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

[Czech_pivo]

Things are not all roses and sunshine south of the border.

More monthly auto loan payments are above $1,000, and most are not for luxury models​

More monthly auto loan payments are above $1,000, and most are not for luxury models

The top five models for the $1,000-plus payments were popular pickup trucks including the Ford F-150, Chevrolet Silverado 1500 and Ram 1500.

www.cnbc.com

• Experian Automotive’s analysis of more than 5 million open auto loans and leases in the first quarter shows nearly 19% of new vehicle loans include a monthly payment of at least $1,000
• 
  
• Almost 74% of the auto loans requiring owners to pay $1,000 or more every month are for non-luxury models.
• 
  
• The top five models for the $1,000-plus payments were popular pickup trucks including the Ford F-150, Chevrolet Silverado 1500 and Ram 1500, according to Experian. @Halifax Tar - Does a CDN F150 translate to a 1k/month payment?

Just five years ago, auto loans with monthly payments over $1,000 accounted for just 5.4% of the market.
The average amount borrowed is now at an all-time high of $43,952, and the average monthly payment has also climbed to an all-time high of $770,

All amounts are in USD - so the average borrowed amount would be 43,952 * 1.38 = 60,652 CAD - that's the total amount borrowed, not the purchase price.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Things are not all roses and sunshine south of the border.

More monthly auto loan payments are above $1,000, and most are not for luxury models​

More monthly auto loan payments are above $1,000, and most are not for luxury models

The top five models for the $1,000-plus payments were popular pickup trucks including the Ford F-150, Chevrolet Silverado 1500 and Ram 1500.

www.cnbc.com

• Experian Automotive’s analysis of more than 5 million open auto loans and leases in the first quarter shows nearly 19% of new vehicle loans include a monthly payment of at least $1,000
• 
  
• Almost 74% of the auto loans requiring owners to pay $1,000 or more every month are for non-luxury models.
• 
  
• The top five models for the $1,000-plus payments were popular pickup trucks including the Ford F-150, Chevrolet Silverado 1500 and Ram 1500, according to Experian. @Halifax Tar - Does a CDN F150 translate to a 1k/month payment?

Just five years ago, auto loans with monthly payments over $1,000 accounted for just 5.4% of the market.
The average amount borrowed is now at an all-time high of $43,952, and the average monthly payment has also climbed to an all-time high of $770,

All amounts are in USD - so the average borrowed amount would be 43,952 * 1.38 = 60,652 CAD - that's the total amount borrowed, not the purchase price.

That would depend what trim level you get I think. Right now I'm looking 250s and 350s with the Godzilla engine and I'm prepared to pay that.

 

[Eaglelord17]

Considering the cheapest new car in Canada is around 18k, it goes up quickly from there.

When I bought a SUV for the wife/child the base model was 45k.

 

[Altair]

This is why the wife and I just buy cars in full. Although we financed our last one for 3 months as we waited for an insurance payout, and it was 550 a month with I wasn't a huge fan of.

 

[Eaglelord17]

This is why the wife and I just buy cars in full. Although we financed our last one for 3 months as we waited for an insurance payout, and it was 550 a month with I wasn't a huge fan of.

That is not a option for most.

Take a house. Paying a mortgage for 25 years basically doubles the cost (ex. you buy house for 100k you pay 200kish by time it is all said and done).

Buying outright saves money, especially in the long term. Unfortunately most can’t afford to do so.

 

[Altair]

That is not a option for most.

Take a house. Paying a mortgage for 25 years basically doubles the cost (ex. you buy house for 100k you pay 200kish by time it is all said and done).

Buying outright saves money, especially in the long term. Unfortunately most can’t afford to do so.

mortgages are one thing. Most don't have hundreds of thousands of dollars sitting around. I don't either, thus I have a mortgage.

But scrounging 5-10k for a car is more doable. It may not be the best car, but the money you save will get you a nicer one going forward. I financed once and never gain, at least not full term.

I'm pretty happy with my ascent now, fully paid off.

 

[Kirkhill]

U.S. official says Canada yet to prove itself as ‘credible’ defence partner - National | Globalnews.ca

The comments were made days after the Pentagon said it was pausing a joint military cooperation advisory board 'to reassess how this forum benefits shared North American defense.'

globalnews.ca

I think we are suffering from the basic "Failure to Communicate".

The US perceives threats. It acts accordingly. It expects that Canada would see the same threats and also act accordingly.

But Canada.

It doesn't perceive threats.
And.
It doesn't believe it could counter those threats in any case.
It also believes that its greatest threat is the US.

So Canada's position starts with placating the US and doing whatever the US wants it to do to ensure Canadians have access to the US and the US doesn't feel the need to come to Canada. A decidedly unsovereign position.
Canada does the bare minimum of whatever the US wants.

What the US expects is that a sovereign country would have a viable plan of defence that addresses the threats it perceives as being common and counters them with its own resources.

If our resources are inadequate then they will backstop in their own interest. But that presumes that we have exerted ourselves in the first place. And they don't perceive any such exertion.

From their stand point, our border represents an undefended approach into their heartland.

....

Canada's problem, in my opinion, is not just that we don't appreciate the threat in the same manner as the US, we are still stuck in an 1867 mindview that sees defence in terms of invading hordes of Fenians and 3 mile cannons.

Not in terms of the hybrid war world in which we live today where non-state terrorists have access to ballistic missiles.

 

[Eaglelord17]

What is a threat to the US isn’t necessarily a threat to us. They like playing world police for their own benefit (because it certainly isn’t for anyone elses), which puts them on a collision course with most countries.

I do think we should take a much more sovereign approach to defence, and a big part of that is defending against the States as they are the only existential threat to Canada.

Yes we should work with them on common threats, but we also shouldn’t ignore the elephant in the room which is the US would invade us if they decided it was in their interests.

Remember even if you never end up at war with America having a military capable of being a threat to them means you can fight just about anyone effectively.

 

[Brad Sallows]

The more entangled our trade with the US, the more disruptive for them any military action would be. Those disinclined to take this principle seriously may refer to Hormuz, Strait of, for examples of disruptive effects of military action. Those advocating disconnect from Trump's America are militating against this form of security, as well as militating against plain good will. Canada can find an admirable position on the spectrum from lickspittle to adult-in-the-room if it chooses.

The US view of Canada's attitude towards threats isn't helped by the vocal minority that always chirps up with some variant of "the US will have to defend us because it's in their interests". Their effect on US public opinion outweighs their actual numbers.

 

[QV]

What is a threat to the US isn’t necessarily a threat to us. They like playing world police for their own benefit (because it certainly isn’t for anyone elses), which puts them on a collision course with most countries.

I do think we should take a much more sovereign approach to defence, and a big part of that is defending against the States as they are the only existential threat to Canada.

Yes we should work with them on common threats, but we also shouldn’t ignore the elephant in the room which is the US would invade us if they decided it was in their interests.

Remember even if you never end up at war with America having a military capable of being a threat to them means you can fight just about anyone effectively.

Such a bad take.

Canada and the US are intertwined culturally, socially, and geographically. A threat to the US is indeed a threat to us and vice versa. We should aim to be really good neighbors and tighten up our ties even further.

There is no other country where a closer relationship with would benefit Canada more than the US has and can.

 

[GK .Dundas]

A direct military threat to the US is a threat to us as well. I certainly wouldn't disagree .
Since the before Confederation Canadian defence policy has basically consisted of building a large enough military to reassure them and not building one large enough to make them nervous.
The latter of course has never happened the former we have failed to manage on several occasions.
If we aspire to a certain amount of independence we should not be surprised that it comes with a pricetag.
It is certainly within our own interests to pay that price.
Our position should be neither craven servility nor spiteful defiance.

 

[Kirkhill]

Such a bad take.

Canada and the US are intertwined culturally, socially, and geographically. A threat to the US is indeed a threat to us and vice versa. We should aim to be really good neighbors and tighten up our ties even further.

There is no other country where a closer relationship with would benefit Canada more than the US has and can.

Has no one gone through the experience of telling a partner that is afraid not to be afraid, they are imagining things?

The faster route to good relations is to do things that make your partner feel safe.

Assuming you want to keep the partner.

 

[Altair]

Has no one gone through the experience of telling a partner that is afraid not to be afraid, they are imagining things?

The faster route to good relations is to do things that make your partner feel safe.

Assuming you want to keep the partner.

nobody should stay with an abusive partner.

 

[GK .Dundas]

nobody should stay with an abusive partner.

Of course opinions being what they are tend to differ.
Which one of us is the abusive partner ?
There's an argument that could made for either party being the offender.

 

[Altair]

Of course opinions being what they are tend to differ.
Which one of us is the abusive partner ?
There's an argument that could made for either party being the offender.

The one who goes around threatening allies.

Take from that what you will.

 

[Furniture]

Such a bad take.

Canada and the US are intertwined culturally, socially, and geographically. A threat to the US is indeed a threat to us and vice versa. We should aim to be really good neighbors and tighten up our ties even further.

There is no other country where a closer relationship with would benefit Canada more than the US has and can.

He's not wrong in that America is the only realistic threat of invasion Canada has, and you're not wrong that cultural and economic ties make us close allies.

That said, cultural ties aren't enough to prevent Annexation if someone wants to. Ask the Czechs and Austrians how that worked out in the 1930s...

There is merit in both maintaining close ties with America, and not becoming entirely dependant on them to the point that they could conceivably walk in and take over without fear of push-back. Most of the online discourse seems to get caught-up in extremes and fails to capture that there is a lot of room between being less reliant on America, and cutting all ties.

 

[Eaglelord17]

Such a bad take.

Canada and the US are intertwined culturally, socially, and geographically. A threat to the US is indeed a threat to us and vice versa. We should aim to be really good neighbors and tighten up our ties even further.

There is no other country where a closer relationship with would benefit Canada more than the US has and can.

Why do you believe a threat to them is a threat to us? Most threats to the US are to their external interests, not to North America itself.

Choosing to get involved globally with other peoples issues for your own financial benefit is a choice they have made. They are a undemocratic oligarchy which actively undermines many democracies in the world (including ours) for their own benefit.

There is benefits to our relationship, but that doesn’t mean that it is all good for us and it behooves us to remember that. They will act against us as is their interests.

The more entangled our trade with the US, the more disruptive for them any military action would be. Those disinclined to take this principle seriously may refer to Hormuz, Strait of, for examples of disruptive effects of military action. Those advocating disconnect from Trump's America are militating against this form of security, as well as militating against plain good will. Canada can find an admirable position on the spectrum from lickspittle to adult-in-the-room if it chooses.

The US view of Canada's attitude towards threats isn't helped by the vocal minority that always chirps up with some variant of "the US will have to defend us because it's in their interests". Their effect on US public opinion outweighs their actual numbers.

100%, and that has been our defence strategy since the 30s. That being said the current illogical administration has shown that there are some within the American political system who don’t care (or don’t understand) how damaging a action will be and carry on anyways. For those reasons we need to create alternative defence plans as not having any isn’t sufficient going forward.

Nukes would be preferred but that is unrealistic as the US would take that as a existential threat and destroy us before that could be.

Next best method which is actually achievable is making it hurt you so bad you won’t want to do it. 250k strong, well equipped army with a decent airforce and navy to back it up would be all it takes to ensure it isn’t in anyones interest to mess with us. Is Canada willing to pay that price though?

He's not wrong in that America is the only realistic threat of invasion Canada has, and you're not wrong that cultural and economic ties make us close allies.

That said, cultural ties aren't enough to prevent Annexation if someone wants to. Ask the Czechs and Austrians how that worked out in the 1930s...

There is merit in both maintaining close ties with America, and not becoming entirely dependant on them to the point that they could conceivably walk in and take over without fear of push-back. Most of the online discourse seems to get caught-up in extremes and fails to capture that there is a lot of room between being less reliant on America, and cutting all ties.

Exactly, you can be friendly without being a vassal. Work together for things that are of mutual interest, but be capable of saying no to the things that aren’t in ours.

 

[The Bread Guy]

More good faith from our partner to the south ....

The administration of United States President Donald Trump wants to increase the percentage of regionally produced content in North American-built vehicles to qualify for preferential treatment under the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) on trade to 82 percent, with 50 percent of that value produced in the US.

The new proposal, which was first reported by the Reuters news agency, citing four unnamed sources familiar with the matter, emerged amid negotiations to revise the USMCA in Mexico City. Canada was not present at the negotiations ...

 

[Czech_pivo]

More good faith from our partner to the south ....

The path forward is sounding very much like the old 1965 Auto Pact - for every Big 3 car sold in Canada one must be produced here.
Also a straight forward path to a lot more French/German/SK/Japanese cars sold here, with a healthy dose of Chinese EV’s.

 

[Altair]

Trump and co can talk about doing this, doing that, dealing with the mexicans, making a bilateral deal....No he cannot. He's pissing into the wind.

It will take an act of congress to leave T-MEC-CUSMA-USMCA and he doesn't have the votes. This will drag on until he's out of office and maybe even beyond that. When a Dem finally wins again, we sign a quick deal and move on.

Everything coming out of Washington is useless noise. In the meantime, we just continue to sign deals elsewhere and move as much trade as humanly possible away from the USA.