After how many people said it was pointless.
That's why it's important not just to elect intelligent people, but to also ignore and / or shun stupid people.
All the people who said pulling US alcohol off the shelves country wide was a stupid move have no idea how many red/southern states love and take pride in selling their liqour/beer to Canada. When that all halted they lost a huge customer base. Those workers are almost all voters too.
Yeah, but they're also largely all Trump voters and the oh so foreseeable consequences of their actions would do nothing to prevent them from voting the same again next time if they could. They are far more "Why is Canada doing this to us?" than "Why is Canada reacting so strongly?".
Its not love or pride, its money. Let's not convolute exactly what's happening and the reality of what really drives everything in our modern politics.
Also, people taking direct action (by swearingboff US booze) to show displeasure and push back against threats to our sovereignty and show patriotism is reason enough to have sworn off US booze. People who said this was stupid are really missing a big point here and a big moral victory for us.
Stupid. That's how we end up getting invaded for real. It would destroy both countries but there's no way the current US regime would let an antagonistic Canada develop nukes.
Again, insanely stupid if you think we could ever keep a secret like that from the americans for any amount of time. They read everything from everybody, and Canada is notoriously terrible with information security.
I love the Aussies as a partner for Canada, but there's the entire fucking Pacific ocean between us and them, instead of the world's longest land border.
Which isn't actually a buyback, but an unlawful forfeiture of personal property that you might get some money for... if you do it right away due to the program's critical lack of funding. The person in charge of Canadian firearms legislation has never even touched a gun in his life and is terrified of them.
Trying to force the new pipeline through BC despite the province's resounding "No" on the issue.
Not cancelling the gun "buyback" that is being forced through despite overwhelming evidence that Canadian firearms crime is not being committed by PAL holders but rather US guns smuggled in by gang activity, and the gov't admitting as such.
It's not prosperity if we're destroying what little we have left of nature. Pipelines aren't the answer, as the ecosystems it would pass through are already falling apart as it is without any spills. We can't continue to be so short-sighted on profits.
It's not short-sighted. Right now, the countries which present the biggest threat to Canada are all ignoring nature and are ruthlessly focusing on profits. You have the cautionary tale of the EU, which has drastically reduced its emissions, drastically hurt its own economic growth, and as a result, they are now getting shafted by the US and China. And people say they are on a decline and will be gone in half a century.
Do you want the same for Canada? At some point, there will be nothing left to export, since the competition has outcompeted us, and we'll only have the resources in the ground. And all the experts who know how to build pipelines have moved south. At that point, who do you think will build those pipelines?
If the US is threatening to annex us, and they are waging economic war on us with the tariffs, then yeah, I don't think we should give them access to critical minerals. They decided to light over a century of friendship with us on fire, that's on them.
When 9/11 happened and we gave our entire airspace to them, and many Canadian families in Gander even welcomed complete US strangers into their homes for free, that was definitely the right thing to do back then. But if something like 9/11 happens again, do we give our airspace to the US again? I don't know about that, I don't really consider them to be "friends" anymore.
With their politics? No, not any American I don't know already. It would just be an insane risk. Even with the ones I do know - and that's a lot, spread around the net - I'd be wary about some of them. That entire country is full of batshit crazy people and I say that as somebody who talks to them every day.
Buddy, he's already said the NAFTA/CUSMA deal he made in his first presidency and was so proud of was terrible.
He can't even be trusted to hold to deals he's made, which is par for the course for anyone paying an ounce of attention to his relationship to people he hires to work for him and then stiffs on paying, thinking he's slick.
We shouldn't trust him because he's proven he can be trusted lol
Well, we don't consume the amount we have and the exports help our economy. But we should be using them as leverage for getting the best deal from the US possible and ensuring we have many customers and not just the US.
Canada isn’t obligated to provide product to preferential trade partners, regardless of the noise they make.
It’s business, not charity, and reliable trade partnerships should be the main focus.
The First Nations cannot do this. They may try to challenge some decisions, but they will not go that far because they know that doing so will turn the public against them. And this may open the door to a review of all claims they have made throughout the years. Many of their past claims were based on interpretations of treaties signed centuries ago. To interpret terms described in those treaties as ownership rights was a far stretch to begin with.
I'm not completely sold on Carney's domestic policies, but at the end of this I want him in as trade and/or foreign affairs minister. He has a certain kind of economic/finance chops, but my intuition is that his talents would be wasted if he were pigeonholed there.
Personally, my criticisms of Carney are all from the left (austerity, corporate handouts, backsliding on environmental protection). So I don't know how much purchase they'll have in this sub.
I don't like the regressions on environmental policies. I think he made veered towards populism on gas fees, and yes, I drive (we just got a Toyota Corolla 2026 after replacing a Sentra 2010). I also have massive doubts about his housing strategy; Trudeau did promise to restore parts of the funding model for co-operatives previously withdrawn by Mulroney and which subsequent Conservative and Liberal governments failed to restore, but ended up failing to honour that promise, as pointed out by the Cooperative Housing Federation of Canada.
I think he's making some positive moves around the TFW portfolio by restricting it, but I'd like to see it returned to the pre-Harper model, perhaps it to high-income specializations, as I believe current model fails Canadians as well as foreign workers who then find themselves subject to suppressed wages and expensive housing, or to frame it differently: Canada is making a promise to foreign labour that it cannot keep for both local workers and for the people coming here to accept work.
In the post-war 1940's, Canada allowed foreign workers into the country to obtain work contracts which enabled rabid building into the 1960's and 1970's, which housed them, built communities, and provided housing for many of our parents. That's a win-win, and that's what I'd like to see out of these programs.
So I'm not necessarily against negotiating environmental policy - I think we need to build a portfolio of small wins or we risk big losses tomorrow. And I'm not opposed to immigration, provided the policy is applied in prudent ways that provide a benefit for all the parties involved - especially labour - and not businesses exclusively. I realize that these are complex topics that deserve deeper conversations and that I have blind spots, but as it stands I see him selling out pieces that I hold as critical for long term sustainable success.
I've largely discounted any real likelihood of annexation on the basis that it's unnecessary -- they get essentially what they need from us already without the hassle of attempting to govern an unwilling populace. But that calculus changes significantly if we don't play ball. They're certainly not going to permit us to supply them to American geo-political adversaries instead.
Realistically, I think this just rhetoric -- but I am concerned about where it puts us if it turns out that it's not. I would tend to argue that it's actually a better bargaining chip as an unexploited resource that could be developed to our shared benefit than as an exploited one we're not selling to them and that thereby represents a potential threat to them.
America will do what it wants and I fully expect any deal we make to fall apart within six months on the basis that "respect under the current administration is "being the first to fuck the other party in a deal". Any kind of retaliation would be viewed as an attack.
With that said, I think our strategy needs to leave as little exposure as possible, lest it be grounds for a negative "response". He's already accused Canada of being the main source of Fentanyl, and then declared it a Weapon of Mass Destruction, so he already has his cause to sell. The only question is: who's going to buy that as cause for a military exercise?
If we don't make an absolute guarantee for natural resources, he can't accuse us of breaking that guarantee. We can trade, but we can exercise control as well.
Its always amusing to see people who take things like this and simplify it to such a simple thing... but fail to recognize that those who said it aren't stupid, they know the same facts... this is all connected you know? What we say and do, what they say and do later, how that appears to others.
Its a move in the middle of a dance, with an audience... we dont care about the dance partner we know theyre going to step on our feet.
We are putting our feet in the spotlight to make sure it is very well seen when it is stepped on, and stating to the media that we do not consent to foot stepping in any capacity.
It’s part of a bigger discussion in terms of our trading relationship, because we have other partners around the world, in Europe for example, who are very interested in participating in those value chains.
Does Canada have any ways to refine and/or export those minerals in significant quantity? If not then there is no leverage as the US can seek other suppliers from Australia, Africa, etc. China, for example, found alternative suppliers for Canola oils.
By the sound of them, they're an Albertan UCP voter (or even worse, a separatist), which puts them around MAGAt level intelligence. Spouting garbage is what they do.
The revenue would be a tremendous boost to our crippled economy. Our economic growth has be stagnant for the last decade and the same trajectory we've been on isn't the correct course.
Imagine in the Northern Gateway was completed and we have pivoted to selling to Asia at marlet prices instead of the US at a discount. Imagine if Energy East could have sold to Europe instead of having to sell crude to the US at a discount.
Help me understand how exporting oil to Asia at a higher price than currently selling to the US wouldn't increase revenue.
Help me understand how wages, economic growth, and taxes collected from the pipeline and spin-off jobs would be a bad thing.
From what I’ve researched, the northern gateway pipeline would only have created less than 220 permanent jobs. Kind of a small reward, for a pretty big environmental risk as bitumen is sludgy & notoriously hard to clean up if an accident occurs.
Also why is it that you think it’s a good idea to ramp up selling a resource that’s only going to increase in value as world resources are depleting?
Wouldn’t it be more forward thinking to wait until some of the resources we currently have become more valuable & perhaps more environmentally feasible to refine or ship safely?
How come you are blaming 70 years of policy from both left and right/provincial and federal on a guy who's been in office less than a year? And with such vitriol?
One more defection and maybe your home leader will resign in shame and give his stolen seat back. Failed opposition leader is the highest PP will ever go.
An excellent bargaining chip as negotiations for CUSMA heat up
Apparently not selling US booze is going to be the best way to negotiate, 😮
After how many people said it was pointless. That's why it's important not just to elect intelligent people, but to also ignore and / or shun stupid people.
All the people who said pulling US alcohol off the shelves country wide was a stupid move have no idea how many red/southern states love and take pride in selling their liqour/beer to Canada. When that all halted they lost a huge customer base. Those workers are almost all voters too.
The LCBO is the single largest purchaser of alcohol in the world. You are damn straight it’d hurt.
LCBO is second largest. Tesco is the largest
Sorry my stats were off BUT if you add all of the other liquor boards across Canada it’s a big hurt.
Used to be, and still top 5. I believe Tesco Group now holds the top spot.
Still a really big number.
Yup
Yeah, but they're also largely all Trump voters and the oh so foreseeable consequences of their actions would do nothing to prevent them from voting the same again next time if they could. They are far more "Why is Canada doing this to us?" than "Why is Canada reacting so strongly?".
Then they can suffer. I don't have an interest in people who voted for the guy who wants to annex our country.
I hope I didn't give you the impression I was worried about their quality of life degrading as ours does. That wasn't my intention.
Their liquor exports have plummeted. They are hurting.
Its not love or pride, its money. Let's not convolute exactly what's happening and the reality of what really drives everything in our modern politics.
Wouldnt it have been better if Maga Danielle actually continued with banning US Booze?
Also, people taking direct action (by swearingboff US booze) to show displeasure and push back against threats to our sovereignty and show patriotism is reason enough to have sworn off US booze. People who said this was stupid are really missing a big point here and a big moral victory for us.
Lol yes, that was essentially the subtext of this and ultimately the reason I commented in the first place.
So yeah, completely agree.
Absolutely. Some people chew on tree bark while others playing 4D chess.
Lmao. I'm stealing that one and adding my own flair. "Time to cut back on your fiber intake and stop chewing bark". Thank you.
You spruced it up 👀
God damn that was clever. Well done lol
If there's one thing Doug can do, it's making decisions on booze.
and gambling
How about not selling them Canadian potash? Many other countries will take it... Then sit back and watch the genocide unfold... That'll be fun.
We should do the same. Keep all our ressources and start using them instead of selling them
Its already given up. Check the fine print
[removed]
Yep, enjoy your burnt bridges.
I'm in favor of Canada pursuing nuclear weapons.
Yup
Stupid. That's how we end up getting invaded for real. It would destroy both countries but there's no way the current US regime would let an antagonistic Canada develop nukes.
They don’t need to know about it until it’s all done. By then it’s too late to avoid M.A.D.
Again, insanely stupid if you think we could ever keep a secret like that from the americans for any amount of time. They read everything from everybody, and Canada is notoriously terrible with information security.
Australia is more than happy to work with us
I love the Aussies as a partner for Canada, but there's the entire fucking Pacific ocean between us and them, instead of the world's longest land border.
You might want to calm down cause the US is already way ahead of Canada https://www.state.gov/pax-silica Ask yourself why Canada was not invited
Canada could have replaced or coordinated with Australia in providing raw minerals. Guess only Australia is getting American money
Non-paywall version: https://archive.is/Iu2rL
Thanks, completely forgot to post.
Great chip to play
Carney domestic hasn't been good, but foreign affairs stuff had been great.
US treats Canada like trash, well the beaver gonna come out to defend itself!
Not defending him or the party, I’m just curious, what do you feel Carney has been doing domestically that isn’t good?
He hasn't cancelled the gun buyback, for one
Which isn't actually a buyback, but an unlawful forfeiture of personal property that you might get some money for... if you do it right away due to the program's critical lack of funding. The person in charge of Canadian firearms legislation has never even touched a gun in his life and is terrified of them.
Trying to force the new pipeline through BC despite the province's resounding "No" on the issue.
Not cancelling the gun "buyback" that is being forced through despite overwhelming evidence that Canadian firearms crime is not being committed by PAL holders but rather US guns smuggled in by gang activity, and the gov't admitting as such.
You consider it a positive thing that BC is blocking the prosperity of the entire country?
I’m not against another pipeline, but you think this pipeline will bring prosperity to the entire country?
Where do you think the majority of the profits from Canadian oil and gas go?
It's not prosperity if we're destroying what little we have left of nature. Pipelines aren't the answer, as the ecosystems it would pass through are already falling apart as it is without any spills. We can't continue to be so short-sighted on profits.
The pipeline is the size of a highway. Do you think a highway destroys nature?
It's not short-sighted. Right now, the countries which present the biggest threat to Canada are all ignoring nature and are ruthlessly focusing on profits. You have the cautionary tale of the EU, which has drastically reduced its emissions, drastically hurt its own economic growth, and as a result, they are now getting shafted by the US and China. And people say they are on a decline and will be gone in half a century.
Do you want the same for Canada? At some point, there will be nothing left to export, since the competition has outcompeted us, and we'll only have the resources in the ground. And all the experts who know how to build pipelines have moved south. At that point, who do you think will build those pipelines?
We can sell those minerals anywhere
We can use them to defend ourselves in an uncertain world.
If the US is threatening to annex us, and they are waging economic war on us with the tariffs, then yeah, I don't think we should give them access to critical minerals. They decided to light over a century of friendship with us on fire, that's on them.
When 9/11 happened and we gave our entire airspace to them, and many Canadian families in Gander even welcomed complete US strangers into their homes for free, that was definitely the right thing to do back then. But if something like 9/11 happens again, do we give our airspace to the US again? I don't know about that, I don't really consider them to be "friends" anymore.
With their politics? No, not any American I don't know already. It would just be an insane risk. Even with the ones I do know - and that's a lot, spread around the net - I'd be wary about some of them. That entire country is full of batshit crazy people and I say that as somebody who talks to them every day.
If Trump wants to make us a deal that works for Canada, then maybe, if not, fuck off.
Doesn’t matter the deal. He won’t live up to it.
Trump will make a deal then criticise who ever made it years lataer
Weeks
Biden's fault obviously
Hopefully he won't live for it either
Buddy, he's already said the NAFTA/CUSMA deal he made in his first presidency and was so proud of was terrible.
He can't even be trusted to hold to deals he's made, which is par for the course for anyone paying an ounce of attention to his relationship to people he hires to work for him and then stiffs on paying, thinking he's slick.
We shouldn't trust him because he's proven he can be trusted lol
He doesn't want a deal with Canada. He wants to annex it.
He doesn't even want to make a deal with us that'll benefit the US: Just him and his cronies!
Luckily they don’t need anything from us apparently
Not, how about just no? They belong to us.
Well, we don't consume the amount we have and the exports help our economy. But we should be using them as leverage for getting the best deal from the US possible and ensuring we have many customers and not just the US.
This u.s. administration deserves none of our critical minerals… period!!!!!!
Tell them to kick rocks and have them come crawling back!
But not rocks that contain critical minerals.
exactly
Oh no.. We getting blockaded aren't we...
They can try. We can always host another visit from our French friends and their nuclear submarines.
We don’t even need to host. St Pierre is France.
Why don’t we mine them, process them, and sell them ourselves?
The US can buy our product.
The Americans always want to break our dairy system. Never give that up.
Honestly we should put in measures to encourage the transformation and manufacturing of our resources in Canada first.
Tarrif on raw exports unless some level of processing up the value chain was done in Canada.
For example we could tarrif raw nickel, but wave them for a product that was nickel plated in Canada.
Give ourselves the first kick at the can with our resources.
Canada isn’t obligated to provide product to preferential trade partners, regardless of the noise they make. It’s business, not charity, and reliable trade partnerships should be the main focus.
Don't make any deals with Americans or Danielle Smith.
They are Corrupt Liars and any agreement is not worth the paper it was written on.
Alberta needs protection from these corrupt scum bags.
Nor should it be
Nice
We can hardly harvest those minerals ourselves with all our self-imposed handicaps on development.
The US keeps finding these "critical minerals" in their own country everytime they actually look for it.
What percentage of "critical minerals" are the US even getting from Canada at the moment? Are they going to notice a 1-5% drop in supply?
Don't worry, Dougie Ford is running commercials saying we will mine them all. All set. /s
Oh no worries at all, I'm sure he'll do a Tim Hortons ad mid commercial as well. Kill two birds with one stone.
I've never seen a nation virtue signal so much.
Kind of a moot point since First Nations groups will make sure that even Canadians won’t have access to the critical minerals.
The First Nations cannot do this. They may try to challenge some decisions, but they will not go that far because they know that doing so will turn the public against them. And this may open the door to a review of all claims they have made throughout the years. Many of their past claims were based on interpretations of treaties signed centuries ago. To interpret terms described in those treaties as ownership rights was a far stretch to begin with.
A lot of words to just be wrong. They don’t care as long as they get their money.
It's a good thing all other ethnic groups in this country are so altruistic as to not want or need money.
That's a very suspect thing for someone supposedly in Quebec to say, unless you know nothing at all about Quebec.
FWIW in my experience the biggest impediment to mining developments tend to be white cottage owners. But people like you never moan about them.
I'm not completely sold on Carney's domestic policies, but at the end of this I want him in as trade and/or foreign affairs minister. He has a certain kind of economic/finance chops, but my intuition is that his talents would be wasted if he were pigeonholed there.
Out of curiosity, what domestic policies are you not a fan of?
killing remote work for federal employees isn't very cash money of him
I agree that if it's not for productivity, then it's bad; however, I don't believe it's up there as an issue that should make someone not support him
It's a domestic policy that I didn't support, but I still support him.
We're on the same page, then
Yeah, but it’ll fill all those Brookfield office towers back up with paying tenants.
Personally, my criticisms of Carney are all from the left (austerity, corporate handouts, backsliding on environmental protection). So I don't know how much purchase they'll have in this sub.
I don't like the regressions on environmental policies. I think he made veered towards populism on gas fees, and yes, I drive (we just got a Toyota Corolla 2026 after replacing a Sentra 2010). I also have massive doubts about his housing strategy; Trudeau did promise to restore parts of the funding model for co-operatives previously withdrawn by Mulroney and which subsequent Conservative and Liberal governments failed to restore, but ended up failing to honour that promise, as pointed out by the Cooperative Housing Federation of Canada.
I think he's making some positive moves around the TFW portfolio by restricting it, but I'd like to see it returned to the pre-Harper model, perhaps it to high-income specializations, as I believe current model fails Canadians as well as foreign workers who then find themselves subject to suppressed wages and expensive housing, or to frame it differently: Canada is making a promise to foreign labour that it cannot keep for both local workers and for the people coming here to accept work.
In the post-war 1940's, Canada allowed foreign workers into the country to obtain work contracts which enabled rabid building into the 1960's and 1970's, which housed them, built communities, and provided housing for many of our parents. That's a win-win, and that's what I'd like to see out of these programs.
So I'm not necessarily against negotiating environmental policy - I think we need to build a portfolio of small wins or we risk big losses tomorrow. And I'm not opposed to immigration, provided the policy is applied in prudent ways that provide a benefit for all the parties involved - especially labour - and not businesses exclusively. I realize that these are complex topics that deserve deeper conversations and that I have blind spots, but as it stands I see him selling out pieces that I hold as critical for long term sustainable success.
Trade deals with the US are not stable and certain? I am shocked and appalled.
Good. Give them nothing.
Let’s hope this goes better than it did for Venezuela.
Carney's Colossal Canada-US Pact
(The Economist, June 11th, 2025)
Seems like a dangerous game to play.
I've largely discounted any real likelihood of annexation on the basis that it's unnecessary -- they get essentially what they need from us already without the hassle of attempting to govern an unwilling populace. But that calculus changes significantly if we don't play ball. They're certainly not going to permit us to supply them to American geo-political adversaries instead.
Realistically, I think this just rhetoric -- but I am concerned about where it puts us if it turns out that it's not. I would tend to argue that it's actually a better bargaining chip as an unexploited resource that could be developed to our shared benefit than as an exploited one we're not selling to them and that thereby represents a potential threat to them.
Its all politics. The minerals. Booze. Resources. The jet contract. Its having ammo for the renegs next year.
We need as many bargaining chips as we can get. Watch it all get resolved in the trade talks.
Carney’s not the one who’s playing games in this negotiation.
America will do what it wants and I fully expect any deal we make to fall apart within six months on the basis that "respect under the current administration is "being the first to fuck the other party in a deal". Any kind of retaliation would be viewed as an attack.
With that said, I think our strategy needs to leave as little exposure as possible, lest it be grounds for a negative "response". He's already accused Canada of being the main source of Fentanyl, and then declared it a Weapon of Mass Destruction, so he already has his cause to sell. The only question is: who's going to buy that as cause for a military exercise?
If we don't make an absolute guarantee for natural resources, he can't accuse us of breaking that guarantee. We can trade, but we can exercise control as well.
Based Carney
If US wants it, it will get it. This is just a joke.
Its always amusing to see people who take things like this and simplify it to such a simple thing... but fail to recognize that those who said it aren't stupid, they know the same facts... this is all connected you know? What we say and do, what they say and do later, how that appears to others.
Its a move in the middle of a dance, with an audience... we dont care about the dance partner we know theyre going to step on our feet.
We are putting our feet in the spotlight to make sure it is very well seen when it is stepped on, and stating to the media that we do not consent to foot stepping in any capacity.
[removed]
Does Canada have any ways to refine and/or export those minerals in significant quantity? If not then there is no leverage as the US can seek other suppliers from Australia, Africa, etc. China, for example, found alternative suppliers for Canola oils.
[removed]
How was it a fraud? And how is he a "failed" PM in less than a year? He seems to be doing rather well.
A fraud how? Or is spouting nonsensical garbage kind of your “thing”?
By the sound of them, they're an Albertan UCP voter (or even worse, a separatist), which puts them around MAGAt level intelligence. Spouting garbage is what they do.
Help me understand how a pipeline will make your life better. Genuine question.
The revenue would be a tremendous boost to our crippled economy. Our economic growth has be stagnant for the last decade and the same trajectory we've been on isn't the correct course.
Imagine in the Northern Gateway was completed and we have pivoted to selling to Asia at marlet prices instead of the US at a discount. Imagine if Energy East could have sold to Europe instead of having to sell crude to the US at a discount.
Help me understand how exporting oil to Asia at a higher price than currently selling to the US wouldn't increase revenue.
Help me understand how wages, economic growth, and taxes collected from the pipeline and spin-off jobs would be a bad thing.
You can sell to Asia by twinning the pipeline we already have no need to do something as bad as putting a pipeline into choppy water.
That’s quite an interesting perspective you have.
From what I’ve researched, the northern gateway pipeline would only have created less than 220 permanent jobs. Kind of a small reward, for a pretty big environmental risk as bitumen is sludgy & notoriously hard to clean up if an accident occurs.
Also why is it that you think it’s a good idea to ramp up selling a resource that’s only going to increase in value as world resources are depleting?
Wouldn’t it be more forward thinking to wait until some of the resources we currently have become more valuable & perhaps more environmentally feasible to refine or ship safely?
How come you are blaming 70 years of policy from both left and right/provincial and federal on a guy who's been in office less than a year? And with such vitriol?
Was.in place in 2016. Government of the day chose to walk away.
I could help you understand how oil has destroyed our planet but you don't care.
Which deal did he promise?
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/carney-canada-day-promises-1.7571538
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-criticizes-carney-u-s-trade-deal-9.6962431
What?!
One more defection and maybe your home leader will resign in shame and give his stolen seat back. Failed opposition leader is the highest PP will ever go.