Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska
312 comments
·March 20, 2025yatopifo
a-priori
It's incorrect to think of Canada as being "cornered" here nor having "nothing to lose".
It's the US that's isolating itself. Canada isn't 'cornered'. It has the entire rest of the world to talk to and make deals with.
It has everything to lose by continuing to rely on the US, which is why you're seeing such a hard pivot toward Europe and Asia.
JeremyNT
> It has everything to lose by continuing to rely on the US, which is why you're seeing such a hard pivot toward Europe and Asia.
The problem is, this kind of pivot would take a long time and be extremely difficult. Out there in the real world, real Canadians have a lot to lose.
The US strong-arming its allies in this way puts them in a massive bind near term. Canada could eventually adapt to a different world order with reduced reliance on the US, but it would suffer a recession (or worse) in the process.
They have no good options here, because how can you really deal with a madman? (In a game theoretical sense [0], if not also a literal one) - but I think the ideal strategy is to acquiesce to the US and pursue these efforts as quickly as they can to remove any reliance going forward.
This is made more difficult by the fact that there seems no obvious way to actually appease the US, whose current goals and objectives are completely opaque.
k12sosse
You greatly underestimate the stubbornness of a Canadian to suffer for what they believe is right.
epa
This is silly. US is Canada's biggest trading partner and one of the largest borders in the world. 80% of people live within 1 hour of the border. Free trade has allowed both economies to prosper. Canada has everything to gain with free trade. You are right on over reliance, but free trade benefits everyone.
overfeed
It takes 2 to make a trade, and the best strategy for an iterated prisoner's dilemma scenario is tit-for-tat. The party that started the silliness should end it, but until then, Canada should rightly consider stronger ties with the Europe - they do share a border with a European country after all.
a-priori
We had free trade. The US has, in a very short period of time, squandered what was a highly profitable and mutually beneficial trading relationship.
There was already a sentiment of distrust in Canada about being so dependent on American goodwill. You can see this in the debates from the 1998 federal election (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyYjRmM7RDY) on the establishment of CUSFTA, the precursor to NAFTA and later CUSMA. Brian Turner (red tie in that video) argued that free trade in Canada would lead inevitably 'reduce' Canada to becoming a 'colony' of the United States. He lost the election, and the agreement went through. Here we are almost three decades later and, as Canadians see it, those fears are at risk of coming true.
I'm not sure that Americans really understand that this has permanently damaged the relationship between our countries. It's going to be a generation before there will be the political will in Canada to consider going back to something similar to NAFTA/CUSMA again. Even assuming the United States returns to open trade policies again, the question forever on everyone's mind will be "what if another Trump gets elected?".
throaway1987
Ironically the "free trade deals" have been broadly bad for workers, but Trump's proposals seem even worse
BobbyJo
I wouldn't color relying on a historical ally that either produces, or is the transit corridor for, most of your food with "everything to lose".
The current trade spat is an issue, and Canada should react accordingly, but the reality is that, even with tariffs, the US still represents a very profitable trade partner, especially when they can levy tariffs of their own.
sjsdaiuasgdia
If it was just the trade spat, you might be right.
But there's also Trump repeatedly talking about annexing Canada. That goes well beyond a trade spat, and I would absolutely expect Canada to do more in response because that is in the mix. Including actively working to reduce their dependency on US-sourced or US-transiting products.
watwut
The issue is not limited to tariffs. There is consistent hostile rhetoric against Canada by multiple members of administration. And by hostile I mean threats of annexation, demands that Canada gives USA parts of its land and false accusations.
Tariffs are only part of the issue. They seem the be the first USA step meant to weaken Canada economically before USA proceeds to steal from from it.
raydev
> It's the US that's isolating itself. Canada isn't 'cornered'. It has the entire rest of the world to talk to and make deals with.
Yes, but any of those deals will pale in comparison to the opporunities Canada has with the wealthiest next door neighbor in the world. The oceans aren't nothing, the culture differences aren't nothing (no matter how small you try to make them with other Commonwealth countries).
Losing the US as a friend is a massive loss, and nothing will match it.
rurp
There has been some darkly hilarious reporting that much of this administration was genuinely surprised and confused that Canada didn't immediately roll over in response to US bullying. Most people realize that the world isn't made up of NPCs during childhood, but I guess the clowns currently in charge missed that developmental step. Either that or they have spent so much time on twitter and similar spaces that it has seriously warped their view of reality.
hintymad
An honest question: what is wrong with reciprocal tariff? Wouldn't that be fair to both countries? I understand that there were many compromises when the countries signed trade deals like NAFTA, so we got some protective tariffs here and there, but I was wondering in general why reciprocal tariff is considered unfair.
jpambrun
I guess it could be fair, but those are unilateral. The official justifications such as considering sales tax, are bogus. The unofficial justification (or official depending on time of day..) is annexation. Surely, you see how this isn't perceived as fair from up North?
anon84873628
The trade isn't necessarily perfectly balanced, is it? In negotiations you have more flexibility if you can increase the size of the pie. Things like transit tolls or cruise ship stops are examples of that.
maxerickson
It's not that it's unfair, it's that it is stupid.
jdlyga
They don't think, and that's the problem. This might've worked during the cold war, but it's not 1960.
Brusco_RF
>[Canada] may eliminate the US from the world arena
Is this a joke?
FredPret
For any armed force, even a 2-3 million strong one, fighting a war against an entire population of 40 million goes one of two ways:
- unimaginable atrocities that would make Hitler blush, and then they might still lose
- Vietnam x 100
machomaster
How many of those 40 millions have military education/skills, are willing to use them, as well as have access to weapons?
psychlops
This sounds like a straw man. Do you have a link showing where supporters think Canada won't resist the US?
Gibbon1
There is this bad penny bit of propaganda that a lot of people believe. Which is only the US has any agency. And everyone else does what they do either under orders from the US or as a reaction to something the US did. It's attractive if you're ignorant and stupid because it makes the world simple enough for you to think you understand everything.
Putin, the current administration and conservatives in general swallowed that hook line and sinker.
Mountain_Skies
Regime?
boringg
noun 1. a government, especially an authoritarian one. "ideological opponents of the regime"
hypertexthero
Historian Bret Deveraux, writing in October 2024:
> Today we’re going to look at definitions of fascism and ask the question – you may have guessed – if Donald Trump is running for President as a fascist. Worry not, this isn’t me shifting to full-time political pundit, nor is this the formal end of the hiatus (which will happen on Nov 1, when I hope to have a post answering some history questions from the ACOUP Senate to start off on), but this was an essay I had in me that I had to get out, and working on the book I haven’t the time to get it out in any other forum but this one. And I’ll be frank, some of Donald Trump’s recent statements and promises have raised the urgency of writing this; the political science suggests that politicians do, broadly, attempt to do the things they promise to do – and the things Trump is promising are dark indeed.
> Now I want to be clear what we’re doing here. I am not asking if the Republican Party is fascist (I think, broadly speaking, it isn’t) and certainly not if you are fascist (I certainly hope not). But I want to employ the concept of fascism as an ideology with more precision than its normal use (‘thing I don’t like’) and in that context ask if Donald Trump fits the definition of a fascist based on his own statements and if so, what does that mean. And I want to do it in a long-form context where we can get beyond slogans or tweet-length arguments and into some detail.
— https://acoup.blog/2024/10/25/new-acquisitions-1933-and-the-...
FredPret
I've seen two apocalyptic North American scenarios in fiction, and have previously dismissed both as ridiculous.
1. In the Fallout universe, the USA annexes Canada
2. In at least two Neal Stephenson novels (Snowcrash and Termination Shock), the USA has collapsed.
I've never before thought that either of these would have a semi-realistic path to actually happening.
zellyn
In the Handmaid's Tale TV show, the US has turned into a repressive religious state horrifyingly cruel to women, and people will occasionally try to cross the border into Canada to safety.
hmmm-i-wonder
As a Canadian, this is increasingly becoming my best case scenario. Hopefully we can maintain our independence, and many of the freedoms and judicial process the US is currently destroying, although there are some exceptions our govt drastically needs to address *
* the biggest example I expect Americans to bring up is gun control. Canada absolutely needs to revert to a logic and data based restriction approach rather than an emotional appeal over looks or otherwise. Unfortunately while 85% of the country supports some form of gun control, only one party is actively implementing it and doing it in the stupidest way possible. That being said, I expect Americans never to agree with gun control in any form, and that's OK and another reason of the many Canadians do not want to be part of the US.
* Canada has mirrored the US in restricting protests and collective bargaining in some cases, and needs to step back and seriously strengthen the laws protecting its people. At the same time, some protestors also need to understand the difference between protesting and terrorizing neighbourhoods...
riku_iki
> to a logic and data based restriction approach
and what would data tell why guns have to be restricted?
Some questions:
- what the fraction of gun crimes are commited by law-abiding citizens, which would be actually subject of restrictions?
- is number of casualties high compared to casualties from knife fights, over-doze, obesity, and car accidents because of speeding
Is there data for this question which would back restricting populations from having tools of self defense against tyrannic government(could happen in Canada too one day) and make it high priority for society compared to other problems?
tpurves
This is already happening. Canada is starting to accept Americans on refugee status. I have multiple US friends or acquaintances applying for Canadian Visas or Citizenship as either an active plan or as a contingency. A cousin of mine who is a Can/US immigration lawyer is absolutely swamped right now.
slaw
It is the first time I hear it. Do you have any source?
diggan
> dismissed both as ridiculous
I think this idealism/naiveness is why you're now sliding further and further away from democracy. Older countries already had their democracies stress-tested, but seemingly this is the biggest test so far for the "checks and balances" in the US, and I feel like many other countries learned to always live with idea that democracy can slip away really quickly unless you always pay attention.
chneu
Americans, and actually young folks worldwide, don't value democracy anymore. There's an episode of Radiolab or This American Life that dives into the results of a worldwide survey.
It's deeply concerning. Essentially, people don't care about democracy because they've grown up in it.
It's one of those "My father rode a camel, I drive a land Rover, my son will drive a land Rover, his son will ride a camel" type stuff.
On top of that, Americans truly believe we are different. We don't have to follow the rules that other nations do because we have manifest destiny. This prevalent all throughout American culture. You'll notice it when you start to look for it. "You can count on the Americans to do the right thing, after they've tried everything else." Americans are stubborn.
Aunche
We're sliding away from democracy because nobody seems to genuinely care about democracy anyone. People want a dictatorship that they agree with. It's not like DOGE was something Trump was hiding. On the left, you don't exactly see anyone applauding the Democrats for not packing the Supreme Court or the relative productivity of the 117th Congress either.
Trasmatta
How do you reconcile that idea with the fact that the United States is the oldest country with a continuously running democracy?
wwweston
Full franchise democracy in the US is arguably younger than living memory. So are a lot of things we take for granted as civil rights (and some of powers that be seem determined to roll those back).
But even assuming the premise, it’s not hard to see how generations who’ve enjoyed a privilege might be more likely to take it for granted than societies that have more recently gained it, and are within living memory of fascism in power (or in neighboring states).
diggan
I guess I'd ask you to define "democracy" first, as for me it would at least include that all citizens are allowed and realistically can vote. It took until 1920 for women to be able to vote, and it wasn't until 1965 every citizen realistically could vote. I don't think in that case it would come close to being the "oldest country with a continuously running democracy".
fmbb
Those are just words.
The world has many old countries. Most of the world’s most democratic states are constitutional monarchies, with centuries of history of not being a settler colony like the US.
How do you reconcile your comment with the fact that the US in the democracy index (from The Economist) is a flawed democracy, and considerably less democratic than a whole bunch of monarchies.
It’s just words.
mitthrowaway2
I don't think these ideas need to be reconciled, because there's no conflict between something having existed for a long time and it not continuing to exist. The Roman Republic had existed for over 450 years when Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon.
wbl
Why aren't you counting San Marino?
ForTheKidz
Well we've only been a true "liberal democracy" for the past sixty years or so. Before that we were a de-facto apartheid state. Maybe at a stretch you could say 105 years if you go by the 19th amendment. And frankly i'm still skittish to call America pre-Trump a democracy with my full chest given the electoral college, completely bonkers division of the country into states, the senate, complete lack of a right to vote, our continual human rights abuses in terms of poverty and imprisonment/executions, etc etc.
I'm just saying there's literally dozens and dozens of countries with far more obvious realization of democratic ideals than we've ever managed to figure out, and at this point our age and blind devotion to dead assholes ("founding fathers") are major barriers to any sort of movement forward.
overfeed
You'd have to do some contortions on the current definition of "democracy" for that to be true. For most of it's history, not everyone could vote, and if that's your bar then democracy in the US is... returning to it's roots.
rurp
It's pretty wild. I'm someone who thinks that disasters and existential threats are seriously underrated by most people, but even still a decade ago I would have put the odds of a major US collapse in my lifetime at a low very number. Now though? I wouldn't even be surprised.
Y_Y
What about Infinite Jest's "interdependence" where a environmental disaster necessitates the merging of USA, Mexico and Canada.
curt15
What about 3. Climate change renders large swaths of the US uninhabitable, leading to an exodus into Canada?
0xffff2
Phoenix and Las Vegas are already major metropolitan areas. With enough money invested in desalination (expensive, but cheaper than migrating a whole country) it's doubtful that any part of the US will be rendered uninhabitable.
rchaud
> With enough money invested in desalination
Cheaper to nullify meteorological services and browbeat media into silence and simply tell Americans everything is fine.
giardini
That would be good for Canada - better weather, more laborers and capital and more reasons to complain about their friendly neighbors to the south.
WorldWideWebb
Also Snow Crash, the US consisting of many large, corpo-owned city states (also being discussed in the current news with techbros trying to start up their own self-regulated cities).
bergie
Not to mention the military agencies having fractured into for-profit corporations like CIC and "Admiral Bob's Navy" etc
malcolmgreaves
And in Cyperpunk 2077, the EU rearms and asserts is power, resulting in the euro becoming the world’s currency and the US being broken into multiple competing city-states and regional governments. Also everything is ruled by corporations. We’re not on the fun timeline :(
Trasmatta
Can I at least get some sick augs out of this mess?
ForTheKidz
I think "annexing" Canada seems a bit ludicrous still. I have no doubt Trump wants to expand, but I suspect such expansion would be deeply unpopular in a country proud, seemingly for the grace of simply not being the US (as, let's be honest, Canada is far more similar to the US than it is to any other country in north america).
0x000xca0xfe
Comments like yours sound eerily similar to Ukraine pre 2014 (and even 2022!). Back then the idea of a full-scale invasion was regarded as ludicrous as well.
FredPret
I daresay being invaded would indeed be "deeply unpopular" here in Canada.
soco
It would be fairly difficult to be similar to any other country in North America, innit
ForTheKidz
Most countries in north america are more similar to each other than they are to the US or Canada, yes. That is precisely what I am saying. Canada is basically the colony that didn't bother.
andy_ppp
I’m surprised all the countries the US is trying to bully aren’t considering moving to the Euro as the reserve currency (even China might go along with this). It would be so damaging for the US they might actually understand they have been benefiting from a win-win situation since the end of the Second World War.
anon84873628
Why does a reserve currency even need to exist? Bretton Woods was a result of the extraordinary circumstances of WW2. The move to the petrodollar was a good deal at the time letting the US play world police. Now it's clear that the US isn't a reliable security partner even if other countries wanted it. The oil producing nations would surely be happy to start selling in other currencies.
rchaud
They would have to unwind USD denominated investments, which make up a large chunk of many pension and sovereign wealth funds' portfolio. This can't be done overnight, but over a few years, definitely possible.
maxwell
On the contrary, a weaker dollar would make exports more competitive and imports more expensive, thus realigning trade balance.
rchaud
This is a strategy for low income countries in a race to the bottom, not rich ones. So maybe circle back to this in 5 years.
jaredklewis
If you are manufacturing complex things with complex supply chains (like a Boeing 787 or a Caterpillar power shovel), the imports being expensive bit also drives up the price of exports.
But regardless of what happens with trade balance, it will also make borrowing money much more expensive, which is not great for the US since our debt to GDP ratio is over 100%.
It also removes another non-military weapon from our toolkit.
rayiner
Why does having the reserve country benefit america? Because it enables us to run unsustainable deficits? Is that good for Americans in the long run?
kube-system
Yes.
* The US is able to get very cheap loans, which enables the US to throw around money when necessary to do things that are important (emergency projects, economic stabilization, etc).
* The US has an extraordinary power to influence global politics due to their ability to control trade and banking systems.
* The US dollar is stable in part because of its status as a trade currency. And a stable currency is extremely important for citizens of a country.
> Because it enables us to run unsustainable deficits?
No, it it actually the primary reason that enables the US to run huge deficits sustainably. The currency is important enough to the world that giving a loan to the US is safer than giving one to another country whose currency is not as important.
rayiner
But that sounds bad! Why should we be borrowing all this money from foreigners when we’re a rich country? What if I want the U.S. to build stuff, instead of moving money around and trying to “influence global politics.”
I’d also love a sane domestic politics that acknowledges that borrowing money from foreigners every year because we can’t square our spending with our taxing is a bad thing.
buyucu
the american standard of living would collapse if america could not run deficits. in the very long term, like in 50 years, it might actually be better for america, but this generation of americans would be hurt big time.
0xffff2
Why? How? The US balanced the budget under Clinton. I was pretty young, but I don't remember the standard of living collapsing in the early 90s (quite the opposite in fact).
mindslight
Being able to trade arbitrarily-devaluable IOUs from a future America for real goods today is a fantastic deal. Putting it in the kid terms that seem to be necessary for this dynamic of endless "questioning" - if Bobby can get ice cream treats from the corner store by giving them pieces of paper with his picture on them, that's pretty awesome for Bobby.
In the bigger picture - the reserve currency dynamic has allowed many things to grow detached from reality, and those things are in dire need of reform (eg the everything bubble). But that the destroy-America-first platform can include condemning the whole dynamic is itself just another symptom of that detachment and entitlement. Talk about wanting to kill the goose that lays golden eggs because you don't understand it, and don't want to spend any effort trying to understand it.
rich_sasha
The US dollar is just so, so, so incredibly ingrained into the global economy, it just ain't that simple. You can or course hold whatever else instead of USD, but then you'll find yourself just exchanging back and forth to/from USD.
It's a bit like coming up with a realistic scheme for a computer with no RAM, only hard drive and CPU caches.
seanmcdirmid
The dollar is appealing because you can buy US treasuries for however much you have of it (because America's debt appetite is almost unlimited). I don't think you do that with the Euro yet, holding it would be much more complicated because you couldn't stash large amounts of it as easily into bonds. Also, the EU might not like being a reserve currency, and can do what the swiss did when CHF was used abroad too much: negative interest rates.
somanyphotons
The EU appetite for debt would grow if non-EU kept trying to buy it. It would force practical EU interest rates lower regardless of what the central banks do, allowing governments to choose to take on more debt-funded projects due to debt being cheap
yeahwhatever10
You should read a book https://www.amazon.com/Trade-Wars-Are-Class-International/dp...
abtinf
For better or worse, dollar is the only reserve currency. Every other central bank holds dollars on both sides of their balance sheet.
As a result, any attempt to switch away from the dollar would be… cataclysmic.
acdha
You couldn’t switch overnight but it’s hard to imagine that if, say, the EU, Canada, etc. started shifting to euros that it wouldn’t have a significant effect over time. They have massive economy anchoring their currency and right now there seem to be a lot of countries who would be receptive to reducing their exposure to economic uncertainty here. The USD has been popular due to stability, but if we voluntarily give that up there isn’t some kind of magic moat.
Brusco_RF
What a lot of commenters cheering this headline might not know is that there is only one single internal road connecting east and west canada which regularly closes. Most commercial routes go through the US. Don't believe me? Route Ottawa to Vancouver in google maps.
This move would amount to throwing rocks from a glass house.
soperj
Trans-Canada regularly closes? That's news to me. The reason google maps goes through the US is that it's significantly shorter. We also don't haul things regularly across the country in the same way they do in the US, we use the trains, and the majority of things would go through ports. If you're on the eastern half of the country (which is the majority of the country) they use the great lakes.
SonicScrub
The parent comment is likely referring to Highway 17, which is the only road connection between Manitoba and Ontario. A boulder once fell on this highway leading to its closure for a period of time.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/winnipeg/article/how-crews-cleared-a-...
I've seen this incident be the subject of hyperbolic clickbait articles and YouTube videos discussing the complete cutting off of East and West Canada (conveniently ignoring the realities articulated by your comment). Perhaps the parent comment is vaguely aware of incidents like this and is extrapolating to unfounded conclusions?
Brusco_RF
While you make a strong point, I'm not ready to cede it. Canada has winter storms that will close that road, albeit for shorter periods of time than the boulder situation. Being able to re-route through the US is critical during that time.
bobthepanda
Trans Canada has a lot of non-dual carriageway segments and single points of failure.
In 2016 there was a bridge failure that resulted in large detours: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nipigon_River_Bridge
echoangle
I wouldn’t call „it closed once in 2016“ regular closure, that actually seems pretty reliable.
cmrdporcupine
It's also not actually true there's only one. To get through northern Ontario, sure. But there's also the Yellowhead all the way from Winnipeg to Haida Gwai, and plenty of highways that connect to Hwy 2 from there.
Trans-Canada is a highway system, not a single road.
It's true that the stretch from Kenora to Sault Ste Marie is a vulnerability. It's tough terrain.
bryanlarsen
It's only Kenora to Nipigon that's vulnerable, there's a decent road between Nipigon and Ottawa. Some prefer it because it's flatter.
mykowebhn
While the majority of the population and infrastructure is located close to the border with the U.S., Canada's East and West is not connected by a single internal road. People do not have to travel through the U.S. to get from one side of Canada to the other. People even have multiple options! I should know. I'm Canadian, and I've done the drive from Montreal to the Yukon and British Columbia.
My take is that you have never been to Canada, and if you have, it was only to a major city, like Toronto.
Suppafly
> Route Ottawa to Vancouver in google maps.
I'm not sure this is evidence of anything that you're claiming. Google routes based on criteria you choose, typically 'fastest' or 'most fuel efficient', that does nothing to prove that other routes don't exist.
jpambrun
After "avoid tolls", google will have to implement a avoid "hostile countries"..
mewse-hn
> Don't believe me? Route Ottawa to Vancouver in google maps.
Default 44hr route goes through the states. If I click and drag the route up to go through winnipeg, it becomes a 47hr route that doesn't go through the states. I don't think this proves anything.
boringg
Listen Im all for smart reactions to dumb policies. This sounds like a dumb reaction to a dumb policy. Right now any article that does anything pro Canada anti US is going to get cheered in Canada because they are David against a mean Goliath (former best friend) situation.
Intelligent conversation and debate has no baring in this absolutely ridiculous situation.
This is truly one of the biggest unforced errors I have seen in a long time.
Descon
What intelligent options are you offering for Canada then? The US is going to tariffs us. They have stated that their aim is economic warfare focusing on collapsing our economy so that they may annex us.
It seems in the face of existential threats to our sovereignty, every option should be considered where we have advantage, and there are few.
cmrdporcupine
You're using the pronoun "they" for the US. But this is by no means the case that there is a singular entity that has stated this policy.
Right now the US is in a political crisis. It has elected a weak, narcissistic man without coherent or sensible policy who is for the short term without serious opposition. (Mainly because its own neo-liberal elite has done a garbage job of running the country for the last 30 years and the population is desperate to try something else.) That man and the sycophants who travel with him is trying to use us as a whipping boy, a sacrificial victim, to rally his base.
In reality what is happening to Canadian workers via these tariffs are not in the interests of American workers, either. If they wake up they will eventually deal with Trump. Things will come to a head. The US will either destroy itself, or rescue itself. Unfortunately we're very much tied to this process because of geography.
dguest
I'm guessing it will close less regularly if they need it open.
throaway1987
Ottawa to Vancouver in google maps goes through the US because the distance is shorter.
dylan604
That's the fun kind of trivia that only a Canadian would know.
throaway1987
its not true (im Canadian)
kps
Should also toll the ‘shortcut’ between Detroit and Buffalo for foreign high-axle-weight vehicles like transport trucks and maybe some electric cars.
tcgv
It looks like the longer route adds about 1 hour and 30 minutes. So, truck drivers would compare the toll price, additional gas usage, and the schedule change to determine if paying is worthwhile, thus limiting how much the toll could effectively charge.
lcnPylGDnU4H9OF
They also have the cost of maintaining the roads that the truck drivers are using. They might decide that a toll that brings that cost down is still a worthwhile toll even if it doesn't bring in money.
phkahler
>> Should also toll the ‘shortcut’ between Detroit and Buffalo for foreign high-axle-weight vehicles like transport trucks and maybe some electric cars.
Nah, Canada ships too much trash to Michigan to go after one of those crossings. Yes it's weird that part of the US is used as another first world countries garbage dump. I've never looked in to why this is happens. Maybe we could put a tariff on trash?
kps
> I've never looked in to why this is happens.
Toronto. Low bidder. We're sorry.
sriram_malhar
It seems everyone is part of the "Not American Treaty Organization".
hypeatei
I don't understand any of the justifications for a trade war with Canada. IIRC, Trump was fudging numbers by only including the "goods" part of "goods & services" so the deficit looked worse than it actually was (assuming a deficit is even bad in the first place)
It's also bewildering that Trump literally negotiated a trade deal in his first term with Mexico and Canada but is now saying we're getting screwed? Is this the "art of the deal" he always talks about?
vohk
The justification is Trump wants to do to Canada much what Putin is doing to Ukraine. Russia being allowed to take Ukraine legitimizes world powers engaging in conquest within their sphere. It's really that simple.
The talk about fentanyl, the supposed trade imbalance, and all the rest is just smoke and noise, because if he said that he wanted to raid Canada for resources and Lebensraum it might actually threaten his support.
He's not being subtle in this. He and his people have made constant comments that Canada doesn't work as a nation, that the border is artificial, and even explicitly that the tariffs would just go away if Canada became the 51st state. This is economic warfare driven by manifest destiny.
bdamm
It is worse than this. Trump is just the spokesman for a younger group who is steering him. He doesn't actually know anything, he's just being fed punchlines and he's good at regurgitating them.
chneu
Trump usually goes along with whatever the last person said to him about a topic. Or whoever promises him the most in return(money or fame).
This was a major thing in his first term. People fight to be the last person to speak in a meeting.
swat535
Is annexing Canada something the United States could even realistically achieve in the next four years?
Even if such an effort were attempted, any progress would likely be reversed by the next administration, assuming Democrats return to power.
Beyond that, the situation has been highly disruptive to Canada. I've witness movements like "Free Alberta" and "Alberta 51" have gained traction, while some people display pro-Trump stickers and wave U.S. flags. At the same time, others are booing the U.S. national anthem and removing American flags.
Overall, this growing division is unhealthy for Canada and has only deepened existing tensions.
It's not fun to be in Canada right now..
cmrdporcupine
To be honest, I've never seen Canadians this united. The polling numbers on "Canada joining US" dropped significantly between December and March (from a tiny number to an even smaller number). The number of Quebecois identifying as Canadian and pro-Canada also went up markedly.
Nationalism is one hell of a drug.
mig39
Canada's market is 10% of the USA. Of course there's going to be an imbalance in trade. Trump doesn't understand this, and he thinks that it means that Canada (the government) is literally ripping off the USA.
Just like he doesn't understand that tariffs are paid by the buyer, not the government of the seller.
Finally, the current trade treaty between Canada-USA-Mexico was negotiated by Trump himself, and it replaced NAFTA. When he says it's a bad deal, why is nobody pointing out that he negotiated it? And famously said it was the best trade deal in history.
busyant
> When he says it's a bad deal, why is nobody pointing out that he negotiated it? And famously said it was the best trade deal in history.
Every sane person is pointing it out.
But the asymmetry of lies and indifference to those lies by a large swathe of the electorate is terrifying.
I have no idea how to fight this.
chneu
Republicans have an amazing ability to just ignore criticism. Their base is primed to also ignore any criticism. This makes it seem like everyone is bringing up a "non issue". It's wild. Thats part of why some issues seem to never gain any traction.
This is a major reason trump kicked a bunch of reporters out of the press pool. They challenged the narrative which doesn't let them ignore criticism.
cmrdporcupine
My take is that part of this is the fact that the US far right took an interest in Canada after the "trucker" convoy protest here during COVID. Multiple Fox segments on what a terrible "communist" place Canada is. And so it's become a brainworm in Trump's head, among a bunch of others. And a useful demagogic point to distract or rile up his base with.
(Nevermind that DHS would have shot some of those protesters on site if the same kind of protests had occurred on the US side of the border. There's a reason the convoy was mobilized towards Ottawa and not to Washington, even though the vaccine requirements for truckers were actually a Biden regime initiative.)
That and a generally liberal government holding power directly on your border, in the same linguistic/cultural/economic mileux has potential domestic consequences / threat.
dylan604
> It's also bewildering that Trump literally negotiated a trade deal in his first term with Mexico and Canada but is now saying we're getting screwed?
That's the really blatant part that is ignored/swept under the rug. He's made recent comments about the worst deal made, and dismissive comments about whoever made that deal. It would be funny if he was being ironic knowing that he was the one that made that deal, but we all know that's not why he says it. He says it because he knows his followers won't look up the details.
wdr1
> The government of British Columbia filed legislation Thursday that would permit the province to levy tolls on vehicles between the Lower 48 and Alaska.
It was nice of them to exclude Hawaii.
Suppafly
I'm kinda surprised they haven't been doing this all along, or at least something to recover revenue from US folks using their roads to travel between the US but not contributing much to the economy in between.
bdamm
Presumably they were happy about the gasoline revenues and hotel stops.
Suppafly
I wonder if they make enough in taxes off those to offset the road damage done by US drivers. It's easy to overlook some of that stuff if you have generally good relations with another country, but I'm sure they are huge costs that likely aren't offset by the economic increase from US drivers.
barbazoo
> The bill does not automatically impose fees on vehicles, but it “just gives BC the tools to do so down the road if Trump continues to escalate his threats towards BC and Canada,” according to a statement from the provincial Ministry of Transportation and Transit.
phkahler
Totally off topic, but after reading some comments here I got curious and went to Google and typed "population" and autocomplete offered "of Canada" with an answer of 40.1 Million already there. Of course that's what I was going to type, but but but... I'm in the U.S. so there's no reason to know what country I was going to look for unless Google (or this MS browser) knew I was just reading this in another tab. Really kind of creepy.
throaway1987
people keep looking up the population of Canada to see where it would rank as a state
phkahler
+1 plausible!
BTW it's very close to California: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territ...
cmrdporcupine
It makes no sense as a single "state". We have two official languages for a reason, Quebec is Francophone and culturally distinct and very large. Other provinces (e.g. New Brunswick) are fully bilingual. We have three ocean coastlines, and a geographic mass which is the second largest country in the world. How you fit that all into one US "state" is preposterous and in fact that's probably one of the most inflammatory ignorant things about the whole way Trump speaks.
Not that we'd ever be "admitted" as a state should we be forced to grovel down to that point. We'd be some sort of occupied territory with no voting rights, but with 100% right for American capital to take our resources freely and dismantle our institutions.
latentcall
Guess I’ll be in the trenches and have someone from Ottawa drop a grenade on me from a drone.
That makes perfect sense. It puzzles me why supporters of the current US regime think Canada won’t resist the US. Be it a trade war or a military invasion, Canada will make the cost so great that it may eliminate the US from the world arena. Canada has been cornered and has nothing to lose at this point.