• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

CAN-USA 2025 Tariff Strife (split from various pol threads)

Standing up to a bully is one thing, continuing to antagonize a bully for nearly a decade while you do nothing to learn to fight in those years….then feigning surprise as he finally hauls back and punches you….well that shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone.
We as a nation have far too long felt morally superior and smarter than those damn Yankees....turns out we are not.

SO I expect all the American haters to stop vacationing anywhere in the USA. Stay at home vacation - in -30C and snow.
 
We as a nation have far too long felt morally superior and smarter than those damn Yankees....turns out we are not.

SO I expect all the American haters to stop vacationing anywhere in the USA. Stay at home vacation - in -30C and snow.
I know a lot that have. Most have aimed for Spain or the Dominican.


This from 2023

And more recently



But I bet our dollar value might have a big part to play in that decision making process.
 
Yeah, 1.51 on some FOREX like in airports, etc. A noticeable part of my comp is in USD. It’s like getting a 50% raise, unless I want to vaycay in the Caribbean or visit family in the US, then it’s just par.
 
"Endless preening".

I reckon we might have a head start on that one.

We as a nation have far too long felt morally superior and smarter than those damn Yankees....turns out we are not.

...

according to research by the Cassandra Project, founded by University of Tübingen professor of comparative literature Jürgen Wertheimer, Mr. Trump and his acolytes are creating a new “social imaginary,”
In this symbolic, totalized world view, Canada is no longer the neighbour on the other side of the “longest undefended border.” Nor is it a perennial “free rider” on America’s military budget. Instead, Canadians, who as Mr. Trudeau had noted define themselves most easily as “not [being] American,” are being redefined for MAGA supporters as an existential insult, an offence against manifest destiny – about which something must be done.

...

I have difficulty with Trump ginning up another invasion a la 1775/1812/1845/1866/1870. I do believe that Trump wants to reset the narrative.

I can believe that he wants Americans to stop seeing Canadians as politer versions of themselves. May be even see Canadians as not a nice as we like to think we are. Make it easier to draw the line between us.

Does he want to make the border more or less distinct? Yes? Change opens up opportunities to renegotiate.

Perhaps Trump would prefer to see a Finland or a Switzerland on his northern border. Someone who takes their sovereignty seriously and acts accordingly. Someone who isn't a morally superior freeloader.

Perhaps he figures the only way he can jolt Canada into action is to present Canada with the prospect of the only threat Canada will take seriously. The US.
 
Look inwards?


Ann Fitz-Gerald is the director of the Balsillie School of International Affairs and a professor of international security in Wilfrid Laurier University’s department of political science. Paul Samson is the president of the Centre for International Governance Innovation.

Canada, once a beacon of affordability and innovation, now faces a cost-of-living crisis and stagnation. Like the American election last year, Canadians seek a compelling vision and plan that tackles paycheques and affordability head on. The next Canadian prime minister must not only articulate this vision but also outline a clear, actionable path to make it a reality.

Canada must adopt a clear economic strategy by treating the economy like a balance sheet and focusing on expanding the “pie” through growth while boosting paycheques. At the same time, a pro-competition agenda should drive down costs and give consumers more choice, creating a dynamic, thriving economy that motivates all Canadians.

Growing the economy must align with prosperity and national security goals. This demands leadership that champions the creation and export of high-value products that are competitive in the global market. Canada must break away from an economic model reliant on importing foreign ideas – such as electric vehicles – that tether us to long-term patent and royalty payments and allow other countries to use our resources as their innovation playground, undermining our sovereignty. A new leader must prioritize Canadian innovation, fostering a marketplace of ideas rooted in Canadian research centres and Canadian businesses, ensuring our economic future is driven by homegrown ingenuity.

The next prime minister’s growth strategy must embrace the reality of a world driven by intangibles, where more than 90 per cent of the S&P 500′s total value is tied to assets like data, algorithms, AI and cloud computing. Intellectual property (IP) and data are today’s most critical business assets, and machine learning is a transformative, general-purpose technology quickly reshaping all sectors. Canada missed the shift to an intangibles economy by failing to prioritize the creation and ownership of valuable IP, costing the economy billions annually. While countries like China and the U.S. secured their leadership in AI patents, Canada’s performance in this area has been in relative decline. Reversing this trend must be central to any credible economic plan.

Like the path to economic prosperity, the tools needed for Canada’s national security are increasingly data-driven and digital. Dual-use innovations will bolster traditional economic sectors and civilian jobs while enhancing national security, defence capabilities and the skills of our armed forces and broader security sector. Canada has previously neglected this integration, which is now essential. Meeting our NATO commitments will force us to go in this direction, which is a good thing.

A compelling economic plan which makes national security and economic security indistinguishable – supported by a pro-competition and high-value productivity agenda – is also necessary to navigate the objectives of the new U.S. administration, which will push to shift its defence focus to the Pacific, reduce commitments in Europe and prioritize technological superiority. In parallel, it will insist that Canada increase its defence spending and take on more Arctic security to defend the continent.

Delivering a new economic strategy requires robust sub-strategies. For example, in an intangibles-driven marketplace, trade negotiations are less about traditional goods and services and more about regulatory frameworks. To secure the most effective trade deals, Canada should build deep knowledge in expert advisory committees, similar to the 26 advisory groups, with more than 700 civilian experts long used by the U.S. government.

Canada’s roughly $10-billion in annual research funding must protect Canadian innovation and no longer be undermined by weak IP infrastructure. Additionally, a competitive tax code and streamlined infrastructure approvals processes are essential. Finally, prioritizing the global growth of Canadian firms and adopting sectoral strategies to develop dual-use, value-added products and services is critical to securing a prosperous economic future. Our next prime minister should understand these factors, and use them to fashion a new and compelling economic vision.

Kinda ....

Not big on the idea of employing idea experts. Bigger on the idea of letting Canadians take advantage of our access to multiple energy sources and, literally, a wealth of treasures held within our borders. Borders worth defending. Treasures worth trading.
 
Trump says he wants Canada in the US. He has threatened tariffs and has said the path to ending those tariffs will be for Canada to join the US as a single new state. He has made speeches about expanding the size of US territory.
Take the lessons of history. When you substantially bigger neighbour’s leader starts pontificating about Lebensraum, you don’t apologize for him by arguing assumed benign intents.
 
"Endless preening".

I reckon we might have a head start on that one.



...




...

I have difficulty with Trump ginning up another invasion a la 1775/1812/1845/1866/1870. I do believe that Trump wants to reset the narrative.

I can believe that he wants Americans to stop seeing Canadians as politer versions of themselves. May be even see Canadians as not a nice as we like to think we are. Make it easier to draw the line between us.

Does he want to make the border more or less distinct? Yes? Change opens up opportunities to renegotiate.

Perhaps Trump would prefer to see a Finland or a Switzerland on his northern border. Someone who takes their sovereignty seriously and acts accordingly. Someone who isn't a morally superior freeloader.

Perhaps he figures the only way he can jolt Canada into action is to present Canada with the prospect of the only threat Canada will take seriously. The US.
Things to remember the next time they want us to proxy for them in places like Haiti or join a Coalition of the Willing for something like Afghanistan. Mind, I don't think with his aversion to wars, we have to worry about the later.

As far as a reset, I agree. I'll take a stab at the reason. Possibly he wants us to become a stronger nation. Kind or a tough love sorta thing. He watched both biden and trudeau take us down the path of financial ruin, open borders and unlimited immigration. Giving support and citizenship to illegal aliens, the destruction of our oil and gas as well as other resources. On and on and on.

I've said a number of times here, that the US would never accept a socialist, a marxist or a WEF country on their border. Perhaps he just wants to see a proper democracy here. Something that a mass majority of Canadian also want, but we just can't bring ourselves to care enough to put the root of the problem in jail. We watched our government bring us to the precipice of total ruin, bankruptcy and third world conditions. We did nothing. Lackadaisical, disinterested, weak or afraid. Someone else can figure our psyche.

He doesn't like the amount of Chinese influence the Laurentien Elites have allowed in Canada. Something our governments keep investigating but do SFA about. He has his own Chinese problems, but he and state governments are do something about it. We aren't.

We got a whole list of shit we need to sort out for ourselves. We have to show we are dead serious about fixing it. Which is what should be at the top of the agenda. Not strutting our puffery talking tit for tat on tariffs and angering the bear. He wants a strong democracy on his north. Someone to depend on.

And we need people that know how to negotiate with someone like him. We're getting ourselves all wrapped up in his rhetoric, which he does by design, giving him the upper hand at the very start of trade negotiations. His style has already led to future talks and deals over Greenland, he has Panama shitting their pants. And Canada? Wobbling around and saying 'oh yeah, well, well....oh yeah?' everytime he says something about us.

Saying we'll cut off liquor sales from the US and throttle our electricity going south just plays directly into his hands and strengthens his case with the US population.

I'll stop rambling. This is all my own theories and daydreaming. I don't profess to know if it's plausible or not.
 
Last edited:
Things to remember the next time they want us to proxy for them in places like Haiti or join a Coalition of the Willing for something like Afghanistan. Mind, I don't think with his aversion to wars, we have to worry about the later.
Peace keeping coalition for Panama? Greenland?
 
Trump says he wants Canada in the US. He has threatened tariffs and has said the path to ending those tariffs will be for Canada to join the US as a single new state. He has made speeches about expanding the size of US territory.
Take the lessons of history. When you substantially bigger neighbour’s leader starts pontificating about Lebensraum, you don’t apologize for him by arguing assumed benign intents.

Legit.

But I have sat across the table with too many blowhards to take all threats at face value. It is worthwhile proofing yourself against those threats but if those threats had been acted on I would be both dead and poorer (or poorer and dead, whichever).

...
 
What is the difference between a tariff and a sales tax?

Both are consumption taxes charged to the consumer at the point of sale.
There are a number of reputable economists, and some influential columnists, that have argued the merits of replacing the income tax system with the national sales tax.

From a logistics standpoint, nationally, we, and most nations, manage harmonized sales taxes across borders. In the EU they have their Value Added Taxes among others. In Canada we have the application of the HST/GST to Inter-Provincial Trade. We manage GST/HST intra-provincially as well. Manufacturers are well versed in managing that tax.

Would they have much difficulty in managing a cross-border sales tax between the US and Canada?

Suppose President Trump is serious (I know!) about relieving the average tax payer of their tax burden by charging a consumption tax on imported goods.

The counter then would be to take him at face value and institute our own national consumption tax on imported goods. We too could use the revenue stream to offset internal taxes.

Of course, with Trump, and other nations, we are likely to get into "social credit" discussions. If we don't play nice with them then they won't play nice with us. That will then become a debate for the diplomats as they try to manage reciprocity and harmonize the taxes.

That calculus is already baked into international trade agreements with the allowable concept of Most Favoured Nation.

....

Trump may indeed be serious about the 51st state. We should take him seriously and plan to negotiate as if on equal footing. But it is up to us to convince him we have a better offer that doesn't include the costs of subsidizing us, keeping a leftish population happy and paying for the defence of a large chunk of turf.

...

1738026421104.png

Tuesday.
 
Let’s not kid ourselves. Trump doesn’t want us actually stronger. He doesn’t care if we’re more democratic because he doesn’t actually care about his own democracy other than as a tool to empower and aggrandize himself. He’s a ‘will to power’ type. He wants to leverage, exploit, and profit from other countries. Our weaknesses and failings aren’t actually things that particularly vex him; rather they’re political and diplomatic vulnerabilities that he knows he can wedge a lever in to justify more crass and exploitive wants of his own.

Being able to literally fold some or all of Canada into the U.S. - to acquire us, in a way familiar tot he him in the world he came up in - would be the ultimate coup. If he actually has his sights set on that, on economically pressuring us to cave and sell out, it’s not something we’ll ameliorate by policy choices.

Now, we should make sound policy choices anyway for their own sake, and to be able to take the rhetorical wind out of his sails at least somewhat. We should absolutely materially improve our sovereignty for the sake of sovereignty. But the Trump wind blows hard, and I think we’re in for four straight years of plain bullying to try to coerce us. Preparing for anything less than that would be foolhardy.
 
Let’s not kid ourselves. Trump doesn’t want us actually stronger. He doesn’t care if we’re more democratic because he doesn’t actually care about his own democracy other than as a tool to empower and aggrandize himself. He’s a ‘will to power’ type. He wants to leverage, exploit, and profit from other countries. Our weaknesses and failings aren’t actually things that particularly vex him; rather they’re political and diplomatic vulnerabilities that he knows he can wedge a lever in to justify more crass and exploitive wants of his own.

Being able to literally fold some or all of Canada into the U.S. - to acquire us, in a way familiar tot he him in the world he came up in - would be the ultimate coup. If he actually has his sights set on that, on economically pressuring us to cave and sell out, it’s not something we’ll ameliorate by policy choices.

Now, we should make sound policy choices anyway for their own sake, and to be able to take the rhetorical wind out of his sails at least somewhat. We should absolutely materially improve our sovereignty for the sake of sovereignty. But the Trump wind blows hard, and I think we’re in for four straight years of plain bullying to try to coerce us. Preparing for anything less than that would be foolhardy.

There is no point arguing opinions. We'll just have to wait and see.
 
Let’s not kid ourselves. Trump doesn’t want us actually stronger. He doesn’t care if we’re more democratic because he doesn’t actually care about his own democracy other than as a tool to empower and aggrandize himself. He’s a ‘will to power’ type. He wants to leverage, exploit, and profit from other countries. Our weaknesses and failings aren’t actually things that particularly vex him; rather they’re political and diplomatic vulnerabilities that he knows he can wedge a lever in to justify more crass and exploitive wants of his own.

Being able to literally fold some or all of Canada into the U.S. - to acquire us, in a way familiar tot he him in the world he came up in - would be the ultimate coup. If he actually has his sights set on that, on economically pressuring us to cave and sell out, it’s not something we’ll ameliorate by policy choices.

Now, we should make sound policy choices anyway for their own sake, and to be able to take the rhetorical wind out of his sails at least somewhat. We should absolutely materially improve our sovereignty for the sake of sovereignty. But the Trump wind blows hard, and I think we’re in for four straight years of plain bullying to try to coerce us. Preparing for anything less than that would be foolhardy.


This podcast is worth a listen.

 
Let’s not kid ourselves. Trump doesn’t want us actually stronger. He doesn’t care if we’re more democratic because he doesn’t actually care about his own democracy other than as a tool to empower and aggrandize himself. He’s a ‘will to power’ type. He wants to leverage, exploit, and profit from other countries. Our weaknesses and failings aren’t actually things that particularly vex him; rather they’re political and diplomatic vulnerabilities that he knows he can wedge a lever in to justify more crass and exploitive wants of his own.

Being able to literally fold some or all of Canada into the U.S. - to acquire us, in a way familiar tot he him in the world he came up in - would be the ultimate coup. If he actually has his sights set on that, on economically pressuring us to cave and sell out, it’s not something we’ll ameliorate by policy choices.

Now, we should make sound policy choices anyway for their own sake, and to be able to take the rhetorical wind out of his sails at least somewhat. We should absolutely materially improve our sovereignty for the sake of sovereignty. But the Trump wind blows hard, and I think we’re in for four straight years of plain bullying to try to coerce us. Preparing for anything less than that would be foolhardy.
It’s not personal. It’s business.
 
The other thing to keep in mind is Trump’s belligerence will funnel a lot of countries into Beijing’s orbit. We are already seeing the smart set in this country saying we should be going back to Beijing cap in hand, and Beijing saying to us and other countries that they will offer “fair deals” to come into their orbit. I think it would be a disaster, but no one in government asks for my opinion on foreign affairs.

If the Trump administration is trying to limit other countries’ exposure to Beijing, they may be going about it the wrong way. Personally, I don’t think they really care. They see trade and the economy as a zero-sum game. I think they are all about crushing “the competition”, whatever that is, regardless the cost.
 
The other thing to keep in mind is Trump’s belligerence will funnel a lot of countries into Beijing’s orbit. We are already seeing the smart set in this country saying we should be going back to Beijing cap in hand, and Beijing saying to us and other countries that they will offer “fair deals” to come into their orbit. I think it would be a disaster, but no one in government asks for my opinion on foreign affairs.

If the Trump administration is trying to limit other countries’ exposure to Beijing, they may be going about it the wrong way. Personally, I don’t think they really care. They see trade and the economy as a zero-sum game. I think they are all about crushing “the competition”, whatever that is, regardless the cost.
Yup, this is a real concern I have.
 
Back
Top