Ugh. This looks like they are preparing a round of cutesy tariffs on Kentucky bourbon and Wisconsin Harleys. That is too indirect and too cute. Need bigger threats.
The incoming WH is aiming a bazooka at our heads and we are going to threaten ping pong balls aimed at pinky toes.
The incoming WH is aiming a bazooka at our heads and we are going to threaten ping pong balls aimed at pinky toes.
Reposted from
Steven Chase
Ottawa mulls early release of U.S. targets for retaliatory tariffs
www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/art...
www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/art...
Comments
We have to face that US exports are such a small part of their economy, we can't do much that they will even notice.
Boutique tariffs are not the answer.
Let's not play around.
Canadian govt apparently: Do I dare to tariff a peach?
It costs us almost nothing. We signal we are not willing to bear costs. That signals weakness.
We need instead to signal that we are willing to take on costs to defend ourselves. That projects strength.
Dani? Crickets.
Yes, wars are costly. That's why we should try to avoid them.
But if a trade war is foisted on us, costs cannot be avoided.
We should aim to win, not be squeamish about costs. Or else we will lose.
https://macleans.ca/facebook-instant-articles/why-pharmaceuticals-could-be-the-prescription-for-trade-warfare-that-truly-hurts-america/
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/business/2025/01/08/canada-energy-minister-warns-trump-against-an-oil-trade-war/
Me, I think this is an entirely different category of threat, and timid cutesy won't work.
Fyi, Canada supplies 2/3 of US oil consumption. Mit's possible they might notice.
The biggest issue is that production is provincial, not federal, and I'm not sure export restrictions work as well.