You just proved my point with your post. Your intelligence level is on par with Trump's. Thanks!
Last edited:
The Best Explaination of the Keystone Pipeline I have seen online.....
- Thread starter cdwright40
- Start date
Let's examine the facts based upon the definitions of the economic's systems.
The Keystone Pipeline is a project planned and funding by a private ownership; TC Energy. By definition that is Capitalism. The project was unilaterally stopped by Joe Biden. Socialism has the central government "representing" the community as a whole. At best Joe Biden's decision to prevent Capitalism from operating is Socialist. At worst it would represent a Dictatorship. Do I need to post the definition of Dictatorship?
Still waiting for you to post your definitions. You keep saying I don't understand the meenings. Still very curious as to your definitions. Also curious why you don't seem to want to answer a simple question on Economic Systems, typically covered in a HS Freshman economics study? I have reprinted the standard definitions as a easy guide for your to explain how they are innacurate.
Capitalism
An economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.
Socialism
a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
· (in Marxist theory) a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of Communism.
Communism
Communism is a philosophical, social, political and economic ideology and movement whose ultimate goal is the establishment of a communist society, namely a socioeconomic order structured upon the ideas of common ownership of the means of production and the absence of social classes, money and the state
No need for this strangely extra long response. I am not here to teach a grown man what he should already know. Once again. I will say it. Being privately held as a company does NOT give you carte blanche to do what you want to do. Please stop trying to complicate what is fairly simple. Example?
If I open a restaurant around the corner from your house. A privately held restaurant. Then everyone in your neighborhood that ate at that restaurant gets food poisoning or it has repeatedly failed it's inspection the city government will shut it down. Nobody gives a shit if it was privately held. It's a danger to that environment.
That's NOT SOCIALISM or COMMUNISM. It is still CAPITALISM because anyone can open a restaurant as long as it is safe and thy comply. We have 340 Million people in this country. Use your head for more than a hat rack. Stop subscribing to right wing rhetoric. Have your own ideals. 340 Million people can't live where there aren't any compliances and it's carte blanche for all.
Common sense should tell you that is impossible. Our elected officials decide the best way. You don't have to agree but that has absolutely nothing to do with socialism or communism. Go look up those countries that are communist or socialist. Then ask yourself based on our constitution is that possible here. It isn't and every time one of you implies we could you sound like you have no clue of what these things are.... and you are just repeating what you hear on Fox news.
Also, the US government creating the regulatory framework by which companies can operate relative to its environmental and economic standards, is actually a part of capitalism, because that is inherently at the core of why government exists - to provide participants with a set of guidelines that allow them to operate based on society's rules and norms. If the US Government deems fossil fuels to be in the process of being phased out due to environmental concerns and the rise of newer, cleaner ways to provide energy, then it has every right to do so.
At the end of the day, deleting Keystone XL is no different than government restricting the ability of companies and industry to pollute the water near their factories, which is no different than breaking up big tech companies who have become monopolies. These are all capitalist actions intended to adhere to society's rules and norms.
BINGO Sir... People forget the framework you are referring to or don't care. Hell I don't think they understand it if you listen to them comment on these things. Protecting our environment is protecting capitalism because it preserves how we can all thrive.
Yeah people like to use words like socialism whenever the government does anything, when in fact its merely the government doing capitalism better.
Is it protecting our environment by using trains and trucks that spew out toxic fumes for Americans to breathe, or is it the fact that trains and trucks have a higher chance of incidents happening than the pipeline? The only thing that Quid Pro Joe is protecting is Warren Buffet's 58 million dollar campaign contribution to him.
Its protecting the environment by shifting our resources and focus from fossil fuels and the infrastructure needed to sustain their transport, and towards clean energy infrastructure required to reach net-zero emissions by 2035. This can't be done by short term day trading on new oil pipelines that would go away anyway because the use of oil is going to fall off a cliff in the coming 10-15 years.
But this oil is being transported regardless. Shouldn't they transport it in the way that would cause the least amount of environmental damage possible? How many Americans will get sick or die from the increased toxic pollution that comes with train and truck transport? Do you have no empathy for those that are affected by breathing bad air?
Its not going to be transported for much longer given that we have less need for oil with each year that passes. Automakers have already announced or are in the process of announcing they are going to stop selling gasoline fueled cars by 2035 or so, which means we are going to be using a small fraction of the oil we are using now, and don't need to be investing in infrastructure that will become obsolete in a few years.
You keep saying 2035 as if oil will just magically go away by then. There are too many other products made from oil for that to happen anytime soon. Where are they going to get the tires needed for all those fancy non combustion engine cars? Not sure that a solar panel or windmill will be able to produce them by 2035.
Oil will still be around in 2035, but we will only use a tiny fraction of what we use today. The ancillary products that require oil will still use oil, but they are a mere drop in the bucket compared with what cars and trucks use.
Oil will be around for much longer than that. Oil use may go down for some things but with increased population we will still need quite a bit of it by then.
As long as there's oil in the ground it will still be used in small amounts, it just wont be the valuable commodity that moves geo-politics anymore, which will be good for us and bad for the Russians and Saudis.
How will it be good for us when we end up dependent on other countries to meet our demand for that oil which is not going away any time soon? How will it be good for us when the prices rise which will lead to an increase in the price for every last thing that we buy due to increased transportation costs? Sounds more like a regressive tax against the poor and middle class that Quid Pro Joe promised to look out for. Yet another lie from the serial liar.
We wouldn't rely on anyone because we would be energy independent. We currently make more oil than anyone else in the world and will be able to use small amounts of that to meet our domestic needs as we ramp up towards net-zero emissions by 2035 or 2050. Other countries will be in the same predicament as us and are already significantly ahead of us in making the transition. Likewise, the oil states like Saudi, UAE, etc., are currently scrambling to diversify their economies so they don't collapse when oil goes away.
So now we're already stretching it out to 2050? You act like America isn't already making the transition away from fossil fuels when we are one of the leaders in that move. We just don't need to be told to do it we do it on our own although like with Barry and Solyndra, we also throw away a lot of money in the name of renewables. How much of that Solyndra money do you think made it back into political donations to Dems?
I was wondering when your good friend "Barry" would put in an appearance in your posts. It seems even a keystone xl discussion needs a "Barry" reference.
Yes, oil is going away, so we don't need to be investing in prolonging something that is ending soon.
Let us know when it actually does go away and then we'll talk. Barry, just like Cuomo in NY, decided to waste our tax dollars on yet another "clean energy" boondoggle. That is where our tax money will go to if the Dems are in charge of where our money goes. This is nothing but big business as usual for Dems at our expense when it comes to "cleaning our air." Then to clean our air even further, idiots like Joey will ship that oil by truck and train in a more polluting way than a pipeline. Instead of a chicken in every pot like the old days, Joey will see to it that there's more toxic pollution in all of our lungs.
shutting down the pipeline is not a benefit to the environment stop believing the lie. Pipeline or not the demand for that oil doesn’t go away.
This is totally a political decision by Biden,
Fact: it’s safer by pipeline than rail and has a lower impact on the environment than by rail and truck
Fact: there’s only so many trucks and trains by forcing all that oil on the trains and trucks less space for agriculture products as result groceries go up
The American Farm Bureau Federation “anticipates increased transportation costs for agriculture as a result of the increased transportation competition between agriculture products and oil,” The organization said it could not estimate how much costs would increase until more data was available.
Transporting oil by pipeline is not only more cost-effective but also better for the environment. A 2017 study published by Environmental Science and Technology found “pipeline transportation produced between 61% and 77% fewer GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions than by rail.”
This is totally a political decision by Biden,
Fact: it’s safer by pipeline than rail and has a lower impact on the environment than by rail and truck
Fact: there’s only so many trucks and trains by forcing all that oil on the trains and trucks less space for agriculture products as result groceries go up
The American Farm Bureau Federation “anticipates increased transportation costs for agriculture as a result of the increased transportation competition between agriculture products and oil,” The organization said it could not estimate how much costs would increase until more data was available.
Transporting oil by pipeline is not only more cost-effective but also better for the environment. A 2017 study published by Environmental Science and Technology found “pipeline transportation produced between 61% and 77% fewer GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions than by rail.”
They only listen to science when it agrees with them. All of this is supposedly being done to fight "climate change" and then they go and make even more pollution just so Joe could pay back Warren Buffett for his $58 million dollar bribe, er, campaign contribution, to Quid Pro Joe.
Easy to look up and much more reliable than your claim that masks are more effective against COVID than the vaccines, when the CDC said that cloth masks alone are only 44.3% effective. Do you still remember that whopper that you told to us?
Actually they don’t listen to the science obviously they listen to cnn and regurgitate... over and over
Until they then think it’s fact.
Just like “hands up don’t shoot “
Or “ the protests are peaceful “
Don’t forget “Russia Russia Russia “
It’s amazing how the left will
A: tell a lie
B: repeat it over and over
C: then come to the place where it’s gospel
D: lie gets exposed and.... crickets
They never admit they were wrong
E: than the very thing they were doing they accuse the republicans of it and their evidence is “ well a source heard from a friend that he overheard a call that he thinks they said this “
IMPEACH!!
To be fair, I don't care much for either side. What I simply want to see is Quid Pro Joe being treated the same way they treated Trump, from his racism and corruption, all the way down to counting his lies one by one. Joe is president now, no more protecting the dementia riddled old fool.
Doesn't it seem he's even more fragile and disoriented since the election?
Yes, they probably stopped pumping him full of adrenaline once they got what they needed from him. It doesn't matter anyway, this election was never about Quid Pro Joe. This was all about getting Kamala in as the first female president when no one would have voted for her for the job. They will soon turn on poor Joe and claim he is unfit for the job once the time is right.
CD,
You contradict yourself when you write:
That's NOT SOCIALISM or COMMUNISM. It is still CAPITALISM because anyone can open a restaurant .
Then you write
Our elected officials decide the best way.
Elected officials = Government. When the government and not private individuals and business decide that is Socialism. You can read again in the time honored written definitions of the various economic systems that I have previolusly provided to you.
Still waiting for you to provide your definitions of Capitaiism, Socialism and Communism.
What you say in response regarding "elected" officials can not be more false. It's complete Bullshit. Read your constitution. We empower our "elected" officials to do what they perceive is in our interest. They campaign on this premise. Therefore we are deciding. Not them In essence so you are completely wrong. If we didn't want this type of leadership we would never elect people for it. It's not "government" as much as it is people we authorize through our constitution.
Stop saying ridiculous shit like *private* in regards to business. Business relies on the public to thrive so it sounds silly. The public will always be protected.
CD, once again your posts prove my point. And they also prove you are a Socialist.
Your words:
Stop saying ridiculous shit like *private* in regards to business. Business relies on the public to thrive so it sounds silly.
Definition of Capitalism
An economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.
Your statement directly conflicts with the definition of Capitalism
Your words:
We empower our "elected" officials to do what they perceive is in our interest.
Definition of Socialism
a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
Your statement clearly is consistent with a Socialist governmental control of economic activity.
Once again, I am using Google page 1 definitions. I can only guess the reason you claim to be a Capitalist is because it polls better? Why don't you have the moral courage and honesty to admit you are a Socialist and proudly proclaim why you believe it is a superior economic system to Capitalism?
I think we have exhausted this debate and are going have to agree to disagree.
Again, I think this proves you have absolutely no idea what socialsm, communist or Capitalistic government is or means. You are simply regurgitating republican / conservative narratives that are bullshit. The fact you are trying to google definitions to fit this narrative are a prime example.
You call people names like socialist. Based on what? The belief we should preserve our environment and protect the welfare of the public? You are contradicting yourself because if that is socialist we do not exercise capitalism here. We have been regulating businesses on behalf of the community here for well over hundreds of years. So, if I feel a business is not safe I am socialist and everyone else is socialist in America for hundreds of years because we don't allow businesses that are not safe and threaten our capitalist framework.
May I suggest you stop following. Start leading or at least follow the right people. Because what you are doing now is following. Which isn't always a bad thing. Your problem is you are following the wrong people. The kind of people that tell you conservativism is putting the constitution first an then allowing the leader of their own party to attack our capital. You are following hypocrites that really have no understanding of anything but greed, money, power and most of all fear.
Last edited:
I believe the person you're speaking to is conflating Democracy with socialism. We the people elect our representatives to be our government, which in turn advances the laws we want it to. That's democracy.
Yes. Which is why I made the comment we can never be socialist here. It's impossible because of our system of government. All our officials are elected so in essence we control our own government. True socialist communities government control the people. Not the other way around. Which is why it is impossible...and Republicans regurgitate this misinformation like it is fact every chance they get and feel great about themselves they told a liberal this nonsense.
