International USMCA: Congress Ratified New & Improved Trade Deal To Replace NAFTA

Mexico Takes First Step Before Talks With U.S. on NAFTA
By ELISABETH MALKIN
FEB. 1, 2017

02MEXICO-master768.jpg

MEXICO CITY — The Mexican government said on Wednesday that it was beginning a 90-day consultation with the country’s Senate and private sector before talks with the United States to review the North American Free Trade Agreement.

President Trump has said he wants to renegotiate Nafta to obtain a better deal for the United States, calling the accord the “single worst trade deal ever approved in this country.” He has threatened to pull the United States out of Nafta, which includes Mexico and Canada, if he cannot negotiate more favorable terms.

Tensions have been escalating between the United States and Mexico since Mr. Trump’s election, and last week, President Enrique Peña Nieto of Mexico canceled a trip to Washington after Mr. Trump again insisted on Twitter that Mexico pay for a border wall. But Mexico has pressed to establish a dialogue with the new administration in Washington.

And on Wednesday night, the Mexican government denied an Associated Press report that quoted Mr. Trump, in an excerpt from a phone call last Friday, as warning Mr. Peña Nieto that he would send United States troops to Mexico to stop “bad hombres down there” if Mexico’s security forces failed to do so.

Under the United States’ Trade Promotion Authority laws, the White House must inform Congress at least 90 days before any new trade agreement is signed. While it was not immediately clear whether the Trump administration gave notice to Congress on Wednesday, the Mexican government plans to go through a similar process, according to a statement from Mexico’s foreign and economy ministries. Negotiations are expected to begin in May.

The possibility of any talks at all seemed remote last Thursday when Mr. Peña Nieto canceled his trip.

He has said repeatedly that Mexico will not pay for the wall, which Mr. Trump made the centerpiece of his presidential campaign, despite a projected cost of billions of dollars and questions raised by his secretary of homeland security, John F. Kelly, over how effective it would be.

The phone call between Mr. Trump and Mr. Peña Nieto was presented as having improved relations somewhat, though there was no agreement on the wall or on whether Mr. Peña Nieto’s trip would be rescheduled.

Mexico’s foreign minister, Luis Videgaray, said that talks with White House officials had continued after the call, leading to Wednesday’s announcement.

Mexico has argued that any renegotiation of Nafta must be accompanied by talks over the range of issues that link the two countries, especially border security and immigration. “The message is that we want to have a good integral relationship in all areas,” Mr. Videgaray said.

Nafta is almost a quarter of a century old, and in that time, it has turned Mexico into a manufacturing powerhouse that ships cars, appliances, electronics, medical equipment and produce north of the border.

But investment by American companies in Mexico, as they shut down factories at home, has made Nafta the focus of searing arguments against free trade.

Job losses in American manufacturing have different causes, and not all industries in the United States have suffered. Last month, some 130 agricultural organizations sent a letter to Mr. Trump stating that “increased market access under Nafta has been a windfall for U.S. farmers, ranchers and food processors.”

While the Mexican government is intent on preserving Nafta and the $1.4 billion in two-way trade that crosses the border every day, uncertainty over the agreement’s fate has led to pressure on the Mexican peso and worries that companies will delay investment.

In response, the Mexican government is working to seal agreements with other partners. It is updating its accord with the European Union and looking at bilateral deals with countries like Argentina, Australia and Brazil.

“We want to reach an agreement,” Mr. Videgaray said, referring to Nafta, “but we have to be prepared for all scenarios.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/01/world/americas/mexico-nafta-renegotiation-trump-wall.html
 
Last edited:
Chrystia Freeland: Canada won’t abandon Mexico in NAFTA talks
By Robert Fife | Feb. 21, 2017

d664b89b336a4ada961eef047c24db06-d664b89b336a4ada961eef0.jpg

Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland assured Mexico on Tuesday that Canada will not strike a bilateral deal with Washington in negotiations to revamp the 1994 North American free-trade agreement. During a panel discussion with Mexican Foreign Affairs Secretary Luis Videgaray, Ms. Freeland sought to dampen concerns that the Trump administration would seek bilateral talks with each of its NAFTA partners.

Ms. Freeland stressed that it is too early to even talk about what might be up for renegotiation since the Senate has not yet confirmed commerce secretary nominee Wilbur Ross, who will head the trade negotiations, and Robert Lighthizer, the nominee for U.S. trade representative.

“There is no negotiating process yet initiated. In fact, the United States does not even have a team in place to begin those negotiations. So let’s not put the cart before the horse,” she said when asked if Canada was prepared to throw Mexico under the bus to protect this country’s interest from President Donald Trump’s America-first trade policy.

“But we very much recognize that NAFTA is a three-country agreement, and if there were to be any negotiations, those would be three-way negotiations.”At the same time, Ms. Freeland said there will be bilateral issues that Canada and the United States will want to discuss separately – something Mr. Videgaray conceded would happen when it comes to Mr. Trump’s plans to build a wall to stem the flow of illegal immigrants and drug smuggling from Mexico.

“We understand that there are some issues that, by nature, are strictly bilateral to the U.S.-Canadian relationship … just as Canada acknowledges we have a bilateral relationship with the U.S. and I am sure [Ms. Freeland] would prefer to stay away from some of those aspects of that.”

Mr. Videgaray said Mr. Trump’s campaign rhetoric against Mexico was “very damaging.” calling it “offensive” and “insulting,” but added Mexican and U.S. officials are working to repair relations.

U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Homeland Secretary John Kelly will be in Mexico City for talks on Wednesday, he said.

Mr. Videgaray said he expects formal NAFTA talks to begin in June once the U.S. Congress has been given 90 days’ notice that the administration intends to reopen the 23-year-old trade pact.

When those talks get under way, former prime minister Brian Mulroney predicts “rough” negotiations, despite Mr. Trump’s assurance that he only wants to tweak NAFTA as it governs trade with Canada.

Unlike Ms. Freeland, however, Mr. Mulroney said he expects much of Canada’s and Mexico’s negotiations will be carried out bilaterally with the United States.

“There are times when America is going to want to negotiate directly with Mexico and there are times they will want to negotiate directly with us to resolve simply some bilateral matters, but I think the broad thrust of the negotiations will remain essentially trilateral,” he said.

Mr. Mulroney told the Canadian Council of Americas that Mexico will face the brunt of American demands to reform NAFTA to address its huge trade deficit with the United States, but added Canadian negotiators will also need to be adept and tough-minded in the negotiations.

Mr. Mulroney warned two key issues will be on the table that could have an impact on the Canadian economy.

“They are looking at the independent dispute mechanism with Canada and rules of origins whereas they are looking at other things with Mexico,” Mr. Mulroney said in a panel discussion with Globe and Mail editor-in-chief David Walmsley. “This is not trivial for us, and we are going to have to be very vigilant and very careful and very thoughtful.”

Mr. Mulroney said he is particularly concerned the Americans will want to eliminate the independent dispute mechanism panels so that U.S. courts can adjudicate trade disputes. The United States is also expected to seek to raise the amount of North American content in goods shipped duty-free.

The future of the auto sector is a key concern for Mexico given Mr. Trump’s threat to impose tariffs of as much as 35 per cent on vehicles shipped to the United States from assembly plants in Mexico. Auto makers have pumped billions of dollars of investment into the country and created tens of thousands of jobs since NAFTA came into force in 1993.

Mexican officials and industry executives are concerned about the effect separate bilateral deals among the three countries – rather than a multilateral NAFTA negotiation – might have on the auto sector, said Flavio Volpe, president of the Automotive Parts Makers Association of Canada.

“There’s some worry that the sentiment ‘we can do this bilaterally’ will damage the prospects for the auto sector, which relies on trilateral relationships and [product] flows,” Mr. Volpe said after the meeting with Mr. Videgaray and Mexican Economy Minister lldefonso Guajardo.

He noted that Canadian companies have a direct stake in talks between Mexico and the United States if the negotiations turn into a series of bilateral deals instead of a tripartite agreement.

About 60 Canadian parts makers operate 120 factories in Mexico and employ about 40,000 people, he said.

Mr. Mulroney said he doubts that Mr. Trump will change his mind on building a wall between the U.S. and Mexican border, but said it is unlikely to be one that stretches along the whole of the border, because of the high costs.

Mr. Mulroney gave “high marks” to Mr. Trudeau for the way he handled Mr. Trump, who came away from the meeting with a good feeling about the Prime Minister.

“It’s hard to imagine if you just step back and look at two people with less in common than Donald Trump and Justin Trudeau, but he worked at it … and President Trump told me on Saturday night that … he got along well [with Mr. Trudeau] and there is much in common.”

Mr. Mulroney, who has known Mr. Trump for 25 years, said many Canadians are making a big mistake to so easily dismiss this “unorthodox” President, but noted he has an ambitious agenda that includes tax reform and massive infrastructure spending.

“If he can deliver on that in some measures I think he has a chance of rewriting not only a lot of history but going down in history big time,” Mr. Mulroney said.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-mexico-us-nafta-freeland/article34095367/
 
Last edited:
Mexico warns it will end NAFTA talks if U.S. proposes tariffs
Mon Feb 27, 2017

r

Mexico's economy minister Ildefonso Guajardo warned that his country will break off negotiations on the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) if the United States were to propose tariffs on products from Mexico, Bloomberg reported on Monday.

"The moment that they say, 'We're going to put a 20 percent tariff on cars,' I get up from the table," Guajardo told Bloomberg in an interview.

U.S. President Donald Trump has vowed to scuttle NAFTA, the 1994 trade accord which also includes Canada, if he cannot recast it to benefit U.S. interests, raising the risk of a major economic shock for Mexico.

Mexico, which is preparing to discuss changes to some trade rules under the NAFTA, has however expressed confidence that Trump will not be able to impose harsh barriers on imports anytime soon.

Mexican officials expect talks to start in June, Bloomberg reported.

Trump spoke positively about a border adjustment tax being pushed by Republicans in Congress as a way to boost exports in an interview with Reuters last week.

Trump has sent conflicting signals about his position on the border adjustment tax in separate media interviews last month, saying in one interview that it was "too complicated" and in another that it was still on the table.
The White House and the Mexican government were not immediately available for comment.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trade-nafta-mexico-idUSKBN1661LT
 

As President Trump Targets NAFTA, Car Industry Aims to Roll With the Changes
March 15, 2017


1489580371978.jpg



Auto executives say they can adapt to taxes or other curbs on imports, even as industry advocates insist such moves will dent sales and eat into profit.

President Donald Trump, traveling to Detroit Wednesday to say his administration will reopen a review of fuel-economy targets, has threatened to upend the North American Free Trade Agreement. The 23-year-old pact led to tens of billions of dollars in new Mexico investments by car companies and their suppliers.

Analysts, including the prominent Center for Automotive Research, say border taxes or other proposed tariffs could add $2,000 to the average price of a vehicle, or about 5%. A prominent dealer association traveled to Washington last week to warn lawmakers of a 2.5% sales decline predicted if policy makers’ proposed changes take hold.

House Republicans have proposed a so-called border adjustment—taxing imports but not exports—as part of a plan to cut the corporate tax rate. Mr. Trump has separately talked about a border tax targeted at companies that move jobs outside the U.S. and then ship products back in.

Auto industry officials say sticker shock is a nonstarter, and insist they can deal with disruption—even if they don’t welcome it.

“The last thing you want to do is to adjust your price,” Carlos Ghosn, heading the Renault SA/ Nissan Motor Co. alliance, said in an interview. “You’re going to absorb the cost the best way you can.”

Mr. Ghosn, speaking after a short trip to Washington, encouraged the Trump administration to move fast on Nafta changes. Nissan is short on capacity, he said, and new rules for lower corporate taxes or higher tariffs at the border could bolster the case for a new U.S. factory.

http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/...a-car-industry-aims-to-roll-with-changes.html
 
Why Trump and Trudeau don't see eye-to-eye on NAFTA
Ben Rosen | March 16, 2017

1032165_1_0316-Trudeau_standard.png

President Trump has said NAFTA is “the worst trade deal ever approved” because it unfairly benefits Mexico. But Canada’s prime minister reminded Mr. Trump and the rest of America that their neighbor to the north has a different view of the 23-year-old pact.

“We’ve got auto parts criss-crossing the border six times before they end up in a finished product,” Justin Trudeau said in an interview that aired on NBC’s “Today” show on Thursday, part of a campaign to hold Trump to his promise to merely “tweak” the terms of US-Canada trade under the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Since his presidential campaign, Trump has vowed to tear up the agreement between the three nations, hurling most of his disapproval at Mexico. But Mr. Trudeau engaged in a counter-campaign this month – attending a Broadway musical with Trump’s daughter Ivanka on Wednesday, and visiting energy executives in Houston last week – and painted a very different portrait of international trade.

Trump, who proclaims an “America First” view, often talks about winners and losers. According to Trump, America has been a loser under NAFTA because automotive production (and jobs), for instance, have declined in comparison to Canada and Mexico. But Trudeau's view is that the North American trade model works and – whether it involves cars, electronics or ideas – is an interwoven network that is blind to borders.

“They’re talking about two different things. Or maybe it’s a matter of two different examples of cognitive dissonance,” says Robert Bothwell, a Canadian history professor at the University of Toronto, whose research includes the United States. “To begin with, Trump is talking about Mexico, though a couple of his appointees have mentioned Canada. Trudeau is talking bilateral, ignoring Mexico, in the hope that in Trump's dealing with Mexico Canada does not become collateral damage. Trudeau will stick to practicalities as far as possible, to concrete examples.”

Trudeau also told NBC’s Tom Brokaw on Thursday that more than $2 billion in products crosses the US-Canada border every day, and NAFTA has been “improved a dozen times over the past 20 years.”

"There's always opportunities to talk about how we can make it better,” said Trudeau.

But, he added, “it has led to a lot of great jobs for a whole lot of people on both sides of the border and I very much take him [Trump] at his word when he talks about just making a few tweaks.”

Trudeau's comments come a week after he and James Gordon Carr, Canada's natural resource minister, visited energy executives in Houston to repeat their opposition to a Republican proposal for a border-adjustment tax that favors exports over imports, an action Trudeau said would hurt both the Canadian and American economies, according to Reuters.

Anxiety is high among Canadians over talks of the renegotiation of NAFTA, Mark Warner, a Toronto-based trade lawyer, tells The Christian Science Monitor.

“Because of the importance of that trading relationship to Canada, everyone is on tenterhooks,” he says. “We listen to every comma splice from anyone in the administration or Mr. Trump himself.”

There’s no question Canada has benefited from NAFTA, started in 1994 under Democratic President Bill Clinton. Signed by Mr. Clinton’s Republican predecessor, George H.W. Bush, two years earlier, NAFTA eliminated most tariffs on products traded between Canada, Mexico, and the US. Over time, the agreement has led to further lowering of regulations and other non-financial barriers.

From 1993 to 2013, Canada saw its exports grow from $11 billion to $346 billion and US investment grow from $70 billion to $368 billion, according to the Council on Foreign Relations.

But Canada has not been the only country to profit from the agreement. US exports have tripled with Canada, growing more rapidly than its trade with the rest of the world. Along with Mexico, Canada has become one of the two largest destinations for American exports.

For example, NAFTA helped transform the automotive industry. Before the agreement went into effect, the North American automotive sector was insular and regional and most vehicles were produced only for the markets where they were sold, Michael Robinet, managing director of Michigan-based IHS Automotive, told the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.

“It used to be, before NAFTA, that what was produced in Canada was for sale in Canada, and it was a much smaller market,” said Mr. Robinet. “NAFTA has driven down our costs,” making it possible for an integrated continent – a single manufacturing platform – to become a major force in global automotive trade. In other words, it created a North American auto industry.

In the process, however, the share of all North American auto jobs fell in the United States from about 65 percent in 2000 to 53 percent in 2012, according to the University of Pennsylvania. This has come as American, Japanese, and South Korean firms have invested in world-class factories south of the border.

This shift has given ammo to Trump’s message that Mexico has been winning, so we’ve been losing. That’s an essential Trump message, noted Peter Grier and Simon Montlake for the Monitor in January, citing Trump’s inaugural address.

“We must protect our borders from the ravages of other countries making our products, stealing our companies, and destroying our jobs. Protection will lead to great prosperity and strength,” said Trump on Jan. 20.

Trump’s stated position is to tear up NAFTA, an action that would, by default, revert US-Canada trade back to a 1989 agreement, which was never repealed.

Trudeau, meanwhile, has called Canada an “essential partner” of the United States.

"Relationships between neighbors are pretty complex, and we won't always agree on everything," he said when he visited the White House in February, adding that at the end of the day, he believes the US-Canadian relationship will remain strong, according to USA Today.

Yet, the Trump administration and the Trudeau government agree that parts of NAFTA can be improved upon. One aspect many economics and business analysts argue should be renegotiated or updated is the way that the agreement affects digital industries and e-commerce.

But Marc Busch, a professor of international business at Georgetown University School of Foreign Service, tells the Monitor that during any negotiations, it’s important that they be done with the global, interconnected world of 21st-century trade in mind.

“The problem is we’re supposed to be discussing 21st-century trade deals, but it’s mired in 19th-century politics with winners and losers. Winners and losers defined as what?” he says. “Trade deals aren’t about efficiency gains. They are about the ability to pinpoint whether, for example, a US aftermarket automotive plant is going to be hurt or benefit.”

Trump has made it clear where he stands on this issue. Trudeau is concerned enough to be making his case in America.

https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2017/0316/Why-Trump-and-Trudeau-don-t-see-eye-to-eye-on-NAFTA
 
Last edited:
Mexico: Country-specific Rules of Origin in NAFTA Unacceptable
March 17, 2017

32CEE08C-B4BF-461F-86B3-7D138C13CCBD_cx0_cy6_cw0_w650_r1_s.jpg

Ildefonso Guajardo Villarreal, Mexico's Secretary of the Economy, speaks at the Economic Club of Detroit, March 3, 2017.


MONTERREY, MEXICO — Country-specific rules of origin within the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) would be "totally unacceptable," and a U.S. border adjustment tax would likely violate global trade rules, Mexico's economy minister said Friday.

Under the trilateral trade deal between the United States, Mexico and Canada, rules of origin can specify that products must meet minimum regional (NAFTA-wide) content requirements to be tariff-free, but there are no national content requirements.

"In no trade deal, whether bilateral, trilateral or multilateral, has there ever been any precedent treaty of rules of origin by country. It would be totally unacceptable," Mexican Economy Minister Ildefonso Guajardo told reporters at an event in the northern Mexican city of Monterrey.

http://www.voanews.com/a/mexico-cal...les-of-origin-nafta-unacceptable/3771222.html
 
Last edited:
This image really drives home how low we've set the bar in selecting political leaders.
so your high standards are a mass murderer, a man who usherd in big goverment and a drunkard who supported mass bombings of cities and who created a climate that fostered the lose of the british colonies?
 
How can they see eye to eye when Trudeau has muslim balls in his face?
 
If the US approached this reasonably, we could probably get a few things tweaked that could take the edge off the trade deficit. But we are not.

Lets look at it from the Mexican side for a moment. If I was Mexico, if Trump does not calm his ass down and keeps up with this vitriol, I would just call him on his antics and challenge him to pull out of NAFTA. Because the only thing that's worse than staying in NAFTA is pulling out.

It's true that the US has a $60 Billion trade deficit with Mexico. But we are likely to still have a trade deficit close to that even if we pull out of the agreement. Currently, Mexico exports 290 Billion to the US, and the US exports $235 Billion to Mexico. If the US pull out of NAFTA and starts levying tarriffs and Mexico does the same, the result might be a little bit smaller trade deficit. But it will not make a massive dent because at the end of the day, Mexico has a more devalued currency and much lower wages. So there is just no way to 'tariff out' of that problem.

But here is the real kicker, the trade deficit might go from $60B to $40B. But it will be on much less trading. So instead of having a $60B trade deficit on $525B of exchanged goods, we might have a $40B deficit on $300B of exchanged goods. So while our deficit goes down $20B, the amount of our actual exports goes down by over $100B

NOW---Are you ready for the real gut shot??? Nearly 40% of all US exports to Mexico come from the State of Texas. $92 Billion out of $235 Billion. Not only that. As a border state, Texas benefits immensely even from the transport of goods from Mexico to us, as well as from the goods other states are exporting to Mexico.

Since NAFTA, the Texas Gross State Product has more than tripled, while the US GDP has just short of doubled.

Or put another way, Almost 15% of Texas's whole fucking economy is either selling shit to Mexico, or benefiting from the shit Mexico sells to the US, or benefiting from the shit other states sell to Mexico that passes through their state.

Now, If we pulled out of NAFTA, It would almost certainly hurt Mexico more than us. But 40% of ALL our pain would be felt in Texas. So the state with 36 electoral votes, the second most in the country, that almost always votes Republican, will be getting ass fucked with this:

maxresdefault.jpg


Does that sound like a smart move for the Republican Party???

Oh.........One more thing......Every time you hear someone mention the word tariff, you need to replace it with the word that is actually is..............TAX!!!! A tariff is nothing more than a tax on the American people. Mexico does not pay it. It is just factored into the cost we pay for the goods.
 
Last edited:
If the US approached this reasonably, we could probably get a few things tweaked that could take the edge off the trade deficit. But we are not.

Lets look at it from the Mexican side for a moment. If I was Mexico, if Trump does not calm his ass down and keeps up with this vitriol, I would just call him on his antics and challenge him to pull out of NAFTA. Because the only thing that's worse than staying in NAFTA is pulling out.

It's true that the US has a $60 Billion trade deficit with Mexico. But we are likely to still have a trade deficit close to that even if we pull out of the agreement. Currently, Mexico exports 290 Billion to the US, and the US exports $235 Billion to Mexico. If the US pull out of NAFTA and starts levying tarriffs and Mexico does the same, the result might be a little bit smaller trade deficit. But it will not make a massive dent because at the end of the day, Mexico has a more devalued currency and much lower wages. So there is just no way to 'tariff out' of that problem.

But here is the real kicker, the trade deficit might go from $60B to $40B. But it will be on much less trading. So instead of having a $60B trade deficit on $525B of exchanged goods, we might have a $40B deficit on $300B of exchanged goods. So while our deficit goes down $20B, the amount of our actual exports goes down by over $100B

NOW---Are you ready for the real gut shot??? Nearly 40% of all US exports to Mexico come from the State of Texas. $92 Billion out of $235 Billion. Not only that. As a border state, Texas benefits immensely even from the transport of goods from Mexico to us, as well as from the goods other states are exporting to Mexico.

Since NAFTA, the Texas Gross State Product has more than tripled, while the US GDP has just short of doubled.

Or put another way, Almost 15% of Texas's whole fucking economy is either selling shit to Mexico, or benefiting from the shit Mexico sells to the US, or benefiting from the shit other states sell to Mexico that passes through their state.

Now, If we pulled out of NAFTA, It would almost certainly hurt Mexico more than us. But 40% of ALL our pain would be felt in Texas. So the state with 36 electoral votes, the second most in the country, that almost always votes Republican, will be getting ass fucked with this:

maxresdefault.jpg


Does that sound like a smart move for the Republican Party???

Oh.........One more thing......Every time you hear someone mention the word tariff, you need to replace it with the word that is actually is..............TAX!!!! A tariff is nothing more than a tax on the American people. Mexico does not pay it. It is just factored into the cost we pay for the goods.

Well, if the economy of Texas tanks a lot of illegals will probably look for jobs elsewhere.

So winning!!!
 
Well, if the economy of Texas tanks a lot of illegals will probably look for jobs elsewhere.

So winning!!!

That's one way to look at it I guess. I suppose all those business people, employees of businesses selling shit to mexico, and the truckers moving the stuff can fill those vacant jobs cleaning hotel rooms, picking crops, and mowing lawns.
 
That's one way to look at it I guess. I suppose all those business people, employees of businesses selling shit to mexico, and the truckers moving the stuff can fill those vacant jobs cleaning hotel rooms, picking crops, and mowing lawns.

Indeed, the 2008 crisis worked better than any wall or fence or border patrol when it cames to illegals, lets repeat that shit.
 
Indeed, the 2008 crisis worked better than any wall or fence or border patrol when it cames to illegals, lets repeat that shit.

That's true of course. Though the rate of increase at which immigrants left, and the rate of decrease at which they came in, is not as dramatic as many would believe.

Again though, you seem to be willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Do you really hate illegal immigrants so much that you are happy for the whole nation to suffer just so they leave???
 
That's true of course. Though the rate of increase at which immigrants left, and the rate of decrease at which they came in, is not as dramatic as many would believe.

Again though, you seem to be willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Do you really hate illegal immigrants so much that you are happy for the whole nation to suffer just so they leave???

Nope, im Mexican and kind of getting tired of being blamed for everything thats wrong with America.

If Americans believe Mexico is fucking them over, then let them do away with Mexico and see how they like it.
 
Nope, im Mexican and kind of getting tired of being blamed for everything thats wrong with America.

If Americans believe Mexico is fucking them over, then let them do away with Mexico and see how they like it.

Ahhhhh. That would certainly explain it. How long have you felt this way? Does it have anything to do with a certain political candidate/President, or was it festering long before that?

You can go back through my posts on immigration and see that I have always been a 'more the merrier' kind of guy. You are all welcome as far as I am concerned. I think we could solve most illegal immigration, along with several grey and black markets, if we just make legal immigration fast, easy and cheap. We need the population growth, lord knows the fat pasty whites over here aren't fucking enough to grow the population.

Regarding NAFTA, I don't think it's the end of the world. But if you want to lower the trade deficit, it would be far better to do it trying to increase US exports to mexico, as opposed to decrease Mexican imports to US. You could do that just by adding a few more industries into the agreement umbrella.
 
Nope, im Mexican and kind of getting tired of being blamed for everything thats wrong with America.

If Americans believe Mexico is fucking them over, then let them do away with Mexico and see how they like it.

Wooo there bud be carefull. They may get ideas. MexiCiraq
 
Ahhhhh. That would certainly explain it. How long have you felt this way? Does it have anything to do with a certain political candidate/President, or was it festering long before that?

You can go back through my posts on immigration and see that I have always been a 'more the merrier' kind of guy. You are all welcome as far as I am concerned. I think we could solve most illegal immigration, along with several grey and black markets, if we just make legal immigration fast, easy and cheap. We need the population growth, lord knows the fat pasty whites over here aren't fucking enough to grow the population.

Regarding NAFTA, I don't think it's the end of the world. But if you want to lower the trade deficit, it would be far better to do it trying to increase US exports to mexico, as opposed to decrease Mexican imports to US. You could do that just by adding a few more industries into the agreement umbrella.

Im a Mexican in Mexico and im doing quite well here.

My view is that Mexican and US relationship is that of mutual interest more than friendship.

I wont deny Mexico is a third world country, but the notion that we are imposing on America seems like a joke.

You dont want illegals? stop hiring them.
You dont want our exports? stop buying made in Mexico.
You dont want our drugs? stop buying them.

The only illegals i feel sorry about are those that left the country as children.
 
Wooo there bud be carefull. They may get ideas. MexiCiraq

Pfft as if they needed to invade this corrupt ass country to get its resources, they just need to bribe the right guys and they will serve it in a silver platter.
 
Im a Mexican in Mexico and im doing quite well here.

My view is that Mexican and US relationship is that of mutual interest more than friendship.

I wont deny Mexico is a third world country, but the notion that we are imposing on America seems like a joke.

You dont want illegals? stop hiring them.
You dont want our exports? stop buying made in Mexico.
You dont want our drugs? stop buying them.

The only illegals i feel sorry about are those that left the country as children.

Sorry to hear you feel that way. You are abut as neighborly as Ted Cruz. Sounds like if the situation were reversed, you would be a menstruating terk er jerbs douche.
 
Sorry to hear you feel that way. You are abut as neighborly as Ted Cruz. Sounds like if the situation were reversed, you would be a menstruating terk er jerbs douche.

Nope, because in Mexico we dont blame the poor for what our politicians do to us.
 
Back
Top