Pelosi, Schumer To Trump: "Let's Debate Border Funds in Private"

[*Nately120*]

(12-14-2018, 06:43 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Fining and Jail time for companies and individuals that hire illegals is already a law, obviously it's not working.

Any other ideas?

25 to life mandatory sentencing.  If illegals are as dangerous as we are being told, luring them to this county should be treated as high treason.

[HarleyDog]

(12-12-2018, 05:42 PM)jj22 Wrote: For one can we quit acting like only illegals coming here are Mexican? That would help the debate not be so toxic.

I dont think people think that at all. Sure it angers some who think Mexicans come here for a free ride, but the majority doesn’t feel that way. My small town has a lot of Mexicans. I assume some are here on visas or whatever, but they work very hard and do many jobs some of us spoiled people don’t want to do. We have had a few serious crimes in a populated town of about 2500 from mexicans that somehow disappear, but that’s not the norm. Our problems are black & whites living in meth world. But that’s quickly becoming an epidemic everywhere.

It has been easy to enter the U.S. for those who want to. There are dangerous people out there with bad intentions. I want the wall. Not for MAGA, but for security purposes. If people want to come in, we have to have a good system for them to do so.

In a HD world view, dems want illegals and actually want to give them the right to vote because it’s too easy for them. Reps don’t because they won’t get the votes. The rest of us want what’s best for everyone. I just prefer you earn it.

[Belsnickel]

(12-14-2018, 01:38 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Yes, but if here legally?? Wouldn't they be able to make more money and not be exploited? We already have enough Uneducated/unskilled workers here in the US to cover most jobs they would do. So by them being exploited, they are actually hurting people here legally in earned income by causing the pay to be reduced for all workers in those fields.

Also they'd be paying the Gov the fees for processing the Visa's/Green Cards so they would be here legally.

So show me how much they contribute to Sales tax/Property tax (I have no idea why it's legal for them to have a home, obviously they are working illegally if they are here illegally). Payroll taxes? SSA? Fed Taxes?? How many get paid cash to avoid all of that?

If there is no consensus, then how can you prove how much they are a help vs a burden? Just because someone says so and you like that opinion so you roll with it?

Links backing up your claims. You seem to have a problem with that. You blurted out USCIS Numbers in another thread, but couldn't provide a link when I disputed  your numbers. Its pointless to have a discussion with out giving me something to read and chew on so I can look at all angles and make the best educated decision possible. And by the way, I have never once said all of them that are here need to be deported, we need to find a way to make them legal workers and go from there to a USC path. The ones with criminal records, no path. Arrest and deport. Seems fair enough right?

First, I'm not saying they do contribute more than they get. I am saying it is possible, that there are differing opinions on it.

Second, I'm not debating you here. I'm not making any claims to support with data. Your claims have already been debunked by someone else in the thread. I don't have the answers here, only saying that the answers aren't as clear as they seem to some people. Right now, I don't have the time or patience to spoon feed you information. Do the research yourself. Look for peer reviewed journals on economics and public policy (if you can access them).

[Belsnickel]

(12-14-2018, 08:21 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: It has been easy to enter the U.S. for those who want to. There are dangerous people out there with bad intentions. I want the wall. Not for MAGA, but for security purposes. If people want to come in, we have to have a good system for them to do so.

I hope you learn, sometime, how wrong this statement is. Crossing the border is anything but easy. The success rate is exceedingly low. The death rate is almost as high as the success rate. There is an ongoing anthropological study on this, called the Undocumented Migration Project. I suggest reading about it, specifically De Leon's works, for insights into just how difficult this is.

[*bfine32*]

(12-14-2018, 09:02 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: First, I'm not saying they do contribute more than they get. I am saying it is possible, that there are differing opinions on it.

Second, I'm not debating you here. I'm not making any claims to support with data. Your claims have already been debunked by someone else in the thread. I don't have the answers here, only saying that the answers aren't as clear as they seem to some people. Right now, I don't have the time or patience to spoon feed you information. Do the research yourself. Look for peer reviewed journals on economics and public policy (if you can access them).

This thread nails my proposed motto for this subforum.

***"I don't know what's right, I just know you're wrong"


***Disclaimer: No one has actually said that, just my summation if many of the retorts in this subforum

[Belsnickel]

(12-14-2018, 09:18 PM)bfine32 Wrote: This thread nails my proposed motto for this subforum.

***"I don't know what's right, I just know you're wrong"


***Disclaimer: No one has actually said that, just my summation if many of the retorts in this subforum

I don't know that he's wrong. I just think if you are going to make such a declaratory statement about something like this, you should be able to back it up with evidence from a reliable source.

[Dill]

(12-14-2018, 09:18 PM)bfine32 Wrote: This thread nails my proposed motto for this subforum.

***"I don't know what's right, I just know you're wrong"

***Disclaimer: No one has actually said that, just my summation if many of the retorts in this subforum

Why not choose this for a motto: "identifying faulty methodology is not an implicit claim to know conclusions based upon it are wrong."

[*bfine32*]

(12-14-2018, 10:52 PM)Dill Wrote: Why not choose this for a motto: "identifying faulty methodology is not an implicit claim to know conclusions based upon it  are wrong."

Mine rolls off the tongue easier and fits more situations. 

[Dill]

(12-14-2018, 11:02 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Mine rolls off the tongue easier and fits more situations. 

Not this one, though.  

[GMDino]

Never forget that the Republican outcry against immigration has nothing to do with coming to America, "The right way" and everything to do with their fear of the browning of America. pic.twitter.com/JKb10ufsq6

— ?Black Aziz aNANsi? (@Freeyourmindkid) December 16, 2018

[Mike M (the other one)]

(12-14-2018, 09:06 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I hope you learn, sometime, how wrong this statement is. Crossing the border is anything but easy. The success rate is exceedingly low. The death rate is almost as high as the success rate. There is an ongoing anthropological study on this, called the Undocumented Migration Project. I suggest reading about it, specifically De Leon's works, for insights into just how difficult this is.

So now we are inhumane for letting them die in the dessert for a choice they made. SO I wonder if we have a wall, then would the death toll go down and we could claim how good we are for not letting so many people die.

(12-14-2018, 09:20 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I don't know that he's wrong. I just think if you are going to make such a declaratory statement about something like this, you should be able to back it up with evidence from a reliable source.

Didn't I ask the same of you?

(12-17-2018, 11:10 AM)GMDino Wrote:

Never forget that the Republican outcry against immigration has nothing to do with coming to America, "The right way" and everything to do with their fear of the browning of America. pic.twitter.com/JKb10ufsq6

— ?Black Aziz aNANsi? (@Freeyourmindkid) December 16, 2018

Are you even for real?
Propaganda at its best.

______

So far out of this thread, all I have gotten is Wall is bad, ineffective with no evidence that says anything to the contrary.
I pointed out Hungary put up a wall and now their effectiveness is now 90% at keeping out immigrants.

The only thing that's been suggested is we fine/penalize employers that hire illegals. Which we already have a law in place for that specific reason.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1324a

It's not as easy as you think to bust these companies. Many of them know and play it under the radar. It takes manpower, and we are wasting a lot of it at the border.


Anyways, is there any other option that we can do to curb illegal immigration? Any suggestions?

And this isn't about those already here, it's about preventing more that shouldn't be here.

[GMDino]

(12-17-2018, 03:46 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Are you even for real?
Propaganda at its best.

______

Truth at worst.

[hollodero]

(12-17-2018, 03:46 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I pointed out Hungary put up a wall and now their effectiveness is now 90% at keeping out immigrants.

A fence. Not a wall. And it's doubtful it's that effective, but mainly, fence.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(12-14-2018, 02:18 PM)Nately120 Wrote: What if we find Americans who knowingly hire illegals and imprison them?  

(12-17-2018, 04:02 PM)hollodero Wrote: A fence. Not a wall. And it's doubtful it's that effective, but mainly, fence.

Double fence with barbed wire on top of both. I'm very well aware of what it is, but some people here like to use the Wall/Fence term interchangeably.

And why wouldn't it be as effective as they claim? The problem is that the are unsure the number that was actually crossing daily before the fence was erected, but now they definitely know how many aren't coming thru.

[Au165]

(12-17-2018, 04:39 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Double fence with barbed wire on top of both. I'm very well aware of what it is, but some people here like to use the Wall/Fence term interchangeably.

And why wouldn't it be as effective as they claim? The problem is that the are unsure the number that was actually crossing daily before the fence was erected, but now they definitely know how many aren't coming thru.

There are many drug tunnels running under the current border. Currently the value of drugs compared to moving migrants make it not really as valuable to move humans through them. Basically risking having hundreds of people pouring out of the building on the other side isn't a risk worth taking when you look at cost to make the tunnels, however that could eventually change. No wall will keep people out, especially the "really bad people" that these measures are always positioned as trying to stop. I have worked in security for almost a decade with clients that are some of the most secure places in the country, at least by perception, but even these places will tell you security for the most part is all theater. When people really want to break in, or if they really want to do bad things, they will achieve there goal. 

When you are trying to defend something you have to be right all the time, but those attempting to break in or do bad things only have to keep swinging and winning where they can. It is why Airport security is pointless, the real work is being done before people ever make it to the gates.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(12-17-2018, 04:50 PM)Au165 Wrote: There are many drug tunnels running under the current border. Currently the value of drugs compared to moving migrants make it not really as valuable to move humans through them. Basically risking having hundreds of people pouring out of the building on the other side isn't a risk worth taking when you look at cost to make the tunnels, however that could eventually change. No wall will keep people out, especially the "really bad people" that these measures are always positioned as trying to stop. I have worked in security for almost a decade with clients that are some of the most secure places in the country, at least by perception, but even these places will tell you security for the most part is all theater. When people really want to break in, or if they really want to do bad things, they will achieve there goal. 

When you are trying to defend something you have to be right all the time, but those attempting to break in or do bad things only have to keep swinging and winning where they can. It is why Airport security is pointless, the real work is being done before people ever make it to the gates.

OF course there is Tunnels, the border is rather long there. Also many have been found already and now with the tunneling technology, we should be able to find more. No system is 100% perfect. That is why I keep asking what is the most effective way to keep migrants out besides a wall?

[Au165]

(12-17-2018, 05:30 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: OF course there is Tunnels, the border is rather long there. Also many have been found already and now with the tunneling technology, we should be able to find more. No system is 100% perfect. That is why I keep asking what is the most effective way to keep migrants out besides a wall?

Trying to make their country better so they want to stay. Desperate people looking for a way out will always find a way, so throwing money at physical restraints is a futile effort.

 I actually feel like the better approach is partnering with the Mexican government to "go to war" with the cartels but for political reasons it will never happen. Between politicians being scared or on the payroll of the cartels no one really wants to do it. Then add in the fact that Mexicans will perceive us as an "occupying force" going to war with their people and it creates a bit of a nightmare. To be honest that is a more worthwhile "war" than any of the wars we have fought in Iraq or Afghanistan. When you look at how many people the cartels kill each year and the drugs flowing in it is more of a national security threat then anyone in the Middle East. 

[hollodero]

(12-17-2018, 04:39 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Double fence with barbed wire on top of both. I'm very well aware of what it is, but some people here like to use the Wall/Fence term interchangeably.

Still, not the same thing. Your Hungary example might be useful to advocate fencing, it's not that useful to advocate a wall.
Fences are way cheaper. And there's a point to be made that whoever can cross a fence also can cross a wall.

(12-17-2018, 04:39 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: And why wouldn't it be as effective as they claim? The problem is that the are unsure the number that was actually crossing daily before the fence was erected, but now they definitely know how many aren't coming thru.

One of your own links pointed out that people don't think they are that awfully effective. But sure, it's hard to find numbers.

As for your questions how to keep migrants out. Every case is different, for sure. In Europe's case, it wasn't the Hungary fence, but the EU paying Turkey to keep many refugees. The decline in refugee numbers, mostly stemming fom that, is seen all over Europe, not just in fenced Hungary. The fence probably has little to do with that.
In case of Syria, of course, the most effective way to stop migrants is to end the war in Syria. With Mexico, helping them reach a better economic situation might be way more effective than a wall. With the 1 billion each year to maintain a wall, along with the maybe 20 billions to erect it (which is an awfully low estimate), many steps could be taken. Use the funds to build them up. Help them fight the cartels, and so on. Would be my initial suggestions to deal with that. Which makes the US a better neighbor, is the more civil way and would also avoid mass expropriations.
It might also help to deny illegals housing or jobs. Undocumented immigrants seem to have quite an easy time to get work and a place to stay (is my impression). More audits might help. Maybe, and I don't know, the US is also giving away visas too freely. Most illegal immigrants seem to just come with a visa and never leave again. A wall would do nothing about that.
Sure, surveilling the border is a necessity too. A wall seems like a bad way to do it. A wall can be climbed, so you would need to surveil it anyway. A wall also can be tunneled. The Israeli "anti-tunnel" technology costs around 800 million for 37 miles of wall. Which would mean 43 billions for the US border, which kind of seems a lot of additional costs.

[Belsnickel]

(12-17-2018, 03:46 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: So now we are inhumane for letting them die in the dessert for a choice they made. SO I wonder if we have a wall, then would the death toll go down and we could claim how good we are for not letting so many people die.

First, I never said we were inhumane. I merely stated that the journey is not an easy one.

Second, the same terrain that makes the border crossing so treacherous is what makes a wall not only difficult to put in place, but also an unnecessary expense. The natural landscape acts as a barrier in much of the border lands and makes construction difficult and costly.

(12-17-2018, 03:46 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Didn't I ask the same of you?

If only I was the one making a claim. You made a claim and used evidence that was tainted by racist origins and/or pulled out of thin air. You've made the declarative statement, not me. I have stated that the evidence I have read goes either way and that there is no way to be certain that undocumented immigrants are a benefit or a burden to our economy. You claim they are a burden. You have the burden of proof.

[*bfine32*]

(12-17-2018, 04:02 PM)hollodero Wrote: A fence. Not a wall. And it's doubtful it's that effective, but mainly, fence.

Perhaps the point was that a man-made barrier was established. But you're most likely right that the difference between a barrier wall and fence is the main point.