Recent posts

#11

Off the Record / Re: Football (Soccer) Thread

Last post by crazy canuck - Today at 07:46:55 AM

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DOZuwlzDrDG/?igsh=MTI5d3gybHg1Zm00Yg==

The mayor of New York, actually he has some pretty good soccer skills. A sentence I never thought I would ever say.  And he's taking a run at FIFA.  Let's not to like?

#12

Off the Record / Re: What does a TRUMP presiden...

Last post by Savonarola - Today at 07:13:53 AM

Good luck, non-WASPs.

Keeping refugees out of the country is a beautiful way to celebrate the true meaning of Thanksgiving.   


 

(Yes, I realize that the Pilgrims didn't actually come to Plymouth to escape religious intolerance (they were more trying to escape religious tolerance in the Netherlands) and that not everyone who sailed on the Mayflower was a puritan.  MAGA, as near as I understand them, accepts a mythological view of history and yesterday should have been a day for them to celebrate tolerance and refugees; they could go back to hating those things today.)

[A week or two would seem rational.]

#13

Off the Record / Re: Brexit and the waning days...

Last post by garbon - Today at 07:00:30 AM

Day one did seem a bit too far. Though shame they couldn't bring it down from 6 months, thats much too long. A week or two would seem rational.

Would it? I, of course, can only speak from office work. While I have some sense of my employees in the first week or two of employment, I generally am spending a lot of time then training them so I don't have enough to go on usually to assess whether or not they will competently carry out their duties. That usually takes about a month.

At 6 months, I think that lines up with what many people have as a 'probation' period. Feels about right that probation and statuatory rights line up...vs. right now it has always be a fiction as a company can let you pass probation and then quickly fire you given you are still under 2 years.

#14

Off the Record / Re: [Canada] Canadian Politics...

Last post by crazy canuck - Today at 06:53:15 AM

It's a gamble there too. We could disallow potash export to the US at any moment.

There is a certainty that without the expansion of a terminal and the rail capacity to get their product to the terminal, they will not be able to ship their product to market. Balancing that against the unlikely event that Canada will ban potash to it's number one market seems less like a gamble and much more like a sensible business decision.

#15

Off the Record / Re: [Canada] Canadian Politics...

Last post by crazy canuck - Today at 06:47:38 AM

What's so special about potash that it needs a dedicated export terminal?

It's a bulk good. So it needs a lot of real capacity and poor capacity to load it onto the ships that come to pick it up.  The company is expanding its operations in Saskatchewan and so it needs expanded capacity to move that bulk product to market.  It's as simple as that. It has nothing to do with its importance as a commodity.

If you've been to Vancouver, you probably noticed the large grain terminals on the North Shore. That's another example of purpose built, commodity export terminals.

#16

Off the Record / Re: [Canada] Canadian Politics...

Last post by crazy canuck - Today at 06:45:57 AM

The loss is business investment, jobs, materials (probably buy American supplies down there). It adds up to economic activity and Canada has been losing a lot of business investment in the past decade.

Yes, and the construction of a port facility is only a minor part of the economic boost. The operation of a port facility is significant economic multiplier.
 

#17

Off the Record / Re: Archaeologists do it in ho...

Last post by crazy canuck - Today at 06:39:24 AM

The explanation for why the change to lighter skin occurred when the farming cultures took over is interesting

Diet also played a role. Early Europeans relied heavily on meat, fish, and wild foods rich in vitamin D. When farming spread, diets changed. Grain-based foods lack vitamin D. Over time, lighter skin may have helped boost vitamin D production when food could not.

#18

Off the Record / Re: Brexit and the waning days...

Last post by crazy canuck - Today at 06:32:57 AM

The Law Commission is still running here. Their proposals aren't always picked up but often is because it's normally quite unsexy, relatively technocratic changes. So their current research program covers:

Agricultural tenancies
    Commercial leasehold
    Consent in the criminal law
    Deeds
    The defence of insanity
    Desecration of a corpse
    Management of housing estates
    Ownerless land
    Product liability
    Public sector automated decision-making

Which is fairly (admirably) varied I can imagine some of those becoming fairly contentious but a lot won't.

And as I say in this case the government got a report on criminal justice by Sir Brian Leveson, former President of the Queen's Bench Division and Head of Criminal Justice. He looked at Canada, New Zealand and Australian territories (I don't fully know why but Australia is always very popular with judges as a persuasive authority in the UK). The government's plan if they stick to it is to apparently go way, way beyond his recommendations.

Although to Jos' points I think there is a very good reason Leveson limited his comparators to other common law jurisdictions.

Oh my, that makes the situation much worse. Your politicians actually had the mechanism to make an informed decision and didn't fully use it, or perhaps use it at all.

Yikes!

#19

Off the Record / Re: [Canada] Canadian Politics...

Last post by crazy canuck - Today at 06:30:55 AM

What's so special about potash that it needs a dedicated export terminal?

It's a bulk good. So it needs a lot of real capacity and poor capacity to load it onto the ships that come to pick it up.  The company is expanding its operations in Saskatchewan and so it needs expanded capacity to move that bulk product to market.  It's as simple as that. It has nothing to do with its importance as a commodity.

[Microsoft issues chilling warning: New WA taxes will drive companies out—Vancouver already winning]

#20

Off the Record / Re: [Canada] Canadian Politics...

Last post by crazy canuck - Today at 06:27:26 AM

Meanwhile Nutrien is choosing to build a new potash export terminal in Washington state due to excessive regulations in Canada.  This is exactly the thing we're supposed to be avoiding right now. 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/nutrien-selects-u-s-port-to-build-new-potash-export-terminal-9.6992424

It goes both ways, though: https://seattlered.com/taxes/microsoft-business-taxes/4115276

Microsoft issues chilling warning: New WA taxes will drive companies out—Vancouver already winning

...

Vancouver already benefiting as Seattle stumbles
Microsoft has been quietly expanding its office in Vancouver, B.C., doubling its headcount there since before the pandemic.

No, you are making a false equivalency.  Nutrien is not moving its business. It is still extracting Potash from Saskatchewan. The problem they are facing is the lack of infrastructure on the West coast of Canada to move their product to market, and the regulatory hurdles (some would say nightmare) to get things built here.

Bauer is correct to point out this is the very thing Carney is trying to address.  And I would add, needs to get addressed quickly.  One way to think about it is that the announcement of special projects that get to avoid the regulatory tangle we have created is another way of saying that they are probably unnecessary brakes on much needed infrastructure development.

It's a gamble there too. We could disallow potash export to the US at any moment.

Your dismissiveness is unwarranted.  This is a professor in the University of Saskatchewan's  Agricultural and Resource Economics department.  If he doesn't know what he is talking about in this area, then nobody does.

I wasn't dismissive of the issue. I was dismissive of its treatment here. Maybe Canada has an infrastructure problem, but I'd have little reason to subscribe to the argument from that example.

From the article:

« To put a billion-dollar investment in place is going to require rail capacity improvements, and by the sounds of what Nutrient is saying, things are easier to get done in the United States than they are in Canada," Smyth said last week in an interview with CBC's The 306 guest host Theresa Kliem. »

I am solicited by the media often. I know that their modus operandi is to ask for reactions very quickly, and it's up to the individual expert to determine whether or not they are sufficiently informed on the specifics. It does seem here that Smyth is nodding along/drawing from Nutrien's reasoning, rather than from his own analysis.

As for his expertise, a look at his publication history - basically, a pro GM crops outlook - suggests a rather dismissive view of the idea of political controls and regulation. A legitimate perspective, to be sure - not mine - but not one that would lead me to simply defer to his brief media point.

In short, my own perspective is that matters such as these are too serious to be treated mostly through self-serving industry arguments. Are there legitimate issues that require more time? Is this only red tape? What would these legitimate issues be? I'd rather have these questions considered beyond press releases.

The professor obviously does not study the situation in the US, but he obviously knows the situation in Canada. That is his area of study.  And as I said, I also happen to know something about the ports in BC. And the comments in the article that the BC does need to expand and is currently hard to expand is absolutely accurate.

I agree that this matter is serious. And downplaying the fact that Canada, and in particularly the West, needs dramatic increase in its infrastructure is not helping.