So You're Telling Me There IS A Crisis!

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
16,650
23,966
1,743
Tulsa, OK
#2
Anybody who thinks there isn't a crisis on our southern border doesn't understand the meaning of the word. Yet every Democrat and many Republicans continue to pretend it's fine. Then they're shocked when a loudmouthed ahole wins the presidency by trying to address the problem that they won't. Idiots.
 
Jul 25, 2018
1,632
452
163
48
Boulder, CO
#3
"Schumer last week described the Democrats’ plan to address the crisis in a floor speech, and two of its main elements mirrored a plan being pushed by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Graham said Tuesday that he is in talks with Schumer to merge their proposals and expressed hope that reforms such as allowing migrants from Central America to apply for asylum from their own countries or from Mexico and to provide money for more immigration judges on the border — two ideas that Schumer has also endorsed — could be added to the border supplemental bill."

This is the most encouraging part of the story, to me.
 
Nov 6, 2010
726
284
613
#5
I still think economic development in central america needs to be a major part of the solution if any of it is ever going to make any difference.
 
Jul 25, 2018
1,632
452
163
48
Boulder, CO
#6
I still think economic development in central america needs to be a major part of the solution if any of it is ever going to make any difference.
Well I agree, but on the other side of that coin are the billions that we have/are pouring into those countries. How much is enough? How much of it actually goes where it's supposed to? Are we supposed to be blind to the corruption in that region & just pony up more & more, thinking it'll somehow solve the various problems?

Remember the billions raised for Haiti (yes, not Central America) after the hurricane? The place is still a shithole, but hey, everybody feels better!
 
Last edited:

Cowboy2U

Federal Marshal
Mar 31, 2008
11,220
1,676
1,743
#7
I still think economic development in central america needs to be a major part of the solution if any of it is ever going to make any difference.
You mean on our dime... jesus, are we responsible for every failed socialistic/rogue jackoff nation? Freakin left is pathetic.
 
Nov 6, 2010
726
284
613
#8
Well I agree, but on the other side of that coin are the billions that we have/are pouring into those countries. How much is enough? How much of it actually goes where it's supposed to? Are we supposed to be blind to the corruption in that region & just pony up more & more, thinking it'll somehow solve the various problems?
Nope, you have to start with the only institution that is truly strong there, and that is the church. And it's not just Catholics. Evangelicals have a huge presence in central america, and I would think with the rivers of money flowing into churches, along with the need for cheap labor (not Chinese) by international corporations, this should be a fairly easy fix. The government to government stuff is of very little use. It has to be done at a more organic level, and churches and corporations are my vote.
 
Jul 25, 2018
1,632
452
163
48
Boulder, CO
#10
Nope, you have to start with the only institution that is truly strong there, and that is the church. And it's not just Catholics. Evangelicals have a huge presence in central america, and I would think with the rivers of money flowing into churches, along with the need for cheap labor (not Chinese) by international corporations, this should be a fairly easy fix. The government to government stuff is of very little use. It has to be done at a more organic level, and churches and corporations are my vote.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...gration/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.fa695159800d

I don't think the fix is as easy as you say, but perhaps targeting the money more appropriately would help.

From the article:
"More than 40 percent of the population in Guatemala and Honduras live in rural areas; that’s true for 29 percent of El Salvador’s population. However, secure legal rights to land are lacking for many in Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, particularly for vulnerable and indigenous groups. This can limit farmers’ ability or willingness to invest in the land. Of all the U.S. aid to Guatemala from 2015 to 2017, according to the OECD data set, only 16 percent went to agriculture; in Honduras, only 14 percent; and in El Salvador, less than 1 percent of U.S. aid was channeled to the agriculture sector."
 
Nov 6, 2010
726
284
613
#11
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...gration/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.fa695159800d

I don't think the fix is as easy as you say, but perhaps targeting the money more appropriately would help.

From the article:
"More than 40 percent of the population in Guatemala and Honduras live in rural areas; that’s true for 29 percent of El Salvador’s population. However, secure legal rights to land are lacking for many in Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, particularly for vulnerable and indigenous groups. This can limit farmers’ ability or willingness to invest in the land. Of all the U.S. aid to Guatemala from 2015 to 2017, according to the OECD data set, only 16 percent went to agriculture; in Honduras, only 14 percent; and in El Salvador, less than 1 percent of U.S. aid was channeled to the agriculture sector."
Well, easy is of course relative. When we admitted China to the WTO, we lifted 1 billion people out of poverty, which we are now rightly putting the breaks on. The combined population of Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras is somewhere around 35 million. And now that the Nike's of the world are going to face a 25% tariff, it seems the opportunity is there. I spent a week in El Salvador with my wife's family, and you just can't believe how rudimentary their economy is. Add to that the stunning beauty of the place, and it should be a relatively easy fix.
 

llcoolw

Territorial Marshal
Feb 7, 2005
5,651
3,192
1,743
Sammamish, Washington.Dallas, Texas.Maui, Hawaii
#12
You mean on our dime... jesus, are we responsible for every failed socialistic/rogue jackoff nation? Freakin left is pathetic.
I'm not getting a left vibe off of teachum. I think he(?) may be on the right track. Yes, American capitalism would be just the ticket to jump start the smaller economies. Better than our tax dollars going into the elites pockets.
 

Cowboy2U

Federal Marshal
Mar 31, 2008
11,220
1,676
1,743
#13
I'm not getting a left vibe off of teachum. I think he(?) may be on the right track. Yes, American capitalism would be just the ticket to jump start the smaller economies. Better than our tax dollars going into the elites pockets.
Why, so their corrupt politicians can starve the masses? See Venezuela.
 
Jul 25, 2018
1,632
452
163
48
Boulder, CO
#14
Well, easy is of course relative. When we admitted China to the WTO, we lifted 1 billion people out of poverty, which we are now rightly putting the breaks on. The combined population of Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras is somewhere around 35 million. And now that the Nike's of the world are going to face a 25% tariff, it seems the opportunity is there. I spent a week in El Salvador with my wife's family, and you just can't believe how rudimentary their economy is. Add to that the stunning beauty of the place, and it should be a relatively easy fix.
Come on Teach.

With investors worldwide, who are probably way smarter than you or I about this, why hasn't there been a gold rush to these countries if it's so darn easy?
 

SLVRBK

Johnny 8ball's PR Manager
Staff
A/V Subscriber
Oct 16, 2003
14,141
5,147
1,743
Katy, TX
#16
Have to remember that china was never seen as only cheap manufacturing but also a future market with enormous possibilities, none of the Central American countries offer that.
 
Nov 6, 2010
726
284
613
#17
Have to remember that china was never seen as only cheap manufacturing but also a future market with enormous possibilities, none of the Central American countries offer that.
While that is certainly true, there are so many more benefits, immigration being only one, and so much less adversarial potential, I just don't see much downside. This is not a completely foreign culture like with China or the Arab world with completely different value systems, religions, etc. Yes, there is a slight language barrier, but that is breaking down daily as there are so many bi-lingual people both here and there. This is a pretty good article that relates to what I'm getting at, and the opportunity to kill two birds potentially. Warning, it's a little long.

https://nationalinterest.org/feature/its-time-america-break-beijing-63327
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
26,461
31,917
1,743
oklahoma city
#18
Come on Teach.

With investors worldwide, who are probably way smarter than you or I about this, why hasn't there been a gold rush to these countries if it's so darn easy?
Investment wants to lower risk and governmental stability lowers investment risk. Take ineffective and corrupt government and concern about safety regarding drug violence, and other options seem better.

If we could get our appetite for drugs under control, then there would be opportunity.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,136
2,556
1,743
So Cal
#19
I still think economic development in central america needs to be a major part of the solution if any of it is ever going to make any difference.
why is that our issue, and not simply happening naturally by them, in their own country?

Once you answer that question, the rest of it solves itself..... and hint... it does not involve economic investment from the U.S.