Jump to content

Supreme Court Approves Wall


Parsad
 Share

Recommended Posts

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/26/politics/supreme-court-pentagon-border-wall-construction/index.html

 

I'm sure Trump's wall will stop the 14 submerged watercraft that were carrying over $500M in drugs the U.S. was fortunate to capture:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2019/07/11/watch-coast-guardsman-leap-onto-moving-narco-submarine-full-cocaine/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.051ed0d280f4

 

Although he could build a wall in the water as well, I guess!  Cheers!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The effectiveness of the wall does not need to be 100%.

 

It would be worth it if it is 85% effective.

 

The USA could probably NEVER totally control it's borders & prevent illegal immigration, but that does not we should not try

 

I spent many years in Texas...the amount of illegal immigrants is simply stunning.  What HAS been done in the past is simply not working. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The effectiveness of the wall does not need to be 100%.

 

It would be worth it if it is 85% effective.

 

The USA could probably NEVER totally control it's borders & prevent illegal immigration, but that does not we should not try

 

I spent many years in Texas...the amount of illegal immigrants is simply stunning.  What HAS been done in the past is simply not working.

 

I agree it's not working.  85% is a very optimistic number...you'll be very lucky if it manages to cut illegal immigration by 50%.  Increased staffing and monitoring would be more cost effective.  Just catch and release at the border would be effective if they had enough staff.  Walls just means tunnels, ladders, ships, border crossings, and by air.  It won't decrease the numbers or attempts...they'll just look for another way.  Cheers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The effectiveness of the wall does not need to be 100%.

 

It would be worth it if it is 85% effective.

 

The USA could probably NEVER totally control it's borders & prevent illegal immigration, but that does not we should not try

 

I spent many years in Texas...the amount of illegal immigrants is simply stunning.  What HAS been done in the past is simply not working.

 

I agree it's not working.  85% is a very optimistic number...you'll be very lucky if it manages to cut illegal immigration by 50%.  Increased staffing and monitoring would be more cost effective.  Just catch and release at the border would be effective if they had enough staff.  Walls just means tunnels, ladders, ships, border crossings, and by air.  It won't decrease the numbers or attempts...they'll just look for another way.  Cheers!

 

Where there is a will there is a way.

 

HOWEVER, if you make it 2x or 3x or 4x more difficult, that is going to raise the cost & risk to trying to cross illegally.  When you raise the cost of something, I think the demand goes down?

 

Catch & release?  How does that work?  They get released into USA?  I don't think so...that has not been working for 30+ years.

 

This whole immigration policy is a MOCKERY of those who follow the law.  In my own family my Aunt & Uncle suffered, waited, and paid a SIGNIFICANT amount of their net worth to come to the USA legally.

 

Why is it that people who walk/swim across the border are given preference over people in Thailand, Philippines? Colombia? Hungary?  Given preference over those who follow the rules?

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump-donating construction companies are printing the invoices already  ;D

 

 

I must admit LC, you do have a sly sense of humor!

Oh I fully expect that over a beer or five, we'd all get along like a house on fire.  ;D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump-donating construction companies are printing the invoices already  ;D

 

 

I must admit LC, you do have a sly sense of humor!

Oh I fully expect that over a beer or five, we'd all get along like a house on fire.  ;D

 

I think that is the wisest thing I've ever heard you say - that would certainly work for me.....have a great weekend LC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FYI - this money is coming from the joint military construction budget. So instead of keeping military housing fit for our troops, we are building a vanity project.

 

And speaking of Trump’s words describing Baltimore, it may be useful to research the living condition of many of our military bases:

 

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/02/13/mold-lead-and-vermin-survey-finds-toxic-conditions-military-housing.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Catch & release?  How does that work?  They get released into USA?  I don't think so...that has not been working for 30+ years.

 

No, no...why would they release them back into the USA?  Back to their home countries.  Cheers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Catch & release?  How does that work?  They get released into USA?  I don't think so...that has not been working for 30+ years.

 

No, no...why would they release them back into the USA?  Back to their home countries.  Cheers!

 

Parsad:

 

I think you are very mistaken on what "catch & release" is...Please see this article from the Guardian:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/apr/03/mexico-border-us-expands-catch-and-release-practice

 

This is why we need a wall, in addition to many other things and measures.

 

CHEERS!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The effectiveness of the wall does not need to be 100%.

 

It would be worth it if it is 85% effective.

 

The USA could probably NEVER totally control it's borders & prevent illegal immigration, but that does not we should not try

 

I spent many years in Texas...the amount of illegal immigrants is simply stunning.  What HAS been done in the past is simply not working.

 

I agree it's not working.  85% is a very optimistic number...you'll be very lucky if it manages to cut illegal immigration by 50%.  Increased staffing and monitoring would be more cost effective.  Just catch and release at the border would be effective if they had enough staff.  Walls just means tunnels, ladders, ships, border crossings, and by air.  It won't decrease the numbers or attempts...they'll just look for another way.  Cheers!

 

Where there is a will there is a way.

 

HOWEVER, if you make it 2x or 3x or 4x more difficult, that is going to raise the cost & risk to trying to cross illegally.  When you raise the cost of something, I think the demand goes down?

 

If that is the case why did it fail with the drug war? Or with Prohibition? And how is immigration different than those two examples.

 

There is a simpler cheaper way to reduce illegal immigration by 100% that is guaranteed to work!! Simply make it all legal by changing the law.

 

This is why we need a wall, in addition to many other things and measures.

 

We don't need any of these measures since immigration was never a problem that needed solving. The problem is really just invented. Eliminate illegality and the problem vanishes like magic. There are all invented problems. Like your drug problem or your gun problem. And can be solved simply by changing your mental framework.

 

I'm curious also DTEJD1997 about your stay in Texas. Was Texas a horrible place because of the illegal immigrants? Is there a high unemployment rate due to immigrants stealing jobs? Is the economy doing poorly? I mean what exactly are the horrible things going on in Texas that would be solved by these policies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The effectiveness of the wall does not need to be 100%.

 

It would be worth it if it is 85% effective.

 

The USA could probably NEVER totally control it's borders & prevent illegal immigration, but that does not we should not try

 

I spent many years in Texas...the amount of illegal immigrants is simply stunning.  What HAS been done in the past is simply not working.

 

I agree it's not working.  85% is a very optimistic number...you'll be very lucky if it manages to cut illegal immigration by 50%.  Increased staffing and monitoring would be more cost effective.  Just catch and release at the border would be effective if they had enough staff.  Walls just means tunnels, ladders, ships, border crossings, and by air.  It won't decrease the numbers or attempts...they'll just look for another way.  Cheers!

 

Where there is a will there is a way.

 

HOWEVER, if you make it 2x or 3x or 4x more difficult, that is going to raise the cost & risk to trying to cross illegally.  When you raise the cost of something, I think the demand goes down?

 

If that is the case why did it fail with the drug war? Or with Prohibition? And how is immigration different than those two examples.

 

There is a simpler cheaper way to reduce illegal immigration by 100% that is guaranteed to work!! Simply make it all legal by changing the law.

 

This is why we need a wall, in addition to many other things and measures.

 

We don't need any of these measures since immigration was never a problem that needed solving. The problem is really just invented. Eliminate illegality and the problem vanishes like magic. There are all invented problems. Like your drug problem or your gun problem. And can be solved simply by changing your mental framework.

 

I'm curious also DTEJD1997 about your stay in Texas. Was Texas a horrible place because of the illegal immigrants? Is there a high unemployment rate due to immigrants stealing jobs? Is the economy doing poorly? I mean what exactly are the horrible things going on in Texas that would be solved by these policies.

 

So your solution to immigration is open borders?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The effectiveness of the wall does not need to be 100%.

 

It would be worth it if it is 85% effective.

 

The USA could probably NEVER totally control it's borders & prevent illegal immigration, but that does not we should not try

 

I spent many years in Texas...the amount of illegal immigrants is simply stunning.  What HAS been done in the past is simply not working.

 

I agree it's not working.  85% is a very optimistic number...you'll be very lucky if it manages to cut illegal immigration by 50%.  Increased staffing and monitoring would be more cost effective.  Just catch and release at the border would be effective if they had enough staff.  Walls just means tunnels, ladders, ships, border crossings, and by air.  It won't decrease the numbers or attempts...they'll just look for another way.  Cheers!

 

Where there is a will there is a way.

 

HOWEVER, if you make it 2x or 3x or 4x more difficult, that is going to raise the cost & risk to trying to cross illegally.  When you raise the cost of something, I think the demand goes down?

 

If that is the case why did it fail with the drug war? Or with Prohibition? And how is immigration different than those two examples.

 

There is a simpler cheaper way to reduce illegal immigration by 100% that is guaranteed to work!! Simply make it all legal by changing the law.

 

This is why we need a wall, in addition to many other things and measures.

 

We don't need any of these measures since immigration was never a problem that needed solving. The problem is really just invented. Eliminate illegality and the problem vanishes like magic. There are all invented problems. Like your drug problem or your gun problem. And can be solved simply by changing your mental framework.

 

I'm curious also DTEJD1997 about your stay in Texas. Was Texas a horrible place because of the illegal immigrants? Is there a high unemployment rate due to immigrants stealing jobs? Is the economy doing poorly? I mean what exactly are the horrible things going on in Texas that would be solved by these policies.

 

So your solution to immigration is open borders?

 

Yes but to be honest I think the US already has de facto open borders. It just has this huge harassment system and punishment system on top of that which essentially changes none of the underlying reality. My argument is that we get rid of the unnecessary punishment system since its as ineffective as the Drug War or Prohibition. My solution is basically what the US had for most of its history including the period of greatest economic advancement. I don't have a problem though with kicking out terrorists and criminals or even the Muslim ban because in those cases there are problems. But I don't see immigration...even massive immigration in and of itself as a problem that needs solving. I think the green card is a ridiculous concept and a huge infringement on freedom.

 

I've said this before...I never hear arguments against it. I'll repeat myself: Texas has tonnes of illegal immigrants...what are the horrors that are occurring there? What problems are being solved exactly? Can anyone point to anything? Arizona? New Mexico? What is the problem that we are solving here?

 

If illegal immigration is a real problem than I expect that everyone would agree that the Midwest which has few illegals is a much better place to live than the Southwest. So would you rather live in Kansas or Texas. Indiana or New Mexico? California or Nebraska.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've thrown out this potential solution before, curious what you think: we create essentially a temporary work visa system, so:

-you can live and work here legally

-you are taxed like anyone else

-but you are not eligible for long-term benefits i.e. social security/medicare etc.

-it gives you some points on citizenship applications if you maintain 5/7/10 years of employment history

-you can't vote

-you can open bank accts etc

-you get fingerprinted/ID'd so there is some paper trail

 

Perhaps the scale of how benefits "come online" could be adjusted, but I think it helps solve a lot of issues. For the gov't it brings in some revenue, gets these people "on the books", clears up voting questions/criminal records. For the immigrant it gives them peace of mind, incentives them to work legally, set up roots, apply for citizenship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've thrown out this potential solution before, curious what you think: we create essentially a temporary work visa system, so:

-you can live and work here legally

-you are taxed like anyone else

-but you are not eligible for long-term benefits i.e. social security/medicare etc.

-it gives you some points on citizenship applications if you maintain 5/7/10 years of employment history

-you can't vote

-you can open bank accts etc

-you get fingerprinted/ID'd so there is some paper trail

 

Perhaps the scale of how benefits "come online" could be adjusted, but I think it helps solve a lot of issues. For the gov't it brings in some revenue, gets these people "on the books", clears up voting questions/criminal records. For the immigrant it gives them peace of mind, incentives them to work legally, set up roots, apply for citizenship.

 

LC:

 

This is one of the few times I imagine that I would agree with you politically.  I think your "system" is eminently reasonable (for the most part).  I would add an application fee(s) that goes to pay down the national debt...something steep but not impossible.  For example, a $100 non-refundable fee to cover paper work processing and enforcement of the "work visa".  Then, if approved, there is a $500 to $1,000 fee to reduce the national debt.  Visa is good for at least 6 months, maybe a year?  After whatever period it is, you then must return to your home country.  If everything goes well, you get preference in 6 months or a year if you wish to re-apply.

 

If I recall correctly, something like this was done in WWII and the 50's?

 

I doubt this would go through, as it would solve problems and is very reasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Catch & release?  How does that work?  They get released into USA?  I don't think so...that has not been working for 30+ years.

 

No, no...why would they release them back into the USA?  Back to their home countries.  Cheers!

 

Parsad:

 

I think you are very mistaken on what "catch & release" is...Please see this article from the Guardian:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/apr/03/mexico-border-us-expands-catch-and-release-practice

 

This is why we need a wall, in addition to many other things and measures.

 

CHEERS!

 

"Catch and release" can be used a couple of ways.  The President used the term as used in fishing.

 

I was using the term similar to when animal control captures a bear in an area, packs it up, and takes it many miles away to a more habitable territory. 

 

I'm saying catch them at the border or elsewhere, detain them if necessary and deport back to their home countries.  But pour more money into it and do it humanely!  Cheers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Catch and release has been used to describe both "release" to immigrant court jurisdictions in the US, or "release" back into the native country (usually Mexico). So it's not the best term to use...personally I think non-refugee status illegal immigrants should be returned back to the home country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've thrown out this potential solution before, curious what you think: we create essentially a temporary work visa system, so:

-you can live and work here legally

-you are taxed like anyone else

-but you are not eligible for long-term benefits i.e. social security/medicare etc.

-it gives you some points on citizenship applications if you maintain 5/7/10 years of employment history

-you can't vote

-you can open bank accts etc

-you get fingerprinted/ID'd so there is some paper trail

 

Perhaps the scale of how benefits "come online" could be adjusted, but I think it helps solve a lot of issues. For the gov't it brings in some revenue, gets these people "on the books", clears up voting questions/criminal records. For the immigrant it gives them peace of mind, incentives them to work legally, set up roots, apply for citizenship.

 

I'm not a fan of straight open borders as I think it would cause a vacuum. I think open borders would only work if people are equally as free to leave as they are to come. Otherwise everyone will rush the US like a Best Buy TV deal on Black Friday.

 

I have largely agreed with your proposed solution in the past and think it is a reasonable system. A few questions....

 

- Does work need to be lined up before entry is granted? I think it should be

- Is there a limit to the number of people let in?

- How do you deal with these people during an economic crisis? Say they all lose their jobs?

- Are they paying into 401k's, Social Security, unemployment? This could be a significant advantage or disadvantage depending on what they are paying into. Perhaps specific

  program for visa holders?

- How do they receive benefits? Private insurance I hope.

- Can they own property?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Catch & release?  How does that work?  They get released into USA?  I don't think so...that has not been working for 30+ years.

 

No, no...why would they release them back into the USA?  Back to their home countries.  Cheers!

 

Parsad:

 

I think you are very mistaken on what "catch & release" is...Please see this article from the Guardian:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/apr/03/mexico-border-us-expands-catch-and-release-practice

 

This is why we need a wall, in addition to many other things and measures.

 

CHEERS!

 

"Catch and release" can be used a couple of ways.  The President used the term as used in fishing.

 

I was using the term similar to when animal control captures a bear in an area, packs it up, and takes it many miles away to a more habitable territory. 

 

I'm saying catch them at the border or elsewhere, detain them if necessary and deport back to their home countries.  But pour more money into it and do it humanely!  Cheers!

 

Parsad:

 

OK, fair enough...

 

BUT, in the USA, "catch & release" in relation to illegal immigrants means you catch them, detain them, process them, and then let them go in the USA.  That is what it is, and what it has been for a long time.

 

I agree, this is a very stupid idea...and agree with your new way of thinking 100%!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- Does work need to be lined up before entry is granted? I think it should be

- Is there a limit to the number of people let in?

- How do you deal with these people during an economic crisis? Say they all lose their jobs?

- Are they paying into 401k's, Social Security, unemployment? This could be a significant advantage or disadvantage depending on what they are paying into. Perhaps specific

  program for visa holders?

- How do they receive benefits? Private insurance I hope.

- Can they own property?

 

Tough questions and probably where the proposal sinks or swims...

Work on entry: A difficult thing to manage, setting up work in another country usually when you are vastly unskilled. Perhaps a 6 month window is reasonable? Of course that introduces the difficulty of deporting people after 6 months.

Quota: Also difficult. I would say yes such that the marginal immigrant would have to wait 1yr. So 50% of the estimated annual illegal entrants would be the quota.

Economic crisis: I would think either mass unemployment would cause most folks to leave the US. Else, they would be at  risk of deportation due to chronic unemployment.

Benefits: I would think they would pay into all gov't benefits but be unable to claim those benefits or claim them on a tiered scale. Pre-tax personal savings like 401ks/IRAs would not be allowed. This is the "pay to play" component.

Healthcare: obviously the most difficult benefit to manage. Private insurance would be the hope but I would imagine this would be a difficult demographic to provide healthcare for without losing money. Open to ideas...

Property ownership: Yes I think allowing property ownership is a positive for all parties.

 

I think my overall point is that trying to fight back against a tide of human migration is simply a losing battle.

 

And I know it's been mentioned before but ending the drug war would do a lot to disrupt the crime and violence caused by the cartels in the southern americas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share



×
×
  • Create New...