Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why not fine any business who knowingly hires an illegal alien 100,000 for each offense. That would eliminate the need for a wall.
A significant number of illegals are day-laborers, or are stealing identities. Even in states which have near-universal use of e-verify, it has made no difference on the numbers of illegals.
Replace the word "wall" with "barrier" and you can't ask that question because it sounds dumb. Of course a barrier works, that's why it's called a barrier. Will it absolutely prevent 100% of the people who try from getting into the county? No, because nobody is suggesting The Great Wall of China here (although how cool would that be?) but anything that impedes illegal access will work, especially when everyone knows it's there. Half the battle is preventing people from coming to the barrier in the first place.
Replace the word "wall" with "barrier" and you can't ask that question because it sounds dumb. Of course a barrier works, that's why it's called a barrier. Will it absolutely prevent 100% of the people who try from getting into the county? No, because nobody is suggesting The Great Wall of China here (although how cool would that be?) but anything that impedes illegal access will work, especially when everyone knows it's there. Half the battle is preventing people from coming to the barrier in the first place.
The Great Wall of China wasn't 100% either. Why would they even bother?
Why do you want strong enforcement of e-verify? And why are you not interested in the wall? Does everyone on "your side" feel the same way? Why not?
The argument I replied to was one claiming all of one belief, believe the same thing.
Quote:
My point is, the arguments in favor of the wall, or against the wall, aren't about the efficacy of the wall itself. They are related to how you feel about immigration.
And as I said, you are wrong.
Quote:
If your main complaint is about e-verify, we an conclude that you are largely indifferent about immigration itself, but you are annoyed that businesses are exploiting cheap immigrant-labor.
You are full of assumptions. It goes hand in hand. Yes, if those here are forced to leave, wages rise.
Quote:
Would e-verify actually stop illegal-immigration? Would it even make a dent in illegal-immigration? Much of the country already uses e-verify. In Georgia, nearly all employees are run through the system. But trust me, e-verify has done almost nothing about illegal-immigration there.
It's mandatory in only 4 states which is hardly much of the country and no, I do not trust you.
Quote:
As I said, should we have more immigration, less immigration, or no immigration? That is the only real question, and all the ramblings about walls, e-verify, border-security, or whatever, are merely a reflection of how you feel about immigration.
Arguing facts is a waste of time, because no one is actually listening. They are just spewing their stupidity all over the internet.
It might start when you start hitting on actual facts.
The argument I replied to was one claiming all of one belief, believe the same thing.
You are full of assumptions. It goes hand in hand. Yes, if those here are forced to leave, wages rise.
Jonathan Haidt actually said it like this... "When new information comes in, a person asks himself two questions, 'can I believe it?' And, 'must I believe it?' "
You would think that intelligent people would tend to agree with each other. Because if we all know the same things, we should also draw the same conclusions. But that obviously isn't what happens.
In fact, one could argue that intelligent people actually disagree with each other to a greater degree than stupid people. Why?
Because people don't look at facts and then form opinions. They form opinions and then look for facts to justify them.
People have something they "want" to believe. And as long as they "can" believe it, they will. And when competing facts come in, they only ask "must" I believe it? If they can find any excuse to disregard those facts, they do.
So every side has "facts" which they believe are sufficient to justify their beliefs. And this forum is nothing but people throwing these facts at each other, but it doesn't do anything. Because as long as people "can" believe what they want, they will.
So when you claim to believe whatever, I don't particularly care to hear your facts. It is far more-useful to ask, "What do you want?"
What you want tells me everything I need to know about who you are, and what you believe.
The position people have on "the wall", is merely an extension of their politics more-broadly. And your political-opinions are themselves formed from your desires and your values.
And that is why people disagree on the wall. People who are more-favorable of immigration believe the wall won't work and is a waste of time/money. And those are who are less-favorable of immigration think the wall will work. Both have sufficient facts to justify their position, so they will not budge.
Debating the wall itself is pointless. The only relevant debate is, "Is immigration good"?
If you believe immigration is good, then you will believe a wall is bad. If you think immigration is bad, then you will believe a wall is good.
So if I want to convince you that a wall is good, I must first convince you that immigration is bad. But how would I do that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp
It's mandatory in only 4 states which is hardly much of the country and no, I do not trust you.
And what has it accomplished in those states? Do you think Georgia has fewer illegal-immigrants because they mandated e-verify? I lived in that state, and I have family who still live there. It has accomplished close-to-nothing.
During the Georgia governor race, Stacey Abrams even said that "The blue wave consists of both documented and undocumented people." And that her job as governor is to look out for "everyone in our state".
So when you claim to believe whatever, I don't particularly care to hear your facts.
Right, that is obvious. Millions come here for the jobs being offered. You don't want to hear that, you just want to state opinions on those who want to stop that.
Why not fine any business who knowingly hires an illegal alien 100,000 for each offense. That would eliminate the need for a wall.
I'm all for e-verify and punishing the employers but there is still a need for a wall just as long as we give our birthright citizenship to babies born from illegal aliens. That's a big incentive also. Also, many employers pay their illegal workers cash. Not only that but the drug runners, criminals and those from known terrorists countries aren't coming here for jobs, thus the wall. Better to deter every kind of illegal alien at our border as best we can than to allow them to get into our country where they are hard to weed out and more expensive to do so.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
