“Spend less money” appears to be the suggestion, and he’s right. If you’re a businessperson you must be aware of arithmetic and the dangers of excessive debt.
This isn’t some abstract problem. It’s going to hurt people. Remember in the 90s when governments were downloading costs all over the place and health care systems were cutting back? That was a consequence of Trudeau and Mulroney deficit spending in the preceding two decades, and they were never this nuts.
Yeah. And Canada was projected to be at 90% of GDP before the coronvirus hit, and Trudeau’s government just borrowed 1/3 of GDP in one freaking year, and Trudeau is planning to do that again next year, except he’s going to add several major new entitlements and a huge ‘stimulus’/‘green’ spending plan. We haven’t seen the cost estimates yet, but they are going to be enormous.
I’m aware of all of that. I’m also aware that Starlink is going to be available widely in rural Canada LONG before the federal government’s nationwide broadband program would be built out. Hell, it’ll probably be available before they finish the environmental impact analysis. I’m also aware that it’s fiscally and environmentally foolish to run hundreds of thousands of miles of copper or fiber when a better option that requires no infrastructure other than a pizza box sized terminal will be available shortly (or now, if you sign up for the beta). People are already reporting up to 60 mb/s and 50ms latency, and the system still only has about 2% of its satellites up. SpaceX has just applied to the FCC for approval to build five million terminals, and rural Canada is one of SpaceX’ s prime markets for Starlink. And there will be competition, as several other LEO constellations are in the plannjng stages by other companies.
If Canada builds out rural internet, we’re going to have thousands of miles of dark fiber and unused copper in a few years. And billions of dollars in wasted money.
Of course, satellite internet doesn’t create those ‘good union jobs.’
Yeah, those kids belong in institutions instead of with their parents, so you can get labor. Unless of course you get driven out of business by the taxes needed to pay for it all or by a major recession driven by unsustainable debt. Or did you think someone else will pay for it, or the government can borrow as much money as it gets in revenue every year without financial consequence?
How will it affect your hiring if the EI premium triples, including the part you pay, to cover the cost of the new, expansive EI system? How will it affect you if everyone gets $2,000 per month, and you can’t hire anyone anymore for anything close to minimum wage?
Do you use energy in your business? How will it affect your hiring when your energy costs double or triple?
Businesses are targets to this government. They’re already talking about doubling the corporate tax rate.
You just don’t like my answers, which are that governments should interfere in the economy less, be good fiscal stewards of our tax money, and recognize that they can’t and shouldn’t attempt to ‘plan’ the economy any more than we should try to ‘plan’ an ecosystem.
We need a good safety net for people who fall through the cracks, not expansive or universal benefits for all - especially when paid for with borrowed money and high taxes on producers.
If that’s the ‘angry western’ point of view, guilty as charged. I like to think it’s the reality-based point of view, as opposed to the belief that we can borrow unlimited money with no consequences, that Justin Trudeau and his band of progressives will be able to create a million jobs through borrowing and spending, that people will work just as hard and creatively if they are given a universal income, or that the best thing you can do for Canadian children is to incentivize their parents to institutionalize them at the earliest age possible.
@Sam_Stone, I don’t have anyone working for me that makes minimum wage or anywhere near it. Our median salary is in the $85000 range, and yes, I’m willing to pay more tax for a just society. Enhanced EI is not going to prevent me hiring a well paid software developer, although it may make cleaning my office more expensive.
On top of that, I’m already paying for Pharmacare for 60 families. Managing this on a federal basis will likely not change my portion significantly to move it from employer pay to government paid.
My issue with rural broadband is that EVERY government has talked about it for the last 2 decades. Harper did jack squat to move it along, neither did Paul Martin.
Am I on the list for Starlink? You bet your ass, I am. If the CRTC fails to approve the license, I will be pissed. But if they are building 2m ground stations this year, no more than 20% of the capacity will be available in Canada.
I’m not for spending money needlessly, but let’s invest where and when we can. If we starve the engine of fuel, we know that we’ll stall the economy. CEWS and CERB will be looked back upon as saving Canada. A roaring economy needs things like oil, which brings jobs to the prairies and Atlantic Canada. A roaring economy brings students and high skilled immigrants to Canada.
We have different philosophies. I am the son of a Liberal party stalwart - a riding president and fundraiser in PET days - and a lifelong Liberal myself. I believe the Liberals picked up the Natural Governing Party tag for good reason and their programs have generally moved the country up the economic ladder over the last 100 years. So yes, I support these initiatives.
Do all your employees agree?
This is all fine in principle, but there’s costs to suddenly jacking the country’s debt up by these amounts. TNSTAAFL. You’d think people had just totally forgotten the past.
My employees are free to vote for whomever they wish, but I’ll run my business in a way that makes sense for me. If I drive employees away, I won’t have a business anymore.
I agree TANSTAAFL, we’re just arguing about what should be included on the bill.
Biden cancelled Keystone, and other lines might be in trouble in places like Michigan. Keystone was unsurprising - an easy environmental win for Dems. Upset lefties if not addressed. Said he’d do it.
Canada’s economy is a lot broader than the oil sector. Which hoped for more consultations, lobbying and compromise. Canada is a big, cold country. We still need oil. Pipelines are a reasonable way to provide it. Don’t really deserve a lot of the negativity, in my view. There are different opinions on when it is economically best to use oil sand, and political and environmental considerations.
Trudeau was possibly hoping for a balance between jobs and the environment. A “grand bargain” that pleased few. Companies are multinational. But what should Trudeau do? Is he to blame, or Harper who was more sympathetic to valid Western concerns? Why doesn’t Canada insist on refining its own own or restoring the drug industry and manufacturing (possibly of vaccines) that once existed in Montreal?
I’m going to bump this. I think it was hidden low on the list since Canadian niceties are not high priority for most Dopers.
Those of a more conservative bent in Canada are already starting to blame Trudeau for Biden’s election and subsequently fulfilling one of his election promises. Particularly in newspapers in the Post Chain.
I’m not clear on just how it’s Trudeau’s fault, but it might have something to do with how 98% of The Post Chain is owned by American hedge funds.
Predicting their response is easy. No matter what Trudeau does, it’s a disaster and all his fault. If he’d somehow found a way to get Biden to not cancel this pipeline, they’d have made up something about Trudeau selling out Canada to “radical leftists”.
Considering the current price of oil vs. the costs of producing oil in Alberta, they’d probably blame him for “letting the leftists buy all our oil at below cost”, or some such thing.
My prediction is that Trudeau will be blamed for not getting compensation or placing sanctions against the USA for cancelling Keystone XL. I’m a little surprised that Trudeau has not been blamed for Derek Sloan being ousted from the Conservative party yet.
I think it was a mistake for Kenney to rely on a permit denied by Obama but approved by Trump. It should have been clear that the USA is going through a see-saw on policy, e.g. see Iran deal. Relying on long term deals with the USA right now seems fraught with danger. Alberta guaranteeing a $7 billion loan was a serious error in judgement. I think Kenney is in serious trouble come the next election.
Well, let me ask this question. At what point would it make economic sense for Canada to have its own refineries? What do the Newfoundlanders do?
I’m no expert on the matter, but I guess the analyse needs to look at the cost of developing such an industry at a time when people are trying to move away from fossil fuels, while acknowledging that this is not going to happen overnight, i.e., is it likely profitable to do so? The other factor I suppose is whether we can sell products from refined oil (I’m guessing that this should be less of an issue since at a minimum there is the domestic market).
Note, I’m ignoring any ethical issues as to whether we should facilitate continuing to use fossil fuels vis a vis climate change. I think that’s a factor, and is certainly a factor politically, especially for Trudeau who is trying to court both the environmentalists and industrialists.
At some point you either conclude that if the companies aren’t already doing this, it isn’t economically viable, or conclude that Capitalism doesn’t actually work the way everyone thinks it does.
Not necessarily. If there is refinery capacity south of the border, and a pipeline going there, that refinery capacity may be the most efficient way to refine, rather than doing it in Canada, due to economies of scale. But if the current pipelines are at capacity and no new pipelines can be built, then a refinery in Canada may become economically viable.
Change the variables, and the economics can change.
There are four major reasons we don’t refine our own oil:
It has become impossinle to build refineries, due to the massive amount of regulations around them and the fact that multiple groups (indigenous, environmental, NIMBY) have the power to shut down any large infrastructure project they either don’t like or feel didn’t wet their beaks well enough. Ask BC how their hydro project is going.
There are many regulations in the U.S. and elsewhere that demand gas be formulated differently in different states… These regulations are also subject to change, putting Alberta refineries at risk of the whim of U.S. regulators.
Refineries, if they can be built at all, take a long time. The industry average, sans any regulation, is something like 5-7 years. In this environment, I’d count on at least 10 years from approval to the first refined product being finished. And our leaders keep telljng us that they are going to ban fossil fuels by 3035. That won’t happen, but in that environment you’d be nuts to invest billions in new refinery capacity that may not even be allowed to open.
Okay, you have all this sweet gasoline to sell. Just how are you getting it to market, and why would you assume that you’ll manage to do that without every transportation option being shut down? The delivery would be even more difficult, because your customers are scattered all over.
You hear a lot about BC’s obstacles and Alberta’s concerns. One hears less about the refinery in Placentia Bay - but I guess Newfoundland has also been devastated by low oil prices and hydro debacles.
In all honesty, this one answer is pretty much the answer. Gasoline is no easier to transport than crude oil.
That seems an achievable deadline, if we hurry.
That isn’t even a remotely achievable deadline. Especially in North America, where every infrastructure project is hobbled by regulation and special interests.
Take BC’s site C hydro project, a not particularly large hydro project. First proposed in 1980, It finally made it to green light status in 2010. That kicked off a four year environmental review, and first ground breaking hapoened in 2015. It has since seen numerous legal challenges, came close to being cancelled several times, and just last year 200 ‘scholars’ sent a letter to Trudeau recommending cancellation on environmental grounds.
The project is scheduled to be finished in 2025, 45 years after it was first proposed and fifteen years after the project was formally started. And the way these thjngs go, we shouldn’t be surprised if it doesn’t open until 2030 - or never.
I could believe that we could get to 25-30% renewables in the grid by 2035 from 17% today, with new wind and solar projects that currently are in political favor. After that, you run into serious problems with grid stability without some massive battery storage, which opens up a host of new problems and costs. And battery storage is only good for short-term variance - it won’t help mitigate the huge difference in seasonal production of renewables in northern climates. We currently have no solution for that.
you missed the whoosh riffing on the typo there, Sam 