Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Canada hits back at 'punitive' U.S. tariffs in 'turning point' in relations

theprovince.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 120 posts

Re: Canada hits back at 'punitive' U.S. tariffs in 'turning point' in relations

#51

Post by Gustomaximus »

dominotw wrote: post #30
jonhendry18 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way to "negotiate" with the Trump administration involves contributing to the Trump businesses.

Is this true? Do you have an example?

"As I’ve pointed out before, the President can be successfully engaged, and countries like Ukraine, China, and Qatar have demonstrated this. When they want something from the United States, they skip the State Department, and even the White House staff. Instead of approaching their problem state-to-state, they go state-to-man. These countries focus on what Trump wants on a personal level – to enrich his family. So Beijing granted Ivanka trademarks, Qatar invested in one of Jared’s office towers, and Ukraine, with Slavic candor, simply wired half a million dollars to the President’s personal lawyer Michael Cohen."

From this article: https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/trade-sanctions-against-amer...

Also China's loan for Trumps indonesian project and the rumoured Russian financing/laundering and Trumps positive behaviour toward Russia/Putin.

While possibly coincidence, there certainly seems correlation between countries that are treated favourable and helping Trump family business interests.

Re: Canada hits back at 'punitive' U.S. tariffs in 'turning point' in relations

#53

Post by BurningFrog »

parvenu74 wrote: post #11

Can anyone point to an historical case study where protective tariffs resulted in a better economic or social outcome? I can’t help but recall the saying: “When goods don’t cross borders, soldiers soon will.” Not that I think the United States is going to war with Canada, but the (German-dominated) EU and China are less certain.

Tariffs can be good for big companies and other special interests in a country, but never for the country as a whole.

So when you ask if they result in "better economic or social outcome", you have to be careful to think about "for who?".

Re: Canada hits back at 'punitive' U.S. tariffs in 'turning point' in relations

#54

Post by archgoon »

wwweston wrote: post #5

Opinion: Trade sanctions against America won’t work. Sanctioning Trump himself might. https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/trade-sanctions-against-amer...

Seems easy to do since he's refused to separate himself from his business interests when he assumed the presidency.

Re: Canada hits back at 'punitive' U.S. tariffs in 'turning point' in relations

#55

Post by s2g »

craftyguy wrote: post #40
wwweston wrote: post #5

Opinion: Trade sanctions against America won’t work. Sanctioning Trump himself might. https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/trade-sanctions-against-amer...

That's exactly what the US does to folks (e.g. Putin's friends) when they do stupid, I'm surprised that no nations have considered doing the same with Donald and his friends/family.

because Putin and Co. are ultra-corrupt murderous oligarchs.

Re: Canada hits back at 'punitive' U.S. tariffs in 'turning point' in relations

#56

Post by state_less »

wwweston wrote: post #5

Opinion: Trade sanctions against America won’t work. Sanctioning Trump himself might. https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/trade-sanctions-against-amer...

If the trade wars continue escalating, I don't see how this is going to end well.

Re: Canada hits back at 'punitive' U.S. tariffs in 'turning point' in relations

#57

Post by hangonhn »

jcranmer wrote: post #33
s2g wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds a whole lot more like a national security issue than the tariffs. Could also use tariffs to try and hit the states that voted for Trump the hardest.

Well, not so much states that voted for Trump, but small-population states that rack up lots of Senate votes. Put punitive tariffs on corn, soybean, and pork exports, and you'll have a dozen senators imploring Trump to back off.

China had already prepared to do exactly this. Notice what they said they will raise tariffs: pigs, soybeans, etc. A lot of farming states which are core Trump supporters.

Re: Canada hits back at 'punitive' U.S. tariffs in 'turning point' in relations

#58

Post by Larrikin »

throwaway5752 wrote: post #52

Donald Trump is objectively (ranked by presidential historians of all political parties) as the worst president in the 242 year history of the US. It will be work to get back what we can of what we've lost.

I believe it, but would like a source to see the criteria and who is rating.

Re: Canada hits back at 'punitive' U.S. tariffs in 'turning point' in relations

#59

Post by hangonhn »

craftyguy wrote: post #47
jcranmer wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, not so much states that voted for Trump, but small-population states that rack up lots of Senate votes. Put punitive tariffs on corn, soybean, and pork exports, and you'll have a dozen senators imploring Trump to back off.

Interesting that it's perfectly legal for foreign nations to pressure folks into voting one way or another by punishing them for voting in a particular president (and possibly hurting his/his party's chances of re-election), but it's not if they run ads to try and pursuade voters. It's almost like indirect election influencing vs direct election influencing (Russia in 2016). Somehow one is bad, but the other isn't.

I think it's a question of enforcement. You can enforce direct influence in the US because it usually happens on US soil or via US companies but indirect influence via tariffs is nearly impossible since foreign countries largely get to impose rules about what happens in their own country and this is what tariffs are.

Re: Canada hits back at 'punitive' U.S. tariffs in 'turning point' in relations

#60

Post by john00088876 »

craftyguy wrote: post #47
jcranmer wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, not so much states that voted for Trump, but small-population states that rack up lots of Senate votes. Put punitive tariffs on corn, soybean, and pork exports, and you'll have a dozen senators imploring Trump to back off.

Interesting that it's perfectly legal for foreign nations to pressure folks into voting one way or another by punishing them for voting in a particular president (and possibly hurting his/his party's chances of re-election), but it's not if they run ads to try and pursuade voters. It's almost like indirect election influencing vs direct election influencing (Russia in 2016). Somehow one is bad, but the other isn't.

It’s completely fair to target them since they’re responsible for choosing the administration who initiated this, and it’s totally clear what’s going on. Very different than dishonest manipulation of people’s ideas through fabrications. Targeted consequences to actions as a retaliation are very different to secret manipulation ahead of an election.
Post reply on HN