The Wall

[Bus Driver]

No one in Washington is serious about the deficit.

So, opposition to spending for the sake of spending is to be derided when done by Democrats.

If the parties were reversed, you'd be giving credit to the GOP for holding the Dems in check.

 

[Bus Driver]

President Trump just engaging in a little exaggeration and hyperbole.

 

[Kirwan]

What the R's don't get, is that opposing the border wall is not equal to "completely open borders'

Actually, they do get it, but in their typical dishonest fashion, they invent fallacies to rile up the base and make the opposition look bad.   

Fact is, most D's are in favor of border security, and would fund personnel, equipment, training and things that might actually work, instead of an ineffective wall that nobody wants (and will balloon in cost). 

Interesting interview with the mayor of Laredo Texas, where he said the same:  ($200 Billion worth of foreign trade happens there)

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/04/682157001/we-dont-need-a-physical-wall-loredo-mayor-pete-saenz-says

 

[βhyde]

that would be e verify.....  it should be mandatory in all 50 states...not just 20 or so

Exactly. Add criminal charges to any employer found to be hiring illegal immigrates, and your "border" problem disappears.

 

[A guy in the Chesapeake]

What the R's don't get, is that opposing the border wall is not equal to "completely open borders'

Actually, they do get it, but in their typical dishonest fashion, they invent fallacies to rile up the base and make the opposition look bad.   

Fact is, most D's are in favor of border security, and would fund personnel, equipment, training and things that might actually work, instead of an ineffective wall that nobody wants (and will balloon in cost). 

Interesting interview with the mayor of Laredo Texas, where he said the same:  ($200 Billion worth of foreign trade happens there)

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/04/682157001/we-dont-need-a-physical-wall-loredo-mayor-pete-saenz-says

How does the concept of sanctuary cities fit within the narrative that you're proffering?   BTW - Happy fuckin' New Year... 

 

[Raz'r]

Manifestly not.

Still waiting on the data showing that we need a wall. So far, you’ve got. Nothing but bluster. And people stuck in Tijuana proves the border is secure already. Or they’d be in Houston, SF, Boise....

 

[Raz'r]

Take the jobs available sign down and you will not need a wall. 

Yep. Why won’t we do that. Oh, yeah, the Chamber says No!

 

[Raz'r]

How does the concept of sanctuary cities fit within the narrative that you're proffering?   BTW - Happy fuckin' New Year... 

What do Sanc Cities have to do with the border?

 

[A guy in the Chesapeake]

What do Sanc Cities have to do with the border?

It seems to me that supporting the concept of sanctuary cities is in opposition to supporting strong border security.  "yeah - don't let 'em in, but, once they do sneak in, we have to protect them from overzealous, immoral immigration enforcement".   

 

[learningJ24]

"How does the concept of sanctuary cities fit within the narrative that you're proffering? "

Let's apply some pragmatism.

A city has a population that, with the exception of immigration status, is a generally law abiding labor pool that contributes to the local economy. The Federal government appropriates limited resources to the enforcement of federal immigration laws. For the city to enforce these laws incurs costs of enforcement, judicial time, disruption of local business, activating local political movements and sowing distrust in local law enforcement thus making their job harder.  With so many of the enforcement costs, both economic and non-economic, exported to the cities, where's the incentive to cooperate?

 

[Raz'r]

It seems to me that supporting the concept of sanctuary cities is in opposition to supporting strong border security.  "yeah - don't let 'em in, but, once they do sneak in, we have to protect them from overzealous, immoral immigration enforcement".   

Not at all. The whole idea is to develop trust in local communities for local law enforcement. Deporting someone who points the finger at a rapist, a gang banger, an extortion ring would be shitty policing if you care about fighting crime.

yeah, it’s a trade off. One that’s worth it IMHO. And, eventually the problem goes away as the border crossing have dropped to net zero.

 

[A guy in the Chesapeake]

Not at all. The whole idea is to develop trust in local communities for local law enforcement. Deporting someone who points the finger at a rapist, a gang banger, an extortion ring would be shitty policing if you care about fighting crime.

yeah, it’s a trade off. One that’s worth it IMHO. And, eventually the problem goes away as the border crossing have dropped to net zero.

I understand and agree with that intent. The larger point that's conveniently excluded from this conversation is that if they weren't here illegally in the first place?  That wouldn't be an issue.   

IMHO - all this focus on band-aid BS is exacerbating the problem, when we need to quit yelling about things that really don't matter and fix the root problem.   There are valid, pragmatic reasons that nations have borders, and control immigration.  As much as it might make some people feel good, we simply can't support everyone who wants to come here.  Our immigration policies should be planned to consider the constraints of our social services, employment requirements,  medical, etc - instead of the issue being decided by the emotional fringes.   We aren't going to get to that point in the discussion if we continue to let the fringes drive the conversation - as the fringes aren't interested in a workable fix, they want to push their approach as the only viable option. 

 

[Raz'r]

I understand and agree with that intent. The larger point that's conveniently excluded from this conversation is that if they weren't here illegally in the first place?  That wouldn't be an issue.   

IMHO - all this focus on band-aid BS is exacerbating the problem, when we need to quit yelling about things that really don't matter and fix the root problem.   There are valid, pragmatic reasons that nations have borders, and control immigration.  As much as it might make some people feel good, we simply can't support everyone who wants to come here.  Our immigration policies should be planned to consider the constraints of our social services, employment requirements,  medical, etc - instead of the issue being decided by the emotional fringes.   We aren't going to get to that point in the discussion if we continue to let the fringes drive the conversation - as the fringes aren't interested in a workable fix, they want to push their approach as the only viable option. 

Why do you think Dems want everyone to come in?

I agree with you 100% on the need to immigration control. But our undocumented-immigrant problem is from people that came in the 90's and up to the mid-2000s over the southern border, but today is due to people coming on planes and overstaying visas.

Why fight the last war?

 

[Kirwan]

How does the concept of sanctuary cities fit within the narrative that you're proffering?   BTW - Happy fuckin' New Year... 

I think that "sanctuary cities" is another manufactured crisis by the R's to get the base fired up.  

Ok, back at you: Do you really think a physical wall is the solution?  And do you really think $5B is enough? 

 

[Raz'r]

I've seen estimates of between $20B and $100B

Then maintain it.

you'd think if we wanted to stop illegals crossing the southern border, we could do with modern tech at 1/100th the cost, and be just as effective.  Without damaging the environment, taking land from landowners, and building an ugly as shit, ineffective monument to stupidity.

 

[A guy in the Chesapeake]

Why do you think Dems want everyone to come in?

I agree with you 100% on the need to immigration control. But our undocumented-immigrant problem is from people that came in the 90's and up to the mid-2000s over the southern border, but today is due to people coming on planes and overstaying visas.

Why fight the last war?

On a practical level, I really don't. But - that's the logical reaction to the D focus on not deporting those who are here illegally, making it easier for those that want to to come in, etc.   Why?  I think it's political expediency - they want to be seen as "the caring compassionate" party, so that they can paint the opposition as hateful heartless bastards, and the Rs want to paint the Ds as "open border proponents" - and both focus more on painting the opposition in a bad way than either does in enacting any meaningful change.   

Our border issue isn't the people who are trying to come here to better themselves, IMHO, it's those who are oppressing/trafficking those people, the drug-industry violence - if we fixed our work-visas, and let people come/go freely, made them subject to and enforced the same requirements ( ID, driver's licensing, insurance ( health, auto, liability), industry regulations ( construction licenses, building permits, etc) - the former would cease to be an issue.  I'm actually with Tom on this - I think that non-citizen residents ought to be afforded every right, and abide by every regulation, that our citizens do, except participating in elections, either as voters or advocates. 

 

[Ishmael]

I've seen estimates of between $20B and $100B

Then maintain it.

you'd think if we wanted to stop illegals crossing the southern border, we could do with modern tech at 1/100th the cost, and be just as effective.  Without damaging the environment, taking land from landowners, and building an ugly as shit, ineffective monument to stupidity.

Trump just wants a monument to himself that can be seen from space. Unfortunately, 65% of Americans don't want to waste the money on a huge vanity project.

 

[A guy in the Chesapeake]

I've seen estimates of between $20B and $100B

Then maintain it.

you'd think if we wanted to stop illegals crossing the southern border, we could do with modern tech at 1/100th the cost, and be just as effective.  Without damaging the environment, taking land from landowners, and building an ugly as shit, ineffective monument to stupidity.

We can, and we should. 

 

[Raz'r]

On a practical level, I really don't. But - that's the logical reaction to the D focus on not deporting those who are here illegally, making it easier for those that want to to come in, etc.   Why?  I think it's political expediency - they want to be seen as "the caring compassionate" party, so that they can paint the opposition as hateful heartless bastards, and the Rs want to paint the Ds as "open border proponents" - and both focus more on painting the opposition in a bad way than either does in enacting any meaningful change.   

Our border issue isn't the people who are trying to come here to better themselves, IMHO, it's those who are oppressing/trafficking those people, the drug-industry violence - if we fixed our work-visas, and let people come/go freely, made them subject to and enforced the same requirements ( ID, driver's licensing, insurance ( health, auto, liability), industry regulations ( construction licenses, building permits, etc) - the former would cease to be an issue.  I'm actually with Tom on this - I think that non-citizen residents ought to be afforded every right, and abide by every regulation, that our citizens do, except participating in elections, either as voters or advocates. 





2

Changing the discussion? How the hell would we deport 10 million people?  A wall btw won't do diddly for the folks already here, except lock them in. Do you hate the economy and SS recipients?  Cause you'd crash both if you deported 3m+ workers.

And why would you want local gov't to take on a Federal role? I thought you guys were all about Stites Rites?

So you want to build a wall to stop drugs? Why not just legalize them, tax them, and address the problem on the demand side? I know this is a personal issue for you, but would a wall help?  Seems like addicts get easily get drugs in prison, and I don't think we can turn Fortress America into a prison. Even if we did, it still wouldn't work.

 

[Saorsa]

We can, and we should. 

This one is a couple of fences with a road between them and senors where needed to alert guards.  Seems to work.