GG Spending

[Remius]

Sounds like a race to the bottom. Do your job. Live your life. Simple as that.

It is, but failing to recognize where issues started and their impact now leads to inaccurate finger pointing. Inter generational resentment is nothing new but there is plenty of literature that covers what I’ve posted.

Simple sounds good but it rarely is “simple”

 

[daftandbarmy]

A friend of mine is posted to the Netherlands.

They recently posted that it's about 0.8 euro per kWh for energy. Not sure what it exactly translates to here but apparently it's mind-blowing even for the Dutch.

Also, income tax rate there is 48% for over 60k, and HST is 21%.

They are paying for their naivete re: the Russians, of course.

I hope they suffer just enough to learn their lesson, and just a bit beyond that

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Centre your rebuttal about who I choose to make my point (Gen xr) instead of the meat of the discussion. I could have used anything and you would've complained. Nice avoidance tactic.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

You don't "give" out a living wage. By definition you work for a wage.

Also, they did try Universal Basic Income in the 70s in MB, and later in ON. It worked out, until Conservative governments shut it down.

Canada’s forgotten universal basic income experiment

Amid wide unemployment during Covid-19, basic income schemes have gained fresh relevance. A successful Canadian scheme that's over four decades old could provide a road map for others.

www.bbc.com

Also, nice generalization on the "lazy Gen X'er". Not all of them don't want to work - if anything, they're working several job to try and make ends meet and get out of living in their parents' basement.

...and no, I'm not one of them. I'm practically a "boomer" myself.

Centre your rebuttal about my faux pas (living wage v. Universal income) and who I choose to make my point (Gen xr), instead of the meat of the discussion.

 

[mariomike]

A cohort of millennials were screwed over by the baby boomers who lived awesome so yeah, they aren’t too happy.

The cohort of retired baby-boomers I know would have been very happy with the collective agreement ( CA ) millenials have now.

I don't mean the regular wage increases and pension that both generations receive(d).

But, the many benefits now written into the CA that did not exist during our time. The crown jewel being PTSD paid leave and occupational transfer ( with no financial loss ).

We "baby-boomers" came on under the watchful eyes of our '46'ers ( aka "the Greatest Generation" ).

I can only imagine what they would have to say if they were alive today.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Sounds like a race to the bottom. Do your job. Live your life. Simple as that.

Job being the operative word.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

So a lot of people who left the service industry went to other better jobs or retrained to do something else. They aren’t all just sitting at home.

Also note. most genXers are working and and likely mostly employed.

A cohort of millennials were screwed over by the baby boomers who lived awesome so yeah, they aren’t too happy. So yeah they are paying for it now, and so are the boomers who have their part in this but likely will never admit

The majority of new jobs created are federal jobs. Yeah, my 50+ years working and contributing to the government programs, to keep my family solvent was really fucking awesome. I am now the lucky recipient of OAS and CPP of which I contributed to for that 50+ years and I'm still paying my income tax. Time moves on. Advancements in living and life have happened as well as mistakes. Blaming the son for the problems of their fathers,and grandfathers, is a dead end discussion without merit. I am not responsible, in any way, for the way the government decided to operate back then. And certainly not for the current one either.

 

[Remius]

The majority of new jobs created are federal jobs. Yeah, my 50+ years working and contributing to the government programs, to keep my family solvent was really fucking awesome. I am now the lucky recipient of OAS and CPP of which I contributed to for that 50+ years and I'm still paying my income tax. Time moves on. Advancements in living and life have happened as well as mistakes. Blaming the son for the problems of their fathers,and grandfathers, is a dead end discussion without merit. I am not responsible, in any way, for the way the government decided to operate back then. And certainly not for the current one either.

I didn’t mention anything about what or where jobs were created. I mentioned what happened to the service industry folks who decided they didn’t like to be treated like crap and moved on to better things. They took the opportunity.

It has nothing to do with individuals or who worked “harder”. It’s a result of various policies enacted while Boomers were and still are in charge. Deficit spending was pretty much always the norm.

In particular the move from long term planning to short term thinking, the move away from OJT and focusing on formal higher education and training and also a focus on investment in real estate rather than businesses.

Plenty of litterature that supports all of this. And now the incoming generation has inherited that and the older one doesn’t want to hear what they have to say.

We always talk about how our children will pay for our decisions. We’ve reached that point or perhaps the start of that point.

 

[dimsum]

Centre your rebuttal about my faux pas (living wage v. Universal income) and who I choose to make my point (Gen xr), instead of the meat of the discussion.

You are convinced that the Gen Xers (or whatever group you choose) are lazy and we'll be supporting them. Remius has given examples that it isn't like that.

The meat of your discussion, as I can tell, is how much we should be shouldering the tax burden for them. But, your argument is based that they don't want to work, whereas my argument is that they do. So no, I don't think we'll be shouldering the tax burden as much as you think.

 

[Weinie]

As almost always( and I am guilty as well) this thread has gone sideways and off-topic. But I find that MP's questioning $218 per meal for the GG's entourage relevant.

 

[OldSolduer]

As almost always( and I am guilty as well) this thread has gone sideways and off-topic. But I find that MP's questioning $218 per meal for the GG's entourage relevant.

It is relevant yes. But I think the methodology of calculating it may be flawed.

 

[Lumber]

It is relevant yes. But I think the methodology of calculating it may be flawed.

How are they calculating it? Are they factoring the cost of the meal plus the salary of a steward during meal hours? (feel free to just point me to a reference/website)

 

[Weinie]

It is relevant yes. But I think the methodology of calculating it may be flawed.

It was revealed that the catering for food for the flight was about $80k, or $218 per meal. If this is substantive, then I too need an explanation.

 

[OldSolduer]

How are they calculating it? Are they factoring the cost of the meal plus the salary of a steward during meal hours? (feel free to just point me to a reference/website)

Here in lies the issue: Is it the cost per meal or as it as Weinie said - are they including costs of staff who serve the meals.

 

[Lumber]

Here in lies the issue: Is it the cost per meal or as it as Weinie said - are they including costs of staff who serve the meals.

Q. How much do airlines spend on meals per passenger?

A. In fact, among the ten largest U.S. airlines that report their culinary expenditures to the government, United is one of the most generous, spending, on average, $6.08 per passenger in 2014, second only to American, where the tab was $6.43 per person. (That’s for all classes of service, domestic and international.)
The average for all the airlines in the sample was $3.61 per person, but that’s because budget airlines like Spirit, which spent a beyond-budget 26 cents a person, get thrown into the mix. Spirit, along with Southwest and Allegiant, don’t serve food at all, except, perhaps, for a bag of pretzels. Others include Delta, which forks over $5.36 per flier; Virgin America, at $3.73 per person; and JetBlue at $1.39.

So, even factoring in that major airlines are likely getting huge economies of scale by buying tens of thousands of meals each day, and also factoring in that the GG likely gets a better quality meal than your average plebe aboard a commercial airlines, you still cannot get to a price of $218 per meal unless you are adding back in the salary of the cook (which should already be factored into the cost of the meal, so you'd be adding it twice) and the salary of those serving the meal (which should be part of the flight cost, not the meal cost). It's asinine.

 

[Lumber]

So, I've gone and re-read some articles on this, and while it still irks me that they spent this much, I'm not sure they could have avoided it creating a hole slew of new process (read: more red-tape) that might end up costing more in the long run. Consider:

1. the bill included the “cost of food, non-alcoholic beverages and associated fees, including catering handling and delivery, storage, cleaning and disposal of international waste, airport taxes, administrative fees, security charges, and local taxes,”; and,
2. “In some many cases, it’s only a single catering company that’s available to us and because of that they have a monopoly on costs,” Kenny said.
“I know it’s a lot of money for the catering,” he said later, adding that catering costs in Qatar and the United Arab Emirates are “quite high.”

Anyone who's travelled/deployed to the middle east knows they love being able to charge whatever the hell they want when they know they can get away with it. I wouldn't be surprised that the price-per-meal provided to a "foreign government" aircraft in the ME is much higher than for a commercial airline getting the exact same meal.

Considering they spent $80k on only 8 meals, it would probably be cheaper to hire an aviator at $60,000 a year to do nothing but make sandwiches on these flights.

 

[Booter]

Ah yes. The Canadian answer of sending people around the world to liaise and develop partnerships and relationships with foreign governments while on hay boxes or box lunch.

The conversation is useless- the government should be able to show a receipt and cost breakdown. It comes up literally every couple years- the fact that government doesn’t show the work when questioned is the actual problem.

 

[FSTO]

Ah yes. The Canadian answer of sending people around the world to liaise and develop partnerships and relationships with foreign governments while on hay boxes or box lunch.

The conversation is useless- the government should be able to show a receipt and cost breakdown. It comes up literally every couple years- the fact that government doesn’t show the work when questioned is the actual problem.

The PMO and Public Service (including the CAF) could save so much angst by being just a little more open about their dealings. You’d think that after Bev Oda they’d learn.

 

[Lumber]

The PMO and Public Service (including the CAF) could save so much angst by being just a little more open about their dealings. You’d think that after Bev Oda they’d learn.

I don't think it would save THAT much angst. Even if you showed them and said "Lok, we can only carry so much food. We ran out and had to stock-up in Doha. The Qatari catering companies charge $100/meal +$100/meal in various fees and taxes. They even have rules that prevent us from just going into town and buying local food." People wouldn't care. They'd be up in arms that you spend $200/meal for a bunch of elites to go gallivanting around the world to do no more than shake hands and take pictures.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Ah yes. The Canadian answer of sending people around the world to liaise and develop partnerships and relationships with foreign governments while on hay boxes or box lunch.

The conversation is useless- the government should be able to show a receipt and cost breakdown. It comes up literally every couple years- the fact that government doesn’t show the work when questioned is the actual problem.

Exactly what operational benefit does a 200$ meal provide vice that out of hay box ? If its good enough for the forces why isn't it good enough for our politicians/leaders ? Its not like these are diplomatic state dinners. Its a flight. Once on ground and acting in a diplomatic fashion I can understand, but the flight to and from, nope.

Wanna win elections and be the fav GG in history ? Pack a brown bag and make sure its seen as you hop the plane.

Share in the lives of the people and the people will endear to you. Act above and elite and they will despise you.