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

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

There is not much point fighting the battle simply dollar-for-dollar, if that is what is proposed. Canada is on the wrong side of scale (population, outputs), and as always, tariffs are self-inflicted damage. (We can hurt ourselves greatly, without enough tangible effect, by proceeding haphazardly.) Canada must respond asymmetrically; there are definitely some commodities by which maximum pressure can be applied.
Indeed. Export taxes is the way to go, and provide the affected goods/industries with rebates/transfers from the export tax revenue, to offset the impact. No reduction/restriction to any commodity exports, just the tax to the American importer.
 
That's interesting that you would have a deficit of $60B when the total two way trade in agricultural sector is $74B. The actual figure is a US deficit of about $10B, mostly because of their insatiable taste for beef and bacon.

On the car front, the interesting figures are as follows: Total light truck and car production in Canada is 1.4 million vehicles per year, while the new units sales figure in Canada is a little over 1.9 million per year. That's right, we have a car production shortfall of about half a million new vehicles. If we were to build all of the new vehicles we need, we would increase Canadian production by 40% above current levels. In the original days of the Auto Pact, when car production on both sides of the border was protected by, guess what: tariffs, the idea was that for every US made vehicle entering Canada, the US agreed to take one from Canada to the US, and on those traded vehicles, tariffs would be waved. This led to great advantages for both countries because, with all the different models produced, you could specialize the plants on both sides of the border, which made production even more efficient.

Now Trump wants to tariff Canadian "made" vehicles by 50% starting January 1st (watch out Mexico, you'll be next). I say we do the exact same thing to American vehicles, starting on the same day. Tell them the same thing as Trump: build it in Canada: no tariff. Then, we just watch the US industry go bunkers and lobby like you've never seen before because all of their economies of scale would go right out the window.
 
There is not much point fighting the battle simply dollar-for-dollar, if that is what is proposed. Canada is on the wrong side of scale (population, outputs), and as always, tariffs are self-inflicted damage. (We can hurt ourselves greatly, without enough tangible effect, by proceeding haphazardly.) Canada must respond asymmetrically; there are definitely some commodities by which maximum pressure can be applied.

All the rules of competitive endeavour (eg. principles of war) will apply. Correctly identify vital points and corresponding measures of success, select aims, and maintain them. It seems manifestly obvious that any country can fight this kind of battle smarter than an administration led by Trump and acolytes such as Lutnick. Resolve is paramount; once something is started, follow through. There will not be any reasonable excuses for failing to anticipate the pain on our side and caving to domestic discontent. Then we are just weak, and seen to be so, and expected to be so.

Yep! As they say: "When you are dealing with a bully, violence never solved anything ... if you don't hit him hard enough."
 
Now Trump wants to tariff Canadian "made" vehicles by 50% starting January 1st (watch out Mexico, you'll be next). I say we do the exact same thing to American vehicles, starting on the same day. Tell them the same thing as Trump: build it in Canada: no tariff. Then, we just watch the US industry go bunkers and lobby like you've never seen before because all of their economies of scale would go right out the window.

The “Heartbeat of America” about to get 50% more expensive…


IMG_1951.jpeg
 
Not just them. The most popular light truck in North America too: the Ford F-150 built in Oakville. It's simply not possible for the big three (and everybody else, for that matter) to retool the plants on either side of the border so that they locally produce all the various models of a given market. The plant specialization has been going on for more than 60 years, and a plant retooling is a matter of anywhere between two to five years. Trump is screwing with a system that's been integrated for almost as long as he has lived. The disruption is going to wreck havoc on both sides of the border.

Didn't he pay attention when the CUSMA review came up: everybody in business in the US told him 'tweak a few bits here and there, but extend the deal". Instead, he created insecurity and constant instability, and with what result: right now, the employment in industry in the US is going down (not up as he claims would happen). Why? Because you don't invest or change your production pattern in ways that will take five years to produce results when you don't know what will happen from year to year. He is currently making US industry weaker.
 
OGBD, there were many, and the most popular ‘car’ sold in America is indeed the F-150. I just picked the most ironic example of the impact of Trump’s tariff on a relatively well-known large Detroit-based company… 😉
 
Jivani joins Gladu and the rest of the floor crossing MPs demonstrating why constituents should have a mechanism to call a by election.

Or they fire him in the next election, if they so choose.

Meanwhile, Poilievre can deal with him whether it’s booting him out of caucus, having a one-way conversation with him, or continuing to go into the fetal position whenever this guy flaps his gums in awkward ways.
 
Ships Company stand by for heavy rolls.

View attachment 101909
All I can do at this point is laugh at him.

January 1st? Ok, cool, fill your boots. If he really meant it it would be sooner. He knows we have ways to pressure them economically that would hurt him politically, and he doesn’t want to provoke that before already challenging midterms.

By the time January rolls around, probably he’ll have faced still further defeats in court, and he’ll likely be faced with a Congress that will really foul his plans.

This threat is pretty limp dicked.
 
All I can do at this point is laugh at him.

January 1st? Ok, cool, fill your boots. If he really meant it it would be sooner. He knows we have ways to pressure them economically that would hurt him politically, and he doesn’t want to provoke that before already challenging midterms.

By the time January rolls around, probably he’ll have faced still further defeats in court, and he’ll likely be faced with a Congress that will really foul his plans.

This threat is pretty limp dicked.
Was reading an article that Trumps has gained another 23 pounds of weight since being elected this second round. Adding another 6-7 pounds by Jan 1 might just be the tipping point.
This is an 80yr old weighing in at 228 who loves his Diet Coke and Big Macs. Maybe we squeeze them a bit harder?
 
Was reading an article that Trumps has gained another 23 pounds of weight since being elected this second round. Adding another 6-7 pounds by Jan 1 might just be the tipping point.
This is an 80yr old weighing in at 228 who loves his Diet Coke and Big Macs. Maybe we squeeze them a bit harder?
He's only 238 if he's 4'tall unless they are using metric afterall. He looks north of 280, even with tailors working miracles to hide his gut.

In any case, I think it's some self harm on both sides, but I think an export tax on energy and minerals that goes into the fund to help offset all the money we'll be spending trying to protect Canadian industry from the tariff impact should be on the table. With the volume, can be a small value per unit, but will still add up overall.

You can't negotiate with a bully, and you can't trust Trump to hold to an agreement (like CUSMA), so at this point need to protect ourselves and give the electorate concrete reasons to push back for us.
 
Back
Top