[POST] Questions and Answers #10

An Ask Me Anything post

This is a reader-supported publication. I give it all away for free but could really use your support if you want me to keep doing this.

And we’re off …

---

Brent McClintock

The Idle Curiosity Almanac

Could you drill deeper (or have you elsewhere; I've read ANM) on the North-South integration geopolitical challenges of the Western hemisphere (the Americas)? I include economic in geopolitical. It was/is difficult to integrate North America - including Central, Southern Americas even more problematic - imperial & political histories along with the geographic challenges, eg Tim Marshall's Prisoners of Their Geography type: tyranny of distance - north-south - access & transportation, east-west physical barriers (Andes), limited useable land availability.

You are correct about the Americas being deeply affected by North-South geographic constraints. That’s what made it easier for European colonial powers to slice and dice our hemisphere for piecemeal domination. Unlike Eurasia, which has broad, horizontal stretches fostering east-west integration (H/T, Diamond), the Americas' continental shapes stretch vertically, limiting internal lines of communication and supply.

Within South America, the Andes mountains act as a massive east-west barrier, hindering transportation, commerce, and integration. Meanwhile, tropical rainforests, deserts, and rugged terrain further fragment things, making rail, road, and even air links costly and logistically complex. In sum, that’s a recipe for outbound-integrating infrastructure and not inward regional integration.

Then there are the imperial legacies … (I will skip the positive ones you can find near the end of my taped brief below)

North America developed under relatively stable, Anglo-imperial models with early industrialization encouraging large-scale infrastructure development and continental economic integration (Hamilton’s vision). Central and South America inherited more fragmented Spanish/Portuguese colonial legacies, as those powers concentrated (just as they did in Asia) on coastal cities and river basins, leaving the interiors less developed. Instead of getting a lot of connecting infrastructure, many of these nations ended up suffering weak central governance, military strongman (caudillo) leadership, and frequent coups over the control of outbound natural resources (the classic resource curse).

In general, US interventions (Monroe Doctrine, Big Stick, backyard geopolitics) have sometimes led to periods of stability. But they also breed widespread and persistent resentment and political distrust, denting the attraction of deeper North-South integration.

So, what do we now face?

North America possesses most of the region’s wealth and sophisticated infrastructure, primarily due to agreements like NAFTA/USMCA. In contrast, advancement further south is frequently stalled by persistent challenges: namely, illegal immigration and the drug trade. While the United States has the capacity to resolve these issues, its current approach tends to penalize Latin America for not solving them independently. Genuine strategic progress depends on addressing these barriers first.

Regarding immigration, greater state oversight of migrants and border movements is likely. Ideally, an arrangement resembling a limited Schengen Zone for the Americas could emerge — where border crossings are both tightly managed and significantly streamlined through real-time, transparent systems. So, yes, omniveillance is the way ahead, as scary as Palantir seems to be.

The way ahead on drugs is simple enough: copy the Nordic model, IMHO. This means shifting the regional drug strategy away from punitive and militarized approaches and towards health-centered policies focused on harm reduction (e.g., decriminalization of small quantities for personal use, robust support for addiction treatment, and widespread investment in prevention and support programs). By treating drug addiction primarily as a public health issue rather than a criminal one, countries across the Americas could reduce the social costs and violence associated with illicit drug markets and, by extension, lessen the pressure on, and workload of, everybody’s judicial and policing systems.

In the meantime, Central America and much of South America have struggled to build robust internal and external economic linkages due to geographic isolation (most pan-American infrastructure projects stall in the Darien Gap), not enough public/private-sector funding (although China is changing that), institutional instability (thank you, America’s Drug War), and limited usable land (the negative flip side of being “narrow” in those latitudes slated to suffer the most permanent damage from climate change). All of these elements suggest that economic life there will only get dramatically harder with climate change.

So, how to move ahead?

To me, the Americas’ development depends on overcoming the tyranny of geography with large, multi-national infrastructure projects and transnational cooperation. That means we need to accommodate China’s and Europe’s ambitions even as we ramp up our own: fine to encourage raw materials and ag exports to Asia and Europe in general; but we need to be taking the lead on the digital infrastructure build-out. China doesn’t really care about broad development in Latin America, so we need to. In the end, North-South integration is not just about trade, but about creating networks of opportunity that extend to marginalized regions and communities. To not pursue such connectivity is to essentially write off Latin America to Chinese network capture.

Where are the comparative advantages in trade likely to be in decades ahead under climate change and depopulation?

Even as climate change reshapes global agricultural zones, much of Latin America and parts of Central America will retain significant value due to their arable land, fresh water, and natural resources. Yes, I expect a certain depopulation dynamic across my Middle Earth band (reaching 30 degrees north and south of the equator), but that doesn’t mean the hemisphere as a whole can’t still leverage plenty of resources from that zone. It mostly means that keeping large-scale populations there won’t be economically worthwhile.

Fortunately, that brings us to labor flows. North America’s depopulation and aging trends contrast with younger, growing populations throughout most of Latin America and the Caribbean. This demographic complementarity creates strong South-to-North labor and human capital flows, enabling Latin America to serve as a talent and workforce reservoir (having the same time zones helps nicely for any remote work), while North America pushes ahead on high-tech innovation and capital-intensive industries.

Here’s where the Trumpian rejection of renewable energies makes zero sense: Latin America will be increasingly important as a hub for minerals essential for green technologies (e.g., lithium, copper, rare earths). Our approach should be an Americas-First one that says we need to ensure our long-term supplies BEFORE sending off the extra as exports to Europe and Asia. That’s where a modern Monroe Doctrine kicks in, in my opinion.

Then there’s just the rejiggering of the Americas: as some regions become less habitable or productive due to climate effects, other areas in the Americas that remain climatically stable will attract those relocating industries. That will require some diplomatic top cover that we need to build: again, some sort of Americas First trade and investment vision that says we take care of our own before anything else.

In the end, key comparative advantages for intra-Americas trade will come from overcoming historic geographic and political fragmentation through large-scale investments in connectivity, physical infrastructure, digital networks, and harmonized trade rules. Right now China is ahead on infrastructure and is leaping ahead on digital networks. We need to particularly catch up on those digital networks by emphasizing that trade harmonization — something Trump is rather mindlessly destroying.

In sum, our goal must be enabling smoother, more reliable flows of goods, people, and capital across the Americas, which is why I promote the whole open-America-back-up-for-new-members thing.

Isn't there still great scope for East-West economic flows persisting in the Northern hemisphere?

Personally, I see Trump’s disengagement strategy as reflecting a growing awareness and the sheer reality of the fact that the world economy is now dominated by three hubs (North America, Europe, Asia) that will be in long-term competition with one another and in integrating North-to-South within their respective zones due to the focus-grabbing negative dynamics of demographic collapse in the North and environmental/climate stress across the South.

So, sure, legacy flows will linger, but, long term, I see the growth primarily being intra-zonal (West, Center, Asia).

Jim Nuttle illustration from America’s New Map

Just how strong a barrier to North-South flows will Middle Earth become that the North & South hemispheres could become isolated from each other (physical flows)?

That is the trillions-dollar question: I expect things to get worse before better, but also so bad that solution sets are forced. With Trump, we get the visceral, race-based response, and, yeah, we will likely take that as far as we can before realizing how counter-productive, unprofitable, self-destructive, and simply immoral it is.

The better question, from my perspective, is this: Which vertical global zone overcomes these issues fastest to best adapt to the twin challenges of demographic collapse and climate change? Fortunately, as I note, the obvious solution set stares us in the face: Open the kingdom!

Why? Because our multinational state model is built for this sort of voluntary integration.

---

John J. Brown

First, as a 60-year-old that was planning on retiring in 2033, do you think Congress will ever address the Social Security shortfall (i.e. raise taxes/ limits)?

A solution set will be forced. That I know. But as a 63-year-old content creator, I don’t plan on ever retiring, in large part because the vast bulk of my personal identity is wrapped up in my never-ending pursuit of knowledge.

Having said that …

Yes, Congress will have to address the Social Security shortfall eventually, but the timeline and nature of reforms remain uncertain. That solution set will be forged amidst AGI’s emergence/impact and the linked emergence of a Universal Basic Income (UBI). In the meantime (a truly loaded phrase here), individuals should expect less reliance on guaranteed retirement and more on personal adaptability, continuous engagement, and alternative income sources.

I’ve been scrambling to make money since I was about 10. I don’t expect that ever to change for me personally. My Mother’s son, I find leisure unnerving for the most part.

Second, with our AmExit (what I am calling our disengagement from global markets), it appears Trump is never leaving the Presidency and Congress appears to either support this (i.e. Texas redistricting / political Apartheid) or cannot stop him. I suspect our Republic will suffer great unrest. Will the Federal armed personnel ( US Military, National Guard, Homeland Security, FBI, etc.) follow the CINC or will they too disintegrate / fight amongst themselves?

I think I will need dozens and dozens of posts to answer that question between now and January 2029.

Having worked with the US military most of my life, I have great faith in their apolitical stance.

I don’t see Trump trying to stay in office because he simply won’t be able to withstand the great pressure to anoint/bless/support his successor, especially as his cognitive decline gets more obvious. To win in 2028, the GOP has to be VERY excited (across most of 2027-28) about whomever that successor is, and Trump won’t be able to sabotage that (and, if he tries, it will positively rebound to the Dems overwhelmingly).

The most likely highly-negative scenario is still a pretty bad one, though: Say Newsom or Pritzker beats Vance in a close race. Might Trump try to stay in power amidst some resulting “chaos/national emergency” of his declaring?

Hmm.

Now you have me really thinking dark thoughts — thanks!

Let’s revisit after the 2026 midterms.

---

Mark Evans

Sometimes you say Latin America is going to go up in smoke and sometimes you say they will integrate with North America. Maybe the Andean Countries will survive along with Southern Chile and Argentina. I'd like invest in Mercado Libre, which is all over Latin America, what do you think?

Latin America is a region of extremes, with parts susceptible to “going up in smoke” due to climate stress, governance failures, and economic shocks. At the same time, I’ve argued that certain subregions (especially the Andean countries, Southern Chile, and Argentina) possess stronger institutional resilience, demographic stability, and geographic advantages that will help them weather future geo-strategic storms and even benefit from shifts in global supply chains and food production (globalization’s current re-regionalization phase).

Integration with North America remains the best path ahead, especially as demographic decline and climate pressures force “vertical” migration and deeper economic connections. I see the Southern Cone, along with countries like Colombia and Peru, as stability anchors. If you’re betting long, those are the players to keep in mind.

As for Mercado Libre, it’s nicely positioned at the nexus of all these trends. The company runs the largest online commerce ecosystem in Latin America, with deep networks spread across almost 20 countries. That kind of scale and penetration is the result of decades spent building infrastructure in markets that are both fast-growing and under-served — a lesson America dismisses at its economic peril.

So, while volatility in the region is serious, digitization and fintech adoption continue to accelerate, both intra-regionally and involving major outside partners (EU, China). Amidst all that, I’d say Mercado Libre remains a solid long-term play, especially if you believe, like I do, that Latin America’s economic integration with the north will ultimately advance and digital commerce will expand even amid the near-term turmoil that is Trump.

Just keep in mind: the ride won’t be smooth, but the upside can be significant, especially for platforms building real connective tissue across the Americas.

---

”

---