Featured Post

WELCOME TO FACTMISSILE.COM

Our goal is to inject facts into debates that are too often dominated by opinion and feelings. These natural human traits get in the way of ...

Thursday, November 22, 2018

SINGLING OTTAWA OUT FOR THE COLLAPSE IN WESTERN CANADA'S OIL INDUSTRY IS SIMPLY POLITICS..

It's no secret, was never treated as a secret, Trudeau came in understanding climate science and what stands before us, if we don't deal with the human causes of climate change.  He openly campaigned on it.  Is he on the record saying we need to "manage" the wind down of that industry? Yes.  He is also on the record saying that no country would sit on a resource and not sell it when there a market for it.


His is also not the only agenda at work.  That is true of Canada on our own, as well as agendas that are being pushed around the world.   Many by people with more clout over oil than the Canadian government.

OPEC has been seeing their interests pressured on two fronts.

1. Climate change and the work going on to reduce the dependency on carbon based fuels.

2. Massive new reservoirs located around North America  particularly in the United States.

They increased production to secured their market share, while at the same time targeting new production including North American suppliers whose operations are far more expensive to build and maintain.

There is fracking which cracks the shale and pumping water or steam to break the oil out of the shale.

In the case of Alberta's oil sands, massive mining operations feed massive plants to separate the oil from the sand and upgrade it so it can be piped out and refined.

Compare the processes in North America to the OPEC countries.  We saw at the end of Desert Storm, G.H.W Bush's Gulf War, to liberate Kuwait from Iraq, the wells in Kuwait spewing oil and fire under pressure.  These areas have to hold their oil in.  A production increase basically requires simply opening the valves a little wider.  This is clearly an oversimplification,  but the cost difference is impressive.

Photo credit Per Anders-Peterson (Getty Images)

The Americans have a massive oil industry again, mostly in shale formations.  It does require fracking, but is, for the most part refiner ready.  It doesn't require a plant in front of the refinery, to upgrade it, before it can be refined.

It is not false, to recognize that Trudeau is interested in bringing down Canada's CO2 emissions.   It is false to say he wants to shut down these industries before there is alternatives in place to operate our economy.  There are outside pressures over which there is little control.  That being said, the pipeline issue would put us back in a competitive position and for sure the lack of even mentioning these issues in the fiscal update is very unhelpful.  However, if the middle eastern OPEC members, decide the oil market is dying and want to rule the market, cashing in, until the end, there is little we can do to compete.

Wednesday, November 21, 2018

CANADA'S MILITARY WOES AREN'T SOLELY THE LIBERAL'S FAULT, BUT

The Liberal's do have the portfolio now, and it's not moving very well.  There is no surprise that the Royal Canadian Air Force primary fighting capacity is the CF18 Hornets.  It is no surprise that these aircraft are well into/past their effective life.  And we are still holding them together and planning a lifespan increase which is looking forward  into the ridiculous.



Even if the purpose of these aircraft was to ferry people around the north, this would be an almost silly extension.  That is not their purpose.  They are to stand up to hostile aircraft, defending Canada, our interests and allies.  These aircraft,  if called on to go operational, will be up against aircraft that are decades newer, and better equipped.  Even if upgrades are done to keep them bare minimum serviceable they may be little more than target practice for an enemy force.



This did not become an issue, just now.  It was let to go to shambles by government after government, but for sure Trudeau's Liberal government has it now.  Since it would seem as though the Liberals are planning to apply to keep the job they now have, solving the problem,  concretely,  doesn't seem like a strange expectation.

Explaining the costs involved, while committing to them is not going to be the easiest,  but in the age of Trump, the people just may understand,  counting on the US  without a self determined option, for our own defence, is no longer an option for us

Saturday, November 17, 2018

BEEN THERE, DONE THAT, LOST THE TEE SHIRT. TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS WORKS FOR THE RICH, PERIOD.

What is "trickle down economics"?

One percent of people in a country have most of the money, maybe as much money,  as all the rest of the people in the country.  The big idea that won't go away, is to give the one percent people an extra $X million each, through tax breaks that the others in the country don't get.  The plan is, that the one percent people, will then take that money and through a combination of creating jobs, and purchasing products and services, distribute that money to the people who already had less money to start with.  The one percent people will "trickle" money down to the rest of the population, stimulating the economy.   It makes sense, right.  Let's look at a few things.


  1. How much of the $X million dollars a one percent person received, are they going to spend?  Not all of it.  You have to spend money to make money, but if you spend it all, you DON'T GET RICH. So it is for sure, they are not going to trickle down the whole $X million dollars.  Of the money they do spend, how much will be local and trickle down to the country we live in?
  2. Depending on how many, one percent people, get a tax cut, there could be a significant loss of income to our little country.  This, the trickle down salesman say, is going to be off set by the increase in tax revenue from the other people, now flush with cash from the ample money trickling down, from the one percent people.  Let's do some math, letting X=1.
Lost government revenue               $1,000,000.00
25% shifted elsewhere                       $250,000.00
Available for economic boost:           $750,000.00
Material/Goods purchased                 $250,000.00 **
Available for economic boost:           $500,000.00
Amount spend on new wages:           $500,000.00
Tax break exhausted:                                    $0.00

I don't have an accounting degree, and this is a very simplistic example, but ask some questions.  Who is going to take a sizeable tax cut and just roll it all over into wages for staff?  Who wouldn't squirrel at least some of it away, maybe even in a shelter that is a deduction for the next year's taxes?  **Add to that, any purchase of equipment and material for the business comes off of taxes next year as a qualified business expense.  Yes, there will be genuine economic activity around the goods and material purchase.**  I just can't see a scenario where the government can give away $X million in tax revenue and magically get it back. Who else can't find that scenario?  Reality and history. Right this minute the US deficit and debt is exploding, and there is no path to get that money back, except billing it to the future.

History Lesson, Do Big Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/12/07/history-lesson-do-big-tax-cuts-pay-for-themselves/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.9c7d56e124c1

The answer some say, is cutting spending and making government smaller. This is the "smaller government" fantasy that conservatives often push.  We'll cut programs that "lazy, unproductive people" use to live well, off the government, as cost saving measure.  It never happens, because in the end it can't. Government is a complicated undertaking.  There are those who try to speak of it as a business and it should run like a for profit company.  This is the capitalist mantra, make government as small as possible, people should not be getting services from government, if they can't manage it, then they suffer the consequences of their inability. They want to take the civility out of civil society.  Survival of the fittest, what's mine is mine, no one needs help, only to get off their asses.... Taking away the programs that help people, means some people will end up having to do desperate acts to survive.  No faster way we can think of to increase crime, than to make it a plausible last ditch option for some one who is out of other options.  The other issue, in the end, these people also are potential voters, and in the next election year, it all rolls out to get the people back on side.



Government is far more like parenting than it is a business undertaking.  Your family will not get all of the things that it needs if you don't manage your money properly.  You don't, however, buy your kid a new set of shoes at the beginning of the school year based on the amount of money your are likely to make from the shoes over the school year. You buy new shoes because the kid needs shoes.  Governments build roads because we need roads, build water plants because we need clean water, hire police because we need security, hire teachers because education is vital to the future....  These things all cost money and without them we don't have a civil society.

 Military programs, the capitalists never want to cut.  Why?



In today's world an obviously capable military is vital to the sovereignty of an independent nation.  It's also MEGA HUGE BUSINESS.  Fair enough. Development of the weapons in today's military arsenals is extremely expensive, but the programs often protected with such vigour are massively expensive payouts to the big corporations.  A significant amount of military spending in the United States, we argue, is little more than corporate welfare.  Much equipment is built and delivered to storage compounds to sit unused and unneeded. This is not an argument against military spending. It is after all not 1918 anymore, and it not only takes much longer to produce new weapons systems, your enemy can be on top of you in days, or less.  You can't start getting weapons when the fight has already begun. Corporations love these government programs, because they PAY HUGE MONEY.  Even the most strict conservatives like them too, because they mean jobs, often pretty good paying jobs in districts they represent.

New Air Force Planes Go Directly To Bone Yard. 
https://www.military.com/daily-news/2013/10/07/new-air-force-planes-go-directly-to-boneyard.html

Pentagon Tells Congress To Stop Buying Equipment It Does Not Need.
https://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/01/28/pentagon-tells-congress-to-stop-buying-equipment-it-doesnt-need.html

Congress Funds Problematic Weapons Pentagon Does Not Want.
https://www.publicintegrity.org/2016/07/05/19869/congress-funds-problematic-weapons-pentagon-does-not-want
Government has a responsibility to all people in their country.  Capitalist and entrepreneurs need to be respected for their ingenuity, hard work and risk they are taking, often helping to bring other people along with them while trying to secure their own future and reap well deserved benefit from their work. What is often lost is the role, helping people in all circumstances plays in ensuring the environment is there that allows the capitalist to prosper. No sector of society lives in a bubble, no matter how high the walls around a condo complex may be.  The fewer people in desperate situations, the fewer people committing desperate acts.  Now you can worry less about how high to make your wall.

Friday, November 9, 2018

THE SCIENTIFIC PROCESS ON CLIMATE CHANGE IS THE SAME AS ALL OF OUR GREATEST ADVANCES.

Isaac Newton observed an apple falling from a tree and it got him thinking about the attraction of earth to the objects that cling to it's surface.  Over centuries humans have observed birds flying through the air, seeming to defy gravity, and sought to join them.  We have observed the reaction the human body has to different plants and chemicals, or combinations of them, seeking to relieve pain, suffering and even delay death.

In all of these cases we have first developed and then followed a way of planning and executing a process so we don't lose valuable information, and can evaluate our findings to make sure we are not just seeing what we want to see.  It goes basically like this:

  1. Have a question.  They call it a hypothesis.  What will happen to A if we add C?
  2. Observe what happens.  Sometimes it happens naturally and all you have to do is go out to where it happens and watch it. If your question is "what happens to a zebra when a hungry lion sees it?", you go out to the plains of Africa and watch a pack of zebras and wait for a lion to show up.  Sometimes you have to add C to A yourself to see what happens.  This is an experiment. In these cases you have to have a control.  A control is observing A without C added so you know what A does by itself.  This way anything you observe when adding C to A you know C is causing it and what is just A being A.  You do it more than once.  It is always possible there was a variable you did not account for, if you don't get the same result, you determine what was different.
  3. Document. Document EVERY SINGLE TINY DETAIL. Any little thing could be of huge importance.  If you get a different result, a little detail may tell you what you have to change, or could be a HUGE discovery. These details are also extremely importance to the next step.
  4. Publish your findings. A relevant publication prints your findings for other qualified people to look over, question and replicate.  This is vital.  If you do a big study and group of experiments on colour mixing and publish a paper on mixing blue and yellow to get orange other QUALIFIED scientists in the field will try to recreate your experiments. When they are only able to get green from mixing blue and yellow, they can go over your data and point out where the difference is and together you may find an error, or a whole new way to mix colours to get orange.  In either case, something has been learned.
There is a mountain of detail in the process that is not showing in the 4 points on here, but the process is largely the same across the spectrum of legitimate scientific investigations.


The same basic process has been followed over and over again on the many fronts of a very complex investigation into the symptoms of climate change, the process causing it, what the future likely holds and what can be done to minimise and eventually reverse what is going on. It is so big, many people just can't grasp it.  Unlike Donald Trumps taxes, everything you need to try and grasp climate change, is out in the open.  But you can't use a microscope, you have to look at the whole thing.

We have to get past arguing about it.  We have to trust the science that has been done for now and start changing our focus.  We need the innovators to focus on new fuels, the new process for getting things moved around keeping people on board.  It's not the earth we need to save by addressing climate change, it's us.


Wednesday, November 7, 2018

WHAT RIGHT DO PEOPLE OUTSIDE THE STATES HAVE TO COMMENT ON US POLITICS?

It's non of my business what goes on in the White House, right?

I live in Canada and what happens in the United States is none of my business, maybe even has no effect on me, right?

Part of me wants to scream a huge NO WAY, to both of these questions, but clearly the answer is not that easy. Some of the domestic policies that are being put in place, or attempted to be put in place do fall under that category of: "If you don't like it, don't come here".  I guess that is really the point in some of them.  It's to  make it less likely for some to come to the United States.  There are those as well, that are trade based, and if I don't like them, than go sell somewhere else, go buy somewhere else.  You may, and in cases are, seeing that happening.

So what business is it of ours, outside the United States to care, and be vocal about what is going on?

It appears to be contagious. Or maybe well organised disruption.  It is, not just creeping, but running full steam into the discourse in Canada. Doug Ford in Ontario is a good example of this style of politics getting deeply rooted.  The tactic of just out and out lying to the public was not created by Donald J. Trump, but he is for sure the best at it, and the most enthusiastic with it. For George W. Bush and even more so Dick Cheney, fear was a major tool used, and lying and misinformation were obvious, but not to the extent that we see now, not even remotely close.

So speaking up, even to a degree participating in the process in the United States these days is not just a matter of interest, or being a political junkie, it is about NOT ON MY SHORE.  It's about stopping something out there before it is here more than we already see it.  It's about making sure it does not become fashionable here, to lie and scare your way into power, then to try to centralise and hold it indefinitely.

November 6th's Midterm Election was not the tsunami of democratic blue that some were hoping for.  It was a major landscape change though, that can't be ignored or discounted.  Some of us will remain, openly trying to help the causes of returning the United States back to its role as a democratic beacon of hope for the world.  Doing it transparently, out in the open, not hiding or trying to subvert.  Just working with allies in the United States, to free the United States from a would be occupier.

AMERICA'S GREAT DEBATES: GUN CONTROL

GUN CONTROL FACTS:


  • Controlling access to firearms does not eliminate the crime of murder.
  • There are a number of ways to injure or kill a person other than guns.
  • Guns have a usefulness in the right place and the right time.
  • Assault style rifles are used in a very small number of gun related deaths, but, they are often, extremely high profile events.
  • No country in the world has a sense of entitlement around guns like the United States, and no other country in the world has a higher rate of civilian gun related deaths and injury than the United States.
  • The vast majority of Americans, including gun owners, want common sense controls on firearms in private citizen's hands.  Assault style weapons are the most demonstrated against, but pose a lower risk to the general population than smaller hand guns that are the main killer on the streets. 


Questions:

Is the United States stuck with the interpretation of the Second Amendment as it is currently being interpreted?

Without Google,  can you name the man credited with developing the second amendment?

Tuesday, November 6, 2018

IT'S MIDTERM GAME DAY! In the specticle that US politics has become. :-(

Yes it is game day in the US Midterm Elections.  More at stake than any other midterm election, maybe even election in general.  It does not need saying that this election is about more than Republican vs. Democrat, or even a referendum on Donald J. Trump.  It is a fight for the life of the American Political Dream.  Independence from a monarchical ruler, now truly working to pull themselves out from under an authoritarian, want to be, dictator.

It's the game of your lives, average american, play hard, play to win.

Monday, November 5, 2018

IT'S TIME FOR JOE AVERAGE HEROES TO SAVE THE DAY:

Donald Trump lies about almost every facit of his administration.  He lies about almost everything that happens in and outside his policy.  At the start of this thing, top of mind was trying to dispute the lies Trump constantly tells.  It was not to dispute everything he says, but it turned out, for real, almost everything he says, is a lie.

It is clearly either an innate part of the fabric of his soul, or a calculated strategy, designed to appeal to the base of supporters who give him his power.  The difference between the two is a question of morals.  The practical,  or effective difference between them, is zero.  It has been effective in reaching and motivating his audience as well as polarizing the political discourse.  The people apposite of his views are often goaded into engaging the lies at the expense of ensuring their message is reaching those they need to motivate.

All of this has left openings for foreign powers to exploit the growing devides and isolation of people, who despite having access to more information than ever in human history,  focus on information and views that simply support their biases.  The "information " is often easy to prove wrong, but it doesn't matter, it feels good to hear it, and for some, the rage seems righteous and feels powerful.

Take aways:

1. As long as he is there, the people who support and follow him can not be converted.
2. The people he has reached, are not the majority and therefore should not be the focus of efforts.  Overwhelming them at the polls must be the focus, while that is still possible.  Make no mistake, Trump's goal is to no only hold, but to be, power.

On November 5th, this last day before the most important election day in RECENT WORLD HISTORY, don't be goaded into going off task.  Organize and ensure reasonable, rational people who know the gravity of the situation, GET OUT AND VOTE.

You are literally tasked with making history and saving your country.