We may be talking past each other, but in any case, I don’t think that is a useful way of presenting this information.
Gross domestic product calculates only for the net effect of imports and exports. That is to say, the balance of trade.
56% of Canada’s GDP is consumer spending.
19% is investment.
23% is government spending.
And 2% is net exports.
That’s the $2.2/2.3 trillion GDP of Canada broken down. Yes, it’s technically true to say that the trade relationship represents a value roughly equivalent to 40% of Canada’s GDP, but I don’t believe that’s very helpful framing.
Using the same method, we might say that the various trade relationships of the US represent a value that is roughly 25% of US GDP.
If Canada’s GDP, an acronym that many people take to be synonymous with ‘economy’, was 40% US trade, we’d be talking about more than a 3% recession.
I can’t help but think of the ‘length of a football field’ or ‘weight of an elephant’ mode of analysis.
Also, your definition of the fallout this could create seems very limited in scope, but I take your point that you are only defining said fallout within the confines of the immediate and specific effects of the tarrifs themselves, and not all the various ripple effects.
Otherwise, we probably agree more than we disagree. Trump’s a cunt is about what it boils down to for me.
We may be talking past each other, but in any case, I don’t think that is a useful way of presenting this information.
Gross domestic product calculates only for the net effect of imports and exports. That is to say, the balance of trade.
56% of Canada’s GDP is consumer spending. 19% is investment. 23% is government spending. And 2% is net exports.
That’s the $2.2/2.3 trillion GDP of Canada broken down. Yes, it’s technically true to say that the trade relationship represents a value roughly equivalent to 40% of Canada’s GDP, but I don’t believe that’s very helpful framing.
Using the same method, we might say that the various trade relationships of the US represent a value that is roughly 25% of US GDP.
If Canada’s GDP, an acronym that many people take to be synonymous with ‘economy’, was 40% US trade, we’d be talking about more than a 3% recession.
I can’t help but think of the ‘length of a football field’ or ‘weight of an elephant’ mode of analysis.
Also, your definition of the fallout this could create seems very limited in scope, but I take your point that you are only defining said fallout within the confines of the immediate and specific effects of the tarrifs themselves, and not all the various ripple effects.
Otherwise, we probably agree more than we disagree. Trump’s a cunt is about what it boils down to for me.