ADVERTISEMENT

Will imagine that...

Why would we invest in Canadian oil companies? It’s a Canadian business exclusively to facilitate export of Acadian oil.. providing Canadian jobs.

Smoking Joe in a genius move signed a bipartisan bill that benefits all Americans an adds 800K permanent US jobs in all 50 states.
Is 800k worth more than 39k temporary construction jobs in two states?

 
Why would we invest in Canadian oil companies? It’s a Canadian business exclusively to facilitate export of Acadian oil.. providing Canadian jobs.

Smoking Joe in a genius move signed a bipartisan bill that benefits all Americans an adds 800K permanent US jobs in all 50 states.
Is 800k worth more than 39k temporary construction jobs in two states?

Anyone mentioning Biden and genius in the same sentence should be institutionalized
 
Why would we invest in Canadian oil companies? It’s a Canadian business exclusively to facilitate export of Acadian oil.. providing Canadian jobs.

Smoking Joe in a genius move signed a bipartisan bill that benefits all Americans an adds 800K permanent US jobs in all 50 states.
Is 800k worth more than 39k temporary construction jobs in two states?

How many are government jobs besides the 187K new IRS agents ? You do know the irs gets paid from the government, any pipeline job is paid by private companies .
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Reasoned
Why would we invest in Canadian oil companies? It’s a Canadian business exclusively to facilitate export of Acadian oil.. providing Canadian jobs.

Smoking Joe in a genius move signed a bipartisan bill that benefits all Americans an adds 800K permanent US jobs in all 50 states.
Is 800k worth more than 39k temporary construction jobs in two states?

Take it up with potato joe and his admin. They are the ones that prepared the report so they must think closing the pipeline was not a brilliant move.
 
Anyone mentioning Biden and genius in the same sentence should be institutionalized

bingo-cousin-eddie.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: hokiemokie
Take it up with potato joe and his admin. They are the ones that prepared the report so they must think closing the pipeline was not a brilliant move.
Is 800k permanent jobs now than 39k temporary jobs? Seems like it is..
Considering also that all infrastructure work will be sourced in US under Bacon Davis wages? That would Include the pipe fitter unions in two states will be among those getting more permanent jobs…. I’ll do the math for you.. Therefore Genius Joe increased jobs by a net 860k jobs?

That’s Not even considering indirect manufacturing jobs… and those in his new microchip gigafactories in the Biden Infrastructure Bill ( which will kneecap China) .

Go Joe!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Menace Sockeyes
Is 800k permanent jobs now than 39k temporary jobs? Seems like it is..
Considering also that all infrastructure work will be sourced in US under Bacon Davis wages? That would Include the pipe fitter unions in two states will be among those getting more permanent jobs…. I’ll do the math for you.. Therefore Genius Joe increased jobs by a net 860k jobs?

That’s Not even considering indirect manufacturing jobs… and those in his new microchip gigafactories in the Biden Infrastructure Bill ( which will kneecap China) .

Go Joe!
Analysis showed it would have netted less than 50 permanent jobs and been an environmental disaster. OP is a moron.
 
Analysis showed it would have netted less than 50 permanent jobs and been an environmental disaster. OP is a moron.

Remember, we only care if something hurts the environment in any capacity if it is in our backyard, that's BAD.

But if we can virtue signal, and ruin the environment halfway around the world with cobalt and lithium mines (among other things), but not see any of the immediate environmental effects here, that's GOOD.

Everything in life is a tradeoff. Investing in infrastructure for oil and gas has much better positive trade offs currently than negative ones. This project would've been no different.
 
Remember, we only care if something hurts the environment in any capacity if it is in our backyard, that's BAD.

But if we can virtue signal, and ruin the environment halfway around the world with cobalt and lithium mines (among other things), but not see any of the immediate environmental effects here, that's GOOD.

Everything in life is a tradeoff. Investing in infrastructure for oil and gas has much better positive trade offs currently than negative ones. This project would've been no different.
He’s a lib. Despite his “MIT degree” and faux sense of self confidence, he’s wrong literally 100% of the time, bless his bleeding little heart.
 
Remember, we only care if something hurts the environment in any capacity if it is in our backyard, that's BAD.

But if we can virtue signal, and ruin the environment halfway around the world with cobalt and lithium mines (among other things), but not see any of the immediate environmental effects here, that's GOOD.
Who is making those two arguments? It would be great if Conservatives could accurately assess the arguments of liberals, but they struggle with higher order thinking,
 
Why would we invest in Canadian oil companies? It’s a Canadian business exclusively to facilitate export of Acadian oil.. providing Canadian jobs.

Smoking Joe in a genius move signed a bipartisan bill that benefits all Americans an adds 800K permanent US jobs in all 50 states.
Is 800k worth more than 39k temporary construction jobs in two states?

Since you are a logistical genius, is it cheaper for the US to receive oil from a pipeline from Canada or by ship from the mid-east?

Thought so....

What a PUTZ...
 
  • Love
Reactions: BamaFan1137
Analysis showed it would have netted less than 50 permanent jobs and been an environmental disaster. OP is a moron.

Compared to transporting oil any other way (literally every other option), the pipeline would have been an environmental disaster? 😂

Tell us again how we struggle with higher order thinking. LOL, if you believe the environmental disaster bullshit, you struggle with all levels of understanding.
 
Compared to transporting oil any other way (literally every other option), the pipeline would have been an environmental disaster? 😂

Tell us again how we struggle with higher order thinking. LOL, if you believe the environmental disaster bullshit, you struggle with all levels of understanding.
You’ve been duped by fossil fuel industry propaganda. Pipelines fail far more often, at a far more catastrophic scale than other modes of transport. Only ocean tankers get close in disaster scales.
 
You’ve been duped by fossil fuel industry propaganda. Pipelines fail far more often, at a far more catastrophic scale than other modes of transport. Only ocean tankers get close in disaster scales.
Negative- the greatest environmental disasters in the history of civilization have been caused by the oil industry- is that even debatable?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Menace Sockeyes
Negative- the greatest environmental disasters in the history of civilization have been caused by the oil industry- is that even debatable?
Chernobyl might be up there.
 
Negative- the greatest environmental disasters in the history of civilization have been caused by the oil industry- is that even debatable?
Oh, there's this..
 
  • Like
Reactions: BamaFan1137
Chernobyl might be up there.
Yes it would be. Doesn’t that make you anti nuclear?
But we were in an oil thread talking about environmental risk from petroleum exploration and shipping.

IMHO the greatest impending threat to this generation the disposition of carcinogenic toxins and metals in power plant ash ponds. They have been protected fo the last 100 yrs by lobbyists. World best controlled dirty little secret.

Coal ash contains toxic concentrations of mercury, lead, chromium, uranium.. yet disasters like Kingston TN get protection from blatant acts of negligence.

 
Yes it would be. Doesn’t that make you anti nuclear?
But we were in an oil thread talking about environmental risk from petroleum exploration and shipping.

IMHO the greatest impending threat to this generation the disposition of carcinogenic toxins and metals in power plant ash ponds. They have been protected fo the last 100 yrs by lobbyists. World best controlled dirty little secret.

Coal ash contains toxic concentrations of mercury, lead, chromium, uranium.. yet disasters like Kingston TN get protection from blatant acts of negligence.

Awesome, so we can go to all electric cars and eliminate coal and fossil fuels.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: billywayneluck
Yes it would be. Doesn’t that make you anti nuclear?
But we were in an oil thread talking about environmental risk from petroleum exploration and shipping.

IMHO the greatest impending threat to this generation the disposition of carcinogenic toxins and metals in power plant ash ponds. They have been protected fo the last 100 yrs by lobbyists. World best controlled dirty little secret.

Coal ash contains toxic concentrations of mercury, lead, chromium, uranium.. yet disasters like Kingston TN get protection from blatant acts of negligence.

Why would that make me anti-nuclear? You made a claim about the oil industry. I pointed out that your claim wasn't entirely true.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT