You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Vancouver Off-Topic / Current EventsThe off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.
People need to realize they're not "sticking it" to Translink when they vote no. Translink just won't do those improvements. They're not going to magically cut CEO salaries and find $250 million because you vote no. They do not win or lose, regardless of the outcome. The only winners or losers are going to be us.
How much do you spend per year on things that charge PST? 0.5% is 50 cents per $100 spent.
When you have time on your computer, please lecture us. Enlighten us with your knowledge and wisdom.
How you can blindly believe that this increased revenue will suddenly be spent wisely is mindboggling.
The point of voting No (for me anyway) is so that some accountability in all levels of our fucked up governance can be had.
Massey tunnel isn't translink jurisdiction. There is a plan to replace it already, that is 100% exclusive of this plebiscite. Things will improve by having the status quo.
Consider yourself enlightened
Patullo bridge on the other hand should've been replaced ages ago. That should've been one of the priorities instead of other decisions they made (or had made for them)
I don't think Soundy meant or said anything about it being translink's jurisdiction. The massey tunnel is being replaced regardless of this plebiscite but what about other projects/improvements?
The patullo bridge definitely should have been replaced ages ago, but I believe voting no will only delay it that much more. I was originally on the "no" side but I ended up voting yes (reluctantly)... I really hate translink and moonbeam but at the end of the day I'm all for paying for the needed improvements.
Whether they use that money wisely.... I can't really say... I just hope they do.
Like anything else in a democratic society, You vote.
This is the greatest shit I have ever heard.
You can't hold any politician in this stupid province accountable by threatening them with your vote.
You basically have two choices of party (unless your some sort of hippy idiot and vote green), Liberal or NDP.
And since the last time the NDP was in power they made such a cock up of things the liberals have been running around doing whatever the fuck they want for the last 15 years, without a care in the world since they knew most people weren't going to vote for the NDP.
So you saying you can "hold the feet of the liberals to the fire", with your vote is beyond hilarious.
Spoiler!
Here is the part of the post which will rustle a few jimmies and net me the fails:
I won't say never, but it would take something ridiculously absurd to force me to vote NDP, their policies and platform do not jive with me whatsoever. I'm not interested in having a nanny state, I'm a capitalist pig, my world is all about eat or be eaten. NDP is on the other end of my spectrum, they would gladly take my food away and give it to those beneath me. Sorry but I don't work 80 hours a week, just to have 50% of my income siphoned off just because some mom with 3 kids and no education didn't force her drug addict of a boyfriend to wear a condom.
There are far too many people in this world who are fine just living off whatever others are willing to give them for nothing. These people who are happy living in mediocrity should be left to fend for themselves. Giving someone money for doing nothing, just because they have nothing, doesn't help the problem, it simply perpetuates it.
Mark my words: YOU WILL NEVER SOLVE HOMELESSNESS OR HUNGER BY JUST THROWING MONEY AT IT.
Because for every 1 person you put in a shelter, two more people decide that they want a free place to stay as well.
I do have one theory that might possibly reduce the number of leeches in our system, humiliation. Sounds cruel, but if you start a list, and have a publicly available record of the people currently on welfare, or social housing, you may be able to shame these people away from taking handouts. It gives these people a reason to strive to make something of themselves because the shame of having their names on that website or whatever would drive them. As a opposed to the current system of stagnation and complacency, these individuals currently have no reason to strive to make something of themselves, why would they. They get spoon fed life and can just kick back and cruise along.
/Rant.
Man that wen't way beyond fucking translink, but anyways.
You can't hold any politician in this stupid province accountable by threatening them with your vote.
You basically have two choices of party (unless your some sort of hippy idiot and vote green), Liberal or NDP.
And since the last time the NDP was in power they made such a cock up of things the liberals have been running around doing whatever the fuck they want for the last 15 years, without a care in the world since they knew most people weren't going to vote for the NDP.
So you saying you can "hold the feet of the liberals to the fire", with your vote is beyond hilarious.
Spoiler!
Here is the part of the post which will rustle a few jimmies and net me the fails:
I won't say never, but it would take something ridiculously absurd to force me to vote NDP, their policies and platform do not jive with me whatsoever. I'm not interested in having a nanny state, I'm a capitalist pig, my world is all about eat or be eaten. NDP is on the other end of my spectrum, they would gladly take my food away and give it to those beneath me. Sorry but I don't work 80 hours a week, just to have 50% of my income siphoned off just because some mom with 3 kids and no education didn't force her drug addict of a boyfriend to wear a condom.
There are far too many people in this world who are fine just living off whatever others are willing to give them for nothing. These people who are happy living in mediocrity should be left to fend for themselves. Giving someone money for doing nothing, just because they have nothing, doesn't help the problem, it simply perpetuates it.
Mark my words: YOU WILL NEVER SOLVE HOMELESSNESS OR HUNGER BY JUST THROWING MONEY AT IT.
Because for every 1 person you put in a shelter, two more people decide that they want a free place to stay as well.
I do have one theory that might possibly reduce the number of leeches in our system, humiliation. Sounds cruel, but if you start a list, and have a publicly available record of the people currently on welfare, or social housing, you may be able to shame these people away from taking handouts. It gives these people a reason to strive to make something of themselves because the shame of having their names on that website or whatever would drive them. As a opposed to the current system of stagnation and complacency, these individuals currently have no reason to strive to make something of themselves, why would they. They get spoon fed life and can just kick back and cruise along.
/Rant.
Man that wen't way beyond fucking translink, but anyways.
That exact logic is why I am all for paying $$ to improve our roads but am voting "no" to Translink managing the money and pushing so hard for these stupid bike lanes and such. I am personally tired of road users in the Lower Mainland being punished with increasing insurance costs, the highest fuel taxes in the province, and being cast as the villain in nearly every bleeding heart political campaign to win votes.
Like you said above, you will never be able to solve societal problems by simply throwing money at it. I personally think that Translink was given X amount of money, have repeatedly shown us mismanagement and delays, and now want more money. So they are moving on from stealing from drivers to average consumers.
As for your little tirade about hard work, I started working at 15, spend nearly every day of my high-school summers working and saving so I could buy a car and insurance for senior year. Ever since then I have managed to own, maintain, and insure my own car without handouts from my parents (but I am grateful they offered many times). Maybe I am being "selfish" but I can honestly say I still work so hard for the privilege and luxury of owning a car, I don't see how it's fair to cast people like you and I who make the conscious choice to drive as somehow "bad" people. And yet hippies, greenwashers, and ultra-liberal "progressives" vilify car users like myself for working hard in order to enjoy a luxury. Lots of people simply prefer driving to public transit, for reasons X Y or Z. Personally I think there is a way to be "for" public transit expansion without being so blatantly anti-car.
This horse has been beaten to death now - all we have to do is wait for the results.
What bothers me is that according to quite a few of the Yes people I've come across in person and online, is that they think voting No will suddenly make Vancouver an even bigger shitshow than it actually is, that all our children will die, and I will be directly responsible for the apocalypse because I was too cheap and selfish to give another 50 cents for every $100 I spend.
...and then they tell me that this shit will happen regardless of the outcome of this plebiscite.
So, using the same logic, is voting Yes suddenly going to relieve all congestion in all major arteries, people who drive to work will suddenly enjoy biking in the rain, and the people of all municipalities can rejoice in harmony?
Fuck that. Wasteful and downright fucked up spending is going to continue to happen, more complaining of having no money will ensue, and major projects will get built no matter the outcome.
The only difference is that one outcome gives them a free ticket to continue to do whatever the fuck they want, and the other outcome is that they will weasel money from some other source, piss more people off, and eventually/hopefully make enough changes for the better so that when the same plebiscite is held in the future, those who voted No will then be able to vote Yes.
^The fact that this project is going through makes me want to never give our government another penny. It seriously makes me think about taking that job I was offered in Mongolia, and never come back.
I cannot even fathom the levels of disarray from within our entire western system that would have allowed someone to decide 20 years ago that expanding the causeway to 4 lanes to allow for a 4 lane bridge would cause too much destruction and environmental loss, yet today that environmental destruction is an alright trade off because 1 single cyclist died.
Seriously all those years ago the government went through those countless public hearings, and votes, and report after report, and in the end it was decided that expanding the causeway was simply not viable, and therefore the residents of the North Shore would have to live with a 3 lane alternating bridge.
Yet today, because of 1 cyclist, and a freak accident, they voted to blatantly throw out all those reports and say "fuck it pave another 3 metres of the sidewalk and put up these hideous guardrails".
Does nobody else see the ridiculous irony in this? hundreds of thousands of people are inconvenienced by this ridiculous 3 lane bridge every day, but 1 cyclists dies, and all of a sudden the world has to stop and conform entirely because of the REMOTE chance that it might happen once more in the next 20 years?
^The fact that this project is going through makes me want to never give our government another penny. It seriously makes me think about taking that job I was offered in Mongolia, and never come back.
I cannot even fathom the levels of disarray from within our entire western system that would have allowed someone to decide 20 years ago that expanding the causeway to 4 lanes to allow for a 4 lane bridge would cause too much destruction and environmental loss, yet today that environmental destruction is an alright trade off because 1 single cyclist died.
Seriously all those years ago the government went through those countless public hearings, and votes, and report after report, and in the end it was decided that expanding the causeway was simply not viable, and therefore the residents of the North Shore would have to live with a 3 lane alternating bridge.
Yet today, because of 1 cyclist, and a freak accident, they voted to blatantly throw out all those reports and say "fuck it pave another 3 metres of the sidewalk and put up these hideous guardrails".
Does nobody else see the ridiculous irony in this? hundreds of thousands of people are inconvenienced by this ridiculous 3 lane bridge every day, but 1 cyclists dies, and all of a sudden the world has to stop and conform entirely because of the REMOTE chance that it might happen once more in the next 20 years?
Right again.
It's a sad, pathetic little irony that when someone dies in a car accident because they were driving unsafely, the majority of society shows so little sympathy for the driver, even though every single one of us has driven badly at some point whether by accident or on purpose. Even when a pedestrian who is jaywalking and wearing all black during a rainy night is struck by a car, all of the bleeding hearts somehow blame the driver for not keeping a more watchful eye, for driving "too fast", and for somehow lacking the clairvoyance and ESP necessary to prevent an accident before it happens.
But when a cyclist, God forbid anything bad happens to them, dies because of their own damn fault - cyclists, like cars, are required by law to allow a pedestrian the right of way on a shared laneway - and pigheadedness, the government, supported by all its little bleeding hearts and pools of crocodile tears, wants to spend $7 million of taxpayer money to fix a problem that could have been prevented with common sense.
Meanwhile, significantly more people are injured, sometimes even killed, every single day in cars in BC. Yet the irony is that these drivers spend significantly more in taxes, insurance, and fuel costs to maintain our roads... but are somehow written off as "the way of things" when something bad happens to them. Sad.
It's a sad, pathetic little irony that when someone dies in a car accident because they were driving unsafely, the majority of society shows so little sympathy for the driver, even though every single one of us has driven badly at some point whether by accident or on purpose. Even when a pedestrian who is jaywalking and wearing all black during a rainy night is struck by a car, all of the bleeding hearts somehow blame the driver for not keeping a more watchful eye, for driving "too fast", and for somehow lacking the clairvoyance and ESP necessary to prevent an accident before it happens.
But when a cyclist, God forbid anything bad happens to them, dies because of their own damn fault - cyclists, like cars, are required by law to allow a pedestrian the right of way on a shared laneway - and pigheadedness, the government, supported by all its little bleeding hearts and pools of crocodile tears, wants to spend $7 million of taxpayer money to fix a problem that could have been prevented with common sense.
Meanwhile, significantly more people are injured, sometimes even killed, every single day in cars in BC. Yet the irony is that these drivers spend significantly more in taxes, insurance, and fuel costs to maintain our roads... but are somehow written off as "the way of things" when something bad happens to them. Sad.
You made a good point there
The government should focus on the needs and interests of the majority who pay tax to sustain the system instead of spending money unwisely on miscellaneous developments. Instead, infrastructure like highway and bridges should be prioritized in their planning.
Vancouver is just not the right place for cycling as 2/3 of the year is rainy. I just couldn't believe how many millions of dollars are spent to bike lane in downtown, which cause even more traffic congestion. Turning right at the red light is not allowed because of the bike lane where it is empty most of the time? Cars and buses, waiting to turn, emit more gas than they should. What a joke. In the big picture, it's not even green at all.
Another case in point is the Burrard Bridge. Moonbeam got rid of a lane to put barriers for a dedicated bike lane leading to, on, and from the bridge.
The lanes are pretty fucking narrow, with shitty drivers and asshole bus drivers, the road surface is shit, and the new right turn lane from Pacific Blvd. onto the bridge southbound is perfectly set up for accidents.
Snow in the city? No problem, we'll use our snow plows to clear the bike lanes first!
I'm glad I live in Coquitlam if I was a resident of CoV I would be livid.
/rant.
When was the last time you trusted any politician? When was the last time there was a legit 3 way party contestation in ANY province?
Quote:
Originally Posted by meme405
LOL!
This is the greatest shit I have ever heard.
You can't hold any politician in this stupid province accountable by threatening them with your vote.
You basically have two choices of party (unless your some sort of hippy idiot and vote green), Liberal or NDP.
And since the last time the NDP was in power they made such a cock up of things the liberals have been running around doing whatever the fuck they want for the last 15 years, without a care in the world since they knew most people weren't going to vote for the NDP.
So you saying you can "hold the feet of the liberals to the fire", with your vote is beyond hilarious.
Spoiler!
Here is the part of the post which will rustle a few jimmies and net me the fails:
I won't say never, but it would take something ridiculously absurd to force me to vote NDP, their policies and platform do not jive with me whatsoever. I'm not interested in having a nanny state, I'm a capitalist pig, my world is all about eat or be eaten. NDP is on the other end of my spectrum, they would gladly take my food away and give it to those beneath me. Sorry but I don't work 80 hours a week, just to have 50% of my income siphoned off just because some mom with 3 kids and no education didn't force her drug addict of a boyfriend to wear a condom.
There are far too many people in this world who are fine just living off whatever others are willing to give them for nothing. These people who are happy living in mediocrity should be left to fend for themselves. Giving someone money for doing nothing, just because they have nothing, doesn't help the problem, it simply perpetuates it.
Mark my words: YOU WILL NEVER SOLVE HOMELESSNESS OR HUNGER BY JUST THROWING MONEY AT IT.
Because for every 1 person you put in a shelter, two more people decide that they want a free place to stay as well.
I do have one theory that might possibly reduce the number of leeches in our system, humiliation. Sounds cruel, but if you start a list, and have a publicly available record of the people currently on welfare, or social housing, you may be able to shame these people away from taking handouts. It gives these people a reason to strive to make something of themselves because the shame of having their names on that website or whatever would drive them. As a opposed to the current system of stagnation and complacency, these individuals currently have no reason to strive to make something of themselves, why would they. They get spoon fed life and can just kick back and cruise along.
/Rant.
Man that wen't way beyond fucking translink, but anyways.
Had my share of reading both sides from multiple sources and will be voting NO. These upgrades are necessary for Vancouver but I don't mind pushing the timeline and if it means telling Translink to smarten the fuck up with their spending.
What bothers me is that according to quite a few of the Yes people I've come across in person and online, is that they think voting No will suddenly make Vancouver an even bigger shitshow than it actually is, that all our children will die, and I will be directly responsible for the apocalypse because I was too cheap and selfish to give another 50 cents for every $100 I spend.
...and then they tell me that this shit will happen regardless of the outcome of this plebiscite.
lol this thread is a long circular argument.
But pretty much this. This is why I can't stand yes people. With ads included they're an assault to my very existence. In the last week its been: Billboards, side boards, annoying little yes-mormons on foot, tv ads, radio ads, internet ads, cold calls, you name it, they've done it.
With regards to Patullo and Massey, so you suddenly think that 0.5% increase will ease the congestion? You think they'll start breaking ground the moment yes passes? Lol. You'll be wallowing in that congestion for another decade and another 1.5% increase in the PST before bids start to begin construction to improve that area.
Translink was quoted a few years back when they announced the 2015 Patullo bridge Maintenance will be in the 2013 budget, that even if/when they secure funding for new construction (ie. Massey/Patullo) it would take them a minimum of 7 to 10 years to get started on construction. In government speak, that's about 14-20 years.
It's not the end of the world. I'm not against the expansion of infrastructure. I would gladly agree to a 1% increase in PST if they had their shit in order. Throwing more money into a tire fire? Yes, totally seems like a good idea.
I've seen the yes argument, absolutely nothing in there is convincing. Fear mongering is easy when you have a $10million budget, so is promising great things.
reads most threads with his pants around his ankles, especially in the Forced Induction forum.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 10,645
Thanked 2,191 Times in 1,131 Posts
What I wonder is how the Yes side keep saying there will be 1million moving into Vancouver but THEY FORGOT to mention that there are people who will leave Vancouver and move to other province, countries or even pass away.
What if we have 1 million people moving in BUT we have 4 million people moving away or pass away. That means we have 3 million less people so then we don't really need extra funding as there are less people in Vancouver.
What I wonder is how the Yes side keep saying there will be 1million moving into Vancouver but THEY FORGOT to mention that there are people who will leave Vancouver and move to other province, countries or even pass away.
What if we have 1 million people moving in BUT we have 4 million people moving away or pass away. That means we have 3 million less people so then we don't really need extra funding as there are less people in Vancouver.
I think the point he's trying to make is that the figure given of people that will move to Vancouver is both an assumption, and somewhat exaggerated, most likely for the purpose of fear mongering.
An semi-imaginary figure provided by one side is obviously going to be biased.
cry cry cry all u want people.. this is coming out of pockets in one form or another
so much political stancing its not even funny
libs want to act as if they have nothing to do with it when they have caused the issue
vote no vote yes, we're still screwed really..
the truth hurts. it'll come one form or another. all this posturing and campaigning seems like a minor waste of people's personal time. At the same time, it's good to get people active and conversational about a public issue - it's how a democratic society and municipality should operate. While in principle I support all the improvements that this tax supposedly pays for, I am really embittered by how much of our personal income and wealth the government garnishes from us in this province. It's what happens when you spend too much time in Alberta (pre oil crisis, anyway).
RS.net, where our google ads make absolutely no sense!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Tokyo/Vancouver
Posts: 974
Thanked 119 Times in 56 Posts
they also have less expenses and with an enormous revenue stream from oil.. they should really have no debt and have surplus
that to me is where they've royally messed up
If they asked me before Olympic construction, I would have voted yes
If they asked me during Canada Line construction, I would have voted yes
If they asked me 15 years ago as a means to fund the Evergreen line / Broadway Line / Another line in Surrey / misc. projects, I would have voted yes
Asking me after your name has been under constant scrutiny while you stay in bed with dumbass politicians who refuse to actually serve the people per historical definition gets you a big fat fucking no
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
