back
92 comments
The world is simply moving on from dealing with the US. It’s too expensive, too much of a pain in the ass and requires mafia like payments. They will all just trade with each other instead.

Tourism in The US is down to the tune of billions of dollars, soybean exports have tanked, US liquor is basically non-existent across Canada and other countries, etc etc.

I don’t know how long this can go on , when will the average American not be able to take it anymore?

I’ve been waiting to see my countrymen vote in their own best interests for my entire life. I’d be shocked if they started doing it now.

We are astonishingly bad at understanding abstraction. We understand that if Kevin shows up at our house and punches us in the face, we should avoid Kevin. But once you put a layer of abstraction between Kevin and the broken nose, we suddenly become baffled about how this could happen, and then we vote for Kevin.

> I’ve been waiting to see my countrymen vote in their own best interests for my entire life

This is an extremely arrogant statement to think a single individual can know the best interests of an entire country and to know they were wrong in identifying their own. To quantify this, perhaps one close proxy is to see how many people really regretted their vote after the fact, which in the context of US does not appear to be that many (even those unsatisfied with the outcome post hoc would not necessarily have voted for the opponent if given a time machine.)

Perhaps it is not trivial to have visibility into the intricacies of other people's lives and their priorities. Even harder to generalize it to tens of millions of people in a country.

Voter behavior and motivation (and knowledge of the issues, and of basic facts about their own government...) is well-studied and has been for decades. Political scientists studied it really heavily for quite a while because early results were fucking alarming (and proved to be accurate, and also not just a temporary aberration) if you're starting from a firm belief in liberal democracy and a broad franchise.

Voters, to a great extent, aren't motivated by what one might either expect or hope, nor 1/10th as well informed about the operation of their own government or the issues at stake as one might hope. It's a shit-show, so much so that it's practically miraculous that voting produces functioning governments ever, at all, and the whole thing's terribly fragile (after convincing themselves the data weren't wrong, the next step was a few decades of trying to figure out some mechanism by which this whole thing wasn't as worrisome as it seemed, which effort turned out to be based mostly on "copium", to use a modern term, and was eventually regarded as having more-or-less failed)

I mean, if you vote in a terrible human being to lead a country, you are bound to have problems. It’s not an arrogant thing to say.
It's not arrogant. Trump culture, and the subset of conservative US culture it grew out of, explicitly positions itself to be described in these terms. You don't have to be a mean or arrogant person to acknowledge that reality, unlike with most "normal" political parties.

It's also an opinion that doesn't require omniscience to hold. I don't know why that's the bar you've set. Yeah - of course nobody can really know what's best.

Having grown up in an African country that has been "collapsing" for the last 30 years, and looking at the neighbouring countries that went through or is going through similar issues, I think the US has far to go before things can be regarded as "collapsed". Unfortunately such an implosion is not instant, but it's a gradual frog-boiling decline that gets harder and harder to get out of.

If you are hoping for some limit to be reached where a popular uprising will be triggered, then I would advise to not put your hopes on it.

We're on track to be a much-richer Russia. Which is a lot better than being like Russia, and also as poor as Russia. But it's a lot worse than being rich and also not like Russia.

I expect most of the pain will be from lost potential growth rather than an actual decline in real terms, and that it'll take a while for most people to realize how stagnant we've become—because line will continue to Go Up thanks to an inflation-based debt reduction strategy, plus the US is such a giant player in the global economy that our slowing way down will also slow the global economy for quite a while, until it adjusts, so we'll still seem to be doing relatively OK for potentially another decade or more.

Of course we could also derail into something even worse than Russia. Or capital flight might hit us harder and faster than I think it will (anyone who can't see a way to, or can't stomach, getting on the good side of our rulers, will want to get out so they don't lose all their shit, including possibly their lives in extreme cases)

The average American loves this, because it allows them to punish their perceived enemies. Cruelty trumps self-interest.
How’s that working out for US soybean farmers?

The average American loves this Right up until they lose their farms, their distilleries, tourism-based jobs and everything else.

Talking of farming, are there any numbers on if AcreTrader or other similar companies has been buying up farmland, and if so how JD Vance’s investment has been performing?
Considering how much harm he did to farmers in his first term, and they overwhelmingly voted for him again in 2020 and 2024, I’d say they apparently prefer this over the alternative. I don’t expect this to change anything.
Those farmers dont care as long as libs get owned and colored people get abused by ICE.
The average? Are you sure?
Yes. Yes.
Easier said than done. Most of Canada lives along the US border. Without the USA, Canada is as remote as New Zealand - we just don't have a lot of other neighbours close by.
Yeah, but the hubris of American MAGA nationalists doesn’t allow them to see it that way. They’re convinced the world can’t function without them, that everyone needs them.

Anyone with a shred of sense can see where this is heading: the inevitable collapse of the American empire and the end of its unparalleled global dominance. At this point, it’s unavoidable. The U.S. has alienated nearly every ally it once had. Ironically, Trump might be the one who saves Europe in the long run.

>Ironically, Trump might be the one who saves Europe in the long run.

Except that the political class in EU is almost unanimous in following behind US and begging US for approval.

> Tourism in The US is down to the tune of billions of dollars, soybean exports have tanked, US liquor is basically non-existent across Canada and other countries, etc etc.

It's all tech / AI / crypto focus now.

It's good that all of those things are definitely not prone to massive bubbles.
> The world is simply moving on from dealing with the US.

This seems to be an emotional reaction by the observer, not a quantified study, so citation needed. The US market is so big and relatively unified in language and regulations and that make you willing to bite a lot of bullets. Have you ever listed an app on the App Store and dealt with French BS, for example, for a relatively tiny market?

> They will all just trade with each other instead.

Many of the US products and services are not as commoditized.

> This seems to be an emotional reaction by the observer, not a quantified study, so citation needed.

A citation would be good, yes.

I've not seen overall import/export stats this year.

But stats from a few years back, say that the number 1 and 2 imports and exports are food and oil? EVs significantly reduce demand for oil, but it's not got much to do with Trump. I saw the same stories as everyone else abouy soy bean exports to China going to zero, but that's just one export to just one country, not an overall trade update.

> The US market is so big and relatively unified in language and regulations and that make you willing to bite a lot of bullets. Have you ever listed an app on the App Store and dealt with French BS, for example, for a relatively tiny market?

Solving this is the primary purpose of the EU: unified single market.

China also big, unified.

Why is this flagged? BBC seems like a trustworthy news source to me? I guess it might not be just due to the ad, but still it's a peculiar situation that's of interest to the world.
Stuff that casts the current US administration in a less than favourable light tends to get flagged pretty quickly on here. It doesn't seem quite as bad as a earlier in the year, so I wonder if they've taken measures to counteract it. You can visit '/active' instead to make all posts, including flagged ones, visible.
"Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, or celebrities, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic."

-- https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Hacker News is not a political news discussion forum. It is an AI news discussion forum.

Sh*t that goes down that will probably limit your hiring ability and restrict where your "goods and services" will be received is pertinent to the HN community.
It’s just off-topic for HN.

P.S., > “BBC seems like a trustworthy”

Indeed! That’s their best trick.

Are they actually untrustworthy or did they just publish some stuff that slightly challenges your world views and so therefore you have to form the belief that they are fake news?
HN is about tech and the current administration heavily changes how US tech is evaluated in the world.
A better write up with more context (although it's still just as stupid as it sounds): https://www.nbcnews.com/business/economy/trump-canada-trade-...
No doubt slapping tariffs on Canadian goods will reduce the flow of said goods.

But that's a reduction, not a termination. US demand for those goods still exist. And it is US consumers that pay.

The reduction is a result of lower consumer spending power. Which will affect everything, not just the tariffed goods.

Some of the goods may end up being sourced in the US. However that won't affect consumer prices, which will remain high. (The whole point of tarifs is to drive up local prices so domestic production can compete. )

Some may be sourced from other countries. But since all countries are being tariffed there are only marginal gains here.

At the same time Canadian producers will actively explore alternate markets. This will (long term) improve Canada's economic security by reducing dependence on US markets.

All the above assumes T won't start negotiating again next week. Which since TACO is likely anyway.

Either way, this will be a long-term gain for Canada and long term pain for the US.

Why doesn't Canada reduce tariffs on Chinese cars? Instead they're making their citizens pay extra for American cars when they could be paying 1/4 price for better quality electric cars.
The auto industry is huge for Ontario, the province behind this ad, and tightly integrated with US auto makers. As a result I believe tariffs on Chinese cars are being maintained by the federal govt. to show the US that Canada is very serious about ending this pointless situation.

If Chinese cars enter Canada and enter Mexico, you can say goodbye to the US auto industry. Recall, the most recent news is the bankruptcy of an auto loan firm in the US, itself a sign that cars are not affordable to workers, which is the only way these workers can travel for their jobs because public transit is so poorly funded.

Car manufacturing is not going to get cheaper in the US without a whole lotta pain, and the loss of inertia is going to affect all industrial sectors.

Chinese cars have entered Mexico. Over the last couple of years 20% of new car sales there have been Chinese brands. JAC is also making cars in Mexico, and BYD and BAIC have plans to start building in Mexico.

Mexico has increased tariffs, to 50%, but Chinese cars remain competitive even after that.

I assume that's the big stick Carney is using behind close doors to negotiate with the USA.
He probably feels powerful harming businesses (in the US and elsewhere) with his tariffs.

His inheritance performed worse than the s&p by a large margin under his stewardship.

He’s not a business man, he’s someone who inherited $450M in today’s dollars and wears a business suit as a costume, and incidentally more makeup than most drag queens.

He’s disgracing everything he touches and the Trump name will be hated and associated with stupidity and bigotry for a long time.

This seems like poor reporting. It’s far more believable that the ad is an excuse and the real story is this:

> Canada cuts tariff relief on some US cars due to Stellantis, GM ending some Canadian production

https://apnews.com/article/canada-us-auto-production-tariffs...

The ad aired a week ago and Trump said he’d do the same thing and didn’t care. However this development prompted a retaliation. There’s a low simmering trade war that Trump has been waging against partners and these are just excuses he claims so the media doesn’t focus on the actual details of the war but instead on BS culture war topics.

Strong agree. If it was the ads, this would have come when the news about the ads broke, not now.
The ad ran last week, but the Reagan library tweeted the full video of Reagan's speech yesterday. Trump saw that, and then shortly after posted on Truth Social that the ad used fake video, which intended to influence the Supreme Court and the other courts against Trump on tariffs, and cancelled negotiations.

That really does seem to be what set him off.

Doesn’t this action from Canada explain Trump rhetoric though? Essentially, Canada is saying that you can only sell tariff-free if you manufacture their. That’s the same thing Trump is pushing for.
The North American auto sector is propped up by subsidies on both sides of the border.

What the article in the parent post doesn't mention is that Stellantis and GM received massive handouts from the Canadian government to retool factories in Canada, contingent on actually operating those factories and employing Canadian workers. Abandoning them and moving production to the U.S. (because of tariffs) violated their agreements. Hence, no more tariff relief for them.

North American auto companies are between a rock and a hard place right now, but it'd be folly for the Canadian government to let them ignore their agreements without consequence.

TL;DR: It would be more accurate to say Trump tried to steal a cookie from the Canadian cookie jar and is now acting shocked that his hand has been slapped. Canada is merely reacting here, and rather mildly at that. Calling off trade negotiations entirely is clearly not warranted and everyone should expect another TACO Tuesday.

>Doesn’t this action from Canada explain Trump rhetoric though?

Trump already tariffed cars and car parts from Canada under the guise of national security, in complete and utter defiance of USMCA (you know, the best trade agreement ever as described by the guy who signed it: Donald Trump). Canada should return the favour. Canada had tried to play nice with the "American" automakers, but if they screw Canada to pander to the rapist, they lose that benefit.

As a Canadian, I do have to say that we've been putting up tariffs on trading partners' goods and protecting our shitty monopolies as long as I can remember, then whining when others do it back to us.

The situation in Canada is kind of messed up. We literally have trade barriers between provinces, tariffs on a ton of stuff, government protected monopolies and all that has lead to capital either being allocated poorly or allocated right out of the country. Even government pensions put most of their capital in US markets instead of in our own country.

While US tariffs on Canada will obviously lead to economic malaise, I can't say it's undeserved. Hopefully it leads to a wake up call here (it probably won't though, Canadians will just become more and more insular).

It's funny, we've been trying to forge closer ties with the EU and China but again, we are rebuked because we have tariffs on a bunch of their goods.

Also Canadian here. Have been closely following US-Canada trade for years. What you are saying is news to me. I am leaning towards believing you are simply mistaken, but if you have specific evidence about these two assertions, I would love to study them:

> tariffs on a ton of stuff

> we are rebuked because we have tariffs on a bunch of their goods

I can guess why one might think some of this (tariffs on Chinese EVs directly led to agricultural counter-tariffs from them and dairy trade barriers have always been a source of frustration), but in general, Canada's tariffs and barriers are by all indications in line with peer countries (US, UK, EU, Australia, etc.) and not particularly noteworthy. If you have concrete evidence to the contrary (not just that some trade barriers exist between Canada and its trading partners, but that they are out of the ordinary and much higher than other countries'; and that the world, in particular EU does not want closer ties with us because of them), I would love to study your sources and update my understanding.

>As a Canadian

Didn't take long to discover that your "as a Canadian" is actually "as a hyper-partisan Alberta separatist that thinks oil is all that matters".

Kind of gave up the game when you said this nonsense: "we've been putting up tariffs on trading partners' goods".

"It's funny, we've been trying to forge closer ties with the EU and China but again"

You really, really have no idea what you're talking about.

The F your feelings crowd nodding and smiling to Trump ruling on feelings.