Work Resumes On Virtual Fence With Mexico 259
Hugh Pickens writes "Work resumed this week on the five-year project to link a chain of tower-mounted sensors and other surveillance equipment over most of the 2,000-mile border with Mexico. The network of cameras, radar, and communications gear is intended to speed deployment of US Border Patrol officers to intercept illegal immigrants, drug smugglers and other violators, yielding greater 'operational control' over the vast and rugged area. A $20M pilot project for the Secure Border Initiative, or 'SBInet,' carried out in the Bush administration, was generally considered a colossal IT failure. Since that time the DHS has given the prime contractor, Boeing, another $600M. The government says it has learned many lessons and made many changes in the program since the previous pilot rushed off-the-shelf equipment into operation without testing. The Obama administration has lowered the cost estimate for the 5-year project by $1.1B, to $6.7B, mainly by deferring work on the most difficult 200 miles of the border, in southwest Texas."
shyeah right (Score:4, Funny)
Hey, how about that economic collapse? [today.com]
"A majority of US soldiers in Afghanistan stated the place was 'just fine, really' and they were learning to speak Pashto rather than returning. Canada looked south and snickered, though not very much as they still had Stephen Harper to cope with. The Kingdom of Mexico stated its 'regret' today that it has had to close its borders to American refugees."
(I'm in Eng-er-lund. We're way more fucked. And we have Gordon Brown.)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
and if anyone's wondering how fucked we are in England we're this fucked:
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45737000/jpg/_45737580_brown226getty.jpg [bbc.co.uk]
Yes, that's a real picture and yes, the last European leader who pushed ID cards for every citizen starting with select minorities and immigrants had those banners behind him too.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:shyeah right (Score:4, Informative)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8033388.stm [bbc.co.uk]
It's from a school visit.
Really though, the level of incomeptence required by Labour's PR people to allow that shot to be taken has to make you wonder if it was intentional. I'm amazed they can be that utterly incompetent, particularly at a time when Labour is being criticised for spending the last decade implementing totalitarian laws and pursuing a totalitarian path.
I don't think Brown is a Nazi, but I mean come on, the fact they're not even sensitive to having that in the background on official media releases? It suggests they at very least don't understand why the Nazi regime was bad such that it's main symbol makes a bad background for a government already accused of creating policy identical to that of the likes of Hitler and Stalin. I'd go as far as saying that perhaps they even sympathise with many of the ideas for controlling the population that these leaders had even if they disagree with the murderous bits.
Labour seems to want to foster severe incompetence to the very end. Luckily that end is getting closer, 12 more months and counting.
Good Grief! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Good Grief! (Score:5, Funny)
So now you've got round-the-clock, year-long border security, just by paying a bunch of guys five dollars an hour. Now, I admit that it might sound difficult to find people who would be willing to patrol the border, facing off against smugglers and drug runners, enduring cold nights and scorching hot days, all for just $5.00 an hour. But here's the really ingenious part of the plan: we employ illegal aliens from Mexico to do the work for us!
It must be just me... (Score:4, Insightful)
These folks are just trying to make a living & put their kids through school so they can have a better life. I guess I'm the only person in the USA who doesn't recognize that to be the horrible crime it is.
It's not the first time I've been wrong but sometimes I like being wrong. Just ask my ex-wives about that.
Re:It must be just me... (Score:5, Insightful)
It has nothing to do with any of that. It is about using the proper channels to do it. That's not to say that some people aren't just bigots (some are), or that the immigration system doesn't need some work (it does), but it really isn't about not wanting immigrant to get a a better life. It is about people doing things the legal way (and stopping any other unlawful activities that cross the border).
Re:It must be just me... (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it isn't. It's just theater. Here's a question... Prisons. Don't get much more secure than that do you? Are there drugs in prisons? Oh yes, there's plenty. So yeah... good luck stopping illegal traffic. Good luck with that indeed.
Re:It must be just me... (Score:5, Insightful)
The "proper channels" set immigration limits drastically to less than what economic forces would set them to.
If you agree that massive disregard for the law creates problems, then, in tandem with increased enforcement, you should also support a huge increase in the amount of immigration allowed.
My impression is that most economists believe the eventual result of increased immigration would be an increase in employment and standard of living on *both* sides of the border.
Re: (Score:3)
The "proper channels" set immigration limits drastically to less than what economic forces would set them to.
I've always found that to be the kicker to the illegal immigration thing. Sure, what they're doing is illegal, but that doesn't mean it isn't understandable. The proper channels (the immigration system) do need some work, and the illegal immigrants are usually just doing what will be best for them, so I can't say I blame for hopping the border illegally. Nonetheless, there are plenty of otherwise necessary rules that give some people hard times, and we can't just have people doing as they please legal or
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
How much of the problem is people walking over the border, compared to people overstaying their visas?
There aren't a whole lot of problems with people overstaying their visas... at least here in California. Those who are here on visa can be tracked down fairly easily... known locations, pictures, etc. And they do find those people most of the time when a visa expires and there's no application in the system to get an extension or anything. The majority of aliens (I don't care if that word is "politically incorrect"... they're aliens to the USA) in California have no papers whatsoever. There are raids in the
Re:It must be just me... (Score:5, Insightful)
Nonetheless, there are plenty of otherwise necessary rules that give some people hard times, and we can't just have people doing as they please legal or not because of it.
There's an ancient military aphorism taught to all soon-to-be-commissioned officers: "Never give an order that you know will not be obeyed." Giving orders that won't be obeyed accomplishes nothing and undermines the officer's authority. Having ignored one command, it becomes easier for the soldiers to ignore others.
That maxim has a clear corollary in lawmaking: "Never pass a law that huge numbers of people will break". Passing such laws does little or nothing to change human behavior, but does a great deal to undermine the rule of law.
Given that there are large numbers of people who are willing to take tremendous risks to come to the US and work, and there is no shortage of Americans willing to employ them, setting immigration quotas too low is simply stupidity on the part of our immigration system. It makes no sense to blame the illegals, who are just trying to make a living. It makes some sense to blame their employers, but unless there are plenty of Americans clamoring for the jobs being filled by illegals (and, by and large, there *aren't*. Illegals mostly do work that no one else wants to) then even that is silly.
No, in this situation the problem is the law.
Re:It must be just me... (Score:4, Informative)
But here I am, dreaming away. I ought to get back to my jobs to pay off those debts I incurred, just living in this country legally. I like this country overall, but some things about it are more bizarre than anything Kafka thought up in a fevered dream.
Re: (Score:2)
Employment isn't like oil--it isn't a finite resource.
If I babysit the kids while you make dinner, and if we pay each other for that, the money will just go in a circle--but that doesn't mean it was the results cancelled each other out. There were real, concrete benefits. (Dinner got made, kids got taken care of.)
The economy is a much larger and more complicated version of that sort of mutual back-scratching machine. And whenever you add more people you're adding the potential for more of those relat
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Just like when our ancestors came to America, they all filed the proper paperwork and... oh wait a second...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Cut school that day? (Score:2, Interesting)
It's been a long time since I learned about US history in school but I get the distinct impression you're forgetting something. What what that, again? .... April showers [wikipedia.org]?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
For me, that's the whole issue. When my ancestors arrived, they just showed up at Ellis Island, filled out some paperwork, and were let in. I'd like to see some poor Mexican migrant worker show up at the border crossing and ask for the form to legally enter the USA. I wonder how long it would take for the border agents to stop laughing.
For all those people who keep saying the illegals should just follow the proper procedure, you need to realized for your "average Jose" there i
Re:It must be just me... (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Just like when our ancestors came to America
They didn't come to America because there was no America. Kinda hard to legally enter a country that doesn't exist. The analogy you're trying to make doesn't make sense because, even if there was a country that they illegally immigrated into, that still wouldn't have made it right, nor should it have any modern relevance. The founding fathers and many American ancestors had slaves, but it was wrong and their owning slaves has no logical relevance to that. Appeals to whoever are considered fallacies for
if they spent the money on infrastructure instead (Score:4, Informative)
Your comment about proper channels is uninformed.
My wife is from the UK and I have been through the green card process. We had to hire a lawyer because the rules are so arcane and complex, one little slip-up and you're toast.
Case in point - our lawyer told us to delay her "final interview", because it would come before our two year wedding anniversary. Why is that important? If you get your green card before your two year wedding anniversary, your green card is only good for three years, and then you have to go through an expensive renewal process.
If your final interview is after your two year wedding anniversary, your green card is good for ten years.
Our lawyer changed the interview date, but INS lost the letter. Apparently, this is very common. However, we received a letter in the mail saying that because we did not show up for the interview, my wife had 30 days to leave the country.
Our lawyer processes hundreds of applications every month, so he personally knows the director of the Immigration services in Norfolk and intervened on our behalf.
We paid $4000 for the lawyer and $2800 more in application fees and supporting documentational effort.
If they took all the billions of dollars they are spending on stupid techno-junk to watch the border and instead used it to bolster the infrastructure of the application and review process, and to hire more office workers and inspectors, an immigration application would take four weeks instead of 28 months.
When it takes 28 months instead of four weeks, it is because someone is profiting from such an arrangement. In this case it is Boeing, and the companies who exploit illegal labor.
Re:It must be just me... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It must be just me... (Score:5, Informative)
Problem is , many of these poor people are exploited by organised crime (human traffic is big business). If they're 'lucky', they get across OK; if not, they end up dying in the desert, foced into protitution or working all their life to pay offthe 'debt' they owe.
The trafficers are the bastards we need to stop.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
But hey, you gotta love the Virtual Fence. Higher tech means it will take high tech - beginning with bribes - to overcome it.
So, if what you say is true, then the Virtual Fence is lead-pipe cinch guarantee to make the problem worse.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The trafficers are the bastards we need to stop.
No, you just acted like you were taking one step in the right direction and then failed to actually do it.
The only reason the trafficers have the ability to be bastards is America's idiotic immigration system. Fix that and you fix the problem.
We already are going with your approach, and that's why it's such a complete disaster.
Same exact problem with drug laws. There's nothing to be gained by our current policies on either of these issues, except for the scum
Re: (Score:2)
The trafficers are the bastards we need to stop.
Yes, that is a big problem here in Australia too. The trafficers operate in Indonesia. They ship people south on unsafe boats with the intention of getting caught by our navy, so that they can apply for refugee status. A lot of people have died, its really tragic.
Many of the people trying to come over seem to be from places like Iraq and Afghanistan. They sit in Indonesia for years waiting for an opportunity. The silly thing is that Indonesia is not such a bad place to live. If they got together as a comm
Re: (Score:2)
And the cool thing is that when they get hurt on the job site, you can just drive them to the county hospital and drop them off. No need to worry about that expensive wokerman's compensation insurance.
Re: (Score:2)
I feel that many people deliberately conflate the two, in order to make border defense seem like a racist or xenophobic idea. It's not. Curbing illegal immigration would probably result in substantially increasing the legal immigration quotas.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Those people who have to work low paying jobs get pissed off too because some employers rather pay less and deal with people's poor english rather than playing by the rules.
Quite frankly if we're happy to just let the poor flood in from Mexico then we might as well remove H1-B visa limits too and let companies bring in a
I like them too. That's why I dislike illegals. (Score:4, Insightful)
These folks are just trying to make a living & put their kids through school so they can have a better life.
They sure are, that's why I support fully a greater degree of legal immigration from Mexico. But it's also why illegal immigrants should not be given amnesty, and the ones that are here now should be sent back without exception.
Consider this, illegal immigrants make it much harder for people like you describe, to come here legally. Why should people have a shot at a better life by jumping the line ahead of people who are trying to do it right?
That to me is why fundamentally I support locking down the border as tightly as possible, because the process to be a part of America should be as fair as we can make it and not just for those willing to pay a lot of money to a lot of shady people just to get here.
Again, this is obviously in conjunction with a wider open immigration process that would allow a faster flow of legal immigrants - from all over, not just Mexico.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
>These folks are just trying to make a living & put their kids through school so they can have a better life.
When you've had your SSN used by one of them and your wages have been garnered by the IRS, ask them if you can live with them...
Re:It must be just me... (Score:4, Insightful)
I agree. And how about those latest budget cuts?
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/43568/title/Federal_budget [sciencenews.org]'s_new_'black_book'
Each year, the administration releases its federal-spending blueprint -- usually in a series of phone book-sized tomes that must surely weigh eight to 10 pounds. And of course, the first thing most of us look for is what programs are slated for big gains -- or excisions. Well, team Obama made looking for the big cuts a little easier this year. This morning it issued a 120-page volume: "Terminations, Reductions, and Savings: Budget of the U.S. Government, Fiscal Year 2010."
A lot respondents are making hay over legal vs. illegal immigrants. Fine. But look at our real history of our immigration laws. You'd think it would be driven by many good things - such as what our infrastructure can support and so forth. And the pundits would have you believe that. It's not so.
First, we have people complaining about illegals using Social Security. Kindly note that the fossil records clearly show those illegals have paying into Social Security - something the pundits don't want to mention.
They're over-running our infrastructure! Yeah. It's not the white suburban kids pushing meth, it's not the middle-aged housewives enjoying a joint in the middle of the day, it's the not smokers, it's not the cops over-reacting to anyone near a .08 a block from their home, it's not that the insurance companies and HMOs have taken over what a doctor can do in his/her own judgement, it's not that we let the S&Ls and Enrons screw us out of real jobs, it's not that our trade and tariff policies are so fucking complicated that a gaggle of Ph.D.s still can't explain it to anyone reasonably intelligent, and it's not that all of our taxes are regressive, and it's not that the biggest corporations pulling in the most money pay the absolute minimum (if not zero) in actual money turned over as taxes - and it's not as if the whole fucking engine isn't powered by crooked politicians.
The real problem is those pesky, illegal Mexicans - with their strong sense of family and religion and culture and a desire to live outside of poverty, with a deep fear of the law because of where our Immigration Dept. will send them back to live if caught.
Oh yeah - illegal != legal immigration ... sure, that's the real issue. And I'm a monkey's uncle.
Re: (Score:2)
A while back Cringley blogged about a visit from the FBI, seems they wanted to know how he was so certain that there were 18 million people using SSN's used by multiple people. He explained to them he had a source that worked in a credit agency and the data was the result of simple and routine data-mining. It certainly strain our credulity that Equifax can do this routinely, but the SSN admin, FBI and NSA can't. Seems obvious to me that if the same SSN is reporting income and tax withholding from both New Y
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, identity theft is a problem. It has existed long before computers and long before our so-called border problems. I knew a Mafioso in Detroit with 15 Social Security numbers, 40 years ago.
As my signal-processing mentor once taught me - never look for a signal in noise - you will always find exactly what you're looking for.
If today's illegals have a high rate of abusing Social Security numbers, it's because they're buying from an established industry. I'd say it's that established industry that's the
Re: (Score:2)
No the point is there are 18 million people paying Social Security taxes with no prospect of ever collecting benefits; the government has little incentive of correcting this situation. We're going to the hard part and spend $6.7 billion on a virtual fence to stop illegal immigrants, but we're going to skip the easy and inexpensive part of data-mining existing data.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
"I support legal immigration, but not illegal" is it's just a cover for saying "I don't support *more* legal immigration."
Frankly this is all really about freedom. It should be as hard to live and work in the US if you're from Mexico or Canada as it is to live and work in New York if your from Alabama (valid ID, no court orders against you). The EU lets their people have freedom of movement and labor among the Union countries and it works well for them. The NAFTA countries should have that same freedom. It
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
So, I'm assuming that their actions that someone might consider a "horrible crime" is that they don't have proper business licenses, registrations, or inspections to sell food? Or, perhaps, that they don't collect sales tax (if your area has such a thing)?
If this is the case, they should not be allowed to sell food -- any more than Burger King should be allowed to sell prep
Re:It must be just me... (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is quite simple really: we cannot have uncontrolled imigration into a welfare state .
The United States is not generally lumped into the same category as the European Union states with their extensive social safety nets, but we are still at least 40%+ socialist here in the United States with massive social security, medicare, and medicaid entitlement programs (among others). Even now the big government entitlement spending of the past ala the "Great Society", which put us firmly on the road towards the massive defecits that we have been piling up over the last several decades, is beginning to stage a comeback with Obama and the Democrats now firmly grasping the rudder and steering us left. Of course, economics tells us that something will have to give: either we control immigration strictly (as the Europeans do) or we abandon the welfare mentality and open wide the gates to anyone who wants to come, work hard, and make it by their own hard work and initiative BUT without any safety net for those who fail. Why can't we have it both ways you ask? There aren't enough resources on the planet for everyone to enjoy the lifestyle of the average American and live in North America so somebody is going to have to do with less or without and there are really only two ways to decide who gets what: fair competition in free markets OR violence (often perpetrated by the state in the name of "fairness" to redistribute to everyone an equal portion of misery). Personally, I prefer the former rather than the later, but I predict that we here in the United States are going to learn the hard way (again) that socialism doesn't work and neither does borrowing your way out of debt.
That's nice (Score:2, Interesting)
Now please address the hundreds of thousands of illegal alien gangbangers who commit a huge amount of violent crime in the US. In detail, please tell us what should we do about it, and how you can tell by merely looking who is a good illegal alien and who isn't. And also make a case for raising local property taxes to pay for all of this, make the case why we should pay for people here illegally who in no way are paying enough in taxes to offset the increased needs of local communities with increased hospit
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
My friend, I have a teaching degree in vocational education. Look it up - those are not so easy to get, requiring not only a concentration in a particular field, but documented years of working in that field with *strong* references from employers for your concentration in that field, then documentation of work training in industry in that field, then years of teaching as an intern at a post-secondary school. And you study things in depth the way that many teachers to not have to, such as educational psyc
Re: (Score:2)
I got my education degree on top of hard science and math, in order to better train people on nuclear and space systems - after working on both for a great number of years.
So, I'm triply arrogant. If you say so.
Re: (Score:2)
Odd - my words were the same, despite what I degree I hold.
I have read all of the works you suggest, and more. My argument regarding IQ is not ignorant because I am not ignorant at all on that subject.
Your comment about me being able to figure out Gaussian distributions - given that I am well-published in refereed journals using just that - is offensive at face value and matches the condescension in your tone of voice in referencing it.
I believe I've had quite enough of this waste of my time.
Re: (Score:2)
I can dish out condescension to racists all day, every day of the week. I can take being called an idiot by one.
Yeah, and they expected (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
that this system would work to stop marijuana smuggling across the Canadian border too... with all the mountains and trees. Hahahaha.
There's a pretty easy way to stop that, and that's to legalize growing it in the U.S. It practically is already because the Justice Department has made it their lowest priority.
Re: (Score:2)
There are some active attacks against that old SCOTUS decision going on now, and there is a good chance that it will not stand. And if it doesn't: if something originates
Thank God, (Score:3, Funny)
for this fence! Cause they took our jebs! ...relax and realize I'm kidding.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Cause they took our jebs!
They can have him. Does anyone really want a third Bush presidency?
Is this equipment expensive? (Score:5, Insightful)
This happened in South Jersey in the 70's (Score:2)
My father worked for RCA at a remote location in South Jersey (Gibsboro). One week, they put up a chain link fence around the place. Over the weekend, the fence disappeared. I guess "Soprano Fencing" was a bad choice of a contractor.
"Hey, Tony, whadda I do wid dis fence?"
Re: (Score:2)
The contractor is no doubt salivating at the $500,000,000 worth of equipment they'll be replacing every year, for ever.
Let's review the definitions of real and virtual (Score:5, Interesting)
If you can see it, and it's there, it's real.
If you can see it, but it's not there, it's virtual.
If you can't see it, and it's not there, it's gone.
Which applies to the state of this fence?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Also: "Any word that follows 'virtual' is a lie."
Re: (Score:2)
I think "Can't see it, and it is there" is the proper phrase
Work resumes on pissing money away (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The local chicken processing plant here actually warns their workers not to show up on days when the INS is coming.
Take a page from Arizona and enact a Business Death Penalty.
Then make it possible to prosecute doubly for the violation and the attempt to to hide it.
Re: (Score:2)
Jailing the employers of illegal immigrants is a pretty ignorant and useless "remedy" for the problem of illegal immigration. Nobody is hiring "illegal immigrants", they are hiring legal immigrants insofar as the employer is obligated to determine such things. In all the environs I have been in where there were illegal immigrants working, they always had papers sufficient to satisfy the obligation of the employer in determination of their eligibility to work. The employer may strongly suspect they are ille
Re: (Score:2)
How's Pennsylvania for you at Grigsby & Cohen?
Seriously, they're the ones who benefit from overlooking the law and the ones who push for lax enforcement.
Re: (Score:2)
There has actually been numerous attempts to force employers with over X number of employees to match names and social security numbers with an electronic search of the SS system. Several groups are heavily resistant.. I would like, however, to ensure that if someone says they are me, that they prove they are me...
6.7 Billion is a lot of labor hours (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Your Government At Work (Score:2)
The border patrol has approx 25,000 officers to cover the 2,000 mile border.
Think again. Think harder.
[ U.S. Customs and Border Protection, or CBP] is responsible for guarding nearly 7,000 miles of land border the United States shares with Canada and Mexico and 2,000 miles of coastal waters surrounding the Florida peninsula and off the coast of Southern California. The agency also protects 95,000 miles of maritime border in partnership with the United States Coast Guard.
[There are] more than 17,000 CBP Bor
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, I quoted numbers from the article which stated 2000-miles along the mexican border and 25000 agents. The majority of the agents are along the Mexican border. Not a whole lot along the Canada border, and almost none in Fl as the CBP website would imply.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, somebody will have to go scoop up what's left of the would-be illegal immigrants every morning...
Leave them there as a warning.
Soo.. (Score:2)
This will protect us from all virtual Mexicans...
Isn't there already a better, cheaper, solution? (Score:2)
Most of those illegally crossing the boarder are looking for jobs, right? So why not require the use of eVerify, and have a meaningful system of identification, and mandatory jail sentences for anybody hiring an illegal immigrant. For most Mexicans, if they can not get jobs in the USA, there is no reason to come here.
There is also the GWB solution: make the US such an awful place to live, that nobody would want to come here, illegally or otherwise.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There is also the GWB solution: make the US such an awful place to live, that nobody would want to come here, illegally or otherwise.
I wonder if the US could improve the situation in Mexico by creating a new type of visa. The idea is that you could live in the US as long as you want, but only 50% of the time. This would encourage migrants to divide their time between Mexico and the US. There would be more cultural exchange and the people who have (partly) migrated north would have a good reason to make Mexico a good place to live. Ultimately this might result in fewer people wanting to leave the country.
One way to help stop illegals (Score:2)
Start setting up manufacturing capacity in Mexico to make things like kitchenware, toys, computer keyboards and other things that are currently being made in China. I dont know what sort of wages you could pay a Mexican vs what you could pay someone in China to do the same job but I suspect that once you factor in the boat trip from China vs the truck ride from Mexico, the total cost to produce, say, a plastic container in Mexico would be cheaper than producing the same container in China. Assuming that is
Re: (Score:2)
Fence? Forget it. Tax them. (Score:3, Interesting)
Since illeal immigrant are getting health care, police protection, (add a number of government supplied services here) anyway.. just take the plunge, make them citizens... and then proceed to tax the bejesus out of them.
Stop I say! (Score:2)
Or I shall be forced to take your picture again.
Re: (Score:2)
Tap Tap Tap... Is this thing on? Tap Tap Tap... Is this thing on?
You Hack.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm all for protecting the border and trying to stem the flood of illegal immigration, drugs, etc.
However, I don't think it's fair to compare our border with Mexico to the Israeli-Palestinian border. We're considerably less hostile with each other, and I don't buy the terrorist influx argument on any scale I've had pitched to me in the media.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree on the "terroist influx" bit as well. It is seriously sensationalistic.
I do find it funny that the same people who are for unimpeded immigration are usually those who will not be in direct competition with said immigrants. But outsourcing (which does affect them economically)? It is teh 3v1L, and there is much baying for blood. Both are similar in that they are lower cost labor, but one does affect them directly and the other does not. One is acceptable to loathe, the taking away of American (w
Re: (Score:2)
I do find it funny that the same people who are for unimpeded immigration are usually those who will not be in direct competition with said immigrants.
Really? I find that people who are for unimpeded immigration are usually Hispanic, and fail to comprehend that they will have to compete with the illegal immigrants that they support.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm Anglo and I'm for unimpeded immigration because I want freedom. I believe in free markets and free people. I want the ability to legally live and work anywhere and believe others should have that freedom as well. I also believe freedom is a good thing economically speaking. It allows people to go to where the jobs are. I see the lack of border enforcement between the states and I see that it works out pretty well. Even though we have poor states and rich states, there aren't many people who believe erec
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It would probably be simpler to spend money on enforcing work permit laws and so force, making illegal border crossings a less attractive activity.
Or do you also favor beefing up the border with Canada? That would be consistent with worrying about the border with a reasonably friendly nation.
Re: (Score:2)
It'd also be better to overbuild it for that case given the relative instability. Terrorism or not, it would most certainly send a message to Mexico to reform their country.
Immigration to the US is acting as a filter, letting the good people move north and leaving an excess of scum bags south of the border. Perhaps the US should consider sending the legal immigrants back, so they can help reform Mexico.
Re: (Score:2)
Worse? They get tickled to death?
Stupid strawman (Score:2)
When a country engages in discrimination with respect to who gets citizenship and who doesn't then any differences in how citizens and non-citizens are treated is discrimination.
Since every other country without exception chooses who can be citizens, I'd say your point there is pretty stupid.
Or maybe you think it would be OK for the USA to decide that, say, Jewish people are no longer citizens and that a sovereign country has a right to deport non-citizens?
Undoing citizenship is not even close to the same t
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Truth is the US economy would collapse overnight without immigrant labor (legal and otherwise). I find it astonishingly ironic that the most rabid protectionists are also the ones who are apparently pro-free-market.
It would only adjust to having citizens do such work under the existing regulations. All of that would work within the free-market doctrine.
Citizen only refers to status, not race.
Make the next logical step. Free-market means free-market, hire the best workers regardless of their color of skin or supposed national identity. It will sort itself out, and balance itself.
...to the detriment of citizens, just as it has done to manufacturing and IT.
Re: (Score:2)
That's still protectionist. That scenario may be true in the short term. Long term, it will balance out. It also means more jobs stay at home rather than being farmed out to other countries -- which will happen regardless. Once equilibrium is reached, I think there will be a net benefit.
Re:It's not racism. (Score:2)
That scenario may be true in the short term. Long term, it will balance out. It also means more jobs stay at home rather than being farmed out to other countries -- which will happen regardless. Once equilibrium is reached, I think there will be a net benefit.
Waiting 50-100 years is not an option for most if anyone in that situation.
You're not taking into account firms like Grigsby & Cohen that decide to turn on citizens with legal dirty pool.
Better to take the lumps of protecting the nation if we're not going to help our citizens transition.
borders vis a vis the free market (Score:2, Insightful)
I find it astonishingly ironic that the most rabid protectionists are also the ones who are apparently pro-free-market.
That's because you don't understand the physical limits of economics and of the free market.
The free market for labor only works in a closed system with reasonably slow population growth. Human labor is the only commodity that is self-replicating, legally protected and government subsidized. For those reasons it's also the only economic input whose supply has an inverse relationship to quality of living and, thus, utility. Without limits, labor supply would grow uncontrollably, outstripping demand and co
Re: (Score:2)
labor supply would grow uncontrollably, outstripping demand and collapsing individual quality of life.
American population has trippled since 1900. By your logic, our standard of living should be 1/3 of what it was in 1900.
Your assumtions are flawed. It's not a zero sum game. More people means BOTH more workers AND more customers.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
American population has trippled since 1900. By your logic, our standard of living should be 1/3 of what it was in 1900.
No, by my logic our standard of living would be higher if American population had grown at slower rate. In no way did I imply a linear relationship. Furthermore, I also did not imply that the relationship between population and standard of living does not have an inflection point. In fact I specifically accounted for "reasonably slow population growth".
Besides, if we ignored external inputs due to trade (not human trafficking), our standard of living would be much lower than it is currently. And if we f
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That wall was meant to keep people captive.
This wall is simply meant to make people use legal means of immigration, which incidentally will continue to exist.
They violated the law, plain and simple. (Score:2)
To give them amnesty would be to give incentive to border jump even more.
See a very similar attempt in 1986 for example.
Make them reform their country, not ours.
Re: (Score:2)
Why was this modded Flamebait? Don't mod down just because you disagree.