• 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

DaveFagan said:
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?
/
Click to expand...

The Wall is pretty big business also.
 
WCH said:
Thus, the Wall.[along with highly increased internal security measures.]
Click to expand...

LOL since most of the drugs comes from tunnels and shipping containers at the ports, the wall will hardly slow it down.
 
joG said:
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.
Click to expand...

Britain will very likely lose some of the banking jobs that are currently servicing Europe. That alone with no other tariffs will hurt the UK economy
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
Britain will very likely lose some of the banking jobs that are currently servicing Europe. That alone with no other tariffs will hurt the UK economy
Click to expand...

It is quite probable that some jobs will move or try to. This is much more difficult to do, than is widely believed, however. The attempts I have seen of moving business to Frankfurt or Paris were usually unsuccessful and sometimes disastrously so. And to tell you the truth, doing business with the US or Singapore from Düsseldorf or Paris is timeshift aside not much more difficult than doing it with London in my experience. In many ways it was easier doing business with New York from Düsseldorf than with Frankfurt.
But we shall see.
 
joG said:
It is quite probable that some jobs will move or try to. This is much more difficult to do, than is widely believed, however. The attempts I have seen of moving business to Frankfurt or Paris were usually unsuccessful and sometimes disastrously so. And to tell you the truth, doing business with the US or Singapore from Düsseldorf or Paris is timeshift aside not much more difficult than doing it with London in my experience. In many ways it was easier doing business with New York from Düsseldorf than with Frankfurt.
But we shall see.
Click to expand...

London won't lose the international banking but localized service that is restricted to Eu banks that of course the UK will not be a part of. I could see a drop of 10-15% in employment in that sector
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
London won't lose the international banking but localized service that is restricted to Eu banks that of course the UK will not be a part of. I could see a drop of 10-15% in employment in that sector
Click to expand...

What business are you referring to? I am not sure, which you mean. London was never in the Euro, after all.
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
https://www.theguardian.com/busines...sets-out-of-uk-by-2017-if-eu-passport-is-lost

It is in the link
Click to expand...

Yes. I had looked at the Passport question to a limited extent. And it is true that the EU members would like to get the financial services industry profits. And since they could not do the business competently, they love the idea of getting it by decree. That would damage European banking badly, but the Euro shows quite clearly yhat the EU political elite is willing to do damage for ideological reasons. And as they want to do the UK damage in an attempt to stabilise the failing political structure, it is quite believable that they would refuse Passport rights. How much damage that would do depends on many things like which business is affected that the Guardian does not report.
 
joG said:
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.
Click to expand...

If I could predict interest-rates, I'd be a multi-billionaire.

We shall see. Time will tell.

It always does (and often worse than we might like) ...
 
BANANA REPUBLIC

WCH said:
Thus, the Wall.[along with highly increased internal security measures.]
Click to expand...

From the Economist: Man and machine Kicking out immigrants doesn’t raise wages

Excerpt:
MEXICAN immigrants were said to be holding down wages and taking jobs that could go to honest Americans. The poorest natives were supposed to be suffering most grievously. "We cannot afford to disregard it," intoned the president. "We do not condone it." The immigrants were soon sent home and not allowed to return.

All that happened in the early 1960s. The president was John F. Kennedy; the Mexicans were participating in the bracero programme, which allowed almost half a million people a year to take seasonal work on America's farms. But the parallels with the present are plain. Donald Trump has also complained that immigrants are keeping Americans from good jobs and has promised to do something about it …

Michael Clemens and Hannah Postel of the Centre for Global Development, and Ethan Lewis of Dartmouth College, have used archived records of American agricultural jobs and wages to test whether Kennedy was right. Did ending the bracero scheme in 1964 in fact lead to higher wages and more work for Americans in the fields?

The answer is a firm no.
Click to expand...

I think I have the right to say, "Been there, done that ..." Got it wrong then, will get it wrong again. Meanwhile, the cost will be $20B in taxpayer dollars - just because Donald Dork promised "the Wall".

America today is a country going in circles - because of its attitude towards "things past", that is "history". In America, history is yesterday and ancient history was last week. Any events beyond that are lost in the mist of time.

We are paying the price of our fixation on the future and lack of consideration of the past. Except of course, when a PotUS candidate loses the Popular Vote then becomes presidential by means of a dysfunctional Electoral College, of which we should be rid.

Lemme see, what did we once call this when considering some Central American countries?

What were those two words so commonly applied?

Ah, yes - "Banana Republic" ...
 
Last edited:
Lafayette said:
If I could predict interest-rates, I'd be a multi-billionaire.

We shall see. Time will tell.

It always does (and often worse than we might like) ...
Click to expand...

Actually, interest rates at the short end are not at all market driven except in very stressed situations. Since central banks have adopted quantitativ easing and similar instruments the long end is mostly determined by central banks. So it might be true that you or I cannot predict rates. We can say that they are predictable by those that determine them.

But that was not the question at all. The point was that having sovereignty of one's short interest rates and currency is an economic flexibility that the Euroland countries have foregone and that it is that mechanism that means quick adjustment of a country's economy to external shocks is possible. UK has and Eurolanders do not have this possibility. How bad the difference is can be, is visible in the hard time places like Italy are having adjusting to the financial shocks in 2008. Before entering Euroland the process was relatively quick and after a short time the economy was running well again. Now FX no longer adjusts to the poor economy and business does not pick up. Brexit will be just such an external shock economically speaking.

That is the basic framework. How things will play out, we will have to watch.
 
joG said:
Actually, interest rates at the short end are not at all market driven except in very stressed situations. Since central banks have adopted quantitativ easing and similar instruments the long end is mostly determined by central banks. .
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but QE is a recent advent to the Central Bankers' "bag of tricks" and was initiated by the US subsequent to the Great Recession and the almost demise of the entire Wall Street banking system. Moreover, it has proven to be not all-that-effective in both the US and subsequently the EU.

Because it just releases bank funds (from legal reserves) to an "on offer" status. However, in a deep economic crisis as occurred Market Demand nosedives; consumers "hunker-down", and they do not borrow-to-spend (off credit-cards) regardless of the interest rate. Why?

Because they fear for their jobs and personal bankruptcy.

That all changed two years ago, when, finally, the "need to spend" slowly rose from the depths to occupy American mentalities and they got back to their normal "shop-till-you-drop" mode.

And it did not take any miracle from a Donald Dork to "make America Right" ...
 
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...

And how exactly am I robbing and murdering you by smoking a plant in my own home? By your logic, we should ban all guns, because some people use them for violence therefore no one should be allowed to have them and anyone caught with a gun should be thrown in prison, right? Why don't you give freedom and personal responsibility a try instead of trying to use the government as a weapon to enforce your beliefs?
 
RabidAlpaca said:
And how exactly am I robbing and murdering you by smoking a plant in my own home? By your logic, we should ban all guns, because some people use them for violence therefore no one should be allowed to have them and anyone caught with a gun should be thrown in prison, right? Why don't you give freedom and personal responsibility a try instead of trying to use the government as a weapon to enforce your beliefs?
Click to expand...

You do realize that we tried that and it became such an epidemic that we were forced to make laws against it. Why dont look look at history instead on making the same mistakes over and over again?
 
PoS said:
LOL since most of the drugs comes from tunnels and shipping containers at the ports, the wall will hardly slow it down.
Click to expand...

All goes back to Mexico and other narco-governments not doing their part.
 
Crovax said:
You do realize that we tried that and it became such an epidemic that we were forced to make laws against it. Why dont look look at history instead on making the same mistakes over and over again?
Click to expand...

By that logic again, we've tried letting people have guns and there's a murder epidemic. We must ban everyone's freedom for the actions of the few bad actors, right? Can you please explain how I rob and murder you by smoking a plant at my house? Be specific as to why your fears overrule my freedom.
 
Mexico needs to be punished for actually telling their citizens how to break our laws. Frankly, such bull**** is damn close to an act of war in my mind. Heck, I might even go so far as to say it IS an act of war. Though I'm not quite sure about that.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
By that logic again, we've tried letting people have guns and there's a murder epidemic. We must ban everyone's freedom for the actions of the few bad actors, right? Can you please explain how I rob and murder you by smoking a plant at my house? Be specific as to why your fears overrule my freedom.
Click to expand...
Are you blaming a murder epidemic on guns?
 
Koke said:
Are you blaming a murder epidemic on guns?
Click to expand...

I'm pointing out that by the exact same logic of the drug war we should ban all guns because some people misuse them. Crovax says we must lock all drug users in cages just in case they rob and murder. We must limit everyone's freedom based on the actions of a few.

Do you agree with him? Or do you agree with me, that we should hold individuals responsible for their own actions and not throw peaceful gun owners nor peaceful drug users in a cage.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
I'm pointing out that by the exact same logic of the drug war we should ban all guns because some people misuse them. Crovax says we must lock all drug users in cages just in case they rob and murder. We must limit everyone's freedom based on the actions of a few.

Do you agree with him? Or do you agree with me, that we should hold individuals responsible for their own actions and not throw peaceful gun owners nor peaceful drug users in a cage.
Click to expand...

I don't think the comparison is really equal because guns and drugs are very different.

That being said -- the drug war by and large is stupid.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
I'm pointing out that by the exact same logic of the drug war we should ban all guns because some people misuse them. Crovax says we must lock all drug users in cages just in case they rob and murder. We must limit everyone's freedom based on the actions of a few.

Do you agree with him? Or do you agree with me, that we should hold individuals responsible for their own actions and not throw peaceful gun owners nor peaceful drug users in a cage.
Click to expand...

I do not agree with jailing users as a solution.. I'd rather we go nuclear [so to speak] on the cartels and the countries who coddle them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom