A Blog of Their Own

Here's the full statement: Mexico City, November 26, 2024 Dear President-elect Donald Trump, I am writing to you regarding your statement on Monday, November 25, concerning migration, fentanyl trafficking, and tariffs. You may not be aware that Mexico has developed a comprehensive policy to assist migrants from different parts of the world who cross our territory en route to the southern border of the United States. As a result, and according to data from your country’s Customs and Border Protection (CBP), encounters at the Mexico–United States border have decreased by 75% between December 2023 and November 2024. Moreover, half of those who arrive do so through a legally scheduled appointment under the United States’ CBP One program. For these reasons, migrant caravans no longer arrive at the border. Even so, it is clear that we must work together to create a new labor mobility model that is necessary for your country, as well as address the root causes that compel families to leave their homes out of necessity. If even a small percentage of what the United States allocates to war were instead dedicated to building peace and fostering development, it would address the underlying causes of human mobility. On another note, and for humanitarian reasons, Mexico has consistently expressed its willingness to help prevent the fentanyl epidemic in the United States from continuing. This is, after all, a public health and consumption problem within your society. So far this year, Mexican armed forces and prosecutors have seized tons of various types of drugs, 10,340 firearms, and have detained 15,640 individuals for violence related to drug trafficking. Furthermore, the Mexican Congress is in the process of approving a constitutional reform to classify the production, distribution, and commercialization of fentanyl and other synthetic drugs as a serious crime without bail. However, it is publicly known that the chemical precursors used to produce this and other synthetic drugs are illegally entering Canada, the United States, and Mexico from Asian countries. This underscores the urgent need for international collaboration. You must also be aware of the illegal trafficking of firearms into my country from the United States. Seventy percent of the illegal weapons seized from criminals in Mexico come from your country. We do not produce these weapons, nor do we consume synthetic drugs. Tragically, it is in our country that lives are lost to the violence resulting from meeting the drug demand in yours. President Trump, migration and drug consumption in the United States cannot be addressed through threats or tariffs. What is needed is cooperation and mutual understanding to tackle these significant challenges. For every tariff, there will be a response in kind, until we put at risk our shared enterprises. Yes, shared. For instance, among Mexico’s main exporters to the United States are General Motors, Stellantis, and Ford Motor Company, which arrived in Mexico 80 years ago. Why impose a tariff that would jeopardize them? Such a measure would be unacceptable and would lead to inflation and job losses in both the United States and Mexico. I am convinced that North America’s economic strength lies in maintaining our trade partnership. This allows us to remain competitive against other economic blocs. For this reason, I believe that dialogue is the best path to understanding, peace, and prosperity for our nations. I hope our teams can meet soon to continue building joint solutions.

I’m reading a lot of snarky elitism out today where people are in effect writing “oh well this is what Americans voted for. sucks to suck” “reap what you sow” or “let them suffer and they’ll learn” etc. and I do not think this is correctly grounded in voter psychology. People did not vote *for* taxes on goods to rise 20%. They voted *against* inflation and other cost-of-living issues (housing) and *for* abstract narratives to “fix” these problems. We know that most people do not watch/read news or know about policy promises of candidates, let alone know the real-world outcomes of various gov outputs. From various survey work in the 90s we know only half of people can name the vice president, for example. That should give us a lot of doubts about the ability of voters to rationalize about info and policy output. So what info are they bringing to the table when voting? Poli sci says 80-90% of voters are either defaulting to voting with their group, reacting to the state of things (inflation), or have no policy or political awareness at all (that alone is 1/5th of voters). Basically nothing of what we know about the American voter suggests they are digesting specific policy info, especially forward-looking forecasts of outputs and outcomes, and basing voting decisions on that. For better or worse, most people are reacting to conditions of voting with their group. Now, sure, people are going to get the same outcome whether they voted “for” it or not, but generally speaking aside from devoted partisan intellectuals, they didn’t and that’s worth noting. I think this warrants some empathy and introspection on behalf of the analyst class. Also a lot of the takes are just mean-spirited, which I guess is to be expected but still sad to see.