Tarrifs: Canada Reveals $150B In 1st Round Retaliation

[Economy 52,844]

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/business/economics/2025/01/15/canada-readies-tariffs-on-105-billion-of-us-products-if-trump-hits-first/

 

Canada has revealed the 1st round of retaliatory tarrifs will be applied on $150B ($105B USD) annual worth of imports although the exact items are not yet revealed

 

It was also stated they will only be applied if the US does indeed follow thru with making the 1st move

 

Politicians and experts continue to try to make the case that the trade imbalance of $40B annually is very small relative to the $1T in total trade and that China and Mexico which the US has a considerably larger trade deficit with are the problem

 

The small imbalance that does exist with Canada which is only 4% of total trade can mainly be attributed to large exports of Oil and other natural resources the US needs regardless, not due to unfair trade practices

[Economy 52,844]

The deficit with Canada isnt even that big. Trump exagerates the numbers by conviniently excluding trade in services which the US has a surplus with. But even when u have a deficit that doesnt always mean its a bad trade relationship depending on the reason

 

Canada has huge trade deficits with most of Central America cuz we dont produce anything they need but because of our sh*t climate we cant grow anything half the year so we import a lot of produce like Bananas, avocados etc that type of thing

 

Is our trade deficit with Mexico or Ecuador bad? Not really, we still need our bananas and avocados and not buying them to lower our trade deficit them them makes no sense. But Canada isnt complaining about it. Despite a trade deficit, we still need them more than they need Canada or wed starve

[Just A Holy Fool 2,656]

Trump’s talk on trade deficits is absolute nonsense anyway. It just shows you how big of a market they are, so of course they will buy more from other countries than they sell. 
 

Also, **** Danielle Smith who was the only Premier who refused to sign on to the unified plan put forth today. 

[Economy 52,844]

12 minutes ago, Just A Holy Fool said:

Trump’s talk on trade deficits is absolute nonsense anyway. It just shows you how big of a market they are, so of course they will buy more from other countries than they sell. 
 

Also, **** Danielle Smith who was the only Premier who refused to sign on to the unified plan put forth today. 

The size of the market shouldnt matter. Ur balance of trade can be in the red or green whether ur big or small. You have to import more but you also have the capacity to export more

 

IMO the USA has large trade deficit because it runs a chronicly large budget deficit (which constantly capitalizes the economy to be able to consume beyond that it can produce).

 

The US also spends a fortune on military. All that capital and human labor (soldiers) consume goods and food etc but dont do any thing industrially productive that can be sold

 

These are bigger factors but Trump is blaming other Countries "ripping off USA" rather than looking internally and admiting they are running some fiscal policies that indirectly lead to higher trade imbalances

 

Now to a smaller extent some Countries (like China) do add to the problem by not being fair in trade practices. But Canada is definitely not on the list of offenders in that department so not sure what his obsession with Canada is

 

PS: I think his concerns on border security and military spending warrant some consideration and Canada should look into fixing that. But on trade i think hes dead wrong

[Just A Holy Fool 2,656]

13 hours ago, Economy said:

PS: I think his concerns on border security and military spending warrant some consideration and Canada should look into fixing that. But on trade i think hes dead wrong

Military, yes 100% agree now more than ever. The border though is mostly a non-issue as far as the Americans are concerned, as Canada represents barely a fraction of the migrants and drugs going into the USA. Shouldn't it be the USA focused on keeping this stuff out? Its more of an indictment on their border policies than ours IMO.

Its our ability to prevent the guns, migrants and drugs coming from the USA that needs more focus. 

[Economy 52,844]

5 minutes ago, Just A Holy Fool said:

Military, yes 100% agree now more than ever. The border though is mostly a non-issue as far as the Americans are concerned, as Canada represents barely a fraction of the migrants and drugs going into the USA. Shouldn't it be the USA focused on keeping this stuff out? Its more of an indictment on their border policies than ours IMO.

Its our ability to prevent the guns, migrants and drugs coming from the USA that needs more focus. 

I agree that its a small fraction of their issue compared to Mexico but its also about the trend. The fentenol going to the US thru Canada is only like 1% of their supply but the surge is concerning

 

I know the ultra lax immigration in Canada and limited ability to deport anyone who stays illegally also increases the odds that they in turn will try to go into US and there seems to be an increase there too

 

Over blown? Absolutely. And definitely not worth 25% tarrifs. But it at least is still a more valid concern than the notion that were ripping them off on trade

[Petie Estie 5,705]

i think i buy that trump largely uses these ridiculous tactics to get marginal victories but a trade war with Canada is so useless and stupid. Can we please draw the line somewhere

[bionic 50,111]

This could all be avoided if Canada was split up and admitted into the Union as a few new states

[Economy 52,844]

7 hours ago, SEANGT said:

i think i buy that trump largely uses these ridiculous tactics to get marginal victories but a trade war with Canada is so useless and stupid. Can we please draw the line somewhere

I dunno. With Trump its so hard to tell. He may genuinely think this is good for America

[Economy 52,844]

6 hours ago, bionic said:

This could all be avoided if Canada was split up and admitted into the Union as a few new states

If he wants to expand so badly he should ask Mexico. Instead of 10% supporting the idea you might get 22%. Not much to go on but its a step up

 

Or maybe continue to offer more free hotel dinners to the poor in Greenland. The idea might eventually catch on with enough ppl there