[1rudeboy]

You asked what is the benefit of trade with Third World (itself a term that is a Cold War relic). I pointed out that it can be measured in dollars, among other things. Then you changed the subject to illegal immigration (nice use of the Alinsky Method, hedgetrimmer take note). As I stated earlier, if the problem is illegal immigration, and it certainly is a problem, why don't you fixate on that? What does trade have to do with it?

Arguing that we should not sell soybeans to Mexico because illegal aliens come from Mexico just doesn't make much sense.

[american spirit]

If you have to question what trade has to do with illegal immigration then you obviously are forgetting the line of BS we heard from the Clinton's et al about all the "benefits" we'd derive from NAFTA. They lied about our trade balances with Mexico( a healthy surplus has turned into a steadily rising deficit), how it would decrease illegal immigration by creating so many new jobs for Mexicans ( even want to touch that??), plus all the new jobs it would create in this country( an even bigger joke).

The point is this so-called trade agreement created a parasitical relationship between the US and Mexico that now has evolved into a sociological nightmare for healthcare givers, educators, prison officials, etc. Sorry, you just can't focus on one or two aspects of something like this to determine it's impact.......one has to look at the entire impact of NAFTA, CAFTA, etc. on our society to determine it's value.......and so far it's a disaster. If you don'tunderstand that you being disingenuous at best and delusional at worst.

[hedgetrimmer]

Why don't you explain the Alinsky Method to us all?

[tertiary01]

Here's a treatise that explains a lot of the debating styles agoin' on on FR.

http://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/brainwsh.shtml