Friday, January 9, 2015

Anything wrong with this picture?

Canada's governments say that natural resources are driving economic growth across the country. They just don't specify which country.

Resource companies don't want to pay mining, income, sales and property taxes, they don't pay GST and now it seems, some don't want to hire Canadian workers. However, they want to export Canadian metals and minerals using land and sea transportation infrastructure paid for by taxpayers. And, of course, they want their assets kept safe and their foreign workers to access healthcare, drive on roads, rely on police, fire and ambulance protection and safe airports.


Read Wendy Stueck's article at the Globe and Mail.


Recommend this post

6 comments:

  1. There must be some mistake.

    The "Carbon-Neutral" BC Government would surely not be planning to open a new coal mine in BC.

    A big reason for exporting LNG from BC is because it will help countries such as China reduce their use of coal.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hummm...TFW's coming in to work in BC mines. At this rate, native Canadians will be beggars in their own land.

    Time to call this what it it--TREASON!. Me thinks Clark, Harper and other pols and their enablers in business and the media started dancing at the end of a rope...

    ReplyDelete
  3. How absolutely absurd. Surely we can (re)train a Canadian coalminer in the art of 'longmining' faster than we (they) can train a Chinese to speak English?
    The definition of 'ore' is a deposit that is economically viable. At least it was when I went to school. Otherwise, it is 'leverite'. As in: leave 'er right where it is. The point is that HD's 'mine' is a pile of black rock, unless it can be mined economically. Of course, if you don't include labour or equipment expense as a cost, the pile of black rock may become a 'mine'. However, we have labour laws and a host of other conditions which determine the cost of mining. At least we used to. Seems like maybe not so much now?

    Don't let Chrispy get hold of this radical idea (of free labour). She'll bring down the cost of Site C until its viable. Won't take that long to build either, with 100,000 TFW jobs.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hypocracy bc
    New coal mine yes
    New coal transfer Surrey yes
    Cng to lng burning to export lng yes
    Burrard thermal cng generator noooooo
    Campbell river cng generator yes
    BCuc.com to decide site C nooo
    Burrard 950 mW thermal with 90 percent carbon capture noooo

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And you forgot, the BC taxpayer picking up he tab!

      Delete
  5. Yes, there is an election coming and all the bs ads have started. Shortage of workers is but one. Appears maybe the Cons/Liebs may have signed some sort of "agreement" that we are not aware of because these ads continue and we will get more and more. Nevermind all the transmountain/kinder morgan ads we're already seeing. Steve, have you signed an employment arrangement agreement with China, or any other country outside of Canada? Yes or no. Christy, same question for you. Yes or no?
    There are plenty of Canadians who want to work. Ask people you know who are unemployed. Full time jobs are hard to come by. It's time to shut the gates.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/apprenticeship-ad-s-claim-of-skilled-trades-shortfall-open-to-question-1.2890500

    ReplyDelete

COMMENTING

This is an archive only of items published before April 22, 2016. These and newer articles are available at:

https://in-sights.ca/

If you read an article at this blogger site, you can comment on it at the new site.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.