Return to General Talk

Anyone Know About the "North American Union?"

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Re: Anyone Know About the "North American Union?"

Postby 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?
Want an easy icon?
All you have to do is beat a few guys at picking Sunday's winners.[/url]
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterWeb Supporter
Posts: 14414
(Past Year: -302)
Joined: 24 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Parking in the gov't bldg @ 7th and Pine. It's only $3.00 on game day!

Re: Anyone Know About the "North American Union?"

Postby 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
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertMock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 21191
(Past Year: -153)
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: 15th green...

Re: Anyone Know About the "North American Union?"

Postby 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.
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe Ranker
Posts: 5589
(Past Year: -2)
Joined: 7 Dec 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: punting small dogs and being surly


Return to General Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests