It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama smacks down Trump’s border wall plan

page: 16
18
<< 13  14  15   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 03:30 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth
The cost to Mexico, the country, would be barely noticed.

The brunt of the costs, which would be extremely minor relative to the gains, would be shouldered by the person sending the remittance.

And, yes, I did assume that the US has zero influence on electronic transfers from outside the US to Mexico...because the US has zero influence on those transfers. Mexico does have agreements with other nations.




posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 03:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: peck420
a reply to: UKTruth
The cost to Mexico, the country, would be barely noticed.

The brunt of the costs, which would be extremely minor relative to the gains, would be shouldered by the person sending the remittance.

And, yes, I did assume that the US has zero influence on electronic transfers from outside the US to Mexico...because the US has zero influence on those transfers. Mexico does have agreements with other nations.


Banks and clearing houses around the world are sharing data on transfers more than ever. At best its is difficult to send money anywhere without it being traced. China last year aggressively began to close off options for illegal money flows out of the country - not sure why they would bother if it was impossible to do?. Why would Bush bother to make it easier back in 2006 if it was no problem anyway to bypass the rules as they were then? What would happen if those old rules were reintroduced?

The point of the remittance tax on transfers is to reduce the money flow into the Mexican economy, which would be the case IF it could be enforced. I tend to go with the logic that it would have an impact given that there seemed to be a need to make it easier in 2006, plus Obama has openly admitted it would create turmoil within the Mexican economy.... why do you think he is wrong on this? .. and why do you think the 2006 initiative has no benefits that could be revoked?


Amid the discord ignited by Donald Trump’s idea to block money transfers to Mexico until it funds a wall it’s important to note that a U.S. government program is largely responsible for the billions in remittances flowing south of the border from illegal immigrants. The program is called “Directo a Mexico” (Direct to Mexico) and the Federal Reserve, the government agency that serves as the nation’s central bank, launched it nearly a decade ago. Judicial Watch investigated the outrageous taxpayer-subsidized initiative and obtained government records back in 2006. It was created by President George W. Bush following the 2001 U.S.-Mexico Partnership for Prosperity, undermines our nation’s immigration laws and is a potential national security nightmare. The goal was to provide low-cost banking services to illegal immigrants and facilitate the process for those sending money home. Remittances are transferred through the Federal Reserve’s own automated clearinghouse linked directly to Mexico’s central bank (Banco de Mexico). At the time Federal Reserve officials acknowledged that most of the Mexicans who send money home are illegal immigrants so a Mexican-issued identification is the only requirement to use the government banking service. A colorful brochure promoting “Directo a Mexico” offered to help immigrants who don’t have bank accounts and assured the best foreign exchange rate and low transfer fees. A frequently asked question section posed this: “If I return to Mexico or am deported, will I lose the money in my bank account?” The answer: “No. The money still belongs to you and can easily be accessed at an ATM in Mexico using your debit card.” In short, the U.S. created this special banking system specifically for illegal aliens and tens of billions of dollars have flowed through it, according to figures obtained by JW from Banco de Mexico. This is worth noting because news coverage of Trump’s plan to fund a wall along the Mexico-U.S. border has omitted this important information, instead focusing on the negative impact to the Mexican economy if remittances are cut. In fact, the mainstream newspaper that first published the Republican presidential candidate’s idea wrote that it “could decimate the Mexican economy.” Another article, published by a national newswire, said “any move to target payments sent home by people living in the United States could have a crushing financial effect in Mexico, the leading recipient of U.S. remittances.” Various other reports have focused on the devastating effects that cutting remittances will have on poor Mexicans that depend on their U.S. relatives to survive. Under the Republican presidential candidate’s plan, an anti-terrorism law would be used to halt remittances made by illegal aliens unless Mexico makes a payment of $5 billion to $10 billion for a wall along the southern border. President Obama called it a “half-baked” plan that would create turmoil within the Mexican economy and would result in more Mexicans fleeing to the U.S. looking for work, according to a news report. Mexico’s largest newspaper writes this week that Trump has shaken up that country’s government and his hostility towards Mexicans has threatened to make the U.S. a nightmare for all Mexicans, even if the billionaire businessman doesn’t win the presidential election.




edit on 8/4/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)

edit on 8/4/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 06:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Solarmania
a reply to: vethumanbeing

Desperate for what? And no, I just think Trump is a rich loser who plays the anti-establishment role and at the same time without that establishment he would be nothing. So he lies about his loyalties and insults minorities, Muslims his opponents whole states...everybody.So yes I think having a woman president is more important than electing a borderline personality like Trump because Hillary is corrupt. There isn't a politician or billionaire who is not(corrupt). The system is filled with scheming sociopaths.

Too bad Eleanor Roosevelt or Elizabeth Dole or Margaret Thatcher or Jan Brewer is NOT running for President. You picked the Democratic Machine's best woman candidate psychopath/narcissist (probably a sociopath; WELL CALLED).
edit on 8-4-2016 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 06:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: F4guy

originally posted by: vethumanbeing
a reply to: F4guy
I am guessing you reside on an odd flora/fauna rich environment that was formerly a French Colony? Madagascar? Did you fly Phantoms?

Where I live now was at various times under the flags of Spain, France and England. Yes to the Phantom question.

I salute you. Pilots within this family; cargo freighters (WWII) and the next generation; F16 Eagles and the next generation Air Force Academy Grads.
edit on 8-4-2016 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 06:40 PM
link   
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: UKTruth

UKTruth: If Trump said that, he'd be castigated by the media and bleeding hearts the world over for months!
That said, it's now clear what your opinion is.... that Trump won't be able to get drug lords to pay for the wall.

He could always threaten them with *jail time* or join his organization.

Annee: NO, that's not my opinion. My opinion is no one will get Mexican drug lords to pay for and build a fence on our southern border. Annexing Mexico as a territory might be a better answer.

If American Corporations building new facilities would be wise enough to build them along the border (Chihuahua, Sonora, Coahuila, Nuevo Leon, Baha, Maulipa) as a plan to annex the land in future. What drug lord will enter an armed Corporate camp? You should see the Michelin Uniroyal Goodrich Tire manufacturing plant in Mexico City. Its an armed CITY.
edit on 8-4-2016 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 06:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Annee

Drug lords "own" the Mexican government?
So that means all the government efforts to fight smuggling down there is just a show?
I think Trump is referring to trade and tariff balances to make them pay.
walls

I am shocked Guzman is not the President of Mexico by now (perceived as a modern day Robin Hood) even though he does not share the wealth; he could, just chooses not to. Think of it; a drug lord who's exported goods could comprise most of Mexico's GNP. It would be a first. Probably rate in Gross profit higher than North Korea/Cuba/Russia combined.
edit on 8-4-2016 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 06:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

If American Corporations building new facilities would be wise enough to build them along the border (Chihuahua, Sonora, Coahuila, Nuevo Leon, Baha, Maulipa) as a plan to annex the land in future. What drug lord will enter an armed Corporate camp? You should see the Michelin Uniroyal Goodrich Tire manufacturing plant in Mexico City. Its an armed CITY.


There is a program building warehouses on the Mexican side of the border. Its more economical to ship and store product for distribution to the USA. One of the reasons for those 2 major highways from Mexico to Alaska.

San Diego's airport is boxed in and can not expand. Most product to San Diego has to be delivered elsewhere and trucked in.

Los Angeles property has become too valuable to use for warehousing.



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 06:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Annee

Drug lords "own" the Mexican government?
So that means all the government efforts to fight smuggling down there is just a show?
I think Trump is referring to trade and tariff balances to make them pay.
walls

I am shocked Guzman is not the President of Mexico by now (perceived as a modern day Robin Hood) even though he does not share the wealth; he could, just chooses not to. Think of it; a drug lord who's exported goods could comprise mostl of Mexico's GNP. It would be a first.


There are good politicians in Mexico. Its just a losing battle.

Its not worth putting your family and yourself in danger. I doubt Mexico can clean up by itself.



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 07:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: boomerang1215
a reply to: Skywatcher2011
I am tired of seeing Mexicans in line with welfare card for food.They put a few hundred on it. Then they go to customer service . They get a money order to send back to Mexico. Then they get hurt. Go to our hospitals and get charity care. Unbelievable ! How stupid are we. That is why I am voting Trump , the way I understand lying Cruz Wii not use his God given name of Ralphael Cruz . Do not need a President who lies and is a shame of his name.

Doe's the name 'Ralph' as an English translation make a difference? "Ralph Cruz for POTUS". Ted would be Jose? (Joseph). You are describing some mysterious sticky wicket points.



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 07:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Annee

Drug lords "own" the Mexican government?
So that means all the government efforts to fight smuggling down there is just a show?
I think Trump is referring to trade and tariff balances to make them pay.
walls

I am shocked Guzman is not the President of Mexico by now (perceived as a modern day Robin Hood) even though he does not share the wealth; he could, just chooses not to. Think of it; a drug lord who's exported goods could comprise mostl of Mexico's GNP. It would be a first.


There are good politicians in Mexico. Its just a losing battle. Its not worth putting your family and yourself in danger. I doubt Mexico can clean up by itself.

I will say it first here! Go for the border locations (you American Corporations); and become a natural barrier to drug trafficking (I know you arm your facilities and able to do this). Annee does not need to have her lemon orchard as a natural border fence (sly one you). I should not have to put up a fence to keep illegals from coming to my back door (in dire straits). I had to. By Federal law I am Aiding and abetting.



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 07:40 PM
link   
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: vethumanbeing

vhb: If American Corporations building new facilities would be wise enough to build them along the border (Chihuahua, Sonora, Coahuila, Nuevo Leon, Baha, Maulipa) as a plan to annex the land in future. What drug lord will enter an armed Corporate camp? You should see the Michelin Uniroyal Goodrich Tire manufacturing plant in Mexico City. Its an armed CITY.


Annee: There is a program building warehouses on the Mexican side of the border. Its more economical to ship and store product for distribution to the USA. One of the reasons for those 2 major highways from Mexico to Alaska.San Diego's airport is boxed in and can not expand. Most product to San Diego has to be delivered elsewhere and trucked in. Los Angeles property has become too valuable to use for warehousing.

Nogales certainly. The warehouses are obvious (so close put rub marks on the fence when the wind blows). Mexican law enforcement is paid by El Chapo not to investigate (why would they as they are just play acting being enforcers). Mexico is out of control; and it resides along our southern border. Those that live in the 'hinterlands' *out of sight out of mind* (NO WALL ITS UNFAIR TO IMMIGRANTS) are not experiencing MY REALITY. I am surprised the series "Breaking Bad" and "Better Call Saul" seems not to make a difference on some level of popular (current) awareness.



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 10:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Annee


Also, if Mexico really is run by drug lords, then a crack down on the drug trade (instead of facilitating it!) could well be a lever to pull.


Another insanely good point, as a wall only increases the supply and demand. It doesn't STOP them, it makes it harder, yet more profitable.


Yeah, would love to see the designs drug lords come up with for a fence.
Wonder how many hidden tunnels they'd put in.


Drug lords and fences... we should probably stick with talking about the Mexican govt and walls.



What part of the Mexican government is as drug lords contributing to MONEY/INFLUENCE ; are you missing?
I am rejecting your entire premise. Why don't you substantiate your claim?
Why not then just MUG ALL others with a different imagination? Who is in charge of MEXICO? The drug cartels are in control of potential MONEY spent transferred. El Chapo cares little for his OWN people/sheeple and less for changing the Government of Mexico to better the circumstances of the people that live within its Borders.
edit on 8-4-2016 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 06:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Annee


Also, if Mexico really is run by drug lords, then a crack down on the drug trade (instead of facilitating it!) could well be a lever to pull.


Another insanely good point, as a wall only increases the supply and demand. It doesn't STOP them, it makes it harder, yet more profitable.



Yeah, would love to see the designs drug lords come up with for a fence.
Wonder how many hidden tunnels they'd put in.


Drug lords and fences... we should probably stick with talking about the Mexican govt and walls.



What part of the Mexican government is as drug lords contributing to MONEY/INFLUENCE ; are you missing?
I am rejecting your entire premise. Why don't you substantiate your claim?
Why not then just MUG ALL others with a different imagination? Who is in charge of MEXICO? The drug cartels are in control of potential MONEY spent transferred. El Chapo cares little for his OWN people/sheeple and less for changing the Government of Mexico to better the circumstances of the people that live within its Borders.




It's really simple, I do not believe that the drug cartels run the Mexican govt. I suspect, though don't know, they have influence. I'd just like some proof for the claim.

I have no objection to imagination and opinion, but that is not how this was couched.
edit on 9/4/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 12:34 PM
link   
I got a idea. Let the russians go into mexico and weed out all the drug cartels and as payment allow them a base of operations for their naval fleet,but in exchange we get to put up missile defenses in case they get any funny ideas.



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: vethumanbeing

So, you live near the border, as I do.

Bet your local news and publications have stories only heard locally.

Bet you have friends and aquaintenences direct from Mexico, who still have family there. That know how it really is in Mexico.


edit on 9-4-2016 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 08:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: vethumanbeing

So, you live near the border, as I do. Bet your local news and publications have stories only heard locally.
Bet you have friends and aquaintenences direct from Mexico, who still have family there. That know how it really is in Mexico.

I do live near the border. I have known illegals working here in the orchards seasonally and have done so loyally for 20 years same growers. Their problem is they don't have Mexico birth certificates; they cannot legally apply for or gain a green card in this country as cannot prove this is their legal name; they take all cash earned back to their tiny poor villages. They have funny stories as to how their connection works with the border policia (I am not an employer); and yes local news? forget it they didn't respond to my replies regarding the election fraud here on 29th of March (no polling stations open to the *human* visible eye).
edit on 9-4-2016 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 11:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: peck420

originally posted by: UKTruth
I think this is a good negotiating chip that Trump has identified.

Not really.

Ban remittance to Mexico, they will just send it to an intermediary first. Ban remittance to every host nation of intermediaries and you are gonna be awful short on trade partners.

Trump's plan has zero chance of working because it assumes that anything that occurs between the US and Mexico has no bearing on the relationship between the US and any other trade partner, which is far from the reality.



I guess it depends on who needs who more, right?

What's the average illegal gonna do about it?
Create a shell corp to open an offshore account?

What a great idea! I could do that.
Gimme the address and money and for only 35% i will get the money to your grandma.

And what exactly do you think the other countries can do about it anyway?

Extortion?

Hostages?

Seizing US assets?

Sending illegal money out of the country would be money laundering, wouldn't it?
A federal crime, if I'm not mistaken.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 13  14  15   >>

log in

join