Why Is Trump's Wall A Bad Thing?

[Dill]

(02-01-2019, 04:23 PM)Benton Wrote: https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2018/01/weodata/weorept.aspx?pr.x=72&pr.y=11&sy=1980&ey=2023&scsm=1&ssd=1&sort=country&ds=.&br=1&c=273&s=NGDP,PPPGDP,PPPPC,PCPIPCH,LUR,GGXWDG_NGDP&grp=0&a=

Their GDP grew as did their economy (mostly) through the 80s and 90s. As jobs migrated south, illegal (and legal) immigration has slowed proportionally. The late 90s/early 00s when our manufacturing moved there, look at the GDP. It moves from (in the billions) 816 in 90 to 6,600 in 00 to 13,000 in 2010. It's estimated to be 31,000 in 2023. 

Their economy in the 80s and most of the 90s sucked. They came here. Their economy started getting better int he 2000s, their immigration peaked and then dropped off. As their economy improves (and ours worsens), that number will continue to go down.

OH NO!   You are forcing me to choose between the IMF and Pew Research, on the one hand, and the Center for Immigration Studies on the other.

What's a poor voter to do?  Guess I'll have to compare a bit more closely. Seems the CIS claims respond to the argument that immigration is most directly related to up and downturns in the US economy. (Perhaps they are refering to the common sense notion that Mexicans immigrate because there is work here, and so would not if there weren't?) Whereas the other sources support the claim that the Mexican economy is the most important determinant in the flow of immigration.  When there are jobs in Mexico, they stay. When there aren't, they move.  That would explain why immigration doesn't correlate to the state of the US economy.

This is a lot of work, people. Too much. I recommend everyone just visit sites that give them info they already agree with. 

[Benton]

(02-01-2019, 05:01 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: OF course those from Mexico decreased, but not Central America. it's not about Mexican's, its about Illegal Immigrants no matter where they are from.
and again, those numbers start going down when the wall was built.

Look at the numbers from the 80's, 90's and the early 00's when we had recession. They continued to rise.

Even in a recession, our economy was stronger than theirs. It wasn't until our manufacturing jobs went South that it made a real difference. There's no reason to come here and make 8-$10 an hour when they can get a manufacturing job making about the same and stay home 

I don't think a climbable barrier that's not completed had a lot of imoact. Some, sure, but not as much as removing their motivation.

[Benton]

(02-01-2019, 04:53 PM)bfine32 Wrote: There is justification against the wall, but I challenge anyone on this board against this wall to look themselves in the mirror and say that the person requesting it does not play into their decision.

I've mentioned before the wall funding is about 0.1% of the budget. I've never seen congress or the American Public so "fiscally aware" on any project. So folks could do a favor and stop saying they are against it because it doesn't work and/or "too expensive" and honestly say why they are against it.

I'm at the point where it's like "give the man his damn pork and move the #@&$ on."

We've got huge problems in this country. Abortion. Stagnant wages. Wage disparity. Rampant abuse by political leaders. Cumbersome tax codes. Civil rights. The list goes on. Immigration is a neglible problem that's been declining for years, but if it's an obstacle to dealing with real problems, then give them the wall and deal with the real issues.

[CJD]

(02-01-2019, 04:53 PM)bfine32 Wrote: There is justification against the wall, but I challenge anyone on this board against this wall to look themselves in the mirror and say that the person requesting it does not play into their decision.

I've mentioned before the wall funding is about 0.1% of the budget. I've never seen congress or the American Public so "fiscally aware" on any project. So folks could do a favor and stop saying they are against it because it doesn't work and/or "too expensive" and honestly say why they are against it.

I would say he is a great argument against the Wall. The person who wants it is a moron who only wants the Wall as a gigantic monument to his racism.

What better reason not to do something than that?

[fredtoast]

(02-01-2019, 03:07 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: The amount annually doesn't even pay for 1/3 the amount we spend on educating Anchor babies annually.

Educated anchor babies grow up get jobs and expand our economy.  That is a good thing, not bad.

Or are you for zero population growth even among US citizens?

[*bfine32*]

(02-01-2019, 07:30 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I would say he is a great argument against the Wall. The person who wants it is a moron who only wants the Wall as a gigantic monument to his racism.

What better reason not to do something than that?

Kudos for your honesty; however:

He's not the only one that wants it. He won a National Election with it being a big part of his platform.

Save the popular vote stance as of course California doesn't want a wall; they already have one. 

[CJD]

(02-01-2019, 08:11 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Kudos for your honesty; however:

He's not the only one that wants it. He won a National Election with it being a big part of his platform.

Save the popular vote stance as of course California doesn't want a wall; they already have one. 

From the time he was a candidate until this whole shutdown for the Wall thing started, I've heard multiple Republicans, from commentators and politicians to citizens, call the Wall a metaphor. 

I would argue that a lot of people who voted for him thought he was speaking metaphorically about border security, not an actual wall.

I would also argue that a lot of people likely voted for him more as a vote against Hillary who didn't necessarily want the Wall even if it wasn't a metaphor.

And the polls support the fact that most people don't want the wall.

I have not yet seen any statistical evidence saying that the Wall would create any significant improvement in either drug trafficking or illegal immigration. Especially since the Wall cannot get rid of the illegal immigrants that are already here.

To put it simply:

While the Wall would not be so expensive that it would create any kind of havoc on our country's overall budget, statistics indicate it won't stop the drugs that Trump thinks it will. It won't cost what Trump thinks it will. It won't fix the problem with immigration today in regards to the volume of illegal immigrants in this country. And it isn't a crime issue, as immigrants are statistically less likely to commit crime than natural born citizens.

So what is the point? Why spend the money? Why spend the time? And why give in to a whiny idiot of a President who fashions himself a master negotiator when he couldn't negotiate himself out of a wet paper bag?

If you give Trump this, he'll only be incentivized to keep doing stupid shit. And he'll continue to think he's smarter, craftier and better than he is.

Trump is the actual definition of the Dunning Kruger effect and it's a matter of principal in a lot of people's minds not to let a delusional man wallow in his delusions. Especially when he has more power than any other person in this country. He needs to be put in his place, whether he is willing acknowledge it or not.

He is not smart. He is not a good negotiator. He did not accomplish the military. And he is not getting his Wall. Unless he is able to tell us why we need it so badly. That's what a good negotiator does. He convinces you that he is right. Or he incentivizes you to do what he wants. Or he compromises and provides something that you want. Trump has not done any of these things.

Now, conservatives will paint this viewpoint as "TDS," but I think it's just a good policy for any person. If you want something, justify it. Give reasons for why you're doing something that aren't bathed in lies. If you can't, then you don't deserve what you want. Every other politician in Washington has to justify their bills that they put forward.

It's time for Trump to do the same. If he can convince Democrats that the Wall will be worth the investment, then he'll get it. Until then, he'll just be left in his office, stamping his feet and scrunching his nose as much as he wants. We'll wait for the tantrum to end.

[Belsnickel]

(02-01-2019, 03:00 PM)Stonyhands Wrote: https://youtu.be/un34XlVaLhI

You must be an expert on border security because you present yourself as someone who knows more than the actual border agents who deal with the issue on a daily basis.

Or is this just another garbage source?

I don't know more than actual CBP agents, I have just heard conflicting information on this from CBP and other government sources. Some say walls work, some say they don't, some say they only work in urban areas. Then there is the data that says most illegal immigration, including drug smuggling, occurs through legal ports of entry which means a wall would provide little to no impact. This has all been hashed out before on here with various links. .Feel free to peruse.

(02-01-2019, 03:19 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: At what point do you actually provide something with an actual link so we can read it for ourselves?

When I think it's worth my time. Why should I bother doing the research trying to convince people that don't want to be convinced? There are conservatives I will have lengthy, in depth discussions with about policy issues because I know they value the research and evidence. You don't fall into that category based upon the evidence I have seen on the forum. I was also commenting on the source being used, not making my own claim, in this particular instance. The source being used by the NY Post has already been discussed as being disreputable and racist on this board.

[Dill]

(02-01-2019, 08:32 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: From the time he was a candidate until this whole shutdown for the Wall thing started, I've heard multiple Republicans, from commentators and politicians to citizens, call the Wall a metaphor. 

I would argue that a lot of people who voted for him thought he was speaking metaphorically about border security, not an actual wall.

I would also argue that a lot of people likely voted for him more as a vote against Hillary who didn't necessarily want the Wall even if it wasn't a metaphor.

And the polls support the fact that most people don't want the wall.

I have not yet seen any statistical evidence saying that the Wall would create any significant improvement in either drug trafficking or illegal immigration. Especially since the Wall cannot get rid of the illegal immigrants that are already here.

To put it simply:

While the Wall would not be so expensive that it would create any kind of havoc on our country's overall budget, statistics indicate it won't stop the drugs that Trump thinks it will. It won't cost what Trump thinks it will. It won't fix the problem with immigration today in regards to the volume of illegal immigrants in this country. And it isn't a crime issue, as immigrants are statistically less likely to commit crime than natural born citizens.

So what is the point? Why spend the money? Why spend the time? And why give in to a whiny idiot of a President who fashions himself a master negotiator when he couldn't negotiate himself out of a wet paper bag?

If you give Trump this, he'll only be incentivized to keep doing stupid shit. And he'll continue to think he's smarter, craftier and better than he is.

Trump is the actual definition of the Dunning Kruger effect and it's a matter of principal in a lot of people's minds not to let a delusional man wallow in his delusions. Especially when he has more power than any other person in this country. He needs to be put in his place, whether he is willing acknowledge it or not.

He is not smart. He is not a good negotiator. He did not accomplish the military. And he is not getting his Wall. Unless he is able to tell us why we need it so badly. That's what a good negotiator does. He convinces you that he is right. Or he incentivizes you to do what he wants. Or he compromises and provides something that you want. Trump has not done any of these things.

Now, conservatives will paint this viewpoint as "TDS," but I think it's just a good policy for any person. If you want something, justify it. Give reasons for why you're doing something that aren't bathed in lies. If you can't, then you don't deserve what you want. Every other politician in Washington has to justify their bills that they put forward.

It's time for Trump to do the same. If he can convince Democrats that the Wall will be worth the investment, then he'll get it. Until then, he'll just be left in his office, stamping his feet and scrunching his nose as much as he wants. We'll wait for the tantrum to end.

Hope our Trump defenders can push past all the "Trump hate" to see both the factual points laid out here and the standards/rationale for negotiating with Trump.

Why can't the "deal maker" make this deal?  Seems he only takes one demographic seriously, not making an argument to the whole country. Shouldn't the taxpayers be good negotiators too?  

[Mike M (the other one)]

(02-01-2019, 07:36 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Educated anchor babies grow up get jobs and expand our economy.  That is a good thing, not bad.

Or are you for zero population growth even among US citizens?

All for coming here and doing it the "legal" way, so their family won't be a burden upon the system. What is so difficult about understanding that?

Illegals can skirt the welfare system by putting their child in it, remember the welfare agent is not allowed to determine the legal status of the family.

It also takes multiple generations for it to balance out, where as those that come here legally, they are typically educated workers and the "growth" you are talking about comes reasonably fast.

Where did I ever say I was for zero population growth? It has nothing to do with this conversation. You sound like Trump spewing nonsense.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(02-01-2019, 08:58 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: When I think it's worth my time. Why should I bother doing the research trying to convince people that don't want to be convinced? There are conservatives I will have lengthy, in depth discussions with about policy issues because I know they value the research and evidence. You don't fall into that category based upon the evidence I have seen on the forum. I was also commenting on the source being used, not making my own claim, in this particular instance. The source being used by the NY Post has already been discussed as being disreputable and racist on this board.

Waste of time for you then if you aren't even going to contribute anything useful.

Who says the source is disreputable and racist? You? SPLC?
Last time I looked CIS was rated as a hate group, yet they want amnesty for those here and only want to curb those coming here illegally???
I haven't seen them at any marches either. Nothing violent, just a think tank on immigration issues.

So I see this as a perfect example of SPLC as abusing it's power of the word "hate group"

So then why should you bother posting in a forum where it's about sharing each others ideas with the intent to enlighten others?
Guess that's not your "intent" here.

I've never claimed the wall was the end all be all to everything, just that none of the other things they can do via legislation are even being attempted, so I'll settle for a wall as a consolation prize and see how it goes from there.

I think many of you on here have no clue about what to do to curb illegal immigration, but because Trump wants it, you're automatically against it. Thing it we don't know exactly how good/bad it will do until it's actually put in place. Until then it's just a lot of speculation and foot stomping from both sides.

I mean seriously, look at some of the "charts" people using to back up the fact that immigration decreased at the same time as walls went up.

Ask anyone from any Mexico/Central/South American country, US or your home??? You know what the answer will be.
Very rarely will it be I'm happy where I am thank you very much.

[Dill]

(02-04-2019, 09:08 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I think many of you on here have no clue about what to do to curb illegal immigration, but because Trump wants it, you're automatically against it. Thing it we don't know exactly how good/bad it will do until it's actually put in place. Until then it's just a lot of speculation and foot stomping from both sides.

I mean seriously, look at some of the "charts" people using to back up the fact that immigration decreased at the same time as walls went up.

Ask anyone from any Mexico/Central/South American country, US or your home??? You know what the answer will be.
Very rarely will it be I'm happy where I am thank you very much.

Easy there OtherMike.

I'm always ready to respond to your posts and "share ideas."  One guy doesn't it's no big deal.
I always look at your FAIR and CIG data.

I'm pretty sure NO ONE here is against any Trump policy just "because Trump wants it."  Also, the purpose of doing studies and reviewing the consequences of past policies is precisely so that we do have an idea whether something will work BEFORE we put it in place.  If the majority of drugs, for example, comes in through major ports, then it is not "speculation" or Trump hatred to suggest a wall will not stop that.

Nor is it "foot stomping" to ask how cost effective a wall might be. We know over the last two years hundreds of tunnels have gone under existing walls. Mightn't electronic listening equipment the length of the border do a better job? 

And I don't think your last statement is much of a point.  I think people in Guatemala would be happy to stay there if gangs and corruption were not making their lives miserable.  Ask anyone from any Mexico/CentralSouth American country: US or your home with security and a job, and I'm pretty sure most will say "my home."  

[Benton]

(02-04-2019, 09:08 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Ask anyone from any Mexico/Central/South American country, US or your home??? You know what the answer will be.
Very rarely will it be I'm happy where I am thank you very much.

I've gotten to know a lot of people here legally who came from South America. The bulk of them would be back there if there was work. Granted, these aren't the murdering rapist types,but educated people who went through the process.

I realize it's hard to imagine people not really wanting to live where a large chunk of the population vocally opposes them being here, but it happens. Most people come here for work, not for nonexistent welfare they aren't eligible for or because it's so easy to make it here.

[Dill]

(02-04-2019, 10:06 PM)Benton Wrote: I've gotten to know a lot of people here legally who came from South America. The bulk of them would be back there if there was work. Granted, these aren't the murdering rapist types,but educated people who went through the process.

I realize it's hard to imagine people not really wanting to live where a large chunk of the population vocally opposes them being here, but it happens. Most people come here for work, not for nonexistent welfare they aren't eligible for or because it's so easy to make it here.

Also, many people actually like their own culture and language, and living around extended family in familiar surroundings.

It takes some big negatives to send people walking thousands of miles, children in hand.

[Belsnickel]

(02-04-2019, 09:08 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Waste of time for you then if you aren't even going to contribute anything useful.

Yes, but it's amusing to me.

(02-04-2019, 09:08 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Who says the source is disreputable and racist? You? SPLC?
Last time I looked CIS was rated as a hate group, yet they want amnesty for those here and only want to curb those coming here illegally???
I haven't seen them at any marches either. Nothing violent, just a think tank on immigration issues.

Actually, if you will note back when we discussed CIS, I said that the SPLC part was really irrelevant. I was speaking more to the fact that organizations from which the data was pulled by CIS to make their claims have outright said CIS is misrepresenting their data in a substantial way. They are an anti-immigration advocacy group, much like the one they sprouted from, the one you used before, FAIR. Neither is a legitimate think tank.

[*bfine32*]

Those that point to the "real problem" as those over-staying thier visas will most likely applaud this sting by ICE:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/attorney-fake-university-sting-ice-130212875.html

Quote:About 10 years ago, Phanideep Karnati emigrated from India to the U.S. on an H1-B visa in search of the American dream.

He became an IT engineer, was earning a masters degree at the University of Louisville in Kentucky and is today married with two sons, ages 2 and 9.

But on Monday, the 35-year-old Kentucky man appeared in shackles and a prisoner's jumpsuit in a federal courtroom in Detroit, arraigned on charges of conspiracy to commit visa fraud and harboring aliens for profit as a recruiter for a fake university in Farmington Hills, Michigan, created by U.S. law enforcement. A not-guilty plea was entered for him by Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen, who ordered him released on a $10,000 unsecured bond.

[Benton]

(02-05-2019, 08:13 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Those that point to the "real problem" as those over-staying thier visas will most likely applaud this sting by ICE:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/attorney-fake-university-sting-ice-130212875.html

Huh?

Quote:Except for Karnati, who is on a work visa, the defendants will not be released from jail because they have immigration holds since they are undocumented since the U.S. revealed the university they were enrolled in was fake. 

Unless I read it wrong (and I may have) Karnati is here on a regular work visa, and allegedly committed fraud by recruiting students. I'm not seeing the overstay issue, just an alleged lawbreaker here legally.

[GMDino]

(02-06-2019, 12:07 AM)Benton Wrote: Huh?


Unless I read it wrong (and I may have) Karnati is here on a regular work visa, and allegedly committed fraud by recruiting students. I'm not seeing the overstay issue, just an alleged lawbreaker here legally.

C'mon man...only illegal immigrants create fake universities.  Everyone knows that. 

[Benton]

(02-06-2019, 12:20 AM)GMDino Wrote: C'mon man...only illegal immigrants create fake universities.  Everyone knows that. 

Well, and trump.

[*bfine32*]

(02-06-2019, 12:07 AM)Benton Wrote: Huh?


Unless I read it wrong (and I may have) Karnati is here on a regular work visa, and allegedly committed fraud by recruiting students. I'm not seeing the overstay issue, just an alleged lawbreaker here legally.

8 folks held on visa fraud. That's a good thing, right?