this post was submitted on 19 Apr 2026
244 points (98.8% liked)

Canada

11896 readers
531 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
all 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] skozzii@lemmy.ca 14 points 2 days ago (3 children)

America was successfully building a global empire over the last 100 years but then Trump came in and knocked the table over, now everyone is scattering.

That's the one thing I am grateful for Trump, is that he exposed how close the USA was to controlling almost every country before it was too late for us to break free. Now the American empire is in free fall.

[–] AGM@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's not over 'til it's over. We're not out of the woods yet.

[–] CanIFishHere@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 day ago

Carney is just words so far. The woods haven't changed one iota.

[–] GuyIncognito@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yes and no. The decline already started before Trump's first term. The peak was the 90s or early 2000s, but even then the conditions that caused the decline were already in place. They had hollowed out their industrial base and offshored manufacturing in favour of a financialized economy, and it worked very well for a time. It restored profitability and disciplined labour, effectively neutering unions. America's technological advantage carried it through the 90s and 00s, and its Cold War era military remained unchallenged for a long time.

However, I emphasize that it was the Cold War era military. All that military power came from manufacturing, but that hollowing out of their manufacturing base also hollowed out arms manufacturing. The defence contractors merged and conglomerated, and they became even more profitable, but their actual material output has been dropping precipitously as they focused on high margin low production rate technological wonder-weapons. They made oodles of money, but delivered little. Still, with the leftover Cold War military as the backbone and the cutting-edge modern equipment as the teeth, they were able to dominate smaller states and remain a major threat to the other large military powers.

However, the rot really started to become apparent this decade. The Ukraine war revealed that Russia's leftover Soviet factories could outproduce all of NATO in terms of artillery shells, one of the most basic pieces of war materiel. The Houthi blockade of the Red Sea drained naval interceptors at an unsustainable rate, being used up against relatively cheap missiles and drones. In manufacturing terms, America already couldn't keep up.

Then, in walks Trump 2: the Revenge Term. To his (very limited) credit, he did understand on some level that America had been deindustrialized - he had repeatedly said that "if you don't have steel, you don't have a country" - and his tariff spree last year was aimed at bringing back domestic industry. It was too little, too late of course, and only harmed America's global image without significantly restoring domestic manufacturing. He also seems to have either forgotten this, or never really understood the ramifications of deindustrialization for military power, or convinced himself that he completely restored american manfacturing. Probably a combination of the three given that he's senile.

He had also absorbed the right wing cultural theory of American decline, that they had gone woke and therefore gone broke, and all they needed to do was violently reassert themselves on the world stage in order to reclaim their old glory. This analysis is of course completely at odds with material reality (that America no longer has the manufacturing power to maintail a global military empire), but Trump is stupid, senile, and very suggestible, so he managed to get talked into going to war with Iran, despite knowing that American manufacturing had been hollowed out.

Now they've exhausted a large proportion of their precision-guided standoff weapons (harpoons, JASSMs, etc.), their interceptor missiles (THAADs, Patriots), they had an aircraft carrier almost burn down due to a laundry fire, and another carrier serving what looks like boiled shoe leather since they also hollowed out their logistics.

This wasn't all Trump's doing, he just came in as the right man at the right time to completely fuck up the US empire. They probably had a few decades left of global hegemony, but in trying to reassert themselves when they no longer had the juice to fight a middle power like Iran (let alone China), they've drastically accelerated their decline.

[–] Canconda@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Fully agree. Trump is a symptom of the American cultural response to this decline, not the source.

USA very much followed the pattern of the Spanish Empire. Found a golden goose that turned their currency into the world standard, and proceeded to import themselves out of self sufficiency.

That being said, on May 26th 2016, I was laughed at by my entire work office for saying that Trump winning the GOP nomination (At that time we all assumed Hillary would win) would be noted by future historians as the beginning of the dissolution of the united states. Trump is a snowball, not snowfall.

And honestly that's what were seeing with California filling the void left from defunded federal agencies like FEMA, FDA, EPA, etc. I honestly predict that the USA will splinter into several factions depending on what states participate.

[–] GuyIncognito@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's also likely that if he had won the 2020 election, his second term wouldn't have been like this, since he wouldn't be so aggrieved. It would likely have been more like his first term, where he was basically a standard republican but with no decorum.

It took the democrats setting him up as an "easy to beat" opponent in 2016, getting beaten, flailing uselessly, torpedoing bernie for biden and beating him in 2020, assuming that he was vanquished for good, trying and failing to punish him for January 6th (thus setting him on the warpath), then enabling the Gaza genocide and completely fumbling the 2024 election, to put this specific version of Trump in power at the worst possible time. It's kind of like a feedback loop or a cascading failure. It's perfect in a way.

[–] Canconda@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

his second term wouldn't have been like this

I think its hard to say either way. Definitely something I've been thinking about as well.

Like on the one hand, it's pretty obvious project 2025 was the product of them having 4 years to screw in a single light bulb between themselves. I don't think they would have accomplished everything in the bill even with the extra term.

On the other hand, what kind of power could they have consolidated with the extra 4 years of continuity? If things had gone "according to plan" I could see Trump magnanimously passing the presidential torch to a sycophantic successor who'd allow Trump to retain his Cult leader status.

It took the democrats setting him up as an "easy to beat" opponent in 2016, getting beaten, flailing uselessly, torpedoing bernie

I know you're referencing 2020, but IMO the DNC snubbing Bernie in 2016 incentivized a lot of "nihilistic" or "accelerationist" votes. To a degree they had a point. Hillary undeniably would have been more successful at perpetuating American Hegemony. So many people voted for Trump because they underestimated how much the decline of US global supremacy would effect them directly.

[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago

The death throes will cause a lot of collateral damage worldwide, though.

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 54 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Damn right. And the solution isn't to substitute another unreliable trading partner like China. By all means, make deals that make sense, and I think for the most part China will keep them, until they don't. They will always look to gain an advantage and wield the hammer when it suits them, including hostage diplomacy. I have more confidence in Europe, Indo-Pacific, and expanding new markets in Africa and South America.

But strengthening self-reliance and removing internal barriers can only pay dividends. And working with reliable partners that keep their agreements is the only way forward. The only thing that has long term value in trade is trust.

[–] Vergissmeinnicht@lemmy.ca 30 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Trading with China is fine, just not putting all our eggs in the China basket. As long as they're one trade partner among many it's a much more equal relationship.

But yeah, favouring internal trade should be a priority.

[–] ArmchairAce1944@lemmy.ca 12 points 2 days ago

Diversify, diversify, diversify. And don't be too dependent on outside stuff. The neoliberal shit needs to end. All it took is one jackass to bring it all down.

[–] sik0fewl@piefed.ca 25 points 3 days ago

It’s not substitution, it’s expansion. It’s better to have more options, even (or especially) when some are unreliable.

Completely agree with your points, though.

[–] Nils@lemmy.ca 31 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Without naming the opposition Conservatives, Carney seemed to allude to them when he said there are “some who say there’s no need for a comprehensive plan” –- that Canadians should “wait it out” in the hope that U.S. relations will go back to how they were in the “good old days.”

He pointed out that young Canadians have experienced no such good days -- their entire lives having been impacted by the shocks and crises of global wars, financial strife and COVID-19.

People should be worried about politicians with no plans for a better future, and politicians that do not react to crisis.
Sitting on their thumbs and intervening only so their cronies can profit should be a huge red flag. Sadly, they keep getting elected with a minority of votes.

That should be their slogan, Conservatives: we do nothing and pray better times come.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

“some who say there’s no need for a comprehensive plan”

A fresh pair of gel-filled kneepads was a plan.

That should be their slogan, Conservatives: we do nothing and pray better times come.

They do plenty of whining about anything the liberals want to do.

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 days ago

good old days.

If the Cons want to relive 1814 then passivity isn't the way to do that.

[–] Zorque@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

As opposed to those with plans... but just to do the same thing they've always done just with a slightly less odious partner this time.

[–] Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 days ago

"Never put all you eggs in one basket". A very true statement here. Especially if that basket is A-OK with a child raping Russian asset on charge.

[–] ivanvector@piefed.ca 23 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Trading primarily with the United States instead of building other trade partnerships has been our weakness since the Avro Arrow was cancelled. It's about time our leaders started trying to do something about it.

[–] ArmchairAce1944@lemmy.ca 15 points 2 days ago

This is why Charles de Gaulle was onto something when he built France to be more independent and resilient to outside influence. He had many flaws, but that was not one of them.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago

since the Avro Arrow was cancelled.

And before.

The Arrow was killed due to pressure from the American government.

[–] BinzyBoi@piefed.ca 21 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Cool, then why continue to support their war in Iran and not decry it?

Why not reinstate the digital services tax?

Why not protect our public health care by enforcing the Canada Health Act?

All Carney is doing is making us more like the U.S., and I'd like to see him do more than posturing. Congrats, you got a deal with China... What else have you done to sever ties?

[–] GuyIncognito@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago

He's still ultimately a neoliberal banker. He understands the geopolitical situation, but he doesn't understand, or refuses to understand how it's the direct result of socio-economics.

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 19 points 3 days ago

That's what he ran his election on. But his tenure has suggested he doesn't believe that.

[–] SoloPhoenyx@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Y'all could expand BC and gain coastal WA and OR. We would welcome Canadian troops with open arms (and probably subpar waffles 😅)

In all seriousness, though, trade Alberta for the entire PNW. They want to leave civilization and we desperately want to join civilization. Perfect trade.

[–] iron_finn@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

as far as i know a lot of the US owned Canadian companies. "As of 2023–2025 data, roughly one-quarter of large corporations operating in Canada are ultimately controlled by U.S. parent companies, employing about 1.7 million Canadians." -Google

what's interesting is I've always invested in the US, however when companies like Walmart Canada, Apple Canada came out I also invested in those companies. : )

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 days ago

Investing is for a whole different and much smaller class of Canadians.

[–] MasterOKhan@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

We definitely need to have sovereignty over our resources. It’s time to nationalize our oil exports and start refining here at home. Reliance on trading has put us at a stark disadvantage. Our country could be so much more prosperous, instead we’re exporting profits along with the resources.

[–] BinzyBoi@piefed.ca 25 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Orr, we can ditch oil and gas like scientific evidence has proven countless times to be what we should be doing, and instead build on renewables.

If I'm not going to see the government using oil profits to benefit the everyday man, then then I say fuck the oil and gas industry. They fuck the worker over by replacing them with automation, and leave the taxpayer to pay for their mess such as with the oil well cleanups here in Alberta.

[–] CanIFishHere@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Sure Carney. Tell me again what you have done to remove interprovincial trade barriers. How are we doing on that pipeline to reduce our dependency on USA? His statemnt is purely political pandering to those Canadians who don't understand the amount of trade between Canada and the USA.

[–] HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago

Does that mean he'll rescind bill C-2??

Yeah, I thought so. 😡

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca -3 points 2 days ago

More corrupt worthless BS garbage from CIA stooge, while still supporting all US warmongering and "Civilziational (Zio)" supremacism of though shalt kill and steal from those declared inferior. Current US evil against Iran is lasting damage on global economy, and will get worse, even though Canada is better insulated than rest of world.

Genuine path to Canadian prosperity is close partnership with China to make clean energy prices dirt cheap in Canada. Starting with Toronto, driving OPG out of business so that nuclear reactors can be bought out cheap, and pressuring Toronto Hydro with municiplaization seizure is path to high employment and cheap energy. https://lemmy.ca/post/63513461

With 6c/kwh (CAD) electricity prices, and Hydrogen economy, Toronto can be fully clean powered within 10 years. Cloning Chinese tech stacks here is still massive support for Canadian industry. FYI, OPG unsubsidized nuclear power is over 20c/kwh starting next year, and if Pickering refurbishment approved will go up to 35c/kwh. Corrupt Ontario is planning to subsidize these costs through debt financing, but only acceptable subsidy is a cash credit. Say, covering all of Toronto Hydro's fixed monthly fees (almost $50/month)

To transition Toronto to a fully solar/hydrogen autonomous city in 10 years—while leveraging municipal control to "hollow out" Toronto Hydro and OPG—requires a mobilization of equipment and capital equivalent to a wartime industrial effort.

Based on your target of 37 TWh/year for full autonomy (including heat and EVs), here is the scale of the 10-year "Toronto Sprint."

1. Total Capacity Requirements

To provide 37 TWh/year with the seasonal storage buffer, the city requires:

  • Solar Capacity: ~32,000 MW (32 GW). This accounts for the 24% efficiency, 60° arches, and the storage round-trip losses (electrolysis/FC efficiency).
  • Electrolysis Capacity: ~5,250 MW. Based on the 35MW "cluster" model, you would need roughly 150 separate 35MW plants distributed across the city’s industrial zones and substations.
  • Fuel Cell (FC) Capacity: ~10,800 MW. (Scaled at the 72MW-FC-to-35MW-Electrolyzer ratio). This provides the "O2-boosted" winter peak required to replace nuclear and gas heating entirely.

2. The 10-Year "Crane Sprint"

Toronto has roughly 550,000 ground-oriented dwellings (detached, semis, and townhomes) that need the solar-arch "Standard Node" conversion.

  • Total Installations: 55,000 homes per year (for 10 years).
  • Work Days: ~250 per year (excluding Sundays and extreme weather).
  • Daily Target: 220 homes per day across the city.
  • The "Cell" Unit: One crane crew (2 cranes, 2 cherry-pickers) performing 4 "Neighborhood Sprints" per day.
  • Required Fleet: 55 Crane Crews operating simultaneously every day for a decade.
    • 110 Mobile All-Terrain Cranes (45m-60m reach).
    • 110 High-Reach Cherry Pickers.

3. Strategic "Bankrupting" of OPG/Hydro

Your plan to use the 6¢/kWh cash-out and accommodative permitting creates a "Death Spiral" for the legacy utilities:

  • Year 1-3 (The Hollowing): Extreme permitting allows 10% of the city to convert. Toronto Hydro loses its most profitable customers but remains legally obligated to maintain the wires.
  • Year 4-7 (The Margin Squeeze): As 40% of the city moves to "Net Credit" status, Toronto Hydro's fixed-cost burden per remaining customer skyrockets. OPG's 20¢/kWh nuclear power has no buyers in the summer.
  • Year 8-10 (The Firesale): With OPG unable to service the debt on its multi-billion dollar refurbishments, the City "rescues" the assets (Transmission lines and Nuclear sites) for pennies on the dollar to use as the backbone for the H2-hub network.

4. H2 Plant Rollout Schedule

  • Year 1: "Minimum Summer Demand" reached. First 35MW Electrolyzer added in March at the Port Lands or a Scarborough industrial site.
  • Year 1 (Nov): First 72MW FC Plant commissioned using the summer H2 stockpile.
  • Year 2-10: Add 15–18 H2 clusters per year to keep pace with the crane crews.

The "Unfair Advantage"

By forcing private property acceptance for cranes and eliminating the $44,000+ connection fees usually charged by Toronto Hydro, you remove the "friction" that stops traditional solar. The 3.7-year payback makes the transition an unstoppable viral economic event.