this post was submitted on 22 Jan 2025
114 points (90.7% liked)

Canada

7348 readers
385 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

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 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Canada should not respond to potential U.S. tariffs with retaliatory tariffs, as this would primarily harm Canadian consumers by driving up prices. Instead, Canada should leverage its industrial and technological capabilities to undermine the monopolistic rent-seeking of American corporations by legalizing and promoting third-party modifications, repairs, and alternative marketplaces for technology, agriculture, and other industries. By dismantling restrictive intellectual property laws—many of which were imposed under the USMCA trade agreement—Canada could become a global hub for jailbreaks, independent app stores, and right-to-repair solutions, thereby reducing dependence on U.S. tech monopolies and fostering a new high-tech economy that directly benefits Canadian consumers and businesses.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 41 points 13 hours ago (3 children)

I agree in principle. Personally, I think Canada needs to pivot hard to being much closer to the EU. However, that approach will take too much time and bear out a lot of pain before we're done.

In the short term though, Trump is a bully so responding to tariffs with anything other than escalation is likely to attract more tariffs and economic damage.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 minutes ago* (last edited 2 minutes ago)

Agreed.

Doctrow's suggestion is a good long term approach and definitelysomething w should have started when Trump first tried to attack our economy.

But in the short term we also need to react swiftly and in kind. And to focus that response disproportionately on the people and industries that most strongly enable Trump and his supporters.

 

Working against expanding our markets and suppliers is geography, though. It takes much longer and costs much more to move goods between Canada and Europe/Asia/South America than it does to the US.

[–] LostWon@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 hours ago

I agree. We could also forge better partnerships with Mexico, Central and South American countries, and Pacific island nations. Up to now I think our companies have been more exploitative (i.e. manipulating governments or bringing underpaid labour), but we could do things that are mutually beneficial instead. Strengthening less powerful neighbours is beneficial to everyone in a region (including the US, ironically), while exploitation just helps the specific corporations involved.

[–] smuuthbrane@sh.itjust.works 11 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I've actually been wondering if we shouldn't approach the EU for membership. It's probably a pretty hard sell from the EU side, but it would send a message about turning on one's closest ally.

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I mean one of the requirments is being part of Europe. And yes the council determines what that means. But it we could be very hard to say Canada is part of Europe.

[–] smuuthbrane@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 hours ago

Europe is what Europe defines itself to be. Definitely a stretch to include Canada, but if we also keep a trade agreement with the rest of North America we could be a back door to European goods to sell into the USA.

Again, WILDLY unlikely.