Funny how Trump and Minister of Propaganda Spicer still saying Mexico will pay for the wall, yet ...

[torontoeers]

Thanks for posting those graphs TarHeelEer. Anyone who thinks Mexico or Canada can get by without healthy trade with us thinks Baskin-Robbins can make money without selling Ice-cream.

Easy fella...38 states largest export partner is ...you guessed it us igloo folk, also approximately 9 million Americans are employed by Canadian companies located in the US....do we suffer without US trade and more so than you. Yes. However it isn't that easy. Trump I assume is no fool to negotiation and he knows the best deal is one between friends. Enemies create problems. I honestly don't blame Nieto for standing his ground somewhat he has to. Strong economic ties for all are the goal, IMO trade wars are the last thing we all need in the current world climate....Exactly why Freeman and Shwarzman are the go to's in our future bi-lateral.

I actually wonder at this point however just where in the heck is that red pepper I bought yesterday at the grocers from Mexico at 1.99 a lb going to come from now if NAFTA is gonzo? It is going to cost more I assume...

 

[WVU82_rivals]

Mexico's economy is a house of cards...

and Trump can blow it down anytime he wants...

I can't blame the Mex Pres for bailing...

 

[atlkvb]

Wrong. They are our second largest export recipient, 15.7% of all exports, twice as large as the next recipient, China. Only a fool wouldn't recognize this. Even dumbass Mcconnell and Paul Ryan got Trump to change his tune real quick today as soon as he got off the plane back to D.C., from a 20% tarrif on Mexico to it is one of many options we are looking at.

Mexico has free trade agreements with 40 countries.

If Trump freezes their US assets here countryroads89 do you think they will just blow it off and go somewhere else to get their money? They have no leverage over us. What do you not see?

We are the bookie in this betting pool. We have the odds, we have the numbers. We can lose some, but they will lose all if we throw down with them.

It's Mike Tyson vs Laila Ali. Who would you bet on?

 

[Original Mountaineer1]

Mexico's economy is a house of cards...

and Trump can blow it down anytime he wants...

I can't blame the Mex Pres for bailing...

Why do people think that is a good thing?

 

[countryroads89_rivals]

Mexico threatening to pull out of NAFTA with us is like Marshall threatening to never play us again.

Really?

So you, like Dave, feel an economically ruined Mexico is a good thing.......... I just can't even imagine why that's a good thing.[/QUOTE]

So if Mexico's economy takes a hit, do more Mexicans try to come to America? Rhetorical.

 

[Original Mountaineer1]

So you, like Dave, feel an economically ruined Mexico is a good thing.......... I just can't even imagine why that's a good thing.

So if Mexico's economy takes a hit, do more Mexicans try to come to America? Rhetorical.[/QUOTE]

And more drugs.....lots more drugs. Another rise of the cartels.

I can't understand how any educated person thinks crushing Mexico's economy benefits the U.S. in the long run

 

[WVU82_rivals]

Who cares about Mexico ?

seriously ?

It's time to put the US back in the driver's seat...

It's up to you to jump on board...

Trump is driving forward...

 

[atlkvb]

Easy fella...38 states largest export partner is ...you guessed it us igloo folk, also approximately 9 million Americans are employed by Canadian companies located in the US....do we suffer without US trade and more so than you. Yes. However it isn't that easy. Trump I assume is no fool to negotiation and he knows the best deal is one between friends. Enemies create problems. I honestly don't blame Nieto for standing his ground somewhat he has to. Strong economic ties for all are the goal, IMO trade wars are the last thing we all need in the current world climate....Exactly why Freeman and Shwarzman are the go to's in our future bi-lateral.

I actually wonder at this point however just where in the heck is that red pepper I bought yesterday at the grocers from Mexico at 1.99 a lb going to come from now if NAFTA is gonzo? It is going to cost more I assume...

torontoeers you know I'm down with Oh Canada! I'm simply saying when it comes to something known as leverage, which in negotiations you use to your advantage neither country has it over the US.

Do we need trade with both countries? Absolutely!

Are we helpless without it?

Nope?

Is is reciprocal? Depends.

Canada I think has more leverage with us, not as much as us, but they can't easily be brushed off, I agree with you there.

Mexico has less than Canada...still not easily brushed off, but they'd be in much more dire straights without our trade than Canada would be.

All they have to do is realize that boarder is just as much their problem as it is ours....more so for them. If they help us now paying for that wall, it will help them much much more later.

No help, they're going to suffer more than we will.

 

[malew1]

There will be no wall built before the clown exits stage right in four years. Everyone talking about who pays for it. The real reason it won't get done is the logistics. Nobody even talks about all of the private landowners that will have to go through eminent domain proceedings just to allow the government to start building the damn wall. You don't think many of them won't play Trump like he plays his contractors? They won't roll over quietly. Those cases could be tied up in the courts for years. Then, how about the terrain issues in parts of West Texas and New Mexico? Jesus, what a joke!

 

[dave]

And what are he positives of that? More drugs streaming over, under, and around the wall?

I am not sure what your issue is? The goal is to renegotiate NAFTA, like you suggested.

 

[PriddyBoy]

And what are he positives of that? More drugs streaming over, under, and around the wall?

I shouldn't reply for dave, but I think he was agreeing with you. Judges?

 

[dave]

Wrong. They are our second largest export recipient, 15.7% of all exports, twice as large as the next recipient, China. Only a fool wouldn't recognize this. Even dumbass Mcconnell and Paul Ryan got Trump to change his tune real quick today as soon as he got off the plane back to D.C., from a 20% tarrif on Mexico to it is one of many options we are looking at.

Mexico has free trade agreements with 40 countries.

I really cant explain it to you because you dont want to see reality. Of all those 40 countries who has the biggest economy? Go read a book or something.

 

[Original Mountaineer1]

Who cares about Mexico ?

seriously ?

It's time to put the US back in the driver's seat...

It's up to you to jump on board...

Trump is driving forward...

Did you lose a job to a Mexican? Why the hate? I know you aren't an economist but do you realize the pain you are going to feel when prices skyrocket in your new world of America First?

 

[dave]

Mexico threatening to pull out of NAFTA with us is like Marshall threatening to never play us again.

Really?

So you, like Dave, feel an economically ruined Mexico is a good thing.......... I just can't even imagine why that's a good thing.[/QUOTE]
Where did I suggest I want an economically ruined Mexico? I think a lot of people are being way too emotional and illogical.

 

[Original Mountaineer1]

I am not sure what your issue is? The goal is to renegotiate NAFTA, like you suggested.

I've said many times we need to renegotiate NAFTA. But we can't cripple the Mexican economy in doing so. That benefits nobody.

 

[dave]

I've said many times we need to renegotiate NAFTA. But we can't cripple the Mexican economy in doing so. That benefits nobody.

I dont think anyone wants to cripple them. Trump wants balanced trade and controlled borders. The only point about Mexico is that we have the leverage to negotiate because a trade war with us cripples them.

 

[countryroads89_rivals]

There will be no wall built before the clown exits stage right in four years. Everyone talking about who pays for it. The real reason it won't get done is the logistics. Nobody even talks about all of the private landowners that will have to go through eminent domain proceedings just to allow the government to start building the damn wall. You don't think many of them won't play Trump like he plays his contractors? They won't roll over quietly. Those cases could be tied up in the courts for years. Then, how about the terrain issues in parts of West Texas and New Mexico? Jesus, what a joke!

Eminent domain can be made to process fairly quickly. But you are exactly right about the terrain.

 

[atlkvb]

So you, like Dave, feel an economically ruined Mexico is a good thing.......... I just can't even imagine why that's a good thing.[/QUOTE]


No Original, I want Mexico strong, self sufficient, economically viable, and independent of us not dependent on us.

I'd like to see it where their Nationals don't have a need to come over here to find work. I hope they can improve their economy to the point where they are attracting workers instead of waiting on us to bring in our factories. I hope they can stabilize the Peso, and make it more desirable as a trading currency.

None of that happens though without that wall securing their border and ours. We have to stop the illegal flow of drugs and bodies, so commerce can flourish instead of crime.

 

[atlkvb]

I dont think anyone wants to cripple them. Trump wants balanced trade and controlled borders. The only point about Mexico is that we have the leverage to negotiate because a trade war with us cripples them.

Mexico threatening to pull out of NAFTA with us is like Marshall threatening to never play us again.

Really?

 

[Boomboom521]

So if Mexico's economy takes a hit, do more Mexicans try to come to America? Rhetorical.

And more drugs.....lots more drugs. Another rise of the cartels.

I can't understand how any educated person thinks crushing Mexico's economy benefits the U.S. in the long run[/QUOTE]
Honestly, I think it partly the alpha dog, winner versus loser, tough talking bully, America is number one mentality.

 

[WVU82_rivals]

President George W. Bush signed the Secure Fence Act into law in 2006. To build the wall the federal government filed dozens of eminent domain lawsuits against private landowners to gain access for the wall's construction.

The result was a border fence that roughly followed the general path of the Rio Grande but created a no-man's land between the fence and the river. It also left gaping holes in the wall so that the landowners could access their land south of the wall.

The Texas-Mexico border is a mixture of several urban locations like Brownsville, Laredo and El Paso but most of it is hundreds of miles of vast, wide-open spaces.

---g o o g l e i s y o u r f r i e n d---

 

[countryroads89_rivals]

None of that happens though without that wall securing their boarder and ours. We have to stop the illegal flow of drugs and bodies, so commerce can flourish instead of crime.

The wall does absolutely nothing for Mexico's economy. Good lort.

And it's border, not boarder.

 

[WVU82_rivals]

President Donald Trump will be able to order the construction of a wall on the Mexico border Wednesday with the stroke of a pen, because of a 2006 law passed with the help of Democrats including Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton.

The 2006 law authorized the construction of 700 miles of fencing along the southern border, as well as additional lights, cameras and sensors to enhance security. Although former President George W. Bush signed the measure into law, the Democrat-controlled Congress that took over a few months later ensured it would never be completed by means of an amendment to a 2008 spending bill.

The amendment removed an explicit requirement the wall be made of double-layer fencing, and gave the Department of Homeland Security authority to put in place less effective barriers, such as simple vehicle barriers that do not keep pedestrians out. As a result, Democrats were able to avoid a politically unpopular vote against the wall, and then turn around and quietly gut its construction. But Trump and Republicans in the new Congress now plan to use that law to ensure a proper wall is constructed.

Since the law was never actually repealed, the federal government is still authorized to build a substantial wall on the southern border. Congress doesn’t have to pass a new law to begin construction, and can instead package the funds necessary into a massive spending bill Democrats would have a politically hard time opposing. Trump may get a head start on the process by diverting other funds congressional leaders have indicated are available for the project, ensuring a snafu over the spending bill doesn’t hinder prompt construction of the wall.

---the thread ender...---

 

[PriddyBoy]

lort

 

[torontoeers]

And more drugs.....lots more drugs. Another rise of the cartels.

I can't understand how any educated person thinks crushing Mexico's economy benefits the U.S. in the long run

Honestly, I think it partly the alpha dog, winner versus loser, tough talking bully, America is number one mentality.[/QUOTE]
I like your spunk Boom...and in many ways you are dead on with this statement...we knew just who we were dealing with here for many years...this one is a wildcard. As I said to atlkvb this whole negotiation is going to be interesting if nothing else.

 

[atlkvb]

The wall does absolutely nothing for Mexico's economy. Good lort.

And it's border, not boarder.

OK countryroads89 I'll submit my posts for you to spell check from now on if it will make you happy. BTW since you're such a good speller do you know what sanctimonious means?

You could try spelling that a few times without your "spellchecker"

As for that wall stabilizing both economies why do you think Trump wants it built?

You probably think it's because he hates Mexicans. But actually once that b-o-r-d-e-r is secured, Mexico can control the flood of illegals pouring into its country and drug cartels destroying its ability to conduct commerce and trade safely without drug smugglers or human trafficking coyotes taking over local law enforcement and bribing them.

Do you think South Chicago is a good place to do business right now with those Negroes shooting each other up everyday? Well Mexico is not a good place to do business either with drug gangs ruling the countryside.

That wall represents Law and order, which you must have if any civilized society is going to function and become self sufficient which is what we want Mexico to eventually become. Chicago too.

Wake up my Man!

 

[torontoeers]

torontoeers you know I'm down with Oh Canada! I'm simply saying when it comes to something known as leverage, which in negotiations you use to your advantage neither country has it over the US.

Do we need trade with both countries? Absolutely!

Are we helpless without it?

Nope?

Is is reciprocal? Depends.

Canada I think has more leverage with us, not as much as us, but they can't easily be brushed off, I agree with you there.

Mexico has less than Canada...still not easily brushed off, but they'd be in much more dire straights without our trade than Canada would be.

All they have to do is realize that boarder is just as much their problem as it is ours....more so for them. If they help us now paying for that wall, it will help them much much more later.

No help, they're going to suffer more than we will.

I do hope this all shakes out for the best...good and honest brokers will ensure it does just that.

 

[dave]

The wall does absolutely nothing for Mexico's economy. Good lort.

And it's border, not boarder.

I think at this point everyone realizes you are fuking stupud but why are you such a douchebag? Get laid or something. Rent a friend.

 

[atlkvb]

President Donald Trump will be able to order the construction of a wall on the Mexico border Wednesday with the stroke of a pen, because of a 2006 law passed with the help of Democrats including Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton.

The 2006 law authorized the construction of 700 miles of fencing along the southern border, as well as additional lights, cameras and sensors to enhance security. Although former President George W. Bush signed the measure into law, the Democrat-controlled Congress that took over a few months later ensured it would never be completed by means of an amendment to a 2008 spending bill.

The amendment removed an explicit requirement the wall be made of double-layer fencing, and gave the Department of Homeland Security authority to put in place less effective barriers, such as simple vehicle barriers that do not keep pedestrians out. As a result, Democrats were able to avoid a politically unpopular vote against the wall, and then turn around and quietly gut its construction. But Trump and Republicans in the new Congress now plan to use that law to ensure a proper wall is constructed.

Since the law was never actually repealed, the federal government is still authorized to build a substantial wall on the southern border. Congress doesn’t have to pass a new law to begin construction, and can instead package the funds necessary into a massive spending bill Democrats would have a politically hard time opposing. Trump may get a head start on the process by diverting other funds congressional leaders have indicated are available for the project, ensuring a snafu over the spending bill doesn’t hinder prompt construction of the wall.

---the thread ender...---

I had heard of this, but wasn't exactly sure how the Left got around it...this explains it. Democrats...scurrilous.

 

[countryroads89_rivals]

I think at this point everyone realizes you are fuking stupud but why are you such a douchebag? Get laid or something. Rent a friend.

Aw dave, you can do better than that.

Call me fuktard or libtard. Show more anger. We haven't heard hypocrite in a few hours.

 

[atlkvb]

I think at this point everyone realizes you are fuking stupud but why are you such a douchebag? Get laid or something. Rent a friend.

You make me laugh so hard it's beyond funny!

 

[dave]

Aw dave, you can do better than that.

Call me fuktard or libtard. Show more anger. We haven't heard hypocrite in a few hours.

Its ok if you like being an unbearable dick. No skin off my back. I just feel sorry for you because your inferiority complex is like a mole on your nose when you start correcting everyones typos.

 

[countryroads89_rivals]

Its ok if you like being an unbearable dick. No skin off my back. I just feel sorry for you because your inferiority complex is like a mole on your nose when you start correcting everyones typos.

Typos are one thing, using the wrong word is another. You conservatives are mentally challenged. I know I shouldn't be so hard on you all. You can't help it that you're stupid. Maybe it's hereditary. Are your parents dumbf'ucks too? Did they teach you your political beliefs?

 

[atlkvb]

Its ok if you like being an unbearable dick. No skin off my back. I just feel sorry for you because your inferiority complex is like a mole on your nose when you start correcting everyones typos.

I can deal with his arrogant snobbery correcting everyone's spelling, but on substance when he gets trapped by his own mental dysentery, he cuts and runs like a whippet puppy and doesn't even show the testosterone to stand corrected or admit he posts a like misguided scud missile fired from Pyong Yang. Always off target.

countryroads89 in his natural habitat:

 

[dave]

Typos are one thing, using the wrong word is another. You conservatives are mentally challenged. I know I shouldn't be so hard on you all. You can't help it that you're stupid. Maybe it's hereditary. Are your parents dumbf'ucks too? Did they teach you your political beliefs?

After the day you have had you probably shouldnt be putting stupidity alongside genetics. Your mom will thank you.

 

[countryroads89_rivals]

After the day you have had you probably shouldnt be putting stupidity alongside genetics. Your mom will thank you.

Because I know what the Constitution says? Tell me more about the US Senate nullifying NAFTA.

That's okay. When the US Congress (Senate and House) vote to withdraw from NAFTA, I'll be sure to throw it in PATX's, atl's and your face how you were wrong saying either the senate alone or the president alone could do it.

Please tell me your wife is intelligent. I hope you have someone that can help you out.

 

[atlkvb]

After the day you have had you probably shouldnt be putting stupidity alongside genetics. Your mom will thank you.

His Mom didn't reveal to him until much later in his developmental Life how he had to repeat Kindergarten. Some of those fundamentals he missed then he still hasn't mastered, like how many weeks there are in a month?

 

[countryroads89_rivals]

His Mom didn't reveal to him until much later in his developmental Life how he had to repeat Kindergarten. Some of those fundamentals he missed then he still hasn't mastered, like how many weeks there are in a month?

You suck at this.

 

[dave]

Because I know what the Constitution says? Tell me more about the US Senate nullifying NAFTA.

That's okay. When the US Congress (Senate and House) vote to withdraw from NAFTA, I'll be sure to throw it in PATX's, atl's and your face how you were wrong saying either the senate alone or the president alone could do it.

Please tell me your wife is intelligent. I hope you have someone that can help you out.

WTF are you even talking about? House? Senate? Getting out of the deal? You said in this thread that the US cant get out of a trade deal and if they tried an international panel would punish us and now you are saying that when the US pulls out of NAFTA you will throw it in my face? Good god you are one stupid motherfuker.

 

[atlkvb]

When the US Congress (Senate and House) vote to withdraw from NAFTA, I'll be sure to throw it in PATX's, atl's and your face how you were wrong saying either the senate alone or the president alone could do it.

They can do no such thing countryroads89, and I never said otherwise. I pointed out to you that NAFTA is not statutory US Law, therefore it is not subject to the provisions you cited under the commerce clause.

It is regulatory, and falls under the purview of Foreign affairs, which the Executive branch under the Constitution has specific authority to manage and/or negotiate subject to approval of Congress. The President's authority to abrogate treaties or renegotiate trade agreements is not subservient to Congress nor dependent on its permission to execute or terminate.

Congress only needs to grant it's approval of any such agreements/revisions to make them binding, but not dispository. The President can act unilaterally on trade, and Congress has no role or Constitutional obligation to stop him.