# Opposition to the wall - moral, financial, practical, or otherwise **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [January 25, 2019, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/opposition-to-the-wall-moral-financial-practical-or-otherwise/828420 "2019-01-25T20:36:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 14
**Author:** ![Littleman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ccd318/32.png) [@Littleman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Littleman)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2019, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/opposition-to-the-wall-moral-financial-practical-or-otherwise/828420/261 "2019-01-30T19:16:56Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > Your reservist background is showing, active duty doesn’t pay anything for co-pays nor is tricare deducted from their paychecks. Depends on the chosen plan, and duty station. And yeah I went from active duty to national guard to dual status to screw it. ---
**Author:** ![Littleman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ccd318/32.png) [@Littleman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Littleman)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2019, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/opposition-to-the-wall-moral-financial-practical-or-otherwise/828420/262 "2019-01-30T19:21:08Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > But not for $1300 a month, which was your whole point. You were implying that finding 10s of thousands of border patrol agents to man this wall wouldn’t cost a grip because army. > > But nobody in the army works for $1300 a month. Entry level pay right now by the time someone gets out of training is over $1500 a month, minimum BAH is $783, plus BAS and other benefits. Bare minimum starting pay is over $30k, and as you know a lot of that is predicated on making E-5 in a few years when the pay really starts to take off. Plus college benefits, retirement, etc. A basic grunt costs the government a lot of money annually. > > It already seems like you’re not a fan of a Trump styled wall, but you’re super eager to throw taxpayer money at coming up with a wall that _could_ work – why? And if we’re throwing billions upon billions of taxpayer dollars at something, don’t you think this should be a bill with lots of details that gets the benefit of a public debate? Are you arguing that we should give the executive branch an open ended check for border security just because you can imagine an effective “money is no object” border barrier? I’m not eager to do anything. Just pointing out that saying some wall plan that noone knows the specifics of is inneffective is simply not the best argument against it. ---
**Author:** ![Littleman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ccd318/32.png) [@Littleman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Littleman)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2019, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/opposition-to-the-wall-moral-financial-practical-or-otherwise/828420/263 "2019-01-30T19:38:52Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Not sure if you are joking or not, but the first link is for Dental services. > > And the second link clearly shows that Active Duty military and their families have no enrollment fees, deductibles, or any costs for any covered service. > > I’m well aware of this because I spent 22 years getting medical care for my family and I, and never paid a dime. So call the starting salary 1700 a month plus benefits and tuition reimbursement. So people are willing to watch sand for roughly UPS pay. It doesn’t take a lot relative to other jobs. Wasn’t really joking , just not focused. Since it’s all just vaguely relevant at this point. We already have 20k CBP they want to add another 15k… This regardless of a wall. I’m fairly sure any physical barrier would in fact help those 35k CBP agents secure a border if that’s the goal. I know a wall,or any kind of physical barrier certainly helped me secure an area. ---
**Author:** ![Littleman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ccd318/32.png) [@Littleman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Littleman)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2019, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/opposition-to-the-wall-moral-financial-practical-or-otherwise/828420/264 "2019-01-30T19:41:04Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > If I have sex with a woman who shows me an ID that says she is 22, and later it turns out she is (some illegal age), am I off the hook? > > Treat businesses and people not legally allowed to work the same way. > > (At the same time, I absolutely am in favor of increased visas and whatnot) Very true but your also not required to sleep with hundreds of young girls In order to function ( I’m sure it would be nice if that were the case though) ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2019, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/opposition-to-the-wall-moral-financial-practical-or-otherwise/828420/265 "2019-01-30T19:41:49Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > If I have sex with a woman who shows me an ID that says she is 22, and later it turns out she is (some illegal age), am I off the hook? Actually I don’t know the answer to that. As a basic, I would say that if they were 17, vs if they are say, 10, there’s a bit of a difference. You can tell, by looking at someone approximately what age they are. Unless someone has Hutchinson-Gilford progeria syndrome, then you at least can tell when you are dealing with “edge cases”. Can you tell the citizenry of a person by looking at them? If you think you can, then that is illegal discrimination. > [@](#): > > Treat businesses and people not legally allowed to work the same way. So, require that businesses discriminate. If someone is browner than a certain color, require more documentation, a background check? > [@](#): > > (At the same time, I absolutely am in favor of increased visas and whatnot) I am in favor of them being unnecessary. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2019, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/opposition-to-the-wall-moral-financial-practical-or-otherwise/828420/266 "2019-01-30T19:42:13Z")
> [@Littleman](#): > > I never worked a fully civilian government job. > I was dual status. Wore an army uniform the whole time and performed army duties while being considered a civilian employee soooo they kind of can be treated the same. > > I’m just saying, people do sucky jobs all the time, especially ones with gov benefits. So your position is indeed that managers in civilian life can manager their subordinates in the same manner that an NCO can manage an E-2? Seriously? ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2019, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/opposition-to-the-wall-moral-financial-practical-or-otherwise/828420/267 "2019-01-30T19:46:33Z")
> [@Littleman](#): > > I know a wall,or any kind of physical barrier certainly helped me secure an area. What about a large river or a desert? Those are physical barriers. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2019, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/opposition-to-the-wall-moral-financial-practical-or-otherwise/828420/268 "2019-01-30T19:51:56Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > Actually I don’t know the answer to that. > > As a basic, I would say that if they were 17, vs if they are say, 10, there’s a bit of a difference. You can tell, by looking at someone approximately what age they are. > > Unless someone has Hutchinson-Gilford progeria syndrome, then you at least can tell when you are dealing with “edge cases”. I’m not 100% but I’m pretty sure that no matter what ID a woman has, or where you met her (say, a bar), or anything else she may tell you, if it turns out she is under the age of consent, it’s statutory rape or something like that. > [@](#): > > Can you tell the citizenry of a person by looking at them? If you think you can, then that is illegal discrimination. > > So, require that businesses discriminate. If someone is browner than a certain color, require more documentation, a background check? Of course not. I propose to do that for everyone, regardless of what they look like. Maybe it’s a visa overstayer from Norway? ---
**Author:** ![slash2k](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/439d5e/32.png) [@slash2k](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/slash2k)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2019, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/opposition-to-the-wall-moral-financial-practical-or-otherwise/828420/269 "2019-01-30T20:24:21Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > If I have sex with a woman who shows me an ID that says she is 22, and later it turns out she is (some illegal age), am I off the hook? Depends on state. Some places require a showing of intent (i.e., that you knew she was underage and proceeded anyway), while in others statutory rape is a strict liability offense, and your knowledge or lack thereof is irrelevant. The problem in the case of undocumented workers is that oftentimes the employer knows quite well that there is a or at least could be a problem, and just doesn’t care. For example, the article I linked to above about Trump’s country clubs included anecdotes about managers telling employees that “these identification documents you have aren’t good enough; you can buy some better ones from X.” I remember newspaper reports about a business in my area that had multiple employees announce they were changing their name and social security number, some of them several times during the course of their employment, and the payroll department never even blinked. How do you distinguish between the honest businesses fooled by fake documents, the more-or-less honest businesses that just didn’t ask too many questions, and the not-at-all honest businesses that provided fake documents? ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2019, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/opposition-to-the-wall-moral-financial-practical-or-otherwise/828420/270 "2019-01-30T20:31:16Z")
> [@slash2k](#): > > How do you distinguish between the honest businesses fooled by fake documents, the more-or-less honest businesses that just didn’t ask too many questions, and the not-at-all honest businesses that provided fake documents? How do you distinguish between the honest guy fooled by a fake driver’s license, the more-or-less honest guy that just didn’t ask too many questions, and the not-at-all honest guy who knew she was underage but just did it anyway? However that happens, use the same techniques for businesses and workers applying for jobs. If ICE, or DHS, or whomever, can find out if someone is legally entitled to work here, then make that system available to businesses and force them to use it, and keep records of them using it to check each and every employee. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2019, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/opposition-to-the-wall-moral-financial-practical-or-otherwise/828420/271 "2019-01-30T20:34:53Z")
> [@slash2k](#): > > You mean why hasn’t Congress implemented burdensome regulations and onerous fines on good American businesses that are being deceived by those nasty brown people? [/sarcasm off] > > In all seriousness, the business groups and individuals who provide so much campaign cash have no particular incentive to want to make themselves pay. Yeah, the core of the GOP is business. They may gripe about immigration for whatever reason, but they won’t impose a fine on the businessmen who are their party organization. That goes for small businesses as well as big. The whole idea is a non-starter in the GOP, so you’d have to get Democrats in control to do it, and despite using that rhetoric, they may not actually care for it in practice either. > [@](#): > > The _coyotes_ and the cartels pay better. > > That’s not just sarcasm. At various times, the Border Patrol has had difficulty with agents being paid (or threatened) to look the other way, because a system is only as good as the people running it, and if you can compromise the people, whatever barriers and sensors you’ve got are meaningless. One reason they’ve had trouble filling the ranks is the extensive background checks and interviews trying to weed out those who might be susceptible to malign influence. Let’s also note that possibly the greatest beneficiary of heavy border security is Mexican organized crime, or rather the part that’s able to control a choke point. If the border is open, crossing is cheap. If the border is 97% closed, whoever controls that 3%, or just knows which guards to bribe, can charge a lot of money getting stuff across. What stuff? Well, to start, smuggled goods: guns into Mexico, dope into Usonia, whatever. Before IIRIRA, that might’ve been most of it. After IIRIRA, maybe a few jerks who got deported for dumb reasons and are trying to get back into the USA? The more the USA tries to stop persons and goods, the more people have to go to _coyotes_ to get across. That’s what businessmen call “creating value.” But it sucks for everyone else. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2019, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/opposition-to-the-wall-moral-financial-practical-or-otherwise/828420/272 "2019-01-30T20:38:26Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > I’m not 100% but I’m pretty sure that no matter what ID a woman has, or where you met her (say, a bar), or anything else she may tell you, if it turns out she is under the age of consent, it’s statutory rape or something like that. Like I said, I don’t know the rules, and I assume that they vary by state. But, if you are looking to extend sexual exploitation laws and consequences to labor laws, then it is on you to research them and know how they would relate. In any case, it isn’t relatable, as you can tell the age of someone by looking at them, you cannot tell the nationality. If someone looks like they are in their 30’s, and they have a fake ID, then I think you can probably get off on extenuating circumstances. Personally, I simply advise not dating anyone that looks under 30, and you are good to go. Discrimination based on appearances. > [@](#): > > Of course not. I propose to do that for everyone, regardless of what they look like. Maybe it’s a visa overstayer from Norway? Okay, so we can no longer have small businesses that don’t have the resources to hire a private investigator to vet the hell out of any employee before they can be hired. You can say to a young looking woman, “Hey, you’re cool, I like you, and you showed me your ID that says you are 22, but I’m just not going to risk it, not at least without further documentation.” If you say the same thing to a prospective employee, you just opened yourself up for a discrimination lawsuit. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2019, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/opposition-to-the-wall-moral-financial-practical-or-otherwise/828420/273 "2019-01-30T20:43:27Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > If you say the same thing to a prospective employee, you just opened yourself up for a discrimination lawsuit. How can it be discrimination if you do it for EVERY prospective employee? Isn’t that the exact opposite of discrimination? And like I also posted, however ICE or DHS or whomever verifies it, make that process free and open to business owners, along with requiring documentation of the check. ---
**Author:** ![slash2k](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/439d5e/32.png) [@slash2k](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/slash2k)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2019, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/opposition-to-the-wall-moral-financial-practical-or-otherwise/828420/274 "2019-01-30T20:48:50Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > How do you distinguish between the honest guy fooled by a fake driver’s license, the more-or-less honest guy that just didn’t ask too many questions, and the not-at-all honest guy who knew she was underage but just did it anyway? As I noted, depending on jurisdiction the honest guy fooled by a fake driver’s license can still get 25 to life. Some places try to use their own judgement, but others don’t, and even in the ones that do, it comes down mostly to “do I think this guy is telling the truth?,” with all of the built-in prejudices that accompany that. (White upper-middle-class guys with private attorneys apparently tell the truth a lot more than black guys or guys using public defenders, e.g. [more sarcasm].) > [@Slash1972](#): > > If ICE, or DHS, or whomever, can find out if someone is legally entitled to work here, then make that system available to businesses and force them to use it, and keep records of them using it to check each and every employee. The problem is that such a reliable system doesn’t exist. E-Verify attempts to be that system, but in fact it can be fooled. For starters, it can [most of the time, anyway] tell you that Person X is entitled to work here, but it can’t tell you if the person in front of you with identification documents bearing X’s name is in fact X, or merely an identity thief. Less-than-honest employers have been caught providing faked documents to their employees precisely so the employer can “prove” they verified identity. When the feds actually need to prove somebody’s identity, the most reliable way is fingerprints or other biometric data; however, plenty of genuine American citizens don’t have fingerprints on file anywhere and would not be willing to submit to that level of government intrusion. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2019, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/opposition-to-the-wall-moral-financial-practical-or-otherwise/828420/275 "2019-01-30T20:53:50Z")
> [@slash2k](#): > > The problem is that such a reliable system doesn’t exist. E-Verify attempts to be that system, but in fact it can be fooled. For starters, it can [most of the time, anyway] tell you that Person X is entitled to work here, but it can’t tell you if the person in front of you with identification documents bearing X’s name is in fact X, or merely an identity thief. Less-than-honest employers have been caught providing faked documents to their employees precisely so the employer can “prove” they verified identity. Pictures cannot be added to E-Verify? Other biometric data? Come on. Can these fake documents be used to get a US Passport? If not, why not? ---
**Author:** ![Littleman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ccd318/32.png) [@Littleman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Littleman)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2019, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/opposition-to-the-wall-moral-financial-practical-or-otherwise/828420/276 "2019-01-30T20:57:26Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > What about a large river or a desert? Those are physical barriers. A desert is just an area. A river could be a barrier or just a terrain feature, it depends. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2019, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/opposition-to-the-wall-moral-financial-practical-or-otherwise/828420/277 "2019-01-30T21:00:49Z")
> [@slash2k](#): > > How do you distinguish between the honest businesses fooled by fake documents, the more-or-less honest businesses that just didn’t ask too many questions, and the not-at-all honest businesses that provided fake documents? And by the second example there, you also mean honest businesses that follow the law that says that you aren’t allowed to ask too many questions. > [@Slash1972](#): > > How do you distinguish between the honest guy fooled by a fake driver’s license, the more-or-less honest guy that just didn’t ask too many questions, and the not-at-all honest guy who knew she was underage but just did it anyway? Well, you don’t. You pretty much treat them all the same, regardless of intent. That is why you shouldn’t date anyone that looks like they are under 30. > [@](#): > > However that happens, use the same techniques for businesses and workers applying for jobs. Just look for the ones that are not being driven out of business by discrimination lawsuits for asking too many questions, or basing employment on their appearance. > [@](#): > > If ICE, or DHS, or whomever, can find out if someone is legally entitled to work here, then make that system available to businesses and force them to use it, and keep records of them using it to check each and every employee. They don’t do that through an automatic check. They will run backgrounds and fingerprints and a bunch of other stuff. Can you expect employers to go through a full background check with ICE and DHS for every single hire they make? Now, there is E-Verify, but two things on that. One, it sucks, is unreliable, will not necessarily pick up on eligible workers, and will give false positives for eligible ones. It also is not instantaneous, sometimes taking a few days. Then there is the problem that it is a govt service, reliant on the govt functioning. During the shutdown E-verify was not operational. That’s a whole month that anyone who used e-verify could not hire employees. Bad enough that trump takes the country hostage, I’m not letting him take my business hostage as well. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2019, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/opposition-to-the-wall-moral-financial-practical-or-otherwise/828420/278 "2019-01-30T21:04:16Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > Well, you don’t. You pretty much treat them all the same, regardless of intent. That is why you shouldn’t date anyone that looks like they are under 30 That’s good advice for 18 year old men :rolleyes: > [@](#): > > They don’t do that through an automatic check. They will run backgrounds and fingerprints and a bunch of other stuff. Can you expect employers to go through a full background check with ICE and DHS for every single hire they make? I expect that if ICE and DHS want to limit the amount of illegal immigrants working illegally in the US, they would make such a system available for free to business owners. > [@](#): > > Then there is the problem that it is a govt service, reliant on the govt functioning. During the shutdown E-verify was not operational. That’s a whole month that anyone who used e-verify could not hire employees. Bad enough that trump takes the country hostage, I’m not letting him take my business hostage as well. Yeah, that would suck. Maybe people would then learn not to elect morons to high executive offices of our country. ---
**Author:** ![slash2k](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/439d5e/32.png) [@slash2k](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/slash2k)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2019, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/opposition-to-the-wall-moral-financial-practical-or-otherwise/828420/279 "2019-01-30T21:08:40Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Pictures cannot be added to E-Verify? Other biometric data? Come on. Have you ever seriously tried to verify identity with the sort of pictures commonly associated with the DMV or other similar agencies? Adding biometric data to the system requires that you HAVE the data. For immigrants, we can require it as part of their visa application. For native-born Americans, where is the political will to compel them to give up their fingerprints or retina scans or DNA? A lot of people on both sides of the aisle have very firmly rooted objections, ranging from governmental overreach to being treated like a criminal to whether the government’s biometric database will be hacked. (You can change your SSN in extreme cases if its misuse becomes life-altering; changing your fingerprints is a wee bit more difficult.) > [@Slash1972](#): > > Can these fake documents be used to get a US Passport? If not, why not? While the State Dept does take steps to verify the identity of applicants, yes, their process [has been shown vulnerable](https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-922T) to issuing genuine passports based on fake documents. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2019, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/opposition-to-the-wall-moral-financial-practical-or-otherwise/828420/280 "2019-01-30T21:16:53Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > How can it be discrimination if you do it for EVERY prospective employee? Isn’t that the exact opposite of discrimination? Read the I-9 instructions sometime. > [@](#): > > It is illegal to discriminate against work-authorized individuals. Employers CANNOT specify which > document(s) an employee may present to establish employment authorization and identity Hmmm, can’t cut and paste from this PDF, but later… typed manually > [@](#): > > You cannot specify which documents an employee may present. If you discriminate in the form i-9 process based on cit status, immigration status, or national origin, you ma be in violation of the law > … > A document is acceptable as long as it reasonable appears to be genuine and relate to the person presenting it. So, yeah, asking questions is opening yourself up to a lawsuit. > [@](#): > > And like I also posted, however ICE or DHS or whomever verifies it, make that process free and open to business owners, along with requiring documentation of the check. And how long do I have to wait for DHS to get through their backlog before I can hire an employee? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/opposition-to-the-wall-moral-financial-practical-or-otherwise/828420.md?page=13) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/opposition-to-the-wall-moral-financial-practical-or-otherwise/828420.md?page=15)