View Single Post
Old 12-31-2009, 09:32 AM   #15 (permalink)
Baraka_Guru
warrior bodhisattva
 
Baraka_Guru's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: East-central Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3 View Post
If you would like to go into this issue in more detail I am game. Oil sands is controversial. I think much of the "difficulty" is related to political obstacles. I also think traditional oil producing countries manipulate price and production of oil the best they can to limit development of alternatives. Our politicians often play right into this manipulation.
Of course there are political obstacles. But in the Oil Sands, the biggest challenge is the cost of extraction/production due to the nature of the oil in the sands vs. a well. Only fairly recently has technological developments made it such an attractive place to invest. Even still, it's only when oil prices are above a certain point will it remain so. The margins on oil extraction from "traditional" rigs are much higher than the extraction process from the sands.

Quote:
I repeat, I don't think Canada will fail to do what is "right". However, when a nation like China gets resources they are free to use those resources as they see fit. I did not read where Canada made any demands on China to limit "polluting the planet". "Environmentalist" in this country have a voice, they do not have a voice in China. China can smile, make nice, take resources, use those resources within their boarders in ways Canada has no control over. Also, understand that at some point China may have the power to dictate the rules. It is a risk. I am sure you understand that.
I misunderstood you at first. Canada is relatively unconcerned with what China does with the final product. We're only really concerned with China's operations within our borders. But as supporters of economic freedom, it's not our business how China burns oil. Sure we'd like them to be efficient, but we'd like everyone else to be as well. But look at us: we use obscene amounts of both water and oil ourselves. Per capita, we are far worse than China.

Quote:
Pure ego. It is that simple. I like being the best, number one, top dog, control, etc., etc. I do not want China to become the economic equal or superior to the US. I am offended that we let Petro China become bigger than Exxon-Mobil. I want the home team to win.

Canada is like the girl next door. I never did like guys dating the girls that lived next door to me.

Please, don't try to call me names or say how juvenile I am. I already know what I am. I understand what I am. I don't pretend to be something I am not. I am not going to change.
At least I now know where you stand. I'm not encouraged to ridicule you on your opinion, as you are entitled to it (though your condescending opinion of Canada is a bit disagreeable to my senses). America is Top Dog (economically, anyway) and you want it to stay that way. Unfortunately, it looks like it might not happen. Such is the way of the world. Ask Britain.

Quote:
I disagree. When people are free to innovate new technologies naturally emerge. When new technologies are cost effective, the old is replaced by the new. I would argue that China has been primarily taking advantage of technological advances initiated in this country. When was the last time you heard of something "cutting edge" coming out of a communist or a socialist country? Even Israel, for as small as it is generates more technological advances than China.
This is a bit misleading. China is actually ranked 6th in the world with regard to overall R&D spending. Their R&D expenditures as a % of GDP is low compared to OECD countries, yes, but this will likely improve in the current environment. They are slowly moving away from a Soviet style of research to a more market-based one. This is parallel to what they're doing with their economy. You may not hear much about China's innovations, but they're there, and I'm willing to bet you'll hear about this over the next several years. China's space program was the third in the world to obtain independent human spaceflight capability, behind only the U.S. and the Soviet Union. They also used a surface-fired missile to destroy a satellite, the first time it was attempted/accomplished since the U.S. did it in the '80s. If that's not cutting-edge or innovative, then I don't know what is.

China might seem behind to you, but methinks they're catching up.
__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Last edited by Baraka_Guru; 12-31-2009 at 09:35 AM..
Baraka_Guru is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360