Why didn’t Trudeau want to link the Fort Mac fire to climate change?

[petros]

You are still missing the aspect of fire prevention didn't include thinning of the trees or eliminating debris on the forest floor as being a cause of why the fire grew so fast in the first place.

The sacred land that used to be flooded by beaver dams that provided jobs for first nations for 450 year's?

I'll stand by the data provided by environment Canada.

"from January to April 2016, Fort McMurray recorded 72 millimetres of precipitation based on water equivalent measurements. The 30-year average for those same months is 69 millimetres of precipitation."



There's no denying it.... They are 1 in the same

2 in the same.

 

[MHz]

If this is climate change then the east coast should have to dry the wood out before it will even catch fire at all, let alone a wildfire.

The sacred land that used to be flooded by beaver dams that provided jobs for first nations for 450 year's?

Who took the beavers? The Peace used to flood also and that lost a lot of wet-lands, it isn't like the area is shy on that and if they need more open water the move some of the moss around and you have a new lake for the birds, being in the swamp means nobody will be walking up to in when it isn't frozen.

 

[mentalfloss]

Canada 'Needs to Do More' to Mitigate Climate Disasters Such as Wildfires, Flood

 

[MHz]

It would seem to be cheaper and more effective to repair the damage, rather than trying to prevent all forest fires.

 

[JLM]

It would seem to be cheaper and more effective to repair the damage, rather than trying to prevent all forest fires.

Not sure about that! Perhaps you are only considering monetary costs.

 

[MHz]

If anybody is tracking the Red Cross donations this might help as it shows how they skim off most of the funds for themselves.

https://www.propublica.org/article/...ress-refused-to-level-with-people-haiti-money

Here are more details from the report:
The Red Cross wasn’t able to detail how tens of millions of dollars were spent

On a page recently added to its website, the Red Cross says the so-called program costs for Haiti — roughly $70 million — went to “monitoring the use of donations, informing donors about how their money has been spent, paying skilled staff members to carry out the work, renting secure office space, and ensuring that dollars are leveraged as far as possible.”
But pressed by Grassley’s investigators, the Red Cross could not give an accounting of the oversight it says it did with the money. After repeated requests by Grassley’s investigators over the course of months, the Red Cross finally last month produced a document with a narrative description of oversight but no financial details.
In general, the Red Cross itself doesn’t know how much money it spent on each project in Haiti because of a “complex, yet inaccurate” accounting system, the report found.
The report echoes confidential findings made by consultants hired by the Red Cross, which were previously reported by ProPublica and NPR. An internal evaluation of one of the group’s water and sanitation projects found there was “no correct process for monitoring project spending.” Another assessment found that the group’s figures on how many people helped in a hygiene project were “fairly meaningless.”
In response to Grassley’s investigation, the Red Cross for the first time posted online a list of specific projects in Haiti. But the accounting on the list, along with other materials provided to Grassley, raises more questions than it answers.
Documents provided by the Red Cross to Grassley show that the charity at times spent large sums of money on management even when it appeared to be simply writing a check to other organizations that were doing actual projects.

 

[JLM]

If anybody is tracking the Red Cross donations this might help as it shows how they skim off most of the funds for themselves.

https://www.propublica.org/article/...ress-refused-to-level-with-people-haiti-money

Here are more details from the report:
The Red Cross wasn’t able to detail how tens of millions of dollars were spent

On a page recently added to its website, the Red Cross says the so-called program costs for Haiti — roughly $70 million — went to “monitoring the use of donations, informing donors about how their money has been spent, paying skilled staff members to carry out the work, renting secure office space, and ensuring that dollars are leveraged as far as possible.”
But pressed by Grassley’s investigators, the Red Cross could not give an accounting of the oversight it says it did with the money. After repeated requests by Grassley’s investigators over the course of months, the Red Cross finally last month produced a document with a narrative description of oversight but no financial details.
In general, the Red Cross itself doesn’t know how much money it spent on each project in Haiti because of a “complex, yet inaccurate” accounting system, the report found.
The report echoes confidential findings made by consultants hired by the Red Cross, which were previously reported by ProPublica and NPR. An internal evaluation of one of the group’s water and sanitation projects found there was “no correct process for monitoring project spending.” Another assessment found that the group’s figures on how many people helped in a hygiene project were “fairly meaningless.”
In response to Grassley’s investigation, the Red Cross for the first time posted online a list of specific projects in Haiti. But the accounting on the list, along with other materials provided to Grassley, raises more questions than it answers.
Documents provided by the Red Cross to Grassley show that the charity at times spent large sums of money on management even when it appeared to be simply writing a check to other organizations that were doing actual projects.

Is it realistic to expect every charity to contribute 100% of the donations to the cause? There's light and phone bills to pay and some of the workers are the bread winners for their family.

 

[MHz]

Perhaps you should read the fu*king article rather than defending their gouging the people making the donations in good faith. This is systematic of all the ones they were involved with. The bigger the disaster the bigger their gouging or do you think their wages are dependent on the size of the disaster.
I wonder how much they skimmed off the quake in the Indian Ocean a few years back?

Where did the Indian Ocean tsunami aid money go? | Global development | The Guardian
The public response to the 2004 tsunami was colossal, with more than $6.25bn donated. But where was it spent? And what was it spent on? We’ve got the data

5137M taken in and 1947M spent that leaves 3190M for 'expenses'. You have to be joking when you claim all their expenses are 'valid'.

 

[MHz]

Apparently JT is a lot smarter than Obama is.
Obama Falsely Links Fires to Climate Change at Yosemite | GOVERNMENT SLAVES

 

[JLM]

Apparently JT is a lot smarter than Obama is.
Obama Falsely Links Fires to Climate Change at Yosemite | GOVERNMENT SLAVES

Ummmmmmmmmmmm...........................................Nah!

 

[MHz]

That would make him smarter than both of you then.