Would a North American Union solve the immigration "problem?"

[BurtWorm]

At least insofar as Mexican and meso-American immigration is concerned? I'm talking about something on the model of the EU, in which citizens of member states use the same currency (preferably), have rights to travel and work in other member states, vote for members of a Union parliament, etc. Would such a system eventually improve the Latin American members' economies, such that traveling to the US would become less and less appealing, while at the same time instantly decriminalizing immigration? Would Americans ever consent to sharing their economy with Mexico and Canada and whoever else wants to join? Should the Democrats take a stand in favor or against an NAU?

[Walt Starr]

1. I believe opening up the Union to Mexico and Canada would be an easier

proposition to sell, but some form of economic union is not only necessary, it's inevitable.

[yvr girl]

2. I think the Canadian economy is doing better than the US

There would be benefits for Canada, but a lot of dangers too. We only have 32 million people, I think we'd be overshadowed pretty easily. I also think the US would want us to play by your rules, which wouldn't fly here.

[BurtWorm]

5. With the low-lifes in power in the US now, this isn't going to happen

anyway. But there might come a day when adults return to positions of power in the US. And they may believe, as DU's own Walt Starr does, that a union of some kind is inevitable. Would Canada ever find such a union attractive, if it could have equal input in the rule-making, for example? I would think the hardest part of getting such a union going would be convincing Americans that this wasn't some commie plot to take over the world.

[Robert Oak]

3. you've got a problem w/ that because Mexico is 3rd world

Mexico has massive corruption, a huge uneducated/unskilled population,
I believe horrific deficits and other financial problems..

so unlike the EU countries which were all 1st world economies I think
it would pull down the US economy as well as Canada dramatically.
w/ Canada it would be ok because it's 1st world - 1st world...like the
EU.

But, getting rid of a Mexico president whose answer to his starving,
poverty striken, citizens is to tell them to jump the border illegally...
plus ridding the massive corruption and wealth redistribution of tthe 20 families in Mexico who
hold most of the wealth and power through a socialist tax system, plus workers rights, environmental
rights to raise up Mexico I think is a very good idea..

right now the relationship seems to be

Vicente Fox: Mr. Bush, need cheap
labor you can exploit and pay less than minimum wage for your
meat packing, construction, Wal-mart and other industries? Ok, all of
you uneducated poverty stricken citizens...hey, get out of Mexico, cross
the border and assist in Mr. Bush's labor, union busting, workers rights busting, power destruction as well
as the new world order goals of having no concept of nations anymore..
only corporations.

After we (Vincente Fox and pals) have plundered the country for ourselves leaving our people in utter ruin and despair this seems
like a very good way to get rid of them!

=========================================
In general putting pressure on 3rd world countries for labor rights,
environmenal rights, workers rights and so forth can only be a good
idea..
but those multinationals aren't interested in that for the truth
of "globalization" should be "exploitation" of most people by the ruling elite.

We're basically going backwards into fuedalism, but instead of
lords and kings we have presidents and CEO's and note:
the kinds are not the presidents...the kings are CEO's and their
boards.

[Robert Oak]

6. i'll sign up for a deal w/ CA only if

Canada's laws and social norms and foreign policy are adopted by the US.
I'll also sign up for a blue state succession to Canada. :)

[BurtWorm]

7. Spain, Greece and Ireland were bordering on third world, though no longer

and now the Central European countries are in similarly bad shape, but several will be joining the Union. I don't know if the state of Mexico's economy is an argument against the union or in favor of it.

[Robert Oak]

10. i don't believe they were even close to the bad shape of

Mexico...

but this is interesting to see exactly how the EU gets them to prepare
for joining. I know they have to get their deficits under control and
many other things...

Seems their model is working while the "exploit" model of the WTO/GATS/C hina PNTR/NAFTA/CAFTA sure as hell isn't...

maybe this could be a model for future trade agreements at least...
how the EU analyzes and prepares a country for entry.

how bout the blue states join the EU? :)

[BurtWorm]

12. Consider what happened to Germany after reuniting

West Germany went from being the powerhouse economy in Europe to being a basketcase. That should indicate where the countries that didn't have a rich uncle to take them in would be after ten years of no Eastern bloc.

Turkey is another interesting case to watch. Not only is its economy less than stellar, but it has a very alien political culture (let alone religious one). But it probably will become a member state. How it becomes one will be interesting to watch.

[Robert Oak]

14. exactly Germany is one of the biggest models

showing what happens when one takes on another countries population
and problems...

this is the fundamental argument w/ illegal immigration...

here's a side note, of the the most famous trade analysis
talks about the best scenario is a 1st world - 3rd world trading
partner, but only under certain conditions.

I'm really wondering if the whole premise of this theory is wrong..
for seemingly anytime a 1st world economy mixes w/ a 3rd world one
it's a disaster for most of the 1st world people.

I guess my new project is going to be reading about the EU and how
exactly it set up the whole process of integrating in the 1st place.
It's currently a clear success.

[amazona]

4. don't know, it might help us all long run

The point of the EU is not to reduce migration of peoples but to facilitate it, you know. People can move easily and freely between nations and get jobs, etc. I wouldn't assume that everybody would instantly move to the United States if we all had the same rights to job, health care, etc. Many people, at least many older people, would pick up and move to Mexico. One trouble I see is that right now the only nation in such a union to offer universal health care is Canada. But there are other rules all nations in the union have to accept. For instance, no death penalty in the EU -- the United States would have to get onboard with Mexico about that instead of going on its merry way executing people. We would have to accept that some of our historic injustices don't look so good from the outside and need to be corrected -- just as we would expect Mexico to correct its injustices.

The EU is an impressive achievement to this visitor and I see a lot of advantages to the U.S. not just to Mexico of such a union. If we come at it with an attitude of the great United States giving a hand-out, then I think we've got an attitude problem that maybe needs to change. Mexico has a lot to offer and not just the oil and gas.

Canadians would also benefit by being able to travel, work, and study down here without so much paperwork.

I don't think just granting amnesty to the people most willing to break the law to move to the United States (or Mexico for that matter) is a terrific idea for anyone. We do need an answer to the problem of illegal immigration and other issues caused by these artificial lines on the map. A North American Union might be that answer. I've often thought about how great it would be for me personally if such a thing existed. (Yeah, I know, selfish.)

The conservation movement is a breeding ground of communists
and other subversives. We intend to clean them out,
even if it means rounding up every birdwatcher in the country.
--John Mitchell, US Attorney General 1969-72

[BurtWorm]

9. I wonder if it isn't inevitable, so we might as well facilitate it

It's a much more elegant solution to the "problem" than trying to close the borders or shut down the giant sub-economy illegal workers have going within the US. It would allow people to stay where they are, would save billions in immigration law enforcement... But we're so far from taking any of the steps. 9/11 has really screwed Americans up in their thinking about borders, for one thing.

[PeaceProgProsp]

8. I think people would choose to keep extended families together

but I still think people should be allowed to go wherever they want to find a high paying job.

So, yeah. If there were good unions all over the world and labor wasn't exploited in, say, Mexic, a lot of laborers would probably keep their families together in Mexico.

But if a New York law firm wanted to hire a Mexican attorney or secretary or janitor, that Mexican should be allowed to take that job. If anyone in one country wanted to start a home-building company in another country, they should be able to go wherever there's a great homebuilding marketplace and engage competitively in that industry.

[Maple]

11. Thanks for the invite, eh?

But....no.

[BurtWorm]

13. Just curious: why not?

What would Canada stand to lose, do you think? I think it might stand to lose some of the arrogance of its next door neighbor. Possibly.

[applegrove]

15. People whose wages are going down are really going to be for 66 Million

Mexicans having a right to compete for their jobs.

It does nothing for Canada. We have it pretty good up here. Why the hell would we want to join with you and have your problems?

Me - I'd love to join Canada to Kuwait!

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.