Umm, do USMB Republicans understand that the Keystone pipeline will only create 35 permanent jobs?

[Pogo]

This sounds far more like one of those "green" windfarm projects that are supposed to create hundreds of jobs but then only create 10. What's wrong deanie, it's OK if it's a windmill that slaughters birds but not if it's a pipeline? You must have stock in Buffets company which is why you don't want the competition.

This MOD makes a good point that it's similar to Wind Farms and a movement.

Sadly the fool is focused on "slaughter birds" and ignores that Oil Refineries can be built closer to Canada instead of making a pipeline through the entire nation. One leak and it will be our water sources that are slaughtered. I mean, ever since oil fracking was exposed for killing people they stopped pumping the water back into the soil causing people to have to import their water supply in some area's, including Texas.

Birds are cool. Humans are better.

Good luck getting a refinery built anywhere in the USA. Eco Nazi's will fight those tooth and nail.

Again --- link?

Again, this depends on the bottom line. Building refineries is a cost for a corporation, and given the volativity of the end product, a risky one. If one looks at the profit margins for Big Oil, it would seem they know what they're doing, given that objective. And while no new ones have been built since 1976 and the number of refineries has actually dwindled, it's disingenuous to suggest "one refinery" equals X amount of capacity and therefore we're at some kind of "limit":

>> While the number of operating refineries has fallen from 254 in 1982 to 137 in 2011, the operating capacity of today's 137 facilities is over 830,000 barrels per day more than it was in 1982. Basically, while we've watched 117 refineries close, capacity has risen. (The Energy Information Administration's earliest records date to 1982.)

Moreover, since 1985, when refinery capacity hit a low of 14.7 million barrels per day, we've seen over three million barrels of capacity added, or the equivalent to 23 average modern day facilities. A stark contrast to the misleading tidbit about having no new refineries built since the 1970s. So while we haven't seen new refineries open in new locations, we have virtually added the capacity of 23 of today's average size facilities—and that is nothing to scoff at. << (here)
​

So again, there's a reason "we" haven't built new refineries (assuming "we" means Big Oil) --- "we" (read: 'they') haven't needed to.

 

[BULLDOG]

This sounds far more like one of those "green" windfarm projects that are supposed to create hundreds of jobs but then only create 10. What's wrong deanie, it's OK if it's a windmill that slaughters birds but not if it's a pipeline? You must have stock in Buffets company which is why you don't want the competition.

This MOD makes a good point that it's similar to Wind Farms and a movement.

Sadly the fool is focused on "slaughter birds" and ignores that Oil Refineries can be built closer to Canada instead of making a pipeline through the entire nation. One leak and it will be our water sources that are slaughtered. I mean, ever since oil fracking was exposed for killing people they stopped pumping the water back into the soil causing people to have to import their water supply in some area's, including Texas.

Birds are cool. Humans are better.

Of course refineries could be built closer to Canada, or even in Canada, but that leaves out much of the profit to be had. First off, The land where the bitumen is being mined is owned largely by the Koch brothers, as well as other owners of Gulf Coast refineries. Next, since the first production stop will be in the refineries, they will be able to take advantage of "free trade zones" That's a little known perk for refineries where they can import feed stock directly into the refinery, and export it directly from the refinery to foreign nations, without paying any taxes. The law was set up so they could unload crude ships directly at the refinery, refine it, and ship it right back out without taxes be levied. The same people make money on the mining, refining, and pay no taxes all in one shot. They will make a fortune.

The same people make money on the mining, refining, and pay no taxes all in one shot.

Of course that's not true. They pay corporate taxes on their profits. Even if they pay no tariffs.

Definition of customs duty: A tax levied on imports (and, sometimes, on exports) by the customs authorities of a country.

Free trade zones eliminate customs duties. Customs duties are taxes. What part of that don't you get?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

This sounds far more like one of those "green" windfarm projects that are supposed to create hundreds of jobs but then only create 10. What's wrong deanie, it's OK if it's a windmill that slaughters birds but not if it's a pipeline? You must have stock in Buffets company which is why you don't want the competition.

This MOD makes a good point that it's similar to Wind Farms and a movement.

Sadly the fool is focused on "slaughter birds" and ignores that Oil Refineries can be built closer to Canada instead of making a pipeline through the entire nation. One leak and it will be our water sources that are slaughtered. I mean, ever since oil fracking was exposed for killing people they stopped pumping the water back into the soil causing people to have to import their water supply in some area's, including Texas.

Birds are cool. Humans are better.

Of course refineries could be built closer to Canada, or even in Canada, but that leaves out much of the profit to be had. First off, The land where the bitumen is being mined is owned largely by the Koch brothers, as well as other owners of Gulf Coast refineries. Next, since the first production stop will be in the refineries, they will be able to take advantage of "free trade zones" That's a little known perk for refineries where they can import feed stock directly into the refinery, and export it directly from the refinery to foreign nations, without paying any taxes. The law was set up so they could unload crude ships directly at the refinery, refine it, and ship it right back out without taxes be levied. The same people make money on the mining, refining, and pay no taxes all in one shot. They will make a fortune.

The same people make money on the mining, refining, and pay no taxes all in one shot.

Of course that's not true. They pay corporate taxes on their profits. Even if they pay no tariffs.

Definition of customs duty: A tax levied on imports (and, sometimes, on exports) by the customs authorities of a country.

Free trade zones eliminate customs duties. Customs duties are taxes. What part of that don't you get?

They pay corporate taxes on their profits. Even if they pay no tariffs.

Corporate taxes are taxes. What part of that don't you get?

 

[Pogo]

This sounds far more like one of those "green" windfarm projects that are supposed to create hundreds of jobs but then only create 10. What's wrong deanie, it's OK if it's a windmill that slaughters birds but not if it's a pipeline? You must have stock in Buffets company which is why you don't want the competition.

This MOD makes a good point that it's similar to Wind Farms and a movement.

Sadly the fool is focused on "slaughter birds" and ignores that Oil Refineries can be built closer to Canada instead of making a pipeline through the entire nation. One leak and it will be our water sources that are slaughtered. I mean, ever since oil fracking was exposed for killing people they stopped pumping the water back into the soil causing people to have to import their water supply in some area's, including Texas.

Birds are cool. Humans are better.

Of course refineries could be built closer to Canada, or even in Canada, but that leaves out much of the profit to be had. First off, The land where the bitumen is being mined is owned largely by the Koch brothers, as well as other owners of Gulf Coast refineries. Next, since the first production stop will be in the refineries, they will be able to take advantage of "free trade zones" That's a little known perk for refineries where they can import feed stock directly into the refinery, and export it directly from the refinery to foreign nations, without paying any taxes. The law was set up so they could unload crude ships directly at the refinery, refine it, and ship it right back out without taxes be levied. The same people make money on the mining, refining, and pay no taxes all in one shot. They will make a fortune.

The same people make money on the mining, refining, and pay no taxes all in one shot.

Of course that's not true. They pay corporate taxes on their profits. Even if they pay no tariffs.

Definition of customs duty: A tax levied on imports (and, sometimes, on exports) by the customs authorities of a country.

Free trade zones eliminate customs duties. Customs duties are taxes. What part of that don't you get?

They pay corporate taxes on their profits. Even if they pay no tariffs.

Corporate taxes are taxes. What part of that don't you get?

Looks to me like you can't touch his original point. Deflect much?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

This MOD makes a good point that it's similar to Wind Farms and a movement.

Sadly the fool is focused on "slaughter birds" and ignores that Oil Refineries can be built closer to Canada instead of making a pipeline through the entire nation. One leak and it will be our water sources that are slaughtered. I mean, ever since oil fracking was exposed for killing people they stopped pumping the water back into the soil causing people to have to import their water supply in some area's, including Texas.

Birds are cool. Humans are better.

Of course refineries could be built closer to Canada, or even in Canada, but that leaves out much of the profit to be had. First off, The land where the bitumen is being mined is owned largely by the Koch brothers, as well as other owners of Gulf Coast refineries. Next, since the first production stop will be in the refineries, they will be able to take advantage of "free trade zones" That's a little known perk for refineries where they can import feed stock directly into the refinery, and export it directly from the refinery to foreign nations, without paying any taxes. The law was set up so they could unload crude ships directly at the refinery, refine it, and ship it right back out without taxes be levied. The same people make money on the mining, refining, and pay no taxes all in one shot. They will make a fortune.

The same people make money on the mining, refining, and pay no taxes all in one shot.

Of course that's not true. They pay corporate taxes on their profits. Even if they pay no tariffs.

Definition of customs duty: A tax levied on imports (and, sometimes, on exports) by the customs authorities of a country.

Free trade zones eliminate customs duties. Customs duties are taxes. What part of that don't you get?

They pay corporate taxes on their profits. Even if they pay no tariffs.

Corporate taxes are taxes. What part of that don't you get?

Looks to me like you can't touch his original point. Deflect much?

The same people make money on the mining, refining, and pay no taxes all in one shot.

Can't touch his original error? LOL!
Even if they don't pay import taxes on the oil, they still pay taxes on their profit.
Confused much?

 

[Jackson]

Umm, do USMB Republicans understand that the Keystone pipeline will only create 35 permanent jobs?

Umm, do USMB Democrats understand that construction jobs are always by the nature of their jobs "temporary"?

When one job is done, they have to go to another, right?

 

[Pogo]

Of course refineries could be built closer to Canada, or even in Canada, but that leaves out much of the profit to be had. First off, The land where the bitumen is being mined is owned largely by the Koch brothers, as well as other owners of Gulf Coast refineries. Next, since the first production stop will be in the refineries, they will be able to take advantage of "free trade zones" That's a little known perk for refineries where they can import feed stock directly into the refinery, and export it directly from the refinery to foreign nations, without paying any taxes. The law was set up so they could unload crude ships directly at the refinery, refine it, and ship it right back out without taxes be levied. The same people make money on the mining, refining, and pay no taxes all in one shot. They will make a fortune.

The same people make money on the mining, refining, and pay no taxes all in one shot.

Of course that's not true. They pay corporate taxes on their profits. Even if they pay no tariffs.

Definition of customs duty: A tax levied on imports (and, sometimes, on exports) by the customs authorities of a country.

Free trade zones eliminate customs duties. Customs duties are taxes. What part of that don't you get?

They pay corporate taxes on their profits. Even if they pay no tariffs.

Corporate taxes are taxes. What part of that don't you get?

Looks to me like you can't touch his original point. Deflect much?

The same people make money on the mining, refining, and pay no taxes all in one shot.

Can't touch his original error? LOL!
Even if they don't pay import taxes on the oil, they still pay taxes on their profit.
Confused much?

Just say "yes". It's shorter.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The same people make money on the mining, refining, and pay no taxes all in one shot.

Of course that's not true. They pay corporate taxes on their profits. Even if they pay no tariffs.

Definition of customs duty: A tax levied on imports (and, sometimes, on exports) by the customs authorities of a country.

Free trade zones eliminate customs duties. Customs duties are taxes. What part of that don't you get?

They pay corporate taxes on their profits. Even if they pay no tariffs.

Corporate taxes are taxes. What part of that don't you get?

Looks to me like you can't touch his original point. Deflect much?

The same people make money on the mining, refining, and pay no taxes all in one shot.

Can't touch his original error? LOL!
Even if they don't pay import taxes on the oil, they still pay taxes on their profit.
Confused much?

Just say "yes". It's shorter.

Just say "yes". It's shorter.

Yes, you're confused.

 

[Pogo]

Definition of customs duty: A tax levied on imports (and, sometimes, on exports) by the customs authorities of a country.

Free trade zones eliminate customs duties. Customs duties are taxes. What part of that don't you get?

They pay corporate taxes on their profits. Even if they pay no tariffs.

Corporate taxes are taxes. What part of that don't you get?

Looks to me like you can't touch his original point. Deflect much?

The same people make money on the mining, refining, and pay no taxes all in one shot.

Can't touch his original error? LOL!
Even if they don't pay import taxes on the oil, they still pay taxes on their profit.
Confused much?

Just say "yes". It's shorter.

Just say "yes". It's shorter.

Yes, you're confused.

Hardly -- I know a deflection when I see it. The difference is, I can admit you deflected, and you can't.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I didn't deflect anything. Oil companies will still pay taxes.

 

[kaz]

CNN s Van Jones says Keystone pipeline only creates 35 permanent jobs PunditFact

So to do maintenance work and repairs, unload and process oil coming out of the pipeline, transport it to trucks, refineries or ships, deliver it to the refinery, refine it, transport the gas to where it's headed and sell it, do accounting, finance, inventory, maintain equipment, perform HR duties and manage the whole process, Smedly Van Jones added it all up and came up with 35 job. Not to mention the people who benefit from where the people who have the jobs spend their money. And you believe him.

Damn, every time I think you can't get any dumber you not only show me to be wrong but decisively so. Well done deanie.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Just say "yes". It's shorter.

Yeah, but if he says "I kicked the shit out of your ignorant ass" it is a lot more accurate.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

Why is the far left against jobs being created?

I like the idea of thousands or millions of jobs. 35 just aren't enough.

The Koch brothers stand to gain millions upon millions of dollars:


""""Based on data from the Alberta provincial energy department, corporations’ annual information forms, information from a mapping firm called GeoScout, data from a Calgary-based exploration services firm called Divestco Geomatics and interviews with industry analysts and executives, here is a list of individual companies’ net acreage lease holdings in oil sands:"""

●Cenovus Energy (Canada) 1.57 million* (includes rights to an air weapons range)

●Athabasca Oil Corp. (Canada) 1.56 million**

●Koch (U.S.) 1.12 million to 1.47 million***

●Canadian Natural Resources (Canada) 1 million*

●Suncor (Canada) 986,000****

Does Koch Industries hold most Canadian oil sands leases It s complicated. - The Washington Post

 

[Pogo]

CNN s Van Jones says Keystone pipeline only creates 35 permanent jobs PunditFact

So to do maintenance work and repairs, unload and process oil coming out of the pipeline, transport it to trucks, refineries or ships, deliver it to the refinery, refine it, transport the gas to where it's headed and sell it, do accounting, finance, inventory, maintain equipment, perform HR duties and manage the whole process, Smedly Van Jones added it all up and came up with 35 job. Not to mention the people who benefit from where the people who have the jobs spend their money. And you believe him.

Damn, every time I think you can't get any dumber you not only show me to be wrong but decisively so. Well done deanie.

Once again your inability to read gets you in deep doodoo. The U.S. State Department came up with the number 35 as part of the analysis it's required to do -- and that was quite some time ago. Van Jones didn't analyze squat -- he's just repeating the same number that's been well known public information. So your me-too attempt to poison the well is not only a failure, it's derivative. It's been shot down repeatedly right in this thread, but hey, nothing like running the same play over and over and expecting different results.

And all those jobs you're counting twice because they're already employed doing the same thing, no you can't count them twice. I'm not sure even Karl Rove would try to get away with that kind of math.

 

[kaz]

The Koch brothers stand to gain millions upon millions of dollars:

And Warren Buffett gains millions by not building it due to his investment in railroads transporting oil, but that doesn't bother you apparently, you only want people you hate to not make money.

So speaking of money, are you thinking it's great for the six families a year who will get millions in insurance money and all they have to do is leave widows and fatherless children to get it? Just thinking of their college funds, are you?

http://www.newsweek.com/keystone-pipeline-would-save-6-lives-year-report-says-227950

 

[kaz]

Once again your inability to read gets you in deep doodoo. The U.S. State Department came up with the number 35 as part of the analysis it's required to do -- and that was quite some time ago

You crack me up. The article didn't say that. It said that was his claim based on his analysis of the State department report. The State Department report didn't include all the things I listed, it only included the team that directly oversees the pipeline. It's like measuring the size of a church based on the number of people who work in the church office.

 

[Pogo]

Once again your inability to read gets you in deep doodoo. The U.S. State Department came up with the number 35 as part of the analysis it's required to do -- and that was quite some time ago

You crack me up. The article didn't say that. It said that was his claim based on his analysis of the State department report.

That's what I just said. I've done the same thing in the past, quoting the same number from the same source. That doesn't make it "my idea".

"35" is an absolute number. It doesn't need "analysis" -- it means "thirty-five", not "twenty -eight" or "forty seven thousand" or any other number.

The State Department report didn't include all the things I listed, it only included the team that directly oversees the pipeline. It's like measuring the size of a church based on the number of people who work in the church office.

That's because they're not relevant to the pipeline. You listed a bunch of people in refining and transporting the end product -- people who are already employed right now doing just that. They don't suddenly get defined as "new jobs" just because a raw material source changes.

 

[kaz]

Once again your inability to read gets you in deep doodoo. The U.S. State Department came up with the number 35 as part of the analysis it's required to do -- and that was quite some time ago

You crack me up. The article didn't say that. It said that was his claim based on his analysis of the State department report.

That's what I just said. I've done the same thing in the past, quoting the same number from the same source. That doesn't make it "my idea".

"35" is an absolute number. It doesn't need "analysis" -- it means "thirty-five", not "twenty -eight" or "forty seven thousand" or any other number.

The State Department report didn't include all the things I listed, it only included the team that directly oversees the pipeline. It's like measuring the size of a church based on the number of people who work in the church office.

That's because they're not relevant to the pipeline. You listed a bunch of people in refining and transporting the end product -- people who are already employed right now doing just that. They don't suddenly get defined as "new jobs" just because a raw material source changes.

So you don't grasp that if there is more oil, more people need to work to process it. Why doesn't that surprise me?

 

[Pogo]

Once again your inability to read gets you in deep doodoo. The U.S. State Department came up with the number 35 as part of the analysis it's required to do -- and that was quite some time ago

You crack me up. The article didn't say that. It said that was his claim based on his analysis of the State department report.

That's what I just said. I've done the same thing in the past, quoting the same number from the same source. That doesn't make it "my idea".

"35" is an absolute number. It doesn't need "analysis" -- it means "thirty-five", not "twenty -eight" or "forty seven thousand" or any other number.

The State Department report didn't include all the things I listed, it only included the team that directly oversees the pipeline. It's like measuring the size of a church based on the number of people who work in the church office.

That's because they're not relevant to the pipeline. You listed a bunch of people in refining and transporting the end product -- people who are already employed right now doing just that. They don't suddenly get defined as "new jobs" just because a raw material source changes.

So you don't grasp that if there is more oil, more people need to work to process it. Why doesn't that surprise me?

That processing (refining) already operates at max capacity. A fact noted over and over here in this thread as well as others. There is no work "added". All there is is overhead subtracted -- for the oil company. You can't put more water into a full glass.

 

[Star]

Construction jobs are by definition temporary.

Any idiot knows that but you people are idiots of a particular kind aren't you?

So maybe we should just put the kibosh on ALL construction jobs because none of them are permanent.

Unfuckingbelievable.

What's "Unfuckingbelievable" is how the rightwinger/Republicans tried/trying to pull the wool over the American peoples eyes by touting KXL as an American jobs bill. Not even a half year ago the cowardly Speaker of the House said KXL would create 100,000 jobs, while TransCanada was claiming 20,000 jobs (at least TransCanada didn't say "American" jobs).

But now-----now on this thread, rightwing/Republican's are admitting that enabling the world to burn what many are calling the dirtiest oil in the world is not much of a jobs bill, nor is it an American energy independence bill - in fact, KXL does little, very little, for America except put our land and water at risk of contamination but-----but kochsuckers support it anyway - wtfiwwy?


John Boehner says Keystone XL pipeline would create 100,000 jobs
By Steve Contorno
June 26th, 2014

<snip>

Our ruling
Boehner said Obama’s "delay in approving Keystone is costing Americans more than 100,000 jobs." He was citing a study that experts said was "flawed" and the company in charge of the project, TransCanada, said was "no longer relevant." The State Department estimated a much lower amount, and TransCanada cited that study to PolitiFact.

We rate Boehner’s statement False.

"The nearly six-year delay in approving Keystone is costing Americans more than 100,000 jobs."
— John Boehner on Wednesday, June 25th, 2014 in an op-ed for "USA Today"

.​