North American Union? (place to live, land, best)

[Future Trooper]

if you are for the NAU? or against please state whether you like the NAU or not and give some reasons why?

[fp1978]

When is MORE GOVERNMENT ever a good idea?

Absolutely NO! when it comes to the NAU!

[edk]

In a survey a few months back, about 65% of Americans thought it would be a good idea for Canada to join the US. Only about 15% of Canadians agreed, however.

[Winston Smith]

Wouldn't an NAU contradict the U.S. stance on tougher borders? How does requiring passports to return from Canada or Mexico when this was never needed in the past square with merging the three countries into one union? Not saying the NAU is a hoax, but the notion of such a union given the new border policies of the U.S. doesn't compute for me.

[gdblauvelt]

No, but if Canada wants to become part of the U.S. that would be awesome.

[CMDallas]

Originally Posted by gdblauvelt

No, but if Canada wants to become part of the U.S. that would be awesome.

They get very mad when you say that. Many act as if they were from a totally different species then us. Although many Canadians I hear would prefer us over those in Quebec, especially those in West Canada.
I am pro, this is a trade agreement like the EU... The there was an American Union (meaning all of the Americas) we would probably be much more powerful then the EU. especially with Economic Giants like Brazil, Mexico, US, and Canada. Even though some of them are 3rd world they are way better off then many nations.
Trade is good, bring in the money, interlocks us into peace, if we all had a common currency that would be ok...Government can mess things up but if all they do is loosen the strings between countries, and well as their goods then why not?
They're too many Anti-NAUs for it to become one country.
and anyways, why not absorb Mexico if your going to absorb Canada? I don't like that term absorb, I would hate for them to go all under the US. I would much rather see a totally new country then 2 go under one.

[Winston Smith]

Originally Posted by CMDallas

I am pro, this is a trade agreement like the EU...

and anyways, why not absorb Mexico...

This is a sore point, the U.S. "absorbing Mexico." It was done once (1846-49) and resentments still linger even unto this day over the U.S. taking 55 percent of Mexico's land by force. Any notion of further annexation (union, or whatever word one chooses) carries with it a ton of baggage.

But anyway, I'm still looking for an explanation as to how anyone can be talking NAU when we now need passports to return to the U.S. from Mexico and Canada. If the NAU is to be more like the EU, then there should be a minimized need for passports. Citizens in the U.S., Canada and Mexico would be able to work and live anywhere in the Union zone with little restriction. This is how the EU functions. But as far as I see, restrictions are currently being strengthened, not loosened.

[sevenofsix]

I haven't read the agreement, any unbiased links?

[Zephora]

Originally Posted by Winston Smith

But anyway, I'm still looking for an explanation as to how anyone can be talking NAU when we now need passports to return to the U.S. from Mexico and Canada. If the NAU is to be more like the EU, then there should be a minimized need for passports. Citizens in the U.S., Canada and Mexico would be able to work and live anywhere in the Union zone with little restriction. This is how the EU functions. But as far as I see, restrictions are currently being strengthened, not loosened.

That's what's confusing me too!

[resettheclock]

It sounds like a very interesting idea. Such a union would be in the best interest of all involved (except die-hard extreme republicans). After all, this would make the world a somewhat better place to live in - with Mexico for example hopefully (and arguably) becoming more democratic.