Though at first glance it seems unlikely that international trade relationships would exhibit this kind of behaviour, a closer look shows it happening in our own country. We need only look at our energy relationship with the United States to see that even nations can be swept off their feet and ignore the long-term consequences of certain affairs. Unfortunately, Canada has become more fretful about losing the blonde bombshell that is America than about losing respect in the international community or standing up and doing what’s in our best interests as a nation.
As an oil daddy, Canada has been overly kind to the US, serving as their largest foreign supplier of oil (2.12 million barrels a day in 2004 compared to 1.64 million barrels from Mexico and 1.56 million barrels from Saudi Arabia, according to Bloomberg), and sending them 99 per cent of our total oil exports. This is a function not only of their close proximity to us, but of the North American Free Trade Agreement that was supposed to benefit all parties involved.
Instead, the agreement hasn’t been giving America’s oil daddy more of what he wants—actual free trade on softwood lumber and a cut to the heavy subsidies the US farm industry receives that make Canadian farmers uncompetitive—but is bleeding Canada of its resources.
We need to be smarter as a nation and demand more for what we’re receiving for our precious oil and natural gas reserves. While it may negatively affect our relationship with the US, Canada must ignore the pleading cries of overly territorial politicians in Alberta and make changes to our energy relationship with America as a response to other trade disputes.
http://www.gateway.ualberta.ca/view.php?aid=5381
Note: http://www.gateway.ualb...
Canada Is A Rich, Ugly, Oily Bastard—He Deserves Better
Posted on Friday, January 13 at 10:22 by jensonjContributed By
Topic
Article Rating
(0 votes)
Options
Stumble It!Comments
view comments in forum
Page 1 2
Canada is that rich fat , ugly , oily bastard aren't we ?
---
Good government is not a party government
<br />
<a href="http://usinfo.state.gov/is/Archive/2005/Jun/29-375937.html">http://usinfo.state.gov/is/Archive/2005/Jun/29-375937.html</a><br />
<br />
Yeah, the U.S. and Mexico get access to Canada's resources, while we get "cheaper prices on goods" manufactured in those countries. Gee, thanks. I'd rather have the resources, SELL them at market prices, and BUY cheap american and mexican shit, thank you very much. <br />
<br />
"Fuck the g ride, I want the machines that are making 'em." <br />
<br />
Stupid canadians. WAKEUP!!!!
I think we were probably right in there on this "arrangement". i.e. I'm not sure "blame the Americans" is entirely correct.
Also, I think you missed my point: the writer's prose is quite vulgar and as a result does nothing to advance the issue he is trying to address. Has nothing to do with how Canada is or is not, or the U.S. is or is not.
This is why I can no longer support political process that set up an elected "oligarch" , I refuse to vote any longer. If I do not vote .. they do not listen and if I do vote they do not listen ... unless I am a card carrying member of the winning team. But then again I must be very high up in the party to be heard too, so let the rich, ugly , fat oily bastards drive their own frigging signs in the ground, they can find another sucker I had it with all of these old parties.
---
Good government is not a party government
<<<<<
AGAIN! If you SELL something, at fair market value, for the maximum that you could get from anyone else like you are doing with your oil it is no longer yours.
If you buy something, handing your money over to the person who sold it to you does it still belong to them? No, it doesn’t.
You can’t expect to have the cash for the barrel of oil you sold and the barrel of oil as well. Pick one or the other but don’t try to pretend that you are being victimized because someone is buying something that you are selling.
---
"If you must kill a man, it costs you nothing to be polite about it." Winston Churchill
With large scale projects, like Syncrude / Suncor / the new Shell Oilsands project, we charge half, or $2.50 if the project is a new one. The half price deal is usually for 5 years, then increases to $5. This is to encourage new projects.
Conversely, Norway charges $17.50 USD, and even Alaska charges $12.50.
When the anon's use the logic 'well, you sell your oil on the open market', no we don't. Shell, PetroCan, BHP sell the oil they bought from us for $5 a barrell on the open market.
So I ask the Anon again, when does Alberta sell our oil at fair market value? Wouldn't 'fair market value' be more what Alaska, Venezuela, Norway, the U.K. charge for their oil? What Alberta and even Newfoundland and Labrador should be doing is contracting these companies to drill for the oil, then selling it to oil refiners on the open market.
We could eliminate tax at the pumps, and have plenty cash left over to run the government. Perhaps even invest a few trillion in infrastructure, so some of the Northern communities that depend on ice roads 3 months a year don't have to pay $12 for 4l of milk.
---
"If you must kill a man, it costs you nothing to be polite about it." Winston Churchill
I think harmonizing with the extraction fees charged by the state of Alaska sounds fair, given that we sell almost all of our exports of this commodity to the U.S. How 'bout it anon? Dare we "deep integrate" here?
Question: why is the U.S. (Alaska at least) not jumping all over this "unfair subsidy"? I thought low stumpage on crown plots was the issue in softwood!
Also: given that nobody seems to be complaining about the relative subsidy who is earning the plum in the middle, if not Alberta/Canada?
Also: what proportion of the $2.50-$5.00 goes straight back into further subsidizing that industry?
The price of oil is set by energy traders in New York and London, they take in to account numerous factors in doing so but the biggies are supply and demand. Currently it is at $63.92 a frigging barrel. Why? Because that is the maximum price that people are willing to pay for it before they walk away. Currently the oil being scooped out of the tar sands is being sold to us bastards at $63.92 a frigging barrel. If China were to want to buy your oil it would cost them $63.92 a frigging barrel. Please note that you are not selling it to us for $63.90, or $63.91 because of some devious NAFTA clause that you were hoodwinked into signing, we pay the going rate of $63.92 a frigging barrel. Not one penny less even though we are such good neighbors.
Were Canada to try to charge $68.92 a frigging barrel (The going rate + $5 extra for the good folks of Alberta) No one would buy it if they can get it for $63.92 from the blasted Arabs, or Venezuelans, or the North Sea or Alaska or wherever. As of Friday night $63.92 a frigging barrel is what you are going to get and the number that you have to work with.
>>.Wouldn't 'fair market value' be more what Alaska, Venezuela, Norway, the U.K. charge for their oil?<<<
See above, face it, it is all you are going to get.
>>>So, …..is that fair market value? At $60? $70?<<<<
As to what percentage Alberta gets and what percentage Shell/BHP/Petrocan gets and what percentage your grasping, clawing, vampire like federal government sodomizes out of you that is certainly up to you. The thing is, you are going to have to take it out of that fair market value pie. ($63.92 a frigging barrel) You are not going to be able to increase the size of the pie because people will buy someone else’s pie. If Alberta wants more pie, and IMHO it should be getting more pie the slice is going to have to come out of someone else’s share of that $63.92 a frigging barrel, be it Shell/BHP/Petrocan or the federal vampires. Obviously, like most everything else under the sun, I have a few ideas, but ultimately that is going to be up to you to decide.
To see some nincompoop like Ross Prusakowski, (in a rant that is at least universally offensive to anyone with the misfortune of having read it, regardless of which side of the border they are on.) claim that the USA is “bleeding Canada of its resources” is just idiotic. Canada is selling something. The price is determined by what people are willing to pay for it. If you don’t want to sell it don’t. The fact that is invariably over looked by the professional victims is that you can’t have the $63.92 AND the barrel of oil. Selling us something and taking the maximum amount of money you can get for it is not injuring Canada.
It is entirely up to you, but it is going to have to come out of that market price. You can get a higher percentage of return by maximizing efficiency, but after that either the oil companies or the federal government or whomever else has their fingers in the pie are going to have to give up some money to give Alberta more.
You can demand more from the oil companies, but that might make them reticent to expand. You can demand more from the federal government, but that might make them reticent to waste your money on crack pipe kits, immigration scams and sponsorship scandals while they give you the big “go take a flying fuck at a rolling doughnut” in return. It seems to be quite a conundrum with no obvious solution….
I would address your other questions MK but all I can think when I see your user name now is: “FASCIST!”…
WTF? How the heck did I earn that one?
No, it's not. $63 dollars on New York is for West Texas intermediate crude. Syncrude Sweet blend, being a higher grade, demands a higher price. Usually 15%. I think SSB is going for $93 a barrel, when last I looked.
" and what percentage your grasping, clawing, vampire like federal government sodomizes out of you"
Nice demonification, but a distraction nonetheless. Natural Resources are Provincial matters, the feds have no say. Which is one reason the NEP still has a bad taste.
"The price is determined by what people are willing to pay for it. If you don’t want to sell it don’t."
I didn't say that. I just think we should get a fairer price for it. It's not going to last forever, and we should build infrastructure with it while we can.
"Selling us something and taking the maximum amount of money you can get for it is not injuring Canada. "
Like I said, we sell it at $5 a barrell. Fixed price, nothing to do with market price. The oil companies are the ones 'trading' it. Since Oil companies are willing to pay $12.50 for Alaskan oil, and $17 for Norwegian, I see no reason why they wouldn't pay similar prices for Alberta oil.
We still don't sell our oil on the open market.
---
"If you must kill a man, it costs you nothing to be polite about it." Winston Churchill