Investors Bolt Mexico as Peso Enters Free Fall

[jackofwind]

The solution is to strengthen the border and ramp up deportation to much higher rates.

Which will kill the US agricultural sector and fuck over the whole country.

Solid plan, Cotton.

[Deleted]

What could happen is Trump could strong-arm a better trade deal and fulfill one of his promises from his campaign, the wall problem can be saved for later.

[Deleted]

Trump, just put them in the dirt!

Trump provide the irrigation too, courtesy of very friendly russian ladies desperate to use the loo...

[Deleted]

More people also means more opinions. More opinions means more division. More division means less progress. Less progress means more poverty.

It's like group projects. When it is just two people, you can work on a compromise. When you add another 10, that compromise becomes much more difficult to achieve. Add even more people, and you may find the group will split into opinion segments. Now you have people opposing each other, which will drive emotions between them.

Also the expression, "Too many cooks spoil the broth"
(something that you say which means that if too many people try to work on the same piece of work, they will spoil it)

Not to mention more people sharing a finite amount of dwindling resources leading to several key problems for nations and individuals alike.

[Fugus]

Law 1 would destroy many small businesses in a hurry as well as American households. How many capable replacement managers are there? Currently, welfare recipients aren't picking oranges in the heat or scrubbing toilets for minimum wage and that isn't going to start. Household earners can't support families from prison and small businesses will have everything hurt the bottom line, especially fines.

How do you show legitimacy without showing papers for law 2?

Law 1:

Any company caught knowingly hiring or attempting to remain willfully ignorant of hiring an illegal immigrant will have its management imprisoned in no less than a medium security prison for 1 year and pay no less than a $5,000 dollar fine per illegal employed. This is repeated all the way up the chain of administration for each who knew or attempted to make sure they didn't know with each paying the full amount and doing the full time, this can go all the way to the CEO and the board if they were complacent in it. If they are not paying at least the prevailing wages for these jobs, the fines jumps to 5 years and $25,000 per illegal employed. Any fines that could not be paid out of the guilty parties expenses will be taken from shareholder dividends.

This makes sure the ones responsible for hiring them get the punishment and it doesn't directly hurt the companies bottom line so they can't use it as an excuse to raise their prices.

Would not destroy any small businesses except for the ones trying to hire illegals for exploitation and technically would not directly hurt the businesses directly as it would not be punishing the business itself, it would be punishing the wallets of those hiring them within the business and the shareholders as to avoid hitting the companies profit margins at all.

Question, would you feel the same way about the company being destroyed if it was supported with drug money or prostitution instead? Because they are still using something illegal to prop up what should be a legal establishment.

And actually welfare recipients ARE working many times and the wages are so low that they still qualify for welfare while working. And if the place can't get legal workers to do the job for the wage they are offering, logic dictates they are offering drastically less than the job is actually worth.

And as for Laws 2

Any illegal who turns himself in along with the company hiring him with proof, instead of being deported shall be given 1 year free room and board and shall be put on the fast track for US citizenship with all expenses paid, he will still have to do the paperwork though and qualify. During this time, he will be issued a temp visa and allowed to job hunt and hold a normal job and to save his money. After that year, if he has his citizenship, he now can move out as a lawabiding citizen with the money he saved while working over that year to buy a home of his own. He also does not have to put this on any paperwork while looking for a job so they can not discriminate on him based on this to avoid job retribution from employers over this.

I would justify it by stating that that illegal performed a public service to the US and it's people turning in an employer attempting to exploit them and should be rewarded for their actions.

And by putting what is in the best interests of each a group against each other, actually helps to kill demand for illegal labor which kills the reason for them to come here to begin with.

[Deleted]

Will be funny to see if mexico gets in trouble and then the effect ripples back to the USA.

Doesn't he know that Mexico is a very important trading partner, and making them poorer, makes the USA poorer, and what happens then is that Mexico can't buy the majority of products anymore and the USA will have more supply than demand, meaning their products will fall in prices too, and then eventually Americans will lose their jobs. It's always been like that, Trade wars in general are futile, and will do more good than harm.

Why you think all countries are pushing so hard for trade agreements? Because it completely eliminates the instability problem all together.

[dextersmith]

Law 1:



Would not destroy any small businesses except for the ones trying to hire illegals for exploitation and technically would not directly hurt the businesses directly as it would not be punishing the business itself, it would be punishing the wallets of those hiring them within the business and the shareholders as to avoid hitting the companies profit margins at all.

Question, would you feel the same way about the company being destroyed if it was supported with drug money or prostitution instead? Because they are still using something illegal to prop up what should be a legal establishment.

And actually welfare recipients ARE working many times and the wages are so low that they still qualify for welfare while working. And if the place can't get legal workers to do the job for the wage they are offering, logic dictates they are offering drastically less than the job is actually worth.

Some of those jobs are really shitty and those wages would have to be raised by a good amount for Americans to do them, and that would increase prices for consumers unless things can be automated.

And as for Laws 2



I would justify it by stating that that illegal performed a public service to the US and it's people turning in an employer attempting to exploit them and should be rewarded for their actions.

And by putting what is in the best interests of each a group against each other, actually helps to kill demand for illegal labor which kills the reason for them to come here to begin with.

That didn't answer my question.

[Adolecent]

No the more is not merrier. The planet is already overpopulated.

Just out of curiosity, how do you want to tackle that problem?

[dextersmith]

Is that all we are competing against, slaves?

Does that mean the solution is to close off borders, refuse to purchase foreign products, and significantly increase the minimum wage?

Are we going to get a Mexican history month too?

[Machismo]

Are we going to get a Mexican history month too?

That sounds like even more unnecessary government intervention.

By the way, we have one, already.

[Jinxz]

This is surely not gonna backfire on trump. Nope, there is no way it will backfire.

[Zarc]

They made it pretty clear they will never pay for the wall. That doesn't mean they are not open to negotiating security, trade and migration. It just means they will never pay for the wall. Trump will probobly end up putting a tariff up and claim that Mexico is paying for the wall by way of that tariff. Which isn't true, as businesses will be the ones paying for the wall in that case. Mexico will also remain a potent force in the globalized trade flow, and will seek to diversify their free trade arrangements which is already the most diverse of any country, which also means they have among the most experienced free trade negotiators in the world. They have for example reached out to the European Union to improve the already existing free trade agreement between Mexico and the European Union. Guess the lower peso will help Mexican exports, increasing Mexico's attractiveness as a global auto-maker even more. Though it will be bad for Mexican workers as it reduces their purchasing power as imported goods becomes more expensive. But I think Trump will motivate them to pull through that, and direct the blame to him.

[Berengil]

Just out of curiosity, how do you want to tackle that problem?

IDK about our buddy Primary, but as for me:

My dream plan

1)2 child policy worldwide ( enforced evenly across all ethnicities/religions/etc)

2)contraceptives free and available to anyone 16 and older who requests them from any government health facility

3)confiscation of all assets (down to the poverty line) of anyone who violates this policy, and the children are removed from the home and given to childless couples who want children

4)abortion 100% legal ( and free) for any and all reasons through week 16 of pregnancy, legal thereafter for rape/incest/danger to the mother/ severe physical deformity or inherited disease

5)tax breaks on housing & education for those who freely choose to have 1 or no children


The more realistic plan

2,4, and 5 from above

[dextersmith]

Mexico will just be the first target that will suffer greatly from Trumps bulldozer-politics.

He wont stop there.

With china, on the other hand, he has a target he will not be able to beat.

Canada will be next.

[Berengil]

They made it pretty clear they will never pay for the wall. That doesn't mean they are not open to negotiating security, trade and migration. It just means they will never pay for the wall. Trump will probobly end up putting a tariff up and claim that Mexico is paying for the wall by way of that tariff. Which isn't true, as businesses will be the ones paying for the wall in that case. Mexico will also remain a potent force in the globalized trade flow, and will seek to diversify their free trade arrangements which is already the most diverse of any country, which also means they have among the most experienced free trade negotiators in the world. They have for example reached out to the European Union to improve the already existing free trade agreement between Mexico and the European Union. Guess the lower peso will help Mexican exports, increasing Mexico's attractiveness as a global auto-maker even more. Though it will be bad for Mexican workers as it reduces their purchasing power as imported goods becomes more expensive. But I think Trump will motivate them to pull through that, and direct the blame to him.

He's talked about passing a law that would heavily tax remittances from people in the US to Mexico. So, money that would have been in the Mexican economy would stay in the US.

And let me say it again, because it doesn't get said enough: Free trade is a crap deal for workers in developed first world economies. It amounts to economic treason from their representatives.

[dextersmith]

That sounds like even more unnecessary government intervention.

By the way, we have one, already.

We don't have it in Canada.

[Berengil]

This is unjustifiably harsh and intrusive.

I disagree, of course. Having children is getting to the point where it's not just a " this affects only me, leave me alone, freedom RABBLERABBLERABBLE" decision anymore.

Eventually, no matter how many technological tricks we come up with, you simply can't squeeze anymore resources/living space out of this world. Malthus was right, but his timing was a bit off.

[Berengil]

This is unjustifiably harsh and intrusive.

Additional context that makes it even funnier:

There's nothing inconsistent about those two statements.

Freedom ends when one's exercise of it begins to negatively affect one's community. It's not a black or white issue.

- - - Updated - - -

We're really not even close to carrying capacity.

Why try to cut it close? What purpose does playing chicken with the planet serve?

[Rasulis]

china is salivating with trump's policies, its like they can now overtake large parts of the world as the trade titan that they always wanted to be

- - - Updated - - -



not only that, but the mexicans are one of the countries with more workhours per week in the western world (if not the most) with an average of 56-60 hours/week

Wanted to be?

Look at the list of top 30 ports in the world. China has 11 in top 30, 7 in the top 10, including nos. 1, 3, 4 and 5. Shanghai container traffic alone is double that of LA, Long Beach, NY and NJ combined. Many of their ports are expanding.

China’s companies has concession rights at major ports all over the world (London, Helsinki, Haifa, Qatar, Dubai, Malaysia, etc.).

Look up “One Belt and One Road”. That will give you an idea what China’s ultimate goal is.

This is an interesting reading.

http://theconversation.com/chinas-ne...nfluence-70862

The way it looks right now, China is planning to extend this to Latin America with the construction of an transcontinental railroad from Brazil to Peru.

[moremana]

I did not say it is currently great in Mexico. What I read on wages and expenses in Mexico is different from what you note there, but it is not really important to my point. We all know that the Mexican economy had been terrible for a long time and that economic reasons are what leads many to try to migrate to the US - even illegally, if necessary.
However, things have improved steadily over the past years, which also caused migration to decline. I am looking at a development, you look at a fixed point in time. Mexico can't just magick up a great economy, but it has been improving. That is a more worthwhile endeavor than building a wall from the Mexican side or whatever, which was what I was talking about.

It is funny that you compared Mexico to Canada in that regard. You say that Canada is better in controlling illegal immigration to the US, but that does not necessarily have to be because they do much more at the border. It is just that there aren't that many. In terms of actual numbers, they are below illegal immigrants from China and Korea and most of them simply overstay their visas.
That is weird, isn't it, given that the US shares a much wider border with Canada than Mexico? Well, it might just be that Canada is much better off than Mexico, economically speaking. If Mexico was at the same level as Canada, we would see a lot less immigration from there, too. That is why improving conditions in Mexico would be a better solution than, say, making them much worse and laughing at them.

You missed the whole point of my comment. I see your point, but it is not the US's job to fund the Mexican economy. The US companies only build and employ there for the cheap employees, those companies are the problem then is what your saying? .... or its the govenment thats the problem? ....

if so, then you have only reiterated my point.