This news story:
Dozens dead in Mexico truck crash and blast
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070910/ts_nm/mexico_blast_dc_3;_ylt=AgO0U5VeKOU6VNVgG3uR7mIE1vAI
underscores the danger of letting Mexican trucks onto US roadways... this was a truck loaded down with explosives, driven by a diver who probably didn't have HAZMAT certification... a simple traffic accident turned into a horrible tragedy, which could have been avoided if a few simple safety principles had been adhered to.
Do we really want this on US roads?
2007-09-10 19:22:25 · 14 answers · asked by shroomigator 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Immigration
NO, It's a bad idea because Mexico does not have the same laws that U.S. trucker have to follow. No CDLs. No hazmat. No physicals bi yearly, Mexico doesn't have insurance laws like the U.S. Mexicans work cheaper so they work longer hours to make more money (there are laws as to how many hours truckers can work in a day which Mexico doesn't have). By letting them into the country to work cheaper they take money away from American truckers.
2007-09-11 06:59:23 · answer #1 · answered by Butch R 1 · 1⤊ 2⤋
NAFTA is a touchy topic for me personally. I was working in a textile in NC when this Bill was put into affect Jan. 1, 1994, and it was Clinton! It was during his administration! My daughter is 14 years old and she was a new born when this Bill was past! It was signed by Clinton on Dec. 8, 1993. Reagan actually spearheaded the agreement but never got it passed. Eden Yarns Inc (49% Sara Lee Owned), passed around a potition for all the employees to sign in support of this Bill. I was one of the few who did not sign it. Now lets see what NAFTA really done for this country. Eden, NC was a textile town. It was Built by Fieldcrest Cannon. Before NAFTA there were 18 factories which employed at least 200 people in each facility within a 20 mile radius of Eden. Less than one year of this Bill being put into action two of these plants closed all facilities in the area putting well over 1000 people out of work. Now 14 years later there is one small plant which employs about 200 people left in operation. All of the companies pulled out and open their facilities in countries such as Costa Rica, Mexico, Peurto Rico, and a couple of other countries. These companies are boosting the other countries economy instead of America's. Why shouldn't they? I mean they now pay an average wage of 2.00 per hour for labor instead of 8.00 to 15.00 per hour for American workers. They also get tax exempt status on the merchandice that they manufacture when they bring it back into the USA and sell it to the same people that they laid off to begin with. It is a win win situation for the companies. All it cost them was some campaign contributions so they could save millions. FYI the shirts that have the Made in America tags are actually made in other counrties if they have the two buttons sewed into the bottom of them! As long as the two buttons are sewed on by American workers then the company can place a Made in America tag on it. Ross Perot was right after all! The American companies did exactly what he stated that they would do! They fled taking the jobs with them. Sheila
2016-05-17 04:42:24 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of course not. It lets in more drugs and people, while taking American jobs....for what? For the corporations to make more money.
This is all part of the bigger picture. Wonder why the southern border wasn't closed after 9/11 and still hasn't been closed? Which brings another question...where are the "terrorists"? 250,000+ Mexicans can "freely" cross each year, but these mastermind "radical Islamists" that pulled off 9/11 aren't smart enought to follow the Mex's? Get Real....911 was fake.
It's called the NAU, or North American Union
http://www.stopthenorthamericanunion.com/TwoPeas.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzOcW2Q-ZvM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aC-MPHsJ-pY&NR=1
Notice how Bush ingores the question above
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJj-G6EuQww
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RR8nFGQke30
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CL3kUfLKPbs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu_oeIpbUeA
Just like the EU (European Union) and all the other continental unions, which will eventually be turned into a one-world money/government system. Call me a quack, but that's where we're headed.
2007-09-10 19:26:48 · answer #3 · answered by Izzy N 5 · 10⤊ 3⤋
It's a really bad idea. As if we need more big trucks clogging the highways. Road trips just aren't fun anymore.
Also, once they come inside our country, where do they go? Do they go back home?
2007-09-10 23:49:31 · answer #4 · answered by sister_godzilla 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
It is coming. I noticed how in the article that they said Hazardous materials will not be allowed into the USA...But WHO is there to search them? NOT ONE "F"ING PERSON! The soonest place that they would search is Kansas City. Don't believe me? Look it up on the KC PORT website to see that this is true.
2007-09-10 19:57:23 · answer #5 · answered by Fedup Veteran 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Yes a tragedy that could have prevented.My major concern at this point is the violence this could create as far as Unions such as the Teamsters.Innocent victims could be caught in the crossfire.
2007-09-10 19:29:14 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
You are correct to assume that one single isolated event should be taken as evidence that ALL Mexican trucks are nothing but bombs waiting to go off.
Get real...
2007-09-10 19:46:33 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
You know just when I thought our government was as worthless and as corrupt as they could get...they reach a new low...
Wow at least I know that they totally don't give a crap about anything but bribes...I guess we live in Mexico already.
2007-09-10 19:36:08 · answer #8 · answered by spqr_us 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
don't be a sensacionalist man
US has lots of ppl with no certifications
it was an accident,
don't turn a truck accident into a inmigration problem pal
it;'s just irritating the way some things turn
2007-09-10 19:31:45 · answer #9 · answered by ? 3 · 3⤊ 4⤋
He11 no it is not a good idea. I do not know what that crap was all about, other than George W. Bush has become too liberal. His pu$$y way of fightin in Iraq...liberal His illegal immigration stance...liberal. His spending is DEFINATELY liberal.
What are the dems crying about anyway? He has become one of them.
2007-09-10 19:26:53 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 5⤋