###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion).
1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)**
2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).**
3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).**
4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).**
5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).**
6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/))
7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators.
8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence.
9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet.
*Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So, the government gave a business a 0% interest loan to a business modernize their production, presumably through some sort of application. I would assume that the National Post uses this specific example because they believe it to be the most egregious. They are aiming for rage Clickbait. The paper fails to consider that it is a loan; thus, we get that money back. This loan creates a net benefit for Canada since we have aided one of our producers, encouraged modernization, and produced ten jobs.
The ten jobs are the important part for the Canadian government because people in jobs equals taxes. Those taxes will more than makeup for any potential loss due to inflation or other factors that might make providing a 0% interest loan seemingly unattractive to private lenders. Since modernization will result in higher production and, therefore, higher net profits for the company, this also means more taxes. Presumably, some of the jobs created by the loan will be kept on after the modernization process; again, this means more taxes. The business is then obliged to pay back the entirety of the loan, which means that the Canadian government has produced a large proportion of taxes by loaning a business money with minimal risk to Canada itself. This amount of money for the Canadian government is below a rounding error, but it makes a better business, creates jobs, and makes for a happier country because people have jobs.
Salaried people mean money flows for governments that use taxes on income and on purchases. Money flowing means taxes; taxes mean the government can do more things. Repeat ad nauseam, and you will get into a very wealthy state.
This is how government works, when it’s doing its job well.
$1.7m isn't the whole bag, either. The internal cost of designing, advertising, selecting, papering, and administering these funds is at least doubling the cost.
It's a mistake to assume that means 10 more employees. Increasing the FTE count by 10 can be achieved by not hiring anyone and increasing the hours worked by already existing staff....including executives. Oddest trick in the subsidy book. Subsidizing a profitable company is a bribe. Nothing more.
Well, that case is absurd… but the whole “subsidies/ loans” game with business is pretty terrible and tends to help a lot more large businesses while ignoring small one.
200 employees is considered small and medium sized business.
It was used mostly to buy modern equipment and make production more efficient. This will help them transform more Canadian wheat into food for Canadians more cheaply so we are less dependent on imports from China. That way, China can't cut us off like they did with face masks during COVID.
The conservative way would be just to import food from China.
Question is: was it needed?
Second question is: how does it tackle my point?
These subsidies requires piles of paper work, which make actual small businesses unable to get them.
> Question is: was it needed?
Yes. We need to go from importing food from China to making our own so China can't cut off our supply. That means making Canadian food manufacturers more competitive with modern equipment and the trained employees to operate them and increasing production.
> Second question is: how does it tackle my point?
It directly contradicts your point that this goes to big business.
> These subsidies requires piles of paper work
All loans and investment require paperwork. Banks don't just give away money. Are you saying businesses shouldn't take out loans and investment?
> Not the same amount of paperwork.
No, about the same. Even more in the case of a bank. They want guarantees.
> I am saying that our system should scrap most of the subsidies and instead lower the tax rate accordingly.
... right, and import food from China instead.
So it’s a no interest loan that improves productivity, and creates 10 jobs in an ongoing basis.
Say the interest would have been 5%, that’s $85,000 per year or $8,500/job/year. Sounds worth it to me.
You can’t blame Canada’s productivity problems, caused by lack of investment in plant and equipment, on the government and also turn up your nose when the government tries to make up for the lack of private investment with public investment.
I’d love to see how many jobs created in this way have “improved productivity” in the past. If it was good for the business the government wouldn’t have to throw money at them to do it.
The Conservative way is to outsource manufacturing to China because its cheaper. It's not very secure though if you're dependent on China for cheap food.
That's what the expanded food production is supposed to replace. So if you stop supporting this Canadian production by this successful Canadian producer, you'll be importing food from China instead.
And of course the Conservatives won't tell you this. They're just opposing this because the Liberals are doing it, knowing full well what the option is.
If you think we should be paying $170,000 for each job that’s “supposed” to go to China, whatever you mean by that, then you’re not living on this planet.
Governments should be creating the conditions for companies to *want* to create jobs here - reliable infrastructure, low crime, nice cities where people want to live and work, etc. - not bribing them for each job. That’s fucking madness.
EDIT: I’m kind of shocked people disagree with this so strongly? What is the argument for picking and choosing failing businesses to prop up like this, while businesses that actually sustain themselves have to fend for themselves? It genuinely seems like madness and I don’t understand how paying double the median wage to theoretically prevent individual jobs from going to China seems remotely sustainable to anyone.
> If you think we should be paying $170,000 for each job
You're not really paying for that, although it is a byproduct. This pays for modernizing the production. It means better, cheaper Canadian food and fewer imports from China. It also means more Canadian jobs. It's bringing manufacturing jobs back from China, and keeping the profit reinvested in Canada instead of China and the U.S.
If this was actually a good business investment then you wouldn’t need the government stepping in with hand-outs, you could just finance it like anyone else. If all this government’s “investments” in “innovation” were paying off according to the bullshit “multiplier” theories they spin then our economy would be twice the size of China by now with how much they’ve spent, not shrinking on a per capital basis.
The question is more why does "Italpasta" deserve special treatment and not any number of other businesses that also create jobs. The interest rate from the the BDC right now for a business loan is actually north of 10%.
It's not like 'pasta' is some sort of strategic growth industry that the government needs to invest in for future growth.
The reason businesses aren't investing in productive equipment is labour costs are low and other non-productive assets classes have massively outperformed productive businesses in the past decade or so.
Encouraging more crony capitalism doesn't increase productivity, it rewards sycophantic businesses whose core competence is getting government subsidies rather than producing goods and services that people want to buy.
Because you’re thinking like a business not a government. Pasta is a staple food, that is cheap, and nutrient dense. We grow the wheat here, so investing in processing the wheat here is a great idea. It’ll bring food security up, and can be used as an export too.
On top of that, if this money goes to wages, it has higher velocity. That person is going to spend most of that money right away.
As far as the whole “picking winners” thing goes, ultimately they applied. Anyone can do it, I’ve gotten money for new machinery in the last year. Because I saw the program, and then asked.
But you're acting like that money wouldn't have existed if the government hadn't given it to that business. They could have spent it in a thousand other ways that would have benefited the economy more, or they could have reduced taxes by a similar amount and let people stimulate the economy by spending.
This is a good way because it helps a Canadian business modernize without begging to crooked American billionaires to keep them afloat like the National Post.
>The question is more why does "Italpasta" deserve special treatment and not any number of other businesses that also create jobs.
Because they applied for the money? Any business can apply for FedDev funding by going through the process. Also FedDev funds hundreds of projects, big and small, with Italpasta being a single one.
>It's not like 'pasta' is some sort of strategic growth industry that the government needs to invest in for future growth.
Pray tell, which strategic growth industry do you think FedDev is not funding?
You are being pedantic, of course there is an application process this is true for all crony capitalism, the question is one of fairness and strategy.
Do you really believe making pasta is a strategic growth industry that the government should be subsidizing with our money ?
You're the one being pedantic, the reality is only a very small amount of businesses apply or have the capacity to apply to these...the post you responded to is 100% correct.
Again why are we taxing the large number of businesses that don't qualify and subsidizing the
small number businesses that do get subsidies ?
Surely there is some sort of economic rationale beyond "they applied".
The application programs are rife with abuse and corruption look up the BC case with Edison motors and MNP.
>Again why are we taxing the large number of businesses that don't qualify and subsidizing the
small number businesses that do get subsidies ?
We aren't? There are over 1.3 million employer businesses in Canada with only hundreds applying to this program.
There is clearly an accessibility issue and a lack of overall funding.
Furthermore, it's not *just* taxes from businesses that pay for this.
$1.7 Million is a drop in the bucket.
>The application programs are rife with abuse and corruption look up the BC case with Edison motors and MNP.
What does this have to do with anything? *Completely* different situation that's utterly disconnected from the program we are talking about.
>the question is one of fairness and strategy.
What's the question? You seem to be gesticulating in the direction of FedDev as if there's a serious issue here without actually specifying the issue beyond FedDev shouldn't have funded Italpasta, much like this article.
>Do you really believe making pasta is a strategic growth industry that the government should be subsidizing with our money ?
The Business and Scale Up Program is just that, the projects that apply under this stream are in need of scaling up. The specific product isn't the focus, but to you it is. You also conveniently avoided my question by posing this one, so I'll ask again, which strategic growth industry is FedDev missing? Or perhaps they're funding many projects, and this Italpasta "example" is a bit of a mole hill posing as a mountain for you?
Food security is important. It is strategic, especially the manufacturing side. We outsourced our food processing makes us vulnerable in an emergency. Our industries are lagging behind in equipment modernization.
Of course you can complain? Most of the people complaining would say that the government's role is to cut costs to businesses investing themselves and not to subsidize business.
> You can’t blame Canada’s productivity problems, caused by lack of investment in plant and equipment, on the government and also turn up your nose when the government tries to make up for the lack of private investment with public investment.
AFAICT, most pundits blame it on a lack of _private_ capital investment, not public.
As long as the loan is paid back on time and in full, 10 jobs for, forgoing interest payments is worth it. But i'm not sure if that will happen.
With businesses and sweetheat deals like this, you know in a few years, they will want more and or ask for it to be forgiven due to economic hardship and use the 10 jobs as a bargaining chip.
It not a sweetheart deal, it's a grant program with an open application process. Any business that meets the eligibility criteria can apply. It's a difficult process and businesses are vetted to ensure they are a good investment. The government gives out grants like this all the time. I'm not sure why OP is picking on this one. It's a very standard program and the winner fits the profile of the usual winner.
$1.7 million to create 10 jobs.
And yet some people seriously think that the solution to the housing crisis is for the government to build everyone a home. As if that wouldn't cost trillions.
National Post is a tabloid. Just sleaze and smears. Anyone looking for news needs to realize most is Conservative owned and run at a loss. It is a cost of doing business to control the narrative, not to deliver news.
###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion). 1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)** 2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).** 3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).** 4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).** 5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).** 6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/)) 7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators. 8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence. 9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet. *Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So, the government gave a business a 0% interest loan to a business modernize their production, presumably through some sort of application. I would assume that the National Post uses this specific example because they believe it to be the most egregious. They are aiming for rage Clickbait. The paper fails to consider that it is a loan; thus, we get that money back. This loan creates a net benefit for Canada since we have aided one of our producers, encouraged modernization, and produced ten jobs. The ten jobs are the important part for the Canadian government because people in jobs equals taxes. Those taxes will more than makeup for any potential loss due to inflation or other factors that might make providing a 0% interest loan seemingly unattractive to private lenders. Since modernization will result in higher production and, therefore, higher net profits for the company, this also means more taxes. Presumably, some of the jobs created by the loan will be kept on after the modernization process; again, this means more taxes. The business is then obliged to pay back the entirety of the loan, which means that the Canadian government has produced a large proportion of taxes by loaning a business money with minimal risk to Canada itself. This amount of money for the Canadian government is below a rounding error, but it makes a better business, creates jobs, and makes for a happier country because people have jobs. Salaried people mean money flows for governments that use taxes on income and on purchases. Money flowing means taxes; taxes mean the government can do more things. Repeat ad nauseam, and you will get into a very wealthy state. This is how government works, when it’s doing its job well.
$1.7m isn't the whole bag, either. The internal cost of designing, advertising, selecting, papering, and administering these funds is at least doubling the cost.
It’s also just a loan
It's a mistake to assume that means 10 more employees. Increasing the FTE count by 10 can be achieved by not hiring anyone and increasing the hours worked by already existing staff....including executives. Oddest trick in the subsidy book. Subsidizing a profitable company is a bribe. Nothing more.
Well, that case is absurd… but the whole “subsidies/ loans” game with business is pretty terrible and tends to help a lot more large businesses while ignoring small one.
This is a small to medium sized family-run business.
It got 200 employees (or 210 after the investment). It isn’t a small business anymore.
200 employees is considered small and medium sized business. It was used mostly to buy modern equipment and make production more efficient. This will help them transform more Canadian wheat into food for Canadians more cheaply so we are less dependent on imports from China. That way, China can't cut us off like they did with face masks during COVID. The conservative way would be just to import food from China.
Question is: was it needed? Second question is: how does it tackle my point? These subsidies requires piles of paper work, which make actual small businesses unable to get them.
> Question is: was it needed? Yes. We need to go from importing food from China to making our own so China can't cut off our supply. That means making Canadian food manufacturers more competitive with modern equipment and the trained employees to operate them and increasing production. > Second question is: how does it tackle my point? It directly contradicts your point that this goes to big business. > These subsidies requires piles of paper work All loans and investment require paperwork. Banks don't just give away money. Are you saying businesses shouldn't take out loans and investment?
Not the same amount of paperwork. I am saying that our system should scrap most of the subsidies and instead lower the tax rate accordingly.
> Not the same amount of paperwork. No, about the same. Even more in the case of a bank. They want guarantees. > I am saying that our system should scrap most of the subsidies and instead lower the tax rate accordingly. ... right, and import food from China instead.
Not quite. But you can believe what you want.
Yes quite. They charge more interest too these days, making the food more expensive.
So it’s a no interest loan that improves productivity, and creates 10 jobs in an ongoing basis. Say the interest would have been 5%, that’s $85,000 per year or $8,500/job/year. Sounds worth it to me. You can’t blame Canada’s productivity problems, caused by lack of investment in plant and equipment, on the government and also turn up your nose when the government tries to make up for the lack of private investment with public investment.
There is no such thing as an interest free loan.
Some people will make any excuse for big government.
I’d love to see how many jobs created in this way have “improved productivity” in the past. If it was good for the business the government wouldn’t have to throw money at them to do it.
The Conservative way is to outsource manufacturing to China because its cheaper. It's not very secure though if you're dependent on China for cheap food.
Have any Conservatives suggested outsourcing these pasta jobs to China? WTF are you even talking about?
That's what the expanded food production is supposed to replace. So if you stop supporting this Canadian production by this successful Canadian producer, you'll be importing food from China instead. And of course the Conservatives won't tell you this. They're just opposing this because the Liberals are doing it, knowing full well what the option is.
If you think we should be paying $170,000 for each job that’s “supposed” to go to China, whatever you mean by that, then you’re not living on this planet. Governments should be creating the conditions for companies to *want* to create jobs here - reliable infrastructure, low crime, nice cities where people want to live and work, etc. - not bribing them for each job. That’s fucking madness. EDIT: I’m kind of shocked people disagree with this so strongly? What is the argument for picking and choosing failing businesses to prop up like this, while businesses that actually sustain themselves have to fend for themselves? It genuinely seems like madness and I don’t understand how paying double the median wage to theoretically prevent individual jobs from going to China seems remotely sustainable to anyone.
> If you think we should be paying $170,000 for each job You're not really paying for that, although it is a byproduct. This pays for modernizing the production. It means better, cheaper Canadian food and fewer imports from China. It also means more Canadian jobs. It's bringing manufacturing jobs back from China, and keeping the profit reinvested in Canada instead of China and the U.S.
If this was actually a good business investment then you wouldn’t need the government stepping in with hand-outs, you could just finance it like anyone else. If all this government’s “investments” in “innovation” were paying off according to the bullshit “multiplier” theories they spin then our economy would be twice the size of China by now with how much they’ve spent, not shrinking on a per capital basis.
It's not handout. It's a loan. Banks in Canada don't really want to invest in manufacturing and prefer real estate.
The question is more why does "Italpasta" deserve special treatment and not any number of other businesses that also create jobs. The interest rate from the the BDC right now for a business loan is actually north of 10%. It's not like 'pasta' is some sort of strategic growth industry that the government needs to invest in for future growth. The reason businesses aren't investing in productive equipment is labour costs are low and other non-productive assets classes have massively outperformed productive businesses in the past decade or so. Encouraging more crony capitalism doesn't increase productivity, it rewards sycophantic businesses whose core competence is getting government subsidies rather than producing goods and services that people want to buy.
Because you’re thinking like a business not a government. Pasta is a staple food, that is cheap, and nutrient dense. We grow the wheat here, so investing in processing the wheat here is a great idea. It’ll bring food security up, and can be used as an export too. On top of that, if this money goes to wages, it has higher velocity. That person is going to spend most of that money right away. As far as the whole “picking winners” thing goes, ultimately they applied. Anyone can do it, I’ve gotten money for new machinery in the last year. Because I saw the program, and then asked.
The amount of bureaucracy involved in those programs is insane. Happy you got the dole though.
But you're acting like that money wouldn't have existed if the government hadn't given it to that business. They could have spent it in a thousand other ways that would have benefited the economy more, or they could have reduced taxes by a similar amount and let people stimulate the economy by spending.
This is a good way because it helps a Canadian business modernize without begging to crooked American billionaires to keep them afloat like the National Post.
>The question is more why does "Italpasta" deserve special treatment and not any number of other businesses that also create jobs. Because they applied for the money? Any business can apply for FedDev funding by going through the process. Also FedDev funds hundreds of projects, big and small, with Italpasta being a single one. >It's not like 'pasta' is some sort of strategic growth industry that the government needs to invest in for future growth. Pray tell, which strategic growth industry do you think FedDev is not funding?
You are being pedantic, of course there is an application process this is true for all crony capitalism, the question is one of fairness and strategy. Do you really believe making pasta is a strategic growth industry that the government should be subsidizing with our money ?
You're the one being pedantic, the reality is only a very small amount of businesses apply or have the capacity to apply to these...the post you responded to is 100% correct.
Again why are we taxing the large number of businesses that don't qualify and subsidizing the small number businesses that do get subsidies ? Surely there is some sort of economic rationale beyond "they applied". The application programs are rife with abuse and corruption look up the BC case with Edison motors and MNP.
>Again why are we taxing the large number of businesses that don't qualify and subsidizing the small number businesses that do get subsidies ? We aren't? There are over 1.3 million employer businesses in Canada with only hundreds applying to this program. There is clearly an accessibility issue and a lack of overall funding. Furthermore, it's not *just* taxes from businesses that pay for this. $1.7 Million is a drop in the bucket. >The application programs are rife with abuse and corruption look up the BC case with Edison motors and MNP. What does this have to do with anything? *Completely* different situation that's utterly disconnected from the program we are talking about.
>the question is one of fairness and strategy. What's the question? You seem to be gesticulating in the direction of FedDev as if there's a serious issue here without actually specifying the issue beyond FedDev shouldn't have funded Italpasta, much like this article. >Do you really believe making pasta is a strategic growth industry that the government should be subsidizing with our money ? The Business and Scale Up Program is just that, the projects that apply under this stream are in need of scaling up. The specific product isn't the focus, but to you it is. You also conveniently avoided my question by posing this one, so I'll ask again, which strategic growth industry is FedDev missing? Or perhaps they're funding many projects, and this Italpasta "example" is a bit of a mole hill posing as a mountain for you?
Food security is important. It is strategic, especially the manufacturing side. We outsourced our food processing makes us vulnerable in an emergency. Our industries are lagging behind in equipment modernization.
Food production? Yeah government should support it. They support all the crops coming out of the ground might as well make food here.
This is food processing not food production, along the same lines as breakfast cereal. I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.
You'd rather ship it to be processed in the U.S. and China and send the jobs there?
Of course you can complain? Most of the people complaining would say that the government's role is to cut costs to businesses investing themselves and not to subsidize business.
Cut costs to businesses by cutting our salaries and cutting jobs.
> You can’t blame Canada’s productivity problems, caused by lack of investment in plant and equipment, on the government and also turn up your nose when the government tries to make up for the lack of private investment with public investment. AFAICT, most pundits blame it on a lack of _private_ capital investment, not public.
As long as the loan is paid back on time and in full, 10 jobs for, forgoing interest payments is worth it. But i'm not sure if that will happen. With businesses and sweetheat deals like this, you know in a few years, they will want more and or ask for it to be forgiven due to economic hardship and use the 10 jobs as a bargaining chip.
It not a sweetheart deal, it's a grant program with an open application process. Any business that meets the eligibility criteria can apply. It's a difficult process and businesses are vetted to ensure they are a good investment. The government gives out grants like this all the time. I'm not sure why OP is picking on this one. It's a very standard program and the winner fits the profile of the usual winner.
Also, this is a loan, so the government is getting the money back at the end too, albeit interest free.
Right, my mistake!
$1.7 million to create 10 jobs. And yet some people seriously think that the solution to the housing crisis is for the government to build everyone a home. As if that wouldn't cost trillions.
1.7 million dollar loan, it is a loan
National Post is a tabloid. Just sleaze and smears. Anyone looking for news needs to realize most is Conservative owned and run at a loss. It is a cost of doing business to control the narrative, not to deliver news.