It devastated small farmers in Mexico and as a resut many moved to big cities in Mexico and to the US to make a living and support their families.
It devastated small farmers in Mexico and as a resut many moved to big cities in Mexico and to the US to make a living and support their families.
Didn't NAFTA have the opposite effect?
Rather than Mexicans coming to the US to steal US jobs, NAFTA paved the way for US companies to move the US jobs to Mexico, resulting in more employment for Mexicans in Mexico, and less immigration to the US.
Small farmers in Mexico are devastated by US Agriculture subsidy policies.
I'm all ears.
How do you think most illegal immigrants enter this country?
I'll give you a hint: it's not our southern border.
Black Lives Matter wrote:
It devastated small farmers in Mexico and as a resut many moved to big cities in Mexico and to the US to make a living and support their families.
I blame Newt Gingrich and the GOP controlled congress circa 94-00 for NAFTA, illegal immigration, and basically all of the worlds problems.
Black Lives Matter wrote:
It devastated small farmers in Mexico and as a resut many moved to big cities in Mexico and to the US to make a living and support their families.
So let me get this straight. NAFTA cost American jobs and Mexican jobs? So who got'm? The friggin Canucks?
Black Lives Matter wrote:
It devastated small farmers in Mexico and as a resut many moved to big cities in Mexico and to the US to make a living and support their families.
Yeah we sure didn't have any illegal immigration during the 80/90s. And absolutely zero people took advantage of the amnesty in 1986 because there weren't millions of them in the US.
Illegal immigration from Mexico has plummeted as its economy has stabilized. There has been net emigration from the U.S. for those born in Mexico for half a decade or more. What a completely made up issue.
Trade agreements are written by lawyers. If NAFTA was written by Libertarian PhD economists, it would have been best. Free trade is good. NAFTA should've been more like the European Union, no borders. Free trade keeps retail prices modest. Yes, unskilled factory workers who had $30/hr. jobs were hurt. In the aggregate, free trade is good. If NAFTA would have been a pure borderless free trade agreement, all the money wasted on US Border Patrol could have made K through 12 schools better or said money could have subsidized public universities to a greater extent.
jjjjj wrote:
Illegal immigration from Mexico has plummeted as its economy has stabilized. There has been net emigration from the U.S. for those born in Mexico for half a decade or more. What a completely made up issue.
You are either lying or really ignorant.
There are ~10 million illegal immigrants currently in the US. It is not a "completely made up issue". Furthermore, there has not been PRACTICAL net emigration. The AVERAGE for the past 5 years is ~20,000 (if i recall correctly) illegal immigrants per year leaving.
1) That does not mean each of those 5 years was net emigration
2) Your "net emigration" number is ~20,000. Calculate how many years it would take for 10,000,000 people to leave at a rate of 20,000 per year. This isn't considering how many are added by new births.
Where is the "like" button here. Truly jjjjj is an idiot.
koofk wrote:
jjjjj wrote:Illegal immigration from Mexico has plummeted as its economy has stabilized. There has been net emigration from the U.S. for those born in Mexico for half a decade or more. What a completely made up issue.
You are either lying or really ignorant.
There are ~10 million illegal immigrants currently in the US. It is not a "completely made up issue". Furthermore, there has not been PRACTICAL net emigration. The AVERAGE for the past 5 years is ~20,000 (if i recall correctly) illegal immigrants per year leaving.
1) That does not mean each of those 5 years was net emigration
2) Your "net emigration" number is ~20,000. Calculate how many years it would take for 10,000,000 people to leave at a rate of 20,000 per year. This isn't considering how many are added by new births.
The immigration structure in this country is insane. In1965 it was changed to make sure that there could be no affordable white communities anymore.
As a consequence white birth dropped because because a family became unaffordable; at the same time other ethnic groups were incentivized through various tax programs to have more babies while white people faced steep housing prices and longer working hours for both parents.
Illegal immigration has existed since the pilgrims arrived on this land in 1620. Have you forgotten how Europeans arrived in droves without the permission of the natives taking over their land, building towns everywhere they went and putting the natives in reservations. Don´t complain about it now, when this country was founded by illegals. Just because they came from Europe and a long time ago does not mean it is any different than now. Not one of those Pilgrims had a green card with them issued by the Native Americans.
Not so fasttttt wrote:
Illegal immigration has existed since the pilgrims arrived on this land in 1620. Have you forgotten how Europeans arrived in droves without the permission of the natives taking over their land, building towns everywhere they went and putting the natives in reservations. Don´t complain about it now, when this country was founded by illegals. Just because they came from Europe and a long time ago does not mean it is any different than now. Not one of those Pilgrims had a green card with them issued by the Native Americans.
This is a often used but dumb analogy. There was not a legal framework in place when the native americans were pushed out so there was no legal or illegal notion. It was about power. The natives lost.
ofkfm wrote:
Not so fasttttt wrote:Illegal immigration has existed since the pilgrims arrived on this land in 1620. Have you forgotten how Europeans arrived in droves without the permission of the natives taking over their land, building towns everywhere they went and putting the natives in reservations. Don´t complain about it now, when this country was founded by illegals. Just because they came from Europe and a long time ago does not mean it is any different than now. Not one of those Pilgrims had a green card with them issued by the Native Americans.
This is a often used but dumb analogy. There was not a legal framework in place when the native americans were pushed out so there was no legal or illegal notion. It was about power. The natives lost.
But there was a legal framework in place when US citizens illegally emigrated to Mexico back in the 1830s and then fomented a revolution. That's the history of Texas, in case you were unaware. What goes around comes around.
K. Arma wrote:
But there was a legal framework in place when US citizens illegally emigrated to Mexico back in the 1830s and then fomented a revolution. That's the history of Texas, in case you were unaware. What goes around comes around.
This is an equally silly comparison and conclusion.