Good riddance to Canada’s worst Prime Minister ever. Conservatives will take power and seek a deal with Trump.
Trudeau to Resign
Reuters reports Canada PM Trudeau Is Likely to Announce Resignation
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is increasingly likely to announce he intends to step down, though he has not made a final decision, a source familiar with Trudeau’s thinking said on Sunday.
The source spoke to Reuters after the Globe and Mail reported that Trudeau was expected to announce as early as Monday that he would quit as leader of Canada’s ruling Liberal Party after nine years in office.
Trudeau’s departure would leave the party without a permanent head at a time when polls show the Liberals will badly lose to the official opposition Conservatives in an election that must be held by late October.
Sources told the Globe and Mail that they did not know definitely when Trudeau would announce his plans to leave but said they expect it would happen before a emergency meeting of Liberal legislators on Wednesday.
An increasing number of Liberal parliamentarians, alarmed by a series of gloomy polls, have publicly urged Trudeau to quit.
If he does resign, it would likely spur fresh calls for a quick election to put in place a stable government able to deal with the administration of President-elect Donald Trump for the next four years.
But calls for him to step aside have grown since December, when Trudeau tried to demote Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland, one of his closest cabinet allies, after she pushed back against his proposals for more spending.
Freeland quit instead and penned a letter accusing Trudeau of “political gimmicks” rather than focusing on what was best for the country.
A botched immigration policy led to hundreds of thousands of arrivals, straining an already overheated housing market.
Landslide Conservative Victory
FirstPost reports Canada PM Justin Trudeau may resign today, who can replace him till Oct election
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is expected to announce his resignation as Liberal Party leader on Monday and may announce his plans to leave ahead of a key national caucus meeting scheduled for Wednesday.
Over the past few months, 53-year-old Trudeau has been losing support within his own party and facing a caucus revolt. Also, he and his party have been facing dismal public opinion polls that show Liberal Party will likely be swept out of power by Pierre Poilievre’s Conservatives in a landslide victory if the elections are conducted now.
Canada polls are due in October this year, but if Trudeau resigns, it would spur fresh calls for a quick election to put in place a government able to deal with the administration of President-elect Donald Trump for the next four years.
‘Great Deal’: Trudeau’s Conservative Rival Makes Energy Pitch to Trump
Bloomberg reports ‘Great Deal’: Trudeau’s Conservative Rival Makes Energy Pitch to Trump
Pierre Poilievre — the Conservative leader who is the front-runner to beat Trudeau’s party in the next election — says he could increase Canada’s exports to the US and strike a “great deal” with Trump anyway.
Poilievre sketched out an elevator pitch to the US president-elect during an interview with right-wing Canadian influencer Jordan Peterson, posted online Thursday. If elected, Poilievre said he plans to speed up approvals to build oil refineries, liquefied natural gas plants, nuclear facilities and hydro power. Canada has the ability to grow its electricity surplus with the US, helping to run the data centers that are essential to its booming artificial intelligence sector, he added.
“If you look at the history of President Trump, he negotiates very aggressively and he likes to win, but in the end, he doesn’t appear to have a problem if his counterparty also wins,” Poilievre said. “And so I think that we can get a great deal that will make both countries safer, richer, and stronger.”
But Trump should also be aware that Canada currently sells its oil and gas to the US at “enormous discounts,” Poilievre told Peterson.
The US trade deficit in goods with Canada was $50.5 billion through the first 10 months of the year. It would be larger, but Canadian crude is sold cheaply to US refineries, particularly in the Midwest.
“That is the true story — it’s the pathetic story — of our trade surplus, is that we’re actually handing over our resources, stupidly,” Poilievre said. “It’s not the Americans’ fault, it’s our fault, we’re stupid. And we’re going to stop being stupid when I’m prime minister.”
“The last thing he should want to do is to block the underpriced Canadian energy from going into his marketplace,” he continued, appealing to Trump. “In fact, what I would encourage him to do is to approve the Keystone pipeline,” he added, referring to a long-running Keystone XL project designed to ferry some 800,000 barrels a day from Alberta’s oil sands to southeast Nebraska, where it would link up with existing pipelines.
President Joe Biden revoked a key permit for that project after taking office in 2021, effectively killing it. Trump is in favor of Keystone XL, but there has been no sign yet that South Bow Corp., owner of the Keystone system, would want to revive it.
If Trump somehow stopped Canada’s trade surplus with the US immediately, American workers at refineries would lose their jobs and consumers would pay higher prices, Poilievre said. He argued that Canada should instead ramp up extraction of resources such as critical minerals that so both countries can get richer while weaning themselves off supplies from unfriendly states like China.
Poilievre said he would address US concerns about border trafficking and military spending, adding that a Conservative government would invest the planned gains of his energy-exporting strategy in Arctic security. Trump has long complained the US is being shortchanged by allies, and Canada is currently far short of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization goal to spend 2% of gross domestic product on defense.
“I can fund a more robust military and continental defense if I have more free trade with the greatest economy the world has ever seen — and we can both win,” he said.
I am looking forward to a landslide victory by Tory leader Pierre Poilievre.
Poilevre said “both countries could get richer…”
If you have to debase the dollar by printing more, you aren’t rich. Idk what Canada’s debt is but the US is 36 trillion, or 36 thousand billions, $107,000 for every US citizen. We aren’t rich, we are more poor waiting to happen when either all the bubbles finally burst or inflation rips higher.
Pierre Poilievre — the Conservative leader, is presenting himself as Maple Maga. Every time the Canadian Conservative Party gets a majority, it is followed by a severe recession. Similar to American Repubicans.
A MAGA recession is brewing again, which comes with a significant, widespread, and prolonged downturn in economic activity. US sneezes and Canada catches the flu.
Pierre Poilievre is a double whammy for Canada.
2/3 of the parties listed have ‘Canada’ in the party name.
Normally it would be considered pleonastic for a political culture to have to add national specificity to disambiguate.
What? Castro’s son is voluntarily resigning?
Technically the worst Prime Minister was probably Kim Campbell. She presided over the complete destruction of the Conservative Party in the early 90s.
Yes, she was only PM for a few months time before being swept out of office but her loss was a historic one because the Political party was essentially wiped out for almost 20 years.
Trudeau has been worse in the fact he’s actually been in power a long time and made endless boneheaded decisions (Canadians are definitely NOT better off as he leaves office) but until the election we won’t know if he’s going to cause the Liberal party to be wiped out.
Justin always put himself above Canadians. Hopefully he is taken under the fold of some U.N. agency and sent off into obscurity. He has left Canada hobbled.
Finally! My Canadian friends will be celebrating his departure..
The embarassing treatment of trucker protesters and supporters should have ended his harmful time in office. Now all that’s left to wonder is if, when he applies makeup in the future, he will choose a foundation that is more appropriate for his skin tone.
Baby Castro was indeed a travesty. A Soros / WEF puppet, a grotesque mockery of Canada. The question behind it all is who was pulling Soros’s strings (and now Baby Soros)?
About damn time! What a waste of a term in office! He did just about all he could, to destroy the Country in which He was in charge, it was like a “Wish” of His to destroy His Own Country. Very bizarre Non-Leader if I have ever seen one.
I just thought of another one, just before I hit post! Zelensky of Ukraine would definitely fit the bill as well. Hey maybe those two could hook up? Jr. Would be for it, we know, and Z likes being in charge of anything, even if He isn’t. Who knows?
I imagine the Germans, Canadians, and Ukrainians doing a Circle Jerk. The European Union Headquarters in Brussels would provide the snacks, Blow and Hookers to take up the slack in Manliness.
It is quite ridiculous, how these Countries are behaving. They have zero “Logic” in play for any outcome worthy of their actions. People overwhelmingly revolt against such tactics (See U.S.), and they press ahead anyway.
Zelensky never was and never will be in charge of anything, as He is simply a puppet for the regime’s string pullers.
Trudeau is just simply an utter fool, and also a puppet being controlled. He doesn’t have a clue what He is doing, because He’s not in charge, much like Zelensky.
Germany is a mystery to Me personally, as I have worked in Supply Change Management for decades, and with and for Germany heavily for 9 years! I have visited and seen the Country and its workers and businesses, and they looked and sounded absolutely nothing like these reports say? I couldn’t have worked with these clowns in this fashion. We would have gotten nothing accomplished. That was roughly 7-9 years ago or so that I slowed down with them. I can’t even imagine this over there. My Old Friends and Co-Workers over there must be beside themselves…
The Canadians and Europeons are under the illusion that they are partners is some grand rules-based order working toward peace and prosperity for mankind. In reality they are pawns that the U.S. uses while it is convenient and will dispose of faster than an underwater gas pipeline when it serves U.S. interest to do so. The Eastern Europeons – Poland, Romania – are the next probable implements to be used to weaken Russia for its eventual vivisection.
Turdo will be president for life in the People’s Republic of Canada
He has been like a Hollywood monster that will not die. Even if he resigns, they should drive a wooden stake through his heart and shoot him with a silver bullet and mash some garlic onto him and bury his corpse in the shadow of the holy cross.
Alas, he is but one pustule on a pustulous corpse, and whilst removing him may cause delight, there are still too many other pustules to burst.
This brings us to the inevitability of a much larger “GFC II” sequel to the 2008-09 global financial crisis.
Although the available data is neither complete nor timely, we can estimate that, stated at constant values, worldwide financial assets have increased by at least USD 450 trillion, or 150%, during a twenty-year period in which global real GDP grew by only 70%, or USD 44tn.
In a credit-money system, the assets of the financial system are the liabilities of those government, household and private non-financial corporate (PNFC) sectors of the economy which alone can honour this stock of monetary claims.
The apparent implication – which is that more than $10 of new financial claims have been created for each dollar of growth – is a serious understatement of the true severity of the situation. For a start, assumed-but-not-binding commitments, such as enormous shortfalls in pension provision, aren’t included in the liabilities numerator. Worldwide, these pensions “gaps” may now be well in excess of USD 200tn.
As for the denominator in this equation, GDP, as a measure of transactional activity rather than the supply of value, fails to capture the distorting effects of the spending of borrowed money, and takes no account whatsoever of the adverse consequences of relentless rises in the Energy Cost of Energy, which is the single most important determinant of trends in material economic prosperity.
The sheer size of the stock of claims reveals the extent of scale risk in the financial system, but cannot quantify the equally important issue of complexity risk.
This isn’t the occasion for a discussion of monetary economics, but we know that the financial system consists of a huge network of cross-collateralized obligations.
Any serious deflation of the “everything bubble” in capital markets will trigger a succession of collateral impairments right across the system, resulting in a chaotic wave of defaults.
https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2025/01/06/296-predicament-not-outcome/
Beyond the bizarre notion that monetary innovations could re-invigorate the material economy, the reckless expansion of financial obligations can be traced to a determination to support the status quo in the face of irreversible adverse trends in the underlying economy.
A short history of this folly begins in the 1990s, when credit expansion was seen as the solution to “secular stagnation” in the economy.
When this exercise in “credit adventurism” culminated in the GFC of 2008-09, we had a choice. We could have allowed the normal workings of financial dynamics in risk and return to continue to their logical conclusion, which would have been the wiping out of the over-leveraged and the unfortunate.
Instead, we opted for “monetary adventurism”, using QE, NIRP and ZIRP to prop up the markets. By pricing capital at negative real levels, we incentivised borrowing, and artificially inflated the prices of assets.
This drove a wedge between the experiences of a minority already possessed of assets, and a majority dependent on earned incomes. We should be in no doubt that much of the subsequent increase in inequalities has been the result of deliberate decisions whose effect was to skew the relationship between asset prices and all forms of income.
Just as seriously, these actions undermined the core principles of the market capitalist system. Investors could no longer earn appropriate real income returns on their capital – pushing them into acceptance of ever greater risk in the search for yield – whilst markets were prevented from exercising their function of putting a price on risk.
All of this has hard-wired a crisis denouement into the system. Either a belated recognition of economic weakness, or a simple tremor of vertigo, will burst the “everything bubble”.
Cross-collateralization will then trigger a cascade of defaults across the system. The vastly greater scale of exposure in comparison with 2008-09, and the far weaker balance sheets of governments, make a successful repetition of the interventions of the GFC impossible.
https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2025/01/06/296-predicament-not-outcome/
Have you read: “The Great Taking” by David Rogers Webb. I would recommend it. I can provide a PDF Copy here if anyone is interested. I can post a link to my Drive with a copy. Here is an excerpt: “We are in the grip of the greatest evil humanity has ever faced (or
refused to acknowledge, as the case may be). Hybrid war is unlimited. It
has no bounds. It is global, and it is inside your head. It is never-ending.
Nothing focuses the mind like an imminent hanging, or as Samuel
Johnson originally said, “Depend upon it sir, when a man knows he
is to be hanged in a fortnight, it concentrates his mind wonderfully.”
Hybrid war can be stopped. Stopping it begins in your mind.”
And another Excerpt from that Incredible Book:
“Never before has a system benefited so few at the great expense of so many. Is this not inherently unstable and unsustainable? Physical control, as opposed to rule by deception, requires enormous energy.
Can this be sustained while destroying all economies, and abusing all people, globally? They do not know how to “build back better.” Look at their footprint around the world—the destruction, the economic devastation. When it comes to the real world, they are exceptionally good at just one thing: fucking things up. Then they declare victory, and fix blame on others for the horrific damage done.”
What does this have to do with this?
https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2025/01/06/296-predicament-not-outcome/
Hmmm, More petroleum, gas and mineral exports to the US from Canada? Trump, the American economy and myself would call that “winning.”
Gaslighting on Energy Intensifies
Desperate to distract the barnyard animals from the truth
https://fasteddynz.substack.com/p/gaslighting-on-energy-intensifies
Current U.S. annual oil production is about five billion barrels. Canadian Oil Sands have about one hundred an fifty billion barrels available immediately. That means that the oil sands alone can supply *all* of America’s current production levels for the next thirty years. And that’s only half of Canada’s current oil production. Of course, the oil sands contains another three hundred billion barrels in proven reserves. That is to say ….another sixty years after that.
It is clear from the sneering tone in your post and especially your substack that you think that you are the smartest guy in the room. Maybe that’s because of your choice of rooms.
December 19, 2024
The Great Drama of American Shale Production may now be nearing its final act – Goehring & Rozencwajg Natural Resource Investors
For years, we have anticipated that the relentless growth in shale output would crest by late 2024 or early 2025, catching many off-guard. In hindsight, even this expectation might have erred on the side of caution. Quietly and without much fanfare, both shale oil and shale gas appear to have passed their zenith several months ago.
Recent data from the Energy Information Agency (EIA) reveal that shale crude oil production reached its high-water mark in November 2023, only to slide 2%— roughly 200,000 barrels per day—since then.
Likewise, shale dry gas production peaked that same month and has since slipped by 1% or 1 billion cubic feet per day.
The trajectory from here, according to our models, looks steeper still.
https://fasteddynz.substack.com/p/predictions-for-2025
What’s saved the world from oil decline was unconventional tight “fracked” oil, which accounted for 63% of total U.S. crude oil production in 2019 and 83% of global oil growth from 2009 to 2019.
So it’s a big deal if we’ve reached the peak of fracked oil, because that is also the peak of both conventional and unconventional oil and the decline of all oil in the future.
https://fasteddynz.substack.com/p/predictions-for-2025
Rozencwajg has been debunked by Doomberg. SPREAD OUT YOUR RESEARCH WINGS, pal.
Nope. Production of natural resources like shale oil are dependent on price. Breakeven costs for new wells are in the mid $60 range. As WTI prices declined to $70, so did drilling activity. If prices go back above $80, drilling activities will increase as well. At $100+, you would see a drilling boom and rapidly increasing US production.
Yes. US shale oil production will likely peak sometime this decade and begin a slow decline after that. How soon that happens will depend largely on prices.
At $50 WTI, shale oil is done quickly. At $100+, it has a long way to go.
Most of my oil investments are in long life (75 year) Canadian oil sands companies with break-evens around $30-$35.
With a new Conservative government in Canada by the end of this year, I expect these companies to double in value.
The same was said for conventional oil … it didn’t happen:
Consider the case of conventional U.S. crude production in the 1970s. Production peaked in November 1970 at 10 million barrels per day, with oil priced at just $3.18 per barrel. At that time, the industry operated a modest 302 rigs drilling for oil.
The first OPEC oil crisis in 1973 sparked a response from President Nixon in the form of Project Independence—a sweeping initiative aimed at reversing the decline in U.S. output through deregulation and expedited permitting. Much like today, optimism abounded among oil producers, who believed that higher prices would unleash a drilling boom and restore U.S. production growth. They were confident they knew where to drill; all they needed was the right price signal.
Prices soared from $3.18 per barrel in 1973 to $34 per barrel by 1981. Producers, true to their promises, responded with vigor. The rig count climbed from 993 in 1973 to a staggering 4,500 by late 1981. Yet despite this unprecedented surge in drilling activity, U.S. oil production steadily declined throughout the 1970s. By the end of 1981, production had fallen to 8.5 million barrels per day—far below the peak achieved a decade earlier and lower than when Nixon announced his ambitious goals.
Three decades later, in 2010, U.S. oil production hit a nadir of 5 million barrels per day, even as prices hovered around $100 per barrel—30 times higher than in 1973. The depletion paradox had firmly taken hold. The industry’s assumption—that higher prices alone could counteract geological realities—proved tragically flawed. Today, as we observe the shale sector grappling with similar dynamics, it seems history may once again be repeating itself.
We believe the U.S. shale sector now stands at a crossroads eerily similar to that faced by conventional oil production in 1973. While shale’s achievements have been extraordinary, they remain subject to the inexorable forces of depletion. Yet, the industry, Wall Street, and the President-elect appear poised to repeat the missteps of half a century ago.
https://blog.gorozen.com/blog/the-depletion-paradox
Yep. Yet US production is currently 13.5 mbpd. Highest ever. With rig counts of just 480. Gas rigs around 100. There are still a fair number of tier 1 sites to drill and “a lot” of tier 2, and 3 sites. Tier 2 sites are worth the effort at $80 and tier 3 at $90. It is very price dependent.
We are producing the most oil and gas ever and as a result we are currently the world’s largest exporter of both oil and LNG.
In fact, the majority of US oil production is exported, because our refineries can’t use shale oil anyway. We export 10 mbpd of light shale oil. And we import 8 mbpd of heavy crude for our refineries from Canada, Mexico and Venezuela. So any drop in US shale production is meaningless domestically. It would only reduce our exports.
Too bad there was no internet or Mish Talk back in 1973 … I am sure that there would have been people like saying ‘just you wait till the price of oil is 100 bucks…we’ll be pumping out record amounts of conventional oil!!!’
Three decades later, in 2010, U.S. oil production hit a nadir of 5 million barrels per day, even as prices hovered around $100 per barrel—30 times higher than in 1973.
The depletion paradox had firmly taken hold. The industry’s assumption—that higher prices alone could counteract geological realities—proved tragically flawed. Today, as we observe the shale sector grappling with similar dynamics, it seems history may once again be repeating itself.
He should go listen to “Doomberg.” BRILLIANT analytical summaries and he supports the assertion that American brimming with Natgas and Oil.
I didn’t even mention the equally large if not larger equivalent in Venezuela. In other words, enough petro between them to match America’s current annual output for centuries. From just two of many sources in the western hemisphere.