Some Guy In BC

What’s fascinating is the governments at the helm of the decline of the Anglo-sphere are doubling down on many of the policies that were the cause of this malaise.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL With that far left eco-loon running the show you’ll be lucky to keep the ridings you have. He’s truly the epitome of what your party is today, a party by and for the weakest of Canadian society. Enjoy the far reaches of leftist politics for the next few centuries.

@SmithWinstonIng @Smileyyeg Cope

It is very funny that the NDP uses equity cards to ensure that white men are essentially never allowed to speak in the process of electing a rich old white dude who has never worked a day in his life.

@globeandmail Good for them. At least they’re principled in their desire to remain the far left goon squad of also rans. Likely will never be a series threat to anyone outside of the handful of ridings they currently hold.

Avi Lewis, a 59-year-old documentary filmmaker, activist and former television host, has been elected as the new leader of the NDP after a nearly seven-month race. It comes during a period of turbulence for the federal party, which has struggled from years of declining support and remains far from achieving official status in the House of Commons. theglobeandmail.com/canada/article…

@schtev69 Or that he’s a far left eco-loon. That wouldn’t make a good headline.

I guess it's cooler to call him a "Film Maker" than what he actually does for a living - Prof in the Geography Dept at UBC 🥱

True

@AmazingZoltan A party by and for the weakest of society?

HAPPENING NOW: There's surprising amount of disagreement and intellectual diversity at the 2026 NDP leadership convention, but one matter everyone seems to agree on is that they hate the "equity cards."

You do understand that profits aren’t made only at the pump, right? There’s profits made after extraction, after refining, and after export. All those profits points remain. Albeit refining and pump profits may see restrictions, they’d easily be offset by increased exports…which increases those profits. Royalties could be used to ensure we feed our fuel needs first. Nothing is impossible. What I don’t understand is why we just shrug our shoulders and say “welp, this is the way it is and there’s nothing we can do about”, then bitch and moan about the costs of fuel, and everything fuel prices affect (which is literally everything). Totally defeats, and lazy thinking.

@SomeGuyInBC @sjmuir I just don't understand how it is possible for oil producers to not lose revenue compared to their peers outside NA, while gasoline prices are cheaper than outside of NA under your proposed system.

Energy experts I know have been talking among themselves for weeks now, just matter of fact like, about oil at $200-$300 a barrel. A lot of people starve in this scenario.

@ottawavalleywx @sjmuir FFS… is this idea really that abstract for you? I guess you’d rather continue being at the mercy of the Middle East. Have a good night.

@SomeGuyInBC @sjmuir What will stop companies from sending their product to the higher priced export market? Who is going to pay for all this new infrastructure?

If the $2.05, about 65 cents are taxes….still has us over 50% higher. It’s simple. We feed our fuel needs first. We have excess refining capacity, but don’t have the infrastructure to feed all the refineries with domestic oil. Fix that. At the same time build more oil export infrastructure (pipelines to ports, and the necessary port infrastructure). Then add local fuel storage to where needed (probably is sufficient most places, may need to improve it in others). When that’s all done, refineries keep running just like they are feeding our domestic fuel needs, refining domestically sourced oil, and the excess crude the oil companies will also be extracting is sent for export. At the end of the day the oil companies will be extracting more oil and selling it globally, at global prices…THAT is how they continue to make profits (probably more than they are currently). Pump prices will not need to be influenced by world issues, because we’ve fed our needs first. And, by not having pump prices fluctuating wildly every time an ant farts in Kuwait, our economy can run without the impacts of unnecessarily high fuel prices…which trickle down and negatively affect literally everything. And when I say “our”, I mean all of North America…Canada, USA, and Mexico. This would likely strengthen all of our economies more so than any other initiative.

@SomeGuyInBC @sjmuir Do you realize what % of our gasoline prices are directly related to the price of oil and what % are taxes? Im still trying to understand how your system would work?

Do you think our fuel prices are the same as “outside North America”? Hate to break it to you….they aren’t. Fuel prices differ vastly from region to region. For instance, the Saudi Arabia currently has fuel around CA$0.80/litre…and that’s 91 octane. Not sure what it is where you’re at, but it’s about CA$2.05 here. Hardly on par.

@SomeGuyInBC @sjmuir That our fuel prices would be less than those outside North America. How exactly would your proposed system function?

@ottawavalleywx @sjmuir What do you think it means?

@SomeGuyInBC @sjmuir What does "stabilize internal fuel prices" mean?

@ottawavalleywx @sjmuir Where did I say they need to take less money for their oil?

@SomeGuyInBC @sjmuir So will companies voluntarily take less money for their oil or will they be legislated to do so?

Why don’t you re-read my tweet, then re-read it again. Take a half hour or so after that to contemplate it, then get back to me. I didn’t suggest they couldn’t make money, or profits. I didn’t suggest anything needs to be nationalized. I just pointed out….we have all the oil we need, and vast amounts more than that, therefore we don’t need to be screwed by the Middle East or any other global issue just to go buy groceries.

@SomeGuyInBC @sjmuir How do you compensate shareholders for not receiving market/ global prices for their products?

@ottawavalleywx @sjmuir Oh FFS m not talking about nationalizing it. Use your brain.

@SomeGuyInBC @sjmuir Trudeau senior tried that already.

Your body doesn’t “become genetically predisposed” to Alzheimer’s by eating steak. That’s not how genes work. And Alzheimer’s IS a form of dementia, responsible for 60 to 80% of all cases. This tweet is saying meat eaters are at higher risk of the very disease they’re supposedly protected from. The actual study came out March 19 in JAMA Network Open. A Swedish team tracked 2,157 people over 60 for 15 years. They focused on one gene called APOE that moves cholesterol around your brain. It has three versions. The oldest, APOE4, is the single biggest genetic risk factor for Alzheimer’s. 1 in 4 people carry it. Among Alzheimer’s patients in Northern Europe, 7 out of 10 have it. Carriers who ate the most unprocessed meat (about 2 pounds a week) had slower mental decline than carriers who ate less. At low meat intake, carriers had more than double the dementia risk of non-carriers. At high intake, that excess risk vanished. A 55% reduction. For everyone else, meat made zero difference to brain health. APOE4 is ancient. It showed up between 1 and 6 million years ago when our ancestors lived almost entirely on animal food. The version most of us carry today, APOE3, appeared around 200,000 years ago as humans shifted toward farming and plants. The researchers think APOE4 carriers might still be biologically wired for a meat-heavy diet, and modern eating patterns could be working against their specific biology. Nordic countries have roughly double the APOE4 rates of Mediterranean countries, which tracks with how much meat those populations ate historically. The tweet also left out the biggest caveat. Processed meat (bacon, sausage, hot dogs) was tied to higher dementia risk for everyone regardless of their genes. The benefit was only from unprocessed meat. Tara Spires-Jones at the University of Edinburgh noted the effect was only marginally significant even within the gene groups they studied. And people reported their own diets from memory, so this can’t prove the meat itself caused the protection. Eating steak doesn’t rewrite your DNA. 1 in 4 people carry this gene. If the research holds, an unprocessed cut of beef might actually help them. A hot dog definitely won’t.

Prof G (@profgalloway) nails it here. instagram.com/reel/DTzFi4mDr…

Yeah, @BenMulroney nails it here. This was all about the Terrebonne by-election. However, where I'm sure Ben and I disagree, my position is that bilingualism applies only to the federal government and its services. It does not apply beyond that. Its application to "federally regulated" business is a stretch, and it most certainly doesn't apply at all to any private enterprise, regardless of the enterprise. The idea that we are "bilingual nation" is ridiculous. Why stop at two? Why don't we say we're a "multilingual nation"? It is a far more accurate descriptor. The reason we don't say that is because Quebec would be pissed off, and the idea of declaring a nations "official language(s)" is one that only exist within and for the federal government and its services – as previously noted – and the government isn't about to start offering services in every language spoken in the country. It's time we stopped with this thing altogether. We have FAR bigger issues to deal with. podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/the…