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. 

Why Is This Man Exuberant?

 

Well, he has just become a trillionaire, one of the many reasons Elon Musk must feel chuffed these days. Being a master of the universe is surely a heady experience, one denied to almost everyone on the planet. But this visionary entrepreneur, according to a recent column by Mark McQueen, represents an opportunity for all of us, and should be thus lionized, not villified as he is by many:

I don’t care whether Musk is personally worth $1 billion or $1 trillion — both are tough to fathom. But he didn’t steal that money from his neighbours, like some embezzling tinpot dictator. And by allowing others to invest alongside him, Musk’s actually sharing his unique gifts in a far more tangible way than the world’s most talented opera singer or footballer.

Do you want to guess which group of Canadians probably don’t hate him? The beneficiaries of the Ontario Teacher’s Pension Plan.

A canny $300 million pre-IPO investment into SpaceX is now worth more than $20 billion to 346,000 Ontario teachers. It’s a windfall that must surely be the single best payday in the history of their plan. For every teacher in the plan, the pension fund has already gained over $35,000 from Musk’s efforts — capital that can be used to enhance future pension benefits or reduce payroll deductions.

Silicon Valley’s much maligned “Bro culture” delivered handsomely for our educators, a sector that’s about 75 per cent female.

Not so fast, says Star letter-writer Tony D'Anrea of Toronto:

Mark McQueen argues that entrepreneurs who amass millions or trillions are good for Canada because their success helps fund teachers’ pensions — 75 per cent female, no less. On first glance, his claim that one man’s towering fortune lifts us all seems a prosperous insight. But it does not follow that every rich person’s singular fortune is a social good.

McQueen treats Elon Musk becoming a trillionaire as a win-win. Instead it’s a zero-sum game. Adam Smith wrote convincingly about how self-interest working cooperatively achieved “the wealth of nations.” There is no proof that the wealth of one man benefits a greater number.

The “rising tide” defence of extreme wealth requires the tide to actually rise. Consider the ledger. Musk spent $250 million helping elect Donald Trump, then ran DOGE, which gutted some of the very programs McQueen credits the wealthy with sustaining. USAID dismantled. Children’s cancer research defunded. The Department of Education abolished. A boon for Canada’s teachers’ pensions is cold comfort in the face of all this gutting of programs. Some of these programs may have even benefitted Canadians down the road. 

The issue is not entrepreneurship but scale. Beyond a certain point, extreme wealth purchases political influence, reshapes public priorities and amplifies one individual’s power over millions. No Musk fortune, no Trump war in Iran, no daily trauma visited on the Cuban people and no unending disruptions of the world order.

A trillion dollars in one pocket is not a social dividend. It’s a bill the rest of the world is paying.

Readers of McQueen’s millionaires’ prosperity gospel should remember: “caveat emptor”.

With great power comes great responsibility, something people of Elon Musk's ilk seem to have conveniently forgotten.

The People Speak

  

Sometime when I write, I wonder how many of my views are shared by others. Given current media political coverage, it is often difficult to gauge. That is one of the reasons I always read newspapers' letters-to-the-editor section. And it is there that I almost always find a basis for hope, offering proof as they do that critical thinking is not dead.

The following take issue with the direction the Carney Liberals are taking.

Carney, Smith sign carbon price deal, suggest fall 2027 pipeline approval, May 15

As a lifelong Canadian and supporter of Liberal governments I am very disappointed by Prime Minister Mark Carney’s oil and gas agreement with Alberta.

Surely clean air to breathe is a priority for the good health of Canadians. Surely a sustainable way forward is harnessing solar, wind and other non-polluting energies.

Let’s leave our children and their children energy sources that provide clean breathable air, good water to drink and heating and cooling sources that don’t shorten lives.

Judith Murray, Burlington

 

When is our government going to finally put the environment first?

I am a scientist who has worked hard to learn about, teach and protect our earth and its environment.

May I suggest members of the federal Liberal party (and everyone else for that matter) read the following two books: The Lorax by Dr. Seuss (a quick five-minute read) and Silent Spring by Rachel Carson (about an hour’s read).

If you don’t have time, here are two quotes I think sum up what is being done to our environment under the current government, with its many new bills and policies.

Rachel Carson: “The most alarming of all man’s assaults upon the environment is the contamination of air, earth, rivers, and sea with dangerous and even lethal materials.”

Dr. Seuss: “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It’s not.”

I have learned over the years we must constantly fight for our environment in both good economic times and the bad ones. As a government priority it has never been given the attention it deserves.

It is time to put solar energy, wind power and the protection of animal and plant habitat on the front burner. It is time for companies to prove something is safe before they are permitted to sell it rather than waiting 10 to 20 years to see the effects on our environment.

It is time for companies to put money up front, before they begin fracking, building pipelines, or transporting toxic materials through our waterways and along our roads, to cover the cost of the inevitable environmental spills that will occur.

Who is going to put the environment first? Who is going to make Canada a great economy built on protecting our environment?

Because, “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It’s not.”

Yvonne Clifford, Cambridge, Ont.

Oil is a dirty and finite resource. The sun is neither

I boggles my mind why Canada and Alberta are spending enormous amount of money, time and expertise on extracting dirty oil and building expensive pipelines to generate electricity and other forms of energy. Why indeed, when in about 40 years oil will be depleted, as it is a finite resource.

But the sun will shine for millions, perhaps billions, of years, providing free energy to everyone on Earth.

Gwen Petreman, Barrie, Ont. 

As long as the spirit of resistance and critical thinking are alive, falling into despair is not an option.

From Canada's Industrial Heartland

 

While I hardly expect that Ontario should garner much sympathy from the rest of Canada, every so often I can't help but write about our poor state of politics. Led by "Captain Canada," Doug Ford, the legislature spends far more in recess than it does in session. I suspect our 'leader' finds it an irksome impediment to whatever he does with his time, given his Progressive Conservatives command a clear majority that certainly puts a damper on accountability. That is, until he does something that provokes widespread public outrage.

While there is much to condemn in this heavy-handed government's rule, it wasn't until Ford's recent purchase of a $29 million jet that public hackles were raised. As a result, Ford has reversed his purchase, but even now he insists buying it was the correct choice; as with most hubristic politicians, Ford claimed it was not a failure of policy but rather a failure of communication. He didn't do enough to prepare the public for his extravagance.

Well, many people are having none of his nonsense about what has been dubbed his "gravy plane". The following letters to the editor amply attest to this:

Time for a premier who puts Ontario first

This is a typical Doug Ford move. He appears to be driven by self‑interest and a desire for personal attention.  This runs from ordering speed cameras to be removed, mixing up Toronto’s street traffic and  removing bikes and walkways, totally ruining Ontario Place, stating that he’ll expand the island airport for larger planes and spending millions on a new plane to fly himself around. Earlier he was only interested in building new country roads and pulling down country greenspace in order to build expensive homes. None of this does anything to improve Ontario.

Ontario needs intelligent improvements for Ontarians, Canadians and visitors. It’s time to make political changes.

Chris Andrews, Vaughan, ON

Doug Ford the salesman

Ford says Ontario has sold controversial private jet at no loss, April 22

Well, done, Doug! The plane is gone. Now you should terminate the island spa agreement and return Ontario Place to the public, remove the traffic calming barriers being installed in school zones and restore speed cameras. Next, ask your construction buddies to return any money regarding the Ontario Science Centre property along with  refunding any money spent on studies for the tunnel under Highway 401. Only then will it really feel like you have listened to the people. And, oh, one more thing … let Toronto voters decide on the future of the island airport.

Carolynne Canham, St. Catharines, ON 

There was no justification for a private jet for Ford in the first place

How did Doug Ford justify spending nearly $30 million dollars of taxpayer money on his own jet in a province where most locales can be reached on a propeller plane in one hour? And most northern communities don’t even have airports that support a jet!

At a time when our medical care is compromised and our school system is crumbling this huge expense, not just for the purchase of the jet but also for its maintenance, cannot be tolerated by taxpayers.

At least Ford heard the outrage and reversed course.

Ford never campaigned on the promise to buy himself a jet.

Dianne Ness, Toronto

I find it an incredible coincidence that after eight years of Premier Ford in power, the first time he raises the issue of jets using Billy Bishop airport coincides with his now quickly reversed decision to purchase a taxpayer-funded private jet, to the tune of $28.9 million.

Some estimates for the infrastructure needed to allow jets at Billy Bishop will cost in excess of $1 billion.

Ontario taxpayers deserve transparency. Just whose interests are actually being served by expanding the island airport for jets?

At least the premier did the right thing and grounded his jet.

Norm Di Pasquale, Toronto

The problem with winning three majority governments is that you think you are invincible. Ford fatigue has begun to set in. Perhaps it is time for the premier to do some serious, sober soul searching about seeking a fourth term, as he has recently mused about. 

UPDATED: Spectacle Abounds

 

I am old enough to remember the early days of space exploration, days that included John Glenn in orbit, the Mercury space program, followed by the Apollo missions, etc. In those early days, achievements in space commanded a great deal of attention, in part because it was essentially a battle of ideologies, capitalism against evil communism, an ongoing grudge match between the U.S and the Soviet Union. Who would emerge victorious, the world wondered.

But those days are long over. The U.S.  'won', as if somehow its technological prowess atoned for its racism, its foreign wars, its naked imperialism. 

So what accounts for the current fascination with the Artemis 11 mission and its almost endless news coverage? 

There is, of course, the matter of spectacle, an always useful, time-tested way to capture the attention of the masses and divert them from the really important matters that plague all of us. Americans are especially prone to embracing such blandishments, always ready to put hand over heart in patriotic fervour. So what if they started a needless and senseless war? So what if so many of their fellow citizens live on the street, with no chance of better lives? So what if ICE' murders fellow citizens? So what if their president is a dementia-ridden despot? Such matters pall in the face of going to the moon, eh?

But beyond that, it is striking that the news networks seem willing to carry the water for those who benefit the most from such 'excursions': the billionaires who walk amongst us. Consider the fact that the majority of television media are now part of large corporate conglomerates, and you have the perfect conditions for influencing and molding public opinion; thus we become conditioned to cheer on the prospect of a permanent moon base being established in the not-too-distant future. Somehow, that has become the imperative, as if establishing such a base would confer American lunar hegemony and ensure a bright future.

But a bright future for whom? From the perspective of the billionaires, the almost limitless profits to be made from such a feat, almost totally funded by taxpayer dollars, is undoubtedly occasioning all kinds of pavlovian salivation. And while the oligarchs amass even greater profits, the general public is left to hope for a few orts from the table, reminded yet again of their true place in the scheme of things. 

Democracy's ill-health is a precondition of such predatory monetary achievement, and given that the U.S. has now devolved into a vicious autocracy, clearly the conditions are golden for new rounds of pillaging. 

UPDATE: A thoughtful letter-writer offers offers his reality check on the new space race:

Why aren’t we taking more care of Earth? It has everything to sustain life

If only the moon was made of any kind of cheese, then spending $95 billion to go there might begin to make sense. You can’t live on the moon. There is no existing photosynthesis.  Everything to establish a “moon base” must be brought from Terra Ferma. Even if after a trillion dollars or many trillion dollars are spent, building a base in order to launch to Mars is laughable. There is no oxygen on Mars, it gets extremely cold and it has a covering of iron oxide (rust). Trips can only occur every 26 months and there would be no return flights from Mars as re-fueling is not available. The human body could not sustain the change in gravity. We know that interplanetary colonization is impossible. The shame of this waste lies in the forgetfulness of just how magnificent our precious Earth actually is. Everything we need is here, with the exception of more people willing to save the planet from those who seek to destroy it. So, the question remains — why can’t we take more care of a place that provides everything we need instead of chasing dreams of inhabiting the moon?

Dave de Sylva, Aurora, ON

SOS From Ontario

 

As a resident of Ontario, I confess to being disenchanted these days. After Doug Ford has won three successive elections with very substantial majorities, he seems untethered, his megalomaniac plans substituting for competent governance.  

There is, of course, his preposterous plan to build a tunnel under Highway 401, but there are also other ideas that merit ridicule, not sober consideration, such as building an artificial island upon which to build construct a new convention centre for Toronto; he is also keen on extending the local airport (Billy Bishop) to accommodate jets, despite the fact it is a plan widely opposed by those living downtown. 

Ford is also considering opening the HOV (high occupancy vehicle) lanes to solo drivers in 'off peak hours' (whenever that might be in perennially-congested Southern Ontario). As well, citing fiscal constraints,(after eliminating a multitude to revenue sources), he has abruptly cut OSAP aid for university students. Especially worrying for those who value transparency in government, the premier is now in the process of crippling freedom of information requests by excluding cabinet records and government 'business' conducted on personal cell phones. And, of course, there is the long-standing RCMP criminal probe (eight years and counting, I believe) into the Greenbelt scandal. Of his lengthy recesses of the legislature I will not even speak.

I have been wondering of late whether or not people are tiring of his populist poses. If letters to the editor are any measure, there is a sliver of hope that people are beginning to understand that bluster and wild schemes are not a substitute for proper government:

Ontario to make premier, cabinet ministers’ records secret as it tightens FOI laws, March 13

The Conservative Ford Government has plans to exempt the premier and cabinet from freedom-of-information (FOI) requests which would deny the public access to documents held by the office, and signatures upon agreements relating to economic, financial and corporate contracts. The EV agreements the public would love to review will certainly never be made public. With the legalities carried out within the Legislatures and NDAs,  much has been agreed upon and held deep within the shadows of conservative backrooms and corporate parlors.

Ontario is truly for sale folks, and we will never know who the new owners are, what agreements were signed and if financial largess has passed into political party hands.

Steven Kaszab, Bradford, ON 

A premier who fears FOI is a premier with something to hide

Once again, Doug Ford is moving Ontario towards autocracy and non-accountability. A premier who fears Freedom of Information is a premier with something to hide. Here is the litmus test: is this a power you would want every party to have? How would Ford have responded if former Liberal premier Kathleen Wynne had made this proposition? Something dirty is afoot. And blaming the Chinese government is just a tactic to avoid accountability. People should be horrified by this. 

Elaine Jackson, Mount Albert, ON  

Premier Doug Ford has stated his government should be exempt from releasing documents, government records, etc., under the Freedom of Information Act. Amongst his arguments for is the fact he receives 1,000 calls per day about very personal problems and says he feels like a psychologist trying to solve everyone’s personal issues. Therefore, he will not release personal information about people’s lives.  Ford should make  use of an official government phone and  use  his personal phone only when engaged in the role of “psychologist.”

Mary Morrison, Mississauga, ON 

Are HOV users legitimate ride-sharers?

Ontario wants solo drivers to use HOV lanes outside rush hours, but experts doubt it will speed up traffic, March 17

Until the creators/supporters of HOV lanes presents conclusive evidence that the majority of vehicles using HOV lanes are doing so as legitimate ride-sharers the concept of HOV lanes should be considered a sham and a waste of valuable pavement.

Robert Woodcock, North York, ON

While the machinations of Ontario politics may be of little interest to those living elsewhere in Canada, the province surely offers an object lesson for all whenever their next provincial elections may be.

Carney Undermines Himself

I had such high hopes after Mr. Carney's speech at Davos. It articulated a realistic and pragmatic view of the world,  peopled as it is with both heroes and villains. However, as previously noted, his immediate, almost reflexive endorsement of Trump's illegal war on Iran is too much to swallow. 

Toronto Star letter-writers express their disapproval:

Canada once rejected America’s aggressive, unlawful foreign policy. Today, Mark Carney embraced it, Feb. 28

During his recent, celebrated speech to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Prime Minister Mark Carney acknowledged that “the story of the rules-based international order was partially false” because the rules tended to be upheld or ignored depending on which state was violating them. He also stated that Canada would aim to be “both principled and pragmatic. Principled in our commitment to fundamental values, sovereignty, territorial integrity, the prohibition of the use of force except when consistent with the UN Charter and respect for human rights.”

In hindsight, it would be generous to describe the prime minister’s statement as “partially false,” given Carney’s immediate show of support for U.S. President Donald Trump’s attacks on the territorial integrity of Venezuela and now Iran — attacks carried out in violation of both the United Nations Charter and, for that matter, United States law. Six weeks after Carney’s speech in Davos, it’s clear that the rules-based international order remains dead, while hypocrisy is alive and well.

Bart Hawkins Kreps, Bowmanville, Ont.

Lloyd Axworthy, the former minister of foreign affairs, is right to criticize Carney for his decision to back the U.S. and Israel’s bombing of Iran. By supporting “Operation Epic Fury,” as America is calling the campaign, Canada is only helping to further dismantle the international rules-based order that the prime minister invoked in his speech in Davos. Using military force against a sovereign state absent a clearly articulated justification or objective, and without having given diplomacy a fair chance or come to a collective decision with the UN Security Council, constitutes a clear abandonment of international laws and norms. At the World Economic Forum, Carney emphasized Canada’s commitments to the values of sovereignty and territorial integrity, as well as to avoiding the use of military force except when consistent with the UN Charter. How are Canadians to believe his words now? The prime minister’s endorsement of this war is unnecessary and reckless.

Pamela Mulligan, Grimsby, Ont.

I commend Axworthy for his sternly reproachful op-ed, as well as Justin Ling for his piece published the same day. Carney seems blinkered by trade concerns. How else to account for his misguided, weak-kneed public statements about Trump’s war in Iran? As Axworthy and Ling both correctly assert, taking concrete actions to help free Iranians from their country’s oppressive regime is desirable, but it must be done within the bounds of international law.

Trump leaves me so incandescent with rage that I can’t bear to hear him without shouting at whatever screen he appears on. His haughty contemptuousness and delusional self-assurance would be comical if the stakes weren’t so high for the world. By rights, the president should be arrested, hauled off and convicted for his assorted crimes, and then put unceremoniously behind bars. Instead, serious people like Carney are compelled to hold their tongues and behave with deference. It’s all so farcical, yet it’s a farce without laughs.

Oliver Lenhardt, Toronto

I guess Carney has decided Canada needs to put its sign back up in the window: his recent statement on the U.S.-Israeli bombing of Iran marks a sad and cowardly retreat from the views he expressed in Davos. There, he argued that the world’s middle powers had to stick together in defence of certain fundamental principles, including “the prohibition of the use of force except when consistent with the UN Charter.” We now see what all that amounts to when the rubber hits the road — and when 350,000 Iranian Canadians march up Yonge Street. Center-left voters have been cutting Carney a lot of slack on climate change and Indigenous rights, but I no longer trust his allegedly good intentions.

Jerry Ginsburg, Markham, Ont.

Trust lost is very difficult to regain. I predict tumultuous times ahead in Mr. Carney's relationship with Canadians.

Judged By The Company You Keep

By the titled measure, I think we know how to evaluate Jamil Javani, the peripatetic Conservative who seems to have a special relationship with his old pal, JD Vance. Indeed, he even made it over to the chief MAGA propagandist, Breitbart News (formerly run by Steve Bannon), where he said, in regard to Canadian trade tensions wrought by Herr Trump's fits of pique,

Canadians would be “shooting ourselves in the foot if we continue this anti-America hissy-fit.”

In addition to media scrutiny over his unhelpful  comments, Toronto Star letter-writers have chimed in: 

“Anti-America, hissy fit,” is a rich statement coming from Jamil Jivani. His own “hissy fit” was on full display on election night, when he complained about Ontario Premier Doug Ford. This elected official seems to only care for promoting himself.

Paul Terech, Courtice, ON 

It’s difficult and problematic to have multiple voices speaking for the same political party. Having an MP saying one thing and the leader saying another is politically strange and probably not unifying. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre says he speaks for the party and that Conservative MP Jamil Jivani speaks for himself. Does this mean that a member of the party can say anything, even if it’s at odds with the party line? The Conservatives have numerous opinions under their very big tent, but when dealing with the public, conflicting messaging does come across as ambiguous and somewhat puzzling.

Douglas Cornish, Ottawa, ON 

The race to sell out Canada

For the last few months, we’ve had a clear front-runner in the race to sell out to/bow down to/kiss the ring of our former American friends — the Alberta separatist movement. After reading  Conservative MP Jamil Jivani’s comments regarding Canada’s efforts to remain sovereign and united, it’s no longer clear. The separatists are  neck and neck with the federal Tories.

Craig Gibson, Thornhill, ON

In addition to being an embarassment to Canada, Jamani can't be earning any points with his leader, Pierre Poilievre, still fighting the latest defection from his party's ranks, with possibly more to come.

Some Editorial Reflections

Although throughout most of my life I have been an inveterate writer of letters to the editor, I rarely write such missives anymore, for reasons that are not entirely clear to me. However, I do read editorial letters daily, and often like to acknowledge the keen insights contained therein. 

What follows are some of those insights:

Air Canada, WestJet, Air Transat suspend flights to Cuba, work to return travellers on island nation, feb. 11

Three people I  know in Toronto just cancelled their trips to Cuba. The reason they were given was a “shortage of fuel.” One of them said, almost casually, “It’s too bad my parents can’t go because of the fuel situation, while another one said, “Oh well, these things happen.”

The problem is not just a shortage of fuel. There is political strangulation that produces a fuel shortage. There are people making decisions that destroy livelihoods .

Cuba is being economically suffocated, and the people paying the price are not governments, but ordinary human beings: taxi drivers, hotel workers, musicians, café owners, guides, families who make their livings from tourism and human connection.

We are watching collective punishment.

It feels like we’re all in a school with a bully. Everyone knows who he is. Everyone knows what he’s doing. The rules exist. The charters exist. The teachers exist. And yet nothing happens. Not because no one sees it. But because everyone is afraid.

The bully is rich. He controls resources. He retaliates. He ignores norms. So the institution adapts. It stops enforcing rules and starts managing damage. Leadership becomes appeasement. Silence becomes strategy. This is how systems rot.

We are told to be calm. To be civil. To avoid anger. But there is something deeply corrupt about a world that demands politeness in the face of organized cruelty. Anger is not the problem. Moral numbness is.

Mary Y. Mouammar, Richmond Hill  

Do Republicans even know why they hate Canada?

Donald Trump threatens to block new Windsor-Detroit bridge, demands part ownership, Feb. 9

It is absolutely amazing how much U.S. President Donald Trump hates Canada. He is surrounded by a large group of sycophants who seem to hate everyone, with  Canada  at the top of the list. The problem is they react to things they do not understand, and they do not seem to look at facts. The Gordie Howe International Bridge is the subject of the latest stupidity. Canada paid for the bridge with Michigan’s co-operation and help in building it. That an American and a Canadian construction worker shook hands when both sides met in the middle  says it all, but the White House has no clue. 

Jack Hughes, Welland, ON

Tired of the insults, I’m no longer buying U.S. goods

As a senior living in southern Ontario, I have for years enjoyed the purchasing options of many U.S. branded products and services. I’ve purchased automobiles, major appliances, clothing, footwear, computers and  a wide range of American brands of food, home use cleaning chemicals, personal care items, lawn equipment and tools. I have also enjoyed  multiple  American-owned restaurant experiences. I’ve travelled south of the border and bought U.S.  entertainment  over the decades.

 Now I find myself  frustrated and tired of the ongoing insults from the current U.S. president claiming lack of respect and unfair treatment to America from Canada.

Now it’s time for me to move away from American products and  focus  on domestic  products and those  manufactured outside the U.S. — in countries that   value, appreciate and respect loyal customers.

Barry Brigham, London, ON

We could do more for Cuba 

I agree with the letter-writer who said she was happy to see that Mexico is offering some humanitarian aid to Cuba.

I would like to see Canada doing likewise. Is there any way that we can help Cuba with green energy? They have a great source of energy in sunlight, wind, and the ocean  to produce power on the island.

It puzzles me that the world stands by while a deranged president bullies the world into listening to his demands.

It breaks my heart that we are not doing more to help.

What has happened to Venezuela is unconscionable.

The Cubans are wonderful people and their island country is a good place to visit for those of us who love the sun, especially in the winter.

Lillian Shery, Toronto

While our government may have to be circumspect as it creeps around the mad king, it is clear that regular Canadians cannot and will not be silenced.