Total Posts:24|Showing Posts:1-24
Jump to topic:

Tej on a Border Fence: Why It's a Bad Idea

tejretics
Posts: 6,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 2:39:56 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
I've been against building a border fence on the border between US and Mexico for a while. It's just a bad idea. I have a few reasons for this.

A border fence wouldn't work at all. 670 miles of fences have already been built along the United States - Mexico border. And they serve no purpose. They don't even work in their plan to stop illegal immigration. They've all been breached by smugglers and immigrants thousands of times. Repairing those breaches is a waste of money and manpower, as is building more fences. A study by Christopher Wilson says that border fences redirect immigration towards non-urban areas, and those immigrants move from within the country to urban areas.

And the impact on the economy is really massive. The cost of completing the fence would be $28 billion *per year.* Further, popular anti-immigration plans involve deportation (e.g. Trump's plan). And that could cost somewhere between $100 billion and $300 billion dollars for apprehension and removal. Add that to the current border enforcement costs, and we have somewhere between $420 billion and $620 billion. Up to $620 billion for a policy that's largely *ineffective* isn't something the United States should do.

Spending $620 billion for next to nothing isn't a good government policy.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,292
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 3:20:53 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/13/2015 2:39:56 PM, tejretics wrote:
I've been against building a border fence on the border between US and Mexico for a while. It's just a bad idea. I have a few reasons for this.

A border fence wouldn't work at all. 670 miles of fences have already been built along the United States - Mexico border. And they serve no purpose. They don't even work in their plan to stop illegal immigration. They've all been breached by smugglers and immigrants thousands of times. Repairing those breaches is a waste of money and manpower, as is building more fences. A study by Christopher Wilson says that border fences redirect immigration towards non-urban areas, and those immigrants move from within the country to urban areas.

And the impact on the economy is really massive. The cost of completing the fence would be $28 billion *per year.* Further, popular anti-immigration plans involve deportation (e.g. Trump's plan). And that could cost somewhere between $100 billion and $300 billion dollars for apprehension and removal. Add that to the current border enforcement costs, and we have somewhere between $420 billion and $620 billion. Up to $620 billion for a policy that's largely *ineffective* isn't something the United States should do.

Spending $620 billion for next to nothing isn't a good government policy.

It's be par for the course as far as gubbernment polices go, and it will make some people feel fuzzy inside, which is the true purpose of all government programs.
tajshar2k
Posts: 2,384
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 3:23:44 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/13/2015 2:39:56 PM, tejretics wrote:
I've been against building a border fence on the border between US and Mexico for a while. It's just a bad idea. I have a few reasons for this.

A border fence wouldn't work at all. 670 miles of fences have already been built along the United States - Mexico border. And they serve no purpose. They don't even work in their plan to stop illegal immigration. They've all been breached by smugglers and immigrants thousands of times. Repairing those breaches is a waste of money and manpower, as is building more fences. A study by Christopher Wilson says that border fences redirect immigration towards non-urban areas, and those immigrants move from within the country to urban areas.

And the impact on the economy is really massive. The cost of completing the fence would be $28 billion *per year.* Further, popular anti-immigration plans involve deportation (e.g. Trump's plan). And that could cost somewhere between $100 billion and $300 billion dollars for apprehension and removal. Add that to the current border enforcement costs, and we have somewhere between $420 billion and $620 billion. Up to $620 billion for a policy that's largely *ineffective* isn't something the United States should do.

Spending $620 billion for next to nothing isn't a good government policy.

Somebody get's it :D
"In Guns We Trust" Tajshar2k
slo1
Posts: 4,351
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 3:53:41 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/13/2015 2:39:56 PM, tejretics wrote:
I've been against building a border fence on the border between US and Mexico for a while. It's just a bad idea. I have a few reasons for this.

A border fence wouldn't work at all. 670 miles of fences have already been built along the United States - Mexico border. And they serve no purpose. They don't even work in their plan to stop illegal immigration. They've all been breached by smugglers and immigrants thousands of times. Repairing those breaches is a waste of money and manpower, as is building more fences. A study by Christopher Wilson says that border fences redirect immigration towards non-urban areas, and those immigrants move from within the country to urban areas.

And the impact on the economy is really massive. The cost of completing the fence would be $28 billion *per year.* Further, popular anti-immigration plans involve deportation (e.g. Trump's plan). And that could cost somewhere between $100 billion and $300 billion dollars for apprehension and removal. Add that to the current border enforcement costs, and we have somewhere between $420 billion and $620 billion. Up to $620 billion for a policy that's largely *ineffective* isn't something the United States should do.

Spending $620 billion for next to nothing isn't a good government policy.

Well played. I often try to convince people that illegal immigration is largely an economic problem. With out addressing that any gains in reducing the illegal population in the US simply means it changes the economics to be more favorable for more attempts to immigrate illegally. As a result your estimate for 100 to 300 billion for rounding up and deporting just increases. Fix the economics and that fixes the bulk of illegal immigration.
beng100
Posts: 1,055
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 6:27:38 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/13/2015 2:39:56 PM, tejretics wrote:
I've been against building a border fence on the border between US and Mexico for a while. It's just a bad idea. I have a few reasons for this.

A border fence wouldn't work at all. 670 miles of fences have already been built along the United States - Mexico border. And they serve no purpose. They don't even work in their plan to stop illegal immigration. They've all been breached by smugglers and immigrants thousands of times. Repairing those breaches is a waste of money and manpower, as is building more fences. A study by Christopher Wilson says that border fences redirect immigration towards non-urban areas, and those immigrants move from within the country to urban areas.

And the impact on the economy is really massive. The cost of completing the fence would be $28 billion *per year.* Further, popular anti-immigration plans involve deportation (e.g. Trump's plan). And that could cost somewhere between $100 billion and $300 billion dollars for apprehension and removal. Add that to the current border enforcement costs, and we have somewhere between $420 billion and $620 billion. Up to $620 billion for a policy that's largely *ineffective* isn't something the United States should do.

Spending $620 billion for next to nothing isn't a good government policy.

I disagree. I think strong border controls and mass deportation of illegal immigrants is the way forwards. The methods I would use for deportation would not be that costly as there would be no expensive court processes. People would just be sent home.
ken1122
Posts: 481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 7:11:37 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/13/2015 2:39:56 PM, tejretics wrote:
I've been against building a border fence on the border between US and Mexico for a while. It's just a bad idea. I have a few reasons for this.

A border fence wouldn't work at all. 670 miles of fences have already been built along the United States - Mexico border. And they serve no purpose. They don't even work in their plan to stop illegal immigration. They've all been breached by smugglers and immigrants thousands of times. Repairing those breaches is a waste of money and manpower, as is building more fences. A study by Christopher Wilson says that border fences redirect immigration towards non-urban areas, and those immigrants move from within the country to urban areas.

And the impact on the economy is really massive. The cost of completing the fence would be $28 billion *per year.* Further, popular anti-immigration plans involve deportation (e.g. Trump's plan). And that could cost somewhere between $100 billion and $300 billion dollars for apprehension and removal. Add that to the current border enforcement costs, and we have somewhere between $420 billion and $620 billion. Up to $620 billion for a policy that's largely *ineffective* isn't something the United States should do.

Spending $620 billion for next to nothing isn't a good government policy.
I disagree. If you repair the fence and put the national guard on the border, that would stop the illegal immigration. Once people are consistently spending their life savings to be smuggled into the US illegally only to be caught at the border, that would discourage people from attempting to come here illegally and encourage them to stay home where they can improve conditions where they live.
It may be a little expensive at first, but with more than 30% of federal convictions being of illegal immigrants, the expense of convicting and sending someone to prison who should not have been here in the first place, this would save money if less of them came over. Also for those who obey the rules, they often drive down wages making things easier for the rich and harder for the poor. I think securing the border would be a worth while investment this country should make.
Ken
Death23
Posts: 781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 7:55:36 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/13/2015 2:39:56 PM, tejretics wrote:
I've been against building a border fence on the border between US and Mexico for a while. It's just a bad idea. I have a few reasons for this.

A border fence wouldn't work at all. 670 miles of fences have already been built along the United States - Mexico border. And they serve no purpose. They don't even work in their plan to stop illegal immigration. They've all been breached by smugglers and immigrants thousands of times. Repairing those breaches is a waste of money and manpower, as is building more fences. A study by Christopher Wilson says that border fences redirect immigration towards non-urban areas, and those immigrants move from within the country to urban areas.

And the impact on the economy is really massive. The cost of completing the fence would be $28 billion *per year.* Further, popular anti-immigration plans involve deportation (e.g. Trump's plan). And that could cost somewhere between $100 billion and $300 billion dollars for apprehension and removal. Add that to the current border enforcement costs, and we have somewhere between $420 billion and $620 billion. Up to $620 billion for a policy that's largely *ineffective* isn't something the United States should do.

Spending $620 billion for next to nothing isn't a good government policy.

You're arguing that it wouldn't be effective and that it would be very expensive. This isn't convincing because your sourcing is weak. For your claim about efficacy you just say that Wilson says so in some study, but you don't say which study or what page. You don't cite any source for your claims on cost.
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 9:38:52 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/13/2015 6:27:38 PM, beng100 wrote
there would be no expensive court processes. People would just be sent home.

Explain to me how that's supposed to work, let alone be constitutional?
beng100
Posts: 1,055
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 11:48:17 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/13/2015 9:38:52 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 12/13/2015 6:27:38 PM, beng100 wrote
there would be no expensive court processes. People would just be sent home.

Explain to me how that's supposed to work, let alone be constitutional?

Basically I would increase spending on border controls, reducing illegal immigration and therefore reducing the cost of deporting people. If people knew it was harder to get into and stay in the country less people would attempt to do so. As soon as an I legal immigrant is discovered I would arrest them and send them home. It's that simple really. It is not healthy economically to allow illegal immigration.
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 1:14:54 AM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/13/2015 11:48:17 PM, beng100 wrote:
At 12/13/2015 9:38:52 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 12/13/2015 6:27:38 PM, beng100 wrote
there would be no expensive court processes. People would just be sent home.

Explain to me how that's supposed to work, let alone be constitutional?

Basically I would increase spending on border controls, reducing illegal immigration and therefore reducing the cost of deporting people. If people knew it was harder to get into and stay in the country less people would attempt to do so. As soon as an I legal immigrant is discovered I would arrest them and send them home. It's that simple really. It is not healthy economically to allow illegal immigration.

How do you know they are illegal? Should everyone have to carry their papers around all the time? Why should they be deported without being charged of a crime, let alone convicted?
beng100
Posts: 1,055
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 1:26:41 AM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 1:14:54 AM, TN05 wrote:
At 12/13/2015 1, 1:48:17 PM, beng100 wrote:
At 12/13/2015 9:38:52 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 12/13/2015 6:27:38 PM, beng100 wrote
there would be no expensive court processes. People would just be sent home.

Explain to me how that's supposed to work, let alone be constitutional?

Basically I would increase spending on border controls, reducing illegal immigration and therefore reducing the cost of deporting people. If people knew it was harder to get into and stay in the country less people would attempt to do so. As soon as an I legal immigrant is discovered I would arrest them and send them home. It's that simple really. It is not healthy economically to allow illegal immigration.

How do you know they are illegal? Should everyone have to carry their papers around all the time? Why should they be deported without being charged of a crime, let alone convicted?

I would carry out checks on applying for and obtaining jobs, getting school places or crossing borders. I would also encourage citizens to report the presence of illegal immigrants. I acknowledge finding them will take time but if you stop more getting in the problem will gradually reduce. The crime they committed was entering the country illegally without permission. Priority should go to those who attempt to follow legal means to enter the country. Illegal immigrants are criminals. Another strategy I would employ would be checking people leave the country following the expiry of their visa. If they haven't left the country I would attempt to find their location. I would also consider getting visa receivers to pay a deposit on entering the country they are given back upon leaving to deter them from staying in the country illegally.
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 1:29:40 AM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 1:26:41 AM, beng100 wrote:
At 12/14/2015 1:14:54 AM, TN05 wrote:
At 12/13/2015 1, 1:48:17 PM, beng100 wrote:
At 12/13/2015 9:38:52 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 12/13/2015 6:27:38 PM, beng100 wrote
there would be no expensive court processes. People would just be sent home.

Explain to me how that's supposed to work, let alone be constitutional?

Basically I would increase spending on border controls, reducing illegal immigration and therefore reducing the cost of deporting people. If people knew it was harder to get into and stay in the country less people would attempt to do so. As soon as an I legal immigrant is discovered I would arrest them and send them home. It's that simple really. It is not healthy economically to allow illegal immigration.

How do you know they are illegal? Should everyone have to carry their papers around all the time? Why should they be deported without being charged of a crime, let alone convicted?

I would carry out checks on applying for and obtaining jobs

How are you going to get the federal government to do this? Is this a constitutional role for the federal government?

,getting school places or crossing borders. I would also encourage citizens to report the presence of illegal immigrants. I acknowledge finding them will take time but if you stop more getting in the problem will gradually reduce. The crime they committed was entering the country illegally without permission. Priority should go to those who attempt to follow legal means to enter the country. Illegal immigrants are criminals. Another strategy I would employ would be checking people leave the country following the expiry of their visa. If they haven't left the country I would attempt to find their location. I would also consider getting visa receivers to pay a deposit on entering the country they are given back upon leaving to deter them from staying in the country illegally.

You didn't answer how you plan to punish people without charging or convicting them of a crime.
beng100
Posts: 1,055
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 1:40:53 AM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 1:29:40 AM, TN05 wrote:
At 12/14/2015 1:26:41 AM, beng100 wrote:
At 12/14/2015 1:14:54 AM, TN05 wrote:
At 12/13/2015 1, 1:48:17 PM, beng100 wrote:
At 12/13/2015 9:38:52 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 12/13/2015 6:27:38 PM, beng100 wrote
there would be no expensive court processes. People would just be sent home.

Explain to me how that's supposed to work, let alone be constitutional?

Basically I would increase spending on border controls, reducing illegal immigration and therefore reducing the cost of deporting people. If people knew it was harder to get into and stay in the country less people would attempt to do so. As soon as an I legal immigrant is discovered I would arrest them and send them home. It's that simple really. It is not healthy economically to allow illegal immigration.

How do you know they are illegal? Should everyone have to carry their papers around all the time? Why should they be deported without being charged of a crime, let alone convicted?

I would carry out checks on applying for and obtaining jobs

How are you going to get the federal government to do this? Is this a constitutional role for the federal government?

,getting school places or crossing borders. I would also encourage citizens to report the presence of illegal immigrants. I acknowledge finding them will take time but if you stop more getting in the problem will gradually reduce. The crime they committed was entering the country illegally without permission. Priority should go to those who attempt to follow legal means to enter the country. Illegal immigrants are criminals. Another strategy I would employ would be checking people leave the country following the expiry of their visa. If they haven't left the country I would attempt to find their location. I would also consider getting visa receivers to pay a deposit on entering the country they are given back upon leaving to deter them from staying in the country illegally.

You didn't answer how you plan to punish people without charging or convicting them of a crime.

Checking documents is a task for prosodctive employers. Obvioudly employers employing illegal immigrants or failing to carry out checks will be subject to prosecution and large fines. I classify illegal immigration as a crime. A trial is not needed as it's a simple case of do you have documents? Yes or no. Deportation to country of origin immediately is the solution. They have no right to be here. Simple as that.
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 1:42:25 AM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 1:40:53 AM, beng100 wrote:
At 12/14/2015 1:29:40 AM, TN05 wrote:
At 12/14/2015 1:26:41 AM, beng100 wrote:
At 12/14/2015 1:14:54 AM, TN05 wrote:
At 12/13/2015 1, 1:48:17 PM, beng100 wrote:
At 12/13/2015 9:38:52 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 12/13/2015 6:27:38 PM, beng100 wrote
there would be no expensive court processes. People would just be sent home.

Explain to me how that's supposed to work, let alone be constitutional?

Basically I would increase spending on border controls, reducing illegal immigration and therefore reducing the cost of deporting people. If people knew it was harder to get into and stay in the country less people would attempt to do so. As soon as an I legal immigrant is discovered I would arrest them and send them home. It's that simple really. It is not healthy economically to allow illegal immigration.

How do you know they are illegal? Should everyone have to carry their papers around all the time? Why should they be deported without being charged of a crime, let alone convicted?

I would carry out checks on applying for and obtaining jobs

How are you going to get the federal government to do this? Is this a constitutional role for the federal government?

,getting school places or crossing borders. I would also encourage citizens to report the presence of illegal immigrants. I acknowledge finding them will take time but if you stop more getting in the problem will gradually reduce. The crime they committed was entering the country illegally without permission. Priority should go to those who attempt to follow legal means to enter the country. Illegal immigrants are criminals. Another strategy I would employ would be checking people leave the country following the expiry of their visa. If they haven't left the country I would attempt to find their location. I would also consider getting visa receivers to pay a deposit on entering the country they are given back upon leaving to deter them from staying in the country illegally.

You didn't answer how you plan to punish people without charging or convicting them of a crime.

Checking documents is a task for prosodctive employers. Obvioudly employers employing illegal immigrants or failing to carry out checks will be subject to prosecution and large fines.

Where in the Constitution does it grant the federal government this power?

I classify illegal immigration as a crime. A trial is not needed as it's a simple case of do you have documents? Yes or no. Deportation to country of origin immediately is the solution. They have no right to be here. Simple as that.

If they committed a crime and it is so obvious, why not allow a trial like we do for every other crime? We don't just void the right to trial because we decide it's obvious you are a criminal. That's what we did during witch trials.
tejretics
Posts: 6,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 3:41:03 AM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/13/2015 7:11:37 PM, ken1122 wrote:

If the national guard apprehends everyone, what's the point of the fence?
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,315
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 5:51:41 AM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/13/2015 2:39:56 PM, tejretics wrote:
I've been against building a border fence on the border between US and Mexico for a while. It's just a bad idea. I have a few reasons for this.

A border fence wouldn't work at all. 670 miles of fences have already been built along the United States - Mexico border. And they serve no purpose. They don't even work in their plan to stop illegal immigration. They've all been breached by smugglers and immigrants thousands of times. Repairing those breaches is a waste of money and manpower, as is building more fences. A study by Christopher Wilson says that border fences redirect immigration towards non-urban areas, and those immigrants move from within the country to urban areas.

I think a common misunderstanding (on both sides, to be clear) is what a "border fence" would really be. Seriously, is it going to be a big wall, reflective of what was in Berlin? It's hard to measure the effects, I'd think, if there is an unclear vision of what the goal is. Until I know that, specifically, I'm misguided in any opinions -- as is everyone -- which could be feasibly formulated.

And the impact on the economy is really massive. The cost of completing the fence would be $28 billion *per year.*

Again, to what proposal (size?) is this referring?

Further, popular anti-immigration plans involve deportation (e.g. Trump's plan). And that could cost somewhere between $100 billion and $300 billion dollars for apprehension and removal. Add that to the current border enforcement costs, and we have somewhere between $420 billion and $620 billion. Up to $620 billion for a policy that's largely *ineffective* isn't something the United States should do.

Spending $620 billion for next to nothing isn't a good government policy.

Yet we still have the death penalty legalized. ;)
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
tejretics
Posts: 6,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 5:54:35 AM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 5:51:41 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:39:56 PM, tejretics wrote:
I've been against building a border fence on the border between US and Mexico for a while. It's just a bad idea. I have a few reasons for this.

A border fence wouldn't work at all. 670 miles of fences have already been built along the United States - Mexico border. And they serve no purpose. They don't even work in their plan to stop illegal immigration. They've all been breached by smugglers and immigrants thousands of times. Repairing those breaches is a waste of money and manpower, as is building more fences. A study by Christopher Wilson says that border fences redirect immigration towards non-urban areas, and those immigrants move from within the country to urban areas.

I think a common misunderstanding (on both sides, to be clear) is what a "border fence" would really be. Seriously, is it going to be a big wall, reflective of what was in Berlin? It's hard to measure the effects, I'd think, if there is an unclear vision of what the goal is. Until I know that, specifically, I'm misguided in any opinions -- as is everyone -- which could be feasibly formulated.

And the impact on the economy is really massive. The cost of completing the fence would be $28 billion *per year.*

Again, to what proposal (size?) is this referring?

Basically a completion of the border barriers as they exist today.


Further, popular anti-immigration plans involve deportation (e.g. Trump's plan). And that could cost somewhere between $100 billion and $300 billion dollars for apprehension and removal. Add that to the current border enforcement costs, and we have somewhere between $420 billion and $620 billion. Up to $620 billion for a policy that's largely *ineffective* isn't something the United States should do.

Spending $620 billion for next to nothing isn't a good government policy.

Yet we still have the death penalty legalized. ;)

Which the US should abolish. Is/ought fallacy.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,315
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 1:57:44 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 5:54:35 AM, tejretics wrote:
At 12/14/2015 5:51:41 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:39:56 PM, tejretics wrote:
I've been against building a border fence on the border between US and Mexico for a while. It's just a bad idea. I have a few reasons for this.

A border fence wouldn't work at all. 670 miles of fences have already been built along the United States - Mexico border. And they serve no purpose. They don't even work in their plan to stop illegal immigration. They've all been breached by smugglers and immigrants thousands of times. Repairing those breaches is a waste of money and manpower, as is building more fences. A study by Christopher Wilson says that border fences redirect immigration towards non-urban areas, and those immigrants move from within the country to urban areas.

I think a common misunderstanding (on both sides, to be clear) is what a "border fence" would really be. Seriously, is it going to be a big wall, reflective of what was in Berlin? It's hard to measure the effects, I'd think, if there is an unclear vision of what the goal is. Until I know that, specifically, I'm misguided in any opinions -- as is everyone -- which could be feasibly formulated.

And the impact on the economy is really massive. The cost of completing the fence would be $28 billion *per year.*

Again, to what proposal (size?) is this referring?

Basically a completion of the border barriers as they exist today.

I see.


Further, popular anti-immigration plans involve deportation (e.g. Trump's plan). And that could cost somewhere between $100 billion and $300 billion dollars for apprehension and removal. Add that to the current border enforcement costs, and we have somewhere between $420 billion and $620 billion. Up to $620 billion for a policy that's largely *ineffective* isn't something the United States should do.

Spending $620 billion for next to nothing isn't a good government policy.

Yet we still have the death penalty legalized. ;)

Which the US should abolish. Is/ought fallacy.

I was joking, not being serious :P
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
kingkd
Posts: 100
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 1:58:39 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 2:39:56 PM, tejretics wrote:
I've been against building a border fence on the border between US and Mexico for a while. It's just a bad idea. I have a few reasons for this.

A border fence wouldn't work at all. 670 miles of fences have already been built along the United States - Mexico border. And they serve no purpose. They don't even work in their plan to stop illegal immigration. They've all been breached by smugglers and immigrants thousands of times. Repairing those breaches is a waste of money and manpower, as is building more fences. A study by Christopher Wilson says that border fences redirect immigration towards non-urban areas, and those immigrants move from within the country to urban areas.

And the impact on the economy is really massive. The cost of completing the fence would be $28 billion *per year.* Further, popular anti-immigration plans involve deportation (e.g. Trump's plan). And that could cost somewhere between $100 billion and $300 billion dollars for apprehension and removal. Add that to the current border enforcement costs, and we have somewhere between $420 billion and $620 billion. Up to $620 billion for a policy that's largely *ineffective* isn't something the United States should do.

Spending $620 billion for next to nothing isn't a good government policy.

Its good
The Constitution is just a damn piece of paper
-Barack Obama
"I actually support ...the Spanish inquisition, the murder of natives and so much more."
airmax1227
"Water is wet."
airmax1227
tejretics
Posts: 6,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 3:04:23 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 1:57:44 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/14/2015 5:54:35 AM, tejretics wrote:
At 12/14/2015 5:51:41 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:39:56 PM, tejretics wrote:
I've been against building a border fence on the border between US and Mexico for a while. It's just a bad idea. I have a few reasons for this.

A border fence wouldn't work at all. 670 miles of fences have already been built along the United States - Mexico border. And they serve no purpose. They don't even work in their plan to stop illegal immigration. They've all been breached by smugglers and immigrants thousands of times. Repairing those breaches is a waste of money and manpower, as is building more fences. A study by Christopher Wilson says that border fences redirect immigration towards non-urban areas, and those immigrants move from within the country to urban areas.

I think a common misunderstanding (on both sides, to be clear) is what a "border fence" would really be. Seriously, is it going to be a big wall, reflective of what was in Berlin? It's hard to measure the effects, I'd think, if there is an unclear vision of what the goal is. Until I know that, specifically, I'm misguided in any opinions -- as is everyone -- which could be feasibly formulated.

And the impact on the economy is really massive. The cost of completing the fence would be $28 billion *per year.*

Again, to what proposal (size?) is this referring?

Basically a completion of the border barriers as they exist today.

I see.


Further, popular anti-immigration plans involve deportation (e.g. Trump's plan). And that could cost somewhere between $100 billion and $300 billion dollars for apprehension and removal. Add that to the current border enforcement costs, and we have somewhere between $420 billion and $620 billion. Up to $620 billion for a policy that's largely *ineffective* isn't something the United States should do.

Spending $620 billion for next to nothing isn't a good government policy.

Yet we still have the death penalty legalized. ;)

Which the US should abolish. Is/ought fallacy.

I was joking, not being serious :P

So was I lol
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,315
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 3:24:37 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 3:04:23 PM, tejretics wrote:
Yet we still have the death penalty legalized. ;)

Which the US should abolish. Is/ought fallacy.

I was joking, not being serious :P

So was I lol

Haha. :D
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
Geogeer
Posts: 4,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 10:25:49 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 2:39:56 PM, tejretics wrote:
I've been against building a border fence on the border between US and Mexico for a while. It's just a bad idea.

I know! It should be a deep trench, with slick walls on the US side (gotta let people get back out), the bottom half a moat filled with hungry crocodiles.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,292
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 10:31:36 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 10:25:49 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:39:56 PM, tejretics wrote:
I've been against building a border fence on the border between US and Mexico for a while. It's just a bad idea.

I know! It should be a deep trench, with slick walls on the US side (gotta let people get back out), the bottom half a moat filled with hungry crocodiles.

I would rather fill it with social justice warriors contracted to spend a few hours down there with pitchforks every day to pay off their massive student loan debts.
Geogeer
Posts: 4,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 10:32:26 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 10:31:36 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 12/14/2015 10:25:49 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:39:56 PM, tejretics wrote:
I've been against building a border fence on the border between US and Mexico for a while. It's just a bad idea.

I know! It should be a deep trench, with slick walls on the US side (gotta let people get back out), the bottom half a moat filled with hungry crocodiles.

I would rather fill it with social justice warriors contracted to spend a few hours down there with pitchforks every day to pay off their massive student loan debts.

Hey man... no need to be cruel to the Mexicans...