|
Post by Incogayno. on Nov 19, 2014 16:11:49 GMT -6
When the right blocks legislation, they are racist bastards. When the left does the same, they are protecting ignorant proles from the desires of the oligarchy. Is that about correct? Yes.
|
|
|
Post by BrainFerentz4Prez on Nov 19, 2014 16:13:03 GMT -6
When the right blocks legislation, they are racist bastards. When the left does the same, they are protecting ignorant proles from the desires of the oligarchy. Is that about correct? The right are racist bastards regardless of whether or not they are blocking legislation.
|
|
|
Post by A boy named Sioux on Nov 19, 2014 16:14:31 GMT -6
When the right blocks legislation, they are racist bastards. When the left does the same, they are protecting ignorant proles from the desires of the oligarchy. Is that about correct? Yes. Ok, good to know.
|
|
|
Post by Incogayno. on Nov 19, 2014 16:18:35 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by A boy named Sioux on Nov 19, 2014 16:26:17 GMT -6
Wont get fooled again.
Insert Who vid here
|
|
|
Post by BrainFerentz4Prez on Nov 19, 2014 16:36:45 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by The Resistance on Nov 19, 2014 16:37:30 GMT -6
As the late great Icehide said one time.
"Doesn't affect me, I don't curr".
Carry on.
Now the way that Pelosi is treating her fellow Congress women with stumps. Now that's another story.
|
|
|
Post by Stan's Field on Nov 19, 2014 16:47:02 GMT -6
As the late great Icehide said one time. "Doesn't affect me, I don't curr". Carry on. Now the way that Pelosi is treating her fellow Congress women with stumps. Now that's another story. Eh?
|
|
|
Post by Stan's Field on Nov 19, 2014 16:48:25 GMT -6
I wish we'd stop fracking so prices would go up to where proles coodint afford oil er gas. I need Sterbucks dey dont.
|
|
|
Post by Stan's Field on Nov 19, 2014 16:59:20 GMT -6
It is planned to run right through the middle of the ND oil patch. What makes you think it would not carry murican oil? Doesn't look like it even goes through ND... Darn it, it's not even remotely close to that oil field......
|
|
|
Post by Ginger on Nov 19, 2014 17:20:57 GMT -6
I haven't been referred to as "Vin" in a long time, Osten. Ur funny! I prefer Chuck.
|
|
|
Post by A boy named Sioux on Nov 19, 2014 17:22:08 GMT -6
Doesn't look like it even goes through ND... Darn it, it's not even remotely close to that oil field...... Missed it by that much.
|
|
|
Post by thunderhawk on Nov 19, 2014 23:53:44 GMT -6
When the right blocks legislation, they are racist bastards. When the left does the same, they are protecting ignorant proles from the desires of the oligarchy. Is that about correct? Actually that's a reasonably accurate description of reality. I personally wish those dumbass honky proles had to live with the consequences of their voting, ie have their taker transfer payments eradicated.
|
|
|
Post by Plez Azkins on Nov 20, 2014 7:24:15 GMT -6
Billy when you compare those puny numbers with our massive imports (which are largely from Canada). They are not worth mentioning. I am curious as what sort of loophole is being exploited and for whose benefit that slight trickle of oil is allowed to creep across our border. That wasn't the point I was making. My point was the Canadians have enough oil to use themselves three times over, but they still import oil. It doesn't matter where it comes from. In fact, Canadians import about 40% of the oil they use. Of the domestic oil they use for themselves? Almost none of it is tar sand oil. It's cheaper to import oil than to transport tar sand oil to places in Canada where people live. Why don't the Canadians build a pipeline for them to better use their own oil, instead of shipping it to the US? No really, why? I have no clue of the validity of this, but I was talking about Keystone with a Canadian co-worker who lives in Calgary. He said the Canadians can't run the pipeline west because the only viable route goes through some Indian lands. The tribes face palmed the Canadian government when they asked. I get this thing has some ancillary benefits for companies like the one I work for, but I'm not so sure the juice is worth the squeeze on this one. Why don't they build refineries in Western Canada and Montana? Wouldn't that create a lot of jobs?
|
|
|
Post by Ginger on Nov 20, 2014 7:37:36 GMT -6
I think the Canadians reallly like us. They know our national anthem. I don't know theirs...
|
|
|
Post by Stan's Field on Nov 20, 2014 8:06:11 GMT -6
That wasn't the point I was making. My point was the Canadians have enough oil to use themselves three times over, but they still import oil. It doesn't matter where it comes from. In fact, Canadians import about 40% of the oil they use. Of the domestic oil they use for themselves? Almost none of it is tar sand oil. It's cheaper to import oil than to transport tar sand oil to places in Canada where people live. Why don't the Canadians build a pipeline for them to better use their own oil, instead of shipping it to the US? No really, why? I have no clue of the validity of this, but I was talking about Keystone with a Canadian co-worker who lives in Calgary. He said the Canadians can't run the pipeline west because the only viable route goes through some Indian lands. The tribes face palmed the Canadian government when they asked. I get this thing has some ancillary benefits for companies like the one I work for, but I'm not so sure the juice is worth the squeeze on this one. Why don't they build refineries in Western Canada and Montana? Wouldn't that create a lot of jobs? There's already refineries 'round Billings. Oh, and when was the last time you heard of a new refinery being built in the US??
|
|
|
Post by thunderhawk on Nov 20, 2014 9:48:41 GMT -6
If only there were somethin liek scrap metal... No gubmint subsidy=no wind turbines. I rest my case. i know we give big oil subsidies as well, but that is only so that lobbyists can line the pockets of our elected officials. Big oil would still function without the subsidies. The same can not be said of wind and solar. Wind and solar should be given massive subsidies for R&D, but it makes zero sense to subsidize todays uneconomic "commercial" installations. Yeah, well I'm in favor of subsidizing the living shit out of renewable energy, so for me that's a feature not a bug. Also, renewables won't require this massive subsidy which Le Grande Oil has received for decades: It's time to move on from burning dead dinosaurs and the ferns they feasted on. Come on humans. You can do it.
|
|
|
Post by thunderhawk on Nov 20, 2014 9:50:28 GMT -6
That wasn't the point I was making. My point was the Canadians have enough oil to use themselves three times over, but they still import oil. It doesn't matter where it comes from. In fact, Canadians import about 40% of the oil they use. Of the domestic oil they use for themselves? Almost none of it is tar sand oil. It's cheaper to import oil than to transport tar sand oil to places in Canada where people live. Why don't the Canadians build a pipeline for them to better use their own oil, instead of shipping it to the US? No really, why? I have no clue of the validity of this, but I was talking about Keystone with a Canadian co-worker who lives in Calgary. He said the Canadians can't run the pipeline west because the only viable route goes through some Indian lands. The tribes face palmed the Canadian government when they asked. I get this thing has some ancillary benefits for companies like the one I work for, but I'm not so sure the juice is worth the squeeze on this one. Why don't they build refineries in Western Canada and Montana? Wouldn't that create a lot of jobs? This is true. They're called First Nations peoples up there, eh, and they essentially wield a veto when it comes to their territories.
|
|
|
Post by A boy named Sioux on Nov 20, 2014 9:52:41 GMT -6
Did you not read that i wanted massive R&D subsidies for alternatives? It is the colossal waste of money that installing these commercial wind farms that I oppose.
|
|
|
Post by Presidential Immunity Cock on Nov 20, 2014 9:56:22 GMT -6
Did you not read that i wanted massive R&D subsidies for alternatives? It is the colossal waste of money that installing these commercial wind farms that I oppose. Why do you oppose wind farms? Le Birds that get slaughtered by it? Eh, I guess raping the earf and poisoning the drinking water is a better solution.. May it be a "final" solution? Achtung baby!
|
|
|
Post by Plez Azkins on Nov 20, 2014 9:59:46 GMT -6
I have no clue of the validity of this, but I was talking about Keystone with a Canadian co-worker who lives in Calgary. He said the Canadians can't run the pipeline west because the only viable route goes through some Indian lands. The tribes face palmed the Canadian government when they asked. I get this thing has some ancillary benefits for companies like the one I work for, but I'm not so sure the juice is worth the squeeze on this one. Why don't they build refineries in Western Canada and Montana? Wouldn't that create a lot of jobs? There's already refineries 'round Billings. Oh, and when was the last time you heard of a new refinery being built in the US?? Just did a little research. Montana has 4 compared to 29 in Texas and 16 in Louisiana.
|
|
|
Post by thunderhawk on Nov 20, 2014 10:05:58 GMT -6
Did you not read that i wanted massive R&D subsidies for alternatives? It is the colossal waste of money that installing these commercial wind farms that I oppose. Well we agree on the former, but don't you at some point have to just bite the bullet and implement some working technology? My bias is "let the market decie" when it comes to commercial enterprises. I know I'm getting bilked here but I'm ok with it because it's a necessity.
|
|
|
Post by A boy named Sioux on Nov 20, 2014 11:22:03 GMT -6
I oppose them as a huge waste of money. Until they can get both the efficiency up and the cost of maintenance down, they are not cost effective. If the gubment was not footing the bill for these wind turbines, non would be built beyond full scale R&D test model, and I would be fine with that. Take the money we are wasting on the current generation wind farms and use it to develop the next generations.
|
|
|
Post by BrainFerentz4Prez on Nov 20, 2014 11:27:44 GMT -6
I oppose them as a huge waste of money. Until they can get both the efficiency up and the cost of maintenance down, they are not cost effective. If the gubment was not footing the bill for these wind turbines, non would be built beyond full scale R&D test model, and I would be fine with that. Take the money we are wasting on the current generation wind farms and use it to develop the next generations. Can't happen bruh. We in all kinds of carbon emissions agreements wif other countries.
|
|
|
Post by A boy named Sioux on Nov 20, 2014 11:40:46 GMT -6
Those wind farms currently produce 4% of our electricity. If you add back in the CO2 released by their production and remove the CO2 that would have been absorbed by vegetation that would have occupied the ground the turbines are built on, there is no reduction.
|
|