Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

ReeferMadness

Members
  • Content Count

    3,926
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

21 Excellent

About ReeferMadness

  • Rank
    Full Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Between Venus and Mars

Recent Profile Visitors

10,728 profile views
  1. False equivalence. However much they might stretch the truth, it isn't even remotely in the same league as Trump. He tells lies almost every time he speaks and they are easily disproven. The comparison is really idiotic. Sure - you could compare Trump to any of them. Take your pick. Trump wouldn't allow people from his own fuqqn administration to testify. Why not?? What is he trying to hide?? What is it about people in his cult that can't wrap their heads around how wrong this is? Maybe that's where the psychologists and sociologists should focus their efforts. Oh, wait. They already are. Bad guy? Lemme see. He's refused to rent to black people, making him a raving racist. I guess that's not a problem for many of his followers. He has a long record of ripping off contractors. I guess his followers don't mind if he's a crook. He used charities to enrich himself. I guess you must be OK with that. His multiple bankruptcies show him to be shitty at business so he's a fraud. Tony Schwartz, the person who actually wrote "Art of the Deal" called him a "scared child" and has repeatedly warned people about his narcissistic personality. He's a blatant misogynist. He's cozied up to the world's worst authoritarians including MbS, Kim Jong Un, Putin, Erdogan and Duerte. His fraudulent university ripped off thousands of people. He's defended and been defended by white nationalists and white supremacists. He and his family have used his presidency to enrich themselves. He's divided the country and encouraged racism. Bad? I don't know quite how delusional you need to be not see see him for what he is. Maybe you can share.
  2. There is excellent documentation that shows Trump is a prolific liar. Why people choose to listen to him is an interesting question for psychologists and sociologists. However, I'd point out that lots of lying sociopaths, including Hitler, had huge followings. Just because people listen to you doesn't make you right. It just means that people aren't very rational. Yes, "acquitted". LMFAO. Do you even know what scare quotes are? Trump was indeed "acquitted" in a "trial" that didn't allow witnesses. Sounds like a Soviet-style trial. If he was innocent, why was the White House trying so hard to block the first-hand witnesses from testifying? It doesn't really make a lot of sense, does it?
  3. Because. he. is. president. And the attorney general is corrupt. For anyone who watches something besides Fox News, this really isn't too hard.
  4. I don't recall saying it was all Trump's fault. I'm no huge fan of Obama or either Clinton. US politics is one enormous cesspool. The country is deeply dysfunctional. But far and away, Trump is worse than either Obama or the Clintons and the red states are, on average, far worse than the blue ones.
  5. I should point out that the above number is averaged across the country. The poverty is considerably worse in Trump-voting southern red states.
  6. Maybe things like "data" and "thinking" aren't your strongest points. The US doesn't have the highest median income in the world (I haven't the foggiest clue what "per median income is") but it does have one of the highest poverty rates in the developed world. Over 20% of kids live in poverty. https://data.oecd.org/inequality/poverty-rate.htm
  7. Sadly, many of them won't. The US prefers to keep its citizens poor and dumb.
  8. Hey, look at that. Apparently, it's OK just to quote half the article now.
  9. Here is some honesty from Alberta that you don't see from the main parties, who are more comfortable just feeding the myths.
  10. Note to the moderators: I see you've chosen to ignore the misogynist reference to Rachel Notley. Not surprising - right wingers get away with anything on MLW.
  11. By dramatic, I assume you mean true. When you've existed on a steady diet of fiction for so long, no doubt the truth does seem a bit dramatic. I grew up in northern Alberta back when they were still called tar sands. Thanks for the "education". Oh, You mean a socialist hellhole like Norway where they now have a sovereign wealth fund worth $1.2 trillion and some of the world's best social programs? Yeah, that would really suck. I'm sure you're glad you're not in their shoes. Canada had a national oil company but sold it when it wasn't worth much because Mulroney wanted to suck up to Alberta. Alberta invested in tar sands technology as part of Alberta Energy Corporation but sold it at at a time it wasn't worth much because... well, because it's Alberta. In Norway, they take care of the people and the oil companies are expected to look out for themselves. In Alberta, they take care of the oil companies and the people? Whatever, right. You're asking the wrong question. Why are you shipping raw bitumen out of the province instead of refining it? Why are the royalties and taxes so low that money is being piped out of the province faster than the oil? Why are you producing 3 million barrels a day and still running a multi-billion dollar deficit? Gross incompetence.
  12. I understand very well. I understand Alberta is the author of its own misfortunes. I understand that 30 or so years ago, they elected a beer-guzzling ex-mayor whose main qualification was that he publicly referred to people from Central Canada as "eastern bums and creeps". He later showed himself to be so completely out of touch with his own electorate that in a drunken haze, he publicly lambasted and abused people in a homeless shelter, not understanding some of them had full time jobs but couldn't afford rent on what they were making. But back to the main point. He wanted companies to come in and develop Alberta's low quality tar sands badly. He wanted it so badly, he offered a sweetheart deal. They were offered oil at a 1% royalty rate (essentially free oil) until they paid off the huge investments necessary to develop the tar sands. The result was predictable. There was a stampede of companies rushing into the tar sands. Since they were paying for the development costs with essentially free oil, they had zero incentive to be efficient. They rushed in like coke-addled rhinos. They distorted the labor-market, bidding up the cost of semi-skilled and unskilled labor which is why Alberta now has Canada's most overpaid workforce. There was so much money sloshing around, people were flying in to Alberta to work their shifts. The resulting gold-rush bid up the cost of real estate, causing increased homelessness (see above). They increased Canada's GDP in a way that didn't really increase Canada's wealth, since most of the money just flowed out of the country to reward foreign shareholders or pay for expensive equipment, the vast majority of which was manufactured elsewhere. It did, however, artificially increase the value of the Canadian dollar, which resulted in manufacturers in other provinces being less able to compete on the world market. Never once have I seen an Albertan cry over Ontario jobs lost due to our bouncing petro-dollar. Here's what people don't seem to get. Alberta's boom didn't come from selling oil. They're produce 3 million barrels a day! It came from from building massive infrastructure to mine bitumen so that it could be shipped out to American refineries. These are plants which last for decades so an economy based on building new plants is the height of economic delusion. Such is Alberta. So, now where do things sit? Alberta is running a massive deficit, trading in delusional conspiracy theories, carrying ~$300 billion in unfunded clean-up liabilities, and going all in on a dying industry while oil companies thank them by giving them the finger while leaving. Kenney is determined to give away every last public dollar to the oil industry before it goes under. So you want to know who's to blame? Look in the mirror. And stop whining.
  13. sure it is. Which is why I never said any of that. Unless you're going to somehow rewrite the laws of economics, the most expensive oil will be priced out of the market first... Sure. When it comes to oil, there is the side of the oil industry which everyone immediately genuflects before. Then there is the side of the workers, which is mostly ignored. There is the side of the resource owners, the people of the Alberta. They've been royally (royalty) screwed since King Klein instituted the great give away. The side of the environment, which, in Alberta at least, is essentially openly mocked. The side of climate change, which Albertans apparently believe will be resolved with a bag of magic beans. Then there is the side of thinking Canadians, who wonder when it was exactly that reality departed Alberta for good. You're hilarious. Criticize me about being presumptuous about Alberta and then come back with a random and completely unfounded accusation about Trudeau. I'm no expert or fan of Trudeau but here's what I know: His childhood was mostly spent in Ottawa When he became an adult, he chose to live in Vancouver On the subject of Quebec as a nation, he once said that nationalism was a 19th century notion and that recognizing Quebec as a nation went against everything his father ever believed. Honestly, I don't know why you think what you think about Trudeau. Personally, I think he's a lightweight who's very likable and has had some solid political instruction. I think he went to Quebec because his family name got him elected there, not because he's some kind of secret Quebec agent.
  14. Alberta hasn't sent anything. You don't seem to understand how Equalization works.
  15. The Greens are the only ones who would prioritize environmental issues. The others are pretenders. But blaming it on the parties is weak. The reason that the parties have won't prioritize it is that too few people are demanding action. Imagine World War II where everyone says "Yeah, someone should go fight those Nazis" but nobody is willing to give up anything until everyone else does first. That's exactly the situation we're in today. European countries are showing much more progress than we are. And China and India are showing bolder leadership in technology development. One day, we're going to wake up and find the world has passed us by while we're arguing over the toxic, carcinogenic sludge in Northern Alberta.
×
×
  • Create New...