First, the news item that got me thinking along the above lines:
Quote from: Associated Press
Trump proposes funding wall by cutting off remittances
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Donald Trump would force Mexico to pay for a border wall by threatening to cut off billions of dollars in remittances sent by immigrants living in the U.S., according to a memo released by his campaign Tuesday.
The memo outlines how Trump would try to compel Mexico to pay for a 1,000-mile wall if he becomes president.
In his proposal, Trump threatened to change a rule under the USA Patriot Act, an anti-terrorism law, to cut off funds sent to Mexico through money transfers known as remittances. Trump said he would withdraw the threat if Mexico makes "a one-time payment of $5-10 billion" to finance the wall."
The U.S. is home to about 12 million Mexicans, some living here illegally, according to various research organizations that monitor trends in immigration. They and other migrants use money transfer agents or banks to send money home, often with the objective of supporting their families.
The Mexican central bank reported that money sent home by Mexicans overseas hit nearly $24.8 billion last year, overtaking oil revenues for the first time as a source of foreign income. Cutting off those transfers would therefore represent a significant blow to the Mexican economy. Trump's campaign says that money "provides substantial leverage for the United States to obtain from Mexico the funds necessary to pay for a border wall."
"We have the moral high ground here, and all the leverage," the memo reads. "It is time we use it in order to Make America Great Again."
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Donald Trump would force Mexico to pay for a border wall by threatening to cut off billions of dollars in remittances sent by immigrants living in the U.S., according to a memo released by his campaign Tuesday.
The memo outlines how Trump would try to compel Mexico to pay for a 1,000-mile wall if he becomes president.
In his proposal, Trump threatened to change a rule under the USA Patriot Act, an anti-terrorism law, to cut off funds sent to Mexico through money transfers known as remittances. Trump said he would withdraw the threat if Mexico makes "a one-time payment of $5-10 billion" to finance the wall."
The U.S. is home to about 12 million Mexicans, some living here illegally, according to various research organizations that monitor trends in immigration. They and other migrants use money transfer agents or banks to send money home, often with the objective of supporting their families.
The Mexican central bank reported that money sent home by Mexicans overseas hit nearly $24.8 billion last year, overtaking oil revenues for the first time as a source of foreign income. Cutting off those transfers would therefore represent a significant blow to the Mexican economy. Trump's campaign says that money "provides substantial leverage for the United States to obtain from Mexico the funds necessary to pay for a border wall."
"We have the moral high ground here, and all the leverage," the memo reads. "It is time we use it in order to Make America Great Again."
Now, it could be argued that the above item is 100% nothingburger because Trump won't win the Presidency. That's a point, but consider these two counterpoints:
1) The fear engendered by the fact that someone like Donald Trump has come close to the Presidency;
2) The related, and more rational, fear that the Establishment politicians will act to cut off or heavily tax those to-Mexico remittances anyway. If Donald Trump winds up losing, all they have to do is wait a long-enough interval to credibly claim that they're not knuckling under to The Donald and then claim that they've "answered the just demands of the [Trump supporters]".
What's intriguing about this use-case is that it has the potential to be framed as moral to a much wider group of people than hardcore libertarians. Imagine the typical Dem who hears about a Monero-powered para-remittance channel for those immigrants, justified as a way to "fight xenophobia!" He or she would actually be torn. On the one hand, it would clearly be a dark-market operation whose reason for being is to evade a new tax. But on the other hand, it would be explicitly set up to evade a highly regressive tax placed on the backs of mostly poor immigrants. The fact that it'd be a dark money pathway explicitly set up to help a group of disadvantaged and recently-maligned group of people would elicit a lot of squirmy sympathy or even hand-wringy support amongst Dems who can't stand the Trump movement. As a "moral" dark market, it's far more bankable than is Agora or the now-defunct Silk Road.
And, to shift to admittedly callous dollar-sand-cents figuring, a Big Fat Tax on fiat remittances to Mexico would open up a much larger "liquidity cushion" than Western Union's fees do. Even if the net proceeds from a Monero remittance were to knock off 50% in fiat terms, that 50% would match a 10% fee with a 40% tax piled on top of it.
But I think the best way to sell it, to undocumented-immigrant communities who already have lots of good reasons to be stuck-in-the-familiar-rut cautious, is emotional. Present a Monero para-remittance path as a way to whack the Donald Trump piñata with your money.
To be frank, I know next to nothing about those communities and I have no connections to any of them; I know no Spanish. So in this sense, I'm talking through my hat. But feel free to comment on this idea.
