Jump to content

KeyStone PipeLine

Rate this topic


eddie

Recommended Posts

 

 

Let me get this strait. So, without our govrrnment's blessing, TransCanada is sending out dear john letters regarding emminent (sp) domain. Nice. We should do that and just claim it on all of Canada making it the US and just keep all our own oil.

Sounds like a solid plan. :D

 

Except Transcanada is not 'taking' Land, just an 'Easement' over a section of it. I don't believe 'Government Blessing' is needed for Eminent Domain, just the Courts.

*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except Transcanada is not 'taking' Land, just an 'Easement' over a section of it. I don't believe 'Government Blessing' is needed for Eminent Domain, just the Courts.

 

Taking an "easement" from an unwilling property owner is "taking". If one believes in the notion that a free market is best, then one would want the property owner to be able negotiate a price (or refuse) without government or court interference...right?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except Transcanada is not 'taking' Land, just an 'Easement' over a section of it. I don't believe 'Government Blessing' is needed for Eminent Domain, just the Courts.

 

What is said "easement" is right though the center of my house? I saw an episode of Bugs Bunny and the freeway over his rabbit hole being bit that is similar. :D;)

Be the chimp, not the frog.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by eddie View Post

 

Taking an "easement" from an unwilling property owner is "taking". If one believes in the notion that a free market is best, then one would want the property owner to be able negotiate a price (or refuse) without government or court interference...right?

 

I have a question for the "libertarians of convenience".  Do you want to see this pipeline built,yes or no?

 

 

 

“My happiness is not the means to any end. It is the end. It is its own goal. It is its own purpose.”

 

Ayn Rand

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Taking an "easement" from an unwilling property owner is "taking". If one believes in the notion that a free market is best, then one would want the property owner to be able negotiate a price (or refuse) without government or court interference...right?

 

Correct. As long as one is willing to accept the 'Consequences' of their actions. Take the Local Issue near me recently. Weavers Cove wanted to put in a NG Terminal, Locals were against it, and beat it back. In your 'Free Market', the Supplier of Natural Gas to Fall River should now be able to shut off the Gas Supply to them and sell it to others. After all, they are the owners of the Natural Gas and should be able to sell, (or refuse) without government or court interference...right? In a 'truly' Free Market, that is. Would you have a problem with this? How about the Oil Companies who would benefit for this Pipeline increasing their gas Prices by $2.50 a Gallon to compensate for it not being built? Problem with that? Dare I bring up Electricity? 'Free Market', it works both ways, like a Double Edged Sword....................:beers:

*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is said "easement" is right though the center of my house? I saw an episode of Bugs Bunny and the freeway over his rabbit hole being bit that is similar. :D;)

 

In that case, if you actually did read the Letter you made reference to, you would get a New House out of it.;)

*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wraith View Post

 

Correct. As long as one is willing to accept the 'Consequences' of their actions. Take the Local Issue near me recently. Weavers Cove wanted to put in a NG Terminal, Locals were against it, and beat it back. In your 'Free Market', the Supplier of Natural Gas to Fall River should now be able to shut off the Gas Supply to them and sell it to others. After all, they are the owners of the Natural Gas and should be able to sell, (or refuse) without government or court interference...right? In a 'truly' Free Market, that is. Would you have a problem with this? How about the Oil Companies who would benefit for this Pipeline increasing their gas Prices by $2.50 a Gallon to compensate for it not being built? Problem with that? Dare I bring up Electricity? 'Free Market', it works both ways, like a Double Edged Sword....................beers.gif

 

What if people were freely allowed in the USA to drill for oil on their land?  What if the government did not own half the acrreage west of the river, and a man was allowed to freely buy and use some of that land as he saw fit?

 

 

 

Wemmay not even need that stuff from Canada.

 

 

 

 

 

As i said-Libertarians of convenience.

 

“My happiness is not the means to any end. It is the end. It is its own goal. It is its own purpose.”

 

Ayn Rand

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a map of existing pipelines in the country.

 

283

 

The West is already criss-crossed with energy pipelines. Why is this one, just one more to the mish mosh, so environmentally critical? Pipelines already cross the Western aquifers. Again, the eco-obstructionists are seeking to stifle any further 'carbon' based fuels. A disgusting, despicable tactic from the 'hate America first' crowd, who would rather see us shiver in the dark, than actually tackle this National Security energy issue. :mad:

"I think, that all right thinking people, are sick & tired of being told that they're sick & tired of being sick & tired. I, for one, am not. And I'm sick & tired of being told that I am."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a map of existing pipelines in the country.

283

The West is already criss-crossed with energy pipelines. Why is this one, just one more to the mish mosh, so environmentally critical? Pipelines already cross the Western aquifers. Again, the eco-obstructionists are seeking to stifle any further 'carbon' based fuels. A disgusting, despicable tactic from the 'hate America first' crowd, who would rather see us shiver in the dark, than actually tackle this National Security energy issue. :mad:

 

if the west is already criss-crossed with pipelines, then why is this one needed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if the west is already criss-crossed with pipelines, then why is this one needed?

 

My guess is that the existing pipelines are already at capacity. :read:

 

 

"I think, that all right thinking people, are sick & tired of being told that they're sick & tired of being sick & tired. I, for one, am not. And I'm sick & tired of being told that I am."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does one do with the product being Transported in the Pipeline being 'Upgraded'? If you mean laying a 'New' line next to it, you still have 'Easement' issues to deal with.

 

sure, but not as much of an impact to land owners to increase an easement vs getting a new one from someone else. Plus the infrastructure is already there (service roads and the like) so you would think it would be less expensive to do it that way.

 

I just haven't heard anything about the "need"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...