stopping huge global movement of people, is a stronger world police needed?

yeah, I think where we disagree is more on the fact that I think a lot of the prosperity in the 20th century was based on scientific advances and fossil fuels. I don't credit free markets as much as you do, so I'm more willing to focus on the downsides while you focus more on the upsides. I do think we both have a reasonably balenced perspective on the ups and downs, it's just where we choose to fall on that line of argumentation.

I'm just a little bit more antsy on moving forward

 

Considering the fact that half of Mexico lives in poverty... Capitalism probably has a very small thing to do with it if anything at all. Plus Mexico is like two different countries.

Just the same it will be like that in Mexico regardless of what economic system they have because the US will never let Mexico (and other parts of South America) be on her feet...

 

Very much globally, ex. India.

 

By the people, for the people

 

Thanks, fair enough. A lot of times its just about looking at the same thing with different perspectives

 

Mexico has only recently turned to a more liberal economy and it has had much more growth.

This is despite the crazy drug war

 

That's all fine and good but it still doesn't mean that's why immigration has dropped...

And who do you think helps those drug cartels...??? Like I said, It doesn't matter what economic system they have.

 

Yeah, cause there is only unregulated capitalism and communism.

Just curious. Given your simplistic fundamentalism in economics and social policy do you subscribe to fundamentalism in religion, also?

 

delete

 

No, but I am a reading-is-fundamelist.

 

Its the money. That's why they can over.

The government helps those cartels, of course.

 

My cynical side tells me that this is only the beginning. Sending in the troops will be the final outcome rather than the prescription.

Food disruption whether by climate change or political chaos will underly drastic migrations on top of the "vanilla" reasons like freedom fightin' or religious fervor.

Something like mass flooding in Bangladesh would tip the scales moreso than the outpouring Syria is facing right now.

Climate uncertainty also correlates with trade uncertainty to some extent. Countries affected by that smaller disruption in trade would be ones economically dependent upon a single key export like oil or minerals, which are usually state owned in that case.

I tend to view that more global trade is good, but it depends on if the exchange evolves over time and how tightly coupled their supply chains get. Tighter integration means more efficient delivery and less waste but it's also less resilient to unexpected circumstances.