Just to comment on the actual ability to use a ladder to get over a wall. A 16ft aluminum ladder weights 20-30 pounds. It’s not like it’s weight is something any adult can’t handle. You can climb on top of the wall, lift the ladder over and go down it again. no rope needed. If you want to climb over with a bunch of people you could splurg on a 32ft extension ladder so you could put a 16ft section on each side. It would be a ten minute exercise to get over a wall. Well withing the capacity of even young children.
But you see, it’s NOT $5Billion. $5B is how much to get started.
It’s anywhere from $15- 70 billion, and hundreds of millions per year to maintain (up to $750M).
Then there’s the moral cost of taking all that land from US citizens who live along the wall.
Then there’s the ecological damage.
And the fact it- it’s nigh useless. Oh sure, the Border patrol and the DEA would like several sections of fencing rebuilt, more fencing in some areas, and etc. That would help with drug interdiction. That would be fine.
Few are asking for open borders. But Mexicans have been coming here to pick our produces for a hundred years and more. They dont cause much crime, they pay into Soc Sec and dont get any out, and overall they are not a burden.
There are these things called “ladders”. And another thing called “tunnels”.
But most illegal com in on airplanes. How is the wall gonna stop them?
And, there are more benefits than problems with illegal immigration.
My primary reason for opposing the wall is that it is a high cost to obtain something that won’t be very effective. There’s many better ways to spend $5 billion or $50 billion, either for border security or on other higher national priorities.
The reason I care about opposing the wall so much is that it gives me extra joy to oppose a stupid idea proposed by a racist for no other reason than to appeal to the worst instincts of people.
So speaking for myself, opposing Trump isn’t the main reason I oppose the wall. But opposing Trump makes me oppose the wall with greater gusto.
We have done that before, under Reagan, with the Bracero system, where we welcomed Mexicans to come here for Ag work.
They have border patrol videos of them doing exactly that.
Yep. The Border patrol and the DEA, etc have made just such requests, and the Democrats* agreed to that funding.* But McConnell blocked that dues to trumps temper tantrum.
In other words, the border security that the experts really wanted- they didn’t get due to Trump. **We have LESS border security due to trump’s wall.
**
So you dont want produce?
Look, the employers get a SocSec number. They treat their illegals just like other workers, same pay etc.
So, how and why would you arrest them?
So what’s wrong? It violates due process and it harms the economy.
No, no they didnt. The fencing put up was primarily for drug interdiction, in the hot spots. Yes, it also slowed illegal immigration.
The feds have several visa programs for temporary workers, notably including H-2A temporary agricultural workers. There’s not exactly a huge demand for it, probably precisely because employers are expected to comply with all the rules surrounding workers comp, paychecks, proper withholdings, etc. It’s easier to skip the paperwork and hire workers who will never complain to OSHA if they get hurt on the job.
Oh the irony here is delicious.
Those visas are very hard to get under this regime.
You must be eating imaginary cake, because there was no irony there.
Open borders is a ludicrous notion. However, a wall is impractical. Moats with crocodiles on the other hand might work.
They’ve never been popular, though. The most recent statistics I can find (for April-June 2018) show 3622 petitions received that quarter; 3492 were approved and 40 denied. Going back to the same quarter in 2012 shows 2785 submitted, 2619 approved, and 30 denied. (Some petitions remain pending at the end of a quarter.) Those aren’t exactly terrible approval rates, then or now. What’s the evidence that they are more difficult now?
The wall, the fence, the palisade, is a minor thing. It is not sufficient to border security, it may be mostly unnecessary, & in some places it may be counterproductive. But it would only make sense in the context of a heavily defended border.
Opposing “the wall” allows Democrats to try to pander to Hispanics; without actually taking a stand against the Gingrich-Clinton-era law that deports far more aliens than the USA used to, or the state-level laws criminalizing aliens and those who aid them.
But really, the problem is that too many anglos in the USA, in both parties, of different skin colors, have instituted anti-immigrant policies: to cause migrants to die in the desert rather than make it to the USA and get a blue-collar job; to deport persons established in the country for years; and now to drive out their American children.
We never really needed to militarize the border between San Diego & Tijuana, wrecking that community. But it was about winning elections and looking tough on law enforcement, even if it meant writing new laws stricter than the median person would find appropriate or fair.
Get rid of IIRIRA, put in a no-quota guest worker visa available to practically anyone this side of Colombia, shut down the contract detention facilities & end the policies that require them, restore the Bill of Rights to the 100-mile zone, and, yes, de-escalate the militarization of San Diego’s border. Then if you want some fencing to help interdict smugglers, you might be taken seriously. But a wall to interdict Mexicans for the crime of being Mexicans sounds just like bigotry.
I admit: I’m pretty ignorant about drones. So – how hard is it to shoot one down?
Because unless it’s practically impossible to shoot a drone down, I can easily envision groups of folks on the Mexican side of the wall shooting at the drones for sport. It sounds like it could be fun.
Can we compromise with alligators? Importing crocs and adding salt to the Rio seems a bit much.
For me, it would represent the nation’s inability to effectively address the effects of all the enterprises that have been exacted upon Latin America, leaving so many countries dreadfully fucked-up. It would be enduring monument to America’s stupidity and weakness, and for that reason, I chose “moral”, although there is a practical aspect to that as well.
All of the above, plus a different moral: I object, on principle, to anything whose justification is entirely based on falsehoods. The problem this “wall” is supposed to solve does not exist.