Liberal Minority Government 2021 - ????

[Brad Sallows]

That tech on a pole can can work for any telcom that is allowed to compete with the big three or any of the entities that replaces them if they are broken up.

Sure is a 180 from arguing for financial help for people whose work has been arbitrarily interrupted by government COVID mandates. Group A affected by government fiat: help 'em out! Group B: fuck 'em!

 

[Edward Campbell]

"That tech on a pole can can work for any telcom that is allowed to compete with the big three ..."

And there, of course, is the rub. "The fix is in" in Canada and competing with the big three (plus Quebecor) is, effectively, forbidden by the same terminally f_ _ _ ing stupid people who bring you Justin Trudeau et al over and over and over again.

 

[Brad Sallows]

The budget plans in Canada are the cost what people getting with top of the line services in other countries.

For all the bitching about plan costs, no-one seems to be able to break it down and point to some place that "excess profits" are flowing. I suppose it is because there are none: the employees get paid, the shareholders get dividends (yields typically in the 3%to 6% range, which is reasonable), and the infrastructure is expanded and improved. Which part should be cut back?

 

[Brad Sallows]

competing with the big three (plus Quebecor) is, effectively, forbidden

In what ways? Canadian federal governments (CPC and LPC) have made a big deal of trying to subsidize/prefer "fourth" carriers (particularly with spectrum auctions) in the hopes of stimulating "competition". The CRTC effectively sets rates at which ILECs are obligated to sell access to their means to competitors. Like most utilities, telecomm is a natural monopoly.

Going by subscriber base, Canada has 3 dominant wireless companies. The US has ... 3. How many should we have?

 

[Edward Campbell]

In what ways? Canadian federal governments (CPC and LPC) have made a big deal of trying to subsidize/prefer "fourth" carriers (particularly with spectrum auctions) in the hopes of stimulating "competition". The CRTC effectively sets rates at which ILECs are obligated to sell access to their means to competitors. Like most utilities, telecomm is a natural monopoly.

Going by subscriber base, Canada has 3 dominant wireless companies. The US has ... 3. How many should we have?

First, the CRTC has no business regulating where no shortages exist. There are NO, zero, zilch, nada, shortages in wire, cable or spectrum* . The CRTC is nothing but a tool which the telcos use to cement their anti-competitive instincts. The Gov't of Canada uses the CRTC to give one company which, probably, could not exist at all in a competitive market, a "leg up."

Second, telecom is NOT a natural monopoly. It was, in Europe and Asia, because governments wanted to control the means of communications. The USA proved, for all to see, back in 1982, that there is no need for any sort of monopolistic entity. There IS a need for standards ~ that's quite a different thing. Until the advent of general purpose dialling and so on, which required strict adherence to technical standards, there were over 1,400 private, individual telecom in Ontario, alone. The need to adopt technical standards made "long distance" access financially impossible for most of the small ~ very often owned by the local physician, for what I think are obvious reasons ~ community telcos to upgrade so they sold out to Bell.

Three companies is enough for a competitive market ... see e.g. Australia (see my post above) and the USA which has four ~ AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile and Verizon ~ and Germany (Telekom (a subsidiary of Deutsche Telekom), Vodafone and Telefónica Germany.

-----
* Spectrum is a seemingly finite natural resource but by increasingly more clever coding we are able to jam more and more bits into fewer and fewer Hertz. Anyway, the CRTC does NOT deal with any spectrum issues that is all Industry (Innovation?) Canada.

 

[Brad Sallows]

natural monopoly

We might be using different definitions. I'm thinking of the cost of duplicating all the hardware (lines and facilities). It doesn't make sense - one set is enough in a given area, just like having only one set of water pipes, sewer pipes, hydro lines, etc. The nation is divided among the ILECs (fewer actual companies now, since the demise of Stentor), but each company is close to being a market monopoly in its area and would be closer if not for rules governing contracted use. No competitor seriously entertains the thought of building its own competing infrastructure on someone else's incumbency turf; it is self-evident that just the cost of continually upgrading hardware preoccupies everyone involved. Consumers' interests are better served by this (they'd otherwise be paying for much more redundant hardware than otherwise, and there'd be less funding available for private/public expansion into the markets which, charitably, are not profitable). If any of the companies could cut the legs out from under a competitor on its own turf using regulated prices to access the latter's hardware, it would already be doing so.

I can't remember the exact numbers, but back when the federal government was promising Canadians to lean on the telcos to cut 25% off some plans, some wag noted that fees the government charges and requires the telcos to collect on its behalf (and which ignorant consumers probably think is money going to the companies) come close to that amount.

I suspect that if foreign investors were given greater freedom, some with big pockets would swoop in, make handsome offers to current shareholders, and we'd still functionally have 3 large entities with different ownership.

 

[Eaglelord17]

I guarantee you there is a lot of money they could cut off everyone's bills if they wanted. Why is it things like 'Long Distance' fees are in place still for some when it is a digital signal? Made sense when there were switch boards operated by people having to manually connect everyone, but when it is a digital signal that doesn't care if its in Europe, Asia, the Americas, or Africa, why are we still charging people for it?

Why is it Manitoba charges significantly less than every other province for the same service, and if I have a Manitoba phone I can use it across the country without issue? It is because everyone else is being raked over the coals, and the big telcos are laughing at our expenses.

 

[Edward Campbell]

We might be using different definitions. I'm thinking of the cost of duplicating all the hardware (lines and facilities). It doesn't make sense - one set is enough in a given area, just like having only one set of water pipes, sewer pipes, hydro lines, etc. The nation is divided among the ILECs (fewer actual companies now, since the demise of Stentor), but each company is close to being a market monopoly in its area and would be closer if not for rules governing contracted use. No competitor seriously entertains the thought of building its own competing infrastructure on someone else's incumbency turf; it is self-evident that just the cost of continually upgrading hardware preoccupies everyone involved. Consumers' interests are better served by this (they'd otherwise be paying for much more redundant hardware than otherwise, and there'd be less funding available for private/public expansion into the markets which, charitably, are not profitable). If any of the companies could cut the legs out from under a competitor on its own turf using regulated prices to access the latter's hardware, it would already be doing so.

I can't remember the exact numbers, but back when the federal government was promising Canadians to lean on the telcos to cut 25% off some plans, some wag noted that fees the government charges and requires the telcos to collect on its behalf (and which ignorant consumers probably think is money going to the companies) come close to that amount.

I suspect that if foreign investors were given greater freedom, some with big pockets would swoop in, make handsome offers to current shareholders, and we'd still functionally have 3 large entities with different ownership.

No argument on the infrastructure. Almost all the physical wired infrastructure was put down by the old Bell Alliance (Stentor and other names) and is now owned by Bell, Telus and affiliated companies or by Rogers. The Bell affiliates and Telus still own almost all the switching. Most of the wireless infrastructure was put up by the Bell affiliates, Telus (in the East when it was ClearNet), Shaw and Rogers. Those were HUGE investments ~ some, like the Trans-Canada Microwave System and the TeleSat Canada network were, largely, publicly funded. It was much the same everywhere in the world. Even in the USA the Bell system received enormous public subsidies and the microwave and satellite networks were put up with even larger doses of public funds.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Why is it Manitoba charges significantly less than every other province for the same service

Maybe because they own their own wires and haven't really attempted to compete elsewhere, and so haven't taken on the additional costs.

As I say: if people are being raked over the coals , show where the extra revenue is going if not absorbed by legitimate costs.

 

[dangerboy]

When I got posted out of Shilo I kept my Manitoba cell phone number as it was a lot cheaper than an Ottawa phone number. Also since long-distance doesn't really mean anything these days it makes no sense to switch numbers every time you move.

 

[Jarnhamar]

As I say: if people are being raked over the coals , show where the extra revenue is going if not absorbed by legitimate costs.

I don't suspect these people get to where they are by making it easy to call them on their creative book keeping. Look at how long the WE brothers rolled under the radar.

Anecdotal example, I was paying around $110 or more a month for Rogers with something like 10 gigs of data. Asking Rogers about extra data was like asking them to cut their hands off. I tried to get an extra 10 gigs due to using lots of data for work and after spending literal hours on the phone it cost me $80 for 10 gigs in addition to my monthly $110 bill, and I had to change my plan.

Meanwhile $20 USD a month in Iraq gets you unlimited calls, texting AND data. And the cell reception was legitimately better than you get in most places in the Ottawa valley. Sure the geography is different and that affects the signal but we're talking the NCR vs Iraq. It's crazy. Hell I even remember having better reception with a cell phone in Afghanistan 10 years ago than in Canada.


I do think you're bang on about who would end up footing the bill of the government doesn't pay up. Consumers and peon employees, 100%.

 

[Brad Sallows]

I doubt geography is a factor as much as climate and weather.

What does it cost to have a crew and heavy equipment dig a 50 foot frontage of property (trenchless under the driveway) to run a community-serving fibreoptic line?

What does it cost to have a crew and heavy equipment come in to cut back beetle-killed trees (fire and blowdown hazard) along a kilometre of utility poles serving a dozen recreational properties?

How long to recover the costs of infrastructure to support a small remote community (internet access being a right, after all)?

I have no doubt some customers are net losses subsidized by other customers. I suppose one solution is to convince the government to allow rates to float freely enough so that every subscriber pays the true cost of whatever service is provided - more for remote and rural customers, customers in areas subject to frequent seasonal damage, etc.

 

[Haggis]

I suppose one solution is to convince the government to allow rates to float freely enough so that every subscriber pays the true cost of whatever service is provided - more for remote and rural customers, customers in areas subject to frequent seasonal damage, etc.

Why should the government care about the costs of services to rural customers? So what if they pay more than urban subscribers. Rural Canada is not where the bulk of the votes are.

 

[Brad Sallows]

The government cares a great deal about providing utilities and services (health care, roads, clean water, electricity, telecomm) to remote and rural Canadians, particularly indigenous communities. That's why governments partner with companies to provide those services. But as economic ventures they are money losers, so someone else has to make up the difference.

 

[Altair]

House of Commons unanimously agrees to pass bill to ban conversion therapy

The House of Commons unanimously agreed to pass Bill C-4, the legislation to ban LGBTQ2S+ conversion therapy, through all stages without study or amendment after a Conservative motion, making it the first bill to pass the House in the 44th Parliament and head to the Senate. This rapid...

www.ctvnews.ca

House of commons votes to unanimously pass the bill on banning conversion therapy.

Well done CPC, well done Erin O'Toole

 

[Altair]

Taxpayers should not have to 'subsidize' rich telecoms that chose Huawei, Conservatives say

Huawei says the company has sold more than $700 million worth of equipment to telecom operators in Canada since 2018

nationalpost.com

The Conservatives are urging the Liberal government not to spend public money to compensate Canada’s large telecom companies for choosing to use Huawei equipment if it goes ahead with a Huawei 5G ban.“

We ask that your government categorically reject requests for compensation from Canada’s large telecommunications companies,” Conservative Public Safety critic Raquel Dancho said in a letter sent Friday to Public Safety Minister Marco Mendocino and Innovation Minister François-Philippe Champagne.

Dancho’s letter noted Canadians already “pay some of the highest monthly fees for cellphone service in the world” and said Canadian taxpayers “should not be forced to subsidize the private business decisions of some of Canada’s most profitable companies.”

The CPC, first by backing the ban on conversion therapy and now by calling for the big telecoms to not get one cent of government money, is trying really hard to win my vote.

I appreciate the effort.

 

[Altair]

The Omicron Variant - December 7, 2021

THIS SURVEY EXPLORES CANADIANS’ AND AMERICANS’ PERSPECTIVES ON THE OMICRON VARIANT. On November 26, 2021, the World Health Organization designated the Omicron variant of COVID-19 a variant of concern. Cases of the Omicron variant have been detected on all continents excluding Antarctica. Given...

leger360.com

LPC 36
CPC 29
NDP 19
BQ 7
PPC 5
GRN 3

I wonder how much staying power the PPC have.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Column from the bought-and-paid-for media ....

... In a party whose unity of purpose Trudeau did much to restore, it’s long been considered poor form, or wasted energy, for Liberals to contemplate the prospect of life without the leader who brought them back from the brink of irrelevance. This fall, that taboo lifted. It’s as though a screw that had secured some plate in the Liberals’ psyche for nearly a decade had been loosened by one full counterclockwise turn. Suddenly Liberals are granting themselves licence to speculate. And so the biggest question in Canadian politics in 2022 is whether Justin Trudeau will still be Prime Minister when the year is done ...

 

[Altair]

Toronto, Canada & Global Breaking News – CP24

Most recent News News business news stories and video from CP24

www.cp24.com

New Brunswick has signed a child care deal with Ottawa to create 5,700 new spaces at an average cost to parents of $10 per day by 2026.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and New Brunswick Premier Blaine Higgs made the announcement today.

The cost of child care in the province is expected to be cut in half by the end of 2022.

New Brunswick is the latest province to sign on to the federal government's child care plan, and so far only Ontario, Nunavut and Northwest Territories haven't reached a deal with Ottawa.

I have my money on the NWT and Nvt signing a deal before Doug Ford and Ontario does.

But congratulations to parents in NB

 

[Altair]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/nwt-federal-child-care-deal-1.6284644

The Northwest Territories and the federal governments are expected to announce a child care deal this week.

ha