A quesiton about the border wall: who's really gonna pay for it?

24

Comments

  • Wambli SkaWambli Ska Moderator Posts: 25,050 Senior Member
    Not rocket science...

    1- We have laws on the books that have to be enforced because when you start cherry picking laws you end up with, well, Obama.

    2- There are folks betting their bacon every day as a job enforcing those laws. Those folks need every advantage and support we can give them so build the damn wall if it will make enforcement of the laws easier. BUT let THEM decide what is needed and give them the resources to make it happen while holding them accountable for results.

    3- If we don't need to enforce the laws on the books then work hard to change them using lawful methods, or get rid of them so we don't need the wall...

    Personally I think $1,000,000 fine per occurrence, non-negotiable to anyone that hires an illegal to do any work will dry up the supply of jobs. But don't be surprised when milk is suddenly $7.00 a gallon, tomatoes become more expensive than gold and the price of getting your lawn mowed quadruples.

    True SWIFT enforcement of drug laws on the books will deal with the traffickers and users.

    Anyone that crosses the border illegally and armed should be considered an invading enemy combatant and dealt with accordingly by the folks that watch over the border.
    "Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching." General George S. Patton
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 13,757 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    The wall seems cheaper in the long run, to me.
    If a wall worked. So what we will wind up with is the cost of the wall (because let's face it-- Mexico is not paying for the wall. Stop kidding yourselves) AND all the other costs we have already been paying. Instead of getting screwed once, we will be getting screwed twice.

    The only thing that is going to work is if we remove the incentives (jobs and drug money) that are motivating people to come here illegally.
  • jbp-ohiojbp-ohio Senior Member Posts: 8,455 Senior Member
    Yes, it will cause the price of consumer goods from Mexico to increase. Price increases makes it more competitive to just make it here in the USA........ https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/chrysler/2018/01/11/fiat-chrysler-investing-billion-dollars-warren-truck/1026517001/
    "The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." Thomas Jefferson
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 21,496 Senior Member
    Jermanator wrote: »
    If a wall worked. So what we will wind up with is the cost of the wall (because let's face it-- Mexico is not paying for the wall. Stop kidding yourselves) AND all the other costs we have already been paying. Instead of getting screwed once, we will be getting screwed twice.

    The only thing that is going to work is if we remove the incentives (jobs and drug money) that are motivating people to come here illegally.

    Invasion is invasion, peaceful or under arms. One is slow death to a country and the other is an act of war. Look at what is happening to European countries. Do we really want that here? California is the canary in the coal mine, and the canary doesn't appear too healthy. Choose your poison. The drugs aren't muled across the regulated border crossings nearly as often as they are at the unregulated border. A wall would at least stop a lot of that illegal crossing where a wall is needed. A wall isn't needed everywhere, but where needed then it should exist.

    And Wambli's ideas are viable, too. Make it a federal crime to hire illegals and make the fines painful for doing so. Remove the incentive for crossing illegally, and make it impossible for them to make a living here crossing illegally.

    And no amnesty for illegals here. They go home, period. With no jobs for illegals, the problem would tend to solve itself.
    A double action revolver is a semiauto firearm. It fires once for every trigger pull.



  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 7,792 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    Invasion is invasion, peaceful or under arms. One is slow death to a country and the other is an act of war. Look at what is happening to European countries. Do we really want that here? California is the canary in the coal mine, and the canary doesn't appear too healthy. Choose your poison. The drugs aren't muled across the regulated border crossings nearly as often as they are at the unregulated border. A wall would at least stop a lot of that illegal crossing where a wall is needed. A wall isn't needed everywhere, but where needed then it should exist.

    And Wambli's ideas are viable, too. Make it a federal crime to hire illegals and make the fines painful for doing so. Remove the incentive for crossing illegally, and make it impossible for them to make a living here crossing illegally.

    And no amnesty for illegals here. They go home, period. With no jobs for illegals, the problem would tend to solve itself.
    It is already a crime to hire illegals. If I remember correctly it's at least a 50k fine per occurrence. It unfortunately is almost never enfoced. This and this alone will make the problem go away. No amount of border security will ever fully stop the flow as long as there is a strong driving force. A combination of helping Mexico and other south and central American countries to improve their own economies plus eliminating the viablility of finding work here will dry up a lot of the flows of people. Unfortunately there are significant interests that have major influence in Washington that do not want that. Too much money being made on the backs of illegal labor.
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 13,757 Senior Member
    A combination of helping Mexico and other south and central American countries to improve their own economies plus eliminating the viablility of finding work here will dry up a lot of the flows of people.
    That is the other key-- lots of these illegal immigrants are poor slobs trying to make some money to support their family back home. Those people wouldn't even be here and if there were better opportunities at home. NAFTA has a big part in that currently but we could do more to help them develop their economy and make money selling them lots and lots of American crap in the process.
  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 4,959 Senior Member
    Jermanator wrote: »
    That is the other key-- lots of these illegal immigrants are poor slobs trying to make some money to support their family back home. Those people wouldn't even be here and if there were better opportunities at home. NAFTA has a big part in that currently but we could do more to help them develop their economy and make money selling them lots and lots of American crap in the process.

    Their own governments should accept responsibility for the welfare of their populations. After NAFTA got passed, American companies moved a huge amount of manufacturing to Mexico and we give them over 320 million in aid annually on top of that. How much of that trickles down to rural and lower income citizens? Their own government takes as much advantage of Mexico's population as American companies do.
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 13,757 Senior Member
    Exactly. Is there some way we could help get that on track to where they are actually working for their citizens as opposed to serving their elite? Granted, we can't seem to do that with our own government, let alone someone elses.

    Wambli and Zee did hit on a good point and I am going to add my thoughts:

    Some rich guy from Manhattan, or even some goober from Michigan really doesn't know what it takes to secure the border. Just because it sounds good at a campaign stop or on an internet forum doesn't make it good or effective policy. The people with the expertise and experience of dealing with the border, day in and day out really should be consulted and empowered to do the right thing based on their experience.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 21,496 Senior Member
    It is already a crime to hire illegals. If I remember correctly it's at least a 50k fine per occurrence. It unfortunately is almost never enfoced. This and this alone will make the problem go away. No amount of border security will ever fully stop the flow as long as there is a strong driving force. A combination of helping Mexico and other south and central American countries to improve their own economies plus eliminating the viablility of finding work here will dry up a lot of the flows of people. Unfortunately there are significant interests that have major influence in Washington that do not want that. Too much money being made on the backs of illegal labor.

    I thought you were against nation building? Only way to do what you say you want is to take over the governments with puppet governments or outright takeover. Your idea sounds good on the surface, but you'd be getting the vapors as the 'wet work' to carry it out was implemented. Sayin'.

    Edit to add: You are also projecting American values on people that don't necessarily want them, and aren't ready for/can't handle them. That's a problem with not taking into account WHY the country is what it is, and how it got to be that way. Democratic principles have taken root in some places and works after a fashion. But it won't work with people not predisposed to such shenanigans.
    A double action revolver is a semiauto firearm. It fires once for every trigger pull.



  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 13,757 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    I thought you were against nation building? Only way to do what you say you want is to take over the governments with puppet governments or outright takeover. Your idea sounds good on the surface, but you'd be getting the vapors as the 'wet work' to carry it out was implemented. Sayin'.

    Edit to add: You are also projecting American values on people that don't necessarily want them, and aren't ready for/can't handle them. That's a problem with not taking into account WHY the country is what it is, and how it got to be that way. Democratic principles have taken root in some places and works after a fashion. But it won't work with people not predisposed to such shenanigans.
    You have good points there. How do you enable positive changes without trampling all over them in the process?
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 9,669 Senior Member
    We don't have to have a wall everywhere, We just need it where the genuine experts say they need it to assist enforcement. Illegal traffic is way down, already, just because it is being enforced more rigorously by more people. An intelligent plan may prevail, if we approach it in a logical way, rather than a purely political way. The fact that ICE is starting to raid companies that are known to hire illegals will decrease it more than anything, if they start making jobs for illegals disappear. The word 'on the street' is that many are not coming because they consider it to be too dangerous, right now, on both sides of the border.

    This is one broken campaign promise that I will approve of, if they actually solve the problem in some other way, which they are definitely making some progress on.
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 13,757 Senior Member
    bisley wrote: »
    We don't have to have a wall everywhere, We just need it where the genuine experts say they need it to assist enforcement.
    I agree and Bush got that done in most of the places where it really is effective. The continuous 2000 mile "great wall that Mexico is going to pay for" that was being sold to the public (and people were buying) is silly.
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 17,917 Senior Member
    Jermanator wrote: »
    How do you enable positive changes without trampling all over them in the process?

    Ask Montezuma, Cochise, Sequoyah, and Geronimo how those noble intentions worked, beginning 300 years ago or so. Plus, there's a vaccine that works against smallpox these days. Maybe we could spread AIDS instead.
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 20,703 Senior Member
    Jermanator wrote: »
    Mexico is our 3rd largest trading partner. In 2016, we sent them $262 billion of our crap and they sent us $317 billion of their crap leaving a $55 billion deficit. Tequila HAS to be made in Mexico in order for it to be called tequila, just like Scotch needs to be made in Scotland, Canadian Whiskey in Canada, and Bourbon in the USA. Tequila sales alone were $7.5 billion in 2016-- we could have shaved off almost 14% of that deficit by switching from tequila to bourbon.

    Well hell, for that matter who cares what you call it? We could have Brown and Foreman Cactus Fire Water. I bet we could even make a better tequila like drink than they can. All we have to do is start cultivating Blue Agave cactus.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • MichakavMichakav Senior Member Posts: 2,021 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    I love watching people who know Ass Hole from an Ass Clown argue about what the border needs. Truly entertaining.

    Exactly. The people on the front lines should be deciding how to best defend the border. I agree with a lot of the suggestions being made regarding penalties for hiring illegals and decriminalizing weed (at least). Those would help stem the flow. But border agents will always be needed. Let them decide how to best do there job. Whether that means a wall, better fencing, more surveillance...etc

    I also believe that it should be much easier and take WAY less time for those that qualify to become a legal citizen.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 20,703 Senior Member
    bisley wrote: »
    We don't have to have a wall everywhere, We just need it where the genuine experts say they need it to assist enforcement. Illegal traffic is way down, already, just because it is being enforced more rigorously by more people. An intelligent plan may prevail, if we approach it in a logical way, rather than a purely political way. The fact that ICE is starting to raid companies that are known to hire illegals will decrease it more than anything, if they start making jobs for illegals disappear. The word 'on the street' is that many are not coming because they consider it to be too dangerous, right now, on both sides of the border.

    This is one broken campaign promise that I will approve of, if they actually solve the problem in some other way, which they are definitely making some progress on.

    Trump himself said this last week. There are places where there are natural barriers and places that can be observed remotely. So no, you don't need a wall everywhere. But where we need one it would stop most of the traffic. A wall in strategic areas would lessen the number of people it would take to properly monitor the border.

    Along the top of that wall there needs to be a 10,000 Volt, 500 Amp Bug Zapper wire just in case some of our friends from south of the border get creative.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 7,792 Senior Member
    I wonder how many who are gung ho on a wall realize that 2/3rds of illegal immigrants originally entered the country legally?

    Again border control is only one part of the equation, but it's only a small part. In general the flow of people is controlled by the percieved value of opportunites here - value of opportunities in home country - cost/difficulty of entering/remaining in the US. In short "build a wall" was a really catchy slogon targeted at an unsophisticated audience. It served its purpose well, but doesn't make for very effective immigrantion policy. As others have suggested we have tens of thousands of people who have focused their careers on managing the border and immigration. It would seem that they should know best. Unfortunately few in Washington seem to have any real interest in listening to them.
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • cpjcpj Senior Member Posts: 36,686 Senior Member
    I wonder how many who are gung ho on a wall realize that 2/3rds of illegal immigrants originally entered the country legally?
    This has peaked my curiousity and makes me ask a question that I don't know the answer to. What's the policy/procedure for someone from Mexico crossing the border at an official (for lack of proper term) check point? Is there a passport requirement?
    "I'm here for the guns, hunting, and skirt wearing men."
    Zee
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 20,703 Senior Member
    It is already a crime to hire illegals. If I remember correctly it's at least a 50k fine per occurrence. It unfortunately is almost never enfoced. This and this alone will make the problem go away. No amount of border security will ever fully stop the flow as long as there is a strong driving force. A combination of helping Mexico and other south and central American countries to improve their own economies plus eliminating the viablility of finding work here will dry up a lot of the flows of people. Unfortunately there are significant interests that have major influence in Washington that do not want that. Too much money being made on the backs of illegal labor.[/QUOTE

    Ya know I agree with you on this in principle but everytime we try to help other countries like this, corruption takes over and we end up giving a lot of money away for no gain. That's one reason there is opposition to it. We usually end up giving them a bunch of money right off the bat and they squander it and a bunch of it ends up in the pockets of some corrupt foreign politicians instead of it being used for the intended purpose. I mean what their economies need is money, but there are people there that have access to the funds we would give them to start various programs and industry, and they will somehow manage to put most of the money in their own accounts. That's generally why they are like they are in the first place. That's why some American Politicians have tried their hands at nation building, which usually fails for a like reason. You gotta have a little something to work with in the first place.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 17,917 Senior Member
    Why should the "war on poverty" work any better on a global basis than it has for the past 80 years or so here? Since Roosevelt started paying people not to work in the 1930's (W.P.A.) until now, the population of lazy parasites has only grown in size, both in actual numbers and as a voting bloc. The left has been pandering to them in order to stay in power the whole time. Why should we try to bribe corrupt politicians all over the world in hopes they will improve the living conditions of the people they're stealing from when it hasn't worked in this country?
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 13,757 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    Why should the "war on poverty" work any better on a global basis than it has for the past 80 years or so here? Since Roosevelt started paying people not to work in the 1930's (W.P.A.) until now, the population of lazy parasites has only grown in size, both in actual numbers and as a voting bloc. The left has been pandering to them in order to stay in power the whole time. Why should we try to bribe corrupt politicians all over the world in hopes they will improve the living conditions of the people they're stealing from when it hasn't worked in this country?
    Jerry
    Handouts aren't the solution. Fair and equitable trade can be. Trade is what is pulling people out of poverty all over the world-- not handouts. Don't dump NAFTA-- while saying so can be a good negotiating tactic, I am sure it could be updated. While doing so, it can be written in such a way that we can make money and bring their economy up to speed with ours and Canada's at the same time. As a bonus, less people will want to come to our country illegally because they have decent jobs at home, and we can sell a whole lot more of our crap to rich Mexicans than we can to poor Mexicans.

    Trump is in an excellent position to enable that change and it would be a great opportunity for everyone.
  • Wambli SkaWambli Ska Moderator Posts: 25,050 Senior Member
    Jermanator wrote: »
    Handouts aren't the solution. Fair and equitable trade can be. Trade is what is pulling people out of poverty all over the world-- not handouts. Don't dump NAFTA-- while saying so can be a good negotiating tactic, I am sure it could be updated. While doing so, it can be written in such a way that we can make money and bring their economy up to speed with ours and Canada's at the same time. As a bonus, less people will want to come to our country illegally because they have decent jobs at home, and we can sell a whole lot more of our crap to rich Mexicans than we can to poor Mexicans.

    Trump is in an excellent position to enable that change and it would be a great opportunity for everyone.
    Exactly! And handouts get stolen by foreign governments, none of it gets to the people it is meant to help. Global trade is essential to our survival as a nation. We just need to negotiate with our country’s well being foremost and not to please global opinion.
    "Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching." General George S. Patton
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 20,703 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    Put a 10% surcharge on money transfers from the US to Mexico. Walmart and Western Union probably handle a billion a year or more in payments from illegals to families back home.
    Jerry

    I was just at HEB where you can send through Western Union and saw lots of people who might not have had legal credentials sending money. I sent my GF $25 to cover medications. I saw people sending whole paychecks to other countries like Mexico, sending their whole paycheck home. They don't want to be American they just want the benefits. My GF wants more than anything to be an American and live with me here in the USA and enjoy the good life while having opportunity to make a better life. She relishes the opportunity to pay taxes and have a shot at the American Dream.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 20,703 Senior Member
    Jermanator wrote: »
    I agree and Bush got that done in most of the places where it really is effective. The continuous 2000 mile "great wall that Mexico is going to pay for" that was being sold to the public (and people were buying) is silly.

    Jerm, I love ya man, but if you lived down here you might want a wall or barrier to stop the onslaught of people coming across that border. The skin tone is getting browner by the week. Now that's not meant as racist. My girl is pretty brown. But when you get too many of one race or better, one culture, they have different culture and different ideas on life. A little bit is cool, but too much and it threatens what our country was built upon. Right now, it's about 50% white and 45% Brown. Add in other races and the balence begins to change. Not good.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 17,917 Senior Member
    snake284 wrote: »
    Jerm, I love ya man, but if you lived down here you might want a wall or barrier to stop the onslaught of people coming across that border.

    Snake he IS close to the border- - - - -the wrong one. His mind is made up- - - - -don't confuse him with facts. When I was trucking produce from the Brawley and Calexico California area to San Francisco and Oakland, it would have been a lot more profitable hauling guys with "damp spines" than lettuce. 40-something years ago the going rate was $100.00 per head to get the guys past the checkpoint between San Diego and Los Angeles by unloading part of my lettuce onto a box truck, packing the empty space full of illegals, and meeting the truck north of the checkpoint to reload. The coyotes even had legitimate-looking seals for my trailer doors to replace the ones they had to break to manipulate the load around. I never took the bait, but a bunch of the guys I ran with did. There was always a risk of a driver getting killed and his load hijacked at the north meeting point. Lettuce can be sold lots of places- - - -like Mexican restaurants, for instance- - - -it doesn't have fingerprints!
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 13,757 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    Snake he IS close to the border- - - - -the wrong one. His mind is made up- - - - -don't confuse him with facts.
    I am sorry. Maybe I shouldn't listen to the people that work protecting that southern border day in and day out. You guys are right. What was I thinking?
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 22,621 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    This has peaked my curiousity and makes me ask a question that I don't know the answer to. What's the policy/procedure for someone from Mexico crossing the border at an official (for lack of proper term) check point? Is there a passport requirement?

    What I just found is yes and they, also, need a Visa since 1 Jan 2018, not visa issued on arrival as in the past.
    My new Signature
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 18,963 Senior Member
    Jermanator wrote: »
    I agree and Bush got that done in most of the places where it really is effective. The continuous 2000 mile "great wall that Mexico is going to pay for" that was being sold to the public (and people were buying) is silly.

    Hello.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • Diver43Diver43 Senior Member Posts: 7,324 Senior Member
    I do not know about elsewhere, but along the border in El Paso, the wall is already there. It is a thick steel fence with a concrete footer.
    When I lived there, along the border freeway the common chain link fence only stopped old ladies from crossing and at best slowed others down. I cant remember how many times I almost ran over border jumpers in that area. Today, not so many, but so many are already there and more come across with legit visitor documents and just dont go back. Border security has merit, and properly placed well built barriers in the proper place will force illegal crossing to be funneled into areas that can be watch using technology and human eyes. Of course having people in our own government and citizens say it is OK for illegals to stay and for tax paying Americans to support them is another story in itself.
    Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 13,757 Senior Member
    Just a suggestion, but how about we spend some money to authorize overtime for border patrol agents that are willing, ready, and able to protect our borders? How about getting their broken rifles fixed? How about raising their salaries in an effort to retain existing BP agents and attract new ones to fill those thousands of unfilled positions?

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file