Ilegal Immigration

[BehindBlueI's]

Or just have police look the other way while citizens secure the border.

Pointless as well. There's too much border and too many methods of bypassing it. You going to have citizens randomly checking trucks coming in? Vigilantism isn't the answer. Removing the economic incentive to come here is. If your family was starving, Indiana had no work for you, but Kentucky had plenty of jobs and at wages that were well above anything you could find even if something opened up in Indiana, what would you risk to cross the Ohio even if it were illegal to do so? If it were patrolled by armed guards, official or not? If your children had no hope of education if you stayed on your side? If your side was crime ridden and lacked the most basic infrastructure? Probably quite a bit of risk. What would you risk if there were no jobs in Kentucky and no education for your children and you could not use the infrastructure of health care, etc. Probably much less. Now, if there was a legal and fair way for you to work in Kentucky what would you risk to enter illegally? Right.

Border security and enforcing it is important, but it's never going to work if you don't fix the underlying issues. The people running across to go to Wal-mart aren't the problem, but they tie up resources as well. Once that's done, the economic migrants stop illegally entering and border security can actually focus on national security issues, like violent drug gangs.

 

[DadSmith]

Pointless as well. There's too much border and too many methods of bypassing it. You going to have citizens randomly checking trucks coming in? Vigilantism isn't the answer. Removing the economic incentive to come here is. If your family was starving, Indiana had no work for you, but Kentucky had plenty of jobs and at wages that were well above anything you could find even if something opened up in Indiana, what would you risk to cross the Ohio even if it were illegal to do so? If it were patrolled by armed guards, official or not? If your children had no hope of education if you stayed on your side? If your side was crime ridden and lacked the most basic infrastructure? Probably quite a bit of risk. What would you risk if there were no jobs in Kentucky and no education for your children and you could not use the infrastructure of health care, etc. Probably much less. Now, if there was a legal and fair way for you to work in Kentucky what would you risk to enter illegally? Right.

Border security and enforcing it is important, but it's never going to work if you don't fix the underlying issues. The people running across to go to Wal-mart aren't the problem, but they tie up resources as well. Once that's done, the economic migrants stop illegally entering and border security can actually focus on national security issues, like violent drug gangs.

I've been telling our congressman to stop buying from China and start buying from Central and South American countries. That would bring them out of poverty and give people in those areas good paying jobs which they don't have now. Imo it's better than supporting our enemies and would help keep those who are coming here for better life in there countries because there is work and money flowing to them. Corporations are not interested in bringing jobs back to America so let's change who we buy from.

Right now even many American made products are still owned by Chinese companies which is owned by the Chinese government.


Edit: added this so you know who owns GE

Haier - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Edit: added this so you know who owns GE

Haier - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

For clarification, Haier owns GE Appliances, which was a subsidiary of GE. GE sold off a bunch of it's subsidiaries to try and reduce debt load, focus on more core areas of their business, and save the overall company. GE finance was sold as components to a bunch of different companies, GE appliances was sold, the locomotive division was merged with Wabtech, with existing shareholders (like me) getting shares in that company. Etc.

Haier does not own GE, which remains an American company with Culp as the CEO. They do not manufacture consumer appliances, but make power generation equipment, health care equipment, jet engines, etc.

 

[DadSmith]

For clarification, Haier owns GE Appliances, which was a subsidiary of GE. GE sold off a bunch of it's subsidiaries to try and reduce debt load, focus on more core areas of their business, and save the overall company. GE finance was sold as components to a bunch of different companies, GE appliances was sold, the locomotive division was merged with Wabtech, with existing shareholders (like me) getting shares in that company. Etc.

Haier does not own GE, which remains an American company with Culp as the CEO. They do not manufacture consumer appliances, but make power generation equipment, health care equipment, jet engines, etc.

Still if you buy a GE appliance it is supporting China. Point is we are not going back to American made any time soon if ever so let's support America's made instead of made in China.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Still if you buy a GE appliance it is supporting China.

That's true. Of course you're also supporting workers in Louisville. America and China's economies are so intertangled we're like prisoners handcuffed together. We can fight, but if one of is is crippled it'll drag the other down as well. That's what happens when you "offshore" so much of your manufacturing capability. But, hey, it made the "job creators" money at least.

 

[DadSmith]

That's true. Of course you're also supporting workers in Louisville. America and China's economies are so intertangled we're like prisoners handcuffed together. We can fight, but if one of is is crippled it'll drag the other down as well. That's what happens when you "offshore" so much of your manufacturing capability. But, hey, it made the "job creators" money at least.

Why we should start investing with central and South America. It would take many years to get going but it would help our neighboring countries and could reduce illegal immigration in the future. Not many politicians are interested in that nor companies now days probably because of what you said we are so entangled with China it would take a drastic move to change. It would probably take a major war with them and many people would die for a long time because of the lack of life saving medications we do not produce but get from China alone.

 

[armalitesheepdog]

The democrats think they will keep there power by letting in millions of democrat voters from other countries. We all know thats the plan. Are they so shortsighted to not see that once all those voters from south of Texas gain the political power to change elections they will run there own candidates. They will vote only for people with the Hispanic names. And Pelosi Shummer Biden.
Will be Sanchez Moreno Ubarra.
I thank God I grew up in a time to experience America at its greatest.
It's all down hill from here.

 

[BE Mike]

The corruption in Mexico, over generations, has kept the situation desperate. This is what allowed the cartels to take over. Citizens who live in Texas, on the border, are afraid to go out in public. Not only are the companies who regularly hire illegals in the U.S. not being held to account, now illegals have found a loophole. They can claim political asylum and have years to wait in the U.S. for a court date, due to the backlog. The recent lack of political will to attempt to stem the tide and even encourage illegal entry has really turned the Texas border into chaos. In years past, there was never enough judicial structure (immigration courts) or detention funding to be an effective deterrent. With jails overcrowded across the nation, can you imagine the impact of jailing illegal aliens? If just the ones who were being prosecuted for felonies were to be jailed, the detention/ corrections systems would be overwhelmed immediately. Immigration law is complicated. There are administrative provisions, such as formal deportation and criminal penalties. Most of what is done is administrative. What is said in Washington, D.C. almost immediately travels through the rumor mill in Mexico and Central/ South America. If the message is "come one, come all" it has an impact on the volume of attempted crossings within days.

 

[Tombs]

Pointless as well. There's too much border and too many methods of bypassing it. You going to have citizens randomly checking trucks coming in? Vigilantism isn't the answer. Removing the economic incentive to come here is. If your family was starving, Indiana had no work for you, but Kentucky had plenty of jobs and at wages that were well above anything you could find even if something opened up in Indiana, what would you risk to cross the Ohio even if it were illegal to do so? If it were patrolled by armed guards, official or not? If your children had no hope of education if you stayed on your side? If your side was crime ridden and lacked the most basic infrastructure? Probably quite a bit of risk. What would you risk if there were no jobs in Kentucky and no education for your children and you could not use the infrastructure of health care, etc. Probably much less. Now, if there was a legal and fair way for you to work in Kentucky what would you risk to enter illegally? Right.

Border security and enforcing it is important, but it's never going to work if you don't fix the underlying issues. The people running across to go to Wal-mart aren't the problem, but they tie up resources as well. Once that's done, the economic migrants stop illegally entering and border security can actually focus on national security issues, like violent drug gangs.

The wall between east and west germany worked pretty well, even with massive incentive to jump it.

People simply lack the will to enforce border security. And those that have the will are usually carted off by law enforcement for attempting to defend their country.

All these hypotheticals and you're neglecting the primary issue here. We refuse to defend our own borders, and would be stuck debating with each other while chinese troops marched across because that's how pathetic the situation has become.

If you think this is an impossible situation, then feel free to explain why we've never gotten on the ground footage inside of area 51.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

The wall between east and west germany worked pretty well, even with massive incentive to jump it.

You're proving my point. The incentives were high so people risked it. Nobody went the other way because there was no incentive to do so.

As far as "worked pretty well", the Berlin Wall had some pretty serious advantages, such as:

It was about 1.5% the length of the US/Mexico border.
There was no routine legal traffic for illegal traffic to hide in
It ran through populated areas
The "escaping from" side was actively thwarting attempts to dig tunnels, etc.

Now if you can build and man about 20,000 guard towers, find the roughly 100k citizens it would take to man them who are willing to shoot anyone, man/woman/child, crossing, find a way to get the Mexican side to inform on tunnel builders, and either shut down all legal traffic or find a way to search every truck, train, cargo container, etc coming across, then you might have similar success. It would definitely be a job building project.

Politics aside, the logistics of having both a border that allows legal traffic and tries to emulate the Berlin Wall/Korean DMZ is impossible and *still* wouldn't work as well as just removing the incentives to come.

 

[phylodog]

Not to worry ya'll. Once the democrats get what they're wanting every immigrant who came into this country and still possesses the ability to get out will flee like their asses are on fire. This place will make Mexico look like a Sandals Resort. I hope Mexico is prepping for their own border crisis because it's coming.

 

[grillak]

It's about punishing you, and rewarding them.

This is what happens when one political ideology no longer has fear of the opposition. It's only going to get worse until they have something to fear again.

they know what they should fear. that's why they're scrambling to repeal the 2A defacto.

 

[jwamplerusa]

This is what happens when one political ideology no longer has fear of the opposition.

And this right here, is an abject example of why the second Amendment was created and the preamble to the Bill of Rights was written. Every elected servant of the people should be afraid of the population! Not deathly fear, but that nagging knowledge at the back of their head that the people are the ones who actually have and retain power. The people can remove them from their cushy job and the perks, and in the most exigent situations, remove them from society completely.

In other words, if you act like a tyrant you should be at risk of reaping the rewards.

Hint, that's why the second Amendment is not about hunting.

 

[BE Mike]

The wall between east and west germany worked pretty well, even with massive incentive to jump it.

Having had intimate knowledge on the subject, I can only say WOW! I could never even imagine that this country would consider using the communist tactics of the past used in the former east block.

 

[BugI02]

build and man about 20,000 guard towers, find the roughly 100k citizens it would take to man them who are willing to shoot anyone, man/woman/child, crossing,

What if we just replace that with a couple of hundred AI piloted drone autogun platforms; although, if we're going to teach them to indiscriminately kill humans, we probably don't want Cyberdyne to make them

 

[Tombs]

You're proving my point. The incentives were high so people risked it. Nobody went the other way because there was no incentive to do so.

As far as "worked pretty well", the Berlin Wall had some pretty serious advantages, such as:

It was about 1.5% the length of the US/Mexico border.
There was no routine legal traffic for illegal traffic to hide in
It ran through populated areas
The "escaping from" side was actively thwarting attempts to dig tunnels, etc.

Now if you can build and man about 20,000 guard towers, find the roughly 100k citizens it would take to man them who are willing to shoot anyone, man/woman/child, crossing, find a way to get the Mexican side to inform on tunnel builders, and either shut down all legal traffic or find a way to search every truck, train, cargo container, etc coming across, then you might have similar success. It would definitely be a job building project.

Politics aside, the logistics of having both a border that allows legal traffic and tries to emulate the Berlin Wall/Korean DMZ is impossible and *still* wouldn't work as well as just removing the incentives to come.

How do military bases prevent people getting in?

I'd wager some sensors and some drones would stop about 90% of illegal crossings.
The concept of a wall is more of an idea than something physical.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

How do military bases prevent people getting in?

I'd wager some sensors and some drones would stop about 90% of illegal crossings.
The concept of a wall is more of an idea than something physical.

You've either never been on a US military facility of any size or you're just trolling at this point.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

For non-anime/sci-fi ideas, keep in mind how much legal traffic needs to be screened.

Border Crossing Entry Data | Tyler Data & Insights

The Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) Border Crossing Data provide summary statistics for inbound crossings at the U.S.-Canada and the U.S.-Mexico border at the port level. Data are available for trucks, trains, containers, buses, personal vehicles, passengers, and pedestrians. Border...

data.bts.gov

Or, you know, keep them from working illegally here, have a reasonable legal work visa program, and don't risk Skynet.

 

[AtTheMurph]

You want to stop illegals? Put real teeth into the laws against hiring them. Not fines, that's just a cost of doing business. Jail time. Real penalties for foreign nationals dealing drugs or committing violent crimes would also help, but the vast majority are coming here for the money.

If you want to stop illegal immigration that is not the way to do it. That's is exactly how we try to stop illegal drugs and we should all know that is a useless waste of resources.

Here is how you stop illegal immigration.

1: End government entitlements. The government is not a nationalized charity.

2: Allow free immigration to anyone without a criminal record and is disease free. (That's how the USA used to operate for over a hundred of years.)

You want to come and try to earn a better life? WELCOME HOME!! We want you here.

Conversely if you plan to come here and simply by entering the country your economic status is raised due to government transfer payments, well that isn't a very good idea and it is completely unsustainable. But that is what we have currently.

There is an entire subculture that has figured out how to milk free money from the govt and the simple fact that a Salvadoran can get across the border means their standard of living is better, is insanity. But that is where we are.

The problem isn't the people, it is the incentives. If you knew that you could better your life by simply traveling 100 miles and some Communist NGO was paying for the ride, you'd take it just like I would.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

If you want to stop illegal immigration that is not the way to do it. That's is exactly how we try to stop illegal drugs and we should all know that is a useless waste of resources.

Drugs and hiring practices are completely different things. The incentive to hire illegals is simple. They are cheaper and have less legal protections. Nobody is addicted to hiring illegals and nobody feels so terrible not hiring illegals they'll suck a dirty...sock in order to do so.

You think you're local HR manager is willing to risk prison time to hire an illegal? Unlike the crackheads pooping in the trash cans downtown, he has something to lose.