
Originally Posted by
Sigfried
if castrating your kids was the only way to ensure they don't get herpes, would that be a good argument for doing it? We have a booming economy (for now), a declining crime rate (mostly), and life is basically pretty decent. Why do I need to build a giant wall on our southern border like some kind of midevil fortress.
Your analogy is absurd. If the choice was to have no front door or an overpriced cast-iron front door, I suspect most people would prefer the latter.
In terms of stemming the flow of illegal immigration, some of us feel it is important. So, I'll take whatever positive steps are available. We have entire communities here made up of illegal immigrants. They get counted in the census and inflate the power of liberals/Democrats. This means they have a fairly large political impact. There is social cost in the forms taxes, social services, and even transportation. A declining crime root sounds good in the main, but it does not matter for individuals impacted by crime. And when we consider the gun legislation liberals desire, why don't they have the same reaction whenever an illegal immigrant commits a murder? At least, in the case of illegal immigration, those crimes could truly be prevented.
In terms of the wall, I am not claiming it is some sort of panacea or even the best solution. I am suggesting it may be the only solution that is politically viable. I mean if the Republicans and Democrats actually wanted to solve the problem, they could do it without a new wall. However, a wall is just the sort of half-measure which could get done. So, I am willing to take what I can get and hope for more later.

Originally Posted by
Sigfried
I'm all for it, it is actually a pretty good tool for this purpose. I think it is part of a good immigration policy.
Too bad most politicians (in either party) really want to solve the problem.

Originally Posted by
Sigfried
Taxing them is tricky because businesses remit all the time and you couldn't really identify what reason they were doing it for. But you could limit access to them and that could be a cheap and effective measure.
I noted that there were problems. Again, there is no serious effort made to control illegal immigration, so this ain't happening either.

Originally Posted by
Sigfried
You could also releave it by making the process simpler and less stringent. Like with drug laws, I feel a lot of the waste is because we have the wrong baseline assumptions. Instead of ever more stringent drug laws, just stop deciding you hate drug use. Manage it rather than try to prohibit it. Funnel immigrants into legal channels that make sese, nto simply fighting to keep as many out as possible
.
Sure. However, like all the other suggestions, it ain't happening.

Originally Posted by
Sigfried
Walls are just a dumb way to do it. Expensive and with a low effectiveness, and hard to modify when you change your mind about the policy. They are a super dumb idea. Of course we have the right to put up a wall and put kids into holding fascilities while we prosecute their parents for seeking a better life. But should we? I don't think so. I think it is stupid and there are much better ways to handle immigration pressures. They start by askigng yourself, what can we do to take advantage of the fact people want to come here and earn a living.
I think we should. Because as noted above, it is the only half-serious improvement to the issue which has a shot of happening. You realize when Americans go to jail, they are separated from their children, right? I really don't see how treating people crossing the border illegally are any different? Of course a wall would severely reduce the number of adults who would bring children and, in particular, reduce the number of children who could viably cross the border unaccompanied by an adult. It is not a panacea, but it does offer an improvement.
---------- Post added at 08:57 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:55 AM ----------

Originally Posted by
evensaul
Regardless of what label is used, Democrats clearly do not favor a secure border, and that is becoming more evident as the years pass. They appear to want immigration into the US to be automatic upon request or at the taking, legal or not, because so far as I can tell, Democrats never talk about a need to make the border secure, and they oppose virtually all efforts to control immigration. That is an observation I am making, not an argument for a secure border. And I haven't suggested that you or Democrats generally are arguing openly for lax border control, though I'm hoping you'll come out in favor of it if that is what you truly believe. In summary, stating a perceived motive (increasing welfare and Dem voter rolls) for a behavior (not supporting a secure border) isn't a straw man argument.
Would you like to share your position and join the debate?
Let's be clear Even, Republicans aren't serious about securing the border either. Republican congress can't even agree on a bill to push forward. They are feckless in this regard. On balance, probably slightly better than Democrats, but not by much.
Bookmarks