Canada doesn't need taking over, they are our 51st state. Mexico sounds like a possibility though. The oil fields they have been drilling for the last 100 years previously belonged to Exxon and other American oil companies. They socialized them from us in the 1930's (it was about then ) and never compensated us for them. That means they owe us trillions for the compensation of oil that has been drilled as well as all the current oil fields and equipment. Plus, if we invade; we get lots of warm, beach front property and no more problems with illegal aliens. It sounds like a plan. I'll tweet Trump with my idea.
Pre Cat 1989 silk the best fuel econony, safety and weight have increased to since not helping. Positive exhaust pump air dilution madness reduced a ford focus us with to uk without from mud to 30s to low 20s, that was done years back maybe they've improved that stupid gimmick. In the uk they claim to be able to get 70+ but real world still getting 45mpg just the same as a 10+ year old car with similar engine size. US was lagging engine wise fuel wise and a lot of big engines still so they have room for improvement, rest of the world unchanged.
I think it's the latter, people tend to switch to more efficient cars and EVs, apart from the slump in the demand there are no other signs of the recession, so...
Never mind the under pricing of the barrel to undercut tax duties or the refusal to improve worker conditions right? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_oil_expropriation Plus private companies are private, there is no 'owe us' jack shit. Unless you're pushing for nationalization of our industries? Also, good luck starting the worst armed conflict in a century over resources that don't belong to us. It's that kind of talk that will give us a leftist government down south in 2018 and make Chavez look like amateur hour.
If a nation nationalizes a resource, they owe it to the companies to reimburse them, whether it is Mexico or Venezuela. I don't know about undercutting the price of oil.....I guess that was well before oil was priced on an open market. But that is what lawyers and Judges are for. Do you honestly think I was serious about invading Mexico? It was a tongue in cheek remark. Calm down, drink a beer , take a Prozac........lighten up. BTW, it was no sabre rattling and propaganda that allowed Maduro to replace Chavez. It was corruption. Old fashioned corruption.
Maduro was corruption for sure, but the left in Mexico does not have that kind of corruption pull (talking about the commie-like left like in Venezuela). The country's been ruled by the center-left for most of its existence and the center-right in the last few years (w/the center left retaking it). Everyone w/a brain cell down there fears the extreme left but they're going to milk the anti-Imperialist/Yankee rhetoric for all its worth and I would place a bet they'll take the presidency. Unless the known corrupt center-left pulls a fast one on them. Apologies for the outburst, been spending too much time in the Politics section, where people are actually serious about invasions. I disagree w/nationalization of most industries, but back in the day, capitalism in Latin America wasn't the prettiest picture, it's important to look at it from a social/historical context. In an ironic twist of events, Chavez nationalized the cement business, paying the Mexicans a fraction for their infrastructure
Agree completely but there's got to be a statute of limitations or a "you just gotta move on" limit to these things, the Mexican oil expropriation took place in 1938. If you open it up that anyone who was ever expropriated or exploited should be compensated you've got to compensate every Native American, a big swath of Hawaiian families, all the Cuban expats, anyone harmed by Germany in WWII (we saw how well reparations worked out after WWI), anyone related to slaves.....it could go on forever. At some point you just gotta let bygones be bygones and move on or you end up with a Hatfield and McCoy situation that benefits no one.