Why do you really oppose a wall?

[JerryBoyle]

If I ask for money for something, isn't it up to me to justify its cost and necessity? Can't remember the last time I said, "give me $10 or tell me why you shouldn't".

[chadk66]

Originally Posted by Clocker

We have special arrangements with Canada and Mexico. Visitors from most other countries need a tourist or business visa.

You think some random guy from Bosnia can show up in NYC without a visa and claim to be a tourist?

State Department:

https://travel.state.gov/content/tra...t/visitor.html

then we need to limit the number of tourist Visa's from certain countries. There must be information on what countries citizens are the most likely to overstay tourists visas?

[Tom]

Originally Posted by JerryBoyle

If I ask for money for something, isn't it up to me to justify its cost and necessity? Can't remember the last time I said, "give me $10 or tell me why you shouldn't".

That is not the topic of the thread.

[woodtoo]

1,900 illegal immigrants arrested in Rio Grande Valley this WEEKEND!!!
Sector Chief Manuel Padilla Jr. says since October more than 40,000 illegal have been detained there.
Move along nothing to see here......

[chadk66]

sounds like an emergency to me

[ultracapper]

The question in the thread is, "Why do you really oppose a wall?"

It just seems like it is so old school, that it really wouldn't be effective. Like the Rio Grande is the moat, and then you come to the castle walls. May have worked in 1619, but in 2019 it just seems like there's a million ways around it. New points of entries would be developed. There's a bazillion tributaries throughout the Gulf of Mexico's northern coast. They'll just find new ways in.

And there's a demand for these immigrants. If there wasn't, they wouldn't come. But they know there is opportunity, so they come. Addressing the demand seems more effective to me in this case than the supply. But then you're butting heads with Texas and New Mexico ranchers, Nevada entertainment interests, and other highly connected sorts.

I'd like to see the U.S. and Mexico come to some kind of mutual agreement as to mutual responsibility when these immigrants cross the border mainly motivated in the hope of receiving social services, such as hospital care. Have the U.S. declare a willingness to assist them while Mexico declares a willingness to cover a chunk of the tab.

It's a tough issue. The U.S.-Mexico border is a unique issue. There are centuries of "connects" between the people of Mexico and regions of the SW USA. I mean, Clinton apologizing for the acts of the 1840s is definitely over the top, and I felt, inappropriate, but it is a recognition of these "connects".

A strong and constructive relationship between the 2 countries would do Mexico a world of good. It's a society that really needs a nudge to raise it's philosophic standards and look to the north for it's model rather than just falling into the Latin American MO. A strong, forward looking Mexico would ultimately drag it's southern neighbors along with them and a cleaning up of Central and northern South America could be addressed constructively.

The U.S. really needs to quit talking out of one side of it's mouth while doing something else. Within the Republican Party you have those calling for a rock solid border, but encouraging a sieve by filling those ranch and hotel jobs with those that slip through. The U.S. really needs a coherent policy towards Mexico and this issue by getting everybody to really voice what it is they want. You want the inexpensive labor, then say it, and let's work from that angle.

Most of the loud people I've heard on this issue, whichever side of the issue they're on, haven't seemed to take the whole picture into account. It's mostly just support or disagreement with hot topic speaking points.

[woodtoo]

Originally Posted by ultracapper

The question in the thread is, "Why do you really oppose a wall?"

It just seems like it is so old school, that it really wouldn't be effective. Like the Rio Grande is the moat, and then you come to the castle walls. May have worked in 1619, but in 2019 it just seems like there's a million ways around it. New points of entries would be developed. There's a bazillion tributaries throughout the Gulf of Mexico's northern coast. They'll just find new ways in.

And there's a demand for these immigrants. If there wasn't, they wouldn't come. But they know there is opportunity, so they come. Addressing the demand seems more effective to me in this case than the supply. But then you're butting heads with Texas and New Mexico ranchers, Nevada entertainment interests, and other highly connected sorts.

I'd like to see the U.S. and Mexico come to some kind of mutual agreement as to mutual responsibility when these immigrants cross the border mainly motivated in the hope of receiving social services, such as hospital care. Have the U.S. declare a willingness to assist them while Mexico declares a willingness to cover a chunk of the tab.

It's a tough issue. The U.S.-Mexico border is a unique issue. There are centuries of "connects" between the people of Mexico and regions of the SW USA. I mean, Clinton apologizing for the acts of the 1840s is definitely over the top, and I felt, inappropriate, but it is a recognition of these "connects".

A strong and constructive relationship between the 2 countries would do Mexico a world of good. It's a society that really needs a nudge to raise it's philosophic standards and look to the north for it's model rather than just falling into the Latin American MO. A strong, forward looking Mexico would ultimately drag it's southern neighbors along with them and a cleaning up of Central and northern South America could be addressed constructively.

The U.S. really needs to quit talking out of one side of it's mouth while doing something else. Within the Republican Party you have those calling for a rock solid border, but encouraging a sieve by filling those ranch and hotel jobs with those that slip through. The U.S. really needs a coherent policy towards Mexico and this issue by getting everybody to really voice what it is they want. You want the inexpensive labor, then say it, and let's work from that angle.

Most of the loud people I've heard on this issue, whichever side of the issue they're on, haven't seemed to take the whole picture into account. It's mostly just support or disagreement with hot topic speaking points.

Agree with most if not all of the above, Congress Must sit down and do their job. Lock em all in a room until they come to an agreement on a COMPLETE immigration package.
LOCK EM UP til they do!!

[Actor]

Wouldn't a ditch be cheaper?

[Actor]

Originally Posted by ultracapper

And there's a demand for these immigrants. If there wasn't, they wouldn't come.

Right. In my home town in Oklahoma during my boyhood the major industry was growing wheat. The entire economy revolved around it. Now the government pays land owners to not grow wheat. Today the county is dotted with small feed lots where they raise pigs. Who is feeding the pigs? Who is shoveling the pig shit? Not the people who used to grow wheat. They are either living on Social Security or have left to become physicists in Ohio. I don't mean to should racist but this is the truth. Hispanics have moved in and they are feeding the pigs and are shoveling the shit. Without them who would feed the pigs and shovel the shit? Where would we get our bacon?

One more thing. I assume these hispanics are legal. But the last census said there were 40 hispanics living in my home town. I'm pretty sure there are a lot more than that (maybe 500?). Why didn't the census count them?

Something tells me I'm going to regret posting this.

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by Actor

Wouldn't a ditch be cheaper?

A red line in the sand worked for Obama, didn't it?

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by ultracapper

The question in the thread is, "Why do you really oppose a wall?"

It just seems like it is so old school, that it really wouldn't be effective...........

This sentence says it all regarding the opposition to a wall. Making decisions based on feelings and not facts is really not an optimum way to go.

[fast4522]

Originally Posted by Actor

Wouldn't a ditch be cheaper?

I do not think so, the cost of doing nothing what you suggest can be measured in costs that the left will never own up to. The politics of the day is a problem pitting what is best for the country versus a political party fighting for its life. That is just the ugly truth where our system is currently.

[chadk66]

If they didn't cost 100 plug billion a year, take jobs away from american's and commit shit piles of crimes we wouldn't be having this discussion.

[davew]

Originally Posted by Actor

Wouldn't a ditch be cheaper?

It is dry most of the places, or are you talking about a canal from Gulf of Mexico to Pacific Ocean? or a deep ditch like the Grand Canyon?

[Ocala Mike]

Originally Posted by AndyC

Making decisions based on feelings and not facts is really not an optimum way to go.

I don't know about that as a universal rule. It worked for DJT in 2016.