MidAmerican upgrading wind turbines early

[jeffmori7]

I've also heard the argument that it takes more energy to make them then they generate, but I too find that almost impossible to believe.  Especially if they have a 30 year expected life.

 

Don't believe the FUD propaganda by the fossil fuel lobby. That industry has gotten hundreds of billions in direct an indirect subsidies over the decades but now they feel threatened because they suddenly have competition from a few sources that relentlessly keep getting better every year...

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_returned_on_energy_invested

[Cardboard]

About everything that I mentioned is reinforced by Jeffmori7 and Longinvestor. These are not counter-arguments... LOL! So funny!

 

"HQ does export a lot of electricity. Actually, exportation account for about one-third of the overall profit, on about 15% of the energy sold."

 

Does anyone need a calculator? It should be an investment website after all. 1/3 of profits on 15% of sales?

 

"Oh and all of this is achieved with the cheapest electricity rates in North America."

 

Yup, subsidies baby to please the public. Just like Venezuela and so many other petro-states selling their gasoline for next to nothing. The end result is lack of innovation, lack of efficiency and eventually poverty as the nanny state grows larger and larger.

 

"HQ has not invested billions in R&D on battery. Something under 100M$, and with the licensing royalties they got, they are probably even. Not great, but not catastrophic either."

 

You seem to have forgotten about all the other projects...

 

Then this:

 

"I do as well. At about $10 to $15 incremental per month, it doesn't get better than that to make a statement."

 

$120 to $180/year taken away from citizens to make a statement? With say around 3 million households, that is $360 to $540 million/year to make a statement? Are citizens getting a "charitable" tax deduction for making that statement? Was there a referendum to approve that? LOL!

 

But, keep going fellows. Just like the $7/day daycare for which I know couples in Quebec earning over $150,000/year using it. At some point other Canadians will wake-up and stop subsidizing your way of living that you cannot afford.

 

Once the mob is in the Street scaring your childrens, you, comfortable elite members of the Quebec socialist state do remember the warnings from Cardboard!

 

Then you have these same guys investing in Berkshire and other companies... What is it, intellectual dishonesty? You think that 3G, Geico and other subsidiaries of Berkshire don`t do cost cutting, don`t compete hard with competitors? You are pleased with the investment returns and what it brings to your lifestyle but, what they do is totally opposed to your political views???

 

Cardboard

 

 

 

[jeffmori7]

Cardboard, I don't get it:

 

"HQ does export a lot of electricity. Actually, exportation account for about one-third of the overall profit, on about 15% of the energy sold."

 

Does anyone need a calculator? It should be an investment website after all. 1/3 of profits on 15% of sales?

 

You said that at least if they were exporting it, it could be a good idea. It is exactly what they do and they make money out of it, what is the problem? Exportation are much more profitable than domestic sales, that's it.

 

"Oh and all of this is achieved with the cheapest electricity rates in North America."

 

Yup, subsidies baby to please the public. Just like Venezuela and so many other petro-states selling their gasoline for next to nothing. The end result is lack of innovation, lack of efficiency and eventually poverty as the nanny state grows larger and larger.

 

What are you talking about? Hydro is not subsidized, it has the lowest cost of production in North America, so they can still sell it at cheap rates and make a decent profit..Again, what is wrong with that?

 

What other projects? They are investing in their business and have a semi-regulated ROI on it...

 

About paying more for low-carbon electricity: actually, that is funny because we are paying much less than everyone else. But I do value clean electricity, because climate change are the greatest threat we have ever faced and there is absolutely a value in hedging to trying to protect us from the economic disaster that could happen in the do-nothing as fast as possible scenario...

 

And about your Quebec bashing...enough, you may not agree with our politics, as I do not, but stop your condescending attitude and stop saying total lies. And people with 150k$ revenue do pay a lot more than 7$ per day for daycare nowadays. And even if that was not the case, we pay high taxes because we have collectively decided that our youth is our greatest asset and it is worth it to pay for this altogether. Education and environment are in my view the most important thing, everything else depend on it.

 

I do not accept your insult about investing and being hypocrite. I do care about a social network, but I am not against private entreprise and making money. But I do want the richest to be taxed and redistribution to happen, and I do want to have some decisions that we take collectively instead of individually. And I do even encourage you to come to Quebec and Montreal and enjoy our province!

 

 

 

 

[jeffmori7]

Oh and by the way, it was only a post about nice upgrade of existing wind turbines before the end of their life expectancy. Why all the bashing?

[John Hjorth]

...Why all the bashing?

 

Exactly, Jeff. Canadian energy policy should be discussed in the Politics Forum here on CoBF, not in the forum for Berkshire.

[Cardboard]

Because it goes deeper than that.

 

Is there someone posting? "Oh watch! The latest Chevy Model Whatever is now doing 45 miles/gallon"

 

Nope! What we have are promoters including Liberty of one way of thinking.

 

The problem is that they do not want to discuss the full picture which has to include subsidies. And since we are talking about Berkshire and Mr. Buffett who gladly accepts all subsidies and does all he can to defer taxes, we should also discuss why he refuses on the other hand to purchase surplus power from homeowners in Nevada who have solar panels?

 

Cardboard

[jeffmori7]

Because it goes deeper than that.

 

Is there someone posting? "Oh watch! The latest Chevy Model Whatever is now doing 45 miles/gallon"

 

Nope! What we have are promoters including Liberty of one way of thinking.

 

The problem is that they do not want to discuss the full picture which has to include subsidies. And since we are talking about Berkshire and Mr. Buffett who gladly accepts all subsidies and does all he can to defer taxes, we should also discuss why he refuses on the other hand to purchase surplus power from homeowners in Nevada who have solar panels?

 

Cardboard

 

Subsidies exist to help kikcstart some technologies, and all the great advances tha tyou claim the free market is doing would not all be there if they weren't subsidies to kickstart them. that is not always true, but sometimes yes.

 

And if you talk about subsidies, could you defend the far largest subsidies from which oil and gas benefit before bashing everything else. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2017/aug/07/fossil-fuel-subsidies-are-a-staggering-5-tn-per-year

 

Oh and where is it written that subsidies are evil? The idea is to get better life, and subsidies are a tool among others, like free market is, ideology is not good. We have to think about the end results, and let's find the means that will improve our quality of life, our environment, our healt, etc.

[Guest longinvestor]

Oh and by the way, it was only a post about nice upgrade of existing wind turbines before the end of their life expectancy. Why all the bashing?

Renewable power is here to stay. If your world view doesn't line up with that, you'll stay frustrated and bash others who are aligned. In the meantime, my $10 per month goes towards killing off fossil fuel because of the near zero marginal cost of renewable power. The capitalist in me thinks that will further my investment in Berkshire Hathaway. Why I'm posting here!

[jeffmori7]

Oh and by the way, it was only a post about nice upgrade of existing wind turbines before the end of their life expectancy. Why all the bashing?

Renewable power is here to stay. If your world view doesn't line up with that, you'll stay frustrated and bash others who are aligned. In the meantime, my $10 per month goes towards killing off fossil fuel because of the near zero marginal cost of renewable power. The capitalist in me thinks that will further my investment in Berkshire Hathaway. Why I'm posting here!

 

I do agree with you. I am just asking why Cardboard is bashing my province because someone brings up an interesting fact about wind turbines and Berkshire!

[rkbabang]

Jeff Bezos christened Amazon’s largest wind farm while 300 feet in the air

 

[Cigarbutt]

-Informational post only.

 

In order to better understand the dynamics (economic and political) of the coming energy transition, since early September, I am following a Coursera course named: "The Future of Energy". Overall, I find it quite good but it is not free of bias. The course is a nice complement to "Fundamentals of Global Energy Business" which is more conventional.

 

For those interested in espousing or rejecting wind power as a potential solution, week 2 of "the Future of Energy" has two relatively short videos on wind power and turbine technologies. The "lecture" is given by a structural engineer and deals with topics like: blade structure and aerodynamics, torque and others. I learned why there are three blades. The engineer feels there may be future in off-shore wind power?

 

If the course is not open now, it will likely re-open in the future.

 

[Guest longinvestor]

-Informational post only.

 

In order to better understand the dynamics (economic and political) of the coming energy transition, since early September, I am following a Coursera course named: "The Future of Energy". Overall, I find it quite good but it is not free of bias. The course is a nice complement to "Fundamentals of Global Energy Business" which is more conventional.

 

For those interested in espousing or rejecting wind power as a potential solution, week 2 of "the Future of Energy" has two relatively short videos on wind power and turbine technologies. The "lecture" is given by a structural engineer and deals with topics like: blade structure and aerodynamics, torque and others. I learned why there are three blades. The engineer feels there may be future in off-shore wind power?

 

If the course is not open now, it will likely re-open in the future.

 

 

I took this course in 2015 but unfortunately, did not complete it (my bad).

 

Another great reference on energy is published by the Great Courses series. https://www.audible.com/pd/Science-Technology/The-Science-of-Energy-Audiobook/B01BVPXR7K; It's all science and very little economics. Some ecological and ethical considerations. I personally like his narration and style, it was easy on the ear and the mind, given that it was all science (was afraid of it before getting into it). Plus very useful analogies to put things like Joules in everyday terms.

 

 

[bizaro86]

And even if that was not the case, we pay high taxes because we have collectively decided that our youth is our greatest asset and it is worth it to pay for this altogether.

 

If that was the end, I don't think you'd get many complaints. But the fact of the matter is that the rest of Canada pays higher taxes to pay for excess spending in Quebec. Both Federal spending well in excess of receipts from QC, as well as direct transfers through equalization.

 

If your choices only impacted your taxes, I wouldn't care. But as an Albertan paying higher than otherwise taxes for QC social programs while QC environmentalists block my livelihood....

[Cigarbutt]

Perhaps, as we can see on a related thread about solar power and BH, incentives matter when it comes to adoption of renewable energy options.

 

(Un?)fortunately, the government is also involved and, like it or not, policies can influence choices.

 

------------------------------

sidetrack for Canadians

 

I also feel uneasy about the equalization payment asymmetry (even if I am on the receiving end). These are tough questions and we should restrain from easy generalizations.

That said, the present system seems to represent an unfair subsidy to provinces that have hydro-electric power generation potential.

To me, higher electricity rates with some form of mitigation for the very low earners makes sense.

 

http://nationalpost.com/opinion/peter-holle-artificially-cheap-hydro-power-your-equalization-dollars-at-work

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/quebec-proves-canadas-equalization-payments-are-not-always-equal

 

From one of the links however, it seems that fair compromises can be reached, ie Hibernia.

 

end of sidetrack for Canadians

--------------------------------------

 

So, when MidAmerican decides to invest long term in wind turbines, one has to consider that there may be a potential role for government involvement and one has to accept that the intervention may introduce inappropriate incentives.

 

We need energy going forward.

I have incomplete knowledge but, long term, I would bet more on solar.

From Thomas A. Edison, who may be a reasonable reference: "I'd put my money on the sun and solar energy. What a source of power! I hope we don't have to wait til oil and coal run out before we tackle that."

 

[jeffmori7]

And even if that was not the case, we pay high taxes because we have collectively decided that our youth is our greatest asset and it is worth it to pay for this altogether.

 

If that was the end, I don't think you'd get many complaints. But the fact of the matter is that the rest of Canada pays higher taxes to pay for excess spending in Quebec. Both Federal spending well in excess of receipts from QC, as well as direct transfers through equalization.

 

If your choices only impacted your taxes, I wouldn't care. But as an Albertan paying higher than otherwise taxes for QC social programs while QC environmentalists block my livelihood....

 

And when we have to pay for the environmental disaster that you Albertans refuse even to acknowledge...

 

And if we talk about historical equalization, you have received money before oil, and if we talk about the stupid choice you make when you have surplus, you send little 100$ check to all your citizen so they will buy rationally more F150, and when oil price plunge, you don't have anything because you are too stupid to plan that it is a cyclical commodity...come on with the Quebec bashing, I can bash Alberta a lot if you ask me too.

[Cardboard]

"because you are too stupid to plan"

 

Now you call fellow Canadians stupid?

 

Interesting that you told me in private previously that you voted for PQ before? Voted Yes for separation in 1995? What would that make you?

 

Cardboard

[StubbleJumper]

"because you are too stupid to plan"

 

Now you call fellow Canadians stupid?

 

Interesting that you told me in private previously that you voted for PQ before? Voted Yes for separation in 1995? What would that make you?

 

Cardboard

 

 

Who the hell cares whether he's a separatist?  I have far more respect for the true separatists in Quebec who are prepared to go their own way, for better or for worse, than the weasels in Quebec who do not truly want to separate but just want to use the threat to try to extort money from the other provinces.  Those particular weasels happily accept equalization money which is funded by oil extraction, but then refuse to permit the exploration of shale gas in Quebec along the St. Lawrence (ie, for them, petroleum money is good, as long as it's not related to development in their own backyard).  Those are the people who are effectively on welfare and refuse to take a job even when there is an obvious job available.  Those weasels are worthy of our disdain.

 

The true separatists who are prepared to go their own way, come what may, are worthy of our respect.  They at least have principles.  They are telling us to stick our equalization transfers where the sun doesn't shine, and they'll happily accept the consequences.

 

 

SJ

[jeffmori7]

"because you are too stupid to plan"

 

Now you call fellow Canadians stupid?

 

Interesting that you told me in private previously that you voted for PQ before? Voted Yes for separation in 1995? What would that make you?

 

Cardboard

 

 

Who the hell cares whether he's a separatist?  I have far more respect for the true separatists in Quebec who are prepared to go their own way, for better or for worse, than the weasels in Quebec who do not truly want to separate but just want to use the threat to try to extort money from the other provinces.  Those particular weasels happily accept equalization money which is funded by oil extraction, but then refuse to permit the exploration of shale gas in Quebec along the St. Lawrence (ie, for them, petroleum money is good, as long as it's not related to development in their own backyard).  Those are the people who are effectively on welfare and refuse to take a job even when there is an obvious job available.  Those weasels are worthy of our disdain.

 

The true separatists who are prepared to go their own way, come what may, are worthy of our respect.  They at least have principles.  They are telling us to stick our equalization transfers where the sun doesn't shine, and they'll happily accept the consequences.

 

 

SJ

 

What I was reffering to was that Albertan governments have been quite stupid through the years to not build a more resilient economy. When petrol goes up, they are planning like Alberta will be rich foreover, with oil projection at the top for a long time, when petrol goes down, they are not ready, and it's the same every time. And some Albertans might be stupid too, as they do not prepare also for the driest times, or to prepare the after-petrol. And some Quebecois are stupid too, for sure.

 

I am not a separatist, at least not a fervent one. I am neither a fervent federalist. I do not believe that there is such a thing as Canada, as BC is one thing, Alberta a different world, Ontario another one, Quebec another one, and so on. WE happen to be together, we might as well try to make it works, but if Quebec separates from Canada some day, I'm fine with that also.

 

We do receive some money from your oil because it is the way it's done with this equalization thing that is part of what the Canada is. But a time will come when Alberta may need some money and it will flow through the Canadien federal government also. Actually, equalization is not all, and if you look at the bigger pictures, everyone pay taxes and receive some services or money, sometimes less, sometimes more. And we pay a lot more taxes in Quebec, we are not just living from federal cash. You can make those choices also if you want.

 

And I will do whatever I can to reduce our oil dependency, and Albertans should do that, or they will have some hard moments in the years to come.

 

 

[bizaro86]

And even if that was not the case, we pay high taxes because we have collectively decided that our youth is our greatest asset and it is worth it to pay for this altogether.

 

If that was the end, I don't think you'd get many complaints. But the fact of the matter is that the rest of Canada pays higher taxes to pay for excess spending in Quebec. Both Federal spending well in excess of receipts from QC, as well as direct transfers through equalization.

 

If your choices only impacted your taxes, I wouldn't care. But as an Albertan paying higher than otherwise taxes for QC social programs while QC environmentalists block my livelihood....

 

And when we have to pay for the environmental disaster that you Albertans refuse even to acknowledge...

 

And if we talk about historical equalization, you have received money before oil, and if we talk about the stupid choice you make when you have surplus, you send little 100$ check to all your citizen so they will buy rationally more F150, and when oil price plunge, you don't have anything because you are too stupid to plan that it is a cyclical commodity...come on with the Quebec bashing, I can bash Alberta a lot if you ask me too.

 

The amount of money Alberta received in the distant past is so nominal as to be insignificant.

 

Alberta's govt sent cheques to everyone a couple of times with surplus oil revenue from our resources. Quebec sends 100s of dollars to its citizens every year in the form of overly generous programs and subsidized hydro prices. They also use Alberta revenue. Which seems more fair to you?

 

Not sure what you're talking about regarding the crash. Oil is pretty low right now. Alberta isn't receiving any equilization, so we seem to still be OK.  On the other hand, QC is receiving over $11 billion this year, roughly $1300 for every man woman and child in the province. You're welcome.

 

Amusing for a defender of QC equilization to be bashing Albertan spending. Those who live in glass houses...

[StubbleJumper]

"because you are too stupid to plan"

 

Now you call fellow Canadians stupid?

 

Interesting that you told me in private previously that you voted for PQ before? Voted Yes for separation in 1995? What would that make you?

 

Cardboard

 

 

Who the hell cares whether he's a separatist?  I have far more respect for the true separatists in Quebec who are prepared to go their own way, for better or for worse, than the weasels in Quebec who do not truly want to separate but just want to use the threat to try to extort money from the other provinces.  Those particular weasels happily accept equalization money which is funded by oil extraction, but then refuse to permit the exploration of shale gas in Quebec along the St. Lawrence (ie, for them, petroleum money is good, as long as it's not related to development in their own backyard).  Those are the people who are effectively on welfare and refuse to take a job even when there is an obvious job available.  Those weasels are worthy of our disdain.

 

The true separatists who are prepared to go their own way, come what may, are worthy of our respect.  They at least have principles.  They are telling us to stick our equalization transfers where the sun doesn't shine, and they'll happily accept the consequences.

 

 

SJ

 

What I was reffering to was that Albertan governments have been quite stupid through the years to not build a more resilient economy. When petrol goes up, they are planning like Alberta will be rich foreover, with oil projection at the top for a long time, when petrol goes down, they are not ready, and it's the same every time. And some Albertans might be stupid too, as they do not prepare also for the driest times, or to prepare the after-petrol. And some Quebecois are stupid too, for sure.

 

I am not a separatist, at least not a fervent one. I am neither a fervent federalist. I do not believe that there is such a thing as Canada, as BC is one thing, Alberta a different world, Ontario another one, Quebec another one, and so on. WE happen to be together, we might as well try to make it works, but if Quebec separates from Canada some day, I'm fine with that also.

 

We do receive some money from your oil because it is the way it's done with this equalization thing that is part of what the Canada is. But a time will come when Alberta may need some money and it will flow through the Canadien federal government also. Actually, equalization is not all, and if you look at the bigger pictures, everyone pay taxes and receive some services or money, sometimes less, sometimes more. And we pay a lot more taxes in Quebec, we are not just living from federal cash. You can make those choices also if you want.

 

And I will do whatever I can to reduce our oil dependency, and Albertans should do that, or they will have some hard moments in the years to come.

 

 

The issue is not the stupidity of Alberta's governments.

 

The issue is not whether you are pur et dur (but I wish you had that courage).

 

The question is whether you are part of the weasel population of Quebec that is quite happy to take equalization money generated from petroleum extraction to fund your $10/day daycare while having the audacity to deliver a sermon to those Canadians who actually conduct the work to provide that money.  A principled Quebecker would either not deliver that type of sermon, or he would lobby his government to reject the portion of the equalization payment that is attributable to the petroleum industry.  Somebody who is unprincipled (une putaine) would take the money and still pretend to be pure.

 

So the real question is, where do you stand on equalization attributable to the petroleum industry?  Should le gouvernement du Quebec send a portion of the equalization payment back to Ottawa with an indignant declaration that Quebec's principles are not for sale?  Or is it collective hipocrisy?

 

Frankly, the people that I respect best in Quebec are the pur et dur.  They have principles and they know what they want.  They do not waste our time giving us a sermon about their moral superiority.

 

 

SJ

 

[StubbleJumper]

For English speaking readers, in the post above, I chose some unusual words that have direct French conjugates to ensure that native French speaking readers understand fully my intention.  As an example, they use the word "sermon" and we do not, but nonetheless everyone understands the relationship between the giver and receiver of a sermon.

 

I would be quite happy to deliver the same missive in French, but it's an English board.

 

 

SJ

[jeffmori7]

And even if that was not the case, we pay high taxes because we have collectively decided that our youth is our greatest asset and it is worth it to pay for this altogether.

 

If that was the end, I don't think you'd get many complaints. But the fact of the matter is that the rest of Canada pays higher taxes to pay for excess spending in Quebec. Both Federal spending well in excess of receipts from QC, as well as direct transfers through equalization.

 

If your choices only impacted your taxes, I wouldn't care. But as an Albertan paying higher than otherwise taxes for QC social programs while QC environmentalists block my livelihood....

 

And when we have to pay for the environmental disaster that you Albertans refuse even to acknowledge...

 

And if we talk about historical equalization, you have received money before oil, and if we talk about the stupid choice you make when you have surplus, you send little 100$ check to all your citizen so they will buy rationally more F150, and when oil price plunge, you don't have anything because you are too stupid to plan that it is a cyclical commodity...come on with the Quebec bashing, I can bash Alberta a lot if you ask me too.

 

The amount of money Alberta received in the distant past is so nominal as to be insignificant.

 

Alberta's govt sent cheques to everyone a couple of times with surplus oil revenue from our resources. Quebec sends 100s of dollars to its citizens every year in the form of overly generous programs and subsidized hydro prices. They also use Alberta revenue. Which seems more fair to you?

 

Not sure what you're talking about regarding the crash. Oil is pretty low right now. Alberta isn't receiving any equilization, so we seem to still be OK.  On the other hand, QC is receiving over $11 billion this year, roughly $1300 for every man woman and child in the province. You're welcome.

 

Amusing for a defender of QC equilization to be bashing Albertan spending. Those who live in glass houses...

 

Sorry everyone for the digression :)

 

Fair enough. But it is not my fault or your fault that the equalization is setup the way it is. And we both know that the amount wouldn't change no matter what is our level of public expanse in Quebec. Even if we wre to cut in our social programs, we would receive the funding. I am not saying it is good or bad, I am saying it is that way now. Equalization is based on the relative richness, with a somewhat strange formula. Cost of living is not included into that. Petrol is such a unique asset that is distorting it all, and making you Albertans far richer than everyone else for now. Still, you don't pay for everything just in Alberta by the way. But I don't accept the idea that hydro is subsidized, our real cost of production are infinitesimal, thus the low rates. Nothing else.

 

Should we change the equalization, probably? But it is not easy, isn'it? The Canadien federation is a strange beast, we all know that. Quebec would probably have to adapt if the equalization changes, but overall, the whole idea is to redistribute money among Canada, and as far as I know, we are part of it.

 

To SJ: Hey, I know we have historically benefited from oil as a society (I mean, the humanity as a whole), but there is no way this is our future. This is part of what I am telling. I am not to refuse that money, because I think we should use that money to build a better future. I like the way Norwegians deal with it. They know it won't be a panacae forever, so they plan accordingly.

 

And I work hard here and pay taxes, to both governments, and I do not agree to many decisions, but it is the way it is. And I will continue to say to everyone, Quebecois like Albertans that we need to stop our petrol junkiness, that's it.

[StubbleJumper]

And even if that was not the case, we pay high taxes because we have collectively decided that our youth is our greatest asset and it is worth it to pay for this altogether.

 

If that was the end, I don't think you'd get many complaints. But the fact of the matter is that the rest of Canada pays higher taxes to pay for excess spending in Quebec. Both Federal spending well in excess of receipts from QC, as well as direct transfers through equalization.

 

If your choices only impacted your taxes, I wouldn't care. But as an Albertan paying higher than otherwise taxes for QC social programs while QC environmentalists block my livelihood....

 

And when we have to pay for the environmental disaster that you Albertans refuse even to acknowledge...

 

And if we talk about historical equalization, you have received money before oil, and if we talk about the stupid choice you make when you have surplus, you send little 100$ check to all your citizen so they will buy rationally more F150, and when oil price plunge, you don't have anything because you are too stupid to plan that it is a cyclical commodity...come on with the Quebec bashing, I can bash Alberta a lot if you ask me too.

 

The amount of money Alberta received in the distant past is so nominal as to be insignificant.

 

Alberta's govt sent cheques to everyone a couple of times with surplus oil revenue from our resources. Quebec sends 100s of dollars to its citizens every year in the form of overly generous programs and subsidized hydro prices. They also use Alberta revenue. Which seems more fair to you?

 

Not sure what you're talking about regarding the crash. Oil is pretty low right now. Alberta isn't receiving any equilization, so we seem to still be OK.  On the other hand, QC is receiving over $11 billion this year, roughly $1300 for every man woman and child in the province. You're welcome.

 

Amusing for a defender of QC equilization to be bashing Albertan spending. Those who live in glass houses...

 

Sorry everyone for the digression :)

 

Fair enough. But it is not my fault or your fault that the equalization is setup the way it is. And we both know that the amount wouldn't change no matter what is our level of public expanse in Quebec. Even if we wre to cut in our social programs, we would receive the funding. I am not saying it is good or bad, I am saying it is that way now. Equalization is based on the relative richness, with a somewhat strange formula. Cost of living is not included into that. Petrol is such a unique asset that is distorting it all, and making you Albertans far richer than everyone else for now. Still, you don't pay for everything just in Alberta by the way. But I don't accept the idea that hydro is subsidized, our real cost of production are infinitesimal, thus the low rates. Nothing else.

 

Should we change the equalization, probably? But it is not easy, isn'it? The Canadien federation is a strange beast, we all know that. Quebec would probably have to adapt if the equalization changes, but overall, the whole idea is to redistribute money among Canada, and as far as I know, we are part of it.

 

To SJ: Hey, I know we have historically benefited from oil as a society (I mean, the humanity as a whole), but there is no way this is our future. This is part of what I am telling. I am not to refuse that money, because I think we should use that money to build a better future. I like the way Norwegians deal with it. They know it won't be a panacae forever, so they plan accordingly.

 

And I work hard here and pay taxes, to both governments, and I do not agree to many decisions, but it is the way it is. And I will continue to say to everyone, Quebecois like Albertans that we need to stop our petrol junkiness, that's it.

 

 

No.  You personally delivered a sermon.

 

You have a choice.  You can take the money from the oil sector which is channelled to Quebec through equalization and through per-capital financing of social transfers and you can be happy and quiet.  Or you can be a hippocrit and accept the money while delivering a condescending sermon to the people who worked their asses off to generate that money.  And that's the problem with the intelligensia in Quebec.  They simultaneously want money from western Canada to build their "advanced" society with low cost daycare and low cost tuition AND they want to criticize and undermine the very petroleum industry that funds their "paradise". 

 

Choose one.  Either reject the money that originates from the petroleum industry (send it back to Ottawa with a note that says, "Va chier s'il vous plait, nos principes sont plus importants que votre argent sale") or quietly accept the money that funds your glorious social programs.  Anything else is hipocracy.

 

Either take the money and shut-up, or reject the money and deliver the sermon about Quebec's moral superiority with respect to the environment and climate change.

 

 

SJ

[jeffmori7]

And even if that was not the case, we pay high taxes because we have collectively decided that our youth is our greatest asset and it is worth it to pay for this altogether.

 

If that was the end, I don't think you'd get many complaints. But the fact of the matter is that the rest of Canada pays higher taxes to pay for excess spending in Quebec. Both Federal spending well in excess of receipts from QC, as well as direct transfers through equalization.

 

If your choices only impacted your taxes, I wouldn't care. But as an Albertan paying higher than otherwise taxes for QC social programs while QC environmentalists block my livelihood....

 

And when we have to pay for the environmental disaster that you Albertans refuse even to acknowledge...

 

And if we talk about historical equalization, you have received money before oil, and if we talk about the stupid choice you make when you have surplus, you send little 100$ check to all your citizen so they will buy rationally more F150, and when oil price plunge, you don't have anything because you are too stupid to plan that it is a cyclical commodity...come on with the Quebec bashing, I can bash Alberta a lot if you ask me too.

 

The amount of money Alberta received in the distant past is so nominal as to be insignificant.

 

Alberta's govt sent cheques to everyone a couple of times with surplus oil revenue from our resources. Quebec sends 100s of dollars to its citizens every year in the form of overly generous programs and subsidized hydro prices. They also use Alberta revenue. Which seems more fair to you?

 

Not sure what you're talking about regarding the crash. Oil is pretty low right now. Alberta isn't receiving any equilization, so we seem to still be OK.  On the other hand, QC is receiving over $11 billion this year, roughly $1300 for every man woman and child in the province. You're welcome.

 

Amusing for a defender of QC equilization to be bashing Albertan spending. Those who live in glass houses...

 

Sorry everyone for the digression :)

 

Fair enough. But it is not my fault or your fault that the equalization is setup the way it is. And we both know that the amount wouldn't change no matter what is our level of public expanse in Quebec. Even if we wre to cut in our social programs, we would receive the funding. I am not saying it is good or bad, I am saying it is that way now. Equalization is based on the relative richness, with a somewhat strange formula. Cost of living is not included into that. Petrol is such a unique asset that is distorting it all, and making you Albertans far richer than everyone else for now. Still, you don't pay for everything just in Alberta by the way. But I don't accept the idea that hydro is subsidized, our real cost of production are infinitesimal, thus the low rates. Nothing else.

 

Should we change the equalization, probably? But it is not easy, isn'it? The Canadien federation is a strange beast, we all know that. Quebec would probably have to adapt if the equalization changes, but overall, the whole idea is to redistribute money among Canada, and as far as I know, we are part of it.

 

To SJ: Hey, I know we have historically benefited from oil as a society (I mean, the humanity as a whole), but there is no way this is our future. This is part of what I am telling. I am not to refuse that money, because I think we should use that money to build a better future. I like the way Norwegians deal with it. They know it won't be a panacae forever, so they plan accordingly.

 

And I work hard here and pay taxes, to both governments, and I do not agree to many decisions, but it is the way it is. And I will continue to say to everyone, Quebecois like Albertans that we need to stop our petrol junkiness, that's it.

 

 

No.  You personally delivered a sermon.

 

You have a choice.  You can take the money from the oil sector which is channelled to Quebec through equalization and through per-capital financing of social transfers and you can be happy and quiet.  Or you can be a hippocrit and accept the money while delivering a condescending sermon to the people who worked their asses off to generate that money.  And that's the problem with the intelligensia in Quebec.  They simultaneously want money from western Canada to build their "advanced" society with low cost daycare and low cost tuition AND they want to criticize and undermine the very petroleum industry that funds their "paradise". 

 

Choose one.  Either reject the money that originates from the petroleum industry (send it back to Ottawa with a note that says, "Va chier s'il vous plait, nos principes sont plus importants que votre argent sale") or quietly accept the money that funds your glorious social programs.  Anything else is hipocracy.

 

Either take the money and shut-up, or reject the money and deliver the sermon about Quebec's moral superiority with respect to the environment and climate change.

 

 

SJ

 

Wow, and you say that I deliver a sermon! You are way more nuanced usually, no? But I do not agree with your binary proposition, everything is not so black and white.

 

I will continue to say that climate change is a threat, and we should all work together to fight it. And I will continue to say that we should use the money from oil to heal us from oil and do the transition. It would be stupid to reject the money. And when I say we, I mean Canada as whole, you in Ontario, and those guys in Alberta and us in Quebec. Take the money where it is and redirect it to where we should go.

 

And we are not funding our social programs with your money, we are funding most of our social programs with our money. You can all raise your taxes if you want to finance social programs also, as most of Canada could do if they wanted to.

 

Honestly, even if Quebec wouldn't receive a cent from equalization, I would stand by my point that environment is above about everything else, and I would still urge Albertans to listen to science a little bit more and to listen to redneck demagog a little bit less :) Oh and we have our fair share of demagog out here also.

[jeffmori7]

An you know what guys, I'm out now. Enough time lost for all of us, it won't go anywhere, as usual. We will have to agree that we disagree, big time.