Quote:
Originally Posted by photon
Exactly, governments invest in business all the time to get them started, to foster growth, to attract new kinds of businesses, to create jobs, etc, with money or tax incentives, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the taxpayer then should have the right to discounts in perpetuity.
Shaw's created many many jobs that wouldn't have existed without that investment, why isn't that good enough?
I can't make a judgment without more information.
|
honest to god photon really?
Quote:
|
but that doesn't necessarily mean that the taxpayer then should have the right to discounts in perpetuity.
|
No one is saying that we should be given discounts in perpetuity but, lets first acknowledge the fact that both telus and shaw had sky high pricing before they started competing with each other. We weren't getting any kind of benefits. THEN we wound up in a situation where these 2 giants of phone and cable were so big and so established with all the infrastructure gifted to them that new companies are impossible to form and compete, thank to the CRTC allowing them to do whatever they want for pricing as a wholesaler. How on gods green earth does any of this sound good for the consumer? Where are these discounts in perpetuity you speak of? People want the OPTION of another cable and telephone provider to compete with telus and shaw but that option isn't possible because of a) perhaps the market is too small b) the start up cost is too high c) any other reasons. Because of this we need the CRTC and government to protect Canadians and encourage competition, and discourage anti competitive acts. This is the backbone of a capitalist society... the idea that competition will drive better innovation, pricing, and quality of product. We don't have that.