• 0li0li@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    2 days ago

    Bandaid solution, based on revenues from 2 years ago. And grocery stores still profit more than ever…

        • howrar@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          Better than nothing in the short term. But beyond those two weeks? I’m not convinced that this is better than nothing.

          • ag10n@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 hours ago

            Agree this is far too short term to make a difference

            I’m not the target audience so assuming it might help someone

        • 0li0li@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 hours ago

          No. Putting that money towards a program/commission to regulate food prices, which affect everybody, would be better than 2 weeks of discounts for some people.

  • HubertManne@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    2 days ago

    Funny thing is I say this about snap in the US. Make it a regular, universal benefit. Restrict it to products grown and processed completely in the country. It would be at that point a massive anti poverty measure that also helps the economy. Its literally a win win. Why is any country exporting food before they feed their own.

    • DriftingLynx@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      Carney has no intention of reducing poverty rates. At the moment he’s presiding over what’s going to be a massive spike in poverty as the mortgage crisis ensues.

      He could fix the structural issues that drive the affordability crisis – one he’s perfectly skilled to understand and address – but instead he’s only done things to keep the 1% wealthy.

      This is more of the same. Just buying votes.