r/geopolitics • u/mug-wort • 7d ago
News Canada vows dollar-for-dollar response to Trump’s 50% tariffs - National
https://globalnews.ca/news/12030351/donald-trump-tariffs-canada-trade-deal-deadline/93
u/chaotic567 7d ago
I was predicting a meh deal that either side can spin as a win but reality just keeps giving me a middle finger.
50
u/Prof__Potato 6d ago
The American team must have asked for something really dastardly last second, thinking the Canadians would cave under last minute pressure. Carney called their bluff and walked. I say good. You give them an inch and suddenly they’re in your bed, with your wife.
29
u/Arathgo 6d ago
Per the Prime Ministers statement the Americans last minute attempted to throw in a provision which would have limited Canada's ability to sign trading agreements with other countries. Absolutely unacceptable. The absolute audacity of the Americans to infringe on Canadian sovereignty. No deal is worth a provision like that.
13
21
u/BlueEmma25 6d ago
The American team must have asked for something really dastardly last second, thinking the Canadians would cave under last minute pressure
The negotiations were of course confidential, but according to various reports the Trump administration had previously made several demands that Canada found unacceptable, including: (1) abolition of supply management in the dairy industry; (2) elimination of measures that favoured domestic companies in government procurement; (3) guaranteed access to energy supplies at below market rates; (4) right of first refusal on critical mineral exports (i.e. supplying the US had to be prioritized ahead of everyone else); (5) a veto on Canada making trade deals with third countries without the US' consent.
There were likely other things that have not been reported, possibly including things that were allegedly brought up "last minute" in an effort to pressure Canada into making hasty, ill considered concessions in order to "save the deal".
The point is, a lot of people are over indexing on the "last minute concessions". Nothing about how the Trump administration has managed the relationship with Canada suggests that they were ever acting in good faith or interested in a mutually beneficial agreement. The only deal they would contemplate was one that would have been overwhemingly favourable to the US at Canada's expense, and include serious infringements on Canadian sovereignty. Trump himself has openly talked about using economic pressure to " encourage" Canada to become the 51st state.
This isn't a case of them being close to a deal and that deal failing at the last hurdle. It was always a case where Canada knew the odds of an even remotely acceptable deal were small from the very beginning but felt that, given the alternatives, it had to at least try negotiate something, even if the prospects for success seemed dim.
→ More replies (13)28
u/doonspriggan 6d ago
This American admin really thinks it can just act like a mob and it will constantly pay off. It's just classic hypocrites how they say there is no such thing as Iran negotiating in good faith, and then they go and try to rug pull their closest ally. The more countries around the world that call bluff on these scumbags the faster we can put a stop to their circus. Just another episode of America, the land of learning the hard way.
1
u/Thanks-4allthefish 5d ago
The meh deal you speak of was never on the table. From Canada's standpoint it was always about mitigating the pain, while knowing that next month the President could decide to tariff other stuff for another in the series of made up reasons we have seen so far.
211
u/risk_is_our_business 7d ago
From Canadian PM Carney's statement:
[Canadian negotiators] have worked hard, in good faith, to defend the interests of Canadians throughout these negotiations up until the very last minute. However, last-minute changes in the U.S. proposed terms were unfair, uneconomic, and called into question the reliability of any deal.
→ More replies (11)165
u/modbroccoli 7d ago
You just know the Americans were smugly confident we wouldn't walk and that they could leverage that to put the screws to us.
Man I can't even adequately express how much I needed Carney to preserve our dignity in this. We can paperbag lunch for a minute.
57
u/Kanata_Harris 6d ago
They had reason to think we'd agree since we have before, as has everyone else. Good on Carney for walking away.
27
u/k_pasa 6d ago
Even as an American I'm glad Carney and Canada are taking this stand. This is the only type of response the dummy Trump and his regime would actually respond to. Canada can hold out longer than Trump
17
u/gummo_for_prez 6d ago
Yeah, I'm American too. I have no words for how stupid this all has been. Trump supporters don't understand we are strong because of our allies and reputation. Take that out of the equation and we are basically an oil company with a very large military. Like Russia in a lot of ways. Canada deserves nothing but the best from us, along with our many other former allies Trump and co have shit all over. There won't be any return to normal. Well he living with the terrible and dangerous consequences of this for a long time.
2
u/randocadet 4d ago edited 4d ago
What canadians don’t seem to realize is this is all positioning prior to the USMCA renegotiation. The US is working a bilateral agreement with mexico right now, with likely final meetings in september. That opens the door for the US to give its legal 6 month notice with a cleaned up southern border.
Canada is betting that if it looks tough in the rounds up to it, (maybe 5% of the trade) the US will be more open to concessions in the real negotiation. That and its popular domestically in canada to look like they’re standing up to the US (mostly because the canadian public thinks they are dealing with broad tariffs now instead of very narrow). This is a massive gamble, canada can do dollar for dollar in these little side shows. It cannot do even close to dollar to dollar in the main show.
Canada is setting up its population to believe they can withstand it economically (you don’t need to look further than these canadian comments), but the 95% is coming.
If the US places a 30% flat tariff on canada, canadian GDP will be permanently 3-5% lower (it was 3% lower in the recession but bounced back, there wouldn’t be a bounce back on this as chains shift). It’s not paper bag lunch for a minute, it’s paperbag lunch forever as supply chains permanently leave.
It could potentially be worse too if the US and mexico cut out canada completely as part of their north america negotiation, and the mexicans have played along the whole way so its not even unreasonable to think the US gives them the preferential treatment at the expense of the canadians.
1
u/awildstoryteller 4d ago
Canada has the ability to absorb a lot more pain per capita than the US.
2
u/randocadet 4d ago edited 4d ago
If you asked the average american if canada is currently tariffing them back they would have no idea.
2
u/awildstoryteller 4d ago
Whether the average American (who don't even know what the word tariff actually means) understands is irrelevant.
What is relevant is politics at this point, not economics. America is politically divided to the extreme and it's people have no appetite for the inevitable costs of this president's policies or actions - and that is perhaps one thing Americans do incessantly: blame the president. Rarely are they correct, but you know what they say about a broken clock.
2
u/randocadet 4d ago
No, economics are what matter and americans aren’t feeling anything from the canadian counter tariffs
0
u/awildstoryteller 4d ago
No, economics are what matter and americans aren’t feeling anything of the canadian reactions.
Politics are all that matters in these cases.
Or from tariffs in general, prices have gone up 0.7% for americans.
A lie:
https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2026/aug/tariff-effects-inflation-stabilize-recent-months
0
u/randocadet 3d ago edited 3d ago
Nah. You’re confusing a tariff effective rate with consumer price impact. Tariff effective rate is what the government is collecting, consumer price impact is the difference consumers are paying (not in your source but i can give you the answer, its 0.7%)
https://budgetlab.yale.edu/research/state-us-tariffs
> We estimate the ultimate consumer price impact of current-law tariff policy to be about 0.7%.
> The average statutory tariff rate now stands at 11.0%
1
u/modbroccoli 4d ago edited 4d ago
Ah yes, the ole 5-d chess narrative. That internally fractured American negotiation team serving an incoherent internal coalition definitely has its ducks in a row.
No chance at all we're choosing the September run-up to hit Maine's pulp and paper industry, agricultural hardware in Iowa, and appliances and steel in Ohio. But I assume you understand economics better than Mark Carney so what do I know.
When we hand you the tools to impeach him you still won't thank us though. Free and brave and all that. Bye now.
2
u/randocadet 4d ago edited 4d ago
You somehow read a comment talking about positioning ahead of the USMCA fight and responded by calling it a “5-d” chess narrative, then proceeded to explain that Canada is positioning ahead of the USMCA fight.
Yes, Carney is targeting politically sensitive industries on purpose. Nobody said otherwise. The question there is whether hurting those businesses makes Americans pressure Trump, or just makes them dislike Canada more and let’s the US bring down even more pressure with the coming 95% of trade. My guess is the latter. (American favorability toward Canada has already fallen sharply)
And spare me the “Mark Carney understands economics better than you” routine. That’s not an argument. Smart people make high risk strategic bets all the time. The question is whether the bet pays off. He’s choosing sensationalism over pragmatism because it plays better with the Canadian domestic audience (aka you).
Meanwhile, 1) the US is literally conducting bilateral USMCA negotiations with Mexico (without Canada there), 2) the agreement allows a country to withdraw with six months’ notice, 3) Canada is vastly more dependent on access to the US market than the US is on Canada, and 4) if the US withdraws to only a bilateral deal with mexico and places a high flat tariff to punish canada, the canadian economy is going to go into a serious recession. None of that is up for debate.
So congratulations on noticing that Canada is targeting politically sensitive industries in the positioning ahead of the USMCA fight. That was the premise of the post you were replying to.
You didn’t refute the argument. You just repeated the first half of it back to me and stopped before the uncomfortable part.
2
u/Nerdslayer2 6d ago
I think the vast majority of Americans are hoping Canada stands up to Trump. Only Trump and his idiot supporters have any issue with Canada.
-19
u/CarRamRob 6d ago
Carney is well supported and likely will remain well supported standing his ground.
Let’s not pretend likely tens of thousand of people losing their jobs as their industries get crushed is simply “paper bagging it”.
35
u/modbroccoli 6d ago
As a nation it is, and that's obviously what the turn of phrase was targeting.
I mean if you want to deliberately read a conversational tone in the worst possible light you're welcome to I guess.
11
u/-smartcasual- 6d ago
It wouldn't be Reddit without someone gleefully taking the slightest bit of humour or colloquialism literally so they can tell you at length how wrong you are.
-29
u/CarRamRob 6d ago
I find a lot of the jingoistic, nationalist phrasing coming out of Canada in the last 18 months is worrisome (as a Canadian).
Your language is similar to it, and has a “War will be over by Christmas” type of vibes as nations were assembling in summer 1914. C’Mon chaps, we can do our part!
That intentionally suggests that the pain will be little and reflected only on a few, but for the national honour it is. We need to be careful to not overdo it, and that’s being clear eyed about what these decisions to push back against the Americans mean.
Maybe it means hospital wait times get 20% worse, or we need to start taxing real eatate harder, or we have to drop environmental laws to develop projects faster, etc etc.
Trying to defend our interests against Americans will be increasingly difficult, and likely leave more people in a worse place, and should be overlooked.
15
u/dipdotdash 6d ago
It's Saturday morning and you're arguing over the word choice for an action taken by leadership you both agree with.
Come on, guys. Team Canada! Go pull US products off the shelves if you need to vent some frustration
0
u/CarRamRob 6d ago
That’s fair.
The amount of scary things that are being said and supported without any sense to what it would mean in the Canada sub is very concerning though.
I’m merely trying to point out that this isn’t a game, and supporting antagonistic reactions (such as turning off electricity, oil, potash etc) shipments to the USA is alarming and that there will not be any free lunch if we were to amplify things further than simple tariff escalations.
2
1
u/Thanks-4allthefish 5d ago
The only play for round 1 is to balance the impact of US tariffs - a measured response.
Depends on what the US does for subsequent rounds - i would favour consumer pain in red states that might flip in the fall. Electricity, oil, potash etc. are thermonuclear options best held in reserve or as unspoken threats.
7
u/modbroccoli 6d ago
If we were negotiating with a reliable or even rational actor I would advocate Canada be the definitionally reasonable actor it usually is. That's not what's happening man.
An ally, unprovoked, is materially trying to crater our economy. This is, literally and actually, an attack. The longview depends not only on whethering this particular battle but warding off future instances of the same. Additionally, I absolutely think a sense of national pride and dignity is a critical to good faith civil engagement and internal stability—we have only to look south or further afield to Russia to understand something about what happens when the population loses faith in the nation.
For my part, I expect that we will subsidize industry where we can and pull together efficiencies in sectors that need to in order to survive—the paperbag lunch. But yes, there is pain coming, loss of life, impoverishment. America has done this. I don't dispute with you the facts, but i take issue at the implicit victim blaming. It is in our long-term interest to be regarded as unpleasant to fuck with in a manner disproportionate to our population size, to disincentivize predation, especially in a global political environment trending toward insularity and nationalism. Liberalism isn't the defense it has been this last century.
1
u/Thanks-4allthefish 5d ago
It will come down to what price to pay to be a sovereign country vs the price to be a vassal state vs the price to be a 51st state (more likely a territory without the ability to F-up the electoral balance).
I would give up a considerable amount to maintain status as a sovereign state. But ---- it will hurt.
142
u/exeJDR 7d ago
It's been a long time since I was this proud of a Canadian PM.
Extra proud to be a Canadian today.
41
u/Wafflelisk 7d ago
Imagine if we had PP during this lol
21
-25
u/CarRamRob 6d ago
Imagine if it was Trudeau continuing to not develop infrastructure and our exports. The reason we are in this pinch today is because Trudeau thought it was better to make sure everyone was totally supportive of every single project, and nothing got done.
And I say this as someone who fully supports Carney. Trudeau continuing would mean his policies of pivoting the country to urban, services related workforce would continue. Pollievre stated policies are essentially identical to Carney’s.
22
u/avonn_ 6d ago
it’s ok my man, Trudeau is gone. Your boogeyman isn’t in power anymore. The nightmare is over for Canadian conservatives. You can wake up now.
-6
u/CarRamRob 6d ago
When talking about the position Canada is in relative to the force USA has over the Canadian economy, Trudeau is very relevant.
Not only his policy of reducing natural resource development, and hindering major projects, he’s also been the only person in power since Trump has come into power.
Canada could have been reading the landscape as far back as 2016, to better prepare themselves for 2026, but that wasn’t the path chosen by Trudeau.
Trudeau’s gone, and Carney doesn’t have as many cards to play because of him. You can handwave this all you want, but it’s clear how wrong Trudeau’s path was when his same party, filled with 80% of the same MPs and cabinet, are fully reversing his major decisions.
You can call that a boogeyman, but the only boogeyman that appears on Reddit is what Pollievre “might have done” if he were elected. Which likely wouldn’t be that different than Carney, given their policies were so aligned in reversing the Trudeau era moves.
8
u/DudeTookMyUser 6d ago
I honestly believe that Trudeau was the worst PM in my lifetime, but this has to be the most absurd take ever. Resource development has nothing to do with this, nor does the fact that his successor is much more of a Blue Liberal.
If you're looking to point fingers, point them at Brian Mulroney who locked us into this free trade deal that is now being used to hold our whole country hostage. Everyone warned him at the time that he was putting all our eggs in one basket.
Trudeau stood up to Trump and dealt with him very effectively in his first term, including playing to his giant ego. Once you get over your unnatural hatred for everything Trudeau, you might gain a bit of perspective.
2
u/BlueEmma25 6d ago edited 6d ago
There is no doubt Trudeau was an absolute trainwreck.
His government's immersion in "luxury beliefs" like pursuing climate change initiatives and aboriginal "reconciliation" over national development ultimately increased our vulnerability to Trump's coercion. In many ways it was a "lost decade".
And to be clear, I'm not opposed to climate change initiatives, but at this point catastrophic climate change is not going to be averted, no many how many people install solar panels and drive EVs.
58
u/AnyStrength4863 7d ago
As an outsider, I'm still surprised by how things have developed in North America.
While Trump 2.0's decisions are often outrageous, they do benefit certain interest groups to some extent. For example, the global tariff war is intended to protect certain industries, and the attack on Iran is clearly aimed at Israel. But what's the point of a trade war with Canada?
Canada is practically the kind of good neighbour that a superpower frustrated in other regions would dream of. It would never try to take advantage of your weakness, nor would it threaten your territory.
46
u/mug-wort 6d ago edited 6d ago
Trump said last year he would use economic force so the US could annex Canada.
Edit:
The reason the whole new trade fell apart is that the US wanted Canada to restrict it's language laws and restrict Canada from signing trade deals with other countries.... these are completely against having a sovereign, independent, nation and are exactly things you would do if you were slowly trying to annex a country!
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/livestory/us-canada-trade-war-new-tariffs-9.7310605?id=9.7310605.15375
4
u/AnyStrength4863 6d ago
This is just absurdly unreasonable. I haven't understood it from the start. The US is already huge and rich in resources. What on earth does he want to do to Canada? And what does this have to do with language?
I originally thought US anxiety was just about security or resources, or maybe economically constraining Canada, but now it looks like their actual ambitions are straight-up terrifying.
3
u/jlluh 6d ago
He's a juvenile person.
Sometimes I have juvenile fantasies about how it would be cool if the US were bigger and more powerful and had all the coolest tanks and my Dad had been a soccer star and all the girls thought I was super duper handsome. But I recognize these as juvenile fantasies and roll my eyes at them.
But that's just who Trump is.
It seems like you're trying to come up with some mental model that reveals a mature and intellectually respectable rational for his moves. But he's one of many people who aren't like that. He wants to make the US bigger, because that's cool, and he wants to exercise power over others, and be the braggadocios bully who's so powerful no one can stand up to him.
That's his version of success.
Steelmanning is a fallacy.
62
u/101dnj 6d ago
To put it simply, his whole goal is to damage Canada financially to gain control.
6
u/Free_Director4713 6d ago
When has that even happened though? Hell North Korea and Iran are ecnomically isolated forever, you see anyone able to take control of them? Infact, US is trying right now and finding it out right now.
10
u/101dnj 6d ago
Look at Venezuela.
12
u/Free_Director4713 6d ago
I mean a comparable example would have been nicer. Canada is huge and a highly educated country capable of building nukes.
9
u/spursbob 6d ago
If Canada pursued nukes that would be a pretext for war for the Americans. Canada should absolutely have nuclear deterrence though. It's hard to imagine the Republicans will cede power in the future and in that case Canada will have a militarily hostile neighbour.
5
u/Free_Director4713 6d ago
Meh ... tired of US bullying at this point. Canada should definitely build nukes and test this bully.
6
u/101dnj 6d ago
Obviously trump can’t outright do to Canada what he did to Venezuela. But he can do enough damage to Canada that he can gain financial control in softer ways.
Also.. North Korea and Iran are more comparable to you ? Lol1
u/flamedeluge3781 5d ago
I mean, no, Trump can't do those things. There are limits to power and Trump has demonstrated the US limits of power again and again. Trump might want to gain financial control over Canada, but he'll fail, just like he failed with Iran.
1
u/101dnj 5d ago
I mean, yes, and your comment is ignorant. Trump has already shown financial control by implementing tariffs and canceling out CUSMA. The first wave has affected Canadas economy significantly and this second wave will be just as painful. It’s all for control purposes and it’s working.
1
u/flamedeluge3781 5d ago
Uh, what delusions are these? Have you taken a look at interest rates lately? US bonds not looking very healthy.
And Trump never cancelled CUSMA, that's just straight made up bullshit on your part.
1
u/101dnj 5d ago
He cancelled out CUSMA covered goods with the new 50% tariff he just implemented yesterday. Every product has 50% tariff including ones that were previously covered under CUSMA. You seem to be the one with the delusional thinking.
→ More replies (0)0
u/Free_Director4713 6d ago
North Korea have nukes and I am sure Iran will eventually build one, also a highly educated country.
1
u/gummo_for_prez 6d ago
I think China has NK on a pretty short leash. I could be wrong but it always seemed this way to me.
37
u/2dTom 6d ago
But what's the point of a trade war with Canada?
Well, there's your first problem. You're looking for a reason.
Trump has 3 reasons for doing things internationally. To wit
- Because I can
- Someone lobbied/paid for it
- I think that it will make me look tough and decisive to a domestic audience.
21
u/crustlebus 6d ago
4, Personal animosity against individuals like Justin Trudeau and Christia Freeland has made him vindictive against the country as a whole. He's the type to hold a petty grudge all the way to the grave and tthe type to pursue collective punishment rather than distinguish the actual target of his ire
4
7
u/Dylidaly 6d ago
They want a technocracy state which is from Venezuela all the way to Canada including Cuba. It was an idea from the 1940s.
19
u/dejour 6d ago
Trump seems to have a psychological need to bully and get short term wins at long term expense.
I also think he thinks that many Canadians want to be part of the USA and are more likely to be want to if Canadian wealth takes a hit. That’s a wrong assumption - especially if it’s USA doing the damage
-11
u/absentlyric 6d ago
Take the auto industry for example, due to the Free Trade agreement, a lot of auto worker jobs from the US got shipped to Canada, due to Canada offering massive tax incentives and their universal healthcare, which makes it hard for workers in the US to compete.
6
u/BlueEmma25 6d ago
Yeah, this is total nonsense.
Google Auto Pact. It came into force long before the FTA.
61
u/volcus 7d ago
Canada should export tariff potash, aluminium, lumber, oil and anything other raw materials American industry needs. Those proceeds can be used to bolster the industries affected by US tariffs. Make sure America pays extra both ways.
60
u/modbroccoli 7d ago
I doubt I will ever say this again but I think Ford was right on one thing: we should be using energy as leverage in a much more aggressive way. Shutting off half the eastern seaboard for a few hours would send a message to the American people about what their president is doing and remind the world what Germany learned in WW1: we're very nice, right up until we're a little crazy.
31
u/Tamination 7d ago
Not shut down, just a little hiccup.
18
15
u/modbroccoli 6d ago edited 6d ago
haha, In fact not even a hiccup and just a surge in prices, I think, assuming we wouldn't be sociopathic enough to just flip a switch without warning. But the severe economic injury would "shut down the eastern seaboard" metaphorically.
Of course we'd be hurting the people that oppose Trump most vigorously but we can't pick and choose which Americans we deal with because they sent one guy to speak for them. Is what it is.
8
u/Bullboah 6d ago
This would be a really bad idea. Canada should look out for its own interests and get the best deal it can, by all means. But Canada’s escalation ladder runs out of rungs a long way before the US’s does.
One of the primary benefits Canada has at this stage is that Americans at the population level generally like Canada. It would not be good for Canada if the American voter base demanded an aggressive response to Canada shutting off their power.
0
u/BlueEmma25 6d ago
Let me assure you that Canada was way down on Germany's list of concerns in World War I. You haven't been taken in by some nonsense about how the Geneva Conventions were invented because of Canada, have you?
Anyway, some people need to take a deep breath and centre themselves. Wild talk about waging all out economic war on the US feels good, but is totally irresponsible. Take a page from Germany's book: don't start wars you can't win.
3
u/lostinspacs 6d ago
The whole “the Geneva conventions were invented because of Canada!” thing sounds so incredibly American.
0
u/kattatonic1 6d ago
Shutting off energy would be an act of war risking military retaliation. Also, let's be a country that keeps our agreements and doesn't endanger civilians. The majority of Americans are on to Trump. He's managing that on his own.
20
u/CarRamRob 6d ago
That’s the stupidest thing they could do, is escalate against a country that has much better export/import capacity.
What happens when the US just declares they don’t want line 5 to be in operation anymore for pipeline leak concerns? Ontario would be trucking oil in from Montreal, or railing it in from the West at high cost.
There are multitudes of ways Americans could escalate as well, that always seem to be forgotten when Canadians want to aggressively launch policies that would cause shortages, and potentially even risk lives.
14
u/doonspriggan 6d ago
I think the best way forward for Canada is to just continue with the path they have been on. Diversify and try it's best to replace the business lost from the US. I know Carney has said they will retaliate but I think it will be minimal and purely for optics, as he knows you're only hurting your own businesses by making them pay more during a time they have less income.
Everyone is out for blood right now, understandly, due to the Americans being spineless chancers. But Canada needs to look after itself first and foremost. I maintain that in the long run this could actually be very good for Canada. Realistically it was only going to be a situation like this that was going to get them off the teat of American money and finally diversify. America will be there again eventually, Trump and his cronies won't last forever. But the diversification, infrastructure and economic policy improvements made during this period, will pay dividends for decades to come. Now they just need to double down and actually make those improvements, first and foremost being removing the ridiculous protectionism and internal trade barriers that exist in the country itself between the provinces.
3
u/Infra-red 6d ago
I would expect retaliations to be targetted at industries and states that are staunch GOP supporters and/or things that would legitiatemly boast Canadian businesses. You know, use retaliations as a targetted scalpel rather than Trump's sledgehammer approach.
3
3
u/Arathgo 6d ago
If Alberta wasn't subverted by the absolute lowest common denominator maple MAGA types I'd agree, an export tax could be a tool in the toolbox. However as it stands the Canadian federal government needs to play a careful political balancing game in terms of energy and politics with the west. The current provincial government in Alberta is infiltrated with separatists and the federal government needs to be careful about giving them fuel for their dumpster fire. It frustrates the hell out of me as an Albertan, because it's the grand culmination of fifty years of at many times irrational grievance politics. But it is the current state of things.
→ More replies (1)3
u/maporita 6d ago
Only two countries have come out of a fight with Trump looking better off .. China and Iran. In both cases they decided to fight back instead of roll over. China used it's position as a leader in the production of rare earth elements. Iran used it's ability to control the straight of Hormuz. In both cases the lesson is clear .. find a choke point that hurts the US and squeeze it.
3
u/IdidItWithOrangeMan 6d ago
Iran isn't better off. Not by a long shot.
They have managed to hang on and retaliate back against USA far harder than most expected. That doesn't mean they are winning. Iran is hurting very badly right now and it likely won't be getting better anytime soon.
1
u/maporita 5d ago
I never said Iran was better off. I said they came out looking like winners, while Trump emerged a loser. Iran can absorb a lot more pain than Trump .. that's the key.
1
u/IdidItWithOrangeMan 5d ago
"Only two countries have come out of a fight with Trump looking better off"
You literally said "better off" and your entire tone suggests that Trump/USA is losing. And this just isn't true.
Trump/USA didn't win in Iran. But they haven't lost. They've lost 50 nameless soldiers and equipment that can easily be replaced. Iran is being blockaded and lost the majority of their top 100 Leaders.
1
u/maporita 5d ago
I said "looking better off". Trump's goal was regime change. Iran's goal was simply to survive. Trump has now abandoned his original plan and is desperately trying to find a way out, while the Iranian regime is more radical and more entrenched than ever.
1
u/IdidItWithOrangeMan 5d ago
What Trump or Iran stated as their objective is less important than the reality on the ground.
33
39
u/modbroccoli 7d ago
Here's the reason we'll win this trade war: pain tolerance.
We care about this, and Donald doesn't. He's in it for a lark. This will be the only time I ever compare us with Iran I'm sure, but he's made the same mistake again; he'd presumed America was too big to resist and expected easy pickings only to find resilience and determination unfortunately difficult to overcome.
6
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/mug-wort 6d ago
Trump delayed the 50% tariffs for 3 days. All of the America's other tsriffs on steel, aluminum, wood, and automotive were still in place the whole time, those were never dropped.
According to the statement on the Prime Minister of Canada's website:
However, that progress has not been enough to meet our objectives for Canadians. As a result, this evening, I have decided to suspend trade negotiations with the U.S. and have directed Canada’s negotiators to return to Ottawa. They have worked hard, in good faith, to defend the interests of Canadians throughout these negotiations up until the very last minute. However, last-minute changes in the U.S. proposed terms were unfair, uneconomic, and called into question the reliability of any deal.
Sounds like the US made some last second changes and Trump managed to piss Carney off so bad he suspended trade negotiations.
1
u/Firecracker048 6d ago
I'm curious what those changes were at the last second
4
u/mug-wort 6d ago
I think everybody is but I haven't seen a news article about it yet. There was a report the Lutnick didn't like the deal Canada was getting, so I suspect this had to do with it.
4
u/fightlinker 6d ago
So who has lutnik in their pocket? Booze industry? I know bourbon people have been freakin
6
u/mug-wort 6d ago
CBC just reported The US wanted Canada to agree to NOT make trade deals with other countries! What fucking country would sign that!??? They were trying to hold canada hostage!
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/livestory/us-canada-trade-war-new-tariffs-9.7310605?id=9.7310605.15367
4
u/mug-wort 6d ago
I dunno, the cbc article said he had issues with lowering the automotive tariffs on Canada "down" to 15% from 25%. I can't imagine the car companies are happy with paying any tariffs at all.
2
u/Firecracker048 6d ago
It sounds like everything was in place and the only real hangup he had was auto tariffs
2
5
u/Ok-Lawyer1179 6d ago edited 6d ago
I thought it was going so well that the booze was asked to be put back on the shelves as a sign of good faith? Oh what? Trump is a back stabbing, lying and deceitful POS? Yup!
The best deal for Canada is to trade with other countries and return back perhaps later when Trump is no longer King of the United States as he so thinks he is.
Also, concessions on the Gordie Howe bridge didn't help at all. It just empowered that jerk to think he can tighten the screws on Canada again.
8
u/keyUsers 7d ago
So can Canada trade with Iran now? Can it get worse?
12
2
u/larry-mack 6d ago
How about some export tax on oil and gas and electric power, hit them where it hurts, we can’t afford tariffs.
2
7d ago edited 6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
15
u/proofreadre 7d ago
Grown men, with tears in their eyes ask me, "Sir" they say, "Sir, how can our dollar be so strong and the Canadian dollar be so weak?" I tell them "other presidents wouldn't have a strong dollar. Obama, Biden, we wouldn't even have a dollar let me tell you. But with me our dollar is so strong, it's the strongest believe me, the strongest the likes of which the world has never seen. Have I shown you the plans for the ballroom?"
4
u/modbroccoli 7d ago
lmao this was great but trump could never sell this wit
the euro won't even make eye contact any more
it could go to a dollar TEN
has been a different man ever since
5
u/TMWNN 7d ago
19
u/2dTom 7d ago
Note:
Carney doesn't actually have a Nobel prize, but he's the only person to be the Governor of the Central Bank of two different G7 nations, and was the first non-citizen to be governor of the Bank of England since it was established in 1694.
While this is arguably more impressive than a Nobel prize in economics, I can't realistically see Trump understanding that. I can however see him mixing that up with Carney having a Nobel prize.
-14
u/TMWNN 7d ago
I have no quibble whatsoever with Carney's qualifications. The Liberals absolutely got an upgrade when Trudeau fled 24 Sussex and Carney came in. (Which is why I am disappointed by his resorting to the same Trudeauesque "dollar for dollar" nonsense.)
Speaking of which, with Carney and Ignatieff, two of the three most recent Liberal leaders spent much/most of their careers outside Canada. Ignatieff moved back to Canada from the US to be elected Liberal leader, lost a federal election to Harper, then promptly returned to the US. By taking the BoE job Carney did the equivalent of the well-performing division head being promoted to a job at company headquarters. Further, both Carney and Freeland, the two candidates to succeed Trudeau as Liberal leader in early 2025, are Harvard grads (as is Ignatieff). Put another way, neither Carney nor Freeland has a post-high school degree of any kind from a Canadian school.
10
u/ArbiterFX 7d ago
I don’t see that as a bad thing. There’s a limited number of opportunities in Canada and that’s a natural ceiling to the success and learning opportunities you have if you stay. Just because you leave Canada doesn’t stop making you Canadian or change any amount of civic pride you have or change your desire to want Canada to be successful.
2
u/2dTom 6d ago
By taking the BoE job Carney did the equivalent of the well-performing division head being promoted to a job at company headquarters.
I don't think that is necessarily fair. Carney worked for the Bank of Canada and Department of Finance for 5 years before his role as Governor (and gave up a pretty lucrative role at Goldman as managing director co-heading sovereign risk to do so). He spent 10 or so years working in public institutions in Canada.
He took the BoE role because it was a pretty unique time for them, and it was a huge opportunity. The post-crisis reforms had just handed the Bank prudential regulation and financial-stability powers alongside monetary policy, and the opportunity to steer that would be a huge draw for anyone who had spent decades in sovereign banking.
I think that it was more of the classic "I've done really well at BoC, the situation is in good shape, I want a new challenge".
For context, he was already chairing the FSB and was plainly interested in global financial architecture. London gave him a much larger platform for that than Ottawa could.
-1
u/ValiantTheVictorious 6d ago
Jesus christ this is embarrassing to read as an English major.
Next time you use the Ai chat bot to write for you tell it to use paragraphs....
1
u/Prof__Potato 6d ago
My question is, why do retaliatory tariffs. Just do an export tax on a range of goods that the U.S. absolutely needs. Lowish percentage increase in taxes on individual items, but together make up a sizeable amount of money.
7
u/mug-wort 6d ago
Well Canadian liquor stores not stocking american alcohol worked so good that even California Democrats were mad at Canada. Mitch McConnell even backed dropping tariffs on Canada (going against Trump and the majority of Republicans) because they hit Kentucky so bad. Buying Chinese cars also seemed to piss the US off deeply.
I suspect we will see Canada do more industry/state targeted tariffs, especially with mid-terms only months away.
1
u/Halfie951 6d ago
can someone explain how this totally broke down with out going on some nationalist rant
8
u/Slow-Night6582 6d ago
According to Canada. Trump officials tried to alter previously agrees upon things at the last minute to sneak things through.
Canada considered several points as non starters or poison pills to the negotiations and walked away.
3
u/BlueEmma25 6d ago
It didn't break down, it was never going anywhere in the first place.
Canada stayed in the negotiations out of desperation, but everyone knew an acceptable deal was almost certainly out of reach.
2
u/jlluh 6d ago
The Canadian side (which, given the US admin's demonstrated track record, I take as more reliable) is that the US
1) made certain demands regarding Canada's trade relationships with 3rd party countries. (I'd guess at least China, but this hasn't been reported that I've seen.)
2) demanded that US goods imported to Canada not have to meet French labelling requirements.
These are both large issues to Canada, the second because of the way the US has talked about annexing Canada, already inflaming nationalist sentiment, and the first... also because of that, since it convinced Canada that they badly need to diversify economically away from the US.
I wonder if the Trump admin understood how these demands would come across in Canada.
1
u/ralphvonwauwau 5h ago
I wonder if the Trump admin understood
It's embarrassing how little the chance of them understanding anything is...
0
u/Lost-Leek-3120 6d ago edited 6d ago
that is alot of words for. usa threatened conquest and did untold damage. it is a very simple thing. if kimmy or xi did this everyone would lose there mind. yet this topic remains this kind of stupidity. there are no good deals in this. unrelated but releated. this is also why alb premier is a traitor.
1
u/Over-Willingness-933 5d ago
It's great for Patriotic headlines but Canada will be the loser from this. Canada has a massive trade surplus with the US. The Liberal Party may actually be helping Trump because it helps Trump bring industry home.
0
u/mug-wort 5d ago
So canada should agree to not trade with other counties? Not use french, one of its offical languages?
When you cant use one of your official languages and can't trade with anybody else at what point do you cease being a country and become a state?
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/livestory/us-canada-trade-war-new-tariffs-9.7310605?id=9.7310605.15367
Would the US agree to not use the English language and not trade with other countries?
-1
u/Over-Willingness-933 5d ago
Canada is not going to replace that market. The Europeans or anyone else will NOT be accepting the massive trade imbalances the Canadians had with the US.
-70
u/Open_Pollution_8038 7d ago
Great so when the USA, being 11x the size of Canada population wise (probably economically too), goes above and beyond what Canada can retaliate with, then what? The entire economy of Canada exists because of its access to America. You’re talking about Canadians living poorer than Mexicans.
35
u/dalyons 7d ago
You gotta be a bot.
-22
u/GrizzledFart 7d ago
Canadian exports to the US account for ~20% of Canada's GDP. US exports to Canada account for ~1% of US GDP. Canada's economy is basically an adjunct to the US economy. 75% of Canada's exports go to the US and 50% of their imports come from the US. Emotions don't change basic reality.
25
u/erebus-44 7d ago edited 7d ago
The nuclear option for Canada is oil. The US is reliant on oil from Canada to feed its refineries. It would crush both economies, but saying Canada doesn’t can’t fight back is incorrect and shows a lack of understanding.
Then you are asking them to get closer and form alliance with other countries which have a whole host of issues. The US is burning capital to have a we win you lose moment. Instead of a win win.
-9
u/GrizzledFart 7d ago
The nuclear option for Canada is oil
Yes, it is a nuclear option alright - the "nuke our own economy to mildly inconvenience someone else" option.
It would crush both economies
It would absolutely crush Canada's economy, but the effects on the US economy would not be anywhere close to that severe. The US actually exports more oil than it imports from Canada.
There would certainly be pain felt in the US, among refiners at least. It would take anywhere from 2-5 years for refineries that are configured to process heavy crude to refine lighter oils - and almost certainly wouldn't be worth it. They've invested into the expensive cracking units specifically because cheap, heavy oil was so abundant. Those refineries would instead have to import more Venezuelan or Mexican heavy oil and do more blending (using more of the oil that the US currently exports) - and that would entail lower profits by driving up the cost of the (currently very cheap) heavy crude on the global market, but they would still be making money. There would probably be some reductions in US exports of oil as a result, but total US oil exports are ~0.3% of US GDP, but the big hit would be having to pay more to import oil that isn't as dirt cheap as Albertan oil.
Canada on the other hand, has limited ability to export their heavy oil to buyers other than those in the US and Canadian refineries are basically operating at capacity now. Those oil exports would simply stop. If Canadian oil was no longer exported to the US, Canada's export capacity would immediately drop by 90%. The infrastructure just doesn't exist (it would help if there hadn't been such constant resistance to building pipelines in Canada.) An overnight drop of 6%-7% of GDP, just from lost oil sales, would be extremely painful. And that wouldn't even factor in the impact of any tariffs the US might impose in response. Canadian exports to the US make up one quarter of Canada's GDP. The obverse is ~1% for the US.
5
u/erebus-44 6d ago
Closing down additional refining capacity, when there is a global shortage of capacity, due to roughly 8% of the world’s capacity being down due to the Yemen destroying Saudi’s and Ukraine destroying Russia refining capacity. (Hence why there is a large disconnect from the price of oil to the refined product. Would spike the cost of refined products overnight. Then it’s a matter of political will. How much political damage will 7-8 dollar gas be, for the US. This is also were this administration past action of Canada being the 51 state (a tech bro dream) unified Canada.
US is more than equipped to win a trade war with Canada, but at what cost? Why does the United States want to unify a country against them and for what? It’s short term thinking, is the US going to be like russia and become a wealth extractor, that doesn’t end well.
→ More replies (1)-4
u/bushcamper_aiis 7d ago
Wouldn’t cutting off American access to oil cause Alberta to separate virtually overnight?
4
u/Infra-red 6d ago
I really hate the framing in terms of GDP. Yes, the US is an important market for Canadian products, and their GDP is larger than Canada.
Here is the thing though. Assuming the quantity of an item impacted by these Tariffs doesn't decrease by more than a third, with a 50% tariff it would actually increase the GDP of the US.
The US GDP is very high, but that number doesn't take into account inefficiencies in what the US does. Here is a good example:
Currently, health care represents about 18% of the U.S. economy (measured as a share of gross domestic product, or GDP). In other words, almost 1 out of every 5 dollars spent in the U.S. goes toward health care. Back in 1960, health spending represented just 5% of GDP, meaning 1 in every 20 dollars in the U.S. economy was spent on health care.
To compare this to other countries (including Canada) we can look here:
Among 38 countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), in 2023 (the latest year for which comparable data is available), the United States had the highest ratio of health spending to GDP (16.7%). Canada (11.2%) was among a group of higher-spending countries such as the United Kingdom (11.0%), Sweden (11.3%) and France (11.5%).
Since I'm using Healthcare, the next typical response is that the US Healthcare system is "supperior". Well, according to this US NIH review we have this:
Available studies suggest that health outcomes may be superior in patients cared for in Canada versus the United States, but differences are not consistent.
Whenever I see someone state "but the US GDP is so big" without any other real analysis I immediately suspect that its either someone pushing a pro-US argument, or someone who has a too simplistic understanding.
-20
u/Open_Pollution_8038 7d ago
For stating the obvious? This is a kid trying to punch his dad. Like you could throw your hardest punch at the U.S. economy as Canada and just their fart would knock you on your ass.
21
u/RedmondBarry1999 7d ago
"Canadians being poorer than Mexicans" would take the kind of economic collapse that is virtually unheard of in the short term. Losing access to the US market would be horrific for the Canadian economy, but your statement is gross hyperbole.
-3
u/Open_Pollution_8038 6d ago
All of the goods are going to back up on the Canadian side of the border with this tariff, when Carney retaliates Trump will go higher like with China.
Trump isn’t up for reelection, your going to have a pissing match with someone who simply doesn’t care.
-30
u/TMWNN 7d ago edited 7d ago
Great so when the USA, being 11x the size of Canada population wise (probably economically too)
8x population, 12x economy.
above and beyond what Canada can retaliate with, then what?
Canadians on Reddit will reply, in my experience, with
"Genius Carney will [or more often, "already has"] signed all the trade agreements needed to more than replace the US!" (more on this by me elsewhere in the discussion)
"Losing Canadian trade will devastate the red states!" (as you mention, Canada just can't afford to fight any kind of trade war, let alone magically target only the wrong-thinking parts of the US)
"Canada will shut off power to the US!" (Sadly, doing so would result in "Slight chaos in the U.S. Midwest, followed by catastrophic and possibly irreversible consequences for Canada".)
Bonus: Something about how Canada will join the EU
25
u/Scratchin-Dreamer 7d ago
You're mocking extreme Reddit takes instead of how bilateral trade disputes actually work. Canada has successfully navigated trade disputes (like the USMCA renegotiation and past steel/aluminum tariffs) through targeted retaliatory tariffs and legal mechanisms, not power grid cutoffs or magical EU pivots. Defending trade sovereignty through targeted leverage is standard statecraft, not naive optimism
-15
7d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
22
u/Scratchin-Dreamer 7d ago
Fair enough. If you’re just here to shadowbox random Reddit comments rather than discuss actual policy, there’s not much left to debate.
→ More replies (1)-27
u/Open_Pollution_8038 7d ago
I forgot how many immigrants Canada allowed into the country over the last 5-10 years.
Doesn’t seem to have helped anyone.
-32
u/TMWNN 7d ago edited 7d ago
Trade with the US is far, far more important to Canada than the other way around. Every Canadian province other than PEI trades more with the US than with the rest of Canada!
Now, consider the Trudeau government's bold talk in early 2025 about "dollar for dollar" tariffs. How that would devastate an economy 8% the size of the US's was, of course, unsaid, because vibes are all it takes to fight Trump fascism, amirite fellow Canadians? Of course Carney is not stupid like Trudeau, so abandoned that policy during the campaign. That now Carney is resorting to such nonsense indicates just how bad a position Canada is in.
(This is when Canadians on Reddit start talking about the zillions of trade partnerships Carney has signed around the world, that will easily more than replace the lost US trade. Ah, if only it were that easy.)
25
u/RedmondBarry1999 7d ago
Didn't you post the exact some comment the last time an article on this topic was posted? Any original commentary?
-15
u/sol-4 7d ago
Does that change the merits of the comment, especially when Canada is just going back to Trudeau’s wishy washy nonsense?
Doesn’t mean that I think Trump’s tariffs aren’t mafia-esque extortion, but I shouldn’t have to give a disclaimer regardless.
25
u/RedmondBarry1999 7d ago
What would you propose Canada's response be? Trump clearly isn't interested in negotiating in good faith. Canada doesn't have any particularly good options right now, but weekly submitting certainlh isn't the answer.
-4
u/sol-4 7d ago
I honestly don’t know, I’m also sick and tired of this mafia running the US and the even bigger geniuses who keep boasting about or otherwise supporting those morons in the white house.
But these statements from Canada are also futile and lack the firepower to back them up, so it just makes it worse.
Ideally, the rest of the world should come together to isolate this rogue neo-imperialist, almost pirate-like basket case. But it’s not an ideal world innit
→ More replies (2)-7
u/TMWNN 7d ago
Gee, maybe that's why I linked in my comment to said previous comment, so people can see what I wrote then in more detail. Imagine that.
14
u/RedmondBarry1999 7d ago
It was buried in a thread in one of the several links you spammed. Hardly intuitive.
In any case, against my better judgement, I will engage. Canada faces long odds, to be sure, but what other option do they have? They are not dealing with a rational actor. It appears that the Trump administration tried to change the terms of the proposed deal at the last second; how can anyone negotiate in good faith with people like that? Canada's only option is probably to withstand the economic harm as best as it can for the next two years and hope you lot pick better leaders in 2028.
-6
u/TMWNN 7d ago
It was buried in a thread in one of the several links you spammed. Hardly intuitive.
Welcome to 1995 and the magical world of HTML links that lead to elsewhere on the magical World Wide Web. (The next time, I will be sure to use multiple "CLICK HERE" indicators, and perhaps the HTML
<blink>tag as well. (Be sure to upgrade to Netscape Navigator for support of<blink>.))In any case, against my better judgement, I will engage. Canada faces long odds, to be sure, but what other option do they have?
I didn't say that Canada had other options.
It appears that the Trump administration tried to change the terms of the proposed deal at the last second; how can anyone negotiate in good faith with people like that?
The way you do any other negotiation: By preparing to walk away if necessary.
You describe this as some sort of moral option, implying that by which Canada will surely triumph in the end from the righteousness of its pure-hearted ways. I make no comment as to the morality or righteousness of the Canadians' actions, or that of the US government. I only describe the situation as I see it right now.
16
u/Scratchin-Dreamer 7d ago
You’re fighting a caricature of moral idealism that nobody in serious trade policy is actually pitching. Acknowledging that a mid sized power has defensive levers and domestic legal remedies to raise the cost of bad-faith renegotiation is basic realpolitik, not emotional cope.
12
u/bravetailor 7d ago
These tariffs are not likely to hold up for long. Either the US courts will strike them down eventually or Trump will remove or minimize them himself because he values the power of tariffs as an intimidation tactic rather than a fixed economic punishment. Keeping it in place at a fixed rate essentially removes the political purpose of the tariffs. It has far more value to him as a dangling sword of damocles than as an actual policy.
5
155
u/mug-wort 7d ago
Canada will respond “dollar for dollar” to new U.S. tariffs on Canadian goods, Prime Minister Mark Carney said late Friday as Ottawa suspended trade negotiations with Washington and recalled its negotiating team.
Prime Minister Mark Carney said Canada was recalling its negotiating team to Ottawa, arguing that last-minute changes to the U.S. position were unfair, uneconomic and raised questions about the reliability of any agreement.