Between Cuba, Greenland and Canada, doesn’t this smack of the North American union plan the NWO and One World Government want for the world? This is what the European Union was about in the 90’s. It’s strange to me no one is talking about this.
Trump's cleaning up our dangerous backyard so our neighbors can't harm us or take advantage of us. If that creates an American union great. I wrote a novel about the American union plan failing, I don't believe Trump is bringing in the evil NWO, just a good America First world order.
I don’t think k there’s any way Canada “becomes a state.” Our President says stuff to rigger responses. I could be wrong. Canadians need their independence from their European overlords.
The U.S. is in a difficult position with Canada. The country is intent on destroying itself and selling itself off to China. In the meantime, the government is taking pride in being as stubbornly anti-American as possible. I’d prefer the old status quo, but I’m not sure that’s even possible anymore.
On a side note, adding Canada as a state is like adding another California. It will be another impediment to MAGA. It will also dissolve our provinces and make the entire “state” Subservient to Toronto. I don’t think this works for anybody.
If the US were to annex Canada, I'm pretty sure each region would just become a state. It wouldn't just be state 51, it would be states 51 through 61, maybe 64 but I don't remember from the old school times what those territories are managed like (just big provinces or just left unmanaged because three goats and a weird dude lives there?)
If this is the case then you would add 2 republican senators and 18 democrat senators. Any way you slice it, Canada will only work against Trumps agenda.
I hadn't thought of this, if its under the guise of fixing everything, everyone (mostly) would be behind it until it was apparent its still a singular world govt. At which point it would be too late.
Remember what Albert Pike said, "when the prople need a hero, we shall supply him...".
That is a concern with validity but I think that in the end what makes the NA union possible is a change to a currency like the EU has with the Eurodollar. The US right now is more interested in creating a shield for the NA continent more so than an economic zone.
The EU was developed to be a counterweight to the US via economics.
The bad guys want this as it's easier to control. They've been planning it for ages. Many of us are aware of the "Technate".
But what if the good guys want control.. wouldn't it make sense to them for the exact same reasons?
We're entering a multi-polar world. This is probably going to happen regardless of who is in power. It's WHO is in power that makes the difference. I hope it's DJT and not Chuck or VonderLyin.
Here's the deal - without all the free money we dump on canada they wouldn't be able to afford the welfare system that pays for the indians to be there in the first place. Without that they go home - (or come here! uh oh)
I don't think it'll happen. The Canadian govt will rile up their own people like Democrats do to the NPCs here and they'd burn down their own neighborhoods. However, we can always welcome Alberta in if they want. That at least brings energy/oil and reasonably based people
Do you think if Trump wants us Canadians, he'll really give our corrupt govermnent a choice? As riled up as Canadians can get, our backs are still being broken by a savagely bad economy, and most of us know who is responsible for that. Relief from that would even sway many of the ridiculous "elbows up" hardliners.
Any wise person like Trump would realize there is no way he can permit a hard communist country to rise up on his own border: the longest unguarded border on the planet.
Majority of self claim Canadian nationalists are all a bunch of FRAUDS!!! FAUX PATRIOTISM (CANADIANS) = TDS
Even Pierre Polllieve sounds like a jackass Canadian RINO when he blames Trump for his own problems that Canadian government screws up with.
And don't get me started with their stupid hockey crap because they like to gaslight themselves into thinking they won at something that they lost to the US in the gold medal game!!!
The overall population in Canada is far too liberal. Making them a state will just give the Demonrats 2 more senators and a bunch more representatives and likely permanent control of both houses of Congress. God forbid we make each individual Canadian province a new state.
Make them a territory for the next several decades like Puerto Rico and like most current states had to go through, fine. But making them states immediately is not only unfair to current states, but will be the end of this country as well.
Conservatives are the majority in California, too, and look at how elections have gone there for the last 40 years. The situation in Canada is no different, possibly even worse. Look at how the supposedly conservative leader of Alberta recently stabbed everyone in her province, including conservatives, in the back on healthcare issues. Even your most conservative province can't stop the liberal politicians and their liberal moles from maintaining an iron-fisted control over the country's political system.
If we allow Canada to join the US and give them immediate statehood, every single province, even those with majority conservative populations, will elect 2 Demonrat senators and a bunch of Demonrat representatives, and that will sign the death warrant of this country. There will be no possibility of coming back from that kind of disaster.
Even allowing Canada in as a territory is probably a bad idea, as CharlesKirkland2 pointed out in his response to my comment because all the extreme liberal immigrants and other liberal Canadians will immediately swarm into all the strong conservative states like Texas and Florida and quickly turn them blue as well.
The best path forward is probably to leave Canada to its own devices, possibly forming some kind of loose cooperation agreement with them that will not allow them to drag our country down with them. And then to hope that the supposed conservative majority population in Canada will find the courage and will to stand up and somehow take back control of their government from the liberal demons who have controlled it all for longer than I've been alive.
The overall population in Canada is far too liberal
Actually, it's not. We are overwhelmingly liberal in the same way that America was overwhelmingly Democratic before the 2016 (and subsequent) elections. It's a lie due to intentional misreporting.
There are a lot of hopeless libs concentrated in the coastal cities and certain hot spots here, just like in America. But the majority of the population is right of center. We hate Carney, and most of us realize he got into power in the same way that Biden did.
The big difference between us and you is that we don't yet have anyone who will lead the draining of our own swamp. So a little help from our friends to the south would be very welcome.
Majority of self claim Canadian nationalists are all a bunch of FRAUDS!!! FAUX PATRIOTISM (CANADIANS) = TDS
Even Pierre Polllieve sounds like a jackass Canadian RINO when he blames Trump for his own problems that Canadian government screws up with.
And don't get me started with their stupid hockey crap because they like to gaslight themselves into thinking they won at something that they lost to the US in the gold medal game!!!
"And she brought forth a male child who would come to rule (all) the nations with a rod of iron." ~Revelation 12
It's only going to get more obvious to those willing to see it.
Be willing to see things you might not (yet) agree with.
Don't get stuck in Plato's cave.
John, Revelation is about events that happen and will be happening far above our point of origin as human spirits: “a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet” is obviously far, far above what we can see. As much as we would want to see those things happening, we simply can’t. What we can see, though are faint reflections in our domain of activity, i.e. spiritual and earthly.
My only objection to making Canada, Greenland, Venezuela, and Cuba a state is that they would be entitled to proportional House representation and two Senate seats each. I would not want them flooding these chambers with socialist libtards. Statehood only if they’re full MAGA.
WOW, HE really is suggesting that Canada will fall under the "SUZERAINTY" of the USA, and I HOPE and ASSUME that based on the same logic Australia would have to fall in the same category for ALL the same reasons.
I am a Canadian. I was once proud, but I'm not anymore. Making Canada into a state would be the best thing to happen to us.
As for the Indians, Muslims, Pakistanis and other immigrants flooding in here, we could easily change all that with the power of statehood and the backing of the Trump admin.
Makes me wonder sometimes how much power does “The Crown” actually have over Canada. I’ve heard what I’m told. But I don’t believe everything I’m told. Trump talks about that line. Guess when that line arrived, more or less. 1776.
We've been basically providing welfare for the entire western hemisphere for decades.
But I really don't want Canada to be a 51st state when 70% of the population is just fine with subjugation. It would just be an oversized California.
My heart genuinely weeps for Canadian patriots, some of which are here on GAW. Even during the darkest times here in the U.S., we at least knew we were in the majority.
The plan I would prefer is a swift, overpowering invasion to conquer Canada, followed by putting Canadian patriots (GAW Canadian patriots at the top of the list) in charge as governors, mayors and deprogrammers.
It's simple-we should essentially own Canada based on any financial measures throughout both countries history.
If the true cost is 200 billion a year (or even 1 penny) what are we gaining? We're gaining Canadian smugness and at best a somewhat supportive but pain in the ass little brother? At worst, that babied little brother that got everything they wanted but still resents you?
So here's the deal-you get cutoff from the spigot, or you become a state and reap the earned benefits.
I see no issue with offering a choice. I do have issue with forcing a country to become a state.
To me it's clear-bring more to the table or don't.
makes sense, and I wonder if they'll have to do something with the tribes; can't have 500+ separate 'nations' many that 'hate colonialists', in One Nation Under God...
Honestly folks, the "trade imbalance" bucket with Canada is nowhere $200 billion per year. What other items could Our President be using to come up with $200 billion that are not included in that bucket? Starting point, perhaps, is posing that question to grok. I'd rather trust Our President than grok, but Our President can be rhetorical to make points. We trust Our President, and despise grok for it's answer, and the answer lays in the framing. KEK
grok:
Yes, the pure bilateral goods trade deficit is only one (relatively small) piece, and Trump's ~$200 billion figure appears to combine it with a very broad attribution of U.S. military/defense spending that benefits Canada.
edition.cnn.com
Trade Numbers (Official U.S. Data)Goods trade deficit: Around $46 billion in 2025 (U.S. imports ~$383B, exports ~$336.5B). It was higher in prior years (e.g., ~$62B in 2024).
ustr.gov
Services: The U.S. runs a surplus with Canada of ~$33 billion (2024 data), which narrows the overall goods + services deficit significantly—to roughly $13–36 billion depending on the exact year and measurement.
ustr.gov
Much of the goods deficit is driven by energy (Canadian oil/s crude). Ex-energy, the U.S. often runs a surplus with Canada because of strong exports in autos, machinery, and other sectors. Canadian energy imports help U.S. consumers and manufacturers with relatively stable, discounted supply.
economics.td.com
Even generously using the higher goods-only deficit (~$60–70B in some recent years), this is nowhere near $200B. Trade deficits aren't a direct "subsidy" or cash transfer—they reflect voluntary purchases (Americans buying more Canadian goods than vice versa), often balanced by capital flows, investment, or other benefits.What Else Is Likely in the $200 Billion Bucket?According to reporting on Trump's statements and White House explanations, the rest comes from U.S. defense and security spending that protects the shared continent (especially via NORAD), which Trump attributes as a subsidy to Canada:
edition.cnn.com
U.S. overall defense budget: ~$900B–$1T+ annually. Trump and supporters argue Canada free-rides because it spends far less as a % of GDP (historically ~1.3–1.4%, though pushing toward NATO's 2% target recently).
NORAD/continental defense: Joint U.S.-Canada air/space/missile defense. The U.S. bears the vast majority of costs for protecting North American airspace, Arctic approaches, etc. Estimates of the "U.S. share" vary wildly depending on methodology (e.g., one analysis put U.S. shouldering ~97% of the burden while Canada gets a disproportionate benefit share due to geography). No precise public breakout equals hundreds of billions specifically for Canada.
Broader attribution: This can include U.S. military presence, intelligence sharing, Arctic monitoring, border security cooperation, and even indirect benefits like deterrence against threats from Russia/China. Trump has framed the entire U.S. security umbrella as subsidizing allies who under-spend.
Even generous estimates of the defense component don't credibly reach ~$150B+ specifically attributable to Canada (to bridge to $200B total). U.S. defense is global, not Canada-specific. Canada's GDP is ~$2.2T; 2% NATO target would be ~$44B (it has been increasing spending). The gap is in the low tens of billions, not $150B.
apnews.com
Other Possible Minor Items (Unlikely to Bridge the Gap)Investment/FDI flows: Substantial two-way (U.S. FDI in Canada is large; Canada invests heavily in the U.S.), but net flows don't add a clear "subsidy."
Remittances, transfers, or aid: Negligible in this bilateral relationship.
Current account: Broader than trade and includes income/investment, but still doesn't support a $200B subsidy claim.
Inflated or multi-year averaging: Sometimes rhetoric uses peak deficit years or rounds up dramatically.
Bottom line: The $200B is rhetorical—combining an exaggerated trade deficit (ignoring services/energy benefits) with a maximalist view of U.S. defense costs as a direct subsidy. Economists across the spectrum note that trade deficits aren't losses/subsidies in the accounting sense (they're offset in the balance of payments), and integrated supply chains (autos, energy, manufacturing) make the relationship mutually beneficial rather than zero-sum. Canada is a top U.S. export market and secure energy partner.
washingtonpost.com
This framing fits Trump's broader "America subsidizes allies" narrative on trade and NATO burden-sharing.
Between Cuba, Greenland and Canada, doesn’t this smack of the North American union plan the NWO and One World Government want for the world? This is what the European Union was about in the 90’s. It’s strange to me no one is talking about this.
Trump's cleaning up our dangerous backyard so our neighbors can't harm us or take advantage of us. If that creates an American union great. I wrote a novel about the American union plan failing, I don't believe Trump is bringing in the evil NWO, just a good America First world order.
I don’t think k there’s any way Canada “becomes a state.” Our President says stuff to rigger responses. I could be wrong. Canadians need their independence from their European overlords.
From what I hear, their current overlords are the Chinese.
Not anymore. Not after Trump's visit to China.
To many commie Canadian fuktards,to let them vote in our country.
The U.S. is in a difficult position with Canada. The country is intent on destroying itself and selling itself off to China. In the meantime, the government is taking pride in being as stubbornly anti-American as possible. I’d prefer the old status quo, but I’m not sure that’s even possible anymore.
On a side note, adding Canada as a state is like adding another California. It will be another impediment to MAGA. It will also dissolve our provinces and make the entire “state” Subservient to Toronto. I don’t think this works for anybody.
If the US were to annex Canada, I'm pretty sure each region would just become a state. It wouldn't just be state 51, it would be states 51 through 61, maybe 64 but I don't remember from the old school times what those territories are managed like (just big provinces or just left unmanaged because three goats and a weird dude lives there?)
If this is the case then you would add 2 republican senators and 18 democrat senators. Any way you slice it, Canada will only work against Trumps agenda.
I hadn't thought of this, if its under the guise of fixing everything, everyone (mostly) would be behind it until it was apparent its still a singular world govt. At which point it would be too late.
Remember what Albert Pike said, "when the prople need a hero, we shall supply him...".
That is a concern with validity but I think that in the end what makes the NA union possible is a change to a currency like the EU has with the Eurodollar. The US right now is more interested in creating a shield for the NA continent more so than an economic zone.
The EU was developed to be a counterweight to the US via economics.
The bad guys want this as it's easier to control. They've been planning it for ages. Many of us are aware of the "Technate".
But what if the good guys want control.. wouldn't it make sense to them for the exact same reasons?
We're entering a multi-polar world. This is probably going to happen regardless of who is in power. It's WHO is in power that makes the difference. I hope it's DJT and not Chuck or VonderLyin.
This is infiltration. Posts like the one above.
Oh good. A state made up of India Indians, Muslims and elbows up citizens who hate us.
And owned by China.
Here's the deal - without all the free money we dump on canada they wouldn't be able to afford the welfare system that pays for the indians to be there in the first place. Without that they go home - (or come here! uh oh)
I don't think it'll happen. The Canadian govt will rile up their own people like Democrats do to the NPCs here and they'd burn down their own neighborhoods. However, we can always welcome Alberta in if they want. That at least brings energy/oil and reasonably based people
Do you think if Trump wants us Canadians, he'll really give our corrupt govermnent a choice? As riled up as Canadians can get, our backs are still being broken by a savagely bad economy, and most of us know who is responsible for that. Relief from that would even sway many of the ridiculous "elbows up" hardliners.
Any wise person like Trump would realize there is no way he can permit a hard communist country to rise up on his own border: the longest unguarded border on the planet.
Yes. Alberta is good.
Majority of self claim Canadian nationalists are all a bunch of FRAUDS!!! FAUX PATRIOTISM (CANADIANS) = TDS
Even Pierre Polllieve sounds like a jackass Canadian RINO when he blames Trump for his own problems that Canadian government screws up with.
And don't get me started with their stupid hockey crap because they like to gaslight themselves into thinking they won at something that they lost to the US in the gold medal game!!!
Yeah, me too. Give them some reps and 2 senate seats.
Hell no!
The overall population in Canada is far too liberal. Making them a state will just give the Demonrats 2 more senators and a bunch more representatives and likely permanent control of both houses of Congress. God forbid we make each individual Canadian province a new state.
Make them a territory for the next several decades like Puerto Rico and like most current states had to go through, fine. But making them states immediately is not only unfair to current states, but will be the end of this country as well.
Conservatives are the majority in California, too, and look at how elections have gone there for the last 40 years. The situation in Canada is no different, possibly even worse. Look at how the supposedly conservative leader of Alberta recently stabbed everyone in her province, including conservatives, in the back on healthcare issues. Even your most conservative province can't stop the liberal politicians and their liberal moles from maintaining an iron-fisted control over the country's political system.
If we allow Canada to join the US and give them immediate statehood, every single province, even those with majority conservative populations, will elect 2 Demonrat senators and a bunch of Demonrat representatives, and that will sign the death warrant of this country. There will be no possibility of coming back from that kind of disaster.
Even allowing Canada in as a territory is probably a bad idea, as CharlesKirkland2 pointed out in his response to my comment because all the extreme liberal immigrants and other liberal Canadians will immediately swarm into all the strong conservative states like Texas and Florida and quickly turn them blue as well.
The best path forward is probably to leave Canada to its own devices, possibly forming some kind of loose cooperation agreement with them that will not allow them to drag our country down with them. And then to hope that the supposed conservative majority population in Canada will find the courage and will to stand up and somehow take back control of their government from the liberal demons who have controlled it all for longer than I've been alive.
Yeah and as soon as you do it all those indians in toronto and quebec are moving to texas
This
Actually, it's not. We are overwhelmingly liberal in the same way that America was overwhelmingly Democratic before the 2016 (and subsequent) elections. It's a lie due to intentional misreporting.
There are a lot of hopeless libs concentrated in the coastal cities and certain hot spots here, just like in America. But the majority of the population is right of center. We hate Carney, and most of us realize he got into power in the same way that Biden did.
The big difference between us and you is that we don't yet have anyone who will lead the draining of our own swamp. So a little help from our friends to the south would be very welcome.
Majority of self claim Canadian nationalists are all a bunch of FRAUDS!!! FAUX PATRIOTISM (CANADIANS) = TDS
Even Pierre Polllieve sounds like a jackass Canadian RINO when he blames Trump for his own problems that Canadian government screws up with.
And don't get me started with their stupid hockey crap because they like to gaslight themselves into thinking they won at something that they lost to the US in the gold medal game!!!
"And she brought forth a male child who would come to rule (all) the nations with a rod of iron." ~Revelation 12
It's only going to get more obvious to those willing to see it.
Be willing to see things you might not (yet) agree with.
Don't get stuck in Plato's cave.
u/#q4465
John, Revelation is about events that happen and will be happening far above our point of origin as human spirits: “a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet” is obviously far, far above what we can see. As much as we would want to see those things happening, we simply can’t. What we can see, though are faint reflections in our domain of activity, i.e. spiritual and earthly.
No chance to read this message…
If the citizen rolls of canada are first cleaned up, I might be ok with it but not as is right now
Only if they don't get to vote.
Just say no to the North American Union that Benjamin Fulford keeps talking about.
You mean Ben Fullofit? I am sure he was helpful once but he never understood Q. Miss Q miss the plan.
My only objection to making Canada, Greenland, Venezuela, and Cuba a state is that they would be entitled to proportional House representation and two Senate seats each. I would not want them flooding these chambers with socialist libtards. Statehood only if they’re full MAGA.
I want Mexico all the way around to the Yucatan.
So what's the upper limit before we get a state of Israel
WOW, HE really is suggesting that Canada will fall under the "SUZERAINTY" of the USA, and I HOPE and ASSUME that based on the same logic Australia would have to fall in the same category for ALL the same reasons.
I am a Canadian. I was once proud, but I'm not anymore. Making Canada into a state would be the best thing to happen to us.
As for the Indians, Muslims, Pakistanis and other immigrants flooding in here, we could easily change all that with the power of statehood and the backing of the Trump admin.
We don't want Ontario, Vancouver, Quebec and the hordes they brought in.
Build a wall.
Technocracy, Inc. and the Technate of America
https://bostonraremaps.com/inventory/technocracy-inc-technate-of-america-1940/
What bust is that in the background? It looks like an Uruk-hai lol
There is a similar weird looking bust of Winston Churchill in the Bush Library.
https://www.dreamstime.com/bronze-bust-winston-churchill-george-w-bush-presidential-library-museum-pictured-bronze-bust-winston-image358339575
Maybe the same, but the base doesn't quite match. Could be the same artist.
imo, it's way too large to just be just one state.
Makes me wonder sometimes how much power does “The Crown” actually have over Canada. I’ve heard what I’m told. But I don’t believe everything I’m told. Trump talks about that line. Guess when that line arrived, more or less. 1776.
We've been basically providing welfare for the entire western hemisphere for decades.
But I really don't want Canada to be a 51st state when 70% of the population is just fine with subjugation. It would just be an oversized California.
My heart genuinely weeps for Canadian patriots, some of which are here on GAW. Even during the darkest times here in the U.S., we at least knew we were in the majority.
The plan I would prefer is a swift, overpowering invasion to conquer Canada, followed by putting Canadian patriots (GAW Canadian patriots at the top of the list) in charge as governors, mayors and deprogrammers.
Now watch the libtard canadians have a fit. I feel bad for the good people of canada. Time to throw off your king and his princes.
Everybody ripping us off per decades and we are working and paying taxes for other people and countries. This makes me angry all the time.
It's simple-we should essentially own Canada based on any financial measures throughout both countries history.
If the true cost is 200 billion a year (or even 1 penny) what are we gaining? We're gaining Canadian smugness and at best a somewhat supportive but pain in the ass little brother? At worst, that babied little brother that got everything they wanted but still resents you?
So here's the deal-you get cutoff from the spigot, or you become a state and reap the earned benefits.
I see no issue with offering a choice. I do have issue with forcing a country to become a state.
To me it's clear-bring more to the table or don't.
makes sense, and I wonder if they'll have to do something with the tribes; can't have 500+ separate 'nations' many that 'hate colonialists', in One Nation Under God...
Sounding a lot like a British empire 2 step...
Loving the trolling of those who think they'll just become a US state tho...
Jesus saves, Gretzky scores.
No one is going to point out this was from a year ago? A lot of Twitter counts bringing up old news for clicks.
Honestly folks, the "trade imbalance" bucket with Canada is nowhere $200 billion per year. What other items could Our President be using to come up with $200 billion that are not included in that bucket? Starting point, perhaps, is posing that question to grok. I'd rather trust Our President than grok, but Our President can be rhetorical to make points. We trust Our President, and despise grok for it's answer, and the answer lays in the framing. KEK
grok:
Yes, the pure bilateral goods trade deficit is only one (relatively small) piece, and Trump's ~$200 billion figure appears to combine it with a very broad attribution of U.S. military/defense spending that benefits Canada.
edition.cnn.com
Trade Numbers (Official U.S. Data)Goods trade deficit: Around $46 billion in 2025 (U.S. imports ~$383B, exports ~$336.5B). It was higher in prior years (e.g., ~$62B in 2024).
ustr.gov
Services: The U.S. runs a surplus with Canada of ~$33 billion (2024 data), which narrows the overall goods + services deficit significantly—to roughly $13–36 billion depending on the exact year and measurement.
ustr.gov
Much of the goods deficit is driven by energy (Canadian oil/s crude). Ex-energy, the U.S. often runs a surplus with Canada because of strong exports in autos, machinery, and other sectors. Canadian energy imports help U.S. consumers and manufacturers with relatively stable, discounted supply.
economics.td.com
Even generously using the higher goods-only deficit (~$60–70B in some recent years), this is nowhere near $200B. Trade deficits aren't a direct "subsidy" or cash transfer—they reflect voluntary purchases (Americans buying more Canadian goods than vice versa), often balanced by capital flows, investment, or other benefits.What Else Is Likely in the $200 Billion Bucket?According to reporting on Trump's statements and White House explanations, the rest comes from U.S. defense and security spending that protects the shared continent (especially via NORAD), which Trump attributes as a subsidy to Canada:
edition.cnn.com
U.S. overall defense budget: ~$900B–$1T+ annually. Trump and supporters argue Canada free-rides because it spends far less as a % of GDP (historically ~1.3–1.4%, though pushing toward NATO's 2% target recently). NORAD/continental defense: Joint U.S.-Canada air/space/missile defense. The U.S. bears the vast majority of costs for protecting North American airspace, Arctic approaches, etc. Estimates of the "U.S. share" vary wildly depending on methodology (e.g., one analysis put U.S. shouldering ~97% of the burden while Canada gets a disproportionate benefit share due to geography). No precise public breakout equals hundreds of billions specifically for Canada. Broader attribution: This can include U.S. military presence, intelligence sharing, Arctic monitoring, border security cooperation, and even indirect benefits like deterrence against threats from Russia/China. Trump has framed the entire U.S. security umbrella as subsidizing allies who under-spend.
Even generous estimates of the defense component don't credibly reach ~$150B+ specifically attributable to Canada (to bridge to $200B total). U.S. defense is global, not Canada-specific. Canada's GDP is ~$2.2T; 2% NATO target would be ~$44B (it has been increasing spending). The gap is in the low tens of billions, not $150B.
apnews.com
Other Possible Minor Items (Unlikely to Bridge the Gap)Investment/FDI flows: Substantial two-way (U.S. FDI in Canada is large; Canada invests heavily in the U.S.), but net flows don't add a clear "subsidy." Remittances, transfers, or aid: Negligible in this bilateral relationship. Current account: Broader than trade and includes income/investment, but still doesn't support a $200B subsidy claim. Inflated or multi-year averaging: Sometimes rhetoric uses peak deficit years or rounds up dramatically.
Bottom line: The $200B is rhetorical—combining an exaggerated trade deficit (ignoring services/energy benefits) with a maximalist view of U.S. defense costs as a direct subsidy. Economists across the spectrum note that trade deficits aren't losses/subsidies in the accounting sense (they're offset in the balance of payments), and integrated supply chains (autos, energy, manufacturing) make the relationship mutually beneficial rather than zero-sum. Canada is a top U.S. export market and secure energy partner.
washingtonpost.com
This framing fits Trump's broader "America subsidizes allies" narrative on trade and NATO burden-sharing.