Viri, Thank you, you provided a great analysis. The framing captures the core issue: this is not just a negotiation about trade, but also about hierarchy and control.
Mexico, like all nations, must navigate a path forward with an increasingly volatile and unpredictable United States. Its high degree of economic dependence makes this especially complex, yet Mexico also possesses structural strengths—resilience, adaptability, and a deeply integrated and competitive production base.
It is worth remembering that the interdependence runs both ways. Trade friction (and lack of cooperation in other areas) can lead to negative economic and political impacts for the U.S. as well, and people in the U.S. generally have less tolerance for such effects. The political disruption for a U.S. president is greater than for a Mexican president. Furthermore, the U.S. relies on Mexico to remain competitive in global markets, exporting value-added goods made possible through Mexican supply chains, expertise, and labor.
The challenge ahead is to preserve sovereignty and balance within that mutual dependency. This article underscores why that balance is both fragile and essential. Given the volatile nature of the U.S. president, this will remain a dynamic situation for Mexico and all other nations.
Viri, consider this: unless Mexico develops its own internal capabilities, we will always be at a disadvantage in international negotiations. Relying on a larger power for help—whether the US, China, or Russia—is not a sustainable strategy, as history shows this often leads to unfavorable outcomes.
The root of the problem is that a country plagued by educational deficits, corrupt politicians, and widespread poverty dependent on welfare is fundamentally unstable. Our tax base is unsustainable; the top 25% or less carries the burden for the rest. We cannot simply keep raising taxes, as we'll drive away companies and talented individuals—just look at what happened in France.
For a real turnaround, the government must focus on core priorities. First, it needs to professionalize the energy sector (Pemex and CFE) to at least break even, using technical expertise instead of political appointments. This alone could contribute significantly to the national budget. Second, social programs like non-contributory pensions should be reformed to encourage positive behaviors like education, health, and family planning, rather than fostering dependency.
If we continue on this same path, we will only grow poorer, like other failed Latin American states. While the productive will always find a way, we need a national shift in mentality towards building capability.
I recognize the issues of inequality and privilege, but success is also built on hard work and skill. I know plumbers, for example, with no special privilege who earn 15,000 to 20,000 pesos a week through sheer effort. There are many such examples.
Ultimately, Mexico must build its own success to negotiate as an equal. Otherwise, we are condemned to accept whatever is offered—a dynamic we've been stuck in since the 1800s.
Very true. I only have a few thoughts to add or questions. The last statement implies Mexico is/was an ally. The US gas no allies only vassals who are aligned or misaligned. Was Mexico ever treated as an equal ally?
Historical forces have not played out in favor of Mexico, it seems to me an almost insurmountable task to get out of under the hegemony of an empire of this scale. What would be done here?
Mexican neocons, and right wingers and even the political class will probably be in favor of many of these changes since they prefer short term gain and stability over any meaningful national pride or project. Can anyone align the country otherwise?
We are missing civil pride, when something goes wrong it’s an external cause that is creating this problem we don’t really care to get our hands dirty and don’t even see the institutions of our government as “ours” I’m unsure how the country can get push forward with all this historical baggage
Viri, Thank you, you provided a great analysis. The framing captures the core issue: this is not just a negotiation about trade, but also about hierarchy and control.
Mexico, like all nations, must navigate a path forward with an increasingly volatile and unpredictable United States. Its high degree of economic dependence makes this especially complex, yet Mexico also possesses structural strengths—resilience, adaptability, and a deeply integrated and competitive production base.
It is worth remembering that the interdependence runs both ways. Trade friction (and lack of cooperation in other areas) can lead to negative economic and political impacts for the U.S. as well, and people in the U.S. generally have less tolerance for such effects. The political disruption for a U.S. president is greater than for a Mexican president. Furthermore, the U.S. relies on Mexico to remain competitive in global markets, exporting value-added goods made possible through Mexican supply chains, expertise, and labor.
The challenge ahead is to preserve sovereignty and balance within that mutual dependency. This article underscores why that balance is both fragile and essential. Given the volatile nature of the U.S. president, this will remain a dynamic situation for Mexico and all other nations.
Viri, consider this: unless Mexico develops its own internal capabilities, we will always be at a disadvantage in international negotiations. Relying on a larger power for help—whether the US, China, or Russia—is not a sustainable strategy, as history shows this often leads to unfavorable outcomes.
The root of the problem is that a country plagued by educational deficits, corrupt politicians, and widespread poverty dependent on welfare is fundamentally unstable. Our tax base is unsustainable; the top 25% or less carries the burden for the rest. We cannot simply keep raising taxes, as we'll drive away companies and talented individuals—just look at what happened in France.
For a real turnaround, the government must focus on core priorities. First, it needs to professionalize the energy sector (Pemex and CFE) to at least break even, using technical expertise instead of political appointments. This alone could contribute significantly to the national budget. Second, social programs like non-contributory pensions should be reformed to encourage positive behaviors like education, health, and family planning, rather than fostering dependency.
If we continue on this same path, we will only grow poorer, like other failed Latin American states. While the productive will always find a way, we need a national shift in mentality towards building capability.
I recognize the issues of inequality and privilege, but success is also built on hard work and skill. I know plumbers, for example, with no special privilege who earn 15,000 to 20,000 pesos a week through sheer effort. There are many such examples.
Ultimately, Mexico must build its own success to negotiate as an equal. Otherwise, we are condemned to accept whatever is offered—a dynamic we've been stuck in since the 1800s.
Very true. I only have a few thoughts to add or questions. The last statement implies Mexico is/was an ally. The US gas no allies only vassals who are aligned or misaligned. Was Mexico ever treated as an equal ally?
Historical forces have not played out in favor of Mexico, it seems to me an almost insurmountable task to get out of under the hegemony of an empire of this scale. What would be done here?
Mexican neocons, and right wingers and even the political class will probably be in favor of many of these changes since they prefer short term gain and stability over any meaningful national pride or project. Can anyone align the country otherwise?
We are missing civil pride, when something goes wrong it’s an external cause that is creating this problem we don’t really care to get our hands dirty and don’t even see the institutions of our government as “ours” I’m unsure how the country can get push forward with all this historical baggage