| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| More on North American Union; from the man at the center of it | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Dec 15 2006, 05:03 PM (98 Views) | |
| David Burton | Dec 15 2006, 05:03 PM Post #1 |
|
Senior Carp
|
Making a competitive continent By ROBERT PASTOR Friday, December 1, 2006 6:49 AM PST The election of a Democratic majority in the U.S. Congress and the inauguration of Felipe Calderon as president of Mexico offer the two countries an opportunity to reinvigorate a deteriorating relationship. To do so, the new leaders must change the agenda from illegal immigration to North American development and resolve to narrow the income gap between Mexico and its two northern neighbors. Early in their presidencies, George W. Bush and Mexican President Vicente Fox made the mistake of putting immigration at the top of the agenda. Migration is a net cost to Mexico and a net benefit to the United States, but conventional wisdom in the two countries begins with the opposite premise. Many Mexicans see migration to the United States positively as an “escape valve” and a source of remittances, while Americans exaggerate the costs to the United States. The main reason that emphasizing immigration was a mistake is that the United States won’t do the two things necessary to stem the flow of migrants: strict enforcement of employer sanctions for hiring illegal workers (because business wants a cheap, docile workforce) and creation of a fraud-proof national identification card (because it is expensive and some view it as intrusive). Migrants come to the United States for higher income, and so the only way to stop them is to narrow the income gap between Mexico and its northern neighbors. The North American Free Trade Agreement stimulated the economy of northern Mexico because of its proximity to the United States. The north grew 10 times faster than the south, but it served as a magnet, pulling labor from the south. Part of the solution to Mexico’s development problem should be to extend NAFTA to the south with new highways. Jobs would follow. Bush and Calderon should work with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper to create a North American Investment Fund to invest $20 billion a year for a decade in infrastructure — roads, ports, railroads, communications — to connect the southern part of Mexico with the lucrative North American market. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, has introduced a little-noticed bill for such a fund. The United States is unlikely to give any aid to Mexico unless Washington is convinced that the funds will be well spent. That is why we should take note of Calderon’s comments to Bush at their meeting Nov. 9 and hold him to them: “I did not come to the U.S. looking for the Americans to solve Mexico’s problems. We have to solve them on our own.” If Mexico undertakes needed reforms on energy, electricity, education, labor and taxes, and puts up half the money for the North American Investment Fund, the United States and Canada should pledge the other half. Such an initiative would stimulate the second-largest, but potentially fastest-growing, market for U.S. goods. Although it would not stop illegal migration soon, if the initiative succeeded in doubling Mexico’s growth rate, the income gap with the United States would be reduced by 20 percent in a decade, and Mexicans would begin to think about their future in Mexico rather than seek jobs to the north. The United States, Canada and Mexico should stop debating NAFTA and begin collaborating to make the continent more competitive. (Pastor is director of the Center for North American Studies at American University. This essay originally appeared in the Los Angeles Times.) |
![]() |
|
| Daniel\ | Dec 16 2006, 04:20 AM Post #2 |
![]()
Fulla-Carp
|
Does this have anything to do with the highway from Mexico to Canada without exits in the US? Does this highway exist or is it going to be built? I've been accused of being a conspiracy theorist but I swear I read about this in the newspaper. Colin Powell said "we called the presidents of Mexico and Canada and they said they couldn't do anything about it" and I thought "this is surreal". They're going to build a road through the US and we have nothing to say about it? Maybe I was dreaming. |
|
| |
![]() |
|
| Mikhailoh | Dec 16 2006, 08:05 AM Post #3 |
|
If you want trouble, find yourself a redhead
|
I agree that we, as one of the richest nations, cannot rightly be indifferent to the poverty to our south. The question remains, what can be done to improve Mexico's economy? |
|
Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead - Lucille Ball | |
![]() |
|
| David Burton | Dec 19 2006, 06:45 PM Post #4 |
|
Senior Carp
|
The question REALLY is, what can be done to improve Mexicans? |
![]() |
|
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |







4:57 PM Jul 10