Mexico: World's 2nd Deadliest Nation
 

In 2016, Mexico saw around 23,000 violent deaths. This was second in the world only to Syria, and ahead of both Iraq and Afghanistan. And yes, ahead of Chicago.

Data junkies and deep divers, have a look at this report at the link below. One thing I found particularly interesting was the discussion of the phrase Pax Sinaloa around page 30 or so. This is something I privately speculated about during the years homocide rates fell (being a student of ancient Rome, I wish I was clever enough to come up with the phrase).

bit.ly/2q3Ngg0

Finding this report just today, so far I’ve only skimmed it. Therefore my comments are primarily based on previous understanding of the situation. I am no expert on the border, but do try to watch it from the nosebleed level. So, off the cuff, the following:

Spillover is less about refugees/immigrants than it is about the (US) internal rot brought about by drugs and, to a lesser extent, drug violence on this side of the border. Illegal immigration is down significantly since Trump won the election, even before January 20th. If the wall isn’t built, but the hardline against illegal immigration remains, I would expect the cross border numbers to creep up slowly as the poor south of the border assess their personal risk acceptance levels. After all, people cross the border from Afghanistan into China, assessing the risk is lower in China than back home. It’s a millennia old calculus.

Lesser in numbers to those seeking better economic conditions, but greater in per capita threat to our nation are the SIA’s—Special Interest Aliens—those from high risk terrorism nations. More than we’d like to think have walked or swam across our southern border. Both Hezbollah (American killer #1 prior to 9/11) and ISIS have links to the Mexican drug cartels. I would expect both of these sophisticated actors to exploit the best, most secure trafficking networks. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (Iran) connection to the cartels has already been established. Just look up the busted plot on the Saudi ambassador to the US.

On a nonviolent level, gaining control of the border will have a negative economic impact on agriculture and the service industries—primarily restaurants and hotels—you know, those jobs Americans don’t want to do. However, when I visit areas of this country without a significant immigrant population I see those service jobs staffed by young American gaining work experience or by Americans on the lower end of the economic spectrum. I have no idea if this extends to America’s agricultural fields, but I do know that European and American students and other western expats are hired to pick wine grapes in France.

Obviously carrying on for too long, this is my uneducated take on what the violence, and general situation in Mexico means to the United States now.

There are ways of handling this. In the 60s and 70s my mother ran the State Employment office in the OK Panhandle. It wasn't an Unemployment Office back then. Those receiving unemployment checks had to check in with her (daily I believe) and if she had any jobs that she thought suitable for them she sent them out to apply. If they turned down 3 referrals they were cut off the money. Today, I would include anyone on welfare in a similar system.

On the agriculture side, I would also establish private employment offices at border crossings and allow foreigners to resister and farmer/ranchers to submit job offerings that can not be filled locally. Before that could realistically happen, minimum wage laws would have to be done away with and a personal contract system would be instituted. Given that, every worker could negotiate their own terms to include indentured servitude. For you youngsters that recoil at that term, know that many, if not most, of the early immigrants that came to these shores came via that route. Their passage, room, and board were provided as well as craft apprenticeships in exchange for a given period of service. It's how this great nation was built!

It's being destroyed by the reverse method.

Pat

Like 9 out of the top ten most dangerous cities in the world are in South America.....

Good to know we're in the top 20...... :rolleyes:



1 Caracas, Venezuela 119.87
2 San Pedro Sula, Honduras 111.03
3 San Salvador, El Salvador 108.54
4 Acapulco, Mexico 104.73
5 Maturin, Venezuela 86.45
6 Distrito Central, Honduras 73.51
7 Valencia, Venezuela 72.31
8 Palmira, Colombia 70.88
9 Cape Town, South Africa 65.53
10 Cali, Colombia 64.27
11 Ciudad Guayana, Venezuela 62.33
12 Fortaleza, Brazil 60.77
13 Natal, Brazil 60.66
14 Salvador, Brazil 60.63
15 St. Louis, U.S.A. 59.23
16 Joao Pessoa, Brazil 58.4
17 Culiacan, Mexico 56.09
18 Maceio, Brazil 55.63
19 Baltimore, U.S.A. 54.98
20 Barquisimeto, Venezuela 54.96

Would you say it's because all the beautiful latin women down there are bat shit crazy:D

I'm still waiting and hoping for the U.S. to accept and import beautiful Venezuelan refugee women.:munchin

Take a road trip to Miami - no shortage whatsoever.

How does St. Louis and Baltimore appear on that list, but not Chicago?

You really asked that question?

How the most corrupt, left-wing, despot American city was left out of the top 20?

What come to my mind:

Left-wing corruption, federal corruption, state corruption and of course city wide corruption.

That's how chicago, Murder-City stays off such a list or out of the top 20.

...latin america is not the same as south america ;)

In any case, for a first world country the USA is going pretty strong (belt, head and shoulders above all other developed nations), taking four places out of 50:

http://www.worldatlas.com/articles/m...the-world.html

And is middle of the pack for intentional homicide rate:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._homicide_rate

Because they have world class combat EMT's today and ER's that are practiced in multiple gun shot wound care.

If they did not have this emergency care they would get ranked.

That's probably very true...

Or the corrupt liberal/socialist paid someone not to be on the list.......... :munchin

Where is that Tiny Dancer?

In answer to my own question about Chicago not being in the top 50, the ratings are based upon per capita. Chicago's population keeps its murder rate per capita low enough to stay off the "most dangerous cities" list.