maybe instead of debating about a wall the question should be how should they deal with the people entering the country illegally? i also bet if you ask people in regions that receive the majority of undocumented immigrants you'd get a different view on the whole undocumented immigration issue.
Posted by: syncro
maybe instead of debating about a wall the question should be how should they deal with the people entering the country illegally? i also bet if you ask people in regions that receive the majority of undocumented immigrants you'd get a different view on the whole undocumented immigration issue.
This is what always puzzles me. The Rust Belt and Bible Belt spend more time freaking out about illegal immigration and Sharia Law than anyone else even though they experience far less of either concern. Or maybe everyone needs to watch the new Sicario movie to truly understand the problem.
Posted by: chupacabra
Posted by: syncro
maybe instead of debating about a wall the question should be how should they deal with the people entering the country illegally? i also bet if you ask people in regions that receive the majority of undocumented immigrants you'd get a different view on the whole undocumented immigration issue.
This is what always puzzles me. The Rust Belt and Bible Belt spend more time freaking out about illegal immigration and Sharia Law than anyone else even though they experience far less of either concern. Or maybe everyone needs to watch the new Sicario movie to truly understand the problem.
I have read an article a few months ago about the issue you are mentioning, the less a group has contact with a different group considered different the bigger the prejudices and whatnot. It can actually be observed in parts of Germany as well. Those regions with the least amount of immigrants/refugees/non-Christian population have the biggest issues with them and most of the prejudices.
I think this issue which has to do with perspective is well known in sociology and anthropology.
I really observe I tend to forget a lot of info that I do not "refresh" regularly.
I have not seen that movie so I can not comment on that, sorry.
Posted by: aShogunNamedMarcus
Posted by: Mic
Posted by: aShogunNamedMarcus
This isnt about how smrt we are.
But?
Seriously.....a wall has never worked. Life does not work like that. Kind of like water.
A wall has never helped keeping a status quo...not in China and not in Roman antiquity. In the long term it does ot work in Israel as well. And the Berlin Wall and the fence that went through Europe...well...history in the long run has a pretty effective way of not caring about walls.
So instead of trying to figure things out differently...let us all move back to nationalist times of a century ago. Instead of solving problems it is far easier to bury the head in the sand, this time behind a wall.
I think you and most others are looking at it completely wrong. Trump is building the wall as the will of the people. This was an election pledge that you could argue won him the election. He has a mandate from the masses and the masses are the ones that agree with the NEED for a southern border wall. US Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Agents also happen to agree with those voters on a need for a wall. And obviously the wall doesnt need to span the entire border coast to coast.
You want to figure this out differently? Change immigration laws and redefine certain things. If you or I were a repeat serious offender that's already been deported 3+ times, would you care about reoffending inside the US again if you just get thrown out but allowed back in? Why pay any admission fee when you can just walk around to the back? Is that how you run your house?
Interesting argument...to be honest... and rather simplistic as well. I do not have time right now to answer in depth apart from stating that the argument of the "serious offender" and the follow up question directed at me is rather simplistic and yes...a wall would not keep a serious offender out of the USA.
Edit: I saw an interview with a marshall who clearly stated that a wall does not change anything or keeps out the illegals. It would be far better to use that money for personnel and technology.
Posted by: Mic
I have not seen that movie so I can not comment on that, sorry.
Posted by: shoreboy
54% of the 'masses' didnt vote for Trump. Using your logic, that means more than half of the 'masses' dont want a wall. Im not sure why wall supporters continue to ignore the fact that most 'illegals'/drugs/MS13 enter through legitimate ports of entry. The visa over stayers are a much bigger problem than people crossing the southern border illegally. Wasting time/money on a wall/barrier/slats will not change that.
... yet he's in the Office.
Besides the media, who says wall supporters are ignoring facts? Pretty sure someone who supports a wall would support tougher immigration laws and actual physical detention of said illegal(s). Maybe even biometric/DNA entry into the data bank. For arguments sake and it might require some imagination but lets say 1/4 - 1/3 of illegals enter where a wall would block - would something like that seem beneficial to the broader spectrum of the issue? Obviously people walking across are not huge mule's for drugs. Those are coming in through ports and cross border tunnels mainly. And that military side hustle angle.
Posted by: Mic
Interesting argument...to be honest... and rather simplistic as well. I do not have time right now to answer in depth apart from stating that the argument of the "serious offender" and the follow up question directed at me is rather simplistic and yes...a wall would not keep a serious offender out of the USA.Edit: I saw an interview with a marshall who clearly stated that a wall does not change anything or keeps out the illegals. It would be far better to use that money for personnel and technology.
What if the wall would've kept the serious offender out in the first place? These people usually walk across because they dont have the money to travel in otherwise.
So how far are you willing to change things? Deport them and confiscate their property and bank accounts amassed during their whole time illegally spent in the USA? Biometrically implant them to set off scanners at ports of entry (yes the new digital tattoo). Adopt a new detention system where wherever that person is from, we adopt their prison system (you get caught and sent it, you need someone sending you food or, you steal ya lose a hand kind of thing - like an actual deterrent to go through legal means?).
As you can see, the other side of the wall argument is way uglier.
To allow illegal immigrants across the border is a slap in the face to all those who have filled out applications & are waiting in line for the process to take it's course. Perhaps the answer is improved monitoring & improvements to the wall, but in a smaller scale?
Somehow I don't think the US lawmakers are concerned that immigration applicants are getting slapped in the face.
When you deal with billions of dollars, at what point do you stop investigating fraud? $1? $10? $100? $1,000? $10,000? $100,000, $1,000,000, $10,000,000? $100,000,000?
Each step costs a magnitude more to address.
Trump is willing to give $20,000,000,000 to save $10,000.
Math is a helluva drug and it's important everyone is afraid of it, otherwise we'd have brought out the guillotine decades ago.
Posted by: aShogunNamedMarcus
What if the wall would've kept the serious offender out in the first place? These people usually walk across because they dont have the money to travel in otherwise.
So how far are you willing to change things? Deport them and confiscate their property and bank accounts amassed during their whole time illegally spent in the USA? Biometrically implant them to set off scanners at ports of entry (yes the new digital tattoo). Adopt a new detention system where wherever that person is from, we adopt their prison system (you get caught and sent it, you need someone sending you food or, you steal ya lose a hand kind of thing - like an actual deterrent to go through legal means?).
As you can see, the other side of the wall argument is way uglier.
Let us keep to the "What if's"...what if the serious offender would never had had a need to become a serious offender? What if US American politics in Meso- and South America would not have turned quite a few places into "shitholes"? What if there would never have been the need for a wall in the first place? What if the war on drugs would have simply never started because for whatever reasons, and there would never had been the need for even cheaper coffee and bananas and whatnot, and cheap work force and support from authoritarian governments just to keep the communists or socialists or who ever was "Public Enemy du jour" at bay?
We can debate and exchange questions and WhatIfs into all eternity, this does not change my original statement one tiny bit: Walls have never worked and are not going to work because ... see my posts above.
Politics can not change any given status quo or development by simply ignoring it and building a wall. Never worked, never will.
Whether the wall Trump wants is warranted or not is irrelevant, he doesn't have the political capital to get the money needed. Not getting his wall is the cost of the historic loss the GOP and Trump suffered in the midterms. It's compromise time and if the Trump base wants increased border security the answer lies somewhere between the strong, powerful wall of precast concrete and Pelosi's middle finger. I bet 99% of wall supporters were spamming Facebook with posts about Obama thinking he was a king and ruling as a tyrant just 4 years ago, but they lack any self-awareness to see that is what they want Trump to be.
Posted by: Mic
Posted by: aShogunNamedMarcus
What if the wall would've kept the serious offender out in the first place? These people usually walk across because they dont have the money to travel in otherwise.So how far are you willing to change things? Deport them and confiscate their property and bank accounts amassed during their whole time illegally spent in the USA? Biometrically implant them to set off scanners at ports of entry (yes the new digital tattoo). Adopt a new detention system where wherever that person is from, we adopt their prison system (you get caught and sent it, you need someone sending you food or, you steal ya lose a hand kind of thing - like an actual deterrent to go through legal means?).
As you can see, the other side of the wall argument is way uglier.
Let us keep to the "What if's"...what if the serious offender would never had had a need to become a serious offender? What if US American politics in Meso- and South America would not have turned quite a few places into "shitholes"? What if there would never have been the need for a wall in the first place? What if the war on drugs would have simply never started because for whatever reasons, and there would never had been the need for even cheaper coffee and bananas and whatnot, and cheap work force and support from authoritarian governments just to keep the communists or socialists or who ever was "Public Enemy du jour" at bay?
We can debate and exchange questions and WhatIfs into all eternity, this does not change my original statement one tiny bit: Walls have never worked and are not going to work because ... see my posts above.
Politics can not change any given status quo or development by simply ignoring it and building a wall. Never worked, never will.
What if this: that serious offender was already a serious offender at home and decided to improve his options. The money he takes is worth more in the US, the things he steals are worth more in the US and the laws and prison system dont reflect the opportunisticness of these illegals. Other than to say I'm not going to bring past US foreign policy decisions into this, obviously those are some massive what ifs about the shit holes. But what if those illegals stayed home in the shit holes to rebuild instead of trying their hand in the first world - no wall necessary if they stayed home, right?
I disagree obviously. Walls are one part of an effective secure border. Even if it's sole purpose is more of a carall than a block. Call it a multi-billion dollar fence if it makes you feel better.
And are you actually suggesting we let the status quo of illegal aliens continue? Just dont address it all? If no wall, then what needs to change?
Posted by: ReductiMat
Math is a helluva drug ....
Sure is.
$5 Billion to start a wall or continue paying $155 billions per year which will only rise as more make their way in.
Posted by: chupacabra
Whether the wall Trump wants is warranted or not is irrelevant, he doesn't have the political capital to get the money needed. Not getting his wall is the cost of the historic loss the GOP and Trump suffered in the midterms. It's compromise time and if the Trump base wants increased border security the answer lies somewhere between the strong, powerful wall of precast concrete and Pelosi's middle finger. I bet 99% of wall supporters were spamming Facebook with posts about Obama thinking he was a king and ruling as a tyrant just 4 years ago, but they lack any self-awareness to see that is what they want Trump to be.
He doesnt need any capital. Presidential emergency powers cover it.
Wasnt Trump willing to compromise with Pelosi and Schumer in the last shut down? Pelosi will most likely step down at some point with the next shut down. It's a shame Trump didnt start the RIF procedures during the shutdown either. He does miss a lot of opportunities.
Forum jump:
