Stephen Harper government doesn’t understand Ontario, Justin Trudeau says

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,264
14,263
113
Low Earth Orbit
Stop interrupting their fantasy Petros, they're sensitive, lolz.

Stupidity and sensitivity are a bad mix. F-ck 'em.

You can do that better than me.


How many tax credits do you get?


I think you should get none, same for oil, same for green energy or any other business for that matter.


Let the market decide.
I get the same tax credits all businesses get. Don't you?
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
A little sarcastic irony will keep them at bay when there isn't some actual facts that should shut them up.

When he says 'let the market decide' what if the issue is 76% of a nation that is Muslim wants to elect a Muslim, even if he is an idiot, they still have that right, as proven by the US many times since 2000AD. Suddenly that rule no longer applies I'm suspecting.
 

Grievous

Time Out
Jul 28, 2014
1,009
0
36
Whitby
A little sarcastic irony will keep them at bay when there isn't some actual facts that should shut them up.

When he says 'let the market decide' what if the issue is 76% of a nation that is Muslim wants to elect a Muslim, even if he is an idiot, they still have that right, as proven by the US many times since 2000AD. Suddenly that rule no longer applies I'm suspecting.


That is why we have to wipe them out.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
That is why we have to wipe them out.
Reducing 'their' population so they were the voting minority was tried in 1948, the results visible today say that is a failed policy.

'We' only have to provide sanctuary to a religious group known as 'the Jews'. UN 181 and the UN Human rights for Children (and women) would take care of the 'legal' issues and a Court was designed just to hear all the little squabbles that would arise from a peaceful settlement rather than hostile acts that qualify as war crimes. The Courts could have been bust the last 65 years instead of the arms industry so that by itself makes it a failed policy unless another 65 years of perpetual war is 'the solution on the table'.
Jews want religious freedom give it to them along with the tax-free status that goes with it under the provision that any money they
hand out' has to be interest free unless it is for large construction projects. (or a fancy house)
That would give the 5M that live there a 'common trade' as it is building houses of worship and tourism would be the income. Arabs who are the majority gets grants from OPEC Nations like Saudi and Kuwait as they will also be funding a lot of heavy reconstruction in Syria and overseen by a Jewish Foundation for the Restoration of Eden just so no pennies get lost in the cracks.

If a 7 year peace deal makes people a bit skitterish make it a 70 year one (for the whole area) and make the first 7 years 'the clean-up' as that prophecy takes place when all wars have ended. The actual garden will be a virtual tour and the 10m Jews that live outside of Israel can do a yearly visit. Something a bit different than leaving body parts all over the place. A body is a body if it is slightly damaged or made into nothing more than a stain, how it got that way is a lot more important than a little important. 'We' might be powerless to prevent 24,000 children dieing a day, but when we willingly make it 24,001 the 'we' are off the rails.

That is why we have to wipe them out.
What happens when Muslims make up the voting majority in the UK? London would be cheering what is going on is Glasgow rather than beating people up that are from there. Let alone what will happen to the Monarchy when Christians aren't a large enough number to stop the checks being cancelled and the property confiscated (for the needy).
I agree it would be a radical change for the UK and I'm sure they can find another industry other than the arms one. Boats, become sailors and see the world while working for others who own the boats, give them to Israel so the Arab leaders can make sure they don't sit in port all the time.

You sure that is the right move, it's been used a lot in the past and we still have that 'reservation problem' from the last time we 'wiped them out'.

Any more talk like this and you will have to sit with Colpy and the usual suspects.
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
148
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
Yep, oil loses money all the time, what a risk that must be.


It was when oil was cheap, not any more.

Send me your disposable income and I'll get you into the 'sure thing' industry.... You can learn first-hand

They don't lose, at all.


Why create a tax credit for an industry that doesn't need it?


I wouldn't give a credit to any of them, green or otherwise.


Same goes for farms btw.

You don't get it, do you?... That tax credit to the agri sector subsidies YOU as the consumer.

I already went over this with captain in another thread and he accepted it.

It was a percentage of 2011 GDP which came out to around 20 billion for that year alone.

Bullsh*t I accepted that.... The numbers you quoted from the IMF included (in their definition of 'subsidy') car accidents as being a direct oil sector subsidy.

.... You really amaze me MF... You're not stupid, but you sure bend over backwards in twisting your logic to back a losing argument all in the name of not liking Harper
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,264
14,263
113
Low Earth Orbit
Send me your disposable income and I'll get you into the 'sure thing' industry.... You can learn first-hand



You don't get it, do you?... That tax credit to the agri sector subsidies YOU as the consumer.



Bullsh*t I accepted that.... The numbers you quoted from the IMF included (in their definition of 'subsidy') car accidents as:) being a direct oil sector subsidy.

.... You really amaze me MF... You're not stupid, but you sure bend over backwards in twisting your logic to back a losing argument all in the name of not liking Harper

Contacted by The Tyee, researchers from the IMF helpfully provided a detailed breakdown of Canadian subsidies provided to petroleum, natural gas and coal consumption. The lion's share of the $34 billion are uncollected taxes on the externalized costs of burning transportation fuels like gasoline and diesel -- about $19.4 billion in 2011. These externalized costs include impacts like traffic accidents, carbon emissions, air pollution and road congestion.

The report also referenced figures sourced from the OECD showing an additional $840 million in producer support to oil companies through a constellation of provincial and federal incentives to encourage fossil fuel extraction. This brought total petroleum subsidies in Canada in 2011 to $20.23 billion -- more than 20 times the annual budget of Environment Canada
Revenue of $34 Billion lost by not having a Carbon Tax are the alleged externalized cost of consuming gasoline and diesel and car crashes? How do you carbon tax a car crash? They are saying that money was given away to oil producers because it wasn't collected? A flat out lie.

Wow $840 Million in zero cash given tax credits that created how many $Billions and hundreds of thousands of high paying jobs in goods, labour, services in dry exploration or producing and maintaining of wells invested by industry and not a penny by Governments.

Is SK booming because of oil sands tax credits too? Did oil turn our economy around? We aren' oil dependent WTF did SK do right?
 
Last edited:

El Barto

les fesses a l'aire
Feb 11, 2007
5,959
66
48
Quebec
Quote: Originally Posted by GrievousView Post
Let the market dictate who survives.


That works for small businesses not industries that effect the economy.
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
148
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
The percentage of GDP was not based on IMF's definition of a subsidy.

I went with the IEA methodology because cap'n was so touchy about that one part of the IMF's definition.

IEA - Methodology for Calculating Subsidies

Give this a read MF and then get back to me, maybe this write-up will offer some perspective although I'm not holding out that you'll move from blind ideological bent to objectivity.

Separating fact from fiction in the claim that oil and gas companies are over-subsidized - Alberta Oil | Canada’s leading source for oil and gas newsAlberta Oil | Canada’s leading source for oil and gas news
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,340
113
Vancouver Island
Here's a new report showing we are the third highest fossil fuel subsidizing country (just behind the U.S. and the U.K.).

New Report Highlights Fossil-Fuel Exploration Subsidies in G7 Countries | Global Subsidies Initiative

The lion's share of the subsidies goes to Alberta and then Saskatchewan.


You know, the provinces that complain the most about equalization and public funding.

Still don't understand what constitutes a subsidy do you? Too bad the so called news sources you read don't understand the term either.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.
I agree.

One of the biggest factors that helped us at the onset were regulations that prevented banks from handing out loans to everyone.


True.

And the stupidity of bankers, a bloody 8th grade class could have done better.

BTW, who deregulated Wall Street?? Those damn Republicans, huh??

Nooo....Bill Clinton.

And who co-authored a (failed) attempt to re-regulate them in 2002??

John McCain.

Interesting.