Someone in the Yukon had a brilliant idea: Buy gold and throw in a creek at a taxpayer-funded publicity stunt. The Yukon government jumped on board and spent $139,000 to promote and stage the Gold Rush II initiative where organizers threw gold into a creek as part of a tourism influencer campaign. Since the original gold rush cleaned out most of the gold, the organizers started with a crowdfunding campaign to raise money to buy some gold. The Klondike Visitors Association (KVA) set a goal to raise $100,000, but fell a bit short, raising just over $4,500.Despite this setback, the KVA used the crowdfunded money to buy 3.5 ounces of gold and the event went ahead, with the Yukon government spending $139,000 to execute and promote the event. Organizers planned to send invitations to more than 20 media outlets, but only three social media influencers and one reporter showed up.
It’s that time of year again: The Canadian Taxpayers Federation Teddy Awards. (pdf, for some reason.)
P. T. Barnum had it right: there is one born every minute.
Come on BA.
You just know their is a joke in there some where. (-:
Its already been done, it was called Bre-X.
Somehow, none of that surprised me. What I find disturbing is the lack of outrage from affected citizens. Maybe the MSM is too wrapped up in reporting on the global warming emergency.
on the topic of money:
NME666
March 4, 2020 at 6:15 pm
hb, go take an economic and investment course , before opening yer pie hole about that which you do not understand, thanks in advance
hb
March 4, 2020 at 8:03 pm
yo. rev 1318, I did take economics courtesy Waterloo University.
most of which they taught is still very relevant.
do you have a magical way of spending the *precise exact SAME dollars* in 2 different places?
a quantum physics property includes money. far out.
pls elaborate on which points you disagree before making it personal.
ya mouthy pryck.
NME666
March 4, 2020 at 9:38 pm
hb, dollars flow thoughan economy, A earns $x and spends them on a car, which gives jobs to those who prep the car, and those who prep the car buy bread, sooo girly bouy, those dollars are spent in several different places, by several different people Kapeach. Now go ask for that tuition fee back paid to waterloo U. Bucks are like a liquid the flows through an economic state. Bucks frozen in one spot add very little to an economy, unless it is to secure a business that creates jobs, and allows a cash flow that their work produces, and then their pay flows through the economy. You must have failed eco 101
hb
March 5, 2020 at 6:27 pm
yo, satan worshiper:
the difference then, is a given dollar can only have ONE pathway thru the economy, which can include NUMEROUS detours and stops.
but THAT given dollar CANNOT ever be spent one more than ONE transaction at a given time. it CANNOT go in TWO directions AT THE SAME TIME.
if that exact specific dollar is spent in a given specific transaction at any point in its ‘lifetime’ it CANNOT *at the same time* hive off in a totally different direction.
note I am NOT disputing the point you make, but what you disputte IS NOT WHAT I SAID.
you have grossly misunderstood the concept of OPPORTUNITY COST.
its like a kid has a hockey stick they consider an asset.
which can be used to play the game until it gets broken in the usual wear and tear.
OR they can trade it for a baseball bat.
it is a resource that once utilized CANNOT [key word here!!!!!] SIMULTANEOUSLY BE UTILIZED IN A DIFFERENT APPLICATION.
for THAT to happen, the kid needs to *get another hockey stick* in which the same opportunity cost limitation yet again applies.
get it asswipe?????
the friggin hockey stick CANNOT be in *two different places at the same time*
if it gets stolen during a game, the kid needs to FIND A DIFFERENT ONE TO REPLACE IT.
if it gets traded instead, the new owner if free to send it on a journey of getting traded for ‘stuff’ by a host of SEQUENTIAL owners.
capiche? ya mouthy pryck.
Throwing gold away, when it comes to gubmint waste you can’t make this stuff up