Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said on Wednesday that she had spoken with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and that the two had agreed to strengthen trade collaboration, particularly in light of the tariffs from U.S. President Donald Trump set to go in effect on August 1.

“We both agreed that the (U.S.-Canada-Mexico) trade agreement needed to be respected, and we shared our experiences about the letter than we received from President Trump,” Sheinbaum said in her daily morning press conference.

Trump has sent a flurry of letters in recent days, threatening to slap a range of tariffs on U.S. trade partners.

  • TimewornTraveler@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    I wonder, what physical trade routes exist between Canada and Mexico that don’t involve the USA?

    do they send ships up the US coasts? fly them over/around?

    • PancakesCantKillMe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      3 days ago

      You’ve answered your own question. I’d think they’d avoid trucking through the US to prevent confiscation or transport levies or some such fabricated bullshit. Maybe (like Somalia) they’ll even have to sail 200 miles out to avoid the US raiders that will eventually ply the coasts looking for booty.

    • wampus@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      There are agreements in place to facilitate the transit of goods via rail/truck through the USA, without onerous tariffs involved. Just like there are agreements in place to allow for transit of goods through Canada up to Alaska.

      Could the fascists in the USA impact those trade routes? Sure. But they haven’t yet, and there’s been no explicit talk of it as far as I’ve seen at least. The most ‘noise’ on this front was caused, briefly, by the premier of BC saying they were going to tax trucks going to Alaska – a threat they backed down from almost immediately, as they realised what it’d likely open the doors for in terms of Canada / Mexico trade routes.

      • Danquebec@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        Isn’t it more economical to do mass transport by sea anyway? We can just go through international waters.

        And all Canada’s largest population centers are connected to the sea.

        • merc@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 hours ago

          And all Canada’s largest population centers are connected to the sea.

          Calgary and Edmonton are large population centres, and they’re hundreds of km from the sea, and the shortest route to the sea involves going over some enormous mountains.

          Toronto is technically connected to the sea via the St. Lawrence, but you can’t exactly park a container ship in the Toronto harbour. I mean, technically Minneapolis is connected to the sea via the Mississippi but there’s a reason there’s no big container port there.

          • Danquebec@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            18 hours ago

            You’re right, I wasn’t imagining Calgary and Edmonton to be this large but I just looked up and they are.

        • wampus@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          Shipping by rail is generally quicker, at a relatively low price point, and with far less ecological impact.

          Shipping things like produce via sea to/from Mexico would likely result in a lot of spoiled food. Larger non-perishables it ‘might’ work, but you wouldn’t bother if you have a cheap, less damaging and quicker option available.