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

Trump administration 2024-2028

QV said:
My view of the anti-US crowd is they are operating from a position of contradiction. For example, less trade with US and more with CCP China is viewed as a good goal because the US is being abusive, while pretending the CCP would be less so. Obama pushing for higher NATO spending (ignored) Trump achieving it (horrible).

How Canadians are characterizing the current World Series showdown between the Toronto Blue Jays and LA Dodgers is also a good contradiction. The "elbows up" crowd and some media have portrayed this as Canada vs the US. Yet the Blue Jays play in the American League of US dominated MLB, and there is only 1 x Canadian who plays on the Blue Jays while most players are American.

So here we have a certain demographic of people playing politics with a sport (or economics) they would never be a part of (80$ foreign exports) if it weren't for Americans and the USA in the first place. And prior to this we had Canadians booing US NHL teams that were mostly Canadian players.

Contradictions everywhere.
Click to expand...
The goal is more varied trading, not just with China, but a consistent trading partner that actually adheres to international agreements is definitely better than when some geriatric toddler can have a temper tantrum and try and wipe out people's lives.

Every single country will try and maximize their benefits of any trade agreement, so not sure why anyone thinks China would be different. They have enough production to flood anyone's market, but nothing wrong with limited free trade (just like what we do with every other country on the planet outside of US and Mexico)
 
Navy_Pete said:
The goal is more varied trading, not just with China, but a consistent trading partner that actually adheres to international agreements is definitely better than when some geriatric toddler can have a temper tantrum and try and wipe out people's lives.

Every single country will try and maximize their benefits of any trade agreement, so not sure why anyone thinks China would be different. They have enough production to flood anyone's market, but nothing wrong with limited free trade (just like what we do with every other country on the planet outside of US and Mexico)
Click to expand...
Diversification and less reliance on an ever growing unreliable source not interested in mutual benefits.
 
Hilarious that one side thinks other countries will be more reliable etc than the US has been. As if these other countries don't have their own interests primarily in mind along with a host of other factors (across oceans, less stable borders/governments, etc).

Has Canada done anything significant about interprovincial trade barriers yet?
 
Remius said:
Diversification and less reliance on an ever growing unreliable source not interested in mutual benefits.
Click to expand...

My position is we don't reduce trade with the US. But we increase trade where we can. For example with O&G, we send as much to the US as they'll take, AND we find export markets off our coast. I'm of the same mindset for all our trade. But this boycott USA thing is the absolute wrong approach.
 
QV said:
Hilarious that one side thinks other countries will be more reliable etc than the US has been. As if these other countries don't have their own interests primarily in mind along with a host of other factors (across oceans, less stable borders/governments, etc).
Click to expand...
Trump just ended trade talks over an Ad. Europe isn’t causing grief by violating CETA.

The fact is we’ve been too reliant on the US and Trump is exploiting that fact.
QV said:
Has Canada done anything significant about interprovincial trade barriers yet?
Click to expand...
Yes. But more needs to be done for sure.
 
QV said:
My position is we don't reduce trade with the US.
Click to expand...
That isn’t a choice . They are the ones doing that. Reducing trade with us.
QV said:
But we increase trade where we can.
Click to expand...
Yes
QV said:
For example with O&G, we send as much to the US as they'll take, AND we find export markets off our coast. I'm of the same mindset for all our trade. But this boycott USA thing is the absolute wrong approach.
Click to expand...
buying Canadian is the better approach. You’ll never be able to completely boycott but just pick other options.
 
Remius said:
Trump just ended trade talks over an Ad.
Click to expand...

I'd expect that. Just as sure as I'd expect Canada taking some measure if the US paid for Ads in Canada contradicting our government.

Doug Ford was unwise in that ad effort given the circumstances, and now BC's Eby suggests he is going to toss some gasoline on that bonfire. Dumb, dumb, dumb.
 
QV said:
I'd expect that. Just as sure as I'd expect Canada taking some measure if the US paid for Ads in Canada contradicting our government.

Doug Ford was unwise in that ad effort given the circumstances, and now BC's Eby suggests he is going to toss some gasoline on that bonfire. Dumb, dumb, dumb.
Click to expand...
And it only highlights the volatility and unreliability of the current administration.
 
QV said:
Hilarious that one side thinks other countries will be more reliable etc than the US has been. As if these other countries don't have their own interests primarily in mind along with a host of other factors (across oceans, less stable borders/governments, etc).

Has Canada done anything significant about interprovincial trade barriers yet?
Click to expand...
I believe that most have been signed already. Believe that Quebec (not surprised) is the odd one out.
 
QV said:
But this boycott USA thing is the absolute wrong approach.
Click to expand...
Why? Do we have a obligation in CUSMA to buy heinz over frenchs? To vacation in the USA over the Caribbean or Europe? To stock our liquor stores with US alcohol over Canadian or European alchohol? Do we need to buy US fruits and vegetables over Canadian fruits and vegetables?

Why, exactly, is a US boycott the "wrong" approach?
 
QV said:
Hilarious that one side thinks other countries will be more reliable etc than the US has been.
Click to expand...
Has been =/= is. The reliability bar for other countries to get over has fallen through the floor.

QV said:
But this boycott USA thing is the absolute wrong approach.
Click to expand...
Selling =/= buying. Pushing back by reducing our imports of their goods is not the same as refusing to take their money for our goods.
 
Altair said:
Why? Do we have a obligation in CUSMA to buy heinz over frenchs? To vacation in the USA over the Caribbean or Europe? To stock our liquor stores with US alcohol over Canadian or European alchohol? Do we need to buy US fruits and vegetables over Canadian fruits and vegetables?

Why, exactly, is a US boycott the "wrong" approach?
Click to expand...

Publicly campaigning a boycott USA program is damaging, the USA holds the big stick in this economic spat and if that were to be reciprocated Canada would feel the hurt much more. Having a media scrum to dump out American booze (or Canadian for that matter) is infantile. As is boycotting vacation destinations.

The Americans are our friends and allies, we are socially and culturally closer to the US than other country, we are intertwined as two nations. If you have served any length of time you no doubt benefitted intimately from joint US/Can relations and have been supported in theatre by US assets.

Letting emotions dictate the political response to an unorthodox POTUS is unprofessional and gets us nowhere. The US has raised important issues, some of which many of us are now benefitting from (NATO 2%+) which would never have been a consideration without a whack from a bigger stick. Canada is no innocent victim in all this and for the past decade has pursued puerile policies. Some accountability is in order.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top