Any Guru comments about US roads NOW open to Mexican Trucks?

[countryhorseman]

I think if we really apply ourselves, we can start at least 10 more threads on this same subject and say the same things over and over and over and over........

Doesn't that show you how concerned drivers are? I'm sure you get the same "comish" regardless who you recruit. For that reason, and we already know your stand point, you may remove yourself from any further discussion on this topic, if you don't like it. :wink:

What in the world does this subject have to do with recruiting? American companies will never hire mexican drivers. THESE ARE MEXICAN COMPANIES USING MEXICAN DRIVERS TO HAUL MEXICAN FREIGHT.
Im sure recruiters down in mexico are busy right now. But that has nothing to do with us.

If you are going to let your paranoia get the best of you and you really truly believe that 5 years from now american truck drivers are only going to make 15cpm because of this, why dont you start looking for another career? If you are 100% sure all this negative stuff is going to happen, wouldnt that be the smart thing to do?

I have to respectfully disagree also! There are a couple of U.S. based companies that have been chomping at the bit for this to be implemented, as they have intererest in companies south of the border. One has big red trucks, one has orange trucks and one has white w/yellow trim trucks. They already have hired Mexican drivers, they own the companies. One of the top executives from one of these companies had the nerve to tell the ATA President to back off of the lawsuit that was filed against the FMCSA, or his company would withdraw from the ATA. Now if that ain't some BS.

The above is not paranoia, pure fact! As a said with all respect, you have some excellent points that I agree with. Catch ya later.

[continental]

The northern herd was peacefully grazing on their lush greens, when one of the sheep noticed the southern herd was advancing.
-They're coming-he yelled.
-No, they're not-said the Sheepherder.
-No, they're not-echoed his faitful sheepdog, Fuzzy.
-But I can see them coming- said the sheep.
-What now, master?-asked the concerned faithful sheepdog, Fuzzy.
-We'll stand between them to block their view!-said the crafty Sheepherder.
-But I can still smell them- said the sheep.
-What now master-panicked the concerned but still faithful sheepdog, Fuzzy.
-We'll distruct them with loud farts- answered the Sheepherder.
-But I know they're coming-said the sheep.
-Don't worry-said the Sheepherder-they're bringing their own grass.
-Bringing their own grass-repeted the parrot dog.
...to be continued.

[Night Zombie]

This should turn the whole industry upside down, as well as our roads which will be supporting fire-bomb trucks with no additional taxes.

Just like illegal aliens: all benefits go to cheap-azz Industry while the tax payers will foot the bills for roads and illegal alien benefits.

Trucking will be the last of good middle class jobs sucked out of the USA that will go to either China for marked up poor quality goods, or illegal aliens entering FL in loaded cruise ships daily.

Good job GW and Jeb Bush!

Seems to me newbies may never taste successful wages and veterans have their days numbered before they will have to accept lowered wages.

No offense Sheepdancer, but I doubt seriously if the "excess" profits derived from the 1%, will be passed in its entireity to the 99%. The company has the intial expense to recapture, then upper level stock options and bonuses. Then the everyday increases in benefits cost, insurance, maintanence, fuel etc., and count in for inflation, after, or IF, any of the 1% is left over, then that amount can be passed on to the 99%.
Granted it was many moons ago when I was a economics major, But I am having a difficult time understanding the new "globalism." This country has lost 3 MILLION manufacturing jobs since 2000. Please tell me how taking, say a 45K and year job with benefits, and shipping that job to another country, then having the taxpayer expense of retraining those displaced workers to have a 40K a year job with less benefits. Then take the 40K a year job, that is displaced again, retrain again, and now you have a 30K a year job with even less in benefits, how does this benefit the US economy overall?
Sorry, I degress, the the subject was, Mexicans. I think it is too early to tell overall, but I would venture a guess, that it doesn't look good long term for the American trucker trying to make a living. Or for new hires to enter the industry. But, if there are no Americans entering the industry, then corporations will say that they hire the Mexicans because no American will do the job. Wait, this is beginning to sound like a broken record.
My apologies, having trouble understanding again. Didn't mean to hijack the forum.

You hit the nail on the head, Gordousa and Ddog.


It used to be that what was good for American corporations, and the venerable shareholders, was also good for American citizens, but that concept has become a romantic memory. What's good for American corporations is probably good for workers in some foreign country who just got a pay increase from 30 cents an hour to 31 cents an hour.

American corporations have actively expanded into other countries, and have created the "globalism" we now enjoy. It didn't just happen. American corporations created "globalism" for their own benefit.


Unless it can be stopped by political forces, what I foresee for trucking is that the "shortage" ( and I agree there is somewhat of a shoratge of drivers) will be filled with increases in drivers from foreign countries with work visas, and the relocating of trucking companies to Mexico, as you mentioned.

The CEO's I guarantee you, are thinking "Why do I have to pay that trucker $50,000 a year plus benefits, when I am only paying that factory worker $20,000 a year plus benefits ??" They can't stand to see any blue collar person make much more than minimum wage.


I am surprised Bush and congress hasn't already allowed the floodgates to open with work visa truckers. Could they possibly want to protect the jobs of American-born truckers? I really believe some do. Like senator Jeff Sessions.

I think the Kennedy/ McCain amnesty crap was all about getting a large new supply of legal truckers and other workers. The the millions of Mexicans with amnesty could (and would) become truckers legally and the huge new wave of labor could push wages down to that happy $20,000 a year plus benefits that makes the CEOs happy. And hey, if Hillary gets in, and Universal health care begins, the corporations won't even have that expense. ! Just shove it onto the good ole taxpayer.


I really think that if we call our congressmen we can stop the loss of our wages, or slow it down. There was a house bill passed that calls for the cancelling of the Mexican truck pilot program. The Senate has not yet voted on it. We need to call our senators and urge them to vote for the cancelling of the Mex truck program. I think they actually care what we think.

[ben45750]

ddog, Nafta was implemented Jan ,1, 1994, Bill Clinton was president,
. As you can see below the opening of the borders were part of the
Nafta agreement . "Partial access 1995,full access in 2000" . Although
full access was not opened until 2007, the plan was in place from the get go. I am not a GW fan but the facts are that Bill Clinton signed the agreement. This is the info I came up with , if you find that it is wrong
please let me know . Darin

I'm no Clinton fan but he walked into the NAFTA deal, He had nothing to do with the creation of NAFTA so I don't really think any blame should be put on him. The agreement was initially pursued by conservative governments in the United States and Canada supportive of free trade, led by Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, U.S. President George H. W. Bush, and the Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari. The three-nation NAFTA was signed during December 1992, pending its ratification by the legislatures of the three countries.

Here's the signing in 1992.


http://www.usatoday.com/money/2004-0...n-impact_x.htm

But if you dig deeper Reagan had a big part of the "idea" of NAFTA

Promoting free trade policies

Reagan negotiations with Canada were the predecessors of the North American Free Trade Agreement. He expanded the scope of international agreements and helped expedite trade talks.

While much of his work did not come to fruition until the Clinton administration, supporters say he deserves credit for pursuing open markets in the face of then-record trade deficits.

[redsfan]

I will agree with you that Clinton did not work out the details of NAFTA, most of that was done by Bush 1, but Clinton did sign it into law. Technically, by that standard if blame were going to be placed with anyone, he would have to be more to blame than any of the others since he certainly had the power to kill the Treaty. As a matter of fact, NAFTA was a big part of the debates in 1992. Clinton wouldn't say he was totally against NAFTA, but he was totally against the agreement as Bush had drawn it up. He even said something to effect of, if all he did was sign agreements that Bush worked out, what would be the need for him to even be President? Then when he had the chance to make all those changes to Bush's agreement, he didn't change one thing. Instead he complimented it very highly and enthusiastically signed it into law within his first year in office.

I'm sure that there are papers out there that will back this up, but I recall this from memory. It was a big part of the debates between Clinton, Bush and Perot. Now, that Perot fella didn't like NAFTA period! I'm sure there are transcripts out there somewhere if anyone cares to look them up...

[countryhorseman]

I will agree with you that Clinton did not work out the details of NAFTA, most of that was done by Bush 1, but Clinton did sign it into law. Technically, by that standard if blame were going to be placed with anyone, he would have to be more to blame than any of the others since he certainly had the power to kill the Treaty. As a matter of fact, NAFTA was a big part of the debates in 1992. Clinton wouldn't say he was totally against NAFTA, but he was totally against the agreement as Bush had drawn it up. He even said something to effect of, if all he did was sign agreements that Bush worked out, what would be the need for him to even be President? Then when he had the chance to make all those changes to Bush's agreement, he didn't change one thing. Instead he complimented it very highly and enthusiastically signed it into law within his first year in office.

I'm sure that there are papers out there that will back this up, but I recall this from memory. It was a big part of the debates between Clinton, Bush and Perot. Now, that Perot fella didn't like NAFTA period! I'm sure there are transcripts out there somewhere if anyone cares to look them up...

One has to remember also, that after Clinton signed NAFTA, he delayed the border opening the first time, supposedly for technical issues, but the real reason was that he was up for re-election and it was unpopular then. Then the second time, delayed it again, do to the next election, and did not want to tarnish his legacy by opening the border. The Monica Legacy was more worthy issue.

[redsfan]

One has to remember also, that after Clinton signed NAFTA, he delayed the border opening the first time, supposedly for technical issues, but the real reason was that he was up for re-election and it was unpopular then. Then the second time, delayed it again, do to the next election, and did not want to tarnish his legacy by opening the border. The Monica Legacy was more worthy issue.

Tarnish his legacy? I didn't know he had a legacy. Honestly, I don't remember him doing much of anything at all. In his defense, however, I will say that Bush 1 was pretty much a do-nothing President also. I prefer the ones that at least try something whether the results are good, bad or indifferent.

IMO, NAFTA and the Pilot Project were inevitable regardless of who was or will be President. There were and are proponents and opponents on both sides of the aisle. I'm not certain that it will prove to be a great thing, but I certainly don't believe in the doom and gloom naysayers either. My thinking is that it's here, we knew it was coming. Why not let things play out and see where it goes?

[countryhorseman]

The Senate is scheduled to take a vote on the Cross Border Program in the morning. Call your Senators and express your opinions first thing in the morning. Below is an Alert from OOIDA earlier today. The Capitol switchboard has been flooded with calls on the issue since last week, and the Senate is finally paying attention. CALL!

Senators Byron Dorgan (D-ND) and Arlen Specter (R-PA) offered an amendment today that will slam the brakes on the Mexican trucking pilot program!

The Senators' amendment to the Senate's version of the FY08 transportation appropriations bill will cut off all funding for the DOT's cross-border pilot program.

In July the U.S. House of Representatives passed a similar amendment to their version of the FY08 transportations appropriations bill. The amendment will be voted on sometime tomorrow (Tuesday) morning.

Please contact both of your U.S. Senators ASAP to tell them to SUPPORT the "Dorgan-Specter cross-border trucking" amendment.

To contact your senators, call the U.S. Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121, provide the operator with your home zip code and they will connect you with the office of your senators.


----------------------------------------------
SAMPLE MESSAGE:

"I am from ________ and I am adamantly opposed to the DOT's cross-border trucking pilot program. As my elected representative, I insist that the Senator votes for the Dorgan-Specter cross-border trucking amendment."

----------------------------------------------

[Sheepdancer]

Ok it happened, 2 whole mexican truck drivers came into this country and drove all the way to the northeast and delivered their loads.
On a completely different note that has nothing to with this subject, I would like to announce our new improved pay plan for drivers. Because of a "restructuring" of our corporate model, we have now lowered our driver pay to 6 cents per mile. I know you all will welcome this and help make this industry more profitable....thanks for your support.
Just kidding :wink:

[Bandit102]

Quote: (My thinking is that it's here, we knew it was coming. Why not let things play out and see where it goes?)

Sit. Stay. Roll Over. Good Boy!!!