Liberal (Minority/Majority) Government 2025 - ???

[Halifax Tar]

Interesting take from Sylvain Charlebois.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2060407685099483425

 

[Czech_pivo]

Interesting take from Sylvain Charlebois.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2060407685099483425

Perception is everything.

 

[brihard]

Interesting take from Sylvain Charlebois.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2060407685099483425

We can be headed in the best direction reasonably and realistically achievable at this time while still being at the mercy of larger macroeconomic forces. Even the best case in policy and economic terms may not be a great outcome in the moment when subject to economic attack from our largest trading partner.

Now, I’m not saying we actually are in the best possible overall direction. Generally I think the government is setting us on the right track; there could always be some things done better. However short of economic and political capitulation to the U.S., I think we’d inevitably be feeling pain right now.

 

[YZT580]

We can be headed in the best direction reasonably and realistically achievable at this time while still being at the mercy of larger macroeconomic forces. Even the best case in policy and economic terms may not be a great outcome in the moment when subject to economic attack from our largest trading partner.

Now, I’m not saying we actually are in the best possible overall direction. Generally I think the government is setting us on the right track; there could always be some things done better. However short of economic and political capitulation to the U.S., I think we’d inevitably be feeling pain right now.

Every time I think we are doing really bad I take a look at England.

 

[suffolkowner]

Fault is a personal conclusion of mine, but he was the biggest and possibly sole driver behind the way the climate change policies and the carbon taxes were pushed, as well as likely a lot of ministerial foot dragging on various environmental assessments and other issues, where the focus was on the environment regardless of the impact on Canadians and Canadian businesses.

If it was up to him, all the oil would stay in the ground, which is fine in theory if you completely ignore that pretty much every advance in the industrial revolution onwards and the entire information age relies heavily on petrochemicals.

Emission controls on vehicles and industries, investment in cleaner energy (like nuclear mini and micro energy), etc all have a real and measurable impact on Canadian emissions than the punitive approach he tried to take, and is being walked back because it is a shitty way to do it.

Things like EV tax credits, home energy improvement programs, emission improvement tax credits for industry etc are actually pretty effective in real terms. One big win generally is the planned upgrade of the national energy grid which is long overdue, and needed EV or not to support growth, but a very real measure the government can do on the infra background that actually enables a lot of things that will actually make a difference.

these just seem like policy disagreements to me, not something to attract too much vitriol over to me

 

[suffolkowner]

or continue to purchase waterfront acreage in areas that are supposed to be underwater in a few years. They have the inside knowledge, are addicted to making money and yet they blow it on ocean front property. Incidentally, as far as sea level rise is concerned, many of those islands that were supposed to disappear have actually gained ground. The one the UN used as a poster child, Tuvalu has actually increased by 3%. But don't believe me, believe the experts: Kench, P.S. et al., Patterns of island change and persistence offer alternate adaptation pathways for atoll nations.
So why is it that you continue to promote a return to the 18th century way of living because that is the only way you will ever meet the limits being imposed by government? I got it: you are lifetime members of the Justin, Guilbeault fan club. The very fact that they supported it is proof enough that there is a scam built in.

There are lots of really expert experts who totally disagree with the entire issue of AGW. Here are a few of them Mann and his hockey stick were proven totally false. The Emails that were released contained ample evidence of conspiracy amongst the correspondents. Polar bears are increasing in number and the 97% consensus is based upon quicksand.

1. Lennart O. Bengtsson, who was Director of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg, Germany.
2. John R. Christy, Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science and Director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville.
3. Roy Spencer, University of Alabama in Huntsville, and NASA. He and Dr John Christy received NASA’s Exceptional Scientific Achievement Medal for their global temperature monitoring work with satellites.<a data-state="closed" data-grace-area-trigger="" href="Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW)"><span>34</span></a>
4. Judith A. Curry, who due to the “craziness” of the politicization of climate science, in 2017 took early retirement from her position as Professor in the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Tech, USA, a position she had held for 15 years.
5. Richard S. Lindzen, Professor Emeritus in the Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences at MIT, contributed to the IPCC’s 1995 and 2001 reports, but became skeptical of the alarmist climate model projections.
6. Nir J. Shaviv, Professor and Chair of the Racah Institute of Physics at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem

most of these individuals dont attract much attention in scientific circles because they are just bad at the science





interestingly Spencer is having it out with Pat Frank right now on his insane ideas, showing that within the small group of skeptics there is no agreement on an alternative hypothesis

 

[Navy_Pete]

these just seem like policy disagreements to me, not something to attract too much vitriol over to me

Well, he was also arrested dozens of times for pretty high profile protests, was generally a bit of a zealot that ignored all reasonable attempts at discussion, and was his own worst enemy. I can not agree with someone's policies but not have a personal issue with someone, but even as a social handgrenade with typical autistic issues with people skills, this guy is awful at dealing with any suggestions.

So less of a policy to him, and more like a religious belief, and questioning that was heresy.

Canada's greatest advantage is our natural resources and employs hundreds of thousands of people while supporting a lot more, so his policies and divisive approach directly impacted a signficant number of people pretty negatively, and the overall policy impacts made everything more expensive for all Canadians (directly and indirectly). And I agree with the goal of decarbonization, just his approach is insanely unworkable.

 

[Halifax Tar]

The hits keep coming

Canada plummets in ‘best country’ ranking — placing lower than U.S.

Canada has fallen more than a dozen spots in a “best countries” list, sinking one place lower than the United States. Read on.

torontosun.com

 

[suffolkowner]

Well, he was also arrested dozens of times for pretty high profile protests, was generally a bit of a zealot that ignored all reasonable attempts at discussion, and was his own worst enemy. I can not agree with someone's policies but not have a personal issue with someone, but even as a social handgrenade with typical autistic issues with people skills, this guy is awful at dealing with any suggestions.

So less of a policy to him, and more like a religious belief, and questioning that was heresy.

Canada's greatest advantage is our natural resources and employs hundreds of thousands of people while supporting a lot more, so his policies and divisive approach directly impacted a signficant number of people pretty negatively, and the overall policy impacts made everything more expensive for all Canadians (directly and indirectly). And I agree with the goal of decarbonization, just his approach is insanely unworkable.

well its possible he was a bad choice as a Minister based on his past but the history of civil disobedience just speaks to the passion and conviction he had for the ideas. Not a negative IMO

If his religious belief is that AGW is really, really bad that is just based on good science

Balancing natural resource use and environmental outcomes is always going to be a difficult choice

We'll see if we can decarbonise without an approach

 

[Altair]

The hits keep coming

Canada plummets in ‘best country’ ranking — placing lower than U.S.

Canada has fallen more than a dozen spots in a “best countries” list, sinking one place lower than the United States. Read on.

torontosun.com

Hahahaha, yes, we dropped due to low renewable energy use and our environmental rankings dropped due to carbon emissions

We best get right on those issue, ya?

Hahaha

Let's bring back trudeau while we are at it, we were 1st in 2021

 

[Navy_Pete]

well its possible he was a bad choice as a Minister based on his past but the history of civil disobedience just speaks to the passion and conviction he had for the ideas. Not a negative IMO

If his religious belief is that AGW is really, really bad that is just based on good science

Balancing natural resource use and environmental outcomes is always going to be a difficult choice

We'll see if we can decarbonise without an approach

Yeah, and while I am onboard with his goal, and appreciated his passion and conviction, I don't think he ws the right personality to be in charge of any of it as he's too inflexible and seemed to lack all basic practical grounding.

Sometimes having that big vision guy works out, but very rapidly falls apart as soon as they touch things, and I think the George Lucas dialogue writing is a great example (as opposed to VFX, where he had an idea, and then let the wizards that worked for him figure out how to do it).

I think things like generational reinvestment in the grid and development of the nuclear reactors both poitn towards there being an approach, but also realizing that exporting LNG to allies like Germany helps stabilize the globe by undercutting Russia's stranglehold, so has huge soft power benefits for us and the EU, and hopefully rolling back on some of the massive resentment that is feeding the Alberta separatist movement. Maybe not, as there are a lot of people too dug in that instantly had the F&#K CARNEY stickers, but once in place will keep delivering something tangible regardless of who is in power.

 

[suffolkowner]

Yeah, and while I am onboard with his goal, and appreciated his passion and conviction, I don't think he ws the right personality to be in charge of any of it as he's too inflexible and seemed to lack all basic practical grounding.

Sometimes having that big vision guy works out, but very rapidly falls apart as soon as they touch things, and I think the George Lucas dialogue writing is a great example (as opposed to VFX, where he had an idea, and then let the wizards that worked for him figure out how to do it).

I think things like generational reinvestment in the grid and development of the nuclear reactors both poitn towards there being an approach, but also realizing that exporting LNG to allies like Germany helps stabilize the globe by undercutting Russia's stranglehold, so has huge soft power benefits for us and the EU, and hopefully rolling back on some of the massive resentment that is feeding the Alberta separatist movement. Maybe not, as there are a lot of people too dug in that instantly had the F&#K CARNEY stickers, but once in place will keep delivering something tangible regardless of who is in power.

cant say never met the man and honestly im not tuned in enough to the political relationships and machinations going on to know
I question what was wrong with the policies and whether any alternatives will work

 

[YZT580]

most of these individuals dont attract much attention in scientific circles because they are just bad at the science
View attachment 100549


View attachment 100550

interestingly Spencer is having it out with Pat Frank right now on his insane ideas, showing that within the small group of skeptics there is no agreement on an alternative hypothesis

honestly you don't attain those positions without knowing just a little bit about the topic. No.1 was head of research at the European Centre for medium range weather forecasts and then founded the department of theoretical climate modelling and participated in their development. So I suspect he is a little bit known in the field.
No.2 is another loser. He developed the first successful satellite temperature record in collaboration with another scientist. Here is what Wilki has to say: He was appointed Alabama's state climatologist in 2000. For his development of a global temperature data set from satellites, he was awarded NASA's Medal for Exceptional Scientific Achievement and the American Meteorological Society's "Special Award."</a> In 2002, Christy was elected Fellow of the American Meteorological Society.
No.3 Roy Spencer He was the other half of the Satellite development. Again from wilki. He is a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, and the U.S. Science Team leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer (AMSR-E) on NASA's Aqua satellite. He has served as senior scientist for climate studies at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center. His position on AGW is simply that there is some but it isn't worth worrying about and has written several books on the subject.
No.4 Judith A. Curry She is an interesting case. She is very well known and she does believe in AGW and, if the worst case scenario were to come to pass it would be bad indeed but she questions the immediacy of of the problem and is firmly opposed to our current efforts. She is no loser.
No.5 Richard S. Lindzen I can't begin to list this fellows achievements. He has published over 200 times as of 2010 on topics I can't begin to understand. He taught at both Harvard and MIT and is totally opposed to all the climate change stuff.
No.6 Nir J. Shaviv is an astrophysicist and is very well known in that field. His observations have led him to maintain that warming is primarily a result of the sun and its rays. He has written a bunch of stuff as welll so all of them are known and all of them, including Judith were highly respected scientists in their field. Mann didn't like her very much but that certainly isn't a vote against anyone.

The problem with my experts is they publish stuff that you don't agree with and thus you insult them and their careers without knowing anything at all about them. Now this whole thing is a long way removed from the topic so I am going to cease my participation here with a hearty apology to the mods who have been very patient. ciao