|
HookShot posted:That whole part of Highway 1 is already a giant clusterfuck, I don't even WANT to know how many lane changes I'm going to have to make to get back onto Highway 7 without accidentally ending up somewhere I don't want to be. If you want we'll trade you Rob Ford for the Mayor of Surrey, sight unseen? Rob gets access to new drugs, you get a guy who will STOP THE WAR ON THE CAR and whoever we get in return has got to be an improvement.
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 14:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 10:12 |
|
|
Telus won't be buying Mobilicity today.quote:The federal government won't allow Mobilicity to transfer its wireless spectrum to larger rival Telus, Industry Minister Christian Paradis says, which means the companies' $380-million takeover is nixed as currently constructed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 14:06
|
|
|
Wow, I wouldn't have guessed that. It's always nice when they actually do make the right decision when dealing with the big telcos. Also, I'm going to La Bottega for the first time later today because of this thread! (or, the previous iteration of it.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 14:57
|
|
|
Man, I'd go, but last time the line was out the door, and I don't have time for that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 15:29
|
|
|
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/06/03/guy-giorno-harpers-former_n_3378099.htmlquote:Giorno, a lawyer with Fasken Martineau, is well respected as an expert in accountability and ethics law. He is considered a specialist in the rules on lobbying. My fiancee has met Giorno and says he is indeed a *smart* guy, and a real expert on lobbying law - he was the keynote speaker at a workshop for lobbying law for non-profits she attended. Also that Wright is smart for picking him.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 16:24
|
|
|
Today I learned that there's no apostrophe in Tim Hortons because the language police in Quebec raised a stink about an English possessive being in the name.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 16:50
|
|
|
See finally we did something right! Love us please. But really, I was thrilled about this too! thexerox123 posted:
Amazing enjoy it my friend. It is well worth the wait if you're able too! Assuredly it will be the best sandwich you have had in Ottawa. Though Dirienzo's off Preston is great too. Rust Martialis posted:
I have had the pleasure of working with him and while his humour is dry and having to listen to him give a speech can be just boring as all hell, he is an incredibly brilliant dude!
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 16:52
|
|
|
less than three posted:Based on the consultation, all three proposed methods will probably have a toll. "Costs could be covered by user-based revenues, subject to additional analysis." Ugh, loving Christ. Toll roads are one of those things that make me SO loving ANGRY. THIS IS WHY WE PAY TAXES, SO THAT EVERYONE CAN USE THE ROADS WITHOUT DRIVING TO loving ABBOTSFORD.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 16:52
|
|
|
Right but in practice what's happened is that road maintenance is now subsidized by public transit fees, which are a lot easier to raise than taxes. I am not opposed to toll roads.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 16:54
|
|
|
HookShot posted:Ugh, loving Christ. Toll roads are one of those things that make me SO loving ANGRY. THIS IS WHY WE PAY TAXES, SO THAT EVERYONE CAN USE THE ROADS WITHOUT DRIVING TO loving ABBOTSFORD. Do you object to paying bus fares? I don't see why roads should be any different - transport that's largely funded by taxation but which also contains a user-fee component.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 16:55
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:Do you object to paying bus fares? I don't see why roads should be any different - transport that's largely funded by taxation but which also contains a user-fee component. I like your reasoning, and it is fairly solid. It's unfortunate though, that these tolls primarily target those across the river, who also have the least access to decent public transit, yet pay for it as a part of TransLink just like those on the 'right' side of the Fraser do. I guess raising the gas tax has become pretty much untenable to people, and transit rate increases are getting frankly ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 17:06
|
|
|
rhazes posted:I like your reasoning, and it is fairly solid. It's unfortunate though, that these tolls primarily target those across the river, who also have the least access to decent public transit, yet pay for it as a part of TransLink just like those on the 'right' side of the Fraser do. I guess raising the gas tax has become pretty much untenable to people, and transit rate increases are getting frankly ridiculous. They use up far far far far more infrastructure dollars per capita (in highways, roads and bridges) than the inner city though...
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 17:15
|
|
|
rhazes posted:I like your reasoning, and it is fairly solid. It's unfortunate though, that these tolls primarily target those across the river, who also have the least access to decent public transit, yet pay for it as a part of TransLink just like those on the 'right' side of the Fraser do. I guess raising the gas tax has become pretty much untenable to people, and transit rate increases are getting frankly ridiculous. Yeah, I can definitely sympathize with that. However, a system of modest tolls on all bridges (or even all major roads, technology permitted) would strike me as an equitable way to extract payment from users of infrastructure in proportion to how much they use it (i.e. exactly like bus fares). I repeat - it really doesn't have to be expensive - I was just in Virginia and I noticed a toll of $0.85 on one of the bridges. This seems less likely in Canada, where the default position is apparently that one must charge a minimum of $5 for basically anything, but there's no reason we couldn't do the same.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 17:16
|
|
|
priznat posted:I'm sure whatever is chosen New West will manage to be whiny douchenozzles about it. As a whiney New Westminsterer, I do honestly wonder where the hell all that traffic is going to offload. Isn't McBride-Kingsway already the comedy option for commuting? Or is the idea to hop on the 1 via Brunette-Columbia? Surely the savings for that vs the new Port Mann aren't that significant, considering you have to backtrack towards it anyway?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 17:23
|
|
|
Mr. Wynand posted:As a whiney New Westminsterer, I do honestly wonder where the hell all that traffic is going to offload. Isn't McBride-Kingsway already the comedy option for commuting? Or is the idea to hop on the 1 via Brunette-Columbia? Surely the savings for that vs the new Port Mann aren't that significant, considering you have to backtrack towards it anyway? People are already spending $4 in gas to avoid the $3 toll.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 17:32
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:Yeah, I can definitely sympathize with that. However, a system of modest tolls on all bridges (or even all major roads, technology permitted) would strike me as an equitable way to extract payment from users of infrastructure in proportion to how much they use it (i.e. exactly like bus fares). The Port Mann's is 3.00 one-way, and I can't honestly remember if it is going to be increased over time to keep up with inflation, or if inflation will whittle that cost down over time to make it more reasonable over time. I hope it's the latter, and I bet whatever new bridge they put in will be horrendously expensive as well. The tolls themselves just seem to be punitive and excessive, but I guess that's what happens when there's a public-private partnership, of course the business wants to get in and gouge the poo poo out of people. I think there's a real problem with trying to make the fees associated with certain actions to be their actual costs. Transit SHOULD be subsidized heavily, because of the positive externalities it brings with it: less emissions, less traffic/infrastructure needed for transportation, increased sense of 'community' and ease of use for tourists/low income residents. But, bridge users shouldn't be bearing the brunt of the burden either, just because a new bridge is such an obvious lightning rod with how much it costs and how huge of a project it is. (Compared to smaller projects like re-paving, lane expansions, adding new street lights, expanding sewage/etc infrastructure under the roads themselves.) gently caress it, jack up the gas tax again.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 17:34
|
|
|
mr. unhsib posted:Today I learned that there's no apostrophe in Tim Hortons because the language police in Quebec raised a stink about an English possessive being in the name. Not really - it's that Tim Hortons and Harveys (who use a maple leaf instead of an apostrophe) choose not to use apostrophes in their English signs because they can then use the same set of materials all across Canada instead of having to print separate French versions for use in Quebec.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 17:34
|
|
|
Mr. Wynand posted:As a whiney New Westminsterer, I do honestly wonder where the hell all that traffic is going to offload. Isn't McBride-Kingsway already the comedy option for commuting? Or is the idea to hop on the 1 via Brunette-Columbia? Surely the savings for that vs the new Port Mann aren't that significant, considering you have to backtrack towards it anyway? Yeah I don't really understand where that traffic would end up. As it is the Brunette interchange is extremely busy at rush hour as is the whole Columbia area as far as I know. And Kingsway/Marine drive out of New West are super slow at rush hour as it is too. I guess it all goes back to those studies that say increasing road capacity doesn't get rid of congestion it just moves it to the next heavily loaded area.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 17:36
|
|
|
rhazes posted:The tolls themselves just seem to be punitive and excessive It's the Canadian way. rhazes posted:But, bridge users shouldn't be bearing the brunt of the burden either, just because a new bridge is such an obvious lightning rod with how much it costs and how huge of a project it is. (Compared to smaller projects like re-paving, lane expansions, adding new street lights, expanding sewage/etc infrastructure under the roads themselves.) That's why in my ideal world, drivers would pay proportionate to distance driven (at amounts commensurate with actual justifiable infrastructure spending needs, and no higher). There's virtually no other area of consumption where people don't expect to pay proportionally for usage (outside of a Chinese food buffet) and I really don't see why driving should be any different. Especially given its negative externalities. Lexicon fucked around with this message at 17:44 on Jun 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 17:39
|
|
|
On the other hand, War On Cars.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 17:47
|
|
|
Giant Goats posted:Not really - it's that Tim Hortons and Harveys (who use a maple leaf instead of an apostrophe) choose not to use apostrophes in their English signs because they can then use the same set of materials all across Canada instead of having to print separate French versions for use in Quebec. ... because the French language police give you poo poo for having an apostrophe in your company name.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 17:47
|
|
|
Don't they have to print up a whole french set of stuff anyway? Like cups and wrappers to have french all over them? I have no idea if the cups are bilingual or not already, honestly, I never eat at Tim Hortons. Not since my childhood spent as a boy named Tim with a last initial of H 
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 17:50
|
|
|
Rust Martialis posted:... because the French language police give you poo poo for having an apostrophe in your company name. Which I couldn't believe when they did. How insane is that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 17:51
|
|
|
Blade_of_tyshalle posted:Don't they have to print up a whole french set of stuff anyway? Like cups and wrappers to have french all over them? I have no idea if the cups are bilingual or not already, honestly, I never eat at Tim Hortons. Not since my childhood spent as a boy named Tim with a last initial of H Yeah, any large business just gets packaging done bilingual to save money.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 17:52
|
|
|
less than three posted:Yeah, any large business just gets packaging done bilingual to save money. My level of French comprehension is 'cereal box'.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 17:55
|
|
|
Giant Goats posted:Not really - it's that Tim Hortons and Harveys (who use a maple leaf instead of an apostrophe) choose not to use apostrophes in their English signs because they can then use the same set of materials all across Canada instead of having to print separate French versions for use in Quebec. We do something similar for our logo. Becuase Liberal en Francais is Libéral, we use a maple leaf, with the stem fitting over the E so it can be used in both official languages  EDIT: With a picture 
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 17:56
|
|
|
When I realized that about the Liberal logo, I thought it was pretty bitchin'. None of the other logos come close, especially not this turd. What is that? It looks like a big ol' V with a C hidden behind it, and the leaf is just kind of jammed in there like they forgot to have one in the first place. This could be a nifty space agency logo, but a political party?  I like the CPC logo, too, it's just a big ol' C with a red leaf inside. Looks nice.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 18:01
|
|
|
Team THEOLOGY posted:Which I couldn't believe when they did. How insane is that. Who cares? This is a company that makes a half billion dollars in profit each year I'm sure they'll survive having to have different cups and signs to suit the various localities where they do business. Maybe they can dip into their endless budget for stupid TV commercials to pay for it
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 18:05
|
|
|
THC posted:Who cares? This is a company that makes a half billion dollars in profit each year I'm sure they'll survive having to have different cups and signs to suit the various localities where they do business. Maybe they can dip into their endless budget for stupid TV commercials to pay for it Yea, gently caress margins. Business is about survival not success. [/S] I see what your saying but obviously disagree with you and could offer a million hyperbolic examples to show why that statement seems so privileged and from an economic perspective just foolish. But I think we know I don't agree anyway so I guess I won't. But out of curiosity why does that happen to them but then Burger King can have it's name as above on St Catherine Street across from The Bay and Game Buzz? I never fully understood it. Team THEOLOGY fucked around with this message at 18:12 on Jun 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 18:07
|
|
|
THC posted:Who cares? This is a company that makes a half billion dollars in profit each year I'm sure they'll survive having to have different cups and signs to suit the various localities where they do business. Maybe they can dip into their endless budget for stupid TV commercials to pay for it Because its an anti-small business measure that makes companies not want to do business in Quebec and is especially harmful to start ups.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 18:09
|
|
|
Blade_of_tyshalle posted:When I realized that about the Liberal logo, I thought it was pretty bitchin'. None of the other logos come close, especially not this turd. My favourite thing about the Canadian Alliance logo is that it got ripped off by a mexican party.  (Also Tim Hortons could've kept the apostrophe by having its name in Québec be Les Restaurants Tim Horton's or something, it's really no big deal.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 18:14
|
|
|
Tim Hortons is a small business. Right.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 18:16
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Because its an anti-small business measure that makes companies not want to do business in Quebec and is especially harmful to start ups. You're gonna have to explain that assertion. Fledgling companies (ones which aren't run by morons, anyway) aren't going to randomly expand into Quebec without a strategy for it, or they're already there in which case the language law stuff is second nature to them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 18:18
|
|
|
rhazes posted:gently caress it, jack up the gas tax again. Sure, if you do this in places where public transit is actually an alternative. I live in a small town, where public transit is three bus routes with colours for names. And there's one bus per route. With no real stops at places other than downtown tourist areas. It's useless for me as I can't use it to get to work, and the downtown core is entirely walkable so there's very little reason to use the transit. Add in that the town doesn't really have the population to support a transit system, and it doesn't make sense. London (UK) uses a congestion charge, which would make more sense than hiking the gas tax.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 18:21
|
|
|
Nah gently caress that let's jus use the same exact one-size-fits-all strategy and marketing materials in every region and if it doesn't work for whatever reason or god forbid the people there get mad at us for making GBS threads cookie-cutter english symbols and terms all over their neighbourhood we can just go cry about it on Sun News or whatever MY 9 FIGURE MARGINS
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 18:21
|
|
|
Blade_of_tyshalle posted:You're gonna have to explain that assertion. Fledgling companies (ones which aren't run by morons, anyway) aren't going to randomly expand into Quebec without a strategy for it, or they're already there in which case the language law stuff is second nature to them. Exactly. Hence why a lot of companies skip out on Quebec for contests and promotions. Quebec seems to function fine without it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 18:22
|
|
|
Picturing a tiny swarm of Tim Hortons, distributing lovely coffee and awful donuts.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 18:22
|
|
|
priznat posted:Picturing a tiny swarm of Tim Hortons, distributing lovely coffee and awful donuts. If you want a vision of the future...
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 18:24
|
|
|
THC posted:If you want a vision of the future... A double double pouring down the throat of humanity forever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 18:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 10:12 |
|
|
rhazes posted:The Port Mann's is 3.00 one-way, and I can't honestly remember if it is going to be increased over time to keep up with inflation, or if inflation will whittle that cost down over time to make it more reasonable over time. I hope it's the latter, and I bet whatever new bridge they put in will be horrendously expensive as well. The tolls themselves just seem to be punitive and excessive, but I guess that's what happens when there's a public-private partnership, of course the business wants to get in and gouge the poo poo out of people. This is basically what I agree with. I don't think there should be toll roads, I think taxes should be increased (preferably on the rich!) to pay for bridges that can be used by all users, regardless of whether they can afford to pay $6 a day to get to their jobs. As far as I'm concerned, roads and bridges are an essential service and should be treated as such. It shouldn't be a thing where people who can afford to pay the toll are able to cross the river, and those who can't are just poo poo out of luck.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 18:29
|
|