Make Mexico the 51th state! Good idea?

[Nyarlathotep]

Mexico may officially be a Democracy but it isn't anything like American Democracy.

The only substantive difference between Mexican Democracy and American Democracy is that Mexican corruption is more overt.

They come here to make more $.

If Mexico was a 51th state then they would have the 5$ minimum wage laws applied to it. Companies could work in mexico easier and come in and out easier. So could people.

New businesses would spring up by the thousands in Mexico with it being part of America.

The basic infostructure would improve because of the massive influx of $..

And life would be a parade of sunshine, lollipops and free ponies for everyone.

It's not nearly that simple. Having to absorb mexican poverty would be a massive blow to our economy. Having to pay American wages would be a massive blow to their economy. Poverty in Mexico has a lot of complicated causes that can't be fixed by making them a state and making them beholden to minimum wage laws. And absorbing the cost of trying to kickstart a country the size of Mexico's economy could end up not so much helping them as hurting us.

And lastly, it's not our job to improve Mexico's economy. It's their job

Like a limb who's circulation is cut off...The blood flow could be fixed and it would be strong.

Or it could be like a limb whose circulation is cut off, then it gets gangrene and the infection kills the whole body.

 

[delphi_ote]

I didn't know any terrorists came over that border. I thought a couple made it over the Canadian border, and the rest entered legally?

And, of course, when you're discussing borders and ease of maintaining it, Mexico may have a shorter land border to the south, but it also has two significant coastlines, with a great many islands near one of them, some of which are other nations and others of which are possessions of still other nations. We'd switch from being a country with neighbors Mexico, Canada, Cuba, and Russia to being a country with dozens of neighbors. Sounds like an increased risk of border penetration to me, not a lower risk.

Monkey, you fail to see that we have a universal solution here. If you have a problem controlling your border, just annex the country on the other side.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Monkey, you fail to see that we have a universal solution here. If you have a problem controlling your border, just annex the country on the other side.

That was the problem with the Roman Empire. To protect the frontier provinces, they'd have to conquer the neighboring nation. Then the conquered nation was the new Roman frontier province, and needed to be protected from its neighbors. Which had to be conquered....and eventually the Roman Empire was mostly non-Roman, and they wound up with Syrian sun cult boy emperors and other rather non-Roman things.

 

[ARubberChickenWithAPulley]

Haven't you been watching the news lately? The whole controversy over imigration!

If Mexico was a 51th state then there would be no more problems with imigration of mexicans to America.

Yikes. So we currently have a problem of a few million poor people flooding across the border and costing a lot of money to support, feed, school, etc. and your solution to the problem is for us to assume responsibility for 100 million more? I'm not sure I follow.

If Mexico became a state, then they could all flood across the border, legally, since they would be American citizens. It would make the problems we have now look like nothing.

Well there are those problems, and the very obvious one of most Mexicans probably not particularly wanting to join the United States.

 

[peptoabysmal]

[cynic]

What makes you think that Mexico is NOT already a de facto state of the USA?

[/cynic]

Er... Because their cars wouldn't pass smog inspection in any state?

 

[peptoabysmal]

I have tried finding problems with this idea but I can't seem to find any. What are the potential problems with doing something like this? I post this here to get any opinions on it.

You haven't gotten as far a defining how you are going to accomplish this feat, that's why you don't see any problems yet. What is your proposed method, purchase, take by military force, or influx Americans into Mexico until the population is too diluted to fight back, or some other ingenious plan?

I'm going to spend next summer on Planet X, I can't find any problem with my plan either.

 

[Chupacabras]

FYI, immigration into the US across the mexican border is not only mexicans, but people from Nicaragua, El Salvador, etc...

As of the rest, I vote this thread to be moved to the humor section.

 

[Gravy]

I can't for the life of me figure out why the U.S. doesn't invade Mexico and Canada and enslave their citizens. Who's going to stop us? Why shouldn't every American family have a Mexican and a Canadian servant? Why shouldn't a single guy like me have one or the other? Personally, I wouldn't mind it if a Canadian* were here right now to do the dishes.


*I don't know the Spanish word for "dishes." Platas?

 

[Dustin Kesselberg]

The only substantive difference between Mexican Democracy and American Democracy is that Mexican corruption is more overt.





And life would be a parade of sunshine, lollipops and free ponies for everyone.

It's not nearly that simple. Having to absorb mexican poverty would be a massive blow to our economy. Having to pay American wages would be a massive blow to their economy. Poverty in Mexico has a lot of complicated causes that can't be fixed by making them a state and making them beholden to minimum wage laws. And absorbing the cost of trying to kickstart a country the size of Mexico's economy could end up not so much helping them as hurting us.

And lastly, it's not our job to improve Mexico's economy. It's their job




Or it could be like a limb whose circulation is cut off, then it gets gangrene and the infection kills the whole body.

That's capitalism. If the companies can't pay fair wages then they go out of business. That's how it works.

I figure mexican companies will go out of business due to LACK of work where mexicans are leaving and flooding to America.

If American money started to easily flow into Mexico like it does in any other state then I figure that people will have more $ to spend on Companies thus companies would have more $ to pay it's workers.

 

[Dustin Kesselberg]

That was the problem with the Roman Empire. To protect the frontier provinces, they'd have to conquer the neighboring nation. Then the conquered nation was the new Roman frontier province, and needed to be protected from its neighbors. Which had to be conquered....and eventually the Roman Empire was mostly non-Roman, and they wound up with Syrian sun cult boy emperors and other rather non-Roman things.

But Mexico is the only one we'd do it to. Our problem currently with mexico is massive and won't be solved by any small solution.

By extending the border of mexico south all of the way to the Panamal canal then we'd cut the border down dozens of times to something extremly small and easily to maintain.

No need to go further south where the border is less than 100 miles wide and maintaining it is easy.

 

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Yikes. So we currently have a problem of a few million poor people flooding across the border and costing a lot of money to support, feed, school, etc. and your solution to the problem is for us to assume responsibility for 100 million more? I'm not sure I follow.

If Mexico became a state, then they could all flood across the border, legally, since they would be American citizens. It would make the problems we have now look like nothing.

Well there are those problems, and the very obvious one of most Mexicans probably not particularly wanting to join the United States.

Why would they flood across the border when they could get jobs where they live because the minimum wage is higher?

I'm afraid that within in the next few decades if the current trend continues we'll see 100 million people coming over here from mexico anyway.

Nevada is a state..Why don't nevada citizens flood north? because they have no reason to. If Mexico were as economicaly strong as an American state then no one would want to leave it.

And I don't see any other way to make it economically strong than to make it part of America and allow trade as easily as trade is possible between states and then just secure the border at the Panamal Canal.

 

[Dustin Kesselberg]

You haven't gotten as far a defining how you are going to accomplish this feat, that's why you don't see any problems yet. What is your proposed method, purchase, take by military force, or influx Americans into Mexico until the population is too diluted to fight back, or some other ingenious plan?

I'm going to spend next summer on Planet X, I can't find any problem with my plan either.

A vote. The Mexican population vote to decide wether they want America to take control or not.

If they DO then over a few years we'll get the entire government to crumble and Americans to be elected as Govenors.

Over time gradually we'll turn Mexico into the 51th state.


The mexican Govt is currently HELPING people cross the border into our country so I doubt they would protest much as far as the "take over " goes. Gradually they would just resign.

 

[Zep]

If by "helping people cross the border" you mean "having the border police chasing, capturing and imprisoning them, then sending them back", then I suppose you have a point.

 

[ARubberChickenWithAPulley]

I am not sure I even want to argue this seriously, but I'll humor you.

Why would they flood across the border when they could get jobs where they live because the minimum wage is higher?

What makes you think that if we raise the minimum wage, there will suddenly be millions of job offers in Mexico. As it is, the only reason companies really relocate to Mexico is because they pay lower wages. Far more likely, if we were to suddenly implement the U.S. minimum wage, companies would flee for countries with even cheaper labor.

I'm afraid that within in the next few decades if the current trend continues we'll see 100 million people coming over here from mexico anyway.

Nevada is a state..Why don't nevada citizens flood north? because they have no reason to. If Mexico were as economicaly strong as an American state then no one would want to leave it.

I think you just got your glove on the point, but let it slip into the outfield. If Mexico were as economically strong as an American state, we wouldn't be having this discussion. The United States can't wave it's magic wand and suddenly make Mexico affluent. Becoming part of the United States doesn't suddenly repair your infrastructure, build new homes, raise your GDP or anything else. The same people living in poverty in Mexico would still be living in poverty the day that Mexico became a state; the only difference is, then they would be able to legally move from Mexico to anywhere in the current U.S.

For the same reason, South Korea isn't real thrilled with the idea of North Korea collapsing and South Korea having to absorb them. And South Korea at least has very significant cultural and historical reasons to want to unite with North Korea. That is far more than we can say with Mexico and the U.S.

 

[brodski]

Why would they flood across the border when they could get jobs where they live because the minimum wage is higher?

I'm afraid that within in the next few decades if the current trend continues we'll see 100 million people coming over here from mexico anyway.

Nevada is a state..Why don't nevada citizens flood north? because they have no reason to. If Mexico were as economicaly strong as an American state then no one would want to leave it.

And I don't see any other way to make it economically strong than to make it part of America and allow trade as easily as trade is possible between states and then just secure the border at the Panamal Canal.

If you want to see what happens when an economically devolved nation merges with a much less economically advanced nation, have a look at Germany post reunification. It's not all roses and puppies in happy la la land. If you feel that immigration (legal or otherwise) puts a drain on your resources as a nation, why do you think totally opening your borders would help?

 

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Germany is a perfect example supporting my idea. West Germany was nowhere near as powerful as America currently is economically speaking. Only about 15 years later and you see absolutely no signs of a difference between East/West Germany economically speaking and Germany is very powerful economically today after the re-unification.


Once Mexico is absorbed into the United states it would take several years for jobs to appear there and for it's infostructure to be fixed. Also note I said "Over a few years" we would absorb it. Meaning not suddenly make it a 51th state overnight. We would gradually build up it's economy and help it's government and get new jobs to appear there and slowly get rid of the border between Mexico and America.

This would prevent a massive influx of mexicans to America and it would also prevent an economic dip after absorbing it.

 

[Kerberos]

You can't make Mexico the next US state! That honour belongs to Australia already!

Sorry the Brits gotta have first claim on this, perhaps you can come in as number two.

 

[brodski]

Only about 15 years later and you see absolutely no signs of a difference between East/West Germany economically speaking and Germany is very powerful economically today after the re-unification.

</p> I'm sorry, can you provide any evidence for this? </p>Economic disparaties between the former east and west Germanies are huge, and eth shock to the German economy which reunification caused is still beign felt today.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

You'll just move the line southward...although, once you get to the Panama Canal, border patrol/enforcement would be a lot easier.

Still, I'm against the idea of them becoming the 51st state. Maybe the 55th or so.

And besides, Canada has had the wish of being the 51st state for quite a few years now.

 

[ARubberChickenWithAPulley]

Only about 15 years later and you see absolutely no signs of a difference between East/West Germany economically speaking and Germany is very powerful economically today after the re-unification.

Not quite.

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/spiegel/0,1518,373639,00.html

Edit: Just wanted to highlight the last sentence of the article in particular:

Bavaria received federal subsidies for almost 40 years until "the state finally became a net payer among German states." It's year 16 of reunification, and if Germany's easterners aren't any quicker than the Bavarians, they will need help from Berlin for another 24 years.

Also note I said "Over a few years" we would absorb it. Meaning not suddenly make it a 51th state overnight.

A little more than "a few years."