President Joe Biden

whatithink said:
Are you going to ask Poland how to control the judiciary also? I assume you'd be good with the D's coming up with a new rule that causes a large number of the judiciary to have to "retire" so that they can then replace them - that would be following Poland's example too.

The same Polish government in a long running dispute with the EU over the rule of law.

Is "Hail Poland" meant to be ironic, given that their leaders would like a "Heil" when saluting them, given their inclinations?

Holding up the opinion of the Polish government is pretty risible given their actual inclinations.

And, fwiw, I don't agree with censorship etc. but Poland, FFS.
Click to expand...
Actually I think the theme is that country realizes there is a problem with tech companies who effectively control the town square. They don't like it.

Today we have a party that is fine with the censorship we are seeing.

So that is the point.

Amazing to see how many D leaders and talking heads in the news who have no problem with censorship
 
watfly said:
don't think we should hang Biden on the cross of mask wearing, that's just garden variety hypocrisy. Let's hang him on the cross of eliminating more jobs in the midst of a pandemic.
Click to expand...
I think you call politicians on hypocrisy.

I agree more importantly you call them on policies that costs money/jobs.

I vote based on economic issues as my main issue.

So I didn't like the reversal of the Keystone pipeline nor the banning of fracking on fed lands.
 
Desert Hound said:
Actually I think the theme is that country realizes there is a problem with tech companies who effectively control the town square. They don't like it.

Today we have a party that is fine with the censorship we are seeing.

So that is the point.

Amazing to see how many D leaders and talking heads in the news who have no problem with censorship
Click to expand...
The Polish leadership wants to control the town square, just like they want to control the judiciary. I'm sure they have wet dreams about how the Chinese can control everything. Using the current Polish leadership as somehow being bastions of freedom of speech gives your post zero credibility.

You don't need them to make the point.
 
watfly said:
I don't think we should hang Biden on the cross of mask wearing, that's just garden variety hypocrisy. Let's hang him on the cross of eliminating more jobs in the midst of a pandemic. F'ing brilliant. Right now I wish he would just help states that are struggling with the vaccine rollout. Like implementing financial ramifications for failing to reach some aggressive benchmarks.
Click to expand...

His strings are being pulled. Big government rarely/barely understands impacts of emotional policies. It's likely that shutting down the XL pipeline is going to INCREASE emissions - crude oil is still going to be delivered, just not through the pipeline. And of course there is the instant loss of jobs, which is just silly given the current economic conditions. There will likely be regulatory uncertainty for big investors. That will suppress future projects, jobs, etc.

Vaccine deployment is certainly an issue - plenty of blame to go around.
 
Grace T. said:
Awful.....also apparently an outbreak has taken place among the Guardsmen.

www.politico.com

‘We feel incredibly betrayed’: Thousands of Guardsmen forced to vacate Capitol

Guardsmen were later let back into facilities after an outcry from lawmakers.
www.politico.com www.politico.com
Click to expand...
And this is why politicians are such loathsome creatures. Never pass up an opportunity to create drama where there really isn't drama.

Yes, it's unfortunate that these troops had to take their break in a parking garage - not the end of the world though. Demonstrates poor planning on behalf of everyone. 25000 troops needs somewhere to go. Having them hang out in the capitol building on their breaks is dumb. Having them go back to their hotels is dumb. Having them go to a parking garage with just two sh!tters is dumb.

And, having 25000 NG troops in WA DC is/was dumb and cost the tax payer plenty of money. So I understand it correctly - our fearless government doesn't listen to credible chatter about the possibility of unrest on 6 JAN. Basic measures weren't taken to be able to contain/control/react to a large crowd (that had a permit). They storm the capitol building because a phalanx of 8 bike cops just isn't enough to stop a couple of thousand people that casually walk around unmanned barriers, given them unhindered access to a building that houses or legislative body. We then over react and deploy 25K NG troops from all over the country and place them in a deserted city. Brilliant work!
 
happy9 said:
His strings are being pulled. Big government rarely/barely understands impacts of emotional policies. It's likely that shutting down the XL pipeline is going to INCREASE emissions - crude oil is still going to be delivered, just not through the pipeline. And of course there is the instant loss of jobs, which is just silly given the current economic conditions. There will likely be regulatory uncertainty for big investors. That will suppress future projects, jobs, etc.

Vaccine deployment is certainly an issue - plenty of blame to go around.
Click to expand...
I thought the XL pipeline is already on hold, per the Supreme Court in July, pending environmental assessments in Montana. If that's the case, then there are no immediate jobs impact either way.

It seems to be a much broader issue, to me, anyway
  1. At the current price of crude (and for the last year) its, at best, marginally viable economically, i.e. price of crude > $60 is viable but under probably not when it costs $8B to $12B to build. Crude is running under $60 per barrel.
  2. There are already two other pipelines so why not just expand capacity (which they are already doing) on those or use those existing routes.
  3. The jobs created during construction (2 years) is around 40K, although probably not all at the same time. The permanent jobs created is around 50. The US needs to create 200K jobs per month in normal times to maintain the same employment levels, so while 40K is nothing to be sneezed at, its no panacea.
  4. This is some of the dirtiest oil out there, and if it spills - and they always spill - it will have very real environmental impact.
 
Desert Hound said:
I think you call politicians on hypocrisy.

I agree more importantly you call them on policies that costs money/jobs.

I vote based on economic issues as my main issue.

So I didn't like the reversal of the Keystone pipeline nor the banning of fracking on fed lands.
Click to expand...
I can't say as I'm a fan of fracking. IMV the direction should be renewables. I do get the short term gains, but the long term unknowns out weigh those, to me anyway.

Pros and cons of fracking: 5 key issues » Yale Climate Connections
 
whatithink said:
I thought the XL pipeline is already on hold, per the Supreme Court in July, pending environmental assessments in Montana. If that's the case, then there are no immediate jobs impact either way.

It seems to be a much broader issue, to me, anyway
  1. At the current price of crude (and for the last year) its, at best, marginally viable economically, i.e. price of crude > $60 is viable but under probably not when it costs $8B to $12B to build. Crude is running under $60 per barrel.
  2. There are already two other pipelines so why not just expand capacity (which they are already doing) on those or use those existing routes.
  3. The jobs created during construction (2 years) is around 40K, although probably not all at the same time. The permanent jobs created is around 50. The US needs to create 200K jobs per month in normal times to maintain the same employment levels, so while 40K is nothing to be sneezed at, its no panacea.
  4. This is some of the dirtiest oil out there, and if it spills - and they always spill - it will have very real environmental impact.
Click to expand...
The way I understand it, this project was well underway, clearing hurdles along the way. It's the most studied infrastructure project in american history.

as far as the green politics are concerned..mehhh. Their is always concern when dealing with petrol. This decision is 100% political and will have downstream economic impacts, near and long term. Direct/indirect job loss/gain will be argued until the nth degree. Petrol politics are complex. It's always more simple to look at it from a macro economic perspective.

I don't know the cost to expand existing infrastructure or how efficient that infrastructure is. Bottom line is that oil will be delivered, one way or the other. The Keystone pipeline already exists.

Is there environmental risk -sure their is. Will the Canadians still build it, but not cross the border into the US - Maybe. They could route it west to BC. We would have zero leverage on where that oil goes, who gets it, how much, etc, etc..
 
whatithink said:
I can't say as I'm a fan of fracking. IMV the direction should be renewables. I do get the short term gains, but the long term unknowns out weigh those, to me anyway.

Pros and cons of fracking: 5 key issues » Yale Climate Connections
Click to expand...
I will just say that for me the geopolitical benefits of being energy independent far outweigh any climate risks of fracking or the pipeline...at least in the short term until we can develop better alternatives.

I personally don't care for the unsightly aspect of solar and wind farms. I'm a big proponent of solar for individual buildings, and have converted two of our facilities with excellent results. Years ago I was the liquidating Trustee for the worlds largest wind power company, so I'm aware of many of its faults and efficiency problems (although I suspect some may have since been resolved since that time).

IMO nuclear energy and battery technology are far and away the best alternatives.
 
watfly said:
I will just say that for me the geopolitical benefits of being energy independent far outweigh any climate risks of fracking or the pipeline...at least in the short term until we can develop better alternatives.

I personally don't care for the unsightly aspect of solar and wind farms. I'm a big proponent of solar for individual buildings, and have converted two of our facilities with excellent results. Years ago I was the liquidating Trustee for the worlds largest wind power company, so I'm aware of many of its faults and efficiency problems (although I suspect some may have since been resolved since that time).

IMO nuclear energy and battery technology are far and away the best alternatives.
Click to expand...
I probably agree on nuclear. Batteries have their own issues, not least on the raw materials to produce and where they are, exploitation and longevity of supply. I think nano technology may be the game changer on renewables long term.

I'd prefer the unslightly aspect of operational solar & wind farms versus the unsightly aspect of tens of thousands of expired fracking wells all over the country.
 
whatithink said:
I probably agree on nuclear. Batteries have their own issues, not least on the raw materials to produce and where they are, exploitation and longevity of supply. I think nano technology may be the game changer on renewables long term.

I'd prefer the unslightly aspect of operational solar & wind farms versus the unsightly aspect of tens of thousands of expired fracking wells all over the country.
Click to expand...
Fair point on current battery technology. If we're allowing expired fracking wells to stand, I have a huge problem with that. The landscape should be restored to its prior condition.
 
happy9 said:
The way I understand it, this project was well underway, clearing hurdles along the way. It's the most studied infrastructure project in american history.

as far as the green politics are concerned..mehhh. Their is always concern when dealing with petrol. This decision is 100% political and will have downstream economic impacts, near and long term. Direct/indirect job loss/gain will be argued until the nth degree. Petrol politics are complex. It's always more simple to look at it from a macro economic perspective.

I don't know the cost to expand existing infrastructure or how efficient that infrastructure is. Bottom line is that oil will be delivered, one way or the other. The Keystone pipeline already exists.

Is there environmental risk -sure their is. Will the Canadians still build it, but not cross the border into the US - Maybe. They could route it west to BC. We would have zero leverage on where that oil goes, who gets it, how much, etc, etc..
Click to expand...
The sand oil isn't an economic game changer from a US economic perspective. Its more of a nice to have - from a macro level. Its seems a lot of political capital being used for a marginal marco level economic benefit.
 
Desert Hound said:
I just find this very disturbing. Political thought is starting to be suppressed online.

"Parler, which emerged as a Twitter alternative for conservatives, officially went offline on Monday after Amazon Web Services refused to host the site any longer. Following the Capitol riots on Wednesday, Apple and Google removed Parler from their app stores, claiming the site had refused to take down posts inciting violence. On Saturday, Amazon announced it would follow suit after employees pressured the company to remove Parler.



Parler saved its data and prepared to switch to a different provider, but on Monday, Parler CEO John Matze announced the process would take longer than expected.

“I wanted to send everyone on Parler an update,” Matze posted. “WE will likely be down longer than expected. This is not due to software restrictions—we have our software and everyone’s data ready to go. Rather it’s that Amazon’s, Google’s, and Apple’s statements to the press about dropping our access has caused most of our other vendors to drop their support for us as well.”
Click to expand...

Ha ha. Amazon squished Parler in court like the cockroach bug that it is. The First Amendment and free enterprise are alive and well.

You should be very concerned that this is just the first of many traitorous magat companies to go down.
 
whatithink said:
The sand oil isn't an economic game changer from a US economic perspective. Its more of a nice to have - from a macro level. Its seems a lot of political capital being used for a marginal marco level economic benefit.
Click to expand...
Maybe not a game changer but it's a pillar of stability for plenty of local economies. Economists always seem to overlook micros. 56% or so of all crude imports come from Canada - I would guess most of that goes to our midwest refineries. Don't forget other energy import/export that goes on between the US and Canada. It's pretty balanced. Not everything needs to be a game changer, most things aren't. Stability is the key. Eventual transition to renewables is certain, how we get there is the question. Politicians don't know how to not be emotional, greedy, and self serving. They'll figure out a way divide people into factions and cause friction.

Leave it up to politicians to politicize.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top