Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Mexico
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-03-2018, 03:09 AM
 
Location: Cebu, Philippines
5,869 posts, read 4,205,244 times
Reputation: 10942

Advertisements

It has been a very long time since any nation has successfully annexed an historically sovereign nation without massive bloodshed. Don't count on it happening there.

The world's present nationalistic paradigm if very, very resistant to annexations. Nations split apart more often than they merge.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-03-2018, 03:30 AM
 
Location: San Bernardino, CA
242 posts, read 317,376 times
Reputation: 175
Kinda off topic, but

Wasnt there going to be a Latin American version of NAFTA involving rail connections from Mexico to the Central American countries & possibly even into South America if it wasnt for the Darien Gap.

That would of been a boost for the Central American economies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2018, 08:44 AM
 
Location: Charlotte, NC
983 posts, read 1,633,759 times
Reputation: 846
No, we don't have any plans to annex South Chiapas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2018, 09:22 AM
 
14,611 posts, read 17,532,401 times
Reputation: 7783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattks View Post
I could also see a loose union of sorts of Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Guatemala. I don’t see Costa Rica or Panama being part of it, Belize is also less likely. They would most likely form a entirely new currency or adopt the US dollar like El Salvador and Panama all ready have. I don’t see any changes in actual national borders.
A now retired US Republican senator from Florida Connie Mack III, is a politician who served two six year terms from 1989–2001 had a background in banking.

He felt that any Latin American country that wanted to switch to the USD should be given the banknotes for a minimal cost of producing them. As long as they kept up certain goals to prevent money laundering, they would also be given a yearly stipend. The reasoning is that paper banknotes don't cost very much to produce and to sell them at face value made it difficult for a country to dollarize. The solid currency and stable financing would make the Latin American country a better trade partner for both Northern America and Europe, and it would have the added bonus of decreasing the need to emigrate to look for better wages.The proposal called for no efforts on the part of the USA to encourage a country to dollarize. It was meant only to help countries who had made the decision by giving them the banknotes at minimal charge.


Panama has used the USD for over a century. El Salvador had a stable currency, but they have such a large population of immigrants in the USA that the government reasoned that it was actually costing them more to have their own currency. Ecuador switched to the USD in 2000 after a massive depression occurred after the 1997–98 El Niño, which was regarded as one of the most powerful El Niño–Southern Oscillation events in recorded history, resulting in widespread droughts, flooding and other natural disasters across the globe. Euador's largest denomination banknote was worth US$2 at the time of the transition.

Connie Mack's proposal was rejected by the US Senate and never got out of committee.
I've always felt that a small Central American nation should try to adopt an electronic currency. Once the banknotes and coins are gone, it would be easier to fix the exchange rate to the USD and accept larger value US banknotes in transactions.

The largest banknote in Guatemala is the 200 GTQ = USD$27.24
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2018, 01:36 PM
 
4,668 posts, read 3,895,546 times
Reputation: 3437
Quote:
Originally Posted by PacoMartin View Post
A now retired US Republican senator from Florida Connie Mack III, is a politician who served two six year terms from 1989–2001 had a background in banking.

He felt that any Latin American country that wanted to switch to the USD should be given the banknotes for a minimal cost of producing them. As long as they kept up certain goals to prevent money laundering, they would also be given a yearly stipend. The reasoning is that paper banknotes don't cost very much to produce and to sell them at face value made it difficult for a country to dollarize. The solid currency and stable financing would make the Latin American country a better trade partner for both Northern America and Europe, and it would have the added bonus of decreasing the need to emigrate to look for better wages.The proposal called for no efforts on the part of the USA to encourage a country to dollarize. It was meant only to help countries who had made the decision by giving them the banknotes at minimal charge.


Panama has used the USD for over a century. El Salvador had a stable currency, but they have such a large population of immigrants in the USA that the government reasoned that it was actually costing them more to have their own currency. Ecuador switched to the USD in 2000 after a massive depression occurred after the 1997–98 El Niño, which was regarded as one of the most powerful El Niño–Southern Oscillation events in recorded history, resulting in widespread droughts, flooding and other natural disasters across the globe. Euador's largest denomination banknote was worth US$2 at the time of the transition.

Connie Mack's proposal was rejected by the US Senate and never got out of committee.
I've always felt that a small Central American nation should try to adopt an electronic currency. Once the banknotes and coins are gone, it would be easier to fix the exchange rate to the USD and accept larger value US banknotes in transactions.

The largest banknote in Guatemala is the 200 GTQ = USD$27.24
I haven’t heard of Mack before, but I would support that plan. A more stable and prosperous Central America would greatly help all of North America. We’d get less illegal immigration, we’d have more help fighting drug trafficking, and I believe it would help the US dollar become even more stable. Never having to change currency would also help with trade. I’ve never understood US foreign policy, Central America and the Caribbean should be our highest priority. We have a ton of poverty right on our borders and it’s only a matter of time before it starts pouring over, well it’s already been happening for a few decades.

Dollarizing isn’t going to make a country prosperous by itself, but the 3 countries ( El Salvador, Panama, and Ecuador) that have done it have all greatly improved relative to where they came from.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2018, 02:22 PM
 
1,131 posts, read 1,232,241 times
Reputation: 1507
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattks View Post
Dollarizing isn’t going to make a country prosperous by itself, but the 3 countries ( El Salvador, Panama, and Ecuador) that have done it have all greatly improved relative to where they came from.
Are you sure? El Salvador is still very poor. 0.68 of HDI and still send a lot of migrants to USA.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2018, 04:23 PM
 
Location: Canada
7,363 posts, read 8,394,325 times
Reputation: 5260
El Salvador had already improved before they started using American currency. They haven't improved much since.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2018, 04:59 PM
 
Location: State of Transition
102,188 posts, read 107,790,902 times
Reputation: 116077
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestSideMillennial View Post
With Guatemala being the closest, and most relatable country culturally to Mexico, is annexation a possibility in the future?

I recently watched many videos on Youtube regarding this topic, and the commentators (especially Mexicans) were in favor of annexation.
They're dreaming. Besides, they already have part of what used to be Guatemala. Now they want more? Not gonna happen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-08-2018, 12:05 PM
 
305 posts, read 294,361 times
Reputation: 244
Fake and absurd information.
Nobody wants annexation, neither the Guatemalans nor we the Mexicans.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2018, 10:31 PM
 
71 posts, read 215,743 times
Reputation: 67
No Mexicans dont want this ! It will benefit Guatemala and its people.

Mexican states by human development.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List...elopment_Index

Southern México is pretty poor except (costal resort cities) must be because of the indigenous population Guatemala will be a poorer state and will cause more poverty to México.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Mexico

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top