Off duty police killed by invader

[minnmirman]

I dont see why that wouldnt be agreeable to everyone. I have no problem with immigration, but I was pretty pissed when my truck was hit by someone who was here illegally and my rates went way up when my company had to pay for it (some time ago). I realize that it seems conceited to worry about my insurance rates when that person would end up being deported, but it's a small example of a big problem.

Maybe Mexico should start doing something that would make their people not want to run north

[xoxoxoBruce]

If you were a Mexican outlaw, and the police were looking for you, where would you go?
That's why we're getting so many criminals sneaking in, along with the people just looking for work. But if you say, it's a bad law so ignore it, that's what happens.

[tw]

Originally Posted by minnmirman

Maybe Mexico should start doing something that would make their people not want to run north

Mexico does not create the problem. Problem is created by the same people who caused the first ever failed international trade conference. The Doha Round completely collapsed. The entire world walked out of Cancun three days early do to two nations who so demonstrated contempt for free trade - United States and France.

US provides corporate welfare to cotton, soybeans, corn, sugar, and a long list of other crops. Newest corporate welfare is ethanol. We charge $0.50 for every gallon of imported ethanol. That is a nation who beleives in free trade?

Most of these crops are better grown in other nations such as Mexico. Ethanol that acutally takes less energy to make is in Brazil. Nations that could actually employ their own citizens if, for example, the US did not subsidize 50% of all sugar.

Why do fruit drinks now have so much sugar and no fruit? Again, with sugar paid for by the US government, why would they want to provide a drink that was healthy? Profits are now so high selling corn syrup as Apple Juice. Governement pays for that corn syrup. Government also makes it difficult for Jose to start a farm growing corn or making corn syrup.

Just one example of why American desperately needs so many illegal immigrants and why Jose cannot start in business in Mexico doing what Mexico could do better.

Meanwhile, this is all too complex for most Americans. Easier is to blame all problems on dirty dumb Mexicans. Just another emotion based in racism and 'knowledge without first learning the facts'.

Doha has failed - directly traceable to anti-free trading nations called United States and France.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by tw

Just one example of why American desperately needs so many illegal immigrants and why Jose cannot start in business in Mexico doing what Mexico could do better.

Why can't Jose start a business, growing whatever, for Mexicans?

Meanwhile, this is all too complex for most Americans. Easier is to blame all problems on dirty dumb Mexicans.

That's not a nice thing to say about them.

Doha has failed - directly traceable to anti-free trading nations called United States and France.

I thought NAFTA was supposed to be the be all/end all, for fixing Mexico's problems.

[tw]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Why can't Jose start a business, growing whatever, for Mexicans?
That's not a nice thing to say about them.I thought NAFTA was supposed to be the be all/end all, for fixing Mexico's problems.

How does Jose grow sugar when American government subsidies for sugar make sugar prices less than what it costs Jose. Even American sugar growers would be bankrupt if trying to sell at those prices without government subsidizes. And that was the entire complaint against both US and France in the Doha round. A complaint so loud that most all countries in the world walked out of Cancun three days early.

NAFTA was supposed to open markets. And then Americans kept putting restrictions on free trade such as requiring goods be transferred to American trucks at the border. And then we restricted all Canadian lumber for years because it was selling at better prices. Well, yes. There are some reasons for anti-NAFTA restrictions. But we have this fact. Mexicans must come here to work for farmers. Those same agricultural products that could just as easily be grown in Mexico. But Mexican farmers cannot compete due to American corporate welfare that makes it impossible for other nations to sell competitively.

What is the price of your orange juice? What was it only two years ago? That gallon of orange juice selling for $6 could have been selling again for only $4 IF we permit Brazil to export their oranges. Where is this free trade? Where would so many immigrants go for jobs? Brazil. More illegal immigration solved by eliminating corporate welfare and other anti-free trade laws - by creating free markets.

[9th Engineer]

So why hasn't the Mexican government put tariffs on American goods to make their own industry more profitable within the domestic market?

[tw]

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

So why hasn't the Mexican government put tariffs on American goods to make their own industry more profitable within the domestic market?

Why would they want to start a trade war? This is working for Mexico. Sending so many workers to work in Mexico or the US - Mexico prospers either way. Why do American farmers not move operation to Mexico where they could grow the same crops with less labor costs? Because they would not get those massive American corporate welfare payments.

The question here is why do so many Mexicans must come to America to work? The problem is so easy to fix. Stop subsidizing an agriculture industry because it has so much Congressional influence (Archer Daniels Midland). Then crops would be grown where crops are best grown and where labor is plentiful and hard working. Anti-free trade by United States and France makes that difficult.

Perchance are you denying massive corporate welfare to big corn, big sugar, big cotton, etc? Do you love it when the American government subsidizes all these industries? Why? Why would you support corporate welfare? Why do you approve of industries that exist and must import 1.8 million illegal immigrants only because of foolish laws?

[9th Engineer]

Obviouisly not. It you think that, then you did not see what is happening.

Nice tactic. Even in 8th grade debate class we understood that "if you don't know the answer then I won't tell you" was bullshit. So everyone walked out of the conference, I don't even need to address that because you haven't used to to say anything directly relevant to Mexico's situation.

You obviously have never taken economics at any reasonable level tw, or you've selectively forgotten rules. "Post hoc, ergo propter hoc", 'after this, therefore because of this'. Econ 101 tw, one of the classic errors in economic reasoning. You rant about American businesses and cite an example of other countries getting angry, yet you never drew a line from that conference directly to the situation in Mexico.

By your logic we should be in total economic collapse due to competition from countries like China that use strict wage control and other tactics that are illegal here to keep their prices below our operating costs.

[9th Engineer]

Perchance are you denying massive corporate welfare to big corn, big sugar, big cotton, etc? Do you love it when the American government subsidizes all these industries? Why? Why would you support corporate welfare? Why do you approve of industries that exist and must import 1.8 million illegal immigrants only because of foolish laws?

Dear god, I can just imagine the spittle on your screen after that little gem.

"Perchance are you denying massive conspiracy to attack America? Do you love it when the Arab nations subsidize all these terrorist training camps? Why? Why would you support people who want to kill Americans? Why do you approve of leaving ourselves vulnerable to future attacks only because of foolish laws?"

I knew I recognized that style of debate from somewhere!

[tw]

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

Nice tactic.

Its not a tactic. Posted are the facts. So why do you see anything but those facts? If you think otherwise, then where are your numbers?

Defined is a condition that other nations have called unfair. They wants their fair share of the pie as promised by free trade. How does the world self destruct only because the US perverts free trade using corporate welfare? The only place that exists is in a fantasy. Nothing posted here even implies that. Where are the millions committing suicide in the streets because America subverts free agricultural trade? These events only occur when you expolate things I never said nor even implied.

Meanwhile I still don't see you admitting or denying a single fundamental fact. Why do you ignore basic fact to try and start a pissing war? So the world did not walk of Cancun three days early because US and France refused to open agriculture to free trade? You are the one challenged to admit or deny that fact. Why so much silence on fundamental facts? Why instead do you now want to start a pissing war.

Or why do you now see a worldwide conspiracy? Explained is why America does not have enough illegal immigrants. Why do you forget the topic? I explained a good reason why we need more illegal immigrants. You will not even discuss Cancun? Why do you completely ignore massive government corporate welfare?

You tell me. Why did the world walk out of Cancun blaming two nations for subverting free trade. Notice my questions stay on topic. Why do so many American businesses need illegal immigrants? If you don't like the reasons why, then pray tell us.

[yesman065]

Originally Posted by tw

Meanwhile, this is all too complex for most Americans. Easier is to blame all problems on dirty dumb Mexicans. Just another emotion based in racism and 'knowledge without first learning the facts'.

Easier for you to blame the US - that seems to be your solution to everything. Lets stop all subsidies then - is that your solution?? We can then offer the money to mexico while our own farmers become unprofitable. Perhaps what you are saying is beyond me or just not entirely correct - I don't know which. This is dangerous, but here goes, care to elaborate?
BTW You didn't use "mental midget" nor "traceable to top management" once - I'm proud of ya.