Generally speaking, there are two kinds of economy:
1) I make something, I eat it.
2) I make something, I sell it, I buy something, I eat it.
These are the only two ways to have an economy. But in Hay River, and in the Northwest Territories as a whole, we have a strange unholy system that works like this: the Government of Canada gives the Government of the Northwest Territories money; the Government of the Northwest Territories pays contractors and employees; the contractors and employees buy something and eat it.
There are three major problems with this system.
1) Very little money trickles out to people who do not work directly for the GNWT. This includes employees of contractors. Look at any construction company in Hay River that does lots of GNWT contracts: the owners have big houses; the company owns tons of vehicles that ride up and down the streets all day; the employees own no cars, houses, or even decent boots.
1b) Corollary to #1: the GNWT has to give some of its money directly to the people it does not choose to employ. For nothing.
2) Since the GNWT's costs are not matched to any realistic revenue stream, they're completely out of control. But that's for my chats with the Minister of Finance. (Hi Mike!)
3) Most importantly for my electoral campaign, we don't sell anything. We can't sell anything because we don't make anything. We just eat an endless stream of federal money which apparently, is not as endless as we once thought.
The solution is: make something. Something that can be made here, by the people the GNWT chooses not to hire, and then sold to people not here so we can have money to buy things. That is to say, we need manufacturing.
Ok. Manufacture what?
Brad Mapes is going to make wood pellets. That's good. But it's not differentiated, and it doesn't ship very far, so mostly, he's going to be selling them to us. And the money is gonna go to Brad Mapes, not to us. (I support his project. I just don't think it's enough.)
Then, Avalon. Avalon is gonna process rare earths. Awesome!!!! You know why? Because there is massive demand for rare earths. Just last week I had a Japanese man in my cab, who was here from Japan to see about the rare earths. We can definitely sell rare earths. But there is still one problem with Avalon: we don't own it. Therefore the Avalon employees will get some money, but the not-from-here directors (and shareholders, if they're lucky) of Avalon will get way more out of it than we will.
As for Tamerlane, it's a resource extraction venture. Primary sector is good. Very good, actually, though again it will benefit its own shareholders more than us. But there is still less money in primary than in secondary industries.
No, what we need is a labour-intensive light manufacturing concern that is owned co-operatively by its collectively-bargaining employees. Why? Because by cutting out the owner, you cut out the need to pay for the owner's lifestyle. Take a drive around town, look at the business owners' houses, then look at their employees' houses. If you can find any that are owned by the employees and not by yet another business owner. Owners are a very high cost to a business. So let's get rid of the owners, own the place ourselves, and then the money that would pay for the owners' lifestyle can be shared among the employees instead.
Still, manufacture what?
Well, it has to be differentiated, obviously. "Differentiated" essentially means that people will pay more money for A's product than B's product, for some reason. Gasoline is not differentiated: people go to the cheapest gas station, because all the gas is the same. Whereas beer is differentiated: people will pay extra to get a certain beer. Clothing is also differentiated. Many more things are differentiated, but beer and clothing are the two I've hit upon in my brainstorming.
In any case, it's worth remembering that the GNWT has been spending money on promoting the Northwest Territories "brand", and we can take advantage of that, as long as we can make a differentiated product. Because then it's not just beer, or clothes, or widgets, it's beer, clothes and widgets made in the Northwest Territories and therefore somehow worth paying more for.
You don't think so? Visit Museums of Canada. It's an online joint endeavour of the gift shops of museums across Canada. You'll notice they have several textile items with designs by various Native artists, selling for a pile of money. So if we produced a line of good-quality clothing, designed by various local artists with a "northern" aesthetic, and well made here in the Northwest Territories, we could sell it. The same was true in Australia when I was there: they were making all kinds of clothes with Australian themes and art on them and a label that would say "proudly made in Australia", and it cost an arm and a leg, and people bought it. Because clothing is differentiated, so we can do that. (Now I'm not saying put "Hay River" on a T-shirt. That's never gonna make us any money. I'm talking something that looks different - and that does not have "Hay River" written on it.)
Then there is the boot issue. Go see Steger Mukluks and Moccasins. They're in Ely, Minnesota, making boots. Making, allegedly, "the warmest winter boots in the world." You know how I found out? Because some of my neighbours in the Highrise have been buying their boots from Steger, and so they got a flyer, which got misplaced in the mail, and ended up in my hands. Why in the world are we in the Northwest Territories buying our boots from Ely, Minnesota? Why are we not making boots and selling them to the world? We should make even warmer winter boots, with a distinctly Inuit aesthetic. Like using seal skin in some styles instead of moosehide. And then say "WE make the warmest mukluks in the world and ours are designed by Native and Inuit artists here in the Northwest Territories." There you go: differentiated boots.
And then, beer. I don't drink beer myself, but I know that either Labatt or Molson is unionized. Maybe even both. Which means that beer has high enough margins to support union wages. Score!!!! Set up a micro-brewery, make tasty beer, put something like northern lights and a moose on the packaging and tell them it's made from the water of Great Slave Lake. Voila: differentiated beer. Plus it would be a step towards becoming "more self-sufficient", since we could drink our own beer. And by the way, potatoes grow pretty well here, which means we could also make vodka.
Now of course people have two counter-arguments:
1) Has there been a feasibility study?
2) You can't get people to work there.
No, there has not been a feasibility study. I'm just generating ideas. If these don't work (and there's no reason they shouldn't), we'll generate more ideas. But we MUST make something we can sell. If we can't, we're doomed. So you better hope something is deemed "feasible".
And second, yes, people will work there, if you stop treating them like dirt. Of all the employers here who can't find unskilled people to work, not one is unionized. I've worked for a few of them and they treat people like dirt. Plus, private sector wages are miserable, which is why everyone wants to work for the GNWT. (Contrary to popular belief, only 6% of the workforce is in resource extraction.) But if you have collective bargaining and no owner, you pay people decently and treat them decently, yes, they will want to work there. People want to work. Owners just make it impossible.
That being said, because Hay River people don't get along very well (if you don't think so, you must be one of my fellow candidates), if I had a business I'd put in a break-out room. Then when someone has had words with a coworker or a supervisor, or they're frustrated and about to throw tools, or they screwed up and their ego hurts, instead of walking off the job or saying something inappropriate and having to be dismissed, they can go to the break-out room and sit there for a while to cool down. Or whatever - scream, punch things, I don't care. As long as they come back out and go back to their duties, instead of walking off the job. I think that would significantly improve employee retention in Hay River.
And if it's not profitable on its own, then let's get the GNWT to subsidize it. As I was telling Miltenberger, the GNWT currently subsidizes fur trapping and fishing. Those are the territory's early exports, which are no longer profitable, but we keep them afloat with GNWT money because it's "traditional". So I'm not saying don't give them any money, but start subsidizing the future, not just the past. Subsidize manufacturing. At this point Kevin Wallington interjected that we have "enough subsidies" and we should focus on being "self-sufficient" using "agriculture and music." And this is why I'm so glad he's not running again: because seriously, how about some reality here? Agriculture and music are some of the most heavily subsidized industries in Canada, nor will "music" ever make us "self-sufficient." As for agriculture, supposing even we could grow all the food we want (which we can't, because people will always want exotic things like bananas if they can get them), we'd still have nothing to sell in exchange for our clothes, cars, and yes Kevin, those ATVs that are allegedly "part of our culture." You know what pays for those ATVs? Subsidies. In fact, Kevin's father runs the chicken barn, and egg production is bought by CEMA, and CEMA is quite heavily subsidized. It's good to check your numbers before you open your mouth, you know. But back to my point, everything here is subsidized, so let's start subsidizing something that has a future.
1) I make something, I eat it.
2) I make something, I sell it, I buy something, I eat it.
These are the only two ways to have an economy. But in Hay River, and in the Northwest Territories as a whole, we have a strange unholy system that works like this: the Government of Canada gives the Government of the Northwest Territories money; the Government of the Northwest Territories pays contractors and employees; the contractors and employees buy something and eat it.
There are three major problems with this system.
1) Very little money trickles out to people who do not work directly for the GNWT. This includes employees of contractors. Look at any construction company in Hay River that does lots of GNWT contracts: the owners have big houses; the company owns tons of vehicles that ride up and down the streets all day; the employees own no cars, houses, or even decent boots.
1b) Corollary to #1: the GNWT has to give some of its money directly to the people it does not choose to employ. For nothing.
2) Since the GNWT's costs are not matched to any realistic revenue stream, they're completely out of control. But that's for my chats with the Minister of Finance. (Hi Mike!)
3) Most importantly for my electoral campaign, we don't sell anything. We can't sell anything because we don't make anything. We just eat an endless stream of federal money which apparently, is not as endless as we once thought.
The solution is: make something. Something that can be made here, by the people the GNWT chooses not to hire, and then sold to people not here so we can have money to buy things. That is to say, we need manufacturing.
Ok. Manufacture what?
Brad Mapes is going to make wood pellets. That's good. But it's not differentiated, and it doesn't ship very far, so mostly, he's going to be selling them to us. And the money is gonna go to Brad Mapes, not to us. (I support his project. I just don't think it's enough.)
Then, Avalon. Avalon is gonna process rare earths. Awesome!!!! You know why? Because there is massive demand for rare earths. Just last week I had a Japanese man in my cab, who was here from Japan to see about the rare earths. We can definitely sell rare earths. But there is still one problem with Avalon: we don't own it. Therefore the Avalon employees will get some money, but the not-from-here directors (and shareholders, if they're lucky) of Avalon will get way more out of it than we will.
As for Tamerlane, it's a resource extraction venture. Primary sector is good. Very good, actually, though again it will benefit its own shareholders more than us. But there is still less money in primary than in secondary industries.
No, what we need is a labour-intensive light manufacturing concern that is owned co-operatively by its collectively-bargaining employees. Why? Because by cutting out the owner, you cut out the need to pay for the owner's lifestyle. Take a drive around town, look at the business owners' houses, then look at their employees' houses. If you can find any that are owned by the employees and not by yet another business owner. Owners are a very high cost to a business. So let's get rid of the owners, own the place ourselves, and then the money that would pay for the owners' lifestyle can be shared among the employees instead.
Still, manufacture what?
Well, it has to be differentiated, obviously. "Differentiated" essentially means that people will pay more money for A's product than B's product, for some reason. Gasoline is not differentiated: people go to the cheapest gas station, because all the gas is the same. Whereas beer is differentiated: people will pay extra to get a certain beer. Clothing is also differentiated. Many more things are differentiated, but beer and clothing are the two I've hit upon in my brainstorming.
In any case, it's worth remembering that the GNWT has been spending money on promoting the Northwest Territories "brand", and we can take advantage of that, as long as we can make a differentiated product. Because then it's not just beer, or clothes, or widgets, it's beer, clothes and widgets made in the Northwest Territories and therefore somehow worth paying more for.
You don't think so? Visit Museums of Canada. It's an online joint endeavour of the gift shops of museums across Canada. You'll notice they have several textile items with designs by various Native artists, selling for a pile of money. So if we produced a line of good-quality clothing, designed by various local artists with a "northern" aesthetic, and well made here in the Northwest Territories, we could sell it. The same was true in Australia when I was there: they were making all kinds of clothes with Australian themes and art on them and a label that would say "proudly made in Australia", and it cost an arm and a leg, and people bought it. Because clothing is differentiated, so we can do that. (Now I'm not saying put "Hay River" on a T-shirt. That's never gonna make us any money. I'm talking something that looks different - and that does not have "Hay River" written on it.)
Then there is the boot issue. Go see Steger Mukluks and Moccasins. They're in Ely, Minnesota, making boots. Making, allegedly, "the warmest winter boots in the world." You know how I found out? Because some of my neighbours in the Highrise have been buying their boots from Steger, and so they got a flyer, which got misplaced in the mail, and ended up in my hands. Why in the world are we in the Northwest Territories buying our boots from Ely, Minnesota? Why are we not making boots and selling them to the world? We should make even warmer winter boots, with a distinctly Inuit aesthetic. Like using seal skin in some styles instead of moosehide. And then say "WE make the warmest mukluks in the world and ours are designed by Native and Inuit artists here in the Northwest Territories." There you go: differentiated boots.
And then, beer. I don't drink beer myself, but I know that either Labatt or Molson is unionized. Maybe even both. Which means that beer has high enough margins to support union wages. Score!!!! Set up a micro-brewery, make tasty beer, put something like northern lights and a moose on the packaging and tell them it's made from the water of Great Slave Lake. Voila: differentiated beer. Plus it would be a step towards becoming "more self-sufficient", since we could drink our own beer. And by the way, potatoes grow pretty well here, which means we could also make vodka.
Now of course people have two counter-arguments:
1) Has there been a feasibility study?
2) You can't get people to work there.
No, there has not been a feasibility study. I'm just generating ideas. If these don't work (and there's no reason they shouldn't), we'll generate more ideas. But we MUST make something we can sell. If we can't, we're doomed. So you better hope something is deemed "feasible".
And second, yes, people will work there, if you stop treating them like dirt. Of all the employers here who can't find unskilled people to work, not one is unionized. I've worked for a few of them and they treat people like dirt. Plus, private sector wages are miserable, which is why everyone wants to work for the GNWT. (Contrary to popular belief, only 6% of the workforce is in resource extraction.) But if you have collective bargaining and no owner, you pay people decently and treat them decently, yes, they will want to work there. People want to work. Owners just make it impossible.
That being said, because Hay River people don't get along very well (if you don't think so, you must be one of my fellow candidates), if I had a business I'd put in a break-out room. Then when someone has had words with a coworker or a supervisor, or they're frustrated and about to throw tools, or they screwed up and their ego hurts, instead of walking off the job or saying something inappropriate and having to be dismissed, they can go to the break-out room and sit there for a while to cool down. Or whatever - scream, punch things, I don't care. As long as they come back out and go back to their duties, instead of walking off the job. I think that would significantly improve employee retention in Hay River.
And if it's not profitable on its own, then let's get the GNWT to subsidize it. As I was telling Miltenberger, the GNWT currently subsidizes fur trapping and fishing. Those are the territory's early exports, which are no longer profitable, but we keep them afloat with GNWT money because it's "traditional". So I'm not saying don't give them any money, but start subsidizing the future, not just the past. Subsidize manufacturing. At this point Kevin Wallington interjected that we have "enough subsidies" and we should focus on being "self-sufficient" using "agriculture and music." And this is why I'm so glad he's not running again: because seriously, how about some reality here? Agriculture and music are some of the most heavily subsidized industries in Canada, nor will "music" ever make us "self-sufficient." As for agriculture, supposing even we could grow all the food we want (which we can't, because people will always want exotic things like bananas if they can get them), we'd still have nothing to sell in exchange for our clothes, cars, and yes Kevin, those ATVs that are allegedly "part of our culture." You know what pays for those ATVs? Subsidies. In fact, Kevin's father runs the chicken barn, and egg production is bought by CEMA, and CEMA is quite heavily subsidized. It's good to check your numbers before you open your mouth, you know. But back to my point, everything here is subsidized, so let's start subsidizing something that has a future.
No comments:
Post a Comment