[Sixstrings]

They want a trade war because Canadian meat says made in Canada?

People have no right to know where their food comes from?

Personally I doubt consumers would distrust Canadian meat. Maybe Chinese. Make a good product, build a good reputation and protect it, and be proud to say "made in Canada."

(am i missing something, is there some reason to be worried about canadian meat?)

[Subjectivist]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', 'T')hey want a trade war because Canadian meat says made in Canada?

People have no right to know where their food comes from?

Personally I doubt consumers would distrust Canadian meat. Maybe Chinese. Make a good product, build a good reputation and protect it, and be proud to say "made in Canada."

(am i missing something, is there some reason to be worried about canadian meat?)

[Sixstrings]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Subjectivist', 'I') think it is all about Mad Cow disease, it broke out in Alberta in 1993 and lead to lots of bans/worries about Canadian beef in th US markets here in the states that border on Canada.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bovine_spo ... th_America

[yellowcanoe]

It has nothing to do with Mad Cow disease -- while the incident in 1993 did disrupt what had been an integrated market for beef between Canada and the US that has long since been fixed. Now it is country of origin labeling that threatens the integrated market for beef and other meat. Food processors can currently source meat from either the US or Canada and not worry about the actual origin of each piece as it goes through their plant. It's a whole different ballgame if the packaging has to specify the actual country of origin. It would be a huge headache for a plant to track the origin of each piece of meat as it passes through the plant so most processors will simply start buying US meat only. So from the perspective of Canada, the country of origin labeling is just a form of trade protectionism.

[Subjectivist]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yellowcanoe', 'I')t has nothing to do with Mad Cow disease -- while the incident in 1993 did disrupt what had been an integrated market for beef between Canada and the US that has long since been fixed. Now it is country of origin labeling that threatens the integrated market for beef and other meat. Food processors can currently source meat from either the US or Canada and not worry about the actual origin of each piece as it goes through their plant. It's a whole different ballgame if the packaging has to specify the actual country of origin. It would be a huge headache for a plant to track the origin of each piece of meat as it passes through the plant so most processors will simply start buying US meat only. So from the perspective of Canada, the country of origin labeling is just a form of trade protectionism.

[Keith_McClary]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yellowcanoe', 'I')t's a whole different ballgame if the packaging has to specify the actual country of origin. It would be a huge headache for a plant to track the origin of each piece of meat as it passes through the plant so most processors will simply start buying US meat only.

[Tanada]

Wasn't the whole Mad Cow scare supposed to make Thermal Depolymerization companies rich? Regular sterilizing processes don't kill the prions that cause MCD but if you convert the cow into Diesel fuel you don't have to worry about it, or something like that.

I grew up surrounded by Dairy and Beef cattle, the whole MCD thing seemed like a major media blow everything out of proportion scare, just like when we were all supposed to panic over Alar pesticide on our apples from Washington State.

I am sure John Kerry could settle this whole thing with one memo if he chose to do so, anyone know where he stands on this trade dispute?

[Sixstrings]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yellowcanoe', 'I')t has nothing to do with Mad Cow disease -- while the incident in 1993 did disrupt what had been an integrated market for beef between Canada and the US that has long since been fixed.

[Sixstrings]

By the way, about Canada, there's ads running on TV down here saying the tar sands pipeline is just to sell Canadian oil overseas and it wouldn't do anything for US oil supply:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'K')eystone XL is a tar sands pipeline to export oil out of the United States

Keystone XL would divert Canadian oil from refineries in the Midwest to the Gulf Coast where it can be refined and exported. Many of these refineries are in Foriegn Trade Zones where oil may be exported to international buyers without paying U.S. taxes. And that is exactly what Valero, one of the largest potential buyers of Keystone XL's oil, has told its investors it will do. The idea that Keystone XL will improve U.S. oil supply is a documented scam being played on the American people by Big Oil and its friends in Washington DC.

From Canada's perspective, the problem with existing pipelines is they all end in the U.S. Midwest and only allow one buyer - the United States. As Canada's Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver recently said, "we export 97 percent of our energy to the U.S. and we would like to diversify that."
http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/aswift/keystone_xl_is_a_tar_sands_pip.html

[Subjectivist]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', 'B')y the way, about Canada, there's ads running on TV down here saying the tar sands pipeline is just to sell Canadian oil overseas and it wouldn't do anything for US oil supply:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'K')eystone XL is a tar sands pipeline to export oil out of the United States

Keystone XL would divert Canadian oil from refineries in the Midwest to the Gulf Coast where it can be refined and exported. Many of these refineries are in Foriegn Trade Zones where oil may be exported to international buyers without paying U.S. taxes. And that is exactly what Valero, one of the largest potential buyers of Keystone XL's oil, has told its investors it will do. The idea that Keystone XL will improve U.S. oil supply is a documented scam being played on the American people by Big Oil and its friends in Washington DC.

From Canada's perspective, the problem with existing pipelines is they all end in the U.S. Midwest and only allow one buyer - the United States. As Canada's Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver recently said, "we export 97 percent of our energy to the U.S. and we would like to diversify that."
http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/aswift/keystone_xl_is_a_tar_sands_pip.html

[yellowcanoe]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', 'B')y the way, about Canada, there's ads running on TV down here saying the tar sands pipeline is just to sell Canadian oil overseas and it wouldn't do anything for US oil supply:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'K')eystone XL is a tar sands pipeline to export oil out of the United States

Keystone XL would divert Canadian oil from refineries in the Midwest to the Gulf Coast where it can be refined and exported. Many of these refineries are in Foriegn Trade Zones where oil may be exported to international buyers without paying U.S. taxes. And that is exactly what Valero, one of the largest potential buyers of Keystone XL's oil, has told its investors it will do. The idea that Keystone XL will improve U.S. oil supply is a documented scam being played on the American people by Big Oil and its friends in Washington DC.

From Canada's perspective, the problem with existing pipelines is they all end in the U.S. Midwest and only allow one buyer - the United States. As Canada's Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver recently said, "we export 97 percent of our energy to the U.S. and we would like to diversify that."
http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/aswift/keystone_xl_is_a_tar_sands_pip.html

[yellowcanoe]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Subjectivist', '
')
Based on everything Rockman has posted about the KXL it is 90% completed already and moving the oil already, they just use rail tankers for the border crossing section.

[yellowcanoe]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', '
')
If they want to diversify from selling to the US, then why must it be through a potentially dangerous pipeline through the US? Why not build a pipeline to vancouver and fill tankers up there?

[Sixstrings]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yellowcanoe', 'I')f Keystone XL is not approved I think that will be because more oil from Canada isn't needed right now to meet American demands. Why should the president expend his political capital for something that will primarily benefit another country?

[yellowcanoe]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yellowcanoe', ' ')

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'N')ote that I am saying more oil from Canada isn't needed "right now". It could be a different ball game down the road -- if the supply of oil from other countries dries up due to depletion, war or whatever it could be very handy having that "extra" oil already flowing into the US. It would certainly be easier to get more Canadian oil than if Canada has managed to find another way to export oil that doesn't involve transiting US territory.

[Sixstrings]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yellowcanoe', 'D')espite being a net oil exporter, there's no cheap gas in Canada. Indeed, taxes on fuel are higher so we pay more for gas than you do in the US. Another oddity is that Eastern Canada actually depends on imported oil -- the west exports and we import!

[Subjectivist]

What do the Canadian members here think about the Trudeau win? I only want to hear from those who actually are Canadian, not every J6P who thinks they should pontificate about every topic.

[dissident]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Subjectivist', 'W')hat do the Canadian members here think about the Trudeau win? I only want to hear from those who actually are Canadian, not every J6P who thinks they should pontificate about every topic.

[WildRose]

I'm in Alberta and I'm also glad Harper's out. It's going to take some work to gain back the ground lost in environmental monitoring, accountability, etc. while he was prime minister. I think his economics plan became stale and quite irrelevant. I didn't like that fossil fuels were the "driver" of Canada's economy. We've needed diversification for quite some time. Given the candidates we had to choose from, I think Trudeau is the best person for the job. I think he'll work well with other world leaders and I like his energy.

[Keith_McClary]

This is a metaphor for the state of the nation, Harper's legacy:
Trudeau may postpone move to 24 Sussex to allow crucial repairs
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A') 2008 audit by the federal auditor general said repairs had been put off too long and should be done as soon as possible or the country would face even higher costs and national embarrassment.

The house contains asbestos, a cancer-causing substance. Its windows, plumbing and electrical systems all need replacement, a sprinkler system must be installed and the building must be made accessible for disabled visitors.

Emails obtained by the Citizen in 2013 painted a grim picture of a cold, drafty house plagued by mould, leaky pipes and even a toilet that alarmingly moves when sat upon.

In 2011, the NCC said there was an urgent need for $10 million in repairs — work that would have required Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his family to vacate the building for more than a year.

Harper steadfastly refused to do that throughout his tenure as prime minister, largely for reasons of political optics. He evidently feared that spending large sums of public money on a house he occupied would play poorly with Conservative voters.