LNG moving ahead or not

Civilized, with a Bickering Room for those who aren't.
Locked
User avatar
The Green Barbarian
Insanely Prolific
Posts: 86096
Joined: Sep 16th, 2010, 9:13 am

Re: LNG moving ahead or not

Post by The Green Barbarian »

flamingfingers wrote:It's a PROPOSAL that MIGHT produce 6,000 jobs in the CONSTRUCTION phase.

And where is the MEAT? You know, the tax regime and royalty projections that will show BENEFIT to the CITIZENS of BC?



LOL - no matter what news is announced, the NDP cheer team will find a way to poop on it. Instead of always being negative, if you could find a way to be positive about economic news once in awhile, you might be borderline electable. And for some reason, you just never get it.
"The woke narcissists who make up the progressive left are characterized by an absolute lack of such conscience, but are experts at exploiting its presence in others." - Jordan Peterson
Atomoa
Guru
Posts: 5704
Joined: Sep 4th, 2012, 12:21 pm

Re: LNG moving ahead or not

Post by Atomoa »

They had to chop the tax rate in half before anyone even took the bait. They had to beg. Always a good position when you are the seller.

The LNG dream will always be half as good for British Columbians as it was said to be. If it even happens.
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
User avatar
The Green Barbarian
Insanely Prolific
Posts: 86096
Joined: Sep 16th, 2010, 9:13 am

Re: LNG moving ahead or not

Post by The Green Barbarian »

Atomoa wrote:They had to chop the tax rate in half before anyone even took the bait.


what the hell are you talking about? Chop what tax rate in half? Do you have any clue about the tax rates in BC? I highly doubt it. You really should do some reading before you make foolish statements like this. The BC Corporate tax rate in 2009 is the same as it is now - 11%. Nothing has been cut in half. Why would you post something like this, that is so deliberately misleading? Is your agenda so important to you, that you have to equivocate so much and look so bad? Who did you think you would fool by doing this?
"The woke narcissists who make up the progressive left are characterized by an absolute lack of such conscience, but are experts at exploiting its presence in others." - Jordan Peterson
flamingfingers
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 21666
Joined: Jul 9th, 2005, 8:56 am

Re: LNG moving ahead or not

Post by flamingfingers »

Alas GB - talking to you is like fighting with the Tar Baby - you don't read enough to have even the vaguest clue what is being discussed. You are just hanging on to the ChristyLiberal talking points and simply allow your reptilian brain to keep regurgitating the RAH! RAH!
Chill
Atomoa
Guru
Posts: 5704
Joined: Sep 4th, 2012, 12:21 pm

Re: LNG moving ahead or not

Post by Atomoa »

You couldn't have missed this unless you purposely missed it.

http://m.theglobeandmail.com/report-on- ... ice=mobile

3.5 instead of 7%

In 2037!

Plus... a new LNG tax credit that makes corporate tax at 8% instead of 11%

Ouch, GB.
Last edited by Atomoa on Jan 15th, 2015, 7:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
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
User avatar
The Green Barbarian
Insanely Prolific
Posts: 86096
Joined: Sep 16th, 2010, 9:13 am

Re: LNG moving ahead or not

Post by The Green Barbarian »

flamingfingers wrote:Alas GB - talking to you is like fighting with the Tar Baby - !


why would you possibly use such a horribly racist term? Seriously, you disgust me.
"The woke narcissists who make up the progressive left are characterized by an absolute lack of such conscience, but are experts at exploiting its presence in others." - Jordan Peterson
User avatar
The Green Barbarian
Insanely Prolific
Posts: 86096
Joined: Sep 16th, 2010, 9:13 am

Re: LNG moving ahead or not

Post by The Green Barbarian »

Atomoa wrote:
Plus... a new LNG tax credit that makes corporate tax at 8% instead of 11%

Ouch, GB.


Ouch indeed. You just lied again. Why do you continue to lie and lie and lie? I just don't understand it. You guys wonder why you lose election after election - this is why. You have zero integrity.
"The woke narcissists who make up the progressive left are characterized by an absolute lack of such conscience, but are experts at exploiting its presence in others." - Jordan Peterson
Atomoa
Guru
Posts: 5704
Joined: Sep 4th, 2012, 12:21 pm

Re: LNG moving ahead or not

Post by Atomoa »

Tuck and run GB.

Please continue, you were saying something about "not cut in half" and 11% corporate tax rates.

I just posted from the business section of the Globe and repeated what the BC finance minister said.

I know, I know both are socialist sympathizers through and through. Liars!
Last edited by Atomoa on Jan 15th, 2015, 7:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
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
User avatar
steven lloyd
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 21083
Joined: Dec 1st, 2004, 7:38 pm

Re: LNG moving ahead or not

Post by steven lloyd »

The Green Barbarian wrote: Ouch indeed. You just lied again. Why do you continue to lie and lie and lie? I just don't understand it.

I don't understand how you can be so zealous and fanatical about your point of view, but are never able to provide any reasoning (hint: name calling is not reasoning) or links to any facts to support your position. Although 100% behind the concept of resource development I’m still somewhat uncertain regarding this governments’ facility for making this happen. Other posters provide actual arguments with links to support them while you call everyone who disagrees with you names and use hyperbole apparently thinking that is the compelling route. Certainly I know our choices of government are limited (read: none) in BC, but I’d like to take a good look at the big picture, and not just the one from a place with the nose stuck up the Liberal bum. Hey - I'm just wondering if you actually have an argument you can support with something besides vitriol.
User avatar
The Green Barbarian
Insanely Prolific
Posts: 86096
Joined: Sep 16th, 2010, 9:13 am

Re: LNG moving ahead or not

Post by The Green Barbarian »

Atomoa wrote:Tuck and run GB.


you should tuck and run. Your entire awful negative mantra is just so tired. Why do the NDP lovers have to poop on everything all of the time? Why can't you find any positives in anything? Always negative. And all you do is lose elections. All the time.

Please continue, you were saying something about "not cut in half" and 11%.


Right. The BC tax rate hasn't been cut in half. This is just a massive lie. If this goes ahead, thousands of BC companies will be earning income and paying this tax. Focusing on one area is just wrong and is just plain playing to the most gullible and sad. Tuck and run. Tuck and run.
"The woke narcissists who make up the progressive left are characterized by an absolute lack of such conscience, but are experts at exploiting its presence in others." - Jordan Peterson
Atomoa
Guru
Posts: 5704
Joined: Sep 4th, 2012, 12:21 pm

Re: LNG moving ahead or not

Post by Atomoa »

Who said anything about the NDP?

My view has always been that Canada's resources are for all Canadians. If we develop the resources then the people of Canada must get more than a few jobs (that they pay higher taxes and user fees with), trickle down promises and the lowest amount of tax revenue collected from the private businesses extracting the wealth from our land, for themselves personally to horde.

The BC Liberals made a big promise, which was questionable at best from the start. Then they halved the revenue projections, bumped the revenue stream date up 22 years from now. This is only after we only charge them 1% tax until they recoup all their investment costs. If taxpayers of BC are fronting the money to build the infrastructure, then they should see the biggest piece of the rewards.

Our country is shaking in its boots right now. Unfettered, privatized oil development, low taxes, low royalties, massive billionaire subsidies and look at where we stand. Within a month the books are screwed and there is no money socked away for a rainy day. Alberta looks like a clueless and irresponsible lotto winner.

I'm tired of the people of this country being offered crumbs for what is all our's, especially when it comes to finite resources. When I see a plan about LNG that benefits the people of BC collectively and more than a mere fraction of the population I'll stand behind it. Whomever is proposing it.
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
User avatar
The Green Barbarian
Insanely Prolific
Posts: 86096
Joined: Sep 16th, 2010, 9:13 am

Re: LNG moving ahead or not

Post by The Green Barbarian »

Atomoa wrote: If taxpayers of BC are fronting the money to build the infrastructure, .


are they?
"The woke narcissists who make up the progressive left are characterized by an absolute lack of such conscience, but are experts at exploiting its presence in others." - Jordan Peterson
Geode
Newbie
Posts: 64
Joined: Nov 4th, 2008, 12:46 pm

Re: LNG moving ahead or not

Post by Geode »

LNG exports and Northern Gateway pipeline might be just that - a pipe dream. With the Ukraine crisis, Russia is turning to China as its main supplier of oil and gas. It also makes more sense - building a pipeline over land, and few if any environmental laws to content with. Japan may be our only customer.
flamingfingers
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 21666
Joined: Jul 9th, 2005, 8:56 am

Re: LNG moving ahead or not

Post by flamingfingers »

LNG is a pipedream that got Christy elected. No more, no less.
Chill
George+
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 10022
Joined: Oct 10th, 2011, 12:08 pm

Re: LNG moving ahead or not

Post by George+ »

*removed*
Last edited by Jo on Feb 18th, 2015, 6:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: George, this is NOT the Bickering Room.
Locked

Return to “Political Arena”