this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2026
48 points (98.0% liked)

Canada

11757 readers
763 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 Sports

Baseball

Basketball

Curling

Hockey

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

U.S. officials are threatening major changes to a trade agreement with Mexico and Canada that could upend the way business is done and leave Canada on the outs.

The Trump administration has a list of things it wants Mr. Carney to concede, including longstanding grievances about protected industries in Canada, such as the dairy sector. Another pressing issue for the U.S. administration is the fact that liquor distributors controlled by Ontario and other provincial governments in Canada pulled U.S. liquor off their shelves last year, in retaliation against Mr. Trump’s tariffs on Canada.

Trump administration officials have also been irked by Mr. Carney’s global charm offensive as he seeks to bolster Canada’s trade relationships with other countries, including China. Responding to a modest tariff deal that Mr. Carney struck during a visit to Beijing last month, Mr. Trump threatened to impose 100 percent tariffs on Canadian goods, and claimed that China would “take over” Canada and even ban hockey.

. . .

Mr. Trump and his advisers have indicated that the three-country pact could be scrapped altogether. Instead, the United States could end up with bilateral deals with Canada and Mexico, the advisers have suggested. The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

MBFC
Archive

top 32 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 38 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

This is just an attempt to get Canada and Mexico to play lowest bidder.

Really transparent and weak move.

[–] LeFantome@programming.dev 9 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

And totally ineffective if the other two parties are already colluding (which we are).

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 weeks ago

I would call it collaborating, nor colluding.

[–] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 32 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Agreements made with Trump are not worth the paper they’re written on.

[–] Zaraki42@lemmy.ca 11 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

It's toilet paper. One ply.

[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 7 points 3 weeks ago
[–] sparky@lemmy.federate.cc 9 points 3 weeks ago

Yep, why would anyone bother spending the time and effort to negotiate anything if the US will rip it up a few months later?

[–] weew@lemmy.ca 24 points 3 weeks ago

What's a trade pact worth when the US won't honor it anyways?

[–] smuuthbrane@sh.itjust.works 20 points 3 weeks ago

Coming soon: TACO night. Again.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 17 points 3 weeks ago

That would be a Mexican trade pact.

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 16 points 3 weeks ago

Ignoring these idiots and carrying on without them must be working. Make a pact with Mexico and revisit it when they bring in an administration that honors agreements that are more than 10 minutes old. At this point, agreeing to anything is pointless.

[–] veeesix@lemmy.ca 15 points 3 weeks ago

Mr. Trump threatened to impose 100 percent tariffs on Canadian goods, and claimed that China would “take over” Canada and even ban hockey.

Since every accusation is typically a confession with Republicans, I wouldn’t be surprised if one of Trump’s next moves is to ban Canadian teams from playing in the States.

[–] Nils@lemmy.ca 14 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Dude "wrote" a book on negotiations, but only knows how to play one tune.

And USA congress keeps trying to vote to end those tariffs on Canada.

If Carney's team is smart, by the time USA move on, we would have stronger ties with the rest of the world and business with USA would be optional.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 weeks ago

If Carney's team is smart, by the time USA move on, we would have stronger ties with the rest of the world

That appears to be the plan.

[–] wampus@lemmy.ca 14 points 3 weeks ago

So Canada's already had trade delegations in Mexico, very recently even, discussing 'things' with their partners. Both Mexico and Canada could easily read the room as soon as Trump was elected, that 'nafta' was toast -- and have likely got their own bilateral agreements shelf-ready for when Trump shits himself during trade negotiations later this year.

Trump throwing a pants-shitting hissy fit isn't a surprise to anyone. Nor is him responding with more threatening bullshit, when people are shying away from the US because of their threatening bullshit.

[–] Aralakh@lemmy.ca 13 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Mr. Carney’s global charm offensive

What an odd way to describe diversifying trade.

[–] breakfastmtn@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I dunno, seems like a perfectly fine way to describe what he was doing. What's your issue with it?

He wasn't diversifying trade in his speech at Davos, even if that was ultimately his goal.

[–] Aralakh@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

No issue? Simply observing the language being used to describe something rather normal on the global stage.

[–] breakfastmtn@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I wasn't attacking you. You took issue with the language used and I didn't understand why. Still don't -- it seems like a common way to describe a common occurrence to me -- but you don't have to explain it if you don't want to.

[–] Aralakh@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Thanks for the clarification! I don't have an issue with the meaning of what I quoted to be clear, rather to me the description used is not a common occurrence. Can't say I've come across it often.

[–] breakfastmtn@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 weeks ago
[–] Kyle_The_G@lemmy.world 12 points 3 weeks ago
[–] Reannlegge@lemmy.ca 11 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

And he thinks Mexico is going to go on with a trade deal without Canada.

[–] LeFantome@programming.dev 9 points 3 weeks ago

It would hurt but honestly I would be ok if Canada stopped trading with the US completely.

[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 weeks ago

Oh no! Anyways….

[–] TheDoctorDonna@piefed.ca 4 points 3 weeks ago

So a MexUSA trade pact, not a North American. I mean, he can call it whatever he wants I suppose, but it will still be what it is regardless of the name.

So a trade pact with only the U.S. in it? Sounds good.

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca -4 points 3 weeks ago

I hate Trump for being American but he keeps winning with these trade deals.

He got us out from under the American thumb with NAFTA. If he can get us out if CUSMA then he'd be the best American president in my lifetime.