Return to General Talk
Moderator: Baseball Moderators
by StlSluggers » Thu Oct 18, 2007 10:10 am
What does this mean?
Implement the Social Security Totalization Agreement negotiated between the United States and Mexico.
This agreement would recognize payroll contributions to each other’s systems, thus preventing double taxation.
What circumstances result in double taxation? Do immigrant workers have to pay SS here and then go home and pay it again?
-
StlSluggers
- Hall of Fame Hero






- Posts: 14705
- (Past Year: 109)
- Joined: 24 May 2004
- Bases this season: 195
- Home Cafe: Baseball
- Location: Parking in the gov't bldg @ 7th and Pine. It's only $3.00 on game day!
by Yoda » Thu Oct 18, 2007 10:23 am
I vote for invasion of Canada.
"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that." ~George Carlin
-
Yoda
- Hall of Fame Hero




- Posts: 21344
- Joined: 21 Jan 2005
- Bases this season: 0
- Home Cafe: Baseball
- Location: 15th green...
by RugbyD » Thu Oct 18, 2007 11:12 am
StlSluggers wrote:RugbyD wrote:Mexico, Canada, nor the US will be ceding any sovereignty anytime soon. Anything that increases mobility of goods and labor within the law and without cedeing soverign rights is a good thing IMO. Trade in all its forms (goods, skills, labor, etc) is the great peacemaker. Everyone has a vested interest in making it work.
I guess there is more than one way to look at the definition of sovereignty. I don't imagine anything in this union would allow an international committee to override our own national laws in national issues. I think the people who are worried about sovereignty focus mainly on our country's ability to decide international issues as we see fit. If you're of that mindset, paragraphs like this one would certainly set off an alarm in your head:
Establish a permanent tribunal for North American dispute resolution. The current NAFTA dispute-resolution process is founded on ad hoc panels that are not capable of building institutional memory or establishing precedent,may be subject to conflicts of interest, and are appointed by authorities who may have an incentive to delay a given proceeding. As demonstrated by the efficiency of the World Trade Organization (WTO) appeal process, a permanent tribunal would likely encourage faster, more consistent, and more predictable resolution of disputes. In addition, there is
a need to review the workings of NAFTA’s dispute-settlement mechanism to make it more efficient, transparent, and effective.
I understand how something like a WTO panel could make things run smoother, but others see that as taking matters out of our hands.
The simple solution is to withdraw from the treaty if we feel it cedes too much control. Of course when it comes to cedeing control, I'm in favor of anything that will take power away from DC in terms of erecting barriers to trade.
TennCare rocks!!!!
-
RugbyD
- Hall of Fame Hero



- Posts: 5588
- (Past Year: 8)
- Joined: 7 Dec 2004
- Bases this season: 9
- Home Cafe: Baseball
- Location: punting small dogs and being surly
Return to General Talk
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Ajqpvzdw, alkampInvanna, Boalcyday, DaffedoTame, Eradywheree, Isogspousty, MomaHoommarah, ramankoson, ruidgidly, UtteliMawlGew, veninoxyheese and 2 guests