One [reason to breathe easy] is that every president from Richard Nixon to George Bush has tried to cut down on America’s growing consumption of oil, particularly imported oil.
All of Bush’s predecessors have failed.
And they have failed, according to The Sun, because American consumers are inherently undisciplined.
Besides, even if the U.S. shakes its habit, there's a plan in place to hook the Asians:
What’s more, the booming economies of China and India — with their almost insatiable thirst for oil — means any cuts in U.S. oil and gas use would not be felt by Canadian suppliers.
All of which is apparently cause for much relief, for "Oil is what drives Alberta’s economy."
From this it is easy to understand Alberta's reluctance to move on or even believe in Global Warming. For their leaders, failure to cut consumption means success, and success failure; the world is turned upside-down when seen through the prism of a one industry economy.
Whereas Ontario, with its diverse manufacturing base, tends to look for Opportunity in Change.
So it is useful to keep the following rule-of-thumb in mind when considering political issues in a Canadian context:
While Ontario MAKES, Alberta PUMPS (and Quebec JUST LAYS THERE, like a French sex bomb straight out of the shower, beautiful and useless and asking for candy).
3 comments:
I submit that Canadians suffer as much from affluenza as our American neighbours and are equally undisciplined. This materialism is being exported from North America, especially Hollywood - certainly not democracy. I submit there will be no gain without pain. We should suffer it to allow green alternatives to take hold for the sake of our children.
Alberta is why our present government will never tackle the environment head on, but will try to diffuse the issue with that change of minister. As has been said, they put lipstick on the pig and changed the salesman. Their attack ads against Dion and Liberals will probably backfire, but they may ignite a firefight with the opposition which will highlight their own obstructive pronouncements when Dion was Environment Minister. All that hot air. What will history record?
If we keep blaming "undisciplined consumers" we're going to get exactly no where. It's the government's job to protect us, and if consumers are the reason the environment is being pillaged, then it's time to lay down the law.
It so very typical of modern society. A child takes candy from a store, and the parent looks on and says, "Little Stevie, you can't do that, or I'll have the store owner stock less candy." Stevie stuffs the stolen treat into his mouth and grabs for more while the parent shrugs. They tried voluntary limits after all.
will highlight their own obstructive pronouncements when Dion was Environment Minister.
Fair enough, the Libs didn't do much on the environment - true enough.
I'll say what I see:
1) As minister, Dion had a limited ability to "set the tone" for the government as a whole.
2) Harper is only grudgingly reconstituting programs that HE CUT.
3) How sincere does Dion seem about environment policy? (Purely qualitative, I know)
4) I don't know about you, but I think Harper would simply reverse what he's been forced to do if he gets a majority.
5) In terms of leadership, that leaves us with two other possibles - Layton and May. May's an unknown and unlikely to win an election; as for Jack, I'm starting to think he's "all used up" - his performance lately just hasn't impressed me.
(and cuddling up with Harper is NOT a good thing - to paraphrase "The Grinch" - Harper's about as cuddly as a cactus)
Post a Comment