Too funny. You 'never said is was bad to develop the oilsands', yet in the same post, you go on about not liking 'aggressive' investment into the oilsands.
What a laugh
If you are not going to read my whole post, at least read to the end of the sentences that you choose to respond to.
"What I did complain about is people who support aggressive investment in the oil sands
and then turn around and jeer at other parts of the economy that are now struggling based on the changes that the oil sands development contributed to. If oil is the way to go, lets do it, but instead of chastising sectors that are trying to adjust to a new reality, we should invest some of the money from the oil sands stuff into helping the other areas of the economy adapt."
How does this sound like I am bemoaning oil?
Sure... You bemoan the fact that the mfg industry will hurt because of a high dollar, but have no problem when the rest of the nation has their cost of living go through the roof to support mfg.
Again, please show me the quote where I "bemoan" this. All I have done is discuss what is going on. It is a lot easier to discuss this stuff if you stop getting emotional about it.
The basic facts simply don't support what you are saying.
Look here:
Consumer Price Index, historical summary (1993 to 2012)
CPI chugged along steadily with increases between 0-3% every year as the value of the dollar swung from near 60 cents to well over 1 dollar US.
If you travel or do cross boarder shopping, then you notice it more then, but that simply isn't that big a part of what most people spend their money on.
So, which is it? Drive the dollar really low to help the mfg sector or drive up the CPI for the entire nation?
Who here has ever suggested that the government should manage our exchange rate?
So, I guess that your opinion is that the country would be better-off financially and economically if the hundreds of billions of dollars invested in the oilsands never existed in the first place.
You're an economist, take a look at the total contribution that the oilsands companies make up of the TSE, national GDP and total tax contributions at the Fed level and get back to me on that, m'kay.
Honestly, you really need to read what I write. How does me saying "If oil is the way to go, lets do it" make you think I am against it?
If it's a zero-sum game like you are insinuating, then why do it at all?
Why do major companies, gvts, investment funds, etc do it at all if there is no benefit?
You have got a lot to learn BR
Nobody has used the term "zero sum" other than you.
I have simply described the basic fact that there are winners and losers in anything like this. There are certainly options that are better than others, but even the best plan still creates a certain amount of pain for some people.
The point isn't to never do anything that would ever create losers. That is an inevitable outcome of any plan, even planning to do nothing. The point is that we need to recognize not only the benefits, but the costs of the actions we take. By actually understanding what is going on, you can react with a full understanding of the situation.