Questions you want answered.

Robear wrote:

You need a lawyer to tell you that stuff...

Do you know how expensive that is? It is very expensive.

Vector wrote:
Robear wrote:

You need a lawyer to tell you that stuff...

Do you know how expensive that is? It is very expensive.

So is running afoul of USA and or Canadian law.

MaxShrek wrote:

Those long metal things on the side of roads and highways to keep cars from sliding off a hill or into a tree.. do you call them guide rails or guard rails?

As a very belated reply: guide rails are things that devices move along, generally in constant contact. Guard rails exist to keep things from escaping a defined area, generally with the idea that the guarded things aren't supposed to actually touch them.

The highway version is definitely guard rails.

WizKid wrote:
Vector wrote:
Robear wrote:

You need a lawyer to tell you that stuff...

Do you know how expensive that is? It is very expensive.

So is running afoul of USA and or Canadian law.

I think there’s a misunderstanding. I was wondering if anyone here had any experience in this. I’ve started a company before and am well aware of the ins and outs of the purely Canadian side. Not going to run out and hire someone for a company that doesn’t exist.

Quote button isn't edit button!

Highway guardrails and wire barriers are designed to function as guiderails during an accident. They literally bend out and work to redirect the vehicle back into the roadway. So they are both.

Malor wrote:
MaxShrek wrote:

Those long metal things on the side of roads and highways to keep cars from sliding off a hill or into a tree.. do you call them guide rails or guard rails?

As a very belated reply: guide rails are things that devices move along, generally in constant contact. Guard rails exist to keep things from escaping a defined area, generally with the idea that the guarded things aren't supposed to actually touch them.

The highway version is definitely guard rails.

If you're gonna go back four pages to answer a question, you could at least go a few posts down to see where an expert already responded.

ActualDragon wrote:

The purpose is to guard you from roadside hazards that would be particularly catastrophic by guiding you back onto the roadway. I personally use guard rails. Now I'm curious where it breaks down regionally.

(I am a civil engineer type, and I'd reference a design manual for you but they're all in my office and it seems Wikipedia has us covered)

A guide rail is non-destructive to the thing being guided.

Ideally, hitting a guardrail on the highway is mostly non-destructive. I have literally seen people drive away from hitting guardrails and uprooting the supports, so I've seen this happen.

Is guiderails vs. guardrails the new, even more tedious "is a hamburger a sandwich"?

hbi2k wrote:

Is guiderails vs. guardrails the new, even more tedious "is a hamburger a sandwich"?

Well lets put this to bed right now. Neither guardrails NOR guiderails are sandwiches.

I thought the debate was if a hotdog is a sandwich? Because a hamburger is definitely a sandwich and anyone who says otherwise is an idiot.

The bigger debate is if ketchup is a smoothie.

Jonman wrote:
hbi2k wrote:

Is guiderails vs. guardrails the new, even more tedious "is a hamburger a sandwich"?

Well lets put this to bed right now. Neither guardrails NOR guiderails are sandwiches.

Well, depending on how fast the vehicle was going.

LeapingGnome wrote:

The bigger debate is if ketchup is a smoothie.

Only if you partial freeze it first.

LeapingGnome wrote:

I thought the debate was if a hotdog is a sandwich? Because a hamburger is definitely a sandwich and anyone who says otherwise is an idiot.

The bigger debate is if ketchup is a smoothie.

It's a jam.

maverickz wrote:
LeapingGnome wrote:

I thought the debate was if a hotdog is a sandwich? Because a hamburger is definitely a sandwich and anyone who says otherwise is an idiot.

The bigger debate is if ketchup is a smoothie.

It's a jam.

Obviously.

I'm with the smoothie side, because if it's not a smoothie, just what *have* I been drinking for breakfast all these years?

Robear wrote:

I'm with the smoothie side, because if it's not a smoothie, just what *have* I been drinking for breakfast all these years?

Regret?

Jonman wrote:
Robear wrote:

I'm with the smoothie side, because if it's not a smoothie, just what *have* I been drinking for breakfast all these years?

Regret?

It's only regret if it's from the Regretter region of France, otherwise it's just sparkling sadness

Just call them what the rest of the world calls them - Armco barriers, after their original manufacturer.

LeapingGnome wrote:

I thought the debate was if a hotdog is a sandwich? Because a hamburger is definitely a sandwich and anyone who says otherwise is an idiot.

The bigger debate is if ketchup is a smoothie.

If you put ketchup on a cheese filled hotdog then it’s a pizza.

LeapingGnome wrote:

I thought the debate was if a hotdog is a sandwich? Because a hamburger is definitely a sandwich and anyone who says otherwise is an idiot.

The bigger debate is if ketchup is a smoothie.

Ketchup is a condiment.

Ketchup + cottage cheese is a smoothie.

Are you saying all smoothies have to have dairy?

Well all the ones I like do. I figure they all need a base and additive otherwise they wouldn't count. Orange juice is not a smoothie. If you want almond milk with your ketchup I won't hold it against you.

Can I get a LOL?

Vector wrote:

If I were to start a small company in Canada and hire American workers remotely, how would that be handled from a tax and healthcare perspective?

Americans don't get health care, silly.

*Legion* wrote:
Vector wrote:

If I were to start a small company in Canada and hire American workers remotely, how would that be handled from a tax and healthcare perspective?

Americans don't get health care, silly.

Right, once the first batch of workers gets sick and dies off, you just hire new workers!

I used to work for a corporation that was based in Canada and we had private healthcare through a U.S. insurance company that the company paid into and paid U.S. taxes. There was nothing different from having a Canadian HQ than a U.S. HQ on the employee end.

You can contract with employment companies, which will handle all the paperwork, taxes, and healthcare for you. You will pay a substantial premium, but at that point it's just a matter of shoveling their salary + overhead to the company each week, instead of having to know all that stuff yourself.

You find the people yourself, but then the company hires them on your behalf. You pay the company, and the company pays your employee, but doesn't otherwise involve itself in the relationship.

I would definitely regret drinking catchup for breakfast for years.

Thanks bekkilyn and Malor, I really appreciate your responses. Also *Legion* but for different reasons :P.