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

[RangerRay]

If this is true, the Trudeau shit the bed (again).

https://twitter.com/x/status/1892973318145503692

 

[dapaterson]

Trump talking about the 51st state predates that discussion.

 

[RangerRay]

Trump talking about the 51st state predates that discussion.

If this is true, I believe this would have been the dinner at Mar-a-Lago, right after which the “51st state” trial balloon popped up. I don’t recall him talking about this before hand.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Not sure if this belong here or maybe a new thread?

Assuming that Canada and the US can work out, beneficially for both countries, this latest trade dispute, what are people's thoughts on moving towards a 'Schengen-like' Agreement between Canada and the US?

Personally as someone who grew up on the Windsor/Detroit border and had close family that we'd visit multiple times a month in the days of just showing a drivers license and maybe a birth certificate that was just a small piece of paper, I'd have issues with this. I can see that it potentially should be way to use for individuals in the border cities to cross into Canada with their guns (legal or illegal) and cause complete mayhem.

So the concept of a Schengen situation where you just drive across the border without stopping or showing ID would not work. But, I could see us go to back to where we were pre-9/11 and the ability to show an enhanced drivers license (which we already have in Ontario) that shows your citizenship and no longer have the need to have a passport might be a possibility.

Back over to the potential guns across the border issue. Lets look at a high level between Switzerland and France:

1. Land neighbours
2. Both member of the Schengen Agreement
3. Large difference in population - 9m vs 67m
4. Switzerland has the among most liberal gun laws in Europe, France does not
5. All eligible Swiss males have their automatic service weapon within their home - French males do not
6. Swiss vets can keep their service weapon after they retire - French vets cannot
7. Both require licenses to obtain their weapons, in Switzerland there is no specific requirement for a mental health check
8. Handgun ownership is allowed in both countries - in Switzerland all guns can be full auto
9. Neither have open carry ability - * allowable with a special permit if you work in armed security or have a valid personal security concern
10. You can own an AR-15 in Switzerland with a standard mag capacity - you cannot own an AR-15 in France

So, with the above as an initial starting point, it looks on the whole that Switzerland is alot more liberal in gun ownership that France, I mean Swiss vets get to keep their personal weapon when they retire and they can own an AR-15 with a mag capacity of 10, 15 or 20 (whatever 'standard' mag capacity is). With all that being said, there would be nothing stopping a retired Swiss vet to put his personal automatic weapon with a mag capacity of say 20 rounds, into the trunk of his car and drive with it from Bern all the way down to his summer house in Cap Antibes and put it into his closet while he summer and swims in the Med for the whole month of August and then put it back into the trunk of his car on 31 Aug and drive it all the way back to Bern and home. No Swiss or French authority would be any wiser and no one in the French public would be aware that this occurred.

 

[PrairieFella]

Not sure if this belong here or maybe a new thread?

Assuming that Canada and the US can work out, beneficially for both countries, this latest trade dispute, what are people's thoughts on moving towards a 'Schengen-like' Agreement between Canada and the US?

Personally as someone who grew up on the Windsor/Detroit border and had close family that we'd visit multiple times a month in the days of just showing a drivers license and maybe a birth certificate that was just a small piece of paper, I'd have issues with this. I can see that it potentially should be way to use for individuals in the border cities to cross into Canada with their guns (legal or illegal) and cause complete mayhem.

So the concept of a Schengen situation where you just drive across the border without stopping or showing ID would not work. But, I could see us go to back to where we were pre-9/11 and the ability to show an enhanced drivers license (which we already have in Ontario) that shows your citizenship and no longer have the need to have a passport might be a possibility.

Back over to the potential guns across the border issue. Lets look at a high level between Switzerland and France:

1. Land neighbours
2. Both member of the Schengen Agreement
3. Large difference in population - 9m vs 67m
4. Switzerland has the among most liberal gun laws in Europe, France does not
5. All eligible Swiss males have their automatic service weapon within their home - French males do not
6. Swiss vets can keep their service weapon after they retire - French vets cannot
7. Both require licenses to obtain their weapons, in Switzerland there is no specific requirement for a mental health check
8. Handgun ownership is allowed in both countries - in Switzerland all guns can be full auto
9. Neither have open carry ability - * allowable with a special permit if you work in armed security or have a valid personal security concern
10. You can own an AR-15 in Switzerland with a standard mag capacity - you cannot own an AR-15 in France

So, with the above as an initial starting point, it looks on the whole that Switzerland is alot more liberal in gun ownership that France, I mean Swiss vets get to keep their personal weapon when they retire and they can own an AR-15 with a mag capacity of 10, 15 or 20 (whatever 'standard' mag capacity is). With all that being said, there would be nothing stopping a retired Swiss vet to put his personal automatic weapon with a mag capacity of say 20 rounds, into the trunk of his car and drive with it from Bern all the way down to his summer house in Cap Antibes and put it into his closet while he summer and swims in the Med for the whole month of August and then put it back into the trunk of his car on 31 Aug and drive it all the way back to Bern and home. No Swiss or French authority would be any wiser and no one in the French public would be aware that this occurred.

If you mean freedom to live and move, no thanks. That's a good way to formalize brain drain to somewhere warmer from here and alot of poor people coming North for social services from there. Nevermind that our relationship is irreparably broken for probably a generation.

 

[Czech_pivo]

That is not part of the Schengen Agreement that I'm referring to. Sorry, I should have been more specific - mea culpa.

I'm referring about the ability to drive/fly/train/boat/walk into one of the Schengen countries without the need to show a passport or ID. I have experienced this many many times during my trips to Europe.

I rent a house in Arcachon and I drive down in San Sebastian in Spain for the day and drive right into Spain, no border check, no ID check, nothing because France cleared me initially when I flew into Bordeaux and the French clearing me into their country gives me the ability to drive into any other Schengen country with the same 'rights' as a French citizen.

That is what I was referring to.

If you mean freedom to live and move, no thanks. That's a good way to formalize brain drain to somewhere warmer from here and alot of poor people coming North for social services from there. Nevermind that our relationship is irreparably broken for probably a generation.

 

[PrairieFella]

Oh, w

That is not part of the Schengen Agreement that I'm referring to. Sorry, I should have been more specific - mea culpa.

I'm referring about the ability to drive/fly/train/boat/walk into one of the Schengen countries without the need to show a passport or ID. I have experienced this many many times during my trips to Europe.

I rent a house in Arcachon and I drive down in San Sebastian in Spain for the day and drive right into Spain, no border check, no ID check, nothing because France cleared me initially when I flew into Bordeaux and the French clearing me into their country gives me the ability to drive into any other Schengen country with the same 'rights' as a French citizen.

That is what I was referring to.

Oh! Well thats different. I'd be a bit worried about American criminals taking advantage of this to run guns and drugs but the impacts socially probably wouldn't be too tricky.

 

[Lumber]

This is getting out of hand:

B.C. woman detained at U.S. border, sent to Arizona detention facility in chains

Her mother says 35-year-old Jasmine Mooney has been detained in inhumane conditions since March 3, and is pleading for help. Read more.

vancouversun.com

 

[QV]

Prediction:

The US is divided on whether it would accept Canada as a state or combination of states and likewise there is a large majority in Canada against such a union. The 51st state scenario has shallow support for all the numerous reasons already posted here by others, but namely for Canada the loss of sovereignty and identity, and for the US an unacceptable tilt to the left and all that brings.

Right now Trump has created a narrative where there are two extremes. One extreme being the 51st state and the other is status quo. Both are untenable. Most of Canada and a large part of the US will resist the 51st state scenario. But the US won't allow and Canada won't be able to maintain status quo. Canada will not survive a full blown economic war with the US and we are too far behind on defence, resource development, and economic diversity to put up a serious fight, we would crater our country. Trump through his chaotic approach has made the tariff issue a top priority of Canada, who now can't ignore the issue and kick the can down the road.

I think we are going to land right where I stated at the start of this thing. In the middle. A far more integrated North America both economically and militarily. There will be some winners and some losers in this scenario. I don't know exactly how that will look but at the end of the day both countries will be far better off in the long run.

 

[Remius]

We already are or at least were economically integrated under CUSMA.

As we have now seen, agreements with the USA cannot be relied on. The US has turned isolationist.

The alignment is not towards further integration. We are already looking the other partners.

The damage is done.

 

[Genetk44]

Prediction:

The US is divided on whether it would accept Canada as a state or combination of states and likewise there is a large majority in Canada against such a union. The 51st state scenario has shallow support for all the numerous reasons already posted here by others, but namely for Canada the loss of sovereignty and identity, and for the US an unacceptable tilt to the left and all that brings.

Right now Trump has created a narrative where there are two extremes. One extreme being the 51st state and the other is status quo. Both are untenable. Most of Canada and a large part of the US will resist the 51st state scenario. But the US won't allow and Canada won't be able to maintain status quo. Canada will not survive a full blown economic war with the US and we are too far behind on defence, resource development, and economic diversity to put up a serious fight, we would crater our country. Trump through his chaotic approach has made the tariff issue a top priority of Canada, who now can't ignore the issue and kick the can down the road.

I think we are going to land right where I stated at the start of this thing. In the middle. A far more integrated North America both economically and militarily. There will be some winners and some losers in this scenario. I don't know exactly how that will look but at the end of the day both countries will be far better off in the long run.

If a more integrated North America both economically and militarily is really what Trump wants then there are certainly less hostile and destructive ways to accomplish it than what Trump is doing. So far all he has managed to do is piss off 40 million Canadians, destroy the trust between our two countries, re-energize the Liberal Party of Canada and cause chaos to the stock-markets. Not to mention that this all could go in a very unwanted and unforseen direction that even the mango-mussolini wasn’t expecting or wanting.

 

[QV]

If a more integrated North America both economically and militarily is really what Trump wants then there are certainly less hostile and destructive ways to accomplish it than what Trump is doing. So far all he has managed to do is piss off 40 million Canadians, destroy the trust between our two countries, re-energize the Liberal Party of Canada and cause chaos to the stock-markets. Not to mention that this all could go in a very unwanted and unforseen direction that even the mango-mussolini wasn’t expecting or wanting.

The Canadian commitment to NATO 2% says you're wrong. Canada has displayed master class dithering across all governments. Trump has forced the issue he thinks is important to be the top priority for others. Not a single Canadian politician is now waking up in the morning and not thinking about Trump's tariff threats. Trump's chaotic approach has forced Canada's hand where the normal reaction would have been platitudes and can kicking (the 'we'll meet 2% by the year 2085' kind of bs).

 

[QV]

While I agree that our dithering about our NATO commitment was egregious and should have been fixed long ago, it and Trumps other issues that he is unhappy with were not done in a vacuum. Other countries are below their NATO commitments also, the CUSMA trade issues and tariffs he claims are unfair that he is so upset about were negotiated and signed-off by Trump himself and he touted it as the greatest trade-deal in history. My point is, he came in and didn’t just kick-over the gameboard but he did it in such a way that he has destroyed a hundred years of trust, goodwill and civil co-operation that has been in play for a hundred years……and now will take a generation at least to rebuild. It’s a pretty stupid, destructive and unevolved way to try and correct percieved grievences among supposed allies.

The problem for Canada is that it's not just that it doesn't meet, it's at the very bottom. Secondly, Canada's contribution (or lack of) directly impacts defence of North America which is of prime concern for the US. So the issues created by Canada are far more compounded for the US than other NATO countries.

We should know by now that Trump will wield any stick (trade issues etc) he can to achieve the outcomes (defence spending, access etc) he's looking for.

 

[Remius]

Another m

The Canadian commitment to NATO 2% says you're wrong. Canada has displayed master class dithering across all governments. Trump has forced the issue he thinks is important to be the top priority for others. Not a single Canadian politician is now waking up in the morning and not thinking about Trump's tariff threats. Trump's chaotic approach has forced Canada's hand where the normal reaction would have been platitudes and can kicking (the 'we'll meet 2% by the year 2085' kind of bs).

Another moving goal post.

2%, 5% etc. None of that matters.

 

[PrairieFella]

The problem for Canada is that it's not just that it doesn't meet, it's at the very bottom.

Accuracy is important in these discussions, Canada's spending is 6th from the bottom in terms of percentage of GDP ahead of Iceland, Spain, Luxembourg, Slovenia and Belgium and is 6th in total spending behind the USA, Germany, the UK, France and Italy.

Obviously not good and we desperately need that moolah but it isn't true that we're at the bottom.

 

[Seyek]

The Canadian commitment to NATO 2% says you're wrong. Canada has displayed master class dithering across all governments. Trump has forced the issue he thinks is important to be the top priority for others. Not a single Canadian politician is now waking up in the morning and not thinking about Trump's tariff threats. Trump's chaotic approach has forced Canada's hand where the normal reaction would have been platitudes and can kicking (the 'we'll meet 2% by the year 2085' kind of bs).

If he had come out and said we're going to put tariffs on Canada until they are paying 2% (or more to make up for previous lack of funding), make changes to border controls, and other security related issues, and include defence and security clauses into future trade deals, I'd say you have a point. Hell, I'd even say he's right. But he didn't, he's lied and misrepresented Canada's role in US drug and border problems, he has pushed annexation, and lied and misrepresented the trade deal he negotiated and signed. Hell, he even torpedoed the border bill last year that would have helped address some of the actual border issues with Mexico, supported by his own party. I'm all for good faith negotiations - but they need be good faith negotiations, based on real issues, with realistic goals that are mutually beneficial.

 

[MrWhyt]

We should know by now that Trump will wield any stick (trade issues etc) he can to achieve the outcomes (defence spending, access etc) he's looking for.

he's wielding a stick cause he's got a stick and he wants to wield it cause he thinks it makes him look tough like the dictators he admires.

 

[McG]

Accuracy is important in these discussions, Canada's spending is 6th from the bottom in terms of percentage of GDP …

But Canada is very bottom in terms of the commitment for equipment spending to be at least 20% of 2% of GDP.

 

[brihard]

BBC has good coverage of the tariff issues today.

Trump threatens 200% tariff on alcohol from EU countries - latest

The US president says it will happen unless the EU stops a "nasty 50% tariff on whisky".

www.bbc.com

Lots of European focus today of course, but very importantly, earlier today Lutnick was commenting about what’s on the table and what’s not:

“We have identified some strategic industries – steel and aluminium, likely autos – but everything else is up for grabs,” he says in response to a question about the possibility of the trade fights leading to lower trade barriers.

Steel, aluminum, and probably cars- we’re in this for the long haul, and Trump may ride those tariffs all the way to and through certain industries crashing.

Trump also spoke further on Canada in the past hour:

"We don't need anything they have," the US president says of Canada, adding that he believes the nation would be a good addition to the United States.

“We don’t need their lumber, we don’t need their energy," he says.

Trump also acknowledged that there would be "disruption" as a result of the tariffs and counter-tariffs.

"But it won't be long," he says.[/Trump]

Not sure why he thinks it won’t be long. These are not industries that can pivot onshore quickly.

 

[RangerRay]

If a more integrated North America both economically and militarily is really what Trump wants then there are certainly less hostile and destructive ways to accomplish it than what Trump is doing. So far all he has managed to do is piss off 40 million Canadians, destroy the trust between our two countries, re-energize the Liberal Party of Canada and cause chaos to the stock-markets. Not to mention that this all could go in a very unwanted and unforseen direction that even the mango-mussolini wasn’t expecting or wanting.

In short, he’s doing it wrong.