I'm speaking as a Canadian here, so a slightly different view on this, possibly. But, for us and Mexico, there's another factor, I would think. I'm no trade negotiator, but this sounds like it's wildly against the USMCA trade agreement which was signed only a few years ago after being negotiated by a President....(checks notes)...Trump.
Why would any nation trust any deal with the United States if it can't even trust the man who brokered it to follow it?
Tim, this aspect of it all does not receive enough attention. The US executive does have broad powers to adjust tariffs, unless there is a superseding document where that power is limited. Should he try to change it, a court ought to put a hold on it immediately as USMCA says none of the US, Mexico, or Canada can change these terms without following the process to change it as spelled out in the agreement.
Now, the 'ought' is doing a lot of work there as we unfortunately know all too well.
However, I agree that I have seen only a few media outlets even mention USMCA in their coverage of this, and it feels like the journos also 'ought' to be doing better.
Interesting to put the "ought" under the microscope. Like you said, there's a lot of strain on it right now, with SCOTUS willing to twist itself in knots for favourable outcomes at the moment.
You're right about how surprisingly rare mentions of USCMA (or CUSMA as we apparently call it up here) are. I wonder if the media (and those of us who consume it) are just lacking the strength to even pretend that Trump is bound by laws and procedures anymore?
(Checks notes) Are Mexico and Canada presently following the USMCA on drugs, Pharma IP and migrants? Speaking of trust…Canada pulled their combat troops out of the NATO mission, has failed to meet its NATO 2% pledge and is ranked 27th on GDP proportional spends.
Not to refuse to engage with your substance, but you realize that "whataboutism" is literally a TEXTBOOK example of avoiding an issue, right? And that Canada's military spending (for all that I agree with you on the subject) is a completely separate issue? Aside from being another issue, Canada does not have a legislated, treay obligation to hit 2% by a specific date (again, though, I happen to agree that we're not doing enough on that front).
My point is that Trump wanted THIS agreement, got it, and has previously claimed it is a perfect deal. If he's willing to shred it, what would the point of dealing with him be? Please answer that, without whataboutism.
If you and I were neughbours, and we shook hands on a deal to deal with maintaining the lot between our houses (or right-of-way, or shared parking, or whatever), would you even bother trying to negotiate with me again if I came back the next week and said "F*** that, I'm throwing our agreement out, let's start again but this time you better be more generous to me"?
Tom Wilson,"Why would any nation trust any deal with the United States if it can't even trust the man who brokered it to follow it?"
Leva.
USMCA. Mexico and Canada are NOT complying with USMCA, so they will deal with tariffs until Mexico & Canada comply with the USMCA
On Maters of Trust. I can apply same standard to Canada's refusal to honor their 2014 Pledge and 2009 NATO mission withdrawal. This forces the USA to carry an additional burden in defense, treasure and the sacrifice of our troops. Canada signed the 2014 pledge, the T in NATO stands for Treaty, and Canada has benefitted from being a free-rider. USA is spending billions in the Ukraine while Canada says..."hey, we will get around to meeting our pledge in 2032!"
If Canada can put its own needs ahead of the USA, then the USA can use diplomacy to act as a good neighbor.
"Whaboutism" is the inserting of a different subject into the conversation, rather than deal with the issue at hand. This isn't really a matter of opinion, Leva, you are raising a separate issue. I'm honestly at a loss here, you've still failed to engage on the TRADE ISSUE being discussed.
Is your point in raising military spending that Canada is not a perfect nation? I readily concede this point. Unless you want to state that the USA *IS* perfect and has never ever mistreated an ally, abused its powert, or gone back on a deal, then what they hell does it matter?
Unless your issue is that the USA has NEVER been accused of violating any CUSMA provisions (in which case you're an easily disproven liar), then please SHUT UP with the whataboutism and engage on the actual specifics: WHY SHOULD CANADA AND MEXICO DEAL WITH A COUNTRY AND PRESIDENT THAT WILL NOT ABIDE BY HIS OWN DEALS?
If it weren’t for “whataboutism”, the MAGA Cult would have nothing at all. Leva’s a perfect example: if you can’t come up with a cogent argument, even one you’ve copied-and-pasted from another source, change the subject. It’s as clear as day, but she seems to think we’re unaware. Can anyone say “Dunning Kruger Effect”?
I cite all my sources when I paste, so stop lying. For example, Tim Wilson called me an idiot then falsely claimed that NATO's mission in Afghanistan was "opt-in" <- LOL. I cited and pasted from the NATO website to show him he was wrong. Very cogent. How embarrassing for Tim!
I think you are missing the central point...if Canada and Mexico are violating the USMCA, why would the USA not place tariffs?
You asked a question about "trust"...you introduced the topic...I countered with a pretty clear distrust on Canada's commitment to NATO and their ability to reinvest the diverting defense spending for economic benefit.
If Canada (75% exports to USA) and Mexico (83% exports to USA) want to play ball, I would advise them to comply with USMCA.
And (checks other notes) Trump said to Russia that they could do whatever they want with those countries that don't meet their obligation. But aside from that "small" point, his take on Tariffs and how he is wielding his position is almost like he is following Putins' dream playbook on how to screw with US economic health.
This is like the Seinfeld reservation episode...in order to be a treaty organization, you have to honor the treaty...especially the 2014 pledge to have a 2% GDP military spend. Had NATO countries gotten on board in 2014...maybe Russia would not have attacked in 2022? Why are countries, especially if you are based in Europe, not meeting their obligations?Why did Americans fight and die for NATO missions (Afghanistan, Libya) while others NATO nations dropped out? If I didn't pay my auto insurance premiums and the insurance company said,"hey, I will cover you anyway :)" Why would anyone pay their auto-insurance premiums? In the interim, G20 countries can reinvest their defense spend into their economies.
You....you really have no idea what NATO is, do you?
I mean, aside from your flagrant refusal to engage on the issues of THIS thread, you also don't understand NATO. If I was tech-savvier I'd embed a clip of Captain Hector Barbossa, but do you not understand the different between "ratified treaty requirements enshrined as domestic law" and "guidelines for members"? Nor do you understand the basic core of NATO (mutual defence if attacked) vs the opt-in nature of the Afghanistan and Libya missions.
I had four paragraphs typed out, and was browsing sources for the next, when I realized three things:
1. You're either an idiot or a troll.
2. None of this addresses the trade issue.
3. There is no productive outcome from arguing with an idiot or troll.
WRONG; please self-reflect on you calling me an idiot when you are WRONG.
In 2003, NATO invoked Article V for Afghanistan. Is there an "opt-in" nature of Article V?
Canada is part of NATO (remember the T?) Within the framework of the operating model of NATO, Canada pledged to meet 2% GDP military spend and 20% spend on new equipment. Are you saying that Canada is such a distrusted partner that NATO members cannot trust a country's pledge at an annual summit?
=== From NATO's Website
NATO assumed command of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in August 2003 in the wake of the exceptional circumstances that had been created by the terrorist attacks on the United States of 11 September, 2001. The planning for these attacks had originated on the territory of Afghanistan. In response, Allies took the unanimous position that the attacks represented an aggression against them all and, accordingly, invoked Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty for the first time in NATO’s history.
I’ve spent a lot of time over the years trying to persuade Trump supporters that tariffs punish American consumers. It’s hard to change minds of folks who truly believe that vaccines are bad, Democrats control the weather and that the earth isn’t flat. What Trump says has to be true. When Canada, Mexico and China begin their trade war punishing American consumers and eviscerating farmers, AND TRUMPS POPULARITY DIPS, which is the key to this, Trump might change his mind.
Trump processes information at a third grade level. He’s not a sophisticated thinker. Which is actually good for Democrats if they choose to punish him for this. Which they should.
I used to think Trump was a moron. I still think he's a repugnant human being and terribly impulsive and shortsighted at times, but the man is no moron.
Sometimes he bumbles his way into decisions that benefit him. But there are definitely times he's being strategic and using the levers at his disposal to coerce those with whom he negotiates. Again, everything is a transaction with him.
We'll see where this goes. If he blows up the economy, it will hurt him politically (and he knows that). I don't think he'll let it go that far.
Don't forget his mental state. His deductive reasoning power is severely diminished. That's where Vance, et.al. come into play. He may have been sharp at one time, but he is no longer physically or mentally competent enough to lead this country. That said, let's not forget the more than capable and cruel architects of Project 2025, and my God, those cabinet picks—some real winners there.
Give the people what they voted for. As others have said in recent weeks, Trump's opponents and even his good-faith aides and cabinet members thwarted most of his worst instincts during the first term. This time, let the people feel the repercussions of their choices. Let them see the results of voting for a felon over a prosecutor. Let them see what happens when you vote for a sexual predator over someone who prosecutes them. Let them see what they get when they decide the price of eggs and gas is reason not to vote for a black woman but to vote for a demented pathological liar instead. We're all going to suffer, but I look forward to seeing Trump's supporters in particular feel the pain this time around. May it hit them deep and hard.
Trump is not a fella who does things based on careful consideration and through a wide lens. He makes snap decisions through a pinpoint view of what benefits him most. He has not stopped to consider the effect of a trade war on everyday Americans, and more importantly, he does not care. He is looking for deals for himself and his cronies and he’ll find them, at the expense of American consumers. MAGA gave Trump a squeaky 49% margin….the rest of the United States will find its voice in the midterms, and they’re a-comin’. When jobs are lost, prices are higher, and Meemaw’s check no longer arrives, we’ll see how many red hats walk our streets.
Canada should just say, "Go ahead; we'll match your tariffs." And good luck with oil prices. From the Globe and Mail.
"According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), border patrol officers had 23,721 “encounters” with people along the Canadian border last year – this refers to the number of times they stopped people trying to cross the border without going through an official crossing.
That number was a sharp increase from 10,021 the year before and 2,238 the year before that. But it is small over all: by comparison, border patrol had 1,530,523 such encounters at the Mexican border last year, meaning the total number of unauthorized crossings of the U.S. border from Canada was less than 2 per cent of the number coming from Mexico.
Similarly, U.S. customs agents seized 43 pounds of fentanyl at the Canadian border last year. This represented less than 0.2 per cent of the total 21,900 pounds intercepted across the U.S.
Canada has already taken some action to stop migrants attempting to use the country to enter the U.S. Earlier this year, after CBP data showed about half of border guards’ encounters along the Canadian border were with Mexican nationals, Canada imposed a visa requirement on Mexicans entering the country."
The only way to negotiate with a bully is to fight fire with fire. He wants to create a recession in Canada. Fine. We'll return the favor, you economic dunce.
You are very likely correct Chris - this is posturing. Tariffs as pressure function to try to force other countries to fix the USA's border problems??? Interesting non-logic > smells very much like Mexico "will pay for the wall".
The top 5 exports from Canada into the USA are:
1) Crude petroleum: C$10.9 billion
2) Petroleum gas: C$3.52 billion
3) Cars: C$3.35 billion
4) Refined petroleum: C$1.84 billion
5) Motor vehicles; parts and accessories: C$1.3 billion
Odds Trump-ster slaps tariff on oil and gas imports from Canada? Somewhere less than zero.
I hope these countries just call his bluff and let him try to do his dumb tariffs. Really, there’s not much he can do to them that wouldn’t negatively impact us in the long run and possibly the short run, so it seems like Trump has more to lose (and by extension, us).
Chris - tariffs don't make it "more expensive for countries to bring in goods to the US." They make it more expensive for COMPANIES to bring in goods, even US companies! This has nothing to do putting pressure on COUNTRIES. Trump thought other countries were laughing at us before... now they are LMFAOing on the floor! (I agree that the end result is higher prices for US consumers)
The thing is, on the campaign trail, he convinced low information voters that the tariffs will act as an income to the USA. That somehow the exporter is being charged the tax and that they will be paying it to the US government in order to be able to sell their goods here. That is so wrong and the exact opposite of what will happen. People bought that lie and I still see Trump supporters online making that dumb claim. The U.S. importer pays the tariff and then passed it on to the consumer. It is Econ 101.
As a clarification to what Chris said, countries do not pay tariffs. The companies importing the goods into the United States pay the tariffs. Companies are almost certainly going to pass the cost of the tariffs on to the American public. This will fuel inflation. On the other hand, Canada, Mexico, and China may impose reciprocal tariffs on goods that they import from the United States, making those goods more expensive for their consumers. The consequence from such a trade war is that the market for U.S. products shrinks, thereby punishing U.S. producers, often including farmers. Imposing tariffs is a lose-lose proposition for the United States as a whole if enacted as threatened.
Trump likely knows that the tariffs on Canada and Mexico will be voided by the trade agreement. The bluster and threats are just plots to gin up support for his immigration policies.
Funnily enough, I was just discussing that with some friends the other day. For background, we're all Canadians living in Ottawa. We also all share a personal dislike of Justin Trudeau, but favour the Liberals at the moment, though our ideologies from centre-right to left. Those would be on the Canadian scale, of course, so translated to the American, we'd be...I dunno, far-left Democrat to communist-socialist?
Anyway, the concensus was that a Trump government would make Trudeau look better, and Poilievre less appealing, especially if the election can be held off until the Trump chaos is well underway next year. Probably not enough to get to a Liberal victory, but it could well be the difference between a Tory majority or minority government.
This being the expert handicapping of a group of middle-aged men over dinner, at least.
Trump has ruined every business he has led. His only success has been taking over a country that has failed to educate its citizens. He’s good at smelling prey. That’s it. Now that our country is his, he will lose it like everything else in his life. He won’t get Hitler right either.
Because we are a country that ignored its teachers, we left an opening for Trump. Teachers have been trying to tell us how administrators are in cahoots with each other using puppet school boards to silence teachers, the true public servants. No one listened.
The most ingenious evil ever has been administrators getting the public to distrust teachers. That’s why people are so ignorant. Learn about it at WhiteChalkCrime.com and EndTeacherAbuse.org. Then you’ll understand our path back - run for school boards on a save democracy platform. We need to have our island of democracy in place for when this nation goes down like Trump steaks, water, university, you name it. Learn about our corrupt schools and run for school boards.
If you doubt that administrators and their rubber stamping boards are as powerful as teachers are trying to tell you they are, consider the Oklahoma superintendent who bought $25,000 worth of Trump bibles and is unlawfully asking students to pray with him. Our autocratic schools that boards have indulged have carved Trump’s path. Democracy can takeover our school boards once people get what’s been going on in our schools.
According to Fox Trump Propaganda, Trump is wildly exaggerating the number of migrants caravanning from South and Central America through Mexico toward our border. Fox Propaganda reports there are “about 1,500” men, women, and children in a caravan, not multiple thousands.
Jonathan V. Last at The Bulwark has a great article this morning that touches on tariffs and how we should completely change our ways of responding to Trump’s “announcements” of what he’s going to do and how he manipulates his followers into believing he’s done the thing he said he was going to do, when he actually hasn’t.
I'm speaking as a Canadian here, so a slightly different view on this, possibly. But, for us and Mexico, there's another factor, I would think. I'm no trade negotiator, but this sounds like it's wildly against the USMCA trade agreement which was signed only a few years ago after being negotiated by a President....(checks notes)...Trump.
Why would any nation trust any deal with the United States if it can't even trust the man who brokered it to follow it?
Tim, this aspect of it all does not receive enough attention. The US executive does have broad powers to adjust tariffs, unless there is a superseding document where that power is limited. Should he try to change it, a court ought to put a hold on it immediately as USMCA says none of the US, Mexico, or Canada can change these terms without following the process to change it as spelled out in the agreement.
Now, the 'ought' is doing a lot of work there as we unfortunately know all too well.
However, I agree that I have seen only a few media outlets even mention USMCA in their coverage of this, and it feels like the journos also 'ought' to be doing better.
Interesting to put the "ought" under the microscope. Like you said, there's a lot of strain on it right now, with SCOTUS willing to twist itself in knots for favourable outcomes at the moment.
You're right about how surprisingly rare mentions of USCMA (or CUSMA as we apparently call it up here) are. I wonder if the media (and those of us who consume it) are just lacking the strength to even pretend that Trump is bound by laws and procedures anymore?
(Checks notes) Are Mexico and Canada presently following the USMCA on drugs, Pharma IP and migrants? Speaking of trust…Canada pulled their combat troops out of the NATO mission, has failed to meet its NATO 2% pledge and is ranked 27th on GDP proportional spends.
Not to refuse to engage with your substance, but you realize that "whataboutism" is literally a TEXTBOOK example of avoiding an issue, right? And that Canada's military spending (for all that I agree with you on the subject) is a completely separate issue? Aside from being another issue, Canada does not have a legislated, treay obligation to hit 2% by a specific date (again, though, I happen to agree that we're not doing enough on that front).
My point is that Trump wanted THIS agreement, got it, and has previously claimed it is a perfect deal. If he's willing to shred it, what would the point of dealing with him be? Please answer that, without whataboutism.
If you and I were neughbours, and we shook hands on a deal to deal with maintaining the lot between our houses (or right-of-way, or shared parking, or whatever), would you even bother trying to negotiate with me again if I came back the next week and said "F*** that, I'm throwing our agreement out, let's start again but this time you better be more generous to me"?
"whataboutism" is not a different opinion.
Tom Wilson,"Why would any nation trust any deal with the United States if it can't even trust the man who brokered it to follow it?"
Leva.
USMCA. Mexico and Canada are NOT complying with USMCA, so they will deal with tariffs until Mexico & Canada comply with the USMCA
On Maters of Trust. I can apply same standard to Canada's refusal to honor their 2014 Pledge and 2009 NATO mission withdrawal. This forces the USA to carry an additional burden in defense, treasure and the sacrifice of our troops. Canada signed the 2014 pledge, the T in NATO stands for Treaty, and Canada has benefitted from being a free-rider. USA is spending billions in the Ukraine while Canada says..."hey, we will get around to meeting our pledge in 2032!"
If Canada can put its own needs ahead of the USA, then the USA can use diplomacy to act as a good neighbor.
"Whaboutism" is the inserting of a different subject into the conversation, rather than deal with the issue at hand. This isn't really a matter of opinion, Leva, you are raising a separate issue. I'm honestly at a loss here, you've still failed to engage on the TRADE ISSUE being discussed.
Is your point in raising military spending that Canada is not a perfect nation? I readily concede this point. Unless you want to state that the USA *IS* perfect and has never ever mistreated an ally, abused its powert, or gone back on a deal, then what they hell does it matter?
Unless your issue is that the USA has NEVER been accused of violating any CUSMA provisions (in which case you're an easily disproven liar), then please SHUT UP with the whataboutism and engage on the actual specifics: WHY SHOULD CANADA AND MEXICO DEAL WITH A COUNTRY AND PRESIDENT THAT WILL NOT ABIDE BY HIS OWN DEALS?
If it weren’t for “whataboutism”, the MAGA Cult would have nothing at all. Leva’s a perfect example: if you can’t come up with a cogent argument, even one you’ve copied-and-pasted from another source, change the subject. It’s as clear as day, but she seems to think we’re unaware. Can anyone say “Dunning Kruger Effect”?
I cite all my sources when I paste, so stop lying. For example, Tim Wilson called me an idiot then falsely claimed that NATO's mission in Afghanistan was "opt-in" <- LOL. I cited and pasted from the NATO website to show him he was wrong. Very cogent. How embarrassing for Tim!
I think you are missing the central point...if Canada and Mexico are violating the USMCA, why would the USA not place tariffs?
You asked a question about "trust"...you introduced the topic...I countered with a pretty clear distrust on Canada's commitment to NATO and their ability to reinvest the diverting defense spending for economic benefit.
If Canada (75% exports to USA) and Mexico (83% exports to USA) want to play ball, I would advise them to comply with USMCA.
Oh, and one more thing, though pretty minor: my name is Tim, with an *I*.
And (checks other notes) Trump said to Russia that they could do whatever they want with those countries that don't meet their obligation. But aside from that "small" point, his take on Tariffs and how he is wielding his position is almost like he is following Putins' dream playbook on how to screw with US economic health.
This is like the Seinfeld reservation episode...in order to be a treaty organization, you have to honor the treaty...especially the 2014 pledge to have a 2% GDP military spend. Had NATO countries gotten on board in 2014...maybe Russia would not have attacked in 2022? Why are countries, especially if you are based in Europe, not meeting their obligations?Why did Americans fight and die for NATO missions (Afghanistan, Libya) while others NATO nations dropped out? If I didn't pay my auto insurance premiums and the insurance company said,"hey, I will cover you anyway :)" Why would anyone pay their auto-insurance premiums? In the interim, G20 countries can reinvest their defense spend into their economies.
You....you really have no idea what NATO is, do you?
I mean, aside from your flagrant refusal to engage on the issues of THIS thread, you also don't understand NATO. If I was tech-savvier I'd embed a clip of Captain Hector Barbossa, but do you not understand the different between "ratified treaty requirements enshrined as domestic law" and "guidelines for members"? Nor do you understand the basic core of NATO (mutual defence if attacked) vs the opt-in nature of the Afghanistan and Libya missions.
I had four paragraphs typed out, and was browsing sources for the next, when I realized three things:
1. You're either an idiot or a troll.
2. None of this addresses the trade issue.
3. There is no productive outcome from arguing with an idiot or troll.
WRONG; please self-reflect on you calling me an idiot when you are WRONG.
In 2003, NATO invoked Article V for Afghanistan. Is there an "opt-in" nature of Article V?
Canada is part of NATO (remember the T?) Within the framework of the operating model of NATO, Canada pledged to meet 2% GDP military spend and 20% spend on new equipment. Are you saying that Canada is such a distrusted partner that NATO members cannot trust a country's pledge at an annual summit?
=== From NATO's Website
NATO assumed command of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in August 2003 in the wake of the exceptional circumstances that had been created by the terrorist attacks on the United States of 11 September, 2001. The planning for these attacks had originated on the territory of Afghanistan. In response, Allies took the unanimous position that the attacks represented an aggression against them all and, accordingly, invoked Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty for the first time in NATO’s history.
https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2023/06/20/nato-s-engagement-in-afghanistan-2003-2021-a-planners-perspective/index.html
Yawn.
Run along little troll, buffet's closed.
I’ve spent a lot of time over the years trying to persuade Trump supporters that tariffs punish American consumers. It’s hard to change minds of folks who truly believe that vaccines are bad, Democrats control the weather and that the earth isn’t flat. What Trump says has to be true. When Canada, Mexico and China begin their trade war punishing American consumers and eviscerating farmers, AND TRUMPS POPULARITY DIPS, which is the key to this, Trump might change his mind.
Trump processes information at a third grade level. He’s not a sophisticated thinker. Which is actually good for Democrats if they choose to punish him for this. Which they should.
I used to think Trump was a moron. I still think he's a repugnant human being and terribly impulsive and shortsighted at times, but the man is no moron.
Sometimes he bumbles his way into decisions that benefit him. But there are definitely times he's being strategic and using the levers at his disposal to coerce those with whom he negotiates. Again, everything is a transaction with him.
We'll see where this goes. If he blows up the economy, it will hurt him politically (and he knows that). I don't think he'll let it go that far.
Don't forget his mental state. His deductive reasoning power is severely diminished. That's where Vance, et.al. come into play. He may have been sharp at one time, but he is no longer physically or mentally competent enough to lead this country. That said, let's not forget the more than capable and cruel architects of Project 2025, and my God, those cabinet picks—some real winners there.
Agree 100%. He's definitely showing signs of his age. As for the rest, I'm taking a "wait and see" approach. I have to for my mental well-being. ;-)
Give the people what they voted for. As others have said in recent weeks, Trump's opponents and even his good-faith aides and cabinet members thwarted most of his worst instincts during the first term. This time, let the people feel the repercussions of their choices. Let them see the results of voting for a felon over a prosecutor. Let them see what happens when you vote for a sexual predator over someone who prosecutes them. Let them see what they get when they decide the price of eggs and gas is reason not to vote for a black woman but to vote for a demented pathological liar instead. We're all going to suffer, but I look forward to seeing Trump's supporters in particular feel the pain this time around. May it hit them deep and hard.
Trump is not a fella who does things based on careful consideration and through a wide lens. He makes snap decisions through a pinpoint view of what benefits him most. He has not stopped to consider the effect of a trade war on everyday Americans, and more importantly, he does not care. He is looking for deals for himself and his cronies and he’ll find them, at the expense of American consumers. MAGA gave Trump a squeaky 49% margin….the rest of the United States will find its voice in the midterms, and they’re a-comin’. When jobs are lost, prices are higher, and Meemaw’s check no longer arrives, we’ll see how many red hats walk our streets.
Canada should just say, "Go ahead; we'll match your tariffs." And good luck with oil prices. From the Globe and Mail.
"According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), border patrol officers had 23,721 “encounters” with people along the Canadian border last year – this refers to the number of times they stopped people trying to cross the border without going through an official crossing.
That number was a sharp increase from 10,021 the year before and 2,238 the year before that. But it is small over all: by comparison, border patrol had 1,530,523 such encounters at the Mexican border last year, meaning the total number of unauthorized crossings of the U.S. border from Canada was less than 2 per cent of the number coming from Mexico.
Similarly, U.S. customs agents seized 43 pounds of fentanyl at the Canadian border last year. This represented less than 0.2 per cent of the total 21,900 pounds intercepted across the U.S.
Canada has already taken some action to stop migrants attempting to use the country to enter the U.S. Earlier this year, after CBP data showed about half of border guards’ encounters along the Canadian border were with Mexican nationals, Canada imposed a visa requirement on Mexicans entering the country."
The only way to negotiate with a bully is to fight fire with fire. He wants to create a recession in Canada. Fine. We'll return the favor, you economic dunce.
You are very likely correct Chris - this is posturing. Tariffs as pressure function to try to force other countries to fix the USA's border problems??? Interesting non-logic > smells very much like Mexico "will pay for the wall".
The top 5 exports from Canada into the USA are:
1) Crude petroleum: C$10.9 billion
2) Petroleum gas: C$3.52 billion
3) Cars: C$3.35 billion
4) Refined petroleum: C$1.84 billion
5) Motor vehicles; parts and accessories: C$1.3 billion
Odds Trump-ster slaps tariff on oil and gas imports from Canada? Somewhere less than zero.
I hope these countries just call his bluff and let him try to do his dumb tariffs. Really, there’s not much he can do to them that wouldn’t negatively impact us in the long run and possibly the short run, so it seems like Trump has more to lose (and by extension, us).
His crazies are cheering him on!
"Finally, a president with BALLS. We're behind him all the way! Yea, go get those other countries, we're tired of being stepped on. USA USA USA."
Excuse me, MAGA's, who pays for these tariffs?
MEXICO, CANADA and CHINA. YEA!
No, actually, you pay for them.
What yu say, you crazy?
He's not even in office yet and he's just the disruptor-in-charge. Gonna be a loooong 4 years.
But you beat the libs, oh yea.
I think it’s gonna be a very long loooooooong 4 years for you. Have you thought about golf or fishing or some other hobbies?
Chris - tariffs don't make it "more expensive for countries to bring in goods to the US." They make it more expensive for COMPANIES to bring in goods, even US companies! This has nothing to do putting pressure on COUNTRIES. Trump thought other countries were laughing at us before... now they are LMFAOing on the floor! (I agree that the end result is higher prices for US consumers)
The thing is, on the campaign trail, he convinced low information voters that the tariffs will act as an income to the USA. That somehow the exporter is being charged the tax and that they will be paying it to the US government in order to be able to sell their goods here. That is so wrong and the exact opposite of what will happen. People bought that lie and I still see Trump supporters online making that dumb claim. The U.S. importer pays the tariff and then passed it on to the consumer. It is Econ 101.
Right, remember his explanation of how tariffs would pay for childcare?
As a clarification to what Chris said, countries do not pay tariffs. The companies importing the goods into the United States pay the tariffs. Companies are almost certainly going to pass the cost of the tariffs on to the American public. This will fuel inflation. On the other hand, Canada, Mexico, and China may impose reciprocal tariffs on goods that they import from the United States, making those goods more expensive for their consumers. The consequence from such a trade war is that the market for U.S. products shrinks, thereby punishing U.S. producers, often including farmers. Imposing tariffs is a lose-lose proposition for the United States as a whole if enacted as threatened.
Trump likely knows that the tariffs on Canada and Mexico will be voided by the trade agreement. The bluster and threats are just plots to gin up support for his immigration policies.
If there’s anyone who likely benefits most from a Trump presidency, it’s Justin Trudeau
Funnily enough, I was just discussing that with some friends the other day. For background, we're all Canadians living in Ottawa. We also all share a personal dislike of Justin Trudeau, but favour the Liberals at the moment, though our ideologies from centre-right to left. Those would be on the Canadian scale, of course, so translated to the American, we'd be...I dunno, far-left Democrat to communist-socialist?
Anyway, the concensus was that a Trump government would make Trudeau look better, and Poilievre less appealing, especially if the election can be held off until the Trump chaos is well underway next year. Probably not enough to get to a Liberal victory, but it could well be the difference between a Tory majority or minority government.
This being the expert handicapping of a group of middle-aged men over dinner, at least.
Trump has ruined every business he has led. His only success has been taking over a country that has failed to educate its citizens. He’s good at smelling prey. That’s it. Now that our country is his, he will lose it like everything else in his life. He won’t get Hitler right either.
Because we are a country that ignored its teachers, we left an opening for Trump. Teachers have been trying to tell us how administrators are in cahoots with each other using puppet school boards to silence teachers, the true public servants. No one listened.
The most ingenious evil ever has been administrators getting the public to distrust teachers. That’s why people are so ignorant. Learn about it at WhiteChalkCrime.com and EndTeacherAbuse.org. Then you’ll understand our path back - run for school boards on a save democracy platform. We need to have our island of democracy in place for when this nation goes down like Trump steaks, water, university, you name it. Learn about our corrupt schools and run for school boards.
If you doubt that administrators and their rubber stamping boards are as powerful as teachers are trying to tell you they are, consider the Oklahoma superintendent who bought $25,000 worth of Trump bibles and is unlawfully asking students to pray with him. Our autocratic schools that boards have indulged have carved Trump’s path. Democracy can takeover our school boards once people get what’s been going on in our schools.
According to Fox Trump Propaganda, Trump is wildly exaggerating the number of migrants caravanning from South and Central America through Mexico toward our border. Fox Propaganda reports there are “about 1,500” men, women, and children in a caravan, not multiple thousands.
Jonathan V. Last at The Bulwark has a great article this morning that touches on tariffs and how we should completely change our ways of responding to Trump’s “announcements” of what he’s going to do and how he manipulates his followers into believing he’s done the thing he said he was going to do, when he actually hasn’t.
I know that Chris is a JVL fan, as am I, so all should read the very short thought-provoking piece here: https://open.substack.com/pub/thebulwark/p/a-new-approach-to-covering-trump?r=1hynaw&utm_medium=ios