Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Business

Sobering reality check – Trump is right: Canada’s economy can’t survive a fair trade agreement with the US

Published

11 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Conservative Treehouse

Canada’s economy has evolved to completely depend upon the good graces of the USA. If President Trump targets China with punitive tariffs, the Canadian economy will be collaterally damaged.

The current Canadian prime minister is genuinely a walking meme of a Canadian prime minister parody.

During his remarks to Parliament last Thursday, Prime Minister Carney waxed gleefully about the U.S. federal trade court ruling against President Trump’s tariffs, just moments before the federal appeals court stayed the opinion of the lower court. It’s a little funny.

Carney doesn’t seem to recognize the reality of the economic landscape before him. He complains about blocked access to the U.S. consumer base with a level of entitlement that’s genuinely humorous. Meanwhile, the Canadian economy around him is collapsing:

Background

Following the 2024 presidential election, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau traveled to Mar-a-Lago and said if President Trump were to make the Canadian government face reciprocal tariffs, open the USMCA trade agreements to force reciprocity, and/or balance economic relations on non-tariff issues, then Canada would collapse upon itself economically and cease to exist. In essence, in addition to the NATO defense shortfall, Canada cannot survive as a free and independent North American nation, without receiving all the one-way benefits from the U.S. economy.

To wit, President Trump then said, if Canada cannot survive in a balanced rules environment, including putting together its own military and defenses and meeting its NATO obligations, then Canada should become the 51st U.S state.

It was following this meeting that Trump started emphasizing this point and shocking everyone in the process. However, in the emotional reaction to Trump’s statements, no-one looked at the core issues outlined by Trudeau that framed Trump’s opinion.

Representing Canada, Trudeau was not expressing an unwillingness to comply with fairness and reciprocity in trade with the U.S., what Trudeau was expressing was an inability to comply.

Quite simply, after decades of shifting priorities, Canada no longer has the internal economic capability to comply with a fair-trade agreement (FTA). Trudeau was not lying, and Trump understood the argument, hence his 51st state remarks.

Firstly, Canada is a NATO partner, Mexico is not. As Trump affirmed to Trudeau during the meeting, it would be unfair of Trump to discuss NATO funding with the European Union, while Canada is one of the worst offenders. Trump is leveraging favorable trade terms and tariff relief with the EU member states, as a carrot to get them into compliance with the 2.0 percent to 2.5 percent spending requirement for their military.

If NATO member states contribute more to their own defense, the U.S. can pull back spending and save Americans money. However, Canada is currently 26th in NATO funding, spending only 1.37 percent of its GDP on defense.

Canada would have to spend at least another $15 billion/yr on its defense programs in order to reach 2.0 percent. Trudeau told Trump that was an impossible goal given the nature of the Canadian political system, and the current size of its economy ($2.25 trillion).

Secondly, over the last 40 years Canada has deindustrialized its economy, Mexico has not. As the progressive political ideology of its politicians took control of Canada policy, the “climate change” agenda and “green” economy became the focus. The dirty industrialized systems were not compliant with the goals of the Canadian policy makers.

The dirty mining sector (coal, coking coal, ore) no longer exists at scale to support self-sufficient manufacturing. The dirty oil refineries do not exist to refine the crude oil they extract. Large industrial heavy industry no longer exists at a scale needed to be self-sufficient.

Instead, Canada purchases forged and rolled steel component parts from overseas (mostly China). Making the issue more challenging, Canada doesn’t even have enough people skilled to do the dirty jobs within the heavy manufacturing; they would need a national apprenticeship program. Again, all points raised by Trudeau to explain why bilateral trade compliance was impossible.

Thirdly, the trade between Canada/U.S. and Mexico/U.S. is entirely different. The main imports from Canada are energy, lumber, and raw materials. The main imports from Mexico are agriculture, cars, and finished industrial goods. Mexico refines its own oil; Canada ships its oil to the U.S. for refining. There are obviously some similar products from Mexico and Canada, but for the most part there is a big difference.

Fourth, U.S. banks are allowed to operate in Mexico, but U.S. banks are not allowed to operate in Canada. U.S. media organizations are allowed to broadcast in Mexico, but U.S. media organizations are regulated and not permitted to broadcast in Canada. The Canadian government has strong regulations and restrictions on information and intellectual property.

All of these points of difference highlight why a trilateral trade agreement like NAFTA and the USMCA just don’t work out for the U.S.

Additionally, if President Trump levies a tariff on Chinese imports, it hits Canada much harder than Mexico because Canada has deindustrialized and now imports from China to assemble into finished goods destined to the U.S. In a very direct way Canada is a passthrough for Chinese products. Canada is now more of an assembly economy, not a dirty job manufacturing economy.

When Trudeau outlines the inability of Canada to agree to trade terms, simply because his country no longer has the capability of adhering to those trade terms, a frustrated President Trump says, “then become a state.”

There is no option to remain taking advantage of the U.S. on this level, and things are only getting worse. Thus, the point of irreconcilable conflict is identified.

Because the Canadian government became so dependent on its role as an assembly economy, they enmeshed with China in a way that made them dependent. The political issues of Chinese influence within Canada are a direct result of this dynamic. In fact, China was the big winner from the outcome of the recent election because all of their investments into Canada are grounded on retaining Liberal government dependency.

If Trump targets China with punitive tariffs, the Canadian economy will be collaterally damaged. Canada will end up paying a tariff rate because they use cheap Chinese component parts in their finished goods. Canada has structurally designed its economy to do this over multiple years.

Understanding the unique nature of the Canadian economic conundrum, the only way to address the issue is to break out the USMCA into two separate bilateral trade agreements. One set of trade terms for Mexico that leverages border security, and one set of trade terms for Canada that leverages NATO security and border security. The only substantive similarity between them will be in the auto and agriculture sector.

If you think the multinational corporations, political leftists, and UniParty Republicans in the U.S. are strongly opposing Trump now, just wait until later this year when the Trump administration proposes the elimination of the trilateral North American trade agreement, USMCA.

According to the World Bank, the U.S. economy is $27.3 trillion. Canada is $2.1 trillion. Do the math!

From Politico:

The expectation, according to two people close to the White House, is that negotiations to permanently remove the threat of painful 25 percent tariffs on Canada – which Trump mostly rolled back earlier [in April] – and other sector-specific tariffs are likely to be folded into the upcoming review of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement. That review is due in 2026, but the Trump administration wants to accelerate to this calendar year.

“It makes sense to separate out Canada and Mexico from the rest because they are going to want to redo the USMCA,” said one of the people close to the White House, who were granted anonymity to discuss ongoing deliberations. “They’re going to have separate tariffs that focus specifically on Mexico and Canada, and they’re going to take some actions to squeeze them a little bit.”

Reprinted with permission from Conservative Treehouse.

OSZAR »

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Business

Beef is becoming a luxury item in Canada

Published on

This article supplied by Troy Media.

Troy Media By Sylvain Charlebois

Canadian beef prices have surged due to a shrinking cattle herd, high transportation costs, and potential market collusion

With summer weather settling in, Canadians are returning to a familiar ritual—ring up the barbecue. But as they approach the meat counter, many are faced with shockingly high prices. This year, the meat aisle has become a case study in supply-side economics and market dysfunction, leaving
consumers to wonder how this all came to be.

Since January, according to Statistics Canada, beef prices have surged dramatically. Striploin is up 34.2 per cent, top sirloin 33.7 per cent, and rib cuts nearly 12 per cent. Pork rib cuts and chicken breasts have each risen 5.9 per cent, while even meatless burger patties are 6.8 per cent more
expensive. Beef has led the way in these increases, and its dominance in the price hikes is striking. What’s particularly concerning is that it’s not just one cut of beef—virtually every option has seen a dramatic jump, putting pressure on Canadian consumers who were already grappling with rising food costs.

The cause behind these increases lies in Canada’s shrinking beef cow inventory, now at just 3.38 million head—the lowest since 1989. This represents a 1.2 per cent drop from last year, but it signals much more than a cyclical decline. Many cattle producers, facing an increasingly volatile market, are choosing to exit the industry while prices are favourable. Others are opting to reinvest in less risky sectors or even shift entirely to crop production, leaving the beef industry in a precarious state. In short, Canada’s beef industry is retreating, and with that retreat comes rising prices, fewer available cattle, and growing uncertainty.

South of the border, the U.S. is seeing a similar trend, but far less severe. According to the United States Department of Agriculture, the
American beef cow herd declined by just 0.5 per cent to 27.9 million head. This relatively modest drop, coupled with less disruption in their production practices, has resulted in more stable prices.

Over the past year, U.S. boneless sirloin steak rose 5.7 per cent, compared to a staggering 22 per cent in Canada. Ground beef saw a 10.8 per cent increase in the U.S., but 23 per cent in Canada. The price difference between the two countries is stark, and Canadians are feeling the inflationary pressure much more acutely.

There are several factors contributing to the price hikes: Canada’s vast geography, high transportation costs, a limited number of federally licensed beef processors, carbon pricing, and higher labour costs. Carbon pricing, in particular, has added a burden to sectors like beef production, where transportation costs are high. Regulations and logistical inefficiencies add to the costs, driving up prices for retailers and, ultimately, consumers.

This combination of factors is having a compounding effect on the price of beef, making it increasingly out of reach for many.

But there’s another possibility we can’t ignore: potential collusion within the industry. In Canada, a small number of large processors control much of the beef supply, which gives them significant influence over prices. The U.S. government has taken strong action against price-fixing among major meat packers like JBS, Tyson Foods, Cargill, and National Beef, leading to multimillion-dollar settlements. In Canada, however, the Competition Bureau has remained largely silent on similar concerns, allowing the possibility of price-fixing to persist unchecked. Perhaps it’s time for Canada to follow the U.S. lead and ensure the beef industry is held accountable for its actions.

The consequences of these rising costs are already evident. According to IBISWorld, Canadian per capita beef consumption fell by 7.1 per cent in 2023 and is expected to drop another 2.1 per cent in 2024. This isn’t merely a shift in dietary preferences—this is a structural change in consumer behaviour. Beef is becoming increasingly viewed as a luxury item, with many budget-conscious households turning to ground beef as a more affordable option. For many Canadians, beef is no longer a staple food but rather an occasional indulgence, reserved for special occasions or holiday meals.

This shift is unfortunate. Beef remains one of the most natural, sustainable sources of protein available to Canadians. Ranchers and processors have made significant strides in improving environmental stewardship, animal welfare, and food safety, often without recognition. Beef is not only nutritionally dense but also supports rural economies and provides a level of traceability few other protein sources can offer.

For many Canadian families, a summer steak on the grill is becoming more of a splurge than a staple. While Canadians will continue to enjoy beef, the frequency and volume of consumption will likely diminish.

Barbecue season hasn’t disappeared, but for many, it’s starting to look a little different: more sausages, more chicken, and fewer striploins. A shame, really, for a product that offers so much more than just taste.

Dr. Sylvain Charlebois is a Canadian professor and researcher in food distribution and policy. He is senior director of the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University and co-host of The Food Professor Podcast. He is frequently cited in the media for his insights on food prices, agricultural trends, and the global food supply chain.

Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country.

OSZAR »
Continue Reading

Banks

Liberal border bill could usher in cashless economy by outlawing cash payments

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Bill C-2 has raised concerns from legal organizations that warn it could lead to a cashless economy in Canada by banning cash payments over $10,000.

The Liberals’ proposed border legislation may quietly usher in a cashless economy by banning cash payments.

On June 3, the Liberal Party introduced Bill C-2 to strengthen border security and outlaw cash payments over $10,000. Legal organizations have since warned that this is the first step to a cashless economy and digital ID system in Canada.

“Part 11 amends the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act to prohibit certain entities from accepting cash deposits from third parties and certain persons or entities from accepting cash payments, donations or deposits of $10,000 or more,” the legislation proposes.

While the bill purports to strengthen border security and restore Canada-U.S. relations, many have warned that government regulation of cash payments is a slippery slope.

In a June 4 X post, the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) warned that “If Bill C-2 passes, it will become a Criminal Code offence for businesses, professionals, and charities to accept cash donations, deposits, or payments of $10,000 or more. Even if the $10,000 payment or donation is broken down into several smaller cash transactions, it will still be a crime for a business or charity to receive it.”

The JCCF pointed out that while cash payments of $10,000 are not common for Canadians, the government can easily reduce “the legal amount to $5,000, then $1,000, then $100, and eventually nothing.”

“Restricting the use of cash is a dangerous step towards tyranny and totalitarianism,” the organization warned. “Cash gives citizens privacy, autonomy, and freedom from surveillance by government and by banks, credit card companies, and other corporations.”

“If we cherish our privacy, we need to defend our freedom to choose cash, in the amount of our choosing,” it continued. “This includes, for example, our right to pay $10,000 cash for a car, or to donate $10,000 (or more) to a charity.”

“Law enforcement already has the tools to fight crime,” JCCF declared. “Perhaps they need a bigger budget to hire more people, or perhaps they need to use existing tools more effectively. In a free society, violating our right to use cash is not the answer.”

In winter 2022, the Liberal government, under former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, froze the bank accounts of those who donated to the Freedom Convoy, which featured thousands of Canadians camping in front of Parliament to protest COVID mandates.

Similarly, Liberal Prime Minister Mark Carney’s move to restrict Canadians is hardly surprising considering his close ties to the World Economic Forum and push for digital currency.

In a 2021 article, the National Post noted that “since the advent of the COVID pandemic, Carney has been front and centre in the promotion of a political agenda known as the ‘Great Reset,’ or the ‘Green New Deal,’ or ‘Building Back Better.’

“Carney’s Brave New World will be one of severely constrained choice, less flying, less meat, more inconvenience and more poverty,” the outlet continued.

In light of Carney’s new leadership over Canadians, many are sounding alarm over his distinctly anti-freedom ideas.

Carney, whose ties to globalist groups have had Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre call him the World Economic Forum’s “golden boy”. He has also previously endorsed the carbon tax and even criticized Trudeau when the tax was  exempted from home heating oil in an effort to reduce costs for some Canadians.

Carney, who as reported by LifeSiteNews, has admitted he is an “elitist” and a “globalist.” Just recently, he criticized U.S. President Donald Trump for targeting woke ideology and has vowed to promote “inclusiveness” in Canada.

Carney also said that he is willing to use all government powers, including “emergency powers,” to enforce his energy plan.

OSZAR »
Continue Reading

Trending

X
OSZAR »