Price of gas at Pump, Montreal

[RawAlex]

Prices on the way up to 1.43 / litre - or $5.41 per (us) gallon, or $5.46/ gallon is US dollars based on spot exchange rate.

.... and you guys complain about $4?

[softball]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Prices on the way up to 1.43 / litre - or $5.41 per (us) gallon, or $5.46/ gallon is US dollars based on spot exchange rate.

.... and you guys complain about $4?

Three words. Universal Health Care.

[RawAlex]

Three Words: wrong wrong wrong. If that was paying healthcare, our payroll taxes wouldn't be 30% plus.

[softball]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Three Words: wrong wrong wrong. If that was paying healthcare, our payroll taxes wouldn't be 30% plus.

I agree, they would be 40% plus. But your corporate tax is about 17 per cent (which is what is important to us)...not sure about pq, cause you guys are on another planet.

[RawAlex]

Don't even get me started on the thieving Quebec government...

[softball]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Don't even get me started on the thieving Quebec government...

Much as I love Quebec, that was one of the biggest reasons I didn't move there when I left Toronto. Apart from my diabolical French.

[EmporerEJ]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Prices on the way up to 1.43 / litre - or $5.41 per (us) gallon, or $5.46/ gallon is US dollars based on spot exchange rate.

.... and you guys complain about $4?

Yes....we are.
And, as one of the world's biggest suppliers, why do you suppose Canadian Gas is so high?

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by EmporerEJ

Yes....we are.
And, as one of the world's biggest suppliers, why do you suppose Canadian Gas is so high?

Supply and demand. Unlike countries like Venezuela or Iran, the Canadian government doesn't subsidize gas down to 20 cents a gallon just to appease the masses.

[softball]

Originally Posted by EmporerEJ

Yes....we are.
And, as one of the world's biggest suppliers, why do you suppose Canadian Gas is so high?

NAFTA...Canada is the largest supplier of oil and gas to the United States. Nafta is what keeps our prices as high as yours. Gas should be cheaper here because we have it, but due to Nafta it isn't. We have to pay the same as you. Thank God water is excluded from NAFTA.

[DannyCox]

And don't forget all the various Provincial, Federal, Municipal, & Road taxes added at the pump, and the GST & PST ontop of it all. If you look at the base price of gas, we actually pay less than the US. But when you add in all the various taxes and fees, we more than double the cost.

[EmporerEJ]

And into this environment, people expect the government to adopt some sort of Hydrogen plan.

Then, where would they replace all those tax dollars with?
Especially if I have a hydrgen generator in my garage, running from the solar cells on the roof?

Makes me ask again...who killed the electric car?

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by EmporerEJ

And into this environment, people expect the government to adopt some sort of Hydrogen plan.

Then, where would they replace all those tax dollars with?
Especially if I have a hydrgen generator in my garage, running from the solar cells on the roof?

Makes me ask again...who killed the electric car?

The electric car killed the electric car. Until very recently, none of them were any better than gocarts, with effective ranges less than most people's commutes, and only worked well in warmer temps (as it gets colder, the batteries get less and less useful).

If the electric car is the answer, then someone needs to change the question.

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

The electric car killed the electric car. Until very recently, none of them were any better than gocarts, with effective ranges less than most people's commutes, and only worked well in warmer temps (as it gets colder, the batteries get less and less useful).

If the electric car is the answer, then someone needs to change the question.

Apparently, you need to go see the movie.

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by sarettah

Apparently, you need to go see the movie.

I wasn't overwhelmingly interested in the concept. I don't tend to be a fan of documentaries that start out with the conclusion and attempt to build backwards (I don't enjoy Michael Moore except for the laugh factor)

Here is an example of a great electric: http://www.caranddriver.com/buying_g...tesla_roadster

Tesla has pretty much everything going for it. Based on a sexy sports car, has truly amazing acceleration, stopping power, and is actually sexy to look at. 200+ miles on a single charge.

The true problem? How does it get charged? They plug it in the wall. How is that power made? In many cases, by burning fossil fuels (bad) coal (worse) or nuclear (better and worse). Considering that places like California have faced brownouts / rolling blackouts from a lack of power in the last few years, could you imagine if even 10% of all the cars in the state were suddenly plugged in each night?

It still wouldn't run in Alaska in the winter.

They also don't mention the power required to build the batteries, and the enviromental issues that will come from all these batteries, from the spills in accidents, from the horrible implications of cars like this put out to rot in a field with the batteries in it.

Like I said, the answer desperately looking for the right question.

[jackbdirty]

Things are getting so expensive, even police officers are trying to figure out ways to patrol the streets to save city money : )

[softball]

I don't tend to be a fan of documentaries that start out with the conclusion and attempt to build backwards

That is how most documentaries are made. Michael Moore's films are not documentaries, however.
When you go looking for funding for a doc, you start with a premise that you are going to prove. That is what gets you the money.
I am not sure why you have a problem with this.

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by rhetorical

That is how most documentaries are made. Michael Moore's films are not documentaries, however.
When you go looking for funding for a doc, you start with a premise that you are going to prove. That is what gets you the money.
I am not sure why you have a problem with this.

There is a huge difference between a premise and a conclusion. When you work from a premise, you may still end up with a different story if the interviews and the data reveal something different from what you went looking for. Working from a conclusion, you would just eliminate all the data that doesn't agree with you and go from there.

It is the different between drawing a conclusion based on the information you have, or selecting info to support your pre-set conclusion.

[DannyCox]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

or selecting info to support your pre-set conclusion.

Oh, we're talking about Al Gore now!

[softball]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

There is a huge difference between a premise and a conclusion. When you work from a premise, you may still end up with a different story if the interviews and the data reveal something different from what you went looking for. Working from a conclusion, you would just eliminate all the data that doesn't agree with you and go from there.

It is the different between drawing a conclusion based on the information you have, or selecting info to support your pre-set conclusion.

But we were discussing documentary film making. Documentaries usually have a point to make and a conclusion to support. It is not news, but it is journalism. I have worked on more docs than I can remember and I would say that most work this way. The outcome is not always pre ordained, but the path is set and the research done to support your theory. When the outcome is a surprise, then that is just a bonus to a good film maker.

[EmporerEJ]

Originally Posted by sarettah

Apparently, you need to go see the movie.

Exactly.
Convinced me......especially the lengths they went to "destroy the evidence."

[EmporerEJ]

http://www.amazon.com/Who-Killed-Ele..._sim_d_title_5

[RawAlex]

I gotta start marketing bridges and lakefront property on here...