Those are airlines. Expect that type of service to begin as soon as you enter airport property instead of just when you’re interacting with the airline itself.

[–] keyhoh@piefed.social 4 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Airports are already run by independent organizations called airport authorities, who build up everything around the airport and the airport itself. I don't think these authorities are going away, just adding members to their boards through investors. The airport authorities in Canada are all NGOs. In these cases, the airlines will be dealing with the authorities' board members, and all will want to keep people flying so I don't see a huge downgrade incoming.

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 1 points 20 hours ago

Yes but investors are going to want profit so......

[–] Jhex@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The current Airport Authorities are non-profit organizations... Who would "invest" without the expectation of a ROI? even if the AAs are not going away, they will be overran by the new investors

[–] keyhoh@piefed.social 1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Yes they are NGOs, and the infrastructure isn't growing enough to meet the growing need. As Carney just said in his questions to the media, we need investment. So where is it going to come from?

Hear it from the horse's mouth. The first and third questions are directly relating to the airport investments. It sounds reasonable to me.

Carney answers questions at investment summit. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7y1MneiwFyo&pp=ygUIY2JjIG5ld3M%3D

[–] Jhex@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

and the infrastructure isn’t growing enough to meet the growing need.

Source?

we need investment. So where is it going to come from?

So how exactly are we protecting ourselves from the mad neighbour when all Carney seems bent on doing is selling valuable parts of our house to that very neighbour? We will end up with a Canada that is even more of a copy of the dumpter fire Murica is right now... I'd rather see it all go down in flames

[–] keyhoh@piefed.social 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

My source is that video I posted, which I'm assuming you didn't watch, where Carney states something to the effect of what I stated. This plan creates investment in all airports as the money collected from some private investment is in turn invested in the smaller airports to help Canadians get around the country easier.

There's money in more places than the US. Watch that video and learn from one of the best economists in the world and tell everyone Carney didn't think this is in the best interest of Canadians.

[–] Jhex@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

My source is that video I posted, which I’m assuming you didn’t watch, where Carney states something to the effect of what I stated.

I did watch it, he does say the same line you posted but provides no backing for it. What are the growing needs? what is pending that has not been done?

This plan creates investment in all airports as the money collected from some private investment is in turn invested in the smaller airports to help Canadians get around the country easier.

Again, is that an actual problem? Do people in Gatineau complain they need to drive to Ottawa instead of using the tiny Gatineau landing strip?

I would argue that the real issue is the enormous cost of air travel and privatizing the airports is really not going to help with any of that

There’s money in more places than the US. Watch that video and learn from one of the best economists in the world and tell everyone Carney didn’t think this is in the best interest of Canadians.

Carney is a banker... look at what he is doing: selling Canadian assets to whomever will buy them, eliminate environmental regulation, cut tax for the rich... how is that ANY DIFFERENT from what the Orange rapist is doing down south? How will any of that lead to a better Canada for the regular people? I can tell you that it will push some numbers and make the rich richer but the only hope for ANY of this to improve regular Canadians is for the money to "trickle down" which has been debunked 100000x over

[–] keyhoh@piefed.social 1 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I have been looking at what Carney is doing. Two years ago had this trade war started, we would be in a recession right now. Yet we're not. That's more or less thanks to Carney and his government.

Look, I understand praising a politician is never a popular take and I'm expecting to get further down voted for injecting into these echo chambers genuine counter opinions and arguments that should require some thought but often don't because politicians=bad.

Carney is not privatizing air travel. The Canadian government still owns everything - all the infrastructure. These investors get to lease and run, not own. He also gives great examples of how Canadian funds fund similar arrangements in other countries, and we will use that data of other instances of this to maximize the benefit to Canadians.

You understand Canada is fucked without investment right? America is being forced to pull out of our economy and we need to keep that money flowing in lest our society start to crumble. We don't have this money in Canada as if we did, we wouldn't be at such a high risk for a recession.

It's easy to say "no no no" when your belly is full, but what about for those who aren't in your predicament right now, who are worse off and hungrier? We need to stanch the flow of poverty as a society, and upgrading infrastructure is a wonderful way to create the growth we need through jobs.

Also FYI, yes the people in Gatineau complain about driving to the airport, everyone does.

And to your last point, this is not what the pedo-in-chief is doing down south. He is selling . We are leasing. Will it make the rich richer? Maybe, but it certainly won't make us poorer as there's a net influx of money. Will our airports start getting the updates they need? Yes. That's how the average consumer benefits.

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 1 points 20 hours ago

So how is this money going to help Canada? I mean its investment that the government gets but is it going to lower fuel prices, lower groceries make more houses? Is the cost of living going to improve? Or are these investors going to want to make more money then they paid for the privilege of running the airport? Which means there is more money taken out of Canada then put in.

[–] Jhex@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

I have been looking at what Carney is doing. Two years ago had this trade war started, we would be in a recession right now. Yet we’re not. That’s more or less thanks to Carney and his government.

You are giving Carney credit for not being in a recession brought over by a trade war that did not start 2 years ago? While you are at it, please thank me for not doing the rain dance yesterday which is why it's sunny today!

Look, I do not BLAME Carney for the trade war but, up until 3 weeks ago, there was nothing but speculation brought by the lunatic down south. Kudos to Carney for playing it patiently and, apparently, planning for it; but I cannot give him credit for something that was not happening

Look, I understand praising a politician is never a popular take and I’m expecting to get further down voted for injecting into these echo chambers genuine counter opinions and arguments that should require some thought but often don’t because politicians=bad.

May I suggest it it NOT just praising a politician; it's been unable to actually justify your stance in a way that seems logical and not just "I feel this is OK"

Carney is not privatizing air travel.

Nobody said that (at least not in "our" conversation) but undeniably, if the airports raise fees on airline, airlines will pass that on to us.

The Canadian government still owns everything - all the infrastructure. These investors get to lease and run, not own.

A difference with no distinction when we are talking about 50+ year leases with no strings attached.

He also gives great examples of how Canadian funds fund similar arrangements in other countries, and we will use that data of other instances of this to maximize the benefit to Canadians.

Are these great for the people in those countries? I am sure these are great for investors which, in turn, mean they are bad for consumers in our current late stage capitalism

You understand Canada is fucked without investment right? America is being forced to pull out of our economy and we need to keep that money flowing in lest our society start to crumble. We don’t have this money in Canada as if we did, we wouldn’t be at such a high risk for a recession.

Yes but I stand by the principle of "survival is insufficient"; if Canada is to "survive" by selling our infrastructure and making everything worse for regular Canadians in the long run (which is exactly what you see in the USA today), I rather not survive

It’s easy to say “no no no” when your belly is full, but what about for those who aren’t in your predicament right now, who are worse off and hungrier? We need to stanch the flow of poverty as a society, and upgrading infrastructure is a wonderful way to create the growth we need through jobs.

I'd concede this point in your favour if you explain to me how is privatizing everything (an OLD conservative fiscal strategy) going to take regular hungry Canadians to a full belly. Again, what jobs? where are the strings attached to these investments?

We constantly give tax cuts to the "investors" (currently cut our effective rate to 6.3% which is almost HALF of anyone in the G7 and what are the conditions for this? how many jobs have to be created or maintained to enjoy this benefit? NONE

And to your last point, this is not what the pedo-in-chief is doing down south. He is selling . We are leasing.

Again, 50+ years... another difference with no distinction

Will it make the rich richer? Maybe, but it certainly won’t make us poorer as there’s a net influx of money

Ok now you are hallucinating... greater fees will mean greater costs for Canadians, which means we are certainly NOT getting richer. The influx of money would go to the gov and if the gov spends it funding tax cuts for the rich (as they are already doing), there will be ZERO gain for a regular Canadian... maybe a few will get some shitty part time, no benefit, minimum wage jobs... huzzah!

Will our airports start getting the updates they need? Yes. That’s how the average consumer benefits.

Oh yes, a VIP lounge, THAT will solve our problems!

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

Assumingly investments would come from siezed American assets.

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

This same argument was made about sports complexes and the Internet as a whole. Enshittification is a real thing, and this is exactly the sort of move that drives it.

Sure they’ll still provide service, but you’ll be data mined, forced to watch and respond to ads, services will be gutted, security will be even more theatre than it already is — because there’s no alternative. This is a monopoly stake.

HOWEVER, for the select few, there will be private airport services for those who can pay. These services will avoid this race to the bottom until the larger service collapses under borrowing against future growth for current profits.

Why am I so sure of all this?

Because that’s how this playbook has ALWAYS played out. Every. Single. Time. And somewhere in there, regulatory capture rears its head as well.

[–] keyhoh@piefed.social 1 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Maybe you're right, but then people just won't go, or they'll go to alternative airports which have now been invested in thanks to the influx of capital from the big four airports.

To think you're not already all of those things is naive, I'm sorry to say. There's already tons of ads around airports. You're already surveiled. Your info is collected and sold to companies. And, there is already a nicer tier for those willing to pay.

What this sounds like to me is more of the same, maybe to a higher degree, but we'll have infrastructure in the end.

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 1 points 20 hours ago

So which airports well they go to? You know not every airport has international flights and this well not change that.

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

How do people go to alternative airports?

For example, the closest airport to YVR is Abbotsford. Except it doesn’t service the same routes. So you end up having to drive to Seattle, Calgary or Edmonton to fly to… Seattle, Calgary or Edmonton?

The other airports listed have similar issues; for the services they provide, they are a regional monopoly.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

Are you suggesting they can't get worse?