Ministers Dominic LeBlanc and Francois-Philippe Champagne, along with Ontario Premier Doug Ford and Canada's ambassador, met with U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick Thursday.
This statement came after the meeting with Doug and the fed ministers.
They desperately want to flood our protected markets and crash our economy and are pissed we aren’t letting them - hence the threats. Literally every interaction we have had with the Donald government has been a goddamn threat. Let us crush your local production, let us have your resources, let us have the Arctic, etc etc
I think this argument is missing the bigger picture. Trade isn’t some one-sided plot by the U.S. to “take over” Canada—it’s about negotiations, and sometimes, yes, that includes pressure tactics. But the real issue here isn’t some grand conspiracy to flood our markets and crash our economy. It’s that the U.S. often pushes for one-sided trade deals that benefit them more than us, and we push back. That’s not an attack—it’s just how trade disputes work.
The real question is: why should Canada keep such heavily protected markets in sectors like dairy and telecommunications while expecting full access to the U.S. market? Competition is a good thing—it leads to lower prices and better services. Imagine getting European cheeses at a fraction of the cost or finally having real telecom competition. If the U.S. is willing to open its markets to our regional airliners, our softwood lumber, and other key exports, why wouldn’t we negotiate on equal footing?
The problem isn’t trade itself—it’s unfair trade. If the U.S. wants access to our markets, we should be getting equivalent access to theirs. That’s the real fight here. Instead of seeing this as a U.S. plot to crush Canada, we should be focused on securing a deal that works both ways—whether that means better market access, fairer tariffs, or even things like freer movement of citizens across borders.
The goal should be fair trade, not a lopsided deal where one side wins at the expense of the other.
If our local industries cannot survive in an environment where we “fully open up trade” to the supposed benefit of making things better by having competition – a point I also don’t agree with; cheaper does not always mean better, and I don’t want to only have certain American food products of lower quality for example – that means that we then become entirely reliant on America in those sectors. When that happens what is the outcome of the next spat with them? We need to be more self-reliant, not less.
You say they should have the same access to our market that we have to theirs. The problem with this argument is that their economy and production capabilities are 10x what ours are. If we open up to the same degree, they will crush our tiny market by just flooding it easily. You can’t have “equal” access when one economy is 10x the size of the other. We are not equal economies. Yes Canada punches above its weight, but not to the same level as the US. This is why we need to be careful to not let them just flood us. Check the difference between equal vs equitable.
You know trump negotiated the last trade deal, right? Canada has protections set up so the American oligarchs can’t take over Canada like they’re doing down south
Yes, clearly every trade agreement must benefit our local Canadian oligarchs – Irving, Weston, Rogers and Patterson. We certainly can’t use free trade and human dignity to work towards fairer, more equitable societies - that would be too logical right?
I think this argument is missing the bigger picture. Trade isn’t some one-sided plot by the U.S. to “take over” Canada—it’s about negotiations, and sometimes, yes, that includes pressure tactics. But the real issue here isn’t some grand conspiracy to flood our markets and crash our economy. It’s that the U.S. often pushes for one-sided trade deals that benefit them more than us, and we push back. That’s not an attack—it’s just how trade disputes work.
The real question is: why should Canada keep such heavily protected markets in sectors like dairy and telecommunications while expecting full access to the U.S. market? Competition is a good thing—it leads to lower prices and better services. Imagine getting European cheeses at a fraction of the cost or finally having real telecom competition. If the U.S. is willing to open its markets to our regional airliners, our softwood lumber, and other key exports, why wouldn’t we negotiate on equal footing?
The problem isn’t trade itself—it’s unfair trade. If the U.S. wants access to our markets, we should be getting equivalent access to theirs. That’s the real fight here. Instead of seeing this as a U.S. plot to crush Canada, we should be focused on securing a deal that works both ways—whether that means better market access, fairer tariffs, or even things like freer movement of citizens across borders.
The goal should be fair trade, not a lopsided deal where one side wins at the expense of the other.
Cancon is a good counter to your argument. Without it, our music scene would be nothing.
https://junoawards.ca/blog/a-former-hater-comes-clean/
American shills everywhere. Just go away. We will see you soon enough.
Are you willing to die for Trump? Are your loved ones?
I don’t follow this argument.
If our local industries cannot survive in an environment where we “fully open up trade” to the supposed benefit of making things better by having competition – a point I also don’t agree with; cheaper does not always mean better, and I don’t want to only have certain American food products of lower quality for example – that means that we then become entirely reliant on America in those sectors. When that happens what is the outcome of the next spat with them? We need to be more self-reliant, not less.
You say they should have the same access to our market that we have to theirs. The problem with this argument is that their economy and production capabilities are 10x what ours are. If we open up to the same degree, they will crush our tiny market by just flooding it easily. You can’t have “equal” access when one economy is 10x the size of the other. We are not equal economies. Yes Canada punches above its weight, but not to the same level as the US. This is why we need to be careful to not let them just flood us. Check the difference between equal vs equitable.
You know trump negotiated the last trade deal, right? Canada has protections set up so the American oligarchs can’t take over Canada like they’re doing down south
Yes, clearly every trade agreement must benefit our local Canadian oligarchs – Irving, Weston, Rogers and Patterson. We certainly can’t use free trade and human dignity to work towards fairer, more equitable societies - that would be too logical right?