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.

 

Mexican President postures, cancels Tuesday meeting with Trump

page: 6
26
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 02:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: UKTruth
They are not obligated to helping US border security, but they should not be hindering it.

How are they hindering the building of the wall?

They won't pay.




posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 02:01 PM
link   
Its craziness, its like rich people asking for poor people to pay for the wall around their wealthy community.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 02:04 PM
link   
a reply to: WilsonWilson

please, don't give them any ideas!! they'd probably think they are great, why didn't we think of that, and low and behold the poorest of the poor in chicago will be paying for the rich to build themselves fortresses!


edit on 26-1-2017 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 02:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

That is what makes this all so much smoke and mirrors. If the plan was to use US funds and then get it back through taxes on remittances and tariffs then what was going to be negotiated?

If the US position is so strong then why not just start building and follow through on the plan?



edit on 26-1-2017 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 02:18 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

Yeah. Just a huge waste of tax money. Our children will be LOVING us in 20 years...



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 02:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Krazysh0t

That is what makes this all so much smoke and mirrors. If the plan was to use US funds and then get it back through taxes on remittances and tariffs then what was going to be negotiated?

If the US position is so strong then why not just start building and follow through on the plan?




I suspect that is exactly what will happen.
The planning started yesterday.
Doing something WITH Mexico would clearly be better.
I also think Trump will go further than he was going to in response to Nieto's move. (e.g. DACA and DAPA position gets announced in 4 weeks)
edit on 26/1/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 03:00 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Yeah, and mexico "gave him permission" to build the wall last time they met.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 03:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: UKTruth

Yeah, and mexico "gave him permission" to build the wall last time they met.


It was not about permission. According to Trump he wanted to talk about a much broader joint effort(more than the wall) that would benefit Mexico as well.
Trump was always going to build the wall no matter what Mexico think about it. Building it is none of their business, only paying for it is their role.
edit on 26/1/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 03:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: WilsonWilson
Its craziness, its like rich people asking for poor people to pay for the wall around their wealthy community.


Excactly. But we also must acknowledge that the poor people are violent and steal from the rich people so we told them build the wall or you will starve to death. Let's see what they decide.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 03:19 PM
link   
This is Trump doing his Trump thing, also known as "The Art of the Deal."

You make an initial outrageous demand, and expect your adversary to be outraged and refuse it.

Then you can get down to negotiations without the egos. If you look at all of Trump's previous deals, his ego and thin skin are all an act. It is a mask he puts on when it will give him the advantage in negotiations.

The truth is, Mexico doesn't have a lot of options here. With world oil prices plummeting, the US is the only really interested importer of PEMEX oil. America's thirst for mexican oil was already waning before the election, anyway. So the relationship between US and MEX was already in decline. Trump is just pointing out how irrelevant our existing agreements with Mexico really are.

And the Chinese and Russians have zero incentive for developing mexico. China won't do anything that would compete with it's port access to San Diego, and MFN status with Uncle Sam. Russia cannot afford oil under $50 as it is. GAZPROM is taking a beating and the Russian GDP is in a steep downward slide. Propping up mexico would cost them everything and piss off Trump, who holds the key to Putin's project of a Syrian port....

NAFTA is fundamentally tilted in favor of Mexico, because it ignores the V.A.T. tax in mexico, which American vendors have to pay there; yet Americans cannot tax Mexican vendors in the US with an income tax, so Mexican-produced goods are "artificially cheap" in the states.

It was wrong in 1993, and it hasn't gotten better in 24 years.

And NAFTA prevents the US from putting a tax on mexican goods coming into the USA, even to pay for a wall or for immigration controls. In fact, you cannot keep mexican nationals from driving Mexican trucks into the US, with no CDL, (their government issues them their own "international drivers license", but the US isn't allowed to question it, and it doesn't have the requirements of a US CDL). which an American citizen is required to have, to drive a truck here.

That's what this fight is REALLY about.

If NEITO will willingly scrap NAFTA, it makes trump's job faster, and he doesn't have to go through congress to undo Nafta.

Obviously, the way to pay for the wall is a $15 fee on Mexican visas to the US, and a $25 fee on all Western Union Transfers of dollars into Mexico (how 95% of illegals send money home.). Of course, NAFTA doesn't allow for either of those....



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 03:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth
It was not about permission.

Of course not but it was the BS he came back with from their last meeting.


According to Trump he wanted to talk about a much broader joint effort(more than the wall) that would benefit Mexico as well.

The US and Mexico have been holding hands for decades. Look up "Merida Initiative". That is about 10 years of working together.


Trump was always going to build the wall no matter what Mexico think about it. Building it is none of their business, only paying for it is their role.

Actually neither of it is their business. Why would Trump act like either or both of them are?
edit on 26-1-2017 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 03:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: UKTruth
It was not about permission.

Of course not but it was the BS he came back with from their last meeting.


According to Trump he wanted to talk about a much broader joint effort(more than the wall) that would benefit Mexico as well.

The US and Mexico have been holding hands for decades. Look up "Merida Initiative"


Trump was always going to build the wall no matter what Mexico think about it. Building it is none of their business, only paying for it is their role.

Actually neither of it is their business. Why would Trump act like either or both of them are?


I can't recall him ever saying he was seeking permission from Mexico to build the wall.

What the countries have done together in the past is irrelevant. Negotiations between countries on several fronts to change the status quo are commonplace.

He's going to force Mexico to pay for it (or at least try to) whether they want to or not, so it is their business, obviously. Hence they have reacted to it.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 03:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: UKTruth

and just how is getting suckered into shelling out billions for a wall that we want helping his people??

since when is the country who you are protecting your borders from obligated to pay for your security measures?



They are not obligated to helping US border security, but they should not be hindering it.
Trump can extract billions from Mexico whether they like it or not.
Nieto should have tried to get something in return. Now what is he going to do?

Cool beans. So, hypothetically, if Canada turns to the US and says "You down there, a wall, build one. Whole border, and don't skip Alaska. Oh, and pony up the bucks for this or else" that's fair then?

The country the construct is built within is responsible for the cost of it, not the neighbors. We're eating this one like it or not. Tariffs won't cover it because trade with us will cease.
edit on 1/26/2017 by Nyiah because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 03:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nyiah

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: UKTruth

and just how is getting suckered into shelling out billions for a wall that we want helping his people??

since when is the country who you are protecting your borders from obligated to pay for your security measures?



They are not obligated to helping US border security, but they should not be hindering it.
Trump can extract billions from Mexico whether they like it or not.
Nieto should have tried to get something in return. Now what is he going to do?

Cool beans. So, hypothetically, if Canada turns to the US and says "You down there, a wall, build one. Whole border, and don't skip Alaska. Oh, and pony up the bucks for this or else" that's fair then?

The country the construct is built within is responsible for the cost of it, not the neighbors. We're eating this one like it or not. Tariffs won't cover it because trade with us will cease.


Nope.
However if the US govt was helping it's citizens illegally enter Canada and telling them how to avoid detection, then Canada would have a valid complaint

www.nytimes.com...
edit on 26/1/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 03:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth
I can't recall him ever saying he was seeking permission from Mexico to build the wall.

He didn't. He said Mexico agreed to the wall as if they actually had any say about what a sovereign country does. He acted like he had been seeking permission when none was given because none was needed.


What the countries have done together in the past is irrelevant. Negotiations between countries on several fronts to change the status quo are commonplace.

It isn't in the past. It is on-going.


He's going to force Mexico to pay for it (or at least try to) whether they want to or not, so it is their business, obviously. Hence they have reacted to it.

It isn't their responsibility to pay for it although it is in their interest to not pay for it.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 03:53 PM
link   
And here we go...

Trump wants 20% tax on imports from Mexico to pay for wall
www.cnn.com...

It's going to destroy the US Auto Industry that Pres. Obama saved...

Michigan...It's like he is looking to punish the states that got him there...

FYI


Buyers of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV's popular Ram 1500 pickup trucks assembled in Saltillo, Mexico, could see their $26,000 base price pushed up by $9,000 if the tariff is fully passed on to consumers. A Chrysler spokesman declined to comment on Trump's statements.

...


LOWER INCOMES

It would take years for U.S. industry to rebuild supply chains devastated by sudden tariff hikes on Chinese and Mexican goods and any retaliatory measures, said Peter Petri, a Brandeis University professor who has co-authored an influential study on the effects of the TPP trade deal on national income.

Even if U.S. firms were able to make such a transition, Petri said this would likely result in a permanent annual reduction in U.S. national income of more than $100 billion, or 0.8 percent

www.reuters.com...



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 03:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: UKTruth
I can't recall him ever saying he was seeking permission from Mexico to build the wall.

He didn't. He said Mexico agreed to the wall as if they actually had any say about what a sovereign country does. He acted like he had been seeking permission when none was given because none was needed.


What the countries have done together in the past is irrelevant. Negotiations between countries on several fronts to change the status quo are commonplace.

It isn't in the past. It is on-going.


He's going to force Mexico to pay for it (or at least try to) whether they want to or not, so it is their business, obviously. Hence they have reacted to it.

It isn't their responsibility to pay for it although it is in their interest to not pay for it.


So, he did not ever say he was seeking permission. Correct.

The Merida Initiative was agreed in the past and like I said, has nothing to do with any future developments that Mexico and the USA could or will make. The fact that Mexico and the USA have worked together for a long time does not mean that new agreements can not be reached or discussed. Obviously.


What is in their interest to do is irrelevant also to the discussion on Mexico paying for the wall. The discussion was whether it was their business, which it clearly is.
edit on 26/1/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 03:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

Continued on trumps 20% tariff on Mexican goods..



Such a tariff on goods and services would be paid by U.S. consumers and businesses -- people buying anything from avocados and tequila to automobiles. Energy companies, big retailers and other major business interests oppose such an import tax, arguing that it would drive up prices in the United States, curb demand, and erode profits.

On its face, that doesn't appear to fulfill President Donald Trump's oft-repeated vow to force Mexico to pay for the barrier, which Mexican leaders have made clear they don't want and certainly won't agree to pay for.


If anything, it's a tacit admission that the Trump administration can't cajole or coerce Mexico into paying for the project, at least in the near term.

www.dallasnews.com...



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 04:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

Nieto just cost his country a lot of money, just because he got upset about a wall.
Shame.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 04:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth
So, he did not ever say he was seeking permission. Correct.

Of course not. He acted like he had gotten it.


The Merida Initiative was agreed in the past and like I said, has nothing to do with any future developments that Mexico and the USA could or will make. The fact that Mexico and the USA have worked together for a long time does not mean that new agreements can not be reached or discussed. Obviously.

On-going means that it is still in effect. What may come may be different but to date it is still there.


What is in their interest to do is irrelevant also to the discussion on Mexico paying for the wall. The discussion was whether it was their business, which it clearly is.

Paying for it is very relevant and their business. Either way it is not their responsibility.



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join