Ministers Dominic LeBlanc and Francois-Philippe Champagne, along with Ontario Premier Doug Ford and Canada's ambassador, met with U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick Thursday.
This statement came after the meeting with Doug and the fed ministers.
They desperately want to flood our protected markets and crash our economy and are pissed we aren’t letting them - hence the threats. Literally every interaction we have had with the Donald government has been a goddamn threat. Let us crush your local production, let us have your resources, let us have the Arctic, etc etc
Some Art of the Deal there from the old Donny. I know it was a ghost writer who wrote the book and Trump has probably never read it but it is just interesting.
They still, to this day, do everything they can to make the people of Cuba suffer for their decision to stop Usamerican exploitation of their land/labour/resources, decades ago.
They desperately want to flood our protected markets and crash our economy and are pissed we aren’t letting them - hence the threats. Literally every interaction we have had with the Donald government has been a goddamn threat. Let us crush your local production, let us have your resources, let us have the Arctic, etc etc
I think this argument is missing the bigger picture. Trade isn’t some one-sided plot by the U.S. to “take over” Canada—it’s about negotiations, and sometimes, yes, that includes pressure tactics. But the real issue here isn’t some grand conspiracy to flood our markets and crash our economy. It’s that the U.S. often pushes for one-sided trade deals that benefit them more than us, and we push back. That’s not an attack—it’s just how trade disputes work.
The real question is: why should Canada keep such heavily protected markets in sectors like dairy and telecommunications while expecting full access to the U.S. market? Competition is a good thing—it leads to lower prices and better services. Imagine getting European cheeses at a fraction of the cost or finally having real telecom competition. If the U.S. is willing to open its markets to our regional airliners, our softwood lumber, and other key exports, why wouldn’t we negotiate on equal footing?
The problem isn’t trade itself—it’s unfair trade. If the U.S. wants access to our markets, we should be getting equivalent access to theirs. That’s the real fight here. Instead of seeing this as a U.S. plot to crush Canada, we should be focused on securing a deal that works both ways—whether that means better market access, fairer tariffs, or even things like freer movement of citizens across borders.
The goal should be fair trade, not a lopsided deal where one side wins at the expense of the other.
Because they subzidize their dairy and would destroy our dairy industry and then we would be dependent on them for one more thing. Also the US has lost mulotiple cases for the softwood lumber tariffs. And have never paid or stopped the process. So why would it ever be any different.
The real question is: why should Canada keep such heavily protected markets in sectors like dairy and telecommunications while expecting full access to the U.S. market?
Dairy in Canada absolutely has 0 expectation of full access to US market. They produce enough for Canada and that’s it, and they lobby to keep it that way. Telecommunications, I’m not sure what you mean. Certainly Nortel/RIM don’t exist much anymore. Our cell phone and cable companies do not have access to US market either.
European cheeses at a fraction of the cost or finally having real telecom competition.
US dairy policy is to produce liquid cancer, but I get that if it were cheap enough, I/some could go for that. We could subsidize Canadian dairy the same (subsidies vs quotas) way, and dairy lobbyists could be ok with it. Telecom would be better enhanced by China instead of a Canadian enemy. Even cheaper. Hysteria over foreign influence, means only US and our currently extortive oligarchs are allowed political influence, so good luck with that. There’s no other way to make Canadian oligarchy rich than current system. Ukrainian hatred voting block also does not count in foreign influence hysteria.
The problem isn’t trade itself—it’s unfair trade. If the U.S. wants access to our markets, we should be getting equivalent access to theirs. That’s the real fight here.
That is what current democratic dysfunction in Canada will produce. US tells us trade is unfair, and you repeat it. But the Canadian/US oligarchs in control of us tell us to love the US always, and hate its enemies, and you should never consider any other message.
That’s the real fight here. Instead of seeing this as a U.S. plot to crush Canada, we should be focused on securing a deal that works both ways—whether that means better market access, fairer tariffs, or even things like freer movement of citizens across borders.
It 100% is a plan to crush Canada, where your trade fairness euphemism is used to recommend even higher submission in what was always a submissive relationship. It’s only fair if we give up everything in how Canada is structured, and support more wars, and perhaps migration internment camps.
You know trump negotiated the last trade deal, right? Canada has protections set up so the American oligarchs can’t take over Canada like they’re doing down south
Yes, clearly every trade agreement must benefit our local Canadian oligarchs – Irving, Weston, Rogers and Patterson. We certainly can’t use free trade and human dignity to work towards fairer, more equitable societies - that would be too logical right?
If our local industries cannot survive in an environment where we “fully open up trade” to the supposed benefit of making things better by having competition – a point I also don’t agree with; cheaper does not always mean better, and I don’t want to only have certain American food products of lower quality for example – that means that we then become entirely reliant on America in those sectors. When that happens what is the outcome of the next spat with them? We need to be more self-reliant, not less.
At that point we might as well become American. We already debend on them for defense if we also end up relying on them for food are we even a country anymore?
Some market have strategic value other are essentials and you need to control. Under cutting local producers until they give up means you can price gouge after and make huge profits. Deregulate milk and see your farmers disappear, you become dependant on a not so friendly neighbor.
My wallet shouldn’t be used to subsidize a fundamentally unproductive Quebec dairy farm because political parties need to prop up their Quebec MPs. Markets should be free, trade should be open and fair for trading partners that feel likewise.
Yes, that seems to be the preference among this crowd. It’s good to lick the boots of monopolies and I’m sure everyone loves paying 3x the global cost for cell phone service.
You say they should have the same access to our market that we have to theirs. The problem with this argument is that their economy and production capabilities are 10x what ours are. If we open up to the same degree, they will crush our tiny market by just flooding it easily. You can’t have “equal” access when one economy is 10x the size of the other. We are not equal economies. Yes Canada punches above its weight, but not to the same level as the US. This is why we need to be careful to not let them just flood us. Check the difference between equal vs equitable.
They desperately want to flood our protected markets and crash our economy and are pissed we aren’t letting them - hence the threats. Literally every interaction we have had with the Donald government has been a goddamn threat. Let us crush your local production, let us have your resources, let us have the Arctic, etc etc
US is negotiating in bad faith. They don’t care for a deal, they are working to ruin the relationship.
They are doing the same with Ukraine.
Some Art of the Deal there from the old Donny. I know it was a ghost writer who wrote the book and Trump has probably never read it but it is just interesting.
They need to learn to grow the fuck up and learn you can’t have everything.
They could in the past now they want everything for nothing.
They still, to this day, do everything they can to make the people of Cuba suffer for their decision to stop Usamerican exploitation of their land/labour/resources, decades ago.
I think this argument is missing the bigger picture. Trade isn’t some one-sided plot by the U.S. to “take over” Canada—it’s about negotiations, and sometimes, yes, that includes pressure tactics. But the real issue here isn’t some grand conspiracy to flood our markets and crash our economy. It’s that the U.S. often pushes for one-sided trade deals that benefit them more than us, and we push back. That’s not an attack—it’s just how trade disputes work.
The real question is: why should Canada keep such heavily protected markets in sectors like dairy and telecommunications while expecting full access to the U.S. market? Competition is a good thing—it leads to lower prices and better services. Imagine getting European cheeses at a fraction of the cost or finally having real telecom competition. If the U.S. is willing to open its markets to our regional airliners, our softwood lumber, and other key exports, why wouldn’t we negotiate on equal footing?
The problem isn’t trade itself—it’s unfair trade. If the U.S. wants access to our markets, we should be getting equivalent access to theirs. That’s the real fight here. Instead of seeing this as a U.S. plot to crush Canada, we should be focused on securing a deal that works both ways—whether that means better market access, fairer tariffs, or even things like freer movement of citizens across borders.
The goal should be fair trade, not a lopsided deal where one side wins at the expense of the other.
Because they subzidize their dairy and would destroy our dairy industry and then we would be dependent on them for one more thing. Also the US has lost mulotiple cases for the softwood lumber tariffs. And have never paid or stopped the process. So why would it ever be any different.
Dairy in Canada absolutely has 0 expectation of full access to US market. They produce enough for Canada and that’s it, and they lobby to keep it that way. Telecommunications, I’m not sure what you mean. Certainly Nortel/RIM don’t exist much anymore. Our cell phone and cable companies do not have access to US market either.
US dairy policy is to produce liquid cancer, but I get that if it were cheap enough, I/some could go for that. We could subsidize Canadian dairy the same (subsidies vs quotas) way, and dairy lobbyists could be ok with it. Telecom would be better enhanced by China instead of a Canadian enemy. Even cheaper. Hysteria over foreign influence, means only US and our currently extortive oligarchs are allowed political influence, so good luck with that. There’s no other way to make Canadian oligarchy rich than current system. Ukrainian hatred voting block also does not count in foreign influence hysteria.
That is what current democratic dysfunction in Canada will produce. US tells us trade is unfair, and you repeat it. But the Canadian/US oligarchs in control of us tell us to love the US always, and hate its enemies, and you should never consider any other message.
It 100% is a plan to crush Canada, where your trade fairness euphemism is used to recommend even higher submission in what was always a submissive relationship. It’s only fair if we give up everything in how Canada is structured, and support more wars, and perhaps migration internment camps.
You know trump negotiated the last trade deal, right? Canada has protections set up so the American oligarchs can’t take over Canada like they’re doing down south
Yes, clearly every trade agreement must benefit our local Canadian oligarchs – Irving, Weston, Rogers and Patterson. We certainly can’t use free trade and human dignity to work towards fairer, more equitable societies - that would be too logical right?
I don’t follow this argument.
If our local industries cannot survive in an environment where we “fully open up trade” to the supposed benefit of making things better by having competition – a point I also don’t agree with; cheaper does not always mean better, and I don’t want to only have certain American food products of lower quality for example – that means that we then become entirely reliant on America in those sectors. When that happens what is the outcome of the next spat with them? We need to be more self-reliant, not less.
At that point we might as well become American. We already debend on them for defense if we also end up relying on them for food are we even a country anymore?
Some market have strategic value other are essentials and you need to control. Under cutting local producers until they give up means you can price gouge after and make huge profits. Deregulate milk and see your farmers disappear, you become dependant on a not so friendly neighbor.
My wallet shouldn’t be used to subsidize a fundamentally unproductive Quebec dairy farm because political parties need to prop up their Quebec MPs. Markets should be free, trade should be open and fair for trading partners that feel likewise.
So the states subsidezs their milk. So your fine with their citizens payinf for you to have cheaper milk. If that even happens.
ftfy
Yes, that seems to be the preference among this crowd. It’s good to lick the boots of monopolies and I’m sure everyone loves paying 3x the global cost for cell phone service.
Are you saying only Quebec produces milk? Aren’t there farmer in other provinces?
Feel free to move? Canadian society is about supporting individuals
A strong, viable welfare system isn’t funded by good feelings. You too are also welcome to leave if you contribute nothing to society.
American shills everywhere. Just go away. We will see you soon enough.
You say they should have the same access to our market that we have to theirs. The problem with this argument is that their economy and production capabilities are 10x what ours are. If we open up to the same degree, they will crush our tiny market by just flooding it easily. You can’t have “equal” access when one economy is 10x the size of the other. We are not equal economies. Yes Canada punches above its weight, but not to the same level as the US. This is why we need to be careful to not let them just flood us. Check the difference between equal vs equitable.
Cancon is a good counter to your argument. Without it, our music scene would be nothing.
https://junoawards.ca/blog/a-former-hater-comes-clean/
Are you willing to die for Trump? Are your loved ones?