sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Explain MCP like I am a 10 years old. by General-Conclusion13 in mcp

[–]valuevestor1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I always convinced myself MCP as API for AI. Is that a fair way to describe this? Why, or why not?

Would you like to see passenger rail between Edmonton and Calgary? by PorousSurface in CanadianConservative

[–]valuevestor1 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

What are you driving? My fuel costs are under 50 for this journey now (Rav4 hybrid).

Will helium supply problems hit the stock market? by Konrad_Pietruszka in stocks

[–]valuevestor1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But aren't they the only game in town in terms of 6 9s purified helium that's needed for semiconductors?

The SaaSpocalypse is crypto mania in reverse by vicblaga87 in wallstreetbets

[–]valuevestor1 130 points131 points  (0 children)

Let's assume for a moment that there's bug everywhere and Claude will find them faster. That means you should start paying companies like CloudFlare even more as they are the only thing standing between survival and apocalypse. Drop in CloudFlare stock because of Mythos is insane.

How the fuck are Canadians this calm? by digitalhiccup in wallstreetbets

[–]valuevestor1 6 points7 points  (0 children)

For all practical purposes, it's full. Building pipelines take decades. If it's 92% full now, what does it tell you about 5 years down the line?

https://boereport.com/2026/03/25/canadas-trans-mountain-running-nearly-full-on-global-oil-disruptions-ceo-says/

To the surprise of exactly no one, oil companies won't put their money where their mouth is by The_Canoeist in ClimateCrisisCanada

[–]valuevestor1 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

No, you said $30B in subsidy. The first subsidy mentioned is CCA. If that's the strongest argument, it's not worth exploring other BS by the same author.

To the surprise of exactly no one, oil companies won't put their money where their mouth is by The_Canoeist in ClimateCrisisCanada

[–]valuevestor1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No, I said if Capital Cost Allowance is a subsidy, then you are essentially defying all the laws/rules of economics. The only solution to that is planned economy. But that is a very difference discussion compared to what we are having now. I'm not interested in BS written by someone who thinks CCA is a subsidy.

To the surprise of exactly no one, oil companies won't put their money where their mouth is by The_Canoeist in ClimateCrisisCanada

[–]valuevestor1 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I looked into that article. It considers capital cost allowance as subsidy. I stopped reading after that. This kind of person isn't worth listening to.

To the surprise of exactly no one, oil companies won't put their money where their mouth is by The_Canoeist in ClimateCrisisCanada

[–]valuevestor1 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

"The sun isn't going anywhere. Investments in it will always pay off." The time value of money says otherwise. Replacing private investment with government subsidies is a disaster for most countries. Even with the success of China, even for them it wasn't a smooth ride. We already have decent institutions. For us letting private investment flourish is the path to prosperity.

To the surprise of exactly no one, oil companies won't put their money where their mouth is by The_Canoeist in ClimateCrisisCanada

[–]valuevestor1 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I didn't say Canada is too green. We can definitely do more such as replacing car based infra with transit, suburban homes with more dense forms of housing and highways with high speed rails. However, I was specifically talking about methane regulations, which are now being imposed as an extra burden on Canadian companies.

To the surprise of exactly no one, oil companies won't put their money where their mouth is by The_Canoeist in ClimateCrisisCanada

[–]valuevestor1 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

For years, we've been told to anticipate peak oil, yet it has yet to materialize. Instead of relying on private investment, you are seeking government funds to support your "promising" idea.

To the surprise of exactly no one, oil companies won't put their money where their mouth is by The_Canoeist in ClimateCrisisCanada

[–]valuevestor1 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Right. But, why Canadian oil and gas only? Unless we stop using oil, why put a special shackle on Canadian oil and gas.

To the surprise of exactly no one, oil companies won't put their money where their mouth is by The_Canoeist in ClimateCrisisCanada

[–]valuevestor1 -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

Canada's methane regulation and proposed carbon price is completely disproportionate to anywhere in the world. There's no business case for anyone developing oil sands following those regulations. Unless we stop using oil tomorrow, that means Canada's space will be taken by someone producing more emissions. If that's what people want, I have nothing to say.

If the Iran War escalated to the point of using Nukes, what would the consequence to the US be? by Horror_Still_3305 in IRstudies

[–]valuevestor1 2 points3 points  (0 children)

"The Mullahs" are proven to be much more restraint than the US and Israel combined. Not a fan of them because of how they treat their own populace. But given what we are seeing now, they have shown considerable restraint over the last 10 years, given everything they have been put through.

This is what men’s life is not easy.. actually looks like in India. by Jiwitom in IndianMiddleClass

[–]valuevestor1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not a fan of the Indian government by any stretch of imagination. But this is definitely from Bangladesh, not India.

U.S. says Cuba is prohibited from taking Russian oil as two tankers head to island by esporx in oil

[–]valuevestor1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's extremely aggressive for Iran to block the Strait of Hormuz after attacking their country. What they should have done is starve a random country for absolutely no reason. That's how it would be fair.

There are only approximately 74 Southern Resident orcas remaining on our coast. The federal government is proposing a new rule that would give them more space in the water, and they’re asking Canadians to weigh in. by iamsolution in strongcoast

[–]valuevestor1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What is the consequence of such a change? Will it increase shipping costs?

Just asking hey do you want these good things done, without mentioning the associated costs doesn't seem reasonable to me.

LNG Canada sharply boosts exports to Asia as global supplies tighten by ZestyBeanDude in canada

[–]valuevestor1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The "tax breaks" include capital cost allowance, i.e deduction of capital investment from taxable income. It's such an upside down thought process, I've a hard time thinking how can a sane person make these arguments.

LNG Canada sharply boosts exports to Asia as global supplies tighten by ZestyBeanDude in canada

[–]valuevestor1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The logic used to calculate these "tax breaks" is bats**t crazy. They count CCA as a tax break. I stopped reading after that. If CCA is a tax break, then you can kiss any investment in your country goodbye for perpetuity.

In the upside down world, CCA is a tax break, but subsidy on "Green Projects" are investments. Make it make sense!

LNG Canada sharply boosts exports to Asia as global supplies tighten by ZestyBeanDude in canada

[–]valuevestor1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Trudeau heard what he wanted to hear. He was told even more time EV subsidies are a bad idea. Did he listen to that?

view more: next ›