[DirectionNorth]

^I like this to be true, but I have to ask how much of the claims are vetted for here?

I think this scrambles a maybe on the probability scale. The sequence of events does somewhat match, although I personally think the pieces don't fit together that way.

Just to be sure, a Snopes piece saying it's an unverified claim.
Snopes: Unpacking claims that Canadian PM Mark Carney orchestrated a US Treasuries sell-off

 

[PinkLucy]

It’s getting quite a bit of coverage and it’s getting positive response for both Carney and Canada

 

[Bojaxs]

True or not, I'm getting a crash course on global economics. Today I have a better grasp of how bonds work than I did yesterday.

I'll refrain from posting the Dean Blundell article since it's not verified. But in the article, Blundell included a short video of a guy explaining that Carney ordered the issuing of new Canadian bonds in USD. Which apparently were subsequently snapped up my U.S. investors. I'm guessing this means more Americans just became invested in the Canadian economy? Which means more Americans having an invested interest against Trump's tariffs on Canada?

 

[Admiral Beez]

True or not, I'm getting a crash course on global economics. Today I have a better grasp of how bonds work than I did yesterday.

I'll refrain from posting the Dean Blundell article since it's not verified. But in the article, Blundell included a short video of a guy explaining that Carney ordered the issuing of new Canadian bonds in USD. Which apparently were subsequently snapped up my U.S. investors. I'm guessing this means more Americans just became invested in the Canadian economy? Which means more Americans having an invested interest against Trump's tariffs on Canada?

We seem to have the right PM for the right time.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

True or not, I'm getting a crash course on global economics. Today I have a better grasp of how bonds work than I did yesterday.

I'll refrain from posting the Dean Blundell article since it's not verified. But in the article, Blundell included a short video of a guy explaining that Carney ordered the issuing of new Canadian bonds in USD. Which apparently were subsequently snapped up my U.S. investors. I'm guessing this means more Americans just became invested in the Canadian economy? Which means more Americans having an invested interest against Trump's tariffs on Canada?

Why not post it. I think there are a lot of circumstantial evidence and unverified information in it, but it is the best collection of the various claims I have been seeing the past few days online on this issue.

My biggest issue with the theory is that wouldn’t the American Feds just buy up the bonds as other countries offload them?

But it would be a nice answer to the question “what the heck did Carney tell Trump on that phone call”.

 

[PinkLucy]

I posted it in the election thread yesterday

 

[Admiral Beez]

My biggest issue with the theory is that wouldn’t the American Feds just buy up the bonds as other countries offload them?

Because that’s how the US funds its debt. The US is broke, owing debt of 156% of GDP (Canada’s is about 106%) and doesn’t have the liquidity to buy its own bonds back. A good summary here.

Carney’s Checkmate: How Canada's quiet bond play forced Trump to drop tariffs - Law and Society Magazine.

Carney, Japan and the EU proved America’s idiot Emperor has no clothes By Dean Blundell Let’s talk about the moment Donald Trump blinked. It wasn’t loud. It wasn’t a tweetstorm or a rally rant. When the tariff threats that had the world on edge—125% on China, 25% on Canada’s autos, a global...

lawandsocietymagazine.com

 

[Richard White]

Because that’s how the US funds its debt. The US is broke, owing debt of 156% of GDP, and doesn’t have the liquidity to buy its own bonds back.

That's what you get with low federal taxes, increased military spending and little oversight.

It also doesn't help that they have to increase the debt ceiling every other year to avoid catastrophic consequences.

The US knows they are screwed and continually papers over it.

If not for the fact it would bring global economic ruin, I'd love to see the US default. If they threw up their hands and said **** it we're bankrupt it would be the best thing for them (not the rest of the world though).

 

[junctionist]

Many of Trump's policies can be explained by the fact that the American government's finances are in terrible shape. The country vastly overspends on its military and has also spent a lot of money policing the world, which it can't afford to do to the extent that it has.

Thus, the Americans are trying to end the war in Ukraine by any means necessary, demanding that NATO countries spend more on defence, and trying to grow the tax base through tariffs. The Americans don't want to admit it, but it's true--they can't afford to be as powerful as they want to be. They love the "American exceptionalism" narrative, except that they've pushed government spending far beyond what even an exceptional economy can sustain.

Tariffs can generate some temporary relief, but they'll end up shrinking the size of the country's economy over time.

 

[Admiral Beez]

American government's finances are in terrible shape. The country vastly overspends on its military

US military spending per GDP is only about 3.4%, which is on par with Greece (3.2%), South Korea (2.8%), and Poland (3.8%). What the US has is a revenue problem, where most of its wealthiest citizens and largest corporations pay very little tax.

 

[junctionist]

US military spending per GDP is only about 3.4%, which is on par with Greece (3.2%), South Korea (2.8%), and Poland (3.8%). What the US has is a revenue problem, where most of its wealthiest citizens and largest corporations pay very little tax.

Poland and South Korea neighbour belligerent states and have to spend that money to protect their existence. The US doesn't really have that issue, which means that its military spending per GDP is excessive. I appreciate why they want the power that they've built up, but they have to pay up big time to fund it or cut back on defence spending.

 

[Northern Light]

US military spending per GDP is only about 3.4%, which is on par with Greece (3.2%), South Korea (2.8%), and Poland (3.8%). What the US has is a revenue problem, where most of its wealthiest citizens and largest corporations pay very little tax.

On the latter, I agree, on the former, I would say, yes.....but.....that's misleading in a couple of ways.

1) The nations you note all have vastly lower GDP and GDP per capita so their defense budgets are much smaller in absolute dollars. Your link shows that the U.S. alone accounts for 37% of all military spending in the world. For a country with 4% of the population......

2) What one includes or does not include in military spending is a matter of some conjecture. (how you count varies by country)

The U.S. has military dollars set aside within much of their research money, there's dollars embedded in the NIH, NEA....and several more ABCs....

 

[lenaitch]

On the latter, I agree, on the former, I would say, yes.....but.....that's misleading in a couple of ways.

1) The nations you note all have vastly lower GDP and GDP per capita so their defense budgets are much smaller in absolute dollars. Your link shows that the U.S. alone accounts for 37% of all military spending in the world. For a country with 4% of the population......

2) What one includes or does not include in military spending is a matter of some conjecture. (how you count varies by country)

The U.S. has military dollars set aside within much of their research money, there's dollars embedded in the NIH, NEA....and several more ABCs....

In terms of defence spending by NATO countries, there is a policy:

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_49198.htm

No clue as to how it is policed, but variations in counting is largely driven by variations in the structure of national organizations. For example, in Canada, our Coast Guard and federal police service (RCMP) can not be included in our expenditure calculation but some of those of other nations can because they do not operate under military command and are not deployable in support of military operations.

 

[afransen]

Carney was interviewed by Scott Galloway.

 

[chrisw]

Canada Strong | Liberal Party of Canada

liberal.ca

Liberal Platform released