100 pointsby tartoran5 hours ago8 comments
  • juliusceasar3 hours ago
    Meanwhile Israel is sucking USA empty and they call out Canada for being not "fair".

    What a sick people.

    • lemoncookiechip2 hours ago
      Someone has to fund Israel's universal healthcare.
  • ElProlactin4 hours ago
    Art of the deal strikes again.
    • 3 hours ago
      undefined
    • epolanski3 hours ago
      This administration has a thing for being really vicious with the closest allies.

      It really feels strange, odd, yet unsurprising that the US is going from a globalist leadership to selfish nationalism.

      • Paradigma1121 minutes ago
        Its easier since they have no defenses up and lots of valuables are in reach. It makes sense if you are that ethically challenged.
      • hermitcrab3 hours ago
        Trump projects his greed and selfishness onto everyone else. So doesn't understand that there can be such a thing as a win-win relationship.
        • charcircuit2 hours ago
          I think you are ignoring the situation of a WIN-win relationship where one party is winning much more at the other party's expense. Just because it may be net positive for both countries that doesn't mean that it's a fair arrangement. The excuse that the smaller winner is still technically winning is not a good excuse against pushing for a more fair deal.
          • AngryData2 hours ago
            In what way was the US not the big winner already? Canada bought all sorts of military equipment from the US, followed 99.9% of US foreign policy, produced tons of raw materials for the US economy and freely traded it for finished goods and consumables, contributed to many US wars. Canada gave US priority in pretty much every international trade and political matter and even bandwagoned onto many US laws.

            Literally the only losing move was to mess with our relations to them.

            • charcircuitan hour ago
              The US can become an even bigger winner than it is now as it's the greatest country on earth.
              • exceptione37 minutes ago
                Be careful repeating slogans, in the long term they tend to blind the people that devised them to blind the mass. Self-delusion often ends in self-humiliation. The US is nothing without its partners, as the Iran fiasco has showed.

                The Heritage Foundation's agenda is to isolate the USA and bring it back to the Gilded Age, which runs counter to the narrative of 'the greatest country on earth'. So far, the Heritage Foundation is making great progress with putting processes in motion that makes the downfall almost irreversible.

          • benfortuna2 hours ago
            That just sounds like greed. It's not enough to be winning, I need to be winning as much if not more than everyone else.
            • charcircuitan hour ago
              This line of thinking would be similar to the people who think that running a business well is corporate greed. Worse run businesses don't need to be given better deals from well run businesses.
          • Arodex2 hours ago
            Where is Trump pushing for a "more fair" deal? State what is his metric and demonstrate it is "fair" for both sides.

            Show us it isn't just lies and bad faith.

            • charcircuitan hour ago
              It is a common theme in his speeches on tariffs.
              • Arodexan hour ago
                No, you don't understand: what exactly is "unfair" and what "fair" alternative is he proposing? And show us how it is fair for both sides.
      • lostlogin3 hours ago
        > the US is going from a globalist leadership to selfish nationalism.

        It’s worse than that. This doesn’t suit the US. It suits Trump (or at least, that’s what his addled mind thinks).

      • cumshitpiss3 hours ago
        The US doesn’t have allies; it has interests.
    • conartist64 hours ago
      Very good yesterday, very bad today. I understand completely why nations are not eager to bargain with a petulant child
      • epolanski3 hours ago
        The problem is more long lasting. The world cannot accommodate 180 degree turns every 4 years in Washington.

        So anybody that will follow, regardless of the person's policies won't matter fully, as that person itself will be replaced 4-8 years later.

        • jjav2 hours ago
          > So anybody that will follow, regardless of the person's policies won't matter fully, as that person itself will be replaced 4-8 years later.

          That is the fundamental problem. The only way out, is to make changes to the constitution to specifically prohibit the executive branch from having any of this power to arbitrarily change things on a whim. That is the only way international peer could in the future trust an agreement made with the USA.

          As long as the US feels it is ok to sign an agreement and immediately violate it, nobody in their right mind will bother to negotiate any future agreements. Which is not a good state to be in.

        • toast03 hours ago
          At least the timing of the turns is predictable... I imagine working with countries with snap elections is harder, especially when they have trouble forming a government.
          • biorach3 hours ago
            You might think. The UK would be the most prominent example and in fact has been a much more predictable and consistent trading and negotiating partner than the USA
            • philipallstar3 hours ago
              The UK hasn't really changed, regardless of who's in charge, in 20 years. Because it's mostly run by the state and not by the politicians.
              • Symbiote2 hours ago
                In case you hadn't noticed, within the last 20 years the UK made an enormous constitutional change by leaving the EU.
                • philipallstaran hour ago
                  That is the one change, and it hasn't resulted in the thing people actually were voting for (but couldn't): less immigration. Because the state says we must just import 750k people a year, so that's that.
                • mrkstuan hour ago
                  Made by the people rather than the politicians- the mainline politicians all thought it would/wanted it to fail- they just thought they’d get a boost from catering to a disaffected minority.
                • classified2 hours ago
                  But no government has reversed that step.
                  • vrganj2 hours ago
                    Yeah but that step itself was a dramatic change within said 20 year timeframe
              • tyrabound2 hours ago
                You didn’t say it and it may not occur to you, but you are correct, the UK is among the many sham democracies, which is arguably the primary objective of “democracies”; an illusion supported by a concept called choice supportive bias, i.e., if you believe the outcome of something was due to your own action, choice, or agency you’re prone to accept it, defend it, not question it, and ignore its detrimental effects.

                It’s a rather diabolical form of control, democracy. “You have fake choices and you like … nay, you love what you choose”, quite literally. You have to love it, because you have to believe it’s true. And that’s where they latched onto your mind.

                It’s quite ingeniou.

            • mschuster913 hours ago
              > The UK would be the most prominent example and in fact has been a much more predictable and consistent trading and negotiating partner than the USA

              European here: Oh hell no. The Brexit breakup drama was years of chaos with each of the braindead Prime Ministers somehow managing to make things worse.

              • benj1112 hours ago
                It still is.

                We still aren't doing border checks on EU imports.

                Still, Boris Johnson wasn't as bad as Trump.

              • Normal_gaussian2 hours ago
                That's quite a take.

                The EU-UK negotiations were mired in issues of EU maximalism; attempting to force each PM to agree a worse deal knowing not agreeing to it would cause short term pain for that PMs political situation. Its quite the thing that the UK managed to hold on as much as it did.

                The UK was on the back foot in all negotiations having been forced into the Brexit outcome.

                For all the nonsense printed in the UK and Continental presses, the UK had a surprisingly consistent position through the entire thing with clear threads of staff and policies still running to today.

                • vrganj2 hours ago
                  The EU position was consistent from even before the referendum: Either in or out of the single market, no cherry picking.

                  Each PM in the UK's neverending parade gained power by telling their electorate "I have this genius plan that'll totally let us cherry pick" only to be deflated when the EU held to its clearly stated position.

                  The problem with Brexit was that the Brits wanted something that was never on the table, they voted for Brexit under false pretenses and then got mad when they couldn't get what they wanted.

                • Arodexan hour ago
                  >the UK had a surprisingly consistent position through the entire thing

                  Please state the official "consistent" position regarding the main problem caused by your own decision to leave: the Irish border.

                • benj1112 hours ago
                  What?

                  "Forced into the Brexit outcome"

                  Cameron stepped down after he shat the bed, every PM was a Tory.

                  And yeah, the position was consistent. Before it was 'we could have all the benefits of being in the EU, with none of the down sides'. We could have soft Brexit, or the less popular hard Brexit.

                  Teresa Mays position was "Brexit means Brexit" and non of the others had a clue either. Because they promised everything to everyone. In the event we got a harder Brexit than the hardest Brexit discussed before the vote.

                  So if you want to say the UK was consistent, I say fuck you to the civil servants that consistently ignored the conversation prior to the vote.

          • epolanski3 hours ago
            No, why would that be?

            That's the reality of most mature democracies from UK to Germany to Italy.

            If anything, that makes change slower and based on coalition consensus, not a single winner-take-all individual mood.

            Which means that there isn't much to "work" as previous arrangements keep holding and they hardly change.

            I would never exchange our democracy for a king electing one like in US, Turkey or Russia.

            I'd rather have our democracies slower, the governments more unstable, but representative.

            • com2 hours ago
              Deliberative and hopefully self-stabilising. Real directional change happens over the span of a decade, not a few months. All arms of government (including non-kingship executive) brought to a rough consensus of choice and consequences.
          • expedition32an hour ago
            Countries realise that trade agreements are too important for politics.

            They are usually negotiated by a nation's crack team of experts. America just does not take any of this seriously anymore.

        • rich_sashaan hour ago
          But we’re talking 180 degrees every… 2 weeks?
        • mschuster913 hours ago
          > So anybody that will follow, regardless of the person's policies won't matter fully, as that person itself will be replaced 4-8 years later.

          There is only one chance the US has - they need to do what us Germans were forced to post-1945, rearchitect everything.

          The US and UK are the only major countries that didn't undergo some sort of revolution, war or other reset of their constitution and legal systems and it shows everywhere.

          If we Europeans (or anyone else) are supposed to ever trust the US again, we demand they properly fix their shit and prevent another madman's rise for good.

          • ed_elliott_asc2 hours ago
            I fear this is just the beginning, I’ve seen nothing to say the voting American public are any less into divisive politics than they have been for the last decade

            [edit autocorrect changed divisive to decisive]

          • benj1112 hours ago
            You do realise that Germany had a shiny new constitution, and then went on to elect that Austrian painter. And that's after the prior new and shiny constitution leading into ww1

            Afghanistan had a new constitution and legal system when the US pulled out.

            As a Brit, my take away is that having a nicely laid out constitution doesn't matter if you don't have the culture there to back it up. The US did manage to deal with one term of Trump, so that's something.

            • mschuster912 hours ago
              > The US did manage to deal with one term of Trump, so that's something.

              Trump caused a lot of suffering and damage even in his first term, his second term (especially "thanks" to DOGE) was orders of magnitude worse.

              A good democracy can survive one direct hit, maybe two, but anyone with a working brain cell left can clearly see the cracks in the foundation one needs to exploit to become President - and there will be such exploitation attempts, unless by a huge wonder the next President will be a Democrat, have a majority in both chambers of Congress and prosecutes everyone involved in the Trump administrations.

      • sandworm1013 hours ago
        "That's like a toddler with a harpoon. There's a toddler wandering around in that office with a harpoon." The Thick of It s4e2.
  • sandworm1013 hours ago
    It is a good thing canadians are so nice. Dropping US alcohol is a tiny thing compared to some of the weapons canada might deploy. Look at all the back-and-forth deals in recent years and you will see an exemption for oil and potash. Think gas prices are high now? See what happens if canada starts shipping less crude. Think food prices are high? See what happens when there is no fertilizer because canada has restricted potash exports. And what will make Musk's head explode: canada is starting to allow cheap chinese EVs into north america. Canadians will be driving them around the US very soon.

    https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/dispatches/how-to-secure-the...

    > US mines produce roughly 500,000 metric tons of potash per year, only about 8 percent of the 5.9 million metric tons of apparent annual US consumption. The remaining demand is met through imports, producing a net import reliance of about 92 percent. Reflecting the high concentration of global potash production, most of that supply comes from Canada (79 percent), with smaller volumes from Russia (12 percent) and other producers (9 percent) including Israel.

    • thangalin3 hours ago
      The sentiment here is that nobody wants U.S. citizens to be negatively impacted by trade restrictions or tariffs. We are figuratively and, in many cases, literally friends and family. (Aside, even if our provincial governments allow southern booze back on shelves, it'll stay there.)

      It would be decidedly un-Canadian to leverage electricity, potash, or other commodities necessary for survival in trade negotiations -- despite what Ford may suggest. We're nice, but we won't bow to bullies. Elbows up, eh!

      • bluealienpie2 hours ago
        I want them to be negatively impacted. Maybe a couple family members spoke publicly about what’s happening, and the rest remain silent or indifferent. My cousins are too busy with their multi million dollar AI roles to even see us non-millionaires as human.
      • benj1112 hours ago
        You do realise it's the citizens that voted trump in?

        And you don't have to ban them, just make them more expensive. Your US brethren did vote for tarriffs. With that comes higher prices.

    • thijson3 hours ago
      It's a slow moving train wreck. I hope the consequences of these petulant actions scar the minds of voters for years to come. We're seeing the yield on treasuries creeping up, I think that's one of the consequences.
  • metalman2 hours ago
    People here in Canada have not been sitting still. It is a truely fantastic oportunity, it's almost like 10% of the US market was suddenly transported to another country for free, and all we have to do is fill it.
    • spwa42 hours ago
      Prepare the distilleries ...
  • MrSkelteran hour ago
    You cannot negotiate with a country that doesn’t stand by its word.

    All other issues aside, Trump and the Republicans love to boast that they aren’t bound by anything including their own promises. This is the end result of that.

    You’d be mad to cut a deal with the US right now. The Trump Admin will just try to take another bite. They are dishonest and unreliable. Making America’s word mean nothing is the greatest long term damage done to the country and the surest indicator of the end of the American Century (80 years but we can round up)

    • Haven88025 minutes ago
      It has to do with how America politically structured. The trade nego change every 1-2 terms. China is much more consistent in this, and will scrap all markets from America in the long term. I simply dont see America able to force a Plaza Accord out of this. Japan fizzled because of that. But China wont. And China now backed by Russia, world powerhouse of fossil and minerals. Russia has way more natural reserve than what Venezuela America and Middle East officially published.
  • tancop2 hours ago
    There's a good opportunity to use that tariff money and subsidize critical exports to everywhere but USA. Europe gets cheaper minerals and Trump gets left begging China for scraps at insane prices.

    If you want political gestures then impose heavy sanctions on Israel and declare that Latinos can get refugee status in Canada because of ICE. That would be an economic win too.

    • bluealienpie2 hours ago
      But the Canadian government wants to be the 51st state. They have rapidly defunded social services, expanded fossil fuels and will adopt US style militarization. In fact, purchasing those munitions from the only country that has threatened to take it over.
  • woggy3 hours ago
    Meanwhile Trump is pushing to rekindle his love affair with Kim Jong Un.
  • TMWNN4 hours ago
    [flagged]
    • mvdtnz3 hours ago
      It's difficult to imagine lower quality comments. If you asked an AI to generate the lowest quality, most content-free comment thread possible I doubt it could rival the quality of comments on that website.
      • gpt53 hours ago
        To be fair, it doesn't seem like the post here is attracting high quality and thoughtful comments either.
        • DarmokTanagra2 hours ago
          YC has an obnoxious habit of putting itself above other social networks when in reality its just a haven for spoiled little boys who were constantly told how smart they are and grew up into entitled assholes who think they are better than everyone because they can write some code.
        • blooalien2 hours ago
          > ... attracting high quality and thoughtful comments either.

          Sadly, U.S. politics doesn't attract high-quality thought in general (especially in more recent years), so any discussion surrounding our little three-ring circus cult here isn't likely to be much better than the subject matter bein' discussed. It's all just too crazy to base any sane discussion around.

      • solenoid09373 hours ago
        Reddit is an incredibly easy website to bot/psyop, especially if you have older accounts.