Forums > General > General Forum

1 2 3 View All

YucaLandia

Sep 11, 2010, 10:15 AM

Post #1 of 64 (4564 views)

Shortcut

US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

Surely Mexico's problems and US complicities are limited to only drug-related Narco-Traficante driven issues?

It is clear that NAFTA and GATT "agreements" have had minimal effects on the everyday lives of ordinary Mexican and even less impact on small Mexican farms, since only 7 million or so former farmers moved North to avoid being crushed by US Govt. farm subsidies that reduced the value of Mexican corn by 64% (1985-1999) due to artificial (US govt. driven) corn surpluses that flooded the Mexican market, and shifted the balance of food trade to the point that Mexico now imports over 70% of her food from the US, and in 2006, agriculture accounted for only 3.9% of GDP, down from 7% in 1980, and 25% in 1970.
https://www.cia.gov/...ok/geos/mx.html#Econ , http://dgcnesyp.inegi.gob.mx/bdiesi/bdie.html & http://www.iie.com/...ew/332/05iie3349.pdf

Other Citations for facts listed: http://useconomy.about.com/...p/NAFTA_Problems.htm, http://books.google.com/...ge&q&f=false & http://useconomy.about.com/...cancun/mythtrade.htm , http://www.fas.usda.gov/...factsheets/NAFTA.asp & http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Mexico.

i.e. There really have been few effects from US taxpayers agreeing to 3 decades of Congressional subsidizing the forced dumping of American corn onto Mexican markets, as shown by studies demonstrating years of US Govt. agricultural policies that made corn "cost an average of $3.41 a bushel to produce in the U.S. and sold on the international market for $2.28 a bushel." There clearly is no cause-and-effect going-on here in the creation of illegal immigrants who move to seek work and the near crushing of an entire sector of the Mexican economy (reduction from 25% of GDP to under 4% of Mexican GDP - and where did those farmers move to?). There also is no clear relationship between the intentional manipulation of corn prices by the US Govt using billions of US taxpayer dollars and Mexican farmers switching from money-losing corn production, instead to profitable marijuana production.

I also note that there are no other US influences in dramatic social and living changes in Mexico due to Madison Avenue marketing campaigns & Hollywood's cultural messages on materialism: who and what is beautiful, what we need to be happy, and their heavy promotion of the virtues of patience, humility, charity, self-denial, self-sacrifice & compassion.

Wall Street's creative investment banking schemes clearly played no role in the health of the Mexican state and the health of the Mexican economy, after a decade of US Govt approved 30:1 margin lending, naked short selling that created over 30 million shares of virtual stock shares (see collapse of Bear Stern and Lehman Brothers), Wall Street's intentional bundling and peddling of $60 billion in junk/toxic mortgages, and credit default swaps that allowed "investors' to put (bet) borrowed money on wagers that Hurricane Katrina would destroy homes and cause mortgage holders to default. (Yes, Virginia, you other New Yorkers et al could borrow and bet millions of dollars via taking out insurance policies on other people's homes that were in the path of Katrina, where if Katrina smashed some poor guys home, you could get a pay-out on an insurance policy that you took out on his home without his permission - under the crystal-clear name of: credit default swap - paid for by US taxpayers' bailout of AIG and Goldman Sachs).

None of these admirable US Government approved and Govt. Regulated investment policies had anything to do with the economic crises that have rocked the world, with only $3 trillion in related Government losses and $17 trillion in losses to the US public so far. (Where the US Treasury quietly announced the $17 trillion in US personal family asset losses last May http://thehill.com/...easury-official-says - and we should thank the US media for making us aware of all of these items, so, we can make rational future choices.) So, the US Govt. approved and regulated policies that allowed, enabled, and effectively created the financial crisis, and the resulting financial crises around the world have had no significant effects on Mexico and her citizens. And US citizens, taxpayers, & US posters on MexConnect also have no culpability in these matters, because US voters have no responsibility for what their government has done for the last 3 decades.

All of Mexico's problems are clearly due solely to SOB (South of the Border) issues, and the USA has no culpability in anything that happens outside her borders.

Sources for the above citations: http://en.wikipedia.org/.../Credit_default_swap , http://www.euractiv.com/...ign-debt-news-325532 , http://www.bnet.com/...personal-wealth/5624

All this seems to mean that the 28,000 deaths and other problems attributed to Narco-Traficante activities should be our only focus when considering US Govt. and US cultural impacts on México, and the USA's alleged enhancement of other problems of the 125 million Mexicans who remain in the after-effects of "the failed Mexican state" and Mexico's bloody war on drugs, are not worth considering. Finally, the US Govt's Mérida Initiative also plays no role in the current situation in México.

We clearly do not get what we have paid for, and old adages have failed: "Cria cuervos que te sacaran los ojos."
("We feed / nurture / create the crows that pick-out our eyes." has no place in our modern world.)

Time to take my tongue out of my cheek,
continue being happy,
and know that it truly will somehow all-work-out, due to the resilient and resourceful natures of ordinary Mexicans and Americans,
steve

- -
-
Read-on MacDuff
E-visit at http://yucalandia.com

Hound Dog

Sep 11, 2010, 11:28 AM

Post #2 of 64 (4526 views)

Shortcut

Re: [YucaLandia] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

Surely Mexico's problems and US complicities are limited to only drug-related Narco-Traficante driven issues?

Geez, Steve:

Are you trying to say that Dawg´s ire as expressed under the thread I initiated regarding U.S. complicity in the destabilization of Mexico as manifest in the current drug war was too narrowly focused? If so, it seems that you may have a point there.

Maybe you and I have lived in Mexico too long. An old acquaintance in California just informed me that all that was really needed was a contingent of U.S. Marines to come down here and kick some narcotraficante ass. I presume he meant in a manner similar to that employed by U.S. troops over the past eight years to kick al Quaeda and Taliban ass in Afganistan with such notable success.

That reminds me. Remember how Americans were concerned that Iran, in its new incarnation as a power without Saddam´s leveling influence, might be supplying arms to Iraqis used to kill American military personnel? Imagine how they will feel if they send U.S. troops to Mexico who are then killed or wounded by cartel militants using armaments supplied the cartels by their American brother gun runners from Texas and Arizona.

In the deep south of the United States, we white southerners always found that the best sleeping pill was a heavy dose of rank hypocrisy taken with straight-up Early Times to allay those nocturnal images of night rider lynch mobs defending the honors of assorted southern belles. Modern Americans have apparently found the same medicine enticing.

I really miis that place.

YucaLandia

Sep 11, 2010, 1:35 PM

Post #3 of 64 (4503 views)

Shortcut

Re: [Hound Dog] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

"...we white southerners always found that the best sleeping pill was a heavy dose of rank hypocrisy taken with straight-up Early Times to allay those nocturnal images of night rider lynch mobs defending the honors of assorted southern belles."

Hilarious!

For better or worse, the grand overarching concepts that I was not alluding-to were:
1. The fates of the USA and Mexico are inextricably intertwined *, and

2. We need to work towards real solutions (like a rational US guest-worker program that would provide legal channels for temporary immigrant workers to enter & work in the USA - where the jobs have been moved-to, while simultaneously providing reliable remittances back to Mexico = fewer poor Mexicans resorting to drug traffic-ing) - and

3. Mexico-bashing and US-bashing typically don't move us closer to workable effective solutions.

i.e. H. Clinton's recent México bashing via her direct comparisons of Mexico to Columbia's loss of entire areas of the country -where Billary portrayed the relationship as if the US is a wholly virtuous partner with no culpability - is almost as useful and helpful as: the US Military's years of Mexico-bashing, some MexConnect Mexico-bashers, the US Media's past & ongoing lurid Mexico-bashing, and: Obama's, Arizonans, & Border Vigilante's one-sided perspectives. Said another way: As long as the US Govt uses her 19'th century Big Stick policies to force and enforce highly inequitable trade agreements onto Mexico, drug & immigration problems will continue to grow.

Free Trade? Fair Trade? 19'th century Mercantilism?
Just what have we had the last 30 years between México & the USA?
Follow the money...
I think the data clearly demonstrate that Mercantilism has been the overriding theme for 30 years: big business in bed with big government - just like the Railroad Barons, Oil Barons, Steel Barons, Coal Barons, & Big Banks in league with the US Govt. in the late 19'th century - giving away Govt. lands and assets - a supposed "Free Market" system that created "capitalists" who amassed fortunes unlike anything seen before in history. (J.P. Morgan, Rockefeller, Carnegie, and other robber-barons in league with Tamany Hall, military heroes and Presidents like U.S. Grant, hundreds of US politicians, et al)

Modern Mercantilism, (exercised through US Govt. policies that over-fill the coffers of American big businesses like ADM, ConAgra & Monsanto), has created 3 decades of a vicious cycle, where US agribusinesses et al reward USA politicians and bureaucrats to force their unbalanced agendas onto México, which reap big business incredible profits, while creating economic chaos in Mexico, and then agribusiness & other big businesses pay-off the US Govt. officials with $100's billions in campaign contributions - i.e. to fund their $5 million per Senate seat election races - creating a demand for more cash for the next election cycle - which forces the US Congresspersons and Senators to do big business's bidding so they can afford the next election cycle, while Big Media collects huge checks from both Big Govt Politicians and Big Business execs.

The current US system is clearly far less corrupt, as it only involves hundreds of billions of dollars**, rather than the vast Mexican conspiracy of many small bribes and police & Mexican Govt. official's corruption that the US Media and internet posters love to feast on. . . . Hmmmm.... US Media pays it's bills from hundreds of billions in advertising dollars from big business for decades***, and then they collect $100's billions from US politicians, and then somehow US Media neglects to tell the facts about what's actually happening between big business, US politicians, and Big Media.
No cabal there.

**CNN estimated a mere $120,000,000 ($120 billion if you tired of counting all the zeros) spent in just the 2004 elections alone... I bet that the 2008 election cost far less. No corruption there. Nobody being bought off, nor ethics compromised in a totally up-and-up fully legal & Congressionally legitimized processes. http://www.cnn.com/...sident/campaign.ads/

***US Big Businesses & select Politicians bought " 30-second spot(s) on ABC's "Grey's Anatomy" cost(ing) an average of $240462,..." , Desperate Housewives rang-up $229,000 per hit fees, and NFL football 30 sec. spots cost big business & pols a mere $108,000 per fix in 2006. Even Bart and Homer cost $210K per 30 sec. shot, not to mention the $2.5-$3.0 million Super Bowl slots. But that kind of money clearly does not affect what's reported and how it's reported. http://adage.com/...le?article_id=139923

The chump change that US politicians, US Media, and big business shuffle around to each other ($100's of billions per group) certainly does not affect the US public's knowledge of what's actually happening, and it's oh, so, much more fun (and safe) to take jabs at México.

The Mexican bribes and corruption regularly reported here on this and other websites clearly are far far bigger than the roughly $400 billion in pay-offs made by the US power elite** & ***. For comparison sake: Mexican drug sale earnings estimates range from $13.6 billion to $48.4 billion annually, according to disreputable sources.****

****US Congressional Research Report: Mexico's Drug Cartels http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL34215.pdf & the BBC's 2010 "Mexico Drug Gangs' report: http://news.bbc.co.uk/...americas/8588509.stm

Wait a minute, if the entire Mexican drug trade gross revenue is 10X less than the money slushing around between US politicians, US Media, and big business, how could corruption in México be worse than the past 3 decades of incestuous relationships between the US power elite?

Which is worse: an obviously corrupt prison warden who leaves the ladders out, or a systematically legally corrupt US Senator or President who pushes through NAFTA, GATT, and other clearly unfair-trade bills that economically crush ordinary Mexicans and pick the pockets of middle class Mexicans - while the US players and Mexican players receive $ millions in pay-offs, for promoting agendas & policies that harm both the US and Mexican public - driving both illegal immigration and the illegal drug trade?

It's kind of like arguing whose wet dawg smells worse,
or
Do Mexican skunks really smell worse than US skunks?
steve

ps I currently don't miss the USA...

because we're here visiting our daughters for 2 months! H-ray!
--
*A final random thought: Isn't Mexico-bashing & US bashing sort of like telling stories at a party of friends just how big your wife's a** has gotten, complaining about your mother-in-law in front of your wife, or dishing juicy details about the latest escapades of a black-sheep brother? Hope y'awl are getting a few laughs from this...
- -
-
Read-on MacDuff
E-visit at http://yucalandia.com

(This post was edited by YucaLandia on Sep 11, 2010, 1:50 PM)

Reefhound

Sep 11, 2010, 4:40 PM

Post #4 of 64 (4456 views)

Shortcut

Re: [YucaLandia] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

"3. Mexico-bashing and US-bashing typically don't move us closer to workable effective solutions."

That's pretty hilarious when you immediately follow up that statement with a load of US-bashing!

Memo

Sep 11, 2010, 4:56 PM

Post #5 of 64 (4453 views)

Shortcut

Re: [Reefhound] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

I watched these two documentaries recently that were very interesting in regards to Monsanto. The first one does discuss issues with corn and Monsanto in Mexico. Perhaps youve seen them already though. If not, theyre worth the time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hErvV5YEHkE&fmt=22

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E42ndfjnP1g&fmt=22

YucaLandia

Sep 12, 2010, 3:42 PM

Post #6 of 64 (4379 views)

Shortcut

Re: [Reefhound] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

Reefhound,
I think I provided widely accepted sources on all the facts I quoted: BBC, the US Congressional Record, US Congressional Research reports, publicly accepted CNN statistics on elections, LA Times reports, etc. If so, how does quoting facts from accepted reliable sources that directly address $100's of billions of problems between Mexico and USA, qualify as bashing? I noted at least 4 different times how bashing is not helpful. Is it now politically incorrect to make observations on the culpability of powerful US entities?

I also note that you only labeled what I wrote, and you provided neither solutions, nor rebuttle, nor facts to dispute the proposals. How can one discuss problems and hunt for solutions, if we are not willing to even acknowledge and discuss the facts that describe and characterize the problems? Listing & documenting key contributing factors seem to be essential steps in determining rational, practical, workable solutions, (unless the point of these discussions is simply for frustrated parties to vent about their personal bents and tell lurid stories about the latest gory details of the truly troubling drug war in Mexico.)

i.e. Would the Mexican Govt. be pursuing the war on drugs in their current ways without the USA's huge cash payments and support (see the Merida Initiative)? . Does noting the $1.4 billion in US taxpayer promised pay-offs to the Mexican Govt to fight drug activity, somehow, now qualify as USA-bashing?
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/...-rights-killing.html

I heartily acknowledge that Mexico has serious problems, and I also recognize that Mexconnect posters have done a very very good job using many many posts to describe Mexico's problems. I simply believe that some balanced observations on USA's decades of contributing to the problems, is also useful, because there have been far fewer posts on the very real and quite significant US contributions to the shared problems - and that the 10X larger magnitude of USA's complicity seems to show that the major parts of the shared problems, and hence the major parts of the solutions will have to occur North of the Border.**

I think I also pointed to some functional solutions and tangible goals in resolving the joint US-Mexican problems of immigration, unbalanced-unfair trade, and the illegal cross-border trading in guns, cash, and drugs.

Please, I interpret what you wrote as little more than name-calling, instead, I invite you to offer some good long-term practical workable solutions to the clearly unbalanced situations with the heavily-linked and inextricably interwoven issues of US's illegal gun exports, Mexican individuals immigrating to the US, US's abusive trade policies, Mexico's drug war, US's seeming insatiable appetite for drugs, Mexico's corruption, US's dumping of billions of dollars of govt. subsidized products into Mexican markets, the destabilization of Mexico's economy that has resulted from Govt. approved corrupt Wall Street practices, and Mexico's illegal exporting of marijuana & meth, and Columbian cocaine into the USA. (a Gordian Knot worth tackling?)

One final note; the majority of the US complicities I noted are items that the US govt. could address and fix directly (changing unfair US Govt. mandated trade policies, US Govt. subsidies to Monsanto, ConAgra, etc), while the Mexican problems of: immigration are individuals crossing the border, lots of different private drug cartels, and individual corrupt Mexican Govt officials.

**It is worth noting that it is very difficult to change the behavior of millions of individuals and multiple private groups acting independently, as seems to be the case with the Mexican aspects of the problems I listed for Mexico, while it is far easier to use the centralized power of the US Govt to quickly change US policies that heavily contribute to the cross-border problems.
Cheers, steve

ps Calderon's latest public press statements, today, curiously affirm some of the points I made in my 2 earlier posts - which seems to add a little weight to why it is important to include the topics of US complicities in joint Mexican-American problems, on a Mexican-issue-oriented website.
-
Read-on MacDuff
E-visit at http://yucalandia.com

(This post was edited by YucaLandia on Sep 12, 2010, 3:56 PM)

Hound Dog

Sep 12, 2010, 4:12 PM

Post #7 of 64 (4364 views)

Shortcut

Re: [YucaLandia] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

Please, I interpret what you wrote as little more than name-calling, instead, I invite you to offer some good long-term practical workable solutions to the clearly unbalanced situations with the heavily-linked and inextricably interwoven issues of US's illegal gun exports, Mexican individuals immigrating to the US, US's abusive trade policies, Mexico's drug war, US's seeming insatiable appetite for drugs, Mexico's corruption, US's dumping of billions of dollars of govt. subsidized products into Mexican markets, the destabilization of Mexico's economy that has resulted from Govt. approved corrupt Wall Street practices, and Mexico's illegal exporting of marijuana & meth, and Columbian cocaine into the USA. (a Gordian Knot worth tackling?)

What a pleasure to witness Yucalandia´s thoughtful, well-disciplined and properly documented rejoinder to the glib and superficial musings of the dabbler Reefhound. Thank you, Yucalandia, for your inspirational postings. The Dawg is duly impressed but you must not take my accolades lightly. I may turn on you.

Dawg

Reefhound

Sep 12, 2010, 5:09 PM

Post #8 of 64 (4352 views)

Shortcut

Re: [YucaLandia] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

I think I provided widely accepted sources on all the facts I quoted: BBC, the US Congressional Record, US Congressional Research reports, publicly accepted CNN statistics on elections, LA Times reports, etc. If so, how does quoting facts from accepted reliable sources that directly address $100's of billions of problems between Mexico and USA, qualify as bashing? I noted at least 4 different times how bashing is not helpful. Is it now politically incorrect to make observations on the culpability of powerful US entities?

By the same standard that anytime one comments on Mexico's problem using statistics and links it is considered "Mexico bashing" by many here.

Your BBC and US Congressional links related to Mexico's part in all this. For the US part you went to CNN and other media links. To call campaign advertisements and Superbowl ads as corruption and buying off on par with bribery and corruption destroys any credibility you might have in the eyes of any impartial thinking person. The very fact that you can document that spending, who paid for it and how much, is prima facie evidence that it is above the table and honest. Show me documentation of the money paid by the cartels to Mexican authorities for comparison. You can't, only estimates, because it is under the table dishonest corruption.To equate the two is illogical.

Interesting that you excuse Mexico's part of the problems as one of individual actions when the primary problems you have with the U.S - drug usage and gun exports - are due to individuals. Here's a news flash - the U.S. government isn't consuming these drugs or exporting these guns.

As for NAFTA, if you put it to a vote in the US it would be gone in 60 seconds.

(This post was edited by Reefhound on Sep 12, 2010, 5:09 PM)

Peter

Sep 12, 2010, 7:50 PM

Post #9 of 64 (4313 views)

Shortcut

Re: [YucaLandia] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

I invite you to offer some good long-term practical workable solutions to the clearly unbalanced situations with the heavily-linked and inextricably interwoven issues of US's illegal gun exports, Mexican individuals immigrating to the US, US's abusive trade policies, Mexico's drug war, US's seeming insatiable appetite for drugs, Mexico's corruption, US's dumping of billions of dollars of govt. subsidized products into Mexican markets, the destabilization of Mexico's economy that has resulted from Govt. approved corrupt Wall Street practices, and Mexico's illegal exporting of marijuana & meth, and Columbian cocaine into the USA.

What, there's a problem? It sounds like business as usual with the involved entities carrying-on in a predictable fashion. I may be wrong but it seems there is little I can do to pursuade them to play nice.

For anyone that is interested I will let you in on the secret to my success and happiness: No brain = no headache. I just watch the signs and cross on the green light. I usually set out with a particular destination in mind but allow a change course and heading along the way, particularly if there's a green light to cross on. Overall I'm not too adventurous but my little sloop seems to leave port more often than most of the other pleasure craft and also has fewer barnacles.

Seriously, I appreciate the time and effort you spent posting this and appreciate the information and insight provided. I found it very interesting but admit I needed an aspirin by the time I got done reading it all. Regrettably I find I have nothing of value to add nor am able to offer any solutions. It is obvious though that some of these nations' and entities' finest minds have been working overtime to best manage their interests in these situations.

Also regrettable is that being a Hogwart's dropout I find I can only exert control over my most immediate environment and am rather powerless over the forces operating on a grander scale. Fortunate though that I have found some modest success dealing with my most direct concerns.

Sorry I can't offer anything in the way of solutions or even add to the discussion, but if anybody is taking up a collection to fix these things I could probably kick in a few pesos.

donemry

Sep 13, 2010, 7:50 AM

Post #10 of 64 (4250 views)

Shortcut

Re: [Peter] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

"Sorry I can't offer anything in the way of solutions or even add to the discussion, but if anybody is taking up a collection to fix these things I could probably kick in a few pesos. "

Sorry, but spending money to influence governmental actions is "corruption" as defined by YucaLinda.

YucaLinda reported a lot of facts and then spun a conspiracy theory to tie all of those facts together to make his point, which was of course, USA bashing.

Peter

Sep 13, 2010, 8:03 AM

Post #11 of 64 (4243 views)

Shortcut

Re: [donemry] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

Sorry, but spending money to influence governmental actions is "corruption" as defined by YucaLinda.

Right. I respectfully rescind my offer then. Just trying to be helpful. Over-stuffing my brain, I should've know better. That aspirin hadn't kicked-in by the time I replied.

YucaLandia

Sep 13, 2010, 9:46 AM

Post #12 of 64 (4214 views)

Shortcut

Re: [Reefhound] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

Reefhound,
"... To call campaign advertisements and Superbowl ads as corruption and buying off on par with bribery and corruption destroys any credibility you might have in the eyes of any impartial thinking person. ... "

It seems that Reefhound has assumed that illegal payments must be made for some corruption to exist: a very narrow interpretation of a rich and useful word. Might corruption also mean contamination? (more on this below).
=======================================================================

By saying
"... destroys any credibility you might have in the eyes of any impartial thinking person."

Reefhound has also cleverly concluded that anyone who agrees with anything I proposed cannot be ... impartial ... and people who might agree with me must also not be ... thinking ... people.

Are these the arguments & proposals of an honest-dealer?
Just what are an author's intentions, when things are given such heavy spin?

Please, read-on and decide for yourselves.
=======================================================================

In another twist, Reefhound has made a good, but partial observation. It is easy to excise bits of text out of a bigger argument, which leads to missing the real content and intent of the proposal, unless the author intentionally ignores the principle, particularly if the goals are to misdirect and mislead.

By taking items out-of-context, we miss opportunities for workable solutions and change: The $100's billions spent by politicians to buy their seats in the US Congress & Senate, clearly affect Big Media's future willingness to provide unbiased reporting on controversial issues. This hydra has many heads: TV execs regularly report that they rely on election year campaign spending to pay for news reporting and news broadcasts- and when $100's of billions of dollars are on the line, Big Media execs, producers, and editors clearly know who butters their bread, which causes certain news-stories to wind up on the cutting-room floor during the editing process.

Reefhound has neatly split a hair to make his point, but in doing so: he has missed the opportunity to identify real problems; he has misdirected the discussion, and more importantly, he has missed the chance to offer and pursue valid workable solutions.

It would be naive to propose that $100's of billions of advertising/election spending by a small group (100 Senators and 435 Congressional Reps) carries no weight, and it is equally false to assume that there are no corrupting influences when $100's billions of dollars are on-the-line, when producers decide which stories get aired using very valuable air-time. It is also worth noting that the huge sums slushing around between the media and political elite also affect which stories are chosen for investigation. Which leads to the second point:

US Congressmen and Senators clearly choose to whom to give interviews (rewarding the parts of the media who give them favorable coverage, & punishing malcontents), and politicians & powerful bureaucrats also choose whom to leak information/stories to. See Bernie Goldbergs book, Dan Rather and other sources on this point: When individuals or groups within Big Media do not play-ball with powerful politicians/bureaucrats, the guys who do not play-along & their associated editors, reporters, & talking heads quickly find themselves frozen out from future stories.

==============================================================================

Maybe Reefhound is not aware that the production & development of news stories in Big Media has changed dramatically from 40+ years ago, when reporters were actual journalists who truly took time to investigate stories. Current US news story development today mainly consists of talking heads and their staff & producers soliciting quotes & opinions from politicians and bureaucrats, and then the "reporters" do just that: report what the pols & bureaucrats say and think, without actually investigating or developing background information.

This means that US "news programs" have basically become bully-pulpits for prominent politicians and bureaucrats (and their chosen "experts"), as simple pass-through portals of the latest Govt. party-lines, and "news" personnel who choose not "go-along to get-along" find themselves frozen-out from the daily feeds of cheap & easy news stories.

Investigation takes time, and in today's "microwaved" - "I want it NOW" culture - news cycles are typically measured in only hours - leaving no time for investigation or thoughtful consideration - which means that the current reported "news" does not have the fact-checking and investigation that Reefhound, Dawg, myself, Chinagringo and other geezers grew up to expect.

====================================================================================

I truly apologize for this divergence into the machinery of "news" production, but Reefhound's comments misdirect & show degrees and levels of misunderstanding that can only be clarified by explaining the rational and real backgrounds of: how huge advertising/election $$$ corrupt the news and political processes; -the corrupting effects of $100's billions of big business's campaign donations; - and the corrupting effects of $100's billions of Big Business advertising $$$ that similarly contaminate & corrupt: US trade agreements w/ Mexico, US elections, and US "news" processes.

By listing "bribery and corruption" together as a seeming single entity, Reefhound has created an artificial link that illegal payments must be made for some corruption to exist: a very narrow interpretation of a rich and useful word.
My family understood corruption to mean that something was rotten and often smelled bad, due to contamination. I attempted to clearly state that the $400 billion or so dollars that annually slushes-around between Big Media, Big Business, and Powerful Politicians & Bureaucrats (heads and asst. heads of US Govt agencies) corrupts & contaminates a number of key processes that directly affect the shared Mexican-American problems.

Reefhound has neatly split a hair to make his point, but in doing so: he has missed the opportunity to identify real problems; he has misdirected the discussion, and more importantly, he has missed the chance to offer and pursue valid workable solutions.

It seems much easier to me to affect the decisions and actions of 51 Senators, 218 Representatives, and 15 US Department Secretaries (and their 15 asst. heads) and 1 President = affecting just 300 supposedly-law abiding individuals - than it is to affect the choices of millions of independent-thinking illegal immigrants and 10,000's of narco-traficantes.

================================================================================

So, where exactly is the low-hanging fruit? Where can we find the easy meat?
Is it easier to get 300 people to change - people who claim & promise to have the country's best interests at heart - vs. changing the behavior of 12 million+ independent individuals who have already proven their willingness to break laws?

================================================================================

US Government officials have the power to quickly change things, and the Govt holds the leashes of Big Media and holds great power over Big Business, and the US Govt. is directly responsible for the unfair trade agreements they forced through => which means that the easiest & quickest solutions to many of US-Mexico's shared problems could and should come from Washington - but this kind of change likely requires grass-roots efforts by US citizens.

I propose that US taxpayers have also been complicit in many of the tremendously complex US-Mexico shared problems, via their support of corrupt Big Media, corrupt Big Business, and corrupt Politicians & Bureaucrats. US voters could demand an end to farm subsidies and unfair trade practices: i.e. US taxpayer dollars have artificially driven down the historic export prices of key agricultural products by 33% = dumping of cheap US-subsidized corn into the Mexican market and forcing through unfair trade agreements => which directly led to the ruination of roughly 40% of Mexican farms => which led to an estimated 7 million new illegal immigrants and likely drove other Mexican farmers & Mexican agri-business employees to plant marijuana and to enter the drug trade.

Just for a bit of perspective, please consider that "Mexico has gone from a small-key player in the pre-1994 U.S. export market to the 2nd largest importer of U.S. agricultural products" by just 2004.
Refs for the above stats & assertions: http://wilsoncenter.org/...ure_rpt_English1.pdf, & http://etd.lib.ttu.edu/...k_Georgia_Thesis.pdf & http://en.wikipedia.org/...Free_Trade_Agreement

===========================================================================

There is one last hidden bard in Reefhound's assertions that seems worth exposing. The points he makes imply that complicity = sole responsibility.

Hint: complicity is a deligtful word that means
" ... association or participation in or as if in a wrongful act. ..." (Merriam Webster)

- which is exactly why I gleefully hijacked the term from Dawg's previous post.

Reefhound's protests clearly attempt to refute the real problems and likely-solutions by mis-labeling the issues and misdirecting our attention from problems we can affect and change.

I think the overwhelming number of facts and data clearly show association or participation of the US Govt & US taxpayers & citizens in our shared Mexican-American problems = complicity.

Can one legitimately propose that the USA is neither associated nor has participated in the problems of:
Illegal drug consumption,
Illegal arms selling and illegal arms smuggling into Mexico,
Unfair/unbalanced trade agreements,
Dumping of US Govt. subsidized ag products, and
Funding of Mexico's war on drugs efforts?

Mexico's Govt and her people have clearly played major roles in the shared USA-Mexico problems, but that does not absolve the US Govt and US citizens from their obvious and proven complicities and responsibilities.

Please, point out some additional workable & practical solutions that could be enacted faster and more effectively than our opportunity to pick the existing low-hanging-fruit and easy-meat that could come from the actions of just 300 Washington pols and bureaucrats.
Cheers, steve
- -
p.s. Peter, THANKS! for the hearty guffaws and wry smiles your replies have created!

Thanks also to Mexconnect readers and editorial staff who have slogged through my too-long explanations of seemingly-simple proposals.

--
-
Read-on MacDuff
E-visit at http://yucalandia.com

(This post was edited by YucaLandia on Sep 13, 2010, 10:16 AM)

YucaLandia

Sep 13, 2010, 10:32 AM

Post #13 of 64 (4195 views)

Shortcut

Re: [donemry] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

donemry,
"...YucaLinda reported a lot of facts and then spun a conspiracy theory to tie all of those facts together to make his point, which was of course, USA bashing. ..."

Labeling factual observations as a conspiracy theory, sure seems to be an attempt to trigger emotive reactions by readers, rather than actually proposing solutions. Why not, instead, rebut the validity of the proposals?

The natural consequences of the effects of $100's billions of dollars being spent and received by an elite few, does not make it a conspiracy, and there can be serious contamination of important processes without there being conspiracies.

Like Reefhound's post, the donemry post also has the (unintended?) effects of mislabeling and misdirecting my attempts to identify some elements of the shared Mexican-American problems and to offer practical workable solutions.

The repeated charge of " USA bashing. ..." also mis-labels using inflammatory rhetoric, mis-directs via pushing emotional buttons, and ignores my multiple assertions of Mexico's significant and major contributions to the shared USA-Mexico problems.

Guys, let's focus on solutions.
- which leads to identifying what parts of the problems can be resolved quickly and effectively.

It's easy to name-call and sling pooh & barbs - it's harder & more complex to work on fixing the problems.

Is this forum a marketplace of ideas & solutions or is it just a place to hurl our old fruit & veg?
Cheers, steve
-
Read-on MacDuff
E-visit at http://yucalandia.com

(This post was edited by YucaLandia on Sep 13, 2010, 10:34 AM)

Reefhound

Sep 13, 2010, 10:34 AM

Post #14 of 64 (4191 views)

Shortcut

Re: [YucaLandia] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

Hahahaha, I think you were probably criticizing me quite severely as I saw "ReefHound" stand out as I skimmed down but I must admit I am with Peter all the way in that reading your posts makes my head hurt. I bear no ill will against you and if you want to believe the U.S. is the big bogey man in everything then fine.

Rolly

Sep 13, 2010, 11:44 AM

Post #15 of 64 (4182 views)

Shortcut

Re: [YucaLandia] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

Is this forum a marketplace of ideas & solutions or is it just a place to hurl our old fruit & veg?
You make a very good point, YucaLandia. It does seem that some folks have an over supply of "fruit & veg."

Rolly Pirate

mensamia

Sep 13, 2010, 6:27 PM

Post #16 of 64 (4119 views)

Shortcut

Re: [YucaLandia] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

Guys, let's focus on solutions.
- which leads to identifying what parts of the problems can be resolved quickly and effectively.

Quote

1) Require that all voters have an IQ of at least 120. With the average IQ of the voting public well below that, how can any real progress be made?

2) Legalize all drugs. Retrofit all vehicles with state of the art drug testing meters so operation of the vehicle will be impossible if the driver is impaired in any way. Powerful anti-drug progams to begin in school with pre-teens, similar to the very effective anti-smoking campaigns.

3) Disallow all farm subsidies except for organic fams producing non GMO-modified crops.

4) Much harsher penalties for violent crime.

5) Free major network air time to alternative news networks.

6) A contest with a huge financial prize to the company that invents the most effective alternative natural energy.

7) Large financial renumeration to those whistleblowers brave enough to risk their careers.

ken_in_dfw

Sep 13, 2010, 6:47 PM

Post #17 of 64 (4105 views)

Shortcut

Re: [mensamia] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

Not a bad list. I would add:

8) All elections be publicly funded. The use of private funds to campaign for or on behalf of a person running for public office would be strictly prohibited. "Free" lobbying would be permitted, but only with monitoring for compliance. Any organization or individual lobbying elected officials would be prohibited from hiring or awarding business to any elected official for 12 months from the time they leave office. NO MORE "finest government money can buy!"

PS - I think this particular provision would benefit both the governments of the United States and México. But then, that's just me.

smokesilver

Sep 13, 2010, 7:11 PM

Post #18 of 64 (4096 views)

Shortcut

Re: [ken_in_dfw] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

Yippee. I'm for that. Where do I vote?

Peter

Sep 13, 2010, 8:36 PM

Post #19 of 64 (4071 views)

Shortcut

Re: [mensamia] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

1) Require that all voters have an IQ of at least 120.

Do you really think that is fair?!?

You just eliminated 90% of the current voters. And if that applies as well to politicians you just eliminated at least two of the last three Republican presidents.

I'd like to get a vote in this!

YucaLandia

Sep 13, 2010, 9:23 PM

Post #20 of 64 (4059 views)

Shortcut

Re: [YucaLandia] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

Wonderful proposals!
-
Read-on MacDuff
E-visit at http://yucalandia.com

donemry

Sep 14, 2010, 8:07 AM

Post #21 of 64 (3992 views)

Shortcut

Re: [YucaLandia] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

YucaLinda posted:

"I attempted to clearly state that the $400 billion or so dollars that annually slushes-around between Big Media, Big Business, and Powerful Politicians & Bureaucrats (heads and asst. heads of US Govt agencies) corrupts & contaminates a number of key processes that directly affect the shared Mexican-American problems."

This is a consiparacy theory. You have provided no evidence that supports this theory, only speculation and postulation.

(This post was edited by donemry on Sep 14, 2010, 8:08 AM)

YucaLandia

Sep 14, 2010, 9:08 PM

Post #22 of 64 (3893 views)

Shortcut

Re: [donemry] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

Donemry,
The sum of the monies spent by politicians on political advertising
+ the sum of monies spent by big agribusinesses on advertising
+ the sum of the monies spent by big agribusinesses on campaign spending, congressional junkets, trips, etc.
+ the amount of monies spent by the US government on agricultural subsidies that primarily reward big agribusinesses
- including the subsidies that reduce exported corn prices by 33% (all items documented above)

all sum to more than $400 billion per year.

These things are all published facts and hence are not theories. This spending has occurred for at least 10 years, so, it is not an aberration.

The only thing that qualifies as a theory is the effects of the $400 billion of money that is passed within these circles every year: Big agribusiness makes $100's of billions of money selling US taxpayer subsidized corn, and Big Agribusiness then spends those profits from US Govt driven Mexican sales, to make huge campaign contributions to the same senators and congressmen who made the policy that made the big agriculture profits possible. Big Agribusiness also spends the profits made on US Govt subsidized corn sales on TV advertising, to influence the public that they are doing good things, commercials which subtly communicate to the public that big agribusiness deserves to continue to receive taxpayer subsidizes.

Big media receive an annual total of $100's billion from both of the two other parties, completing the circle, where news producers have regularly reported that they rely on political ad campaign spending and big agribusiness spending during their news programs to pay the bills. If you do not live in an agricultural area, you are likely not familiar with years of Monsanto's Round-Up Ready ad campaigns et al.

Here's the highly controversial "follow the money" theory about why reporters and politicians do not talk about how and why US has intentionally harmed the Mexican economy:
When politicians and ag-business et al pay the TV news producers' bills, is it not reasonable to expect that reports of bias by media insiders might have some merit?

It seems clear that the three sets of players each have huge individual self-interests and shared mutual interests in the US taxpayers not realizing some the effects of continued US Govt subsidies to agriculture, which have driven US govt. trade policies that have harmed the Mexican agricultural system.
Cheers, steve
-
Read-on MacDuff
E-visit at http://yucalandia.com

(This post was edited by YucaLandia on Sep 14, 2010, 9:10 PM)

donemry

Sep 15, 2010, 1:20 PM

Post #23 of 64 (3807 views)

Shortcut

Re: [YucaLandia] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

YucaLinda,

One more thing and I will leave you alone. When trying to explain how some association of government, business and media relate, you would be more persausive if you did not make up (or rely on made up stats). For example, total corn production in the USA has been about 13 Billion bushels. Once you pay the farmer and other expenses, there is no way that "big Agribusiness" can spend 100's of billions of dollars from selling corn to influence media and government.

Source: http://www.nass.usda.gov/Charts_and_Maps/Field_Crops/cornprod.asp

norteño

Sep 15, 2010, 1:59 PM

Post #24 of 64 (3796 views)

Shortcut

Re: [donemry] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

This article may be of interest to anyone interested in the actual facts according to the Mexican government itself. I believe the forum strictly limits the amount of text that can be translated from a link but I will include the first paragraphs.

The article goes on to say that between 2006 and 2008 imports fell by 1.5 million metric tons, and that 93 percent of imports were yellow corn mainly intended for animal feed and starch production, and that while total acreage in corn has dropped the increased production is due to the higher yield per acre.

http://www.cronica.com.mx/nota.php?id_nota=449313

Mexico reduces corn importations, in 14 years production increased 2.6%

Notimex | Nacional
Monday August 3, 2009 | Time of creation: 23:54| Last modification: 00:23

Between 1994 and 2008 Mexico achieved an increase of 2.6% in corn production, for a total of 24.8 million metric tons of this grain in 2008 and allowing a reduction in imports, mainly from the United States.

Furthermore, monthly imports were down in the first quarter of 2009 compared to previous years, and it is expected that it will close the year with a yield of 26 million metric tons of corn.

Reefhound

Sep 15, 2010, 3:26 PM

Post #25 of 64 (3779 views)

Shortcut

Re: [YucaLandia] US Complicities in Mexico's Destabilzation?

| Private Reply

"corn surpluses that flooded the Mexican market, and shifted the balance of food trade to the point that Mexico now imports over 70% of her food from the US, and in 2006, agriculture accounted for only 3.9% of GDP, down from 7% in 1980, and 25% in 1970."

Yuca, how do you reconcile this with Mexico's own stats that domestic corn production increased and imports decreased?

Furthermore, how do you blame GATT and NAFTA when the greatest part of the GDP decrease occurred in the 70's before Mexico signed onto GATT (in 1986) and NAFTA?

Hmmmm, could it be that agriculture decreased as a percentage of GDP, not because production decreased, but because something *else* increased? Can you spell OIL?

Could it be that small Mexican farmers (like small American farmers) have been hurt, not because the markets have been flooded with subsidized products, but because they cannot compete with other domestic producers using modern technology and mass production?

BTW, you seem to have cobbled your agristats from a variety of sources where you may have mixed and matched methodologies and parameters. Here is a EarthTrends site where you can at least compare selected countries and selected years using the same database and methodology. Interesting that they also show agriculture in the U.S. dropping significantly as a percentage of GDP over recent decades. I wonder what evil country is flooding U.S. markets with subsidized exports?

(This post was edited by Reefhound on Sep 15, 2010, 3:29 PM)

1 2 3 View All