The Manitoba Provincial Politics Discussion

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by headhorse

access to food is a human right. how is capitalism and private property synonymous with freedom when it's illegal for me to use nature and the earth to fulfill my human right to food, shelter, and water?

Sounds like something else that's now legal has entered your body!

[vid]

Originally Posted by optimusREIM

Hey it's a free market. You're welcome to take your talents elsewhere if you feel something is unfair. No one is forcing you to work for someone. Be your own boss if you dont like the rules from one employer. The reason that businesses get to set the terms is that they take on all the risk. So... yeah, it's pretty free. Not sure you can get much freer than being able to start your own business if you want... or looking after yourself however you see fit. I mean, technically no one is stopping you from leaving for a doctor's appointment, even if you work for someone, but they're also free to get rid of you for just walking out unannounced, no matter how justified you feel the reason is.

Profit is the reward for taking on risk, not some conspiracy to put down your beloved proletariat.

A friend of mine runs a small bakery, does fairly well. Loblaws sends people to the city on a regular basis to make sure his labeling is perfect. Any flaw, such missing ingredients, undeclared allergens, lack of French on the label, and they report the product to the CFIA when then goes back to him and orders a redesign on his labels. Loblaws isn't doing this because they care about labeling requirements. They're doing this because Weston wants to be the bread supplier to the stores he is in. They're hoping he gives up. In many cases, his product gets pulled off of shelves until labels are updated, and since it's perishable, that means the product goes to waste and he has to reimburse the store.

"Anyone can start a business".

Another friend of mine owns a deli that makes many of its own smoked meats. Maple Leaf Foods sends people there occasionally (as they do to many small delis and meat shops) and if they notice anything wrong, they report it to OMAFRA who then sends representatives to the deli and bitches about things like "there are chocolates in bags but they don't have labels so that's illegal" and "there is no double door entry to the processing area so you need to install more doors" (even though regular inspections by OMAFRA and the Health Unit didn't bring this up over previous decades, and the regulation isn't new).

"Anyone can start a business".

Now, you're going to say "oh, those pesky government regulations!" and yes, some government regulations are pretty stupid. (Honey cannot be sold in 350mL containers; it's illegal!!) But the kinds of inspections they were subject to are not routine inspections the government does to everyone all the time. They're complaints based. Now read this again and ask yourself, who complained?

"Anyone can start a business".

It's hard to thrive when larger businesses are purposefully sending anything and everything they can toward you to undermine your business to prevent you from getting any shred of market share.

I could go on with stories like this, about how larger companies with near-total market domination constantly do things to make it difficult if not impossible for small business to survive, but it's late, and I'm not sure you can even get my point anyway.

"Anyone can start a business".

We didn't even touch on the number one barrier, start up costs.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by vid

A friend of mine runs a small bakery, does fairly well. Loblaws sends people to the city on a regular basis to make sure his labeling is perfect. Any flaw, such missing ingredients, undeclared allergens, lack of French on the label, and they report the product to the CFIA when then goes back to him and orders a redesign on his labels. Loblaws isn't doing this because they care about labeling requirements. They're doing this because Weston wants to be the bread supplier to the stores he is in. They're hoping he gives up. In many cases, his product gets pulled off of shelves until labels are updated, and since it's perishable, that means the product goes to waste and he has to reimburse the store.

"Anyone can start a business".

Another friend of mine owns a deli that makes many of its own smoked meats. Maple Leaf Foods sends people there occasionally (as they do to many small delis and meat shops) and if they notice anything wrong, they report it to OMAFRA who then sends representatives to the deli and bitches about things like "there are chocolates in bags but they don't have labels so that's illegal" and "there is no double door entry to the processing area so you need to install more doors" (even though regular inspections by OMAFRA and the Health Unit didn't bring this up over previous decades, and the regulation isn't new).

"Anyone can start a business".

Now, you're going to say "oh, those pesky government regulations!" and yes, some government regulations are pretty stupid. (Honey cannot be sold in 350mL containers; it's illegal!!) But the kinds of inspections they were subject to are not routine inspections the government does to everyone all the time. They're complaints based. Now read this again and ask yourself, who complained?

"Anyone can start a business".

It's hard to thrive when larger businesses are purposefully sending anything and everything they can toward you to undermine your business to prevent you from getting any shred of market share.

I could go on with stories like this, about how larger companies with near-total market domination constantly do things to make it difficult if not impossible for small business to survive, but it's late, and I'm not sure you can even get my point anyway.

"Anyone can start a business".

We didn't even touch on the number one barrier, start up costs.

GG oligopoly is real.

[optimusREIM]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

GG oligopoly is real.

Yeah its funny how restrictions seem to favor large corporate entities....funny how centralized control of certain parts of the economy through those regulations seems to favor elites.

[optimusREIM]

Originally Posted by vid

A friend of mine runs a small bakery, does fairly well. Loblaws sends people to the city on a regular basis to make sure his labeling is perfect. Any flaw, such missing ingredients, undeclared allergens, lack of French on the label, and they report the product to the CFIA when then goes back to him and orders a redesign on his labels. Loblaws isn't doing this because they care about labeling requirements. They're doing this because Weston wants to be the bread supplier to the stores he is in. They're hoping he gives up. In many cases, his product gets pulled off of shelves until labels are updated, and since it's perishable, that means the product goes to waste and he has to reimburse the store.

"Anyone can start a business".

Another friend of mine owns a deli that makes many of its own smoked meats. Maple Leaf Foods sends people there occasionally (as they do to many small delis and meat shops) and if they notice anything wrong, they report it to OMAFRA who then sends representatives to the deli and bitches about things like "there are chocolates in bags but they don't have labels so that's illegal" and "there is no double door entry to the processing area so you need to install more doors" (even though regular inspections by OMAFRA and the Health Unit didn't bring this up over previous decades, and the regulation isn't new).

"Anyone can start a business".

Now, you're going to say "oh, those pesky government regulations!" and yes, some government regulations are pretty stupid. (Honey cannot be sold in 350mL containers; it's illegal!!) But the kinds of inspections they were subject to are not routine inspections the government does to everyone all the time. They're complaints based. Now read this again and ask yourself, who complained?

"Anyone can start a business".

It's hard to thrive when larger businesses are purposefully sending anything and everything they can toward you to undermine your business to prevent you from getting any shred of market share.

I could go on with stories like this, about how larger companies with near-total market domination constantly do things to make it difficult if not impossible for small business to survive, but it's late, and I'm not sure you can even get my point anyway.

"Anyone can start a business".

We didn't even touch on the number one barrier, start up costs.

Yes you've described annoying regulations and competition. Nice. Are you seriously suggesting that we should live in an economy where you're literally not allowed to start a business or decide where to work? Because that's what happens when the government plans the economy: your freedom is hugely eroded. Barriers are only barriers if your ideas suck or if you let the barriers hold you back. Free markets maximize productivity and create the most wealth. Centralized economies dont really create anything...

[Hecate]

[QUOTE=vid;8396683]If you're in Ontario, you'd be paying over $3,000 for that civic, easy. It's not unusual for young people with "commonly stolen" cars (like the Civic) in Ontario to pay $3000+ for insurance. Ontario has demerits on its insurance too, if you get in an accident or get too many tickets (or a ticket that's considered "bad" by the insurer) your premium jumps up a lot. If you've got a ticket and a Civic, you're not going to pay less than MPI for insurance if you go to Ontario, I can guarantee that.



I checked out a couple of different insurance calculators across Canada. They all came in cheaper than Manitoba. Just look at premium averages. We should be ranking with Quebec for the lowest rates but we don’t. MPI is making multi million dollar profits and the province uses that money to subsidize their non stop spending. That is not right. Jacking up rates for a speeding ticket should be illegal accross the country. If you are proven to be a dangerous driver because you hit a pedestrian or were driving under the influence by all means raise the rates on the Liscence. But not the insurance. Why should someone who is afforded the luxury of a company vehicle not be subject to the additional fines, while someone who is insuring multiple vehicles for their family ends up paying hundreds or even thousands more, in addition to their already paid fine. Why should someone who has a Liscence but doesn’t insure a vehicle be exempt from these extra charges?

[ywgwalk]

Why should it be illegal to increase the insurance on someone who has shown that they drive over the speed limit? They are more likely to cause a claim.

If you don't like insurance rate changes based on demographics or lifestyle, you certainly aren't going to like any private insurance.

[optimusREIM]

Originally Posted by ywgwalk

Why should it be illegal to increase the insurance on someone who has shown that they drive over the speed limit? They are more likely to cause a claim.

If you don't like insurance rate changes based on demographics or lifestyle, you certainly aren't going to like any private insurance.

I think the problem is less that it's done and more that it isnt very fairly applied because of loopholes. It's also kinda bullshit that fines and hikes insurance premiums are used as a de facto tax collection agency rather than a means to cause conformity to law. Fines etc. Should only be used insofar as they effectively achieve their desired outcome and should not be used as a means to bring in revenue. For example speeding fine should have as a goal to reduce the incidences of speeding yet everything points to a fine being ineffective to that end. Hence, the speeding fines while they can continue to grow astronomically higher are always going to be more and more unjust.

[Hecate]

Originally Posted by ywgwalk

Why should it be illegal to increase the insurance on someone who has shown that they drive over the speed limit? They are more likely to cause a claim.

Seriously I just explained why. Because it’s not a fair penalty. Why isn’t it fair? because it’s not applicable to everyone and you have already paid your fine. Someone with a clean driving record for thirty years who gets caught doing 110 in a 100 km zone is not more likely to cause a claim. Stop eating the shit that you’re fed.

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by vid

Then why do I need permission to take an hour off work to see the doctor?

You don't need permission, you are not a child. You are expected to inform your employer that you will be missing work as a common courtesy. Even better if you take the initiative to find someone to fill in while you are gone.

[Authentic_City]

Originally Posted by Hecate

... MPI is making multi million dollar profits and the province uses that money to subsidize their non stop spending...

Where are these millions of dollars in profits? I've checked carefully through the audited financial statements and I don't see millions of dollars in net revenues?

https://www.mpi.mb.ca/en/PDFs/2017-1...Statements.pdf

[dmacc]

Originally Posted by Authentic_City

Where are these millions of dollars in profits? I've checked carefully through the audited financial statements and I don't see millions of dollars in net revenues?

https://www.mpi.mb.ca/en/PDFs/2017-1...Statements.pdf

Uhm, doesn't it say they are sitting on nearly $90 million dollars and made about $41 Million dollars?

[Authentic_City]

Originally Posted by dmacc

Uhm, doesn't it say they are sitting on nearly $90 million dollars and made about $41 Million dollars?

90 million in assets has nothing to do with profits. You don't expect an insurance company to operate with no assets, do you?
Look back to 2012. They've posted a net loss every year except 2017. The markets did well last year. Not so much this year.

[Hecate]

According to this article. They made over $90 million in profits last year. https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/lo...485612561.html

[vid]

Originally Posted by optimusREIM

Yes you've described annoying regulations and competition. Nice. Are you seriously suggesting that we should live in an economy where you're literally not allowed to start a business or decide where to work?

No. Not at all. I'm suggesting an economy where larger players forming monopolies, colluding with each other and forcing smaller players out through sabotage tactics like oversupply and price fixing happens less often, and that it would be the governments role to do that. This was essentially the role of government as described by Adam Smith, as a check against monopolization and collusion among the corporate class in ways that damage the free market. Gas prices in Thunder Bay are 25 cents higher than the Ontario average and every single gas station has the same price, all 32 of them. That's not a free market, and we've recently reduced government interference with that sector of the economy in this province.

When a single company controls a significant majority of the market, that is no longer a free market, whether that company is owned by private investors or the government.

Originally Posted by optimusREIM

Because that's what happens when the government plans the economy

I don't want the government to plan the economy. I want them to protect the free market. They are currently doing a poor job of it, by bending more towards the priorities of the large corporate sector over those of small businesses. Large businesses aren't capitalism, small businesses are, and it's small businesses that make the real innovation. Much of what Google provides today was originally invented by a small tech startup which Google later purchased. Google itself innovates very little these days, and when they do, it's to find ways to take our personal information and advertise other large companies shit at us.

Originally Posted by optimusREIM

Barriers are only barriers if your ideas suck or if you let the barriers hold you back. Free markets maximize productivity and create the most wealth. Centralized economies dont really create anything...

Do you really consider a market where two or three companies control 90% of the market to be a "free" market? Because I don't.

Ideally, companies would only be allowed to get so big before they split up into separate, smaller companies again. And the people who put the most time, effort, and energy into a company, regardless of the amount of financial capital they've invested, should get a say in the direction of that company, as they have a vested interest in its success, being dependent on it for a livelihood.

[Riverman]

Every drop of gasoline in Thunder Bay comes by rail from the Imperial Oil depot in East St. Paul. Most likely all at the same price.

Perhaps if you want better choices in pricing you should consider relocating.

[vid]

Originally Posted by Riverman

Every drop of gasoline in Thunder Bay comes by rail from the Imperial Oil depot in East St. Paul. Most likely all at the same price.

Perhaps if you want better choices in pricing you should consider relocating.

Haha, capitalism for the win!

[P&M40BELOW]

Here is a little incite into auto insurance in Canada. Manitoba and Saskatchewan are the only two places in North America with basically a 100% government controlled auto insurance program.

Manitoba does not have “cheap insurance” premiums. In Manitoba good drivers subsidize the poor ones. In Manitoba the government forces you to purchase full coverage on an older car even though they know that they won’t pay you out in the event of a claim. We are an expensive place to buy auto Insurance if you are a good driver. Manitoba also provides an inferior product to Ontario, Alberta, the territories and the maritimes. Manitoba has no fault with no ability to sue in the case of a catastrophic loss like you can elsewhere. just ask Steven Fletcher if he likes Manitoba’s PIPP payments scheme or for that matter anyone who has had a family member killed in an accident by a reckless driver, then looking for fair compensation.

As far as comparing Manitoba to Ontario it’s apples and oranges. It’s silly to compare Manitoba to the GTA. We don’t have the 401 with 16 lanes and freezing rain all winter and a tort system of auto iinsurance. Better insurance with higher claims exposure result in higher rates.

It’s better to compare us to Nova Scotia or Quebec. Nova Scotia rates are comparable to Manitoba. However they have a superior product and you can shop if you aren’t happy with your current provider.

Quebec is a great model which Manitoba should move to. Quebec has the lowest rates in the country. Quebec uses a hibrid system, where the government does the accident benefits and the basic level of bodily injury. All other coverage is optional and the public has choice. You can bundle your home and auto and save money; which you are barred from doing in Manitoba.

Finally, it’s also important to remember that MPI collects huge premiums by surcharging on drivers licenses as well; this isn’t done elsewhere as far as I’m aware. We need to move beyond a government monopoly and move to at least a hibrid system where the consumer has choice. Can any of us imagine going back to having one telecom option in Manitoba; owned by the government? Time to modernize!

[drew]

How would Steven fletcher have successfully sued a moose?

[Dengler Avenue]

https://m.huffingtonpost.ca/2019/01/...70923565739338

Why is this still happening in Manitoba??