A (genuine) thanks to the Food Prof for engaging with the material and (mostly) avoiding ad-hominin attacks. This is refreshing.

However, while some of the critiques in his thread have merit, I don't think he is making the argument he intends.

Let's break it down.

THREAD (pt1) Note that I'm blocked, otherwise I would be quote tweeting rather than screenshotting.
Additionally while I will mostly leave it to the authors to respond or not at their discretion (it's their paper), I do know a few things about IO models and about industrial organization.
2/25

OK, so, Singh might actually be (accidentally) correct here. But probably not for the reasons he things.

Lets say the US puts an x% tariff on everything it imports from Canada. The initial effect is a combination of CAN export price reduction and US import price increases
1/7

https://twitter.com/journo_dale/status/1854246616083124472

The first order effect would be a reduction in the price that exporters receive equal to some small fraction (a) of the x% tariff.
On the other side of the boarder the price US importers pay will increase rises by a larger fraction (1-a) of the x% tariff. 2/7

@politicalham @maxfawcett @KevinBirn @bataille_chris Working on it (sort of).

The short answer(s):

Oil sands are price takers.

Bitumen and lighter crudes are differentiated, but there is certainly a degree of substitutability between them, so light conventional production/pricing will affect bitumen prices.
1/n @politicalham @maxfawcett @KevinBirn @bataille_chris OPEC is really the only group with significant market power, so they will cut production first to trade off between intensive and extensive margins (this is a standard model of a dominant supplier with a competitive fringe).
2/n

As a (likely less amusing) followup to this:

The reason I needed the casarole dish was to make Turnip Puff. I usually make the turnip Puff at Thanksgiving and Christmas because (aside from my late grandmother) no one in the family does it correctly.

Here is why.

https://twitter.com/GK_Fellows/status/1473895189324263427

You can make Turnip Puff using basically any recipe you can find and it will turn out ok, but there are three critical things you need to do (modifying the recipe if necessary) to make it a top tier Turnip Puff.

Good evening Twitter, I come to you tonight with what I hope is (mildly) amusing tale of holiday shopping.

Perhaps a brief respite from the seasonal doom scrolling to which we've recently grown accustom.

A tale of my December 22nd trip to Canadian Tire Our story begins (and ends) this morning, as I find myself simultaneously in need of a new battery for my 1957 International Harvester 350 Wheatland special (pictured) as well as a decent sized casserole dish.

My Econ/Policy related tweets are getting far too much engagement for comfort, so here's some boring woodworking commentary.

Table saws are overused and a good radial arm saw is in many cases a far superior substitute for both a table saw and a compound miter (chop) saw. I have, and regularly use the following 3 bench saws:
A Table Saw,
A compound miter (chop) saw,
and
A Radial Arm saw.

The Radial arm saw is by far the best of these.

I also have a scroll saw, but it falls into a different category so I'm ignoring it in the rest of this thread.

Yesterday's @globeandmail article is bad and presents gross and incorrect speculation as informed analysis.

I'm getting tired of this. But, here is ANOTHER thread on TMX. Necessitated by reactions to this week's CER Energy Futures Report.
theglobeandmail.com/opinion/articl… First off, the way that Global News handled this file is far more responsible than the above linked Globe and Mail article.

@ealini interviewed both me and @robynallan to get different analysis and opinion.

globalnews.ca/news/7483307/c…

I'm not a political scientist, (ask any of my undergrad poli-sci profs), but I have some expertise in game theory.

Based on that, a proposition:

"Fearless Advice, Loyal Implementation" only works if BOTH sides (elected and public service) act responsibly and in good faith. If elected officials use the public service as a shield for decisions that they themselves are ultimately responsible for, the scope for cooperative outcomes is diminished.

I hear (via CBC's morning news) that TMX is in the news today with "new" (read: zombie) speculation that the additional capacity is not "needed."

So, a short thread starting with a graph. Shippers nominate volumes for the existing Trans-Mountain pipeline monthly. When these nominations exceed capacity, everyone gets a prorated portion of their nomination (this is called apportionment).

I don't want to be included with the "sky is falling" crowd, but I think there are a number of good reasons to be deeply critical of this move even without the "important details."
And I think it's fair to comment on these even at this stage.

https://twitter.com/trevortombe/status/1219488001664774144

.@trevortombe is absolutely right that incentives matter and universities should be accountable with public funds.

But: Resource constraints are (arguably more) important and I'm not sure how/if the threat of funding cuts presents an effective incentive here.

Ugh, this claim is making the rounds again due to a new study by IEEFA.
It's wrong, Trans-Mountain is most certainly NOT operating at a loss. I can forgive the IEEFA authors for getting this wrong though.

Settle in for a Pipeline Regulation Thread.

https://twitter.com/ellekane/status/1196817243121704965

First off, corporate accounting for regulated assets is more complex than normal corporate accounting (which is already pretty complex).