How will we pay for stuff without the resource sector?

Atomoa
Guru
Posts: 5704
Joined: Sep 4th, 2012, 12:21 pm

Re: How will we pay for stuff without the resource sector?

Post by Atomoa »

How will we pay for stuff without the resource sector?

We'll find out in 53 years.

Canada's longterm future indeed (oil state).

http://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/pdf/En ... report.pdf

(BP says 53 years left of oil production at current proven fields)

Also I love this "line of thinking"

So the plan is : tax the hell out of the right wing oil companies who paid for the current government in power to be in power so the government can fund left wing "social services" with the gobs of taxes collected?

Has someone told the oil companies this plan?
The true business of people should be to go back to
school and think about whatever it was they were
thinking about before somebody came along and told
them they had to earn a living.

- Buckminster Fuller
hobbyguy
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 15050
Joined: Jan 20th, 2011, 8:10 pm

Re: How will we pay for stuff without the resource sector?

Post by hobbyguy »

You do have to distinguish between metallurgical coal and thermal coal. About 80% of BC coal is metallurgical coal - which is what puts the carbon in carbon steel. Life without steel? Difficult - it is all around you.

I do have a problem with the federal port metro Vancouver arbitrarily and without local input deciding to provide a new coal terminal for thermal coal (used in coal fired electricity plants) from Wyoming. They only want to come here because Portland, Seattle, Bellingham and others told them no. Now that is a dirty and polluting product for which there are many substitutes.

Probably the left out part of the equation with resources in Canada, BC included, is that we have allowed ourselves to fall into the trap of just being raw material suppliers. The correct approach is to use the resources, like we do forest resources (very limited raw log sales) to create vibrant communities with good jobs. We are not alone in that problem, the Alberta Federation of Labor has been advocating hard for Alberta NOT to export dilbit, only synthetic crude (which is easier to handle, has wider markets, can be used domestically, and creates many more jobs). That approach though runs contrary to the aims of foreign owners and contrary to the aims of quick buck artists. What would happen if we insisted on at least primary processing of our resources? More jobs from less raw material, which would make the resources last longer.

Unfortunately, we continue to allow foreign buyers to buy up our industries, and then shut them, transferring the jobs to their home countries - or to cheap labor countries. Like the Hamilton steel plants that US Steel bought, then reneged on the agreement with Harper and the boy (who did nothing) and closed them down, shipping the jobs to the US. That scenario, precisely that scenario, is what Brian Mulroney predicted when he campaigned against "free trade" with the US (which of course, once in power he reversed and sold us down the river). Smart man, Brian Mulroney, he knew exactly what would happen with the "free trade" deals - too bad he lacked the moral compass to do the right thing, I guess the fat envelopes were too much for him to resist.

We used to have a steel plant in BC. We used to have a copper tubing plant in BC. Now we ship metallurgical coal and raw copper.

The first step is to make our resources last, that means slowing down the flow a bit and processing them in Canada, and in BC, Alberta, or whichever province the resource originates in. That will spur manufacturing in this country. The more manufacturing we have, the less we need to rely on raw resource exports. Japan has diddly for resources, and they do OK as a manufacturer.

Of course that would mean we would have to take our sovereignty back by invoking the opt out clauses in some the dumb free trade agreements that have been signed. Somebody please 'splain me why Harper and the boys signed a free trade agreement with Honduras??? And there would be a hullabaloo over opting out of NAFTA, but that would be a necessary step - as since NAFTA was signed Canada has lost 25%+ of its manufacturing capacity (not jobs, that number is worse, the capacity is the ability to make stuff - even if automated with fewer jobs). The US has come about even with that deal, and Mexico - gee, guess where the 25% capacity wound up.

Now there I go being a conservative, insisting that Canadian governments ought to look after Canadians first. What a novel concept...
The middle path - everything in moderation, and everything in its time and order.
Post Reply

Return to “B.C.”