(06-08-2019, 08:19 AM)mikesez Wrote:

(06-07-2019, 10:25 PM)Last42min Wrote: What's a synonym for urinated? Cycle through until you get one that makes sense in that context. The more inappropriate, the better in this scenario.

The question is does Mexico have any power to stop immigrants from coming through their country. If the answer is yes, then it's perfectly reasonable to punish or reward based on those efforts. If the answer is no, then punishment or compensation isn't going to do anything. Do you know the answer to the question, Mike?

I don't think that's actually how stuff works. Yes, Mexico could stop most of these people.  But
Mexico's government is supposed to make Mexicans safe and happy.  It's unreasonable to expect them to do the bidding of Americans without compensation. That could be us giving them money, or us agreeing to do something that they have been wanting us to do for a while.

You have such a myopic view of the world, dude. Hate to beat a dead horse, but you need to expand your thinking.

If a neighbor and I are trading goods, let's say I give them eggs from my chickens and they give me oranges from their tree. If I notice they are dumping trash on my yard and stop trading with them, that's my prerogative. If I don't like the color they painted their house, and stop trading with them, that's my prerogative. If I don't like that he's sleeping with the neighbor's wife, and stop trading with him, that's my prerogative. 

You use an unsupported conclusion to suggest that trade policy change should be only be predicated on some kind of trade grievance, but have not shown any premises that support that conclusion. My demonstration supports my position, that your claim is not how it works in any facet of our world. It's odd to me that you would reason that way in this specific example, yet you turn around and talk about the interconnection of everything a couple posts later. Please don't waste your time looking for some part of my analogy that's slightly off. The point has been clearly made. Just acquiesce or show why someone would need to limit trade preference to an official trade grievance.

---