Climate change facts for Greta

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by EZM

Oil companies themselves have reported that profits and equity value has been eroded due to new environmental regulation imposed and have, in fact, led to an erosion of profits and share value.

The basic premise and understanding of how finance/business works ........ your profits are a measure, in the most simplified sense, of your sell price (revenues) minus costs (expenses).

The oil company's revenues are set my the market price for oil. Oil companies simply don't get to "charge more" for their oil to "pass along" their costs if the market (oil prices) don't allow for that ...... business and economics does work that way.

Added environmental regulations, like increased cost of water, reclamation, etc... are costs and expenses for the oil company as a part of continued operations.

So, with those three elements explained ........ I will state it again ...

The oil company are losing money, and stand to loose more money and erode profits further through environmental regulation. Big Money. The oil companies themselves have reported this.

Let's not deflect this to another topic, have this lead to insults, and have you try and make your words true and credible when they simply are not.

BTW - We are not discussing "renewables", oil/gas are non renewable resources - I have no idea what that pertains to, or how this is related to this discussion - and, honestly, I don't care to feed any further deflections to try and rescue yourself on what you said.

Low commodity prices and government regulatory road blocks is killing oil companies.

Costs and savings due to global warming fears gets passed onto consumers. Oil companies in general have very low rates of return for shareholders. Right now commodity prices are key.

When temps cool or get reported fairly and prices rebound...so will stock prices.

Great warms ONLY renewable power. Wind, solar etc. That is totally unrealistic with the population and energy consumption needed to power key things like food production, health care, transportation etc.

[Pathfinder76]

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/mobile.r.../idUSKCN1LL1CX

[gman1978]

Again, this has nothing to do with climate change and everything to do with lining pockets full of money. Fool a gullible population into thinking the world is going to end sit back and watch the crazy’s do all the work for you. No politician wants to speak out against it because it’s suicide at the polls. Somebody is laughing all the way to the bank and it’s not the over taxed citizens. This is way bigger than poor Greta she’s just an abused child that’s expendable, she will be fed to the dogs when her expiry date is up and there will be someone else to take her place.

[EZM]

Originally Posted by HyperMOA

I, like you, can’t find specific numbers because there likely isn’t published numbers but I believe that anti oil industry money outweighs lobbying by 10:1+. Neither of us can prove this but I have at least a bit of reasoning to support my thoughts. (That doesn’t mean it’s true) So how can Canadian oil companies lobby? Political donations which are a pittance. Realistically that is a drop in the bucket no truly successful lobbying comes from it.
.

Let me restate this a little more clearly. I was referring to sector data specific to Canadian oil/energy lobbyists versus Environmental lobbyists, because, primarily there is a strict distinction on the rules of how/who you can "pay off" here in Canada versus the US. We really don't have "lobbyists" i the same way as we have in the US and "contributions" are strictly regulated here.

To your point, you are guessing that's it a 10/1 ratio in favor of environmental lobbyists? I have to strongly disagree, I think it closer to what we are seeing in the US.

Oil and Gas in the US disclosed $2 Billion in 2017, in direct lobbying donations to campaigns and politicians and DOES NOT include the billions of other dollars they put into leisure centers for local politicians, funding of local school programs, parks and other ways where those donations are reclassified under a different financial disclosure category.

These ratios will be similar here in Canada is my premise for argument.

There are less direct contributions but more "community contributions and donations" when working in consort with their local MLA/MP who promises to raise money for a new leisure center having already cooked a deal with the big bad wolf in the background. Don't ask me how I can make this egregious statement, as an absolute statement of fact, but I will tell you this goes down a lot, and there is big money here. Drive by your locally funded facilities and look who is sponsoring them ....... I rest my case.

And, with relation to that, I highly doubt the hippies are lobbying or donating hundreds of millions, let alone multi billions of dollars ....... sorry ...... they just don't have the money to do that considering regulated industries (of which energy is a huge part of) represents more than 2/3 of the GDP in Canada and the US.

I just don't think it's physically possible for you to be right. No offence, the math just doesn't work and I don't see ANY examples of expenditures this large coming from hippies and going anywhere, but I can take a drive and see a library, leisure center, park and medical center with some regulated industry's name, along with the politician who cut the red ribbon on it, on the plaque on the front of it.

Either way - no point in splitting that hair anyways.

[6.5 shooter]

Y2K
Global cooling
Global warming
The ozone
Nuclear bad
Russians bad
China bad
Cuba bad
Oil bad
Gas shortage
Brown outs
Black outs
Food shortage
Iron shortage
Now the glaciers are melting so water shortage.

The list goes on
Green is Greed !

[HyperMOA]

Originally Posted by EZM

Let me restate this a little more clearly. I was referring to sector data specific to Canadian oil/energy lobbyists versus Environmental lobbyists, because, primarily there is a strict distinction on the rules of how/who you can "pay off" here in Canada versus the US. We really don't have "lobbyists" i the same way as we have in the US and "contributions" are strictly regulated here.

To your point, you are guessing that's it a 10/1 ratio in favor of environmental lobbyists? I have to strongly disagree, I think it closer to what we are seeing in the US.

Oil and Gas in the US disclosed $2 Billion in 2017, in direct lobbying donations to campaigns and politicians and DOES NOT include the billions of other dollars they put into leisure centers for local politicians, funding of local school programs, parks and other ways where those donations are reclassified under a different financial disclosure category.

These ratios will be similar here in Canada is my premise for argument.

There are less direct contributions but more "community contributions and donations" when working in consort with their local MLA/MP who promises to raise money for a new leisure center having already cooked a deal with the big bad wolf in the background. Don't ask me how I can make this egregious statement, as an absolute statement of fact, but I will tell you this goes down a lot, and there is big money here. Drive by your locally funded facilities and look who is sponsoring them ....... I rest my case.

And, with relation to that, I highly doubt the hippies are lobbying or donating hundreds of millions, let alone multi billions of dollars ....... sorry ...... they just don't have the money to do that considering regulated industries (of which energy is a huge part of) represents more than 2/3 of the GDP in Canada and the US.

I just don't think it's physically possible for you to be right. No offence, the math just doesn't work and I don't see ANY examples of expenditures this large coming from hippies and going anywhere, but I can take a drive and see a library, leisure center, park and medical center with some regulated industry's name, along with the politician who cut the red ribbon on it, on the plaque on the front of it.

Either way - no point in splitting that hair anyways.

Yeah I never thought of the community projects. You are right it’s about the only way that Canadian companies can “lobby”. I neglected to think of it honestly. With this I will concede that the money definitely isn’t the 10:1 as I stated. I bet it’s a lot closer to even than you think though. How many hundred millions is tides alone responsible for in Canada?

I will say this though, a firehall in Conklin, a park in Fort McKay, a community center in Red Deer are all helping to build our communities not tear them apart. What do these other activists do to ensure our communities are successful and growing? I’ll gladly hold our energy companies ransom for a few community halls instead of lining the pockets of crooked US congressmen. However, I think we both likely agree on this point.

[EZM]

Originally Posted by HyperMOA

Yeah I never thought of the community projects. You are right it’s about the only way that Canadian companies can “lobby”. I neglected to think of it honestly. With this I will concede that the money definitely isn’t the 10:1 as I stated. I bet it’s a lot closer to even than you think though. How many hundred millions is tides alone responsible for in Canada?

I will say this though, a firehall in Conklin, a park in Fort McKay, a community center in Red Deer are all helping to build our communities not tear them apart. What do these other activists do to ensure our communities are successful and growing? I’ll gladly hold our energy companies ransom for a few community halls instead of lining the pockets of crooked US congressmen. However, I think we both likely agree on this point.

Yes we do. I think if a sponsor like an industry/company can give to the community (even of it is through he hand of a politician) then it's far better than making a "campaign contribution" to a crooked politician like in the US we are better off.

Problem is, often times it can lead to awarded contacts, legislation favoring these companies and industry, etc.. that can be problematic - it's not perfect - but it's at least more transparent.

The anti's and environmentalist seem to have taken a very hard line, which does not allow for the reasonable and measured changes we all want. We all want to make the environment cleaner for the future, but we also need to keep families employed, clothed and fed.

The path forward is to recognize we can and should take steps to limit our impact on the earth, the second step is to take action that allows for a transition where we are not disrupting the economic benefits of that industry, the third step is to implement and legislate these changes that have been ratified by industry and the government that appeases the consensus.

Reaching the consensus with extreme views on both sides of this issue is the biggest challenge.

[HyperMOA]

Originally Posted by EZM

The path forward is to recognize we can and should take steps to limit our impact on the earth, the second step is to take action that allows for a transition where we are not disrupting the economic benefits of that industry, the third step is to implement and legislate these changes that have been ratified by industry and the government that appeases the consensus.

I think that this is exactly what is happening in Canada. If the rest of the world had the same standards as our O&G sector the world would be vastly better off; nevermind other industries like mining. (globally I mean, not Canadian) Well I believe it was happening this way about 5 years ago anyways.

[goldscud]

A different point of view from the first video link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XIp...ature=youtu.be

Always useful to dig into information

[EZM]

Originally Posted by goldscud

A different point of view from the first video link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XIp...ature=youtu.be

Always useful to dig into information

I watched the video. The amazing part to me is there's a bunch of people who totally missed the point and left comments opposite to the position the author/speaker of this video is making. His comments are clearly cynical and perhaps, his points are too subtle for the typical audience with a short attention span and no scientific background.

His point was that many people who have made money (perhaps on both sides of the equation) look at correlative data, try dispelling well ratified and peer reviewed studies, or borrow presentations from others have no clue what they are talking about.

Unfortunately, his main point seems to have been missed by most people who left comments.

This guy is not a denier. He's a cynic.

[goldscud]

Indeed EZM. Most folks commenting missed the point.
This guy has lots of videos discussing the science.
Look up Potholer54 on Youtube

[EZM]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

Low commodity prices and government regulatory road blocks is killing oil companies.

Costs and savings due to global warming fears gets passed onto consumers. Oil companies in general have very low rates of return for shareholders. Right now commodity prices are key.

I agree low commodity prices are the main reason oil/energy company profits and values are down. To a lesser extent, yes, the governments increased regulatory legislation, that do increase costs to these companies, increase costs and contribution to costs on that company's balance sheet that further drive down profits.

Where we vehemently disagree is your second statement.

"Passing along costs to consumers" from a company that derives it's revenues from a commodity is an impossibility. It's the most basic premise economics, and an elementary concept.

"Passing along costs" infers that a company is able to raise the price of the product to recover these costs ........... an impossibility when your product sell price (value) is set by the market.

And, as a result, any and all added incremental costs (such as adding costs to meet new legislated regulations) simply shrink that profit.

This cannot be disputed. It's fact.

So, this is precisely why I continue to say that oil/gas/energy companies have a major motivation to limit legislation and regulations that erode profits.

They have a SIGNIFICANT amount of money (profits) on the line and they are IN FACT the largest contributor to funding lobby groups which will/can effect legislators and influencers. I'm saying they have way more to loose and/or gain here and spend way more money to push their mandate.

I hear/see many internet rags, videos, or special interest speakers compare this to the amount of the money contributed or made by the environmental groups - and I shake my head as they lie to us - this position is either ignorant or belligerent. There massive money on the line and these guys will line up in droves to lie to us - so we need to discuss these things critically among ourselves and make up our own minds.

Basically that was my main point.

You also know me well enough to know I'm not a liberal, environmentalist (in the sense of being opposed to industry), nor do i have any self serving position on this.

I just can't accept poor information as a basis for us to make intelligent arguments either.

[Flatlandliver]

Proof of global warming

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by EZM

I agree low commodity prices are the main reason oil/energy company profits and values are down. To a lesser extent, yes, the governments increased regulatory legislation, that do increase costs to these companies, increase costs and contribution to costs on that company's balance sheet that further drive down profits.

Where we vehemently disagree is your second statement.

"Passing along costs to consumers" from a company that derives it's revenues from a commodity is an impossibility. It's the most basic premise economics, and an elementary concept.

"Passing along costs" infers that a company is able to raise the price of the product to recover these costs ........... an impossibility when your product sell price (value) is set by the market.

And, as a result, any and all added incremental costs (such as adding costs to meet new legislated regulations) simply shrink that profit.

This cannot be disputed. It's fact.

So, this is precisely why I continue to say that oil/gas/energy companies have a major motivation to limit legislation and regulations that erode profits.

They have a SIGNIFICANT amount of money (profits) on the line and they are IN FACT the largest contributor to funding lobby groups which will/can effect legislators and influencers. I'm saying they have way more to loose and/or gain here and spend way more money to push their mandate.

I hear/see many internet rags, videos, or special interest speakers compare this to the amount of the money contributed or made by the environmental groups - and I shake my head as they lie to us - this position is either ignorant or belligerent. There massive money on the line and these guys will line up in droves to lie to us - so we need to discuss these things critically among ourselves and make up our own minds.

Basically that was my main point.

You also know me well enough to know I'm not a liberal, environmentalist (in the sense of being opposed to industry), nor do i have any self serving position on this.

I just can't accept poor information as a basis for us to make intelligent arguments either.

The pressure valve is to stop producing.

If a company can’t raise the price of gasoline and incurs a loss it will go out of business.

In the case of gasoline a company can and does charge what it feels. Yes...the gasoline wholesale price is fixed...but the retail price is not.

Then he higher price of gasoline on trucking causes them to pass additional costs onto their customers.

Just like airlines tack on a jet fuel surtax.

If and only if a company makes a hefty rate of return may they have room to swallow additional costs.

But any argument that additional costs of global warming and/or regulatory roadblocks will be absorbed by oil companies is not accurate. Such companies have a very small profit margin...especially compared to say McDonalds.

One can’t look at size of profits without balancing the company size. Large profits does not mean they can afford added costs. With small profit margins in oil and gas a company will just stop producing rather than incur a loss.

[lmtada]

Iceland (Island), had big dump 30’ snow last week Northern Iceland 🇮🇸. Approx 350km from Reykjavík.

https://icelandmonitor.mbl.is/news/n...v7ZUEgh3muXLUk

[EZM]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

The pressure valve is to stop producing.

If a company can’t raise the price of gasoline and incurs a loss it will go out of business.

In the case of gasoline a company can and does charge what it feels. Yes...the gasoline wholesale price is fixed...but the retail price is not.

Then he higher price of gasoline on trucking causes them to pass additional costs onto their customers.

Just like airlines tack on a jet fuel surtax.

If and only if a company makes a hefty rate of return may they have room to swallow additional costs.

But any argument that additional costs of global warming and/or regulatory roadblocks will be absorbed by oil companies is not accurate. Such companies have a very small profit margin...especially compared to say McDonalds.

One can’t look at size of profits without balancing the company size. Large profits does not mean they can afford added costs. With small profit margins in oil and gas a company will just stop producing rather than incur a loss.

Agree that gasoline retailers (the guys that run the stores and the fuel pumps) have to operate at cost plus to survive. These are retailers.

There is a distinction between retailers and industry (producers).

With very few exceptions (Walmart, amazon, etc..) retailers don't lobby the government. And when they do it's not related to environmental regulation, it's for the purposes of exclusion and/or tariff rates on imported goods - so largely irrelevant to our discussion.

What we are talking about is industry (producers) which are the ones lobbying the government and dumping massive amounts into lobbing, influencing and buying off politicians and influencers to suit their agenda - which is denial and less restrictive, new, or any regulation that costs them money and erodes their margins.

Big industry (Pharma, Chemical, Oil/Gas, Mining, Energy), pumps in far more money than any other "special interest" group hands down, in fact, they represented, on average, over 90% of the donations under disclosure for the past 10 years.

There isn't even a category for "the special interest groups" related to what I will describe as the environmentalists, hippies, fear mongers, etc... - it doesn't even show up as a single digit %. It's a spec of dust in comparison to the dump trucks of money big industry spends on lobbying environmental regulators, legislators and politicians.

So when I hear about all this "massive dollar conspiracy" by environmental groups dumping money into their cause .......... it simply is not true. It's a repeat of some hoax rag newspaper, or loud mouth conspiracy theorist radio host, who's probably funded or paid off by big industry, to deflect and lie to us.

We, as consumers of lies end up believing them. We as tools end up passing along these lies as truth, while they pad their pockets and laugh at us having created us and used us their tools.

I won't be a tool - at least not in this scenario

That was my point.

I am also pretty much done making this argument, or trying to prove anything to anyone. If people want to believe the world is flat, then I can't help them any longer, their minds are made up and no facts and evidence can convince them otherwise. They will keep watching Fox, CNN, reading the Rebel, Earth First, or Breitbart and consuming these rags. That's cool, they can fill their boots.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by EZM

Agree that gasoline retailers (the guys that run the stores and the fuel pumps) have to operate at cost plus to survive. These are retailers.

There is a distinction between retailers and industry (producers).

With very few exceptions (Walmart, amazon, etc..) retailers don't lobby the government. And when they do it's not related to environmental regulation, it's for the purposes of exclusion and/or tariff rates on imported goods - so largely irrelevant to our discussion.

What we are talking about is industry (producers) which are the ones lobbying the government and dumping massive amounts into lobbing, influencing and buying off politicians and influencers to suit their agenda - which is denial and less restrictive, new, or any regulation that costs them money and erodes their margins.

Big industry (Pharma, Chemical, Oil/Gas, Mining, Energy), pumps in far more money than any other "special interest" group hands down, in fact, they represented, on average, over 90% of the donations under disclosure for the past 10 years.

There isn't even a category for "the special interest groups" related to what I will describe as the environmentalists, hippies, fear mongers, etc... - it doesn't even show up as a single digit %. It's a spec of dust in comparison to the dump trucks of money big industry spends on lobbying environmental regulators, legislators and politicians.

So when I hear about all this "massive dollar conspiracy" by environmental groups dumping money into their cause .......... it simply is not true. It's a repeat of some hoax rag newspaper, or loud mouth conspiracy theorist radio host, who's probably funded or paid off by big industry, to deflect and lie to us.

We, as consumers of lies end up believing them. We as tools end up passing along these lies as truth, while they pad their pockets and laugh at us having created us and used us their tools.

I won't be a tool - at least not in this scenario

That was my point.

I am also pretty much done making this argument, or trying to prove anything to anyone. If people want to believe the world is flat, then I can't help them any longer, their minds are made up and no facts and evidence can convince them otherwise. They will keep watching Fox, CNN, reading the Rebel, Earth First, or Breitbart and consuming these rags. That's cool, they can fill their boots.

We agree to disagree.

Oil companies aren’t spending money on lobbying nor education on the facts to the degree you state.

There are billions of dollars in global warming such as carbon credits, lobbyists, and massive amounts for targeted “research” with the prime requirement is it will be against oil and gas.

There is millions being sent to sway political opinion in the guise of environmental charity.

It tends to be a social mantra that companies are evil and unions are saints. Some people on both sides are bad and most are good. Live in the negative and might as well live in a conspiracy world.

I will state again. When regs and costs creep up producing companies option is to stop drilling and stop producing.

That is why we are losing 100,000 jobs in Alberta.

[gunnar]

While I agree the youth always blame the parents they need to take accountability for their part. The debt is rising exponentially and a good portion has occurred in the last decade. This is where the youth have helped elect socialist governments that have blown the debt out of proportion. Look at Europe, and the damage that Trudeauand Notley have done in less than a decade.
They can blame their parents for all the manufacturing jobs moving off shore, but they are guilty and have the same values as their parents...and that is they know the price of everything and the value of nothing. Everyone wants the lowest price, but the,y never look at the true cost.
I think they are being brainwashed in our schools and then just like the so called scientists who support climate change don’t want to admit their wrong when presented with the facts.

[EZM]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

We agree to disagree.

Oil companies aren’t spending money on lobbying nor education on the facts to the degree you state.

.

Really?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmc.../#1dd1ef3e7c4f

Come on Sundance ..... you are spinning in circles.

You don't think oil/gas companies lobby to the tune of millions and millions of dollars to influence legislators despite the fact the companies themselves, the government and even legislators themselves disclose this openly?

You do realize this is the law in the US - that every single donation of greater that $2800 singly, or on aggregate, constitutes disclosure (meaning they have to report from who it came from). This becomes public record and is a law.

Seems to me the only one having any doubt about this is ........ you.

This is public record and there is simply no reason to even enter a debate.

Keep in mind we are on the same team here - so let's give it a rest.

Either way .... Merry Christmas and hope you are feeling better ....

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by EZM

Really?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmc.../#1dd1ef3e7c4f

Come on Sundance ..... you are spinning in circles.

You don't think oil/gas companies lobby to the tune of millions and millions of dollars to influence legislators despite the fact the companies themselves, the government and even legislators themselves disclose this openly?

You do realize this is the law in the US - that every single donation of greater that $2800 singly, or on aggregate, constitutes disclosure (meaning they have to report from who it came from). This becomes public record and is a law.

Seems to me the only one having any doubt about this is ........ you.

This is public record and there is simply no reason to even enter a debate.

Keep in mind we are on the same team here - so let's give it a rest.

Either way .... Merry Christmas and hope you are feeling better ....

You’re trying to make it out to something gargantuan and evil.

Pull actual factual number coming from oil companies versus coming from those with vested interests in global warming businesses.

There is a distinct shortfall in Canada and the US on peoviding oil and gas facts to the populace.

Think about the new professional accountant ads saying they are now leading edge.

In oil and gas terms...all public lobbying has been publicly negative.

Given fossil fuel oil saved the earths whale population and made energy affordable for the masses and in turn making massive strides in healthcare...and so much more...the facts should get out there.



https://images.app.goo.gl/xCXGKKxQtsrGkSLr7

[Sundancefisher]

[Sundancefisher]

[EZM]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

You’re trying to make it out to something gargantuan and evil.

Pull actual factual number coming from oil companies versus coming from those with vested interests in global warming businesses.

Oh ....... you mean like from public record (2017? maybe) .... in descending order ........

1) Pharmaceuticals/Health Products: $3,937,356,877
2) Insurance: $2,704,636,807
3) Electric Utilities: $2,353,570,360
4) Electronics Manufacturing and Equipment: $2,230,043,875
5) Business Associations: $2,217,425,929
6) Oil & Gas: $2,096,923,653
7) Education: $1,633,122,450
8) Hospitals/ Nursing Homes: $1,604,696,566

.......

67) Environmental Lobby Groups $2,060,380

Oil and Gas Spent OVER 1000 TIMES the money compared to what the "environmental group did" according to the government, the legislators and the contributors themselves.

Give it a rest - This is public record.

I am done arguing that fact isn't fact .... It's like beating my own head against a wall here .......

I'm done with this .......

[waldedw]

image001.jpg

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by EZM

Oh ....... you mean like from public record (2017? maybe) .... in descending order ........

1) Pharmaceuticals/Health Products: $3,937,356,877
2) Insurance: $2,704,636,807
3) Electric Utilities: $2,353,570,360
4) Electronics Manufacturing and Equipment: $2,230,043,875
5) Business Associations: $2,217,425,929
6) Oil & Gas: $2,096,923,653
7) Education: $1,633,122,450
8) Hospitals/ Nursing Homes: $1,604,696,566

.......

67) Environmental Lobby Groups $2,060,380

Oil and Gas Spent OVER 1000 TIMES the money compared to what the "environmental group did" according to the government, the legislators and the contributors themselves.

Give it a rest - This is public record.

I am done arguing that fact isn't fact .... It's like beating my own head against a wall here .......

I'm done with this .......

Link
?

So now...

Spend by a few company in the millions...

You believe in following the money?

Please don’t ignore this then.

Without looking on global warming spend from 2008 to 2019...a quick look found that from 2003-2008...

$106.7 BILLION WAS SPENT!!!!

So...what pocket of cash has the bigger influence on political decisions.


And a link.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybe.../#79f6ca7e7ebb

Remember...in this “scientific” endeavour, there is no money allowed for any research suggesting to disprove any studies promoting global warming nor money spent to prove CO2 is not a factor.

This is not science. It is business pure and simple.

An oil company spending a million to say oil is needed is not heard in the crowd clamouring for a share of billions.

Don’t kid yourself. Global warming is big business at its finest.

Lobby groups attacking any scientists not following the global warming religious mantra.

And still...studies continue to be mostly what if studies and computer models. Non lend themselves to scientific testing.

It all comes down to...if it is happening and we do nothing...what about the kids...the grand kids...think about the kids...

So only time will judge did we waste hundreds of billions for no reason while ignoring clean water, poverty, disease and hunger.

[flyrodfisher]

EZM
Your quoted facts are simply misleading…..

From the website that you obviously pulled these numbers from...it states that
the US lobbying numbers are for a total over a 20 year period...1998 to 2018.


Are you now telling us to believe that the environmental lobby groups have only spent $100,000 per year in that period....if so, I have a bridge to sell you..

Be careful about blindly quoting numbers pulled from the internet...

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by flyrodfisher

EZM
Your quoted facts are simply misleading…..

From the website that you obviously pulled these numbers from...it states that
the US lobbying numbers are for a total over a 20 year period...1998 to 2018.


Are you now telling us to believe that the environmental lobby groups have only spent $100,000 per year in that period....if so, I have a bridge to sell you..

Be careful about blindly quoting numbers pulled from the internet...

Hense I asked for link...provided a link with numbers.

Facts suck when promoting global warming.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by EZM

Oh ....... you mean like from public record (2017? maybe) .... in descending order ........

1) Pharmaceuticals/Health Products: $3,937,356,877
2) Insurance: $2,704,636,807
3) Electric Utilities: $2,353,570,360
4) Electronics Manufacturing and Equipment: $2,230,043,875
5) Business Associations: $2,217,425,929
6) Oil & Gas: $2,096,923,653
7) Education: $1,633,122,450
8) Hospitals/ Nursing Homes: $1,604,696,566

.......

67) Environmental Lobby Groups $2,060,380

Oil and Gas Spent OVER 1000 TIMES the money compared to what the "environmental group did" according to the government, the legislators and the contributors themselves.

Give it a rest - This is public record.

I am done arguing that fact isn't fact .... It's like beating my own head against a wall here .......

I'm done with this .......

Plus you seem to be completely missing spend by the radical left.

Such as the Tides Foundation. It’s one year spend is massively higher than the companies you quoted.

https://www.activistfacts.com/organi...-tides-center/

The Liberals relaxed lobby laws to let these economic terrorists operate in Canada under the guise of a charity.

They secretly pay a few First Nations money to have them as pawns to do their bidding.

Yup...we can agree to disagree.

[flyrodfisher]

From the above link...

"In 1997 Larry Wright, an officer with the Northern California District of the IRS, told The San Francisco Bay Guardian that “tax-exempt status is not transferable.” A nonprofit like Tides that holds a tax exemption, he said, legally has to prove that the activities of all of its sponsored “projects” satisfy the same exact tax-exempt purpose for which its own exemption was granted. “You can’t just set up a clearinghouse,” Wright said. “[Tides] can’t pass along its tax-exempt status.”
There ought to be a law. Oops — there is a law. It should be enforced."

Obviously set up to skirt US tax laws...

Perhaps Tides will soon fall on their own sword...

[EZM]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

Link
?

So now...

Spend by a few company in the millions...

You believe in following the money?

Please don’t ignore this then.

Without looking on global warming spend from 2008 to 2019...a quick look found that from 2003-2008...

$106.7 BILLION WAS SPENT!!!!

So...what pocket of cash has the bigger influence on political decisions.


And a link.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybe.../#79f6ca7e7ebb

Remember...in this “scientific” endeavour, there is no money allowed for any research suggesting to disprove any studies promoting global warming nor money spent to prove CO2 is not a factor.

This is not science. It is business pure and simple.

An oil company spending a million to say oil is needed is not heard in the crowd clamouring for a share of billions.

Don’t kid yourself. Global warming is big business at its finest.

Lobby groups attacking any scientists not following the global warming religious mantra.

And still...studies continue to be mostly what if studies and computer models. Non lend themselves to scientific testing.

It all comes down to...if it is happening and we do nothing...what about the kids...the grand kids...think about the kids...

So only time will judge did we waste hundreds of billions for no reason while ignoring clean water, poverty, disease and hunger.

Please READ the article YOU, YOURSELF attached.

Your article has NOTHING to do with lobby/special interest money "spent".

The money was "spent" on regulations and changes required as a result of new legislation and regulation. It is a cost.

YOUR ARTICLE describes the COST to industry in having to meet new regulations, stringent guidelines, etc...

That was my point.

If you don't want to believe Industry has more to loose, spends more money lobbying and is incurring the cost of environmental regulations read your own article.

I need a break ...... I'm out and done with this ....... congratulations .... I'm out.