No, not really. The cartel owns Mexico, and anything we do to help their government will be helping the cartel. The problem is the drug lords are the government. If we do anything to help get rid of them, it will be met with opposition. It's not like Iraq where bad people were in charge. It's bad people controlling whoever happens to be in charge at the time. 

The wall works in Israel. It works in Hungary. In fact, other European countries are also building walls, since it works so well in Hungary. So yeah, it's a proven solution and that's beyond any doubt. Whether you like it or not, is a different question. I can't say for US/Mexico, since I'm European, but I personally think that if Germany doesn't stop being so fucking morronic, we should consider building a wall on our border to seperate us from the dump they are turning their country into.

So now we are debating whether the primary function of a wall will actually work.

Next up: Can a can opener open a can?!?

People consistently blame Donald Trump for not mentioning specifics. What are Hillary Clinton's and Bernie Sanders' specific plans to fix the illegal immigration issue?

A wall might help but it will be so expensive to build, and then they would still need thousands of guards to protect the border. Seems like a waste of money to me...

Did you maybe want to actually look for Sanders and Clintons immigration plans?

https://berniesanders.com/issues/a-fair-and-humane-immigration-policy/

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/immigration-reform/

All this talk about the wall cutting the deficit (which it won't). Cutting defense spending will also cut the deficit. Cutting the deficit doesn't seem so important when that fact is bright up to incessant deficit hawks. Illegal immigration is a problem, that's for sure. But there are precedents to this wall and none of them have worked. But we're America so ours will work, right?

BAZINGA!!!

In certain parts of Mexico that's true, but not nationally. Plus, do you honestly think that the Mexican people want to lose their country to the U.S.? 

People have been trying the whole "Don't worry, we'll take over, since we know what's best for you" thing all throughout history, and it just doesn't work.

While illegal imigrants are technically not allowed to receieve many welfare benefits (though they can in several states), the administration has lowered a lot of the security around this making it very easy to defraud the system (or illegal immigrants with a citizen child).

Immigrants (legal and illegal) (51%), particularly from Mexico and Cental America (73%), do use a disproportionately high level of welfare compared to the native population (30%).

---

Sources:

http://www.gao.gov/products/HEHS-98-30

http://cis.org/Welfare-Use-Immigrant-Native-Households

http://thelawdictionary.org/article/why-is-it-that-illegal-aliens-get-free-food-stamps-health-insurance-and-pay-no-taxes/

---

That being said, I am not a Trump supporter, nor do I agree with him on immigration (actually, it would be hypocritical of me). I do think making welfare a citizens-only thing, however, could reduce many concerns with immigration, save the US taxpayer a bunch of money, and help to only attract the "right" kind of immigrants (ie, the traditional kind, who will work for their incomes).

If you think all of Mexico isn't under their thumb, then you're being naive. 

And with most countries, yeah, I see that being a problem. With with how much they want to move to America anyway...