I apologize if someone has already done this, but I couldn’t find anything in search.
WOW 100%…hmm
“Less border security” != “open borders”.
To be effective it would need to be like the old Berlin Wall- mine fields, guard towers, shoot to kill. And it would need to be on all borders AND coasts, or boats would be used to get around it. Much simpler to punish anyone who hires illegals.
Aw, but if the pollster allows people to disambiguate those options one of them might actually win!
Better to have the “I think Hispanics are wonderful people and/or we should actively import MS-13 members” as one single option. Keeps the right narrative going, don’t you know.
Indeed. To deal with the problems presented by illegal immigration you need to look at the incentives that lead to it, and not just on the immigrant side.
- People come to the US informally to better their situations.
- Their situations are better because they can find work
Yes, enforcement of such laws as we have accomplish a certain amount, but without removing the prospect of employment the incentives are still there. Fines and such for those employing undocumented immigrants need to grow and become distinctly painful for employers. Perhaps raising fines, multiple violations leading to compliance inspectors onsite for months at a time and eventually revocation of business licenses.
But that should be paired with a visiting worker program. Something that allows for a temporary worker visa similar to hi-tech’s H1B visa program but for lesser skilled jobs such as agriculture and similar work. Come in for planting and harvest and go back. Organize and manage what’s already happening instead of simply attempting to stop it cold.
I agree with all of this, and think it’s suspicious that the people who make the most noise about illegal immigration never seem to target the demand side, only the supply side, when proposing solutions.
Any capitalist should know that demands get filled, regardless of laws or boundaries.
I am bemused how ardent supporters of “Wall” are so terrified of desperate, starving people hoping to come to the United States to take our shitty, bad paying jobs buchering chickens and cleaning toilets that these self-proclaimed “fiscal conservatives” advocate spending billions of dollars essentially recreating one of the greatest political blunders of a defunct government that failed so completely that the country it was constructed to ‘protect’ no longer exists. There is a golden comedy routine in this, but only for the demographic of devoted Hardcore History and FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast listeners. “What do you get when you invite Stephen Miller to dinner? A Jewish Nazi with a goombah hairstyle lecturing you about the dangers of an open border while complaining that his soup isn’t ‘gluey’ enough.”
Stranger
I don’t understand why so many people think comparing an American border wall to the Berlin Wall is somehow the biggest “gotcha!” argument of all time.
The entire point of the Berlin Wall was that East Germany was so shitty and mismanaged under a corrupt government that people were leaving en-masse and to save face the Government had to forcibly keep them in the Communist sector.
I understand you can make EXPENSIVE WALL = EXPENSIVE WALL comparison but apparently everybody on Earth only knows of one wall that has ever existed. The “Great Wall of Trump” comparison at least makes sense.
Like others have stated nobody wants to get rid of the obvious pull factors that are much easier to address. If they threatened and enforced possible jail time for anyone employing, providing housing to, educating illegal immigrants then you eliminate what pulls them here.
Dangle a carrot on the other side of a wall and it doesn’t matter how big of a wall you build, people will find a way over, under, through it.
Eliminate the carrot and you don’t even need a wll of any kind.
A wall would probably improve border security somewhat but cost a helluva lot more than $5 billion to build and maintain, plus have bad optics (how many poll options does that cover?).
In the realm of fantasy budget-making, here’s to Robert Reich, who claims that for the $5 billion Trump wants for his wall, we could finance Medicaid for 1.4 million people, double federal spending on renewable energy and double spending on mental health and substance abuse. Even if he actually meant any single one of those options, instead of all three at once (which is what it sounded like), it’d cost considerably more than $5 billion.*
*though putting the dough into any one of those areas would be a much better use of funds.
I also refuse to vote since you merged open borders with saying that current levels are too high. Even going back to Obama levels is a decrease, given what Trump has done down there.
And, yes, we’d get a lot more bang for our buck if we went after those who hire illegal immigrants. The problem, of course, is that our economy needs them to keep our costs down, so there’s no way that’s going to happen.
I believe a nation has the right to establish policies and laws as to who and how any can enter for permanent or temporary residence. Other than completely open borders, I don’r really care what policies we decide to have, but whatever they are, they should be enforced.
I don’t know how effective or costly a wall would be in controlling illegal entry on the US-Mexico border, but the Israeli barriers seem to be working. In general, I don’t like the idea of a wall, but we do need effective means of controlling illegal entry.
In my thoughts, I’ve compared Trump’s Wall to the Great Wall of China, the Berlin Wall also. The comparison that I keep coming back to though is The Maginot Line. Trump’s Wall will be just as effective, for largely the same reasons.
The wall isn’t about controlling unregulated immigration, it’s about pandering to the white natioanlists that are Trump’s base.
Border security is fine as it is. Chump is just scaremongering a problem that does not exist.
On second thought, it might be good to tighten up on those icebacks coming from the north.
I agree with Obama when he said, “We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States, undetected, undocumented, unchecked and circumventing the line of people who are waiting patiently, diligently and lawfully to become immigrants in this country.”
And as President, Obama promised to put illegal immigrants “to the back of the line behind the folks trying to come here legally.”
And I agree with Chuck Schumer when he said,
“The American people are fundamentally pro-legal immigration and anti-illegal immigration. We will only pass comprehensive reform when we recognize this fundamental concept”.
“First, illegal immigration is wrong, and a primary goal of comprehensive immigration reform must be to dramatically curtail future illegal immigration.”
And finally I agree with Nancy Pelosi when she said, "“Because we do need to address the issue of immigration and the challenge we have of undocumented people in our country. We certainly do not want any more coming in.”
…so you ticked “I think our border security is fine as is, and is working effectively. No need to use more money and resources on a wall?”
Trump’s “Wall” is clearly not the functional equivalent of the Berlin Wall, as the former is intended to keep supposed ‘undesirable’ people out while the latter was intended to keep the most desirable people in. In the sense of being a very public statement on how debased and misguided the overarching policy and the regime supporting it is, however, “Wall” is a very good analogue of the Berlin Wall. Not only will “Wall” not accomplish the desired effect of preventing immigration, it is actually a stupid and counterproductive goal insofar as [URL=The Effects of Immigration on the United States’ Economy — Penn Wharton Budget Model]immigration is a net economic positive* and also provides a necessary replacement population for low wage workers performing crucial roles in food production, construction, and child/elder/health care, the last of which is a foreboding crisis with no practical solution other than to import and train foreign workers to support an aging population.
The real solution to this supposed crisis of immigration is to stop reflexively responding to this boogyman argument, reform the immigration system so that existing undocumented immigrants who are productive workers without criminal records can apply for permanent residence and citizenship, allow others to apply for work visas or asylum as appropriate, and provide the necessary educational, vocational, and financial support to allow immigrants to succeed and contribute to our economy and society without this manufactured fear that they are going to rape all the white women or suck the public teat of imaginary unlimited benefits. Reforming the immigration system would cost next to nothing (and realize tangible benefit to our economy), especially in comparison to a border wall that is going to cost way more than $5B to construct and even more to patrol and maintain to zero economic benefit whatsoever.
Virtually everyone living in the United States today is the descendent of immigrants if not a recent immigrant themselves, and it is exactly the combination of cultures and ideas, along with the enthusiasm for innovation and defying institutional conventions in their own countries, which is what has made the United States a world leader in technology, entertainment, and finance. It is also an edge we are rapidly losing in many areas specifically because of the social conservatism and unwillingness to integrate ideas from other cultures.
“Wall” is just a dog whistle for bigotry and fear. We don’t need any more “Wall”.
Stranger
What does any of that have to do with the wall?