The big fence debate

[dtw]

Originally posted by scottmandue
I'm not saying we should do nothing but can't we come up with something more high-tech than a giant fence?

Have any of you tried to keep a dog inside a fenced yard that was determined to get out?

My dog was never bounded by a few yards of fence, and he wasn't even a real go-getter as far as dogs go. Mexicans have more desire (ganas, ese!!) than my dog -- AND opposable thumbs.

Fence = stupidest thing I've ever heard. Enforce the rules we've got. I think starting a massive campaign of checking IDs in the workplace and immediately deporting violators (have the bus waiting outside) would pay dividends immediately.

[nostatic]

Originally posted by dtw
My dog was never bounded by a few yards of fence, and he wasn't even a real go-getter as far as dogs go. Mexicans have more desire (ganas, ese!!) than my dog -- AND opposable thumbs.

Fence = stupidest thing I've ever heard. Enforce the rules we've got. I think starting a massive campaign of checking IDs in the workplace and immediately deporting violators (have the bus waiting outside) would pay dividends immediately.

I'd have to agree with this. If you eliminate the incentive to come here, you don't need the fence.

Instead of putting national guard at the border, have them serve as "la migra." Fine the businesses. Deport the people. Repeat as necessary.

Price of living may go up...but I suppose you have to do the experiment. But the real money will be in providing better fake documents. Always a business opportunity...

[dd74]

Stop gap measures abound. Fences, Nat'l Guard troops in some sort of intangible support role - it's all appeasement toward voters.

What needs to be done is effectively take the responsibility away from government who will never resolve this problem. Pelican board member Cisero has the right idea of boycotting businesses that employ illegals. The problem with that is he is just one man, and nearly every aspect of daily life involve some sort of interaction with illegals. One can't eliminate everything, but one can clear their conscience:

1. Fire your gardener and house cleaner.
2. Wash your own car.
3. Buy produce from less major grocery stores.
4. Boycott Latino run busniness of which YOU KNOW HIRE illegals - one has to be fair about this.
5. As a radical decision - don't travel to Mexico.

Done in mass by, say, 1 million Americans, the economic impact on the illegal aliens will be vast. But relying on GW/the govt is like pounding sand.

[scottmandue]

Originally posted by nostatic

Instead of putting national guard at the border, have them serve as "la migra." Fine the businesses. Deport the people. Repeat as necessary.

Exactly, instead of spending billions on fences that won't work why not spend the money on quadrupling (or more) the INS and have them work like food inspectors. Have the INS drop in randomly on businesses and hall away anyone who is here illegal. That would cost the employer in productivity ($$$) and would be a PITA for the illegal who would at least have to sneak back into the country.

[Racerbvd]

If we start shooting them and sending mexico the bill instead of aid, the will get the message.

[austin552]

Wouldn't a mine field be cheaper and more effective?

[Superman]

Originally posted by Dantilla
Super, you know I lean towards the right, and I have a simple (hopefully not simple-minded) answer.

I believe in limited government, but there are things that are best done by government. By far, the most important role of government is to protect and defend the nation. Without that, the nation disappears into tomorrow's history books.

With the country protected against outside enemies, we are all free to pursue life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Wanting limited government is not the same as hating the government, something you regularly accuse conservatives. Government has it's proper roles, but left unchecked, government will outgrow it's proper roles into areas it does not belong. I am all for a government that is efficient and productive.

I wish for all people on this planet to have the same opportunities I have as an American. (Oops! Is that too compasionate?) But we need a big wall, on both borders, along with an efficient way to welcome those who want nothing more than the American dream.

I've always respected your views and I understand your preference on this. And besides, I might want to borrow your trailer again some day.

Sure, we could build a government whose only job is national defense. But then, people in communities would get together and say "Hey, all these individual water systems are much more expensive than if we just built a community one." Then they would say "My covered wagon wheels are always needing to go to the blacksmith for repair....I wonder if we could just smooth out these roads, perhaps surface them with something.....we all would benefit and it would cost less than we are paying individually for wheel repair." Then someone would say "Gosh, some of your septic systems have failed and I know you don't care, but several of us live downwind of you and we care........"

Fact is, we as a community (even and especially if the "community" is nation-sized) can accomplish much more together, in cooperation, than we can accomplish separately, in competition. At least with respect to certain things. Now, you can point at roads and water systems and sanitary systems and yell "Gubmit waste!", but we'd have to disagree on that.

And besides the thrust of my post is conservatives' selective use of "market forces." A fence between us a Mexico is a vain attempt at thwarding market forces that is doomed to failure. Why do we hear this conclusion from conservatives when it forwards their opportunities to make money, and then see them implementing a completely opposite agenda when the opposite agenda will help their bottom line. Kids, this is about money. And frankly, the really funniest part of this, BY FAR, is that these conservative forces that are pretending to be thinking about solving this immigration problem........enjoy cheap labor MUCH more than votes.

Gentlemen, the Republicans (in other words, the corporations) are not going to limit illegal immigration. It's not going to happen. Or at least, if it does happen, it won't be the current administration that gets it done.

And even then, it would be a doomed tactic.

[Superman]

Originally posted by nostatic
Fine the businesses.

This ain't gonna happen either. At least, certainly not under the current "administration." Yes this is the best solution, by far. But it ain't gonna happen. Freedom in America is for corporations, not citizens.

[coldstart]

Canada should build the wall. I used to live in Windsor (aka South Detroit) and there would be lineups at the walk-in clinics of Americans looking for free healthcare. You could easily buy under-the-table Ontario health cards to get free medical care.

Personally, I prefer the U.S. as Canada caters to the lazy and/or unemployed. The less you do, the more you get. There is a lack of drive in our society to work harder given the tax situation and the way the unemployed/underemployed are treated. Said like a true Porsche driver.....

[dd74]

Originally posted by Superman
Freedom in America is for corporations, not citizens.

These days, that's certainly true.

[scottmandue]

Speaking of the other two big walls in history... think about the countries that built those... is that who we want to emulate?

[Superman]

Originally posted by scottmandue
Speaking of the other two big walls in history... think about the countries that built those... is that who we want to emulate?

You must be a terrorist, based on your hatred for America.

[Dantilla]

Originally posted by Superman
And besides, I might want to borrow your trailer again some day.

Anytime.

I don't believe that national defense is the only role of government. For instance, I'm glad that the federal government is in charge of air-traffic control.

I may be flying my little airplane back to the mid-west soon, and am realy glad that I don't have to know a different set of rules for Idaho, Montana, N&S Dakota, Minnesota..... yada yada.

One set of national rules works great. Same with interstate highways.

Some places government doesen't belong- Why are education dollars sent to Washington DC, and then after bureaucrats cut their salaries from the top, the money is sent back to the states?

Why not cut out the middle man, and increase school funding?


To reiterate: You can use the trailer anytime!

[1fastredsc]

Could always make it an electric fence. After all, you know what they say, don't piss on the eletric fence

[red-beard]

I went to a fence company online and priced up the best security fence they have. 2300 miles would cost roughly 2 billion installed.

$2B invested in a money market account with 5% interest would yield about $100 million per year. $100 million @$100K per border agent (Including Equipment, spanish lessons, truck, guns and bullets), would add 1000 guys to the INS permanently. With 40 hour work weeks, Holidays and weekends and admin staff, you get 1 person on the boarder for each 5 people added. So the net effect would be 1 person per 10 miles of boarder.

Fence or 1 guy every 10 miles? Which would be more effective?

[scottmandue]

Originally posted by red-beard

Fence or 1 guy every 10 miles? Which would be more effective?

But you didn't account for maintenance on the fence. It's a given that they will cut holes in it when we are not looking plus normal wear and tear on a fence.

Besides wouldn't the INS guys be more effective at Home Depot?

[Racerbvd]

Originally posted by scottmandue
But you didn't account for maintenance on the fence. It's a given that they will cut holes in it when we are not looking plus normal wear and tear on a fence.

Besides wouldn't the INS guys be more effective at Home Depot?

It would be cheaper just to shoot them, just like on our property in upstate New York, Trespassers Will Be Shot!!!