The results of the Squawk survey, previously mentioned, are out. The survey was not designed to lend itself to statistical calculations, and responses may (or may not) have been edited or omitted, but the result shows exactly what I was saying about our hollow economy.
There were 28 responses published. Each item was assigned to one or more categories, for example, "build a new rec centre" is in both "construction" and "sports facilities". However where one respondent proposed several projects in the same category, it was counted only once. As a result there are 95 items being counted. The percentages given below are always the percentage of respondents who chose a given category, not the percentage of individual items that all into that category; hence it adds up to a lot more than 100%.
46% of respondents claimed they would donate massive amounts. This may or may not reflect what they would actually do, as of course we all like to think of ourselves as benefactors of humanity. And one of the respondents (accounting for 4 percentage points) would have donated the money to the Third World, thus breaking the rules. (That was your correspondent, as you might suspect.)
Other than self-image, the top priority was construction of various kinds, tied for first at 46% of responses. This included massive renos to the Highrise, renos at the Legion, a new Youth Centre, new recreation centre, skateboard park, additional ice surface, paving a parking lot, various cultural facilities, and some residential construction. Technically though, this entire category fails the "local" criterion since all the materials, tools and machines, and most of the labour, will be imported.
39% of respondents would spend money on services that would normally be provided by the government, including: roads, sidewalks and street lighting; literacy and continuing education; more RCMP; medical services; programs for the differently-abled; resources for people affected by family violence; and more park benches (the only one downtown being reserved to the use of "The Regulars", as we call the habitual drunks and half-drunks who spend their days on it watching the world go by). This would be mind-boggling to anyone who doesn't live here, considering that Hay River is one of the wealthiest communities in a territory that has (allegedly) the highest GDP per capita in Canada, and that the territorial and municipal governments together spend $35,000 per person per year. To the insider however, the combination of abnormally high reliance on the government as nanny and the woefully poor performance of government services makes this perfectly self-evident. That being said, most of these services are staffed by imported workers, and of course all their materials are also imported, so this is questionable as an eligible "local spending" choice.
25% would buy land. Finally, an item that qualifies as "local". I included those who would buy a house in this category, as opposed to those who would build a house, who are in the "construction" pile.
Another 25% would build sports facilities, all of which I also included under "construction" except the ball park twinning, which is more "destruction" than otherwise, and replacing the school's shale track with rubber, which unfortunately also doesn't count as "local" spending.
21% would put their money into tourism or cultural events and facilities, including the Fisherman's Wharf (a local custom wherein locals sell their cooking and crafts at the fishing harbour, hence the name), museums, performance venues, music events, a Renaissance Festival, an RV park and campground (of which we already have three), and a fair ground for "large community events" (of which we have none, that I know); and finally, promotion. This category is "local" to the extent that producers and performers live here, but of course the raw materials are mostly imported, except for the fish.
18% would pay for clean-up and beautification, including of litter on beaches (a serious embarrassment to us as a community, it must be said), a park downtown, and various attempts to pick up garbage, plant flowers, and so on.
11% want to spend their money on controlling other people's behaviour. This included deporting "all the uninformed naysayers and negative people opposed to progress", a description so general I wonder who would be left. I rather suspect your correspondent would be among those purged. In any case, this at any rate would certainly use "local" talent. Another wanted to spay or neuter every dog in town, not altogether a bad idea in my books, but not valid as "local spending" since the V-E-T comes from High Level AB. And one proposed issuing everyone a loaded paintball gun so we can shoot madly at ATVs, vandals, kids and other miscreants. Cathartic perhaps, but since the paintball guns would be imported, this one doesn't fly either.
The same number propose to eat at local restaurants until they burst. The joints thus honoured were the Frozen Grape (set to open in September), Atlantis Eatery (a purveyor of everything that can be deep fried who operates out of a little trailer and is making a fantastic business by the looks of it), and the Rooster (the local gas station, where one may procure delicacies by Hygaard Foods out of Alberta, but also pizzas, burgers, breakfast sandwiches, potato wedges, and other grossly unhealthy yet rather tasty eats). While the workers do live here, the brains in all three outfits are imported, as are of course the equipment and ingredients. But let's just say we'll allow this as local.
Still tied for eighth place we have various proposals to interfere with local businesses, and just as many plans to destroy native or not-quite-native vegetation, replacing it either with pavement, lawn grasses (as opposed to wild meadow), or newly imported species.
Here we have a tie between horses (not produced locally), boats (likewise), the Highrise (not actually local now I think of it, since the owner resides in Alberta most of the time), and two items that would actually qualify as local: starting a business or cutting more trails. All these ideas got two mentions each.
Finally the stragglers, one each, included peacocks (imported), cultivated flowers (ditto), a new truck (same), the afore-mentioned paintball guns (likewise), a rhinoceros (definitely likewise), genetic modifications (obviously likewise – the purpose here being to cross the horses with the rhinoceros to produce a unicorn), a second-hand shopping spree (nearly all items being previously imported, and in any case second-hand is not considered to add to the economy since nothing is produced), and a huge party (using imported beverages and other implements). One wanted car maintenance, which would include local labour (trained, however, out of the territory), but imported parts and supplies.
The great realist in all this is the guy who simply planned to cry if he had to spend his money in Hay River.
In summary, therefore, it is not just your correspondent who knows our economy has nothing in it. 27 other residents also had difficulty thinking of anything to buy. By the time we rule out everything that's clearly not "local spending", and the appalling perceived need to shore up our government services, the options are:
That being said, your correspondent is hungry. Better hie me to the Rooster for some potato wedges, I say.
There were 28 responses published. Each item was assigned to one or more categories, for example, "build a new rec centre" is in both "construction" and "sports facilities". However where one respondent proposed several projects in the same category, it was counted only once. As a result there are 95 items being counted. The percentages given below are always the percentage of respondents who chose a given category, not the percentage of individual items that all into that category; hence it adds up to a lot more than 100%.
First place
46% of respondents claimed they would donate massive amounts. This may or may not reflect what they would actually do, as of course we all like to think of ourselves as benefactors of humanity. And one of the respondents (accounting for 4 percentage points) would have donated the money to the Third World, thus breaking the rules. (That was your correspondent, as you might suspect.)
Other than self-image, the top priority was construction of various kinds, tied for first at 46% of responses. This included massive renos to the Highrise, renos at the Legion, a new Youth Centre, new recreation centre, skateboard park, additional ice surface, paving a parking lot, various cultural facilities, and some residential construction. Technically though, this entire category fails the "local" criterion since all the materials, tools and machines, and most of the labour, will be imported.
Third place
39% of respondents would spend money on services that would normally be provided by the government, including: roads, sidewalks and street lighting; literacy and continuing education; more RCMP; medical services; programs for the differently-abled; resources for people affected by family violence; and more park benches (the only one downtown being reserved to the use of "The Regulars", as we call the habitual drunks and half-drunks who spend their days on it watching the world go by). This would be mind-boggling to anyone who doesn't live here, considering that Hay River is one of the wealthiest communities in a territory that has (allegedly) the highest GDP per capita in Canada, and that the territorial and municipal governments together spend $35,000 per person per year. To the insider however, the combination of abnormally high reliance on the government as nanny and the woefully poor performance of government services makes this perfectly self-evident. That being said, most of these services are staffed by imported workers, and of course all their materials are also imported, so this is questionable as an eligible "local spending" choice.
Fourth place
25% would buy land. Finally, an item that qualifies as "local". I included those who would buy a house in this category, as opposed to those who would build a house, who are in the "construction" pile.
Another 25% would build sports facilities, all of which I also included under "construction" except the ball park twinning, which is more "destruction" than otherwise, and replacing the school's shale track with rubber, which unfortunately also doesn't count as "local" spending.
Sixth place
21% would put their money into tourism or cultural events and facilities, including the Fisherman's Wharf (a local custom wherein locals sell their cooking and crafts at the fishing harbour, hence the name), museums, performance venues, music events, a Renaissance Festival, an RV park and campground (of which we already have three), and a fair ground for "large community events" (of which we have none, that I know); and finally, promotion. This category is "local" to the extent that producers and performers live here, but of course the raw materials are mostly imported, except for the fish.
Seventh place
18% would pay for clean-up and beautification, including of litter on beaches (a serious embarrassment to us as a community, it must be said), a park downtown, and various attempts to pick up garbage, plant flowers, and so on.
Eighth place
11% want to spend their money on controlling other people's behaviour. This included deporting "all the uninformed naysayers and negative people opposed to progress", a description so general I wonder who would be left. I rather suspect your correspondent would be among those purged. In any case, this at any rate would certainly use "local" talent. Another wanted to spay or neuter every dog in town, not altogether a bad idea in my books, but not valid as "local spending" since the V-E-T comes from High Level AB. And one proposed issuing everyone a loaded paintball gun so we can shoot madly at ATVs, vandals, kids and other miscreants. Cathartic perhaps, but since the paintball guns would be imported, this one doesn't fly either.
The same number propose to eat at local restaurants until they burst. The joints thus honoured were the Frozen Grape (set to open in September), Atlantis Eatery (a purveyor of everything that can be deep fried who operates out of a little trailer and is making a fantastic business by the looks of it), and the Rooster (the local gas station, where one may procure delicacies by Hygaard Foods out of Alberta, but also pizzas, burgers, breakfast sandwiches, potato wedges, and other grossly unhealthy yet rather tasty eats). While the workers do live here, the brains in all three outfits are imported, as are of course the equipment and ingredients. But let's just say we'll allow this as local.
Still tied for eighth place we have various proposals to interfere with local businesses, and just as many plans to destroy native or not-quite-native vegetation, replacing it either with pavement, lawn grasses (as opposed to wild meadow), or newly imported species.
Twelfth place
Here we have a tie between horses (not produced locally), boats (likewise), the Highrise (not actually local now I think of it, since the owner resides in Alberta most of the time), and two items that would actually qualify as local: starting a business or cutting more trails. All these ideas got two mentions each.
Seventeenth place
Finally the stragglers, one each, included peacocks (imported), cultivated flowers (ditto), a new truck (same), the afore-mentioned paintball guns (likewise), a rhinoceros (definitely likewise), genetic modifications (obviously likewise – the purpose here being to cross the horses with the rhinoceros to produce a unicorn), a second-hand shopping spree (nearly all items being previously imported, and in any case second-hand is not considered to add to the economy since nothing is produced), and a huge party (using imported beverages and other implements). One wanted car maintenance, which would include local labour (trained, however, out of the territory), but imported parts and supplies.
The great realist in all this is the guy who simply planned to cry if he had to spend his money in Hay River.
In summary, therefore, it is not just your correspondent who knows our economy has nothing in it. 27 other residents also had difficulty thinking of anything to buy. By the time we rule out everything that's clearly not "local spending", and the appalling perceived need to shore up our government services, the options are:
- real estate (a very, very bad choice, here more than elsewhere),
- local artists, artisans and fishermen,
- cleaning up garbage and vandalism,
- local restaurants (iffy as "local", however),
- starting a business (not at all a good choice given the state of the economy),
- cutting trails,
- or crying.
That being said, your correspondent is hungry. Better hie me to the Rooster for some potato wedges, I say.
No comments:
Post a Comment