• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trumped Trade with Mexico

Lafayette

Lafayette

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
9,594
Reaction score
2,072
Location
France
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
From the Economist: Playing Chicken

Excerpt:
MEXICO sells America more goods than America sells Mexico, and it enrages President Donald Trump. In 2015 the difference was $58 billion (0.3% of GDP). That is enough, thinks Mr Trump, to justify rewriting the North American Free-Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which allows goods to flow across the Rio Grande free of tariffs. Yet the trade deficit masks bigger figures: America sends almost $240bn in goods to Mexico every year. Were NAFTA to disappear in a renegotiation-gone-wrong, many Americans would pay a price—and not just as consumers faced with dearer avocados. Which American producers would suffer?

Suppose, optimistically, that each side followed World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules. Then, tariffs would revert to so-called “most favoured nation” rates. (That might sound vaguely friendly, but it simply means neither side can offer a different deal from what it gives to any other WTO member.) By matching these tariffs to trade flows for about 5,000 goods, The Economist has estimated which states’ exporters would be worst-affected by the levies.

Little wonder that the farm lobby tends vocally to support free trade. Yet farm states are lucky to have plenty of customers elsewhere. Idaho’s exports to Mexico are worth less than half a percent of its GDP. Other state economies are more tangled up with Mexico’s. These places should worry about NAFTA’s fate despite facing low average tariffs (see chart).
Click to expand...

Chart linked here.

Once again, Donald Dork opens his fat mouth and puts his foot into it.

Who in the US would be affected most? Also excerpted from the article:
Among this group, Texas stands out. It faces an average tariff of only 3%, but its exports to Mexico are worth nearly 6% of its GDP (compared with 1.3% nationally). As in Iowa, farmers would suffer. Texan cuts of Gallus domesticus—otherwise known as chicken—would incur the largest tariff bill, $174m, of any single product category in the country. In total, as a percentage of GDP, Texas would pay more than any other state. Michigan also fits this category. Its exports of cars and parts—many of which end up back in America—would attract tariffs averaging only about 5%. But with such shipments totalling $4.1bn, the bill would be painfully large.
Click to expand...

Trade is a two-way street, always has been and always will be. If a country indulges in "beggar-thy-neighbor" tactics, it will find itself also the victim ...
 
If Mexico did something about the cartels [drugs and human trafficking] illegal aliens and the price of tequila, perhaps some of the trade issues could be overlooked.
 
Lafayette said:
From the Economist: Playing Chicken

Excerpt:

Chart linked here.

Once again, Donald Dork opens his fat mouth and puts his foot into it.

Who in the US would be affected most? Also excerpted from the article:


Trade is a two-way street, always has been and always will be. If a country indulges in "beggar-thy-neighbor" tactics, it will find itself also the victim ...
Click to expand...

Currently, the cost of housing illegal citizens from Mexico exceeds $100 billion per year, most of this amount is born by States like Texas and California. Further, the total amount of remittances being pulled out of the US economy and sent to Mexico averages another $25 billion per year.

Reigning in this runaway cost, thus saving States billions, would make the hypotheticals The Economist created rather meaningless.
 
Lafayette said:
From the Economist: Playing Chicken

Excerpt:

Chart linked here.

Once again, Donald Dork opens his fat mouth and puts his foot into it.

Who in the US would be affected most? Also excerpted from the article:


Trade is a two-way street, always has been and always will be. If a country indulges in "beggar-thy-neighbor" tactics, it will find itself also the victim ...
Click to expand...

The United States represents the largest market in the world. The American consumers' value to Mexico is unparalleled anywhere in the world. Let them sell their **** to India if we're giving them too hard a time. Or maybe France will buy their crap after they pay tens of millions to get it there. We aren't beholding to Mexico in any way, shape or form.
 
WCH said:
If Mexico did something about the cartels [drugs and human trafficking] illegal aliens and the price of tequila, perhaps some of the trade issues could be overlooked.
Click to expand...

Well the American public finances the cartels, so I doubt the Mexican gubmint can do anything about that.
 
PoS said:
Well the American public finances the cartels, so I doubt the Mexican gubmint can do anything about that.
Click to expand...

The government could kill pretty much all funding to the cartels tomorrow by simply legalizing drugs and letting Americans control their own bodies. Unfortunately Republicans hate freedom and personal responsibility.
 
Lafayette said:
From the Economist: Playing Chicken

Excerpt:

Chart linked here.

Once again, Donald Dork opens his fat mouth and puts his foot into it.

Who in the US would be affected most? Also excerpted from the article:


Trade is a two-way street, always has been and always will be. If a country indulges in "beggar-thy-neighbor" tactics, it will find itself also the victim ...
Click to expand...

It's like with Brexit. If the Eu put trade barriers in place it will harm not only the English.
 
MaggieD said:
The United States represents the largest market in the world. The American consumers' value to Mexico is unparalleled anywhere in the world. Let them sell their **** to India if we're giving them too hard a time. Or maybe France will buy their crap after they pay tens of millions to get it there. We aren't beholding to Mexico in any way, shape or form.
Click to expand...

I suppose it is easy for a person from IL to overlook that Mexico is their second largest international trading partner, representing $7.3B (2013), more that 10% of IL exports. For AZ, exports to Mexico represents 30% of all exports...but just as important is the amount of shopping Mexicans do in AZ, $2.5B (2014) supporting 30K jobs in AZ, primarily in Southern AZ and Tucson. We are already seeing a decline outside of the change in the Peso.

https://www.siue.edu/business/itc/pdf/mexicobusinessstrengthinnumbers

https://azmex.eller.arizona.edu/news-article/27jan2017/new-data-visitor-travel-arizona
https://azmex.eller.arizona.edu/az-trade/exports-mexico
https://twitter.com/Eller_AZMEX/status/829483704586104832/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
 
Last edited:
MaggieD said:
The United States represents the largest market in the world. The American consumers' value to Mexico is unparalleled anywhere in the world. Let them sell their **** to India if we're giving them too hard a time. Or maybe France will buy their crap after they pay tens of millions to get it there. We aren't beholding to Mexico in any way, shape or form.
Click to expand...

Oh. There is no doubt that free trade lifts general welfare in all participating societies. But it is not trivial for a society to adjust internally to be able to utilize the improvement smoothly. Here the challenge is that labor is quite inexpensive and exerts competitive pressure on American labor. In Europe it is more a combination of non tariff barriers and their currency gone bad. In the case of Mexico it is not sensibly for them to do anything. It is us that are falling down. The Eu is quite another matter. It makes sense to force the issue with them.
 
I think Trump is engaging in the same tactics he used in the Business World. He is threatening and suggesting other Nations give us something as a show of good faith so he doesn't file metaphorical bankruptcy and kill the golden egg laying goose. It's an interesting tactic and works against the banks and other litigation sensitive Corporations. Whether or not it works between Nations is yet to be seen.
/
 
RabidAlpaca said:
The government could kill pretty much all funding to the cartels tomorrow by simply legalizing drugs and letting Americans control their own bodies. Unfortunately Republicans hate freedom and personal responsibility.
Click to expand...

Republican really hate getting robbed and murdered by drugs addicts and then having to use thier tax dollars to pay for all the medical side effects of drugs.
 
DaveFagan said:
I think Trump is engaging in the same tactics he used in the Business World. He is threatening and suggesting other Nations give us something as a show of good faith so he doesn't file metaphorical bankruptcy and kill the golden egg laying goose. It's an interesting tactic and works against the banks and other litigation sensitive Corporations. Whether or not it works between Nations is yet to be seen.
/
Click to expand...

If it works as good as it did when Trump made: Trump steaks, Trump vodka, Trump air, Trump magazines, Trump the game, Trump casinos and the USFL... then we should be just fine.
 
Lafayette said:
From the Economist: Playing Chicken

Excerpt:

Chart linked here.

Once again, Donald Dork opens his fat mouth and puts his foot into it.

Who in the US would be affected most? Also excerpted from the article:


Trade is a two-way street, always has been and always will be. If a country indulges in "beggar-thy-neighbor" tactics, it will find itself also the victim ...
Click to expand...

why dont we trade them 11 million illegals for a stick of butter
 
PoS said:
Well the American public finances the cartels, so I doubt the Mexican gubmint can do anything about that.
Click to expand...

So we should accept that Mexico and other countries are narco governed? Shipping their poisons here and beyond.
 
11Bravo said:
why dont we trade them 11 million illegals for a stick of butter
Click to expand...

Because I wouldn't even trade YOU for a stick of butter.

More likely half a stick should do nicely ...
 
WCH said:
So we should accept that Mexico and other countries are narco governed? Shipping their poisons here and beyond.
Click to expand...

No. Our CIA agent, Noriega in Panama, was also a big drug dealer to the CIA through the Medellin cartel to get Nicaraguan Contra cocaine to Mena, Arkansas CIA training base and illegal arms shipment in return to the Contras. The CIA also got cocaine from the nascent Mexican cartel of "El Chapo" Guzman, the Sinaloa cartel. Several large US Banks have been found guilty of laundering billions of dollars of drug money. The CIA in Afghanistan is in charge of Opium poppy irradication in that Nation. They've done one hell of a job. Opium production in Afghanistan in 2002 was 290 tons. Last year was 15,000 tons. Only 50 times more opium. It must be really difficult to track 15,000 tons of opium into the World market or we are being scammed. Decide for yourself. Then there's Drug Wars. Good money for Corporate MIC in USA as long as we don't win these type wars. Gary Webb, deceased, revealed the CIA drug dealing in the late 1980s and only after he committed suicide, shot himself twice in the head, was the truth of his reporting acknowledged. Wars are big business. Terror war is big business, Hot war is big business. Immigrant war is big business. Drug war is big business. Is there a common theme here?
/
 
WCH said:
So we should accept that Mexico and other countries are narco governed? Shipping their poisons here and beyond.
Click to expand...

They're doing all they can to fight it, but if we keep handing the cartels billions, they cant do much about it. Whoever's got more money wins, you know.
 
joG said:
It's like with Brexit. If the Eu put trade barriers in place it will harm not only the English.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but it will harm MOSTLY the British. (I have Brit-friends who work for Airbus and they really do not know what will become of them here in France. And it is not just having to show their passport when taking the ferry to Dover.)

The French are particularly upset with the Hard Brexit that May has planned. She's going to get a lot of grief from the EU.

And, likely, her constituency. Many figure she'll lose the next election. And leave the doing to a Labor gummint that wanted to sink Brexit.

Fitting justice, I say. British Labor is at present a sack-of-fools. Might wake 'em up?

NB: Five London banks are looking for offices in either Paris or Amsterdam ...
 
Crovax said:
Republican really hate getting robbed and murdered by drugs addicts and then having to use thier tax dollars to pay for all the medical side effects of drugs.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Conservatives are afraid of caricatures and boogeymen that have only a tangential relationship with realty. Republicans do fear, not nuance.
 
MaggieD said:
The United States represents the largest market in the world.
Click to expand...

Not really. Neither in GDP nor population. But in GDP per capita, yes. And, frankly, that is the key statistic.

But, that's today and not tomorrow. The US, if it continues with Donald Dork down this road, will spend not only 4 years with him but another two presidencies correcting his mistakes.

That's 12 longgggg years ...

MaggieD said:
The American consumers' value to Mexico is unparalleled anywhere in the world.
Click to expand...

Unparalleled in North America, yes - but "in the world"?

You are exaggerating, methinks.

The inter-EU trade is more than 7 times that of inter-NAFTA countries (in dollars). Let's compare what is comparable - trade between national trade entities combined, one in North America the other in Europe.
 
ocean515 said:
Currently, the cost of housing illegal citizens from Mexico exceeds $100 billion per year, most of this amount is born by States like Texas and California. Further, the total amount of remittances being pulled out of the US economy and sent to Mexico averages another $25 billion per year.

Reigning in this runaway cost, thus saving States billions, would make the hypotheticals The Economist created rather meaningless.
Click to expand...

Yes, well the fence is predicted to cost $20B. So, just ask Mexico to build it!

We'll see how far you get with that one.

The illegals are just one aspect of the commonalities between the three NAFTA countries (Canada, Mexico and the US).

And it's really funny how most Replicants don't say a damn thing about all the illegal Canadians working in the US! For your edification: Canadian Immigrants Lead World In Illegal U.S. Visa Overstays, According To First-Ever DHS Estimates

And whilst we are indulging in some "Much ado about nothing", let's note that of the total 10.9 million illegals in the US (a whopping 3.4% of the total number of American citizens!!!), the 92K Canadians are a minor fraction, and the Central Americans the much larger portion ...

NB: Oh, and also this: "According to the last Mexican census (2010), more than 738,000 people born in the United States now live in Mexico." From here.
 
Lafayette said:
Yes, well the fence is predicted to cost $20B. So, just ask Mexico to build it!

We'll see how far you get with that one.

The illegals are just one aspect of the commonalities between the three NAFTA countries (Canada, Mexico and the US).

And it's really funny how most Replicants don't say a damn thing about all the illegal Canadians working in the US! For your edification: Canadian Immigrants Lead World In Illegal U.S. Visa Overstays, According To First-Ever DHS Estimates

And whilst we are indulging in some "Much ado about nothing", let's note that of the total 10.9 million illegals in the US (a whopping 3.4% of the total number of American citizens!!!), the 92K Canadians are a minor fraction, and the Central Americans the much larger portion ...

NB: Oh, and also this: "According to the last Mexican census (2010), more than 738,000 people born in the United States now live in Mexico." From here.
Click to expand...

It's unfortunate you tripped so loudly while dodging the issue.

Leaves your pivot in a very lonely place.
 
Lafayette said:
Agreed, but it will harm MOSTLY the British. (I have Brit-friends who work for Airbus and they really do not know what will become of them here in France. And it is not just having to show their passport when taking the ferry to Dover.)

The French are particularly upset with the Hard Brexit that May has planned. She's going to get a lot of grief from the EU.

And, likely, her constituency. Many figure she'll lose the next election. And leave the doing to a Labor gummint that wanted to sink Brexit.

Fitting justice, I say. British Labor is at present a sack-of-fools. Might wake 'em up?

NB: Five London banks are looking for offices in either Paris or Amsterdam ...
Click to expand...

Then let's hope that the populations of the Eu don't understand why a new misery comes down on them. Even they might loose their cool at that. The U.K. is a major recipient of German or Portugiese goods. If those fall off badly both would go into recession and it would be difficult to get out without a major fall in currency rates for the Euro. Rates and monetary policy are already stretched to the limits and the US might be less good natured than Europeans are used to Americans being since 1945. And let's hope the Brits are ready with new trade contacts. But they can handle it more easily having their own interest rate and currency.
 
PoS said:
They're doing all they can to fight it, but if we keep handing the cartels billions, they cant do much about it. Whoever's got more money wins, you know.
Click to expand...

Thus, the Wall.[along with highly increased internal security measures.]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom