Did you consider researching how to spell the word border?
WOW remembrance from 2010
See post #34
You are correct. The USA does nothing but gain from migrant farm workers, etc. They commit less crime, ask for less aid, work at jobs the average American wont and cant. We need them in the Ag industry.
The only reason for the Wall is racist Xenophobia.
Or a monument to self.
Actually, I’m going to slightly shift my comments given that kanicbird is saying they won’t change any existing immigration policies and this is merely an additional option for entry with funds curiously earmarked for a “wall.”
In which case, like, okay? I don’t think it’s a GOOD plan, but if you float it and people want to apply and it somehow passes a cost analysis to merely keep itself running…then sure. But I really doubt this would produce revenue in any meaningful way. I still think it would just increase net illegal immigration by adding a new way for people to enter and overstay. But, hey, it’s a safer way than desert crossing so I guess that’s good?
I’m reading this more as a plan that Trump might get behind because he can sell it to his base as Mexico paying for the wall, when the reality is that it would get little revenue, but not really hurt anything (assuming nothing else is changed).
In that form, it’s not the worst idea I’ve heard. I’m just not sure even a show of giving Trump what he wants is a good idea at this point.
I’m actually for migrant worker programs with eventual possibility for citizenship. But it would require cracking down on hiring undocumented workers, particularly those who help them get fake SS numbers and stuff. It would have to be the only option.
Still, it fits my idea that the way to fix the illegal immigration problem is to allow legal immigration to rise to meet demand.
Idk where you got $7500 from but
Looks like between minimum wage and about $15hr.
Some people fully expect 25 percent of America to live on this.
All the farms i know of have temporary housing for their migrant workers. They certainly aren’t expected to commute. Most provide at least lunch, since the logistics of them getting lunch some other way would be quite a challenge.
All in all I’d say they have a much easier time living on 7.50 an hour for 90 days while being provided housing than a citizen who lives here and still has to pay rent and utilities.
Rather, idk where career trend got 7500 from. All they say is, “it is estimated…” But not by whom.
Well, when they are working their pay isnt half bad, but many do not work year around.
Why confuse the o.p. with facts?
Stranger
Yeah, I mean, in the context of the OPs suggestion though. It doesn’t seem like a terrible idea except…
I don’t know how the system is set up currently for a non-citizen migrant farm worker.
So I can’t compare to what it’s like now.
How hard is it currently to get a temporary visa?
How easy is it to overstay it?
( I imagine this part is easy thus the sort of deposit suggestion)
The only way I can think of to give them the rest of their money on return would be at the border. I can only imagine the cesspool of scammers, thugs, and unscrupulous sales people waiting on the other side to take advantage of workers coming home with $7000.
I like BigTs statement, the only way to really curb illegal immigration way down is to allow legal immigration to meet the demand.
I would put it more like make it more practical to do legally than illegally.
That usually requires both facilitating access and enforcing restrictions. Which I guess is why the topic is devisive… What’s the best combination…
Aside from all the other problems with your proposal, let’s not overlook the damn wall itself.
Structural issues, flooding, and crap:
Eminent domain destroying people’s houses (on the Merkin side):
Environmental damage:
And when the ends of the proposed wall reach the edges of the beaches, what then?
Well…swim around. Boat around.
As for the argument that walls simply don’t work against immigration…idk one only need look at the Berlin Wall to see otherwise.
12ft tall and it changed the emigration out of east Germany from tens of thousands per month to only about 5000 over 30 years.
So the whole innefctive argument is kind of shot to shit in my mind.
Body’s of water as natural barriers… Those have proven effective for thousands of years.
I haven’t really decided whether I like the wall or not but the innefective argument is nonsense.
There may be very good argument’s against it but to be honest each of the articles linked are extremely weak.
A civil engineer who seems to talk nonsense and mostly about some kinda environmental negative that must be there ,she’s not even sure what.
Problems with eminent domain… These have sprang up in every use of it probably ever and yet it’s used constantly. Miilions of miles of linear structures have In fact been built through it’s use.
Even the scientific American article is mostly if not entirely speculation without so much as an actual case study. It shouldn’t be hard to get proof of impacts on migration for the existing sections but all I see there is some scarce anectodal evidence… Animals have been spotted along the fence…well no kidding.
Bollocks.
Machine guns, towers, tank traps, etc. Not exactly what Trump is proposing.
Plus it was only 90 miles long.
While what they make may go a long way back in Mexico, while you’re in the US you need to pay US prices, not back-home prices.
Spain managed to chop down illegal immigration from Latin America to almost nothing by 1) already having legal methods to immigrate and 2) pointing them to people who were inmigrating illegally due to misinformation. We still have a lot of problems regarding other sources though, and the causes combine both a) having less options to migrate legally and b) not having as easy a way to inform people as when they already watch our public television.
We also do not have “work permits” separate from “residence permits”: the paperwork is still a maze, but it’s simpler than where “right to live here” and “right to work” are separate. No limited work permits, no work permits linked to a specific job; a residence permit may still be temporary, but whether permanent or temporary it always includes the right to work (if you’re a child or otherwise part of a ‘special group’, the restrictions which apply are the same as for a national who’s a member of that same group). Not only does this mean simpler options, it means the possibility of someone working under the table while being otherwise ‘legal’ is a matter of taxes, not inmigration law: the option to tell an employee “you’ll continue working here, but without a work permit” does not exist as it does in the US. Conversely, if someone who’s in the country temporarily or illegally gets a long-term job, their employer can “legalize” them (the fact that they found a job means their skills are needed).
First off, if your defense boils down to, “Hey, it worked for East Berlin!” you may need to reevaluate what you’re trying to defend.
Secondly, different animal. The Berlin wall was TWO large walls, tons of razorwire and guard dogs and other impediments, and 24-hour, shoot-on-sight guards posted across the entire length. It didn’t deter immigration because it was difficult to surmount – it deterred immigration because trying to cross it was a likely death sentence.
It was also less than a fifth of the length of the minimal needed length of Trump’s wall or a twentieth of the length of the actual border.
The US does NOT have the political will to build anything comparable, structurally. They’ll build a heavy-duty fence or a low-quality concrete wall, and I guarantee that it will have compromising damage within months.
The only good that would come from building this wall will be the moment of catharsis when Mexicans and Americans tear it down sooner than later.
In addition to a crackdown on travel visas, which Latin American countries have no reason to enforce, and would massively hurt the American tourism industry if America put in place.