1. The volatility in U.S. politics—ranging from tariffs imposed by the President on Canada to threats of annexation—has created an unstable economic climate. The stock market has responded sensitively, and the manufacturing sector, including steel production, is already feeling the strain.
Given Hamilton’s economic landscape, where steelmaking remains a significant industry, what strategic advice would you offer to both the city and Canada at large to navigate these challenges? Are there specific actions Canadians should take to mitigate the impact of these measures? Additionally, what practical guidance would you offer to the average Canadian consumer in this climate?
I describe these days as an “economic pandemic”. Five years ago, we found ourselves in a medical pandemic. We were facing a new disease – COVID-19. Medical authorities were still learning about the disease, how it was being shared, steps that could be taken to reduce the risk of catching the disease, and how we should live our lives. There was no vaccine on the horizon. So, where once we could plan our lives weeks, months, or years in advance, we had to move to day-to-day thinking. It was terribly uncomfortable for society to do but it was what we had to do.
We are in that mode again given the “economic pandemic” caused by President Trump. We really don’t know what actions he is going to do and, when he takes some actions, they change a few days later. As a result, my best advice to businesses and people is to default back to day-to-day thinking. Our collective mission is to survive to fight another day. I have heard people predict President Trump’s executive orders will only live a few months while others suggest they are a permanent part of the landscape – at least for the next 45 months.
I am not selling my investments. If I believe in those investments and I am invested for the long term, I am leaving that money where it is. For businesses, if they can, diversify their client base. There are no tariffs with Mexico or Europe or most of the rest of the world. It has been quite easy doing business in the United States but if that relationship has changed significantly, it is a signal to open the door to other markets and the purchasers in those markets.
2. In reference to President Trump’s previous administration, tariffs were deployed on Canada, before being withdrawn. In retrospect, what do you believe was the net effect of those tariffs? Did they achieve their intended economic goals? How did Canada respond at the time, and what lessons can we apply from that experience to better position ourselves against similar challenges today?
There have been very few lingering effects from the brief period where tariffs were imposed on Canada. The credit for this goes to the new USMCA (CUSMA in Canada) Free Trade Agreement that was signed in 2018. This was a deal that President Trump proclaimed (at the time) was the best deal ever for the United States. In that deal was a clause that said the agreement should be reviewed from time to time and that review is slated for 2026. Possibly President Trump is lobbing these economic grenades right now because he wants to re-open the discussion early. I suspect that whoever emerges as Prime Minister on April 28th will be open to starting talks fairly quickly. It took nearly 18 months to create USMCA in 2018. I doubt that a broad-based trade agreement can be re-negotiated much faster. As part of that discussion, Mr. Trump should be reminded that we have a valid free trade deal with the USA and Canada should invoke a dispute resolution clause that could declare Trump’s tariffs to be illegal.
3 In the current political climate, strong leadership will be crucial in guiding Canada through potential economic and diplomatic turbulence. In your view, who is best positioned to lead Canada through this period? Additionally, do you believe Prime Minister Carney is sending the right message to our American counterparts?
4 If you were to assess Hamilton on a scale of 1 to 10 (1 being poor, 10 being exceptional), how would you rate the city in the following key areas?
Affordable housing and cost of living
Crime rates and public safety
Efficiency of public transportation (buses, trains, bike lanes)
Infrastructure quality (roads, bridges, utilities)
Economic strength (job market, business climate)
Opportunities for entrepreneurship and innovation
Urban design (walkability, bikeability)
Sense of community and civic engagement
Please remember - there is never anything so good that it couldn’t be better. On most of these eight factors, I would give Hamilton a rating of six or seven. Of the eight, the “opportunity for entrepreneurship and innovation” has more like a nine or ten rating. All of the major institutions (health, education, civic government, industry) are seen as champions and enablers in this area. Hamilton’s economy is certainly more diversified than it was 20 years ago.
“Urban design”, “public transportation”, and “infrastructure quality” would get a rating of six. Part of this is because, on the sidelines, we have the very large and potentially transformative project of the LRT. For example, along the route of the LRT, all of the underground infrastructure (like water and sewers) will be upgraded and then the above ground infrastructure will be renewed. It would be foolish to do major upgrades in 2025 only to have them redone in 2028. It would be helpful if a full sense of what is going to be done and when was released to the public. Conceivably, when this project commences, there may be more excitement in the air about the possibility of transformation. In the meantime, there is a lot of “patching” that is happening and that never builds the excitement of a city.
Generally, “crime rates and public safety” are satisfactory. Yes, from time to time, there is an incident that shocks us in its senselessness or its brutality and, oddly, I am glad we still have that societal reaction. For a couple of decades I have visited Southern California where most incidents of murder are viewed as just being a part of life. I would like to live in a community where there are NO incidents of brutality or assaults on public safety but I am not sure that is possible.
“Economic strength” in Hamilton is likely a seven. Hamilton has a well-educated work force. Interest rates are half of what they were eighteen months ago. Inflation is floating around the 2% range. Block out the activities of Donald Trump and Hamilton is in a pretty good economic place. We continue to see construction cranes in the skyline. While some condo and apartment projects seem to take forever to launch, others are happening and changing the landscape.
Two ideas were combined on one dimension of the list. If I was rating just “sense of community”, I would score it as an eight out of ten. Whether it is people attending Supercrawl or a Hamilton Forge game or neighbourhood festival or a CFL game, Hamiltonians turn out. I have seen them preparing hot meals for less fortunate neighbours or helping deliver food hampers or raise money for charitable causes. One focal point for the community has been out of commission – the former Copps Coliseum or First Ontario Centre – which is getting a major facelift after 40 years. When it returns to full operation, more community activity is bound to occur. The other half of the dimension was “civic engagement” and I suspect that would get a score of four out of ten. The percentage of people voting in municipal elections continues to decline. Some of this might be due to Hamilton becoming more a “stop along someone’s career path” rather than a destination. People live in Hamilton when there is an advantage to their career to do so but as careers evolve, they will move on. Not everyone is putting down deep roots in Hamilton so they are less engaged in the issues that present themselves. The Hamiltonian might be helping this as many people who live here are not connected to local media alternatives whether it be the local radio station, television station, or newspaper. If someone gets their news from the Internet or a streaming service, they will not be getting much local content and without that, their civic engagement drops.
I have left affordable housing and cost of living to the end. I suspect there is much disagreement about this in the community. Some people might score this as a one or two out of ten while others might give it a six or seven. For sure, the cost of housing has increased. For those of us who are older, we remember the cost of our first housing and then compare it to today and wonder how people can afford to buy or rent. We tend to forget that household income has risen over this time period with the average annual household income in Hamilton being above $100,000. There is also no easy answer to lowering house prices. If you own a house, the equity you have accumulated in your house might help to finance your retirement needs. If I proposed cutting house prices by 25%, homeowners would be quite upset while people looking to get into the market would cheer. The same goes for the cost of living. The major cause of inflation in 2022 and 2023 was the end of COVID-19. A reporter asked me if I thought it would take five or six years for consumers to start spending again after COVID-19. I guessed they were wrong and it would take five or six months. In reality, we resumed our old buying habits in five or six WEEKS. This posed a problem for businesses. They had throttled down production as there was no point making things only to place them in inventory. When we started buying, the private sector could not make things fast enough. When demand exceeds supply, that’s when you have inflation. In 2025, demand and supply have re-balanced and inflation has fallen to reasonable levels. I know people would like to see deflation or a reduction in prices but that just doesn’t happen. And for the past two years, annual wage increases have averaged more than the rate of inflation so the buying power of consumers is improving.
5 What are your thoughts on Hamilton’s approach to homelessness, particularly in relation to encampments and non traditional housing models? Do you believe City Council has taken effective steps to address the issue? What improvements, if any, would you recommend?
All Canadian cities had by-laws that prohibited encampments on public land. When COVID-19 hit in 2020, city councils were advised that continuing to force people to live in shelters would expose them to the disease and could lead to death. Cities temporarily relaxed those by-law restrictions and, in the name of social distancing, allowed encampments. For most citizens, homelessness had been an invisible problem. The odd person might stop you to beg for pocket change but otherwise these people had been “out of sight and out of mind.” The encampments made the problem “real” for citizens. I am not sure the actual number of homeless had changed all that much but we all could see the problem and we did not like what we saw. Canada has been dealing with homelessness for nearly 100 years. I wish it was simply an economic problem because all one would have to do is throw money at it. Instead, the issue is multi-layered with some homeless facing mental health challenges, drug addictions, alcohol addictions, post-traumatic stress disorder, and other problems. Most homeless people are the brothers or sisters, mothers or fathers, sons or daughters of other people. If all they had was an economic problem, most family members would reach out and they would sleep in a basement or on a couch or in a spare bedroom. For them to be on the street, the challenges they face have to be more than what family members can handle.
The easiest “solution” is to revert back to banning the encampments and the problem would APPEAR to go away. We would go back to “out of sight and out of mind.” I don’t have a lot of inexpensive solutions. Sure, we can build “small home projects” and that would help for some people. I suspect we need to create more treatment facilities for mental health issues and more rehab facilities for those addicted to drugs or alcohol. And, of course, the best idea is to intervene before people find themselves homeless. I am not aware of any place that has the solutions to this. And it is worth noting that people are free to travel. If Saskatoon comes up with some good solutions and that becomes public knowledge, homeless people would try to raise the funds to get themselves to Saskatoon. Efforts need to be coordinated across all metropolitan areas so that cities do not find demand for services increasing.
6 What is Marvin Ryder up to these days? What projects or initiatives are you currently involved in? Is there any message you’d like to share with Hamiltonians at this time?
I wish there was something big to share here. I am completing my 41st year at McMaster University in the DeGroote School of Business. Though I can hear the siren call of retirement, I suspect I will be teaching for a few more years. Because I am a believer in lifelong learning, I try to visit other parts of the world twice a year. In 2024, I visited Sicily and Malta in late May and then Belgium in the fall. This year, I will be heading to Greece. It is certainly humbling to be standing in front of buildings or sculptures that were created 2,500 years ago.
I am not sure I have any “big” message. I have tried to live my life using the “glass half full” approach. Every moment of every day might not be perfect but, on balance, things are pretty good. When life sends some bad news your way, face it head on and with positivity. Making the best of any situation seems the best way to lead a fulfilling life.
Given Hamilton’s economic landscape, where steelmaking remains a significant industry, what strategic advice would you offer to both the city and Canada at large to navigate these challenges? Are there specific actions Canadians should take to mitigate the impact of these measures? Additionally, what practical guidance would you offer to the average Canadian consumer in this climate?
I describe these days as an “economic pandemic”. Five years ago, we found ourselves in a medical pandemic. We were facing a new disease – COVID-19. Medical authorities were still learning about the disease, how it was being shared, steps that could be taken to reduce the risk of catching the disease, and how we should live our lives. There was no vaccine on the horizon. So, where once we could plan our lives weeks, months, or years in advance, we had to move to day-to-day thinking. It was terribly uncomfortable for society to do but it was what we had to do.
We are in that mode again given the “economic pandemic” caused by President Trump. We really don’t know what actions he is going to do and, when he takes some actions, they change a few days later. As a result, my best advice to businesses and people is to default back to day-to-day thinking. Our collective mission is to survive to fight another day. I have heard people predict President Trump’s executive orders will only live a few months while others suggest they are a permanent part of the landscape – at least for the next 45 months.
I am not selling my investments. If I believe in those investments and I am invested for the long term, I am leaving that money where it is. For businesses, if they can, diversify their client base. There are no tariffs with Mexico or Europe or most of the rest of the world. It has been quite easy doing business in the United States but if that relationship has changed significantly, it is a signal to open the door to other markets and the purchasers in those markets.
2. In reference to President Trump’s previous administration, tariffs were deployed on Canada, before being withdrawn. In retrospect, what do you believe was the net effect of those tariffs? Did they achieve their intended economic goals? How did Canada respond at the time, and what lessons can we apply from that experience to better position ourselves against similar challenges today?
There have been very few lingering effects from the brief period where tariffs were imposed on Canada. The credit for this goes to the new USMCA (CUSMA in Canada) Free Trade Agreement that was signed in 2018. This was a deal that President Trump proclaimed (at the time) was the best deal ever for the United States. In that deal was a clause that said the agreement should be reviewed from time to time and that review is slated for 2026. Possibly President Trump is lobbing these economic grenades right now because he wants to re-open the discussion early. I suspect that whoever emerges as Prime Minister on April 28th will be open to starting talks fairly quickly. It took nearly 18 months to create USMCA in 2018. I doubt that a broad-based trade agreement can be re-negotiated much faster. As part of that discussion, Mr. Trump should be reminded that we have a valid free trade deal with the USA and Canada should invoke a dispute resolution clause that could declare Trump’s tariffs to be illegal.
If Canada did anything “wrong” in 2018, it was that we did not take that dispute to heart and work to lessen our dependence on the USA as a market for Canadian products and services. It is human nature to want to go back to “business as usual” after resolving an economic disruption. And possibly the COVID-19 pandemic also made us focus on serving the markets we knew best rather than trying to open new markets.
3 In the current political climate, strong leadership will be crucial in guiding Canada through potential economic and diplomatic turbulence. In your view, who is best positioned to lead Canada through this period? Additionally, do you believe Prime Minister Carney is sending the right message to our American counterparts?
Mark Carney served as Governor of the Bank of Canada from 2008 to 2013 and assisted Canada as it recovered from the recession of 2007/08. At that time, I expected him to serve another term as both Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Finance Minister Jim Flaherty spoke glowingly of his service in that position. Instead, he was wooed away to become Governor of the Bank of England from 2013 to 2020. He was the first non-British person to hold that position in 300 years which spoke quite highly of Mr. Carney on the world stage. Though Mr. Carney did not believe that Britain should exit from the European Union, he worked hard to minimize the negative impact of that decision before he left the Governor’s job. Since then, Mr. Carney has worked in many capacities including as Vice-Chair of Brookfield Asset Management and as a United Nations Special Envoy on Climate Change and Finance.
I share this because Mr. Carney would be the most qualified person to serve as Prime Minister of Canada in quite some time. The other candidate, Pierre Poilievre, has spent multiple decades in Ottawa starting as an advisor to former Reform Party Leader, Stockwell Day. He then was elected to Parliament and ultimately served as a young cabinet member under Stephen Harper. He certainly is a skilled and experienced politician. I am less certain of his economic credentials.
Whoever is leading Canada has a formidable opponent in Donald Trump. He has been a candidate in the last three Presidential elections in the United States and, for the first time, he won both the popular vote for President and the Electoral College vote. He seems quite buoyed by this accomplishment and that has led to the hundreds of executive orders he has issued. Faced with this kind of opponent, a Canadian leader really only has two behavioural choices: 1) they can stand firm matching toughness with toughness; or 2) they can choose to be more deferential – stroking and praising the American President – before suggesting actions that might be different than what the President planned. Since this is an unprecedented time, I would suggest the firm and tough approach is the right way to go. President Trump seems to understand and even grudgingly respects that approach from other national leaders. That tone is being matched by the leader of Mexico and some other leaders around the world. Only time will tell if it works over a medium term.
I share this because Mr. Carney would be the most qualified person to serve as Prime Minister of Canada in quite some time. The other candidate, Pierre Poilievre, has spent multiple decades in Ottawa starting as an advisor to former Reform Party Leader, Stockwell Day. He then was elected to Parliament and ultimately served as a young cabinet member under Stephen Harper. He certainly is a skilled and experienced politician. I am less certain of his economic credentials.
Whoever is leading Canada has a formidable opponent in Donald Trump. He has been a candidate in the last three Presidential elections in the United States and, for the first time, he won both the popular vote for President and the Electoral College vote. He seems quite buoyed by this accomplishment and that has led to the hundreds of executive orders he has issued. Faced with this kind of opponent, a Canadian leader really only has two behavioural choices: 1) they can stand firm matching toughness with toughness; or 2) they can choose to be more deferential – stroking and praising the American President – before suggesting actions that might be different than what the President planned. Since this is an unprecedented time, I would suggest the firm and tough approach is the right way to go. President Trump seems to understand and even grudgingly respects that approach from other national leaders. That tone is being matched by the leader of Mexico and some other leaders around the world. Only time will tell if it works over a medium term.
4 If you were to assess Hamilton on a scale of 1 to 10 (1 being poor, 10 being exceptional), how would you rate the city in the following key areas?
Affordable housing and cost of living
Crime rates and public safety
Efficiency of public transportation (buses, trains, bike lanes)
Infrastructure quality (roads, bridges, utilities)
Economic strength (job market, business climate)
Opportunities for entrepreneurship and innovation
Urban design (walkability, bikeability)
Sense of community and civic engagement
Please remember - there is never anything so good that it couldn’t be better. On most of these eight factors, I would give Hamilton a rating of six or seven. Of the eight, the “opportunity for entrepreneurship and innovation” has more like a nine or ten rating. All of the major institutions (health, education, civic government, industry) are seen as champions and enablers in this area. Hamilton’s economy is certainly more diversified than it was 20 years ago.
“Urban design”, “public transportation”, and “infrastructure quality” would get a rating of six. Part of this is because, on the sidelines, we have the very large and potentially transformative project of the LRT. For example, along the route of the LRT, all of the underground infrastructure (like water and sewers) will be upgraded and then the above ground infrastructure will be renewed. It would be foolish to do major upgrades in 2025 only to have them redone in 2028. It would be helpful if a full sense of what is going to be done and when was released to the public. Conceivably, when this project commences, there may be more excitement in the air about the possibility of transformation. In the meantime, there is a lot of “patching” that is happening and that never builds the excitement of a city.
Generally, “crime rates and public safety” are satisfactory. Yes, from time to time, there is an incident that shocks us in its senselessness or its brutality and, oddly, I am glad we still have that societal reaction. For a couple of decades I have visited Southern California where most incidents of murder are viewed as just being a part of life. I would like to live in a community where there are NO incidents of brutality or assaults on public safety but I am not sure that is possible.
“Economic strength” in Hamilton is likely a seven. Hamilton has a well-educated work force. Interest rates are half of what they were eighteen months ago. Inflation is floating around the 2% range. Block out the activities of Donald Trump and Hamilton is in a pretty good economic place. We continue to see construction cranes in the skyline. While some condo and apartment projects seem to take forever to launch, others are happening and changing the landscape.
Two ideas were combined on one dimension of the list. If I was rating just “sense of community”, I would score it as an eight out of ten. Whether it is people attending Supercrawl or a Hamilton Forge game or neighbourhood festival or a CFL game, Hamiltonians turn out. I have seen them preparing hot meals for less fortunate neighbours or helping deliver food hampers or raise money for charitable causes. One focal point for the community has been out of commission – the former Copps Coliseum or First Ontario Centre – which is getting a major facelift after 40 years. When it returns to full operation, more community activity is bound to occur. The other half of the dimension was “civic engagement” and I suspect that would get a score of four out of ten. The percentage of people voting in municipal elections continues to decline. Some of this might be due to Hamilton becoming more a “stop along someone’s career path” rather than a destination. People live in Hamilton when there is an advantage to their career to do so but as careers evolve, they will move on. Not everyone is putting down deep roots in Hamilton so they are less engaged in the issues that present themselves. The Hamiltonian might be helping this as many people who live here are not connected to local media alternatives whether it be the local radio station, television station, or newspaper. If someone gets their news from the Internet or a streaming service, they will not be getting much local content and without that, their civic engagement drops.
I have left affordable housing and cost of living to the end. I suspect there is much disagreement about this in the community. Some people might score this as a one or two out of ten while others might give it a six or seven. For sure, the cost of housing has increased. For those of us who are older, we remember the cost of our first housing and then compare it to today and wonder how people can afford to buy or rent. We tend to forget that household income has risen over this time period with the average annual household income in Hamilton being above $100,000. There is also no easy answer to lowering house prices. If you own a house, the equity you have accumulated in your house might help to finance your retirement needs. If I proposed cutting house prices by 25%, homeowners would be quite upset while people looking to get into the market would cheer. The same goes for the cost of living. The major cause of inflation in 2022 and 2023 was the end of COVID-19. A reporter asked me if I thought it would take five or six years for consumers to start spending again after COVID-19. I guessed they were wrong and it would take five or six months. In reality, we resumed our old buying habits in five or six WEEKS. This posed a problem for businesses. They had throttled down production as there was no point making things only to place them in inventory. When we started buying, the private sector could not make things fast enough. When demand exceeds supply, that’s when you have inflation. In 2025, demand and supply have re-balanced and inflation has fallen to reasonable levels. I know people would like to see deflation or a reduction in prices but that just doesn’t happen. And for the past two years, annual wage increases have averaged more than the rate of inflation so the buying power of consumers is improving.
5 What are your thoughts on Hamilton’s approach to homelessness, particularly in relation to encampments and non traditional housing models? Do you believe City Council has taken effective steps to address the issue? What improvements, if any, would you recommend?
All Canadian cities had by-laws that prohibited encampments on public land. When COVID-19 hit in 2020, city councils were advised that continuing to force people to live in shelters would expose them to the disease and could lead to death. Cities temporarily relaxed those by-law restrictions and, in the name of social distancing, allowed encampments. For most citizens, homelessness had been an invisible problem. The odd person might stop you to beg for pocket change but otherwise these people had been “out of sight and out of mind.” The encampments made the problem “real” for citizens. I am not sure the actual number of homeless had changed all that much but we all could see the problem and we did not like what we saw. Canada has been dealing with homelessness for nearly 100 years. I wish it was simply an economic problem because all one would have to do is throw money at it. Instead, the issue is multi-layered with some homeless facing mental health challenges, drug addictions, alcohol addictions, post-traumatic stress disorder, and other problems. Most homeless people are the brothers or sisters, mothers or fathers, sons or daughters of other people. If all they had was an economic problem, most family members would reach out and they would sleep in a basement or on a couch or in a spare bedroom. For them to be on the street, the challenges they face have to be more than what family members can handle.
The easiest “solution” is to revert back to banning the encampments and the problem would APPEAR to go away. We would go back to “out of sight and out of mind.” I don’t have a lot of inexpensive solutions. Sure, we can build “small home projects” and that would help for some people. I suspect we need to create more treatment facilities for mental health issues and more rehab facilities for those addicted to drugs or alcohol. And, of course, the best idea is to intervene before people find themselves homeless. I am not aware of any place that has the solutions to this. And it is worth noting that people are free to travel. If Saskatoon comes up with some good solutions and that becomes public knowledge, homeless people would try to raise the funds to get themselves to Saskatoon. Efforts need to be coordinated across all metropolitan areas so that cities do not find demand for services increasing.
6 What is Marvin Ryder up to these days? What projects or initiatives are you currently involved in? Is there any message you’d like to share with Hamiltonians at this time?
I wish there was something big to share here. I am completing my 41st year at McMaster University in the DeGroote School of Business. Though I can hear the siren call of retirement, I suspect I will be teaching for a few more years. Because I am a believer in lifelong learning, I try to visit other parts of the world twice a year. In 2024, I visited Sicily and Malta in late May and then Belgium in the fall. This year, I will be heading to Greece. It is certainly humbling to be standing in front of buildings or sculptures that were created 2,500 years ago.
I am not sure I have any “big” message. I have tried to live my life using the “glass half full” approach. Every moment of every day might not be perfect but, on balance, things are pretty good. When life sends some bad news your way, face it head on and with positivity. Making the best of any situation seems the best way to lead a fulfilling life.
Thank-you Professor Ryder for sharing your wisdom and engaging with Hamiltonians in The Hamiltonian!
No comments:
Post a Comment
Your comments are welcome. Please abide by the blog's policy on posting. This blog facilitates discussion from all sides of issues. Opposite viewpoints are welcome, provided they are respectful. Name calling is not allowed and any posts that violate the policy, will not be authorized to appear. This blog also reserves the right to exclude comments that are off topic or are otherwise unprofessional. This blog does not assume any liability whatsoever for comments posted. People posting comments or providing information on interviews, do so at their own risk.
This blog believes in freedom of speech and operates in the context of a democratic society, which many have fought and died for.
Views expressed by commentators or in articles that appear here, cannot be assumed to be espoused by The Hamiltonian staff or its publisher.