It's time to Grade Trudeau


Mowich
Conservative
+5
#31
Trudeau should try walking the walk on climate change

You have the dullards at home and abroad resisting the need for action. There are the petty critics leveling accusations of hypocrisy at those bold enough to take action on things like single-use plastics. And then there’s the tinfoil brigade who thinks carbon dioxide is simply wonderful stuff and the Earth can’t have enough of it. No, it’s not easy being green.

Say a prayer, then, for Justin “Carbon Tax” Trudeau who just winged his way to Japan on his 35-year old plane (GHG emissions = ?) for the G-20 Summit, where the debate on climate change won’t last as long as a fart in a hurricane, such is the geopolitical distemper of our times.

How weak will the climate change program be in the land of the Kyoto Accord? Well, the Americans have apparently already pressured the Japanese into downgrading the G-20’s previously agreed climate change language on the Paris Accord in the Summit communiqué.

Sorry climate emergency, the G-20 will instead be about Donald Trump and Xi Jingping, as the world waits to see whether a showdown can be averted between the United States and China. Will a trade truce be struck? Will the tariff walls come down? Will Huawei be allowed to resume its rapid creep across the West’s critical telecommunications infrastructure? Will Huawei’s Meng Wangzhou be bartered as part of a deal?

One thing we do know is Trump is coming into the meeting on blazing form. He’s already dumped on host (and frequent golfing buddy) Shinzo Abe, accusing him of being willing to sit back and watch a World War III between the U.S. and China on a Sony TV.

He’s also been tetchy about people asking about his bilateral meeting with his Russian handler. And he’s gone and accused former Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller of committing crimes ahead of Muller’s appearance before Congress.

No, even Mother Nature couldn’t push climate up the agenda under these circumstances. But given climate change is so central to the Trudeau brand and its prospects for re-election, what could Trudeau do to put it front and centre at home and abroad?

For one, he could start by staying at home at bit more often.

Air travel is a huge contributor to carbon emissions and much of international summitry is useless. Why go be a carbon-emitting fly on the wall in the Trump-Xi show, i.e. where Canada’s views aren’t solicited or listened to when given? Sure, it would be wonderful if Trudeau could buttonhole Xi on the margins of the G-20 to demand the release of our two abducted Canadians, but given the Chinese won’t even take our phone calls right now the chances of such a meeting are slim.

Instead of being ignored, why not announce that until further notice Canada will be dialling into future Summit sessions? Sure, it will drive the Global Affairs bureaucracy nuts, but it would send a message and be talked about. The Greenies would love it. And, sure, if another global economic depression arrives you go and meet face-to-face, but has a G-20 meeting truly mattered since about 2011 or so?

The same flight discipline should be applied at home, too. Instead of running a contest to ride the Liberal campaign plane around the country, as the Liberals are now doing, or taking the Challenger to Florida on holiday twice in one week, Trudeau should announce that, going forward, he will be restricting his travel and doing his announcements via video conference. Imagine how a campaign full of digital rallies, or a good old-fashioned (and less carbon intensive) train ride across Canada, would look and feel?

Mixing the Luddite with the high tech would start a different green conversation to the merits of carbon taxation and help counter any allegations of hypocrisy. It would finally put Trudeau’s money where his mouth has been for the past four years.

Because one of Trudeau’s main weaknesses is absolutely that he is a “do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do” politician. He railed against rich people getting child benefits throughout the 2015 campaign and then put two nannies on the 24 Sussex payroll the day after he won. He said the woman must always be believed on sexual harassment and kicked members out of his caucus for abuse, but then threw away the standard when a credible allegation was made against him. And he banned single-use plastics only to use them a few days later at a constituency meeting.

Yes, the flak for the single-use gaffe was overdone, but it does illustrate the difficulty in changing embedded behaviour. That is the climate change conundrum in a nutshell: everybody wants to do something as long as they don’t have to do much of anything.

Seeing a leader like Trudeau walking the walk—truly walking the walk—by restricting his enormous footprint and doing things differently would be a welcome bit of principle on climate change. Because as it stands, the Liberals’ position is that their plan would do a better job at not meeting Canada’s targets than the Tory plan.

Being a climate champion is hard work because it involves upending an entire way of life. If the Prime Minister of Canada is willing to do it, it makes it harder for others to say they won’t do their bit.

https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/trud...limate-change/

 
pgs
Free Thinker
+1
#32
Quote: Originally Posted by Mowich View Post

Trudeau should try walking the walk on climate change

You have the dullards at home and abroad resisting the need for action. There are the petty critics leveling accusations of hypocrisy at those bold enough to take action on things like single-use plastics. And then there’s the tinfoil brigade who thinks carbon dioxide is simply wonderful stuff and the Earth can’t have enough of it. No, it’s not easy being green.

Say a prayer, then, for Justin “Carbon Tax” Trudeau who just winged his way to Japan on his 35-year old plane (GHG emissions = ?) for the G-20 Summit, where the debate on climate change won’t last as long as a fart in a hurricane, such is the geopolitical distemper of our times.

How weak will the climate change program be in the land of the Kyoto Accord? Well, the Americans have apparently already pressured the Japanese into downgrading the G-20’s previously agreed climate change language on the Paris Accord in the Summit communiqué.

Sorry climate emergency, the G-20 will instead be about Donald Trump and Xi Jingping, as the world waits to see whether a showdown can be averted between the United States and China. Will a trade truce be struck? Will the tariff walls come down? Will Huawei be allowed to resume its rapid creep across the West’s critical telecommunications infrastructure? Will Huawei’s Meng Wangzhou be bartered as part of a deal?

One thing we do know is Trump is coming into the meeting on blazing form. He’s already dumped on host (and frequent golfing buddy) Shinzo Abe, accusing him of being willing to sit back and watch a World War III between the U.S. and China on a Sony TV.

He’s also been tetchy about people asking about his bilateral meeting with his Russian handler. And he’s gone and accused former Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller of committing crimes ahead of Muller’s appearance before Congress.

No, even Mother Nature couldn’t push climate up the agenda under these circumstances. But given climate change is so central to the Trudeau brand and its prospects for re-election, what could Trudeau do to put it front and centre at home and abroad?

For one, he could start by staying at home at bit more often.

Air travel is a huge contributor to carbon emissions and much of international summitry is useless. Why go be a carbon-emitting fly on the wall in the Trump-Xi show, i.e. where Canada’s views aren’t solicited or listened to when given? Sure, it would be wonderful if Trudeau could buttonhole Xi on the margins of the G-20 to demand the release of our two abducted Canadians, but given the Chinese won’t even take our phone calls right now the chances of such a meeting are slim.

Instead of being ignored, why not announce that until further notice Canada will be dialling into future Summit sessions? Sure, it will drive the Global Affairs bureaucracy nuts, but it would send a message and be talked about. The Greenies would love it. And, sure, if another global economic depression arrives you go and meet face-to-face, but has a G-20 meeting truly mattered since about 2011 or so?

The same flight discipline should be applied at home, too. Instead of running a contest to ride the Liberal campaign plane around the country, as the Liberals are now doing, or taking the Challenger to Florida on holiday twice in one week, Trudeau should announce that, going forward, he will be restricting his travel and doing his announcements via video conference. Imagine how a campaign full of digital rallies, or a good old-fashioned (and less carbon intensive) train ride across Canada, would look and feel?

Mixing the Luddite with the high tech would start a different green conversation to the merits of carbon taxation and help counter any allegations of hypocrisy. It would finally put Trudeau’s money where his mouth has been for the past four years.

Because one of Trudeau’s main weaknesses is absolutely that he is a “do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do” politician. He railed against rich people getting child benefits throughout the 2015 campaign and then put two nannies on the 24 Sussex payroll the day after he won. He said the woman must always be believed on sexual harassment and kicked members out of his caucus for abuse, but then threw away the standard when a credible allegation was made against him. And he banned single-use plastics only to use them a few days later at a constituency meeting.

Yes, the flak for the single-use gaffe was overdone, but it does illustrate the difficulty in changing embedded behaviour. That is the climate change conundrum in a nutshell: everybody wants to do something as long as they don’t have to do much of anything.

Seeing a leader like Trudeau walking the walk—truly walking the walk—by restricting his enormous footprint and doing things differently would be a welcome bit of principle on climate change. Because as it stands, the Liberals’ position is that their plan would do a better job at not meeting Canada’s targets than the Tory plan.

Being a climate champion is hard work because it involves upending an entire way of life. If the Prime Minister of Canada is willing to do it, it makes it harder for others to say they won’t do their bit.

https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/trud...limate-change/

But if the Prime Minister won’t do his bit , why should I ?
 
Jinentonix
No Party Affiliation
+6
#33  Top Rated Post
It's not just Groper though. I've noticed that those with money who scream the loudest about the climate are the worst offenders when it comes to emissions and other aspects of their "carbon footprint".

But here's the thing the AGW crowd doesn't get. Zero emissions is a total impossibility until we figure out zero point power generation. And even then we'll still need fossil fuels and other carbon-based resources for all the shit we like to have.
 
Danbones
Free Thinker
+4
#34
Inheritance does not necessarily equate to intelligence or actual scientific acumen.
 
Danbones
Free Thinker
#35
We could always be using a system based on Hydrogen peroxide, but noe, that would be feasible, affordable, easy to modify existing items for, would produce only pure air elements and water for pollution, and would make perfect sense.
 
Curious Cdn
No Party Affiliation
#36
Quote: Originally Posted by Danbones View Post

We could always be using a system based on Hydrogen peroxide, but noe, that would be feasible, affordable, easy to modify existing items for, would produce only pure air elements and water for pollution, and would make perfect sense.

Meet HMS Explorer, a.k.a. HMS Exploder ... the Royal Navy's experimental Hydrogen Peroxide powered submarine in which the crew had neither hair nor eyebrows, the stuff is so unstable ....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Explorer_(submarine)
 
Decapoda
+1
#37
Here's how Justin Trudeau promised change and didn't deliver

Budget not balanced

Electoral reform reneged

Indigenous reform still rocky

Scandals overshadowed


Disregarding the many failures this CTV article missed....just taking into consideration the points in article alone, he deserves a...

--FAIL--
 
Hoid
#38
Quote: Originally Posted by pgs View Post

But if the Prime Minister won’t do his bit , why should I ?

Why should you actively oppose it?

If you want to pose a real question.
 
Danbones
Free Thinker
#39
Quote: Originally Posted by Curious Cdn View Post

Meet HMS Explorer, a.k.a. HMS Exploder ... the Royal Navy's experimental Hydrogen Peroxide powered submarine in which the crew had neither hair nor eyebrows, the stuff is so unstable ....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Explorer_(submarine)

So what are you saying...?


You drink g ass all the time and it's perfectly safe....like the weed killer is?
(LOL!)
Have a nice shot of chlorine gas, it's safe and stable like horse poop stink too.

say...





Who knew?

Madeleine Albright says 500,000 dead Iraqi Children was "worth it" wins Medal of Freedom


ttj1776
Published on May 2, 2012
Madeleine Albright says 500,000 dead Iraqi Children was "worth it".....wins Presidential Medal of Freedom from Obama

As the anniversary of probably one of the most infamous responses in broadcasting history approaches, the woman who uttered it is shortly to be awarded "the highest honour" that America bestows upon civilians — the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

Madeleine Albright, Iraq's Grim Reaper, of course, confirmed on Sixty Minutes (May 12, 1996) that the deaths of half a million children as a result of the absolute, all-embracing deprivations of the UN embargo were: "A hard choice, but the price, we think the price is worth it."

One cynical blogger, was so incensed that the header read: "Genocidal war criminal wins Presidential Medal whilst invoking Holocaust memories."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omnskeu-puE

Yep...GAS and isr oil is perfectly safe for everyone young and old.
Last edited by Danbones; Jul 23rd, 2019 at 03:17 PM..
 
MHz
#40
"A hard choice, but the price, we think the price is worth it."
What makes you think 'we' was a reference to America and not 'the Jewish people that are in control as that is who she takes her orders from.


What makes you think the decade of sanctions was the only time those methods have been used in the past. Cuba, Iran after 1979 (the year she also became a nuclear threat) or even Russia after the 1990 fall.


Economic sanctions would include bad medicine as well as no usefull. The 1918 flu is an example of how many they are willing to kill via 'medicine'. The total possible deaths would have to include the Black Death and the 200M it may have and even the death in Venezuela this year should be included to qualify just how little they care about 500,000 rag-tag children.
DU munitions used to be in the news a lot back then as some villages were dusted with that material and the birth defects were 'monitored' with no relief offered. That all stopped as soon a Japan blew up 4 reactors in a week, they now have a whole island that can be studied because that radiation is 'good for people'. A low dose that keeps on giving for a few 100 years will get them 'changes' that aren't the overdose that went on in Iraq.

A vid on South Africa admits diseases were used as the first shot in a war mean to exterminate the local as the war that followed would be 'one sided in the extreme there as well as Australia and North America rather than there were many accidental deaths. Diseases would have worked both ways and no explorers died from diseases they caught from 'the locals'.


The 'wicked witch of the world' would have been using 500M people in all when she said 500,000 was low enough to be worth it. That many probably means the sanctions were doing just what they were supposed to do. Gaza and the long term effects on a persons mental outlook has had 70 decades were they were not interrupted by having to kill all the witnesses. I'm going to go out on a limb and saw she had already stopped caring about the numbers long before she was ever in the position she reached when she laid the law down for all 'lesser races'. The stench includes the lie about recently finding out she was Jewish. Jerod may have clued her in.

https://time.com/4649987/madeleine-albright-donald-trump-muslim/

Madeleine Albright Says She's 'Ready to Register as Muslim' to Protest President Trump



Albright called attention to her own diverse background in a post on Twitter, noting that she was “raised Catholic, became Episcopalian & found out later my family was Jewish.”
 
MHz
#41
Quote: Originally Posted by Danbones View Post

So what are you saying...?

Yep...GAS and isr oil is perfectly safe for everyone young and old.

If you keep the part out where using it in a leaky stove will drive you insane due to the poisonous gasses rather than 'Cabin Fever' only comes from the uncouth who live in a cold climate most of the year. If you shoot holes in all of the stoves and the whole nation dies in one long winter are you insane or a master at war? (either should be shot on site and do 100 of their closest followers as a reminder to people in the future how bad of a 'mistake' that really was)
They should know the war is lost as their numbers get smaller every year compared to 'Us' and to come up with the solution of killing so many of us that the 1% at the moment will become more than the 50% that is the normal ratio for deciding that.

66% at the Vatican but nobody thinks any of them are sane anyway.
 
Tecumsehsbones
#42
Quote: Originally Posted by Jinentonix View Post

It's not just Groper though. I've noticed that those with money who scream the loudest about the climate are the worst offenders when it comes to emissions and other aspects of their "carbon footprint".
But here's the thing the AGW crowd doesn't get. Zero emissions is a total impossibility until we figure out zero point power generation. And even then we'll still need fossil fuels and other carbon-based resources for all the shit we like to have.

That's a new one. "Unless we can get to zero, there's no point in reducing."

I'll put it on the list.
 
MHz
#43
If we can judge the man at the bottom of the Totem pole of power when do the ones at the top get a chance to explain what they have learned so far and what would they change if they had the chance. 95 of the world's population could accept that God is now (2019.5) turned his face so He is at least looking on 'His people' again and allowing them to do something that can avoid the fate that is fitting for the entity that us Satan's version of 'Church and the Collection Plate' as covered in the 'harlot' verses. They expire before the two witnesses do and they are the only ones who die in the war of Jesus against Satan. 4 days after that war is 'lost' they are resurrected and the same level of plagues that came to Egypt will come onto the world in just a few hours starting at Jerusalem.

That is when God is calling the shots, until then the 'fate of Jerusalem and the world is 'up for grabs'.

The reference to 'wars' means there will always be strife and the armies that carry the sword in Romans:13 are directed by the government that runs the nation. It does not mean there has to be as much way as possible as assign that God has not returned. Moses dies at the age of 120 for a reason, nobody will live longer than that until the day the two witnesses are resurrected and then they and everybody that is alive after them will have a celebration and when they are 1,000 years old and sinless. They get to be witnesses to see God send Satan and the remaining fallen angels (2 are 'missing' as they are in the lake of fire and 4 are a stain on the ground called 'the river of blood' that is what comes out when He puts 200M angelic horsemen onto 'the wine-press')


A big celebration could be had if the UN was moved to Jerusalem from DC and London and the Vatican would 'have offices there' as they would be the bank conduit between the World bank and 'the Nations, there are about 200 at the moment and the UN can make or break any one or any group just so we know who is at the top) The last 200 years have seen the flow go from the nations into the banks (at year end) That money could not be spent if they tried as the goal is to keep everybody as poor as possible as financial freedom is easy to control and it is as big of a disability in a capitalist world as having 8 arms and no legs would be. The move would see the reverse happen and all that money would 'be a gift' from 'the Jews' as directed to them through various passages in their holy books as a change from the 'exodus wars era' to the time of prosperity for the land under the 12 tribes and for whoever they traded with. (wars in the era were 'civil wars' and they would be something a court would settle, first for the Jews and then the rest of the planet. Have the into as lowkey as possible and save the 'celebration' for a decade (or 7) later when justice has been served (and a lot of money collected to keep the free stuff coming)


Jer:25:28-28:

And it shall be,

if they refuse to take the cup at thine hand to drink,

then shalt thou say unto them,

Thus saith the LORD of hosts;

Ye shall certainly drink.
For,

lo,

I begin to bring evil on the city which is called by my name,

and should ye be utterly unpunished?

Ye shall not be unpunished:

for I will call for a sword upon all the inhabitants of the earth,

saith the LORD of hosts.
Therefore prophesy thou against them all these words,

and say unto them,

The LORD shall roar from on high,

and utter his voice from his holy habitation;

he shall mightily roar upon his habitation;

he shall give a shout,

as they that tread the grapes,

against all the inhabitants of the earth.





Translate that to a functioning ICC and the fines pay for round 2 of renovations. The 1st round is a 'gift' that is repaid at a modest interest rate over 70 years. That is based in the Social credit party in Alberta after the war. They bundled all personal debt and the World Bank covered it and once it was repaid the money in the black was called 'the heritage Trust Fund, once the Politicians found it a bunch of new golf courses were built. Poof, as they say.
 
Curious Cdn
No Party Affiliation
#44
Quote: Originally Posted by The Left View Post

Isn't prophet Adam I declare it's prophet Moses right.

Neither of them turned a prophet.

Try Jeremiah.
 
Twin_Moose
Conservative
+2
#45
Worried about offending Trump, 'flaky' Trudeau 'humiliated' fellow leaders during TPP trade talks: former Aussie PM

Quote:

Former Australian prime minster Malcolm Turnbull has accused Justin Trudeau of “humiliating” other world leaders during negotiations for a revamped Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal in 2017.
In a just published autobiography, Turnbull said he personally felt let down by Trudeau and upbraided him for embarrassing other world leaders when he failed to show up for a critical meeting.
Turnbull said he was scheduled, by coincidence, to meet with Trudeau after the no-show and the Canadian prime minister seemed more interesting in talking about his socks than the previous meeting.
“Justin always wore perfectly tailored suits that fitted like a glove, bright socks and on this occasion two-tone shoes,” wrote Turnbull. “‘What do you think of the socks?’ he asked, crossing his legs as he sat down. ‘Justin,’ I said, ‘we’re not here to talk about your socks’.”

Turnbull said Canada’s indecision on the trade deal also made Trudeau look “flaky.”

The meeting at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation conference in November 2017 was supposed to include the 11 countries that would eventually agree to a resurrected trade deal after U.S. President Donald Trump pulled his country out of the agreement in early 2017.
The new deal was informally called TPP-11, but Turnbull wrote that the other countries were so annoyed that they were ready to announce a TPP-10 agreement that excluded Canada.
It was generally assumed among the other leaders that Trudeau was putting the brakes on the new trade deal because he was concerned about offending Trump, Turnbull wrote in A Bigger Picture released Monday. Turnbull agreed with that, but said it was the wrong way to deal with the U.S. president.
“The best way to deal with Donald was to be up-front, frank and stand your ground; there was no other way to win his respect,” Turnbull wrote.


Canada eventually agreed to a new deal, called the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership or TPP-11, after coming to side agreements with several other countries.
Canada’s behaviour put a heavy wrench into the process in 2017, though, Turnbull writes.
At the time, Canadian officials blamed the no-show on a meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe running late, rather than any deliberate attempt to derail the negotiations. Turnbull’s account tells a different story.
After discussions with each country’s trade ministers, the leaders were under the impression that all that was left was to shake hands and smile for the cameras. For Vietnam, which was hosting the conference, the new deal was set to be a major diplomatic coup.
The leaders noticed that Abe and Trudeau were late for the meeting and some murmuring broke out. Abe soon came striding into the meeting looking “very flustered,” according to Turnbull.
When Turnbull asked him what was going on, Abe said, “Justin won’t sign. He’s pulling out.”
Asked if Trudeau was trying to scuttle the deal, Abe said he thought so.
“I was extremely disappointed with Justin and felt really bad for Shinzo Abe. He’d put so much into the TPP-11 and this was a very public humiliation. Likewise for Prime Minister (Nguyen Xuan) Phuc of Vietnam. He had dozens of cameras waiting to record the historic moment, and then it hadn’t happened,” wrote Turnbull.
Even more annoying for the other leaders was they felt they had “bent over backwards” for Canada during the negotiations, allowing for the clunky new name requested by the Canadian delegation, among other things.
Turnbull also felt that Trudeau had personally let him down. After initially believing that Trudeau had been unfairly cast as a “lightweight” by his critics, simply because of his youth and looks, Turnbull had come to believe that Trudeau was “more thoughtful than some of his reviews suggested.”
Now, he doubted himself. “This last minute backflip looked flaky. Had I misjudged him?” Turnbull wrote.
It was then that Trudeau met with Turnbull and mentioned his colourful socks.
“What, Justin, is going on? You have just humiliated our friend Shinzo, who happens to be the leader of the third largest national economy in the world,” wrote Turnbull. “And, if that wasn’t enough, you have humiliated our host, Prime Minister Phuc.”
Turnbull says that Trudeau was non-committal in the meeting and Turnbull began to feel like a “grumpy old man” scolding the younger leader. He warned Trudeau that he may have done a lot of damage to Canada’s standing with Japan.
The APEC conference soon devolved into a series of confused meetings between world leaders trying to figure out what Canada was up to.
Enrique Peña Nieto, who was then Mexican president, confided to Turnbull that he believed Trump was at the heart of it and that he was pessimistic about the Canadian prime minister changing his mind again.
Nieto told Turnbull that Trudeau had “lacked the strength to say ‘no’ months ago and now lacked the strength to say ‘yes’.”
In the following weeks, Canada raised issues around its music and television industry but, according to Turnbull, “it was still largely unclear what those concerns were.” In December, Japanese sources were floating the idea of pushing ahead without Canada.
On Jan. 18, 2018, Turnbull and Abe met to hammer out a solution. “We have to keep the train moving, we can’t stop. If Canada won’t come, make it a TPP-10,” said Turnbull.
A Canadian trade representative was due the next day and Abe hoped that Canada “might have a sense of guilt about their behaviour.” A Japanese negotiator presented the Canadians with two draft press releases about the deal, one excluding Canada and one including Canada and said “right now, we are pretty indifferent as to which one we issue.”
Less than a week later, Trudeau told the World Economic Forum in Davos that Canada was back in TPP-11, although he made sure to call it the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.

 
Avro52
+1
#46
Straight from Trudeau's paid for media.

There goes that narrative.
 
Twin_Moose
Conservative
+3
#47
Quote: Originally Posted by Avro52 View Post

Straight from Trudeau's paid for media.
There goes that narrative.

National post is one of only a couple that criticize Trudeau, not sure if they got any or how much of the bailout money.
 
Avro52
#48
Quote: Originally Posted by Twin_Moose View Post

National post is one of only a couple that criticize Trudeau, not sure if they got any or how much of the bailout money.

Post media is expected to get 8 to 10 million per year that's more than torstar.....so that's not just the National Post, that include the Sun as well.

Bye bye narrative.
 
Jinentonix
No Party Affiliation
+2
#49
Quote: Originally Posted by Walter View Post

He has a pretty wife.

Yeah, but she's a dumb as hell Celine Dion wannabe. When you're addressing a room full of Black people during Black History Month, it's not the brightest idea to bust out into some slave song.
 
Jinentonix
No Party Affiliation
+2
#50
Quote: Originally Posted by Tecumsehsbones View Post

That's a new one. "Unless we can get to zero, there's no point in reducing."

I'll put it on the list.

That's not what I said. But yeah, let's just knee-jerk more solutions to problems. It's worked soooo fecking well for us so far. And if you really think their plan is about reduction, think again. The amount of mining that will be required to have the resources to replace current energy output and then continue to meet growing demand is literally ecologically unsustainable. And especially if they plan on doing by 2050, well it will be completely impossible.
I left an article in another post but I'll use just one of it's examples. There's a silver mine in Mexico that is one of the largest anywhere. It's a huge open pit mine that encompasses something like 40 miles. It contains 11,000 tonnes of silver and will tap out in about another 10 years. In order to meet the silver demand required for such a venture as carbon-free by 2050 we'd need 130 more mines the size of the aforementioned one. And it turns out that mining, not farming or oil and gas extraction, but mining is the prime culprit in loss of wildlife habitat and other ecological destruction including fresh water.


The amount of other basic resources like copper, iron and tin will be in the millions of tonnes. Then there's all the rare earth elements that really leave a nasty mark from mining and processing.



All this green crap is doing is trading one kind of destruction for another. Christ, we've literally blown the tops off of mountains to get at the mineral wealth inside them. Keep that up and how much it will affect weather patterns?


Our best recourse is personal reduction. Both in energy and consumer goods. Let me lay you onto an amusing story about that shit. Years ago when I was stupid and still smoked I went to the store to buy some smokes. I had forgotten that they went up something like 10 cents a pack the previous night so when the girl rang them up I casually said, "Oh that's right, they went up last night". No complaint, just remembered. Some fat sow who had pulled up in an early 70's New Yorker and wheezed her way into the store to buy lottery tickets in the meantime, heard our little conversation and piped out, "Those of you who smoke and pollute our air shouldn't complain about the cost of cigarettes." I retorted, "You sure have a lot to say about polluted air after driving your gas-guzzling, poison-belching land yacht half a dozen blocks to drag your fat ass to the store to buy lottery tickets". I knew the neighbourhood and recognized the car. The poor girl behind the counter almost imploded trying not to burst out laughing.


I'm not some kind of environmental nihilist. But having studied a LOT of history I've learned that humanity has an amazing capacity for paving the road to hell with good intentions. Often times it's for an "immediate" feel good moment with little forethought about potential future consequences.
 
spilledthebeer
+1
#51
Quote: Originally Posted by Mowich View Post

Trudeau should try walking the walk on climate change

You have the dullards at home and abroad resisting the need for action. There are the petty critics leveling accusations of hypocrisy at those bold enough to take action on things like single-use plastics. And then there’s the tinfoil brigade who thinks carbon dioxide is simply wonderful stuff and the Earth can’t have enough of it. No, it’s not easy being green.

Say a prayer, then, for Justin “Carbon Tax” Trudeau who just winged his way to Japan on his 35-year old plane (GHG emissions = ?) for the G-20 Summit, where the debate on climate change won’t last as long as a fart in a hurricane, such is the geopolitical distemper of our times.

How weak will the climate change program be in the land of the Kyoto Accord? Well, the Americans have apparently already pressured the Japanese into downgrading the G-20’s previously agreed climate change language on the Paris Accord in the Summit communiqué.

Sorry climate emergency, the G-20 will instead be about Donald Trump and Xi Jingping, as the world waits to see whether a showdown can be averted between the United States and China. Will a trade truce be struck? Will the tariff walls come down? Will Huawei be allowed to resume its rapid creep across the West’s critical telecommunications infrastructure? Will Huawei’s Meng Wangzhou be bartered as part of a deal?

One thing we do know is Trump is coming into the meeting on blazing form. He’s already dumped on host (and frequent golfing buddy) Shinzo Abe, accusing him of being willing to sit back and watch a World War III between the U.S. and China on a Sony TV.

He’s also been tetchy about people asking about his bilateral meeting with his Russian handler. And he’s gone and accused former Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller of committing crimes ahead of Muller’s appearance before Congress.

No, even Mother Nature couldn’t push climate up the agenda under these circumstances. But given climate change is so central to the Trudeau brand and its prospects for re-election, what could Trudeau do to put it front and centre at home and abroad?

For one, he could start by staying at home at bit more often.

Air travel is a huge contributor to carbon emissions and much of international summitry is useless. Why go be a carbon-emitting fly on the wall in the Trump-Xi show, i.e. where Canada’s views aren’t solicited or listened to when given? Sure, it would be wonderful if Trudeau could buttonhole Xi on the margins of the G-20 to demand the release of our two abducted Canadians, but given the Chinese won’t even take our phone calls right now the chances of such a meeting are slim.

Instead of being ignored, why not announce that until further notice Canada will be dialling into future Summit sessions? Sure, it will drive the Global Affairs bureaucracy nuts, but it would send a message and be talked about. The Greenies would love it. And, sure, if another global economic depression arrives you go and meet face-to-face, but has a G-20 meeting truly mattered since about 2011 or so?

The same flight discipline should be applied at home, too. Instead of running a contest to ride the Liberal campaign plane around the country, as the Liberals are now doing, or taking the Challenger to Florida on holiday twice in one week, Trudeau should announce that, going forward, he will be restricting his travel and doing his announcements via video conference. Imagine how a campaign full of digital rallies, or a good old-fashioned (and less carbon intensive) train ride across Canada, would look and feel?

Mixing the Luddite with the high tech would start a different green conversation to the merits of carbon taxation and help counter any allegations of hypocrisy. It would finally put Trudeau’s money where his mouth has been for the past four years.

Because one of Trudeau’s main weaknesses is absolutely that he is a “do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do” politician. He railed against rich people getting child benefits throughout the 2015 campaign and then put two nannies on the 24 Sussex payroll the day after he won. He said the woman must always be believed on sexual harassment and kicked members out of his caucus for abuse, but then threw away the standard when a credible allegation was made against him. And he banned single-use plastics only to use them a few days later at a constituency meeting.

Yes, the flak for the single-use gaffe was overdone, but it does illustrate the difficulty in changing embedded behaviour. That is the climate change conundrum in a nutshell: everybody wants to do something as long as they don’t have to do much of anything.

Seeing a leader like Trudeau walking the walk—truly walking the walk—by restricting his enormous footprint and doing things differently would be a welcome bit of principle on climate change. Because as it stands, the Liberals’ position is that their plan would do a better job at not meeting Canada’s targets than the Tory plan.

Being a climate champion is hard work because it involves upending an entire way of life. If the Prime Minister of Canada is willing to do it, it makes it harder for others to say they won’t do their bit.

https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/trud...limate-change/






Oh no - you are mistaken! Being a LIE-beral Climatard IS HARD WORK because it involves so much DECEIT AND DECEPTION!



For instance - LIE-berals HAVE COMPLETELY FAILED TO EXPLAIN how fair it is to BANKRUPT ORDINARY PEOPLE


so the LIE-berals and their GROSSLY ENTITLED HOG PALS can continue living their carbon rich luxurious lifestyle!


AT OUR EXPENSE while we suffer and are DENIED!
 
Twin_Moose
Conservative
#52
Quote: Originally Posted by Avro52 View Post

Post media is expected to get 8 to 10 million per year that's more than torstar.....so that's not just the National Post, that include the Sun as well.
Bye bye narrative.

I guess they are the exception to the buy out, maybe a paid for critic
 
Hoid
#53
I give him A+ on the $9 billion student relief announcement.

About time he put some money into Canadians rather than companies.
 
spilledthebeer
+1
#54
Quote: Originally Posted by Twin_Moose View Post

I guess they are the exception to the buy out, maybe a paid for critic




Well - perhaps you should consider the source - Avro is NOT what I would call a reliable reporter!



And HE DID USE that qualifying word "expected" which allows for later REVISION of previously claimed B.S. by LIE-berals!



In related news - a quick look online says that Toronto Star has weekday circulation in GTA of 192,000



while Toronto Sun and its National Post cousin - owned by the same parent company - sell 240,000 papers weekdays!


Thus Post Media is selling OVER TWENTY FIVE PERCENT MORE PAPERS in GTA on week days than the Star



and thus OUGHT TO GET a bigger share of govt gravy if LIE-berals are stupid enough to hand it out!


In related news - Toronto Sun has ALREADY PRODUCED an editorial SCORNING the new LIE-beral slush fund and stating that


LIE-berals SHOULD NOT hand out gravy TO ANY CDN MEDIA!



In related news - NO LIE-beral nor any LIE-beral friendly news media EVER ADMITTED WHO GOT WHAT SHARE



of the six hundred million dollar LIE-beral sluhs fund that Our idiot Boy set up before the 2019 election


TO REWARD CDN MEDIA "that LIE-berals Trusted"!
 
taxme
#55
Quote: Originally Posted by B00Mer View Post


F. for Failure

"F" for we the normal people are fuked.
 
Avro52
+3
#56
Quote: Originally Posted by Hoid View Post

I give him A+ on the $9 billion student relief announcement.
About time he put some money into Canadians rather than companies.

Companies employ Canadians who then pay taxes to subsidise students to the tune of billions a year then companies hire said employees who then pay taxes...etc

Lets hope we have given companies enough to continue this symbiotic cycle.
 
Jinentonix
No Party Affiliation
+1
#57
Quote:

Say a prayer, then, for Justin “Carbon Tax” Trudeau who just winged his way to Japan on his 35-year old plane (GHG emissions = ?)

Actually in 2015 the PM's plane was upgraded to an Airbus Voyager A332. Which is just a non-commercial version of the A330-200. I don't know what emissions it generates but depending on how the cabin is appointed, you're looking at a fuel burn rate of between 5500 and 6300 kg/hr.
 
pgs
Free Thinker
#58
Quote: Originally Posted by Jinentonix View Post

Actually in 2015 the PM's plane was upgraded to an Airbus Voyager A332. Which is just a non-commercial version of the A330-200. I don't know what emissions it generates but depending on how the cabin is appointed, you're looking at a fuel burn rate of between 5500 and 6300 kg/hr.

You can afford it .
 
Jinentonix
No Party Affiliation
+1
#59
Quote: Originally Posted by pgs View Post

You can afford it .

Actually, when appointed as a commercial airliner and with just 150 of a possible 406 seats filled it's pretty much the most fuel efficient airliner in the skies right now. What that means is with just 150 passengers on board it's fuel efficiency is something like 94% that of other fully loaded airliners of similar size.
 
Avro52
#60
Canada cut number of stockpile storage locations for critical medical supplies by one third in past two years.

Trudeau's paid for media.