Are you in favor of a barrier along the US - Mexican border

[keith]

Originally Posted by D.O.A.R.

You bring up another concern with our immigration problem. In the past, immigrants went through processing centers, where among other things, they were screened medically. Not so now, resulting in 3rd world diseases being brought to our shores.

Such as?

Originally Posted by D.O.A.R.

On a somewhat related topic, my wife told me about a special she saw (on 60 minute, I think) about bed bugs, and how 5 star hotels are reporting having problems with infestation. Apparently, the USA had irradicated these decades ago, but international travel has reintroduced them. Its a good thing we can't afford to stay at more than 2-3 star hotels.

Which would indictae that all first class travellers should be stripped and fumigated before they are allowed to enter the country; just like economic migrants. How egalitarian!

[D.O.A.R.]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

There are probably more cost-effective measures than a physical barrier---especially an unmonitored physical barrier---but at the same time I cannot side with those who dismiss the idea out of hand as one that "just won't work". How does one arrive at the conclusion that an idea which hasn't been tried can't possibly work? The suspicious mind immediately begins to look at the motives of those who say such things...

What else is out there if not a physical barrier? Theres no doubt that building a wall along our southern border would cost a large sum of money. Still, such a barrier would be effective in stemming the flow of millions crossing over from Mexico. 100% effective? No, but monitored by our border patrol and remote sensors, I would think would be 75-85% effective. Add a second wall, even more so.

Some columnist said our immigration policy needs large walls and wide gates. I agree. While we work out the wide gate aspect, we should at least get the high walls going.

[D.O.A.R.]

Originally Posted by keith

Such as?

http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dq/diseases.htm

Originally Posted by keith

Which would indictae that all first class travellers should be stripped and fumigated before they are allowed to enter the country; just like economic migrants. How egalitarian!

I was only suggesting people should be careful where they lay their head at night.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by lochinvar

Any idea can be made to work, given the proper amount of sweat, time, and money. Build a big enough and long enough wall and man it every 50 yds or so with M50 machine guns, and it will work. Oh, yes--don't forget to sink sensors into the ground ever few yards or so to pick up the tunnelers...

Yes, except there's also been no proof offered that it would actually be necessary to go to those extremes. Convenient, that.

Possibly we could try som things, and then if they fail we could conclude that they won't work. But to throw up our hands and surrender at the very outset seems a bit, I don't know...French?

However, the efficacy of the project isn't really in question, but rather whether the cost/benefit ratio of the project is ultimately in the nation's interest.

Right, that's always the relevant question ( or should be ) for a nation.

But again, where is the evidence that smaller-scale, less expensive efforts are preordained to fail? Because that seems to be the prevailing political tactic: can't work, won't work, it's just obvious, so let's just look at something else...hey, I have this nifty idea for a "guest-worker" program...

My own view is close to Tom Friedman's: "a high wall with a wide gate". While he believes without evidence that other unproven canard of the immigration debate---that it's simply impossible to deport all illegals currently in the country---I ask why that, too, should be accepted as a given. And I advocate not only deportation for them all but a jail term first...after which they can have a shot at coming back through a widened gate, ie a much expanded set of quotas for immigration and a streamlined application/checking process. That is, once they have paid their debt to the society which they injured by breaking its laws as their first act in the country. ( And " You have to learn English" is not any sort of proper punishment for lawbreaking. )

What we have right now is a narrow gate standing in the middle of the desert, with no wall to either side. So few bother with the gate at all.

Do we really need to spend the enormous resources required? Might not the labor and capital be better spent updating our antiquated manufacturing base?

That's best left up to industry, I think, but the national infrastructure ( roads, dams, electrical grid, etc ) IS in dire need of some investment...

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by keith

Such as?

Antibiotic-resistant tuberculosis, for one.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by D.O.A.R.

What else is out there if not a physical barrier?

In the long run, demographics will resolve the issue. The overall Mexican birth rate has fallen to about replacement levels, and they are already beginning to experience some mild shortages of unskilled labor in certain areas as many of the workers who would have done those jobs have all come here. Illegal immigrants into Mexico from Guatemala and points south are beginning to filter into those job markets in Mexico.

Give it another 30 or 40 years and illegal immigration will be Mexico's problem not ours. And they are more willing to combat it harshly than we are.

Do we have 4 decades? I don't know.

What other measures present themselves? Increased penalties for illegally crossing the border will increase the potential price of the activity, and anything which raises the price tends to decrease quantity. So although many oppose it vehemently, making illegal crossing a felony might have some effect.

Making it possible for local and state authorities to arrest and prosecute illegals---breaking the monopoly on that by the woefully underfunded and understaffed ICE---might also help. It would mean federally funding local law enforcement and corrections to assist in a federal task, though...and bureaucrats guard their jurisdictions jealously.

Roadblocks and checkpoints, both roving and fixed, is another proven tactic. But of course, that's "profiling" and "anti-American" to many.

There are things which can be done, and they take more political will than resources. Which I suppose is why we are getting amnest--er, sorry, "guest worker" programs instead, and why so may insist that the ONLY effective measure is prosecution of employers...

[lochinvar]

Well, I suppose we could always issue letters of marque and place a bounty on every illegal scalp they bring in.

[felicote]

The only way of combating illegal immigration is to examine the causes of it.
The reason such a large flow of hispanics come into the US is because of the economic situations in their countries, forcing them to find a way out to be able to feed themselves and their children. This economic swamp that most of latin america seems to be stuck in is largely caused by unfair policies established by the UNited States and their very often corrupt leaders. So how do we stop illegal immigration? Either we make it much easier for immigrants to enter the US or we help their economies. Changing the current immigration laws is only putting a band aid on a huge wound. The band aid is still needed but we need some major changes to international trade to heal the wound.

[Feltan]

Originally Posted by felicote

The only way of combating illegal immigration is to examine the causes of it.
The reason such a large flow of hispanics come into the US is because of the economic situations in their countries, forcing them to find a way out to be able to feed themselves and their children. This economic swamp that most of latin america seems to be stuck in is largely caused by unfair policies established by the UNited States and their very often corrupt leaders. So how do we stop illegal immigration? Either we make it much easier for immigrants to enter the US or we help their economies. Changing the current immigration laws is only putting a band aid on a huge wound. The band aid is still needed but we need some major changes to international trade to heal the wound.

I find that difficult to accept for a number of reasons.

Are you suggesting that the US leaders are more corrupt than the leaders of Central American countries? The way you worded your statement makes it difficult to interpret your meaning.

However, given that there is an economic divide -- one NAFTA was supposed to help balance -- does that warrant illegal entry into a country?

If the roles were reversed, do you think Mexico and the Central American countries would welcome migrant Amercian workers?

I think a strong argument can be made absent the economic situation you point out. The US has laws. It is allowed to control its own border. Illegal border crossing is a captiol offense in many parts of the world -- and all the US is trying to do is establish some order.

There are many many areas of the world far worse off than our southern neighbors, and the fact that they completely disregard the laws of the very country they wish to enter for economic gain is an irony that prevents me, and I would venture to guess many others, from having unbounded sympathy for their plight.

Regards,
Feltan

[Epee_Pox]

Originally Posted by felicote

This economic swamp that most of latin america seems to be stuck in is largely caused by unfair policies established by the UNited States and their very often corrupt leaders.

It makes perfect sense now!

Glad to hear that it's the US's fault, and not primarily due to Latin America's own persistent history of:
perverse corruption,
lack of freedoms,
insane government policies that stifle development,
lack of individual rights,
systems where the people serve the government rather than the other way around,
impossibility of class advancement,
cronyism,
cultural norms that prevent growth,
oppressive institutions,
unstable unpredictable and unreliable governments,
absence of rule of law,
state mercantilism,
faddish marxism,
oligarchic statism,
truly insulated and overpowered elites, and
truly voiceless and powerless lower classes...
all of which combine to prevent any meaningful social or economic progress DESPITE economic assistance and free market reforms from the USA.

Your explanation is so much more easy to work with. Glad you've figured it out. What do you plan to do about it?

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by felicote

The reason such a large flow of hispanics come into the US is because of the economic situations in their countries, forcing them to find a way out to be able to feed themselves and their children.

Yes, but relying only upon measures aimed at reducing demand is not likely to be as productive as combining them with measures aimed at the supply side...

This economic swamp that most of latin america seems to be stuck in is largely caused by unfair policies established by the UNited States and their very often corrupt leaders.

You know, historically speaking Latin American economic problems precede the founding of the United States, much less its rise to regional hegemon, much less its rise to global hegemon ( by which I mean of course to Font of All Evil ).

Either we make it much easier for immigrants to enter the US or we help their economies.

"Help their economies"?! What do you call the $20 billion in remittances to Mexico alone every year by immigrants in the United States? The boot of Yankee oppression?

[gojujay]

Originally Posted by lochinvar

Might not the labor and capital be better spent updating our antiquated manufacturing base?

Only in regards to getting rid of red tape. Private industry will dictate the rest...

Originally Posted by lochinvar

To my mind, the emmigration of jobs is far more worrisome than the immigration of workers.

See above for red tape argument with the addition of minimum wage laws...

[gojujay]

Originally Posted by felicote

The only way of combating illegal immigration is to examine the causes of it.
The reason such a large flow of hispanics come into the US is because of the economic situations in their countries, forcing them to find a way out to be able to feed themselves and their children. This economic swamp that most of latin america seems to be stuck in is largely caused by unfair policies established by the UNited States and their very often corrupt leaders. So how do we stop illegal immigration? Either we make it much easier for immigrants to enter the US or we help their economies. Changing the current immigration laws is only putting a band aid on a huge wound. The band aid is still needed but we need some major changes to international trade to heal the wound.

We've tried "economic incentive" programs before in third world countries. They amounted to throwing money at the problem. We ended up wasting a lot of money for an infinetismal ROI. What is needed in most Third World countries is a change in their formal legal systems to recognize the extralegal workarounds that the poor are currently using. This is no small project and requires a willing non-socialist regime.

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!

Let us assume, for the sake of the discussion, that an inpenetrable barrier can be built and enforced. The cost can probably be estimated by using economic data from the East German border costs, and extrapolating in proportion to border length.

What then? Would not illegal entry through sea ports, airports, and small vessels sailing from Baja California to San Diego take up the slack?

I say: target the employers of illegals. Employers are already into the system, and have a lot to lose. Just leaving at the drop of a hat is not an option for most of them. The IRS already knows a lot about them, some auditing should be able to reveal where illegal work comes in.

Give tax breaks to employers who provide info on other employers who hire illegals - what a motive! Getting a tax break and kicking your competition in the shins in one move - legally!


Have a nice time!

Peter Gustafsson

[Inquartata]

It's a lot more difficult, dangerous and above all expensive to slip in by sea or air. That's significant. If you want to reduce some activity, raise it's price ( said the economist ). Most illegal immigrants are fairly penurious and can probably be deterred by making entry costly enough...and impossible using cheaper alternatives. Currently the only unavoidable cost is that of shoe leather and a plastic jug or two of water.

Of course, that would not help with the threat of terrorist and criminal border-crossings, as these sorts are usually well financed. But it would be a start.

[lochinvar]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

Most illegal immigrants are fairly penurious and can probably be deterred by making entry costly enough <snip> Of course, that would not help with the threat of terrorist and criminal border-crossings, as these sorts are usually well financed.

Right. Shoot the mice but leave the elephants to roam free...

[Feltan]

Originally Posted by lochinvar

Right. Shoot the mice but leave the elephants to roam free...

Twenty million mice inside your borders creates a problem by itself (to carry forward an analogy that seems a bit odd to start with).

Just because a barrrier would not be 100% effective does not mean that it is not worthwhile. Stemming the cascade of illegal entries would also have the happy effect of freeing up enforcement personnel to address the less popular/more expensive modes of illegal entry.

Regards,
Feltan

[umbrella]

Only if it looks like the Great Wall of China. No, but seriously, a wall wouldnt do anything for anyone, unless it was a decorative thing. Maybe Mexico, North America and Canada should become one big thing, but running such a huge government would be the problem.

Someone mentioned in another thread that white people don't want to get their hands dirty. I agree that many white men have failed the system by refusing work that looks 'bad'; the most classic example is the Migrant Farm Workers who are 'traditionally' from mexico. Why should it be just their job? Why aren't local kids from the "valley" doing the pickin? I feel its time that some significant changes occur in the attitudes of white people. Being 1/2 white and 1/2 Italian, I feel I can say this. I did a lot of so-called 'dirty-work' kitchen work,busing tables, I worked hard for my temple raking leaves; shoveling snow; vacuming the rugs and setting up chairs for people.

It goes back 1985; when Pres. Bush Senior; bought up farmland in the Midwest, and those people just gave it up to Protor and Gamble.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by umbrella

Only if it looks like the Great Wall of China. No, but seriously, a wall wouldnt do anything for anyone, unless it was a decorative thing.

How do we know?

Where are the trials?

Where are the studies?

We don't see those. We just hear assertions that "It wouldn't work". It seems to boil down to certainty based on nothing more than faith, on "Trust me, I know".

This reminds me of an anecdote I once heard. I think it was before the US entered WWII, the government was asking the country's airplane manufacturers to produce X warplanes by a certain date and was told flatly that it was impossible, the factories couldn't turn out that many even working day and night even if they had the raw materials needed, which they didn't. In other words, industry management knew it couldn't be done. They didn't just doubt that it could be done, they KNEW it. They