February 8, 2016

"Mexican people, we are not going to pay any single cent for such a stupid wall! And it's going to be completely useless."

"The first loser of such a policy would be the United States... If this guy pretends that closing the borders to anywhere either for trade (or) for people is going to provide prosperity to the United States, he is completely crazy."

Said Felipe Calderon, the President of Mexico, referencing Donald Trump, whom he called a "not very well-informed man."

136 comments:

Limited blogger said...

Perfect. The debate has been started. We weren't even talking about this until Trump brought it up. A. big. beautiful. wall.

tds said...

This is exactly how negotiation works:
Trump (opening); Mexico will pay 100% of the wall's cost
Calderon: We won't pay a single dime for your ridiculous wall!
Trump:...

Sal said...

Trump should keep insisting that the Mexicans will have to pay for the wall, just to drive them crazy.

boycat said...

Not only will the Mexicans build the wall for President Trump, they will do it joyfully. You watch.

Limited blogger said...

The wall will have a door. And some windows. Big. Beautiful.

coupe said...

"Mr. Trump - Tear down this wall" - President Putin on his visit to the Mexican border.

Terry said...

" . . . If this guy pretends that closing the borders to anywhere either for trade (or) for people is going to provide prosperity to the United States, he is completely crazy."
Mexico has famously strict immigration controls because it wants its citizens to prosper.
Between 10 and 25 percent of all people born in Mexico now live in the United States.

David Begley said...

The real issue in my mind is why do millions of people leave Mexico?

Fix your own country!

EDH said...

He doth protest too much.

Trumps reply: any fall off in immigration from Mexico is because of the Obama economy. A resurgent US economy under Trump would attract more.

Also look at Mexico's own immigration policies.

coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Steve M. Galbraith said...

Trump wants Mexicans to build the wall? Another example of wealthy people sending jobs overseas.

Yeah, pay for it. It's just as asinine.

Trump is a jackass, a buffoon, a clown. And those are his good qualities.

AllenS said...

coupe said...
"Mr. Trump - Tear down this wall" - President Putin on his visit to the Mexican border.

The Berlin Wall was built not to keep people out, but to keep their own people in. Big diff.

EDH said...

Blogger coupe said...
"Mr. Trump - Tear down this wall" - President Putin on his visit to the Mexican border.

Offering one way bus tickets out would counter that argument.

Limited blogger said...

Trump's New Hampshire numbers bump up when this story hits the news stands.

Bay Area Guy said...

Maybe, El Presidente of a different country should refrain from commenting on our elections? Just a suggestion.

Very simple formulation for our friends on the Left:

We, the good 'ole USA, have never in our history had an "open door" immigration policy.

Indeed, we selectively chose those (mostly from Western Europe countries), whom we thought would likely assimilate into our American culture. It worked pretty darn well, too.

It is a terrible idea to allow hordes of immigrants, who don't speak English, and won't assimilate into our culture, too simply become Democrat voters trapped into a welfare bureaucracy, or worse, in unskilled jobs, which drive down wages of the American working class.

That would be bad for the country. (Exhibit A -- Muslim refugees in Europe)

Anyone disagree with this?

J. Farmer said...

I'm for a wall, but I always thought the "Mexico will pay for it" line was an unnecessary flourish.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Steve M. Galbraith said...

Trump wants Mexicans to build the wall? Another example of wealthy people sending jobs overseas.

Let me guess...You learned geography in a public school, right?

mccullough said...

Lol. Mexico is starting to worry. Must hurt that the heroin El Chapo and other Mexican drug lords were smuggling into the US that found its way to New Hampshire.

Our shale revolution is also hurting them since they are such an oil economy.

These are the outbursts of a leader who know he'll be paying for that wall and is frustrated.

DanTheMan said...

>> Trump wants Mexicans to build the wall? Another example of wealthy people sending jobs overseas.

Ignoring the "overseas" part, even if Trump could make the Mexicans pay for it, there's no reason he couldn't hire Americans to build it... since I suspect his plan is to build it on our side of the border.
Dan

EDH said...

J. Farmer said...
I'm for a wall, but I always thought the "Mexico will pay for it" line was an unnecessary flourish.

In negotiation it's called "anchoring".

It shifts the debate from whether to build a wall to who's going to pay for it.

Brando said...

The president needs money appropriated by Congress to build the wall (his idea about the Mexicans paying for it really means "we'll cut their foreign aid by an equivalent amount to cover the wall's costs", but this would still require an act of Congress to shift that money). If Congress hasn't appropriated that money already, why would they do so in 2017? Is there a critical mass of pro-wall candidates that are going to swoop into office to vote on this?

The great thing about the gridlock is you can promise any number of things and never have to see what results from them because none of those proposals are going anywhere.

cubanbob said...

Calderon has just admitted what the Mexican government is afraid of. I understand Calderon's statement is for domestic Mexican political consumption but the fact is that Mexico needs to export its surplus labor and needs the foreign remittances and Trump is scaring them. Let's see if Trump can turn this statement to his advantage.

Fernandinande said...

Mexico Deports More Immigrants Back to Central America than the U.S. Does

J. Farmer said...
I'm for a wall, but I always thought the "Mexico will pay for it" line was an unnecessary flourish.


Import taxes.

jr565 said...

"Mexico Deports More Immigrants Back to Central America than the U.S. Does"

Yup, it works quite well for Mexico.

jr565 said...

It doesn't have to be a wall. It could be a fence. or a barrier. Or multiple fences. maybe electrified. Is that too harsh?

tim in vermont said...

First comment gets it. I don't like Trump, but the negotiation has begun. It's like the old joke that ends "We've already established that, now we are dickering over the price."

jr565 said...

coupe wrote:
"Mr. Trump - Tear down this wall" - President Putin on his visit to the Mexican border.

The difference being there was a wall between east and west Germany. Mexico is not part of American territory. There are natural borders between countries.And even when there is a wall between two sides of one country it doesn't always mean its a bad thing.

North Korea and South Korea may also have a wall. Doesn't mean it should come down.

JSD said...

Calderon is the old President. Where is Mexico’s current President, Enrique Nieto? State sponsored massacre of students in Igualla; a high speed rail project cancelled due to scandal and embezzlement; falling peso; falling oil; drug cartels; you get Mexico’s invisible president. Even worse, behind Nieto’s matinee idol good looks are ugly rumors worthy of Laslo. (Google his name with gay, murder). Mexico’s bargaining position is a lot weaker than Calderon’s bluster. Mexico has ten auto plants producing cars for the American market. I don’t think they want to jeopardize that foreign investment. They can do a lot more about illegal immigration.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Sounds like Felipe Calderon is not a very well informed man when it comes to the topics of trade, import tariffs, taxes, trade imbalances and other financial jiggery pokery.

There are all sorts of financial maneuvers that will cause the Mexican economy and especially the importation of goods manufactured in Mexico to contribute towards the cost of immigration mitigation (a wall).

In addition, the discouragement of importation of goods from Mexico will likely (not certainly but likely) help American manufacturing. Will it make some goods and commodities more expensive. Probably. However, the net pay of in security, less illegal immigrants degrading our own economy and lowering wages and a boost in domestic manufacturing will likely be a good trade off.

Trump makes it sound simple. They will pay for the wall.....when it really is a quite complex matter and if he were to try to explain it, the math challenged and economically ignorant public would just have their eyes glaze over. So....KISS....

Michael K said...

"I always thought the "Mexico will pay for it" line was an unnecessary flourish."

Yes but several others have pointed out that Trump is a negotiator.

"We have established what you are. Now we are negotiating about price," he said to the hooker.

Tank said...

Calderon speaks up on behalf of his people as he should.

We too could have a president who speaks up on our behalf.

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

Of course we could seal the border, IF WE WANTED TO. We could do it tomorrow (or shortly). Take 10,000 troops from Europe and S. Korea, station them on the border instead, make LOUD announcements that we will be shooting people trying to sneak in. The first week, you shoot a few invaders. Then they will stop. We can do it now, IF WE WANT TO. Some of us really do want to (no we don't want to kill Mexicans, we want them to stop de facto setting our immigration policy).

Michael McClain said...

Mexico continues to export it's poverty to the U.S. You'd think that such an exodus of productive workers would be an embarrassment.

jr565 said...

JSD wrote:
a high speed rail project cancelled due to scandal and embezzlement;

That points out exactly the problem with Mexico and liberals. They waste huge amounts of money on these crazy pipe dream projects. High speed rail? In Mexico? they dont' have money for basic services, yet they want to waste it on high speed rail?

Sebastian said...

And by the way, answers Trump, from now on I will use the same deportation rules you do.

tim in vermont said...

Mexico is not part of American territory.

Not since the Mexican War... Half of it is "American territory" now.

BarrySanders20 said...

And now the Pope is coming for a photo op to wag his finger at the unfairness of border security.

On Mexico's northern border, not southern.

And leave the Vatican out of it. He's head of state but don't expect him to grant residency to just anyone, despite the obvious ease with which Eurpoe is assimilating its new migrants.

AJ Lynch said...

How do we say Fuck You Felipe in Spanish?

samanthasmom said...

There are a lot of ways to get Mexico to pay for the wall. There's reducing our foreign aid. Putting a tax on any monetary transactions that originate in the US and end in Mexico. A lot of money earned in the US by Mexican citizens is wire transferred to Mexico on payday. Remittances from illegals in the US is a large source of income to Mexico. We could end the program that gives companies reduced tariffs for goods assembled in Mexico from parts made in the US. Maybe even bring a few jobs home with that one. Trump never says he's going to get a check from the Mexican government.

Jim said...

Mexico receives billions of dollars from workers in the United States. Same with the Philippines. It is one of the largest sources of income for mexico.
They will pay to build the wall. And we can issue work permits to to the hundreds of thousands of men and women who come here to avoid the craphole that Mexico is now.
Many of them will want to become citizens. That is fine too.
But an open border, and granting citizenship to illegals is madness.

Alexander said...

If Trump is elected, and makes the best faith attempt at the wall and is foiled by congressman and governors, then I will make sure to buy popcorn stocks well before November, 2018.

sdharms said...

so.... our prosperity comes from open borders with Mexico? not likely.

Tyrone Slothrop said...

If you know anything about border states, you know this-- any "American" laborers hired to build the wall would be illegal Mexicans.

Terry said...

In the last great wave of immigration, around the turn of the 20th century, two American intellectuals opposed the massive influx of Southern and Eastern Europeans. The two intellectuals were Owen Wister (author of the seminal Western novel "The Virginian'), and the artist Frederick Remington.
Wister and Remington were afraid that the Italian, Greek, Slav and Jewish immigrants would settle mostly in industrial cities and that would change forever the national character of the United States. They were right.

tim in vermont said...

And now the Pope is coming for a photo op to wag his finger at the unfairness of border security.

Well the Pope is the one who gave Mexico to the Spanish, so the Mexican War invalidated a papal decree. Same as he is the one who gave Brazil to Portugal. Of

DrMaturin said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
DrMaturin said...

President of Mexico: Donald Trump is insane if he thinks Mexico will pay for a wall.
President Trump: The first trainload of illegals has just left the station on it's way back to Mexico.
President of Mexico: What!! You can't do that!
President Trump: The second trainload has just left.
President of Mexico: Wait! Let's talk about this!
President Trump: The third trainload just left.
President of Mexico: All right, how much do you want?

2/8/16, 12:56 PM Delete

Dan Hossley said...

I don't think we should be taking advice from Mexico. Their country is what our country will look like in 15 or 20 years....one screwed up mess.

YoungHegelian said...

What's the second largest Mexican city?

Los Angeles.

The Mexican ruling class has for too long exported its people to the US as a safety valve for its systemic incompetence & corruption. While the transition time would be brutal, even perhaps fatal, for folks like Calderon, the US stopping Mexican immigration might be a good thing even for Mexico.

holdfast said...

Walls, fences, minefields, tank traps, whatever - all are simply obstacles and all are only effective when covered by observation and/or fire. Which means we certainly need better barriers, but we also need more humans on the border - of course, those humans need to be allowed to do their actual jobs. Some suggestions:

- Liquidate the ATF and transfer all personnel to the border patrol. The ATF performs very few useful functions, and those few could be performed by the FBI (the FBI already runs the NICS background check system). Repeal the NFA and the GCA, thereby giving the ATF nothing to enforce.

- End the war on drugs, starting with the "soft" drugs and transfer surplus DEA personnel to the border.

- Get rid of all those SWAT teams owned by Federal agencies who have no business owning sub-machine guns (IRS, SSA, etc.). If you want to play with guns you can do so at the border.

Curious George said...

"Mexican people, we are not going to pay any single cent for such a stupid wall! And it's going to be completely useless.""

Single cent? No. Just a fuck wad boatload of those worthless pesos.

Freeman Hunt said...

No one really thought Mexico was going to pay for the wall.

Calderon should keep his trap shut about other politicians until his government starts providing some basic law and order for the people of Mexico.

PuertoRicoSpaceport.com said...

TDS, you nailed it. This is exactly how negotiation works.

As to it being loony to expect that Mexico will pay for the wall, how about this?

Attention all Mexicans. If you have a HS diploma and a skill as well as no criminal record, we are now issuing permanent green cards. This will permit you to work in the US and put you on the normal path to US citizenship. All you have to do is get here.

All other Mexicans, if we find you in the US we will ship you back to Mexico so fast your asshole will take a week to catch up with you.

Maybe we would be a bit more finicky on the qualifications but you get the idea. We would create a massive hemorrhage of talent that Mexico has paid to educate and train and that Mexico needs.

Mexico would be forced to build a wall to prevent this brain drain. We would say "Oh, you have a problem now? You need to build a wall to keep your people in. Your problem, you pay for it."

Hat tip to Scott Adams who suggested this a couple months ago.

Another way we could get them to pay for the wall is this: "You can see what is happening to Venezuela when they run out of oil revenue. Nice little country you have there Mexico. Be a shame if something happened to the oil revenues."

Right now the US has so much oil that we literally don't know what to do with it. Here's an idea, start selling it to Mexico's export markets at a cut rate.

I did use literally correctly there, for the pedants.

Drill, baby, Drill! (Go Sarah, Go!)

John Henry

BDNYC said...

A wall spanning the entire border is dumb. A complete waste of money that should instead be spent on improving our surveillance technology (drones, sensors, cameras, etc.) and efficiently directing our enforcement efforts.

A wall or fence makes sense in more densely populated areas ... but the entire US-Mexico border, much of which is open desert? Please. Technology should provide a solution, a way forward.

If coyotes and drug runners felt there was a greater chance of confrontation with American law enforcement because of an operational and effective virtual fence, illegal border crossings would plummet. But if all we had was some dumb fence in the middle of the desert and a border patrol that cannot possibly watch it all, what have we accomplished?

tim in vermont said...

The problem with a virtual wall is that the next president could just shut it down. Same as Obama has done with the limited virtual wall we have now, since they need the voters for this coming election. At least a real wall would have to be visibly torn down, not just removed with a pen and a phone making inaction policy.

TreeJoe said...

Just put significant restrictions on the transfer of money via the banking system between the U.S. and Mexico until Mexico works to secure the border.

Problem solved.

PuertoRicoSpaceport.com said...

Young Hegelian,

You too nailed it. A wall would probably be a good thing for Mexico. If people could not escape, if the flow of remittances stopped, there would be big trouble.

The Mexican govt might even be forced to clean up its act.

As a carrot to go with the stick of the wall, we might even be able to help them a bit.

John Henry

traditionalguy said...

Let the Games begin!

Trump's speeches are already getting counter offers. He is in effect already our President.

Ford had better hurry building its new Dearborne in Mexico. Then the Trump Tariff on Ford products will pay for the wall. UNLESS, Trump turns into Bush IV and sets up a quick 100 million dollar donor PAC called The FoMoCo Free Trade PAC.

tim in vermont said...

You know a good working definition for "virtual"? "Not really," as in "not really a wall."

n.n said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Matthew Sablan said...

You know, I don't think Trump is talking about completely closing borders and not allowing anyone in for any reason forever.

But, that's what people are reacting against, which makes it hard for me to trust talking to them. Maybe they'll ignore what I have to say, too. Note: I'm not sure I either trust or like what Trump is saying, at least I have the decency to acknowledge what he's actually saying.

n.n said...

Perhaps it will force Mexicans to address the local causes of mass emigration.

Perhaps it will force Americans to reconsider trade, welfare, immigration, and selective-child policies.

It will reduce immigration. At least until Mexico et al, and America address their internal conflicts. It will highlight the lost people in urban ghettos who are currently subsidized through redistributive change in order to secure a stable environment. It may save over one million American lives annually lost to the abortion and reactive parenthood industries.

rhhardin said...

Has he heard about foreign aid.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Yeah you jerks, you should be THANKING us for the hundreds of thousands of people who sneak across your border in violation of your laws each year. Geez, you're WELCOME, ingrates.

holdfast said...

The nature of the barrier would have to depend on the geography, human and natural. In some places multiple fence barriers might make sense (to thwart tunnels). In other places, a big-ass wall like Israel has with the WB might be the thing to do. In others, low tangle-wire seeded with trip flares might be the right move. During the initial building phase the Army and Marines can contribute units of Combat Engineers, and going forward reservist / National Guard sappers can be involved in maintenance and upgrades.

But the "wall" won't really matter without a robust and swift process for deportation. When an illegal is caught, they should be returned to their home country, no questions asked, within 48 hours, unless a check of DNA crime databases gets a hit. If the US needs to seize airfields Central America to facilitate those deportation flights, then so be it.

If an illegal is caught a second time, then should be jailed until the family or country pays a $10k indemnity, and then they would be deported home.

eric said...

Doesn't this guy know that his words will only elevate Trump in the election?

holdfast said...

Of course, if the Mexican government really wants to get shirty, we can start giving arms and organization to the autodefensas in Mexico. Why should the cartel thugs and the government thugs have all the guns? The US has a ton of ways to bring pain to the Mexican government. Time to use, or at least threaten a few of them. The Mexicans are aiding and abetting a [sometimes armed] invasion of a neighbor - that's not very neighborly of them.

J. Farmer said...

@Michael K:

"Yes but several others have pointed out that Trump is a negotiator."

Who is he negotiating with? We don't need Mexico's consent or permission to build a wall.

Alex said...

Good walls make for good neighbors.

Alex said...

It doesn't have to be a wall. It could be a fence. or a barrier. Or multiple fences. maybe electrified. Is that too harsh?

Add rottweilers & dobermans. Maybe land mines and machine-gun nests.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Isn't it weird that Mexico's southern border is so much more secure than their northern border? Coincidence, I'm sure.

jr565 said...

tim in Vermont wrote:
Mexico is not part of American territory.

Not since the Mexican War... Half of it is "American territory" now.

La Raza wants to reclaim portions of the Southern States for Mexico. but I suppose we could just solve the problem by annexing Mexico. True, it would cause more problems than it would solve, but at least it would stop the endless border crossings, AND would make the the La Raza types incensed that they lost all of Mexico to the gringos.

Sammy Finkelman said...

Mexico Deports More Immigrants Back to Central America than the U.S. Does

That's because of the Obama Administration.

The United States outsourced that to Mexico. They can be crueler, and they don't pay attention to requests for asylum, or much less.

As that article you linked to says:

"Mexico now deports more Central American migrants than the United States, a dramatic shift since the U.S. asked Mexico for help a year ago with a spike in illegal migration, especially among unaccompanied minors.

And Mexico is paying for it. They won't pay for a wall, though. They'd rather have a cold war/trade war with the United States. Unless Donald Trump offers visa free travel for Mexicans in exchange.







CJ said...

A ten percent tax on the money Mexicans in the USA wire back to Mexico would make a serious dent in the cost of a border wall.

As others have noted, Calderon is speaking up for Mexicans, which is what a president of Mexico is supposed to do.

DanTheMan said...

I'm not sure how we deal with the 10+ million already here, but I think we can stop adding to the problem as follows:
If you are caught entering the US illegally from Mexico, you will be returned to Mexico. To Cancun, Mexico.
Having to travel 1,500 miles to try again might be a bit of a deterrent.

J. Farmer said...

HoodlumDoodlum:

Isn't it weird that Mexico's southern border is so much more secure than their northern border? Coincidence, I'm sure.

To be fair, Mexico's southern border is probably about a quarter the size of its northern border. I do not understand what you mean by its northern border being "more secure." It's not the job of a country to keep people inside its borders.

Unknown said...

"The Berlin Wall was built not to keep people out, but to keep their own people in. Big diff."

-- NOT IF MEXICO BUILDS THE WALL.

Quinn Satterwaite said...

"Maybe, El Presidente of a different country should refrain from commenting on our elections? Just a suggestion."

And even a EX President.

How is how opinion relevant?

Michael K said...

""Yes but several others have pointed out that Trump is a negotiator."

Who is he negotiating with? We don't need Mexico's consent or permission to build a wall."

No, but getting them to pay for it was a negotiating tactic. The suggestions about remittances are good ones. Oil is another pressure point. If Obama thinks he can impose a $10 a barrel tax on US production, why not the reverse ?

I don't have the answer but I know the "virtual fence" is not it. Mexico is now paying central American refugees to come north.

Michael K said...

" I do not understand what you mean by its northern border being "more secure." It's not the job of a country to keep people inside its borders."

Mexico's immigration policies and its enforcement of its southern border should be a model for us.

Sammy Finkelman said...

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/08/world/americas/mexico-migrants-central-america.html
This is all being done because of the deporter-in-chief, President Barack Obama. It's a pathetic attempt to appease the Republicans.

Fleeing a surge in gang violence and a void of opportunity, record numbers of Central Americans began streaming toward the United States in the spring of 2014.

[It should be noted that fleeing from a criminal gang that threatens your life is not grounds for asylum, unless it can jammed into some other category.]

That year, 68,631 children, nearly twice as many as the previous year, were stopped at the United States border, having chosen the risks of the 1,000-mile journey over the dangers they faced back home.

To stem the flow, the White House promised aid to help build better lives for the migrants in their own countries. In December, $750 million was approved for Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador.

But the Obama administration took other steps, too, pressing the Mexicans to tighten their borders and to create what amounts to a migrant dragnet hundreds of miles south of the United States.

Plan Frontera Sur, as the Mexican government’s campaign is called, serves as a first line of defense for the United States. Deportations have soared in the last year, while the arrests of Central American migrants in this country have more than doubled to more than 170,000 last year from about 78,000 in 2013.

But for all the effort, the Mexican campaign has not deterred the flow of migrants north. Instead, what was already a treacherous journey has become even more dangerous.

The enhanced vigilance of the Mexican authorities has forced migrants to abandon once-preferred trains and buses in favor of riskier routes on foot through remote stretches of the Mexican countryside crawling with gangs, frustrated villagers and corrupt police officers...


Yes, Obama is getting people killed in Mexico.







Sammy Finkelman said...

Michael K said...2/8/16, 1:55 PM

Mexico is now paying central American refugees to come north.

Where do you get this news? The exact opposite is true.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Americas/2015/0716/As-Mexico-tightens-southern-border-migrants-confront-new-threats

Also, there has actually been a great falloff in migration from Mexico. There are far fewer births per woman now.

Matthew Sablan said...

"Yes, Obama is getting people killed in Mexico."

-- Is this before or after taking into account walking guns there fast and furiously?

Sammy Finkelman said...

“The message the government is sending with detaining and deporting migrants quickly is that the migrants aren’t the priority of this policy,” Knippen says. “Nothing will happen to you if you steal from a migrant because they will be deported anyway.”

- July 16, 2015 Christian Science Monitor.

Obama really should know: Appeasement never works.


J. Farmer said...

@Michael K:

"No, but getting them to pay for it was a negotiating tactic."

Again, who is he negotiating with? We can easily pay for it ourselves, so why bother getting into a useless pissing match over money we don't need with an important neighboring country.

"If Obama thinks he can impose a $10 a barrel tax on US production, why not the reverse ?

Obama can't impose that. But he can propose it to Congress.

"I don't have the answer but I know the "virtual fence" is not it. Mexico is now paying central American refugees to come north."

My answer is a trifecta of policies: border wall, E-VERIFY, and entry/exit tracking for visas. What is your source for Mexico paying central American refugees to come north? I had not heard of that and would be interested in reading about it further.

Sammy Finkelman said...

"Yes, Obama is getting people killed in Mexico."

Matthew Sablan said...2/8/16, 2:04 PM

-- Is this before or after taking into account walking guns there fast and furiously?

After, of course. He was Mexicans killed before, but now it's people from Central America trying to each the United States.

Obama both knows and doesn't know what he is doing.

Mac McConnell said...

TreeJoe said...
Just put significant restrictions on the transfer of money via the banking system between the U.S. and Mexico until Mexico works to secure the border.

Problem solved.

2/8/16, 1:19 PM

Yes, Mexico will pay for the wall, 15% to 25% surcharge on all remittances to Mexico by non US citizens.

By the way, Cruz argued for a wall long before Trump ever mentioned it or announced his campaign.

tim in vermont said...

By the "Finkleman Rule," the only policy that Obama could undertake that isn't "getting migrants killed" is to send secure transportation down there and pick them up.

Sammy Finkelman said...

* He was [getting] Mexicans killed before, but now it's people from Central America trying to [r]each the United States.

Once they reach Texas, and cross the border, they can apply for asylum, and get a tentative court date of Friday, November 29. 2019. (the day after Thanksgiving)

They cannot voluntarily cross back, because they are not Mexican citizens. They have to fly back by airplane. Cubans gets to stay if they make it.

Sammy Finkelman said...

tim in vermont said...2/8/16, 2:10 PM

By the "Finkleman Rule," the only policy that Obama could undertake that isn't "getting migrants killed" is to send secure transportation down there and pick them up.

If the United States didn't pressure Mexico to crack down, it wouldn't be responsible for what happened, and it wouldn't be so dangerous.

Obama is trying to hide the fact that there really are open borders, so he's trying to stop them before they reach the border. They can't be put in prison because there is a limit on capacity and because federal judges have ruled against it, especially for minors.


FullMoon said...

DanTheMan said... [hush]​[hide comment]

>> Trump wants Mexicans to build the wall? Another example of wealthy people sending jobs overseas.

Ignoring the "overseas" part, even if Trump could make the Mexicans pay for it, there's no reason he couldn't hire Americans to build it... since I suspect his plan is to build it on our side of the border.
Dan


Dan is the MAN, Trump should broadcast this, and say it will be Union Labor, get the unions behind him.

William said...

Wasn't Calderon the Prez whose brother got caught with a million dollars in a suitcase in some kind of shady deal? It may have been another one. There have been so many Mexican Presidents with so many shady deals. At any rate, the wall could easily be paid for by imposing a 10% excise tax on all bribes paid to Mexican politicians. Perhaps the daughter of Chavez could throw in a few billion in the spirit of Latin solidarity. She'd never miss it, and it would be a nice gesture.......Mexicans aren't going north in order to flee rapacious Gringo capitalists like Trump. They're fleeing cartels and their employees in the Mexican government. Ever since Viva Zapata the Mexican government has been in the hands of left wing populists. If Mexico is such a bad place that everyone with half a brain is plotting to leave shouldn't politicians like Calderon accept some of the blame.

rehajm said...

Whoever builds the wall- can we put in a cat door?

Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...

The US wall at the border with Mexico is as much an international disgrace as the Berlin Wall.

Yes, illegal immigration is a problem. For several years we lived along the Rio Grande and nightly watched illegals run past our bedroom window.

A wall is not the answer.

Two things -
..tighter citizenship rules - just popping out of a womb on US soil should not convey citizenship
..less free stuff for all and sundry
would greatly reduce the problem.

Quaestor said...

Well of course Calderon would dump on Trump and the WALL. If there was a WALL Mexico would have to have a social security system, health care, and Johnson-style Great Society programs that they would actually have to pay for.

The details about the wall.

Fernandinande said...

AJ Lynch said...
How do we say Fuck You Felipe in Spanish?


"¡Vete a la mierda Felipe en EspaƱol!" According to Bing, anyway.

My Spanish is pretty bad and sometimes say "Como tu mama" as a joke greeting - it means "like your mom" and/or "I eat your mom", either one of which could be insulting. So anyway, this friend was buying a kilo of coke from some Mexicans and he tells me "Don't say that 'como tu mama' shit, these guys are Mexican Mafia and they don't fuck around", so of course I said it and the Mexican guys laughed. (Note to NSA readers: that was all more than statute-of-limitations years ago).

Mike said...

"Mexico receives billions of dollars from workers in the United States."

Yes it is the SECOND largest income source after oil, and these figures may be out of date, making remittances the #1 source of "income" for Mexicans. They should be worried. Just a dollar tax on remittances would have a yuuuuuuge impact.

Gusty Winds said...

We all know Mexico knows a great deal about prosperity for its people.

Gusty Winds said...

Said the man who's citizens can't flee his country fast enough.

Ken Mitchell said...

I've been advocating a high tax on remittances for several years now. That tax could easily pay for Trump's wall, and the tax would also encourage illegals to "self-deport" or in other words, "go home".

tim in vermont said...

The US wall at the border with Mexico is as much an international disgrace as the Berlin Wall

You say it, but you never explain why. Why is it as bad as building a wall to keep your own citizens in, and shooting the ones who try to escape your rule?

Gahrie said...

"Mr. Trump - Tear down this wall" - President Putin on his visit to the Mexican border.

there is a difference between a all designed to keep people in (prison) and a wall to keep people out (the fence around your yard).

Lyle Smith said...

In the civil law fences are the responsibility of the landowners on either side of their fence. Mexico will have to pay in some form or another because their own law suggests they must.

Gusty Winds said...

Mexico exported $86 Billion in vehicles in 2014; its #1 export. Well it's not really "their" exports; they just let their people be exploited by foreign companies for cheap labor.

But this list I found doesn't include marijuana or cocaine. Unless maybe they are lumped in with vegetables which are 10th on the list.

Gusty Winds said...

From 2013 NRO, when they still thought like Trump:

Until 2011, when it passed reforms, Mexico had among the most draconian immigration laws in the world. Guatemala has criticized Mexico for initiating construction of a fence along its southern border.

Mexico has zero tolerance for illegal immigrants who seek to work in Mexico, happen to break Mexican law, or go on public assistance — and zero tolerance for any citizens who aid them.

In Mexico, legal immigration is aimed at privileging new arrivals who have skill sets that will aid the Mexican economy and, according to the country’s immigration law, who have the “necessary funds for their sustenance” — while denying entry to those who are not healthy or would upset the “equilibrium of the national demographics.” Translated, this apparently means that Mexico tries to withhold legal residency from those who do not look like Mexicans or do not have the skills needed to make money.

If the United States were to treat Mexican nationals in the same way that Mexico treats Central American nationals, there would be humanitarian outrage.


Sounds like Mr. Calderon is a complete hypocrite.

Paul Ciotti said...

If illegal immigrants are such a good deal for the U.S. why doesn't Mexico keep them at home and get all the benefits itself?

JSD said...

Carlos Salinas, president from 1988 – 94, is exiled in Ireland. He brother Enrique murdered in 2004 (unsolved). Older brother Raul convicted of murder of brother-in-law Jose (conviction overturned). Salinas’ Brother-in law Antonio’s arrest in Switzerland led to a hidden fortune of hundreds millions of dollars. Zedillo succeeded Salinas after handpicked PRI candidate Colosio was assassinated (solved, lone gunman, but the nearly the entire investigative team was subsequently murdered/disappeared).

Mexico is one of those screwy places where the elite take great pride in nationalism but have self-loathing of their own people. If you aren’t foreign educated (Harvard Oxford etc) and you can’t speak English and maybe some French, you’re a low life nobody.

Jonathan Graehl said...

PuertoRicoSP, "undercut Mexican oil" means you pay $X subsidy (per) for people to not buy from Mexico. That's silly - Mexico can offer those same people $X+.01 to buy from them (by undercutting your undercut).

Theranter said...

JR565 ...but I suppose we could just solve the problem by annexing Mexico

You stole my line! I've wondered this since I was a teenager in L.A., and I still joke that it isn't a bad idea. It's crazy that some 30yrs. later nothing has improved there--a people and land with such potential.

Maybe Trump should make an "eminent domain" type offer, ask the Mexican people to buy in to the U.S., if the threshold amount is met, send in our military and take out their govt and cartels, and install our govt and police in our newly peacefully-conquered land. It's a beautiful country with beautiful people, full of natural resources and fertile farm land, so it's a win-win for all.

Big Mike said...

Spoken like a guy who's never had his arm twisted by Donald Trump.

CWJ said...

"But the 'wall' won't really matter without a robust and swift process for deportation."

Catapults combined with the airbags extreme skiers now use. A little bit of both the first millennium and the 21st century. Plus the image of bombarding border towns with bouncing deportees makes me smile.

JSD said...

We occupied Mexico City on September 14, 1847. Stayed just long enough to force the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe annexing the entire Western Continental U.S. The U.S. withdrew in June 1848. The U.S. troops started to see organized rebel resistance. Mexico’s defeat had upended the entire social order of the country (sound familiar?). The generals could see nothing but misery in maintaining the occupation and got out ASAP. Our ancestors may have been brutal, but they weren’t stupid. However, the seeds of the American Civil War were planted in that fateful adventure.

traditionalguy said...

Trump likes two fers. He will hire El Chapo to consult on Wall and Tunnel designs that can stop Sinaloa guys in exchange for time off his sentence.

Then he will tax Mexican marijuana and tequila. The Sin Tax Wall by Sinaloa has a ring to it for the Evangelicals .

n.n said...

Mexico has an emigration problem and refugee crisis. With the defeat of American forces in Syria, Libya, Iraq, etc., the solution is to uproot millions of people, displace millions more, abort to control native population growth, disenfranchise citizens in order to exploit democratic leverage, establish minority fiefdoms to divide people, and profit from a multi-trillion dollar welfare industry.

n.n said...

I wonder if government, industry, and environment lobbyists will return the land taken under eminent domain in Mexico, Guatemala, etc., and America, too, so that the people will no longer be corralled in urban ghettos and retarded by social and welfare industries.

Skeptical Voter said...

I call that big talk for a fat one eyed President of Mexico.

Owen said...

No need for a wall. IEDs would do. And we probably have plenty of recent arrivals who can make them.

Gallifreakin said...

Land mines. Lots of 'em.

mccullough said...

Actually Nieto is the President of Mexico. Calderon was president of Mexico from 2006-2012.

jr565 said...

Just send Syrian refugees to mexico. See if they like people immigrating into their country. We have to deal with the Mexicans leaving their country, so turnaround is fair play.

Sammy Finkelman said...

tim in vermont said...2/8/16, 2:10 PM

By the "Finkleman Rule," the only policy that Obama could undertake that isn't "getting migrants killed" is to send secure transportation down there and pick them up.

Come to think of it, he's doing exactly that (although I can only find links froom July saying he's considering that - nothing clear that that happened, but I think so. I think the United States government is paying the airfare.)

Of course, this was designed to appease people, and make it appear more would be approved than actually would be.

See:

http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/us/obama-to-fly-illegals-from-honduras-straight-to-the-u-s-so-they-can-avoid-dangerous-journey

This quotes this New York Times article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/25/world/americas/administration-weighs-plan-to-move-processing-of-youths-seeking-entry-to-honduras-.html?_r=1

Hoping to stem the recent surge of migrants at the Southwest border, the Obama administration is considering whether to allow hundreds of minors and young adults from Honduras into the United States without making the dangerous trek through Mexico, according to a draft of the proposal.

Secretary of State John Kerry made a speech on Wednesday, January 13, 2016 at the National Defense University in which he said:

http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2016/01/251177.htm

In that vein, I am pleased to announce that we have plans to expand the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program in order to help vulnerable families and individuals from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, and offer them a safe and legal alternative to the dangerous journey that many are tempted to begin, making them at that instant easy prey for human smugglers who have no interest but their own profits – I might add, making them also prey for one of the great scourges of the world today, which is human trafficking, and many, many people – millions, 20 million-plus – living in a state of modern slavery.



Sammy Finkelman said...

Gallifreakin said...2/8/16, 5:45 PM

Land mines. Lots of 'em.

Hong Kong has that - mines in the water, I read once but can't find a reference to. They were put there by the British at the request of Red China.

Of course such thigs would work - but that goes back to my point: killing people.

And tnow there wll be a moral test of western civilization at the Syrian Turkish border. Vladimir Putin is enjoying this.


Sammy Finkelman said...

JSD said...

Zedillo succeeded Salinas after handpicked PRI candidate Colosio was assassinated (solved, lone gunman, but the nearly the entire investigative team was subsequently murdered/disappeared

Personally, I think President Clinton had something to do with that one. Not killing the investigative team - I mean the plot to kill Colosio.

a6z said...

As the Blogfather says (probably not originally), the wall can be paid for with an excise tax on remittances.

The legal incidence would fall not quite on Mexico, but on those Mexicans, ex-Mexicans, and descendants-of-Mexicans who remit money from the U.S. to Mexico.

The economic incidence is another matter. It would be split between the United States and Mexico.

(1) If Chicano activists are right that Chicano labor is precious to the United States, the burden will fall mainly on the United States: largely in the form of higher salaries for unskilled or semi-skilled labor, which quite a few Trump supporters sound like they could learn to live with.

(2) If the reverse is true, most of the burden will fall on Mexico in the form of lower remittances. Which may be bad for Trump's supporters, but is good for Trump's proposition that Mexico will pay. (Even a stopped clock is right bis die.)

rcocean said...

He won't pay for the wall? Well, that's what he says now.

rcocean said...

"We occupied Mexico City on September 14, 1847. Stayed just long enough to force the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe annexing the entire Western Continental U.S. The U.S. withdrew in June 1848."

Given the result, we might as well stayed and annexed them. Right now, we have the worst of both worlds.

Michael K said...

"If Chicano activists are right that Chicano labor is precious to the United States,"

If they were "precious" the place it would be most precious is Los Angeles, home to more Mexicans than Guadalajara. A few years ago, the Mexicans decided to prove how much we needed them. They all stayed home from work for a day. It was the best traffic situation in decades. We have been trying to get them to stay home for another week or two but no luck.

R.C. said...

Hmm.

Any tax on remittances is easily circumventable.

So how, exactly, is The Donald planning to convince Mexico to pay for it?

There isn't any way to get Mexico to pay for all of it. But he likely can get them to pay for part of it.

The most-likely option I can think of is: He makes it into a jobs program for Mexican laborers, with the U.S. agreeing to match whatever the Mexican government pays per hour for the labor.

The Mexican government looks at this and says, "Hey, we have a bunch of laborers who'll be working at government-provided jobs, wherein we only have to pay half what we normally would. Not a bad deal."

Result: Mexico pays Mexicans to build the wall (but the U.S. is also paying).

Downside: They intentionally build it poorly.

Workaround: U.S. engineers and managers supervise and audit and spot-check, and only pay laborers for work that's well-done. (But now it's getting less and less Mexican-done-and-paid-for.)

There are some details to work out, but that seems a plausible option.

Gahrie said...

So how, exactly, is The Donald planning to convince Mexico to pay for it?

He deducts it from the federal aid Mexico receives every year.

future toothless bum said...

Hell, I could get Mexican's to pay for it.

A mile of fence and you are a US citizen.

Original Mike said...

""We occupied Mexico City on September 14, 1847. Stayed just long enough to force the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe annexing the entire Western Continental U.S. The U.S. withdrew in June 1848."

Given the result, we might as well stayed and annexed them. Right now, we have the worst of both worlds.


They build the wall and we'll give back California. Best of both worlds.

Paul said...

We have a few armored divisions in Texas. Let's invade Mexico, shoot all the Narco-terrorist and their politician buddies, and annex 'em.

Do it for the children.

bgates said...

Actually Nieto is the President of Mexico. Calderon was president of Mexico from 2006-2012.

The fact that Calderon is no longer President of Mexico is stated in the first sentence of the article Althouse linked. She even quoted part of that sentence. Yet she inexplicably appears to remain unaware of who the President of Mexico is, while purporting to quote the President of Mexico calling Donald Trump (ironically) "not very well-informed".

I'm holding the question open....

Charles said...

It may have already ben said. Mexico could fund the wall by taxing all of the money flowing back to Mexico from the US. Say a 25% tax on it. And that would not even require an agreement from the Mexican Government.

aritai said...

"Nice resort business you have there." The U.S. has lots of unfilled resorts and underemployed resort workers. Where a willingness to work hard is enough, no degrees needed.

Will make the wall look cheap cheap, especially since all our estimates are 100x inflated over actual. Like many projects the U.S. government undertakes. I've seen $2,500 efforts turn into $2.5M boondoggles for defense contractors. Sometimes with good reason - attempting to comply with all USG mandates that exist no where else in the world. DOD 5000 is a wonderful opportunity to inflate costs and hire 1000s of highly paid lawyers. Vice thoe that actually do the work.

Mike said...

Well well well, from today's Investors Business Daily web site:

“Last week, Mexico’s central bank reported that for the first time since statistics have been kept, the $24.8 billion in immigrant remittances received have surpassed Mexico’s $23.4 billion in oil earnings, meaning that the government of Mexico is more dependent than ever on the earnings of maids and gardeners in the U.S. to keep itself afloat.”

Kirk Parker said...

All you advocating for annexing Mexico... do you really think we would hold the entire population in some kind of non-voting status until American Civic Values™ take hold?

Really??? Because La Raza is here to tell you otherwise.