-->
@TheUnderdog
no it doenst, thats not poverty reduction
our gdp may be at record high but our poverty rate hasnt moved since the 60's
Should the US annex Panama?
Posts
Total:
42
-->
@TheUnderdog
Given that people never fully agree about anything, what are the chances of an invading army being welcomed by 100% of Panamanians.
-->
@Dr.Franklin
our gdp may be at record high but our poverty rate hasnt moved since the 60's
That's probably because of Lyndon B Johnson's failed governmental programs, but this is off topic. Trade with the Panamanians would lift them out of poverty. It's what trade does.
-->
@zedvictor4
The locals don't have to all agree, just a plurality have too.
-->
@bmdrocks21
no it doesnt
-->
@TheUnderdog
above
-->
@TheUnderdog
I think what you actually mean is......F**k the locals, U.S.A. knows best.
And I think with the word plurality, you mean, enough to wave a few stars and stripes at the T.V. cameras.
-->
@zedvictor4
F**k the locals, U.S.A. knows best.
The locals would get out of poverty by trading more with the US. We get a canal. It's a win win.
-->
@TheUnderdog
A few select locals might benefit and the U.S. would get a canal.
Why not just trade more with Panama anyway and not steal a canal.
I would suggest that your interest, really is all about forcibly acquiring a canal.
-->
@zedvictor4
We should do more trade with them, but we do trade with a lot of nations that are still poor(like Mexico). Getting the canal can make the locals more on par with the Americans.
-->
@TheUnderdog
Getting the canal can make the locals more on par with the Americans.
Nope. The Americans would have a canal and the Panamanians wouldn't....That's not par.
This politics forum section is like one big comedy series.
What the FUCK entitled US to annex Panama?