Who would you prefer as border gaurds? Uzbekistan gaurds? They are perfect if you don't mind the use of excessive brute force.
Are you kidding me? The right fears U.S. folks fleeing to the wonderful life awaiting us in Mexico?
The gov will be in charge of this fence and ten years is wildly optimistic. The last time we tried to build one much of it was tied up in court and still is over environmentalist law suits.
The right legislation can avoid problems like that.
Think back to WWII
As my friends here know, my opinion regarding the "illegal immigration" is rare and "extreme": Basically, I consider it an imaginary problem in perpetual search of nasty and expensive solutions.
Having said that, a physical barrier on the border does not offend my sensibilities. After all, criminals, human traffickers, and just plain infectious diseases are beneficiaries of poorly guarded borders as well.
But is anyone going to do cost-effectiveness analysis? Let's say per every billion spent on the Great Fence, we "apprehend" - or prevent from even trying to enter - a thousand migrant workers who would contribute to our economy, a dozen thugs who would subtract from it, and one hapless dude carrying the latest fashionable coronavirus.
Was it worth the sacrifice? How do we calculate these things?
You have more faith than I do in our current gov both dem and rep. I don't think we will ever be the country we were in the 40s. Here's hoping you are right and I am wrong though. :cheers:
You have more faith than I do in our current gov both dem and rep. I don't think we will ever be the country we were in the 40s. Here's hoping
you are right and I am wrong though. :cheers:
The 40's were not great for most people we should not want to go back.
There was good and bad, unfortunately the good was thrown out with the bad.
The right legislation can avoid problems like that.
Think back to WWII
I am going to guess that if the fence, plus increased security prevents one incident like 9/11 most Americans will agree that it was worth the cost.
I recall the French built extensive fortifacations called the maginot line to keep the Germans out. Too bad the Germans found a way around it.
Sorry I am so cynical but i don't see how a fence is going to deter anyone from crossing the border, especially if they are determined.
You missed my point.
I referred to WWII because in WWII the USA didn't let red tape, etc. stand in the way of winning the war.
Immediate laws (with real enforcement) against hiring illegal labor should be more of an issue than future plans for border control. Most illegals are not jumping any fence, they simply enter as tourists, shoppers or students and then stay here. I agree that much better border control is needed, but that is much less effective while maintaining the economic magnet of a steady employment opportunity, little chance of deportation and coupled with automatic birthright citizenship for any offspring.
Senators plan to introduce a 'Border Surge' plan that would double the size of the Border Patrol and ensure that 700 miles of fencing is finished on the Southern border.
Read more here: Immigration deal would double size of Border Patrol - Manu Raju and Seung Min Kim - POLITICO.com
I just want to add that every sovereign country on this planet has the right to guard its borders against unwelcome intrusions and control access to its territory.
This should have been done a long time ago.
I totally support this idea and anyone who knows me, knows that I am not anti-immigrant. My wife is an immigrant (She didn't sneak across the border.).
"Tolerance is giving to every other human being every right that you claim for yourself." ~ Robert Green Ingersoll
There's already a law (since 2006) requiring the 700 mile of fence. only 35 miles have been built and gaps in that have been mandated by the Secretary of the Interior as necessary for deer crossings. What will be different this time?
I'll answer my own question. Nothing, except we get legalization once again just as in 1986 without solving the problem...
What do you think of all of the "Cornhusker Kickback" type pay-offs being demanded by the several Senators on both sides of the aisle from Reid before ensuring their vote on immigration?
It simply means the bill is a stinker...
Passing legislation that provides needed funds makes it at least a little more likely, eh?
It simply means the bill is a stinker...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?