News   Apr 03, 2020
Pastel Morning
 6.1K     1 
News   Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 7.6K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
Soon to be Gone
 4.5K     0 

The Great Canadian Tariff Thread

This is the issue with the change candidate, especially when they lack experience. They break things in the name of change and that causes chaos. Americans voted for change and "concepts of a plan." That scared no one off.

It sucks that our system has left some people behind but the global economy did help more than just the wealthy, and I think we forgot that or ignored it and blamed the system for the failures of governments to properly help the people that were left behind. The Canadian support system is much better than the Americans and we benefitted immensely from the global economy. We did so well we got really comfortable with minimal productivity because we were still doing fine and unlike Americans are a little more European in our economic ambition.

The toothpaste is out of the tube and we're on our way down a new path. What makes me so uncomfortable is the trust that has been lost, that deal is only a deal if you can trust the other side to hold up their end. We're out here on an island and cannot trust our neighbour to be reliable. We'll find trustworthy partners and we'll be fine, we're a top 10 economy in the world. We will have to get use to being uncomfortable.

At home I worry more and more about people choosing the break things, change candidate... I can't hire that guy for the job because I don't trust him. For us to come out the other side better stability is the most important thing.

P.S. The Chinese tariffs are not getting the press our conversation they deserve, we're fight a two front war and don't have the soldiers. Sure China is not a democratic country and they come with some baggage but at least they're stable and reliable.
 
CalgaryTiger said:
Guess you've never heard of cartels. If you truly believe that there's some ocean front property in Mexico City you can buy.
Click to expand...
The cartels don't negotiate trade. Mexico has a sitting Parliament with an elected leader who has the legitimacy to negotiate.
 
Surrealplaces said:
There's a theory that Trump is a Russian agent helping to destabilize the US. I don't personally believe it, but I have to say that if he is, he's executing the playbook perfectly. Deteriorate alliances with Canada, Mexico and Europe. It doesn't leave any other meaningful alliances.
Click to expand...
That theory is backed by a lot of evidence, not to mention essentially all of his words and actions thus far. Even Elon's "anti-woke" Grok AI calculates an 85% chance that Donald is a Russian asset, based on scans of all relevant public domain data. It's pretty hilarious, even if scary.

At this point, I feel like anyone who's thinking that a US invasion of Canada is pie-in-the-sky overreacting or whatever is simply not paying attention, or just terrible at pattern recognition. I admit of course that I have a greater stake in the proverbial game, as I'm gay and we literally have to pay attention to politics as our very right to exist freely and equally is at issue every time there's an election. Honestly though, almost every action they've taken so far is a shot-for-shot snatch straight out of the Nazi playbook. The Nazis went for trans people first too, they always start with the most marginalized groups. The Nazis destroyed the world's first and only gender affirming care clinic in their first few months, and burned all literature pertaining to sex and gender. That part is never really talked about in history, but yes it happened. Now add in the "christo" part of their christo-fascist oligarchic coup, they're rapidly reducing women's rights as well. They're about to challenge same-sex marriage in the supreme court, and there are rumblings about challenging interracial marriage.

They have been systematically eliminating the command structure of the US military, replacing those loyal to the constitution and US allies with Donald's sycophants. Another textbook fascist play.

Shitler holding a Tesla Sales Event on the Whitehouse lawn is obviously the most glaring sign that the US has completed its degeneration to full oligarchy. Now he's talking about labeling people vandalizing Teslas as terrorists. All of this is absolutely fcking insane of course, but it's real, and will continue to go downhill as we're only 50 days in.

So yes, invasion is a real possibility.
 
Last edited:
DougB said:
The cartels don't negotiate trade. Mexico has a sitting Parliament with an elected leader who has the legitimacy to negotiate.
Click to expand...
You said: Functional government.

My point was if you think Mexico's government is more functional then to go Mexico where politicians or people running for public office are killed for opposing cartels. If you don't think that affects the running of government I cannot help you.

Canada's federal government was elected and has been functioning just fine since. If you don't like the party that won government, fine. If you don't like the leader that has a day left in office, fine. Maybe you don't like that the party you don't like changed leaders and that makes the new leader prime minister? That's fine too. But you are not saying that.

You're outing yourself (semi-anonymously) on a development forum by saying Canada's federal government is not legitimate. That is simply not fact.

I don't like the Alberta government that was elected but I would never question their legitimacy and I honestly don't hear anyone doing that.
 
CalgaryTiger said:
You said: Functional government.

My point was if you think Mexico's government is more functional then to go Mexico where politicians or people running for public office are killed for opposing cartels. If you don't think that affects the running of government I cannot help you.

Canada's federal government was elected and has been functioning just fine since. If you don't like the party that won government, fine. If you don't like the leader that has a day left in office, fine. Maybe you don't like that the party you don't like changed leaders and that makes the new leader prime minister? That's fine too. But you are not saying that.

You're outing yourself (semi-anonymously) on a development forum by saying Canada's federal government is not legitimate. That is simply not fact.

I don't like the Alberta government that was elected but I would never question their legitimacy and I honestly don't hear anyone doing that.
Click to expand...
It has nothing to do with the governing party. Trudeau's drawn out resignation and prorogation left the country vulnerable. Even if the prorogation hadn't happened, Canada would have had a lame duck government with which the US government would have no motivation to negotiate.

The Liberals should have expected trouble from Trump 2.0 and if they actually cared about anything other than electoral longevity, would have engineered an election in advance of that in the US. Instead, they gambled (correctly) that a Trump victory would help their fortunes at the expense of the Canadian economy.

What are your theories as to why Canada is being targeted more so than countries like Mexico and China?
 
Last edited:
DougB said:
It has nothing to do with the governing party. Trudeau's drawn out resignation and prorogation left the country vulnerable. Even if the prorogation hadn't happened, Canada would have had a lame duck government with which the US would have no urgency to negotiate.
Click to expand...
You can't have it both ways. And you're not using facts.

Trudeau's resignation and prorogation will lead us into an earlier election than we would've otherwise had. There is no such thing as a lame duck government in the Westminster system, this is not the US, where the person who loses still governs after an election.

In our system the government wheels keep turning, even during an election, which is why Carney needed to appoint a cabinet today. When one leader resigns so does their cabinet so a new cabinet was needed. After the election a new government takes over.
 
A tricky issue for sure. On the one hand, reconsidering or delaying the purchase might help the push for Trump to get rid of his tariffs. On the other hand, the F-35 is by most accounts the most capable fighter jet out there right now, and being used by larger powers like the UK, Italy and Japan. Since realistically with our limited military budget whatever we do buy will need to last 4 decades, are there any other good options?
 
In reality I think they accept some of the F-35s, the ones they've paid for but also do a deal with SAAB. So you can do both. Sure, it means multiple aircraft but when has putting all your eggs in one basket been a good thing.

From : https://www.eurasiantimes.com/shot-down-by-f-35-jas-39-gripen-back-in/

Technical Comparison​

FeatureF-35 Lightning IISaab Gripen
GenerationFifth-generation stealth fighterFourth-generation (Gripen E: 4.5 gen)
Stealth CapabilityAdvanced stealth designLimited stealth measures
AvionicsSensor fusion, AESA radar, advanced EWAESA radar, IRST, advanced datalink
SpeedMach 1.6Mach 2.0
Range1,500 nautical miles1,800 nautical miles
CostApprox. $115 million per unitApprox. $60 million per unit
MaintenanceHigh operational costsLower operational costs
InteroperabilitySeamless integration with NATO systemsNATO-compatible, but less integrated
 
CalgaryTiger said:
In reality I think they accept some of the F-35s, the ones they've paid for but also do a deal with SAAB. So you can do both. Sure, it means multiple aircraft but when has putting all your eggs in one basket been a good thing.

From : https://www.eurasiantimes.com/shot-down-by-f-35-jas-39-gripen-back-in/

Technical Comparison​

FeatureF-35 Lightning IISaab Gripen
GenerationFifth-generation stealth fighterFourth-generation (Gripen E: 4.5 gen)
Stealth CapabilityAdvanced stealth designLimited stealth measures
AvionicsSensor fusion, AESA radar, advanced EWAESA radar, IRST, advanced datalink
SpeedMach 1.6Mach 2.0
Range1,500 nautical miles1,800 nautical miles
CostApprox. $115 million per unitApprox. $60 million per unit
MaintenanceHigh operational costsLower operational costs
InteroperabilitySeamless integration with NATO systemsNATO-compatible, but less integrated
Click to expand...
So the Saab is faster, has better range and is cheaper. Seems like the only major downside is it's limited stealth capabilities. Now sure how critical that is?

On another note, impressive that Sweden has built itself a strong defence industry with only 1/4 our population!
 
Last edited:
Both are single engine fighters which we didn't want. Twin engine gives a factor of safety when flying over the arctic, wonder if there are other options to consider, maybe the Rafale.
 
Albertasaurus said:
So the Saab is faster, has better range and is cheaper. Seems like the only major downside is it's limited stealth capabilities. Now sure how critical that is?
Click to expand...
Stealth matters, for example to US in Yemen can get closer to the bombing target without detection because of it. Do we do that? Hard to say what our future missions will be.

Mountain Man said:
Both are single engine fighters which we didn't want. Twin engine gives a factor of safety when flying over the arctic, wonder if there are other options to consider, maybe the Rafale.
Click to expand...
Tons, too many to list. Gripen finished second in our competition so we went fairly far down the road with them already.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top