Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Oil Sands and Related Stocks -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: johnlw who wrote (18193)	10/27/2007 4:17:53 PM
From: LoneClone	Respond to of 25575

Great post amidst all the hysteria, John. LC

To: johnlw who wrote (18193)	10/27/2007 6:02:39 PM
From: Rocket Red	Respond to of 25575

The Oil may belong to the Albertan People but don't expect a cheque in the mail anytime soon. GO WORK FOR YOUR MONEY thats the bottomline

To: johnlw who wrote (18193)	10/28/2007 2:25:30 PM
From: FreedomForAll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 25575

John, I did not intend to insult you personally with my comments and I do not see anything in my comments that should be personal insults. You have responded with personal insults that I believe were uncalled for and inappropriate. (Insult via sarcasm is insult nonetheless.) Where I am from is irrelevant, as is whether I criticized governmental actions in other locales in the past. Those governments and locales have nothing to do with the topic of this forum, the Oil Sands. In the interest of clarity and understanding, I am not singling out Alberta over any other jurisdiction; the objectionable actions that I comment on are happening in Alberta, here and now. If like actions occur in other jurisdictions in Canada or elsewhere, my comments on those actions would likely be very similar. I stated that the people of Alberta are not getting a "fair share" and are being poorly represented by their public servants in oil sands actions. This is not unique to Alberta, but other regimes are not a topic of this forum at present. Perhaps the discussion could be more beneficial if we try to answer the question: What is the legitimate reason that the government finds it necessary to repeatedly modify agreements and increase taxes on oilsands businesses after making commitments that those businesses rely upon when making very substantial investments in the oilsands?

To: johnlw who wrote (18193)	10/28/2007 2:50:40 PM
From: Metacomet	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 25575

It appears as though we have input from one of those great American patriots who believe that taxes are akin to terrorism. The Ron Paulists who are firmly convinced that any form of government spending is a form of thievery from the populace. These people are unable to connect the fact that roads and schools and fire departments etc. are appropriate endeavors for a government to perform. They are also the contingent that keeps America from developing beyond a mercantile 19th century philosophy that of course becomes apoplectic at the suggestion that health care should be a legitimate service by governments funded by "shudder" taxes. This commitment to opposing any and all forms of taxation will lead the adherents to vote for an imbecile as long as he says what they want to hear. (See presidential elections, US-2000 and 2004.) America will choke to death on its own greed if these folks continue to succeed.