Yup, nothing crazy here, no sir!

How is this brief?

I'd love a nice safe road to Brazil. Does that make me part of the New World Order? ROADTRIP!

*notbrief

This video has been deemed incorrectly flagged brief (not less than 1 minute in length) - declared notbrief by geo321.

I wonder what the people in Texas that have had their land taken from them via eminent domain for this mythical project feel about this. After all, Spain is our ally and we should be thankful that they are going to control a major set of thoroughfares in the US. I know this has been brought up in Congress and the House a few times. It's interesting to see some people call the NAFTA Superhighway project a crazy conspiracy theory when in actual reality it's right there in front of us.

The Amero however, is not on the table for our country but.. if our dollar fails then we'll have some sort of different currency now won't we? Unsure of what that might be, but I doubt it would be something real such as silver/gold-backed currency. It's more profitable and controllable for bankers to institute FIAT based currency, so I'm sure it would be just another form of that.

>> ^ButterflyKisses:

I wonder what the people in Texas that have had their land taken from them via eminent domain for this mythical project feel about this. After all, Spain is our ally and we should be thankful that they are going to control a major set of thoroughfares in the US. I know this has been brought up in Congress and the House a few times. It's interesting to see some people call the NAFTA Superhighway project a crazy conspiracy theory when in actual reality it's right there in front of us.


I don't get the opposition to this freeway. Aren't there always eminent domain issues with new or widened highways/roads? Also, is Spain really going to completely own this road? What would be the point of Spain controlling a highway on American soil? What advantage would that give them? What ill could they inflict upon us if this were true? Potholes? A big toll? Staging point for a Spanish invasion? Is this just more conservative xenophobia?

Just curious - I've not really studied the arguments against this project.

What would be the worst-case scenario if the NAFTA superhighway were built and controlled by Spain (or any other nation, for that matter)?

1. People would lose there property through eminent domain. However they wouldn't be screwed, because they would all be compensated for their property, as required by law. This happens every day in the U.S. anyway, for a vast number of public works projects. So there is nothing new here.

2. A major thoroughfare would easily connect Canada, Mexico, and the U.S. This would boost economic activity between these three nations, benefiting them all. I don't see a downside. Well, I suppose Canadian and Mexican tanks could more easily invade the U.S. Umm, yeah.

3. Spain (or whoever) might charge exorbitant tolls for its use. First of all, there are other major highways already in existence that could be used as alternative routes, most notably Interstate 35. So it would have competition from day one if it were built. Secondly, if Spain (or whoever) started being major dicks about tolls or access to it, we could simply nationalize it. And what could Spain do about it? Blow it all up, and declare war on us?

This is a non-issue. Red meat for the tea party crowd, that's all.

First off, I'm not part of any specific party. I don't see much difference between dems and repubs in regards to issues like this. NAFTA was started during the Clinton administration and this measure was approved during the Bush administration.

Secondly, I do see a problem paying a use tax to Spain if I wish to drive on a major thoroughfare in the US. I highly doubt the founding fathers would ever approve of such a thing.

Thirdly, what the hell is all this talk about invasion from Canada, Spain or Mexico from you guys? That's just absurd and shouldn't be a point of discussion in regards to this. You're just accusing ridiculous points that were never brought up by those that oppose it.

Fourthly, there is always a terrorist threat these days and putting security in the hands of a completely separate sovereign nation with points of entry sounds ludicrous to me.

If the US owned and operated this series of highways then I wouldn't have a problem with it. The taxes would go back into our economy, not another country's. Yes, Eminent Domain occurs regularly in America. Eminent Domain for another country doesn't.

I'm not happy about this and I'm pissed at the Dems and Repubs for allowing this to happen and even more pissed that they both try to act like it's some crazy conspiracy theory up until the toll booths are in use.

>> ^ButterflyKisses:

First off, I'm not part of any specific party. I don't see much difference between dems and repubs in regards to issues like this. NAFTA was started during the Clinton administration and this measure was approved during the Bush administration.
Secondly, I do see a problem paying a use tax to Spain if I wish to drive on a major thoroughfare in the US. I highly doubt the founding fathers would ever approve of such a thing.
Thirdly, what the hell is all this talk about invasion from Canada, Spain or Mexico from you guys? That's just absurd and shouldn't be a point of discussion in regards to this. You're just accusing ridiculous points that were never brought up by those that oppose it.
Fourthly, there is always a terrorist threat these days and putting security in the hands of a completely separate sovereign nation with points of entry sounds ludicrous to me.
If the US owned and operated this series of highways then I wouldn't have a problem with it. The taxes would go back into our economy, not another country's. Yes, Eminent Domain occurs regularly in America. Eminent Domain for another country doesn't.
I'm not happy about this and I'm pissed at the Dems and Repubs for allowing this to happen and even more pissed that they both try to act like it's some crazy conspiracy theory up until the toll booths are in use.


Firstly - I didn't mention a party, I said conservative, which is where your arguments seem to be coming from. No shame in that.

Secondly - Your link doesn't work and wiki doesn't mention Spain, so I'd be curious to learn more about your claims. Not attacking you, defending Spain, appeasing terrorists or anything else, I've just not heard about the Spain thing. Just trying to figure out if this a legitimate concern, false information or out of context political boogeymanism.

Thirdly - The invasion stuff is just for yucks. Figured that was obvious. Didn't mean to offend. Humor can be fun.

Fifthly (I'm limiting my lys to prime numbers) - Again, the Spain thing, linky linky? Hopefully from some semi-respectable source?

(>"<) xoxo

^If Spain operated a toll-road in this country, do you think all the money collected would go directly to Spain without the U.S. collecting taxes on it? Foreign companies are already in the U.S. manufacturing products and paying taxes to the U.S. Heard of Toyota?

Personally I would prefer our government own and operate all the roads, with no third party involved, neither foreign nor domestic. But if it's going to be privatized, then I don't have a problem with a foreign entity operating it, as long as they comply with all applicable laws and properly secure it.

You say my point of discussion about invasion from Canada, Spain, or Mexico is absurd. Well of course it is. It's meant to point out the absurdity of the arguments being used against it. But in the very next breath you mention terrorist threats as a reason for not letting a foreign entity owning it. It sounds 'ludicrous' to you. So if the U.S. owned it we would do a better job of policing it? Really? If our occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq have taught us anything, it's that the local security does no better of a job of securing their borders than the Americans do. In fact they are often worse.

To repeat, I really don't want ANY private entity to own and/or operate our roads. To me that should be a function of government. But if they are going to allow privatization, then I don't see U.S. ownership of these roads being any superior to that of a foreign entity. A foreign entity would have to be under contract, and they would have to comply with security procedures we lay out for them. If they failed to do it, then they would lose their contracts and ownership would revert to the U.S. This would be a strong incentive for them to do it right.

And who knows what the Founding Fathers would think about anything these days? The internet would blow their freaking minds. Rockets to the moon would freak their shit out. To invoke their names isn't necessarily going to convince me of anything.

The NAFTA Superhighway thing always struck me as the weirdest rightwing conspiracy theory ever. Let's set aside for a moment whether or not it's real. Why is it something they oppose?

I mean, NAFTA is the North American Free Trade Agreement. Free trade is part of what you need for a free market. Business people love it, liberals kinda hate it.

Mexico and Canada are physically adjacent to the US, but to ship goods to and from them, it makes most sense for us to use road and railways as the primary cargo carriers. Since we're opening up trade, we expect the volume of goods transported between the countries to increase, putting additional load on our state-run road and rail systems. So they need to be enhanced, to deal with the added load.

Now yes, building highways is technically a big socialist public works project funded by tax dollars, but I've never met a Republican who thought roads weren't something government should build, and I've never met a crackpot Ron Paul-style "constitutionalist" who thought building roads weren't something the Federal government had the power to do.

That said, the talk about Spain controlling it actually comes from this (no, World Net Daily isn't reliable in the usual sense, but it is usually the source of most right-wing crazy these days). Basically, Ed Rendell (PA-Gov, and a DEMONCRAT) auctioned off the contract for managing the Pennsylvania Turnpike, possibly the most well-known toll road in America, to private companies. Who had the winning bid? A private corporation based in Spain called Abertis Infraestructuras that manages toll roads all over Europe.

So, basically, I'm left wondering...why the hell this is supposed to be scary?

Now, I can think of a few good reasons why liberals would be opposed to such a thing. Specifically, it makes it easier for companies to move manufacturing to Mexico to take advantage of their cheap labor, low taxes, and low regulation, plus it makes it so they can use non-union ports to unload goods coming in from Asia, and then truck them into the US. But those should all sound like positives to your average right-winger.

I get that this is lumped in with a fear of some sort of EU-style North American Union, but I honestly don't get why that is supposed to be scary either.

Are all conservatives so xenophobic that they see any signs of long-term collaboration between the US and its closest neighbors as a threat of some sort?

Anyways, for those who are curious, this is the most thorough debunking of this nonsense I've seen.

^Mexico City to Toronto? How boring. I've been to both places, but never in a row. There is nothing remotely interesting between Toronto and Mexico City. I take back all the nice things I said about this super-highway. It's not really "super" at all. Super would be Brazil to Alaska, now THAT would be a super-fucking-highway. Build me a road from Brazil to Alaska and Spain gets carte blanche.

I also wish Spain would widen the I-5.

I don't see a highway...can we focus on things we see because I can see a lot of oil on my beachfront property right now.