Log In
Register
Home
Topic RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Email this10:27 pm
February 27, 2018
Offline
If Canada adds a 10% tariff on imported American goods. Will the Canadian producers see the opportunity to raise their prices by... say 8%?
6:05 am
September 11, 2013
Offline
It's a business decision. If you owned a business selling your product in Canada for $1 against an American competitor also selling for $1 but now the competitor's product costs $1.10 in Canada, what would you do?
11:41 am
February 27, 2018
Offline
The sad reality is... i agree with Bill. Canadian producers will increase their prices, probably to a $1.15 and that's why we're in the boat, we're in.
Example. Oil price drops, canadian government sneaks in more tax, so the gas pump price remains high.
Innovation, entrepreneurship is what canada lacks. Here's an opportunity to grow, become independent as a country. Canadian producers should lower their prices to 90 cents. Then, through mass production, make more profits than ever. Shelf space should be divided, here is OURS, all the imports are THERE.
I said in another post, a Canadian banking crisis will happen because one event, will trigger another event and soon all the dominoes will start to fall.
A BOC interest rate increase, could be that trigger. Greed, could also be that trigger. The government of canada believes our ability to keep paying more, is endless... it is NOT. The bough will break and the cradle will fall.
11:51 am
December 17, 2016
Offline
Kidd said
The government of canada believes our ability to keep paying more, is endless... it is NOT.
As Britain's Iron Lady reminded us -
... Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They always run out of other people’s money.
12:13 pm
September 11, 2013
Offline
Kidd, I wasn't suggesting an answer, I was just asking you what you would do. I'm guessing some will take advantage by raising prices but others might take advantage by letting their lower price increase their market share. In any event, those in our communities working (including unionized workers) for Canadian producers will likely benefit as well, as that's the whole idea for tariffs, i.e. to protect or benefit "local" workers and their employers.
12:52 pm
December 17, 2016
Offline
My concern has to do with the $2 BILLION backstop pledged by the Canadian taxpayers to those who are deemed 'most' affected by the tariffs - and I didn't read anything about that money being repayable loans.
2:06 pm
August 4, 2010
Offline
If Canada is applying tariffs of 10% (and 25% on the affected steel imports) on $16+ billion of US imports, than the additional revenue nominally expected from the tariffs is effectively just being redistributed out again to the support programs.
The bulk of the $2 billion is "$1.7 billion through the Business Development Bank of Canada and Export Development Canada to help companies prepare to export their products to other markets", with another $250 million in innovation grants to steel and aluminum and $50 million over 5 years to help business take advantage of the new trade deals with the EU and Asia.
http://magazine.cim.org/en/new.....companies/
2:17 pm
December 17, 2016
Offline
This is what I gleaned fro the above cited article -
Canada’s federal government is making a total of $2 billion in innovation, job training and work sharing funding available to the steel and aluminum industries.
[…]
Hajdu said the federal government will also be contributing $25 million to extend the duration of work-sharing agreements to 76 weeks under the Employment Insurance program. Work-sharing agreements are eligible to employees who are working reduced work-weeks while their employer deals with reductions in business activity. It is typically available for a maximum period of 38 weeks.
[…]
An additional $50 million will be made available to the provinces and territories to provide skills and job training for workers in the affected industries, Hajdu said.
Canadian taxpayers backstopping jobs is a bottomless pit.
The bulk of the $2 billion is "$1.7 billion through the Business Development Bank of Canada and Export Development Canada to help companies prepare to export their products to other markets", with another $250 million in innovation grants to steel and aluminum and $50 million over 5 years to help business take advantage of the new trade deals with the EU and Asia.
WOW ... Canadian taxpayers paying for companies coming late too the party - where the hell have these companies been with their market "diversity" ALL these years?
3:38 pm
October 21, 2013
Offline
The typical weakness of government giveaway programmes to corporations is that said corporations have very few strings attached. In particular, they are then allowed to keep the money, close up shop, and move to another country. This has happened countless times in manufacturing, and it doesn't matter which government is in power.
I remember quizzing a candidate on my doorstep about this after another such debacle some years back and he had absolutely nothing to say for himself. Nor would he commit to any future strings.
A few years ago I knew someone who worked for the Cdn Business Development Bank (or Export Dev'mt Bank - I can't remember specifically now). It was her job to drum up business clients to participate. She had to meet a quota to keep her job. She was a resourceful person who I knew worked hard and ought to have succeeded, but what she told me was that it was quite difficult to find client businesses who met the criteria. I have to wonder if more money will find more clients, even with a European trade deal.
4:24 pm
September 11, 2013
Offline
Kidd, I like the last line of the article: we'll get our money...…….. unless the plane's been disposed of! Love it!
Money is given to businesses to keep jobs here and to keep the business's Canadian suppliers from losing a contract and having even more people lose their jobs, i.e. the money, or much of it, ends up back in Canadian workers'/voters' (that's the key) pockets. A beautiful illustration of buying votes with our own money, but preserving Canadian jobs with gov't money seems to be supported by Canadians. I guess there's not much one can do if the business absconds from Canada - it's often a difficult and expensive process to pursue recourse elsewhere in the world, as Kidd's article demonstrates - though I suppose sometimes it would make sense to dole it out piecemeal as it's spent in Canada. But, as Loonie points out, the department in charge of doling out money is at least partly measured by how much it doles out. Canadians, gotta love 'em!
4:27 pm
December 17, 2016
Offline
Did you hear ... Canadian taxpayers bought a pipeline company to expedite the expansion construction from Edmonton to Burnaby ... hell, it only cost us $4.5 Billion, and that was just for the existing Kinder Morgan, it's going to need a further $8 Billion to build the expansion ... has anyone heard or seen any trenches in the ground yet?
4:33 pm
December 17, 2016
Offline
You wanna know what happens to taxpayer dollars when things get out of control THIS is what happens. The now thrown out of government Socialists undertook this project, not because Manitobans needed another dam, NOPE, it was the keep the Union job count up. There is just so little regard for taxpayers money. And now, special interest groups are attempting to hold up construction of the BiPole transmission line UNLESS they get hush money from the taxpayers. From the CBC -
An independent review of Manitoba Hydro's capital expenditure program warns the Keeyask hydroelectric dam could cost the province billions more to complete than expected. It also blames the Crown corporation's lack of construction management experience and skills for failing to keep the multibillion-dollar project on track.
The report, written by Calgary consulting firm MGF Project Services, was commissioned by the Manitoba Public Utilities Board as part of the PUB hearings into Hydro's proposed rate increase. It found the Keeyask dam could cost as much as $10.5 billion due to the "contractor's poor productivity and increased indirect costs" associated with the project.
The 695-megawatt generating station — approximately 725 kilometres north of Winnipeg on the Nelson River — was originally estimated to cost $6.5 billion and expected to be in service by November 2019. In September 2016, Hydro raised its cost estimate to $7.8 billion.
Then in March, it went up to $8.7 billion. At the time, Hydro blamed rising expenses for foundation work for the additional increase.
The MGF report pointed to "the General Civil Contract (GCC) and its performance as the largest single contributor to planned cost and schedule not being met."
"Manitoba Hydro staff are competent and professional, but they are not a construction manager with the experience and skills to direct the GCC. As such, its project management and control effectiveness is low," said the report.
In September, the Crown corporation said it needs to charge consumers more for electricity to offset increasing costs associated with the Keeyask dam and Bipole III transmission line.
Hydro wants to charge 7.9 per cent more per year until 2023-24, and raise rates an additional 4.54 per cent the following year. If allowed, that would mean a $1,000 Hydro bill would reach almost $1,600 in 2023-24, and it would hit $1,650 the following year.
4:46 pm
February 27, 2018
Offline
TOP IT UP... there is a little more to that pipeline story. After paying kinder morgan 4.5 billion. We turned around and hired kinder morgan to build the pipeline, an american company. The top 2 execs were given a bonus of 1.5 million dollars, each.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/kinder-morgan-retention-bonuses-1.4690911
Please write your comments in the forum.