President Bush and President Of Chile about to give a news conference - Fox News.

Fox News

[TexKat]

Live

[rodguy911]

It's called hardcore capitalism, I play the game every day and have since 1970 the truth is only the strong survive. I got wiped out 8 years ago and had to start over you can too.

[McGavin999]

Why do they even bother to have joint press conferences. Nobody every asks anyone but President Bush any questions.

[michaelt]

Remember, he's speaking to the world, not just a US audience. There is still a difference between small "d" democrat and big "D" Democrat. We should be able to tell the difference.

[bd476]

Ping.

[ConservativeMan55]

bttt

[AuntB]

"When my job was taken, they expected us to train the Mexican nationals that replaced us in Mexico serving our American clients. China doesn't need to invade us and Mexico won't need to take up arms to claim the southern states"

I was hoping the President or Pres. Fox might bring up the following subject in their discussion on the tube today:


Totalization: Sellout of American Workers

by Phyllis Schlafly
Nov. 17, 2004
The Democrats are trying to make a campaign issue out of George W. Bush's alleged plan to "privatize" Social Security, scaring seniors into thinking their checks will be cut off. That is a phony issue; all Bush suggests is to offer younger workers the option (not the compulsion) of transferring a very small part of their Social Security benefit into private investments.

The real threat to Social Security doesn't come from giving young people this opportunity. The threat comes from the Bush Administration's plan to load illegal aliens into the Social Security system, an idea that would skyrocket costs and bankrupt the system at the same time that baby boomers flood into their benefit years.

The code word for this racket is "totalization." The United States has totalization agreements with 20 other countries, which have been reasonable and non-controversial, but totalization with Mexico is TOTALLY different.

The idea behind totalization with other countries is to assure a pension to those few individuals who work legally in two countries by "totalizing" their payments into the pension systems of both countries. All existing totalization agreements are with developed nations whose retirement benefits are on a parity with U.S. benefits, and the affected employees work for companies that have been paying taxes into the other countries' retirement systems.

Workers from the other 20 countries come with documents from their employer verifying that they are authorized to work in the United States. Only a minuscule fraction of Mexicans enter with such documents.

The legitimate goal of totalization with other countries is to avoid double taxation for retirement when employers assign their employees to work temporarily in another country. Reciprocity works because there is rough parity between the number of U.S. workers in the 20 other countries and the foreigners from those countries who work in the United States.

But this goal has no relevance to Mexico. There is no parity whatsoever between the number of Mexicans working in the United States and the number of U.S. citizens working in Mexico, and absolutely no parity in the social security systems of the two countries.

Mexican benefits are not remotely equal to U.S. benefits. Americans receive benefits after working for 10 years, but Mexicans have to work 24 years before receiving any benefits.

Mexican workers receive back in retirement only what they actually paid in, plus interest, whereas the U.S. Social Security system is skewed to give lower-wage earners benefits greatly in excess of what they and their employers contributed.

Mexico has two different retirement programs, one for public-sector employees, which is draining the national treasury, and one for private-sector workers, which is estimated to cover only 40 percent of the workforce. The rest of the workers are in the off-the-record economy (euphemistically called the "informal" sector).

The 10 million Mexicans who have illegally entered the United States previously lived in poverty, did not pay social security taxes in Mexico, and did not work for employers who paid taxes into a retirement plan. If they were working at all, it was in the off-the-record economy.

Illegality is no issue with the countries where we have existing totalization agreements because none of them accounts for even one percent of the U.S illegal population. On the other hand, Mexico provides more than two-thirds of the illegals in the United States.

The Bush totalization plan would pay out billions in Social Security benefits to Mexicans for work they did in the U.S. using fraudulent Social Security numbers, something that Americans would go to jail for doing. It would pay Social Security Disability benefits to Mexicans who worked in the United States as little as 3 years.

The Bush totalization plan would lure even more Mexicans into the United States illegally in the hope of amnesty and eligibility for Social Security benefits. The Bush plan would even cover the Mexicans' spouses and dependents who may never have lived in the United States.

Since few if any of the illegal aliens have built up any equity in the Mexican retirement system, what is there to totalize? Totalization is a plan for the U.S. taxpayers to end up assuming the entire burden.

When George W. Bush became President in 2001, the Mexican government expected the United States to pass amnesty (disguised as a guest worker plan and "regularizing" the entry of Mexicans). After 9/11, Mexico's national policy turned to increasing the number of its nationals working in the United States and getting them to qualify for all the social benefits and privileges Americans receive, from driver's licenses to Social Security and Social Security Disability.

The Social Security commissioners of both Mexico and the Bush Administration signed a totalization agreement in June of 2004, but the text of the agreement has been kept secret. Maybe we will be permitted to see it after the President approves it and sends it to Congress.

Let your Members of Congress know you want them to stop this billion-dollar sellout of American workers and taxpayers.
http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2004/nov04/04-11-17.html

[Havoc]

Your vote does do something. So does mine. But who did you nominate and help bring up as an alternative? We're all guilty of it. So don't act like you're being picked on. My protest in the face of abuse here was to not vote for president and let Bush elect himself. Notably, he had a difficult time. That's what my vote did. And it sent a clear message to him. I've no hope that he will on his own respond to it. But, I'm still trying. I'll exhaust all my options and look for more.

[TexKat]

You are welcome lonevoice. When and if a transcript becomes available, I'll post it.

Don't work too hard.

[TexKat]

LOL. How true.

[texasflower]

Thanks for the ping bd476. I didn't know about the press conference, so the ping got me there in time.

Are you coming over to the Dose thread?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1285454/posts

[stopem]

He mentioned NAFTA, I wish NAFTA would be repealed, I see absolutely no benefit to it especially in light of the author of that program....clinton

"January 1, 2004 marks the tenth anniversary of the North American Free Trade Agreement’s implementation. NAFTA promoters - including many of the world’s largest corporations - promised it would create hundreds of thousands of new high-wage U.S. jobs, raise living standards in the U.S., Mexico and Canada, improve environmental conditions and transform Mexico from a poor developing country into a booming new market for U.S. exports."

[Havoc]

It's called hardcore capitalism, I play the game every day and have since 1970 the truth is only the strong survive. I got wiped out 8 years ago and had to start over you can too.

Ah, the old "I was abused and you can handle it too" approach to putting a stop to it. Yes, know this one well. One Jew looks over to the next, brushing the dust off his striped shirt. "Mom took a shower a little while ago. If she did it, we can too.." winks at the Nazi gaurd who stands straight faced...

Yep, that's why we're here now. Because when it happened to you, you let it go and didn't respond. And I was probably defending you verbally then. I defended Delphi jobs locally when no one else would pay attention. You want to guess how many local delphi people opened a yap to defend us when our jobs went.. The number is shaped remarkably like an egg. You want to argue whether we're strong enough to withstand abuse. That isn't the issue. The issue is whether we shouold be taking it at all - and that is what I'm addressing.

[Murtyo]

small "d"

[Mount Athos]

Well Chile has made some very smart economic moves over the years that have made the rest of South America look pretty dumb in comparison (except perhaps Ecuador).

Chile is a truly fantastic and safe place to visit, but one comment about those bars on the windows. There is very little violence in Chile, but they have a really terrible problems with thieves of all kinds. Pickpockets are rampant, house breakins. You see bars on windows of houses throughout Chile.

[ConservativeMan55]

I caught it now! Thanks!

[TexKat]

U.S. President George W. Bush (news - web sites) (L) laughs with Chilean President Ricardo Lagos after a press conference in La Moneda Palace during a state visit following the closing of the annual meeting of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) in Santiago, November 21, 2004. REUTERS/Andrew Winning

U.S. President George W. Bush (C) walks escorted by Chilean President Ricardo Lagos (L) into La Moneda Palace at the beginning of a state visit after the closing of the annual meeting of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) in Santiago, November 21, 2004. Bush will renew pressure on Congress to reach agreement on intelligence reforms this year, after a weekend deal collapsed in the face of Republican opposition, the White House said on Sunday. 'It remains a high priority for the president. He will continue to talk to congressional leaders about how to get it done as soon as possible,' said White House spokesman Scott McClellan. (Carlos Barria/Reuters)

[Libertina]

LOL I like to see an irritated President Bush on occassion. It lets me know he has concerns as do the rest of us Americans... Three cheers for a President with a backbone who is willing to work with his hands :)

[earplug]

Our administration screwed this meeting up. A simple meeting like this is planned months in advance, our local Embassy, state department people talk and plan with the locals and our security is discussed and agreed with.
I don't know what happened or who dropped the ball. Having the president getting physical during a trade meeting is a sign of a broken system.
Who was the resonsible for the coordination? I'd guess the State Department. And I'd guess the securty requirments is a done deal.
Who will take this fall?

[Stoat]

LOL I like to see an irritated President Bush on occassion. It lets me know he has concerns as do the rest of us Americans... Three cheers for a President with a backbone who is willing to work with his hands :)

Agreed...and he gets irritated over the right sorts of things...rude, belligerent reporters, oafish Chilean security-twits, ineffectual UN resolutions, mass murderers posing as heads of State who are allowed by other nations to stay in power because he bribes them with billions of dollars...stuff like that.

What did Kerry get irritated over?  A Secret Service agent getting in his way (or so he says) and causing him to fall while snowboarding , insufficient fou-fou items on the local restaurant menu while campaigning (prompting him to order a massive catered gourmet meal to be served in his bus), insufficient haircutting talent on hand (prompting him to fly his stylist across the nation 'for a trim') etc. etc. etc.

Thank GOD for President Bush and for the wisdom of the American electorate for allowing him to continue his work.   We would have been in an awful place if Kerry had won....a return to Clintonism or worse.

It shouldn't have been so close of an election with someone of Kerry's ilk though.  Bush should have won 48 states.  It causes me concern for the future  :-(

[-=Wing_0_Walker=-]

Based on the indicated break-ins, I'd guess they have no equivalent of the 2nd Amendment?