vinny_in_vancouver

Members
  • Content count

    1,389
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,143 Revered

1 Follower

About vinny_in_vancouver

  • Rank
    Canucks Prospect
  1. This is pure evil.
  2. Can't wait to see Manukyan in action. Also, can't wait to buy his Canucks jersey.

    1. Twilight Sparkle

      Twilight Sparkle

      Manukyan the canuckian? o_o

    2. Baer.

      Baer.

      Its too bad he wont able to go on the rides at playland if he ever comes to Vancouver

    3. vinny_in_vancouver

      vinny_in_vancouver

      he's just 1 inch shorter than Martin St. Louis.

  3. [Signing] Canucks re-sign Troy Stecher

    Based on what I've seen live, his hockey IQ is one of the highest in the Canucks.
  4. Do we give Bo the "C"? POLL

    Bo was leading the team already last season. He has pretty much led by example. During off-season, he worked so hard on his skating and improved it immensely. During the season, any time they needed a big goal, he was the go-to guy. While injured, he worked his butt off and came back with a fitness level better than before his injury. He made his linemates better as he likes looking for them. He is one of our forwards who can create something out of nothing. He plays a responsible game on both ends of the ice. He has already been an All-Star. He recently played for Team Canada - which shows how highly influential hockey guys in Canada think about his game. If I am his teammate and that doesn't inspire me to get better, then somebody be checking my pulse.
  5. They're looking for a D-man. And we know how much they love French. As it happens, Alex Biega fits both requirements. To make it even better, he's from Montreal. So it will have to be Ericsson + Gagner + Biega.
  6. Using tax money to fund green tech is a great suggestion as it's something that's a lot harder (right now) for Trump to tariff away! And it would be great if we can somehow plant these companies in resource-oriented provinces like Saskatchewan and Alberta.
  7. Different job opportunities and competition there, though. With tariffs, they stand to lose more of their existing customers. I really think it's a tough problem.
  8. Unfortunately, in a free trade economy, what every country does matters. If there is the same product of the same quality from but one is a lot cheaper because that country took shortcuts (e.g., deforested its mountains), non-conscientious companies will always opt for the cheaper good. They will excuse it as: if I don't buy the cheaper item, it will put my company's viability at risk. So then, our government will need to subsidize. But then, we have Trump complaining about unfair practices and so on.
  9. I completely agree. But imho, the sales pitch can't be something like: with this carbon tax, we will not only improve the environment but also benefit you guys economically. In the case of carbon tax (and most every tax), that's a hard point to defend. I'd much rather hear: if we don't do this, your children's going to suffer, and if there's economic benefit, then even better.
  10. When big countries like China or even the United States are killing their environment for economic gain while our beautiful worry about the environment, it will be hard to compete economically. I have friends from mainland China who have told me how their city has prospered at the expense of polluted rivers, and so they took their money and left the country. They longingly tell me about their long-lost childhood where they were swimming in the rivers.
  11. You may think so - except that I upvoted you on a few of your hockey posts since then. Hockey is hockey, and it's ok to be opinionated about those. But things that I think really matter need to be talked about: world survival or discrimination (regardless of whether it's religious or sexual orientation or race or ...). In this case, the author put forward the viewpoint of a province which was criticizing the economics of carbon tax - I personally found that unsurprising, but you did. When I asked for your opinion, you didn't give it at first and just went back to one-liners that didn't convince anyone. If we all keep doing that, then we become like Trump.
  12. That's actually more like it. Do note that there were 2 studies mentioned. My own take on it is that carbon tax is going to be bad for a lot of economies, and in the world of free trade, anybody that doesn't play by the rules will be able to take advantage of those who do play by the rules. So when I see articles that point out the negative economic impact of carbon tax, I personally don't find it surprising. It sounds like you did though. To me personally, I look at this whole issue as short-term personal gain versus world survival, and imho, that should be an easy choice for all of us. Based on my experience, I've never seen anybody get convinced to go for carbon tax by telling them that it will be good for them economically.
  13. But I already did. You said the article is an "one guys unsubstantiated opinion piece". I asked for which parts are unsubstantiated. I even pointed out that the writer referred to university research. So which parts are unsubstantiated?
  14. Rob, I believe you'd be making a very huge mistake if you think Jimmy's opinions and the way he presents them represents Canada. I'd like to believe that people here try to reach out to the other side and engage in reasonable discourse.
  15. It would be nice if you can contribute more to the discussion than just name calling as that does nothing to convince anybody. Which parts of the article are you complaining about? Are you going to go after the researches done by the universities? What's your stance and why do you support it? In the interest of full disclosure, I'm definitely in support of drastically cutting down our collective carbon footprint as quickly as possible even at the cost of economic loss for myself (and the rest of the world if need be), and I've been trying to be true to that in my own personal choices.