Alberta Separatism is starting to go mainstream

[Buster]

Interesting developments.

https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/co...m9Y7F7kOfd8hUc

A highly credible new leader has stepped forward to lead the Wexit movement. For Canadian federalists, like me, it’s bad news; for Western separatists it’s great news.

Jay Hill, the former whip and House leader in Stephen Harper’s federal Conservative government, has taken the reins of the Wexit movement — a fledgling entity that aims for Western Canada to separate from Canada.

[killramos]

Brings a tear to the eye.

[kertejud2]

“We could limit their rail and road access through our country,” says Hill.

Good thing Alberta isn’t vulnerable to proportionate retaliatory measures by shipping out millions of barrels of oil A month by rail or anything.

Fucking moron.

Stronger Wexit is good for the Liberals federally and NDP provincially, so its a win there. Plus it’ll separate idiots from their money fundraising. Definitely good for his grandkids.

[ExtraSlow]

All I fucking wanted was moderately competent moderately conservative politics. It's been a long time since we had anything close to that.

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Good thing Alberta isn’t vulnerable to proportionate retaliatory measures by shipping out millions of barrels of oil A month by rail or anything.

Fucking moron.

Stronger Wexit is good for the Liberals federally and NDP provincially, so its a win there. Plus it’ll separate idiots from their money fundraising. Definitely good for his grandkids.

Assuming your counter-parties aren't idiots (questionable when it comes to Canada), you don't need to implement punitive trade restrictions, you just need to be able to have them.

As Jay says in the article, the other provinces have already implemented most of what would be retaliatory. I'm less concerned about the vote being split any more. It's never going to get better than 8 years of Harper, and that was basically a waste.

[ThePenIsMightier]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Good thing Alberta isn’t vulnerable to proportionate retaliatory measures by shipping out millions of barrels of oil A month by rail or anything.

Fucking moron.

Stronger Wexit is good for the Liberals federally and NDP provincially, so its a win there. Plus it’ll separate idiots from their money fundraising. Definitely good for his grandkids.

What is your shit smear of an avatar supposed to be? It looks like black & white Kid Icarus... in Blackface.

[kertejud2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Assuming your counter-parties aren't idiots (questionable when it comes to Canada), you don't need to implement punitive trade restrictions, you just need to be able to have them.

As Jay says in the article, the other provinces have already implemented most of what would be retaliatory.

There are millions of barrels a month that aren’t currently restricted. Any restriction on transport puts those at risk. That’s current production, not expansion capacity. Alberta can’t afford that.

Plus restricting trade doesn’t make you business friendly. Who wants to invest in a landlocked country getting into a trade dispute with their most integrated trading partner before they’re even a country? Just dumb.

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There are millions of barrels a month that aren’t currently restricted. Any restriction on transport puts those at risk. That’s current production, not expansion capacity. Alberta can’t afford that.

Plus restricting trade doesn’t make you business friendly. Who wants to invest in a landlocked country getting into a trade dispute with their most integrated trading partner before they’re even a country? Just dumb.

Of course restricting trade doesn't make you business friendly. Not sure where that leaves bc and qc.

[kertejud2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Of course restricting trade doesn't make you business friendly. Not sure where that leaves bc and qc.

Well Quebec is what Wexiters are aspiring to be, so you should figure that out quick.

[revelations]

WEXIT would essentially be short term pain (5 years?) for long term gain for the West.

I'm glad some politicians are thinking like this - but I hope that no one expects things to be rosy immediately and that the leaders will be able to convey this message accurately.

The West should have gone on their own decades ago - decentralization could have also massively helped, along with fuck off equalization payments - but Ottawa will never go there. They would rather break up a country than hurt their reelection chances.

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Well Quebec is what Wexiters are aspiring to be, so you should figure that out quick.

Are you joking or do you really not see the distinction between the quebec separatist movement and the Alberta one?

[e31]

kertejud thinks that a diesel engine just makes noise and soot, that the caboose is what magically propels a train down the rails and not just burdensome dead-weight from history hanging on without a purpose.

A Western Bloc wouldn't need to resort to restricting trade with the rest of Canada; Success as a self-determining economic engine is all the revenge we should be looking for. However I would enjoy sending a train car back east with a double-middle finger salute.

[kertejud2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Are you joking or do you really not see the distinction between the quebec separatist movement and the Alberta one?

The Quebec separatist movement was willing to deal with economic sacrifices in the name of cultural sovereignty, because it was more about the latter than the former.

Alberta separatists think that the threat of separation is what gets Quebec so much attention (it isn't) and think they can recreate the same conditions, and pretend the economic perils don't exist. It's just dumb to see.

[ThePenIsMightier]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

kertejud thinks...

I believe you started off on the wrong foot, here.

[speedog]

Jay who?

[ExtraSlow]

Are you Johnny Ray?
Are you Slim Ray?
Are you Paid Ray?
Who wants to know? Who wants to know?
Are you Sting Ray?
Are you Nick Ray?
Are you Jimmy Ray?
Who wants to know? Who wants to know?

Preyty sure it's Jimmy Ray.

[zechs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There are millions of barrels a month that aren’t currently restricted. Any restriction on transport puts those at risk. That’s current production, not expansion capacity. Alberta can’t afford that.

I haven't been on here very long, but does this guy just make up reality?

There are two to three pipelines coming online in the next year or so. Alberta will have sufficient, cheap oil transport/export for the forseeable future, if not for the length of time oil is still viable. None of it reliant on Canada as all that oil is for export.

The Federal Liberals have done their darndest to drive capital not just out of Alberta, but Canada. The country is wholly inhospitable to resource development. So its unlikely we will see further large increases in oil production beyond the peak levels we have already seen, or through efficiency measures and current plant expansions.

If we have pipelines, pretty hard to restrict those (both in the literal sense, as well as by the laws of countries). And with the $10-$20bil a year not being shipped out of province of tax resources, we can likely chase that holy grail of "diversification" that the left loves so much through government interference/spending.

You are correct in your assessment Alberta separation and Quebec separation is different. Quebec was playing a game, and Alberta is actually serious. It also helps that we have money, while Quebec realized they'd be killing their golden financial goose (confederation) if they left.

[kertejud2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I haven't been on here very long, but does this guy just make up reality?

There are two to three pipelines coming online in the next year or so. Alberta will have sufficient, cheap oil transport/export for the forseeable future, if not for the length of time oil is still viable. None of it reliant on Canada as all that oil is for export.

The Federal Liberals have done their darndest to drive capital not just out of Alberta, but Canada. The country is wholly inhospitable to resource development. So its unlikely we will see further large increases in oil production beyond the peak levels we have already seen, or through efficiency measures and current plant expansions.

If we have pipelines, pretty hard to restrict those (both in the literal sense, as well as by the laws of countries). And with the $10-$20bil a year not being shipped out of province of tax resources, we can likely chase that holy grail of "diversification" that the left loves so much through government interference/spending.
.

If things were sufficient then there wouldn't be so much anger and concern over Northern Gateway, Energy East, or KXL.

Trying to prop up trade restrictions as leverage when you're relying on 200,000+ barrels of oil a day by rail puts Alberta at a disadvantage for any negotiation with transport restrictions. That's just oil, doesn't even take into account other mining or agriculture or warehouses and logistics that make up a big part of the economy and have a large reliance on rail. the ROC could just go with different shipping routes and outlast. A landlocked province thinking it can get into a transportation fight over rail and road is just the pinnacle of stupidity and short shortsightedness.

[pheoxs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If things were sufficient then there wouldn't be so much anger and concern over Northern Gateway, Energy East, or KXL.

Trying to prop up trade restrictions as leverage when you're relying on 200,000+ barrels of oil a day by rail puts Alberta at a disadvantage for any negotiation with transport restrictions. That's just oil, doesn't even take into account other mining or agriculture or warehouses and logistics that make up a big part of the economy and have a large reliance on rail. the ROC could just go with different shipping routes and outlast. A landlocked province thinking it can get into a transportation fight over rail and road is just the pinnacle of stupidity and short shortsightedness.

People don't seem to understand how much the pipeline constraints hurt our other industries. Shipping grain or manufactured goods via rail competes with oil for rail space. This drives up the cost of transportation across the board.

You want diversity with other industries? We need to get oil off of rail so that other industries can have cheaper shipping access because we don't have any ship access.

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

A landlocked province .

moving the oceans is, indeed, a bold move. I like your thinking.