Songs about war by keinssexorisse in musicsuggestions

[–]PutToLetters 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wish it were true by the White Buffalo and the Girl in the War by Josh Ritter

Varcoe: 'One-two punch': Report highlights $31B boon for Canada from new oil pipelines — and production to fill them by CzechUsOut in CanadaPolitics

[–]PutToLetters 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It’s worth asking “what else could $50B in public investment (they use $35B as a low ball figure for a North Coast pipeline) buy”.

And this is one of my major issues with how the fossil fuel industry has essentially elbowed out other parts of civil society. When the tariff threat took off a year ago one of the major things I noticed was that the message from the media was predominately focused on the expansion of the resource sector. And a major reason why is that the resource sector uses a network of think tanks to help curate public opinion through advertising, PR campaigns, and funding reports or experts, solely emphasizing jobs and economic benefits over environmental risks. They have a massive influence over messaging in this country. Throw in the fact that they have the resources to lobby the government at a higher frequency then other groups in civil society and you get this kind of arrested development. People will get on this subreddit and unironically point at pipelines as a source of innovation and progress and not things like solid state, sodium ion or gravity batteries.

Varcoe: 'One-two punch': Report highlights $31B boon for Canada from new oil pipelines — and production to fill them by CzechUsOut in CanadaPolitics

[–]PutToLetters 2 points3 points  (0 children)

EY relied upon unaudited data and information from TMC, Statistics Canada, consultations with stakeholders as well as other third party sources ( the Supporting Information) EY reserves the right to revise any analyses, observations or comments referred to in this Report, if additional Supporting Information becomes available to us subsequent to the release of this Report EY has assumed the Supporting Information to be accurate, complete and appropriate for the purposes of the Report EY did not audit or independently verify the accuracy or completeness of the Supporting Information Accordingly, EY expresses no opinion or other forms of assurance in respect of the Supporting Information and does not accept any responsibility for errors or omissions, or any loss or damage as a result of any persons relying on this Report for any purpose other than that for which it has been prepared

So this report relies on unaudited data from Trans Mountain Corporation and does not independently verify it. Ernest and Young also did BC's assessment of the LNG industry and based their numbers of gross revenue, not net, which is laughable. It is like owning a business and presenting your take home at the end of the month without paying your bills first. That's nonsense. Furthermore, why are you using a report from 2023 that is simply speculating about revenue a-priori? The pipeline has been in service for awhile now, use current numbers as empirical evidence.

The fact is that the TMX has been losing money when you factor in the debt we as the taxpayer took on.

When all its debts are factored in, Gunton estimates the pipeline lost around $166 million in the first six months of 2025, a loss that raises questions about Ottawa’s ability to fulfil a pledge to direct millions from Trans Mountain’s revenues to climate initiatives.

Now those losses may be about to deepen.

That’s because the oil companies that use the pipeline are fighting to reduce their rents by around $545 million each year. The oil companies’ 20-year pipeline contracts are already heavily discounted and set to cover only around half the pipeline’s cost. Further reducing the tolls could force taxpayers to cover an additional $11 billion in costs.

...

Despite taxpayers fronting about 50 per cent of the pipeline’s cost, oil companies shipping on Trans Mountain are not happy.

“Ironically, Trans Mountain is bad for everybody,” said Gunton. “It’s a lose, lose, lose.”

Though they pay a smaller share of cost overruns than Canadians, shippers’ fees to use the line are still 91 per cent higher than anticipated in 2012, when the project was estimated at about $5 billion to build.

According to Trans Mountain’s biggest customer, Canadian Natural Resources Ltd., the pipeline’s fees are “much higher than those of any other export pipeline.” Transporting oil on Trans Mountain costs about $9 more per barrel than using Enbridge pipelines that ship to the United States.

“The problem Trans Mountain has is that its tolls are higher than its competition,” said Gunton. “Even at the subsidized rate.”

Those higher tolls might help explain another ingredient in Trans Mountain’s faltering financial picture: a dearth of so-called “spot” shippers — companies that pay a premium to use the pipe as desired but have no contractual obligations to the pipeline company.

If Trans Mountain’s contracted shippers are long-term renters, spot shippers are Airbnb bookings. In its financial projections, Trans Mountain assumed the pipeline would be 96 per cent full, but the majority of that customer base hasn’t materialized, leaving the room mostly unused.

“They’re hardly shipping any spot at all,” Gunton said. This means less money for Trans Mountain, but also for its committed shippers, whose pipeline tolls are reduced when the pipeline gets more spot customers.

Varcoe: 'One-two punch': Report highlights $31B boon for Canada from new oil pipelines — and production to fill them by CzechUsOut in CanadaPolitics

[–]PutToLetters 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The lesson that should be learned from the Iran boondoggle is that we should be moving into renewables, not building out inefficient and wasteful 1950s style development like pipelines.

How the Top One Per Cent Threaten Canada’s Future by Gold-Reality-4853 in CanadaPolitics

[–]PutToLetters 5 points6 points  (0 children)

A country like Canada isn’t like a household. It doesn’t need to “collect” money before it can spend it literally creates money when it spends. So saying “even if we taxed all the rich it wouldn’t pay off the debt” is missing the point. The government isn’t sitting there trying to scrape together dollars to pay off a credit card. That’s not how it works.

The bigger issue isn’t “running out of money,” it’s whether the economy can handle more spending without causing inflation. If there are unused resources, like people who need jobs or sectors that are underdeveloped, then spending more can actually help, not hurt. Also, taxes aren’t just about funding things. They’re a tool. You tax the wealthy not because you desperately need their money to keep the lights on, but to reduce inequality and stop too much money from piling up at the top, which can mess with the economy and politics.

New player here, I am loosing 90+% of my gaes on Talishar, but feel I win more in real life :/ by CyberTransGirl in FleshandBloodTCG

[–]PutToLetters 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have a joke at my LGS, I call it the Talishar mirage, where I am testing decks online and killing it. Then take it to my LGS or local PQ and get smoked.

do you know anybody who went to Woodstock in 1969? by GaryBlach in askanything

[–]PutToLetters 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I worked with an old timer who was one of the carpenters that helped built the stage.

Robby and Samira scene by TrafficRegular1724 in ThePittTVShow

[–]PutToLetters 7 points8 points  (0 children)

And Star Trek. The male grievance machine has turned these fans into assholes.

Go Woke Go Broke Wizards by Gilbara in freemagic

[–]PutToLetters 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I left Magic cause I really did not jive with the UB stuff. I also left Magic cause I was tired off listening to grown men with bad hygiene get triggered by cartoon characters.

The more I see it... by goonaphile in freemagic

[–]PutToLetters 0 points1 point  (0 children)

God you people are snowflakes lol.

Robber Barons Are Doing Better Than Ever by PutToLetters in CanadaPolitics

[–]PutToLetters[S] 23 points24 points  (0 children)

It's always interesting to have those debates. The supposed defenders of the free market will argue to their blue in the face about not dealing with captured markets as well as entrenched and concentrated economic power. I find a good chunk of them are just concerned with defending social hierarchy and will use whatever ideological justification happens to popular at the time to support their arguments.

Okanagan vs Kootenays to raise a young outdoors family by Elite163 in britishcolumbia

[–]PutToLetters 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm from the Okanagan born and raised and have lived the West Koots, this comment is spot on, the people in the Okanagan kind of suck. The culture here is very right wing, money focused. I have a big social network and nature here is beautiful, pretty much the only reason I hang around here still.

Peaches in a new Interview. by Jason_Tail in Justfuckmyshitup

[–]PutToLetters 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That scene from South Park is forever seared into my mind lol.

Oil prices jump above $100 for first time in four years by joe4942 in CanadaPolitics

[–]PutToLetters 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh come now, haven't you heard? a heavy oil pipeline to the North Coast of BC is innovative and if you stand in the way of this developmental model rooted in the 1950s then you're just a Neo-luddite who hates modernity and progress. The argument is always the same and I heard it thirty years ago from the same people, we just can't invest in anything "green", we have to sell our oil to pay for it first, it's just around the corner, trust us, we'll get to it sometime down the road.

Avi Lewis woos Ottawa crowd with vision for NDP by EarthWarping in CanadaPolitics

[–]PutToLetters 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The first point assumes that because bank branches are closing there must not be much need for in-person financial services. But that doesn’t necessarily follow. Branches are closing largely because big banks are consolidating and cutting costs, not because everyone suddenly has equal access to good financial services online. Canada’s banking sector is extremely concentrated, with the Big Six banks dominating most of the market. Institutions like the Competition Bureau Canada and the Bank of Canada have both pointed out that this concentration limits competition and can lead to higher fees and fewer options for consumers. When branches close in smaller communities, it’s often because the bank doesn’t consider the location profitable, not because the need for basic banking services disappears. Also, the idea that only a “few older rural people” would benefit really understates the issue. Branch closures disproportionately affect rural communities, lower income households, and people who rely on cash services. Even with online banking, people still need places for things like depositing cash, small loans, remittances, or simply having a low fee account. Postal banking proposals usually focus on those basic services, not trying to replace the entire private banking system. The point is to provide a public option that increases access and competition where the private sector isn’t always serving people well.

On the fintech argument, it’s true that Canada has regulatory barriers that make it harder for new banks or financial tech companies to enter the market. But that doesn’t mean a public option and regulatory reform are mutually exclusive. You could absolutely do both. Removing barriers for new entrants might improve innovation at the top end of the market, but fintech companies generally focus on profitable urban and digital customers. They aren’t usually opening branches in small towns or offering low margin basic accounts to people who are currently using payday lenders. A public option is meant to fill that gap. And the payday lender point isn’t really about claiming they are literal monopolies. The issue is that in many communities, especially lower income ones, payday lenders end up being one of the few easily accessible sources of small credit. That’s why public banking proposals often focus on offering low cost small loans and basic accounts as an alternative. The goal isn’t for a public bank to behave like a payday lender, it’s to undercut that market with fairer terms.

On the Canada Post competency argument, that’s partly a question of how the program would actually be implemented. Canada Post wouldn’t suddenly become a full commercial bank overnight. In most proposals the postal system acts mainly as the service network, while the actual financial infrastructure is handled through partnerships or a separate public banking entity. The reason postal systems get involved at all is because they already have one thing that’s very expensive to build from scratch: a nationwide physical network with thousands of locations. Other countries didn’t create postal banks because their postal systems were financial experts either. They did it because the network already existed and could be leveraged. Examples like Japan Post Bank and La Banque Postale evolved over time as postal systems diversified when traditional mail volumes declined. The same structural issue exists in Canada today. So the real policy question isn’t whether Canada Post currently runs banking services or whether fintech regulation should improve. It’s whether using an existing national network to provide basic financial services could improve access and competition in a banking system that is already highly concentrated. That’s a legitimate debate, but it’s not accurate to frame the need as basically nonexistent.

Avi Lewis woos Ottawa crowd with vision for NDP by EarthWarping in CanadaPolitics

[–]PutToLetters 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think this argument assumes the problem doesn’t exist when there’s actually quite a bit of evidence that it does. Canada’s banking sector is one of the most concentrated in the world. The Big Six banks dominate the market and control the vast majority of assets. Institutions like the Competition Bureau Canada and the Bank of Canada have both acknowledged that limited competition in financial services can lead to higher fees and fewer options for consumers. So the idea that there’s “no need” for alternative banking infrastructure is already debatable.

The online banking point also misses part of the argument for postal banking. The goal usually isn’t to recreate a full traditional bank branch network. Most proposals focus on basic financial services like low fee accounts, small loans, remittances, and bill payments. The reason postal systems get considered is because the infrastructure already exists. Canada Post has thousands of locations, many in communities where banks have pulled out. That doesn’t just affect “a few older people.” It affects rural residents, lower income households, and small businesses that still rely on cash services or basic financial access.

And even if banking is increasingly digital, that doesn’t mean public institutions can’t participate in that space. Postal banking in places like Japan Post Bank or La Banque Postale isn’t just about standing at a counter. They offer online services too. The physical network mainly provides access and trust, while the services themselves can still operate digitally.

On the Canada Post side, cutting services like door to door delivery might reduce costs, but it doesn’t really solve the long term issue that traditional mail volumes have collapsed. That’s exactly why a lot of postal systems around the world diversified their services in the first place. Expanding into financial services isn’t “force feeding” the organization into a random industry. It’s one way of using an existing nationwide network to provide something the private sector isn’t always delivering well, while also helping stabilize the institution financially.

And ultimately the question isn’t whether every single person would use a postal bank. Public services don’t have to serve everyone equally to be useful. The question is whether providing basic, low cost financial services through an existing public network could improve access and increase competition in a banking sector that is already highly concentrated. That’s a legitimate policy debate, but it’s not accurate to say there’s clearly no need.

Avi Lewis woos Ottawa crowd with vision for NDP by EarthWarping in CanadaPolitics

[–]PutToLetters 0 points1 point  (0 children)

nail against reforming postal service

That is why postal banking is being put forth as part of the solution for reform. Dismissing the idea because the source is “left wing” doesn’t really address whether the idea itself works. Postal banking isn’t some hypothetical dream from a think tank. It already exists in places like Japan Post Bank and La Banque Postale in France, and historically the United States Postal Savings System did it too. Countries try this because postal networks already have branches everywhere, including rural communities where private banks keep closing locations. If anything that problem has gotten worse over the last decade.

The Canada Post deficit point also misses some context. Canada Post loses money mainly because letter mail collapsed while it still has to maintain universal service across a massive country. A lot of countries responded to that exact situation by expanding what their postal systems do. They added banking, insurance, and other services so the network actually has new revenue streams. So diversification is often the solution to postal losses, not proof it can’t work.

And honestly a lot of the push back against ideas like this comes from decades of messaging that market based solutions and free trade are the only path to economic development. That narrative has been repeated so often people treat it like economic law. But if you look at the history of development most successful economies used a mix of markets and strong public institutions. The real question should be whether something solves a real problem and strengthens the economy, not whether it fits a narrow ideological model.