Go look up what the U.S. was demanding by the end of the recent trade negotiations. They wanted Canada to give up its ability to set its own cultural and trade policy independent of the U.S.. That's a huge step to becoming, not the 51st state, but a protectorate. We wouldn't even have been the Puerto Rico of the North!

Lost jobs can be created again, but signing away sovereignty is not reversible. If the democrats take over in 2028, they're not going to give back what we let Trump take. We know that from past history. We also know, from very recent history, that giving Trump everything he asks for would likely not have spared us. If we had capitulated he'd just come up with new demands.

When your largest trading partner violates its signed commitments and betrays you, there may simply be no way out that doesn't involve some pain.

▲

vivekd a day ago | parent | next [-]

I wasn't able to go look up the deal. Please explain to me - because last I checked it was being kept confidential by Carney's party while the opposition party is asking for it to be released

▲

redanddead a day ago | parent | next [-]

They came for the frenchies and that was truly a bridge too far

▲

fooster a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Carney made it pretty clear what was in the deal. I don’t understand why you believe Trump who lies every time he opens his mouth?

	▲	vivekd 19 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I don't trust either of them to be honest, which is why I want the actual deal released to the opposition party so that the parliamentary system can function as intended
	▲	beloch a day ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		It's the current CPC line of attack. A month or so ago they tried arguing that Carney, a former governor of two national banks, is worse at economics than a career politician. That didn't go well. Now they're trying to make the case that some kind of conspiracy is going on because a working agreement, which probably isn't in a neat and tidy state and which would probably embarrass and anger the Americans if released in full, wasn't immediately sent to the press. It's the CPC's job to be critical of Carney. It's everyone else's job to decide when their arguments are grounded in reality.

▲

exe34 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

https://www.ft.com/content/c806d2ce-efed-47a0-9abb-508e218b6...

▲

toomuchtodo a day ago | parent | prev [-]

The US demanded Canada to give up its sovereignty and become the equivalent of the 51st state. Clearly when a country attempts to force you to do that, it’s time to accelerate decoupling and find allies with other rational counterparties (which Carney is doing). There are other countries that can and will buy Canadian exports.

The US overplayed its hand, as is tradition.

▲

rdm_blackhole a day ago | parent | prev [-]

> signing away sovereignty is not reversible

Signing away sovereignty is exactly what happens when you get in bed with the EU. That's even the prerequisite to become a member as EU laws take precedence over your own laws by default.

They make it also extremely hard to leave once you are in it.

If your concern was to keep your sovereignty you should have chosen to play the game like India and basically stay in the middle without picking a side while all sides compete for your trade dollars.

You do know that the end goal of the EU is to form some sort of super state like the US of Europe right? You may not end up being the 51st state of the US but you could very well end up as the 28th province of the EU commandeered by Brussels.

	▲	beloch a day ago \| parent [-]
		Carney is pursuing what he calls "associate membership", which has yet to be defined[1]. If the EU wants to form the backbone of a group of middle powers that can hold their own against superpowers like China, as Carney has suggested in the past, they are motivated to offer a deal that doesn't include unacceptable loss of sovereignty. If they can do that, other nations might follow Canada's lead. One thing the EU has not done is threaten to use economic coercion to force annexation, as the U.S. has done repeatedly. If becoming an associate member of the EU involves some loss of sovereignty, it will probably be less than we'd surrender by choosing not to diversify our trade away from the U.S.. ___________________ [1]https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/carney-pushes-idea-ma...