By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
the-pi-guy said:
EricHiggin said:

The less drugs that enter America, the less money they need to spend on crime, health, etc, and the less money that enters Mexico. Less Mexican's being able to constantly cross the border, working in America without paying taxes, and bringing it back to Mexico, that also means more jobs for American's who can be taxed, leading to less poverty, less spending on crime, heath, etc. Many less people getting over the wall means less border spending, crime, etc, plus a bunch of people stuck in Mexico and how many are really going to go back to where they came from, causing many problems which will surely mean money spent that wouldn't be otherwise for Mexico. That's just a small portion of all the many ways Mexico would pay for it. I don't know why you seem to want direct examples as I clearly stated earlier that it would be indirect. 

There's a lot that's wrong here:

A large percentage of drugs come to the country through legal entrances.  Even if they weren't, you'd start to find that drug dealers would go to different lengths to make it happen.  Building a wall isn't what is going to stop drug trafficking.  At most, all it would do is change how drug trafficking is done.  And it won't even do that, because again,
https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/border-issues/2019/01/08/most-hard-drugs-get-smuggled-into-u-s-through-ports-entry/2517586002/

Americans aren't interested in farm work.  It's a nice idea that Americans would start picking up these jobs, but it's not what happens.  Despite the fact that there are currently not enough workers, native born American workers aren't picking up these jobs.  

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/farmers-suffer-from-a-shortage-of-workers-but-native-born-americans-dont-want-the-jobs/
https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-farms-immigration/

On the note that border spending will go down.  That's another thing that just won't happen.  It costs a lot of money to build and maintain a wall.  You might think that you could use less people, but you really can't.  If you want the border wall to work any better than our current border works, then you need to throw a ton of money at it.  You still need a lot people patrolling to make sure they aren't building tunnels, climbing over, finding spots in the wall that aren't well maintained.  

At some point with a wall, you reach diminishing returns. Where it actually costs more money to defend the border than it actually saves.  

EricHiggin said:

Then why do American's build walls within their own country if walls won't do what a wall is supposed to do? 

Firstly a tiny wall around a house doesn't compare to a several thousand mile wall that has to be built through deserts and mountains.

Secondly no one is building a wall around their house because they are worried about the influx of undocumented immigrants. 

The best reason to build a fence around your house is privacy, not security. 

Wrong? So no drugs come across the border? What if those lengths were no longer worth it? What if it was cheaper to just sell them elsewhere? More work to get them in, more cost, less drug use, less money going across the border. Once the border wall is taken care of, and money is being saved, where do you think they will focus on next?

Why work in terrible conditions for min wage when you can pretend to look for a job and collect welfare? You do realize you said working a job that provides the one thing people have to have, no question, that's mass produced, isn't worth it right? American's also don't seem to care about protecting their borders and fellow citizens within them.

Part of the point of a wall is to at least flat line if not decrease spending in that area. Once it's built, if done correctly, other than maintenance here and there and border patrol to verify the wall isn't breached, the wall should save money overall. Why are the Dems saying more needs to be spent on manpower and tech? That's what would need to be done without a proper physical barrier and would get more costly over time.

SpokenTruth said:
EricHiggin said:

Then why do American's build walls within their own country if walls won't do what a wall is supposed to do? We only get a single Canadian news channel and they don't talk all that much about American politics, but when they do, they just repeat whatever has been said by the lefty American MSM, like CNN. I know because when I see American political news I check various sources on both sides of the net, plus what's being said on both sides on YouTube where they go more in depth, and make up my mind, based on what makes the most sense. There are plenty of times both sides give the facts on a topic, and yet somehow the facts are rarely the same even if their talking are about the same thing. I'm not sure how that's possible if they are in fact, fact's.

Experts? I used to work for a specialized company, and we were well known as experts, and after working with some of the competition as well, I can assure you, while we were some of the best at what we did, at best, the oldest vet of the company was worthy of that title themselves, but nobody else I had ever worked with came close. As a sizable group working on a site, we could be considered experts with all of our knowledge and abilities pooled together as one, but not individually. We also weren't always right and didn't always make the best decisions either. We at times made decisions that benefited the company as well instead of doing what was best for the customer. Expert does not mean perfection. The word expert has lost it's true meaning, because most who hold it are anything but, yet claim to be and are followed blindly. When I hear the word expert today, all I hear is a marketing PR buzzword. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/05/us/border-crossing-increase.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FIllegal%20Immigration

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/05/us/crossing-the-border-statistics.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FIllegal%20Immigration

Do you mean privacy fences?  Or walls around a gate community?  I need to know more about what you mean.

As for your links, those are caravans of refuges who are entering at the points of entry seeking asylum.  Did you read your own articles?

"But a wall would do little to slow migration, most immigration analysts say. While the exact numbers are not known, many of those apprehended along the southern border, including the thousands who present themselves at legal ports of entry, surrender voluntarily to Border Patrol agents and eventually submit legal asylum claims."

Those that are more spread out now and are crossing illegally are doing so because of the frustrations and fear of actually crossing at the legal points of entry (exceptionally long waits and family separation....still thousands of kids separated from their parents and officials have no idea where they moved the kids to).

Any type of barrier.

Exact numbers are not known. Hmmm. Surrendered and eventually asked for asylum. Hmmm. Most analysts say. The experts again? Hmmm. Same type of people who've been telling us the world was doomed because of climate change way back, who weren't wrong, obviously... just made poor calculations due to lack of info, who now again know the world is over in 12 years if we don't do something right now?

So it's America's fault they just won't let everyone walk right into the country uninterrupted? Maybe America needs to borrow more and add more debt just to make it easier for immigrants to enter the country and instantly be completely taken care of? Thousands of kids used as pawns to cross the border?

Last edited by EricHiggin - on 14 March 2019