Or she set it to private because she was overwhelmed with the messages she was getting.

It would be smart to diversify, but it’s going to take a long time, and it’s never going to be as efficient as just moving things across the biggest land border in the world.

Canada would have to build up the Atlantic shipping ports, and all the rail and highway connections leading to those ports to do more business with Europe. That’s going to be expensive and take a long time.

As an example, Australia is an isolated continent so everything entering/leaving has to go by port. Its largest port is the Port of Port Hedland in WA. That port handles more than 500 million tonnes of cargo every year.

By contrast, the biggest port in Canada is the Port of Vancouver which handles only 140 million metric tonnes, less than 1/3 of what Port Hedland handles. Australia has multiple other ports over 100 million tonnes too.

In addition, tariffs need to be seen as a rational thing that will be kept in place for a long period.

If Trump wants to bring manufacturing jobs back to the US, businesses need a minimum 5 year plan to buy or build factories, buy equipment, hire people, and so-on. That’s a huge investment and a big risk. If the tariffs are cancelled before the factory is finished and orders start coming in, the investors might be out the entire amount.

Trump’s tariffs are utter chaos. They’re applied then removed, the value changes randomly. He’s putting tariffs on US military bases and uninhabited islands. In that kind of environment potential investors are just going to convert their money into gold and wait out the chaos.

As an example of that, Canada currently depends massively on trading with the US. US tariffs are devastating to Canada’s economy.

But, over the last week or so, the Canadian dollar has done extremely well against the US dollar because for all the damage the US is doing to Canada, it’s hurting itself so much more.

I hope one of the first things to change is the ridiculous Intellectual Property laws the US forced on the rest of the world. Those laws benefit the US at the expense of everyone else.

If it’s just a park, why aren’t the spectators in the park?

I think the original is just meant to be a simple concept without a fully fleshed out world. In the true original version, it’s only meant to differentiate between equality and equity. It does that by showing that equality gives everyone the same resources, but equity focuses more on ensuring everybody has the same outcomes.

By changing the wall into a chain-link fence and labelling that as justice, it basically opens the door to asking more questions about this world being depicted. Why is there a wall in the first place? In most cases when you have spectators at a sporting event who have to stand on something to see over a wall, it’s because it’s a professional sporting event that sells tickets, and doesn’t want people who haven’t bought tickets to be able to see the event.

If justice is removing the wall and replacing it with a chain-link fence people can see through, what does that mean for the world of professional sports? Are people who didn’t buy tickets entitled to view the game regardless of buying tickets to see it? If you take that concept more broadly, should people be able to access any good or service they want without having to pay for it?

I’m mostly just making fun of the over simplified world depicted in the meme.

Or, replace the chain link fence with a dodgy internet stream of the game. It’s unjust that some people don’t get to see the game, and other people who paid for a ticket do.

(only partially joking)

It’s also useful to ask “if you don’t support DEI, is it diversity, equity or inclusion you have an issue with?”

Should certain people or certain kinds of people be excluded? Is that why inclusion is bad?

What’s bad about equity? Should things be inequitable? Should certain people get preferential treatment? If so, which people and why?

Or, is it diversity that’s the problem? Is uniformness important? Is it so important that it’s reasonable to exclude people who don’t come from the right backgrounds or don’t look a certain way?

You could get out of the crypto grift before the bubble bursts.

I believe this is what they call “preaching to the choir”.