nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

Yep. Caught again.

bdamage Loc: My Bunker

And the libs be like....

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

Sounds as if that poor woman was fleeing with her child, a desperate effort to escape her husband, who must be a right wing thug of the highest order..

Hope she makes it..

How about that other guy on the cover?

he looks like someone who was given a fortune by his criminal father and squandered the Millions on whores and in casinos to the point where he has to lie to his cult and have them provide him money for his
con operations..

And some of those cult followers truly believe him...LOLOOLOLOL, Isnt that outragiious.. the dumbest thing your ever heard??

People area that stupid....

bdamage Loc: My Bunker

"How about that other guy on the cover?"

"cult followers"?

Here ya go frosty...

In the REAL world...


You are the "cult follower" buddy

JoyV

I have a good friend who lost his business due to NAFTA. He struggled from soon after it was implemented until the 2008 crash put the nail in the coffin. I also was seeing a small business adviser where I've met several people whose small businesses were hit hard by NAFTA. More than half wound up closing. Others struggled.

NAFTA was good for a small percentage American businesses. But mostly it helps Mexican businesses at the expense of American ones. Often due to Mexican businesses which operate in the US under NAFTA not having to comply with the regulations American businesses need to operate under. And though large businesses are welcomed to operate in Mexico, small businesses are not. And the trouble you can get into for stepping on the wrong toes is far more serious than the trouble you can get into in the US. For instance, there are lots of regulation, fees, and laws truck drivers need to operate in the US. But under NAFTA, Mexican truck drivers can operate in the US but be exempt from US regulations, fees, and some of the laws.

Can you explain to me how American farmers are making more money under NAFTA? My economic understanding must be deficient.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

I made a lot of money after NAFTA,,,,,, but it had nothing to do with NAFTA....

So, I would say unless those small biz were doing working with Mexico/Canada and some regulations went against them, nothing would change..

I was under the impression that driver had to change at the border.. But have not been involved with trucking over the road biz for the time of the agreement..

American farmer and the ag biz had huge contracts for grain, hogs and mchy with Mexico and also with Canada..

when the orange mouth went on a rant about the trade agreement. Mexico moved contracts to Brazil and other nations for all of those things.

Combine the NAFTA loss with the loss of trade to China and a number of farmers may not survive to any kind of new contract...


http://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/370363-nafta-has-helped-grow-american-agriculture-for-two-decades

But it is hard to imagine that anything has been as important to America’s agricultural community over the last two decades than the sustained success provided by the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).


Among NAFTA’s many accomplishments, it has opened markets in Canada and Mexico to American farmers that would otherwise be closed completely or complicated by needless barriers. In 2016 alone, this resulted in $43 billion worth of food and agricultural goods being exported to Mexico and Canada, making those countries the largest export markets for American agriculture.

he growth driven by NAFTA has been nothing short of amazing. Agricultural exports from the United States to these two countries have grown by 450 percent since 1994 and Mexico is now the top export destination for a long list of U.S.-grown products, including beef, rice, soybean meal, corn sweeteners and apples. With record yields being produced across the United States, we’ve needed access to export markets more than ever and NAFTA has met the challenge.

The benefits of NAFTA are seen across various sectors within the American economy, however. For example, post-NAFTA, the U.S. food and agriculture industries have flourished and now support more than 43 million jobs and economists say NAFTA has boosted the U.S. economy by $127 billion annually. The benefits are wide-ranging, extending down to American consumers who pay less at the store for everything from avocados to televisions thanks to this trade agreement.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-trump-effect-corn-exclusive/exclusive-as-trump-trashes-nafta-mexico-turns-to-brazilian-corn-idUSKCN1G61J4?utm_source=applenews

Exclusive: As Trump trashes NAFTA, Mexico turns to Brazilian corn
P.J. Huffstutter, Adriana Barrera
8 MIN READ

CHICAGO/MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - Mexican buyers imported ten times more corn from Brazil last year amid concern that NAFTA renegotiations could disrupt their U.S. supplies, according to government data and top grains merchants.

Mexico is on track to buy more Brazilian corn in 2018, which would hurt a U.S. agricultural sector already struggling with low grains prices and the rising competitive threat from South America.

U.S. farmers, food processors and grain traders have spent months trying to prevent trade relationships from falling apart if the North American Free Trade Agreement implodes. They are trying to protect more than $19 billion in sales to Mexican buyers of everything from corn and soybeans to dairy and poultry.

Despite their efforts, South American corn shipments to Mexico are surging. Mexican buyers imported a total of more than 583,000 metric tonnes of Brazilian corn last year – a 970 percent jump over 2016, according to data from Mexico’s Agrifood and Fishery Information Service (SIAP).

The purchases all came in the last four months of last year. They followed visits by Mexican government officials and grains buyers to Brazil and Argentina to explore alternative supply options in the months after U.S. President Donald Trump took office and threatened to tear up the trade pact.

Mexico has long been the top importer of U.S. corn, and is the second largest buyer of U.S. soybeans, giving Mexico leverage in corn-belt states that are staunch Trump supporters but also strongly back the trade status quo.

Mexico’s Economy Minister Ildefonso Guajardo, who is overseeing Mexico’s NAFTA neogitating team, encouraged the country’s major grain buyers last year to explore South American corn to strengthen his hand at the negotiating table, saying the country needed a “Plan B” in case Washington pulled out of the trade deal.

JoyV

This is not a response to any one person's post. I have posted this elsewhere. It is not from an article but my own attempt to simplify the path taken which led to the current state of the problem of child separation.


Briefly here are some of the problems, solutions which were applied, and additional problems those solutions created starting with the Flores v Reno case:

1) Problem: Children incarcerated with their parents when the adults illegally crossed the border with children.
Solution: A 20 day limit on how long children could be kept in detention.
New problem: Children being separated from their parents after 20 days.

2) Children being separated from their parents after 20 days.
Solution: Speed up processing of adults by holding mass hearings.
New problem: Could not ensure everyone got a fair hearing.

3) Problem: Not every illegal getting fair hearing due to mass hearings.
Solution: Require each person to be individually addressed by the judge.
New problem: Back to longer processing times and separation of children.

4) Problem: Separation of children after 20 days.
Solution: Remove families from detention before 20 day limit through Catch and Release policy.
New problem: No shows at hearings and location of illegals unknown.

5) Problem. Catch and Release policy leading to illegals never being fully processed and thier whereabouts unknown.
Solution: Return to Zero Tolerance policy but with better holding facilities for both families and children.
New problem: Children again removed from parents.

6) Problem: Children removed from parents.
Solution: EO requiring children's return to parents or relative (or foster care if they can't be located).
New potential problem: Ignores the Flores v Reno law when parents are in detention, so the EO might be challenged and quashed.

Potential solution in my opinion: New legislation from Congress!!!!

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

Exactly what Trump has been calling for.

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

Perma has this problem;
TDS
http://static.onepoliticalplaza.com/upload/2018/6/24/t1-405573-libs8.jpg

bdamage Loc: My Bunker

Hold my beer and....