K-9 Posted February 4 Report Posted February 4 I can’t help but laugh at the absurdity of it all. Did anyone seriously think that oil industry leaders were gonna let him get away with imposing these stupid tariffs? We import 4 million barrels a day from Canada alone. I won’t even mention the potential ramifications when it comes to Canadian lumber, which comprises nearly half of our lumber supply. Geniuses all.
SABRES 0311 Posted February 4 Report Posted February 4 (edited) 1 hour ago, K-9 said: I can’t help but laugh at the absurdity of it all. Did anyone seriously think that oil industry leaders were gonna let him get away with imposing these stupid tariffs? We import 4 million barrels a day from Canada alone. I won’t even mention the potential ramifications when it comes to Canadian lumber, which comprises nearly half of our lumber supply. Geniuses all. https://apnews.com/article/trump-tariffs-canada-mexico-china-sheinbaum-trudeau-017efa8c3343b8d2a9444f7e65356ae9 Were Canada and Mexico already taking the actions listed in the article? Edited February 4 by SABRES 0311
LGR4GM Posted February 4 Report Posted February 4 33 minutes ago, SABRES 0311 said: https://apnews.com/article/trump-tariffs-canada-mexico-china-sheinbaum-trudeau-017efa8c3343b8d2a9444f7e65356ae9 Were Canada and Mexico already taking the actions listed in the article? Canada approved 1.3 billion for border security back in December. So yes. Also, there's very little evidence of fentynal coming over the Canadian border. Trump won't even check up on this and the Canadians are just going forward with what they decided on in December. No idea on Mexico. Bread and circuses
K-9 Posted February 4 Author Report Posted February 4 38 minutes ago, SABRES 0311 said: https://apnews.com/article/trump-tariffs-canada-mexico-china-sheinbaum-trudeau-017efa8c3343b8d2a9444f7e65356ae9 Were Canada and Mexico already taking the actions listed in the article? As @LGR4GMpointed out, Canada had already agreed to the enhanced border security agreement. And I was only addressing the proposed tariffs imposed on Canada, not Mexico. Perhaps I should have been clearer. The idea that Trump could leverage border security for Canada to avoid tariffs is a ludicrous idea put forth by the White House in a pathetic attempt to save face. Canada would have imposed retaliatory tariffs on the 4 million barrels of oil they export to the US daily as well as the nearly 50% of our lumber supply that they export to the US as well. I suspect Trump’s corporate masters pointed that out to him as he isn’t smart enough to understand basic economic facts.
K-9 Posted February 4 Author Report Posted February 4 12 minutes ago, LGR4GM said: Canada approved 1.3 billion for border security back in December. So yes. Also, there's very little evidence of fentynal coming over the Canadian border. Trump won't even check up on this and the Canadians are just going forward with what they decided on in December. No idea on Mexico. Bread and circuses Some people are making a killing on Wall Street based just on the fear of tariffs. Like in his first term, the threat of tariffs saw the markets dip. Savvy investors then pounced and enjoyed nice gains as Wall Street rallied with the news the tariffs had been “paused.” And I don’t think that kind of market manipulation is mere coincidence, either.
SABRES 0311 Posted February 4 Report Posted February 4 (edited) Well it looks like the tariff threat resulted in Canada’s willingness to label cartels as terrorist organizations and a task firce (which has been done before). Probably could’ve been done without a tariff IMO. @K-9 there’s another one with China. Edited February 4 by SABRES 0311
K-9 Posted February 4 Author Report Posted February 4 9 hours ago, SABRES 0311 said: Well it looks like the tariff threat resulted in Canada’s willingness to label cartels as terrorist organizations and a task firce (which has been done before). Probably could’ve been done without a tariff IMO. @K-9 there’s another one with China. So the threat of retaliatory tariffs by Canada had no bearing on the decision to “pause” them? It was making Canada cave to labeling cartels terrorist organizations that did the trick? Not a chance. Believe what you will, but the difference between labeling them “criminal organizations” vs “terrorist organizations” is negligible when it comes to the pursuit, capture, and prosecution of cartel members. I’m aware of the proposed tariffs on Chinese goods. What will the leverage against China be to make them bow to the threat of tariffs on the goods we import from there?
SABRES 0311 Posted February 4 Report Posted February 4 17 minutes ago, K-9 said: So the threat of retaliatory tariffs by Canada had no bearing on the decision to “pause” them? It was making Canada cave to labeling cartels terrorist organizations that did the trick? Not a chance. Believe what you will, but the difference between labeling them “criminal organizations” vs “terrorist organizations” is negligible when it comes to the pursuit, capture, and prosecution of cartel members. I’m aware of the proposed tariffs on Chinese goods. What will the leverage against China be to make them bow to the threat of tariffs on the goods we import from there? No idea what the end goal is with China when it comes to tariffs. I do know China 2049 and what they have been doing is of concern. Regarding Canada you should take the blinders off when reading what I said. I specifically said getting Canada to label cartels as terrorist organizations could have been done without tariffs IMO. I am not familiar with Canadian laws but the difference calling some group or person a terrorist vs criminal is not negligible. First off, prosecuting criminals is the point of pursuit and capture. When it comes to terrorists, sometimes killing them is the purpose of pursuit. Some you capture to make your way up the chain or if they surrender. Others get a bullseye.
K-9 Posted February 4 Author Report Posted February 4 44 minutes ago, SABRES 0311 said: No idea what the end goal is with China when it comes to tariffs. I do know China 2049 and what they have been doing is of concern. Regarding Canada you should take the blinders off when reading what I said. I specifically said getting Canada to label cartels as terrorist organizations could have been done without tariffs IMO. I am not familiar with Canadian laws but the difference calling some group or person a terrorist vs criminal is not negligible. First off, prosecuting criminals is the point of pursuit and capture. When it comes to terrorists, sometimes killing them is the purpose of pursuit. Some you capture to make your way up the chain or if they surrender. Others get a bullseye. I didn’t have blinders on and I fully appreciated your comment because I agree, whatever Canada agreed to had nothing to do with tariffs. But the rhetoric from the White House always seems to suggest the great negotiator Trump won some sort of major concession by leveraging the threat of tariffs. It’s total bull$hit damage control imo because everyone with a clue knows the economic damage these tariffs would cause, especially when inflation is still a major concern and I’m convinced his puppet masters got him to see the light. As for China, the sheer amount of essential electronic components, from computers to phones to automobiles and everything in between, that we import from them tells me the tariffs won’t last long, if at all. It was interesting to me that many US manufacturers ordered stockpiles of these components in the months leading up to the inauguration. And I doubt we will see any appreciable uptick in the pursuit, capture, and prosecution of the cartels now that they’re designated as terrorists. It would be a welcomed reality though.
Recommended Posts