This Explains A Lot

Surveying various reactions to Trump's latest tariff tantrum is an interesting exercise. Paul Krugman, on his Substack, has this to say about Trump's latest threat against Canada:

The Trade Act of 1930, generally known as the Smoot-Hawley tariff, lost its standing as the worst trade policy action in US history when Donald Trump imposed his “Liberation Day” tariffs in April 2025. But Smoot-Hawley was widely recognized as a terrible mistake soon after its passage, as it provoked widespread retaliation and contributed to the downward spiral of world trade that accompanied and reinforced the Great Depression.

The result of all of Trump's 'volatility' ?

 I see an America that has become an ineffectual bully, sicker, poorer, and riven by political extremism, with no friends anywhere in the world.

Barry Appleton observes: 

We are also being singled out. Canada is one of only two nations, with China, that retaliated instead of cutting a deal, and we are punished for it even as U.S. negotiators fly to Mexico this week to talk. That is how you split a bloc, and it works when the other side keeps diving early.

So we play this smart. Stop guarding the wrong post, because the visible date is rarely the real one. Test the weak points in court: a flat 50 per cent, spread across goods that have nothing to do with the discrimination alleged, is hard to defend as the tailored offset the statute requires, Section 338 has never survived a court, and overriding CUSMA invites a challenge Washington has not had to answer. Press all three. But litigation is defence, and defence alone does not win a match.

Some letters to the editor remind us that we all have a role to play in this battle with the U.S.

Re “Trump escalates trade war against Canada with threat to impose 50% tariffs” (July 21): If Donald Trump thinks additional tariffs will pressure Canadians to resume importing and selling American alcoholic beverages, well, think again.

Although he may not believe Canadians are intelligent, we are smart enough to develop other markets for our products.

Luc Lachapelle Hudson, Que.

So California winemakers cheer additional punishing tariffs on Canadians because we will be forced to buy their wine? A better strategy would be asking their government to stop the tariffs, which started the boycotts in the first place.

Cheering for tariffs does not make trading sense, but American culture does not seem to understand the concepts of fairness, kindness and equity, only war and winning.

This Canadian will never purchase California wine or visit the United States ever again. This is not friendship.

Trish Johnston Central Kootenay, B.C.

 Re “Bets off” (Letters, Oct. 28, 2025): Last year, you were good enough to publish a letter in which I suggested that as a result of our dealings with Donald Trump, “our relationship with the United States will be harsh, distant and purely transactional.” Might I be permitted the minor luxury of briefly saying I told you so?

I concluded my letter with the assertion that “we are a resilient people with vast natural resources. We’ll be okay.” I remain of that opinion.

Michael Royce Toronto 

I do not envy Mark Carney in all of this, but I think the majority of Canadians would agree that the time for concessions as acts of appeasement is over. What we do next must be strong, firm, and leave do doubts about our resolve to stand up to an insane president and his increasingly debased nation.