3 ms·

I wouldn't color relying on a historical ally that either produces, or is the transit corridor for, most of your food with "everything to lose". The current tr

I wouldn't color relying on a historical ally that either produces, or is the transit corridor for, most of your food with "everything to lose". The current trade spat is an issue, and Canada should react accordingly, but the reality is that, even with tariffs, the US still represents a very profitable trade partner, especially when they can levy tariffs of their own.

watwut 2y ago
The issue is not limited to tariffs. There is consistent hostile rhetoric against Canada by multiple members of administration. And by hostile I mean threats of annexation, demands that Canada gives USA parts of its land and false accusations. Tariffs are only part of the issue. They seem the be the first USA step meant to weaken Canada economically before USA proceeds to steal from from it.
- cmrdporcupine 2y ago
  Exactly this. It's interesting watching how Americans are talking about this issue vs Canadians. Even my liberal friends in the US think it's more "Silly" and "Troll" behaviour on Trump's part -- "you're not taking that seriously, are you?" Yes, we're taking it seriously. It wasn't some one-off tweet. He's the official head of state and silence from the rest of the GOP and the US political class generally isn't exactly doing anything to calm tensions. We faced heavy tariff threats under 1.0 and it wasn't anything like this. The reaction here isn't really about trade at all. It's about sovereignty. The US is the only country that has ever invaded us.
  - rayiner 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - throaway1987 2y ago
      isn't annexing another country based on it being merely an economic client state a...fascist rationale?
      - rayiner 2y ago
        [flagged]
        watwut 2y ago
        Yes and likely yes.
        pcwalton 2y ago
        You should visit Canada sometime. It's quite a nice country. British Columbia in particular is gorgeous.
        rayiner 2y ago
        I have been visiting Canada for decades—quite a bit of my family lives there. I was just there in 2022 for a wedding reception. It’s a nice place that seems like it won’t be a nice place in 50 years. Cops watched me like a hawk—I assume they have good reasons. Punjabi Uber driver told me he doesn’t even have to speak English because everyone at the bank, store, etc., speaks Punjabi. For some reason his elderly, past working age parents were immigrating to join him. Had to defend my being married to an American to some family friend at the wedding—there’s so many Bangladeshis there it’s possible to maintain endogenous marriage. Tried to charge my rented Tesla in a part of town that was all Indians. I let one Indian lady cut in front of me, which pissed off the Indian lady behind me, who started yelling at me “why are you letting her do that?” Not Canadian nice, certainly. In the 1990s, Canada was a phenomenally well run and efficient country. More federalized than the U.S. (with 80% of spending run through the provinces). Canada had universal healthcare while having non-military per-capita government spending lower than the U.S. Now you’re running a sociologist experiment about what really causes prosperity and orderliness in western countries.
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - rrr_oh_man 2y ago
        Not when we do it. And, also, look at all the other countries doing it!
  - dylan604 2y ago
    [flagged]
  - blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
    > The US is the only country that has ever invaded us. Who is “us”? Surely we need to acknowledge that Europeans invaded Canada in the first place? The “us” that can make claims about having been invaded likely is just the indigenous people of that land. Of course, this applies to America as well. I do wonder what causes all of us to view a certain set of borders as the “correct” one. I also do the same thing. > Yes, we're taking it seriously. It wasn't some one-off tweet. As for whether Trump’s language about 51st state or whatever is a troll: I think it’s partially that. It’s really more about calling attention to the future of Canada and whether it makes more sense for it to be a part of the US than linger on its own. I don’t think it literally means annexing it through force but more like asking whether it’s mutually good for Canada to also be among the “United States” - just as you could ask that question of whether it should be in the EU. Trump’s aggressive way of stating this has succeeded in one sense, which is drawing attention to the idea. It has backfired in another sense, which is that it is highly disrespectful and maybe has turned Canadians off that possibility entirely. Or worse, it may permanently push Canada into the arms of China or the EU. So I do agree that it is partially a troll but still destructive.
    - cmrdporcupine 2y ago
      I actually share general skepticism about the US-Canada border and the structure of the Canadian state generally. But I also have deep skepticism of the US project generally. I think northeastern US states have more in common with us than their own southern states. I think the Canadian political class -- both conservative and liberal -- are really parasitical awful people overall, and our own business community are oligopoly-trending douches with a penchant for using regulatory capture to screw their own citizens. I think Quebec could as easily be its own nation, in a north american federation and that the structure of much of the Canadian state is arbitrary. But I think you've touched on something, which is that Trump has poisoned all discourse. I like many others have turned rabidly nationalist in the last few months. In any case there's a reason why Canada exists. It's not some accident of history or just some retrograde unenlightened loyalists who liked the monarchy. Many of our ancestors saw aspects of dysfunction and injustice in the way the US was taking shape, and chose Canada as an (imperfect) alternative. And that there is an "alternate path" for governance in North America is in fact I think the precise thing that actually enrages people like Trump. As for the "who is us?" and the invasion comment, my point is only that there is actually a long-running "meme" inside American politics since the very foundation of the US that objects to the existence of Canada at all, and included the assimilation of Canada in a large Manifest Destiny project. It's usually been a fringe position, but it has at times become amplified. E.g. under McKinley there was similar talk as what Trump is mouthing now, and of course during 1812, etc. It's "out there", but it's consistently present. And that's the reason Canadians take this annexation talk seriously.
sjsdaiuasgdia 2y ago
If it was just the trade spat, you might be right. But there's also Trump repeatedly talking about annexing Canada. That goes well beyond a trade spat, and I would absolutely expect Canada to do more in response because that is in the mix. Including actively working to reduce their dependency on US-sourced or US-transiting products.
- zardo 2y ago
  At the very least you would expect them to start looking at other sources for arms.
  - a-priori 2y ago
    Absolutely. Canada is almost certainly going to cancel or severely limit a pending F35 order, and is actively sourcing aircraft and negotiating mutual arms deals with European partners.
    - fmbb 2y ago
      … which is hard to do for European plane makers that have engines with parts licensed from US companies. Hopefully this all leads to more countries stopping relying on US trade.
      - overfeed 2y ago
        I'm sure Rolls Royce expects their order book to grow over the next few decades. Likely some engineers have been tasked with researching the viability of creating drop-in replacement models for American engines.
      - a-priori 2y ago
        Of course, NATO was founded on the assumption that the US is a reliable trading and security partner, and the defense supply chains reflect that assumption. It will take time to untangle those chains, but you're watching all of NATO speed-running that process right now.
      - 2y ago

watwut 2y ago

The issue is not limited to tariffs. There is consistent hostile rhetoric against Canada by multiple members of administration. And by hostile I mean threats of annexation, demands that Canada gives USA parts of its land and false accusations. Tariffs are only part of the issue. They seem the be the first USA step meant to weaken Canada economically before USA proceeds to steal from from it.

cmrdporcupine 2y ago
Exactly this. It's interesting watching how Americans are talking about this issue vs Canadians. Even my liberal friends in the US think it's more "Silly" and "Troll" behaviour on Trump's part -- "you're not taking that seriously, are you?" Yes, we're taking it seriously. It wasn't some one-off tweet. He's the official head of state and silence from the rest of the GOP and the US political class generally isn't exactly doing anything to calm tensions. We faced heavy tariff threats under 1.0 and it wasn't anything like this. The reaction here isn't really about trade at all. It's about sovereignty. The US is the only country that has ever invaded us.
- rayiner 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - throaway1987 2y ago
    isn't annexing another country based on it being merely an economic client state a...fascist rationale?
    - rayiner 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - watwut 2y ago
        Yes and likely yes.
      - pcwalton 2y ago
        You should visit Canada sometime. It's quite a nice country. British Columbia in particular is gorgeous.
        rayiner 2y ago
        I have been visiting Canada for decades—quite a bit of my family lives there. I was just there in 2022 for a wedding reception. It’s a nice place that seems like it won’t be a nice place in 50 years. Cops watched me like a hawk—I assume they have good reasons. Punjabi Uber driver told me he doesn’t even have to speak English because everyone at the bank, store, etc., speaks Punjabi. For some reason his elderly, past working age parents were immigrating to join him. Had to defend my being married to an American to some family friend at the wedding—there’s so many Bangladeshis there it’s possible to maintain endogenous marriage. Tried to charge my rented Tesla in a part of town that was all Indians. I let one Indian lady cut in front of me, which pissed off the Indian lady behind me, who started yelling at me “why are you letting her do that?” Not Canadian nice, certainly. In the 1990s, Canada was a phenomenally well run and efficient country. More federalized than the U.S. (with 80% of spending run through the provinces). Canada had universal healthcare while having non-military per-capita government spending lower than the U.S. Now you’re running a sociologist experiment about what really causes prosperity and orderliness in western countries.
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
    - rrr_oh_man 2y ago
      Not when we do it. And, also, look at all the other countries doing it!
- dylan604 2y ago
  [flagged]
- blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
  > The US is the only country that has ever invaded us. Who is “us”? Surely we need to acknowledge that Europeans invaded Canada in the first place? The “us” that can make claims about having been invaded likely is just the indigenous people of that land. Of course, this applies to America as well. I do wonder what causes all of us to view a certain set of borders as the “correct” one. I also do the same thing. > Yes, we're taking it seriously. It wasn't some one-off tweet. As for whether Trump’s language about 51st state or whatever is a troll: I think it’s partially that. It’s really more about calling attention to the future of Canada and whether it makes more sense for it to be a part of the US than linger on its own. I don’t think it literally means annexing it through force but more like asking whether it’s mutually good for Canada to also be among the “United States” - just as you could ask that question of whether it should be in the EU. Trump’s aggressive way of stating this has succeeded in one sense, which is drawing attention to the idea. It has backfired in another sense, which is that it is highly disrespectful and maybe has turned Canadians off that possibility entirely. Or worse, it may permanently push Canada into the arms of China or the EU. So I do agree that it is partially a troll but still destructive.
  - cmrdporcupine 2y ago
    I actually share general skepticism about the US-Canada border and the structure of the Canadian state generally. But I also have deep skepticism of the US project generally. I think northeastern US states have more in common with us than their own southern states. I think the Canadian political class -- both conservative and liberal -- are really parasitical awful people overall, and our own business community are oligopoly-trending douches with a penchant for using regulatory capture to screw their own citizens. I think Quebec could as easily be its own nation, in a north american federation and that the structure of much of the Canadian state is arbitrary. But I think you've touched on something, which is that Trump has poisoned all discourse. I like many others have turned rabidly nationalist in the last few months. In any case there's a reason why Canada exists. It's not some accident of history or just some retrograde unenlightened loyalists who liked the monarchy. Many of our ancestors saw aspects of dysfunction and injustice in the way the US was taking shape, and chose Canada as an (imperfect) alternative. And that there is an "alternate path" for governance in North America is in fact I think the precise thing that actually enrages people like Trump. As for the "who is us?" and the invasion comment, my point is only that there is actually a long-running "meme" inside American politics since the very foundation of the US that objects to the existence of Canada at all, and included the assimilation of Canada in a large Manifest Destiny project. It's usually been a fringe position, but it has at times become amplified. E.g. under McKinley there was similar talk as what Trump is mouthing now, and of course during 1812, etc. It's "out there", but it's consistently present. And that's the reason Canadians take this annexation talk seriously.

sjsdaiuasgdia 2y ago

If it was just the trade spat, you might be right. But there's also Trump repeatedly talking about annexing Canada. That goes well beyond a trade spat, and I would absolutely expect Canada to do more in response because that is in the mix. Including actively working to reduce their dependency on US-sourced or US-transiting products.

zardo 2y ago
At the very least you would expect them to start looking at other sources for arms.
- a-priori 2y ago
  Absolutely. Canada is almost certainly going to cancel or severely limit a pending F35 order, and is actively sourcing aircraft and negotiating mutual arms deals with European partners.
  - fmbb 2y ago
    … which is hard to do for European plane makers that have engines with parts licensed from US companies. Hopefully this all leads to more countries stopping relying on US trade.
    - overfeed 2y ago
      I'm sure Rolls Royce expects their order book to grow over the next few decades. Likely some engineers have been tasked with researching the viability of creating drop-in replacement models for American engines.
    - a-priori 2y ago
      Of course, NATO was founded on the assumption that the US is a reliable trading and security partner, and the defense supply chains reflect that assumption. It will take time to untangle those chains, but you're watching all of NATO speed-running that process right now.
    - 2y ago