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.
> 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.
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.
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.
> 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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
When there is now a 6-month backlog of people trying to take the CFSC/CRFSC courses to get their PAL, and the CAF recruitment site is constantly overloaded, yes - Canadians will definitely be resisting any military style invasion. Add that to the grassroots "Buy Canadian" movement, and no - Canadian's are not going to roll over and accept US pressure for either tariffs or annexation.
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.
> 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.
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.
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...
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 :(
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.
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).
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).
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.
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.
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.
You're always going to have one currency that is used for most of international trade, because it's much cheaper for country A exporters and country B exporters to settle in one currency. 1-N systems are generally stabler than N-N systems.
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.
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.
* 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.
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.
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.
Consider that this is the point of all the machinations. The US having the reserve currency is a liability in many ways and the direct reason why it's a consumer not producer economy.
Losing reserve status will be damaging to some parts of the american economy and create a boom in others.
Take a look at what current tariffs are across the world. The US isn't necessarily bullying as equalizing.
> Losing reserve status will be damaging to some parts of the american economy and create a boom in others.
Which parts will benefit from higher inflation?
The only reason the US has been spared from >20% inflation after engaging in what would be called "money printing" by American press when practiced by a 3rd world country is that there are deep pools of unused reserves slowing the overall velocity. Americans don't know how good they have it.
> Losing reserve status will be damaging to some parts of the american economy and create a boom in others.
The primary effect of losing reserve currency status would be on the government's ability to borrow money. That's going to be a problem since US government debt to GDP ratio is >100%. We have no fiscal discipline now and neither party shows interest in making cuts or raising taxes. DOGE hasn't changed anything yet unfortunately, as daily government outflows are still roughly inline with where they were under Biden. Even if DOGE cut all discretionary spending (obviously impossible), we'd still have a budget deficit and massive existing debt burden.
If we lose reserve currency status, my guess is we'll go full Argentina with hyper inflation as the government prints money to pay debt and fund the government.
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.
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
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.
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.
I would suspect that some countries would definitely go to China due to the more sizable economy. But a large number of others - especially those with more democratic idealogies - would go with the Euro.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
> 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
>> 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?
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
> 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.
It's been considered, but it's not going to help much. A tiny percentage of Alaska's goods come through BC.
Instead, alternative markets and surcharges for potash, minerals, energy, counter tariffs and bans of American goods, expanding interprovincial trade, bans on government procurement from the US, bans on American propaganda and media should be sufficient. And re-armament.
Given that it's clear that America cannot ever again be trusted, (electing Trump once was an accident, twice is actively malicious), and given that it's likely compromised by Russia, it should be considered what it is - a dangerous, unstable, suicidal foreign adversary. A kind of North Korea, but with nuclear weapons.
> It's been considered, but it's not going to help much.
It may not help much in terms of revenue, but it may help with public perception. People spend a lot of time and energy in their car. Think about how much people talk about gas prices as a measure of whatever politicians they think are responsible for them.
Yeah, I'm not sure it won't be worse than you think. I think about 8% or so of goods to AK go by truck along the Al-Can. I suspect though there is a very good reason for that 8%.
You force that 8% on to ship or by air and I suspect whatever that cargo was is going to get a good deal pricier or a good deal late.
Readit News
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.
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.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madman_theory
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.
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.
Is this a joke?
- unimaginable atrocities that would make Hitler blush, and then they might still lose
- Vietnam x 100
Putin, the current administration and conservatives in general swallowed that hook line and sinker.
> 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-...
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.
* 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...
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.
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.
https://www.lynalden.com/fraying-petrodollar-system
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.
* 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.
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.
Losing reserve status will be damaging to some parts of the american economy and create a boom in others.
Take a look at what current tariffs are across the world. The US isn't necessarily bullying as equalizing.
Which parts will benefit from higher inflation?
The only reason the US has been spared from >20% inflation after engaging in what would be called "money printing" by American press when practiced by a 3rd world country is that there are deep pools of unused reserves slowing the overall velocity. Americans don't know how good they have it.
What would it take for America to have more of a German-style economy than the current American one? Who would that hurt and who would that help?
The primary effect of losing reserve currency status would be on the government's ability to borrow money. That's going to be a problem since US government debt to GDP ratio is >100%. We have no fiscal discipline now and neither party shows interest in making cuts or raising taxes. DOGE hasn't changed anything yet unfortunately, as daily government outflows are still roughly inline with where they were under Biden. Even if DOGE cut all discretionary spending (obviously impossible), we'd still have a budget deficit and massive existing debt burden.
If we lose reserve currency status, my guess is we'll go full Argentina with hyper inflation as the government prints money to pay debt and fund the government.
It's a bit like coming up with a realistic scheme for a computer with no RAM, only hard drive and CPU caches.
As a result, any attempt to switch away from the dollar would be… cataclysmic.
But even on a purely economic level… does the Eurozone even have a larger economy than China?
I can see countries moving away from USD, but I don’t see them coalescing around a single alternative.
Dead Comment
This move would amount to throwing rocks from a glass house.
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?
In 2016 there was a bridge failure that resulted in large detours: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nipigon_River_Bridge
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.
My take is that you have never been to Canada, and if you have, it was only to a major city, like Toronto.
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.
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.
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.
It seems in the face of existential threats to our sovereignty, every option should be considered where we have advantage, and there are few.
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?
Toronto. Low bidder. We're sorry.
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?
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.
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..
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.
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.
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.
Instead, alternative markets and surcharges for potash, minerals, energy, counter tariffs and bans of American goods, expanding interprovincial trade, bans on government procurement from the US, bans on American propaganda and media should be sufficient. And re-armament.
Given that it's clear that America cannot ever again be trusted, (electing Trump once was an accident, twice is actively malicious), and given that it's likely compromised by Russia, it should be considered what it is - a dangerous, unstable, suicidal foreign adversary. A kind of North Korea, but with nuclear weapons.
It may not help much in terms of revenue, but it may help with public perception. People spend a lot of time and energy in their car. Think about how much people talk about gas prices as a measure of whatever politicians they think are responsible for them.
You force that 8% on to ship or by air and I suspect whatever that cargo was is going to get a good deal pricier or a good deal late.
Dead Comment