Mexico says to seek broad negotiating strategy with Trump

Reuters ^ | January 11, 2017 | Carlos Jasso

[Beautiful_Gracious_Skies]

Mexico's government said...it would throw its relationship with the United States wide open when it sits down for talks with the incoming U.S. administration, putting security, migration and trade on the table in search of a deal.

... President-elect Donald Trump has threatened to tear up a trade agreement that underpins Mexico's economic model if he cannot renegotiate its terms in his favor, battering the peso currency and fuelling uncertainty over foreign investment.

However, President Enrique Pena Nieto said Mexico would take a broad approach to the talks, seeking a deal that would benefit both Mexico and its neighbor as his government attempted to head off the risk of an economic shock from the Trump presidency.

"All the issues that define our bilateral relationship are on the table, including security, migration and trade," Pena Nieto said ...

... Mexico's government aimed to use security and migration to gain leverage over the US in its talks with Trump, and could offer to reinforce its borders to get a better deal on trade.

... Mexico named former finance minister Luis Videgaray to be its new foreign minister, giving him a crucial role in discussions with the new U.S. government...

[Trump] said he would soon begin talks with Mexico on building a border wall to keep out illegal immigrants and would make Mexico reimburse the U.S. for construction costs. Trump also promised a major border tax on companies that moved jobs outside the U.S.,...

Pena Nieto said Mexico would invest in a more secure border but repeated that it would not pay for Trump's wall.

He noted the U.S. government shared responsibility for the migrants seeking to reach the U.S., and should also work to stop the southward flow of illegal weapons and illicit funds that helped finance organized crime in Mexico.

[Windflier]

If the care and feeding of the indigent-through-their-own-fault was not stolen from me and redistributed to them, then no problem.

I don't disagree with that at all, and in fact, your comment points toward a natural solution to the problem of drug use.

As with most things, imposing government force against the problem not only doesn't solve it, it makes the problem worse, and introduces multiple side effects that do great harm to the civil society.

If you simply constrain government to its intended purposes, the problem will right itself.