FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Trump Administration Halts Research Spending in the Health Field

As a recent article in the New York Times1 points out, by some measures, the U.S. produces more influential health-sciences research than the next 10 leading countries combined.  At risk are not only the tens of thousands of grants the National Institutes of Health (N.I.H) awards each year, but also American dominance of biomedical research.  The world’s leading medical labs can be found in the United States, and they rely heavily on grants from the N.I.H.  Billions of dollars are spent on research for diseases and health conditions such as cancer, Alzheimer’s, heart disease, brain injuries, child health, diabetes, H.I.V. infections and numerous other ailments.  The N.I.H notes that every dollar the agency spends on research generates more than two dollars in economic activity.  Why?  The results of medical research in the past have often led to the pharmaceutical industry developing drugs and vaccines for the treatment and prevention of diseases and health conditions, thereby fueling pharmaceutical advancements.  The result is also the fact that American companies will export many of the resulting drugs and vaccines to other countries, helping to grow the U.S. economy and positively lead to an American trade surplus.

Canadians and Americans have benefited from the medical research leading to pharmaceutical advancements.  Often, Canadian researchers will contribute to health-sciences research as was the case in the discovery of insulin years ago.  Today, there is on-going biomedical research at a number of Canada’s top universities.  Hopefully, researchers in both countries will continue to share in their findings.  The current U.S. administration’s handcuffing of its own scientists and holding back their important research will no doubt lead to serious consequences for advancements in the health field. 

The above mentioned New York Times article goes on to stipulate: “In response to all the uncertainty, universities are retrenching. The University of Pittsburgh froze Ph.D. admissions. Columbia University’s medical school paused hiring and spending. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology froze the hiring of non-faculty employees.”  In addition, some lab leaders indicated that they were making contingency plans to fire scientists, and that graduate students are being forced to search for new sources of funding.  I personally know of one young Canadian graduating from the University of Ottawa’s science faculty who a few years ago ended up in New York to participate in cancer research as part of a post-graduate program.

Much of biomedical research deals with not only areas related to treatments, but also areas related to the prevention of diseases, including those which particularly affect our aging population in both countries.  To hamper the work of such an important American institution as the National Institutes of Health is a major disservice to Americans and Canadians alike, and will have longer-term consequences.

1 “Paying for Science”: Benjamin Mueller, New York Times, February 25, 2025

Leave a comment »

Trump’s Trade Policy Appears to be Directed at Securing Critical Mineral Rights

After three years of war that forged a new unity within NATO, the Trump administration has made clear it is planning to focus its attention elsewhere: in Asia, Latin America, the Arctic and anywhere President Trump believes the U.S. can obtain critical mineral rights.  Moreover, this is why Trump to a large extent has his eye on annexing Canada and Greenland, both of which have an abundance of critical minerals such as uranium, graphite and lithium.  Critical minerals are currently used in over 230 sectors of the U.S. economy, from energy infrastructure to advanced technology manufacturing, and from aerospace engineering, including satellites, to medical equipment.  Critical minerals are the building blocks for the green and digital economy and demand for them will only grow throughout the global energy transition. Disruption potential is related to how much of a commodity’s global production is concentrated in countries that are relatively unwilling or unable (due to political or economic instability, workforce or infrastructure inadequacies, regulations, etc…) to supply the U.S. with critical minerals.  Some critical minerals are produced primarily in countries that are economically or politically unstable, or do not have a reliable trade relationship with the U.S. —  thereby representing a higher supply risk.  This however does not apply to Canada which is a stable supplier of minerals in general, including copper, zinc, phosphorus, silicon metal, cobalt, high-purity iron ore, and rare earth elements.

The lack of stability in Ukraine is a major reason why Trump apparently ha turned down Ukraine
President Volodymyr Zelensky’s extraordinary offer that the U.S. be granted a 50 percent interest in all of Ukraine’s critical mineral resources as compensation for past and future support of the war with Russia. 

However, Canada recognizes that critical minerals are the foundation on which modern technology is built upon.  They’re used in a wide range of essential products, from mobile phones and solar panels to electric vehicle batteries and medical applications. By building critical minerals value chains, Canada can become a major global supplier of choice for critical minerals and the clean energy and technology sources they enable.  For this reason, Canada is not willing to simply give away control of these precious minerals to the U.S. or any other nation for that matter.  They are also essential to Canada’s economic or national security.

Canada has already partnered with the U.S. when it comes to discovering and mining critical minerals.  In January 2020, the Canada-U.S. Joint Action Plan on Critical Minerals was announced to advance bilateral interest in securing supply chains for the critical minerals needed in strategic manufacturing sectors.  Canada has also worked with other countries such as Japan to encourage cooperation on international standard-setting for critical minerals, as well as several multilateral organizations such as the International Energy Agency (IEA), the World Bank, the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), and the Intergovernmental Forum on Mining, Minerals, Metals and Sustainable Development (IGF).  The U.S. is also an active member of these multilateral organizations.

For these reasons, it is difficult to understand why Trump continues to be so aggressive when it comes to the U.S.-Canada trading relationship.  Canada is an exporting nation, which includes most of our natural resources which make up the bulk of exports.  Canada is very interested in exporting critical minerals to its allies through various trade agreements, and is investing more in the extraction of these minerals.  Canada already provides a stable and growing market when it comes to critical minerals.  If Trump wants to ignore the existing cooperation between the two countries, he does so at his own peril and that of those American businesses which rely on a steady and reliable supply chain.

Leave a comment »

Canada Should Be Thanking President Trump For His Proclaimed Trade War!

There is no point in analyzing what Donald Trump’s executive orders are doing to shake up the government in Washington, particularly since there are more than enough American observers to undertake this analysis.  Instead, we in Canada can best focus on Trump’s continuing attacks on Canada’s sovereignty and its current trade relations with the U.S.  Trump’s proposed imposition of an across the board (except for oil and natural gas) 25% tariff on Canadian imports to the U.S. is seen as a blatant insult to the vast majority of Canadians.  After decades of free trade arrangements between both countries, such a tariff imposition would seriously alter the current relations both economically and politically.  The threat has created an outrage among Canadians that I have never seen in my lifetime.  In addition, there is little doubt that a trade war would economically hurt both Canadians and Americans alike.  It would certainly lead to greater inflationary pressures in both countries, something that the Trump Republicans had campaigned to control.

President and CEO of the Public Policy Forum, Inez Jabalpurwala, recently stated: “We must seize this moment to take decisive action to shape a stronger, more resilient and innovative energy-secure economy, as well as a united Canada.  It is incumbent upon us to stimulate economic growth, advance clean technology, expand our markets, remove internal trade barriers and get projects built.”  What we are seeing are campaigns across Canada to promote “Buy Canada” efforts by consumers whenever there are Canadian-made alternatives to imported American products.  In addition, the situation has convinced provincial premiers to seriously find ways to reduce or eliminate any inter-provincial trade barriers.  This has been something that the provinces have not really taking up earnestly until now.  By encouraging greater inter-provincial trade, Canadian business associations believe that it could result in billions of additional dollars for provincial economies.  Such an initiative, once implemented, would also lead to greater internal investment and the expansion and growth of Canadian companies throughout the country.  Even Canadian municipalities that purchase American products and contract with American companies for services are now examining local and Canadian alternatives. 

What the Trump administration has done is to galvanize Canadian governments, businesses and consumers to move to being less dependent on our southern neighbour for many products and services.  Past trading arrangements led to greater integration of and prosperity for both of our economies, especially in relation to the automotive industry, mining and the energy sectors.  Canada is a trading nation, particularly given its abundance of natural resources which make up the largest amount of its exports to the U.S. and other countries.  The current situation has again encouraged Canada to look more closely to further opening up its trade with other countries, including those in the European Union and Southeast Asia.  This move is rapidly gathering momentum and will no doubt increase regardless of Trump’s possible change of mind when it comes to the proposed tariffs.  The past trust of Canadians has been severely damaged, and a new reality of the predictable disintegration of our common markets has surfaced.

For this, we must thank Donald Trump!  His impertinent declarations that Canada should become the 51rst state have resulted in an expected backlash among Canadians.  It has unified the country as never witnessed before, even what happened during Quebec’s failed separation initiatives during the 1970s.  Canadians still view ordinary Americans as their friends and allies, but will not stand for Trump’s blatant “bullying” tactics as portrayed by numerous Canadian spokespersons.  Canadians, while normally seen as a polite people, are expressing their disappointment and anger with the U.S. administration and its supporters in multiple ways.  I suspect that they will continue to do so as long as Trump is in power and continues to attack our sovereignty.

Leave a comment »

Once Again the Ugly American Raises His Head

In 1958, a political novel entitled “The Ugly American”, written by Eugene Burdick and William Lederer, depicted the failures of the U.S. diplomatic corps in Southeast Asia. The bestseller, which naturally I read at the time with great interest, has remained continuously in print and is one of the most influential American political novels.  Shortly after, in July 1959 the first U.S. soldiers were killed in South Vietnam when guerrillas raided their living quarters near Saigon.  After, a decades’ long war began, with many years of anti-war protests within the U.S. In April 1975, with the Fall of Saigon, U.S. Marine and Air Force helicopters transported more than 1,000 American civilians and nearly 7,000 South Vietnamese refugees from Saigon in an 18-hour mass evacuation effort.  Remember that the Vietnam conflict was never actually declared a “war” by Congress, but was instead begun through a presidential “executive statement”.  Congress simply controlled the purse strings for this tragic conflict which ended with thousands of American deaths and even many more injuries.  Sounds familiar?

Today, with the presidential inauguration of one Donald Trump, the ugly American has once again raised his head.  Only this time, he is turning his back on his allies and major trading partners: Canada, Mexico and more likely others.  Trump’s administration appears to want a trade war: a war which will hurt several economies, including that of the U.S., and consumers in both the U.S. and the affected countries.  The great self-declared “peace maker” has suggested that the U.S. will take back the Panama Canal, perhaps by military force.  He has hinted that he will acquire Greenland through the use of economic force against Denmark, a NATO ally.  He has also installed his billionaire friends in numerous key ambassador posts in Europe.  His so-called advisor Elon Musk has personally attacked the policies of several current European countries and has supported far-right populist movements.  This has created great consternation among European leaders, and rightly so.

Off-the-cuff comments by Trump suggesting that he could force Canada to become part of the U.S., primarily by economic force, has stirred up national sentiments among Canadians who view his position as being totally absurd.  If this is how one treats one’s friends, imagine how one will treat one’s enemies! 

Next, there’s the very apparent tone in Trump’s remarks that appear to suggest a return to American isolation when it comes to the international arena.  However we live in a world which is more global than ever before, where many of the today’s major issues instantaneously affect each country.  For example, one appears to have forgotten the fact that we lived through a global pandemic, wherein the World Health Organization played a major role in tracking and helping to contain the spread of COVID.  Now, Trump wants to remove the U.S. from the WHO.  We are also living in an era where climate change is real and extends well beyond our borders.  Again, Trump is withdrawing the U.S. from the 2015 Paris Accord on climate change.  President Biden had pledged to boost U.S. climate aid to poor nations to more than $11 billion a year.  This aid would help lesser developed countries cope with the environmental and economic consequences of climate change given that natural disasters are expected to escalate.  These moves towards American isolation appear to be just the beginning given Trump’s past threats against NATO and U.S. support for aid programs run by the United Nations.

The “America First” policies will mean that other countries, including U.S. allies, will have to cope with numerous destructive economic, military, social and political initiatives in the next four years.  One can only hope that the damage can be contained in an apparent world where countries are becoming increasingly driven by perceived domestic self interests.  Canada is but one country in particular that unfortunately is caught up in Trump’s stated move to so-called “Manifest Destiny”.  The notion of annexing Canada echoes the 19th-century belief in Manifest Destiny, a concept that symbolized America’s past ambition to expand its territory and influence.  However, I am certain that Canadians may have something to say about this ideology.

Leave a comment »

Elon Musk May Be More Dangerous Than Trump

From a Canadian perspective, president-elect Donald Trump’s recent declarations about Canada’s sovereignty and the imposition of a 25% tariff on the country’s imports are bad enough.  What is even more worrisome is the rise of Elon Musk’s influence in Trump’s circles.  During the election, all of Musk’s posts traveled further and resounded more widely than ever. Mr. Musk’s X account began to dominate the platform, effectively making him the host of his own social media site.  More recently, he has a perch as Trump’s apparent right-hand man, even weighing in on his possible Cabinet choices and joining his conversations with global leaders.  One has to wonder what the role of J.D. Vance will be?

Internationally, Musk has begun an on-line and in-person campaign to try to influence foreign political parties’ policies.  Most notably, he has posted support for the policies of far-right and extremist figures in Europe, criticizing for example the current governments of Britain and Germany.  Recently, Musk has turned his attention to the northern neighbor, praising an interview with Pierre Poilievre, a populist firebrand who leads Canada’s Conservative Party and is expected be the country’s next Prime Minister.  In addition, his financial influence is everywhere because of his companies and investments in the U.S. and Europe.  In some instances, this has led to questions about potential conflicts of interest in light of his many business interests, especially in any future Trump administration.  For example, he once again in a tweet raised Britain’s Online Safety Act which will take effect in March 2025.  The British law requires social media companies like X to prevent children from accessing harmful and age-inappropriate content and to give adults more control over what they want to see online.  Companies that run afoul of the law can face fines of up to 10 percent of their global revenue.

Experiences with Trump’s past foreign policies had been troublesome, especially when it comes to NATO, the Middle East and relations with Canada and Mexico.  The involvement of Elon Musk in positioning the next president with respect to foreign policies is a major concern.  Originally, Trump appeared to want Musk to concentrate primarily on improving efficiencies and policies within federal departments and agencies, obviously leading to potential reductions in services, employees and regulations.  Now, reports are indicating that Musk is attempting to also influence Trump’s future foreign policies, including attempts to have an impact on the domestic politics of several European countries and Canada.  Needless-to-say, American interference in other countries’ governance will not be appreciated by their current governments.

The U.S. has been very vocal about any covert foreign interference in its governance and its elections, and rightly so.  Although Elon Musk is not an elected official at this time, he is expected to be part of Trump’s administration in some official advisory capacity.  Any attempt by Musk to influence or represent the foreign policy of the next administration is totally inappropriate.  That is the role of the Secretary of State.  What is especially dangerous is the opportunity presented to Musk to influence the future president on foreign matters by having his ear on a daily basis.  If I were the next Secretary of State, I’d be very concerned.  It’s one thing for Musk to involve himself in U.S. governance and domestic matters, it’s a whole other concern if he attempts to do so in matters related to foreign affairs and dealings with America’s allies!

Leave a comment »

What Does Next Year Have In Store For Canada-U.S. Relations?

Well, if the end of this year is any indication, 2025 is going to be a tough year for Canada-U.S. relations.  Even before he is sworn in as the next president, Donald Trump has alright stirred up a hornets nest with off the cuff statements aimed at Canada.  Firstly, he warns the Canadian government that he intends to impose 25 percent tariffs on Canadian goods if Canada does not reduce the flow of migrants and fentanyl into the U.S.  Such a move of course could be devastating for Canada, whose economy depends heavily on exports to the U.S.which is its largest trading partner.  However, Trump himself has suggested that the tariff plan may have less to do with border security than with his desire to eliminate the $50 billion trade deficit with Canada.  Interesting, given the fact that oil and gas exports from Canada account for most of that trade imbalance.  Without them, the U.S. generally has a trade surplus with Canada.  This would greatly impact the province of Alberta which supplies the U.S. with the bulk of crude oil and represents a safe, cheaper and more accessible source for Americans.  Therefore, the impact on the U.S. could mean higher costs for fuels.

Nevertheless, both federal and provincial governments in Canada hit the panic button.  Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was forced to meet with the provincial premiers to discuss how to positively react to Trump, especially as it pertains to the issue of border security.  By the way, the issue of border security has a lot more to do with the border between Mexico and the U.S. That southern border has been a far worst scenario when it comes to illegal border crossings and drug smuggling.  The subsequent immediate result was the dinner Trudeau had with Trump at Mar-a-Lago over the Thanksgiving weekend, as well as telephone conversations between members of Trudeau’s cabinet and Thomas D. Homan, Trump’s designated border czar.  Next, was a follow-up by two top Canadian ministers, Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly and Finance Minister Dominic LeBlanc.  They met on December 27th with members of Trump’s circle in Florida about a planned 1.3 billion Canadian dollars’ worth of a package of proposed new border security measures.

Whether the Canadian government’s preemptive moves will satisfy Trump is anyone’s guess?  I would suggest that it won’t and he will continue to pursue the matter as part of trade negotiations with Canada once he is in office.  Meanwhile, Trump is clearly aware that Trudeau’s minority government is now politically in trouble.  There is little doubt that the opposition parties intend to introduce a non-confidence vote possibly by the end of January after parliament re-adjourns after the holidays.  This would then result in an election being called early in the New Year, with a predicted majority win by the Conservative Party under Pierre Poilievre.  Whether Trudeau will lead the Liberal Party once more is still up in the air given his current unpopularity among the electorate.

This will place a lot of perceived difficulties for Poilievre’s Conservatives on this and other potential issues in the face of President Trump’s administration.  It may mean that the next Canadian government will spend a good deal of its time simply reacting and responding to Trump’s demands.  The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), signed in 2018 during Trump’s first term, is up for review in 2026.  Should a Trump administration take a hard-line stance requesting fewer restrictions on American exports to Canada, it could lead to a trade war with the U.S.  Such an outcome will no doubt further damage our relations, and would lead to higher product costs for consumers in both countries.  Due to our size, Canada has to be an export-import country in order to grow and thrive economically.

What makes the future that much more unclear are the irrational and uninformed outbursts of one Donald Trump.  How the next Canadian government will react to his social media musings will be very interesting?  For Canadians, there is little doubt that these will be trying times.  Stay tuned for more of the Donald Trump saga!

Leave a comment »

Why I’m Proud to be Canadian and Not American

Whether in jest or being serious, Donald Trump’s ludicrous assertion that Canada should become the 51rst state is a blatant insult.  He suggested that there are many Canadians who would support the idea.  However, I’m not one!  Instead, I’m quite happy to remain as a Canadian, one whose family immigrated to this country after World War II and made a good life for themselves.  Here’s a few reasons why in a short excerpt.

First, I prefer our parliamentary system of governing over that under the Republic, especially as it pertains to that of electing a president through the antiquated electoral college process.  Even numerous American observers have promoted doing away with the electoral college and simply going with whoever wins the overall popular vote.

Secondly, the manner in which Supreme Court judges are appointed is far more politically influenced than in Canada.  As witnessed in recent years, the Supreme Court’s decisions have unfortunately caused a regression in modern American societal matters, including endorsing the right to bear arms and the overturning of Wade vs Roe.  The latter put a woman’s reproductive rights back a half century or more.  In addition, there is no age limit on the term of Supreme Court judges as is the case in Canada.

Thirdly, Canada, like most industrialized countries in the Western world, has a universal health care system.  Moreover, no one has to mortgage their home in order to pay for their medical expenses.  In the U.S., there is a much more obvious two tier system, one for the rich and the other for the rest of Americans.

Fourthly, Canada does have gun control measures in place.  The possession of guns is not seen as a right, but as a privilege which has strict requirements and does not include handguns except under tight restrictions.  As a result, shootings on a per capita basis involving homicides are very small compared to those in the U.S.  School shootings in Canada are almost unheard of, compared to the U.S. where the nation’s nearly 130,000 schools report gun incidents each year.  In 2020 for example, guns became the leading cause of death among American children under 18.

Fifthly, through its Truth and Reconciliation processes, Canada has formally recognized the injustices perpetrated upon its indigenous population in concrete terms.  In particular, we recognize those injustices involving the history of residential schools, moving to compensate those directly affected and beginning an extensive program of educating and informing Canadians about this terrible period.  Americans are just starting to recognize the tragedies of their indigenous peoples resulting from the use of residential schools as a form of assimilation and the destruction of their culture and languages.

Finally, although some Americans will refer to Canada as a so-called “socialist” state, Canadians have long prided themselves on their entrepreneurial skills and a healthy and thriving market-based economy.  As in the U.S., Canadian governments have long supported the business community and its research and development efforts, particularly as they pertain to new technologies.  Our labour force is as well educated and skilled as any in the world, attracting various forms of direct or indirect foreign investment.  Several thriving Canadian companies, including some of our major banks, are multinational in nature.  For example, over a million Canadians work and live in the U.S., most often because of their sought-after credentials, skills and experience in their respective fields.

Given our smaller size, Canada has to be an exporting nation.  Canada has free trade agreements, not only with the U.S., but also with the European Union, the Americas, and the Pacific Rim
nations in Asia.  Although Canada is considered to be a peaceful nation, Canadians proudly served and died alongside Americans in two World Wars, Korea and more recently Afghanistan.  Canadians are proud to stand up for our democracy and freedoms, much like Americans.  This is why I am more than proud to remain being Canadian.


Leave a comment »

New Political and Social-Economic Realm of Diversity in America

Back in March of this year, the Biden administration ordered changes to a range of federal surveys to gather more detailed information about the nation’s ethnic and racial makeup.  Why is this important?  For example, most people of Middle Eastern and North African descent reportedly are currently classified as “white” in U.S. census data.  According to the Census Bureau estimates, this represented about 3.5 million people falling into that category.  They represent for example people whose descent is Lebanese, Egyptian, Iranian, Syrian, Iraqi, and Israeli.  Under the new format, people of Middle Eastern and North African descent will have their own category.  Officials of the Office of Management and Budget, which oversaw the review of the current survey questions, said the changes were needed in part to make surveys more accurate.

The reason more accurate surveys are increasingly important is that America is increasing becoming more diverse.  The non-white population has nearly doubled since 1990 to over 40% in 2023, as the proportion of non-Hispanic whites decreased from 75% to 58%.  According to the USAFacts Team, the nation’s non-white population has almost doubled over the past four decades, growing from about 24% of the population in 1990 to over 40% in 2023.  Furthermore, according to the US Census Bureau, the multiracial population is projected to be the fastest-growing racial or ethnic group over the next four decades, followed by the Asian or Pacific Islander and Hispanic populations.  The non-Hispanic white population is expected to continue shrinking.

The above announced changes most likely have the potential to rankle conservatives who believe that the nation’s focus on diversity has already gone too far.  Interestingly, both the Republicans and Democrats during the recent election attempted vigorously to cater to Blacks, Latinos and Hispanics to have their votes which were deemed critical in several states.  This time around, the Trump campaign notably targeted those communities with diverse populations.  In many cases, the non-White populace was just as concerned about the economy and immigration as many of his White supporters.  Something that the Democratic Party failed to fully realize during its campaign — a startling factor given Pamela Harris being a Black candidate.

Now one has to ask is whether Donald Trump will allocate more positions in his cabinet to better reflect the nation’s diversity?  So far, the answer appears to be a resounding “no”.  Specifically selecting people from such bodies as Fox News certainly doesn’t help.  He may have to go outside his comfort zone!  In addition, federal policies will have to better reflect the importance of diverse populations.  Those who broadly support the new survey questions — academics, civil liberties advocates and racial and ethnic interest groups among them — say they would help promote greater fairness in schools, housing, hiring and other aspects of society where census data is used.  I’m not so sure that Trump’s immediate advisory body, made up mainly of rich White men, is going to facilitate appropriately dealing with such issues.

Favouring one group over another will lead to even more division within the country.  Hopefully, the Republicans in Congress will appreciate this matter in their deliberations.  Many marginalized groups are made up of persons from diverse communities, and are affected particularly hard by any reduction in socio-economic benefit programs.  Such policies would no doubt lead to increased hardships for these people.  Cutting such programs in the name of “efficiency” should not be an option in these dire times, accentuated by growing poverty, homelessness and inadequate medical care.  One has to question what Trump means when he proposes to make America great again?  Just who will actually benefit?

Leave a comment »

Trump’s Tariff Threats Against Canada and Mexico Will Hurt Americans Equally

Here we go again, Donald Trump’s bargaining concept is getting in the way of economic realities.  Threatening to impose a 25% tariff on all Canadian and Mexican products entering the U.S. is simply nonsense, and most likely in violation of the current U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement.  This agreement, by-the-way signed during the former President’s first term, is up for re-negotiation in two years. 

The U.S. is the largest importer of goods in the world, with Mexico, China and Canada its top three suppliers.  Take for example the North American automotive sector which relies on integrative parts and components from both Canada and Mexico, whereby auto plants on both sides of the border and some production lines would most likely screech to a halt.  Not only can higher tariffs cause increased inflation, but they would also cause job losses in all three countries.  The tariffs, if implemented, could dramatically raise prices for consumers on everything from gas to automobiles to agricultural products.

For some reason, President-elect Trump believes that putting economic pressure on Mexico and Canada would force both countries to tighten up their borders against illegal migrants and the influx of drugs like the deadly synthetic opioid fentanyl.  Mexico’s efforts to fight drugs — which are manufactured by Mexican cartels using chemicals imported from China — have apparently weakened in the last year.  However, the new Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum has argued that the flow of drugs is more of a problem of public health and drug consumption in American society, and rightly so.  On the other hand, both Mexico and Canada have an argument when it comes to the influx of weapons smuggled in from the United States, estimated to account for over 90% of arms smuggled into both countries.

Unfortunately, neither Mexico nor Canada like to be bullied into adherence to some needless policies by an American president, past or present.  President Sheinbaum has already declared that the introduction of new tariffs would result in retaliatory measures by Mexico.  The Canadian government is already examining the ramifications of increased tariffs, hoping to open up a further dialogue with the new American administration.  Hoping to avoid a trade war, both countries have indicated that they are willing to engage in talks on the issues at hand. 

What’s obviously a shot across the bow, Trump appears to think that these threats are an effective manoeuvre as part of some form of future negotiating tactics.  However, the resulting consequences will be dire for all parties concerned.  Canada in particular has clamped down on the flow of fentanyl both into and out of the country.  More aggressive attempts have also been made to deal with the influx of weapons from the U.S.  There is little doubt that these are security issues on both sides of the border.  Canada is also concerned about the potential influx of migrants from the U.S. as a result of Trump’s talks about a “massive deportation” program of illegal migrants during his second term.  Northern border security is just as important to Canadians as it is to Americans, and is nowhere close to American concerns over its southern border security.

I believe that the Canadian government will take a more cautious and respectful approach to Trump’s threat than the Mexican government which has warned the U.S. against any blatant attempts to subjugate its sovereignty through such threats.  As noted, Sheinbaum’s bristly response suggests that Trump faces a much different Mexican president than he did in his first term.  As for Canada, time will tell.  In addition, federally there will be an election next year and Trump’s administration will have to face a new Canadian government.  Unfortunately, the entire situation does not look good for the future of all three countries, both economically and politically.

Leave a comment »

Angry Young Males Revolt In America

Back in 2013, I read a very interesting book by Michael S. Kimmel entitled: “Angry White Men: American Masculinity at the End of an Era.”  In it, he described an increase in anger in the seismic economic, social and political shifts that have so transformed the American landscape among young white men.  Downward mobility, increased racial and gender equality, and a tenacious clinging to an anachronistic ideology of masculinity left many white men feeling betrayed and bewildered.  “Angry white male” is a term for white men holding conservative or right-wing views. Today, the term is often used when talking about the politics of the U.S. The term mostly refers to a group which emerged in the early 1990s. They reacted to what they thought were injustices created by “affirmative action.”  An angry white male is opposed to anti-discrimination policies (such as affirmative action) that benefit racial minorities and women.  Supporters of Donald Trump are sometimes said to largely include angry white men.  Today, one might add young Black and Hispanic men to their numbers, especially now that affirmative action is no longer in play.

Back in the 1960s, when activists pushed for laws to equalize opportunities for women, girls had been much less likely than boys to graduate from college.  However, a recent study indicated that by 2015, the situation had flipped.  Boys were much less likely than girls to make it through college and reap the premium jobs that came with degrees.  Young men were not just getting lower-paying jobs than young women, they were also more likely to leave the job market altogether.  This left many of them living with their parents and gave them lots of free time to spend on video games and in chat rooms.  One research team looked at national time-use surveys and found that young men between the ages of twenty-one and thirty spent 12 percent less time on paid work in 2015 than they had ten years earlier — a much sharper drop than was seen in any other demographic group. The newly freed-up time was spent largely in front of a computer.  The amount of time that men under thirty dedicated to video games and “recreational computer time” rose to 520 hours a year in 2015, 99 hours more than what it had been ten years earlier; a significantly greater amount of time and a sharper increase than was seen among older men and women of all ages.1

Even when it comes to investing and playing the markets on-line, young men dominate the scene, preferring to gamble in day trading in order to possibly become wealthier as well as clearly attaining a high out of risk-taking.  Normally, these men are between 20 and 30 years old and live at home with a lot of time on their hands.2  This phenomenon was particularly exasperated by the pandemic, which also continued to have negative impacts on men with respect to  the post-pandemic labour market and low wages.

The results of the American elections illustrated a clear statistical divide between more educated males and lesser educated males, with the majority of the prior supporting Kamala Harris and the latter Donald Trump.  In particular, young men in the so-call working and middle classes are unhappy with the way the economy has gone for them.  They are also still angered over what they perceive to be as unfair and unequal treatment when it comes to women, whether real or not.  This placed Harris at a clear disadvantage during the election when Democrats obviously failed to address the issue.  The Republicans used conservative social media effectively to appeal to the grievances of young working, unemployed and underemployed men.  Policies pushed by the Democrats, including reproductive rights and gender-based ones, did not appeal to most young men.

Canada is not immune to the lure of conservative policies which tend to attract young Canadian males to their political thinking, all of which will have a direct impact in the federal election expected to happen next year.  Unless there is a drastic change in the economy and labour market, one can expect a similar backlash against the current Liberal government whose social policies will no doubt be a major target by conservative groups.

1. Richard V. Reeves and Ember Smith: “Boys Left Behind: Education Gender Gaps Across the US” (The Brooking Institution, October 12, 2022)  https://www.brookings.edu/articles/boys-left-behind-education-gender-gaps-across-the-us/.

2. The Trolls of Wall Street (How the Outcasts and Insurgents are Hacking the Markets)”: Nathaniel Popper (HarperCollins Publishers, New York, N.Y., 2024) p. 53

Leave a comment »