eatshitndie, can I get your advice about skiing outside of Canadian resorts? USA? Europe? What's a good resort to go to? Big with challenging on piste runs. Not those small ones for beginners. So far we have already skied at Lake Louise, Sunshine Village, Marmot Basin, Kicking Horse, Nakiska, and Panorama. Heading to Revelstoke in spring as well. Any recommendations?
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Dont migrate to Canada, it could become Zimbabwe..LOL
- Thread starter larky28
- Start date
northstar near lake tahoe has great runs, double diamond type plus slopes for x-treme free style snowboarding. the other one is squaw valley where winter olympics was once held. i've been to park city in utah, and it's also great with various runs. it was also once a winter olympics venue.
now that i'm getting much older, i need to preserve my knees and hips with more cuntry skiing. it requires stamina and a lot of determination. the best i ever skied was in the alps between italy and switzerland starting from cervinia-breuil on the italian side and round-tripping from zermatt on the swiss side. there's a summit cable car station just beside and below the tip of the matterhorn where the border is. you ski up to the station and take the cable car down. :p oops sorry, you take the cable car up to the very summit from either cervinia or zermatt and ski down either trail. you can have breakfast when you drive up to cervinia from torino, go up to summit, cross the border, ski down to zermatt for lunch, go up to summit again, and ski down to cervinia for coffee break, and back and forth until bones break.
ski map from cervinia side....
the other resort near torino is champoluc.
Last edited:
ski map from zermatt side.....same alpine range but matterhorn is on the right when going up. need to bring passport just in case. and gopro camera.
Last edited:
it's less expensive on the italian side as everything on the swiss side is highly inflated. moreover, for travel it's more fun to fly into torino or milano (more flights) and drive up the windy road (only one road up from a few autostrade off-ramps) to the alps from those 2 cities. driving to zermatt can be arduous and troublesome from geneva or zurich, but taking the trains from either city is a breeze. you can check in your skis and equipment at the airport and the train will drop them at zermatt when you arrive. swiss are efficient, orderly and don't gesture with their hands as much. :p
Last edited:
Baloney ...when oil price hits $80, those dollars will come back.
If Notley tries to be a Muclair, she will be gone.
You have no clue on how the equalization work and you sprout nonsense. By the way, your neighbour Saskatchewan took a good chunk of the money as well.
Ontario is out $15 billion a year. Alberta sends peanuts. When immigrants leave Alberta for Ontario, the federal funding supporting immigrants remain in Alberta, not go to Ontario.
Right-wingers are idiots ...they don't know their facts and spout nonsense.
Please lah, know your facts first before you spout nonsense.
Would we have such a huge deficit if the voodoo economist Harper not reduce corporate tax revenue to the tune of $12 billion annually and HST revenue to the tune of $14 billion annually?
Secondly, how did Harper spend the money? It was not investment on infrastructure because he dictated that only projects that could be completed in 2 years qualified for the money. So, we have gazeebo and toilet built in the middle of nowhere, more skating rinks which are cost centers ...meanwhile spending on infrastructure did not happen.
Who created the deficit in the 80s? And who slayed it? And who generate surplus there after? And who invested in social programs again?
How is aggregate demand generated? If business is not investing despite low taxes, consumers are not spending, where is aggregate demand going to come from.
I don't have the time to do research for you on Grant Devine.
You are a bloody contradiction. You are not happy with balanced budget and not happy with deficit spending. What the hell do you want? More voodoo economics from Harper that got us into this mess?
[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Why Canadians need not fret over the low loonie: Walkom
The oil price collapse gives Canada an opportunity to rethink its dependence on raw materials.
The country is in a tizzy about the falling Canadian dollar. It needn’t be.
We are not going the way of Zimbabwe.
Yes, imported cauliflower may now cost $8 a head. But there is relatively simple solution: Don’t buy cauliflower. Eat cabbage instead.
And when you can, buy Canadian.
The fact that our dollar is now hovering around 70 cents (U.S.) does not mean we are somehow less virtuous than we were when the two currencies were near parity.
It means only that foreigners don’t need as many loonies to buy the Canadian exports they want.
By and large, that’s because the price of oil — a commodity that accounts for a big chunk of Canadian exports — has cratered.
On the one hand, this is real problem, particularly for those whose jobs depend on a never-ending oil boom.
On the other, the oil price collapse gives Canada a chance to rebalance its economy.
Since the 1880s, Canada has been divided, with southern Ontario focusing on manufacturing while the rest of the country concentrated on raw materials — or what economists sometimes call staples.
Oil is only the latest staple. In the end, Alberta and other oil-producing provinces were vulnerable to the weakness that afflicts all staple-dependent economies — the sheer volatility of commodity prices.
When resource prices crash in such economies, they bring down everything around them.
Canada’s former federal Conservative government refused to acknowledge this problem. Instead, it accentuated it.
In particular, it sat by as the oil boom pushed the dollar to a level so high that many Ontario manufacturers could no longer compete in the U.S. market.
They mothballed their plants, laid off workers or went out of business.
New Democratic Party Leader Thomas Mulcair diagnosed this early on as an example of the so-called Dutch disease that can afflict countries caught in a commodity boom.
He later backed away from his analysis for fear of insulting Albertan voters. But his initial call was correct: the oil boom had hurt manufacturing.
Today that high-dollar mistake is being painfully corrected. The cost is falling on ordinary consumers. Manufacturing exports are rising. But it takes time to undo years of damage.
What can Justin Trudeau’s new Liberal government do?
First, it can’t affect the world price of oil. That will be set in part by markets and in part by the Saudi-led OPEC cartel.
What the government can do, however, is use the oil-price depression to encourage a rethinking of Canada’s approach to energy and industry.
Certainly, it makes no sense in climate-change terms to keep the Alberta oilsands. Increasingly, it makes less sense economically.
In his new book, After the Sands, political economist Gordon Laxer calls for the tarsands to be phased out, oil exports to be curbed and Canada to focus instead on energy self-sufficiency.
That’s one solution. Presumably, there are others. The point is that the oil-price collapse provides some room for re-imagining the role of staples in the Canadian economy.
In the meantime, the best way for Ottawa to ease the adjustment back to a low-loonie world is to do what it promised.
First, borrow to spend. Business isn’t investing enough yet to end the slump. Government has to take up the slack.
More to the point, there are useful public works projects that should be built, as well as social needs, such as child and long-term care, that remain unmet.
Second, take a hard, critical look at trade deals such as the as-yet unratified trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).
Most of these pacts are predicated upon the idea that Canada will continue to focus on raw material exports. The TPP in particular would make it harder for Canadian firms to challenge the technology monopoly of existing U.S. pharmaceutical giants.
Eventually, the loonie will rise again as Canadian non-oil exports pick up. With encouragement, it will stabilize at its so-called purchasing power parity rate of about 81 cents (U.S.) — low enough to encourage exports, high enough to allow the occasional trip south.
In the meantime, as we ponder ways to escape the staple trap, enjoy your cabbage. Prepared properly, it can be quite tasty.
Thomas Walkom’s column appears Wednesday, Thursday and Sunday.
The oil price collapse gives Canada an opportunity to rethink its dependence on raw materials.
The country is in a tizzy about the falling Canadian dollar. It needn’t be.
We are not going the way of Zimbabwe.
Yes, imported cauliflower may now cost $8 a head. But there is relatively simple solution: Don’t buy cauliflower. Eat cabbage instead.
And when you can, buy Canadian.
The fact that our dollar is now hovering around 70 cents (U.S.) does not mean we are somehow less virtuous than we were when the two currencies were near parity.
It means only that foreigners don’t need as many loonies to buy the Canadian exports they want.
By and large, that’s because the price of oil — a commodity that accounts for a big chunk of Canadian exports — has cratered.
On the one hand, this is real problem, particularly for those whose jobs depend on a never-ending oil boom.
On the other, the oil price collapse gives Canada a chance to rebalance its economy.
Since the 1880s, Canada has been divided, with southern Ontario focusing on manufacturing while the rest of the country concentrated on raw materials — or what economists sometimes call staples.
Oil is only the latest staple. In the end, Alberta and other oil-producing provinces were vulnerable to the weakness that afflicts all staple-dependent economies — the sheer volatility of commodity prices.
When resource prices crash in such economies, they bring down everything around them.
Canada’s former federal Conservative government refused to acknowledge this problem. Instead, it accentuated it.
In particular, it sat by as the oil boom pushed the dollar to a level so high that many Ontario manufacturers could no longer compete in the U.S. market.
They mothballed their plants, laid off workers or went out of business.
New Democratic Party Leader Thomas Mulcair diagnosed this early on as an example of the so-called Dutch disease that can afflict countries caught in a commodity boom.
He later backed away from his analysis for fear of insulting Albertan voters. But his initial call was correct: the oil boom had hurt manufacturing.
Today that high-dollar mistake is being painfully corrected. The cost is falling on ordinary consumers. Manufacturing exports are rising. But it takes time to undo years of damage.
What can Justin Trudeau’s new Liberal government do?
First, it can’t affect the world price of oil. That will be set in part by markets and in part by the Saudi-led OPEC cartel.
What the government can do, however, is use the oil-price depression to encourage a rethinking of Canada’s approach to energy and industry.
Certainly, it makes no sense in climate-change terms to keep the Alberta oilsands. Increasingly, it makes less sense economically.
In his new book, After the Sands, political economist Gordon Laxer calls for the tarsands to be phased out, oil exports to be curbed and Canada to focus instead on energy self-sufficiency.
That’s one solution. Presumably, there are others. The point is that the oil-price collapse provides some room for re-imagining the role of staples in the Canadian economy.
In the meantime, the best way for Ottawa to ease the adjustment back to a low-loonie world is to do what it promised.
First, borrow to spend. Business isn’t investing enough yet to end the slump. Government has to take up the slack.
More to the point, there are useful public works projects that should be built, as well as social needs, such as child and long-term care, that remain unmet.
Second, take a hard, critical look at trade deals such as the as-yet unratified trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).
Most of these pacts are predicated upon the idea that Canada will continue to focus on raw material exports. The TPP in particular would make it harder for Canadian firms to challenge the technology monopoly of existing U.S. pharmaceutical giants.
Eventually, the loonie will rise again as Canadian non-oil exports pick up. With encouragement, it will stabilize at its so-called purchasing power parity rate of about 81 cents (U.S.) — low enough to encourage exports, high enough to allow the occasional trip south.
In the meantime, as we ponder ways to escape the staple trap, enjoy your cabbage. Prepared properly, it can be quite tasty.
Thomas Walkom’s column appears Wednesday, Thursday and Sunday.
Similar threads
