Right-wing populism.

[hollodero]

(09-27-2016, 12:22 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I've shown a couple of "pros" for the wall. 
Shown how in the long run it can save us more money than it actually cost to build it.

Have to give that to you... you really did make an effort. I doubt most of the things you said, but you actually did think about it. When did Trump take his whole "Mexico's going to pay for it" back?
One thing you kind of have to admit though: I gave the whole idea much more credit then most of your fellow american opponents would here. I did not try to ridicule it beyond reason.

I'm just "saying it as it is" here, if you will.
There is of course a personal stance. I do not believe in walls. I do not believe they achieve anything to make mankind better, to make relations better, to solve problems, I think they are backwards thinking and denying the world as what it will become and has to become, a place where people get closer. I consider these things important issues and I can't help but seeing things that way. Won't bore you with details. But sure, that's how I "feel" in the first place.

I do try to get the other stance, though. Fighting crime, drugs and terrorists are sure valid talking points and don't necessarily have to stem from a xenophobic background. These racism thing gets pure rhetoric too easily, too. So leaving that out (which I tried to do), there still is severe doubt that the possible positive effects even remotely justify the effort.

About the effects:

- There's a good chance a terrorist won't be stopped by the wall. So this terrorist argument is really thin. You kind of said so yourself after capitalizing my alias :)
- Drugs, I give you that that it probably will be hampered. I guess your "90%" estimate of how much it can be reduced is grossly overstated. Drugs don't just come over the green border, there are other ways. And cartels will find new ones; you can't shut down your country completely. I give you 50%, and that's generous.
- Immigrants. Look. I'm not on my strong foot here, so I will apply benefit of the doubt here and believe some of your estimates regarding the costs. 
But these illegal immigrants don't all exactly swim the Rio Grande. Many (probably up to half of them) just get in with visas and stay. You think only 5% would make it with a wall? I think that's in no way supported by - reality. Logically, denying Mexicans visas would be far more effective to achieve your goal. (I would never support that, of course.) If you don't, what's a wall really gonna do?
Or do you indeed want to file a follow-up statement regarding visas. If you don't, no way you stop 95%. No way.

So ok, it might not sum up to "zero", these effects. That I still can acknowledge.

And now for the effort.

This really is the best, most cost-efficient solution you could come up with? Just look at what you just built. Not only a wall that is 2.000 miles long, but also equipped with fancy tunnel detection technology, observed by drohnes and applied with quick response forces in case the drones see something. It probably is lighted by night (so the quick response forces don't accidentally run into the wall...), what a monument. Wonder if you can see it from the moon. What a sight.
And what a lovely gesture towards Mexico. (Not that you might consider that important, but I do.)

A few years ago, this would have been unthinkable. (And not that it matters, but I liked that America better.)

What happened? (Open question :) )

And it's a part of an even bigger picture, which was the initial point of this thread. Right-wing populism. That's what happened.
Now if you want to respond or not - that's up to you. I did include a wikipedia link, though.