1
   

Do Not Vacation in Mexico

 
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Apr, 2006 03:35 pm
But the explosion that would result from the match may destroy all of Mexico.
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Apr, 2006 01:22 pm
A friend just returned from a trip to Mexico and brought back a couple of Cuban Cohibas for me. (Those are cigars, for those who don't partake.)

I'll bet that's a tale to inflame cjhsa for hours...
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Apr, 2006 02:19 pm
When you cross from Detroit to Windsor, and head east on Huron Church Road, it seems as though every other store front is either a strip joint, or a tobacconist prominently advertising Cuban cigars . . .
0 Replies
 
Bella Dea
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Apr, 2006 03:01 pm
****, if we have to throw out those who are not true American citizens because their ancestors came here illegally....that would include me, since my great great grandfather was a stowaway on a ship.

Are you going to stone me back to where I belong?
0 Replies
 
Bella Dea
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Apr, 2006 03:04 pm
cjhsa wrote:
dagmaraka wrote:
...and your point is?


The illegal part. Too many "legals" really aren't, IMO, because their parents cheated the system to allow them to be born here.


This is what I was referring to, btw.
0 Replies
 
Anon-Voter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Apr, 2006 03:05 pm
Since my family got here in 1656, I frankly think that all you foreigners that got here after 1660 should leave, go back home, and leave it to us REAL Amurrikans!!

Anon
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Apr, 2006 03:06 pm
O.K.

So, if everyone in the U.S. follows cjhsa's reco not to vacation in Mexico, there will be fewer tourist-related (and other) jobs in Mexico, and more incentive to try to get to the U.S. where there are jobs.

Less American tourists in Mexico as a way of decreasing illegal immigration from Mexico to the U.S. I guess it makes sense in some parallel universe.
0 Replies
 
Anon-Voter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Apr, 2006 03:08 pm
ehBeth wrote:
O.K.

So, if everyone in the U.S. follows cjhsa's reco not to vacation in Mexico, there will be fewer tourist-related (and other) jobs in Mexico, and more incentive to try to get to the U.S. where there are jobs.

Less American tourists in Mexico as a way of decreasing illegal immigration from Mexico to the U.S. I guess it makes sense in some parallel universe.


Or a galaxy, far far away ...

Use the force Luke!!

Anon
0 Replies
 
Pantalones
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Apr, 2006 11:41 pm
Please move this thread to Politics.

I'm now worried, I can't stay in my home for vacations.
0 Replies
 
dagmaraka
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Apr, 2006 11:42 pm
Oh, people won't stop going just because of a few bitter sourpusses, Joe. I will certainly go to Mexico and when I do go, I hope to see you again.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Apr, 2006 11:56 pm
(gradually dawning on me in as I land in my new hometown, I'm much closer to Mexico. Hmmm, an a2k mexico meet some day?)
JL once mentioned - I think it was, as a nice place to live - Tonala'? can't remember, though I looked it up at the time. Sort of near Mexico city in the mountains, and started with T.
0 Replies
 
Pantalones
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Apr, 2006 12:03 am
I know dag, I don't anyone's views will change from reading this thread.

I hope you come near Tijuana or catch me doing the all-over Mexico trip I've been planning since 3 years ago but probably won't do soon.
0 Replies
 
Pantalones
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Apr, 2006 12:07 am
Toluca, perhaps?

About one hour from Mexico City to the north, well over 2km high.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Apr, 2006 12:19 am
That was it, Toluca. I looked it up and it sounded industrial... but on the other hand, that is no more a dissuader than anything else, for me. He remembered it as a good possible place for someone like me to land, back when I was looking more widely, a couple of years ago.
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Apr, 2006 01:25 am
Do Not Vacation in Mexico

or France
or Canada
or Venezuela
or Russia
or China
or Cuba
or ...............
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Apr, 2006 01:54 am
NAFTA Remember that? We protested it. But we were no match for corperate America and everybody just laghed in our face. Just like Global warming, Iraq and 9/11.


NAFTA Controversy


NAFTA has been controversial since it was first proposed. Transnational corporations have tended to support NAFTA in the belief that lower tariffs would increase their profits. Labor unions in Canada and the United States have opposed NAFTA for fear that jobs would move out of the country due to lower labor costs in Mexico. Some politicians, economists, and policy experts have opposed free trade for fear that it will turn countries, such as Canada, into permanent branch plant economies. Farmers in Mexico have opposed and still oppose NAFTA because the heavy agriculture subsidies for farmers in the United States have put a great deal of downward pressure on Mexican agricultural prices, forcing many farmers out of business. Wages there have decreased by as much as 20 percent in some sectors. NAFTA's approval was quickly followed by an uprising amongst Zapatista revolutionaries, and tension between them and the Mexican government remains a major issue. Furthermore, NAFTA was accompanied by dramatic reduction of the influence of trade unions in Mexico's urban areas. NAFTA has been accompanied by a dramatic increase of illegal immigration from Mexico to the United States; presumably, a significant fraction of these people are farmers forced off their land by bankruptcy. Opposition to NAFTA also comes from environmental, social justice, and other advocacy organizations that believe NAFTA has detrimental non-economic impacts to public health, the environment, etc


On September 6, 2001, Fox and Bush met as newly elected presidents and agreed to work "matching willing workers with willing employers" and "ensuring migration takes place through safe and legal channels, but the events of September 11 stopped the negotiations and shifted the debate in the United States towards a migration policy where security is the main goal. As a consequence in December 2001 US and Canada a NAFTA wide security zone and announced a "smart border" accord to speed commuters and truckers by the use of electronic passes through the check points.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Apr, 2006 05:30 am
Lots of American retirees in Guadalajara, too (or once were, at any event). Beautiful city, at about a mile in elevation, so hot days are followed by cool nights. I would not mind living there, despite the heat, because of the relaxed, friendly atmosphere i saw there. Of course, the last thrity years of American retirees may well have spoiled that by now . . .
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Apr, 2006 05:58 am
dlowan wrote:
Eryemil wrote:
That is not becoming cjhsa.


You don't think 'e orta?

Ha ha ha!

cjhsa wrote:
Until the illegals stop their insurgency, don't patronize their homeland.

Insurgency? Like in Iraq? Did I miss something?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Apr, 2006 06:01 am
Eryemil wrote:
Reyn wrote:
10 pages of.....??? Rolling Eyes

<sheesh!>


Gayness.

Ha! Eryemil, you're great ;-)
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Apr, 2006 06:07 am
cjhsa wrote:
Eryemil wrote:
Then again, look at the US. Anyone know what percent of the population Native Americans make?


They make tons of money, as they own all of the casinos outside of Vegas and Jersey.

They also have special exemptions when it comes to fish and wildlife.

Oh. Well, that makes all the mass murder and genocide against them ok, then. They have special exemptions when it comes to fish and wildlife.
0 Replies
 
 

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/27/2024 at 01:57:59