Trump slaps tariffs on Mexico, Canada and China

(cnbc.com)

60 points | by SirLJ18 hours ago

9 comments

  • 3vidence14 hours ago
    Why is the American government so hell bent on destroying its own economy?

    The biggest things they import for Canada aren't even manufactured goods but raw materials.

    The only way to avoid the T tarrif at that point is to import from a different country but there are tarrifs there as well.

    What is even the end game here? Make China the new biggest game in town?

    • 12 hours ago
      undefined
    • stevenwoo12 hours ago
      https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/29/us/politics/elon-musk-tru...

      They state they think the temporary pain to consumers and the loss of good will with Canada and Mexico is worth some other goal that will be achieved like they think this will cause American manufacturers to decide to expand in America, also they always talk about tax cuts and tariffs are a way to increase federal revenue without a change in the tax code. There's also the stated justification of fentanyl and undocumented immigrants from Canada and Mexico but the vast majority of both of those comes from Mexico with Chinese connections for some avenues of fentanyl so the Canada thing feels like it's a flimsy excuse to be included just for some bargaining on some other subject, or just to have an accomplishment, like how Trump in first term pushed for TikTok ban, then after winning 2024, Trump undoes ban he initiated in first term to claim that as an accomplishment. Versus say the border wall he promised in 2016 campaign but had a paltry result by 2020.

      It's like they think a factory or manufacturing plant can be spun up in a few weeks.

      • 3vidence5 hours ago
        How do you spin up factories for crude oil and potash?

        America is just an unserious country right now.

        • stevenwoo1 hour ago
          I didn't say I agreed with them, merely summarized what they said in 2024 campaign and speculated on other motivations. I think they are entirely serious in their other motivations, they are flooding the zone with actions listed in Project 2025, just doing as many executive actions as possible to keep opponents busy so some will stick.
    • dismalaf4 hours ago
      Trump wants concessions out of us. Like securing our border, spending more on defence, you know, stuff we agreed to do in various treaties but don't actually do. We've also had tariffs on US dairy for example for years, as long as I can remember...

      Little do they know that Canada has such a hugely unpopular government that our government would rather destroy our economy even further so they can blame it on Trump to try regain popularity than try to do anything productive at this point...

      • 3vidence43 minutes ago
        Just a straight lie, enjoy the down votes.

        Trump is quoted as saying "there is nothing Canada can do".

        Rejoin the conversation when you come back to reality.

  • A_D_E_P_T17 hours ago
    As I recently wrote on Cowen's blog, a lot of the electorate doesn't know how tariffs work.

    Say I manufacture a widget in [country]. At present, there is no manufacturer of that widget in the USA. We export to the USA, and now the US importer or distributor pays a ~25% tariff on the declared value to Fedgov. Then that US importer or distributor receives the widgets and sells them. Because its margin is down, it raises its price. Who paid first? The US business that imported the widgets. Who pays in the end? The US customer.

    Now say I manufacture some specialty aluminum rods in [country]. We export to a heatsink manufacturer in the US. As they need our rods, they pay the tariffs. Their product is now considerably more expensive and there's more friction in their supply chain.

    The only way this ends is with Americans paying more for goods. It could be a lot worse than routine inflation.

    The right way to go about things would be to shore up US manufacturing capabilities first, and then utilize tariffs selectively. Right now, there's really no way around foreign inputs in manufacturing and/or wholly foreign-made goods, so there's going to be a lot of pain.

    • aborsy8 hours ago
      [country] may have no other place to sell to, at least immediately, and at the same transportation cost. Moreover, unlike US, [country] may not have diversified its trade. The US may be able to control inflation like last time, by buying some of these goods from elsewhere and through interest rates etc.
      • dutchbookmaker2 hours ago
        It is also through the exchange rates.

        USD to CAD has front ran a lot of this already. 1.45 is crazy.

        The idea Canada can so easily re-route trade is absurd. Especially when the trade is going to be settled in USD.

        I have been trying to understand the point of all this and come up empty this morning. I would have to assume it is for enormous leverage in the trade deal that ultimately ends all this. The leverage this gives the US in a trade deal, especially with Canada is pretty incredible.

        25% is just so insane that it probably does cause Mexico and Canada to concede to whatever Trump wants in a trade deal and in short order. I think this is why Trump won't even take a call from Trudeau right now. It is a leverage tactic and then when they do talk what leverage does Trudeau have? Basically zero.

        • nightowl_games57 minutes ago
          Yes, the USA has massive leverage over Canada on basically every front. We are a small child standing next to a massive person with a gun. But what is the point of destroying us?

          Our economy is already down. All of our tech elite move to Silicon Valley. Our energy infrastructure cant get off the ground. The USA dictates so much of what Canada is able to do.

          What is the point of squeezing us more? We have so little we can offer you.

          We've already given you the lives of our soldiers as we follow you into pointless wars. What more do you want? The pennies in our pockets?

    • B-Con16 hours ago
      The simpler way to explain it is that a traffic is literally just a tax.

      "Trump imposes an N% tax on goods from X" would be just as accurate but likely get a different reaction from the populace.

    • llm_nerd17 hours ago
      >The right way to go about things would be to shore up US manufacturing capabilities first

      The US has basically "full employment" (the economic measure when more employment is inflationary). In a vacuum the idea that you're "bringing home the jobs" makes sense, but it makes zero sense when you simply don't have the capacity to build more. If Americans thought inflation was unacceptable under Biden, they're in for a real shock now.

      Americans have no idea how good they have it. They're the biggest consumer of goods on the planet, and basically want their cake and to eat it too. It doesn't work like that.

      And really, the US essentially has balanced trade with Canada, and if you exclude oil the US has a massive trade surplus with Canada. So when Canada and Mexico both "shore up" their own capabilities and stop buying the $1T of goods from the US, where does that leave the US? It enjoys a massive internal economy -- an irrationally large one -- but much of that is illusory and built on a myth.

      Liberal trade is the reason the US became the richest country on Earth. Trump thinks everything is easy and is about to crash it to the ground.

    • dismalaf13 hours ago
      There's basically nothing that's manufactured only in Canada...

      The vast majority of our exports are raw materials, and of our manufactured goods most are foreign multinationals that set up shop to take advantage of our cheap(er) labour versus the US... They can and will move to the US because of these tariffs.

      This will decimate our economy and it really feels like Trudeau simply wants someone to blame our shit economic performance on...

      • fspeech13 hours ago
        Unless the world demand for these raw material goes down or production elsewhere goes up someone will still buy these raw materials. If tarriff is high enough to force US to source from and Canada to sell to more distant places the world will be less efficient.
      • A_D_E_P_T8 hours ago
        I've got one word for you: Potash.

        Hugely important for agriculture, barely produced in the US at all, mostly imported from Canada.

        If Canada retaliates by barring or limiting potash exports, it would be so harmful to the American agriculture sector that Trump would go ballistic.

        > They can and will move to the US because of these tariffs.

        That's a lot easier said than done, and as US policies might change at any time -- it's a coin-flip what'll be the case in four years -- they'll probably just decide to wait it out and let US consumers eat the tax.

        Seriously, you might think it's easy to relocate, e.g., a car manufacturing plant, but it sure ain't...

        • dismalaf4 hours ago
          Potash is important yes. Canada also imports a majority of our fruit and vegetables from the US. Over 90% of our leafy greens come from the US. We already have a massive cost of living crisis. And I'm not sure if American commentators have been paying attention to our economy or not but Canada's GDP per capita has gone down for 6 straight quarters.

          And here's the analysis from the Bank of Canada: https://www.bankofcanada.ca/publications/mpr/mpr-2025-01-29/...

          I know commentators want to stick it to Trump but Canada's economy has been in a bad place for years and this isn't good for us at all...

          • deeg2 hours ago
            I don't think anyone is saying it won't hurt Canada; trade wars hurt both sides. The discussion is whether Canada can make it hurt Trumps supporters enough to pressure him to remove the tariffs.
            • psb2171 hour ago
              You also have to account for how much Trump cares about his supporters vs how much any Canadian politician with sufficient power to act cares about their supporters. Trump is already elected, so whatever self-interested concern he had for his supporters is gone. I doubt Canadian politicians, with an election looming, are as willing to throw their supporters under the bus.
            • dismalaf2 hours ago
              My perspective is as a Canadian. The US GDP per capita is 7% above pre-Covid numbers, Canada's is 2% below. Or you can say our GDP per capita has diverged by 9% since COVID. Canada's cost of living is actually untenable right now. Canada can't hold the line long enough to do anything to the US.

              We'll do it for political reasons until the election this year but it's going to decimate our economy even further.

  • Terr_18 hours ago
    1. Don't worry, even if Canada retaliates with their own tariffs, we'll just buy from Mexico, and Canada will be left out in the cold, jealous of our success.

    2. Don't worry, even if Mexico retaliates with their own tariffs, we'll just buy from China, leaving Mexico and Canada out in the cold, jealous of our success.

    3. Don't worry, even if China retaliates with their own tariffs, we'll just buy from the EU, leaving China and Mexico and Canada out in the cold, jealous of our success.

    4. Don't worry, even if the EU retaliates with their own tariffs, we'll just buy from... Hold up, what happened to our four biggest trading partners and over half of all the trade we were doing? Well, their loss.

    ...

    96. Okay, Azerbaijan, you'd better give us a really good deal right now, or else we'll take our business to Turkmenistan, and you'll have nobody to trade with except basically everyone else!

    • laverya1 hour ago
      97. Well, I guess the US is one of the countries best able to implement Autarky today, so let's give it a try!

      Trade makes things more efficient. Trade gives access to resources not available otherwise. Trade allows greater economies of scale, and production efficiencies via comparative advantage.

      Trade is also not fundamentally necessary for the US in the way it is for essentially every other country on the planet, because the US is large enough, diverse enough, and resource rich enough to (with a fair bit of pain!) survive on our own.

      I do not think it will come to that, but it is true.

  • TheAlchemist17 hours ago
    What's the plan here ?

    Tariff war with all main trading partners ? According to Trump EU tariffs are coming in soon.

    US can win any tariff war against a single country. They maybe could win against China or EU or Canada / Mexico alone. But all of them at once ? This is going to be a disaster for the US.

    Because of current sky-high stock market valuations, US thinks it's the only game in town. We will soon see if it's the case. The tide is turning, and it's only when the tide goes out do you discover who's been swimming naked. US is in for a big surprise.

    • dutchbookmaker3 hours ago
      I don't really understand what the end game is with Canada here.

      For Mexico, it seems more like a prod for social policy on immigration and fentanyl.

      I listened to Trudeau yesterday and he isn't even able to get a hold of Trump right now, something that seems just insane.

      I am just not sure that is true though that this is a disaster for the US. How much can China afford to fight back here with the state of their economy? Canada retaliating is asymmetrically bad for Canada.

      Dollar strength and an emerging market currency breaking is what worries me. Inside the US, I would expect much of the potential inflation will just be exported through dollar strength. I imagine that is the method to the madness.

      • laverya1 hour ago
        What I've been seeing is people saying that Canada is the source for most fentanyl coming into the US, not Mexico.

        (This is also the US's stated reason for tariffs on Canada)

    • pixl9717 hours ago
      With things like tariffs on prescriptions, I guess get the population to riot then declare marshall law and just fully coup the US successfully this time.
    • deeg13 hours ago
      Trump has an infantile view of the economy. He seems to think that a trade deficit means the US is losing money, as if it was a business. If he can manufacturer a trade surplus then then he can do away with taxes.

      He also seems to believe that tariffs are paid by the foreign countries, not American consumers. It is unfathomable that people voted for this idiot.

      • 11 hours ago
        undefined
      • Terr_11 hours ago
        > as if it was a business

        Even among the folks who really do want to "run government like a business", the kinds of businesses they usually admire--large, publicly traded, with a CEO beholden to sharehodlers--are utterly different from the kind that Trump has inherited from his father.

        Only kind of government Trump's business experience has prepared him for is running North Korea: A lifetime CEO on top who can't be removed, the ability to fire anybody on a whim, and sneaky power struggles between the kids for who will inherit when the old man finally strokes out.

        ... He's going to do a lot of damage to America trying to twist it into working that way.

    • dashundchen2 hours ago
      They've been telling us the plan.

      Fascist Elon Musk was telling us before the election they were going to crash the economy and wreck the government. Project 2025 was freely available.

      https://www.marketwatch.com/story/kaboom-elon-musk-predicts-...

      They want to snap up assets, strip mine and privatize government services once theyre broken, and install the billionare oligarchcy as the permanent ring class.

      Theyre speed running Russia's 1990s economic crash into oligarchy.

  • maxglute14 hours ago
    Interesting times intensifies.
  • llm_nerd18 hours ago
    Canada was specifically warned not to retaliate in any manner, which is basically an acknowledgement that Canada has some powerful levers. This is farcical and of course Canada is going to retaliate. The $450B of American goods sold to Canada is going to collapse. The F35 purchase will be cancelled. Various other projects with the US will be abandoned. Oil will be export tariffed. Every American service -- Netflix, Disney, Prime, Apple services -- need to have enormous tariffs applied. We can handle without them, and every enabler of this insanity needs to suffer. Literally the single military threat Canada faces is an increasingly rogue and insane United States, so it's time to start a nuclear program again, which can be quickly completed.

    Which will cause Trump's various sprogs to write mean, threatening tweets, and for Trump to redouble again.

    This is going to spiral out of control very quickly.

    And for those not caught up, this has absolutely nothing to do with secure borders. Canada contributes a rounding error to US border problems, and the reverse is much more the case. Trump outright said there was nothing we could do. He truly thinks income tax can be replaced by tariffs, despite the latter being incredibly regressive, and the ridiculous fentanyl lie justifies his outrageous abuse of your country's limits of power, allowing him to invent an imaginary threat to push his agenda.

    • toomuchtodo13 hours ago
      > Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said Canada will respond by placing 25% counter-tariffs on C$155 billion ($107 billion) worth of American-made products. That will include tariffs on C$30 billion worth as of Tuesday, with the rest coming later in February, to allow Canadian companies to adjust their supply chains and find alternatives.

      > American beer, wine, food and appliances will be among the many items subject to Canadian tariffs, and the country is also considering measures related to critical minerals, Trudeau said. He encouraged Canadians to buy locally made products and skip US vacations.

      https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-02-02/-complete...

      https://globalnews.ca/news/10992959/donald-trump-tariffs-can...

      • _DeadFred_12 hours ago
        Canada is specifically going after goods from red states. Imagine if every nation Trump goes after targeted the same states that Canada has? They can't devastate the entire USA but they can absolutely devastate a few US states if they play smart and work together. Especially poorer red states.
        • ygjb9 hours ago
          It was a pretty effective strategy during the last Trump administration
    • dutchbookmaker3 hours ago
      The figures I have seen in a trade war with Canada is Canada causes a -.2% hit to US GDP while Canada gets a -2% hit. That is not going to work for Canada.

      These aren't abuses of power though. We just largely got use to the president not trying to do all that much.

      Obama issued 275 executive orders and Franklin Roosevelt issued 3721. Calvin Coolidge issued 1203. I think all the presidents during my lifetime combined issued less than Woodrow Wilson at 1803.

      That is not to say I think a trade war with Canada is a good idea. It really makes no sense to me at all.

      • 3vidence38 minutes ago
        You would have a better point is Trump was only messing with Canada. But they are threatening so many countries at the same time that it's enivitable to start forming free trade agreements outside of America.

        That would be seriously destabilising to America for the future.

      • llm_nerd3 hours ago
        >That is not going to work for Canada.

        Is it going to shut up shop and close down? What does "not going to work" mean? The US is the one who chose this path, not Canada, and Canada is going to do what needs to be done for the situation the US forced it into. And FWIW, many Americans are a little in denial about how fragile your entire economy and social order is, and how little it takes to topple it. The impact of a trade war is likely to be much more significant than the "well it's just a trillion dollars of exports" rhetoric claims.

        Canada has to "retaliate", in that it will adjust economic levers that will force production that currently happens in the US, serving the Canadian market, to adjust to players in Canada. Canada foolishly treated the US as an ally and partner and integrated our economies, so of course there is going to be pain. But to let you in on a little secret, a lot of Canadians have wanted this for a long time: There will be pain for a while, but Canada has increasingly become a branch office of the US. Despite enormous geographical, educational and social benefits it keeps falling behind. Trump is really just looking to MCGA. Next we can punt all of the US corporations out of Canada -- again, the ability for US businesses to operate freely in Canada is courtesy of NAFTA/USMCA. That agreement is defacto shredded now. The Canadian government needs to do everything possible to prevent discretionary dollars from travelling South of the border.

        >These aren't abuses of power though.

        Claiming a "border security" emergency -- a complete BS lie that only the incredibly stupid take at face value -- to push through an economic plan is absolutely, by every measure, a grotesque abuse of power. Americans are so accustomed to it now that it's just normal. If you think it isn't an abuse for your president to lie to you to have powers that he doesn't have, you have lowered your standards to corrupt banana republic levels.

        Again, Canada and the US were operating under the trade agreement Trump forced on us the last time around. I don't see any clean exit of this where things return to normal. Canada must not ever treat the US as a sane, rational, responsible player on the world stage, as it constantly 180s on everything as American voters treat government like some perverse reality show.

    • Grosvenor17 hours ago
      They could start a joint nuclear program with Ukraine. Canada has the Canadian shield which is rich in Uranium.

      Both Canada and Ukraine get nukes (Ukraine has a bridge that needs blowing up), Ukraine gets safety, Canada gets huge reputation gains in trade with Ukraine.

      NB: Ukraine will be the fastest growing western economy post war for at least a decade or two.

      • Gunnerhead10 hours ago
        Nukes for everyone yay! Hey Georgia is also under Russian threat, why don’t they also get a nuke or two? Then maybe their neighbor Armenia will think to themselves “why not me, I’m also under threat by an ex-Soviet country”? Then maybe Azerbaijan, then Turkey, then Saudi Arabia, everyone gets a nuke, I freaking love it! Then maybe other countries that got invaded by a bigger power like maybe Vietnam? Iraq? Why not!
        • Ekaros4 hours ago
          Is it time finally to give Cuba some nuclear weapons.
        • 10 hours ago
          undefined
        • llm_nerd2 hours ago
          I mean...why not? What moral right does the US have to nuclear weapons that others don't? US exceptionalism?

          Just looking at what is happening in the US right now -- an astonishingly corrupt banana republic increasingly led by an insane Christian nationalist movement that bizarrely doesn't seem to understand a thing about Christ's teachings -- I have more faith in North Korea's management of nuclear weapons than the US.

          Nuclear non-proliferation relied upon a global order where borders were fixed and there was in essence an international law and detente. Now we have an America openly musing about militarily taking countries and land as if it's just casual talk.

          Yes, everyone should have nuclear weapons. And many of them should be pointed at US cities. The US is undeniably the most dangerous nation on Earth right now, and has lost any and all credibility as a rational player.

      • selimthegrim15 hours ago
        Andrei Codrescu is spinning in place right about now.
    • Marsymars16 hours ago
      > Every American service -- Netflix, Disney, Prime, Apple services -- need to have enormous tariffs applied.

      No tariffs required, just suspend their copyright protection and spin up some free government-run streaming video servers.

      • dismalaf4 hours ago
        Unfortunately we already have a few Canadian run streaming services and they're utter shit... As in constant buffering, won't cast to TVs properly, that sort of thing.
        • Marsymars2 hours ago
          Yeah, but e.g. if the gov suspended Netflix copyright protection and had Crave load up Netflix's entire catalog... I don't know how many people would opt to still pay for Netflix just to avoid Crave's UI/UX.
    • peeters12 hours ago
      > Every American service -- Netflix, Disney, Prime, Apple services -- need to have enormous tariffs applied. We can handle without them, and every enabler of this insanity needs to suffer.

      No need to wait for tariffs. I started cancelling all American services today. Netflix and Prime were first. I will not send money to a country that has declared an unwarranted trade war on my country.

      And it truly is unwarranted. The current trade agreements were negotiated by Trump in his last term, and are well balanced. The only reason for any current surplus is that oil prices are currently high. In general, Canadian raw resources go to the U.S. to be manufactured by skilled labour into end goods that are then imported back into Canada at a large markup. Trump has cited fentanyl and immigration as sticking points while providing no specific demands or suggestions. Less than 1% of illegal immigration to the U.S. comes via the Canadian border. It's incredibly frustrating to be utterly betrayed by a friend in this way.

      • _DeadFred_12 hours ago
        Please get your government to work with Mexico and China to put tariffs on specific red states. You can absolutely devastate the economy of a few states, especially poorer red states and other states Senators would then think twice before voting in favor of things that could turn those tariffs to their state.
    • polishdude2017 hours ago
      I'm not sure if software services are part of this tarrif? Can anyone confirm?
      • tossandthrow10 hours ago
        Traditionally it is not, but it can be, it is just doing it.
    • 18 hours ago
      undefined
    • seanmcdirmid17 hours ago
      China, Canada, and Mexico will all retaliate, there is zero consequence for the governments doing so and a lot of consequence for not doing do (Trump is very unpopular in all of these countries, so giving into him or agreeing to his terms won’t be seen as very viable). So get the popcorn ready, this weekend and especially Monday will be really interesting.

      I bet this concludes with a free trade treaty between China, Canada, and Mexico.

      I’m actually sympathetic to the fent problem, but all that comes in untariffed anyways, or maybe the plan was to have the smugglers busy with illicit legos and bananas instead?

      • 1over13712 hours ago
        >I bet this concludes with a free trade treaty between China, Canada, and Mexico.

        Well Canada & Mexico already have NAFTA 2.0. I doubt there will be one between Canada and China, they have frosty relations.

        • llm_nerd11 hours ago
          Canada is a member of CPTPP, which was the replacement for TPP that Trump backed the US out of.

          Canada really doesn't have a bad relationship with China. We had a tiff previously when we arrested Meng Wanzhou on behalf of the US, and in return China arrested the Canadian "two Michaels"[1] and both countries used Canada as a pawn.

          [1] I turns out they were, in effect, intelligence operatives in a sense, and China actually had a case. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/07/michael-spavor...

          • Ekaros4 hours ago
            Also who if not Chinese from China would keep pumping in money to Canadian real estate market... Have to keep inflating that bubble.
      • llm_nerd16 hours ago
        >I’m actually sympathetic to the fent problem

        If this were limited to China and Mexico, the fentanyl thing might have been a rational argument. Adding Canada, which is the source of a vanishingly small amount, betrays the lie. He needed the excuse to claim an emergency, rather than the incredibly self-destructive "recreate federal funding through tariffs" policy, which coincidentally (and forebodingly) led to the great depression.

        • _DeadFred_12 hours ago
          Living near the border, we send way more drugs Canada's way than come back down to us. Maybe before weed was legal more was coming the other direction, but fent/mexi's are going from us to Canada.
        • fuzzfactor16 hours ago
          >led to the great depression.

          This is the only kind of thing Trump is on track to make great again.

          Doesn't look like he's going to stop until it's greater than ever.

    • locallost6 hours ago
      He's financed by billionaires. And he's adding tariffs that will make everything expensive for normal people, while at the same time cutting corporate taxes of those same billionaires that fund him. Basically it's just a continuation of ever increasing inequality, where in the end the top few % will own everything and the rest will fight over scraps.

      Of course Canada was warned - the last thing a bully wants is retaliation. Others might get the same idea.

  • ConspiracyFact16 hours ago
    Every article I’ve read on this contains some variation of the following:

    >Tariffs will only hurt American consumers >Countries targeted by tariffs will retaliate

    I think this speaks for itself…

    • smnrchrds13 hours ago
      I have never seen any article saying tariffs will "only" hurt American consumers. They hurt both sides and every article I have seen acknowledges this. However, American news sites tend to focus on the effects in the US, while Canadian news sites focus on the effects in Canada.
      • rsynnott5 hours ago
        Yeah, this is far from a zero sum game and will be hugely disruptive globally.
      • ConspiracyFact12 hours ago
        I may have worded that wrong. Articles say that they will hurt American consumers and don’t address the actual purpose of the tariffs, which is to put political pressure on their targets. If the tariffs didn’t have at least some chance of succeeding at this, the targets wouldn’t be talking about retaliation.
        • rsynnott5 hours ago
          > If the tariffs didn’t have at least some chance of succeeding at this, the targets wouldn’t be talking about retaliation.

          … Eh? Retaliation is an absolutely standard part of a trade war; it virtually always happens, and, unfortunately, it can’t really be foregone. Like, people are talking about retaliatory tariffs because that is _how it works_; that is what always happens and really must happen.

        • nullhole12 hours ago
          Targets talk about retaliation if they think the tariffs have some chance of succeeding, true. Targets also talk about retaliation if they think retaliation has a chance of succeeding.
          • ConspiracyFact11 hours ago
            What?
            • nullhole10 hours ago
              There are two possible reactions to tariffs that you think will put political pressure on you.

              One is to retaliate. You only do this if you think you might win the trade war. Canada retaliated, and Canada thinks it might win the trade war.

              The other is to roll over. You only do this if you don't think you'll win the trade war. That's what Columbia did.

              Retaliation is a sign that the attack was strong, yes, but it's also a sign that the defence is strong.

              • seszett8 hours ago
                > The other is to roll over. You only do this if you don't think you'll win the trade war. That's what Columbia did.

                The situation is a bit different IMO, Colombia had a clear reason for getting tariffs and it was possible for them to roll over.

                Canada though, it's not even clear why the tariffs are there or what Canada could do not to have tariffs. There isn't really anything for Canada to do except retaliate.

        • Marsymars11 hours ago
          Political pressure to what end? Trump said “jump” on border measures and Canada jumped even before the tariffs.

          The retaliation is posturing for the other party and for the electorate. If you’re driving in a car and your passenger pulls the pin on a grenade, you can “retaliate” by pulling the pin on your own grenade.

          • ConspiracyFact11 hours ago
            But if the tariffs don’t actually cost the target anything, why retaliate?
            • rsynnott5 hours ago
              … Eh?

              Tariffs do of course cost the target; they reduce the market for its goods, because consumers and businesses in the country applying tariffs can no longer afford to buy them. Now, how much they hurt will depend to some extent on whether there are other markets, etc.

              Imagine there are two countries, A, B. A exports $1bn in raw materials annually to B. B exports $1.1bn in finished goods to A. B imposes a 25% tariff on A. Businesses buying the raw materials will generally not be able to afford a 25% increase in input price (very few manufacturing businesses have margins anything like that high) so will fold. A no longer has B buying its stuff, so the raw material production will halt, leading to losses there. A will no longer be able to afford to buy B’s finished goods (even if A does not impose retaliatory tariffs, which it almost certainly will), so even if some of B’s industry can survive the input cost hike, it has a smaller market.

              Obviously this is _extremely_ simplified (for a start, other countries exist, and you might see more of a _rerouting_ around A, a little like what has happened to post-Brexit UK. But it’s a serious mistake to think of this as a zero-sum game. In general high broad tariffs hurt everyone.

            • Marsymars10 hours ago
              > But if the tariffs don’t actually cost the target anything

              I don’t think anybody has suggested this.

              Or, see my analogy; pulling a grenade pin in a moving car costs everybody.

            • watwut7 hours ago
              They do cost the target, the claim is not they cost nothing. But, if they costed the target nothing, you would safely retaliate, because that is rational response to someone trying to target you.
        • watwut7 hours ago
          You mean ... supposed pressure for Canada over the fentanyl? What exactly is to be gained there? It is political pressure for the sake of political pressure and looking like a macho man.

          In that setup, Canada has no choice but retaliating. Trump is a bully and so is Musk. If you do what they want, they will bully you further. So, you have to retaliate if you can.

  • _DeadFred_12 hours ago
    Imagine if every country does what Canada has and target specific states? If every country Trump goes after targets goods from the same few states they could devastate that state. Sure the US is bigger, but absolutely devastating just a few states economies could get some attention.
  • spacemanspiff013 hours ago
    ...
    • therealpygon3 hours ago
      Things make a lot more sense when you realize the benefits a recession has for the top 1% and will have for Trumps personal wealth. While yes, they will temporarily go through some pain in the form of a decrease in their net worth, a recession allows the rich to expand their businesses, consuming smaller businesses that are much harder hit by a recession and collecting their technology and markets for pennies. I don’t think there is a coincidence that all these billionaires are holding hands with Trump. It will also be a fantastic distraction as they convince people how this bill or that bill that quietly strips away your rights is going to be good for business and “bringing the economy back”.

      The goal is pretty simple and obvious… Beat The People with the stick until they can barely move, then offer them a carrot and a shackle.