Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-18-2017, 06:36 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by YourWakeUpCall View Post
Your post perfectly encapsulates why I don't want extremists (from either the left or the right) controlling the government. Extremists tend to cite sensational incidents, no matter how statistically insignificant, as proof that their position is the correct one and anyone who disagrees is stupid. In this case, the anti-pipeline crowd has failed to consider the massive amounts of energy used by trains/trucks relative to a pipeline, not to mention the pollution emitted by this army of trucks and trains or the energy required to maintain the infrastructure they use (roads, train tracks, etc.). Nothing is ever as simple as extremists make things out to be.
There is nothing extreme in the belief that it is wrong for the government to take your land to give to a private company, especially when you have nothing to gain by it.

Does it take more energy to go by road or rail? It does. Too bad.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-18-2017, 08:30 AM
 
9,508 posts, read 4,342,349 times
Reputation: 10564
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
There is nothing extreme in the belief that it is wrong for the government to take your land to give to a private company, especially when you have nothing to gain by it.

Does it take more energy to go by road or rail? It does. Too bad.
LOL. You just proved my point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2017, 10:19 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by YourWakeUpCall View Post
LOL. You just proved my point.
You may think so. The extreme position is the one that believes that the government should be able to take land from me to give to someone else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2017, 10:23 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,108,083 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCALMike View Post
Because safety measures that reduce the risk to a negligible risk are EXPENSIVE!
But the fines and the loss of 210K gallons is not...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2017, 10:24 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,108,083 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheyenne2134 View Post
But something needs to be done, these oil spills are common enough. We are killing ecosystems around the world, the damage we do to the environment is irreversible.
Shut your computers off and start walking everywhere..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2017, 11:01 AM
 
22,923 posts, read 15,489,598 times
Reputation: 16962
Quote:
Originally Posted by Casper in Dallas View Post
Except that the product being carried by Keystone is not available for the US market, it is all destined to be shipped to other Nations for sale so that a Canadian company. So explain again why we ever even needed the pipeline. Maybe the Canadians need to build their own refineries.
WRONG!

The U.S. is still a net crude IMPORTER .......understand.....the U.S. and it's companies are buying it for resale after processing FOR PROFIT! It's those U.S refiners making it unavailable to U.S. markets simply because your market is already saturated with your own crude.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier.../#3dc31106264c

The Canadian crude gets bought by those seeking to make a profit, with the two biggest players being Valero and Exxon who refurbished old Gulf coast and some mid-west refineries to process it for resale overseas. It also gets bought at a preferred rate due to NAFTA (that agreement Americans claim is so unfair to them) guaranteeing first dibs to all the Can. crude American companies want at that preferred rate. The crude is paid for before it goes into the pipe.

The Canadian Co. ..Transcanada is paid a fee per barrel to transport it in the same way Warren Buffet does using his trains.

It's not Canadian companies driving this demand for pipelines or trains, it's US REFINERS who can buy it cheaper, refine it and sell it wherever for profit.......... Get it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2017, 12:15 AM
 
Location: E ND & NW MN
4,818 posts, read 11,003,333 times
Reputation: 3633
Quote:
Originally Posted by GotHereQuickAsICould View Post
What difference does that make?
It was in response to the state of SD voting for Trump in the latest election and they reap what they sow. I thought the person making the comment was confusing the Keystone XL pipeline with the Keystone pipeline.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2017, 01:22 AM
 
4,668 posts, read 3,899,635 times
Reputation: 3437
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
You may think so. The extreme position is the one that believes that the government should be able to take land from me to give to someone else.
Rail, pipe, highways, power lines. Doesn’t matter, the government has to take the land for infrastructure. Anyone who opposes those things should reconsider their positions.

Pipelines are the most effective and clean way to move petroleum and natural gas. We need to build and maintain them and we need government oversight to make sure it’s handled with care and they don’t harm other property or the environment.

Only the extreme left and right make this a controversial issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2017, 01:25 AM
 
Location: Sector 001
15,946 posts, read 12,287,130 times
Reputation: 16109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamsack View Post
It was in response to the state of SD voting for Trump in the latest election and they reap what they sow. I thought the person making the comment was confusing the Keystone XL pipeline with the Keystone pipeline.
These comments are so silly. We need these pipelines because we need oil and natural gas. How are we supposed to get the jet fuel that lefties depend on to jet all over the world to the major airports? Railcar or truck? Waste of energy.

The alternative is to stop flying all over the world, stop driving, stop using boats, stop needing to set your home at exactly 75 degrees year-round, and all the little things that spoiled people do in life meanwhile they are the same people complaining about how we need to help the environment.

If I didn't see that most people are hypocrites that preach something they don't practice themselves I might care about some of these comments suggesting we dismantle all the pipelines, but fact is I see too many people like I mentioned above.. they talk the good talk, but waste tons of energy in their own personal lives. Then they install a low flow toilet and think they are some sort of environmental activist.

I keep my home at 60 degrees most of the winter, drive a Toyota Camry, rarely fly, and just ordered my Toto Drake Eco, and I voted for Trump. What did you to do save energy?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2017, 04:13 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattks View Post
Rail, pipe, highways, power lines. Doesn’t matter, the government has to take the land for infrastructure. Anyone who opposes those things should reconsider their positions.
It is not all the same. Yes, they will take land to build interstates. That is not what I said. Rarely do people want to discuss what I actually say.

Quote:
Pipelines are the most effective and clean way to move petroleum and natural gas. We need to build and maintain them and we need government oversight to make sure it’s handled with care and they don’t harm other property or the environment.

Only the extreme left and right make this a controversial issue.
What else can a private business take your land for? If anyone that wants it can throw around enough money, what is the point of privately owned property?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:09 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top