Mexico's Outrage . . .

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

. Interesting. I've been all over Mexico but I've never seen a retail environment that is comparable to what we have even here in a small border city like McAllen,

Really?

I went to Mexico city for a couple of days a few years ago and found retail environments that rival anything in even medium sized US cities without even looking for them. Let's Google it.

Look: https://theculturetrip.com/north-america/mexico/articles/8-shopping-malls-mexico-city/

They look every bit as good to me as this does:

http://www.simon.com/mall/la-plaza-mall/map

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Gap between rich and poor is irrelevant. One cares about the average person's health, wealth, and longevity. Clearly there is a big difference between the two (although I understand Mexico may be fatter than the US.)

Well lets look at life expectancy:

Mexico 77.1
USA 78,7
Canada 81.2

So again we see Mexico is closer to the US than the US is to Canada.

 

[Aepervius]

Well, maybe income inequality isn't the right phrase. When almost half of your country lives in poverty, that sounds like pretty bad inequality to me. I'm not saying the US is a paragon of income equality, but it is much better in that regard than Mexico -which is why so many Mexicans risk their lives to get to the US.
And let's expand this a little bit. If you are a poor person in Mexico, your life sucks. Sure there are some government help programs but they are clearly not enough. You don't have good roads, access to good transportation, secure housing, That half of Mexico that lives in poverty actually lives in third-world conditions -especially in the South of Mexico where poverty is even worse.

Sorry, but if you compare the poor of Mexico to those of the US and Canada, there is no way you can argue that Mexico is to the US as the US is to Canada. That's what I'm getting at.

Illegal immigration from mexico has slowed down, compared to all other nation, up to the point that the mexican population in 2012 was lower than the one in 2008.

http://immigration.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000845

In other word, it was estimated that mexican folk were going from the US , TO mexico as a net result (more going back than coming).

Blow your mind, ain't it ?

 

[Praktik]

1) The profits from a steady flow of drugs into the US. Cut the drug routes into the US and you disempower the cartels massively.

Can you point to where that has actually happened?

Cutting routes seems to have a few impacts:


A) potential for highly localized price spikes in immediate days following closure of a route
B) development of alternate routes which quickly replace the original

Seems to me the wall shouldn't change a thing with respect to the drug trade. There will be places to cross the border. Those places have a high throughput and fallible people to manage the crossings.

Who knows, with mass hiring to up the numbers maybe quality of personnel will suffer and drugs will be more easily imported.

Besides land routes are only part of the picture, boats, submarines, air travel, shipping container ships, integration into supply lines of legit businesses where corrupt personnel utilize them to move drugs on the side.

We'll see the same thing we saw for the last 30 years in the war on drugs from increased enforcement budgets and a multi billion dollar wall: increasing purity, availability and cheaper prices.

That's been the consistent trend no matter which president promised X billion to crack down on the problem - why do we expect different results this time?

 

[bruto]

Really?

I went to Mexico city for a couple of days a few years ago and found retail environments that rival anything in even medium sized US cities without even looking for them. Let's Google it.

Look: https://theculturetrip.com/north-america/mexico/articles/8-shopping-malls-mexico-city/

They look every bit as good to me as this does:

http://www.simon.com/mall/la-plaza-mall/map

Yes, but McAllen has a J.C. Penney. Closing the border will do them lots of good if they don't finish going bankrupt first, because most of the sweatshops and maquilladoras they get their stuff from are either in Asia or Central America. Make Amreeka great again!

 

[Cavemonster]

Can you point to where that has actually happened?

Cutting routes seems to have a few impacts:


A) potential for highly localized price spikes in immediate days following closure of a route
B) development of alternate routes which quickly replace the original

Seems to me the wall shouldn't change a thing with respect to the drug trade. There will be places to cross the border. Those places have a high throughput and fallible people to manage the crossings.

Who knows, with mass hiring to up the numbers maybe quality of personnel will suffer and drugs will be more easily imported.

Besides land routes are only part of the picture, boats, submarines, air travel, shipping container ships, integration into supply lines of legit businesses where corrupt personnel utilize them to move drugs on the side.

We'll see the same thing we saw for the last 30 years in the war on drugs from increased enforcement budgets and a multi billion dollar wall: increasing purity, availability and cheaper prices.

That's been the consistent trend no matter which president promised X billion to crack down on the problem - why do we expect different results this time?

Is your position that no action and no amount of money spent trying to restrict drug traffic can materially impact the drug trade's bottom line?

I agree that Trump's wall in particular will just send routes elsewhere, but are you saying that we are entirely powerless to disrupt this flow no matter the intervention?

 

[Dr. Keith]

No, feel free to broaden it if you want. My point, though, isn't really about the larger relationship between the US and Mexico. it's about the disconnect. One one hand, these people denounce klarfrajas/wealth inequality/economic unfairness/etc and on the other they want to continue to benefit from a system that exhibits a high degree of economic exploitation.

Who are these people? Your "friends" that we can not involve in the conversation and who can not clarify or defend your representation of their views or actual pundits or politicians whose words and actions may be examined?

You may have friends who are idiots or you may not be representing their thoughts fairly. Neither concern me much.

 

[dudalb]

It is nice to see that you have so much concern for the people of Mexico.

They are all Untermensch anyway.

 

[xjx388]

Really?

I went to Mexico city for a couple of days a few years ago and found retail environments that rival anything in even medium sized US cities without even looking for them. Let's Google it.

Look: https://theculturetrip.com/north-america/mexico/articles/8-shopping-malls-mexico-city/

They look every bit as good to me as this does:

http://www.simon.com/mall/la-plaza-mall/map

Oh sure, I'm sure Mexico City (never been) has great shopping. I'm thinking places like Monterrey, San Luis Potosi which certainly isn't devoid of shopping but has nowhere near the selection of McAllen. After speaking with a friend of mine who lives in Monterrey, the main reason they come here to shop is that it's much cheaper to buy stuff here. The markup related to import taxes and such is enough to make it a bargain to cross over and shop here. I wonder how much tax it would take to truly discourage them from coming.

 

[Dr. Keith]

Is your position that no action and no amount of money spent trying to restrict drug traffic can materially impact the drug trade's bottom line?

Increased shipping prices only hurt the customer if there is only one supplier. Americans have show a real appetite to pay whatever it takes to get their goods from across the border. If you really want to hurt the cartels, legalization seems like the more fruitful path.

 

[xjx388]

Who are these people? Your "friends" that we can not involve in the conversation and who can not clarify or defend your representation of their views or actual pundits or politicians whose words and actions may be examined?

You may have friends who are idiots or you may not be representing their thoughts fairly. Neither concern me much.

Fair enough. I just figured this would be a good sounding board. Maybe there are nuances I haven't considered. I do appreciate the responses I've gotten here.

 

[Resume]

The markup related to import taxes and such is enough to make it a bargain to cross over and shop here. I wonder how much tax it would take to truly discourage them from coming.

nm

 

[Cavemonster]

Increased shipping prices only hurt the customer if there is only one supplier. Americans have show a real appetite to pay whatever it takes to get their goods from across the border. If you really want to hurt the cartels, legalization seems like the more fruitful path.

For one thing, I think you're overestimating the elasticity in price.

The real junkies are already paying about as much as they can muster. People who are not seriously addicted are capable of being put off by prohibitively large prices. Make things expensive enough and you spur the locally "cooked" or grown markets.

All that is if you simply view the efforts as adding expense. If they also diminish the rate of flow of drugs, again, they can only make them so much more expensive. Less product flowing in, less money flowing back.

Add to that that competent security measures would make arrest while transporting more likely, cutting down on the qualified labor and making it less attractive.

I'm on board that are current efforts aren't working. I certainly think the whole idea of a solid wall is a poor use of resources and dumb for a million other reasons, but I have a hard time believing that no intervention, even if we're looking at the billions that would be spent on this wall, could make a reasonable dent.

On the subject of legalization, we likely will legalize cannabis although it may take a bit longer given our current administration. While that may hurt cartels, we'll never legalize the other drugs they run, so the effect is limited.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Mexico may be our #3 trading partner, but we have to be their #1. Time for them to kow-tow to Trump.

Trump was not elected king, you know. You think corporate America is going to let their Congressional puppets go along with mucking up their international trade?

 

[chrispy]

. If what you say is true ... What I do know is that losing that business is a big concern to the Mayors and retail industry here on the border.

Trust me, it is true. Also, again, the border is but a small area of one very large, diverse country. Mexico, that is. The fact that Mexico is the second largest purchaser of American goods isn't because of people going over the border to buy. It is BECAUSE the goods are available here to purchase. I wonder where in Mexico you have gone, because it is largely a consumer culture (not much different than in the US). Yes, there is more poverty, but even poor people find ways to buy things they want even if they don't need them.

 

[Garrison]

Is your position that no action and no amount of money spent trying to restrict drug traffic can materially impact the drug trade's bottom line?

I agree that Trump's wall in particular will just send routes elsewhere, but are you saying that we are entirely powerless to disrupt this flow no matter the intervention?

Not powerless, but you aren't going to stop all of it and what gets through makes the cartels rich. Simply making the physical barrier on the border longer and higher isn't going to affect that, nor is Trump's insistence on blaming Mexican's for meeting the US demand for narcotics.

 

[dudalb]

Not powerless, but you aren't going to stop all of it and what gets through makes the cartels rich. Simply making the physical barrier on the border longer and higher isn't going to affect that, nor is Trump's insistence on blaming Mexican's for meeting the US demand for narcotics.

I am betting a lot of the Drugs don't come across the land border, but come in ships, etc. ANyway, with drugs such a profitable product, even if the wall is built the Cartel will find a way to export their product.

 

[Dr. Keith]

Oh sure, I'm sure Mexico City (never been) has great shopping. I'm thinking places like Monterrey, San Luis Potosi which certainly isn't devoid of shopping but has nowhere near the selection of McAllen. After speaking with a friend of mine who lives in Monterrey, the main reason they come here to shop is that it's much cheaper to buy stuff here. The markup related to import taxes and such is enough to make it a bargain to cross over and shop here. I wonder how much tax it would take to truly discourage them from coming.

My mom drives three hours to go to an outlet mall. She can afford retail but likes to think she is getting a deal.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I am betting a lot of the Drugs don't come across the land border, but come in ships, etc. ANyway, with drugs such a profitable product, even if the wall is built the Cartel will find a way to export their product.

Tunnels.

 

[Praktik]

Is your position that no action and no amount of money spent trying to restrict drug traffic can materially impact the drug trade's bottom line?

I agree that Trump's wall in particular will just send routes elsewhere, but are you saying that we are entirely powerless to disrupt this flow no matter the intervention?

One could read your post as if it was clear that money and efforts spent on drug enforcement have some track record of success by which we should judge the wall. (I was reading into your post a claim that there may be some incremental effort to drug enforcement by creating the wall - I was countering this by questioning whether enforcement had any track record of success by which further spend could be justified)

Its been clear ever since some important RAND studies in the 90s that treatment is a far better spend if you're looking to curb the harm done to society from drugs.

That being said, is it possible some hypothetical enforcement scenario could "materially impact" the drug trade?

Maybe, for a week or two. Right?

Where is the success story we can point to that tells us to expect any different?