Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-07-2017, 02:25 PM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 18,612
DACA if Mexico pays for the wall.

I must have heard just about every Democrat asking for a "clean" dreamers bill. is there ANY chance that a dreamers bill won't come with a bunch of shit added to it?

If I were Trump, I would put together bill that gives permanent residency to dreamers and taxes Mexican imports to pay for the border wall. And that's how you get Mexico to pay for the border wall.

Would Democrats really vote against a Dreamers bill because there was a tariff that would pay for the wall attached to it?
Advertisements  
  #2  
Old 09-07-2017, 02:27 PM
silenus silenus is offline
Shoehorn butterhorse
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 48,143
In a heartbeat. They won't (I hope) fall for something as stupid as that.
__________________
I coulda used more cowbell.
  #3  
Old 09-07-2017, 02:29 PM
leftfield6 leftfield6 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Atlanta Metro
Posts: 2,930
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
I must have heard just about every Democrat asking for a "clean" dreamers bill. is there ANY chance that a dreamers bill won't come with a bunch of shit added to it?

If I were Trump, I would put together bill that gives permanent residency to dreamers and taxes Mexican imports to pay for the border wall. And that's how you get Mexico to pay for the border wall.

Would Democrats really vote against a Dreamers bill because there was a tariff that would pay for the wall attached to it?
So, in other words, the American taxpayers still pay for his fucking wall? Cause that's what a tariff on Mexican goods would do.

Why is that so hard to understand? Do you know how tariffs work?

Fuck Trump and his wall.
  #4  
Old 09-07-2017, 03:34 PM
Ravenman Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 21,331
Absolutely zero chance that the Dems would vote for such a bill. It's not only a bad idea, it's a terrible deal. Why trade something that has pretty substantial bipartisan support and strong popular support (Dreamers) for something that is divisive and a political loser (having Americans pay for the wall with higher taxes on tequilla and cars)?
  #5  
Old 09-07-2017, 03:38 PM
TimeWinder TimeWinder is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Albany/Corvallis, OR
Posts: 4,113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
...taxes Mexican imports to pay for the border wall. And that's how you get Mexico to pay for the border wall.
You apparently have a wildly inaccurate idea of who pays import taxes.
  #6  
Old 09-07-2017, 03:56 PM
GrandWino GrandWino is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Evanstonia
Posts: 9,556
I've heard rumblings that Dem leaders would be amenable to border security funding in exchange for getting DACA made into law. I don't know if that means wall money or not but it could.

Last edited by GrandWino; 09-07-2017 at 03:57 PM.
  #7  
Old 09-07-2017, 05:28 PM
JohnT JohnT is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 18,479
Here's the thing about the wall - it's just another Federal boondoggle program that's going to suck up about $50-500 billion all told for something that will never be completed and will be obsolete the day it is designed.

So, as a Dem in Texas, uh, sure... y'all want to throw 20-200 billion at my state, in some of the poorest areas of the country in a massive federal program the likes of which we have not seen started since the 1960s? Sure, go right ahead. By all means.

Last edited by JohnT; 09-07-2017 at 05:29 PM.
  #8  
Old 09-08-2017, 06:45 AM
FlikTheBlue FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,014
Here's what I don't get about people who want a wall. A wall is useless without ICE agents* manning it. People will just climb over an unmanned wall. On the other hand if you do have enough border agents to man such a wall, they would probably be able to do the job of apprehendeding people who cross the border just as well without the wall. It's not the lack of a physical barrier that allows people to cross the border away from the regular checkpoints, it's a lack of border agents. Building a wall won't fix that.

* I do realize that we would need a huge number of agents if we were to try to adequately watch the border. I think the whole project is just too impractical to carry out in the real world.
  #9  
Old 09-08-2017, 06:56 AM
FlikTheBlue FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,014
I would also like to add that while I think the project of building a wall at the border is impractical, I don't have a problem in theory with trying to control the border. If Democrats want to compromise and give Republicans border security in exchange for allowing the Dreamers permanent status, I'm all for that. The Dreamers had no choice in coming over. Adults who are presently crossing do have the option not to come. If the trade off is allowing those who came here due to someone else's choice to stay while at the same time trying to prevent others from making that same choice in the future, I have no problem with that.
  #10  
Old 09-08-2017, 06:58 AM
JohnT JohnT is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 18,479
See? It's a jobs program as well as an infrastructure boondoggle!
  #11  
Old 09-08-2017, 08:00 AM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 18,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by leftfield6 View Post
So, in other words, the American taxpayers still pay for his fucking wall? Cause that's what a tariff on Mexican goods would do.

Why is that so hard to understand? Do you know how tariffs work?

Fuck Trump and his wall.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimeWinder View Post
You apparently have a wildly inaccurate idea of who pays import taxes.
I think I understand how tariffs work.

Did you know that no one wants other countries to tariff their products? If it costs them nothing, why don't they like it? Yes, tariffs increase costs of imported goods it also puts pricing pressure on the exporter. So in a very real sense, tariffs impose a cost on the exporter.

I don't give a shit about the wall. Liberals are falling on their swords for too much (barely) symbolic shit these days and diluting their message against stuff that really matters. Who gives a shit if Trump wastes a few billion dollars on a stupid fucking wall that won't achieve anything. if we can get through the next 4 years and only be out of pocket a few billion dollars, I will consider that a huge success for the country.
  #12  
Old 09-08-2017, 08:06 AM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 18,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by silenus View Post
In a heartbeat. They won't (I hope) fall for something as stupid as that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
Absolutely zero chance that the Dems would vote for such a bill. It's not only a bad idea, it's a terrible deal. Why trade something that has pretty substantial bipartisan support and strong popular support (Dreamers) for something that is divisive and a political loser (having Americans pay for the wall with higher taxes on tequilla and cars)?
Because Republicans hold both chambers of congress and they will continue to hold both chambers for at least the next year and 4 months. They need a law in the next 6 months to avoid putting the dreamers in jeopardy, Democrats cannot force a vote on anything unless Ryan and McConnell agree and if McConnell can slow roll a fucking supreme court nomination for over a year I guaran-fucking-tee you that he can slow roll the Dream Act. You need both chambers of congress to just shove shit through and your no compromise stances are admirable if you don't mind getting nothing done.

So the Democrats can throw the dreamers under the bus for the sake of principle on the wall or they can give trump his stupid fucking wall and get real meaningful legislation done.
  #13  
Old 09-08-2017, 08:20 AM
Fiveyearlurker Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 4,810
Which encourages the strategy of opening your offer with "I'm going to punch you in the face two times," but compromising it down to one time.
  #14  
Old 09-08-2017, 08:35 AM
John Mace John Mace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 79,065
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
I think I understand how tariffs work.
Do you understand how trade wars work?
  #15  
Old 09-08-2017, 08:54 AM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
I think I understand how tariffs work.

Did you know that no one wants other countries to tariff their products? If it costs them nothing, why don't they like it? Yes, tariffs increase costs of imported goods it also puts pricing pressure on the exporter. So in a very real sense, tariffs impose a cost on the exporter.

I don't give a shit about the wall. Liberals are falling on their swords for too much (barely) symbolic shit these days and diluting their message against stuff that really matters. Who gives a shit if Trump wastes a few billion dollars on a stupid fucking wall that won't achieve anything. if we can get through the next 4 years and only be out of pocket a few billion dollars, I will consider that a huge success for the country.
But mexico will not be paying those tariffs, us citizens will.

Mexico's economy may be harmed by decreased exports, but that is not them paying for it.

What is paying for it is americans paying higher prices on goods imported from mexico.

In a real sense, tariffs may harm the exporter, but the cost of them is felt by the importers.

Quite a number of people do care about Trump wanting to waste more than just a few billion dollars on a pointless wall that is only a symbol of isolationism. You do realize that most estimates put it close to $30billion, and that's just to build it, not to staff it. If he is holding the dreamers as hostage for that 30 billion, then what does it incentivize him to do if we give in?

Trump's proposal will hurt the mexican economy, will hurt the US economy, will increase the cost of goods we purchase, and serve no purpose other than to show off to the rest of the world how isolationist we have become. Do we have to give in to every one of trumps stupid wasteful ideas that will cause harm to our country because he is threatening someone?

IF he says that he will get sessions to lay off the medical marijuana states if the govt ponies up a few billion to renovate trump tower, should we just give him that too? If he threatens to nuke california unless we spend a trillion on building a sea wall in front of all his golf properties?
  #16  
Old 09-08-2017, 10:14 AM
Procrustus Procrustus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW. ¥
Posts: 9,468
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post

I don't give a shit about the wall
Every broken Trump promise helps the good guys in 2018 and 2020 (or so one would hope)
  #17  
Old 09-08-2017, 11:28 AM
Ravenman Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 21,331
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
Because Republicans hold both chambers of congress and they will continue to hold both chambers for at least the next year and 4 months. They need a law in the next 6 months to avoid putting the dreamers in jeopardy, Democrats cannot force a vote on anything unless Ryan and McConnell agree and if McConnell can slow roll a fucking supreme court nomination for over a year I guaran-fucking-tee you that he can slow roll the Dream Act. You need both chambers of congress to just shove shit through and your no compromise stances are admirable if you don't mind getting nothing done.

So the Democrats can throw the dreamers under the bus for the sake of principle on the wall or they can give trump his stupid fucking wall and get real meaningful legislation done.
Democrats aren't the ones in jeopardy here. Every single Dreamer knows that Dems are in their corner, and they know that Republicans are the reason why they don't already have some sort of legal status already.

Dems know damn well that getting DACA with no wall is a reasonable position. I would think the vast majority of Dreamers would think that DACA and the wall is a sell-out position for the Dems. Dems cutting that deal would almost certainly piss off a lot of their supporters: why would they cut a deal that immigration advocates think is terrible?

And since your argument relies on using swear words, let me just chime in with my own fuck fuck fuck not a fucking snowball's chance in hell.

ETA: And oh yeah here's a fucking cite for my fucking position: https://hotair.com/archives/2017/09/...-funding-wall/

Last edited by Ravenman; 09-08-2017 at 11:30 AM.
  #18  
Old 09-08-2017, 01:43 PM
CBEscapee CBEscapee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: México
Posts: 2,108
The question is will gringos be willing to pay much higher prices for guacamole and their trendy avocado toast while we ship our aguacates to Europe? And your other winter fruits and vegetables? And your grain producers will set on tons of rotting grain that we will buy from Argentina? The Chinese have lots of money and are very interested in increasing trade. It may be further away but there are a whole lot more customers. You guys really fucked up with that magnificent pendejo you elected.

Last edited by CBEscapee; 09-08-2017 at 01:44 PM.
  #19  
Old 09-08-2017, 02:08 PM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,790
Quote:
Originally Posted by CBEscapee View Post
The question is will gringos be willing to pay much higher prices for guacamole and their trendy avocado toast while we ship our aguacates to Europe? And your other winter fruits and vegetables? And your grain producers will set on tons of rotting grain that we will buy from Argentina? The Chinese have lots of money and are very interested in increasing trade. It may be further away but there are a whole lot more customers. You guys really fucked up with that magnificent pendejo you elected.
Agreed, but I didn't vote for him.

The US will suffer, we will pay more and have less, but that is the sacrifice we are apparently willing to make in order to have a wall.

Mexico will get a lower value on its crops. It is useful that its main trading partner is right next door, so losing us will hurt. But hurting mexico doesn't actually do anything to pay for the wall. And, I doubt mexico will be hurt as much as we seem to think, as there are, as you say, plenty of other trading partners that would be happy to take the product that is denied to americans.
  #20  
Old 09-09-2017, 02:38 PM
Silver lining Silver lining is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnT View Post
See? It's a jobs program as well as an infrastructure boondoggle!
Yes, it is.
  #21  
Old 09-09-2017, 02:40 PM
Silver lining Silver lining is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by CBEscapee View Post
The question is will gringos be willing to pay much higher prices for guacamole and their trendy avocado toast while we ship our aguacates to Europe? And your other winter fruits and vegetables? And your grain producers will set on tons of rotting grain that we will buy from Argentina? The Chinese have lots of money and are very interested in increasing trade. It may be further away but there are a whole lot more customers. You guys really fucked up with that magnificent pendejo you elected.
Mexico needs us. 80% of their exports go to the USA.

What would a 5% tariff really mean to the USA consumer? Mexican goods are fairly cheap, correct?
  #22  
Old 09-09-2017, 02:57 PM
running coach running coach is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Riding my handcycle
Posts: 30,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silver lining View Post
Mexico needs us. 80% of their exports go to the USA.

What would a 5% tariff really mean to the USA consumer? Mexican goods are fairly cheap, correct?
So you're accepting that Mexico won't pay for it after all.
__________________
"To give anything less than your best is to sacrifice the Gift."
Steve Prefontaine
  #23  
Old 09-09-2017, 03:09 PM
Folly Folly is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Chicago! (no more burbs)
Posts: 1,838
DACA if Mexico pays for the wall

DACA, when the walls fell.

FEMA on the ocean

The children of Trumpa...the beast at Maralago.
  #24  
Old 09-10-2017, 07:57 AM
CBEscapee CBEscapee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: México
Posts: 2,108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silver lining View Post
Mexico needs us. 80% of their exports go to the USA.

What would a 5% tariff really mean to the USA consumer? Mexican goods are fairly cheap, correct?
When you start applying punitive tariffs, trade wars are a common result. Yes, most of our exports are to the US but so are most of our imports. You run the risk of losing much of that revenue and the risk of losing jobs in sectors that produce the goods we import.

Trump is a complete loser with no idea how to run a country. He appeals mostly to ignorant racists. They don't have an idea what life on this planet is all about outside of their very small minds.
  #25  
Old 09-10-2017, 08:50 AM
enipla enipla is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Colorado Rockies.
Posts: 11,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by CBEscapee View Post
When you start applying punitive tariffs, trade wars are a common result. Yes, most of our exports are to the US but so are most of our imports. You run the risk of losing much of that revenue and the risk of losing jobs in sectors that produce the goods we import.

Trump is a complete loser with no idea how to run a country. He appeals mostly to ignorant racists. They don't have an idea what life on this planet is all about outside of their very small minds.
Yup. Racist morons.

Just what the hell does Trump and his supporters think they are going to do about the Rio Grande? The idea of this wall only takes 5 minutes of thought before realizing what a completely ridiculous idea it is.
  #26  
Old 09-10-2017, 09:54 AM
John Mace John Mace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 79,065
Quote:
Originally Posted by Folly View Post
DACA, when the walls fell.

FEMA on the ocean

The children of Trumpa...the beast at Maralago.
Dharma and jihad at Tunisia.
  #27  
Old 09-10-2017, 11:48 AM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,790
Quote:
Originally Posted by enipla View Post
Yup. Racist morons.

Just what the hell does Trump and his supporters think they are going to do about the Rio Grande? The idea of this wall only takes 5 minutes of thought before realizing what a completely ridiculous idea it is.
That's 4 minutes 53 seconds longer than his attention span.
  #28  
Old 09-12-2017, 07:51 AM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 18,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mace View Post
Do you understand how trade wars work?
I think I do and I bet the Mexicans do too. Do you think they'll want to respond with tit for tat? If we go full blown nuclear trade war with Mexico, they go from losing a few billion dollars out of their economy to losing 15% of their economy while we would lose something like 1%.
  #29  
Old 09-12-2017, 08:04 AM
leftfield6 leftfield6 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Atlanta Metro
Posts: 2,930
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
I think I do and I bet the Mexicans do too. Do you think they'll want to respond with tit for tat? If we go full blown nuclear trade war with Mexico, they go from losing a few billion dollars out of their economy to losing 15% of their economy while we would lose something like 1%.
But, just so we are clear, you do understand that a tariff imposed on Mexican goods means US citizens are paying for the wall, right?

The flip comments about 5% more for avocado toast make for good internet banter, but the reality is much different. These are Mexico exports to the US in 2015 (last year a summary is available)

Quote:
Vehicles $74 Billion (Passenger cars, Vehicle parts)

Electrical Machinery $63 Billion (Flat screen TVs , Electrical Generators, Monitors)

Machinery $49 Billion

Crude Oil $14 Billion

Medical Instruments $12 Billion

Fresh Vegetables $4.8 Billion (Avocados, Tomatoes)

Fresh Fruits $4.3 Billion

Alcoholic Beverages $2.7 Billion (Beer, Tequila)

Rubber $2.4 Billion

Snack Foods $1.7 Billion

Processed Fruits and Vegetables $1.4 Billion
(source -- https://www.inside-mexico.com/what-d...ort-to-the-us/)

Taking all foodstuffs out of the above, it still means the US citizens are going to pay an additional $10.72 billion dollars in tariffs. Add the foodstuffs back in, and that number rises to $11.34 billion.

$11,340,000,000. Not from Mexico. From you and me. US taxpayers. So much winning.
__________________
Afoot and light hearted, I take to the open road, healthy, free, the world before me...
  #30  
Old 09-12-2017, 08:04 AM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 18,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
But mexico will not be paying those tariffs, us citizens will.

Mexico's economy may be harmed by decreased exports, but that is not them paying for it.

What is paying for it is americans paying higher prices on goods imported from mexico.

In a real sense, tariffs may harm the exporter, but the cost of them is felt by the importers.
You realize that the reason countries implement trade barriers is because there are benefits to protectionism right? If we impose a 10% tariff on Mexican products, the cost of Mexican imports does not rise by 10%. Some of that tariff is offset by a lower price, in fact, depending on what the demand and supply curve looks like for their products, much of that 10% could be borne by Mexico while creating more opportunities for domestic production. Mercantilism wasn't a thing for centuries because it made absolutely no sense.

Quote:
Quite a number of people do care about Trump wanting to waste more than just a few billion dollars on a pointless wall that is only a symbol of isolationism. You do realize that most estimates put it close to $30billion, and that's just to build it, not to staff it. If he is holding the dreamers as hostage for that 30 billion, then what does it incentivize him to do if we give in?
OK, so you're willing to throw the dreamers under the bus for sake of principle?

Quote:
Trump's proposal will hurt the mexican economy, will hurt the US economy, will increase the cost of goods we purchase, and serve no purpose other than to show off to the rest of the world how isolationist we have become. Do we have to give in to every one of trumps stupid wasteful ideas that will cause harm to our country because he is threatening someone?
Yes, that's how hostage taking usually works. If there is a credible threat to the hostage you either sacrifice the hostage on the "we don't negotiate with hostage takers" principle or you give the hostage takers what they want in exchange for the hostages.

Quote:
IF he says that he will get sessions to lay off the medical marijuana states if the govt ponies up a few billion to renovate trump tower, should we just give him that too?
Do you think Republicans would support that? Lets pick a less ridiculous example. Lets say that Trump says he will back the legalization of marijuana law but he wants to tax recreational marijuana and he wants the tax to pay for the wall.

Quote:
If he threatens to nuke california unless we spend a trillion on building a sea wall in front of all his golf properties?
I'm pretty sure he would lose support over that.
  #31  
Old 09-12-2017, 08:06 AM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 18,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
Every broken Trump promise helps the good guys in 2018 and 2020 (or so one would hope)
You really think that broken promises are going to make a difference hen he can just point to the Democrats and say "those obstructionists wouldn't respect the will of the people and I tried but those Democrats... well you know what they're like"
  #32  
Old 09-12-2017, 08:16 AM
Steve MB Steve MB is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 11,790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
You realize that the reason countries implement trade barriers is because there are benefits to protectionism right?
There you have it; proof positive that there are benefits to fighting a war in Russia during the winter (hey, nobody would have done it if that weren't so, amirite?).
__________________
The Internet: Nobody knows if you're a dog. Everybody knows if you're a jackass.
  #33  
Old 09-12-2017, 08:52 AM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 18,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
Democrats aren't the ones in jeopardy here. Every single Dreamer knows that Dems are in their corner, and they know that Republicans are the reason why they don't already have some sort of legal status already.

Dems know damn well that getting DACA with no wall is a reasonable position.
What does the Dems opinion of reasonable have to do with anything. The Pubs don't ever have to bring up the DREAM Act and they certainly don't have to bring up a clean DREAM Act.

Quote:
I would think the vast majority of Dreamers would think that DACA and the wall is a sell-out position for the Dems. Dems cutting that deal would almost certainly piss off a lot of their supporters: why would they cut a deal that immigration advocates think is terrible?

And since your argument relies on using swear words, let me just chime in with my own fuck fuck fuck not a fucking snowball's chance in hell.

ETA: And oh yeah here's a fucking cite for my fucking position: https://hotair.com/archives/2017/09/...-funding-wall/
How does my argument rely on the use of swear words? It is a simple fucking fact that McConnell and Ryan don't ever have to bring up the DREAM Act. And your cite is an opinion piece. I bet there is some conservative opinion piece out there that is insisting that conservatives are holding all the cards so they should play hardball and considering that the House, the Senate, The White House, more than twice as many Governor's Mansions, more than twice as many Republican State Legislatures as there are Democratic State Legislatures, it is just as plausible as your opinion piece.
  #34  
Old 09-12-2017, 10:05 AM
Muffin Muffin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 19,754
Tariffs against Mexico will greatly increase illegal immigration.

If Mexico is hurt, it will drop out of the Southern Border Plan, which is what presently is holding back a flood of Central Americans who previously transited Mexico on their way to illegally entering the USA.

On top of this, the more Mexico is hurt, the more Mexican economic refugees will sneak into the USA.
  #35  
Old 09-12-2017, 10:16 AM
gnoitall gnoitall is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 4,851
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muffin View Post
Tariffs against Mexico will greatly increase illegal immigration.

If Mexico is hurt, it will drop out of the Southern Border Plan, which is what presently is holding back a flood of Central Americans who previously transited Mexico on their way to illegally entering the USA.

On top of this, the more Mexico is hurt, the more Mexican economic refugees will sneak into the USA.
Buh buh buh TEH WALLL!!!!!111oneone!1

Frankly, the only way the wall has any value is if they design it so it can be picked up in sections, transported cross-country, and laid down as bridges. Because that's the actual infrastructure boondoggle we need.
  #36  
Old 09-12-2017, 10:32 AM
Muffin Muffin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 19,754
nm

Last edited by Muffin; 09-12-2017 at 10:33 AM.
  #37  
Old 09-12-2017, 11:20 AM
Ravenman Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 21,331
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
What does the Dems opinion of reasonable have to do with anything. The Pubs don't ever have to bring up the DREAM Act and they certainly don't have to bring up a clean DREAM Act.
This seems to be the same type of warped thinking that drives Donald Trump to think that if he lets the ACA health exchanges fail, then Dems will rush come to him begging for a health care bill.
  #38  
Old 09-12-2017, 11:59 PM
CBEscapee CBEscapee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: México
Posts: 2,108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
You realize that the reason countries implement trade barriers is because there are benefits to protectionism right? If we impose a 10% tariff on Mexican products, the cost of Mexican imports does not rise by 10%. Some of that tariff is offset by a lower price, in fact, depending on what the demand and supply curve looks like for their products, much of that 10% could be borne by Mexico while creating more opportunities for domestic production. Mercantilism wasn't a thing for centuries because it made absolutely no sense.
I know very well how protectionism works. Prior to NAFTA we had a protectionist economic policy for decades. If you think it benefits your country's economy you are quite mistaken. Domestic products that have no competition on price or quality do not benefit the consumer. Quality will decline and prices will rise. That is the reality of protectionism.
  #39  
Old 09-13-2017, 01:07 AM
Go_Arachnid_Laser Go_Arachnid_Laser is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muffin View Post
Tariffs against Mexico will greatly increase illegal immigration.

If Mexico is hurt, it will drop out of the Southern Border Plan, which is what presently is holding back a flood of Central Americans who previously transited Mexico on their way to illegally entering the USA.

On top of this, the more Mexico is hurt, the more Mexican economic refugees will sneak into the USA.
Not to mention that protectionism is a two way street, and Mexico would probably put their own tariffs on U.S. products.

Why does everybody keep forgetting that Mexico means 127 million clients, here?
  #40  
Old 09-13-2017, 10:47 AM
gnoitall gnoitall is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 4,851
Quote:
Originally Posted by CBEscapee View Post
I know very well how protectionism works. Prior to NAFTA we had a protectionist economic policy for decades. If you think it benefits your country's economy you are quite mistaken. Domestic products that have no competition on price or quality do not benefit the consumer. Quality will decline and prices will rise. That is the reality of protectionism.
A fairly common mis-apprehension is that protectionism is for the good of the consumer.

Protectionism is good for consumers the way that cattle chutes at processing plants are good for cattle.
  #41  
Old 09-13-2017, 11:13 AM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 18,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
This seems to be the same type of warped thinking that drives Donald Trump to think that if he lets the ACA health exchanges fail, then Dems will rush come to him begging for a health care bill.
I don't know that the Republicans are super duper keen on passing the dream act and are just waiting for the Democrats to throw in something to sweeten the pot.
  #42  
Old 09-13-2017, 11:16 AM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 18,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by CBEscapee View Post
I know very well how protectionism works. Prior to NAFTA we had a protectionist economic policy for decades. If you think it benefits your country's economy you are quite mistaken. Domestic products that have no competition on price or quality do not benefit the consumer. Quality will decline and prices will rise. That is the reality of protectionism.
I don't recall saying that the tariff would be prohibitive giving domestic producers an effective MONOPOLY. I'm pretty sure I said 10%, that doesn't even cover the difference in cost of labor between the US and Mexico. And protectionism is rampant all over the world in developed and indusstrialized countries because they like how it works out for them. Ask France, ask Germany, ask Japan, they all practice protectionism to some degree. The unfettered free market simply isn't the panacea some people seem to think it is.
  #43  
Old 09-13-2017, 11:18 AM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 18,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by gnoitall View Post
A fairly common mis-apprehension is that protectionism is for the good of the consumer.

Protectionism is good for consumers the way that cattle chutes at processing plants are good for cattle.
Protectionism is good for domestic suppliers, that includes domestic suppliers of labor. It is bad for domestic consumers but depending on the situation it can be much more good for producers of labor than it is bad for consumers.
  #44  
Old 09-13-2017, 12:06 PM
Ravenman Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 21,331
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
Protectionism is good for domestic suppliers, that includes domestic suppliers of labor. It is bad for domestic consumers but depending on the situation it can be much more good for producers of labor than it is bad for consumers.
... according to politicians and fringe economists.
  #45  
Old 09-13-2017, 03:09 PM
treis treis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 9,007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
... according to politicians and fringe economists.
I don't think any economist is going to argue that protectionism is bad for those being protected.
  #46  
Old 09-13-2017, 03:47 PM
Chisquirrel Chisquirrel is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,042
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
I don't know that the Republicans are super duper keen on passing the dream act and are just waiting for the Democrats to throw in something to sweeten the pot.
The latest polls show that roughly 15% of Americans think Dreamers should be deported. If it becomes an election issue (starts in 6 months, deportations starting roughly 3-6 months after that, so mid-summer 2018), are Republicans willing to go to the voting booth with 3/4 of the population thinking they're idiots? Despite what Trump and his minions may claim, whatever is happening in DC is not the fault of Democrats. Why should they be making concessions?
  #47  
Old 09-13-2017, 05:22 PM
foolsguinea foolsguinea is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 14,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnT View Post
Here's the thing about the wall - it's just another Federal boondoggle program that's going to suck up about $50-500 billion all told for something that will never be completed and will be obsolete the day it is designed.

So, as a Dem in Texas, uh, sure... y'all want to throw 20-200 billion at my state, in some of the poorest areas of the country in a massive federal program the likes of which we have not seen started since the 1960s? Sure, go right ahead. By all means.
It'd be built on top of agricultural land, much of it owned by chicanos. The wall may be money spent in Texas, but it'd be an attack on the property & livelihoods of people who actually live by the Rio Grande. No Texas governor would be fool enough to propose it, and your state's governors are known to typically be fools. It's an act of war on tejanos by a Scotsman/New Yorker who's never lived in Texas.
__________________
Why, in an argument between two Western democratic liberal (yes, classically liberal) capitalist factions, does one keep trying to argue against a caricature of Brezhnev-era Eastern Bloc central planning?
facts about welfare
  #48  
Old 09-13-2017, 05:29 PM
foolsguinea foolsguinea is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 14,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
Which encourages the strategy of opening your offer with "I'm going to punch you in the face two times," but compromising it down to one time.
Or, "I won't punch these kids over there in the face; but that's if you let me declare eminent domain on a bunch of farmland and destroy it, which otherwise would have no chance or passing." I'm a big government socialist, but in this case, the government would be doing things to other people that make pure anarchy sound better.

Last edited by foolsguinea; 09-13-2017 at 05:30 PM. Reason: When did my sig start auto-displaying?
  #49  
Old 09-13-2017, 08:23 PM
foolsguinea foolsguinea is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 14,607
I can't seem to multi-quote, so I lost the post I was going to respond to. Anyway...

I will grant that protectionism has some social utility, but the point of it is certainly not to lower the price demanded by an exporting country for goods they sell to you. If that were the effect, it could be drastically economically counter-productive. It would mean a thumb depressing the economy of that exporting country, and meanwhile your country would gain none of the benefits of protectionism as generally understood.

The point of protectionism is not to punish foreign exporters, but to tax your own citizens for buying foreign goods. The idea is that the retail price of foreign goods will go up, and your country's consumers will buy domestic goods, propping up domestic industry as part of an industrial policy.
__________________
Why, in an argument between two Western democratic liberal (yes, classically liberal) capitalist factions, does one keep trying to argue against a caricature of Brezhnev-era Eastern Bloc central planning?
facts about welfare
  #50  
Old 09-13-2017, 09:28 PM
Ravenman Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 21,331
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
I must have heard just about every Democrat asking for a "clean" dreamers bill....

If I were Trump, I would put together bill that gives permanent residency to dreamers and taxes Mexican imports to pay for the border wall. And that's how you get Mexico to pay for the border wall.
I just read a story on WaPo (can't link, it is in an app) that starts:
Quote:
President Trump and top Democratic leaders late Wednesday agreed to work out an agreement that would protect the nation’s “dreamers” from deportation and enact border security measures that don’t include building a physical wall, according to people familiar with the meeting.
Art of the deal, I guess.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:36 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright © 2017 Sun-Times Media, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017