Canadians are angry with their biggest supermarket(bbc.com)
bbc.com
Canadians are angry with their biggest supermarket
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd11ywyg6p0o
112 comments
> Then why doesn’t Canada have a huge network of ethnic grocery stores tailored to more frugal immigrant communities? I assume it does and the issue is one of consumer education.
Two quick web searches reveal that Canada has about 1/10th the USA population at ~37m people as of 2021. Canada also has roughly 1.6% more landmass than the USA. I don’t think there’s the density to support your theory.
Two quick web searches reveal that Canada has about 1/10th the USA population at ~37m people as of 2021. Canada also has roughly 1.6% more landmass than the USA. I don’t think there’s the density to support your theory.
I think this article illustrates it best: https://www.vox.com/2016/5/5/11584064/canada-population-map
That's 18 million people or half the population living within spitting distance of the US border and that doesn't even include British Columbia. The vast wilderness is largely unpopulated.
That's 18 million people or half the population living within spitting distance of the US border and that doesn't even include British Columbia. The vast wilderness is largely unpopulated.
Most of the Canadian population lives in cities/suburbs, which are mostly on the east, not in the large wilderness parts.
[deleted]
And where were these rebranded Sumo's? We only saw Sumo's this year for $4-5/lb nearly everywhere we looked. Were these rebranded things really Sumo's or did they just look like Sumo's.
I did see something that looked like a Sumo call a 'dekopon' citrus at major grocers on the east coast, but they were maybe $1/lb cheaper as best and not as good or large as one with a Sumo sticker. They were more tart and not as an intense flavor.
It's my understanding that the variety has existed for a long time in Japan and Sumo is just one specific branded citrus sub-variety from California.
I did see something that looked like a Sumo call a 'dekopon' citrus at major grocers on the east coast, but they were maybe $1/lb cheaper as best and not as good or large as one with a Sumo sticker. They were more tart and not as an intense flavor.
It's my understanding that the variety has existed for a long time in Japan and Sumo is just one specific branded citrus sub-variety from California.
They were rebranded as Satsumas but had no sticker, in Southern California at an Arabic grocer.
They were just as large, sweet, seedless, and easy to peel as the Sumos with identical appearance. This is the fourth or fifth year in a row that they've had them at a deep discount and I started eating them when Trader Joes first introduced them at $4/piece so there was definitely a delay before they appeared at other stores. Trader Joes tends to get them a few weeks earlier than the other store so I usually compare them every year.
I don't know if they're actually Sumos or not but they're just as sweet and identical in every other way. It might be a pretty obvious cross so once the farm that made and copyrighted the Sumo name, everyone else figured it out too but they can't sell it as Sumos because that's a registered trademark. I.e. these guys, which don't look like any other Satsuma I've ever seen or found online (real satsumas with stickers are in stock right now at one of my stores): https://paradisenursery.com/product/satsuma-mandarin-trees/
I didn't realize that Sumos were from California. The company that grows them could also just be dumping excess inventory in the local market without stickers to maintain their brand.
They were just as large, sweet, seedless, and easy to peel as the Sumos with identical appearance. This is the fourth or fifth year in a row that they've had them at a deep discount and I started eating them when Trader Joes first introduced them at $4/piece so there was definitely a delay before they appeared at other stores. Trader Joes tends to get them a few weeks earlier than the other store so I usually compare them every year.
I don't know if they're actually Sumos or not but they're just as sweet and identical in every other way. It might be a pretty obvious cross so once the farm that made and copyrighted the Sumo name, everyone else figured it out too but they can't sell it as Sumos because that's a registered trademark. I.e. these guys, which don't look like any other Satsuma I've ever seen or found online (real satsumas with stickers are in stock right now at one of my stores): https://paradisenursery.com/product/satsuma-mandarin-trees/
I didn't realize that Sumos were from California. The company that grows them could also just be dumping excess inventory in the local market without stickers to maintain their brand.
Sourcing regular fresh food staples to be competitive with the big chains is hard. You have to use the big chains sub companies as a supplier more often than not unless you partner with local farmers. Even small grocers I go to have a 'foodland' section for products they can't get local, or for cheaper versions of the locally farmed items.
Then you are a nuance of a trip if you can't carry the fresh food staples, especially outside a metro area.
Then you are a nuance of a trip if you can't carry the fresh food staples, especially outside a metro area.
We do in the major cities and they are slowly growing but our idiot government is letting the big guys buy them up when they become a serious competitor. The problem, as almost always, is the government not doing its job and breaking up/ not allowing acquisitions by these big guys.
There's a lot of ethnic grocers. Although Loblaws owns the largest chinese one
I understand that they are delicious but 3 pounds a day is a lot, throwup238.
> but 3 pounds a day is a lot
Not when you're known as "throwup".
Not when you're known as "throwup".
There are tons of small-to-medium sized grocery stores with a strong ethnic focus and a focus on prices. You don't hear about them because they one-offs and not a national chain.
Target tried to enter the Canadian market and lost $5.4 billion. Yes it's not a grocer but the idea is similar: Canada is a hard country for foreign companies to enter. The countries is filled with failed foreign entrances: cellular, grocer, clothing brands.
On the other hand, there are plenty of success stories of foreign chains entering Canada. Target's rival Walmart has been reasonably successful in Canada, having over 400 stores. Target made a lot of mistakes entering the Canadian market, starting with leasing locations of dying Canadian chain Zellers and even still running them as Zellers for years, which didn't help building up the Target brand in Canada.
Target's approach was quite similar to what Walmart did in 1994, when Walmart entered the Canadian market.
Walmart took over around a hundred or so of the long-established Woolco stores, and converted them to Walmart stores. The Woolco stores I'm aware of were then replaced with new larger Walmart-built store in the same area within a few years.
I think Target's main problem was more timing rather than execution. In 1994, Canada still had a relatively strong middle class with money to spend, although that would eventually be harmed thanks to NAFTA, excessive government interference in the economy, and excessive immigration. By 2011 when Target showed up, Canada's middle class was already suffering, and it has only gotten much worse since then.
All of the Target stores I ever visited in Canada were decent. The pricing typically wasn't as competitive as Walmart's was, but the Target stores were generally a nicer experience.
Walmart took over around a hundred or so of the long-established Woolco stores, and converted them to Walmart stores. The Woolco stores I'm aware of were then replaced with new larger Walmart-built store in the same area within a few years.
I think Target's main problem was more timing rather than execution. In 1994, Canada still had a relatively strong middle class with money to spend, although that would eventually be harmed thanks to NAFTA, excessive government interference in the economy, and excessive immigration. By 2011 when Target showed up, Canada's middle class was already suffering, and it has only gotten much worse since then.
All of the Target stores I ever visited in Canada were decent. The pricing typically wasn't as competitive as Walmart's was, but the Target stores were generally a nicer experience.
They also messed up with their computer system. I forget the details from the account I read, but it had to do with trying to import the entire system from the US, database included, and spending more time fixing errors than actually selling anything. That database (if I recall right) included the sales data they used to predict demand and allocate stock, and it was completely wrong for the new market.
It might have worked if they started with a few stores to work out the kinks and incorporate the data into their planning systems, but they went for a huge launch instead and couldn't keep shelves stocked because nothing was where it needed to be.
It might have worked if they started with a few stores to work out the kinks and incorporate the data into their planning systems, but they went for a huge launch instead and couldn't keep shelves stocked because nothing was where it needed to be.
Not just foreigners. A few years ago many Canadian restaurants tried to pivot to being grocery stores, but the customers never came in any meaningful way. Canadians are exceptionally brand loyal.
Cell carriage is, indeed, another great example. Many of the home-grown independent telcos in Canada started operating cell networks in the mid-2000s, but they were never able to win over the customers loyal to Bell and Rogers. The CEO of one of those telcos, which remains a strong player in the wired market in my local area, states that venturing into mobile was his biggest mistake.
Cell carriage is, indeed, another great example. Many of the home-grown independent telcos in Canada started operating cell networks in the mid-2000s, but they were never able to win over the customers loyal to Bell and Rogers. The CEO of one of those telcos, which remains a strong player in the wired market in my local area, states that venturing into mobile was his biggest mistake.
> Many of the home-grown independent telcos in Canada started operating cell networks in the mid-2000s, but they were never able to win over the customers loyal to Bell and Rogers.
It has nothing to do with loyalty, the coverage of these networks is just bad. I'm on one right now. Canada is a huge sprawling country and many people venture far for camping, to cottages and so on, and they won't go with a cell provider where they lose service 10 mins outside of Toronto.
It's even worse sometimes, coverage in cities adjacent to Toronto, like Oakville, is also sometimes bad. Canada's problem with mobile is sprawl and a largely ineffective regulator.
It has nothing to do with loyalty, the coverage of these networks is just bad. I'm on one right now. Canada is a huge sprawling country and many people venture far for camping, to cottages and so on, and they won't go with a cell provider where they lose service 10 mins outside of Toronto.
It's even worse sometimes, coverage in cities adjacent to Toronto, like Oakville, is also sometimes bad. Canada's problem with mobile is sprawl and a largely ineffective regulator.
> It has nothing to do with loyalty, the coverage of these networks is just bad.
They had nationwide agreements. They still do, technically, but no longer operate any cell sites, now essentially being a Bell reseller. Even as a reseller, their customer base hasn't grown in any meaningful way, certainly not beyond the wired customer audience. In fact, I bet you don't even know their names. Nobody in Canada cares to look beyond their loyalty.
They had nationwide agreements. They still do, technically, but no longer operate any cell sites, now essentially being a Bell reseller. Even as a reseller, their customer base hasn't grown in any meaningful way, certainly not beyond the wired customer audience. In fact, I bet you don't even know their names. Nobody in Canada cares to look beyond their loyalty.
What typically happens is that they are just bought up by one of the big 3. I had a great plan with Fido, very reasonable prices and good service, and because they were growing, Rogers bought them up and then all the prices shot up to match Rogers.
> What typically happens is that they are just bought up by one of the big 3.
Perhaps, but as they are owned by the customer (or government in a few cases), that would ultimately be on the customer to decide. If future service, price, or quality was of concern, they could easily reject the deal.
Perhaps, but as they are owned by the customer (or government in a few cases), that would ultimately be on the customer to decide. If future service, price, or quality was of concern, they could easily reject the deal.
Agreed. If we (Canada) want to make a serious effort at reducing the inflationary expense of groceries, we should start looking at things like the protection racket surrounding our domestic dairy product industry.
But I don't see that happening because that'll lose votes in areas where the Liberal party is weak.
But I don't see that happening because that'll lose votes in areas where the Liberal party is weak.
The farm and farm-adjacent population make up such a small segment of the population these days, even in farming areas, that nobody has to appeal to them. However, the government is legally obligated to buy back the quota, which would be a devastating cost. Ain't no politician (outside of those going to crazy town, like Bernier) would ever touch that even with a ten foot pole.
It was done for tobacco in 2009, but the tobacco industry in Canada was already essentially nothing. The cost to get out was still massive, but only a tiny, tiny fraction of what it would cost to get out of dairy, poultry, and eggs.
It was done for tobacco in 2009, but the tobacco industry in Canada was already essentially nothing. The cost to get out was still massive, but only a tiny, tiny fraction of what it would cost to get out of dairy, poultry, and eggs.
I don't know how this misconception persists, but Target's Canada failure was entirely Target's fault. They made huge errors in distribution/inventory and the shelves were empty from grand opening. They resolved their inventory issues after their fate had been sealed.
Canada is filled with failed companies.
Canadians are risk averse, too afraid to stand out and too eager to put down America and claim to be better than them for any significant change to happen.
Maybe the worst out of the developed countries across all metrics.
Canadians are risk averse, too afraid to stand out and too eager to put down America and claim to be better than them for any significant change to happen.
Maybe the worst out of the developed countries across all metrics.
Maybe, but it’s also remarkable Canada hasn’t had a bank failure in >100 years. It’s a safe, peaceful and prosperous developed country. Hard to argue that Canada hasn’t done fairly well. I still agree it’s perhaps too risk averse, but I disagree it’s the worst performing of all developed countries in that regard.
For greater insight into how grocery stores are run in America, I highly recommend the gripping book "The Secret Life of Groceries: The Dark Miracle of the American Supermarket" by Benjamin Lorr.
The author gets a job at Whole Foods and then works his way through the food chain, reporting every step of the way, and relating it back to what is seen and experienced at the store. Really excellent reporting IMO.
The author gets a job at Whole Foods and then works his way through the food chain, reporting every step of the way, and relating it back to what is seen and experienced at the store. Really excellent reporting IMO.
Blaming 'corporate greed' is a easy thing for politicians to do. It's then not their actions that are causing prices to go up.
Easy to point at things like 'record profits' of Loblaws, without looking at if their margins have changed (they haven't). If you keep the same margins and have the amount of business with inflation then of course there are 'record profits'.
Easy to point at things like 'record profits' of Loblaws, without looking at if their margins have changed (they haven't). If you keep the same margins and have the amount of business with inflation then of course there are 'record profits'.
Their margins actually did go up but it’s kinda hilarious when you see it — they’re squeaking out ~3% these days while it was a razor thin 1.x% before.
Yup that’s an extra buck fitty on your $100 of groceries
Yup that’s an extra buck fitty on your $100 of groceries
I found it interesting that in the comparison of the largest grocery stores in the three countries (US, UK, and Canada), UK's Tesco beat out not only Canada's Loblaw, but US' Walmart as well. I know food isn't the only factor in cost of living, but typically the UK is presented as having a much higher COL than either the US or Canada, but not at least in this case.
Well, the butter is a different size (about half of US/CA size). When adjusted for that, it's very nearly the same as US prices.
The other problem with these kinds of comparisons is size of country and if the average cost of a product is a nationwide calculation. Food costs in Labrador; Alaska; Hawai'i; and the Yukon are very different from more populated States and Provinces close to transportation routes. The entire UK is barely the size of the US's North East, and not nearly the size of even Ontario.
The other problem with these kinds of comparisons is size of country and if the average cost of a product is a nationwide calculation. Food costs in Labrador; Alaska; Hawai'i; and the Yukon are very different from more populated States and Provinces close to transportation routes. The entire UK is barely the size of the US's North East, and not nearly the size of even Ontario.
Agreed. Maybe a Toronto to London to NYC Comparison along with some other smaller markets that are comparable.
Otherwise its a bit like saying that Ireland has the highest GDP per capita.
Otherwise its a bit like saying that Ireland has the highest GDP per capita.
That comparison chart they made should be illegal. Even framing it with the pound its hard to fully read and compare each item.
I'm surprised the BBC left out the elephant in the room: Supply Management [1].
TL;DR Canada has highly protectionist dairy and poultry sectors that artificially constrict supply of dairy and poultry. You'll periodically read reports of dairy farmers intentionally dumping perfectly good milk [2] because they produced more than their allotted quota.
Even worse, all the federal political parties are too cowardly to stop it; in fact, the House of Commons recently passed [3] a private member's bill that essentially prevents the Minister of Foreign Affairs from negotiating any trade agreement that would weaken the supply management regime. (As you can imagine, Canada often gets called out for its hypocrisy during trade negotiations.) The politicians are scared to anger dairy farmers, particularly the ones in Quebec.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dairy_and_poultry_supply_manag...
[2] https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/dairy-covid-19-1.5528331
[3] https://www.theglobeandmail.com/gift/eca53705d5e7568f5ed88c7...
TL;DR Canada has highly protectionist dairy and poultry sectors that artificially constrict supply of dairy and poultry. You'll periodically read reports of dairy farmers intentionally dumping perfectly good milk [2] because they produced more than their allotted quota.
Even worse, all the federal political parties are too cowardly to stop it; in fact, the House of Commons recently passed [3] a private member's bill that essentially prevents the Minister of Foreign Affairs from negotiating any trade agreement that would weaken the supply management regime. (As you can imagine, Canada often gets called out for its hypocrisy during trade negotiations.) The politicians are scared to anger dairy farmers, particularly the ones in Quebec.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dairy_and_poultry_supply_manag...
[2] https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/dairy-covid-19-1.5528331
[3] https://www.theglobeandmail.com/gift/eca53705d5e7568f5ed88c7...
I haven't seen the price of milk or eggs go up all that much but I've seen the price of soda and chips increase by more than 50% in the past few years. I'm fine with our farmers not having to compete with hormone infused milk.
[deleted]
> The politicians are scared to anger dairy farmers, particularly the ones in Quebec.
The Progressive Conservatives were never afraid of angering dairy farmers. They ran on the very platform of ending the supply management in the 90s (granted, it didn't secure them a win, obviously). And, indeed, the PCs who remained in the CPC ranks have shown that they continued to believe in it, sometimes quite vocally. It's interesting that the Reformers are such scaredy cats.
The Progressive Conservatives were never afraid of angering dairy farmers. They ran on the very platform of ending the supply management in the 90s (granted, it didn't secure them a win, obviously). And, indeed, the PCs who remained in the CPC ranks have shown that they continued to believe in it, sometimes quite vocally. It's interesting that the Reformers are such scaredy cats.
I disagree with the presumption that Canadians are angry with grocery stores, and virtually no one has boycotted Loblaws.
Checking out Loblaws' six-month stock market performance, we see a rise from $122 per share to $161 per share, 30% increase since the botcott started.
The highly unpopular government has significantly raised taxes on truckers and farmers, leading to food inflation. Rather than accepting responsibility, this 4th place political party, which is going to lose in the next election, is scapegoating grocery stores. However, this blame game isn't convincing anyone.
Checking out Loblaws' six-month stock market performance, we see a rise from $122 per share to $161 per share, 30% increase since the botcott started.
The highly unpopular government has significantly raised taxes on truckers and farmers, leading to food inflation. Rather than accepting responsibility, this 4th place political party, which is going to lose in the next election, is scapegoating grocery stores. However, this blame game isn't convincing anyone.
Loblaws' stock price going up implies that their profits are better, which implies that their margins are better, which implies that consumers are paying more for the same goods because goods haven't become cheaper due to inflation across the board, which suggests that your claim that Canadians are NOT angry with them is probably not true. I think the fact that Canadians are upset with Loblaws is pretty well documented at this point.
It does not imply that. In fact, given that restaurant patronage has declined significantly in Canada, if they are more profitable it is likely that they are more profitable on volume.
Unless, perhaps, you think Canadians have traded going to restaurants with fasting?
Unless, perhaps, you think Canadians have traded going to restaurants with fasting?
No, profits are growing faster than sales: https://www.thestar.com/business/loblaw-forecasts-profits-wi...
Fair, although that shows the gross margin has declined. So why would gross margin fall, but net margin rise? I posit that it is likely that they can operate more efficiently when the customers buy more groceries.
But if people had an issue with Loblaw, why would they buy more groceries from them?
But if people had an issue with Loblaw, why would they buy more groceries from them?
> Loblaws' stock price going up implies that their profits are better, which implies that their margins are better,
This is not correct. Government policy of continuously purchasing power of currency dictates nominal profits and stock price should go up even if profit margins do not.
This is not correct. Government policy of continuously purchasing power of currency dictates nominal profits and stock price should go up even if profit margins do not.
Some people on reddit are upset with Loblaws
Everyone else is just checking the weekly specials and shopping where the deals are, Loblaws stores included, if they give a shit about grocery prices at all.
Everyone else is just checking the weekly specials and shopping where the deals are, Loblaws stores included, if they give a shit about grocery prices at all.
>Loblaws' stock price going up implies that their profits are better,
Loblaw's PE ratio is 24, a bit high I'd say. Implying not good enough profits.
Looking at gross profit across the last 4 quarters. No significant change.
So you make some assumptions and guesses here which aren't correct, then went on with analysis anyway.
>I think the fact that Canadians are upset with Loblaws is pretty well documented at this point.
This is perhaps/maybe true amongst the NDP and virtually nobody else. Liberals have voted against the NDP on this matter several times now.
This "pretty well documented" probably needs a better source when public data denies this.
Loblaw's PE ratio is 24, a bit high I'd say. Implying not good enough profits.
Looking at gross profit across the last 4 quarters. No significant change.
So you make some assumptions and guesses here which aren't correct, then went on with analysis anyway.
>I think the fact that Canadians are upset with Loblaws is pretty well documented at this point.
This is perhaps/maybe true amongst the NDP and virtually nobody else. Liberals have voted against the NDP on this matter several times now.
This "pretty well documented" probably needs a better source when public data denies this.
> This is perhaps/maybe true amongst the NDP and virtually nobody else.
I have no idea where you're getting your information, but you seem out of touch. The widespread mockery they received for their "generous price freeze" on no name items was virtually unanimous.
I have no idea where you're getting your information, but you seem out of touch. The widespread mockery they received for their "generous price freeze" on no name items was virtually unanimous.
>I have no idea where you're getting your information, but you seem out of touch.
You cede your position on the stock details and only respond to a small mostly unrelated sentence.
I collected my information from the Toronto stock exchange.
>The widespread mockery they received for their "generous price freeze" on no name items was virtually unanimous.
This is another thing which I never saw. Not very widespread obviously. Especially given investor sentiment toward loblaws.
So the Liberals taking a ton of heat over causing high inflation, amended the competition act, in september, to temporarily force grocery stores to freeze pricing. https://openparliament.ca/bills/44-1/C-56/
There was no specific against loblaws factor here, but it wasn't loblaws doing this out of the kindness of their heart.
It's interesting how out of touch you seem to be. I've provided sourcing along the way here.
You cede your position on the stock details and only respond to a small mostly unrelated sentence.
I collected my information from the Toronto stock exchange.
>The widespread mockery they received for their "generous price freeze" on no name items was virtually unanimous.
This is another thing which I never saw. Not very widespread obviously. Especially given investor sentiment toward loblaws.
So the Liberals taking a ton of heat over causing high inflation, amended the competition act, in september, to temporarily force grocery stores to freeze pricing. https://openparliament.ca/bills/44-1/C-56/
There was no specific against loblaws factor here, but it wasn't loblaws doing this out of the kindness of their heart.
It's interesting how out of touch you seem to be. I've provided sourcing along the way here.
And again... are you getting all your info from the subreddit by chance?
They are quite obviously living in a NDP echo chamber somewhere.
It's very interesting how much damage these echo chambers are doing to democracy. How has the governments not essentially banned all this censorship?
It's very interesting how much damage these echo chambers are doing to democracy. How has the governments not essentially banned all this censorship?
Something very interesting: I live in southern Ontario and when I randomly opened up reddit.com in a private Firefox window the night before last (testing a low ram VM, needed some heavy js site) the top of the homepage was a sticky post from that subreddit. For hours. It didn’t even have that many votes or comments but it was stuck at post #1 somehow
Its almost like insane levels of immigration will increase demand for goods
[deleted]
[deleted]
knee jerk conversation has entered the chat
It's disappointing to see people just apply whatever thing they are bother by to every situation. It comes off as pretty narrow minded and political.
The Liberal Party deserves to be wiped out entirely financially and politically for this wreckless policy.
And that's coming from someone who utterly despises the Conservative party.
And that's coming from someone who utterly despises the Conservative party.
I don't think that the Conservative Party will fix this problem. Much like the Liberal Party, the Conservatives are very pro-immigration.
A Conservative government might impose a slight reduction in the rate, to create the appearance of differentiating themselves from the Liberals. I don't think they'd bring it down much beyond that.
I certainly don't see the Conservative Party putting in place the negative immigration rate that's now unfortunately required to deal with the significant economic and social problems Canada is facing. I doubt they'd send home all of the temporary foreign workers, and deport the fake "refugees" who entered from the US, for example.
Even the PPC, which is perhaps the most willing of the broadly mainstream parties to properly deal with this situation, is still calling for an immigration rate of "between 100,000 and 150,000 annually" in its current platform (https://www.thepeoplespartyofcanada.ca/issues/immigration).
A Conservative government might impose a slight reduction in the rate, to create the appearance of differentiating themselves from the Liberals. I don't think they'd bring it down much beyond that.
I certainly don't see the Conservative Party putting in place the negative immigration rate that's now unfortunately required to deal with the significant economic and social problems Canada is facing. I doubt they'd send home all of the temporary foreign workers, and deport the fake "refugees" who entered from the US, for example.
Even the PPC, which is perhaps the most willing of the broadly mainstream parties to properly deal with this situation, is still calling for an immigration rate of "between 100,000 and 150,000 annually" in its current platform (https://www.thepeoplespartyofcanada.ca/issues/immigration).
I agree that the Conservative Party won't fix what the Liberals did to Canada. I won't be voting Conservative. Never have, never will.
The Conservative Party will do what the Conservative Party in the UK did: bring in MASSIVE AUSTERITY. When people start defaulting on their mortgages en mass the government will step in to buy up all the dodgy loans. In, short the taxpayer will be burdened with this huge debt. The Conservatives will say they have to introduce AUSTERITY to pay down this enormous debt. That means savage cuts to services. Just like in the UK. Ten years of Austerity in the UK has turned in the UK into a third world country. The only thing that will "save" Canada from third world status is that it has lots of natural resources. Provided there is demand for them and that they don't give it away too cheaply.
The Conservative Party will do what the Conservative Party in the UK did: bring in MASSIVE AUSTERITY. When people start defaulting on their mortgages en mass the government will step in to buy up all the dodgy loans. In, short the taxpayer will be burdened with this huge debt. The Conservatives will say they have to introduce AUSTERITY to pay down this enormous debt. That means savage cuts to services. Just like in the UK. Ten years of Austerity in the UK has turned in the UK into a third world country. The only thing that will "save" Canada from third world status is that it has lots of natural resources. Provided there is demand for them and that they don't give it away too cheaply.
Because of politics. The NDP (the lesser partner in this effectively coalition government) is trying to demonize grocery stores for political points.
There is a subreddit for complaining about Loblaws.
https://old.reddit.com/r/loblawsisoutofcontrol/
https://old.reddit.com/r/loblawsisoutofcontrol/
[deleted]
Because we're being gouged
I would not call 3% to 4% profit margins gouging.
https://ycharts.com/companies/L.TO/profit_margin
https://ycharts.com/companies/L.TO/profit_margin
Then why doesn’t Canada have a huge network of ethnic grocery stores tailored to more frugal immigrant communities? I assume it does and the issue is one of consumer education.
They’re all over the US in every state with a decent immigrant population. Mexican, Persian, Armenian, Russian, Chinese, Vietnamese, Japanese, Korean, Arabic, and so on - that’s just the ones off the top of my head that I shop at monthly.
Chicken is usually cheaper at Costco and milk/eggs/cheese at Trader Joes, but all other meat and produce is significantly cheaper, on the order of 2-3x lower than the price at Costco/TJs. Their produce varies more based on whats in season and what their suppliers have the most of, but they also have crazy deals every week. My favorite this year was rebranded Sumo mandarins that sold for $0.33/lb which everyone else was selling for $2-3/lb (I was eating 3 pounds a day for a month).