By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The Shopping Trends team, separate from CTV News journalists, has curated a selection of popular items. These recommendations are based on current shopping behaviors and trending products. When consumers utilize the provided links to make purchases, the team may receive a commission. Further information about the Shopping Trends team and their process is available in the “About Us” section.
Read the original article here
Carney’s approach is clear: he’ll talk to POTUS “when it makes sense,” particularly after the 35% tariff lands. This isn’t about stubbornness, it’s about strategy. It’s a recognition that engaging in negotiations prematurely would likely be a waste of time, especially considering the volatile nature of the current situation. He’s learned to wait and see, which is a smart move in the game of international trade and diplomacy. It appears that it’s now perceived as a fool’s errand to try and reason with the current POTUS.
Essentially, there’s a consensus that rushing into talks isn’t productive. There’s a sense that Trump could change his stance abruptly, making any agreements reached today irrelevant tomorrow. This strategic pause is less about avoiding POTUS and more about avoiding a fruitless exercise, and waiting to see how the U.S. economy trends as a result of the tariffs. It’s a tactic of patience, allowing events to unfold and potentially revealing a more favorable landscape for negotiation down the line. If it becomes clear that the US is suffering and comes asking for a break, it will be far more beneficial to the Canadian interests.
The imposition of the 35% tariff is significant, and it’s reasonable to anticipate its impact before engaging. This stance is a strong response. It suggests that Trump is more concerned with flexing muscle, or even posturing, than forging lasting, mutually beneficial trade relationships. Any future deal is perceived as more beneficial and worthy of time and effort than a deal with POTUS. Focusing on actual deals that benefit the country is a priority.
One key theme here is the recognition that Trump is not a reliable negotiator. The history of broken deals and unpredictable shifts in policy is a significant deterrent. The repeated examples of deals being altered or undone quickly demonstrate the futility of negotiating on his terms. There is a lack of trust and a sense that any concessions will be met with further demands, nullifying any initial gains.
The alternative strategy is also quite interesting: The idea of exploring free trade agreements with other countries, like China, could shift the balance of power. Given the established history between China and Canada, focusing on mutually beneficial trade agreements could diversify Canada’s economic partnerships and send a clear message. The implication is that Canada doesn’t need to kowtow to Trump and is capable of pursuing its own interests, strengthening its global position in the process.
There’s a feeling of inevitability that the current POTUS is unlikely to change. This implies that the focus is shifting towards the long term. Considering the unreliable nature of the current POTUS, any trade negotiation is not worth the time, as a long wait will likely be required. It may be a prudent approach to focus on reliable countries and avoid the uncertainty of Trump’s unpredictable policies.
There’s a strong sense of disappointment over POTUS’s actions and decisions. The tariffs are perceived as a self-inflicted wound, harming the US economy in the long run. The focus should be on the American citizens, and the suffering that will result from a bad deal.
The discussion also touches on a broader critique of the current political climate, particularly the two-party system in the US. The constant posturing and inherent disagreement are seen as hindering progress. There is a call for moving away from the US as much as possible. There’s a recognition that the US, as an experiment, may not be the best example for other countries to follow.
The general sentiment is that the current administration’s trade practices are not sustainable. The focus isn’t on individual negotiations, but on the larger strategic landscape. The emphasis is on a long-term approach that prioritizes Canada’s interests and seeks to reduce dependence on a potentially unreliable partner.