"CONSCIOUSNESS" IS AN EMERGENT PROPERTY OF THE "DIVINE SPARK" WITHIN US!
Did you actually expect Canadians to respond positively to Trump disregarding a trade agreement (that HE negotiated btw) and put 25% tariffs on Canadian imports?
What about stating outright that “Canada meant to be our 51st state”.
Let’s not forget disrespecting our Prime Minister by repeatedly calling him governor.
Then, of course, there is saying Canada is one of the nastiest countries to deal with. Lies about Canada charging 250% tariffs (sometimes more depending on the day he’s speaking) on American dairy products.
What about his incessant lies about “subsidizing Canada”?
Oh, and what about threatening to redraw the border between our two countries??
You say Canada should admit we were never a friend to the US.
Let me put this simply for you.
We have viewed you as our closest friend and ally for a century.
We thought of you as brothers and sisters.
We answered the call, again and again, for any support you needed from us.
This isn't a joke to us.
We're not overreacting.
We don't think he's just spouting these lies to cause chaos or negotiate a deal.
We wholeheartedly believe that our closest ally and friend is about to bring violence across our border, economically destroy us, and eliminate our way of life.
Jesse Watters on Fox News said he was personally offended that Canadians did not want to become American.
Well, guess what?
Most Canadians are personally offended that Americans have such little respect for Canada as a country that they would assume we would be “honoured” to be taken over by the United States.
Yes, I said taken over.
Let’s call it like it is.
Stop softening it by using the word annexation.
What Trump is suggesting by “annexing Canada” and “redrawing” the border between our two countries is an act of WAR!
Is that how friends treat each other?
We won’t even discuss the disrespect Trump showed our PM.
One can only imagine what Trump would do if we consistently referred to him as Premier Trump.
His arrogance and intentional disrespect towards the Canadian Prime Minister was disgraceful and unfitting of the office of the President.
Let’s discuss those dairy tariffs, shall we?
The reality is the Canadian Dairy Industry runs under supply management, so it’s all about managing the supply for the Canadian market... BUT there is an 18% allowance for imports and most of that 18% comes from the US.
That is tariff-free.
IF more than 18% is imported into Canada THEN there is a surcharge on CERTAIN dairy products and in SOME CASES that is 250%.
Even the US Dairy industry has said that has never actually happened.
In many categories, notably including milk, the U.S. is not even at half of the zero-tariff maximum.
Trump also made another claim that is simply false.
He told reporters that the situation with Canadian dairy tariffs was “well taken care of” at the time his first presidency ended, “but under Biden, they just kept raising it.”
In reality, Canada did not raise its dairy tariffs under then-U.S. President Joe Biden.
Simply put, Trump’s assertion that Canada kept hiking its dairy tariffs when Biden was in charge is, as usual, a LIE!
Trump just has his knickers in a twist because we have supply management policies in place that support Canadian farmers and protect its dairy, egg and poultry industries from foreign competition.
So yes, there is a 250% tariff after the quota has been exceeded, BUT it has never actually been exceeded, so that tariff has never actually been used.
Lastly, the tariffs Trump is so busy denouncing were negotiated by Trump himself in the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, or USMCA/CUSMA.
The agreement Trump touted as “the best trade deal ever made”.
PS: The US have exactly the same over tariffs in place.
Canada (and PM Trudeau’s associates) nasty??
That is laughable.
Those that Trump considers "nice" are doormats that roll over and agree with everything he says.
The minute someone says no, Trump reacts like a petulant child and has a tantrum; he threatens tariffs and spouts misinformation hoping they will bend to his will.
Guess what?
Canada will not.
Canada considers it a compliment that we are considered “nasty”.
It means we have self-respect.
Trump has directly threatened Canada’s sovereignty and the Canadian economy.
Trump has ridiculed Canadian leaders and insulted the Canadian people, all without provocation.
Canada has been a staunch ally and the largest trading partner for the US.
In return we are directly threatened by the US President.
Many Americans downplay Trump’s rhetoric, but Canadians don’t.
Canadians also know the people of the US put that racist, xenophobe in office and actions have consequences.
His lies, appeals to patriotism, and incitement of violence must be stopped before it is too late.
If you don’t the consequences are on you, the American people, and no one else!
And as for this nonsense about the U.S. “subsidizing” Canada because we run a trade surplus with it. This claim explains why Trump has gone bankrupt so many times.
He has no clue how economics works.
Subsidizing means giving something for nothing.
A trade deficit is not a subsidy.
We sell more to the US than we buy from the US.
That is a trade deficit.
Claiming it is a subsidy is like like claiming that you subsidize McDonald’s when you buy and eat a burger.
Did McDonald’s buy anything back from you?
Do you stand in the parking lot afterwards and scream that you should own the McDonalds because you have been subsidizing them every time you buy a Happy Meal?
Canada has never been your friend you say?
Canada sends firefighters, waterbombers and linesman every time there is a natural disaster in the US.
Canada has a history of offering financial aid and providing food and other relief supplies to the United States following natural disasters, often working through organizations like FEMA (which Drumpf is closing) and the Canadian Red Cross.
For example, in 2017, after Hurricane Harvey, Canada delivered over 27,000 pounds of relief goods to FEMA and thus to American citizens.
In 2005, following Hurricane Katrina, the Canadian Forces participated in a relief operation named Operation UNISON, dispatching ships carrying humanitarian supplies to the Gulf Coast.
Canada hosted thousands of Americans when planes weren’t allowed to land in the US on 9/11.
Canada spent billions and lost hundreds of soldiers supporting the US in Afghanistan.
Canada rescued US Teheran embassy staff and smuggled them out … the list goes on.
As a thank you Canada gets threatened with 51st state and redraw the border nonsense.
Who is not being the friend here?
So your little feelings are hurt because Canada is booing the American national anthem at sporting events and you don’t think we are your friend.
Canadians are not booing the American people, their teams or their players (except those who put our flag on their dressing room floor and/accuse us of cheating), we are booing your government and their unjustified policies.
Pull your head out of your ass and see what’s really happening!
Cate McEachern
%20-%20Copy.png)
I once met an American who hated Mexicans because he thought they all wanted to immigrate to the US, ....and he hated Canadians because they didn't want to immigrate to the U.S.
When Trudeau talks to Drumpf this afternoon... his course of action should be obvious!
There will be NO attempts to try and get the "Orange Turd" to reduce the tariffs!!!!
Instead... Trudeau should just say: "Unless you cancel ALL the tariffs TODAY... by this time tomorrow, the Eastern Seaboard of the United States will be hit with rolling "brown-outs" and"black-outs!"
That will fix his clock!!!
***
NOW!
As for Alberta... since they wouldn't stand up with the "REST OF CANADA," ...they had better not expect ANYTHING from the Federal Government the next time they come... "cap in hand!"
Aside from Brian Mulroney,,, my next favourite politician would have to be Stephan Harper!
Good ol' Stephan wrote a post in the Post today... and everybody in the country should read it... so I'm gonna pass it along as well!
***
Beyond any necessary retaliatory tariffs, Canada must resist its own version of Trumpian protectionism
I am frequently asked what to make of President Trump’s intentions toward Canada and what we are to do about them.
On the former, I do not know, and I suspect there is no way of really knowing.
On the latter, however, Canada must have a plan!
The facts are clear: President Trump was prepared, on a pretence, to jettison the almost entirely tariff-free trade that has defined the Canadian-American economic relationship for three and a half decades.
He appeared prepared to even discard the trade agreement that he signed in his first term.
Then, equally on a pretence, he cancelled that plan for 30 days.
We do not know what the plan is after that, or if there is one.
I suggest that there are four clear lessons for Canada!
First, we must be calm in the face of Mr. Trump’s threats.
We must wait until it becomes crystal-clear what the President will do before acting ourselves.
We should also remember that there is no significant body of public opinion in the United States calling for comprehensive trade action against Canada.
Such action would hurt many Americans!
Second, we should have contingencies for any possible scenario, including the worst.
These must be prepared well in advance!
There should be no debate, for example, over whether we would retaliate in the face of tariffs.
It is true that retaliation is a poor choice, but, in the event of a trade war, we are left with only bad choices.
Thus, our measures need to be carefully calibrated, with clear objectives in mind.
But the worst possible response is no response at all, as that would lead to one-way economic flows from Canada to the United States.
Third, we should not offer unilateral concessions!
Concessions will simply be pocketed, and the demands will be ratcheted up.
Make a concession only when we know what we are getting in return!
That is the simple stuff.
There is, however, a fourth, more troubling lesson, to take from all of this.
It is the general perspective that the President has repeatedly articulated about our country.
It is one that goes well beyond his understandable hostility to our current government!
Rather than seeing the U.S. relationship with Canada as its most profitable, most reciprocal, and most secure in the world, the President views it as a drain on America.
He believes that Canada’s economic activity could take place in the United States and should move there.
And he believes that Canadian sovereignty is undesirable!
I certainly do not share that view of our relationship.
I have repeatedly said that Canada’s alliance, partnership, and friendship with the United States is one of our country’s greatest assets!
However, given a contrary American perspective, our focus now should not be on pursuing a deeper economic and security partnership!
At this stage, whatever comes next from the President, Canada must avoid further dependency on the United States!
I say this because the preservation of Canada’s existence must be our highest objective.
I do not assume that such a belief is universal, particularly if the cost is high.
But it should be, and we need leaders who share that belief, who oppose the woke denigration of Canada, and who are prepared to see this fight through to victory.
Our distinct history, identity, and cultures are worth preserving!
The current situation thus presents great risk, but also considerable opportunity.
We can use this moment to make Canada a proud and serious country once again.
This is a chance for us to develop a long-term agenda to become an internationally competitive economy.
That would mean big changes, not just in government policy, but also in our economic structures and business culture.
"We must break down interprovincial trade barriers, open internal markets, lower taxes, reduce subsidies, thin regulation, get our resources out of the ground, build export-oriented infrastructure, and make it a national mission to diversify our external markets!
My government created a global network of free-trade agreements. It is well past time for Canada to take advantage of the possibilities that were created over a decade ago!
If we choose this path, we will become stronger.
But if we respond to this turmoil with a Canadian version of Trumpian protectionism, our country will weaken!
Beyond the necessary retaliatory measures, enhanced protections and subsidies for Canadian business, even temporarily, only increase damage.
Such policies would mean the adjustment to new economic realities would be delayed. Our balance sheets would be weakened further at the moment when we most need them to be stronger.
Even worse would be continuing down the path of Davos elitism. Our competitiveness agenda must be focussed on opportunities and incomes for working Canadian families, not just the economic one percent!
The elitist priorities of Canada’s current leaders in monetary policy, deficits, immigration, climate, and many other areas have already fuelled inflation, doubled housing costs, and created the worst growth in the G7.
Avoiding economic elitism is especially important when it comes to the re-engineering of our energy economy.
Like it or not, alternatives to fossil fuels — nuclear power excepted — are not economical, reliable, or viable at scale.
There is no guarantee they will become so. That is why they have been massively subsidized for the last decade.
In contrast, fossil fuels will remain an immensely profitable business for the foreseeable future. It is economic malpractice to ignore this fact.
Canada’s best route to quickly turning around the downward trajectory of our economy is the responsible development of our energy resources.
This was true in the recession of the 1980s and during the global financial crisis... and it remains equally true today!
We must also be what every sovereign nation should be: responsible for the protection of our citizens from crime and the maintenance of our own national security!
Yes, our border is a shared responsibility with the United States. But beyond those lines, we must reinvigorate our military and invest in the full range of capabilities necessary for the defence of Canada’s land, seas, and sky.
We should aspire to depend on no one for this work.
We should remain a partner of the United States, yes, but also be capable of independent action.
Finally, we must avoid indulging in our worst instincts.
Bashing the United States or baiting President Trump, however emotionally satisfying, is beneath us.
We must show respect and maintain a long-term perspective.
But so, too, must we approach the coming negotiations with steely professionalism and quiet self-confidence.
These are dark days, but they will pass.
Let us see this challenge as an opportunity for Canada to embark on a voyage of urgent national renewal.
SAL, would it be to Canada's advantage to stop oil and electricity sales to the United States... and what would be the repercussions?
SAL said: Stopping oil and electricity sales to the United States would have significant economic, political, and social implications for Canada. Here's a breakdown of the potential advantages and repercussions:
Increased Domestic Energy Security:
Diversification of Export Markets:
Leverage in Trade Negotiations:
Environmental Policy Shift:
Economic Losses:
Loss of Trade and Diplomatic Tensions:
Infrastructure Challenges:
Regional Impacts:
U.S. Energy Shortfalls:
While Canada might benefit from diversifying its energy markets and asserting greater control over its resources, the short- and medium-term repercussions of halting energy exports to the U.S. would likely be economically and diplomatically severe. Energy interdependence has been a cornerstone of North American prosperity, and unwinding it would come with high risks for both countries.
Would you like me to explore potential policy shifts or alternative strategies Canada could use to maximize its energy advantages without disrupting U.S. trade?
You said:
Imposing a 25% export tariff on oil and electricity would be a bold policy move with wide-reaching implications for Canada's economy, energy sector, and international relations. Here’s a breakdown of the potential impacts:
A 25% export tariff could generate substantial government revenue and encourage market diversification but would also carry considerable economic and diplomatic risks, especially given the deeply integrated nature of North American energy markets.
Would you like me to estimate potential revenue based on recent export data or suggest alternative policy tools to maximize Canada’s energy sector benefits without triggering a trade dispute?
You said: Yes!
SAL said:
Imposing a 25% export tariff on oil and electricity could have significant financial implications for Canada. To provide a clearer picture, let's estimate the potential revenue based on recent export data:
Volume Exported: In 2023, Canada exported approximately 4.84 million barrels of oil per day (b/d).
Annual Volume: 4.84 million b/d × 365 days = ~1.77 billion barrels per year.
Average Price: Assuming an average price of $82 per barrel in 2023.
Total Export Value: 1.77 billion barrels × $82/barrel = ~$145.14 billion.
Potential Tariff Revenue: 25% of $145.14 billion = ~$36.29 billion.
Volume Exported: In 2023, Canada exported 48.1 million megawatt-hours (MWh) of electricity to the United States.
Average Price: Assuming an average export price of $50 per MWh.
Total Export Value: 48.1 million MWh × $50/MWh = ~$2.405 billion.
Potential Tariff Revenue: 25% of $2.405 billion = ~$601 million.
Note: These figures are approximate and based on 2023 data. Actual revenues would vary with fluctuations in export volumes and market prices.
Given the potential economic and diplomatic repercussions of imposing such tariffs, Canada might consider the following alternative strategies:
Diversify Energy Export Markets 🌍
Action: Invest in infrastructure projects like the Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion to access global markets beyond the U.S.
Benefit: Reduces over-reliance on a single market, potentially leading to better pricing and increased energy security.
Enhance Domestic Value Addition 🏭
Action: Develop more domestic refining and processing facilities to export higher-value petroleum products instead of crude oil.
Benefit: Captures more value within Canada, leading to economic growth and job creation.
Invest in Renewable Energy and Technology 🌱
Action: Allocate funds to research and develop renewable energy sources and technologies.
Benefit: Positions Canada as a leader in the global clean energy market, opening new export opportunities and aligning with climate commitments.
Strengthen North American Energy Collaboration 🤝
Action: Engage in negotiations to create mutually beneficial energy agreements with the U.S. and Mexico.
Benefit: Enhances energy security and economic benefits for all parties involved, reducing the likelihood of trade disputes.
Implement Targeted Tax Incentives 💡
Action: Offer tax incentives for companies investing in energy efficiency and low-carbon technologies.
Benefit: Encourages innovation and reduces emissions, potentially leading to new industries and markets.
Conclusion
While a 25% export tariff on oil and electricity could generate substantial revenue, the potential economic and diplomatic costs may outweigh the benefits. Pursuing alternative strategies that focus on market diversification, value addition, renewable energy investment, regional collaboration, and targeted incentives may offer more sustainable and less contentious pathways to maximizing Canada's energy sector benefits.
Would you like to explore any of these strategies in more detail or discuss other potential approaches?
You said:
The likelihood of the United States resorting to military measures in response to a 25% Canadian export tariff on oil and electricity is exceedingly low. The U.S. and Canada share one of the most peaceful, cooperative, and economically integrated relationships in modern history. However, let's break down the factors involved:
Bottom line: Historical precedent strongly favors diplomatic resolution over military action.
Bottom line: The U.S. would likely seek alternative energy sources or retaliatory economic measures rather than military action.
Bottom line: International arbitration is the path of least resistance.
Bottom line: U.S. political leaders would face overwhelming domestic and international opposition if they even suggested military action.
Bottom line: Maintaining stable energy flows through negotiation aligns better with U.S. strategic interests.
Bottom line: The geopolitical cost would far outweigh any perceived economic benefit.
The U.S. is far more likely to respond to a Canadian export tariff with economic and diplomatic tools, such as:
Military action, however, would be politically, economically, and strategically counterproductive, making it an improbable scenario.
Would you like me to analyze potential U.S. economic retaliation strategies or explore how Canada could preemptively mitigate these risks?
You said: Yes!
SAL said:
If Canada imposed a 25% export tariff on oil and electricity, the United States would likely respond through economic and diplomatic channels rather than military measures. Here’s a breakdown of the most probable U.S. countermeasures and some strategies Canada could employ to mitigate the risks.
The U.S. has historically responded to Canadian trade measures with reciprocal tariffs.
Risk: Significant impact on Canada's export-dependent sectors.
Mitigation: Pre-emptively diversify markets and engage in diplomatic talks to prevent escalation.
The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) contains provisions to address unfair trade practices.
Risk: Lengthy legal battles with uncertain outcomes.
Mitigation: Ensure tariffs are compliant with USMCA’s language and seek diplomatic resolution channels.
The U.S. could respond by accelerating domestic energy projects to reduce reliance on Canadian imports.
Risk: Long-term loss of U.S. market share for Canadian energy.
Mitigation: Invest in infrastructure to access Asian and European markets.
Risk: Short-term price drops that hurt Canadian producers.
Mitigation: Align tariff implementation with broader global energy trends to minimize shocks.
Risk: Damage to Canada's international reputation and increased diplomatic isolation.
Mitigation: Proactively communicate Canada's energy policy goals and emphasize cooperation on climate and energy security.
While the U.S. is highly unlikely to resort to military action, it has several powerful economic and diplomatic tools at its disposal. A 25% tariff would generate substantial revenue but also risk significant retaliatory actions that could hurt Canadian industries and strain bilateral relations.
Canada’s best bet: Implement tariffs gradually, communicate proactively, and aggressively diversify its energy export markets to reduce dependency on the U.S. over time!!!
