Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Business

After successful anti-American election campaign, Carney pivots to embrace US: Hails Trump as a “transformational president”

Published

2 months ago

4 minute read

MXM logo MxM News

Quick Hit:

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney met with President Donald Trump at the White House on Tuesday and praised the American leader as a “transformational president” with a relentless focus on workers, border security, and combatting fentanyl.

Key Details:

  • In front of reporters in the Oval Office, Carney said Trump was “focused on the economy, with a relentless focus on the American worker, securing your borders… ending the scourge of fentanyl and other opioids, and securing the world.”

  • The newly elected Canadian leader said he intends to implement a similar agenda in Canada, including heightened attention to border security, defense, and Arctic development.

  • Despite past trade friction between the two countries, Carney voiced confidence in the future of U.S.-Canada relations, stating, “We’re stronger when we work together… I look forward to addressing some of those issues that we have.”

Diving Deeper:

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney offered striking praise for President Donald Trump during a Tuesday visit to the White House, calling him a “transformational president” who has reshaped the global conversation on the economy, national security, and public health. Speaking alongside Trump in the Oval Office, Carney lauded the president’s focus on protecting American workers, confronting the fentanyl crisis, and reinforcing the nation’s borders.

“You’re a transformational president, focused on the economy, with a relentless focus on the American worker, securing your borders… ending the scourge of fentanyl and other opioids, and securing the world,” Carney told Trump.

According to Carney, many of the issues central to Trump’s presidency were also top concerns for Canadian voters. “I’ve been elected… with the help of my colleagues here, I’m going to spread the credit, to transform Canada with a similar focus on the economy, securing our borders, again, on fentanyl, much greater focus on defense and security, securing the Arctic and developing the Arctic,” he said.

Though the two leaders were cordial, the backdrop of their meeting carried a history of trade disputes. Early in Trump’s second term, his administration imposed tariffs on Canadian goods—a move that prompted retaliatory measures from then-Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Still, Carney emphasized cooperation and struck a hopeful tone, noting that the U.S.-Canada relationship has endured challenges before.

“The history of Canada and the U.S. is we’re stronger when we work together, and there’s many opportunities to work together,” Carney said. “I look forward to addressing some of those issues that we have, but also finding those areas of mutual cooperation so we can go forward.”

President Trump, for his part, congratulated Carney on his election and offered warm words of welcome. “I want to just congratulate you. That was a great election, actually,” Trump said. “We were watching it with interest, and I think Canada chose a very talented person, a very good person… it’s an honor to have you at the White House and the Oval Office.”

The meeting marked Carney’s first official trip to Washington since taking office and served as an early sign that the two North American leaders may chart a path of renewed collaboration—grounded in shared priorities of national strength and economic growth.

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
International / 4 hours ago

Trump’s Strike on Iran Reshapes Global Power Balance, Deals First Blow to Beijing and CRINK Axis

National / 4 hours ago

Preston Manning: “Appearing to Cope” – Is This The Best We Can Do?

armed forces / 4 hours ago

How Much Dollar Value Does Our Military Deliver?

armed forces

How Much Dollar Value Does Our Military Deliver?

Published on June 22, 2025

By

David Clinton's avatar David Clinton

To my great surprise I recently noticed that, despite being deeply engaged in wars against at least four determined enemies, Israel doesn’t spend all that much more on their military than Canada does on its forces. What might that tell us about government efficiency?

There’s fairly universal agreement that Canada doesn’t spend enough on its military. But before we can even ask how much we should be spending, we should understand how much we’re already spending. And figuring that out isn’t nearly as easy as I’d expected.

According to the 2025–26 Expenditures by Purpose data released by the Treasury Board Secretariat, the Department of National Defence (DND) was allocated $35.7 billion (CAN). However, the New York Times recently reported that Primer Minister Carney’s $9.3 billion increase would bring the total defence-related spending to $62.7 billion – which suggests that, prior to the increase, we were set to spend $53.4 billion (CAN).

So I’ll work with both of those figures: $35.7 billion ($26 billion USD) and the pre-announcement $53.4 billion ($39 billion USD). By contrast, Israel currently spends around $37 billion (USD) on the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) which is in the neighborhood of 18 percent of their total budget.¹ The IDF is (literally) getting a much bigger bang for their buck.²

I’m going to compare the military inventories of both countries to get a sense of what a dollar of government spending can get you. I understand that this isn’t an apples-to-apples comparison and there are many complicating factors here. But I think the exercise could lead us to some useful insights. First off, here’s a very rough estimate of existing inventories:

I’m sure there are plenty of caveats we could apply to those numbers, including how much of that equipment is actually fit for service on any given day. But they’ll have to do.

In addition, there are currently 68,000 regular troops in the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) along with 22,500 reserves, while the IDF employs 169,500 regular troops and 465,000 reserves. They also cost money.

Based on some very rough estimates,³ I’d assess the value of IDF assets at around 2.6 times the value of comparable CAF assets. That means that the IDF – using their procurement systems – would need to spend just $14.4 billion (USD) to purchase the equivalent of the current set of CAF assets.

Now compare that with our actual (pre-increase) expenditures of either $26 billion USD or $39 billion USD and it seems that we’re overspending by either 80 percent or 270 percent.

I think we’d be wise to wonder why that is.

1

For full context, Israel receives around $3.8 billion (USD) in military aid annually from the U.S.

2

Speaking of which, for simplicity, I completely left the ongoing costs of ordinance out of my calculations.

3

If you’re really interested, you can see my calculations here.

 

Subscribe to The Audit.

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Continue Reading

Business

High Taxes Hobble Canadian NHL Teams In Race For Top Players

Published on June 22, 2025

By

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Lee Harding

Canada’s steep income taxes leave NHL players with less cash in their pockets, putting Canadian teams at a serious disadvantage against their U.S. rivals. Find out why it’s not just bad luck that Canada hasn’t won the Stanley Cup in decades.

NHL commissioner Gary Bettman badly underestimates how much higher income taxes in Canada put Canadian teams at a serious competitive disadvantage by reducing players’ take-home pay and limiting their ability to attract top talent.

The NHL salary cap limits how much teams can spend on player salaries each season, so higher taxes mean players on Canadian teams effectively take home less money for the same salary, putting those teams at a disadvantage when competing for talent.

In a recent TNT broadcast, Bettman dismissed the idea that teams might adjust the salary cap to offset income tax differences, calling it “a ridiculous issue” and saying taxes were only “a little bit of a factor.” Pointing to high state taxes in California and New York, he asked, “What are we going to do? Subsidize those teams?”

What Bettman either ignored or didn’t understand is that every Canadian NHL player faces significantly higher income taxes than any of their U.S. counterparts. According to the Fraser Institute’s 2023 study, Ontario’s top marginal tax rate is 53.5 per cent, and even Alberta’s is 47 per cent. Compare that to the highest U.S. state rate among NHL locations—Minnesota at 41.85 per cent, California at 41.3 and New York at 38.85. Several states, including Florida, Texas, Nevada and Tennessee, impose no state income tax at all.

This tax gap translates into huge differences in players’ actual take-home pay, the money they keep after taxes. With a 2024-25 NHL salary cap of US$88 million, Toronto Maple Leafs players collectively earn $5.7 million less after taxes than Edmonton Oilers players, and a staggering $18.9 million less than players on the tax-free Florida Panthers. That difference alone could sign a star player and shift competitive balance.

Leafs fans frustrated by two decades of playoff disappointment should look less to coaches and management and more to Canada’s punishing tax system that drives talent south of the border or limits how much teams can pay. Lower taxes are a proven magnet for high-priced talent, driving better results and stronger teams.

University of Calgary economist Trevor Tombe calls this the “great divergence,” referring to the growing gap between the U.S. and Canadian economies. He points out that U.S. GDP per capita outpaces Canada’s by 43 per cent, and the gap is widening. This economic advantage means U.S. teams operate in wealthier markets with more financial flexibility, enabling them to offer players better after-tax compensation and attract top talent more easily than Canadian teams can.

Canadian teams also face more intense media and fan pressure in smaller markets, adding to their challenges. The NHL’s prolonged Stanley Cup drought for Canadian teams since 1993 isn’t just bad luck. Statistically, the odds of no Canadian team winning the Cup in over 30 years are about one in 781. Tax policy plays a major role in this unlikely streak.

Don’t blame Bettman or the NHL. Blame the Canadian governments that keep imposing high taxes that punish success, stifle economic growth and keep Canadian teams from competing on a level playing field. Unless tax policy changes, Canadian hockey fans should expect more frustration and fewer championships.

Lee Harding is a research fellow for the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

Continue Reading

Trending

X