Tariffs and migrants plus other letters, Nov. 29: ‘Donald Trump’s ask that we manage our border does not seem unreasonable’

Open this photo in gallery:

Next move

Re “Canada must not cower before Donald Trump’s bullying” (Nov. 28): Donald Trump made it clear during the election that he will use tariffs or financial penalties as a threat to get what he wants. A tariff would be complex, with endless negotiations and haggling on both sides.

His ask that we manage our border does not seem unreasonable. So why can’t our government see it should do exactly that and avoid this mess?

Laurie Kochen Toronto

Seventy per cent of my company’s sales are to the United States. We do not have margins large enough to swallow 25-per-cent tariffs, so our products will be 25-per-cent more expensive than those of our competitors south of the border.

If 70 per cent of our sales disappear, we would have no choice but to lay off most of our Canadian employees. There are tens of thousands of businesses in Canada in the same boat. How many hundreds of thousands of Canadians would lose their jobs?

For the sake of the livelihoods of so many Canadians, I hope our political leaders are successful in negotiating these tariffs away.

Jason Shron President, Rapido Trains Thornhill, Ont.

Donald Trump doesn’t take office for another two months.

Mr. Trump is known for inflammatory and ill-informed messages, so I would appreciate if the media got a grip and toned down reactions to his pronouncements. We have a long way to go to 2029.

I expect the federal government is developing its strategy on working with the new U.S. administration. In the meantime, let’s not get overwhelmed by the threats and late-night musings of the president-elect and his entourage.

Alison Watt North Vancouver

Political play

Re “Liberals table GST relief bill with NDP support, but fate of $250 cheques unclear” (Nov. 28): The penny, or more like billions of pennies, just dropped.

I don’t see the $250 and GST mini-holiday as the government’s attempt to bribe us with our children’s and grandchildren’s money – it is a wedge issue. The Conservatives will vote against it and be cast as mean, cheap and against Canadians.

The government, on the other hand, will tell us plebes that they care for us and are hopeful, by borrowing just a few more billions of dollars, life will be better. Come the new year, if the government’s polling numbers are still weak, just a few more billions of dollars will probably be coming our way.

Then there will be an election derby with its own multibillion-dollar promises. All the while, the problem to the south won’t be addressed in a meaningful way in the form of our 2-per-cent defence commitment.

To recap: Vote-buying good, budget consciousness bad.

Clay Atcheson North Vancouver

Money down

Re “Canada must put up or shut up on defence spending” (Opinion, Nov. 30): I think that Canada should immediately increase its defence spending to 3 per cent of GDP or more. But I have a modest proposal. Spend the money on what Canada does (or at least used to do) best: peacekeeping.

Let us engage the military to rebuild infrastructure in war zones. Until needed, maybe their training periods should be used to build housing for our vulnerable population.

Also, doctors: We should be available to send thousands of doctors to war zones to save lives. In the meantime, let them get experience in places in Canada where there are a lack of doctors.

Please, pour money into the military and let those resources, while they train, help us at home. Build a force to be the best helpers in the world.

Build on our strength.

Craig Cherrie Toronto

Re “Spend where?” (Letters, Nov. 26): A letter-writer says he checks the paper every day to see how many calls there are for government spending. Always plenty, he says. He’s right.

What I’m waiting to see are the calls for more taxation to pay for all that spending.

Judy Lindsay Vancouver

Canadian landscape

Re “Struggling to survive ‘the valley of death,’ some of Canada’s emerging critical mineral miners are now fleeing overseas” (Report on Business, Nov. 23): Mining juniors hope national investors will buy into a promising property. But why would they when majority owners always seem on the indecent side of anxious to sell claims out from under their feet?

FPX Nickel has mineralized rock but no “ore.” Feasibility depends on mineral content, but just as important is the cost of development capital. FPX should not expect someone to give it billions of dollars.

For millennia, mining followed two golden rules: finders keepers, and work it or lose it. If a junior miner found some promising mineralization but didn’t have the capital or skill, it would stand – or be pushed – aside so somebody else could try.

Today British Columbia allows miners to sit on mineral tenures forever, asking for nothing beyond a few dollars rent. Meantime, Canada’s diminishing pool of talent that knows the difference between ore and waste would be wise to learn Spanish.

Robert McCandless Delta, B.C.

Re “CI Financial’s $4.7-billion buyout exposes clash between private buyers, public investors over debt” (Report on Business, Nov. 26): Canada should block the hollowing out of our financial industry by stopping the sale of CI Financial to an Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund and the resulting privatization.

The government stepped in too late to block mining takeovers by foreign companies, leaving our industry hollowed out by the sales of Alcan, Inco and Falconbridge. A sale of CI could be followed by foreign privatization of other financial firms, damaging the TSX and our ability to invest in homegrown companies.

Howard Feldman Toronto

Young minds

Re “Instead of fighting back against our many distractions, these experts say we’re better off accepting them” (Nov. 22): While I appreciate that tech distractions are here to stay, there are also issues at play in regard to our children and their unwitting participation in what I see as a social experiment gone wrong.

I have witnessed a huge impact for this digital cohort on their developing brains and bodies. Tech distractions are not only muting their desire to play outside, and for true play, but also dramatically altering the landscape of their emotional development and maturity (which is what helps with focus and executive function) from a young age, at a huge cost.

There is so much more to say, but I will leave it there.

Jennifer Pearson Registered psychotherapist Toronto

Letters to the Editor should be exclusive to The Globe and Mail. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. Keep letters to 150 words or fewer. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. To submit a letter by e-mail, click here: letters@globeandmail.com