By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - When do YOU think we will see the birth of the American Union?

wfz on 13 April 2009
City17 said:
wfz said:

It's going to happen someday. We already have those super freeways built from Mexico to Canada, and I have convinced myself that the reason why we let thousands and thousands of Mexicans free into America and then give them benefits is because we're trying to take over Mexico by literally absorbing them.

The only thing is Canada might not want to join, and we should be wary of their Coast Guard.

 

 

Are you suggesting that we have a choice in the matter?

I liike the boat :)

 

All I'm saying is I won't be part of the team that tries to go against that guy. :P He's way too badass.



Around the Network
City17 on 13 April 2009
wfz said:
City17 said:
wfz said:

It's going to happen someday. We already have those super freeways built from Mexico to Canada, and I have convinced myself that the reason why we let thousands and thousands of Mexicans free into America and then give them benefits is because we're trying to take over Mexico by literally absorbing them.

The only thing is Canada might not want to join, and we should be wary of their Coast Guard.

 

 

Are you suggesting that we have a choice in the matter?

I liike the boat :)

 

All I'm saying is I won't be part of the team that tries to go against that guy. :P He's way too badass.

 

 

Must be hard to get a lock on!



halogamer1989 on 13 April 2009

When they take the gun from my cold dead hands... Long live the Union!



Kasz216 on 13 April 2009

You know who started to get the "American Union" in process.

George W. Bush. That's partially why his Illegal Immigration policy was so far away from the rest of the Neo-Cons.

So i don't expect much progress for a while. Probably not until America loses a lot more of it's industrail base.

Well and they'll have to get those mexican drug wars and other such civil problems underway.

Plus Canada seems pretty resentful fo the US for whatever reason. So i'm sure terms would have to be reasonable to them unless we went the route of the EU with a loose alliance first.



halogamer1989 on 13 April 2009
Kasz216 said:
You know who started to get the "American Union" in process.

George W. Bush. That's partially why his Illegal Immigration policy was so far away from the rest of the Neo-Cons.

So i don't expect much progress for a while. Probably not until America loses a lot more of it's industrail base.

Well and they'll have to get those mexican drug wars and other such civil problems underway.

Plus Canada seems pretty resentful fo the US for whatever reason. So i'm sure terms would have to be reasonable to them unless we went the route of the EU with a loose alliance first.

Well I know this.  I hated his decision on this part.  I have his avatar for security+war issues.  I don't want to turn this into an argument over President Bush or policy but rather sovereign vs. supranational entities.  Personally, I do not want it.  It would increase partisan bureaucracy and as a Christian, you can probably estimate what my beliefs are when it comes to NWO pre-reqs.

 



Around the Network
City17 on 13 April 2009
Kasz216 said:
You know who started to get the "American Union" in process.

George W. Bush. That's partially why his Illegal Immigration policy was so far away from the rest of the Neo-Cons.

So i don't expect much progress for a while. Probably not until America loses a lot more of it's industrail base.

Well and they'll have to get those mexican drug wars and other such civil problems underway.

Plus Canada seems pretty resentful fo the US for whatever reason. So i'm sure terms would have to be reasonable to them unless we went the route of the EU with a loose alliance first.

 

 

Well we didn't resist NAFTA very much even though the major concensus was that it would be harder on us economy wise in the long run...



Kasz216 on 13 April 2009
City17 said:
Kasz216 said:
You know who started to get the "American Union" in process.

George W. Bush. That's partially why his Illegal Immigration policy was so far away from the rest of the Neo-Cons.

So i don't expect much progress for a while. Probably not until America loses a lot more of it's industrail base.

Well and they'll have to get those mexican drug wars and other such civil problems underway.

Plus Canada seems pretty resentful fo the US for whatever reason. So i'm sure terms would have to be reasonable to them unless we went the route of the EU with a loose alliance first.

 

 

Well we didn't resist NAFTA very much even though the major concensus was that it would be harder on us economy wise in the long run...

Major consensus among the people...

Most of the economists loved the idea.  Espiecally left wing ones.  Clinton after all was a "Big Buisness" Democrat.

He did it to please the buisnesses and as a first step to transition us out of a labor intensive country and to push us even more towards the service industries.

It really wasn't about a NAU.  It was just what economists at the time thought was a good idea.  "You'll hurt a bit and be better off in the future."

It's still what most economists believe... though some more conversvative ones have backed off it.



City17 on 13 April 2009
Kasz216 said:
City17 said:
Kasz216 said:
You know who started to get the "American Union" in process.

George W. Bush. That's partially why his Illegal Immigration policy was so far away from the rest of the Neo-Cons.

So i don't expect much progress for a while. Probably not until America loses a lot more of it's industrail base.

Well and they'll have to get those mexican drug wars and other such civil problems underway.

Plus Canada seems pretty resentful fo the US for whatever reason. So i'm sure terms would have to be reasonable to them unless we went the route of the EU with a loose alliance first.

 

 

Well we didn't resist NAFTA very much even though the major concensus was that it would be harder on us economy wise in the long run...

Major consensus among the people...

Most of the economists loved the idea.  Espiecally left wing ones.  Clinton after all was a "Big Buisness" Democrat.

He did it to please the buisnesses and as a first step to transition us out of a labor intensive country and to push us even more towards the service industries.

It really wasn't about a NAU.  It was just what economists at the time thought was a good idea.  "You'll hurt a bit and be better off in the future."

It's still what most economists believe... though some more conversvative ones have backed off it.

 

Economists make me laugh.  Just like Pachter ;) 



halogamer1989 on 13 April 2009
City17 said:
Kasz216 said:
City17 said:
Kasz216 said:
You know who started to get the "American Union" in process.

George W. Bush. That's partially why his Illegal Immigration policy was so far away from the rest of the Neo-Cons.

So i don't expect much progress for a while. Probably not until America loses a lot more of it's industrail base.

Well and they'll have to get those mexican drug wars and other such civil problems underway.

Plus Canada seems pretty resentful fo the US for whatever reason. So i'm sure terms would have to be reasonable to them unless we went the route of the EU with a loose alliance first.

 

 

Well we didn't resist NAFTA very much even though the major concensus was that it would be harder on us economy wise in the long run...

Major consensus among the people...

Most of the economists loved the idea.  Espiecally left wing ones.  Clinton after all was a "Big Buisness" Democrat.

He did it to please the buisnesses and as a first step to transition us out of a labor intensive country and to push us even more towards the service industries.

It really wasn't about a NAU.  It was just what economists at the time thought was a good idea.  "You'll hurt a bit and be better off in the future."

It's still what most economists believe... though some more conversvative ones have backed off it.

 

Economists make me laugh.  Just like Pachter ;) 

I believe it is a debate between protectionism and free-trade.  I favor free trade but between sovereign nations and not supranational entities, i.e. the EU, AU, Asian U, SAU, etc.

 



Kasz216 on 13 April 2009
halogamer1989 said:
City17 said:
Kasz216 said:
City17 said:
Kasz216 said:
You know who started to get the "American Union" in process.

George W. Bush. That's partially why his Illegal Immigration policy was so far away from the rest of the Neo-Cons.

So i don't expect much progress for a while. Probably not until America loses a lot more of it's industrail base.

Well and they'll have to get those mexican drug wars and other such civil problems underway.

Plus Canada seems pretty resentful fo the US for whatever reason. So i'm sure terms would have to be reasonable to them unless we went the route of the EU with a loose alliance first.

 

 

Well we didn't resist NAFTA very much even though the major concensus was that it would be harder on us economy wise in the long run...

Major consensus among the people...

Most of the economists loved the idea.  Espiecally left wing ones.  Clinton after all was a "Big Buisness" Democrat.

He did it to please the buisnesses and as a first step to transition us out of a labor intensive country and to push us even more towards the service industries.

It really wasn't about a NAU.  It was just what economists at the time thought was a good idea.  "You'll hurt a bit and be better off in the future."

It's still what most economists believe... though some more conversvative ones have backed off it.

 

Economists make me laugh.  Just like Pachter ;) 

I believe it is a debate between protectionism and free-trade.  I favor free trade but between sovereign nations and not supranational entities, i.e. the EU, AU, Asian U, SAU, etc.

 

The funny part is.  It's hard to tell who's on what side on it.   Most polticians are Free Trade mostly.  Even McCain was mostly.

Really the only people not Free trade are going to be Union Democrats and Oldschool Conservatives.