The North American Union?
NAFTA Superhighway?
I'm curious.
Plus, I wanna see if boutons can be civil for once.
As general rule, if the corps are pushing for it (globalization), then it's great for the corps and bad for everybody else. That's the essential nature of -you business.
Note the corps that import food are NOT insuring that food is safe/untainted/uncontaminated, because self-regulating/inspecting/testing would cut their profits. Corporate profits first, and the customer's health, ....?? The FDA and Dept of Agriculture are owned by the corps.
Last edited by boutons_; 07-16-2007 at 07:16 AM.
I have heard so little of it, but am completely opposed to what I have heard.
Oh... this is so cool... New pic on top of your posting:
spp.gov
I'm surprised that more people didn't know about/of this. It's all going on with no votes, no opposition.
The North American Union is a myth. No real agreements have been signed (so far, anyway). It is a terrifying thought though. I'm already disgusted at being ruled by a federal government that in general has no idea what would benefit or harm my area, and what my areas needs are. That would only get worse if you add more levels of crap filled people to the already astounding list.
As for NAFTA, I've never had a real problem with NAFTA itself. In fact, it's had a huge benefit for San Antonio. The Superhighway depends on which form you want to talk about. There's basically 3 forms I've seen.
One basically builds a limited access highway (parts of it possibly tolled) paralleling the Pan Am for the most part, with the idea of bypassing urban areas. This would be good for safety reasons, but would potentially hurt the local economy if it was easy to bypass SA to get to Dallas (bigger air terminal, etc).
The second is building a new interstate from the mexican border to Houston and then eventually up to meet with 35 in another state. This would certainly divert just about everything to Houston instead of San Antonio, since it has extremely large terminals for air, rail, truck, and sea shipping.
The last is just improving I-35 (even including some tolled cutoffs that bypass some metro areas). This is probably the best locally as SA would still be easily accessible, and it could potentially be cheaper to switch freight methods in SA to get to another major hub.
Once you figure out which form you want to look at, then there's pros and cons both locally, and nationally, etc.
I am under the impression that NAFTA was created to off set
the EU. As for the super highways, I am still unsure about them,
except for one thing, tolls. I am opposed to tolls all together
especially when the highway will be built and tolls collected by
private companies. I have travelled quite a bit in the East and
found toll roads to be a pain in the rear-end. And I still
haven't figured out how a working person can afford to pay
them on a daily basis to get to and from work. If they do
come about, which it looks like they will, I foresee the time
when employers do like they do in Europe and pay their
employees a travel allowance on a weekly basis to get to
and from work. And the cost of living will go skyhigh as it
is in Europe. One quirky thing about toll roads, you know
this was tried in California and on one would use them and
the State had to buy them back. San Diego has an express
lane that is toll and it is unused most of the time.
I too an unfamiliar with the North American Union.
As for boutons worry about the big corporations killing their
customers, that really makes lots of sense, doesn't it? Kill
your customers who you depend on..........
Never happen. C'mon, the Eunuchpeons have spent the better part of the last half century trying to make it work and, still, they have nationalistic issues that stand in the way.
Nah, I'm not worried.
I think opposition is muted because 1) so few pay any substantial taxes anymore so, it's not about spending their money and, 2) it'd be a cool engineering project to watch develop...kind of along the lines of the Hoover Dam.
North American Union, a myth? Then explain the whole immigration/amnesty deadlock. Explain border agents Campion and Ramos jacked up incarceration.
As far as the NAFTA Superhighway, it will literally split the country in two.
There's no official agreements between the countries that support it. Didn't say there weren't issues that might support it. The imigration/amnesty debate is an issue with more meaning than the supposedly planned NAU. Haven't paid attention to border agent issues.
And what the heck do you mean "split the country in two?" It's a freaking road meant to facilitate getting good from Mexico and Canada to major hub areas (Kansas City would probably be the primary benefactor due to it's centralized location).
Google Campion and Ramos.
Meh on the border patrol agents. the rudimentary info I looked at definitely shows they shouldn't have been punished, but it's not like crap like that hasn't been happening for decades (long before NAFTA).Google Campion and Ramos.
And what's your point with the map? It's a map of existing corridors that the superhighway would either parallel or absorb. What's the relevence anyway? I'm not sure what your argument about it is.
Very real. Very near. Very uncontrollable.
We are not a people who govern. We are a people who are governed.
Freedom = Laziness. Its inevitable. Hope I am alive when it all happens.
Unless you wrote this from your deathbed, you will be.
Why stop with North America when we can try to add UNASUR, too? Call it the Western Hemisphere Union or some other catchy name. UNASUR wants to unite in EU fashion by 2020 (and face it, 2020 is now closer to present day than 1994 - the NAFTA signing year - was) and all signs point to a loose NAU-style agreement well before then. Plenty of food and unrefined fuel can come flying up our super-duper Rick Perry Memorial transcontinental megaroad from the south.
And I want to be Emperor! Bwhawhawhawa!!!
yes they are obsolete, but we will continue to have them until the oil reserves in the world run out.
alternative forms of transportation will not develop quickly until oil is so scarce that not even Bill Gates can afford to pay for gas/oil for his personal limo fleet.
As long as we keep depending on oil, we will have no need to develop alternative MODES of transportation.
And Ethanol is not the answer to the looming oil shortage. Commodities are going to skyrocket if we keep moving down that track. We don't want to starve ourselves just so we can put corn in our gas tanks to get to grandma's house.
Well, the answer is hemp, but try telling the anti-anything crowd that....And Ethanol is not the answer to the looming oil shortage. Commodities are going to skyrocket if we keep moving down that track. We don't want to starve ourselves just so we can put corn in our gas tanks to get to grandma's house.
Highways aren't obsolete until we have a better form of transportation.
Here's some links to look at. First, wikipedia's article.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Union
The first sentence:
"The Independent Task Force on North America was a project organized by the Council on Foreign Relations (U.S.), the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, and the Mexican Council on Foreign Relations."
Who is the Council on Foreign Relations? They are all over the State Department and anywhere else where foreign policy is involved. Just scroll down and look at some of the notable current and historical members.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council...eign_Relations
"Foreign Affairs" is the magazine that the CFR publishes. Here's an interesting article from their website called "The End of National Currency". Basically they are calling for "dollarization" of North and South America over time, and eventually having only three regional currencies in the world. If you think that this group is insignificant, just note how many members of the CFR have been presidents, vice presidents, secretaries of state and defense, senators, congressmen, Fed chairmen, etc.
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/200705...-currency.html
A quote from the first NAU link from the former US ambassador to Canada and former governor of Massachusetts:
On October 30, 2006, while speaking at the Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Ins ute (CDFAI) 2006 Annual Conference in Ottawa, former American Ambassador to Canada (2001-2005) & former Republican Governor of Massachusetts Paul Cellucci indicated that, after further economic integration, a union would exist in everything but name:
“ Now I don’t believe that we will ever have a, in name anyways, a common union like the Europeans have, I don’t believe we’ll have a common currency here in North America, but I believe that, incrementally, we will continue to integrate our economies because I believe it is in each of our national interests to do so. And along the way, I think we’ll do a couple of things and I think that, well more than a couple of things, but.. I think we’ll.. 10 years from now, or maybe 15 years from now we’re gonna look back and we’re gonna have a union in everything but name…
Here's my thoughts on whether or not a move towards the NAU exists. I posted this first in the "The New and Improved Surrender to Mexico Act" thread.
5 things define a unified nation:
1. Free flow of goods across the land
2. Free flow of people across the land
3. A common defense perimeter
4. A common currency across the land
5. Common taxation and spending at the national level
To see the road that we are on towards a single North American government, just think about the Texas/Oklahoma border vs. the Texas/Mexico border.
The border between Texas and Oklahoma meets all 5 criteria. As for the Texas/Mexico border - NAFTA has us close to #1, and the NAFTA highway will clinch it. Amnesty grants #2 in a de facto way, and it will only become easier. The Security and Prosperity Agreement of North America means we are moving ever closer to #3. #4 is being discussed, even by the head of the Canadian central bank. Inevitable economic and financial events will speed up this process. [EDIT: Not to mention the fact that the foreign policy/economic establishment of the US, Canada, and Mexico all want it. They flat out tell us that in the Foreign Affairs article above.]
In short, the Texas/Mexico border is becoming more and more similar to the Texas/Oklahoma border, and the process is accelerating. Even if we wave different flags, if all of the first 4 critera above are true for the borders of North America, then we are one government. Period. #5 will follow soon after the first 4 are realized.
Here's a good site on the NAFTA highway. The plan is to make Kansas City the new customs point; Mexican trucks will enter straight into the US, and instead of being checked at the border like they are (at least in theory) today, they will be able to go as far as Kansas City before reaching any mandatory checkpoints.
http://www.naftasuperhighway.info/Links.html
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
