Over what other option? Again the are not forced to cross under this program, they can chose another one if they qualify.
The yearly salary of a migrant worker-$7,500…before taxes. Take your 10% off the top, cut that in half, then you tell me where they sleep and what they eat.
Holy shit-at least when they pull this on prisoners they provide room and board. :rolleyes:
Again America first, if you want to come here, to the greatest economy ever, and you are not a citizen, you are given a great great opportunity but must realize that its America First, and they will still make out great, bringing home many pesos to Mama and Papa for them to live not only comfortable but also a bit of luxury back home in Mexico, and all that supporting the US economy in a positive way, defending our boarders and strengthen our relationships with our neighbor to the south, who btw has been taking advantage of us for many many years. (my best Donald Trump impression, as that the audience that also needs to be reached to support this plan).
But perhaps back to kanicbird plan 1.0, just have every Mexican who wants to cross the boarder bring a brick
Yay America!!!
Now how about answering my questions?
Checks forum, IMHO. Yup. IMHO this is incredibly condescending.
Makes me doubt the sincerity of his proposal.
So if the average migrant makes $7500/ year, and say there are 200,000 people who would cross each year*, and all of them will give half their salary under this system.
Let’s see…that’s a collection of $750M/year, at that rate the wall will be paid for in 27 years. (Not counting yearly maintenance and operating costs), assuming it could be built for $20B.
Sounds like a plan. Call us in say 13 years when you’ve got enough to start. Because I’m not advancing any money under this scheme.
*Based on one estimate that the BP stops 100000 people per year, and that they stop appx 50%. And you can’t count the 10M already here in this plan.
Perhaps a little overboard, just trying to express an idea that would satisfy both sides of the aisle and let my emotion get the best of me when I step into Trump to satisfy his base.
Perhaps where they are sleeping now? My assumption is they are coming here to work a short time and make moeny to live in Mexico.
27 years is not bad, as if it looks productive a bond could be taken out to complete the project much sooner, financed with the revenue of the program.
Can we backup the plan to kanicbird plan 0.0 where you learn how to spell the word “border”?
To the plan in the OP, if you let them in with a migrant visa, they have zero incentive to participate in your punitive plan. If they follow the rules, they get 50% of their pay now and 40% if they leave the country after a short time. If they participate and break the rules, they lose 50% of the money they earned. If they break the rules from day one, they keep 100% of the money, and can stay as long as they want.
Can you provide a worse deal for these people?
I’ve believed this for decades, if you want to stop illegal immigration, arrest people who hire illegal immigrants.
Did you actually put thought into this plan? Did you take the time to inform yourself on the wages earned by migrants in the US, the average wages earned in Mexico, the cost of living in both of those places, the cost of administering a migrant work program, the impact of massive migrant work force on unskilled American employment, or… pretty much any relevant facts?
Your plan is grossly ill-informed.
Then they will lose their right to re-cross using that plan. And yes that works very well with the arresting people who hiring illegal immigrants and for my spelling lessons.
So far the take on this is this plan so for due to the replies may sound great to the ill informed and actually do nothing or even be counterproductive while making us believe we are doing something positive.
My take on this plan is that I don’t know whether this is a sincere effort on your part to present a plan that you actually think is viable, or some sort of game you are playing “just to prove a point”…and this post of yours makes me lean towards the second option.
Hey OP, forget the wall, forget immigration, forget your proposal.
Why do you suppose that some people work under the table instead of above-board jobs, knowing that they may risk various penalties for doing so?
It was a thought I had while hiking, I wanted to see how it flies. (it was also why I didn’t have time to research the things you and others questioned.)
If it was a sincere thought, it was ill-thought out and rather insensitive. By the way, if your take-home pay had an extra 10% taken from it and then cut in half, how well would you fare?
“Where do they live now?” In places their very meager pay allows them to live. Reduce that take-home to a fraction that is less than 50% of the original, and you deny them even that necessity. Do you think their landlords will allow them to cut their rent in half?
You were forced to present it to us immediately without doing any research on it?