I saw the effects of a real estate bubble in Spain 25 years ago, whose effects still ripple today. It started with young people feeling squeezed out of the housing market, staying with their parents for longer and either having child’s late or not at all. Then came the lines at the food banks.
This appears to be where we are today in Canada.
Next, foreclosures and a major recession. It is hard to overstate how painful this was to watch even as a bystander, you will see why in a moment. In most cases it goes smoothly and simply contributes to raising rent prices. In other cases, the police would get involved to evacuate people from their (former) homes. Tightly-knit communities would rally around the home that was being foreclosed to stop the police and delay the inevitable.
Sometimes the people whose home was being foreclosed, especially older people, would jump out of their windows to their death as the police were entering. This happened dozens of times, to the point where you become numb to the horror.
Sooner or later extremist political parties emerge and gain popularity, both extreme left, extreme right and regionalist. They offer “obvious” populist solutions to the crisis, from wealth redistribution to clamping down on immigration and a return to “traditional values”. The status quo parties may form temporary coalitions with the extremists in order to form a government.
Once they reach power and and are still unable to solve the underlying economic crisis with their “obvious” solutions, citizens become disillusioned and revert to the former status quo parties.
Nothing lasts forever, and over time the economy starts to limp forward again. It can take a decade or more – see what happened in Spain and Japan at different points of the last forty years. The lasting result is a long period where few babies are born while the remaining population continues to age as usual, placing public pensions in a tight spot unless immigration is increased. The country’s infrastructure, education and healthcare will have seen better times.
Will things unfold somewhat differently in Canada? Without a doubt. But history tends to rhyme, and what I’ve described above is hardly unique to one country.
As a Canadian, the worst part is seeing our government seemingly not care one single bit about us. Seems all they talk about are scandals and foreign affairs, but the actual day to day issues like food costs and the cost of housing that affect Canadians are constantly ignored and pushed aside while we drown.
They were going to release some kind of package to deal with housing costs, but there’s drama with the NDP over introducing free pharmacare, so I’m guessing that’s their focus first.
I’d actually find it strange they’d care.
On a getting\keeping the job level it’s clear that most Canadians thinks we have a 2 party system. So they just have to wait their turn.
On a social economical level the average MP makes 200k, get substantial subsidies, decides their own raises and definitely not working the 40hrs x 52ish weeks a year.
For the humanitarian front the average Canadian donates about $350 a year. I believe we’re seeing about the same amount of concern from the MP’s.
But profits are up so who cares right?
Fuck I hate capitalism.
Prior to the Reagan/Thatcher trickle-down shitshow that fucked us, capitalism was different. Rich people paid 75% tax, Wall St wasn’t given free reign over everything and gov’ts seemed to (mostly) care.
Yep. Profits, dividends, executive salaries, even the companies themselves are acquiring a nice stock portfolio of themselves: https://www.canadaland.com/loblaw-metro-empire-stock-buybacks/
Here in my part of Canada, the local government just voted to give fucking landlords a subsidy as an apology for implementing rent increase caps. It’s unfortunately no surprise that more people are using food banks. I fucking hate this world.
My opinion is that food banks aren’t a good way to help Canadians that can’t afford food. We should create a program that provides food through grocery store infrastructure.
Maybe: Everybody gets a card or code, or registers a fingerprint. The program provides everyone either a fixed reduction on their grocery bill, or complete discount of several ‘food pyramid’ basics (selected by the store to meet federal nutrition guidelines). The card can store up to 15 days of compensation.
It’s a system that would go a long way to ensuring everyone in the country gets enough food. And do it in a way that would (I think) be more convenient, efficient, and less stigmatized.
And it would cost: the cost of the food, and some IT infrastructure (eg a fingerprint reader per store). And some legal wrangling to protect the fingerprint database from the police.
Any other ideas? Critical flaws?
I actually think we should just start an old-school crown corp that directly competes with the grocery stores. That’s what crown corps used to do -push the private sector to do better through competition aimed at serving an important public need.
The crown corp could sell basic foods; produce, bread, simple meats and dairy products, and at a very low margin. The private grocers would have to compete either by tapping into that mysterious private-sector-efficiency to beat those prices, or via luxury grocery products that draw in customers. The crown corp could either build it’s own supply chain, or rely on auctions, as needed.
Okay but why on earth would we need to collect sensitive biometric data for that?
What’s wrong with your name on the card and showing your ID? That’s how worker discounts already work at Loblaws.
You’re adding a massive security risk for no added benefit. This is the kind of thing I would expect Galen Weston himself to suggest, right after he purchases a controlling share in the fingerprint reader company.
Okay but why on earth would we need to collect sensitive biometric data for that?
The thought was that you can’t be mugged of your biometric data. People that live on the streets get a lot of stuff stolen from them.
Also I meant to indicate that fingerprints would be opt in.
It’s a good idea. I see two problems with it out of the gate:
First, if it isn’t accompanied by other changes, it will increase the equilibrium price of food until the poorest are just as squeezed as they are now, or maybe slightly less. “Other changes” could include price caps (perhaps voluntary – grocery stores which agree to the program must also agree to a set of pricing regulations, and they would agree because it lowers their prices for the public without lowering their profit, meaning they have more customers who buy more), breaking up monopolies, or something drastic like a Crown grocery store chain. There could be other ideas too, but you’d have to do something to avoid it just being a subsidy to grocery giants.
Second, programs which are limited to specific foods often take weird stances about what is “acceptable” for poor people to buy. Not only does this rob them of dignity, it’s often very poorly-managed, results in a lot of administrative overhead, and prevents people from buying things like fresh fruit, certain (even cheaper!) brands over others, or food compliant with their dietary restrictions. I’d instead advocate for either no restrictions on what food is purchased, or a blacklist where the card works in every participating grocery store for every product except explicitly excluded ones.
Who pays for it? The issues come from the food supply chain charging more and more to increase profits, as well as other increased costs that get passed to the end customer.
I wouldn’t support the cost coming out of the government as that just subsidizes corporations that are overcharging. Can they add competition in the food space to drive down costs? Can they mandate food pricing and profit limits instead?
Who pays for it?
Everybody, through better taxation.
The issues come from the food supply chain charging more and more to increase profits
I was imagining the government paying close to the stores cost.
So mandate the grocery stores to not take a profit on the items the government subsidizes or have a crown corporation grocery store?
The first option, stores can only charge the program a small percentage more than what they paid for the item.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Volunteers working for the food program inside serve a hot casserole, some rice, and maybe fruit and yogurt if supplies come through.
Canon Maggie Helwig, who helps run the program out of St. Stephen-in-the-Fields church, said it regularly serves 130 people for dinner on Fridays — compared to the two dozen they saw a few years ago.
On Saturday and Sunday mornings, the lineup for breakfast is even longer — with hundreds of parents, seniors, students, working adults and those who are unemployed.
A few years ago, unemployment was a major factor in the number of people seeking support, as the early months of the pandemic brought the economy to a halt.
The Food Bank of Waterloo Region in Ontario said its annual funding needs to double to more than $1.6 million to keep up as demand reaches a “crisis” level.
Helwig said her church is leaning on donations and food rescue programs to keep the service running, though donors — like consumers — are also struggling to pay grocery bills.
The original article contains 867 words, the summary contains 165 words. Saved 81%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Maybe the problem is called “capitalism” and everyone else is trying to find a solution to solve this problem by ignoring the root cause!
Good news. The consensus seems to be that we can solve all this with EVEN MORE!
Your political choices are “do very little” and “give the capitalists everything they ask for” and we are all done trying the first.
Is the opposite of your conclusion!
