Canada Vs Cabbage! Fight!

[dv8nation.livejournal.com]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-18413043

Would you pay C$28 (US$27; £18) for a cabbage? $65 for a bag of chicken? $100 for 12 litres of water? That's not the cost of a meal at a world-class restaurant, but the price of basic foodstuffs at supermarkets in the territory of Nunavut, in northern Canada.

Michael McMullen, vice president for the northern Canada division of the North West Company, which runs 132 stores in remote Canadian communities, says getting food into stores in the north can cost 11 times more than it does in the south of the country.

"Transport generally makes up 13% of our costs," he says. "It costs typically one cent a pound to send stock to Winnipeg, and 30 cents a pound to send something to Iqaluit by sea, but it costs $1.27/lb to air freight stock to Arviat in southern Nunavut, and $3.65/lb to fly something to Clyde River in northern Nunavut."

A federally funded programme, Nutrition North Canada Program (NNCP), gives subsidies to retailers who are supposed to lower the prices of essential healthy foods in communities without regular road or water access.

Mr McMullen says the scheme, which pays $53.9m a year, has brought the cost of four litres of milk down from $15.19 to $7.79, but he concedes that more needs to be done to make food affordable.


Reading this got me thinking about the practicalities of moving food in remote and developing nations. And while there might be some people in Nunavut who aren't getting enough to eat no one is going to strave either. But I can't help but think that this is what scientists like to call "a natural experiment" and that there's something that could be learned here that could help very poor nations.

First, this does seem to be a case where government subsities actually work and do what they're supposed to. On the other hand, if I'm doing my math right, that's around $1,800 per person per year. So clearly that's something Canada can pull off but a poor nation couldn't without international aid.

 But in looking at this all I think the real key is infrastructure. Get goods to where they need to be fast and cheaply. Of course, this being important is hardly a new idea. But I think that if we were to make that a harder focus when it comes to aiding developing countries we'd see a better return.

Thoughts?

Comments

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

Or, why do we care to subsidize people who made a choice to live out in the middle of nowhere? If they have a problem with living there, they can move. If they can support living there, then good for them.

Yes, infrastructure is key, and when people see a market available to them, they build the infrastructure to service it. Except when government gets in the way and says that only they can do it.

[beemo.livejournal.com]

1. they're native
2. canada supports populations that can't adequately support themselves all over the country. equalization payments to have-not provinces, social programs for families, etc.
3. the prices went up like this because the food delivery was privatized

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

1. So what?
2. Yeah, socialism is bad.
3. Yes, it went back to the real cost instead of the artificial price.

[beemo.livejournal.com]

lol oh okay

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

Sounds like something Canada can figure out if it wants to see more people living in those regions. Wait, are we talking about people moving there or the indigenous population? The latter I'm sure have grown up knowing how to find food and survive where they are but is their source of food threatened in any way?

This kind of sounds like what I hear about Hawaii and it being so expensive to live there because you have to ship in everything, compared to the mainland United States I mean.

[beemo.livejournal.com]

indigenous, nunavut has about 30k people and 85% are native

it costs a lot of money to hunt

[beemo.livejournal.com]

they can't build a road to nunavut.

abusive pricing and poor living conditions are a problem in native communities all over the country. most people in nunavut are inuit or other first nations, and from what i can tell, english is not the primary language. also, things like student loans and mortgages are different for them. there are also massive addiction/mental and physical health problems in these communities no matter where they are. should they be moved to different native communities where it'll be the same shit different area code, or to non-native communities where, on top of everything else, they'll get shit and abuse from white people and even less community support than they now have?

the government owes a massive debt to these people. food is not the only subsidized thing. teachers up there make MONEY. >:D