In reversal, Jason Kenney now says Alberta can live with ame
Newsbot @ Fri May 24, 2019 7:22 am
Title: In reversal, Jason Kenney now says Alberta can live with amended C-69 environmental assessment bill
Category: Political
Posted By: llama66
Date: 2019-05-24 07:17:04
Canadian
llama66 @ Fri May 24, 2019 7:23 am
So beginneth the great sell out. Wasn't St. Kenney elected to fight Ottawa? Boy, all that tough talk was nothing more than hot air. The war on Canadian Oil shall continue; and Alberta shall lose.
PluggyRug @ Fri May 24, 2019 7:26 am
The key word is amended.
llama66 @ Fri May 24, 2019 7:27 am
Key word(s) is "he can live with". I don't give a shit what he can live with... what can Albertan's live with?
DrCaleb @ Fri May 24, 2019 7:33 am
llama66 llama66:
Key word(s) is "he can live with". I don't give a shit what he can live with... what can Albertan's live with?
$1:
Canada needs to be flood-proofed, and somebody has to pay for it. Yes, there are other threats, too – fire, hail, wind, snow load, permafrost loss and shoreline erosion will all cost a great deal of money to remediate – but flooding is the big, urgent one.
Entire neighbourhoods will have to be evacuated in the next few years. Others will find themselves on newly redrawn flood plain maps, forced to pay both individually and at the community level for some awfully expensive flood-proofing measures. Even those on higher ground will have to cope with increasingly frequent "waterbomb" storms that park over a city and dump millions of gallons of water in a single rainfall.
Double sump pumps, flood alarms, re-grading, waterproof windows at ground level, backflow valves, diversion channels, underground cisterns, concrete barriers, berms, improved natural drainage infrastructure, better storm sewers — all of those things will need to be done if at-risk homes and communities are going to keep their market value. Or, put another way, if homeowners want to safeguard the biggest investment they have.
Paying some piddling carbon tax on a fuel fill-up is going to have precisely no effect.
. . .
And conservative allergy to government assistance usually only extends to other people's problems.
Just as there are no atheists in foxholes, rugged individualism tends to disappear when you're up to your waist in basement water.
And in any case, let's not forget where we live. This is Canada, for heaven's sake. The cost of flood-proofing this country will be largely paid for with tax revenue. It's inevitable.
It is a clear and present danger at this point, and what are we discussing? A meaningless bit of window-dressing sin tax that would barely cover the cost of morning coffee once a week for most drivers, and is largely being rebated to taxpayers through the income tax system (it is revenue neutral) rather than put toward, say, digging diversion channels or building barriers or strengthening sewer systems, etc.
Our political leaders, presumably, know all this. If they don't, they bloody well should. And in any case, they aren't talking about the cost of remediating damage.
Entire neighbourhoods will have to be evacuated in the next few years. Others will find themselves on newly redrawn flood plain maps, forced to pay both individually and at the community level for some awfully expensive flood-proofing measures. Even those on higher ground will have to cope with increasingly frequent "waterbomb" storms that park over a city and dump millions of gallons of water in a single rainfall.
Double sump pumps, flood alarms, re-grading, waterproof windows at ground level, backflow valves, diversion channels, underground cisterns, concrete barriers, berms, improved natural drainage infrastructure, better storm sewers — all of those things will need to be done if at-risk homes and communities are going to keep their market value. Or, put another way, if homeowners want to safeguard the biggest investment they have.
Paying some piddling carbon tax on a fuel fill-up is going to have precisely no effect.
. . .
And conservative allergy to government assistance usually only extends to other people's problems.
Just as there are no atheists in foxholes, rugged individualism tends to disappear when you're up to your waist in basement water.
And in any case, let's not forget where we live. This is Canada, for heaven's sake. The cost of flood-proofing this country will be largely paid for with tax revenue. It's inevitable.
It is a clear and present danger at this point, and what are we discussing? A meaningless bit of window-dressing sin tax that would barely cover the cost of morning coffee once a week for most drivers, and is largely being rebated to taxpayers through the income tax system (it is revenue neutral) rather than put toward, say, digging diversion channels or building barriers or strengthening sewer systems, etc.
Our political leaders, presumably, know all this. If they don't, they bloody well should. And in any case, they aren't talking about the cost of remediating damage.
Paying some piddling carbon tax will do nothing to defend us from what lies ahead: Neil Macdonald
DrCaleb @ Fri May 24, 2019 7:34 am
The most expensive flooding in Canadian history was still in Alberta.
llama66 @ Fri May 24, 2019 7:48 am
Wooo! The Great Flood of Southern Alberta Flood in 2013!
DrCaleb @ Fri May 24, 2019 7:50 am
llama66 llama66:
Wooo! The Great Flood of Southern Alberta Flood in 2013!
'Zactly. Like my buddy Neil says, there are no athiests when your basement is chest deep in someone elses sewage. Albertans' can't live with that.
N_Fiddledog @ Fri May 24, 2019 8:13 am
I'm confused. Is Neil saying he thinks the carbon tax will be turned into some sort of flood prevention and management tax? Good luck with that, Neil.
More like they'll buy some new private jets to jet the administrator, fat cats off to more climate junkets in exotic locales, kind-of-thing.