Summary

In a virtual speech at the World Economic Forum, Trump suggested Canada could become a U.S. state to avoid his proposed tariffs on imports.

The remark elicited gasps from the audience.

Trump claimed the U.S. does not need Canadian lumber, energy, or vehicles, vastly overstating the trade deficit between the two nations.

He reiterated his intention to impose tariffs, potentially as high as 25%, on imports from Canada and Mexico starting February 1.

Economists warn such tariffs would raise prices for U.S. consumers.

  • Cassa
    link
    fedilink
    English
    733 months ago

    Remember when he said he was gonna end the war in gaza and ukraine?

    Or cut the prices on gas and food?

    Yea, this is abuse of the news cycle. It’s just manipulation of news cycle so you don’t think about any losses, mistakes or other shit.

  • @pixxelkick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1003 months ago

    So many people are extremely missing the point here

    Trump is purposefully threatening Canada to give his canadian conservative buddy Poilievre something to “fight” against, to make him look good

    “Wow Poilievre is standing up against Trump, I’m gonna vote for him!”

    That’s the game plan, in reality the two dipshits are best buds and can collude together to fuck over both countries extra hard, after conservatives get a majority over here.

    It’s a stunt to get conservatives in charge over here “against” Trump, which is so fucking stupid and yet it’s probably gonna work cuz so many people are gonna fall for it.

    I don’t think the liberal party has a good play against it, other than if our new liberal leader challenges Trump and musk to a boxing match and literally bears the shit out of them on live television

    I unironically think the Lincoln “I’ll fight you let’s go right now” leader who seriously fucks up Musk or Zuckerberg or any of those dipshits on live television would actually win by a landslide here

    It’s fuckin stupid but that’s what works apparently…

    • @UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Is electoral reform still a policy of the liberal party. Will they Lucy football is away once the election is over again?

    • @nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      213 months ago

      Trump is purposefully threatening Canada to give his canadian conservative buddy Poilievre something to “fight” against, to make him look good

      This theory is predicated on 1) Trump remembering who PP is, 2) caring enough about who is running Canada to have it drive policy.

      I don’t think either of these things are true.

      • @pixxelkick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        63 months ago

        They literally have meetings, and Trump obviously cares about conservatives willing to help him grift being in charge…

    • @kent_eh@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      4
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Trump is purposefully threatening Canada to give his canadian conservative buddy Poilievre something to “fight” against, to make him look good

      Except Polierve has been the slowest and the quietest to speak out against this bullshit that Trump is trying to pull.

    • @Someone@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      43 months ago

      I don’t think the liberal party has a good play against it, other than if our new liberal leader challenges Trump and musk to a boxing match and literally bears the shit out of them on live television

      Ahh, well that’s not good. Love him or hate him, I think one thing everyone could agree on about Trudeau is that he’d do pretty well in a politician boxing league.

      • @pixxelkick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        03 months ago

        Trudeau is out, we are voting in a new leader shortly

        Hopefully they vote someone in who unironically would challenge dipshits to boxing matches

    • @Revan343@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      23 months ago

      other than if our new liberal leader challenges Trump and musk to a boxing match and literally bears the shit out of them on live television

      That would probably get me to vote liberal for the first time in my life

    • @ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      483 months ago

      The Conservative Premier of Ontario, Doug Ford, is already doing that. I’ve heard his ads on the radio calling for Ontarioans to give him a majority government so he “can stand up to Trump”. The guy spent his time as Premier standing up to nurses and bike lanes. This new stand up against Trump shtick is just more faux populism.

        • @NotSteve_@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          53 months ago

          The centre to left is against it as much if not more than the conservatives. If anything, PP has been awfully silent on the whole thing. And don’t even look up how Danielle Smith (conservative premier of Alberta) is responding

        • @corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          93 months ago

          Sides. But try not to get caught up in the us vs them drama.

          The key point is that Mr Ford is using populism to promote populism, with no actual history where he stands up to bullies as much as he stands up to caregivers and citizens; and populism is the schtick of his party and the national cons, but isn’t a common thread in other parties as they campaign on rights and consolidated services instead.

  • @mercano@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    203 months ago

    Even if Canada would merge with the US, surely it wouldn’t become a state. We all know the importance of the Senate at this point, and how the two-senators-per-state rule affects things. At the very least, each province would want to become a state to get more senators, and it may be in the best interest of some of the larger provinces like Ontario or Quebec to subdivide to gain even more, if they can get away with it. Goodness knows the idea of splitting California has been floated by some to try to get something closer to senator-per-capita parity.

    • Dharma Curious (he/him)
      link
      fedilink
      English
      33
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Y’know, I can see a future where Canada gets annexed, but not Quebec. Those francophones will burn down the whole province down and salt the earth before they became US citizens. I just know it. And I wouldn’t blame them one little tiny bit.

      • @NotSteve_@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        73 months ago

        Maybe Alberta would accept being annexed fairly quickly but the rest of the Canada would fight just as hard as the Québécois. Part of the Canadian identity is not being American and like hell you’re taking that away from us.

        • Dharma Curious (he/him)
          link
          fedilink
          English
          43 months ago

          I’m not suggesting the rest of Canada would lay down and take it, just that the image in my head of Quebecoise is one of salt of the earth and die on that hill type. Like, Canadians are Not American™, and Quebecoise are Not Any Of You Fuckers™

    • Flying Squid
      link
      fedilink
      English
      83 months ago

      We all know the importance of the Senate at this point

      Trump does not understand how anything in the U.S. government works, you must know that.

  • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed
    link
    fedilink
    English
    15
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    So a huge state with an overton window to the left of the US?

    But why have only one state when we can have more!

    Use gerrymandering tactics to pack all the conservatives in one state, then split the rest in a 60/40 ratio, and make them all winner take all.

    magats will lose presidency and the senate forever

    How do you like them apples?

    • @floofloof@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      143 months ago

      Don’t even talk about the possibility. Don’t even weigh it up. He needs to be told and shown very firmly that this will never happen.

  • @Someone@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    153 months ago

    I bet he’ll end up sprinkling in a handful of very specific exemptions. These are what we need to slap export taxes on. Doesn’t need to be much, but match his 25%. At best it’ll hammer them where they need it, at worst it’ll keep things fair for all our exporters.

  • @Gammelfisch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    253 months ago

    Putin’s Sock Puppet taking orders from Moscow to divide the NATO members. For starters, the Canadians should stop buying US made weapons, because the current US leadership is unhinged and unreliable. If anything, the Blue States should become Canadian Provinces.

    • @ubergeek@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      43 months ago

      They don’t want us. As soon as NYS joins, NYC would dominate the votes, due to wild population differences.

      • @HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        43 months ago

        Why wouldn’t Canada want any state to join our Confederation?

        Guaranteed if that were to happen we would be switching to a proportional representation federal vote to fix large population differences.

        • @ubergeek@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          33 months ago

          So, Canada would “fix” it, by employing a system like the US has, that ensures a tyranny of the minority?

  • Obinice
    link
    fedilink
    English
    153 months ago

    We must strengthen NATO’s defences against the aggressive USA and significantly improve border defences, lest they catch us with our pants down when the time comes.

  • @AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    283 months ago

    I still remember fondly the Trump speech at the UN when the whole assembly laughed at him.

    I suspect that there’s going to be a lot more of that to come.

  • @r0ertel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1343 months ago

    I’m going to keep posting this every time I see a reference to US tariffs against Canada.

    https://pluralistic.net/2025/01/15/beauty-eh/

    The TL;DR is that tariffs would violate the NAFTA / USMCA treaty in which Canada agreed to respect US copyright law in exchange for free trade. No free trade? Canada doesn’t need to respect US copyright any longer and can become a flourishing economy of products to compete with US products that are massively overpriced. Think printer ink and other stuff.

    • runeko
      link
      fedilink
      English
      273 months ago

      Yes, please, Canadian produced pharmaceuticals + 15% tariff = an order of magnitude cheaper than what we can buy in the States.

      • @chiliedogg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        43 months ago

        That’s why buying drugs across the border is specifically illegal. Can’t have us buying our medicine at a fair value.

    • @Paragone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22 months ago

      You’re misunderstanding the situation, then, sorry…

      Trump isn’t rational, he is narcissistic-machiavellian-sociopathic.

      IF Canada retaliates like that, THEN Trump may well declare war against Canada.

      They would only need to drop a single large conventional-bomb on Ottawa, & then claim Canada as their “manifest destiny”, declaring all Canadians to be “illegal aliens & criminals”, & their “problem” would be “fixed”.

      He may not have the guts to do that this-week, but he is progressing psychologically, & the end-point of that progression, about 4y in our future, is as the most-murderous-dictator-on-the-planet.

      He will be the complete-set: narcissistic, machiavellian, psychopathic, nihilist, sadist, systemically-dishonest, & hate, before the transformation is complete.

      Tread carefully, when one is near a heavily-armed psychiatrically-defective giant, eh?

      _ /\ _

      • @r0ertel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 months ago

        Sometimes I think you’re right. Other times I think that couldn’t possibly be true.

        I’ve studied many of the bigger wars and they’ve all mostly have been started by far less severe events. It’s scary that one person could wield all that power, unchecked and unaccountable.

        It sounds like it’s time to build a bunker.

    • @dan1101@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Yeah anyone mad at the US government right now should to take it out on the US corporations, not the citizens. Citizens can’t do much about this shitty administration until the next election but the corporations will have their feelings massively hurt every quarter if they don’t meet their profit expectations.

      trump will listen to corporations far more than citizens.

      • @kent_eh@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        73 months ago

        Citizens could have done something about it in November. And almost half of them chose to sit on their hands.

        Of the ones who actually voted, half of those actively voted for this shitshow.

        Sorry to the few who tried to stop it, but the idiots that surround you have brought this on you.

        We will try to aim most of our retaliation at the Redhatter morons, but some of you will likely get caught in the crossfire.

        Please do whatever you can to fix your country’s shit, so we can get back to being friendly neighbours.

        .

        Also, please try not to break any more of the firefighting equipment we loaned you (and sent even after agent orange started threatening us).

      • @NotSteve_@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        203 months ago

        Idk if it’s just for individuals, but our ISPs generally don’t care about pirating already. I use a VPN to pirate here but just set to another city in Canada. I only even do that because I run jellyfin and have terabytes of downloads a month.

        Worst case scenario is the ISP sends you a notice that the media companies are mad, but that’s the end of it. They won’t pursue anything further because they don’t care

        • @ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          173 months ago

          It’s not illegal to download something, it’s illegal to host something (seeding)

          ISPs are compelled to notify you of copyright notices but they can’t hand your information over so you can only get caught if you respond

          • @lazylion_ca@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            83 months ago

            And even if you are dumb enough to respond to one of those emails, the liability is limited to something $50 per title. So it’s not worth the money to pay a lawyer to go after anyone. They will however try to trick you into a private settlement.

            • @Doomsider@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              63 months ago

              No no no, you must charge every user with willful commercial infringement and penalize them $250,000 per violation. It is the American way!

      • @r0ertel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        93 months ago

        I was thinking to host pirate sites of US movies, software, etc. Get the US companies to tell the orange buffoon to behave or better yet, move the companies to Canada.

        I really like the article’s reference to manufacturing US DMCA-breaking technologies and forcing devices to host app stores in Canada where the government can declare the 30% Apple tax illegal.

    • @kent_eh@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      93 months ago

      The TL;DR is that tariffs would violate the NAFTA / USMCA treat

      The treaty that Trump himself negotiated and agreed to.

      That’s the treaty he is calling a “bad deal” and threatening to violate.

  • @finitebanjo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    83 months ago

    Reminder that Tariffs dont work as a threat to other nations.

    The selling price is the same for the seller, they already give the lowest price they can profit from because the modern era allows international distributors to find a demand anywhere, the buyers are the ones paying the import tax for the same goods.

    If you were selling and then the buyer had a tariff you wouldn’t just agree to take less money as a result.

    • Victor
      link
      fedilink
      English
      43 months ago

      Isn’t the point to make the domestic customers choose products from other nations? Why wouldn’t that be a threat to the nation that is selling?

      • @Someone@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        33 months ago

        Yeah but it only really works if it’s targeted. Threatening blanket tariffs on countries that represent 60% of all imports (EU, China, Mexico, Canada) takes a bit of the impact away, it’s unlikely domestic production could handle all that. Even if it could, why wouldn’t American companies raise their prices as much as they felt they now could?

        • Victor
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Probably true. I don’t know enough to speak further down this line. 😅 But I thank you for joining and sharing that! Interesting!

      • @fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        53 months ago

        I think it’s a “threat” but not a very good one.

        There might be 3 brands of toothbrush available to buy in the US but maybe all of them are manufactured in China. If you just tariff everything from China then US consumers will just pay more because there’s no incentive for manufacturers to absorb the tariff.

        It’s a threat to Chinese toothbrush manufacturers because it creates an incentive for other manufacturers to pop up elsewhere, maybe someone will start manufacturing toothbrushes in the US. These toothbrushes would be cheaper than the tariffed ones for consumers to buy, but obviously more expensive than toothbrushes used to be before the tariffs.

        In summary, because consumers are unlikely to buy less toothbrushes, they just end up paying more.

        • Victor
          link
          fedilink
          English
          13 months ago

          These toothbrushes would be cheaper than the tariffed ones for consumers to buy, but obviously more expensive than toothbrushes used to be before the tariffs.

          I think this is my whole point? You’d obviously buy the cheaper one of the products are (fairly) identical. So the Chinese product is disregarded, and thus that market is being hurt.

          • @fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            23 months ago

            Sure ok but to make that point you have to skip over all the other significant impediments to this plan.

            You need to build, staff, and supply a local manufacturing plant for toothbrushes.

            This is no small thing and not something that can be created overnight. It’s not even as simple as “building” a factory… you need the supply chain, and most of the requisite supplies probably come from China - plastic to make the brush head, plastic to make the handles, machines to form the plastic, and technicians to maintain those machines. If you want to invent all these things locally and avoid the retaliatory tariffs from China, that’s going to take decades.

            During those decades consumers will be buying the tariffed Chinese toothbrushes wondering why the fuck everything from toothbrushes to shampoo to laundry powder to televisions costs twice as much as it does in any other country.

            So my whole point is, there’s a “threat” to Chinese producers but it’s not very likely to materialise because the US will lose the political will to maintain the tariffs long before locally made products appear.

            • Victor
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              I was thinking more along the lines of choosing other manufacturers that already exist, that don’t have tariffs affecting them, but in case they don’t (exist), you definitely have a good point from what I can understand. 👍😁

              Thanks for explaining!

    • @kerrigan778@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      73 months ago

      That’s not strictly true, they don’t “pay the tariff” obviously but they do have to balance profit margin and lost sales. Tariffs are likely to decrease number of sales which does hurt their bottom line, the question then is if they just take a loss in sales, cut into their profit margins trying to lower the price to the US (very unlikely the margins are nearly enough for this to be viable let alone preferable) or increase prices further to offset the lower sales. Probably will be mostly the former with raw material type goods and mostly the latter with high end finished goods.

      • Victor
        link
        fedilink
        English
        23 months ago

        Right, that’s what I was thinking. Surely it hurts the seller. But it also hurts the buyer, so it’s like 🙄 well done, Trump…