Canadians will forever be indebted because of Jim Flaherty.

BornRuff

Time Out
Nov 17, 2013
3,175
0
36
You don't talk other to hear your own voice and miss out on everything else.

Lol, I think that this thread is pretty strong evidence that I often do talk to try to hear other people's voices. Some other people just don't want to be heard.
 

BornRuff

Time Out
Nov 17, 2013
3,175
0
36
Is all this happening right under you nose without you knowing? Who obligated me to educate you?

Lol, you tell me. I have no idea what is going on in that brain of yours.

You seem to think that the pipelines are not a part of this, which is pretty strange. Maybe you have not heard about the oil that we have in Alberta?
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,214
14,250
113
Low Earth Orbit
Apparently you have no clue so why even bother?

I have one word that will lead you to where you need to be. Corridors. Govts worldwide are building them. Do some googling.
 

BornRuff

Time Out
Nov 17, 2013
3,175
0
36
Does anyone else now understand what I am dealing with here?

Just for the record, apparently Petros thinks that oil has nothing to do with the direction of Canadian development.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
Lol, you tell me. I have no idea what is going on in that brain of yours.

You seem to think that the pipelines are not a part of this, which is pretty strange. Maybe you have not heard about the oil that we have in Alberta?
Not just oil, nat gas, potash, mineral deposits in the MacKenzie, then we have the ring of fire in Ontario. Next we have water, land and climate for massive food exports. Just to name a few.
 

BornRuff

Time Out
Nov 17, 2013
3,175
0
36
Not just oil, nat gas, potash, mineral deposits in the MacKenzie, then we have the ring of fire in Ontario. Next we have water, land and climate for massive food exports.

Definitely all big things for Canada. Hopefully this is what he is speaking of.

That being said, I don't love the idea of Canada being too dependent on natural resources. It is always ideal to have a more diversified economy that is not solely depending on world market prices.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,214
14,250
113
Low Earth Orbit
Does anyone else now understand what I am dealing with here?

Just for the record, apparently Petros thinks that oil has nothing to do with the direction of Canadian development.
You done reading up already? Absof-ckinlutely amazing BumFluff.

What did you learn?

Spill it.
 

BornRuff

Time Out
Nov 17, 2013
3,175
0
36
You done reading up already? Absof-ckinlutely amazing BumFluff.

What did you learn?

Spill it.

Lol, if you want to have a discussion about something, you are going to have to tell me what it is. Until then, have fun.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
Definitely all big things for Canada. Hopefully this is what he is speaking of.

That being said, I don't love the idea of Canada being too dependent on natural resources. It is always ideal to have a more diversified economy that is not solely depending on world market prices.
The world is developing and countries want resources from a stable supplier. Companies invest in countries that are stable. The majority of oil - ng is controlled by countries where many do not have strong legal protection for investments. Look at Russia and Yukos oil company that was stolen and bought by Gazprom for pennies on the dollar. That is one small example. Why did Mexico open their oil industry to private investment?
 

BornRuff

Time Out
Nov 17, 2013
3,175
0
36
Corridors just like I said.

How many new ports are being built in Western Canada and where?

You seem to almost be making a point.

I am not going to do your research for you. If you have a point, feel free to make it.

The world is developing and countries want resources from a stable supplier. Companies invest in countries that are stable. The majority of oil - ng is controlled by countries where many do not have strong legal protection for investments. Look at Russia and Yukon oil that was stolen. That is one small example. Why did Mexico open their oil industry to private investment?

There is no question that there is a ton of money in natural resources. That certainly isn't a bad thing.

My worry is about how these industries are so heavily impacted by changing market prices.

We certainly need to develop these resources, but it would be nice to see more effort put into trying to maintain a diversified economy.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,214
14,250
113
Low Earth Orbit
The world is developing and countries want resources from a stable supplier. Companies invest in countries that are stable. The majority of oil - ng is controlled by countries where many do not have strong legal protection for investments. Look at Russia and Yukos oil company that was stolen and bought by Gazprom for pennies on the dollar. That is one small example. Why did Mexico open their oil industry to private investment?
That takes building trade corridors to get our abundance of goods to market doesn't it? More pipes, more trucks, more rail and more ships correct? Are we currently building trade, transport and energy corridors along with hubs for distribution and collection of goods?

I know you know butt does BumFluff?
 

BornRuff

Time Out
Nov 17, 2013
3,175
0
36
That takes building trade corridors to get our abundance of goods to market doesn't it? More pipes, more trucks, more rail and more ships correct? Are we currently building trade, transport and energy corridors along with hubs for distribution and collection of goods?

I know you know butt does BumFluff?

Ok, cool. This kind of stuff is obviously important and good to have, but it really supports development. It isn't the driver of development itself. If you don't have anything to trade then this stuff is all moot.

Based on the stats, oil and other resources have really been the driver of most of our economic growth as of late, and will likely continue to be so for a long time. Even within the corridors you are speaking of, oil transport has really taken center stage.

Getting back to the point of the thread though, is this something that Flaherty was heavily involved in? Stuff like infrastructure and trade fall under different ministries.

Is this related to what we were talking about, i.e. what is the best way to reduce the budget deficit, sacrifice or inflation? I think this is actually a pretty good example of how those are not the only two choices. You can also support economic growth to raise revenues.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
That takes building trade corridors to get our abundance of goods to market doesn't it? More pipes, more trucks, more rail and more ships correct? Are we currently building trade, transport and energy corridors along with hubs for distribution and collection of goods?

I know you know butt does BumFluff?
Case in point Australia is bringing a large LNG online in the near future. BC is way behind on getting theirs approved and shovel ready.
I understand the Australia LNG was approx 30 billion. Why can they move so fast and we cannot
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,214
14,250
113
Low Earth Orbit
If your goods can't reach market they don't get developed.

Have you heard of the AP Gateway and corridor project? GTH Regina or CenterPort in Winnipeg?

Case in point Australia is bringing a large LNG online in the near future. BC is way behind on getting theirs approved and shovel ready.
I understand the Australia LNG was approx 30 billion. Why can they move so fast and we cannot

Because the Aussies are aware of the importance to their future.