OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Jan 26, 2015 11:22:51 GMT -5
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709 
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Jan 28, 2015 15:06:16 GMT -5
So, the Democrats aren't going to be content with their continued obstruction of ANWR, now they're going to double down? And block the Keystone XL pipeline. And take credit for the oil boom on private land.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jan 28, 2015 15:30:05 GMT -5
So, the Democrats aren't going to be content with their continued obstruction of ANWR, now they're going to double down? And block the Keystone XL pipeline. And take credit for the oil boom on private land. It seems that from what I have read..the keystone pipeline would just be another government white elephant..very expensive...not needed , especially now and the amount of people hired to run it once completed..miniscue ...possible 50 or less... Obama plan is spend those many $ on infrastructure that is so badly needed ..bridges..interstate repairs that benefit so many more and is so desperately needed and which would also mean jobs ..For someone who professed such concerns over government wast , I am surprised your toting this pipeline...Is it just because the POTUS you don't seem to care for so much is the one who is not in favor of it so anything against this POTUS is a good thing in your book,..?   |
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Jan 28, 2015 16:14:10 GMT -5
The Keystone/XL pipeline is a private project that needs government approval. If it wasn't needed, the businesses proposing it, and their stockholders would let us know.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jan 28, 2015 18:24:03 GMT -5
The Keystone/XL pipeline is a private project that needs government approval. If it wasn't needed, the businesses proposing it, and their stockholders would let us know. It seems there is a public cost here of about $7 billion... "The original Keystone Pipeline cost US$5.2 billion with the Keystone XL expansion slated to cost approximately US$7 billion. The Keystone XL was expected to be completed by 2012–2013, however construction has been overtaken by events.[18]I have also read that due to the delay in construction, the Industry has made other arrangements to get product to market, refinery..and it seems to be working just fine and with the glut of oil on the market and expected to remain so for many years the need of the pipeline has deminished to the point, even proponents beyond the political needs, practicle needs , that has deminished too... Yet the countrys' infrastructure so badly needed for repair and rebuilding still is badly in need....The $7 billion there would go a long way and pumped into the economy, would employ so many in the heavy construction trades. Naturally that would be a good thing for the unemployment roles as well as the economy in general..all the supporting industys'..gravel, sand, tar, concrete, metals , eating establishments etc etc and naturally that would look good on Obamas record so naturally GOP and their followers are against such a thing..{sigh..politics, politics..sucn a sorry mess it is..}  ...  .. ... |
|
fairlycrazy23
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 23:55:19 GMT -5
Posts: 3,306
|
Post by fairlycrazy23 on Jan 28, 2015 20:35:50 GMT -5
No Transatlantic is going to pay for it not public funds. So the 7 or 8 billion that they don't spend won't be going to infrastructure.
Of course there are other arrangements we will be using this oil one way or another, but this pipeline still makes sense. It will be safer and cheaper than rail.
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on Jan 28, 2015 21:42:35 GMT -5
So, the Democrats aren't going to be content with their continued obstruction of ANWR, now they're going to double down? And block the Keystone XL pipeline. And take credit for the oil boom on private land. It seems that from what I have read..the keystone pipeline would just be another government white elephant..very expensive...not needed , especially now and the amount of people hired to run it once completed..miniscue ...possible 50 or less... Obama plan is spend those many $ on infrastructure that is so badly needed ..bridges..interstate repairs that benefit so many more and is so desperately needed and which would also mean jobs ..For someone who professed such concerns over government wast , I am surprised your toting this pipeline...Is it just because the POTUS you don't seem to care for so much is the one who is not in favor of it so anything against this POTUS is a good thing in your book,..? Didn't Obama already waste...ahem, I mean "spend" several hundred million dollars on shovel-ready infrastructure projects that weren't exactly shovel-ready? A lot of good that did us...  |
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Jan 28, 2015 22:21:22 GMT -5
I'd rather have my government spend money on a project that is not absolutely imperiously necessary and will be useful a bit less than claimed than my government spend money starting an unwarranted war in a distant land that would bring nothing but destruction about.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jan 28, 2015 22:56:32 GMT -5
No Transatlantic is going to pay for it not public funds. So the 7 or 8 billion that they don't spend won't be going to infrastructure. Of course there are other arrangements we will be using this oil one way or another, but this pipeline still makes sense. It will be safer and cheaper than rail. Possible you know something I don't Fairly but the site I pulled up, see above, says that US paid out the original $5. something billion and the finishing leg would be US $7 billion...{possible a lot more now since those were old figures and the project is on hold now...and again, from what I have heard on talk shows an media reports..pipeline makes little sense now....If so I give Kudos to Obama of saying no ....enough with all the $ wasted over the years by decisions made by Congress just to help specific political constituency....Since when has rail been unsafe...Pipelines can break too... also if we want to be reaching for possibilities which both of us have no clue on ..pipelines are vulnerable to sabotage..see the pipelines from Egypt into Israel..Gas and oil.... |
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jan 28, 2015 23:14:44 GMT -5
It seems that from what I have read..the keystone pipeline would just be another government white elephant..very expensive...not needed , especially now and the amount of people hired to run it once completed..miniscue ...possible 50 or less... Obama plan is spend those many $ on infrastructure that is so badly needed ..bridges..interstate repairs that benefit so many more and is so desperately needed and which would also mean jobs ..For someone who professed such concerns over government wast , I am surprised your toting this pipeline...Is it just because the POTUS you don't seem to care for so much is the one who is not in favor of it so anything against this POTUS is a good thing in your book,..? Didn't Obama already waste...ahem, I mean "spend" several hundred million dollars on shovel-ready infrastructure projects that weren't exactly shovel-ready? A lot of good that did us... Actually your referring I believe , back six years, to the stimulus program where some projects took longer to be initiated then was originally thought as far as time period..That was a time where quick decisions were imperative according to most respected experts..Depression, not recession..Nations Auto Industry failing completly, more then one...so some miscalculations were made..No one in their right mind said no mistakes were ever made ...and decisions were made by governments , leaders all the time. War time..Pearl Harbor..all our aircraft lined up together on our air fields to protect against possible sabatogue...open easy target to be destroyed which they were. Battle of the Bulge...Military leaders , who had been on the job now for four years now with experience..Eisenhower , Bradlee..in their view war almost over..pull most of experienced troops off the line..celebrate Holidays...inexperienced troops on the line..get a little seasoning..Brass all back in rear celebrating with good food and drink..results..we lost 80,000 troops between death and wounding... Mistakes in government all the time..not purposely but misinformation..good intentions.. Actually, IMHO and just about all experts opinions ...both sides ...the $ spent to keep the Auto Industry healthy..keep us out of depression..stimulus..all people except GOP and their followers..{ Many of them too agree , if they and their businesses profited by the stimulus, they just won't admit it.. } agree $ well spent.. ."A lot of good that did us..." Actually yes..it did do a lot of good.... |
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jan 28, 2015 23:27:16 GMT -5
I'd rather have my government spend money on a project that is not absolutely imperiously necessary and will be useful a bit less than claimed than my government spend money starting an unwarranted war in a distant land that would bring nothing but destruction about. Problem with that..and I believe we all, both sides of the aisle..want that ..but one never knows what is a warranted war and I doubt anyone wants to get involved in a unwarranted one...but you sometimes just don't know till your in one of them. In hind site Nam was unwarranted or at least way to long...Afghanistan...after 9/11...I wouldn't call it unwarranted but how it was fought and the time plus presidential meddling and changing focus... Iraq...even there , with the supposed fact we had... That's why Obama is being so cautious in getting involved in more of them but as the most powerful nation in the world there are obligations, commitments that sometimes forces some kind of action... |
|
fairlycrazy23
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 23:55:19 GMT -5
Posts: 3,306
|
Post by fairlycrazy23 on Jan 28, 2015 23:57:37 GMT -5
That just means that cost is shown in US dollars as opposed to Canadian or some other currency
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Jan 29, 2015 0:54:42 GMT -5
No Transatlantic is going to pay for it not public funds. So the 7 or 8 billion that they don't spend won't be going to infrastructure. Of course there are other arrangements we will be using this oil one way or another, but this pipeline still makes sense. It will be safer and cheaper than rail. Correct. The convoluted way they come up with "public costs" associated with the project has to do with a bunch of stuff government could simply choose not to do. It costs money to get in the way. Getting out of the way saves money. Not only that, but the estimate of the public costs are just that- estimates of the costs. They take into account exactly $0 in public revenue generated by the project which will be in the tens of billions. When you create 42,000 jobs for several years (that's the jobs to get it up and running- I realize the permanent jobs will be closer to a few hundred)-- that's serious tax revenue. |
|
b2r
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:35:25 GMT -5
Posts: 7,257
|
Post by b2r on Jan 29, 2015 0:55:35 GMT -5
|
|
b2r
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:35:25 GMT -5
Posts: 7,257
|
Post by b2r on Jan 29, 2015 1:00:32 GMT -5
Therefore we shouldn't count any construction 'jobs' as employment, because they are by design 'temporary'.  |
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jan 29, 2015 2:22:39 GMT -5
Therefore we shouldn't count any construction 'jobs' as employment, because they are by design 'temporary'. From what I have read I still think it's a bad idea..pipe line but if it is really that important to some folks..easy solution..win the election in 2016..make sure you win the legislature too and then just do your thing..easy as 1..2 and 3 |
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Jan 29, 2015 7:19:27 GMT -5
War in Afganistan WAS warranted! Regardless of what anybody might think. Vietnam was a bit confusing- no reason for- but since it hapened should've been our lesson.
Iraq war on the other hand...don't even look for a reason because there wasn't one. Everybody knew it and said it but the Commander In Chief said otherwise.
And no! I said it before and I'll say it again: we are not the babysitter of the world or caretaker of it. Not all that are not like us have to change to be like us. Stop meddling in people's busines and they stop hating you.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,483
|
Post by billisonboard on Jan 29, 2015 10:21:51 GMT -5
War in Afganistan WAS warranted! ... It might have been "warranted" but was it wise? |
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Jan 29, 2015 20:02:26 GMT -5
War is never wise!
We spend quite a bit of money on training people to do what it needs to be done.
Or you could make a deal with somebody else if you wanna stay "clean". For the right amount of money, anything can be accomplished and is sure as hell wouldn't cost what it did to carry on a full blown war or the immeasurable value of lost lives.
when you deal with a bad man, you don't send an innocent after him, you send a worse one!
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,483
|
Post by billisonboard on Jan 29, 2015 20:44:37 GMT -5
... when you deal with a bad man, you don't send an innocent after him, you send a worse one! Why then did we send an army? |
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Jan 29, 2015 21:38:55 GMT -5
Maybe just to show to the World that we still got it? That we are a force to be reckoned with? Or maybe just to make a point, stupid as it may be?
God only knows what is in the heads of those in charge.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,483
|
Post by billisonboard on Jan 29, 2015 22:35:36 GMT -5
Maybe just to show to the World that we still got it? That we are a force to be reckoned with? Or maybe just to make a point, stupid as it may be? God only knows what is in the heads of those in charge. I don't know what to respond. |
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Jan 29, 2015 22:49:23 GMT -5
I wasn't looking for an answer! I was just wondering because I cannot wrap my head arround things that the leaders of this country, past and present, have done or do. None of them have the guts to make a decisive call that will take care of a problem forever. Just patching things doesn't always work and poor decision after poor decision has been and is being made in regards to international policy. I know that are many factors to consider but from what I see they consider just things that harm/hurth us as a nation albeit for the financial gain of few. |
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Jan 30, 2015 8:20:56 GMT -5
And in regards to Alaska: it is as of now still wild!!! Wouldn't be a good idea to keep it that way? Do we have to go and " modernize" everything by rolling down the road with big trucks on asphalt?
They keep saying about drilling for oil. There are many other places that oil companies have lease on land and they don't drill, just keep it for later.
Turn it into protected area and get over with it.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,483
|
Post by billisonboard on Jan 30, 2015 8:36:55 GMT -5
I wasn't looking for an answer! I was just wondering because I cannot wrap my head arround things that the leaders of this country, past and present, have done or do. None of them have the guts to make a decisive call that will take care of a problem forever. Just patching things doesn't always work and poor decision after poor decision has been and is being made in regards to international policy. I know that are many factors to consider but from what I see they consider just things that harm/hurth us as a nation albeit for the financial gain of few. I certainly wasn't going to come up with an "answer", I was struggling with what I might say to continue the conversation. If we went in to show we still have it, the fact we are there over ten years later ... (still not sure what to say). As far as "a decisive call that will take care of a problem forever", I don't believe such a call exists in regards to terrorism. |
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Jan 30, 2015 9:09:33 GMT -5
Terrorism, that's a different animal!
all you can do about it is wait and be ready!
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,483
|
Post by billisonboard on Jan 30, 2015 9:22:19 GMT -5
Terrorism, that's a different animal! all you can do about it is wait and be ready! I think there is a little more that can be done but it would all be very quiet and behind the scenes. You know, the exact opposite of shock and awe. |
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Jan 30, 2015 9:57:55 GMT -5
All activities that pose a danger to the public have to be dealt with quietly, behind the scenes. Public needs to be made aware of some of it just after the fact.
I did two years of deserters tracking and retrieving in a comunist country and I don't believe that people even knew that that happens once in a while. Not even some of the higher ups in the military. After all everything is "peachy" in the military! Why would one want to desert?
|
|
fairlycrazy23
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 23:55:19 GMT -5
Posts: 3,306
|
Post by fairlycrazy23 on Jan 30, 2015 10:51:21 GMT -5
All activities that pose a danger to the public have to be dealt with quietly, behind the scenes. Public needs to be made aware of some of it just after the fact. I did two years of deserters tracking and retrieving in a comunist country and I don't believe that people even knew that that happens once in a while. Not even some of the higher ups in the military. After all everything is "peachy" in the military! Why would one want to desert? Not to derail this completely but 'deserters tracking and retrieving' seems like a huge waste of resources. |
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Jan 30, 2015 11:23:54 GMT -5
It might be a waste of resources when you consider that there were 5 of us going after one individual but sometimes the target wasn't your average private. Officers that had had access to information, or before disappearing committed a graver offense. Justice needs to be served no matter what the cost!
|
|
