Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Economy

When Potatoes Become a Luxury: Canada’s Grocery Gouging Can’t Continue

Published

7 minute read

By Jeremy Nuttall

I don’t want to live in a country where pensioners have to put back potatoes, a food that supported millions of lives in desperate times

It was a routine wait in the grocery line last year when I personally witnessed the true cost of the grocery price spike. An elderly lady in front of me in the lineup did a double take when the clerk told her the total for her bill.

“What’s $10?” she asked, looking at the cashier’s screen. The clerk told her it was the handful of potatoes she’d grabbed. The woman, easily old enough to be retired, put the potatoes back.

Being middle-aged with a decent full-time job, until that moment, I was fortunate enough that experiencing the rising cost of groceries was not much more than a bit of a drag. But seeing a pensioner putting potatoes back highlighted the problem. The humble tuber has sustained whole civilizations in dire circumstances due to its being inexpensive and nourishing. Now it’s a luxury item?

After two years of complaints about the cost of groceries, the government pretending to fix the issue with the grocery code of conduct (and a lot of big talk), and more Canadians hitting food banks than at any time in recent memory, earlier this month we found out food prices will rise again next year.

The Food Price Report, produced by a joint effort between several Canadian universities, predicted a five per cent increase for meat and vegetables in 2025. That’s more than double the predicted rate of inflation from BMO for the coming 12 months.

Yet again, Canadian government actions have proven worthless.

The message is clear, and “we can’t really help you” is pretty much that message.

Another idea the government had to solve this was to head down to the U.S. to beg some of their chains to open up in Canada. This, rather than breaking up the big Canadian-owned grocery chains dominated by a couple of corporate giants already caught in a major price-fixing scandal, was their best idea.

Anything to get out of doing the work and angering the people with whom they hit the cocktail circuit.

I stopped buying my produce, and most of my meat, at large outlets a couple of years ago. I knew I was saving money, but just how much surprised me recently. I was at a Safeway and wanted to buy a russet potato there to save myself making another stop. I saw the price was $2.69 a pound. The spud I chose was more than a pound—potentially a $3 potato. Disgusted, I left the store without a thing to mash, bake, or julienne.

A few days later, I headed to my usual produce market, the Triple A market on Hastings in Burnaby, a trusty institution with a lot of character. I purchased a big russet potato, a big red onion, two Roma tomatoes, and two Ambrosia apples. (These are random items; please don’t try to make a pie out of this.)

My total was $5.15. This seemed reasonable to me. Right after, I went back to the same Safeway. I purchased the same items, while trying my best to get the weight as close as possible to the first batch I bought.

The result? Even with the Triple A red onion and potato having a couple hundred grams more weight, the Safeway total for the same basket was $8.83. That’s forty per cent more, probably closer to 50 per cent if you factor in the size difference for the onion and potato from Triple A.

A quick look around my nearest Jim Pattison-owned Buy-Low (or Buy Low Sell High, as we call it around my house) revealed prices similar to Safeway, yet the neighbourhood Sungiven, a Vancouver Asian market chain, had prices closer to those of the produce stand.

Now, the argument is often that big grocers have more overhead, advertising budgets, and larger staff. But I think it’s fair to say there’s something suspicious going on here. One thing is clear, though: big grocers are increasingly strictly for suckers.

Out here in B.C., this predicted five per cent increase in grocery prices will have companions by way of increases to property taxes recently passed in Metro Vancouver and a 17 per cent increase to natural gas rates in the province.

We may have a tariff war on the horizon, making all that even worse.

This crushing of Canadians can’t go on. Sadly, it will, due in part to the complete lack of real action from the authorities meant to protect the public interest.

To be clear, I’m not an expert on grocery stores or farming. I’m sure there are flaws in my complaints.

But one thing I know for certain is I don’t want to live in a country where pensioners have to put back potatoes—a food that has saved millions of lives during destitute times—at the checkout after seeing how much they cost.

And any government agency or elected official who thinks it can half-ass the response to something like that while collecting a paycheque is gouging Canadians in their own way.

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Business

Next federal government has to unravel mess created by 10 years of Trudeau policies

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Jock Finlayson

It’s no exaggeration to describe the Trudeau years as almost a “lost decade” for Canadian prosperity.

The Justin Trudeau era is ending, after nine-and-a-half years as prime minister. His exit coincides with the onset of a trade crisis with the United States. Trudeau leaves behind a stagnant Canadian economy crippled by dwindling productivity, a long stretch of weak business investment, and waning global competitiveness. These are problems Trudeau chose to ignore throughout his tenure. His successors will not have that luxury.

It’s no exaggeration to describe the Trudeau years as almost a “lost decade” for Canadian prosperity. Measured on a per-person basis, national income today is barely higher than it was in 2015, after stripping out the effects of inflation. On this core metric of citizen wellbeing, Canada has one of the worst records among all advanced economies. We have fallen far behind the U.S., where average real income has grown by 15 per cent over the same period, and most of Europe and Japan, where growth has been in the range of 5-6 per cent.

Meanwhile, Ottawa’s debt has doubled on Trudeau’s watch, and both federal government spending and the size of the public service have ballooned, even as service levels have generally deteriorated. Housing in Canada has never been more expensive relative to average household incomes, and health care has never been harder to access. The statistics on crime point to a decline in public safety in the last decade.

Reviving prosperity will be the most critical task facing Trudeau’s successor. It won’t be easy, due in part to a brewing trade war with the U.S. and the retreat from open markets and free trade in much of the world. But a difficult external environment is no reason for Canada to avoid tackling the domestic impediments that discourage economic growth, business innovation and entrepreneurial wealth creation.

In a recent study, a group of economists and policy advisors outlined an agenda for renewed Canadian prosperity. Several of their main recommendations are briefly summarized below.

Return to the balanced budget policies embraced by the Chretien/Martin and Harper governments from 1995 to 2015. Absent a recession, the federal government should not run deficits. And the next government should eliminate ineffective spending programs and poor-performing federally-funded agencies.

Reform and reduce both personal and business income taxes. Canada’s overall income tax system is increasingly out of line with global best practise and has become a major barrier to attracting private-sector investment, top talent and world-class companies. A significant overhaul of the country’s tax policies is urgently needed.

Retool Ottawa’s existing suite of climate and energy policies to reduce the economic damage done by the long list of regulations, taxes, subsidies and other measures adopted Trudeau. Canada should establish realistic goals for lowering greenhouse gas emissions, not politically manufactured “targets” that are manifestly out of reach. Our climate policy should reflect the fact that Canada’s primary global comparative advantage is as a producer and exporter of energy and energy-intensive goods, agri-food products, minerals and other industrial raw materials which collectively supply more than half of the country’s exports.

Finally, take a knife to interprovincial barriers to trade, investment and labour mobility. These long-standing internal restrictions on commerce increase prices for consumers, inhibit the growth of Canadian-based companies, and result in tens of billions of dollars in lost economic output. The next federal government should lead a national effort to strengthen the Canadian “common market” by eliminating such barriers.

Jock Finlayson

Senior Fellow, Fraser Institute
Continue Reading

Business

Trump promises tariff revenue, fair trade and more jobs

Published on

From The Center Square

By 

President Donald Trump told Congress on Tuesday that tariffs would make America rich again, but predicted minor “disturbances” on the path ahead.

Trump said he would put reciprocal tariffs on foreign countries starting April 2.

“Whatever they tariff us, we tariff them. Whatever they tax us, we tax them,” Trump said. “If they do non-monetary tariffs to keep us out of their market, then we do non-monetary barriers to keep them out of our market. We will take in trillions of dollars and create jobs like we have never seen before.”

Trump didn’t detail the potential disturbance in his speech, but economists and business groups have raised concerns about higher prices for U.S. consumers.

Trump also promised Congress would balance the federal budget and reduce taxes. Making good on those promises could come with challenges.

Trump previously said he wants a balanced budget, but his promise to extend the tax cuts in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act could make that difficult for both the House and Senate. Extending the tax rates could cost about $4 trillion in federal revenue, independent groups say.

In the past 50 years, the federal government has ended with a fiscal year-end budget surplus four times, most recently in 2001. Congress has run a deficit every year since then.

During his inauguration, Trump touted the benefits of tariffs. He said tariff revenue would make the U.S. “rich as hell ” and lower the tax burden on American taxpayers.

Trump’s comments Tuesday before a joint session of Congress came after he put 25% tariffs on Mexico and Canada and added an additional 10% duty on imports from China. He has said he plans to keep those tariffs in place until Mexico and Canada stop illegal immigration and drug trafficking at the U.S. borders.

The tariffs spooked investors on Wall Street, causing a second day of market losses Tuesday. Consumers and economists have raised concerns about higher prices on a wide range of products as a result of the tariffs.

Tariffs are taxes on imported goods paid by the importer, which are often passed along to consumers through higher prices on the imported products.

Canada responded with plans to put 25% tariffs on nearly $100 billion of U.S. imports. Mexico said it would retaliate with moves to be announced Sunday. China filed a complaint with the World Trade Organization.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Farm Bureau Federation called on Trump to change course on tariffs.

Later Tuesday, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said Trump could announce trade compromises with Canada and Mexico as soon as Wednesday.

Continue Reading

Trending

X