The joke in the BC oilpatch now is that they have a few contractors in BC to fix the roads so the fellas from Alberta can get to work quicker. The joke will be on us if we support this pipeline>

They are talking about $200 a barrel oil... they say because of the crisis in Egypt world market prices will go to $200 a barrel... so the more we are connected to the global markets... the more the international finance that owns the global oil industry will make wind fall profits on energy sold in the Canadian market from things that are completely removed from Canada in far away places like Egypt... and the more we connect our energy markets with those of the overseas global markets the more we are going to be held hostage to the global energy prices, and the more we as Canadians will pay the energy tax to international finance for global instability.

It is completely stupid for Canad to connect its energy markets with that of the overseas market from not only a sovereignty perspective, but in the long run from an economic competitive perspective as well.

IMO the so called economists in Canada should all be thrown in jail for the treason they commit in the name of international finance.

I bet if we had a law that said there was a 100% export tax on export of oil they would still support this pipeline. The profits are too huge for them.

I bet if we had a law that said there was a 100% export tax on export of oil they would still support this pipeline. The profits are too huge for them.

I don't like the idea to build a Pipeline to the Coast, just to supply Asia with Energy, another Thing is ,why do we have to pay World Market Price for our own Oil, I would like to see one for Export and a much lower one for Domestic,I know the Yanks wont like that and NAFTA screwed us on that to, what kind of Market advantage would we have at 50 Cents a Gallon (4.6 Liter) just think about it.

The Yanks would sue us for artificially keeping our gas at 50c a gallon and thereby giving our industry an advantage! We have lost control over our affairs since Brian signed us on to NAFTA!

Just look at the Softwood Lumber never-ending lawsuits and interference! We can't even cut our own trees down without hearing constant bleating from down south!

BTW, they subsidize almost every industry in their own country and we don't question it.

They Idea of expanding global markets for our products is far from stupid or greedy. We are currently held hostage by the US for many products. Look at the lumber business now that China is in the mix. Hopefully one day we can tell the Yanks to pound sand and ship all our wood elsewhere. The same is true for oil. There is currently a large discount beyween WTI oil and Brent crude due to pipeline bottlenecks all heading south. Exporting oil to asia would certainly stop this discount.

Now you can argue we shouldn't use oil at all or keep it for domestic cosumption like Trudea tried with spectacular failure. That line of thinking isn't worth the debate. Like I'll ever buy cheap 2x4s at HD cus I live in PG.

We need these markets. The question is how can we do it within an acceptable fashion. That I don't know.

Eagleone, we have always been held hostage to global prices in every commodity. Whats your point?

Why don't we stop trying to find ways in which to subsidize our 'Producers' and start to subsidize our 'Consumers' instead?

Directly. Instead of the indirect ways that cause us so much difficulty when we try to circumvent International Trade Agreements we've entered into? We're continually doing that latter circuitously, trying maintain 'jobs' and the incomes that come from them. And causing ourselves much grief in the process. There IS a far simpler way.

I doubt there's any International Trade Agreements we've signed that would prevent us from directly augmenting every Canadian Consumer's Income. And this could be done by utilising a technique of credit to effectively LOWER the prices we pay on all retail purchases in Canada, or all goods, both foreign made and domestic.

Trade Agreements are all focused on trying to limit a national governments ability to give their own country's 'PRODUCERS' some untoward advantage in 'capturing' some other country's markets.

Think about what we're REALLY trying to do when we trade internationally.

Beyond our ability to diversify our own consumption by doing so, for what other reasons do we place such emphasis on 'capturing' some other country's domestic markets? Selling them MORE than we buy from them?

Especially where sales are involved for those resources like oil, that are already believed to be finite? And even if they really aren't, ones that may be of great advantage to us to have access to in our own country, for our own use, in the future?

While it's perfectly true that we are not internally self-sufficient in many things we need and want, and that our exports DO pay for our imports of those things, that is certainly NOT the only, or probably even main, reason we trade internationally.

We do it for another reason ~ one that increasingly affects ALL modern industrialized countries, and ever the more so with the passage of time as their industrial productivity increases.

For NOT ONE of them, including us, can buy and pay for ALL their own 'Production', at the total 'financial' Costs of its making. Not from the total amount of ALL Incomes DISTRIBUTED over the SAME period it was made. Those Incomes, taken collectively, cannot do it alone. They have to be augmented by EXPORT, (and more importantly, LOAN), credits.

Now WHY should this be? Surely it must be readily apparent to anyone who gives this very important matter the thought it deserves that if, collectively, we CAN'T ~ no matter whether we want to or not ~ currently buy ALL our own Production from the Incomes distributed as wages, salaries and dividends in the course of its making, then how in the world are we going to buy the EXCHANGE of that production from exporting it?

WE CAN'T. Not without going ever further into debt. And a debt that can NEVER be repaid. One that the service charges on, even at historic low interest rates, are breaking us in taxation to keep current. Why do we have to go to such perverse means to try to deny what is patently obvious?

Is there a solution that won't cause our trading partners to impose sanctions or tariffs on our products? One that would make us FREE to trade, rather than as now, where we are increasingly FORCED to trade?

Yes, there is. It does NOT entail increasing taxes, nationalising oil companies, banks, or anything else. It does not destroy the 'profit' motive, or attempt to replace it as a means of individual inducement with some bureaucratic method of centralised compulsion. It does not involve the Federal government tromping on Provincial rights, as did Trudeau's divisive and nutty National Energy Program.
It is the ONLY way we're are ever going to reverse the descent many have called the "race to the bottom", and preserve those individual liberties we're now rapidly losing.

It involves 'subsidizing' CONSUMERS, directly, though 'subsidy' is hardly the right word to describe the process.

It makes it possible, through a technique of credit, for us collectively to FULLY pay FOR what we've DONE, FROM what we've DONE. Without 'inflation', and with, in fact, a 'deflation' ~ but not one ruinous to the Producer, but in fact, one that would, in most cases if he has a product that's wanted, improve his profitablity through providing it. It may sound fantastic and complicated, but in reality, it is not. It is elemental simplicity once the basic principles are understood and properly applied.