This can't be about fentanyl and immigration, can it? This feels like a smokescreen for something else. Is it really about annexing Canada? I don't buy it. Or is this all truly about Trump trying...
This can't be about fentanyl and immigration, can it? This feels like a smokescreen for something else.
Is it really about annexing Canada? I don't buy it.
Or is this all truly about Trump trying to become emperor of North America?
Yes, a smokescreen. From the article: I don't know the real reason, though.
Yes, a smokescreen. From the article:
There's a reason Trump is framing the expected tariffs as a response to an "emergency" drug and migrant crisis — it gives him the leeway to impose tariffs even though the new NAFTA is in place to prevent exactly these sorts of levies.
Honestly, fighting trade wars is surprisingly normal behavior from Trump. He did this in his first term with China over things like soy beans. His goal is probably just to get a few key...
Honestly, fighting trade wars is surprisingly normal behavior from Trump. He did this in his first term with China over things like soy beans. His goal is probably just to get a few key concessions and show them to his working class supporters. It's not so long ago that I remember Democrats complaining about NAFTA, this is within the normal bounds of political discussion. Ideally it would be through acts of congress, but we're already neck deep with the imperial presidency at this point. Now whether his blanket approach actually gets the results he wants, vs. more slow targeted fights, is yet to be seen.
It's all the other things that Trump does that scare me.
I seem to recall he didn't say there was nothing, he said that Canada could become a US State to avoid the tariffs. Which is honestly worse than nothing.
I seem to recall he didn't say there was nothing, he said that Canada could become a US State to avoid the tariffs. Which is honestly worse than nothing.
I, of course, agree with you completely, but the initial proposal was so idiotic and petty I didn't want to validate it by trying to make it make any sense.
I, of course, agree with you completely, but the initial proposal was so idiotic and petty I didn't want to validate it by trying to make it make any sense.
That's really not true. Five provinces/territories have populations of smaller than Wyoming's, and three of them only have around 40,000 people. The entire country's population is similar to that...
That's really not true. Five provinces/territories have populations of smaller than Wyoming's, and three of them only have around 40,000 people. The entire country's population is similar to that of California.
You could make each of the big six a state. NS, NB, and NL could all feasibly be states, but I would think the best way would be to, at least, combine them with PEI and the territories. But, as this is clearly an imperialist action, making the whole country one state would be perfect. Maybe combine them with Alaska, even, so we can keep the flag.
The other plus is that it would throw every electoral vote they would receive behind just one party. I'm sure Canada would eventually choose to distribute their votes proportionally, but it wouldn't be until after the Democrats have run the country for a few decades, I would think.
I'm a Californian and I have low key supported dividing the state into two or even three states my entire life. In other words we are too big. We don't need more huge states Trump is getting...
I'm a Californian and I have low key supported dividing the state into two or even three states my entire life. In other words we are too big. We don't need more huge states
Trump is getting Canadian people's backs up against anything he supports at this point and that's overall a good thing.
As someone who lived in CA for several years, the thing that gave me pause the most about the idea of splitting the state up was that the likelihood of the lines being drawn in a way that makes...
As someone who lived in CA for several years, the thing that gave me pause the most about the idea of splitting the state up was that the likelihood of the lines being drawn in a way that makes sure that no less desirable part gets left out in the cold is low. A split occurring would almost certainly create one or more poor states with little means to support themselves.
Yeah, I think drawing a horizontal line either just North or just South of Fresno would be a fairly equitable split. Three or more states would be trickier.
Yeah, I think drawing a horizontal line either just North or just South of Fresno would be a fairly equitable split.
Not even close. Even if they proceed with the proposed flat 10% tariff and the layoffs of half the federal workforce, it won't even come close. But their goal is not to reduce the deficit, their...
Not even close. Even if they proceed with the proposed flat 10% tariff and the layoffs of half the federal workforce, it won't even come close.
But their goal is not to reduce the deficit, their goal is to convince the GOP to vote for tax cuts for the rich, which is a different thing entirely.
From the article: Now, two things about this: The amount seized doesn't necessarily correlate with the amount smuggled across the border. Trump is an idiot, and it's entirely possible he believes...
This can't be about fentanyl and immigration, can it?
From the article:
Trump has also said the tariffs are to punish Canada for being lax on drugs and migrants even as the U.S. government's figures show less than one per cent of fentanyl and illegal migrants are coming from this country.
Figures from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) show the agency seized 19.5 kilograms of fentanyl at the northern border last year, compared to a whopping 9,570 kilograms at the southwestern one.
Now, two things about this:
The amount seized doesn't necessarily correlate with the amount smuggled across the border.
Trump is an idiot, and it's entirely possible he believes half the fentanyl in the US comes across the Canadian border.
But most of all, I think Trump is just really into tariffs these days. He throws out random phrases during his rallies, and whatever gets the biggest cheers from the crowd becomes his new policy.
It is about him becoming emperor, but in the short term it's about creating another crisis that only he can "solve". US prices will go up, and he'll blame Canada, Mexico, and China for "raising...
It is about him becoming emperor, but in the short term it's about creating another crisis that only he can "solve". US prices will go up, and he'll blame Canada, Mexico, and China for "raising their prices." He may also pull in a government agency or two, blaming some of the price increases on their inadequate work due to bureaucracy and DEI, prompting Elon to send in his goons to get access to everything and everyone in the departments. After weeks of bashing Mexico, Canada, and China and declaring them "enemies guilty of killing millions of Americans with drugs, rapists, and murders", he'll meet with Mexican and Canadian officials, claim he negotiated the "best deal in history", remove the tariffs, and pricing goes back to normal. There will be no clear answers on just what "the deal" was, and the media won't press for answers.
The deal is him making money off shorting the global economy, covering his shorts cheaply tomorrow, switching to a long position, removing tarriffs, and profiting again off the upswing. Everything...
The deal is him making money off shorting the global economy, covering his shorts cheaply tomorrow, switching to a long position, removing tarriffs, and profiting again off the upswing.
Everything with Trump is either about money, power, or pettiness. Nothing else.
To be fair, the price of gas drops down during a presidential election run-up, and goes back up in the months following the election being over. I've personally seen this as a repeating trend, and...
To be fair, the price of gas drops down during a presidential election run-up, and goes back up in the months following the election being over. I've personally seen this as a repeating trend, and generally assume it to be the interests of oil wealth not wanting the price of gas to be in anyone's mind during said election cycle.
But yes, it may well go up faster / more because of these idiotic tariffs.
It drops going into the winter and rises going into summer. Winter blend gas runs 10-30 cents cheaper. So it seems like it's the election and really it happens every year. (If gas prices have...
It drops going into the winter and rises going into summer. Winter blend gas runs 10-30 cents cheaper. So it seems like it's the election and really it happens every year. (If gas prices have other reasons to spike or crash those happen too, but there's also this very consistent well documented reason)
EDIT: I was being an idiot about the price timeline and conflating 2015 with 2016, and 2019 with 2020. Apologies. Leaving original comment intact below. Hmm. Ok, plausible at least. I can...
EDIT: I was being an idiot about the price timeline and conflating 2015 with 2016, and 2019 with 2020. Apologies. Leaving original comment intact below.
Hmm. Ok, plausible at least. I can definitely see how that trend would lead me to a false association with the election cycle.....
Um... so, I wanted to get my eyes on historical data to see if what I thought was true either was supported by, or disproven by the data.
While I admit this is no peer-reviewed study, I brought up a chart of historical US gas prices over the past 10 years on gasbuddy.com - I see all-time lows near the tail end of 2015 and 2019, with a not-as-significant dip tail end of 2024. The more recent years of data seem less supportive of my theory, and more compatible with your seasonal price explanation, but the data on 2015 and 2019 compared to the surrounding years is quite pronounced.
Edit: I absolutely admit to uncertainty here. I'm trying to find more granular data as well as better data analysis tools for historical gasoline prices in the US. The gasbuddy.com chart doesn't exactly tell me what their sampling rate is, or how data is derived, or all the other nuance that becomes important when you actually want to be able to do real analysis.
But 2015 and 2019 aren't election years? The difficulty here really is there are so many other factors involved with gas (and oil) prices. And I don't know if the entire country switches about the...
But 2015 and 2019 aren't election years?
The difficulty here really is there are so many other factors involved with gas (and oil) prices. And I don't know if the entire country switches about the same time, or if it ripples from North to South, etc. I just catch that sharp drop every year.
I can't say elections don't impact it since it's a commodity and publicly traded and stuff but I'm not sure it's more than that + the fuel switch
I'm an idiot. Wow. I was about to type out 'those are the run-up months to the 2016 and 2020 elections'... and as I was typing that I thought about the 2024 elections, and when the 2024 elections...
But 2015 and 2019 aren't election years?
I'm an idiot. Wow. I was about to type out 'those are the run-up months to the 2016 and 2020 elections'... and as I was typing that I thought about the 2024 elections, and when the 2024 elections actually happened, and during what months of what year the presidential race happened, and that I was incorrectly conflating the years of inauguration with election and that election happens the year before inauguration...
Sorry about that, that was straightforwardly a brain fail on my part.
No worries at all, I was wondering if I was misunderstanding that you meant like primaries or something! This is that whole thing where our brains like patterns and correlations can trick us, like...
No worries at all, I was wondering if I was misunderstanding that you meant like primaries or something!
This is that whole thing where our brains like patterns and correlations can trick us, like how shark attacks and ice cream sales go up at the same time.
I'm open to contradicting evidence though, perhaps it's more complicated than it looks.
This can't be about fentanyl and immigration, can it? This feels like a smokescreen for something else.
Is it really about annexing Canada? I don't buy it.
Or is this all truly about Trump trying to become emperor of North America?
Yes, a smokescreen. From the article:
I don't know the real reason, though.
Cut off oil imports, cause a shortage, then get approval to start drilling/refining/piping in new, formerly protected areas?
Honestly, fighting trade wars is surprisingly normal behavior from Trump. He did this in his first term with China over things like soy beans. His goal is probably just to get a few key concessions and show them to his working class supporters. It's not so long ago that I remember Democrats complaining about NAFTA, this is within the normal bounds of political discussion. Ideally it would be through acts of congress, but we're already neck deep with the imperial presidency at this point. Now whether his blanket approach actually gets the results he wants, vs. more slow targeted fights, is yet to be seen.
It's all the other things that Trump does that scare me.
The thing is that even when asked what Canada could do to avoid tariffs, he said there was nothing.
I seem to recall he didn't say there was nothing, he said that Canada could become a US State to avoid the tariffs. Which is honestly worse than nothing.
If we tried this, each province would deserve to be its own state. But its a garbage idea that matches the guy who came up with it.
I, of course, agree with you completely, but the initial proposal was so idiotic and petty I didn't want to validate it by trying to make it make any sense.
That's really not true. Five provinces/territories have populations of smaller than Wyoming's, and three of them only have around 40,000 people. The entire country's population is similar to that of California.
You could make each of the big six a state. NS, NB, and NL could all feasibly be states, but I would think the best way would be to, at least, combine them with PEI and the territories. But, as this is clearly an imperialist action, making the whole country one state would be perfect. Maybe combine them with Alaska, even, so we can keep the flag.
The other plus is that it would throw every electoral vote they would receive behind just one party. I'm sure Canada would eventually choose to distribute their votes proportionally, but it wouldn't be until after the Democrats have run the country for a few decades, I would think.
Like we’d even get to vote — we’d be Puerto Rico 2.0.
This is Trump and he approves of a higher percentage of northern European descended citizens. He offered state status.
He keeps saying "51st state."
I'm a Californian and I have low key supported dividing the state into two or even three states my entire life. In other words we are too big. We don't need more huge states
Trump is getting Canadian people's backs up against anything he supports at this point and that's overall a good thing.
As someone who lived in CA for several years, the thing that gave me pause the most about the idea of splitting the state up was that the likelihood of the lines being drawn in a way that makes sure that no less desirable part gets left out in the cold is low. A split occurring would almost certainly create one or more poor states with little means to support themselves.
Yeah, I think drawing a horizontal line either just North or just South of Fresno would be a fairly equitable split.
Three or more states would be trickier.
Well, sure. The "emergency", questionably, gives him the authority.
Trump wants to extend the provisions in his signature Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
Well, it’s true that tariffs are a tax and a revenue source. How significant is it?
Not even close. Even if they proceed with the proposed flat 10% tariff and the layoffs of half the federal workforce, it won't even come close.
But their goal is not to reduce the deficit, their goal is to convince the GOP to vote for tax cuts for the rich, which is a different thing entirely.
From the article:
Now, two things about this:
But most of all, I think Trump is just really into tariffs these days. He throws out random phrases during his rallies, and whatever gets the biggest cheers from the crowd becomes his new policy.
It is about him becoming emperor, but in the short term it's about creating another crisis that only he can "solve". US prices will go up, and he'll blame Canada, Mexico, and China for "raising their prices." He may also pull in a government agency or two, blaming some of the price increases on their inadequate work due to bureaucracy and DEI, prompting Elon to send in his goons to get access to everything and everyone in the departments. After weeks of bashing Mexico, Canada, and China and declaring them "enemies guilty of killing millions of Americans with drugs, rapists, and murders", he'll meet with Mexican and Canadian officials, claim he negotiated the "best deal in history", remove the tariffs, and pricing goes back to normal. There will be no clear answers on just what "the deal" was, and the media won't press for answers.
The deal is him making money off shorting the global economy, covering his shorts cheaply tomorrow, switching to a long position, removing tarriffs, and profiting again off the upswing.
Everything with Trump is either about money, power, or pettiness. Nothing else.
Even /r/conservative is baffled by this one. Unfortunately, they'll be talking about how perfect he is again tomorrow.
And the Wall Street Journal is calling it the “Dumbest Trade War in History”.
So, buy gas asap?
I live in Texas and gas is already up 40 cents since the election. I need to leave this state bad…
To be fair, the price of gas drops down during a presidential election run-up, and goes back up in the months following the election being over. I've personally seen this as a repeating trend, and generally assume it to be the interests of oil wealth not wanting the price of gas to be in anyone's mind during said election cycle.
But yes, it may well go up faster / more because of these idiotic tariffs.
It drops going into the winter and rises going into summer. Winter blend gas runs 10-30 cents cheaper. So it seems like it's the election and really it happens every year. (If gas prices have other reasons to spike or crash those happen too, but there's also this very consistent well documented reason)
But September or so is when stations switch.
EDIT: I was being an idiot about the price timeline and conflating 2015 with 2016, and 2019 with 2020. Apologies. Leaving original comment intact below.
Hmm. Ok, plausible at least. I can definitely see how that trend would lead me to a false association with the election cycle.....
Um... so, I wanted to get my eyes on historical data to see if what I thought was true either was supported by, or disproven by the data.
While I admit this is no peer-reviewed study, I brought up a chart of historical US gas prices over the past 10 years on gasbuddy.com - I see all-time lows near the tail end of 2015 and 2019, with a not-as-significant dip tail end of 2024. The more recent years of data seem less supportive of my theory, and more compatible with your seasonal price explanation, but the data on 2015 and 2019 compared to the surrounding years is quite pronounced.
Edit: I absolutely admit to uncertainty here. I'm trying to find more granular data as well as better data analysis tools for historical gasoline prices in the US. The gasbuddy.com chart doesn't exactly tell me what their sampling rate is, or how data is derived, or all the other nuance that becomes important when you actually want to be able to do real analysis.
But 2015 and 2019 aren't election years?
The difficulty here really is there are so many other factors involved with gas (and oil) prices. And I don't know if the entire country switches about the same time, or if it ripples from North to South, etc. I just catch that sharp drop every year.
I can't say elections don't impact it since it's a commodity and publicly traded and stuff but I'm not sure it's more than that + the fuel switch
I'm an idiot. Wow. I was about to type out 'those are the run-up months to the 2016 and 2020 elections'... and as I was typing that I thought about the 2024 elections, and when the 2024 elections actually happened, and during what months of what year the presidential race happened, and that I was incorrectly conflating the years of inauguration with election and that election happens the year before inauguration...
Sorry about that, that was straightforwardly a brain fail on my part.
No worries at all, I was wondering if I was misunderstanding that you meant like primaries or something!
This is that whole thing where our brains like patterns and correlations can trick us, like how shark attacks and ice cream sales go up at the same time.
I'm open to contradicting evidence though, perhaps it's more complicated than it looks.
Well if I or a loved one got bitten by a shark, I’d want ice cream to console me too!
Or does eating ice cream make you tastier to sharks?
/s
Are you dumb? It's that sharks want ice cream as dessert after their human main course.
In your defense, the run up to US presidential elections is literally a year and a half. Trump announced his candidacy for 2016 in mid 2015.
here's a great article that covers the dates and more
The switch to summer gas starts may 1st. The switch to winter gas starts September 15th.
Buy an escooter ASAP, so you need less gas. Failing that...
https://ecomodder.com/
Even though I was peripherally aware of the hypermiling thing, reading about it is different. What a rabbit hole. Thank you.
I've got a baaad feeling about this.
I'm the words of the colonial Marines
".. a baaad feeling about this drop!"