Loved Jen's distinction between lying TO Canadians and lying FOR Canadians. Massively important and I don't expect partisans of any stripe to acknowledge the distinction if it benefits them to not acknowledge it.
And, yes one of the most exhausting of the many exhausting things in the trade war discourse is debating whether PP would be doing a better job than Carney in dealing with Trump. There is absolutely no reason to think one is better than the other, arguing that either one of them is better is unfalsifiable and most importantly it is completely irrelevant.
Really liked the CBC segment. One of my major issues with the media is that for me, they far too often err on the side of "characterizing" events rather than giving me the facts. As one example, don't tell me somebody said or did something racist/sexist/anti-semitic - tell me what they actually said/did and I will decide for myself if it is racist/sexist/anti-semitic. So the rationale for the style guide as set out by G&G makes perfect sense to me. If the media actually took this approach on all stories - and of course, applied it in a common sense way when dealing with events like 911 - it might go some way towards regaining some trust, if that is possible at this point. In short, just give me the facts and don't try and smuggle in your opinion under the guise of "reporting".
USA trade mess - Have you considered what (if anything) it means that carney hired a top Democrat as COO in July and had meetings this year with Obama and other democrats? Just learned of this. Are we being used as pawns in the US election?
Foreign interference - I noticed a significant and immediate shift in political comments on social media mid-election last year. It was too uniform to be anything but bots. Screams foreign interference. Oh yeah - don’t forget we had a super secret inquiry and CCP police stations in Ontario.
Deference to Carney - Carney is untouchable because he is the most competent man for the job while simultaneously having no agency against the erratic orange devil. I would love a job where I’m the only one qualified and not responsible for any output.
I get your style guide narrative, but it isn’t the whole story. Two things can be true. Yes - style guide meetings are painful and bureaucratic. Yes - style guides can dictate words that reframe reality. I think there may have been a novel set in the 80s that explores the significance of style guides.
CBC is a government agency. You may think it doesn’t look like one, but it’s set up by legislation - the broadcasting act. The government created it, structured it, gave it a mandate and funded it. Quack - it’s a duck.
Hope you both had a good summer. Fall looks like it’ll be busy.
On CBC - the problem is that we actually know how the CBC works. We have debated this precise issue - the Ceeb's policy on the use of the word terrorism - at least a half a dozen times in the last ten years. And, yeah, their JSP guidebooks simply have not been dictated by the government. That's just...not how it works.
I think we’re just using the word government in different ways. I appreciate that “The Government” in the sense of ministerial bureaucrats or parliamentarians weren’t in the room. But CBC is a crown corporation, so every person employed by the CBC in the room debating the style guide is in the employ of the government, even if they don’t think they are.
My point was this - despite being at arm’s length from parliament, economic gravity does not hit the CBC like a business. The style guide change is a micro example of this. Because it is a crown corporation, objectively bad (and obviously stupid, in the case of the 9/11 renaming) ideas are not mowed down by the capitalist scythe (feeling poetic today).
If Carney's depiction of U.S. demands at the trade talks is accurate, Canada had no choice but to walk away. In particular, any requirement for U.S. influence over Canada's trade deals with others is completely unacceptable.
So we will have a trade war. That worries me. In particular, I think that Matt and Jen are overly optimistic on several counts.
1. Canadians are not united. For instance, look at interprovincial trade barriers. We haven't even been able to conclude an agreement on full interprovincial sale of alcohol. More fundamentally, there will be a significant tension between Alberta and Saskatchewan on one hand, and central Canada on the other. B.C. also has its own agenda.
2. It's not at all clear to me that Canadians have the pain tolerance that Matt and Jen assume. We haven't been tested in almost a century. While Canadians are talking tough now, talk is cheap.
3. Recent events suggest that at least three provinces -- Ontario, Quebec and B.C. -- effectively have a veto power over a trade deal. Not a good situation.
4. While certain narrow interests in the U.S. will feel the effects of the current round of tariffs and counter-tariffs, the economy and public at large are unlikely to notice. Their attention is fully occupied by culture wars, Iran, immigration, and affordability of food and housing (not hockey sticks).
5. I note that Trump has scheduled his counter-counter-counter tariffs on motor vehicles for January, well after the mid-terms. There is a danger that the trade war will really escalate in 2027.
I have no solutions. As I said, Carney had to walk away last week. But perhaps our counter measures are not the best way forward. Perhaps the best way is to lie low until after Trump leaves office. I don't know. But I am worried.
George, I found your post very interesting, and I will read it a couple of more times.
One comment: as you segue from walking away from negotiations, toward “So we will have a trade war”, is it possible that we have mistaken our approach? What if we are not in an actual “trade war”, but just in a negotiation that has gone badly? Mr. Lutnick seems to have scuttled the progress late in negotiations. But Mr. Greer and Mr. Leblanc appear to have made real progress.
This is not a game: a real trade war would seriously diminish our ability to grow, and to prosper as an independent, united Nation.
What if our best plan forward is to lower the rhetoric, stop swallowing the bait, and return to the negotiations that are in our best interests?
> What if we are not in an actual “trade war”, but just in a negotiation that has gone badly?
That doesn’t fit the facts.
The American have imposed 50% tariffs. That’s a trade war. Even if there are negotiations going on at the same time or if they may start again, that’s still a trade war.
We are a sovereign, independent Nation. We, and we alone, decide if we are at war.
I respect that you feel differently. We don’t have to take the bait, fall for the ruse, or buy the myth.
I think it is time Canadians stopped allowing the Government to tell us how and what to think. I think we should stop allowing our Government to pit us against our friends.
A real trade war is a devastating, economic disaster. What we choose to do is up to us.
It seems to me that a trade war is kind of like a regular war in that an aggressive party can start one whether we like it or not. You can choose not to fight back, but that doesn’t mean you’re not at war.
That said, taking your view as completely correct for the moment, we’re still in a trade war… because you said we alone make that decision and we have decided that we are.
That’s a decision our government has made. You and I don’t set trade policy. We only agree or disagree with it.
At some point, Canadians will begin to feel real pain from the trade war. And Carney can only do so much deficit spending to fix that. And then when the chickens come home to roost, will he go back to Washington with his tail between his legs? My guess is he will instead call an election before he goes to Washington
Price of groceries are outrageous. People on minimum wages are definetely going hungry. While our leaders play politics. Acting like we need to be angry,”Our sovereignty is being threatened.” Phaaaack! Us common folk are just trying to put food on the table,gas in the vehicle,get to work,little Johnny,little Jane starts school,clothes,rent,mortgage,insurance, dental,hospital visits,ect
Great discussion. I don't question for a moment that we probably needed to walk away. So we did and I know we all know all choices have consequences. We need our leaders to be really honest and open about that. we might lose our auto industry. we might lose other industries. what are we going to do about it? Never before in our history have we been faced with a existential crisis like this. I hope to god we don't fuck it up. We better not because our future is at stake. I have been resigned to the complete unseriousness of our country for the last 10 years. I hope Mr Carney can break us of this. the sooner the better. That pipeline should be breaking ground tomorrow.
Just this morning. A huge shot across our bow. "Trump says US reaches deal with Venezuela to control 65 billion barrels of country’s oil reserves" This should very seriously get all of our attention.
No oil major is going to invest even pocket change in Venezuela without a stable government running the place. after that pre-requisite is in place, it will take years to get the infrastructure in place. Not something we need to worry about for the foreseeable.
Good podcast. On the CPC demands for transparency, I’m annoyed and disappointed (my typical feelings about the CPC). From the coverage of the Canadian and Trump’s negotiators, (1) there doesn’t seem to be a lot of room for Carney to be hiding something, and (2) the parties seem pretty far apart, on a lot issues, so it’s not like Carney has some “draft” agreement worth discussing that he’s hiding. I guess the CPC brain trust has decided the “transparency” is the best they can do, but idk smh. I wonder if they feel like they have to say something even if it’s weird and lame?
I get the feeling that demanding the release of the details of the deal is the CPC leadership trying to settle on a response that’ll keep their party united. There’s fissures in the party between those who’d rally to a pan-Canadian stand, those who are pro-Canada but viscerally hate the Liberals, and even a faction of pro-Trump people like Jamil Jivani. Focusing on getting the details allows them to postpone taking a stand that could alienate one or more of those factions.
The problem is that it’s a bit too cute by half: for one thing, a steady drip of information from news outlets and even Donald Trump seems to be confirming much of what Carney claimed last weekend, undermining the premise for the demands to release the details. There’s also reporting from the New York Times today that Canada was required to sign a non-disclosure agreement about the details - apparently a common demand by Trump.
In my experience is life, yes Canadians know more about America than Americans about Canada, but it's superficial. Canadians think they know more than they do. Canadians are pretty ignorant about the day to day life of the US. Taxes, banking, health care, schooling, etc.
As for Canada nationalism, Canadian elites quite frankly talk a good game but rarely put their money where their mouth is. They don't put their own personal money in say Canadian tech or growth industries. Thru aren't all in on Canada like America's and Europe's elite are all in on their ends. Canada's elite like to think they are cosmopolitan but really they are hedging and treat Canada as a going concern. Wealth to be extracted. Canadas business class area this since we interact with them. Perhaps that's why we are the most skeptical of "elbows up Canada?" We don't see the actions being made.
Yes, we might not be good at politics btw, but at least in other countries the business community is acknowledged by the political elite as being who pays the bills. In Canada it's seems entrepreneurship is for those who didn't do well at school. Those who did well get "safe" jobs and professions like the risk adverse colonials that we are.
As for folks who can speak aggressively about Canada to Americans, you won't get that from a born and bred Canadian. The culture weeds them out, chases them out or they never rise. You'll need an immigrant.
As for the CBC, it's an arm of the government. Who pays the Piper calls the tune. To think otherwise is Canadian naivete. Journalists ae the biggest defenders of the CBC because they see jobs, not a noble mission that only government can do. It doesn't cost that much to start a Substack and feeds. Other countries manage but again, Canadians are risk adverse.
In the end we have a bad case of little brother syndrome and it starts from the very top of the elite on down. For a country of 40+ million that is pathetic.
Good stuff.
Loved Jen's distinction between lying TO Canadians and lying FOR Canadians. Massively important and I don't expect partisans of any stripe to acknowledge the distinction if it benefits them to not acknowledge it.
And, yes one of the most exhausting of the many exhausting things in the trade war discourse is debating whether PP would be doing a better job than Carney in dealing with Trump. There is absolutely no reason to think one is better than the other, arguing that either one of them is better is unfalsifiable and most importantly it is completely irrelevant.
Really liked the CBC segment. One of my major issues with the media is that for me, they far too often err on the side of "characterizing" events rather than giving me the facts. As one example, don't tell me somebody said or did something racist/sexist/anti-semitic - tell me what they actually said/did and I will decide for myself if it is racist/sexist/anti-semitic. So the rationale for the style guide as set out by G&G makes perfect sense to me. If the media actually took this approach on all stories - and of course, applied it in a common sense way when dealing with events like 911 - it might go some way towards regaining some trust, if that is possible at this point. In short, just give me the facts and don't try and smuggle in your opinion under the guise of "reporting".
Opinion journalism has replaced the 5ws.
Indeed. And with so many of those opinions based on incorrect facts!
Good podcast. Thoughts:
USA trade mess - Have you considered what (if anything) it means that carney hired a top Democrat as COO in July and had meetings this year with Obama and other democrats? Just learned of this. Are we being used as pawns in the US election?
Foreign interference - I noticed a significant and immediate shift in political comments on social media mid-election last year. It was too uniform to be anything but bots. Screams foreign interference. Oh yeah - don’t forget we had a super secret inquiry and CCP police stations in Ontario.
Deference to Carney - Carney is untouchable because he is the most competent man for the job while simultaneously having no agency against the erratic orange devil. I would love a job where I’m the only one qualified and not responsible for any output.
I get your style guide narrative, but it isn’t the whole story. Two things can be true. Yes - style guide meetings are painful and bureaucratic. Yes - style guides can dictate words that reframe reality. I think there may have been a novel set in the 80s that explores the significance of style guides.
CBC is a government agency. You may think it doesn’t look like one, but it’s set up by legislation - the broadcasting act. The government created it, structured it, gave it a mandate and funded it. Quack - it’s a duck.
Hope you both had a good summer. Fall looks like it’ll be busy.
On CBC - the problem is that we actually know how the CBC works. We have debated this precise issue - the Ceeb's policy on the use of the word terrorism - at least a half a dozen times in the last ten years. And, yeah, their JSP guidebooks simply have not been dictated by the government. That's just...not how it works.
I think we’re just using the word government in different ways. I appreciate that “The Government” in the sense of ministerial bureaucrats or parliamentarians weren’t in the room. But CBC is a crown corporation, so every person employed by the CBC in the room debating the style guide is in the employ of the government, even if they don’t think they are.
My point was this - despite being at arm’s length from parliament, economic gravity does not hit the CBC like a business. The style guide change is a micro example of this. Because it is a crown corporation, objectively bad (and obviously stupid, in the case of the 9/11 renaming) ideas are not mowed down by the capitalist scythe (feeling poetic today).
For the record, there were CCP police stations in BC and Quebec as well. The RCMP "disrupted" their operations, apparently.
Several across the United States as well. Which have also been "disrupted".
In the U.S., more than "disrupted"; the FBI laid charges against the operators, and there was one conviction after trial. Another pleaded guilty. Both are awaiting sentencing. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/bronx-man-convicted-operating-police-station-chinese-government-new-york-city-and
If Carney's depiction of U.S. demands at the trade talks is accurate, Canada had no choice but to walk away. In particular, any requirement for U.S. influence over Canada's trade deals with others is completely unacceptable.
So we will have a trade war. That worries me. In particular, I think that Matt and Jen are overly optimistic on several counts.
1. Canadians are not united. For instance, look at interprovincial trade barriers. We haven't even been able to conclude an agreement on full interprovincial sale of alcohol. More fundamentally, there will be a significant tension between Alberta and Saskatchewan on one hand, and central Canada on the other. B.C. also has its own agenda.
2. It's not at all clear to me that Canadians have the pain tolerance that Matt and Jen assume. We haven't been tested in almost a century. While Canadians are talking tough now, talk is cheap.
3. Recent events suggest that at least three provinces -- Ontario, Quebec and B.C. -- effectively have a veto power over a trade deal. Not a good situation.
4. While certain narrow interests in the U.S. will feel the effects of the current round of tariffs and counter-tariffs, the economy and public at large are unlikely to notice. Their attention is fully occupied by culture wars, Iran, immigration, and affordability of food and housing (not hockey sticks).
5. I note that Trump has scheduled his counter-counter-counter tariffs on motor vehicles for January, well after the mid-terms. There is a danger that the trade war will really escalate in 2027.
I have no solutions. As I said, Carney had to walk away last week. But perhaps our counter measures are not the best way forward. Perhaps the best way is to lie low until after Trump leaves office. I don't know. But I am worried.
George, I found your post very interesting, and I will read it a couple of more times.
One comment: as you segue from walking away from negotiations, toward “So we will have a trade war”, is it possible that we have mistaken our approach? What if we are not in an actual “trade war”, but just in a negotiation that has gone badly? Mr. Lutnick seems to have scuttled the progress late in negotiations. But Mr. Greer and Mr. Leblanc appear to have made real progress.
This is not a game: a real trade war would seriously diminish our ability to grow, and to prosper as an independent, united Nation.
What if our best plan forward is to lower the rhetoric, stop swallowing the bait, and return to the negotiations that are in our best interests?
> What if we are not in an actual “trade war”, but just in a negotiation that has gone badly?
That doesn’t fit the facts.
The American have imposed 50% tariffs. That’s a trade war. Even if there are negotiations going on at the same time or if they may start again, that’s still a trade war.
And that’s just one fact.
Andrew, I respectfully disagree.
We are a sovereign, independent Nation. We, and we alone, decide if we are at war.
I respect that you feel differently. We don’t have to take the bait, fall for the ruse, or buy the myth.
I think it is time Canadians stopped allowing the Government to tell us how and what to think. I think we should stop allowing our Government to pit us against our friends.
A real trade war is a devastating, economic disaster. What we choose to do is up to us.
It seems to me that a trade war is kind of like a regular war in that an aggressive party can start one whether we like it or not. You can choose not to fight back, but that doesn’t mean you’re not at war.
That said, taking your view as completely correct for the moment, we’re still in a trade war… because you said we alone make that decision and we have decided that we are.
That’s a decision our government has made. You and I don’t set trade policy. We only agree or disagree with it.
At some point, Canadians will begin to feel real pain from the trade war. And Carney can only do so much deficit spending to fix that. And then when the chickens come home to roost, will he go back to Washington with his tail between his legs? My guess is he will instead call an election before he goes to Washington
Great chat tonight. Americans have a thousand problems; we have ONE. what a great line!
Nobina, do you really think that is true?
May I list the problems Canada is facing, problems that have been festering for many years, and that Canada shows no signs of addressing?
Price of groceries are outrageous. People on minimum wages are definetely going hungry. While our leaders play politics. Acting like we need to be angry,”Our sovereignty is being threatened.” Phaaaack! Us common folk are just trying to put food on the table,gas in the vehicle,get to work,little Johnny,little Jane starts school,clothes,rent,mortgage,insurance, dental,hospital visits,ect
About the CBC style guide…
Maybe the Americans need to learn to take the CBC seriously but not literally.
Great discussion. I don't question for a moment that we probably needed to walk away. So we did and I know we all know all choices have consequences. We need our leaders to be really honest and open about that. we might lose our auto industry. we might lose other industries. what are we going to do about it? Never before in our history have we been faced with a existential crisis like this. I hope to god we don't fuck it up. We better not because our future is at stake. I have been resigned to the complete unseriousness of our country for the last 10 years. I hope Mr Carney can break us of this. the sooner the better. That pipeline should be breaking ground tomorrow.
Just this morning. A huge shot across our bow. "Trump says US reaches deal with Venezuela to control 65 billion barrels of country’s oil reserves" This should very seriously get all of our attention.
It will be interesting to see how quickly or how slowly it will take to get oil production in Venezuela back up.
It’s one thing to announce something. It’s another to be producing and shipping oil after you’ve trashed your industry.
The damage of the past decades doesn’t get fixed overnight and it’s not as if stability is guaranteed for that country.
No oil major is going to invest even pocket change in Venezuela without a stable government running the place. after that pre-requisite is in place, it will take years to get the infrastructure in place. Not something we need to worry about for the foreseeable.
Good podcast. On the CPC demands for transparency, I’m annoyed and disappointed (my typical feelings about the CPC). From the coverage of the Canadian and Trump’s negotiators, (1) there doesn’t seem to be a lot of room for Carney to be hiding something, and (2) the parties seem pretty far apart, on a lot issues, so it’s not like Carney has some “draft” agreement worth discussing that he’s hiding. I guess the CPC brain trust has decided the “transparency” is the best they can do, but idk smh. I wonder if they feel like they have to say something even if it’s weird and lame?
I get the feeling that demanding the release of the details of the deal is the CPC leadership trying to settle on a response that’ll keep their party united. There’s fissures in the party between those who’d rally to a pan-Canadian stand, those who are pro-Canada but viscerally hate the Liberals, and even a faction of pro-Trump people like Jamil Jivani. Focusing on getting the details allows them to postpone taking a stand that could alienate one or more of those factions.
The problem is that it’s a bit too cute by half: for one thing, a steady drip of information from news outlets and even Donald Trump seems to be confirming much of what Carney claimed last weekend, undermining the premise for the demands to release the details. There’s also reporting from the New York Times today that Canada was required to sign a non-disclosure agreement about the details - apparently a common demand by Trump.
In my experience is life, yes Canadians know more about America than Americans about Canada, but it's superficial. Canadians think they know more than they do. Canadians are pretty ignorant about the day to day life of the US. Taxes, banking, health care, schooling, etc.
As for Canada nationalism, Canadian elites quite frankly talk a good game but rarely put their money where their mouth is. They don't put their own personal money in say Canadian tech or growth industries. Thru aren't all in on Canada like America's and Europe's elite are all in on their ends. Canada's elite like to think they are cosmopolitan but really they are hedging and treat Canada as a going concern. Wealth to be extracted. Canadas business class area this since we interact with them. Perhaps that's why we are the most skeptical of "elbows up Canada?" We don't see the actions being made.
Yes, we might not be good at politics btw, but at least in other countries the business community is acknowledged by the political elite as being who pays the bills. In Canada it's seems entrepreneurship is for those who didn't do well at school. Those who did well get "safe" jobs and professions like the risk adverse colonials that we are.
As for folks who can speak aggressively about Canada to Americans, you won't get that from a born and bred Canadian. The culture weeds them out, chases them out or they never rise. You'll need an immigrant.
As for the CBC, it's an arm of the government. Who pays the Piper calls the tune. To think otherwise is Canadian naivete. Journalists ae the biggest defenders of the CBC because they see jobs, not a noble mission that only government can do. It doesn't cost that much to start a Substack and feeds. Other countries manage but again, Canadians are risk adverse.
In the end we have a bad case of little brother syndrome and it starts from the very top of the elite on down. For a country of 40+ million that is pathetic.