deLaat wrote:

.. You don't want to be aligned with the US or become the 51st State? ..  

Quite happy to be a respected neighbour & trading partner, like it's been for many, many, many decades .. but respect is a 2-way street and loyalty & trust must go both ways.

If Canada was 10x the size of the USA & used it's dramatic size difference to outright bully the USA financial wellbeing with unfounded lies & BS, if Canada's Prime Minister kept referring to the USA president as Premier and kept referring the USA as Canada's 11th province, I suspect you might take a wee bit of offense at the total disrespect. 
 

Jody Thornton wrote:

RadioActive wrote:

It's not exactly quite the one-way street you imply. And letting traffic flow both ways is the only way it works. You may not think much of Canada. But boy, will you notice when we're not there anymore. 

Great stuff RA.  I was sure we hadn't heard DeLaat of him, but that pro-Trump rhetoric makes me EXTREMELY nauseous.
 

Submitted for your approval...the perfect use for A.I.

https://x.com/call_me_tomasso/status/1895722929964699829

deLaat wrote:

Tying broadcasting into this thread, I hope that no Canadian Patriot watched the American Super Bowl game, especially using a VPN or a Seattle TV feed to circumvent CanCon.

I hope no one munched on Doritos dipped in Old El Pase salsa during the game.

Or ordered a pizza from Dominos at half time. Or, perish the thought, added an order of Buffalo Wings, the great American creation. Perhaps they slopped Kraft dip sauce on their Hanes t-shirts or Levi jeans.

Driving home in their Ford or GM product, I hope they didn't listen to an American artist on Sirius/XM. At home, once the game was over, I hope they didn't continue to watch a television program produced for ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox or even the CW.

If they are sports fans, I trust that they do not watch any NBA, MLB, MLS games or indeed the NHL, an American non-profit headquartered in Manhattan whose Canadian players make up 41% of the league.

Nor did they go to work the next day at a Canadian subsidiary of a US parent, a company who manufactures product for export to the US or a natural resource company thriving due to shipments made to, at 75%, Canada's largest trading partner.

You don't want to be aligned with the US or become the 51st State?

It's a bit late.

 

your just getting silly now. I'm sure the starving and sick children in Africa cut off from USAID are in total agreement with you. 
 

Ok. Stop repeating what the FOTUS and his supporters say and do. By echoing their words and actions, you're just giving them attention, promoting them and keeping them top-of-mind, just like all of North America's media do every goddamn minute of every goddamn day. As far as I'm concerned, if you're repeating or otherwise giving any account of anything that the FOTUS and his supporters say and do, you're supporting that side and supporting fascism.

Back to broadcasting for a moment, there are questions about whether Canadians will be willing to give up American streaming services like Netflix and Disney+ to protest the tariffs. The Canada Media Fund, which has an obvious vested interest in promoting local content, is hoping it's the start of a trend that will not only help Canadians discover home grown shows, but benefit the industry here, as well. 

The article below deals heavily with Quebec, a province that will certainly find it easer to reject American programming. Whether English Canada follows suit is another story.

Buying Local Isn't Just About Groceries - It's TV, Too

It's worth noting that Toastmedia, which runs NP and the Sun papers, is American. They can be added to the list of American assets to avoid.

Chrisphen wrote:

It's worth noting that Toastmedia, which runs NP and the Sun papers, is American. They can be added to the list of American assets to avoid.

Even more important to note, PostMedia publications and the Toronto Sun are doing their usual right-wing spin on the tradewar and placing the blame on Canada rather than on Trump. Boycott these assholes. PostMedia will always argue for the American perspective whether you realize it or not and they own 80% of the physical news media in our country now, They are the FOX News of the north, spreading propaganda to gullible fools.


 

Last edited by TomTV (March 4, 2025 1:57 pm)

This is no longer a fight between Liberals and Conservatives, or Greens or NDP. This is a fight with a country that chose to elect a felon, has no interest in fairness, laws or existing trade agreements. It simply wants our land and natural resources.

As to TomTV's post about PostMedia...here's who owns PostMedia...
Chatham Asset Management LLC is an American hedge fund, founded by Anthony Melchiorre in 2000, with a large foothold in newspapers and tabloids, headquartered in Chatham Borough, New Jersey, United States. The company holds a controlling interest in Postmedia, A360media, McClatchy, and RR Donnelley. Chatham's key principal is Larry Buchalter. SOURCE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chatham_Asset_Management

According to a 2018 article in Fortune, Chatham is known for its close ties to the Republican Party.
As many of you know, PostMedia owns the National Post, the Financial Post, the Sun chain of newspapers, and more. Think about that when you read them.
 

Not long ago, speaking directly to Americans...



 

A wonderful history lesson to Canadians, courtesy of Craig Baird on Twitter:

In 1890, the Tariff Act came into place in the United States. It placed tariffs on imports of up to 50%.
While touted as a way to build American industry, there was also the hope it would force an annexation of Canada. It backfired.

Put forward by William McKinley, who was a Congressman at that point, the Tariff Act put duties across imports ranging from 38% to 49.5%.
McKinley was called the Napoleon of Protection. While some items had tariffs eliminated, most had tariffs increased.

One reason for the tariffs was to force the annexation of Canada. The McKinley Tariff declined to make an exception for Canadian products. It was hoped this would make Canada more reliant on the US market, and push Canadians to become the 45th state.

Secretary of State James G. Blaine believed that annexation would eliminate competition with Canada over fishing and timber rights. Blane co-authored the Tariff Act.  He stated of annexation: "a grander and nobler brotherly love, that may unite in the end”

British politician Lyon Playfair saw the Tariff Act for what it was. He called it a covert attack on Canada,
Both Britain and the United States believed the Tariff Act would drive Canada to join the United States.

In reality, it had the complete opposite result.

The Tariff Act instead pushed Canada to align itself more with Britain. People began to rally behind their "love for Queen, flag, and country".

Sir John A. Macdonald used the tariffs as a rallying cry in the 1891 election and was able to win another majority government.

Within two years of the Tariff Act being passed, agricultural exports to Britain from Canada went from $3.5 million to $15 million. Produce and animal exports to Britain grew from $16 million to $24 million during that same period.

Minister of Trade and Commerce Mackenzie Bowell said: “The McKinley Bill, instead of destroying the trade of this country, has only diverted it from the United States to England."

American consumers dealt with a sharp increase in prices.

The Republicans lost the 1890 Congressional elections, losing 93 seats while the Democrats gained 86.

In 1892, the Democrats gained control of the Senate, House and Presidency.
They then replaced the Tariff Act with a new act that lowered tariffs.

As our Prime Minister  stated today during his speech, he believes the real reason for the tariffs is to collapse the Canadian economy in order to make us more vulnerable to being annexed by America. Well let's hope Mr Baird's history lesson will be repeated again and the US itself learns a harsh lesson about fucking around and finding out.

Here is Felon Trump's response to our retaliation:

Please explain to Governor Trudeau, of Canada, that when he puts on a Retaliatory Tariff on the US, our Reciprocal Tariff will immediately increase by a like amount!

Why is this orange idiot capitalizing "Reciprocal" and "Tariff"?



 

Last edited by TomTV (March 4, 2025 3:27 pm)

This post contains no pro/anti Trump comments or opinions. This post contains no pro/anti Canadian comments or opinions.  

It is a question about two Trade Agreements between Canada and the US. that took effect during my time growing up, living and working in Canada. 

Being as RA has given us some latitude in this thread, I am hoping that my questions about the Auto Pact and NAFTA can be answered by someone more knowledgeable than I, perhaps a Newsman or, at very least, someone who was watching The National and not the Baby Blue movie on CITY like I was. 

In a nutshell, what was in it for the US. Did they benefit and how? 

The Auto Pact resulted in an increase from seven percent of vehicles made in 1964 in Canada that were sent south of the border, to sixty percent in 1968. This created thousands of jobs and decreased vehicle costs to Canadian consumers. What was the US's motive? How did it help them? 

A similar question with NAFTA. It appears that a market of 10x was opened to Canadian exporters but the US gained perhaps the size of one additional state. What was the US's rationale? 

Let me state again that I do not know the answer but would like to find out. These are not 'gotcha' questions, ' I told you so questions', or loaded questions. I have long wondered why, plain and simple. Whatever the answer, the US made these deals with its eyes wide open.

I am not saying that he is right, but I am wondering if this is an area where Trump feels the US is being taken advantage of. 

Again, I am not saying that he is right... 

I hope that someone might be able to give me insight into what the US had to gain, or, was it simply worldly thinking?? 

Thank you.

Good question deLaat and any agreement has to a benefit to both sides.  I also am not qualified to answer your question but I did remember Lee Iaccoca speaking about the Auto Pact and NAFTA in his book.

The advantage to the US was money.  The big three (or four if you include AMC) could build cars here for less money.  One huge cost was more or less taken care of and that was health care.  Lee had mentioned in his book Talking Straight that one of the biggest costs for US auto manufacturers was managing health care for thousands of employees and their families.

He said that Ford, GM, Chrysler and AMC had office buildings and divisions that only handled the paperwork and claims for employees health benefits.   He said in Ontario the company didn't need to be involved since the government took care of the paperwork and paid for a good chunk of bills through taxes.

I was able to find a quote from Lee in a Huffington Post article...As far back as the early 1990s, before it became a mark of shame to be the chair of Chrysler Corporation, Lee Iacocca understood the private health care costs that have now crippled the U.S. auto industry. "We save maybe 15, 20 percent by building a car in Canada because the Canadian government's paying that 15 percent for workers' health insurance," Iacocca told AARP's online magazine earlier this year.

The original Auto Pact and later NAFTA were both to get rid of tariffs and to streamline and integrate car manufacturing in North America.   And of course to lower the cost of manufacturing.  

Last edited by paterson1 (March 4, 2025 9:48 pm)

The best part of the Trump speech to me came before he even said a word. As he was entering the chamber and shaking hands, the camera passed by a woman who was carrying a hand-written sign. She wasn't on screen long but it was there long enough for it to be read. I have no idea who she is but her message was clear:



Apparently, I wasn't the only one to see it. A Trump acolyte standing nearby saw her holding it up and violently ripped it out of her hand on camera, then tore it up. 

Maybe the only truth that was told that night! (Although the Congressman getting thrown out for yelling at Trump was pretty enjoyable, too.)

Then, just as he launched into his bragadocious speech, WGRZ - the station I was watching - cut into the proceedings for an emergency alert test, replacing Trump's voice with an EBS tone. 

Otherwise, the whole thing reminded me of one of the rules of Seinfeld's Festivus - the airing of grievances. The only thing missing was the pole and the feats of strength.

RadioActive wrote:

Only two local radio stations carried some of the speech - 680 News Radio featured the section where Trump finished talking about tariffs. CBC Radio1 also carried it, but interrupted it as well after the tariff references ended. Otherwise, the speech was mostly ignored by AM640 and CFRB.

Ignored by me too. There was a time when, irrespective of which party held the Whitehouse, I wouldn't miss one of these addresses to Congress.

Now, I refuse to spend any time watching a chimp throwing feces.