Will money and arrogance cost Christy Clark the election?

[George+]

He was the campaign manager for SHE the Green candidate.
Could not get along with Mr. Ego Weaver.

And could the Lieberals in their arrogance ever get to this....?

https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/11-co ... ble-energy

Perhaps the NDP/Greens could.

[rustled]

He was the campaign manager for SHE the Green candidate.
Could not get along with Mr. Ego Weaver.

And could the Lieberals in their arrogance ever get to this....?

https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/11-co ... ble-energy

Perhaps the NDP/Greens could.

Arrogance isn't an attractive quality in anyone. (Some might say it's arrogant to pretend one hasn't made a mistake. Politician or forum poster, if you're human, you'll make mistakes.)

It's not, to my mind, arrogant to avoid spending a great deal of our resources on the wrong kind of renewable energy project. Here in BC, solar is just that, the wrong kind of renewable to invest in at this time. It seems unlikely to me Clark's stance on Site C cost her votes with anyone who is truly serious about sensible energy policy.

Yes, some posters here continue to claim it's arrogant to move forward with Site C without doing more studies. However, many of us look at practical projections of our energy needs, weigh the likelihood of any renewable other than hydro meeting those needs within the next 7 years, and feel it would be foolhardy (arrogant, even), to ignore the obvious and insist one's political idealism should trump the projected energy needs of British Columbians.

Perhaps on this issue, arrogance is in the eye of the beholder.

[The Green Barbarian]

And could the Lieberals in their arrogance ever get to this....?

https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/11-co ... ble-energy

Perhaps the NDP/Greens could.

LOL - you directly contradicted yourself George. That link extols the virtues of hydro-electric energy, something that the Liberals support, and the Greens and NDP hate. Why would the Liberals not "get it" when they are the only party that is in favor of what you just posted?? By virtue of what you posted, you should be the Liberals number one fan for supporting Site C! Hilarious! George, the BC Liberal supporter. Thanks for posting that link though, it really does go to show just how dumb the Greens and the NDP are for not supporting Site C.

From your link:

Thanks to its unique geography and commitment to environmental preservation, small but mighty Costa Rica meets a huge amount of its energy needs (99% in 2015!) using hydroelectric, geothermal, solar, wind, and other low-carbon sources

[George+]

Costa Rica is unique.

They gave up military spending,
Created controversial dams and are trying for less invasive renewables than hydroelectric.

What is B.C doing with less invasives..pretty much nothing..and jacking hydro rates at the same time.

B.C.'s Site C seems mainly projected on LNG need.

[The Green Barbarian]

Costa Rica is unique.
.

Then look at Germany. None of these countries can boast about "renewables" being a positive to their country from an economic perspective (I realize the global warming People don't care about money so that's a whole different issue) unless they have extremely cheap and extremely green hydro-electric power. Which is why I don't get the idiot NDP and the Green being opposed to Site C. Why do both parties hate poor people so much?

[George+]

There are tremendous taxpayer subsidies dumped into mega hydro.

Why would anyone be so dumb as to not want to live off the grid?

Perhaps with a few start up subsidies?

[rustled]

There are tremendous taxpayer subsidies dumped into mega hydro.

Why would anyone be so dumb as to not want to live off the grid?

Perhaps with a few start up subsidies?

Much better to subsidize hydro in BC. Best renewables bang for our buck.

You go ahead and live off the grid, and I promise I'll cheer you on.

I've been there, done that. There's a good chunk of work and personal responsibility involved, and I really don't see a whole lot of folk racing to embrace that much work and responsibility these days. We've moved from a society built by people with a sense of independence to a society of dependent people.

What issues do you think will be of most importance in the coming month? Do you think the focus will stay on arrogance, or campaign funds?

[George+]

Twill be interesting to see how the Greens now handle Site C.
Cannot see the Liberals have any wiggle room.

The Liberals have a huge campaign fund and will get bucks regardless.
They really could not care less.

Clark is the number one issue now.

[Urban Cowboy]

There are tremendous taxpayer subsidies dumped into mega hydro.

Why would anyone be so dumb as to not want to live off the grid?

Perhaps with a few start up subsidies?

Hydro is putting money into general revenue, to pay for some of the stuff you demand.

Now you want to live off the grid, but want me to pay for your system. Then you can brag about how you don't have a hydro bill. Sounds like a plan to me. Good luck with it.

[George+]

Well...if your power is getting subsidized by the taxpayer
Shouldn't mine be also?

These mega projects will sink B.C billions into debt
while the real needs of people get ignored.

Are there companies not starting up for lack of power?...hardly.
Meanwhile hydro rates just keep on climbing to pay for SiteC.

Christy Clark thinks she is Wacky Bennett but that was a far different era.

[The Green Barbarian]

Well...if your power is getting subsidized by the taxpayer
Shouldn't mine be also?
.

No.

[rustled]

Well...if your power is getting subsidized by the taxpayer
Shouldn't mine be also?

These mega projects will sink B.C billions into debt
while the real needs of people get ignored.

Are there companies not starting up for lack of power?...hardly.
Meanwhile hydro rates just keep on climbing to pay for SiteC.

Christy Clark thinks she is Wacky Bennett but that was a far different era.

No. The taxpayer is already subsidizing infrastructure to meet the energy needs of the people, and to eventually help provide funds for programs. Why would you expect us to subsidize a vastly more expensive experiment for you?

Your subsidies will increase our debt by billions without any likelihood of every providing anything back. Your unwillingness to process readily available information doesn't mean you get what you want while the real needs of people get ignored.

Companies currently have the power they need for start-up, thanks to forward thinking folk who've ensured there's power available. Site C will be online within the next decade, ensuring that trend continues, at a substantial cost but for a technology with a proven track record of long term, consistently reliable energy. This is a promise solar cannot yet make. Power rates are sure to increase over time. Paying for Site C is a dam site (pardon the pun) more efficient than paying for your project.

If any party's truly willing to completely ignore the cautionary tale of Ontario and play fast and loose with BC taxpayers' money just for the sake of politicking, money and arrogance will surely become a major issue in the next election too.

[The Green Barbarian]

while the real needs of people get ignored.
.

what are the "real needs of the people" George? Let me guess, those billions should be spent on education, but not just on education, but on education based on the BCTF running the entire education budget. One student, one teacher ratio is the goal.

[George+]

So...both of you say no to renewables other than hydro?

Stone Age thinking.

[rustled]

So...both of you say no to renewables other than hydro?

Stone Age thinking.

OMG! Someone has accused me of Stone Age thinking!

Now I have to "side" with solar, for sure.

JK.

So...are you saying no to hydro to avoid being accused of Stone Age thinking?


It'd be pretty arrogant for a party to make this kind of decision based on "what will people think".