So what are people supposed to do if they can’t afford food? Starve? This is getting ridiculous. All the big grocery corps need to be broken up to create more competition

[–] BrikoX@lemmy.zip 14 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (2 children)

That is on the new NDP leader's platform.

https://lewisforleader.ca/ideas/public-options

[–] a_gee_dizzle@lemmy.ca 6 points 23 hours ago

That’s awesome

[–] Teppa@lemmy.world -1 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

The problem with grocery stores in Canada is their margins on food are tiny, less than 4%. So a government run entity cant be appreciably cheaper.

Where Loblaws makes its real margin is real estate, which is a monopoly our government fosters and calls peoples nest egg, and they state openly that real estate prices cant be allowed to fall. As a franchise they lease this land out and profit off appreciation of their REIT, and have benefited tremendously from price appreciation like everyone else who owns land in Canada; appreciation caused by sprawled zoning laws, slow permitting time, mass immigration, and a massive greenbelt.

So you're calling on the entity that makes things unaffordable to make it affordable, which we just voted back in the same people who made things far more unaffordable the last decade. People had their say during the election, and they wanted higher asset prices; goods inflation is then collateral damage of high real estate prices.

[–] BrikoX@lemmy.zip 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

So a government run entity cant be appreciably cheaper.

That's simply bullshit.

Did you know that US runs the biggest government own grocery chain in the world? It's literally in the law that they must have at least 23.7% savings compared to other stores. And wouldn't you know, it actually works. Not only prices are a lot cheaper but the selection of goods is even better than many commercial chains.

[–] Teppa@lemmy.world 0 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

Looking into it it appears to be subsidized by the US military budget, and is therefore funded by their exorbitant privilege. Would that be the plan, to borrow money to run them, while also paying union salaries and whatnot?

[–] BrikoX@lemmy.zip 1 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

8,3 million households, $5 billion in annual sales, $1 billion in subsidies. Count me in.

That's half the Canada's total households. So $2 billions in subsidies can lower the grocery prices by 23.7% for every single Canadian and allow those 23.7% of savings back into the economy. Mind blowing when you think about it.

As far as Avi Lewis, he's not planning to use military budget, but instead tax the 1% pedophile class that has been robbing Canadians blind for decades.

[–] Teppa@lemmy.world 0 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

Like I guess its cool if its possible, I mean it would be fantastic, but I have some questions and some doubts.

Where is the margin appearing, if grocery store profits in Canada are mainly due to real estate and their owned REITS then where are the savings coming from? How do we even know the government can do a better job?

Another question is how if theyre paying union wage, which they would as a left leaning policy, where do the efficiencies and low prices come from. If the person person buying food makes minimum wage as a pizza maker or walmart greeter is he subsidizing a union wage for someone providing him food?

[–] dom@lemmy.ca 19 points 1 day ago (2 children)

We need subsidized grocers. Theres no reason the government cant run grocery stores that keeps things as close to cost as possible.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 9 points 22 hours ago (3 children)

Theres no reason the government cant run grocery stores

Even if they did, as soon as there is a conservative government again, they'll privatize it and sell it off for pennies on the dollar to their friends.

[–] a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 1 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

This point hits hard in the US right now.

[–] unbanshee@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Since when does the LPC need the Cons to privatize public services?

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Historically it's been the Cons that have privatized more government assets than any other party.

[–] unbanshee@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 17 hours ago

For sure, they did. Most of the big stuff was started, if not completed, by Conservative administrations.

But Chrétien and Martin continued the process. Air Canada, Petro-Can, and CN Rail were all initiated by Mulroney but completed by Liberal PMs.

My point is, I don't see the LPC as reliable defenders of public services and I think it's dangerous to view them as an ally in that context.

[–] dom@lemmy.ca 2 points 20 hours ago

Too true. Too many dumb dumbs who fall for the cons shit

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 19 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

That's a slippery slope there. I mean, what's next, nationalizing our energy production to make gas and utilities affordable?

[–] unbanshee@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Then pharmacare. Then dental care. Then all the rest of healthcare that our strangled system has left to the private market. Then the telecoms. Then public transit.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 3 points 20 hours ago

we can dream

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 7 points 22 hours ago

Fuck yea.

[–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 2 points 22 hours ago

Québec did it. Why can't the rest?!

[–] huquad@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 day ago

Steal food, completely serious

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago

Look, the important part is that we hit the 2% NATO spending target. Some people at home are just going to have to starve so that we can keep bombing brown people around the world.