LostViking

Members
  • Content count

    643
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

610 Esteemed

About LostViking

  • Rank
    Comets Star

Contact Methods

  • ICQ 0

Profile Information

  • Gender Male
  • Location Abbotsford

Recent Profile Visitors

14,130 profile views
  1. [Injury] Bieksa's Leg...

    I assume if he needed surgery either the team would report it or it would be kept quiet. Looks like just stitches to me.
  2. The article draws on the idea that what we believe consciously may be different than what we believe subconsciously, and that the choices we make may have been subconsciously already made for us. The article then greatly extrapolates that idea to suggest that humans are hardwired towards some form of spirituality. This is an interesting idea, but despite the efforts of the author to argue the contrary, I believe it has far greater ramifications for theists than atheists. If there is a deep rooted spirituality, this revelation would still lack a clear connection to any deity, it could simply be something we developed as we naturally evolved due to it being useful to helping us to survive. On the other hand, the implications for theists could be massive. It could mean there is no ability to choose to be of faith. Many believe that they gain special privilege in the eyes of their deity in exchange for their beliefs, and this could be rendered obsolete. Since the concept of free will in worship and faith is the cornerstone of all major religions, this would complicate things, all belief would essentially become meaningless.
  3. Any Tax Guru's Here?

    I am far from a tax guru, in fact I am quite weak in my tax knowledge (financial analysis/engineering is my thing), but I am an accountant so I have a rudimentary understanding. If you made $16,500 in one pay period, and were paid semi-monthly, then it would appear that you will earn $396,000 per year, which garners a rate of about 40%, which would work out to about $6,600. So if you made about that much, then the tax they withheld is correct. There are also special tax rates on lump sum payments which cover things like receiving a bonus, these are taxed higher than normal employment income. Taxes are calculated by assuming you will make the same amount every pay period for a year, this is a great way to calculate taxes, but if you have lots of ups and downs then you will end up over paying. You can sometimes get your workplace to calculate it differently, but most won't as it takes a lot of extra work and many are not comfortable with it, essentially if you underpay your taxes, the business is then liable to pay the balance. If taxes are being withheld off your cheque, then you are likely an employee. Independent contractors and business owners have to remit taxes themselves. If you are an employee, good luck expensing anything, there are exceptions but to my knowledge not many. Most of the time you will simply submit your expenses to your employer and they will reimburse you (those reimbursements will not have tax withheld and you do not need to include them in income on your tax return). Things like uniform costs, driving your personal vehicle for work purposes, etc, are actually business expenses, and in order for them to be tax exempt they should appear on the business' tax return, and then the business will not have to pay tax on revenue earned against those amounts. This has little to do with the employee, other than receiving a reimbursement. Reimbursable expenses (and hourly pay) use the concept of 'rally points'. This means that your place of work is considered a rally point and any expenses you incur before you arrive / after you leave are not employment related (eg. you can't expense the cost to take the bus to work). This holds true so long as you are not required to work before arriving at the rally point. So if your boss tells you to pick up a coworker on the way to work, you not only get paid (assuming you get hourly pay) but also can get a reimbursement on driving expenses from the time you pick up the coworker to the time you arrive at work (note: this only counts if your employer requires you to do this, and not that you have done this by your own choice). Once at work, anything your employer requires you to pay for is reimbursable, those cannot be expensed on your taxes. If you are driving your personal vehicle for work purposes, then they will pay you a set rate per KM driven, but the onus is on you to track your mileage. If you tell a friend to jump in your car in order to attempt to sell them on a similar one, that is your own choice and the business is not required to provide reimbursement unless you have a signed agreement in place detailing such events. If your work asks you to use your car as a demo, then you can claim reimbursement for the mileage. In order to claim expenses on your tax return, you need to be able to prove these are costs that you paid for yourself in order to work, rather than costs that you paid on behalf of your employer that they should be paying you back for. I imagine most of your costs are reimbursable from your employer, but not expensable on your tax return. If you are having trouble getting reimbursements from your employer, you may want to consider becoming self-employed and ask to get paid on a contract basis, this way you pay your own taxes but can also claim expenses. Depending on your employer and your personal level of business knowledge, it may be simple or tedious to go this route, but usually results in some tax savings.
  4. What we need is to develop our prospects to their full potential, but its fun to think about this sort of stuff so here goes: I imagine we'll have some holes in our goaltending depth by the time Miller is gone. There isn't any room or opportunity for Markstrom, Ericsson, or Cannata, I imagine they'll either leave or never develop. Demko will be along around that time and can backup Lack or be the starter in Utica, but we'll probably want to have another couple guys in the system in case Lack or Demko doesn't work out. Another guy like Demko would be fantastic to add in the next couple drafts. On the blueline we have a few guys who are young enough they could still be around as vets by the time our prospects hit their prime. Edler, Sbisa, Tanev, Stanton, Weber could all provide leadership/support but would also all be past their prime. Not sure who will end up sticking around that long, but we can conceivably pick the guys we want and should be able to retain them. If we want to hope one of these guys will still be a top 4 into their mid-30s and that we could sign a decent UFA top 4 (like we did with Hamhuis), we would need two more top 4 guys. I think the prospects we have now can cover our depth, and I personally have a hard time reading Corrado's future. It would be great to have a future Norris level prospect, but that is not a hole, every team wants that and only a lucky few will get it. Up front we also have some young guys who could be retained as vets for when our prospects hit their prime. Kassian, Bonino, Vey, Matthias, Sestito would make a pretty good support group. I think we could mix a few of these guys with a UFA and a few prospects to make a very strong bottom six. Assuming at least one of these guys could still be a capable top 6, and that we are able to add a UFA top 6, we could conceivably fill the other spots with Jensen, McCann, Horvat, Shinkaruk. Like on D, having a stud prospect who will be a franchise player would be nice, but that is not a hole, more like asking for the moon. I won't break things down by LW, C, RW, since forwards shift position very fluidly and it is impossible to tell which positions our current prospects will be playing. To summarize, another top goaltending prospect and a couple top defense prospects would be ideal, we seem to be fairly set at forward.
  5. Top 30 Canucks Prospects - #16

    Voting Kenins. Nominating McNally.
  6. Shouldn't they have some sort of evidence of a bomb before going nuts like that? Scary that people are prosecuted for what they say, quiet people commit crimes too. I'd be incredibly pissed off if I was on that flight and the police boarded it in such a fashion, and would probably have even gotten up and stood directly in their path. I would not put my head down nor my hands up. People who treat innocent civilians in this fashion are worthless, and there is no argument that they were protecting anyone since there was no bomb or danger.
  7. If we can start scoring again, we'll make the playoffs, maybe even place well in our division. I do not feel Miller will return to his elite form, but he is still solid and so is Lack, goaltending won't be an issue. Our defense was pretty good last year, in the first two months guys were jumping up in the play and contributing well to the offense, and we were fairly tight defensively all year. I don't feel our defense (as is) would be good enough to challenge for a cup, but certainly good enough to keep us in games and make a strong challenge for a playoff berth. Offense is the lynchpin for us, was the lack of offense last year due to Tort's system or a decline in our forwards ability to score? If the former turns out to be true, we should be a decent force this season, though not an elite force. If the latter is true, it may be a long year.
  8. Expectations of Nikita Tryamkin

    I am hoping he turns out like a Hal Gil, just good enough to make an NHL lineup and use his size to his advantage. If he becomes anything more I will be overjoyed.
  9. The only real way to deal with this is to contact the newspapers and tell them the names of the reporters who have caused you to decide to cancel your subscription/online subscription/epub and why you are removing said newspaper's website from your RSS feeds and reading rotations. I told the Province that I am cancelling my subscription and refusing to use their website until they fire Tony Gallagher, if enough people did the same the guy would be gone.
  10. Post your opening night Vancouver Canucks Roster

    Here is my starting lineup, plus accompanying philosophy of how to manage lineup through the season: Sedin-Sedin-Burrows Jensen-Bonino-Vrbata Higgins-Matthias-Kassian Hansen-Richardson-Dorsett Vrbata is a sniper, not a cycler, I don't see him meshing with the Sedins. He can be set up beautifully by the twins and could probably have a career year, but that doesn't help get the puck back to the Sedins so they can score too. We need three scoring threats on our first line, not just one, having a sniper be set up by the cycle is never going to work, other teams know all about this strategy by now and can defend it too easily. I see Burrows and Jensen possibly being interchangeable, but ultimately Burrows knows how to retrieve the puck for the twins and how to keep the cycle going, this gets us back to the system that we know works. For parts of the year, we should put Jensen with the twins and move Burrows to the bottom six, this will allow Kassian to move up onto the second line and will help his development. Second line is there to provide token ice time to young players, they need to develop. Bonino, Vey, Jensen, Shinkaruk, plus whoever shows good in Utica can all cycle in and out all year. Figure out who has chemistry with Vrbata and try to build a more consistent line by the latter half of the season. As mentioned above, Kassian can make appearances as well to bring some grit and help refine his scoring, I think he'd be a good guy to get Vrbata the puckand they could build some chemistry allowing the option of them playing together more next season. I don't see either Vey or Richardson as complimenting the third line well. To capitalize of the talents of the wingers, this needs to be a two-way line strong along all 200 feet of the ice. Vey doesn't bring enough defensively and Richardson is far better suited to a fourth line role. Kassian and Hansen could be interchangeable, but Kassian needs the ice time. Given the weak second line, this line gets extra minutes, this helps to develop Kassian and Matthias. We'll need a strong fourth line in order to compete, given we are adding youth to the top six. I like Sestito but pairing him with Richardson will kill any offense, they should be kept separate while we're healthy. Hansen is fiesty enough to fit in with the others and will bring some offensive punch, though this will kill his trade value a bit (its not that high anyways). This isn't a knock on Hansen, but our young guys need top minutes to develop. Burrows can also easily fill that role at times when Kassian is playing in the top six. Hamhuis-Bieksa Edler-Tanev Sbisa-Stanton Bieksa plays much better with a stable left side player, and you don't get much more stable than Hamhuis. This pairing has proven to bring grit, a small offensive punch, and reliability in our own zone, without having a Norris candidate this is about as good as we can hope for. Edler needs a bounceback year, he should be given a few less minutes and a reliable partner. Tanev is steady and can watch Edler's back. If Edler doesn't start hitting again this could be a flimsy pairing, but we need to believe in our guys and hope he puts his game back together. Third pairing can be given increased minutes, this should be a hard hitting pairing with a bit of offensive punch. When rolled out after the first pairing we can gain a good amount of momentum physically, hopefully having two pairings that are punishing will encourage Edler to go out there and throw a few hits, if it does we'll have a fairly hard hitting d-corps. Stanton will be playing his off side but this shouldn't hurt his game much, he plays a fairly simple style. Miller Lack No brainer to pin Miller as the starter, but still need to give Lack some games in order to continue his development.
  11. [Signing] VAN signs Ryan Miller

    I'm really liking this signing. The three year term is perfect, just enough time for Demko to be ready to turn pro, at which point the torch can be passed to Lack (or Ericsson, Markstrom, etc) while Demko can slot in either as our AHL starter or as a backup. This sets everyone up in a low-pressure environment. The cap hit is steep, but it isn't that much more than what I would consider a reasonable amount ($4.5m). We certainly have the cap to spend right now, and in the third year Miller will be tradeable which gives us options in case we need that cap space. The only real issue would be the second year, maybe there is a holy grail UFA available that we miss out on because of this contract, though those are rare so this is unlikely. There really was no avoiding this, any useful goaltender/mentor would need to be around for more than a year, and you must pay a higher salary if you want to avoid the longer term deals. A+ for not signing Miller to a long term deal, this could have easily been a 6 year deal if other GMs had negotiated it. A+ for picking the goaltender with the highest ceiling, allowing us to remain competitive and avoid becoming the new Edmonton. Pretty well the only guy available who has the potential to be the best in the league, though I don't see that happening personally. A+ for picking the best possible mentor for our young guys, and someone who is already (arguably) on the down slide and will be easy to sweep aside when one of our younger guys is ready. In a perfect world, we still have Schneids in net, but given the situation Benning was presented with, I think he did the best he could. Our goaltending looks to be strong for years to come.
  12. [Draft] VAN selects Jared McCann 24th Overall

    I wouldn't read into the Vancouver comment. He is 17, kids don't even know the meaning of the word 'career' at that age. It'll hit them all soon enough that being part of any NHL franchise is an opportunity of a lifetime.
  13. Why did we keep Glen Gulutzan around?

    You don't work for people, you work with people. That is what it means to be a team. If the coaching staff can't figure that out, what example do the players have to follow? I suspect there will be little issue between Willie and Gully and no one will care who is working for who. Personal career aspirations are a big deal in the off season, but once camp starts its all business or you don't belong as a coach in the NHL.
  14. [Report] Stastny-Avalanche can't complete a deal

    Makes senses. He's a great player and teams will have lots of cap to spend this summer.
  15. I don't mind paying the costs of driving, but I don't care for those who feel they should be allowed to use the same roads without paying the same costs. Basically person A has a car, pays a certain amount, and gets the extra freedom of having their own car, ability to help others, ability to react to emergencies, etc. Person B takes transit, bicycles, walks, etc, pays significantly less, and keeps in shape, helps the environment, traffic congestion, etc. So each person gets benefits, whatever you care for you can pick a mode of transportation that caters to your needs. Yet the odd thing, some people pay far less than others. I figure everyone should be paying at least the amount a frugal car + basic insurance + fuel + basic maintenance would cost if they want to be on the roads whatsoever. So what if you help the environment by biking, I can drive you to the hospital if you have a heart attack, there will always be good and bad things about every mode of transportation, so why give some special treatment.