victor809 wrote:Tail... You have not proven that trump "corrected" something which needed correcting. If you haven't proven that yet, then there's no way to prove it wasn't trump making a fair trade deal unfair for Canada.
Can't base your argument on an unfounded assumption like that.
That wasn't my intent.
I'd have to know a lot more about the intricacies of trades/tariffs, etc to make that claim.
But it's folly to assume the opposite.
Furthermore, the headlines don't care about the effects.
They care about labeling a bully.
And despite the very obvious retaliatory actions by Trudeau, it seems that Trump gets labeled the bully.
And we know why. And it has zero to do with the long term net effect.
This article came across my email this morning.
Thomas.net is a manufacturing-centric marketing organization, yet they are able to do what CNN, the NYT et al were unable: To report what took place, why it happened, and how some predict the impact.
https://news.thomasnet.com/featured/how-retaliatory-tariffs-could-impact-the-united-states-global-response-to-the-new-steel-and-aluminum-tariffs?channel=newsletter&campaign_type=PNA&campaign_name=0618&utm_campaign=0618&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_source=PNA&tinid=221764277&ni=1&cs=PNA
Is it good? Is it bad?
I guess the reader would have to draw their own conclusion (Gasp!).
No wonder the liberal rags don't report like this.