CAN-USA Tariff Strife (split from various pol threads)

[Good2Golf]

Your F35 numbers are off…US numbers are plane only. Multiply capital acquisition by 3-3.5 to capture life cycle support costs. Others probably need adjustment as well…

 

[Good2Golf]

Also, don’t forget, LM is a major subcontractor on CSC…(not just AEGIS and SPY-7)

 

[Kirkhill]

Danielle Smith has said as much about export taxes on energy.

Danielle Smith said she was against export taxes on energy in the context of punishing the US, and inherently Alberta, in an effort to protect Ontario. She also has reason to be reticent about the motives of her dance partners given that history of the relationship since 2015.

Despite the efforts to close in Alberta it is still Alberta oil payments that have been keeping Canada, and its equalization payment scheme, afloat.

Ontario, Quebec and Canada have been benefiting from Alberta oil under the current tax regime.

 

[Kirkhill]

Your F35 numbers are off…US numbers are plane only. Multiply capital acquisition by 3-3.5 to capture life cycle support costs. Others probably need adjustment as well…

Intentionally left life cycle numbers out because large portions of those are spent in Canada. I accept that the number is likely to be higher than 9 BUSD. But the total project is somewhere in the 70 BUSD/BCAD range with the vast majority of it spent on Canadian buildings, Canadian runways, Canadian fuel and Canadian salaries.

Even if you took the spare parts budget as 3.5 times 9 BUSD (30 BUSD) over 40 years you still are not reaching 1 BUSD annually on that one project.

I'll be generous and offer another Billion or 2 annually from the O&M budget.

Trump is looking at our 80 BUSD revenue stream from oil and wanting to know what he can sell us to off set that. 1-3 BUSD in military hardware isn't getting him very far.

 

[Remius]

Danielle Smith said she was against export taxes on energy in the context of punishing the US, and inherently Alberta, in an effort to protect Ontario. She also has reason to be reticent about the motives of her dance partners given that history of the relationship since 2015.

Despite the efforts to close in Alberta it is still Alberta oil payments that have been keeping Canada, and its equalization payment scheme, afloat.

Ontario, Quebec and Canada have been benefiting from Alberta oil under the current tax regime.

If you think they can play ball on that then cool. Something tells me they wouldn’t. Anymore than some political quarters from Quebec accepting pipelines or the end of supply management. Separatists and constitutional crisis threat types generally make a stink about those things. Albertans sound a lot more like Quebecers these days.

 

[JLB50]

I think we could see some notable changes in less than 10 years, TBH, especially if Trump keeps up with the tariffs. It would probably take 12-15 years to hit 50-50, and maybe 20-25 to bring exports to the US into the 25-30% range, but honestly, it shouldn’t be considered a bad thing…some pain yea? But America can’t be trusted for the next almost half decade. Time for Canada to decide…

Amidst all the insanity going on south of the border, one congressman is introducing a bill that, if passed, would allow a third term for Trump. Unlikely to happen? Who would have thought that Trump would have been re-elected after the January 6th Capitol attack.

 

[dapaterson]

Amidst all the insanity going on south of the border, one congressman is introducing a bill that, if passed, would allow a third term for Trump. Unlikely to happen? Who would have thought that Trump would have been re-elected after the January 6th Capitol attack.

As it would require a constitutional amendment, it would also need multiple states to pass it as well.

But if successful, 2028 could be Trump vs Obama.

 

[JLB50]

As it would require a constitutional amendment, it would also need multiple states to pass it as well.

But if successful, 2028 could be Trump vs Obama.

Forgot about the Obama factor.

 

[brihard]

Amidst all the insanity going on south of the border, one congressman is introducing a bill that, if passed, would allow a third term for Trump. Unlikely to happen? Who would have thought that Trump would have been re-elected after the January 6th Capitol attack.

Yeah, that went in a few weeks ago. Quite tellingly it allows for a third term only if the first two terms were non-consecutive. It’s a blatant pandering to Trump. It’s unconstitutional of course; the 22nd amendment expressly rules it out.

 

[Kirkhill]

If you think they can play ball on that then cool. Something tells me they wouldn’t. Anymore than some political quarters from Quebec accepting pipelines or the end of supply management. Separatists and constitutional crisis threat types generally make a stink about those things. Albertans sound a lot more like Quebecers these days.

I do, do I?

 

[JLB50]

Yeah, that went in a few weeks ago. Quite tellingly it allows for a third term only if the first two terms were non-consecutive. It’s a blatant pandering to Trump. It’s unconstitutional of course; the 22nd amendment expressly rules it out.

Although unlikely, repealing or altering an amendment is not impossible. 2/3 of both Houses and 3/4 approval from of states needed. Or…don’t put it past Trump, declare a national emergency of some sort, then declare martial law and “postpone” elections. It’s worked for a number of tinpot dictators.

 

[Remius]

I do, do I?

No clue about you. Calling it how I see it. Alberta has threatened a constitutional crisis. Sounds very Quebecois to me.

They also likely have the second biggest separatist movement (despite being dwarfed by the largest) in the country.

 

[Brad Sallows]

From a security perspective it would be able to knock it all out at once though…

But it is a good idea

A utilities corridor could - and should - mean a swath of land tens of kilometres wide.

 

[Remius]

A utilities corridor could - and should - mean a swath of land tens of kilometres wide.

Which would likely defeat the purpose of minimizing the foot print if trying to minimize impact on FN etc.

Still a good idea.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Which would likely defeat the purpose of minimizing the foot print if trying to minimize impact on FN etc.

Still a good idea.

Big country, small corridor.

 

[foresterab]

A utilities corridor could - and should - mean a swath of land tens of kilometres wide.

As a rough planning area...sure.

But I just measured...dual lane TransCanada highway + dual track CN mainline + TransMountain Pipeline (both pipes) + powerline utility corridor. 450m total width and they are not all adjacent to each other.

Don't get me wrong it's enough to disrupt animal movement patterns and species like the deer/elk/moose sure don't like the open areas.
But it's also pretty impressive how small some of the footprints actually are especially in the scale of the country's size.

 

[Kirkhill]

No clue about you. Calling it how I see it. Alberta has threatened a constitutional crisis. Sounds very Quebecois to me.

They also likely have the second biggest separatist movement (despite being dwarfed by the largest) in the country.

Probably a result of the summer that I spent in Lotbiniere as a teen. Although maybe I have more SNP genes than I thought.

 

[Kirkhill]

A utilities corridor could - and should - mean a swath of land tens of kilometres wide.

Redoing the CPR project. What did they get the rights to? 20 miles either side of the right of way or something like that?

I could see a similar easement being granted but I would expect the actual impact zone to be something like the width of the 401.

 

[Kirkhill]

Which would likely defeat the purpose of minimizing the foot print if trying to minimize impact on FN etc.

Still a good idea.

But, as noted, at least some of these corridors are being proposed by first nations.

NeeStanan Corridor

NeeStaNan (all of us) - Nee Sta Nan (all of us)

neestanan.ca

The attached video has Tom Jackson as the front man.

It is worth giving their pitch a look - rail, pipelines, power lines, fibre optics, an LNG terminal on Hudson's Bay.

Their particular route may not be the right one - but they are open to something of the sort as long as they get their fair share.

 

[RangerRay]

Yeah, that went in a few weeks ago. Quite tellingly it allows for a third term only if the first two terms were non-consecutive. It’s a blatant pandering to Trump. It’s unconstitutional of course; the 22nd amendment expressly rules it out.

I get the feeling that this crew won’t care what the constitution or the courts say.

“How many divisions does the Supreme Court have?”