Building the Border Fence - A Public/Private Partnership

[CultureCitizen]

You think some ignorant Mexican peasant has $1000 to pay for the visa process? Most of them also can't afford to pay coyotes. They walk across the border because that's what they can afford. It isn't that hard.

Yes they do. Specially if the have a relative in the US. As Flooper said family ties are strong, even an uncle or cousin might be willing to send the money.
I am not sure about the coyote stats, and it might be hard to get any hard data. I don't personally know ( or heard of) anyone who has crossed the dessert by himself, but I've heard about persons who got to the US using a coyote or their tourist visa... but that's purely anecdotal evidence.

If family ties are so strong, then why did the original family member leave his family for a job in the United States? That who line of argument is total horseshit. it's just another excuse for doing nothing. I'm sure you've heard the saying "Excuse are like assholes . . . . . ."

Honestly Bripat, I am really not certain illegal immigrants are detrimental for the US economy.
While some argue that they have kept salaries low, that is a debatable situation :
1) They constitute less than 15% of the workforce.
2) The do mostly low income jobs, which I am not sure many Americans are willing to do .
3) All salaries except for the 20% have been kept stagnant and that is certainly not the fault of illegals, but rather the fault of banksters and warmongers who took the US into a fruitless war ( fruitless except for the defense contractors).

Yes, giving welfare assistance to illegals is not correct from my point of view, specially if they are not paying taxes ( though the employer would be incurring in tax evasion and should be punished for doing so).

The EU has a trade and labour agreement with all its members. I am still wondering why the US did not do the same with NAFTA. It didn't take a genius to know unemployment would soar in Mexico with the trade agreement.

The US should re-negotiate tariffs to go up or down according to the number of legalized citizens to cover for certain expenses ( like wellfare) or charge a per citizen fee . A wall? where does that leave free market and freedom of choice? Why else sign a trade agreement? A fence with a trading partner is certainly something I have not heard of in the whole world history.

 

[bripat9643]

You think some ignorant Mexican peasant has $1000 to pay for the visa process? Most of them also can't afford to pay coyotes. They walk across the border because that's what they can afford. It isn't that hard.

Yes they do. Specially if the have a relative in the US. As Flooper said family ties are strong, even an uncle or cousin might be willing to send the money.
I am not sure about the coyote stats, and it might be hard to get any hard data. I don't personally know ( or heard of) anyone who has crossed the dessert by himself, but I've heard about persons who got to the US using a coyote or their tourist visa... but that's purely anecdotal evidence.

If family ties are so strong, then why did the original family member leave his family for a job in the United States? That who line of argument is total horseshit. it's just another excuse for doing nothing. I'm sure you've heard the saying "Excuse are like assholes . . . . . ."

Honestly Bripat, I am really not certain illegal immigrants are detrimental for the US economy.
While some argue that they have kept salaries low, that is a debatable situation :
1) They constitute less than 15% of the workforce.
2) The do mostly low income jobs, which I am not sure many Americans are willing to do .
3) All salaries except for the 20% have been kept stagnant and that is certainly not the fault of illegals, but rather the fault of banksters and warmongers who took the US into a fruitless war ( fruitless except for the defense contractors).

Yes, giving welfare assistance to illegals is not correct from my point of view, specially if they are not paying taxes ( though the employer would be incurring in tax evasion and should be punished for doing so).

The EU has a trade and labour agreement with all its members. I am still wondering why the US did not do the same with NAFTA. It didn't take a genius to know unemployment would soar in Mexico with the trade agreement.

I happen to know from personal experience how illegal aliens keep wages low. My brother had a construction business until companies hiring illegal aliens kept under bidding him and ran him out of business.

Illegal aliens don't just take low-paying jobs. They take a lot of jobs like construction, auto-mechanics etc. that pay quite well. The idea that it won't hurt wages to import a bunch of people who are accustomed to earning a fraction of what typical Americans earn is utterly ludicrous.

The US should re-negotiate tariffs to go up or down according to the number of legalized citizens to cover for certain expenses ( like wellfare) or charge a per citizen fee . A wall? where does that leave free market and freedom of choice? Why else sign a trade agreement? A fence with a trading partner is certainly something I have not heard of in the whole world history.

No, trade barriers should be dropped to zero. There's no benefit to anyone aside from union thugs from imposing tariffs on imports. The way to eliminate spending welfare money on illegals is to keep them out of the country. How do we benefit from illegal aliens? This country has enough people. We don't need to be importing more of them to compete with hard working Americans. Let them straighten out their own countries.

 

[CultureCitizen]

You think some ignorant Mexican peasant has $1000 to pay for the visa process? Most of them also can't afford to pay coyotes. They walk across the border because that's what they can afford. It isn't that hard.

Yes they do. Specially if the have a relative in the US. As Flooper said family ties are strong, even an uncle or cousin might be willing to send the money.
I am not sure about the coyote stats, and it might be hard to get any hard data. I don't personally know ( or heard of) anyone who has crossed the dessert by himself, but I've heard about persons who got to the US using a coyote or their tourist visa... but that's purely anecdotal evidence.

If family ties are so strong, then why did the original family member leave his family for a job in the United States? That who line of argument is total horseshit. it's just another excuse for doing nothing. I'm sure you've heard the saying "Excuse are like assholes . . . . . ."

Honestly Bripat, I am really not certain illegal immigrants are detrimental for the US economy.
While some argue that they have kept salaries low, that is a debatable situation :
1) They constitute less than 15% of the workforce.
2) The do mostly low income jobs, which I am not sure many Americans are willing to do .
3) All salaries except for the 20% have been kept stagnant and that is certainly not the fault of illegals, but rather the fault of banksters and warmongers who took the US into a fruitless war ( fruitless except for the defense contractors).

Yes, giving welfare assistance to illegals is not correct from my point of view, specially if they are not paying taxes ( though the employer would be incurring in tax evasion and should be punished for doing so).

The EU has a trade and labour agreement with all its members. I am still wondering why the US did not do the same with NAFTA. It didn't take a genius to know unemployment would soar in Mexico with the trade agreement.

I happen to know from personal experience how illegal aliens keep wages low. My brother had a construction business until companies hiring illegal aliens kept under bidding him and ran him out of business.

Illegal aliens don't just take low-paying jobs. They take a lot of jobs like construction, auto-mechanics etc. that pay quite well. The idea that it won't hurt wages to import a bunch of people who are accustomed to earning a fraction of what typical Americans earn is utterly ludicrous.

The US should re-negotiate tariffs to go up or down according to the number of legalized citizens to cover for certain expenses ( like wellfare) or charge a per citizen fee . A wall? where does that leave free market and freedom of choice? Why else sign a trade agreement? A fence with a trading partner is certainly something I have not heard of in the whole world history.

No, trade barriers should be dropped to zero. There's no benefit to anyone aside from union thugs from imposing tariffs on imports. The way to eliminate spending welfare money on illegals is to keep them out of the country. How do we benefit from illegal aliens? This country has enough people. We don't need to be importing more of them to compete with hard working Americans. Let them straighten out their own countries.

This is something that puzzles me. Free trade normaly encompasses the free exchange of goods and labour. Such is the agreement of the EU. Why ban the labour from a trading partner? It makes no sense within the context of a free trade agreement.
In such case I would argue both countries would be better of with no trade agreement at all. THEN, and only THEN I would agree on building a wall.

 

[bripat9643]

You think some ignorant Mexican peasant has $1000 to pay for the visa process? Most of them also can't afford to pay coyotes. They walk across the border because that's what they can afford. It isn't that hard.

Yes they do. Specially if the have a relative in the US. As Flooper said family ties are strong, even an uncle or cousin might be willing to send the money.
I am not sure about the coyote stats, and it might be hard to get any hard data. I don't personally know ( or heard of) anyone who has crossed the dessert by himself, but I've heard about persons who got to the US using a coyote or their tourist visa... but that's purely anecdotal evidence.

If family ties are so strong, then why did the original family member leave his family for a job in the United States? That who line of argument is total horseshit. it's just another excuse for doing nothing. I'm sure you've heard the saying "Excuse are like assholes . . . . . ."

Honestly Bripat, I am really not certain illegal immigrants are detrimental for the US economy.
While some argue that they have kept salaries low, that is a debatable situation :
1) They constitute less than 15% of the workforce.
2) The do mostly low income jobs, which I am not sure many Americans are willing to do .
3) All salaries except for the 20% have been kept stagnant and that is certainly not the fault of illegals, but rather the fault of banksters and warmongers who took the US into a fruitless war ( fruitless except for the defense contractors).

Yes, giving welfare assistance to illegals is not correct from my point of view, specially if they are not paying taxes ( though the employer would be incurring in tax evasion and should be punished for doing so).

The EU has a trade and labour agreement with all its members. I am still wondering why the US did not do the same with NAFTA. It didn't take a genius to know unemployment would soar in Mexico with the trade agreement.

I happen to know from personal experience how illegal aliens keep wages low. My brother had a construction business until companies hiring illegal aliens kept under bidding him and ran him out of business.

Illegal aliens don't just take low-paying jobs. They take a lot of jobs like construction, auto-mechanics etc. that pay quite well. The idea that it won't hurt wages to import a bunch of people who are accustomed to earning a fraction of what typical Americans earn is utterly ludicrous.

The US should re-negotiate tariffs to go up or down according to the number of legalized citizens to cover for certain expenses ( like wellfare) or charge a per citizen fee . A wall? where does that leave free market and freedom of choice? Why else sign a trade agreement? A fence with a trading partner is certainly something I have not heard of in the whole world history.

No, trade barriers should be dropped to zero. There's no benefit to anyone aside from union thugs from imposing tariffs on imports. The way to eliminate spending welfare money on illegals is to keep them out of the country. How do we benefit from illegal aliens? This country has enough people. We don't need to be importing more of them to compete with hard working Americans. Let them straighten out their own countries.

This is something that puzzles me. Free trade normaly encompasses the free exchange of goods and labour. Such is the agreement of the EU. Why ban the labour from a trading partner? It makes no sense within the context of a free trade agreement.
In such case I would argue both countries would be better of with no trade agreement at all. THEN, and only THEN I would agree on building a wall.

it's simple: I don't want to be competing with labor from some third world country, and I certainly don't want to have millions of them crowding into our neighborhoods, schools and businesses. The total Gross Domestic Product isn't the only criteria for immigration policy. My quality of life also matters. That's actually the only thing that matters.

 

[FA_Q2]

You think some ignorant Mexican peasant has $1000 to pay for the visa process? Most of them also can't afford to pay coyotes. They walk across the border because that's what they can afford. It isn't that hard.

Yes they do. Specially if the have a relative in the US. As Flooper said family ties are strong, even an uncle or cousin might be willing to send the money.
I am not sure about the coyote stats, and it might be hard to get any hard data. I don't personally know ( or heard of) anyone who has crossed the dessert by himself, but I've heard about persons who got to the US using a coyote or their tourist visa... but that's purely anecdotal evidence.

If family ties are so strong, then why did the original family member leave his family for a job in the United States? That who line of argument is total horseshit. it's just another excuse for doing nothing. I'm sure you've heard the saying "Excuse are like assholes . . . . . ."

Honestly Bripat, I am really not certain illegal immigrants are detrimental for the US economy.
While some argue that they have kept salaries low, that is a debatable situation :
1) They constitute less than 15% of the workforce.
2) The do mostly low income jobs, which I am not sure many Americans are willing to do .
3) All salaries except for the 20% have been kept stagnant and that is certainly not the fault of illegals, but rather the fault of banksters and warmongers who took the US into a fruitless war ( fruitless except for the defense contractors).

Yes, giving welfare assistance to illegals is not correct from my point of view, specially if they are not paying taxes ( though the employer would be incurring in tax evasion and should be punished for doing so).

The EU has a trade and labour agreement with all its members. I am still wondering why the US did not do the same with NAFTA. It didn't take a genius to know unemployment would soar in Mexico with the trade agreement.

I happen to know from personal experience how illegal aliens keep wages low. My brother had a construction business until companies hiring illegal aliens kept under bidding him and ran him out of business.

Illegal aliens don't just take low-paying jobs. They take a lot of jobs like construction, auto-mechanics etc. that pay quite well. The idea that it won't hurt wages to import a bunch of people who are accustomed to earning a fraction of what typical Americans earn is utterly ludicrous.

The US should re-negotiate tariffs to go up or down according to the number of legalized citizens to cover for certain expenses ( like wellfare) or charge a per citizen fee . A wall? where does that leave free market and freedom of choice? Why else sign a trade agreement? A fence with a trading partner is certainly something I have not heard of in the whole world history.

No, trade barriers should be dropped to zero. There's no benefit to anyone aside from union thugs from imposing tariffs on imports. The way to eliminate spending welfare money on illegals is to keep them out of the country. How do we benefit from illegal aliens? This country has enough people. We don't need to be importing more of them to compete with hard working Americans. Let them straighten out their own countries.

This is something that puzzles me. Free trade normaly encompasses the free exchange of goods and labour. Such is the agreement of the EU. Why ban the labour from a trading partner? It makes no sense within the context of a free trade agreement.
In such case I would argue both countries would be better of with no trade agreement at all. THEN, and only THEN I would agree on building a wall.

Why must you go through extremes?

The only options are not limited to 'Free Trade' or no trade agreements at all.

 

[FA_Q2]

You think some ignorant Mexican peasant has $1000 to pay for the visa process? Most of them also can't afford to pay coyotes. They walk across the border because that's what they can afford. It isn't that hard.

Yes they do. Specially if the have a relative in the US. As Flooper said family ties are strong, even an uncle or cousin might be willing to send the money.
I am not sure about the coyote stats, and it might be hard to get any hard data. I don't personally know ( or heard of) anyone who has crossed the dessert by himself, but I've heard about persons who got to the US using a coyote or their tourist visa... but that's purely anecdotal evidence.

If family ties are so strong, then why did the original family member leave his family for a job in the United States? That who line of argument is total horseshit. it's just another excuse for doing nothing. I'm sure you've heard the saying "Excuse are like assholes . . . . . ."

Honestly Bripat, I am really not certain illegal immigrants are detrimental for the US economy.
While some argue that they have kept salaries low, that is a debatable situation :
1) They constitute less than 15% of the workforce.
2) The do mostly low income jobs, which I am not sure many Americans are willing to do .
3) All salaries except for the 20% have been kept stagnant and that is certainly not the fault of illegals, but rather the fault of banksters and warmongers who took the US into a fruitless war ( fruitless except for the defense contractors).

Yes, giving welfare assistance to illegals is not correct from my point of view, specially if they are not paying taxes ( though the employer would be incurring in tax evasion and should be punished for doing so).

The EU has a trade and labour agreement with all its members. I am still wondering why the US did not do the same with NAFTA. It didn't take a genius to know unemployment would soar in Mexico with the trade agreement.

The US should re-negotiate tariffs to go up or down according to the number of legalized citizens to cover for certain expenses ( like wellfare) or charge a per citizen fee . A wall? where does that leave free market and freedom of choice? Why else sign a trade agreement? A fence with a trading partner is certainly something I have not heard of in the whole world history.

Labor is a comodity.

Increase supply (and 15% is a MASSIVE increase btw) of a commodity and what do you get? Price crashes. You see this with oil right now. We see this with labor as well.

 

[Flopper]

Family in Latin American countries is a big. deal. People will travel hundreds of miles often on foot and the most awful means of public transportation to attend a marriage ceremony, a funeral, or just be at the side of loved one. If the family happens to live in the US, there are a number of obstacles particular if you happen to be poor.

First, you have to get a Mexican passport which requires certified copies of documents, paying a fee equivalent to $74 in the US. Then you have to get a US Tourist Visa and Boarder Crossing Card at a cost equivalent to $190US a person. Getting the Visa requires you submit various legal documents and have a successful interview with an agent of the US Bureau of Consulate Affairs, in which you must proof that you have sufficient funds to complete your trip and that you will return to Mexico. The entire process can take months and the cost can be over $400 a person. This process encourages poor Mexicans to illegally enter the US and if they do they often remain in the US.

I am not sure the costs are a deterrent. I think illegal crossings are an option only when the visas get rejected. The violence has increased significantly in recent years ( specially in the north of Mexico) and even poor people would rather pay $1,000 than risk being killed by one of the blodthirsty cartels. A "trusted" coyote might be the second best option. The worst option would be traversing the desert by yourself.
Just as close to a million (mostly legal ?) retirees have migrated from the US to Mexico, because they get a higher standard of living , millions of mexicans ( mostly illegal) migrate to the US for the same reason.

Your wasting your time trying to get any kind of coherent answer from danielpos. The guy's brains are scrambled.

A very concise answer is there; you are just not competent enough to understand it yet, grasshopper.

It will keep out 95% of them. Walls and fences have worked every time they have been tried.

When you you leftwing turds going to admit that you don't want to seal the border?

Who do you think you're fooling?

ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL

Just cause you can't get over a wall does not mean 99.99999999999999999999% of the population can't.

Make it 15' high, top it with 15' of razor wire humming with 50,000 volts and 100 amps, surround it with a 100-yard no-man's land, covered with machine guns on motion detectors and liberally sown with land mines. Patrol it with armed helicopters with "shoot on sight" ROE. Attempting to cross illegally should be nearly impossible and almost-always fatal.

ROFL... if anyone's gonna be armed with helicopters it will be the illegals not our people. We would never shoot our illegal guests who are crossing. We are begging them to come over illegally. Why would we shoot them?

Regardless if you were to spend a trillion dollars a year protecting our border with our entire armed forces... the illegals would just come by boat or visa and stay illegally.

You're a waste of bandwidth. All your claims are idiotic. The idea that illegal entry cannot be drastically reduced no matter how much money the government spends is absurd.

The coast guard already interdicts boats trying to enter U.S waters to search for illegal drugs. If that was an effective means of aliens getting in, they would already be doing it, but they don't.

ROFL you think the coast guard has slowed illegal drug smuggling? You'd have to be the biggest moron on the face of the planet to believe illegals don't come by boat. The biggest moron on the planet. I lived in South Florida. I still visit South Florida. I spent a lot of time out in the water. I used to listen to the planes fly in dropping mj bales and cocaine in the everglades when I lived in corals springs. I'd watch them pick the stuff up with air boats and such as we fished out in the glades. ROFL... Some get caught but it's a small small percentage and more for show than actual security.

The US has 94,000 miles of coast line. Florida has over 8,000. Bringing in illegals and drugs in by boat would be no problem. Unless law enforcement is tipped off, the chance of being caught has to be very small. The only problem with bring in illegals by boat is the cost. About 10% of illegals do enter the US by boat.

 

[Flopper]

You think some ignorant Mexican peasant has $1000 to pay for the visa process? Most of them also can't afford to pay coyotes. They walk across the border because that's what they can afford. It isn't that hard.

Yes they do. Specially if the have a relative in the US. As Flooper said family ties are strong, even an uncle or cousin might be willing to send the money.
I am not sure about the coyote stats, and it might be hard to get any hard data. I don't personally know ( or heard of) anyone who has crossed the dessert by himself, but I've heard about persons who got to the US using a coyote or their tourist visa... but that's purely anecdotal evidence.

If family ties are so strong, then why did the original family member leave his family for a job in the United States? That who line of argument is total horseshit. it's just another excuse for doing nothing. I'm sure you've heard the saying "Excuse are like assholes . . . . . ."

Honestly Bripat, I am really not certain illegal immigrants are detrimental for the US economy.
While some argue that they have kept salaries low, that is a debatable situation :
1) They constitute less than 15% of the workforce.
2) The do mostly low income jobs, which I am not sure many Americans are willing to do .
3) All salaries except for the 20% have been kept stagnant and that is certainly not the fault of illegals, but rather the fault of banksters and warmongers who took the US into a fruitless war ( fruitless except for the defense contractors).

Yes, giving welfare assistance to illegals is not correct from my point of view, specially if they are not paying taxes ( though the employer would be incurring in tax evasion and should be punished for doing so).

The EU has a trade and labour agreement with all its members. I am still wondering why the US did not do the same with NAFTA. It didn't take a genius to know unemployment would soar in Mexico with the trade agreement.

The US should re-negotiate tariffs to go up or down according to the number of legalized citizens to cover for certain expenses ( like wellfare) or charge a per citizen fee . A wall? where does that leave free market and freedom of choice? Why else sign a trade agreement? A fence with a trading partner is certainly something I have not heard of in the whole world history.

NAFTA effectively eliminated tariffs. It's illegal to pay welfare to illegal immigrants.

 

[CultureCitizen]

Labor is a comodity.

Increase supply (and 15% is a MASSIVE increase btw) of a commodity and what do you get? Price crashes. You see this with oil right now. We see this with labor as well.

Same thing : reduce corn prices by 15% what do you get ? Millions of Mexicans crossing the border because they can't compete with corn from the US ( which happens to have a subsidy).
So who gained with this treaty ?
Certainly not mexican peasants.
Not Bripat's brother whose company broke.
Maybe big corporations ( both in the US and in Mx) who expanded their markets. Well good for them.
Sory FA_Q2, but this is what happens when a developed nation signs a FTA with a third world country ruled by a party dictatorship.
So in my viewpoint this is either faced as a consequence of a treaty that has to be fixed by the involved parties ( US and the corrupt governement from Mexico) or you can try and hide behind a wall .

 

[bripat9643]

Labor is a comodity.

Increase supply (and 15% is a MASSIVE increase btw) of a commodity and what do you get? Price crashes. You see this with oil right now. We see this with labor as well.

Same thing : reduce corn prices by 15% what do you get ? Millions of Mexicans crossing the border because they can't compete with corn from the US ( which happens to have a subsidy).
So who gained with this treaty ?
Certainly not mexican peasants.
Not Bripat's brother whose company broke.
Maybe big corporations ( both in the US and in Mx) who expanded their markets. Well good for them.
Sory FA_Q2, but this is what happens when a developed nation signs a FTA with a third world country ruled by a party dictatorship.
So in my viewpoint this is either faced as a consequence of a treaty that has to be fixed by the involved parties ( US and the corrupt governement from Mexico) or you can try and hide behind a wall .

Corn prices have gone up because of the Ethanol mandate, not down. Just recently libs have been complaining about high corn prices are causing starvation. You guys just can't keep your story straight.

 

[danielpalos]

Labor is a comodity.

Increase supply (and 15% is a MASSIVE increase btw) of a commodity and what do you get? Price crashes. You see this with oil right now. We see this with labor as well.

Same thing : reduce corn prices by 15% what do you get ? Millions of Mexicans crossing the border because they can't compete with corn from the US ( which happens to have a subsidy).
So who gained with this treaty ?
Certainly not mexican peasants.
Not Bripat's brother whose company broke.
Maybe big corporations ( both in the US and in Mx) who expanded their markets. Well good for them.
Sory FA_Q2, but this is what happens when a developed nation signs a FTA with a third world country ruled by a party dictatorship.
So in my viewpoint this is either faced as a consequence of a treaty that has to be fixed by the involved parties ( US and the corrupt governement from Mexico) or you can try and hide behind a wall .

Same thing : reduce corn prices by 15% what do you get ? Millions of Mexicans crossing the border because they can't compete with corn from the US ( which happens to have a subsidy).

They should still be able to lower their costs through self-reliance, if not make a profit.

 

[RKMBrown]

I am not sure the costs are a deterrent. I think illegal crossings are an option only when the visas get rejected. The violence has increased significantly in recent years ( specially in the north of Mexico) and even poor people would rather pay $1,000 than risk being killed by one of the blodthirsty cartels. A "trusted" coyote might be the second best option. The worst option would be traversing the desert by yourself.
Just as close to a million (mostly legal ?) retirees have migrated from the US to Mexico, because they get a higher standard of living , millions of mexicans ( mostly illegal) migrate to the US for the same reason.

Your wasting your time trying to get any kind of coherent answer from danielpos. The guy's brains are scrambled.

A very concise answer is there; you are just not competent enough to understand it yet, grasshopper.

ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL

Just cause you can't get over a wall does not mean 99.99999999999999999999% of the population can't.

Make it 15' high, top it with 15' of razor wire humming with 50,000 volts and 100 amps, surround it with a 100-yard no-man's land, covered with machine guns on motion detectors and liberally sown with land mines. Patrol it with armed helicopters with "shoot on sight" ROE. Attempting to cross illegally should be nearly impossible and almost-always fatal.

ROFL... if anyone's gonna be armed with helicopters it will be the illegals not our people. We would never shoot our illegal guests who are crossing. We are begging them to come over illegally. Why would we shoot them?

Regardless if you were to spend a trillion dollars a year protecting our border with our entire armed forces... the illegals would just come by boat or visa and stay illegally.

You're a waste of bandwidth. All your claims are idiotic. The idea that illegal entry cannot be drastically reduced no matter how much money the government spends is absurd.

The coast guard already interdicts boats trying to enter U.S waters to search for illegal drugs. If that was an effective means of aliens getting in, they would already be doing it, but they don't.

ROFL you think the coast guard has slowed illegal drug smuggling? You'd have to be the biggest moron on the face of the planet to believe illegals don't come by boat. The biggest moron on the planet. I lived in South Florida. I still visit South Florida. I spent a lot of time out in the water. I used to listen to the planes fly in dropping mj bales and cocaine in the everglades when I lived in corals springs. I'd watch them pick the stuff up with air boats and such as we fished out in the glades. ROFL... Some get caught but it's a small small percentage and more for show than actual security.

The US has 94,000 miles of coast line. Florida has over 8,000. Bringing in illegals and drugs in by boat would be no problem. Unless law enforcement is tipped off, the chance of being caught has to be very small. The only problem with bring in illegals by boat is the cost. About 10% of illegals do enter the US by boat.

Ayup... and if you increase the cost of entering by land you'll just push more people into boats.

 

[Ravi]

We need a bubble over the USA, patrolled by fighter jets and snipers. Should make going to the beach just wonderful.

 

[CultureCitizen]

Corn prices have gone up because of the Ethanol mandate, not down. Just recently libs have been complaining about high corn prices are causing starvation. You guys just can't keep your story straight.

I am talking about the Mexican corn prices going down by the year 1990 relatively to their own market prices.

 

[FA_Q2]

Labor is a comodity.

Increase supply (and 15% is a MASSIVE increase btw) of a commodity and what do you get? Price crashes. You see this with oil right now. We see this with labor as well.

Same thing : reduce corn prices by 15% what do you get ? Millions of Mexicans crossing the border because they can't compete with corn from the US ( which happens to have a subsidy).
So who gained with this treaty ?
Certainly not mexican peasants.
Not Bripat's brother whose company broke.
Maybe big corporations ( both in the US and in Mx) who expanded their markets. Well good for them.
Sory FA_Q2, but this is what happens when a developed nation signs a FTA with a third world country ruled by a party dictatorship.
So in my viewpoint this is either faced as a consequence of a treaty that has to be fixed by the involved parties ( US and the corrupt governement from Mexico) or you can try and hide behind a wall .

Who ever said that I think FTA's are any different or a good idea. They are asinine.

 

[Flopper]

Labor is a comodity.

Increase supply (and 15% is a MASSIVE increase btw) of a commodity and what do you get? Price crashes. You see this with oil right now. We see this with labor as well.

Same thing : reduce corn prices by 15% what do you get ? Millions of Mexicans crossing the border because they can't compete with corn from the US ( which happens to have a subsidy).
So who gained with this treaty ?
Certainly not mexican peasants.
Not Bripat's brother whose company broke.
Maybe big corporations ( both in the US and in Mx) who expanded their markets. Well good for them.
Sory FA_Q2, but this is what happens when a developed nation signs a FTA with a third world country ruled by a party dictatorship.
So in my viewpoint this is either faced as a consequence of a treaty that has to be fixed by the involved parties ( US and the corrupt governement from Mexico) or you can try and hide behind a wall .

Corn prices have gone up because of the Ethanol mandate, not down. Just recently libs have been complaining about high corn prices are causing starvation. You guys just can't keep your story straight.

Yes, the price of corn did go up and that has certainly been a problem for the poor. There's widespread agreement among experts that the surge in global biofuels production has been an important contributor to the rise in global food prices. When staple food crops are diverted to produce fuel, prices rise. These rising prices have in turn hit import-dependent developing countries hard. The increase production of Biofuels in the US raised the cost of food in Mexico substantially because most of Mexico's corn is imported from the US. It also increased the demand for migrant workers which attracted more Mexicans to cross the border.
http://www.actionaidusa.org/sites/files/actionaid/biofueling_hunger_aausa.pdf

 

[Flopper]

Your wasting your time trying to get any kind of coherent answer from danielpos. The guy's brains are scrambled.

A very concise answer is there; you are just not competent enough to understand it yet, grasshopper.

Make it 15' high, top it with 15' of razor wire humming with 50,000 volts and 100 amps, surround it with a 100-yard no-man's land, covered with machine guns on motion detectors and liberally sown with land mines. Patrol it with armed helicopters with "shoot on sight" ROE. Attempting to cross illegally should be nearly impossible and almost-always fatal.

ROFL... if anyone's gonna be armed with helicopters it will be the illegals not our people. We would never shoot our illegal guests who are crossing. We are begging them to come over illegally. Why would we shoot them?

Regardless if you were to spend a trillion dollars a year protecting our border with our entire armed forces... the illegals would just come by boat or visa and stay illegally.

You're a waste of bandwidth. All your claims are idiotic. The idea that illegal entry cannot be drastically reduced no matter how much money the government spends is absurd.

The coast guard already interdicts boats trying to enter U.S waters to search for illegal drugs. If that was an effective means of aliens getting in, they would already be doing it, but they don't.

ROFL you think the coast guard has slowed illegal drug smuggling? You'd have to be the biggest moron on the face of the planet to believe illegals don't come by boat. The biggest moron on the planet. I lived in South Florida. I still visit South Florida. I spent a lot of time out in the water. I used to listen to the planes fly in dropping mj bales and cocaine in the everglades when I lived in corals springs. I'd watch them pick the stuff up with air boats and such as we fished out in the glades. ROFL... Some get caught but it's a small small percentage and more for show than actual security.

The US has 94,000 miles of coast line. Florida has over 8,000. Bringing in illegals and drugs in by boat would be no problem. Unless law enforcement is tipped off, the chance of being caught has to be very small. The only problem with bring in illegals by boat is the cost. About 10% of illegals do enter the US by boat.

Ayup... and if you increase the cost of entering by land you'll just push more people into boats.

And if you build a wall, they'll tunnel under it or fly over it. You can't solve the illegal immigration problem without addressing the reason why they are coming.

 

[RKMBrown]

A very concise answer is there; you are just not competent enough to understand it yet, grasshopper.

ROFL... if anyone's gonna be armed with helicopters it will be the illegals not our people. We would never shoot our illegal guests who are crossing. We are begging them to come over illegally. Why would we shoot them?

Regardless if you were to spend a trillion dollars a year protecting our border with our entire armed forces... the illegals would just come by boat or visa and stay illegally.

You're a waste of bandwidth. All your claims are idiotic. The idea that illegal entry cannot be drastically reduced no matter how much money the government spends is absurd.

The coast guard already interdicts boats trying to enter U.S waters to search for illegal drugs. If that was an effective means of aliens getting in, they would already be doing it, but they don't.

ROFL you think the coast guard has slowed illegal drug smuggling? You'd have to be the biggest moron on the face of the planet to believe illegals don't come by boat. The biggest moron on the planet. I lived in South Florida. I still visit South Florida. I spent a lot of time out in the water. I used to listen to the planes fly in dropping mj bales and cocaine in the everglades when I lived in corals springs. I'd watch them pick the stuff up with air boats and such as we fished out in the glades. ROFL... Some get caught but it's a small small percentage and more for show than actual security.

The US has 94,000 miles of coast line. Florida has over 8,000. Bringing in illegals and drugs in by boat would be no problem. Unless law enforcement is tipped off, the chance of being caught has to be very small. The only problem with bring in illegals by boat is the cost. About 10% of illegals do enter the US by boat.

Ayup... and if you increase the cost of entering by land you'll just push more people into boats.

And if you build a wall, they'll tunnel under it or fly over it. You can't solve the illegal immigration problem without addressing the reason why they are coming.

And you can't solve the reason why they are coming till you solve the voting problem. IMO the root of our problems is our voting system. When I vote I should be able to pick my top choice(s). Having to only pick one is stupid. The way the system is built forces a two party system onto us. Which would not be a problem if both parties didn't suck so bad.

 

[danielpalos]

We have a Commerce Clause. Only bad capitalists lose money on Commerce at our borders.

 

[OnePercenter]

Illegal immigrants will remain a problem until Sheriff Joe, et al, starts locking up employers thus removing incentives for illegals. Net cost for taxpayers? Close to zero.