this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2025
1 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

11788 readers
741 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 Sports

Baseball

Basketball

Curling

Hockey

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Here's my theory: Carney dropped the DST because of supply management on dairy. My evidence is sparse, but:

Last month, the U.S. and Britain announced a trade deal related to a range of products. But Britain’s 2-per-cent DST was not affected.

(From the Globe)

That shows other countries have a DST but that hasn't been a sticking point in trade negotiations.

Meanwhile, Quebec really likes supply management:

83 per cent of Quebecers want governments to do everything in their power to protect the country’s supply management system.

During the next election, Carney will probably need Quebec's support to stay in power. By giving up the DST, Carney may be able to keep supply management for dairy, and avoid alienating Quebec voters.

I guess we'll see during the final negotiations. Do our dairy farmers get to keep their protections?

top 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I am very disappointed that we are retaliating slowly but conceding quickly. If no deal is reached by the deadline or we get a stupid letter dictating the universal tariff, put the DST back on.

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

There was a lot of talk about elbows up, but I'm unclear what is being taxed and how. There's a list, but I don't know what that represents in terms of financial cost to Canadian buyers and US producers.

Like, is it a tiny bit of posturing for the home crowd, or is it something that will hurt US industries (and Canadian buyers)? I don't know.

[–] nyan@lemmy.cafe 1 points 8 months ago

Some of the existing countertariffs are targeted specifically at the southern states (thus oranges, sugar, tobacco, and such) who tend to be more likely to vote Republican. The idea was originally less "strike out against everyone in the US even if they didn't want this" and more "hurt the people who caused this mess". How well that's worked in practice is difficult to say.

[–] kbal@fedia.io 1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Perhaps the prime minister could take a moment out of his busy schedule to tell us what the fuck he was thinking if it's anything other than "we're absolutely desperate to make a deal and have no choice but to give them whatever they want."

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 1 points 8 months ago

I suspect the PM doesn't want to alienate other voting blocks by saying it out loud. Just like he really didn't want to piss off older Canadians by saying his policies would lower house prices.

I agree with you, but he's smart enough to know that an embarrassing sound bite will play forever in CPC ads, along with a scary voice over like "he's willing to screw over Canadian businesses for dirty yucky Quebec, so why won't he bend over for Alberta's Big Beautiful fossil fuel producers?"

[–] jaxxed@lemmy.ml 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

He doesn't want to give Trump anything to bully on in public, now that he has made a concession.

[–] Reannlegge@lemmy.ca 1 points 8 months ago

Hahahaa, that is a funny joke. Unless you are serious, then it is a not good take, if you give Trump a centimetre he will take the whole damn ruler and then demand every other ruler in the country.

[–] Reannlegge@lemmy.ca 1 points 8 months ago

A problem I see with this is that it is going to become unsafe to consume food stuffs coming from the US very soon. RFK would rather watch people die then put in the proper health requirements, if there is no requirements than capitalism will do what capitalism does and cut costs.