Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like a no-brainer to me, but there seems to be a sizable portion of the country opposed to it, and I honestly would like to know why. I just don't know how the millions of unvetted people coming through the border over the past couple of years can be sustainable or safe. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for immigration (I'm a 2nd and 3rd generation immigrant myself), but wouldn't we want to vet people for safety and make sure we have the necessary infrastructure in place before we let so many people in? Also, isn't it unfair to the millions of people who are waiting to become citizens the legal way? I'm really trying to understand this, so please be kind. I'm worried for our country.

Have you ever seen a topographical map of the border? A wall of any sort stretching the length of the border is absurd.

That's what they said in ancient China.

yes during a time when they did not have home depot where you could get 20 ft ladder to get over the wall, and slave labor was plentiful so they didn't need to pay to build the wall.

Anonymous wrote:1. There is actually a shortage of immigrant labor in this country right now- we don’t have enough people to work as home health care aides, various jobs along the food supply chain, etc. There is no overpopulation or complicatedly large immigrant population.

This is a 'chicken or the egg' argument that is only valid if there is a 0% unemployment rate for legal US residents. Is there a shortage of immigrant labor because Americans refuse to, say, wash dishes in a restaurant, or because businesses have learned that they can hire illegal immigrants for $4/hr undercutting American labor? If we had a secure border, companies would have to pay going rate to American workers creating a large number of jobs with reasonable pay. It also is insulting to the immigrants themselves as it is basically arguing that their work is worth less then Americans.

Anonymous wrote: 2. Immigrants, both documented and undocumented, committed significantly less crime than native born Americans. If you want to see reduction or harmful crime, look to gun control, not immigration policy.

Studies regarding this are typically flawed as undocumented immigrants are less likely to respond to such surveys and are less likely to be open and honest about their immigration status. It also ignores the fact that while illegal immigrants may not be committing crimes at a higher level, the very act of being in the country is a crime. So it is impossible that the rate of crime among illegal immigrants is anything under 100%.

Also, honestly, the bigger issue is that while the immigrants themselves are often perfectly fine people, the whole apparatus used to bring them in is often tied to drug gangs and distribution, that is often tied to the same passages and trips across the border.

Anonymous wrote: 3. There is no ‘immigration line’ for these people. Read up on the different ways to get a visa- there is no path for many migrants. Yet, we depend on their labor.

There is a line. But like every other country in the world, who can get through that line is dependent on a variety of factors (Employment, educational background, credentials, family status, etc), so not everyone who wants to live in the US realistically has the option to do so. This is the same with every first world country. Just because you want to move to the US doesnt mean you can, and I dont see why that is a bad thing.

Anonymous wrote: 4. There are ecological and cultural reasons not to have border walls. Again, easily googleable.

I feel sorry for you, OP. You hold so many mistaken beliefs and they are causing you undue worry. Please try to educate yourself before falling for far right tropes. The ignorance in your post is painful.

Ecological concerns can be mitigated against, and not having a wall is causing its own cultural crisis on the border so I cant see that as valid reason not to secure our border.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like a no-brainer to me, but there seems to be a sizable portion of the country opposed to it, and I honestly would like to know why. I just don't know how the millions of unvetted people coming through the border over the past couple of years can be sustainable or safe. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for immigration (I'm a 2nd and 3rd generation immigrant myself), but wouldn't we want to vet people for safety and make sure we have the necessary infrastructure in place before we let so many people in? Also, isn't it unfair to the millions of people who are waiting to become citizens the legal way? I'm really trying to understand this, so please be kind. I'm worried for our country.

Have you ever seen a topographical map of the border? A wall of any sort stretching the length of the border is absurd.

That's what they said in ancient China.

That wall didn’t work either, but it does look pretty from outer space.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like a no-brainer to me, but there seems to be a sizable portion of the country opposed to it, and I honestly would like to know why. I just don't know how the millions of unvetted people coming through the border over the past couple of years can be sustainable or safe. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for immigration (I'm a 2nd and 3rd generation immigrant myself), but wouldn't we want to vet people for safety and make sure we have the necessary infrastructure in place before we let so many people in? Also, isn't it unfair to the millions of people who are waiting to become citizens the legal way? I'm really trying to understand this, so please be kind. I'm worried for our country.

Have you ever seen a topographical map of the border? A wall of any sort stretching the length of the border is absurd.

That's what they said in ancient China.

Yes, China is just like Arizona.

Anonymous wrote:The answer is we need immigration reform desperately, and we also need a wall. The amount of gaslighting and sanctimony on this thread is repulsive - and oh so typical.

And yet no serious, nonpartisan, career national security experts are clamoring for a wall. It makes sense to have some areas of the border be walled, but one contiguous fence would be a massive waste of money. We may as well build moat and fill it with pirhanas.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like a no-brainer to me, but there seems to be a sizable portion of the country opposed to it, and I honestly would like to know why. I just don't know how the millions of unvetted people coming through the border over the past couple of years can be sustainable or safe. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for immigration (I'm a 2nd and 3rd generation immigrant myself), but wouldn't we want to vet people for safety and make sure we have the necessary infrastructure in place before we let so many people in? Also, isn't it unfair to the millions of people who are waiting to become citizens the legal way? I'm really trying to understand this, so please be kind. I'm worried for our country.

Have you ever seen a topographical map of the border? A wall of any sort stretching the length of the border is absurd.

That's what they said in ancient China.

Anonymous wrote:
The immigrants you are opposing are the people who grow our food, slaughter our animals for food, pick crab meat for food, keep our houses clean, dig our ditches, and wipe our grandparents assess. We need them because they do the jobs native born Americans are too lazy to do themselves. They help grown the economy and they add another strand in the American tapestry.

Why do you hate the US so much that you believe what you see on Fox News?

There is no job class in America that is majority held by immigrants.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m an immigrant and I support a wall although I think the most effective things would be to remove birthright citizenship, make it a felony with mandatory jail time to hire someone who doesn’t have proper work authorization, and completely remove all government benefits unless you’re a citizen of this country (and yes, that means schools too).

All the people who say, “but we need those people to pick our fruit!” are completely unserious people because it’s very easy to allow more temporary work visas (for properly vetted people) to do this work rather than letting whoever just walk across our border and decide to stay here.

The majority of people in the United States illegally are individuals who have overstayed legal visas. You are proposing expanding the number of legal visas. Won’t that inherently raise the number of people in the U.S. illegally?

Indeed.

I will repeat: the only way to curtail illegal immigration is to cut off the demand, then the supply will dry up.

Illegal immigrants know that someone will give them a job here. That is why they come. I don't blame poor people for wanting a job, and making a difficult, harsh, scary journey to get that low paying jobs. Many Americans have ancestors who did this as well.

I do blame the people who hire illegal immigrants. Obviously, they do this because the profit they make is much higher than the puny fees that they are assessed if they are caught having hired them. It's too tempting for them to not hire them.

So, make it not worth it. The penalty for hiring illegal immigrants should be a lot higher. Right now the penalty is anywhere from $100 to $3000 per.

Make it higher:

$50K/per - first time offense
$100k/per - second offense
$500k/per and prison sentence - third and subsequent offenses

+1

And this is what the GOP and their deep pocketed donors will never allow because they and their scummy party rely on illegal immigrants for a number of reasons.

True - neither side will do anything for these reasons. Go read the schools forums. I can't walk into England, for instance, and get free schooling for my kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm an R and I am against it because the ROI just isnt there. It isnt an effective countermeasure to stop illegal crossings.

If a wall is politically necessary, it should be built on the southern border of Mexico. Its a much smaller border, and can be built cheaper.

+1 by and large, most of the illegal immigrants now a days crossing the border are from Central/S. America. Build it in MX. That's a great idea. I wouldn't mind paying for that, actually.

And I agree on the ROI. It's a boondogle. Have you seen how much the wall that Trump built costs? It did not go out for bid, and the contract went under multiple cost revisions within the first few months. It was a yuuuuge waste of taxpayer $$, but I guess it MAGA feel good.

-former R

https://www.texastribune.org/2020/10/27/border-wall-texas-cost-rising-trump/

On the same day in May 2019, the Army Corps of Engineers awarded a pair of contracts worth $788 million to replace 83 miles of fence along the southwest border.

The projects were slated to be completed in January 2020, the Corps said then. Four months into this year, however, the government increased the value of the contracts by more than $1 billion, without the benefit of competitive bidding designed to keep costs low to taxpayers.

Within a year of the initial award, the value of the two contracts had more than tripled, to over $3 billion, even though the length of the fence the companies were building had only grown by 62%, to 135 miles. The money is coming from military counter-narcotics funding.

Those contract spikes were dramatic, but not isolated. A ProPublica/Texas Tribune review of federal spending data shows more than 200 contract modifications, at times awarded within just weeks or months after the original contracts, have increased the cost of the border wall project by billions of dollars since late 2017. This is particularly true this year, in the run-up to next week’s election. The cost of supplemental agreements and change orders alone — at least $2.9 billion — represents about a quarter of all the money awarded and more than what Congress originally appropriated for wall construction in each of the last three years.

Yet an accounting of border wall contracts awarded during his presidency shows that his administration has failed to protect taxpayer interests or contain costs and stifled competition among would-be builders, experts say. In all, Trump’s wall costs about five times more per mile than fencing built under the Bush and Obama administrations.

I'm guessing a lot of that money went to firms that lobbied hard for him.

But of course
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/05/19/politics/border-wall-fisher-sand-gravel-trump/index.html

You're surprised that Trump's associated with grifters and liars and criminals? How naive

Anonymous wrote:1. There is actually a shortage of immigrant labor in this country right now- we don’t have enough people to work as home health care aides, various jobs along the food supply chain, etc. There is no overpopulation or complicatedly large immigrant population.

2. Immigrants, both documented and undocumented, committed significantly less crime than native born Americans. If you want to see reduction or harmful crime, look to gun control, not immigration policy.

3. There is no ‘immigration line’ for these people. Read up on the different ways to get a visa- there is no path for many migrants. Yet, we depend on their labor.

4. There are ecological and cultural reasons not to have border walls. Again, easily googleable.

I feel sorry for you, OP. You hold so many mistaken beliefs and they are causing you undue worry. Please try to educate yourself before falling for far right tropes. The ignorance in your post is painful.

If anyone is free to come into the country why not simply dismantle CBP everywhere? Airports, land borders, the works.

The answer is we need immigration reform desperately, and we also need a wall. The amount of gaslighting and sanctimony on this thread is repulsive - and oh so typical.

Anonymous wrote:A full border wall would probably end up being hundreds of billions of dollars, would be terrible ecologically, and people would still find ways around it.

Haven't read the full thread. But this is the answer. Simple as that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m an immigrant and I support a wall although I think the most effective things would be to remove birthright citizenship, make it a felony with mandatory jail time to hire someone who doesn’t have proper work authorization, and completely remove all government benefits unless you’re a citizen of this country (and yes, that means schools too).

All the people who say, “but we need those people to pick our fruit!” are completely unserious people because it’s very easy to allow more temporary work visas (for properly vetted people) to do this work rather than letting whoever just walk across our border and decide to stay here.

The majority of people in the United States illegally are individuals who have overstayed legal visas. You are proposing expanding the number of legal visas. Won’t that inherently raise the number of people in the U.S. illegally?

Indeed.

I will repeat: the only way to curtail illegal immigration is to cut off the demand, then the supply will dry up.

Illegal immigrants know that someone will give them a job here. That is why they come. I don't blame poor people for wanting a job, and making a difficult, harsh, scary journey to get that low paying jobs. Many Americans have ancestors who did this as well.

I do blame the people who hire illegal immigrants. Obviously, they do this because the profit they make is much higher than the puny fees that they are assessed if they are caught having hired them. It's too tempting for them to not hire them.

So, make it not worth it. The penalty for hiring illegal immigrants should be a lot higher. Right now the penalty is anywhere from $100 to $3000 per.

Make it higher:

$50K/per - first time offense
$100k/per - second offense
$500k/per and prison sentence - third and subsequent offenses

+1

And this is what the GOP and their deep pocketed donors will never allow because they and their scummy party rely on illegal immigrants for a number of reasons.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm an R and I am against it because the ROI just isnt there. It isnt an effective countermeasure to stop illegal crossings.

If a wall is politically necessary, it should be built on the southern border of Mexico. Its a much smaller border, and can be built cheaper.

+1 by and large, most of the illegal immigrants now a days crossing the border are from Central/S. America. Build it in MX. That's a great idea. I wouldn't mind paying for that, actually.

And I agree on the ROI. It's a boondogle. Have you seen how much the wall that Trump built costs? It did not go out for bid, and the contract went under multiple cost revisions within the first few months. It was a yuuuuge waste of taxpayer $$, but I guess it MAGA feel good.

-former R

https://www.texastribune.org/2020/10/27/border-wall-texas-cost-rising-trump/

On the same day in May 2019, the Army Corps of Engineers awarded a pair of contracts worth $788 million to replace 83 miles of fence along the southwest border.

The projects were slated to be completed in January 2020, the Corps said then. Four months into this year, however, the government increased the value of the contracts by more than $1 billion, without the benefit of competitive bidding designed to keep costs low to taxpayers.

Within a year of the initial award, the value of the two contracts had more than tripled, to over $3 billion, even though the length of the fence the companies were building had only grown by 62%, to 135 miles. The money is coming from military counter-narcotics funding.

Those contract spikes were dramatic, but not isolated. A ProPublica/Texas Tribune review of federal spending data shows more than 200 contract modifications, at times awarded within just weeks or months after the original contracts, have increased the cost of the border wall project by billions of dollars since late 2017. This is particularly true this year, in the run-up to next week’s election. The cost of supplemental agreements and change orders alone — at least $2.9 billion — represents about a quarter of all the money awarded and more than what Congress originally appropriated for wall construction in each of the last three years.

Yet an accounting of border wall contracts awarded during his presidency shows that his administration has failed to protect taxpayer interests or contain costs and stifled competition among would-be builders, experts say. In all, Trump’s wall costs about five times more per mile than fencing built under the Bush and Obama administrations.

I'm guessing a lot of that money went to firms that lobbied hard for him.

Yes, exactly. The Mexicans have the same interest as we do to prevent border crossings from their southern border. As much as we complain about Mexico "allowing" migrants at our border, they complain that they are a cut-through for people to get to the US. We could solve the issue more effectively together. And a lot cheaper.

Anonymous wrote:It seems like a no-brainer to me, but there seems to be a sizable portion of the country opposed to it, and I honestly would like to know why. I just don't know how the millions of unvetted people coming through the border over the past couple of years can be sustainable or safe. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for immigration (I'm a 2nd and 3rd generation immigrant myself), but wouldn't we want to vet people for safety and make sure we have the necessary infrastructure in place before we let so many people in? Also, isn't it unfair to the millions of people who are waiting to become citizens the legal way? I'm really trying to understand this, so please be kind. I'm worried for our country.

Have you ever seen a topographical map of the border? A wall of any sort stretching the length of the border is absurd.