I'll take "How do know @Orange_and_Bluke has lost an argument and has nothing of intelligence to add" for $1,000, please.
I wonder how effective BG checks are at detecting violent or other crimes in Venezuela or Guatemala. Some of these folks may have gotten away with crimes, due to less effect law enforcement in their home countries.
Dude, you’re a lost cause. No need to repeat myself to you. You love the illegals and you encourage them to come here no matter the cost or the hurt it causes the US. You are a bleeding heart, tree hugging huge govt lover. Not for me.
I still think this is a better treatment to the problem than a border wall. We have cultural issues with respect to immigration as well, but a lot of the economic issues go away the more you remove the welfare state. You can't have open borders while also having entitlements galore. It just doesn't work. If these liberal cities disagree with me, they're more than welcome to put their money where their mouth is.
I'll give credit where credit is due. You've been tooting the work visas horn forever at this point. Where I disagree is that it's a catch-all solution. It barely scratches the surface assuming it's even a step in the right direction.
Why do you consider a work visa program a success even though it wouldn't completely solve the problem (and it may not even necessarily make it better), but you consider a wall a failure if you see any picture where it has holes, cracks, or people crossing it? Is our entire federal highway system a failure because there are some potholes? I certainly don't think so.
Bro, obviously walls and jail cells don't work. People have escaped jail and prison before, therefore, walls and jail cells are not effective methods of detaining people. #liberallogic
Your suggestions are both racist and hypocritical. They are racist because you support the exploitation of Hispanics for cheap labor. They are hypocritical because you espouse “living wages” …but I guess only for white folks. I guess that is why the democrats are the party of slavery.
You don't need a dude in a truck roaming every square mile of the fence back and forth. You can put surveillance mechanisms in place, monitor high traffic areas, and respond to areas that trigger alarms. If done efficiently (big if), it doesn't have to be even close to the most costly federal operation we have. Once the wall and surveillance mechanisms are in place, you really just have maintenance costs, border patrol, DHS, etc. Not cheap, but not crazy either. And if you don't see the policy interest in doing this. I suggest Ron DeSantis continues shipping illegal immigrants to sanctuary cities until ya'll figure it out.
If the Japanese landed on the shores of California in 1941, what would we, as a sovereign nation, have done?
There's another HUGE difference between Mexicans and Venezuelans. You remember how Barrack Obama said "never underestimate Joe Biden's ability to @$%^$& things up"? He green lit 475k Venezuelans for citizenship path. They're way more like Cubans in their inherent, indelible, seared into their DNA skepticism of big government, having been scorched by the Marxist national anal rape of their motherland. They tend to cringe at politicians' promises. Mexicans tend to favor Dems, and eat up their BS big gov promises. I suspect dems will join pubs in disdaining Joe Biden in looking back in history, albeit for completely different reasons.
Let's dial it back a little. This isn't an act of war. It's mostly people fleeing for jobs. I think they should have a better reason than that, but we don't need to treat them like we would've treated Japanese soldiers literally invading us during WWII. Do your best to secure the border. Deport people who cross illegally. Accept the people with valid asylum claims. Easier said than done.
As expensive as a wall could ever be, it's a heck of a lot easier to build a wall than fix the entire third world.
Ron DeSantis has been "shipping" asylum seekers to other cities. They have a legal right to present themselves to federal law enforcement, request asylum, and receive due process. All that security you're talking about doesn't affect that one bit. Also, the U.S.-Mexico border is massive. You're significantly underestimating how expensive your proposed security plan is. The "wall" is a brilliant idea to ignorant people who have never been to the border and know nothing about migration. Fencing is arguably useful in some limited spots (cities/towns on the border). Beyond that, it's a massive waste of money. Wasteful spending to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
Of course the real goal of leftists is never to help lift others--its always to lower them; to level them like a lawn mower to a lawn. Iow, it's their intent that the US should become a third world country (subject to their--,the ruling classes') control. They have can and will deny this vehemently--in complete contradiction of what your own lying eyes report.
That's besides the point. If they can't handle 50 "asylum seekers" at a time, they sure as Hell can't handle hundreds or thousands of illegal aliens at a time. If they can't handle it, that would suggest there's a border crisis. If there's a border crisis, maybe we should do something about it. I'm not saying we need to agree on the solution, but we should at least start by admitting there's a problem. You're overestimating it. "Limited spots" is doing a lot of work here. The devil's in the details, I don't think we're going to get anywhere by discussing where we draw the line like that. But I think it says something that we're not even arguing whether we should have a wall anymore, we're just arguing over the size and logistics.
