Green Energy Scams Costing Taxpayers Billions

[Bar Sinister]

You are STILL avoiding the fact that the Canadian economic/socialist system has destroyed business in your country and that the the top 10 companies are banks and oil companies which the government has decided to keep their mitts off of since they destroyed their country from the last fiddling.

Socialism does not work and it INEVITABLY leads to totalitarianism. I know that everyone has told you that it was the right wing that does so but all you had to do was pay attention in history class and you've shown that you didn't.

Sadly you know nothing about the Canadian economy. What has hurt the Canadian economy more than anything is the almost unrestricted ability of foreign transnationals to buy up Canadian companies. This action has been condoned by both the Liberal and Conservative parties. The last PM who actually attempted to do anything about it was Pierre Trudeau. Unfortunately he was followed by Brian Mulroney a PM who actually went out of his way to encourage foreign takeovers of Canadian firms.

As for socialism causing totalitarianism I guessed you missed the fact that the most democratic nations on the planet are all socialist. 20 most democratic countries in the world...do you live there? | Angloinfo World: Expat Life

And save your pathetic insults for someone else - all that shows me is that you have run out of intelligent things to say.

 

[Wake]

Sadly you know nothing about the Canadian economy. What has hurt the Canadian economy more than anything is the almost unrestricted ability of foreign transnationals to buy up Canadian companies. This action has been condoned by both the Liberal and Conservative parties. The last PM who actually attempted to do anything about it was Pierre Trudeau. Unfortunately he was followed by Brian Mulroney a PM who actually went out of his way to encourage foreign takeovers of Canadian firms.

As for socialism causing totalitarianism I guessed you missed the fact that the most democratic nations on the planet are all socialist. 20 most democratic countries in the world...do you live there? | Angloinfo World: Expat Life

And save your pathetic insults for someone else - all that shows me is that you have run out of intelligent things to say.

So you tell me I don't know what I'm talking about and then you tell me that America owns all of the companies in Canada. Good move. You sound really bright. That STILL doesn't change the fact that the only large Canadian companies are banks and oil companies.

But I'm sure that in a grab for money to pay your socialized government they will soon sell those off as well. Though why anyone would want a Canadian dollar I don't know. As bad as the American dollar is the Canadian dollar makes it look like pure gold.

 

[Danbones]

Wake appears to work for an oil company. Expect a steady stream of Kochonomics form this source.

better then the steady stream of useless toilet cleaner at the box factory chickench!t from you

dearie

 

[petros]

That STILL doesn't change the fact that the only large Canadian companies are banks and oil companies.

Canadian mining companies are heavy hitters and have market control of several minerals.

 

[pgs]

Canadian mining companies are heavy hitters and have market control of several minerals.

CPR now there is a profitable company .

 

[Wake]

Canadian mining companies are heavy hitters and have market control of several minerals.

That's true but the WORTH of them aren't really large. They are just sole sources for some minerals.

Canada used to be tops in a lot until the decided to follow Great Britain into socializing everything.

 

[Bar Sinister]

So you tell me I don't know what I'm talking about and then you tell me that America owns all of the companies in Canada. Good move. You sound really bright. That STILL doesn't change the fact that the only large Canadian companies are banks and oil companies.

But I'm sure that in a grab for money to pay your socialized government they will soon sell those off as well. Though why anyone would want a Canadian dollar I don't know. As bad as the American dollar is the Canadian dollar makes it look like pure gold.[/QUOTE

Once again a deliberate misreading of my post. Either you can't read or you are too stupid to understand what I said.

This is what I was referring to. More of Canada is owned by foreigners than almost any other industrialized nation, about 20% of Canada's economy in total. That sends a huge amount of profits out of the country each year.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_ownership_of_companies_of_Canada

 

[Cliffy]

Canadian mining companies are among the worst human rights violators operating in third world countries. They hire goons and beat, and murder indigenous peoples for trying to protect their land and water. Makes ya proud to be Canadian, eh. Bunch of scum bags.

 

[Wake]

So you tell me I don't know what I'm talking about and then you tell me that America owns all of the companies in Canada. Good move. You sound really bright. That STILL doesn't change the fact that the only large Canadian companies are banks and oil companies.

But I'm sure that in a grab for money to pay your socialized government they will soon sell those off as well. Though why anyone would want a Canadian dollar I don't know. As bad as the American dollar is the Canadian dollar makes it look like pure gold.[/QUOTE

Once again a deliberate misreading of my post. Either you can't read or you are too stupid to understand what I said.

This is what I was referring to. More of Canada is owned by foreigners than almost any other industrialized nation, about 20% of Canada's economy in total. That sends a huge amount of profits out of the country each year.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_ownership_of_companies_of_Canada

If we agree on something stop trying to start arguments about it. It turns into nothing more than an exchange of insults which gains nothing for either of us.

This is a discussion of AGW. This was NEVER in any manner proven as a hypothesis and has out of nowhere become fact. And it isn't CANADA that did this. It is almost exclusively political sources like the IPCC and the Obama government which is thankfully over.

 

[Bar Sinister]

If we agree on something stop trying to start arguments about it. It turns into nothing more than an exchange of insults which gains nothing for either of us.

This is a discussion of AGW. This was NEVER in any manner proven as a hypothesis and has out of nowhere become fact. And it isn't CANADA that did this. It is almost exclusively political sources like the IPCC and the Obama government which is thankfully over.

I certainly agree with the useless exchange of insults. If you read my posts you will notice that I don't retaliate in kind unless someone insults me first.

And actually I really don't care about GW as much as I care about pollution. China is not really into green energy because it is afraid the world is getting warmer, it simply wants to cut down on the atmospheric filth created by burning coal and oil.

The interesting thing about attempting to lower greenhouse gas emissions is that it is a no lose situation. If man-made global warming is actually occurring then cutting down on emissions worldwide simply makes sense. However, if it is not then everyone gets air that is a little cleaner, and I can't think of a reason to argue with that.

 

[pgs]

I certainly agree with the useless exchange of insults. If you read my posts you will notice that I don't retaliate in kind unless someone insults me first.

And actually I really don't care about GW as much as I care about pollution. China is not really into green energy because it is afraid the world is getting warmer, it simply wants to cut down on the atmospheric filth created by burning coal and oil.

The interesting thing about attempting to lower greenhouse gas emissions is that it is a no lose situation. If man-made global warming is actually occurring then cutting down on emissions worldwide simply makes sense. However, if it is not then everyone gets air that is a little cleaner, and I can't think of a reason to argue with that.

If they sold it as pollution it might be easier to get behind , the hysterical calling of the end of the world is a little much to take .

 

[Cliffy]

If they sold it as pollution it might be easier to get behind , the hysterical calling of the end of the world is a little much to take .

I'm pretty sure that that is why it has been framed as GW and that carbon dioxide is the culprit so people will fight about it. It is a scam to cover up the fact that we are poisoning air, land and water. Some of the biggest culprits in land and water pollution are industrial farming methods: pesticides, herbicides and artificial fertilizers. And now we have the entire Pacific contaminated by plastics, all the chemical run off from agriculture, industry and pharmaceuticals and radiation leaking from Fukushima and Hanford.

 

[petros]

CO2 is a poisoning the air? There is no such thing as artificial fertilizer they are all just salts no matter the source. What is non-idustrial farming? Pulling a plow with a yak?

 

[Wake]

CO2 is a poisoning the air? There is no such thing as artificial fertilizer they are all just salts no matter the source. What is non-idustrial farming? Pulling a plow with a yak?

The third graders are being sold a bill of goods and Cliffy is buying.

 

[Bar Sinister]

If they sold it as pollution it might be easier to get behind , the hysterical calling of the end of the world is a little much to take .

As I said - it is a no lose situation. If the climatologists are right we avoid a world wide disaster. Mind you it wouldn't be the end of the world - the Earth would still be here, but there might be a few less humans.

And if the climatologists are wrong we still get cleaner air and better transport.

 

[EagleSmack]

The third graders are being sold a bill of goods and Cliffy is buying.

Cliffy is a liberal and will believe anything he's told to believe.

 

[petros]

As I said - it is a no lose situation. If the climatologists are right we avoid a world wide disaster. Mind you it wouldn't be the end of the world - the Earth would still be here, but there might be a few less humans.

And if the climatologists are wrong we still get cleaner air and better transport.

Why do only 36% of geoscientists (earth scientists) believe man is behind Climate Change?

 

[Wake]

As I said - it is a no lose situation. If the climatologists are right we avoid a world wide disaster. Mind you it wouldn't be the end of the world - the Earth would still be here, but there might be a few less humans.

And if the climatologists are wrong we still get cleaner air and better transport.

Why gave you done a rapid side-step away from the questions I asked? What are YOU willing to do?

Also we aren't talking about "pollution" which you also plainly do not understand. Your entire rants on here have been about AGW and not pollution until cornered.

This isn't some sort of joke. YOU are the one claiming that "man" is destroying the atmosphere and so what YOU personally are willing to do to help prevent this is of utmost importance.

Why do only 36% of geoscientists (earth scientists) believe man is behind Climate Change?

When you are behind something for political reasons it doesn't really matter who says what.

 

[Bar Sinister]

Why do only 36% of geoscientists (earth scientists) believe man is behind Climate Change?

Where did you get that made up number? Oh, let me guess you did a personal survey of all climatologists. Here's my number. I'd guess the other 3% are shills for oil and coal companies.

https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm

Why gave you done a rapid side-step away from the questions I asked? What are YOU willing to do?

Also we aren't talking about "pollution" which you also plainly do not understand. Your entire rants on here have been about AGW and not pollution until cornered.

This isn't some sort of joke. YOU are the one claiming that "man" is destroying the atmosphere and so what YOU personally are willing to do to help prevent this is of utmost importance.

Do you want an intelligent exchange of ideas or do you just want to exchange insults? Your latest post adds nothing to the discussion and quite frankly I'm a little tired of having a "discussion" with someone who immediately resorts to insults when he can't prove his point any other way. I've stated my point of view - now try to find something wrong with it.

 

[Wake]

Where did you get that made up number? Oh, let me guess you did a personal survey of all climatologists. Here's my number. I'd guess the other 3% are shills for oil and coal companies.

https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm

Do you want an intelligent exchange of ideas or do you just want to exchange insults? Your latest post adds nothing to the discussion and quite frankly I'm a little tired of having a "discussion" with someone who immediately resorts to insults when he can't prove his point any other way. I've stated my point of view - now try to find something wrong with it.

I have several times given you a reference: Climate Change: No, It

You COULD have actually read the his review of the problems but apparently since it isn't directly from NOAA you've decided it isn't worthwhile.