There needs to be more compromise.  Without seeing the details of what Trump wants vs what Canada is offering it's impossible to say who is being more unreasonable.  Some concerns are probably very fair and others might be totally unreasonable or unwarranted.  

Well they no doubt have overcapacity but I still believe they will have to set up some kind of supply chain over here and provide some employment other than dealers or it’s a raw deal. In Canada I cannot see anymore greenfield assembly plants being built. Final assembly that is, maybe battery plant here or there or some kind of components. In the US, if the Chinese ever even infiltrate that market one or more of them are gonna have to build a vehicle plant in the USA. 

Let me explain how this happened.  Corporate processes and decision making 101.   At the beginning there are cost, date and mpg targets and a lot of pressure to meet those targets.  Managers are compensated based on meeting those targets.  There were generally no repercussions for things that happened after launch.     The engineers initially found they could only meet the mpg targets with the dry clutch so they used it knowing it was at the design limit.   By the time the engineers realized there was a serious problem it was so late that making a change would have delayed the launch significantly and more importantly would no longer meet mpg targets either.  When middle managers were given this information they chose to ignore it and continue because it would have negatively affected their performance and compensation.  The only choice the engineers had at that point was to escalate the issue to VP level or higher which probably would have been suicide.  The managers probably said it would just cause some extra warranty claims for a few buyers.     That's how it works when you tie compensation to the wrong KPIs.  That's why I said the only way to fix it is to change compensation and make it worse to lie or say nothing than to say hey we have a problem and figure out how to fix it regardless of the consequences to the schedule and mpg targets.   if my old VP had been in charge the managers who knew about the problem but did nothing would have been fired.  The way it should work is you identify the problem and do a risk assessment that says these are the options - do nothing, change the tranny, change the engine, change both.  Each one has a short and long term cost and pros/cons.  This is run up the chain to at least the VP level and then whatever the executives decide you go with.  At that point the managers have done everything they can do.  The process by which the original decision was made should be revamped so it doesn't happen again.   Now it's entirely possible the executives would have made the same decision depending on how the severity of the problem was estimated.  But if it was underestimated then that in itself is a problem that needs to be fixed.  Change your processes so you don't underestimate.   The real solution is to reward employees far more for long term success rather than just meeting short term objectives.  Ford tried this - holding product teams accountable for warranty costs after launch e.g. but that gets really difficult because the original folks may have changed jobs or left the company. To me the best solution is to hold everyone accountable for meeting targets including quality and warranty costs.  And I think Farley is doing that or at least trying.   Hold people accountable for their decisions including termination for egregious offenses, tie compensation to the correct KPIs and make quality the highest corporate objective and you'll see changes.

Canada doesn’t want to truly decouple from the US. What’s Carney supposed to do just sit there and be compliant with everything that Trump is doing? I was told not to get too political on this site so I’ll leave it at that. I hope when the smoke clears a deal is reached. I work for this company and have been laid off for almost two years, I would like to see a deal reached. Ford has only a tiny footprint left in Canada anyways. All this what I call crap going on is nothing but anxiety.  

China has about 974M employable people, ages15-64 to keep employed. Part of the reason they have so much overcapacity in more than just the automotive sector. Their approach to trade is the reduction of trade barriers and increase of exports, and building in the markets they wish to sell in is only a last resort. Better to employ workers to build auto carrying ships transporting homemade cars than to provide employment offshore.      

The way things are these days thats a possibility. 

Very cool!  Congrats to you and your new bride!

I expect every vehicle we purchase going forward (with the exception of my next Super Duty) will be electrified.  Either BEV or EREV.  The driving dynamics are so much better.

Currently in a hybrid (2025 Maverick Lariat) and seriously considering a Ford based EV for my next purchase due mostly because I have retired and drive a lot less and I believe that the technology is at the tipping point of wider adoption. The future is EV despite what the current administration in Washington thinks. 

Shades of Oldsmobile Cutlass everything....