Trump’s problem, and as a result ours, is that he sees the world as a series of zero sum games. There always has to be a winner and a loser. There concept of mutual benefit is beyond his ken.
Free trade has always been a big part of the problem...for the simple reason that such a pure state has never existed. But we fell for it, and a globalized market place did succeed in creating a couple of decades of expansion......if you overlook the fact that jobs in the American heartland disappeared to China and other parts of Asia where cheap labour could be exploited to increase corporate profits. We still had dust ups about trade that appeared to overly benefit Canada...soft wood lumber comes to mind...and there are lots of folks who don't understand supply management, and are eager to open our borders to what Americans call 'milk', cheaper of course though adulterated by American big ag ideas, and those savings in the mind of the average consumer make up for the fact Canadian dairy farms might well go under.
There needs to be some protectionism for national industries crucial to the national interest. We once had a state of the art laboratory where we made many of our own vaccines...Mulroney sold it as unnecessary given 'global supply chains'. So now everyone is dependent to some extent on those supply chains, as we found out in the famous toilet paper shortage at the start of covid.
But the sad fact is, the country to which American entre proners moved their factories is now eating our lunch...and climate change advances on all of us like a Hallowe'en horror movie. So tariffs it is......particularly for the People's Republic of China...growing approx 3 times faster than is the American economy.
The tarriffs won't work. It's too late for that. Americans need those cheap goods from away, they don't make much at home any more. But China? She has options...and retributions of her own she could bring to bear. So Trump's tarriffs may make money for his government...money lost when he gave away all that tax revenue to the rich in his first term. But the American people are in for it.
Canada should stay calm, carry on......and seriously ask ourselves, is Pierre the man to lead us through the next years......seeing that for him, all things must be broken??? Big changes are coming, but they won't achieve what the Donald imagines....and if we play our cards a bit close to the chest......they just may form a part of saving us from ourselves.
As Lisa says, 'there's nothing wrong with the kids'. We have a few Canadians left who can still think their way out of a wet paper bag as well. Let's all stay tuned, stay calm...and Stand with Canada.
The next four years will be even more disturbing to those who have the habit of thinking than the first four years of the failed businessman/ reality TV ham.
Louis, I respectfully - note: respectfully - take a bit of an issue with your description of Trump as a "failed businessman."
I think that we need to consider him differently: Trump thinks of winners and losers; he simply doesn't agree that there could ever be a win/win relationship, whether in international trade or in business. That means that we have to understand him differently.
Clearly, some of Trump's businesses have gone bankrupt; in the minds of many that makes him a "failed businessman" but I suggest that it is much more nuanced. Trump has and has had many businesses and he operates with a large amount of debt. As a general rule, however, he walls off each of his businesses from the others so that if business A takes on debt and fails, then that is the bank's problem; yes, he loses the equity he put in but that is a small thing in the overall scheme of things. By contrast, if business B takes on debt and flourishes then he more than makes up his losses elsewhere.
Under US law, bankruptcy becomes another tool for an unscrupulous businessman to take advantage of creditors in such a way that a business can go down but the businessman behind it continues to survive and flourish while other businesses suffer hardship.
Trump is not simply a businessman and cannot be judged like "other" businessmen. Trump, like a minority of businessmen, is actually a predator; he looks for opportunities to take advantage of others (the banks that have loans to his bankrupt businesses, perhaps; other businesses that aren't as careful in arranging their affairs, etc.). He knows that a certain number of his businesses will go under but he isn't worried about that as he knows that a larger number of his businesses will be winners and as long as the overall winnings are greater than the overall losses he is happy.
So, again, Trump isn't simply a failed businessman but he is a predator looking to take advantage of other businesses so that his winnings are greater than his losses.
Well said,”Trump isn't simply a failed businessman but he is a predator looking to take advantage of other businesses [or anyone].
Shakespeare described such characters:
“Oswald. What dost thou know me for?
Earl of Kent. A knave; a rascal; an eater of broken meats; a base, proud, shallow, beggarly, three-suited, hundred-pound, filthy, worsted-stocking knave; a lily-liver'd, action-taking, whoreson, glass-gazing, superserviceable, finical rogue; one-trunk-inheriting slave; one that wouldst be a bawd in way of good service, and art nothing but the composition of a knave, beggar, coward, pander…”
I agree with you that he is not simply a failed businessman.
He is definitely a predator that has often failed to pay contractors.
He is definitely happy to have others pay for his businesses that go under, like his casino...
This type of predatory businessman has no qualms about the harm he creates in other people's lives, whether investors or employees.
He is also a predator of another type, as demonstrated in the sexual abuse court case he lost.
I have been fortunate to have met and supported true entrepreneurs and business people. Trump has very few, if any, of the qualities these people have.
Definitely interesting times. Based on past behavior by this narcissistic toddler, he has a need to continue to play to his base. His strength is not economics or diplomacy. It’s outrage, and many people are outraged suffering through the economic divide of neoclassical economics. This is an opportunity for Canada to focus on increasing interprovincial trade; increasing trade with EU countries and others. However, it seems clear that some Provincial governments can’t wait to ’kiss-up,’ or lob trade grenades. Turns out Canada has toddlers as well … who knew?? Diplomacy is a lost art.
I’m encouraged by your students interest in discussions and critical thinking on these current (and past) behaviors. History is a great resource as well. Thanks Lisa.
Great size up Lisa. My view is that the true end game is to generate ‘huuuge’ revenue which he can use or misuse for power. Tariffs are the tool and as you point out he can rationalize them any way he chooses.
Thanks for this. We are at the end of term at the U of Alberta and I assigned the students in my violence course a final exam with questions to choose from, including one that asked them to identify key takeaways, or most transformative lessons/concepts. I also talked about affective polarization in my class. It will be interesting to compare notes.
Ask your students what the main principles of neoliberalism are or if they even have heard of the term which drives not only our economy but our society. For 45 yesrs now! The easiest definition to understand is in Investopedia.com while the best response is George Monbiot's 2024 book Invisible Doctrine The Secret History of Neoliberalism.
If they wake up to neoliberalism being a job cutter, union killer, labour considered as a negative externality then add the Milton Friedman Doctrine which states a company's only purpose is create profit and all profits shall go to shareholders and not such things as staff benefits, community investments or any other frivolous spending of profits, perhaps they will see themselves as pawns controlled by Big Money which can deleted any time.
Your essay is 180 degrees from our Premier’s rant against the imposition of tariffs by them socialist Liberals. With armed parking patrollers on the border, watching over the new elite lodges in our parks, I am reworking my parka to be more like a tuxedo with corporal stripes. Don’t give up Lisa!
I am clinging to hope that she is losing support and it just has not been measured yet. According to Éric Grenier (author of "The Writ" Substack), the most recent polls have the NDP winning 44 seats to the UCP's 43 if the election were held today ("today" being whenever the poll was conducted). That prediction was first made several weeks ago, so I am looking forward to an update.
An interesting read, thanks. With respect to the border, we would probably be better off with integrated border services between Can& US with a greater focus on economic exchange & people moving about management. An Americas focused entity.
I've also been thinking back to the 1988 election. A majority of the country voted against the free-trade deal, or at least thought they did, by voting Liberal or NDP. And yet, when the Liberals crushed the Conservatives in 1993 and returned to office, they not only kept the deal that they had opposed, they expanded it into NAFTA. That was how things went in the late 20th century: your elders and betters decided for you that free trade was the way to go, and majority rule was irrelevant. Decades later, the actual voters who opposed US free trade now come to look like the prescient ones, because if the majority had ruled and there had been no free-trade deal, Trump would not be in anything like that position to bully us. Fat lot of good that does us now, though.
Trump’s problem, and as a result ours, is that he sees the world as a series of zero sum games. There always has to be a winner and a loser. There concept of mutual benefit is beyond his ken.
Free trade has always been a big part of the problem...for the simple reason that such a pure state has never existed. But we fell for it, and a globalized market place did succeed in creating a couple of decades of expansion......if you overlook the fact that jobs in the American heartland disappeared to China and other parts of Asia where cheap labour could be exploited to increase corporate profits. We still had dust ups about trade that appeared to overly benefit Canada...soft wood lumber comes to mind...and there are lots of folks who don't understand supply management, and are eager to open our borders to what Americans call 'milk', cheaper of course though adulterated by American big ag ideas, and those savings in the mind of the average consumer make up for the fact Canadian dairy farms might well go under.
There needs to be some protectionism for national industries crucial to the national interest. We once had a state of the art laboratory where we made many of our own vaccines...Mulroney sold it as unnecessary given 'global supply chains'. So now everyone is dependent to some extent on those supply chains, as we found out in the famous toilet paper shortage at the start of covid.
But the sad fact is, the country to which American entre proners moved their factories is now eating our lunch...and climate change advances on all of us like a Hallowe'en horror movie. So tariffs it is......particularly for the People's Republic of China...growing approx 3 times faster than is the American economy.
The tarriffs won't work. It's too late for that. Americans need those cheap goods from away, they don't make much at home any more. But China? She has options...and retributions of her own she could bring to bear. So Trump's tarriffs may make money for his government...money lost when he gave away all that tax revenue to the rich in his first term. But the American people are in for it.
Canada should stay calm, carry on......and seriously ask ourselves, is Pierre the man to lead us through the next years......seeing that for him, all things must be broken??? Big changes are coming, but they won't achieve what the Donald imagines....and if we play our cards a bit close to the chest......they just may form a part of saving us from ourselves.
As Lisa says, 'there's nothing wrong with the kids'. We have a few Canadians left who can still think their way out of a wet paper bag as well. Let's all stay tuned, stay calm...and Stand with Canada.
The next four years will be even more disturbing to those who have the habit of thinking than the first four years of the failed businessman/ reality TV ham.
Louis, I respectfully - note: respectfully - take a bit of an issue with your description of Trump as a "failed businessman."
I think that we need to consider him differently: Trump thinks of winners and losers; he simply doesn't agree that there could ever be a win/win relationship, whether in international trade or in business. That means that we have to understand him differently.
Clearly, some of Trump's businesses have gone bankrupt; in the minds of many that makes him a "failed businessman" but I suggest that it is much more nuanced. Trump has and has had many businesses and he operates with a large amount of debt. As a general rule, however, he walls off each of his businesses from the others so that if business A takes on debt and fails, then that is the bank's problem; yes, he loses the equity he put in but that is a small thing in the overall scheme of things. By contrast, if business B takes on debt and flourishes then he more than makes up his losses elsewhere.
Under US law, bankruptcy becomes another tool for an unscrupulous businessman to take advantage of creditors in such a way that a business can go down but the businessman behind it continues to survive and flourish while other businesses suffer hardship.
Trump is not simply a businessman and cannot be judged like "other" businessmen. Trump, like a minority of businessmen, is actually a predator; he looks for opportunities to take advantage of others (the banks that have loans to his bankrupt businesses, perhaps; other businesses that aren't as careful in arranging their affairs, etc.). He knows that a certain number of his businesses will go under but he isn't worried about that as he knows that a larger number of his businesses will be winners and as long as the overall winnings are greater than the overall losses he is happy.
So, again, Trump isn't simply a failed businessman but he is a predator looking to take advantage of other businesses so that his winnings are greater than his losses.
Well said,”Trump isn't simply a failed businessman but he is a predator looking to take advantage of other businesses [or anyone].
Shakespeare described such characters:
“Oswald. What dost thou know me for?
Earl of Kent. A knave; a rascal; an eater of broken meats; a base, proud, shallow, beggarly, three-suited, hundred-pound, filthy, worsted-stocking knave; a lily-liver'd, action-taking, whoreson, glass-gazing, superserviceable, finical rogue; one-trunk-inheriting slave; one that wouldst be a bawd in way of good service, and art nothing but the composition of a knave, beggar, coward, pander…”
Well, I always said that Willie had a way with adjectives.
Carrying your thought further, would DJT have been better suited for Willie's comedies or his tragedies? Hmmm ... must consider ...
Very good comment, Sirrah.
Thank you, Ken,
I agree with you that he is not simply a failed businessman.
He is definitely a predator that has often failed to pay contractors.
He is definitely happy to have others pay for his businesses that go under, like his casino...
This type of predatory businessman has no qualms about the harm he creates in other people's lives, whether investors or employees.
He is also a predator of another type, as demonstrated in the sexual abuse court case he lost.
I have been fortunate to have met and supported true entrepreneurs and business people. Trump has very few, if any, of the qualities these people have.
Only someone who’s failed as a businessman becomes the successful ‘predator’ you describe.
Definitely interesting times. Based on past behavior by this narcissistic toddler, he has a need to continue to play to his base. His strength is not economics or diplomacy. It’s outrage, and many people are outraged suffering through the economic divide of neoclassical economics. This is an opportunity for Canada to focus on increasing interprovincial trade; increasing trade with EU countries and others. However, it seems clear that some Provincial governments can’t wait to ’kiss-up,’ or lob trade grenades. Turns out Canada has toddlers as well … who knew?? Diplomacy is a lost art.
I’m encouraged by your students interest in discussions and critical thinking on these current (and past) behaviors. History is a great resource as well. Thanks Lisa.
Great size up Lisa. My view is that the true end game is to generate ‘huuuge’ revenue which he can use or misuse for power. Tariffs are the tool and as you point out he can rationalize them any way he chooses.
Thanks for this. We are at the end of term at the U of Alberta and I assigned the students in my violence course a final exam with questions to choose from, including one that asked them to identify key takeaways, or most transformative lessons/concepts. I also talked about affective polarization in my class. It will be interesting to compare notes.
Ask your students what the main principles of neoliberalism are or if they even have heard of the term which drives not only our economy but our society. For 45 yesrs now! The easiest definition to understand is in Investopedia.com while the best response is George Monbiot's 2024 book Invisible Doctrine The Secret History of Neoliberalism.
If they wake up to neoliberalism being a job cutter, union killer, labour considered as a negative externality then add the Milton Friedman Doctrine which states a company's only purpose is create profit and all profits shall go to shareholders and not such things as staff benefits, community investments or any other frivolous spending of profits, perhaps they will see themselves as pawns controlled by Big Money which can deleted any time.
Your essay is 180 degrees from our Premier’s rant against the imposition of tariffs by them socialist Liberals. With armed parking patrollers on the border, watching over the new elite lodges in our parks, I am reworking my parka to be more like a tuxedo with corporal stripes. Don’t give up Lisa!
We have a Premier who’s falling all over herself to become Canada’s Lukashenko. And she’s not losing any support for it.
I am clinging to hope that she is losing support and it just has not been measured yet. According to Éric Grenier (author of "The Writ" Substack), the most recent polls have the NDP winning 44 seats to the UCP's 43 if the election were held today ("today" being whenever the poll was conducted). That prediction was first made several weeks ago, so I am looking forward to an update.
Thanks Lisa, enjoy your columns. Have a good break from classes!
An interesting read, thanks. With respect to the border, we would probably be better off with integrated border services between Can& US with a greater focus on economic exchange & people moving about management. An Americas focused entity.
I've also been thinking back to the 1988 election. A majority of the country voted against the free-trade deal, or at least thought they did, by voting Liberal or NDP. And yet, when the Liberals crushed the Conservatives in 1993 and returned to office, they not only kept the deal that they had opposed, they expanded it into NAFTA. That was how things went in the late 20th century: your elders and betters decided for you that free trade was the way to go, and majority rule was irrelevant. Decades later, the actual voters who opposed US free trade now come to look like the prescient ones, because if the majority had ruled and there had been no free-trade deal, Trump would not be in anything like that position to bully us. Fat lot of good that does us now, though.