Summary

In a virtual speech at the World Economic Forum, Trump suggested Canada could become a U.S. state to avoid his proposed tariffs on imports.

The remark elicited gasps from the audience.

Trump claimed the U.S. does not need Canadian lumber, energy, or vehicles, vastly overstating the trade deficit between the two nations.

He reiterated his intention to impose tariffs, potentially as high as 25%, on imports from Canada and Mexico starting February 1.

Economists warn such tariffs would raise prices for U.S. consumers.

  • skozzii@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    I still don’t think he realizes the tariffs he keeps threatening us with hurt his people way more…

    • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 days ago

      By “his people,” you mean most voters, yeah.

      But for high millionaires/billionaires, this is effectively a regressive tax that will benefit them.

  • r0ertel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    9 days ago

    I’m going to keep posting this every time I see a reference to US tariffs against Canada.

    https://pluralistic.net/2025/01/15/beauty-eh/

    The TL;DR is that tariffs would violate the NAFTA / USMCA treaty in which Canada agreed to respect US copyright law in exchange for free trade. No free trade? Canada doesn’t need to respect US copyright any longer and can become a flourishing economy of products to compete with US products that are massively overpriced. Think printer ink and other stuff.

    • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 days ago

      “Go fuck yourself” says Canada.

      Just like our Danish friends recently told Trump.

    • Log in | Sign up@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 days ago

      I’ve written to seven senators asking them to make an amendment to the relevant legislation to call it the “Trump inflation explosion act 2025”. Not really, but that’s what this is.

  • ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    The US consumers voted for Trump to lower the price of eggs.

    The price of eggs is soaring today. Why? Because bird flu is killing chicken.

    So what does Trump do? He cancels research on bird flu. Surely the irony won’t be missed on the magats who voted him in.

    And now this: aggression against allied nations that will result in more price hikes. More irony for the maga morons to enjoy.

    It’s only been 4 days. It’s gonna be a long 4 years…

    • marcos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      Surely the irony won’t be missed on the magats who voted him in.

      Oh… You have some completely unrealistic faith on Humanity…

      Of course they will miss the irony. And in 4 years, they will claim the constant 4 years of inflation on Biden.

      • chaosCruiser@futurology.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 days ago

        If he slaps massive tariffs, the prices will go through the roof. If USA annexes Canada, the prices should go down, and I guess that’s was the plan.

        • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 days ago

          Been a while since Canadians burnt down the white house. Looking more and more like the Americans need another spanking to put them in their place.

  • studentofarkad@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    Did someone brainwash this dude to annex other countries or something? Its like he wants to leave a legacy behind of being the first president in the modern age to expand America.

  • Obinice@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    We must strengthen NATO’s defences against the aggressive USA and significantly improve border defences, lest they catch us with our pants down when the time comes.

  • AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 days ago

    I still remember fondly the Trump speech at the UN when the whole assembly laughed at him.

    I suspect that there’s going to be a lot more of that to come.

  • Gammelfisch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    Putin’s Sock Puppet taking orders from Moscow to divide the NATO members. For starters, the Canadians should stop buying US made weapons, because the current US leadership is unhinged and unreliable. If anything, the Blue States should become Canadian Provinces.

    • ubergeek@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      They don’t want us. As soon as NYS joins, NYC would dominate the votes, due to wild population differences.

      • HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        Why wouldn’t Canada want any state to join our Confederation?

        Guaranteed if that were to happen we would be switching to a proportional representation federal vote to fix large population differences.

  • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 days ago

    How does this lower the price of my god damn eggs?

    Also he does know that Canada would be yet another blue state right?

  • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 days ago

    Reminder that Tariffs dont work as a threat to other nations.

    The selling price is the same for the seller, they already give the lowest price they can profit from because the modern era allows international distributors to find a demand anywhere, the buyers are the ones paying the import tax for the same goods.

    If you were selling and then the buyer had a tariff you wouldn’t just agree to take less money as a result.

    • Victor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      Isn’t the point to make the domestic customers choose products from other nations? Why wouldn’t that be a threat to the nation that is selling?

      • Someone@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        Yeah but it only really works if it’s targeted. Threatening blanket tariffs on countries that represent 60% of all imports (EU, China, Mexico, Canada) takes a bit of the impact away, it’s unlikely domestic production could handle all that. Even if it could, why wouldn’t American companies raise their prices as much as they felt they now could?

        • Victor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          Probably true. I don’t know enough to speak further down this line. 😅 But I thank you for joining and sharing that! Interesting!

      • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 days ago

        I think it’s a “threat” but not a very good one.

        There might be 3 brands of toothbrush available to buy in the US but maybe all of them are manufactured in China. If you just tariff everything from China then US consumers will just pay more because there’s no incentive for manufacturers to absorb the tariff.

        It’s a threat to Chinese toothbrush manufacturers because it creates an incentive for other manufacturers to pop up elsewhere, maybe someone will start manufacturing toothbrushes in the US. These toothbrushes would be cheaper than the tariffed ones for consumers to buy, but obviously more expensive than toothbrushes used to be before the tariffs.

        In summary, because consumers are unlikely to buy less toothbrushes, they just end up paying more.

        • Victor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          These toothbrushes would be cheaper than the tariffed ones for consumers to buy, but obviously more expensive than toothbrushes used to be before the tariffs.

          I think this is my whole point? You’d obviously buy the cheaper one of the products are (fairly) identical. So the Chinese product is disregarded, and thus that market is being hurt.

          • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 days ago

            Sure ok but to make that point you have to skip over all the other significant impediments to this plan.

            You need to build, staff, and supply a local manufacturing plant for toothbrushes.

            This is no small thing and not something that can be created overnight. It’s not even as simple as “building” a factory… you need the supply chain, and most of the requisite supplies probably come from China - plastic to make the brush head, plastic to make the handles, machines to form the plastic, and technicians to maintain those machines. If you want to invent all these things locally and avoid the retaliatory tariffs from China, that’s going to take decades.

            During those decades consumers will be buying the tariffed Chinese toothbrushes wondering why the fuck everything from toothbrushes to shampoo to laundry powder to televisions costs twice as much as it does in any other country.

            So my whole point is, there’s a “threat” to Chinese producers but it’s not very likely to materialise because the US will lose the political will to maintain the tariffs long before locally made products appear.

            • Victor@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 days ago

              I was thinking more along the lines of choosing other manufacturers that already exist, that don’t have tariffs affecting them, but in case they don’t (exist), you definitely have a good point from what I can understand. 👍😁

              Thanks for explaining!

  • HighFructoseLowStand@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 days ago

    I would welcome fifty new Congressional districts, the overwhelming majority of which would vote Blue within an American political framework.

    • Jamablaya@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 days ago

      Yeah you don’t know much about Canada, I guess. roughly half would vote democrat, roughly half republican, varying by 5, 10 percent up and down each individual election same as you see every election down south. The Conservatives form government for 8-10 years every 8-10 years federally.

      • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        Your guess is incorrect. The Overton window in Canada is quite a bit to the left of where it is in the US.

        Bernie would be considered a centrist in Canada.