Canada's counter-tariffs take effect on various US goods | Hacker News Reader

Canada's counter-tariffs take effect on various US goods

france24.com

57 pointsgeox13 comments

“ US officials also made unacceptable "threats" to the French language and "Quebec culture", he added, referencing the French-speaking province in eastern Canada.”

The hell.

> This is not something where we push hard, or condition, or red-line," he told Canadian public broadcaster CBC last month.

Why do we push at all on this?

Well the argument is that Quebec has certain laws in place, e.g. French labelling requirements that either increase costs for companies, or make it infeasible for companies to sell to the Quebec market if they've only got marginal profits there.

Some companies would prefer if French labels weren't required.

I don't know, I can't really figure out what modern US conservatives really want anymore. Maybe one of them will chime in and help us understand why we would want this.

They want power, control, and the out tribes to submit to them, while having nothing to offer and not enough leverage to make it happen. Weak bully bullying.

(not a conservative)

I've commonly seen this trade war called "purely random", or the result of Trump holding a personal grudge against Canada. However, the most convincing argument I've seen (and I wish I could recall the source) is that Trump is simply playing to his base.

Blue collar MAGA workers have seen manufacturing jobs slowly bleed to other countries over the last few decades. Nevermind that the U.S. have moved up the value chain while this has gone on, or that the same thing has happened in Canada. It's not about logic. It's about pain and (perceived) revenge. Blue collar MAGA workers want to see other countries punished, regardless of whether they're punished along with them. That's why Trump goes out of his way to humiliate his allies even though it puts him at a disadvantage in negotiations. (If this trade war were purely economic, Carney would have an easier time backing down and giving into demands. As things stand, he has no choice but to dig in and fight.)

If you buy this, what MAGA wants is to punish anyone "not us". It's not about economic gain. It's not some well-reasoned desire to redress past grievances (Canada has lost jobs in the same way, and probably more to the U.S. than vice-versa). It's purely an emotional desire to inflict pain.

A more disturbing question is: "Why is Trump alienating independents to cater to a shrinking hardcore MAGA base?". He can't win elections this way. This does, however, maintain a fanatically loyal base that's willing to do unconscionable things for their leader.

___________

Disclosure: I'm Canadian, not Conservative.

They started with applying it directly based on trade deficit, and that was mentioned again in this with Canada. Completely idiotic economic policy: if you're buying up some crucial rare mineral from some micro nation why would you care that they use the money to buy fuel from some other country closer nearby with refineries and lower shipping costs, etc. It's really backwards.

A balanced trade deficit at each connection between each nation worldwide would be very inefficient.

A trade (money) deficit is a goods surplus. The U.S. is getting more stuff than they can make themselves because the world likes to invest in the U.S. and American consumers are still confident enough that they're not socking away savings. Only if Trump succeeds in driving away foreign investment and shaking the confidence of American consumers can he reduce the trade deficit. That won't be pleasant for Americans, but Trump sure seems to be off to a solid start.

That's the overall trade defecit and you can argue about that, can be fine during periods of growth, etc.., but trying to have no trade deficit with each country on an individual basis makes no sense. It's almost like moving back to barter with no medium of exchange.

Nihilistic power acquisition ? Control over all hoominz ?

Yes, "the hell" that has been our southern neighbours for quite some time, that apparently their vast majority of eligible voters prefers, or is too ignorant to understand their rapid decent into "pick one or more" (they are not mutually exclusive): kleptocracy, dystopia, fascism, theocracy...

> that apparently their vast majority of eligible voters prefers

The 2024 election was 49.8% Trump vs 48.3% Harris on a turnout of 64.3%.

So essentially, only 1 in 3 eligible voters preferred Trump (the other two were split between not voting and voting for Harris).

(If those numbers are accurate, personally - I have "opinions" about the legitimacy of Trumps numbers)

Also - in-my-opinion, complacency around "not voting" means tacit acceptance of whomever arrives.

The lack of any large-scale, on-going citizen protests, disruptions (general strikes), seems to indicate the same - but I sure hope I am wrong and things may shift a little with their upcoming midterms (if they are legitimate).

OTOH, perhaps the various media (traditional and social) platforms have been doing some "calming" around stories of various protests to avert large-scale social disruptions... (We certainly can't trust the various executives/boards of those organizations when you track who/when they have been donating money and "gifts" too, and which events their leadership have attended...)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com