations to Transmountain as an immediate option and to keep ground workers in projects. We should be starting Projects, which will take years and upfront planning, for another West Coast export pipeline and an Eastern pipeline, ideally getting Europe to agree to invest in the later upfront. With Coastal link complete we should be rapidly permitting the Prince Rupert Gas line to keep works employed and lower costs by keeping those same skills and logistics systems employed. And yes interprovincial trade is important as well. But BC doesn't need GM parts from Ontario, Nova Scotia can't change regulations to import Albertan oil and replace the lost demand. New Brunswick might be able to sell more refined products to Quebec, but at the end of the day that's at Quebec's expense. Our economy is based on exporting commodities and importing consumer goods. If we can't export, making it cheaper to ship internally isn't going to offset. We need to be going full steam to reorient our export infrastructure. Not releasing the same proposal to do a study on high-speed rail we see every year. I supported high speed rail every other year, but right now every dollar we have needs to be invested in exporting east and west..
    11
  3. If you're real; what do you think we're living off your success? Because we trade with you? What do you think will happen to your export industries? We produce oil and you refine it to gas. This is like a wheat farmer selling to a flour mill, and having the flour mill expecting us to buy as much as we sell wheat. It makes no sense. We supply you materials that you turn into your own exports. Canada has the 10th largest trade deficit of anyone you trade with. Why are we receiving higher tariffs than China?
    11
  4. There is, lets call it a non 0 chance, that this suggestion ends up in a boondoggle - but I'd say its worth the risk. Government should buy HBC in bankruptcy, keep a few flagstone shops open, open a bunch of small order to locations, and revamp the Bay's Core Business model to be the Canadian Amazon. Then release it from government control and turn it into a customer owned co-op. I would love a large Canadian online retailer, I would love if it were a Co-op, and I am one of those people who would like the bay to hang in there even though I don't use it.
    10
  5. You should also cover A Users Guide to Restructuring the global trade system. Written by Stephen Miran, Trumps chief economist
    8
  6. The data center/Ai growth should be something Canada is trying to pull, and very specifically Labrador. Labrador is drastically oversupplies with electricity, to the point lack of demand is actually pushing consumer prices up. Its obviously freezing half the year. The intercontental line between europe and North America runs through Newfoundland, allowing ease "access to market". And it has very little in the way of economic opportunity. Newfoundland at the same time gets over a thrid of its entire GDP from oil. Newfoundland should be building itself into a hub of tech.
    7
  7. Something I think needs to be discussed in Canadian politics is the sale of The Wheat Board to the Saudis. Who supports oil in Alberta? Everyone, but most importantly the Conservatives. Who makes up the conservative base? Largely farmers. Canada, a major competitor to the the Saudis, allowed the Saudis a near monopsony on the sector of our economy which, through politics, arguably has the most influence on our oil industry.
    6
  8. If we try to join OPEC or cut oil production, aside from the physical difficultly in reducing SAGD outputs, what happens next? Does Trump cut off RRPs to Thunder Bay and cut off the pipelines through Michigan? If we reverse Pipleline 7A to import oil from overseas to southern Ontario, does he blockade the St. Laurent? We're going to throw everything we have at an impluse of Trump's. When does the US Army walk into Alberta?
    5
  9. The issue isn't failing to see weaning off oil, imo, it's failing to see declining prices. I know that sounds similar, but I'd compare it to the rust belt. The world still needs iron, but you can't run an economy around it. Imo, Alberta needs to push investment into Carbon Fiber produced from Bitumen to create an alternative demand Geothermal, to make use of Drilling and Geological fluid transportation expertise, and to leverage existing equipment. Carbon Capture, which I think is a very limited applicability, but I think Canada is the best in the world at it and nursing the technology now if properly leveraged could put us in a Global position. A new way to move oil. I'd settle for a Keystone XL to the US Gulf, which is probably going to happen now, but what I would really like is an Eagle Spirit type pipeline connecting to North BC with a connected series of refineries to diversify our product and market, or else something like bitumen pucks that can easily be shipped by rail and treated like coal.
    5
  10. We need our own government to create a Crown Corporation to engage in minimg.
    5
  11. A lot of Alaska also depends on tourism
    5
  12. Mines need flow through shares and tax deductions, perhaps refundable, for exploration. Environmental assessments are important... In the Rockies and BC. In the Tundra and Boreal forest, the ecosystems evmxist over vast distances with little variations, and is largely green desert in terms of animals or biodiversity. Water has to be protected, we can't have contamination run off, but this area that was under ice for 100s of thousands of years should not be viewed as a pristine and delicate ecosystem; its a system of weeds living on bed rock. Bigger riskes are earth worms and invasive beetles, and we need the government to have money to deal with that. I don't think these American tariffs are going anywhere. I think we should push for having any tariffs on our manufacturing put into the Sovereign wealth fund and invested into Canadian non-energy industries, particularly mining.
    5
  13. If Canada is going to peacefully share north America with the US, and it's really the only way we do share North America, we need to sell them water. I believe we should follow the Great Recycling and Northern Development Canal. Unlike the absurd proposal around Alaska refrenced, this is a partical and low impact option to get access to large quantities of Fresh water.
    4
  14. I really appreciate this discussion
    4
  15. @qjsharing2408  and the profit. But clearly the issue is not enough capital and firms not able to engage on long time lines, both areas a crown Corp can support. When the risk is the government saying no, it seems to be reduced when it's the government trying to say yes.
    4
  16. My biggest fear is that the combination of Trumps Tariffs, lower global demand from Chinas EV push+ economic slow, a return of Russian oil, and a Saudi price war will will plument prices. Alberta will be exporting Bitumen for decades. The Midwest US is built around it. But if the price we're getting is only $30 a barrel, you get no investment, no tax revenue, no good employment. The bigger problem is Fort Mac. Refineries in Alberta can't use Bitumen. So, we upgrade bitumen into lighter SynCrude. Almost all the oil converted to Syncrude comes froma strip mining operation around Fort Mac. And between the mining operations and the upgraders, this is some of the most expensive oil in the world, maybe the most expensive barrel being produced. And unfortunately this is where all the high paying blue collar jobs are. I'm deeply worried about cheap light oil replacing syncrude. A lot of syncrude goes to Ontario and Quebec via US pipelines. But beyond that, oil could move North from Dakota, and my worst fear is a reversal of Transmountain to bring cheap over see light crude to Alberta. If the mining operations shut down, we'll have 10s of thousands of high paying blue collar jobs disappear in Alberta, all centered on Fort McMurray. All going on EI, at the same time as Provincial revenues are being slashed and collapsing Exports are making the CAD plumet. And that will be a national issue. Port cities will struggle with falling imports. Our stock market will collapse if SynCrude (the company) and Suncor write of reserves. CN rail has almost a third of its cargo related to O&G. We desperately and urgently need to diversify our economy. Im worried next year is the point of collapse and Mining will come on line at reduced capacities after defered spring maintenance. We have a regional economy that nearly disappeared during Covid, thats going to drive a provincial depression and national recession if we aren't very skillful with our trade policy over the next few months.
    4
  17. "A 25% rise in Oil Prices" is not going to be the reality. We supply half their oil, but the vast majority goes to the midwest theough Enbridge Mainline system. And we have no alternative market at all for these 4M bbl/day. Whats going to happen will be generally consistent prices paid by US refineries, kept relatively high by Bakken crude from North Dakota and Barges bringing crude from Texas up to Mississippi, and some increased imports from the Atlantic through Pennsylvania pipelines if our output drops. Our output won't significantly drop, however, because the SAGD operations that feed the US can't be turned off without long term damage (In Covid, Mining production was down some 40%, insitu output was nearly unchanged) and because they have low operating costs, and producers will accept lower prices. The real loaer will be the Government of Alberta, because Royalities are on a scaled system, and lower profits have a much more dramatic effect on Albertas budget. The other big issue is the oil mines themselves. They are very expensive to operate and ultimately produce a light oil product, and competitive with US shale oil. If its price is increased, refiners are likely to displace it. To some extent this can be offset by having Ontario and Quebec refiners buy more Syncrude and reduce Bakken imports, and a competent policy might include requiring exports to mix Syncrude into DilBit at some level. But this is the biggest risk point, shutting down the oil mines would kill Fort McMurray and destroy an enormous amount of high wage blue collar employment.
    4
  18.  @BarbMacdonald-uv9zd  I agree. But they didn't. And now it is right now.
    3
  19. Did you post the comment calling this a great interview or time deaf first? I agree with your point on wanting good jobs, but they can't all be oil. We need a leader to come in and say to Alberta: You will start putting all your royalties into an investment fund and investing that money in non oil and gas sectors in Canada And say to the rest of the Provinces: you will allow a pipeline or we will pull equalization payments. But this only works if the other provinces get something out of it. You wouldn't let your neighbor store the fuel tank for their gas station under your garden for free. Canada has for a long time had Dutch disease, oil makes the CAD strong and pushes out manufacturering investment. We need our oil revenues going back into Canadian investing so people can get those good jobs.
    3
  20. Step 1: Prorouge Parliament so that its impossible to legislate because it might help your party
    3
  21. US Banks are allowed in Canada, telecommunications I agree. Grocery store I'm confused by since I've been to Walmart and shop at Costco. But in terms of supply management I disagree. We don't need the good middle class farm jobs that support rural communities being destroyed by hormone laden milk out of a factory farm in the US. I don't want that at all. We allow the US quotas to sell tariff free, and they don't use the quotas, because their milk does not meet health standards.
    3
  22. Why is there never discussion on the deflationary aspects on our exports. Oil prices will collapse if demand is impacted, which means demand must be constant, and therefore prices will decrease 10%. Alberta is going to get cooked.
    3
  23. I genuinely can't imagine something stupider or more harmful to Canada than proroguing government over the period Trump takes the presidency while threatening to place 25% tariffs.
    3
  24. Pensions, and in particular the CPP should be more engaged in these long term Canadian projects. The CPP should have to review future CPP tax revenues when selecting an investment, since obviously over seas investments only return profit and no taxes.
    3
  25. Honestly, nothing that large scale is needed. We just need to Connect Edmonton to Site C and Calgary to Revelstoke, and both cities to each other, so that Alberta can access cheap hydro when the wind doesn't blow and BC can buy cheap renewables when it does. Same with the East coast, we just need to match wind with Quebec and Newfoundland hydro. Honestly the biggest thing is somehow getting Quebec to give a fair deal to Newfoundland. (We should also be pushing investment for data processing centers into Labrador like nobodies business). That mostly just leaves Toronto, where I think the answer is Nuclear, but a Bipole line from Northern Manitoba and/or a connection to Quebec could work, it's an extreme distance either way. The last thing is Saskatchewan, who really love their coal power plant, and honestly I'm okay with letting them keep it for a bit it's such a tiny blip in the picture. I'd say ideally they get connected to Manitoba eventually to do the same wind for Hydro Trade as Albert/BC, but it's much greater distances for much smaller markets. But, it would allow them, potentially, to sell solar power to Ontario through Manitobas hydro lines, particularly solar in the evening while Saskatchewan still has sun for an hour or two.
    3
  26. If we don't rapidly fix this, and ensure industry that we can maintain trade ties, Canadian Auto Manufacturing is dead. This alone could be terrible for any long term prospects, just the idea of tariffs. Labling this as Americans will pay 25% more for cars is wrong. First of all, the majority of Americans won't buy a new (to them) car in the next 4 years. Many of those will be used cars. America has existing parts manufacturing, and lots of time to create manufacturing before an impact is felt by the public, and most importantly we're only talking about parts, the entore car would never see such a drastic price increase. Canada needs to address this rapidly. Any tariff exposure here will rapidly kill off an industry which has been hesitant to remain in Canada to begin with and as a long term prospect is unlikely to grow
    3
  27.  @wesswainson254  I will still argue that turning it into a co-op farmers could opt into, which also buys and sells on an open market, would have been a far preferable option. Selling it to the Saudis for a bigger cash deal was a mistake imo. It also killed any shipping out of Churchill right as we start to discuss opening the Arctic ocean.
    2
  28.  @wesswainson254  the only reason they came to an end was Saskatchewan over paying, no? Plus global wheat prices have been higher since 2010 overall, so that's a confounding factor
    2
  29. Its a nice wish list, but 1) how do you secure a trade deal with a guy who is ripping up the trade deal of false terms? 2) 30% of the budget? Simply how. And do you understand how hard it is to fire a government employee? 3) would be nice, but I don't think the Conservatives (haven't been the PCs for over two decades) are going to run a massive deficit 4) again how? And schizophrenia is a weird way to describe high prices. The houses aren't like confused about their prices. 5) AGAIN, how? While cutting the budget back 30% to boot? PP has been pretty clear we won't be meeting 2% spending goal. Honestly, we need to decide what the point of our military even is before you can make it functional. 6) I guess that would be the point of our military? We could build some airfields maybe for the planes we don't have and can't afford. Secure it from who, anyway? Because the only threat to it in reality is the country to our south, and there is no way we are securing it against them.
    2
  30. Useful things the Cons actually can and probably will do 1) get rid of the bogus gun restrictions 2) Get rid of internet censorship Bs meant to give money to legacy media 3) stop the capital gains increase
    2
  31.  @BarbMacdonald-uv9zd  right now, to have new trade partners, would be incredibly difficult and requires an enormous build out of new infrastructure. I'm not saying that's a bad thing to do or the government is doing a good job. But definitely not easily done
    2
  32. @raphaellagdameo7811  As I said, I have always previously been very supportive of High-speed rail - although frankly Ottawa should be cut out, it increases project cost by an order of magnitude for what could be an easy transfer from Cornwall. But frankly who is making this trip? You aren't going to be running enough trains that people are commuting every day from Kingston to Toronto, certainly not to an extent it impacts housing prices on the lower end. Maybe some executives will choose it over flying but most of them will choose a teams call. And if we are seriously going to try to fight these tariffs, there isn't going to be a lot of money thrown around for tourism. At the end of the day we have rail already, and busses and a Highway for cars. I don't think cars are as efficient as a train, but what's the cost of high-speed rail vs the incremental saving? If our economy is good, and you can say a Canadians time is worth $20 an hour, then it's worth it. But if we're looking at mass unemployment and a collapsing CAD, and suddenly our time is worth half that, it's not worth it. The stimulus impact would be beneficial, but we have better projects that earn us export revenue to support the CAD to choose from. And frankly it's not as though the project is expected to break the ground in the next 5 years in any event..
    2
  33.  @chickenfishhybrid44  the Protectionism point is saying there are no tariffs. So BC wine can be sold without an Extra BC tax. Whether or no the government owned Liquor store decides to buy BC wine is a seperate concern..
    2
  34. I think this is really a non issue with battery storage becoming commercialized. The 2h units we see being built now deal with the frequency control, which allows them to buy and sell power regularly through the day and provide return on capital. Which also lets you turn off NG plants, and since a 2h reserve into the evening is available, let's you uprate NG plants to Cogeneration. Of course, Storage like this works best with Solar. I think as we see Solar with short batteries grow in capacity we'll see existing NG plants uprated in this way to grow NG capacity for the night periods, while burning less gas overall by not operating inefficiently in the day to load follow and not operating overcapacity in the evening. In terms of wind in Alberta though, the simple solution is connections between Edmonton-Site C and Calgary-revelstoke. Allows you to sell power to BC and California when it's windy (less over supply on the local grid let's NG operate at raised levels constantly), while importing cheap Hydro when it's not to avoid NG plants monopolizing prices. We already have the Calgary - Edmonton connections. On the coal point, particularly in Texas where fracking to produce all the NG has such significant leakage, a critical Coal plant might actually be lower emissions - likewise in Alberta where NG is coming from fracking in the North West. It's what China has been doing since they don't have gas, you hear all about China building coal capacity but it's much more efficient than people realize. The much higher capital cost is the killer, imo, since expectations are storage will drop enough to outcompete, whereas NG has less risk of stranded assets. But I do have to point out most coal stations are not bituminous, and that is more expensive than more common Lignite. I'd also like to see large oil Sands SAGD operations move to Nuclear steam production, and through Cogeneration provide a relatively stable baseload to industry around Edmonton. And I'm very hopeful for the investment that's gone into Hydrogen in Alberta. Hydrogen might be an excellent way to adsorb solar and particularly wind surpluses. If cheap hydrogen can be produced, then you can upgrade any carbon feedstock into synthetic NG. It won't matter if it's from coal, or ideally, bitumen, adding Hydrogen can get you all the petrochemicals and light fuel you need without methane emissions from Fracking. I think the best possible outcome would be an upgrader in BC at the end of Transmountain able to produce oil to order specifications to sell to a premium to refineries who need it to balance other blends bought on the market.
    2
  35. Respect for saying Russia could in fact use a Nuke. I think its unlikely and shouldn't dominate our strategic policy, but I'm tired of most commenters acting like its utterly impossible.
    2
  36. Really needs to be clear. We have a coach. Hes just off in the chamge room drinking himself into a coma. He could quit and have someone do this job. He just refuses to.
    2
  37. He's only destroying the part of the Industry that uses pistons. The Tesla part will be better for the lack of competition
    2
  38.  @linebrunelle1004  What's your point ?
    2
  39.  @tdpay9015  who would hurting Quebec's and BCa electrical sales to Democrat leaning states help us? Even if it hurt certain Americans, it would only hurt Democrats, and Trump isn't going to change policy for them.
    1
  40. @Buzzable, the Americans are the one starting the trade war. America let's more drugs and immigrants into our country than the reverse. This isn't Mexico. I don't know how you can expect the solution to an issue clearly not based on facts to be fixing problems that don't exist.
    1
  41. Elastic in Demand doesn't just mean Uranium prices. Trump would probably love to see Nuclear and BC/Quebec hydro more expensive to justify more Coal generation. Just another way to label lower CO2 power as expensive. And again, we can hurt California and New York all day. Trump isn't going to change policy over it, that isn't his base. Potash is better. But at the same time Trump will be forcing a peace deal on Ukrainian and lifting Russia Sanctions, who will be flooding the market with Potash.
    1
  42.  @tdpay9015  Elastic in Demand doesn't just mean Uranium prices. Trump would probably love to see Nuclear and BC/Quebec hydro more expensive to justify more Coal generation. Just another way to label lower CO2 power as expensive. And again, we can hurt California and New York all day. Trump isn't going to change policy over it, that isn't his base. Potash is better. But at the same time Trump will be forcing a peace deal on Ukrainian and lifting Russia Sanctions, who will be flooding the market with Potash.
    1
  43. @Buzzable, the Americans are the one starting the trade war. America let's more drugs and immigrants into our country than the reverse. This isn't Mexico. I don't know how you can expect the solution to an issue clearly not based on facts to be fixing problems that don't exist.
    1
  44. @LelandWolf-zt4wz  Trump will just hand out Agricultural subsidies.
    1
  45.  @tdpay9015  in terms of Potash, I believe the US will just end up buying from Russia if we did this, and because Trump intented on returning Russia to the world market seemingly 1 way or another, Russia will end up swamping the global markets. This is true for many of our commodities on a global market. In regards to Uranium, I think the global market, quantity and value of imports needed, and ability to reprocess waste currently illegal that could be easily brought on line of the US was short on energy make this a very weak threat. And the fact that coal plants (which Trump strongly supports because it generates Domestic coal production in red states) are ideally suited to replacing nuclear will see higher demand will be a policy goal.
    1
  46. @tdpay9015  in terms of Potash, I believe the US will just end up buying from Russia if we did this, and because Trump intented on returning Russia to the world market seemingly 1 way or another, Russia will end up swamping the global markets. This is true for many of our commodities on a global market. In regards to Uranium, I think the global market, quantity and value of imports needed, and ability to reprocess waste currently illegal that could be easily brought on line of the US was short on energy make this a very weak threat. And the fact that coal plants (which Trump strongly supports because it generates Domestic coal production in red states) are ideally suited to replacing nuclear will see higher demand will be a policy goal.
    1
  47. @wesswainson254  the wheat pool and it's evolution only disappeared because Sak wheat bought it for way more than it was worth and promptly collapsed. Alberta Wheat pool didn't fail in anyway.
    1
  48.  @emilschattner3407  this is entirely correct. We need better port access and better internal mobility for goods and labour.
    1
  49.  @Willowgirl2015  it sure seems Canadian whenever you want a pipeline built through another province.
    1
  50. @jodyperyk1978  have you ever considered that the reason no one wants a DilBit pipeline built through their province is Alberta refuses to share any of the revenue? If half of that funded the Federal government, Alberta would see more revenue, because the rest of Canadians would see a benefit and not just a risk. But we did just build you that nice new pipeline over a mountain. And for the record I support Keystone XL, although I think it's a far from ideal project. Mass Commercialization of those bitumen pucks that can be loaded and shipped like coal, or the Eagle Spirit pipeline for large-scale upgraded oil to the Pacific, would be better. Keystone cements our role as a 0 value added exporter of crude bitumen focused entirely on the US, which will ultimately end in us facing steep price discounts when Russian volumes return to Europe. But competition between Chicago and Texas refiners is better than no competition at all, and we might be able to export some internationally, or even domestically to Irving and Quebec, from the Gulf.
    1