25%Tariffs

[LeTromboniste]

Those companies would have to move their entire supply chain to the US, which is impossible in the globalized world market.

Not only in the globalized modern world market. It's just fully, absolutely, categorically impossible. The US lacks a lot of primary resources. Can't just make them appear out of thin air.

Regarding the Doug Ford quotes and the situation with Canada... yeah, when you put oil aside, Canada buys from the US more than the other way around. Where you're biggest customer. Aside from oil, you actually have a 55 billion trade surplus with us. A trade war with Canada is absolutely insane. Now the one thing that pushes the balance in the other direction iand explains the trade deficit is crude oil. You're importing 4 million barrels of it from Canada per day (!!!), which is over 60% of your total oil imports. You're not doing this out of kindness, you're doing it because you absolutely need it, and you get a good deal on it. Cutting off that supply is going to do zero good to the US. This whole tariff war is just going to be shooting the US in the foot, with absolutely nothing to gain from it. You already have a good trade deal with us. The demands regarding the border are equally insane. There's more illegal immigrants and drugs (and guns!) crossing the border from the US into Canada than the reverse. Canada agreeing to reinforce the border security is to keep things in, not out of, the US. This is pure lunacy. It's tilting at windmills on an unprecedented scale.

[LeTromboniste]

I'm waiting to see the relevant docs appear that detail what exactly tariffs are being imposed.

I check the following two sites:

https://www.federalregister.gov/presidential-documents
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/

Anyone know of other sites that would be worth checking out.

Here's the list of imports, worth 21 billion, concerned by the current retaliatory tariffs imposed by Canada
https://www.canada.ca/en/department-fin ... -2025.html

And the list of the further imports worth 87 billion that will be subject to tariffs in three weeks:
https://www.canada.ca/en/department-fin ... goods.html

[CharlieB]

Some pertinent reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... ariff_rate

[glenp]

Here's the list of imports, worth 21 billion, concerned by the current retaliatory tariffs imposed by Canada
https://www.canada.ca/en/department-fin ... -2025.html

And the list of the further imports worth 87 billion that will be subject to tariffs in three weeks:
https://www.canada.ca/en/department-fin ... goods.html

Thanks. I like that they list out all the affected imports. If anyone is interested, here are the docs I've found on the US imposed duties:

Canada:

• Imposing Duties to Address the Flow of Illicit Drugs Across Our Northern Border
• Ammendment to ...

Mexico:

• Imposing Duties to Address the Situation at Our Southern Border
• Ammendment to ...

China:

• Imposing Duties to Address the Synthetic Opioid Supply Chain in the People’s Republic of China
• Ammendment to ...

I didn't find anything on the EU yet. Will look more later.

[tbonesullivan]

The notion that tariffs are permanent is short-sighted, ill informed, and simplistic. The USA has effectively been paying unfairly with VAT for many years. We are doing "reciprocal" tariffs. The comment "Made in the USA" is in relation to the fact that the point is to negotiate better trade deals, part of which involves manufacturing (in other industries as well), and sourcing materials from less exploitative sources and avoiding bad import deals, or negotiating better ones. Sourcing materials where there are not unfair trade deals, so that there is actually an incentive to make everything like we used to in the USA. The point in many instances (we are not just talking about trombones and brass instruments) is to source everything we can either in the United States, negotiate more fair trade deals, and bring manufacturing back to the United States. Have a little faith. Read a book and relax. I recommend "The Art of the Deal".

You mean, the book that he didn't even write? Negotiating trade deals is completely different than real estate, where "winning" means that you get more than you asking for, or less than the seller was asking. International trade does not work in such a simplistic way, and as someone who lives in a state directly impacted by his "deals" (New Jersey), many of them were totally full of "stuff". Go read up on the Piano store and other vendors his companies short changed as part of "making the deal". I won't even go into the entirely misleading way that these tariffs have been sold to the public: that they will stop fentanyl from Canada, or that they will rake in money for the US.

No, the people pay for them, as in, Americans. And using them as a way to protect and stimulate domestic industry? Guess what. It didn't work before, it probably won't work now. What will happen is that all of the prices will increase, and there still won't be domestic production of many items that were "offshored" decades ago in the search of bigger and better margins.

[tbonesullivan]

Not only in the globalized modern world market. It's just fully, absolutely, categorically impossible. The US lacks a lot of primary resources. Can't just make them appear out of thin air.

Regarding the Doug Ford quotes and the situation with Canada... yeah, when you put oil aside, Canada buys from the US more than the other way around. Where you're biggest customer. Aside from oil, you actually have a 55 billion trade surplus with us. A trade war with Canada is absolutely insane. Now the one thing that pushes the balance in the other direction iand explains the trade deficit is crude oil. You're importing 4 million barrels of it from Canada per day (!!!), which is over 60% of your total oil imports. You're not doing this out of kindness, you're doing it because you absolutely need it, and you get a good deal on it. Cutting off that supply is going to do zero good to the US. This whole tariff war is just going to be shooting the US in the foot, with absolutely nothing to gain from it. You already have a good trade deal with us. The demands regarding the border are equally insane. There's more illegal immigrants and drugs (and guns!) crossing the border from the US into Canada than the reverse. Canada agreeing to reinforce the border security is to keep things in, not out of, the US. This is pure lunacy. It's tilting at windmills on an unprecedented scale.

I should add, as many seem unaware, the U.S. refineries? They are set up mostly to process FOREIGN OIL, namely, Canadian oil. U.S. oil? Well that's actually exported, because they get more money that way. So when everyone talks about "drill baby drill" and such, it'll result in oil that we don't even use, and won't help anything. They also want to open up the arctic reserve for natural gas, which will help, right?

Yeah natural gas is so cheap right now the company's who purchase those rights are going to sit on them for years, decades, whatever until the price rises to the point of justifying mining those minerals.

[tbonesullivan]

Thanks. I like that they list out all the affected imports. If anyone is interested, here are the docs I've found on the US imposed duties:

Canada:

• Imposing Duties to Address the Flow of Illicit Drugs Across Our Northern Border
• Ammendment to ...

The illegal fentanyl trade from Canada doesn't exist. oh wait, ok, 0.2% of the fentanyl seized at the border is coming from Canada. That's almost statistically insignificant compared to the other main sources, which are Mexico and China. Canada has its own opioid crisis going on, caused by domestic production, however there is no evidence that it is linked to the United States opioid crisis.

Furthermore, as someone who has lost SEVERAL family members to opioid abuse, the fact that a social issue continues to be turned into a criminal, economic, and political issue is disgusting. They don't give a crap about anyone who is an opioid addict, or addicted to any other substance. They never have, and most likely never will.

[BGuttman]

Please let's restrict the discussion to tariffs and what their effect is and leave MAGA and the POTUS out of this, even though they are inextricably linked to the issue.

[sf105]

One of the very few "Brexit benefits" was that I got to learn from some people who actually knew what they're talking about describing how international trade negotiations work in practice. It's not a job for the impatient and often involves years, if not decades, of sustained effort.

Meanwhile, I live in a country with 2 aircraft carriers, no supporting fleet, and no planes.

[Bach5G]

Alberta Western Canadian Select is about $56/barrel, while W Texas Intermediate is about $68/barrel. Gulf Coast refineries would have to be refitted to process US crude. That would take time and would be expensive.

To TBoneSullivan’s point above, according to D Dale:

“Federal statistics show US border authorities seized 21,889 pounds of fentanyl in the 2024 fiscal year. Of that amount, 43 pounds were seized at the Canadian border — about 0.2% — compared with 21,148 pounds at the Mexican border, about 96.6%.”

I expect MB is correct that there is more fentanyl, guns, and cocaine coming north into Canada than vice versa.

[officermayo]

How it's going in the "Hardware/Instruments" thread lately.

[BGuttman]

Alberta Western Canadian Select is about $56/barrel, while W Texas Intermediate is about $68/barrel. Gulf Coast refineries would have to be refitted to process US crude. That would take time and would be expensive.

This is actually a major issue that seems to be ignored by the Powers that Be. US oil is relatively "sour" (high sulfur content) while Venezuelan and Canadian oil is "sweet" (i.e. lower sulfur content). Refineries have to be "tuned" to be able to fraction these different oils and it's not a matter of adjusting operating temperatures. Often there would need to be a major change to the equipment in the refinery to deal with US gulf crude versus the imported crude we normally process.

[hornbuilder]

Along similar lines, the people that call for the Keystone XL to be reinstated, not knowing that it would carry Canadian oil for export from southern US ports. Providing very view jobs, and basically zero economic benefit to the US.

[tbonesullivan]

I think many people really don't realize how much of what they buy that is "Made in the U.S.A" is actually... not. People can say what they want about California, but they have fairly stringent requirements as to what items can be marked "Made in the U.S.A." compared to some other states. Originally, their 2015 laws made it virtually impossible for items with any type of foreign content to be labled as "made in the U.S.A". In 2016, it became the following:

Products that bears domestic COO-label can be sold in California, if the foreign parts do not constitute more than either:

-5% of the final wholesale value of the product.

-10% of the final wholesale value of the product if:
the foreign parts are not available in the US; and
the manufacturer cannot manufacture the part at issue.

One thing that exists in California are MANY top manufacturers of Guitars, Basses, and Amplifiers for such. Virtually none of them can label their products as "Made in the U.S.A.". This is why they all say Made / Crafted in California, or sometimes even "Assembled in California". Furthermore, many of these products might never have been able to satisfy these requirements any time in the past 40+ years.

Guitar amplifier cabinets, well the usual preferred material- voidless marine grade BALTIC Birch plywood. Yeah that's not gonna get made in the USA... ever. Also the speakers? The most popular maker for guitar speakers are Celestion, which makes some speakers in the UK, with most being made in China, and Eminence, who is based in Kentucky but imports things like speaker cones and the like.

Guitar bodies, fretboards, necks, etc use a lot of exotic hardwoods, like rosewood, ebony, okoume etc. Some of the most desirable "made in the U.S.A." guitars are ones with bodies made almost entirely of mahogany and rosewood, with a maple cap and holly veneer. This is another thing that simply can't be made in the USA. Sure there are plenty of guitars using domestic woods, but not everyone wants those.

Guitar hardware: most companies were offshored long ago in search of higher profits. A German company named Schaller and a Japanese company named Gotoh are two of the best suppliers, and there pretty much isn't any domestic production for these products.

Vacuum tubes - guitar (and some bass) amplifiers still rely heavily on thermionic valves / tubes, which haven't been made in the U.S. in any type of large scale since the military stopped using them in the early 1980s. All the factories shut down, just like they did in Europe. Now there are only major producers in Czechia, Russia, and China, with some smaller producers as well. There are some very small scale producers in the USA, but they can't keep up with the demand, and mainly aim for the HI-FI audio market where people think nothing of a 3ft RCA cable that costs $800.

Electronic components: also offshored long ago.

Anyway, if you want to really see domestic production back, why not talk about REAL ways to bring it back? Tariffs aren't it. Relaxing environmental protections isn't it, unless you want lots of cancer and other results of industrial poisoning. Why not make it so that anything imported has to be made in a way that doesn't involve dumping hexavalent chromium into drinking water supplies?

[mikerspencer]

My understanding is Rath get their slide legs chromed in the USA. Frankly it seems wild they couldn't find someone closer. Not least for shipping costs and emissions.

Many global trade things are a good idea, but I struggle to make sense of that one

[LeTromboniste]

My understanding is Rath get their slide legs chromed in the USA. Frankly it seems wild they couldn't find someone closer. Not least for shipping costs and emissions.

Many global trade things are a good idea, but I struggle to make sense of that one

There are things that you might be able to do in-house on a small scale, or if the volume justifies, have the set up to do on a large scale, but if you have too much volume to handle but not enough to justify the large scale operation, you're better off sending out to a specialized shop, in which case the cheapest option but not be the nearest, and seem nonsensical. Not saying that's the case here, no idea, but that seems like the kind of situation that could be plausible.

[tbonesullivan]

There are things that you might be able to do in-house on a small scale, or if the volume justifies, have the set up to do on a large scale, but if you have too much volume to handle but not enough to justify the large scale operation, you're better off sending out to a specialized shop, in which case the cheapest option but not be the nearest, and seem nonsensical. Not saying that's the case here, no idea, but that seems like the kind of situation that could be plausible.

Economy of scale is always in play, and due to the requirements for the environment, I don't really know exactly how many companies actually do the chrome plating in house for their inner slide tubes, even in the USA. You need a lot of specialized equipment for good chrome plating, and as someone who had a Kanstul inner slide tube start flaking on the stocking, I was not exactly happy with that result. Inner slide tubes really do need to last, and you need a company that can do them right.

I wonder if Rath draws their inner slides in house, or has them made to spec by an outside maker. I mean, it's not completely out of the ordinary that it ends up being that there are only one or two companies making inner slide tubes to various specifications for different customers around the world.

[RJMason]

Guess I’m done buying new horns. Or anything, really? We’re consuming like lunatics, might be good to slow down. There are plenty of old horns out there, buy used. Better for the planet maybe.

Prices will go up, justified or not. Sorry if that hurts businesses I love, but the times have crushed mine too. Streaming payouts are a joke and now some algorithm picks what people listen to.

Trying to find a silver lining in the circus. The world will take a decade to adjust to whatever orange man starts, stops, and starts again. What I can rely on in this world is my LT36BG so I’ll hold onto that!

[amoss1s]

Can we stick to trombone talk? This is a community with many different viewpoints.

[LIBrassCo]

Can we stick to trombone talk? This is a community with many different viewpoints.

The name of the topic is literally 25% Tariffs, there's was never going to be any trombone talk here.

[MrKirk]

I recently went through purchasing a euphonium and two trombones. I ended up with an Adams E3 selected series, Adams TB-1 Sterling Silver Open Flow, and jumped on a Quinn deal on a Bach LT42BOFG.

I was originally set on a Besson Sovereign/Prestige, and every dealer I called and chatted with had none for sale or didn't have good things to say on service and support for Besson in the US. Adams was typically the opposite.

Trombone wise I knew I wanted either Bach or Yamaha. And again Adams impressed, and the Bach won out... play tested a Yamaha 882OR and was left feeling dull. Perhaps the 882GOR would be better, eventually one of these days Ill get my hands on one. I'd love to test other brands as well!

As far as tariffs, I'd say pricing is pretty even at least from what I've seen recently. But then again with trombones, Bach seems to still hold that place near and dear as well as a standard regardless of their QC.

[hornbuilder]

The point is, the 25% tarrifs would increase the cost of your Adams instrument by 25+%!! So no, the pricing would not be "pretty even"

[Fidbone]

I wonder if Rath draws their inner slides in house, or has them made to spec by an outside maker. I mean, it's not completely out of the ordinary that it ends up being that there are only one or two companies making inner slide tubes to various specifications for different customers around the world.

Rath slides are indeed drawn in house.
No part of a Rath trombone is made or sourced from the USA.

[WGWTR180]

I wonder if Rath draws their inner slides in house, or has them made to spec by an outside maker. I mean, it's not completely out of the ordinary that it ends up being that there are only one or two companies making inner slide tubes to various specifications for different customers around the world.

Rath slides are indeed drawn in house.
No part of a Rath trombone is made or sourced from the USA.

This I think we knew. Any thoughts on mikespencer's statement that Rath gets their tubes chromed in the US?

[timothy42b]

Rath slides are indeed drawn in house.
No part of a Rath trombone is made or sourced from the USA.

This I think we knew. Any thoughts on mikespencer's statement that Rath gets their tubes chromed in the US?

Chrome plating in an environmentally safe and legal manner is extremely difficult. Very likely the UK and EU have even higher environmental standards, which might make it easier to do in the US>

[MrKirk]

The point is, the 25% tarrifs would increase the cost of your Adams instrument by 25+%!! So no, the pricing would not be "pretty even"

Maybe , guess only time will tell. I meant currently everything is pretty even apples to apples. Tariffs may or may not affect certain things more or less.

[Kbiggs]

From Wikipedia:

“A tariff is a tax imposed by the government of a country or customs territory, or by a supranational union, on imports or exports of goods. Besides being a source of revenue, import duties can also be a form of regulation of foreign trade and policy that taxes foreign products to encourage or safeguard domestic industry. Protective tariffs are among the most widely used instruments of protectionism, along with import quotas and export quotas and other non-tariff barriers to trade [emphasis added].”

The article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariff

The basic idea or strategy behind a tariff is to discourage domestic consumers from buying certain foreign products, and encourage them to buy domestic products.

From the basic simple definition/explanation, reasonable people can agree that the items targeted by tariffs will increase prices for domestic consumers once the tariff is put in place. It’s too early to tell exactly what the price of goods from Canada, Mexico, and China will be, although we have heard that the tariffs will be 25%.

Why presidents or other fiscal and economic policymakers choose to put a tariff in place is an altogether different question.

[NotSkilledHere]

i think it depends. just because it looks like we are supposed to eat the 25% tariff as an American customer of an imported horn doesn't mean it will truly end up that way. Idk what the profit margins on horns are, but in reality, it will probably end up being let's say 15% more. the other 10% will be eaten by retailer from the profit margin. This will be because 125% price of the horn can likely make horns not worth getting, and idk 115% is more stomachable for people. dont crucify me over the specific %; this is just an example.

so it all comes down to figuring out the balance between sucking up and taking lesser profit margins on these horns vs passing on the 25% tariff to people. we also likely also won't know if the importer is negotiating that manufacturer pays a bit of the tariff too. so in the end maybe horns end up being as 10% higher in price because 10% covered by the end consumer, 10% eaten by retailer/importer, 5% paid for by original manufacturer.

Again dont crucify me over the %. It's just an example

it is possible that might very well see the full 25% completely being shoved onto the customer or at least attempted to. perhaps there will be ways to apply exemptions to the goverment and that way we dont need to have the 25% or full 25% passed onto the customer.

I do agree on one thing however: prices are going up some amount regardless unless the instrument manufacturing process and importing process gets exempted.

[NotSkilledHere]

I say that as I work directly in the supply chain management world so I see materials and supply lines of many global companies and it's definitely not so simple as one side or the other covers all of the tariff. especially for large contracts, it will be in the better interest of both parties to negotiate and figure out an acceptable solution to a) sell product and b) keep materials coming in. the governments simply dont care how they get the tariffs. They just care that tariffs make it into their coffers.

And to add a little onto the subject of eating profit margins, it's in the interest of the manufacturer and the retailer to move horns along. I know retailers can afford to have horns sit maybe a tiny bit, but sitting too long is bad. In some cases with large makers of horns, they may very well have negotiated a significant deal on what they get or purchase every shipment. It is in their best interest to make money and move the horns and not build a huge inventory.

some profit is better than no profit, so retailers will be eating some of the tariffs from profit margins I can guarantee it. and manufacturers, if they choose to keep doing business with american retailers, may be negotiated into slightly lower profit margins on their end too in order to make profit, even if not fully profit as before.

[Doubler]

Would someone please explain to me why reciprocal tariffs would be unfair? Wouldn't the end result be negotiating away tariffs altogether? Wouldn't that result in lower costs and prices across the board? Am I missing something here?

[tromboneVan]

Would someone please explain to me why reciprocal tariffs would be unfair? Wouldn't the end result be negotiating away tariffs altogether? Wouldn't that result in lower costs and prices across the board? Am I missing something here?

Bingo.

[LeTromboniste]

Would someone please explain to me why reciprocal tariffs would be unfair? Wouldn't the end result be negotiating away tariffs altogether? Wouldn't that result in lower costs and prices across the board? Am I missing something here?

Yes, you're missing something: the fact that they're not reciprocal. Canada overall didn't have tariffs on US goods – we have a free trade agreement (that Trump himself renegociated). [edit for clarity: there were small tariffs on both sides on a few specific industries, but those amounted to less than 1% on average overall. And again, on both sides.] The US put this 25% tariff on Canadian goods for reasons they themselves don't seem to be sure of and seem to depend on what mood one particular person is in on any particular day. One day it's about fentanyl and the border, one day it's about putting "reciprocal" tariffs in place – but "reciprocal" to what? – and one day it's about a trade deficit and sticking it up to people who've supposedly been abusing the US through "unfair deals". By the way, the legal basis for the tariffs (because tariffs do have to be legally justified when they go against a trade deal that has been signed into law by Congress!) is the national emergency of uncontrolled influx illegal aliens and fentanyl, not "reciprocal" tariffs. If they had justified them as reciprocal tariffs, they could have been struck down by US courts because it's easy to demonstrate they violate the law. Invoking the national border emergency makes it impossible to challenge because that emergency is also declared by the executive, even when it's really obvious that at least on the Canadian side, the claim is bogus.

I don't know what the official justification for tariffs on European imports will be, but whatever it is, the real reason won't really be about "reciprocal" tariffs: there are currently very small tariffs on both sides, and already more tariffs on European imports into the US than on American imports the EU (the US has about 1.4% tariffs on average, the EU 0.9%). Putting 25% tariffs on EU import is not going to be "reciprocal" to anything, whatever the guys in power claim.

[tromboneVan]

Canada could also become a state, or states, and avoid tariffs completely. Alberta is already working to organize delegates to come to Washington to speak with Trump, to petition for US Statehood, because they are intelligent enough to realize that they can't afford a trade war with the US.

https://www.westernstandard.news/news/a ... g-us/62741

Being an issue of national security is obviously not a single issue that is mutually exclusive, so yeah, it's about the national security of our borders, AND, about securing fair - non-losing trade deals. Reciprocal to bad deals, call it a "Free trade agreement" and argue about the semantics about whether it is called a tariff when it might as well be. Of course Canadians and Europeans are mad, when we are re-negotiating better deals for the USA, because why wouldn't you be when we've been getting screwed for your benefit for decades. What is often missed is the disproportionate contributions by the US to NATO to our European & Canadian friends (one example).

Tariffs again are a negotiating tactic, not an end game. The point is ultimately have no tariffs. Reciprocal denotes what you charge us, we charge you. The tariffs are reciprocal to the raw end of the deal we have been getting on a multitude of issues. Governor Trudeau now imposing a 25% back on us. Subsidizing of Canadian industries when we could simply invest in our own, IS the point.

'I love Canadian people', says Trump “I love the Canadian people, they’re great. But we’re spending hundreds of billions a year to protect it. We’re spending hundreds of billions a year to take care of Canada. We lose in trade deficits we’re losing massive — we don’t need their cars. You know, they make 20% of our cars. We don’t need that. I’d rather make them in Detroit,”

[mgladdish]

@tromboneVan, why do you write so much about things you understand so little? I've not yet found a single thing that you've written that's correct.

I don't wade into threads about pedagogy or embouchure because I don't know enough about them. There are far more knowledgeable people than me whos posts are actually useful, so I leave it to them and read with pleasure. If I came in to a thead about embouchures and argued unequivocally that in order to play high you have to completely relax all the muscles in your face and drop your jaw as far is it will go, would the thread be better or worse? Would others reading that thread be more or less informed than before?

When I do get drawn into political discussions online I make damn sure I've read up on the subject at hand and have at least a basic understanding of the concepts first. And I also make sure I'm super clear about bits I'm either unsure of or based on my assumptions. I strongly believe that's a fundamental requirement for productive discussion, both in person and online. This board would be better if you took some of this advice to heart. I'd even argue every democracy everywhere would be better if we could all take a step back and make a conscious effort to be better informed.

In that spirit, I'll leave a few links here which I hope you'll take the time to read and reflect:

Renowned economist with some excellent explainers on tarrifs
https://paulkrugman.substack.com/
If you only have time to read just one post, this is a good one:
https://paulkrugman.substack.com/p/the- ... small-ugly

US NATO budget contributions in context:
https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/us-c ... 024-05-31/

[MStarke]

@tromboneVan, why do you write so much about things you understand so little? I've not yet found a single thing that you've written that's correct.

...

In that spirit, I'll leave a few links here which I hope you'll take the time to read and reflect:

That's great, thank you for sharing!

We need far more actual fact checking and referring to actual scientific sources.

And less nonsense and aggressive ideas like "Canada becoming the next state..."

[LeTromboniste]

Canada could also become a state, or states, and avoid tariffs completely.

You realize that's extortion, right? Do you think this is the way nations treat should each others in a civilized world?

What if, say, China, some years ago, had announced its intention to annex all Pacific states, started a trade war to try and destroy the American economy and said "see, just let them become Chinese provinces and you can avoid tariffs completely"? That's right, your reaction would be "not in a million year" and you'd have called China a terrorist state and taken it as a declaration of actual war. You can't toy around with global order like 6-year-olds would play games in the schoolyard, go back to survival of the fittest and enact a world-scale game of "king of the hill". Careful what you wish for.

[BGuttman]

As I have said before, Canada consists of some 10 "states" (called Provinces) and would have to be absorbed as 10 (or so) States. Note that Canada is much more Liberal than MAGA US, so these states would probably vote out the Conservative President and change the balance of power in the US House and Senate.

I'm still embarrassed as heck that we negotiated a Free Trade Zone between all the nations in Continental North America which we are now unilaterally abrogating. How can anybody trust any agreement we make?

[tromboneVan]

Lots of aggressive European opinions on American positions... I get it you, you have a wedgie about it, ultimately i'm just giving you a different perspective. You'd rather just insult people than provide any valuable information or opinions, and like your fascistic tendencies of many of you suggest, you just prefer to silence, we know that, and have seen it many times.

Unfortunately I'm entitled to be an American and have opinions, too, despite your preference to belittle me on every thread... sorry, we live in a new paradigm. The USA that caters to you, but you don't pay your fare share (NATO perfect example) doesn't exist anymore.

The hypocrisy of calling tariffs extortion, and then having no issue with the tariffs being used against the USA is proving my point, but that's par for the course with this one .

Again, Tariffs are not the end game, as I recommended before, read the Art of the Deal. How many deals have you won by antagonism? Does that get you very far? We won't always see things the same way,

[tromboneVan]

Follow the Executive Actions
Timber / Lumber:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential ... roduction/

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential ... er-lumber/

What is around the corner for rare earths? metals?

[LeTromboniste]

Lots of aggressive European opinions on American positions... I get it you, you have a wedgie about it, ultimately i'm just giving you a different perspective. You'd rather just insult people than provide any valuable information or opinions, and like your fascistic tendencies of many of you suggest, you just prefer to silence, we know that, and have seen it many times.

Unfortunately I'm entitled to be an American and have opinions, too, despite your preference to belittle me on every thread... sorry, we live in a new paradigm. The USA that caters to you, but you don't pay your fare share (NATO perfect example) doesn't exist anymore.

The hypocrisy of calling tariffs extortion, and then having no issue with the tariffs being used against the USA is proving my point, but that's par for the course with this one .

Again, Tariffs are not the end game, as I recommended before, read the Art of the Deal. How many deals have you won by antagonism? Does that get you very far? We won't always see things the same way,

I'm not European. I'm Canadian, and as such I'm directly affected by these policies, just as you'll be when your gas prices and cost of living skyrocket.

Not insulting you or belittling you. If you consider that being presented with facts that disprove your positions is an insult to you, then I really don't know what to say...

There is no hypocrisy and I didn't call tariffs extortion. The argument of "if you don't like these tariffs, then become a US State" is the part that is extortion.

Yeah tariffs are not an end in themselves and a way for the current administration to get what it wants, we all get that, we're not stupid. That doesn't mean the tariffs will work the way they think they will, that they're a good idea for your country (let alone for the world), that they're legal, that they're not "the dumbest" thing to do (dixit the very conservative Wall Street Journal).

Can we just get back on topic please?

[Arendsdale]

Lots of aggressive European opinions on American positions... I get it you, you have a wedgie about it, ultimately i'm just giving you a different perspective. You'd rather just insult people than provide any valuable information or opinions, and like your fascistic tendencies of many of you suggest, you just prefer to silence, we know that, and have seen it many times.

Unfortunately I'm entitled to be an American and have opinions, too, despite your preference to belittle me on every thread... sorry, we live in a new paradigm. The USA that caters to you, but you don't pay your fare share (NATO perfect example) doesn't exist anymore.

The hypocrisy of calling tariffs extortion, and then having no issue with the tariffs being used against the USA is proving my point, but that's par for the course with this one .

Again, Tariffs are not the end game, as I recommended before, read the Art of the Deal. How many deals have you won by antagonism? Does that get you very far? We won't always see things the same way,

I'm not European. I'm Canadian, and as such I'm directly affected by these policies, just as you'll be when your gas prices and cost of living skyrocket.

Not insulting you or belittling you. If you consider that being presented with facts that disprove your positions is an insult to you, then I really don't know what to say...

There is no hypocrisy and I didn't call tariffs extortion. The argument of "if you don't like these tariffs, then become a US State" is the part that is extortion.

Yeah tariffs are not an end in themselves and a way for the current administration to get what it wants, we all get that, we're not stupid. That doesn't mean the tariffs will work the way they think they will, that they're a good idea for your country (let alone for the world), that they're legal, that they're not "the dumbest" thing to do (dixit the very conservative Wall Street Journal).

Can we just get back on topic please?

This dude said that COVID test results were controlled to influence if there was a pandemic or not. I think we all just need to stop responding to anything he says, it's not worth it

[tromboneVan]

As I have said before, Canada consists of some 10 "states" (called Provinces) and would have to be absorbed as 10 (or so) States. Note that Canada is much more Liberal than MAGA US, so these states would probably vote out the Conservative President and change the balance of power in the US House and Senate.

I'm still embarrassed as heck that we negotiated a Free Trade Zone between all the nations in Continental North America which we are now unilaterally abrogating. How can anybody trust any agreement we make?

Yes, a vote maybe next Canadian administration to really get a feel for what the people want is in order.
Already have seen a lot of hope coming from the people of Greenland to join. Does anyone know if Ukraine has brass? The issue seems to me very advantageous for our desire to buy more and more trombones and keep American manufacturing of trombones going. Looking to solutions for how to improve our supply chain is the next logical step. Yes it's a hurdle to get past the initial bump, but then shouldn't things be better for both consumer and producer (In USA).?

(Kary Mullis inventor of PCR - RIP)

[Matt K]

For what it's worth, there is little reason in the US to believe that international agreements will be followed through on without a ratified treaty from congress, as that requires a 2/3 vote to ratify or dissolve. Other countries have similar problems, particularly parlimentary democracies, as the nominal leader of those countries (thinking in particular France) can only win by having essentially a supermajority coalition government. In effect, that means that whoever is in charge of the legislature is also in charge of the equivalent of the executive branch. That has positive benefits that allow them to move swiftly, but moving swiftly and largely without opposition also has its drawbacks.

[MStarke]

You are basically promoting to look around which countries around the world would be advantageous for the US to "integrate" or better force under their wings. Sorry to everyone else, but all the stuff you are saying here is absolutely imperialistic BS that is absolutely not tolerable. The US is not the center of the world and you guys have no rights to involve into other countries' inner politics as you are suggesting to do. Keep that nonsense for yourself. I hope that in a few years when all that stuff is hopefully gone by, you reconsider your thinking and how you have gotten caught up in all that.

Again, sorry to everyone else and especially the mods, but I cannot be a member of this kind of forum without reacting to someone spreading these kinds of opinions. I will check which options I have here to never see any of that guy's BS again.

[Bach5G]

TromboneVan said “Yes, a vote maybe next Canadian administration to really get a feel for what the people want is in order.”

Well, there will be a new Canadian PM next week when the Liberal party chooses a new leader. That will be followed sometime this year with a federal general election. I guess we will see what Canadians want. Since Trump’s inauguration, Liberals support has surged while the Trump loving Conservative leader’s support has plummeted. The Conservatives are also against the tariffs. The Liberals have two particularly strong leadership candidates, Mr. Carney, a PhD in economics and Ms. Freeland, a former Rhodes scholar who, more importantly, has excellent anti-Trump credentials (Trump hates her).

Recent polling indicated relatively few Canadians think they would be better off if Canada joined the US, from about 18% in BC to 30% in Alberta. I doubt Quebec, the francophone part of Canada, would support the idea. This poll was taken before tariffs were imposed.

Trump’s talk about annexing Canada sounds a lot like Putin’s talk about invading Ukraine pre-2022. Totally insulting and offensive. The same applies to his remarks about Greenland and Panama. I refrain from referring to American imperialism because it’s just Trump and his MAGA followers.

[tbdana]

I can see the quotes of That Dude's posts, but I put him on ignore so I don't experience his posts directly, which has made life in this forum more tolerable. From my little experience with him, he comes in boldly proclaiming some sort of false MAGA rhetoric as empirical truth, then when people correct him he plays victim and claims he's being censored and free speech, blah, blah, blah.

Life here is better with him on ignore. I suggest it. And I suggest he just put me and anyone else who makes him feel like such a poor, poor, victim on ignore. Or I would suggest it. I don't know if he can see my posts. But I'm happier that I don't see his. (He is the only person I've ever put on ignore, and I'm happier and better informed for it.)

I suppose we will all be buying fewer new trombones in the future.

[CalgaryTbone]

I live in Alberta - the tariff talk has swung political opinions further left. Unfortunately, we do have a small contingent of white supremacists and conspiracy theorists that live here - TromboneVan obviously gets his news from them.

As far as Greenland, he obviously missed the reporting that the "excited Greenlanders" who met with Don Jr. when he showed up there were actually homeless people that they offered a free lunch to.

Jim Scott

[tromboneVan]

I can see the quotes of That Dude's posts, but I put him on ignore so I don't experience his posts directly, which has made life in this forum more tolerable. From my little experience with him, he comes in boldly proclaiming some sort of false MAGA rhetoric as empirical truth, then when people correct him he plays victim and claims he's being censored and free speech, blah, blah, blah.

Life here is better with him on ignore. I suggest it. And I suggest he just put me and anyone else who makes him feel like such a poor, poor, victim on ignore. Or I would suggest it. I don't know if he can see my posts. But I'm happier that I don't see his. (He is the only person I've ever put on ignore, and I'm happier and better informed for it.)

I suppose we will all be buying fewer new trombones in the future.

ad ho·mi·nem/ˌad ˈhämənəm/ adjective
(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.

[LeTromboniste]

Here's one to talk...

[mgladdish]

I can see the quotes of That Dude's posts, but I put him on ignore so I don't experience his posts directly, which has made life in this forum more tolerable. From my little experience with him, he comes in boldly proclaiming some sort of false MAGA rhetoric as empirical truth, then when people correct him he plays victim and claims he's being censored and free speech, blah, blah, blah.

Life here is better with him on ignore. I suggest it. And I suggest he just put me and anyone else who makes him feel like such a poor, poor, victim on ignore. Or I would suggest it. I don't know if he can see my posts. But I'm happier that I don't see his. (He is the only person I've ever put on ignore, and I'm happier and better informed for it.)

I suppose we will all be buying fewer new trombones in the future.

Good call, I've just done it. Although adding him as a 'foe' sounds a bit strong!