Canadians Should Thank Trump

He might get us off our butt, out of mediocrity and help us to start acting like adults.

If you believe in the importance of free speech, subscribe to support uncensored, fearless writing—the more people who pay, the more time I can devote to this. Free speech matters. I am a university professor suspended because of a free speech issue, so I am not speaking from the bleachers. The button below takes you to that story if you like.

Please subscribe to receive at least three pieces /essays per week with open comments. The cost is $5.75 per month, or about $4 USD. Everyone says, “Hey, it’s just a cup of coffee.”

(With me, it's not per day but just one per month).)

But if you’re like me, you go, “Hey, I only want so many cups of coffee!” I get it.

But I only ask that when you choose your coffee, please choose mine. Cheers.

In the great sweep of economic history, nations often stumble into their golden ages not through cautious deliberation but through necessity—spurred on by external shocks, existential threats, or the piercing clarity that a crisis brings.

Today, Canada stands at just such a crossroads. Donald Trump's tariff threats, crude and blustery as they may seem, present not just a challenge but an opportunity—an opportunity to break free from a decade of economic and cultural lassitude and embark upon a transformative journey not unlike that undertaken by Ireland during its storied ‘Celtic Tiger’ era.

Except we should do ours without the discouraging and curious new Irish indulgence in rank anti-semitism.

Our grandparents' generation spoke, “When God closes a door, he opens a window.” Let’s head for the Overton window, that hypothetical window of acceptable political options, crank it to the top, punch a wall next to it and put it in a bigger window.

For too long, Canada has been content to muddle along in mediocrity, buoyed by its resource wealth, proximity to the United States, a seemingly infinite supply of self-congratulation, overweening pride at not being American and the occasional gold hockey medal at the Olympics.

But behind the polite facade lies stagnation: supply management systems strangling free markets, interprovincial trade barriers reducing a nation to a fragmented confederation of economic fiefdoms, and fiscal policies that seem blithely unaware of the looming debt trap. The time has come for Canada to abandon this complacency and pursue bold reform—a path that Ireland once blazed and that Canada could now follow.

Under the bold leadership phenomenon, there is a concept called preference revelation. It occurs when people are unsure or divided about what they want until a leader articulates a bold, clear vision or takes decisive action that resonates with them on a deeper level.

It reflects a latent demand, like when marketers bring us products we didn’t know we wanted until we saw them. Voters may not realise they want transformative change until a bold leader presents it.

Right now, Canada is still prone to catering to vocal minorities, and I have seen no evidence that Pollievre will create meaningful political change and, from that, cultural transformation. If things continue, the average Canadian will earn 50% of the average American’s salary in 2050.

We must start by looking at our enormous natural resources, oil and gas, minerals and tremendous agri-business with pride as natural advantages to leverage and be proud of.

(Fun fact: our agri-businesses are larger than Ontario and Quebec-based auto and airline businesses, but guess who gets all the federal grift?).

The madness of putting an environmentalist wackjob, an admitted socialist, in as Environment Minister just to poke a finger in the eye of Alberta reeks of grade school politics and immaturity. No, we cannot ride our bikes through blizzards in -20 C. Steven Guilbealt might try, but he is a very strange man.

Are we good with that?

Let’s hope the Conservatives are bold, but now it’s just marketing and grandstanding.

Is the electorate open to bold leadership? Do we have politicians who can stand strong, even when squeaky wheels moan, and the party’s polling numbers start falling?

The Celtic Tiger and others: A Model for Canadian Renewal

My grandmother left Kerrykeel, Ireland, with her family in the early 20th century; Canada offered hope, and Ireland offered little more than unfair sharecropping arrangements with English landlords.

Even into the late 20th century, Ireland was not unlike Canada today—a small, open economy with abundant potential that was weighed down by protectionism, fiscal profligacy, and an overreliance on government largesse.

Yet, Ireland made a bold choice. It slashed corporate tax rates to among the lowest in Europe, embraced foreign direct investment with open arms, invested heavily in education, and built a regulatory environment to attract global business giants.

Do you think nobody in Ireland was screaming bloody murder and saying such change would be the ruination of Ireland?

But the result? A nation that transformed itself from Europe’s poorhouse to one of the continent’s most dynamic economies. Pollsters say Canadians are increasingly pessimistic, our federal government and prime minister seem disconnected from reality, and the public is hungry for meaningful change.

Through bold reforms, Estonia became a global digital leader, embracing e-governance and digital infrastructure. In the 1990s, after gaining independence, Estonia prioritized internet access and technology education. They implemented an e-residency program, allowing global citizens to start businesses remotely, and developed advanced cybersecurity systems.

Nearly all public services, including voting, healthcare, and taxes, are accessible online. Estonia’s commitment to digital innovation modernised the country and positioned it as a model for e-democracy worldwide.

Do you think they had no squeaky wheels moaning, “It won’t work?”

But we have been here before; every election is the most important ever. Assuming the Conservatives get in, do they have the courage to ignore the polling data on every decision, a strategy that guarantees bold campaigning and the same bland tofu Canadian diet of political governance?

As Milton Friedman once observed, “The most important central fact about a free market is that no exchange takes place unless both parties benefit.” Ireland understood this truth, and Canada must now do the same. Relying on outdated protectionist policies or patchwork fiscal strategies is not enough. Canada must take decisive steps toward meaningful structural reform.

Slaying Sacred Cows: Supply Management and Beyond

At the heart of Canada’s economic sclerosis lies supply management, a grotesque policy relic that drives up consumer prices, limits trade flexibility, and serves as an albatross in trade negotiations. Adam Smith famously said in The Wealth of Nations, “People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public or in some contrivance to raise prices.”

Canada’s dairy and poultry industries are textbook examples of a conspiracy against the public interest. The time has come to dismantle this system, not timidly or piecemeal, but with conviction and clarity. If Ireland could tear down its barriers to international investment, surely Canada can reform an outdated policy that serves the few at the expense of the many.

In 2001, the average extra cost to families due to supply management was $444. Today, it is $1277 per family in pretax dollars. A recent study estimates that approximately 7% of Canada’s milk production has been discarded over the past decade due to overproduction and lack of demand.

This rate is notably higher than in other countries, such as the United States (up to 0.5%), Sweden (0.3%), and France (3.5%). The study, led by Dr Sylvain Charlebois of Dalhousie University, estimates that between 6.8 billion and 10 billion litres of milk were discarded in Canada from 2012 to 2021, valued at up to $14.9 billion.

Are we all good with this? The Conservatives are as afraid of changing this as the NDP and the Liberals.

Will we just say, “Okay, sorry?”