My husband owns his own company and one of his clients has a facility in Monterrey, Mexico. For the past several years, he's traveled to this magnificent location as part of the work he does. I'm glad I had the opportunity to travel with him to see the city for myself.
It's a beautiful place - a huge sprawling conglomeration of modern tall buildings surrounded by neighborhoods and historic churches. While the population of Monterrey proper is around 2 million, the people in the surrounding valley area pushes that number much higher.
It is a huge valley surrounded by mountains. In the summer, the trip up to the mountain parks is a respite from the heat. In the spring and fall, it is breathtakingly beautiful as the butterflies (primarily monarchs) migrate. They have a spectacular national park known for his geographical aspects. In some areas of the park, it looks like God took a huge chuck of the earth, turned it on its side and planted it in the middle of the valley. We've all seen striations in rock, but these run vertically, providing great climbing opportunities and amazing photographs.
The people are overwhelmingly kind and welcoming to strangers. They love the 'tourists' and business people who travel to their city and take every opportunity to speak with them to practice their various languages.
Since the city is surrounded by mountains, it's been relatively insulated from the drug wars permeating the nation. But no more. There have been several incidents, including a shootout near a prominent school in the city. While I'm somewhat concerned for my husband's safety, I know he is being careful and his client has a bodyguard/driver for the people coming to their facility.
I tell you all this so you understand that the perspective I have isn't one of a casual observer to what is going on and what could happen. In talking with people who live there and who travel there on a regular basis, there is great concern that the nation is on the verge of collapse as a result of the drug wars and the way both the government and the gangs are responding to each other.
While I hope and pray that doesn't happen, it could. And the United States needs to be prepared for what will happen if it does.
Right now, our southern border is porous - and not much of a border, when you get right down to it. States trying to protect the border (and their citizens) are getting no real help from the federal government - and national security is one of the few Constitutional responsibilities the federal government actually has.
We all hear the arguments that people (from many nations) coming across our southern border are only seeking a better way of life. I have no problem with their goal, only their method of attaining that goal, which is illegally, rather than through the proper channels. But this post is not about illegal immigration - it is about what we could face if millions of Mexican citizens decide to flee their nation should the drug wars escalate.
How would we deal with the huge influx? Would we consider them to be refugees? Would we try, finally, to seal the border to control the access? If we allow them in, how might we handle all the people who, in many cases, would decide to stay rather than return if Mexico recovered from the problems that led them here?
Experts in the federal government plan to contingencies all the time. Do they have one for this scenario? I sure hope so.
Showing posts with label Mexico. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mexico. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Saturday, August 08, 2009
Some scenes from Monterrey
Never having been to Mexico, I wasn't sure what to expect. Stereotypes based upon what I've seen on television or in movies were in the back of my mind, but not really what I thought I'd see.
The Monterrey metropolitian area, (with 3.7 million people, making it third most populous in Mexico) lies in a valley surrounded by mountains.
It's hot - 100 degrees yesterday - and today the rain clouds are concealing the tops of the mountains, though it's still going to be hot.
I'm here for the weekend with my husband, Sam, who's doing some work at the expanded Hershey plant. What struck me most was the dichotomy between old and new.
Here is a picture of the new office portion of the Hershey plant, a state-of-the-art candy-making facility with all the latest technology:
And across the street, parked along with all the other cars:
Monterrey was described to me as one of the wealthier Mexican cities - their per-capita earnings rank them rather high in North America (though I could not confirm this) and they've been recognized over the last 10 years as a growing industrial city and as a good place to live.
As expected, the people are friendly. Many take advantage of my lack of Spanish skills and say they'd like to practice their English by speaking with me. I did however, learn some very key terms like 'bathroom' and 'how much' ...
The food is delicious...some of the best pinapple I've ever tasted and they have a pulled beef that they serve for breakfast that is fantastic with scrambled eggs. The water is fine in the San Pedro area of the city. The hotels have filters as do almost all the eateries. Seafood is big here - lots of fresh salmon and shrimp - which surprised me in a 'desert' area. But the best thing I've had - which I'll definitely try to duplicate at home - is tortilla chips with salt and fresh lime juice squeezed on it. Technically, these 'limes' are actually small green lemons, but I really didn't care as I munched on this dish. Being a fan of club soda, I'm also hooked, already, on Topo Chico mineral water.
Two things struck me in my short time here. The city has a lot modern, minimalist influences in the buildings and designs. It's not just that there are tons of new buildings, homes and structures, it's the tendency toward the minimalist influence that I didn't expect. And again, the dichotomy of that style mixed with the wrought iron gates and fences, with the old-world designs and craftmanship. Wrought iron is plentiful and cheap and is used decoratively on almost everything.
The second thing is the horizontal size of the city. It seems as if the entire valley is nothing but houses and buildings and structures. Unlike in the states, where the growth is vertical, there is plenty of land here so there aren't that many tall buildings, though there are some. Driving down the streets you'll see zero lot lines everywhere, with what is obviously a private home sometimes sharing a wall with a business of some sort. And there are billboards anywhere space can be found.
Whenever I go to a new place, I like to check out the grocery stores. I think you learn a lot about a people by seeing what they shop for on a regular basis. I was amazed by the 'everyday' H.E.B. store we went to. There were more fruit, vegetable and pepper varieties than you'd find in any dozen gourment stores in the states - combined. The 'bakery' had magnificently decorated desserts and cakes and long shelves that formed aisles that had single servings of every imaginable bread, cake, croissant, pastry, cookie that you could think of. And that wasn't even the donut section...
The selections of cheeses and wines was also impressive. Their olive station put Krogers to shame. In the H.E.B. they also sold television sets, surround systems, books and movies, kitchen goods, and cell phones. There were probably 30 teens standing around in their khaki pants and white shirts waiting to bag and help carry your groceries for you - for a tip, of course. I was surprised when Sam tipped the bagger.
This morning I'm going across the street to one of the malls to see what that's like. While I learned to ask 'how much,' Sam wanted me to learn to say 'that's too expensive.' We'll see.
This afternoon, we plan to visit Marco Plaza, the city's center, including their famous St. Lucia Riverwalk and Cathedral. If it rains, probably one of their museums. Tomorrow, it's a trip to Chipinque National Park.
With so much fun stuff, I probably won't do any political posts over the next couple of days - I'll save it up for next week.
The Monterrey metropolitian area, (with 3.7 million people, making it third most populous in Mexico) lies in a valley surrounded by mountains.
It's hot - 100 degrees yesterday - and today the rain clouds are concealing the tops of the mountains, though it's still going to be hot.
I'm here for the weekend with my husband, Sam, who's doing some work at the expanded Hershey plant. What struck me most was the dichotomy between old and new.
Here is a picture of the new office portion of the Hershey plant, a state-of-the-art candy-making facility with all the latest technology:
And across the street, parked along with all the other cars:
Monterrey was described to me as one of the wealthier Mexican cities - their per-capita earnings rank them rather high in North America (though I could not confirm this) and they've been recognized over the last 10 years as a growing industrial city and as a good place to live.
As expected, the people are friendly. Many take advantage of my lack of Spanish skills and say they'd like to practice their English by speaking with me. I did however, learn some very key terms like 'bathroom' and 'how much' ...
The food is delicious...some of the best pinapple I've ever tasted and they have a pulled beef that they serve for breakfast that is fantastic with scrambled eggs. The water is fine in the San Pedro area of the city. The hotels have filters as do almost all the eateries. Seafood is big here - lots of fresh salmon and shrimp - which surprised me in a 'desert' area. But the best thing I've had - which I'll definitely try to duplicate at home - is tortilla chips with salt and fresh lime juice squeezed on it. Technically, these 'limes' are actually small green lemons, but I really didn't care as I munched on this dish. Being a fan of club soda, I'm also hooked, already, on Topo Chico mineral water.
Two things struck me in my short time here. The city has a lot modern, minimalist influences in the buildings and designs. It's not just that there are tons of new buildings, homes and structures, it's the tendency toward the minimalist influence that I didn't expect. And again, the dichotomy of that style mixed with the wrought iron gates and fences, with the old-world designs and craftmanship. Wrought iron is plentiful and cheap and is used decoratively on almost everything.
The second thing is the horizontal size of the city. It seems as if the entire valley is nothing but houses and buildings and structures. Unlike in the states, where the growth is vertical, there is plenty of land here so there aren't that many tall buildings, though there are some. Driving down the streets you'll see zero lot lines everywhere, with what is obviously a private home sometimes sharing a wall with a business of some sort. And there are billboards anywhere space can be found.
Whenever I go to a new place, I like to check out the grocery stores. I think you learn a lot about a people by seeing what they shop for on a regular basis. I was amazed by the 'everyday' H.E.B. store we went to. There were more fruit, vegetable and pepper varieties than you'd find in any dozen gourment stores in the states - combined. The 'bakery' had magnificently decorated desserts and cakes and long shelves that formed aisles that had single servings of every imaginable bread, cake, croissant, pastry, cookie that you could think of. And that wasn't even the donut section...
The selections of cheeses and wines was also impressive. Their olive station put Krogers to shame. In the H.E.B. they also sold television sets, surround systems, books and movies, kitchen goods, and cell phones. There were probably 30 teens standing around in their khaki pants and white shirts waiting to bag and help carry your groceries for you - for a tip, of course. I was surprised when Sam tipped the bagger.
This morning I'm going across the street to one of the malls to see what that's like. While I learned to ask 'how much,' Sam wanted me to learn to say 'that's too expensive.' We'll see.
This afternoon, we plan to visit Marco Plaza, the city's center, including their famous St. Lucia Riverwalk and Cathedral. If it rains, probably one of their museums. Tomorrow, it's a trip to Chipinque National Park.
With so much fun stuff, I probably won't do any political posts over the next couple of days - I'll save it up for next week.
Monday, January 08, 2007
Totalization Agreements
You're probably wondering - what in the world is this? Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) is one of my favorite legislators, specifically because of his limited government/constitutional perspectives that are supported by his votes. He does a weekly column and this week's is reprinted below. Love to know your thoughts on this!
Totalization is a Bad Idea
January 8, 2007
Through a Freedom of Information Act Request, a private group recently obtained a copy of a 2004 agreement between the United States and Mexico that will allow hundreds of thousands of noncitizens to receive Social Security benefits.
The agreement creates a so-called “totalization” plan between the two nations. Totalization is nothing new. The first such agreements were made in the late 1970s between the United States and several foreign governments simply to make sure American citizens living abroad did not suffer from double taxation with respect to Social Security taxes. From there, however, totalization agreements have become vehicles for noncitizens to become eligible for U.S. Social Security benefits. The new agreement with Mexico would make an estimated 160,000 Mexican citizens eligible in the next five years.
Ultimately, the bill for Mexicans working legally in the U.S. could reach one billion dollars by 2050, when the estimated Mexican beneficiaries could reach 300,000. Worse still, an estimated five million Mexicans working illegally in the United States could be eligible for the program. According to press reports, a provision in the Social Security Act allows illegal immigrants to receive Social Security benefits if the United States and another country have a totalization agreement.
It’s important to note that Congress, like the American people, heretofore had not seen this totalization agreement. This decision to expand our single largest entitlement program was made with no input from the legislative branch of government. If the president signs it, Congress will have to affirmatively act to override him and in essence veto the agreement. This is the opposite of how it’s supposed to work.
There are obvious reasons to oppose a Social Security totalization agreement with Mexico. First, our Social Security system already faces trillions of dollars in future shortages as the Baby Boomer generation retires and fewer young workers pay into the system. Adding hundreds of thousand of noncitizens to the Social Security rolls can only hasten the day of reckoning.
Second, Social Security never was intended to serve as an individual foreign aid program for noncitizens abroad. Remember, there is no real Social Security trust fund, and the distinction between income taxes and payroll taxes is entirely artificial. The Social Security contributions made by noncitizens are spent immediately as general revenues. So while it’s unfortunate that some are forced to pay into a system from which they might never receive a penny, the same can be said of younger American citizens. If noncitizens wish to obtain Social Security benefits, or any other U.S. government entitlements, they should seek to become U.S. citizens.
Also, totalization agreements allow noncitizens to quality for Social Security benefits by working in the U.S. as little as 18 months. A Mexican citizen could work here for only a year and a half, return to Mexico, and retire with full U.S. benefits. This is grossly unfair to Americans who must work more quarters even to qualify for benefits-- especially younger people who face the possibility that there may be nothing left when it is their turn to retire.
Those in favor of sending U.S. Social Security benefits to Mexican citizens argue that crushing poverty in Mexico demands some form of U.S. assistance to that country's aged. While poverty in Mexico truly is deplorable and saddening, the fact remains that Congress has no constitutional authority to enact what is essentially another foreign aid program.
Totalization is a Bad Idea
January 8, 2007
Through a Freedom of Information Act Request, a private group recently obtained a copy of a 2004 agreement between the United States and Mexico that will allow hundreds of thousands of noncitizens to receive Social Security benefits.
The agreement creates a so-called “totalization” plan between the two nations. Totalization is nothing new. The first such agreements were made in the late 1970s between the United States and several foreign governments simply to make sure American citizens living abroad did not suffer from double taxation with respect to Social Security taxes. From there, however, totalization agreements have become vehicles for noncitizens to become eligible for U.S. Social Security benefits. The new agreement with Mexico would make an estimated 160,000 Mexican citizens eligible in the next five years.
Ultimately, the bill for Mexicans working legally in the U.S. could reach one billion dollars by 2050, when the estimated Mexican beneficiaries could reach 300,000. Worse still, an estimated five million Mexicans working illegally in the United States could be eligible for the program. According to press reports, a provision in the Social Security Act allows illegal immigrants to receive Social Security benefits if the United States and another country have a totalization agreement.
It’s important to note that Congress, like the American people, heretofore had not seen this totalization agreement. This decision to expand our single largest entitlement program was made with no input from the legislative branch of government. If the president signs it, Congress will have to affirmatively act to override him and in essence veto the agreement. This is the opposite of how it’s supposed to work.
There are obvious reasons to oppose a Social Security totalization agreement with Mexico. First, our Social Security system already faces trillions of dollars in future shortages as the Baby Boomer generation retires and fewer young workers pay into the system. Adding hundreds of thousand of noncitizens to the Social Security rolls can only hasten the day of reckoning.
Second, Social Security never was intended to serve as an individual foreign aid program for noncitizens abroad. Remember, there is no real Social Security trust fund, and the distinction between income taxes and payroll taxes is entirely artificial. The Social Security contributions made by noncitizens are spent immediately as general revenues. So while it’s unfortunate that some are forced to pay into a system from which they might never receive a penny, the same can be said of younger American citizens. If noncitizens wish to obtain Social Security benefits, or any other U.S. government entitlements, they should seek to become U.S. citizens.
Also, totalization agreements allow noncitizens to quality for Social Security benefits by working in the U.S. as little as 18 months. A Mexican citizen could work here for only a year and a half, return to Mexico, and retire with full U.S. benefits. This is grossly unfair to Americans who must work more quarters even to qualify for benefits-- especially younger people who face the possibility that there may be nothing left when it is their turn to retire.
Those in favor of sending U.S. Social Security benefits to Mexican citizens argue that crushing poverty in Mexico demands some form of U.S. assistance to that country's aged. While poverty in Mexico truly is deplorable and saddening, the fact remains that Congress has no constitutional authority to enact what is essentially another foreign aid program.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
