Search results

Bodes well for North America. Where is the USD is dead crowd these days?

YES! Anyone who has ever actually gone curling knows that athletics are involved. They make it look MUCH easier on TV than it actually is!

Agreed on the first two, not the last. When you get into the specifics of boxing, you'll see that it's much more than just two guys beating the crap out of each other.

Also, Canada has more oil than the USA wants right now. Hence Canada's desire to ship it to Asia. The preferred customer is your next door neighbour, but when your next door neighbour doesn't want your product, you have to turn elsewhere for sales.

Some interesting developments over the weekend. It looks like Harper has confirmed that Canada is now full blown turning to China instead of the USA on this matter. http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2011/11/13/18962481.html Harper on economy: 'Look Far East' Prime Minister Stephen...

Absolutely. So it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to dawdle on this issue. Sure, American midwest refineries make less profit, but surely this could be made up elsewhere if the oil was shipped to Texas.

A nice article from the Globe and Mail yesterday explains why current refineries in Oklahoma would be against the pipeline: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/commentary/jeff-rubins-smaller-world/oil-price-spread-costing-canadian-producers-big-bucks/article2230517/ ...

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-11/u-s-review-delay-may-doom-transcanada-s-keystone-pipeline-flaherty-says.html Flaherty Says U.S. Delay in $7 Billion Keystone Pipeline May Doom Project By Andrew Mayeda and Greg Quinn - Nov 11, 2011 12:02 AM ET “The decision to delay it that long...

It's hard to find anything faulty with that logic. But it seems so obvious, there must be a reason as to why this isn't being done already?

I'm no refinery expert, but wouldn't you still need to ship the stuff somewhere? And wouldn't this require massive investment? Just build a pipeline west and feed China all of the oil they can handle. China is thirsty and we have plenty of drink. The Americans don't want it, so let's go...

Sure, it could be put on tankers and sold at a higher price. It also might not. And even if it is, it's pure profit for American companies, and as you say, benefits the US consumer. To be honest, I think these are great reasons as to why the USA would be in a hurry to complete the...

... Ya that's a reasonable solution...

You got it, RC. A pipeline project is already in the works to deliver oil from Alberta to the west coast of BC, which is then loaded onto tankers headed for China. China has already surpassed the USA in being the #1 customer for Canada's vast timber resources. If the USA keeps making...

In this case I would absolutely agree. There is no plausible reason to delay the decision except to save face politically with environmentalists.

Huh? Landlocked? 15% below market value? And by the way, it's a joint project involving private companies from both countries. It's not being built by the US.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/11/us/politics/administration-to-delay-pipeline-decision-past-12-election.html Keystone Pipeline decision "delayed." USA is in desperate need of jobs - the Keystone Pipeline is expected to create thousands. USA is in desperate need of a stable source of...

Newsflash for the P&R junkies who think this is news - ALL POLITICIANS ARE LIARS.

Where do you get the idea that German banker puppets will be installed to lead Greece and Italy? Since when HAVEN'T bankers and the wealthy elite had first dibs on the fruits of labor? I see the situation slightly different, I think. I see two incompetent leaders who are being driven from...

I think nationalisation would have just fed market panic. There are many, many complicated issues that would come along with nationalisation, so I don't think it would necessarily have been a better option.

Oh get real. Given the chance, any one of us would hit that.