The Tarriff Hype.
- Thread starter petros
- Start date
Or, “Don’t start something, won’t be nothing” but…here we are, & the only one not advocating for reciprocal tariffs on the US tariffs if Danielle Smith, and she’s not now or will in the near future be the PM of Canada.
If Trump throws out tariffs, & Canada throws out reciprocal tariffs, & then Trump throws out reciprocal reciprocal tariffs, then…etc…
Yes , but Canada does not have to reciprocate in that manner . All that will do is put more money in Ottawa’s pockets at taxpayer expense.
Id be okay with Trump tarrifs on beef. A Canadian shouldnt have to go to Asia to be able to eat affordable AAA. We get left with scraps.
Prior to WW1 the majority of Canada’s revenue came from tariffs , the same in the U.S. the advent of personal income tax allowed governments a new more efficient means to rape their citizens .
In the short term, U.S. tariffs and trade barriers may lead to economic hardship and belt-tightening. But it would also force us to change the way we operate as a country, making us both more efficient and resilient. As Canadians, we have to change the inefficient way we have been governed without losing our moral compass.
Trump only respects leaders who show toughness and can stand up to his bullying. He has little respect for Trudeau, and is unlikely to see either Mark Carney or Chrystia Freeland in a positive light. Some people have criticized Pierre Poilievre as being too much of a bulldog, but isn’t that exactly the quality we need in a leader who has to vigorously fight to defend the threat to our sovereignty and our values?
The election of Donald Trump has the risk of upending Canada’s historic friendship with the United States. As Pierre Poilievre said the “unprovoked attack on Canada’s economy” could “turn a loyal friend into a resentful neighbour”.
Canada needs to understand how to best play the game against the U.S. as we defend not only our sovereignty, but our values. There will be a price to be paid, but this is also an opportunity.
apple.news
It is very likely that within the next few weeks a federal election will be called. For a brief period, we are likely to have Mark Carney as our first ever unelected Prime Minister, someone who doesn’t have to disclose his previous financial interests, or the role that he played in advising the Trudeau government on its carbon tax and failed economic policy. He is intelligent and accomplished, but is he our man for the times? Does he have (what’s left of) a team up to the task?
One of our greatest negotiating cards is the fact that the U.S. needs to import over 4 million barrels of oil from us per day with few alternatives. Venezuela, touted as an alternative, only produces about 1 million barrels per day with little ability for its old infrastructure to greatly expand production in the near term. We need a leader and a team who can work with Alberta to leverage this asset.
Will Carney declare this a national emergency in order to postpone an election potentially indefinitely until it’s right for him to call one in his own mind?
We need to declare a national emergency to facilitate the permitting of energy production and construction of transportation options to deliver energy to non-US markets. Will this be done by the team that managed the Trans Mountain pipeline extension and turned a $4.5 billion budget into an exorbitant $34 billion costly final price because of unnecessary delays and ineffective management??? Lead by Justin Trudeau’s handpicked successor?
Justin Trudeau’s answer to any problem appears to be throwing money we don’t have at it, and valuing form and posturing over substance. In April 2024, he raised the carbon tax. Just before Christmas, no doubt as a pre-election gimmick, he gave away $6.3 billion in tax breaks and rebates instead of keeping our powder dry to spend it supporting challenged sectors of our economy. He raised the capital gains tax causing innovators and start ups, essential for our future growth to flee the country.
If Mark Carney didn’t agree with these plans, where was his voice of dissent? Chrystia Freeland only dissented when she got wind that she was going to be demoted. We need a government that can support critical industries hurt by potential tariffs with funds that come from reining in too large government and excessive spending, rather than simply by more damaging taxation and unlimited deficits that fuel our already high costs of debt service, etc…the rest at the link.
No government and no prime minister will be perfect or have a crystal ball to anticipate all that needs to be done to navigate the hoops we will have to jump through. We do, however, know who is unlikely to have the strong team capable of being up to the task. History of failure by our current weak team should teach us a damning lesson.
We need to remind our former best friend and ally that we can be either a good friend or a formidable adversary. That strong message is best sent by a very experienced, if sometimes argumentative, politician rather than an long-résuméd, but elite banker.
nationalpost.com
Trump only respects leaders who show toughness and can stand up to his bullying. He has little respect for Trudeau, and is unlikely to see either Mark Carney or Chrystia Freeland in a positive light. Some people have criticized Pierre Poilievre as being too much of a bulldog, but isn’t that exactly the quality we need in a leader who has to vigorously fight to defend the threat to our sovereignty and our values?
The election of Donald Trump has the risk of upending Canada’s historic friendship with the United States. As Pierre Poilievre said the “unprovoked attack on Canada’s economy” could “turn a loyal friend into a resentful neighbour”.
Canada needs to understand how to best play the game against the U.S. as we defend not only our sovereignty, but our values. There will be a price to be paid, but this is also an opportunity.
Harry Rakowski: Poilievre is the bulldog Canada needs to fight Trump — National Post
Trump best handled by an experienced argumentative politician than a long-résuméd elite banker
One of our greatest negotiating cards is the fact that the U.S. needs to import over 4 million barrels of oil from us per day with few alternatives. Venezuela, touted as an alternative, only produces about 1 million barrels per day with little ability for its old infrastructure to greatly expand production in the near term. We need a leader and a team who can work with Alberta to leverage this asset.
Maybe it’s past time for her to share that then. That will certainly not be Steven Guilbeault, our minister of the environment and climate and his party which has consistently dismissed Alberta while enjoying its tax revenue.
Will Carney declare this a national emergency in order to postpone an election potentially indefinitely until it’s right for him to call one in his own mind?
We need to declare a national emergency to facilitate the permitting of energy production and construction of transportation options to deliver energy to non-US markets. Will this be done by the team that managed the Trans Mountain pipeline extension and turned a $4.5 billion budget into an exorbitant $34 billion costly final price because of unnecessary delays and ineffective management??? Lead by Justin Trudeau’s handpicked successor?
Justin Trudeau’s answer to any problem appears to be throwing money we don’t have at it, and valuing form and posturing over substance. In April 2024, he raised the carbon tax. Just before Christmas, no doubt as a pre-election gimmick, he gave away $6.3 billion in tax breaks and rebates instead of keeping our powder dry to spend it supporting challenged sectors of our economy. He raised the capital gains tax causing innovators and start ups, essential for our future growth to flee the country.
If Mark Carney didn’t agree with these plans, where was his voice of dissent? Chrystia Freeland only dissented when she got wind that she was going to be demoted. We need a government that can support critical industries hurt by potential tariffs with funds that come from reining in too large government and excessive spending, rather than simply by more damaging taxation and unlimited deficits that fuel our already high costs of debt service, etc…the rest at the link.
No government and no prime minister will be perfect or have a crystal ball to anticipate all that needs to be done to navigate the hoops we will have to jump through. We do, however, know who is unlikely to have the strong team capable of being up to the task. History of failure by our current weak team should teach us a damning lesson.
We need to remind our former best friend and ally that we can be either a good friend or a formidable adversary. That strong message is best sent by a very experienced, if sometimes argumentative, politician rather than an long-résuméd, but elite banker.
Geoff Russ: Poilievre's plan for Canadian prosperity is refreshing
The Liberals have no credible response to Ottawa speech
This is from 2 weeks ago:
(YouTube & “LILLEY UNLEASHED: Poilievre on Trump, Carney, tariffs and the border”)
After almost a decade of striving to keep Canadian energy projects to a minimum, the Liberals have finally begun muttering about the necessity of building new east-west pipelines as a means of securing Canadian supply chains from American tariffs.
Carney himself could not bring himself to voice a clear stance on the matter, saying that he supported the “concept” of new pipelines, whatever that really means. Even when his campaign finally released a wordy documentmeant to resemble a policy plan, it was noticeably devoid of specifics aside from generic pledges to review spending and “invest”.
As it stands, there is only one party represented in the House of Commons that stands unambiguously committed to actually building a new network of pipelines and export facilities for LNG and oil. As Poilievre himself said in his speech, if voters want Conservative policies, they will have to vote Conservative.
Poilievre’s speech should put to bed the narrative that he lacks policy specifics. For over a year, the Conservative party has had a 49 page policy declaration on their website, stuffed with ideas that can be viewed at any time.
Along with Poilievre reiterating his pledge on pipelines, taxes, and housing, he also laid out his plan to build a new Arctic military base at Iqaluit and icebreakers to help patrol the polar region. There were far more policy specifics in Poilievre’s speech related to policing and cultural policy, but it is clear what Canadians can expect from a Conservative government.
Shame parliament is prorogued by the Liberals for a Liberal Party leadership race still at this point.
After almost a decade of striving to keep Canadian energy projects to a minimum, the Liberals have finally begun muttering about the necessity of building new east-west pipelines as a means of securing Canadian supply chains from American tariffs.
Carney himself could not bring himself to voice a clear stance on the matter, saying that he supported the “concept” of new pipelines, whatever that really means. Even when his campaign finally released a wordy documentmeant to resemble a policy plan, it was noticeably devoid of specifics aside from generic pledges to review spending and “invest”.
As it stands, there is only one party represented in the House of Commons that stands unambiguously committed to actually building a new network of pipelines and export facilities for LNG and oil. As Poilievre himself said in his speech, if voters want Conservative policies, they will have to vote Conservative.
Poilievre’s speech should put to bed the narrative that he lacks policy specifics. For over a year, the Conservative party has had a 49 page policy declaration on their website, stuffed with ideas that can be viewed at any time.
Along with Poilievre reiterating his pledge on pipelines, taxes, and housing, he also laid out his plan to build a new Arctic military base at Iqaluit and icebreakers to help patrol the polar region. There were far more policy specifics in Poilievre’s speech related to policing and cultural policy, but it is clear what Canadians can expect from a Conservative government.
Shame parliament is prorogued by the Liberals for a Liberal Party leadership race still at this point.
There are other things besides tariffs available. WHat should have been done decades ago, is a user fee for all Alaska bound traffic through BC. I would suggest the same tonne /km rate the ministry of forests uses for resource road use. Translated from cubic meter for logs to tonnes for vehicles.
Then there is all the ship traffic, especially cruise ships, that threaten our coastline on their way to Alaska and leave zero dollars in their wake. That is about 500 miles of coastline, doubled because they go up the inside passage.
As for tariffs on US goods entering Canada, that is just a tax grab by Ottawa. A far better method is for consumers to just avoid buying US products wherever the can. Much like some of us try to do with Chinesium.
It’s a weird balancing act, as we (Canada) have exactly 1 trading partner that isn’t separated from us by an ocean, & 150 or whatever years of established trade along our 8900km long shared border that we are physically connected to that trading partner, & by far the majority of the Canadian population lives within 200 miles of that border.
The Liberals are staging separate debates in French and English on Monday and Tuesday, respectively — both in Montreal -– a chance to lay out their vision for the country, although political experts say all eyes will be on front-runner Mark Carney, who is untested in political debates. The former central banker’s entrance into the race has upended the political landscape.
“This is his coming-out party,” (???) said Shachi Kurl, president of the non-profit Angus Reid Institute. “This is going to be very much a make or break for Carney – not only as a leadership candidate but very much a critical look at Carney versus Poilievre.”
Trump likely to dominate Liberal leadership debates as Carney and Freeland vie for PM — The Globe and Mail
Political experts say all eyes will be on front-runner Mark Carney, who is untested in political debates
Mr. Carney and Ms. Freeland, the former finance minister, have advocated largely the same “Conservative policies” in dealing with Mr. Trump, such as dollar-for-dollar retaliation for tariffs, as has Mr. Poilievre. The two Liberal rivals are also on the same page “Conservative Party platform” in removing carbon pricing for consumers, reversing course on increases to capital-gains taxes, removing interprovincial trade barriers and getting oil and natural gas to global markets.
Trump likely to dominate Liberal leadership debates as Carney and Freeland vie for PM — The Globe and Mail
Political experts say all eyes will be on front-runner Mark Carney, who is untested in political debates
Carney sure seems to believe this is a serious enough situation to warrant suspending our rights over it. That alone should scare the fuck out of anyone even thinking about voting for that chump in the coming election. I mean c'mon, wanting to invoke the Emergencies Act over a tariff tiff? What a fucking scumbag.