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.
A wall is certainly needed. It has been explained over and over that the wall Bill Clinton had built on the San Diego/Tijuana border drastically cut down on crime and illegal crossings. Why do you refuse to see that?
You are very naive if you think that every illegal who sneaks into this country is only looking to work. Many are engaging in trafficking of minors. Then there are those who are sneaking in to cause us harm.
Cracking down on employers when it comes to hiring illegals won't solve the entire problem of illegal crossings
So you are in favor of continuing to let American business owners hire illegal aliens? Got it. You, sir, are a big part of the problem.
So you are in favor of continuing to let American business owners hire illegal aliens? Got it. You, sir, are a big part of the problem.
The person you are replying to is a she not a he. She said that cracking down on the employers won't solve the "entire" problem. How does that mean that she's in favor of allowing them to keep doing so? Believe me the poster you replied to does want to stop the employers. She's just being realistic that not all illegal aliens are here to work so we need to stop those who aren't looking for work also.
No wall is needed. It's ineffective and a huge waste of money that could be better spent elsewhere. We want fair and just immigration which starts with stiff prison sentences for employers in the US who hire illegal aliens. As soon as we get these business owners who hire them behind bars, I have no doubt that it'll be just a matter of time before the issue resolves itself. The only problem is neither party wants to touch this.
Here we go again! How many times do I have to post the links proving that the good walls in place already have been very effective in deterring illegal entry? It's not a huge waste of money either. Illegal aliens cost us over $100 billion a year while completing the 700 mile long wall is only $25 billion....do the math!
Yes, we do need stiff sentences for those who hire them and e-verify will help a lot. However, not all illegal aliens are here to work. Certainly criminals and terrorists aren't looking for work, thus the wall.
Unless we deny the children of illegal aliens our birthright citizenship and benefits losing the job incentive will not be a deterrant all by itself. We need a total package to end illegal immigration. Just going after the employers will not work all on its own but should be a part of that total package.
Here we go again! How many times do I have to post the links proving that the good walls in place already have been very effective in deterring illegal entry? It's not a huge waste of money either. Illegal aliens cost us over $100 billion a year while completing the 700 mile long wall is only $25 billion....do the math!
Yes, we do need stiff sentences for those who hire them and e-verify will help a lot. However, not all illegal aliens are here to work. Certainly criminals and terrorists aren't looking for work, thus the wall.
Unless we deny the children of illegal aliens our birthright citizenship and benefits losing the job incentive will not be a deterrant all by itself. We need a total package to end illegal immigration. Just going after the employers will not work all on its own but should be a part of that total package.
And how many times do I have to post this to show you just what it takes to get over these walls you're so fond of?
So you are in favor of continuing to let American business owners hire illegal aliens? Got it. You, sir, are a big part of the problem.
Stop twisting words, "sir". I said no such thing---and you know it, too.
I want to see e-Verify become the law of the land. Once it's the law of the land, everybody in the workforce needs to be run through it in order to weed out the 8 million no-match SSNs.
Instead of deflecting, "sir", are you okay with those who sneak into this country to do harm? Are you okay with child traffickers or terrorists or gang members sneaking across the border?
The wall is indeed necessary. Once again, the wall Bill Clinton had built on the San Diego/Tijuana border drastically cut down on crime and illegal crossings.
Why are you so vehemently against the wall? Just what is your dog in this fight?
You also know that in addition to a wall, the BP will be there, too.
Just because a wall could get breached doesn't mean they don't work---and you know it, too. The average illegal isn't going to bring along mountain climbing equipment or a 40 foot ladder when they try to sneak in here.
It's simply unbelievable that you think that once the wall is built, the BP won't be around. The wall makes their job easier. Doubt it? Some years back, our daughter and son-in-law attended a BP job fair. The agent they talked to didn't mince words. They were told that if they got hired, they would be on the graveyard shift and be the only agent around for 70 miles. If they needed backup, none would be coming anytime soon. With a wall, the BP's job becomes easier
Other than just posting a picture of a ladder where's the link proving that most illegals are doing that? The last time an illegal tried that on the good double walls he broke both of his legs trying. Nice try, but no cigar. Need the links once again proving how the good double walls in place already have been very effective in deterring illegal entry or are you one these naysayers that think if they aren't 100% effective then they useless?
So I guess its alright to create refuges through our misguided wars in the middle east but we need to refuse to help them when they seek our help. Other countries that had no part in the wars are taking them in but we need to slam the door.
Status:
"Moldy Tater Gangrene, even before Moscow Marge."
(set 1 day ago)
Location: Dallas, TX
5,790 posts, read 3,599,675 times
Reputation: 5697
I wonder if somebody this Administration rejected will turn out to be the person who makes solar energy cheaper than oil (energy security AND less greenhouse emissions)? Or figures out how to make week-long trips into orbit as cheap as a Caribbean cruise? Or finally manages to build a working political consensus (a "new center") for this country - i.e. a long run cheaper form of national stability insurance than increased surveillance and militarization of the police.
Hmm, I suppose they'll go to Europe, Canada, Australia, or New Zealand instead.
Let's be realistic. Our system of "strong man" capitalism has no interest in taking care of Americans....first, middle or last.
Let's dispense with that tale.
Strong man capitalism? lol The irony of this comment in context with the rest of your post is astounding.
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigiri
In the scheme of the current world we are certainly not over-populated, although better planning is always needed.
I always like agreement. I am with you 100% that we should take care of Americans. This requires money - that we collect enough taxes to do the job. Many people don't see the tie-in between a dude like Don cheating the Government out of billions (the compounded value) and giving tax breaks from debt and deficit to (mostly) corporations and the wealthy - and the well-being of Americans.
They are tied together.
Disagree. They are not tied together. A nanny stater would think that. As if government is the only entity that can take care of people. In case you haven't noticed, which you haven't, government does a horrific job at running peoples lives and it's not their job to do that. It doesn't require our government to have money. They are horribly inefficient. We the people help each other, government helps their cronies. They've been doing that for a long time and it doesn't work.
You don't like strong arm tactics unless you're the one doing it. lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigiri
If one believes in "American Corporations rights" to prey upon us with double-priced health care, they can't at the same time say they want Americans to be taken care of!
"prey upon us with double-priced health care". lol Health care didn't get expensive until government got involved yet you want more of it????
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigiri
In short - either you are truly For The Happiness and General Welfare of The People" or, you are for "get away with what you can and he who dies with the most money wins".
Choose one.
This is something you've made up. Those are not the only choices and it's silly to frame it that way. Plus you're talking about specific welfare, not general.
What I want to choose is freedom. Freedom from people like you who want to force your will on others when no ones rights have been violated. Plus you as well as all the other progressives are horrible at picking policies that work. You want government to run the peoples lives from cradle to grave yet in the very start of your post you complain about strong arm capitalism. Which is another way to say crony capitalism. Which is practiced by government that you want more from???
Last edited by Loveshiscountry; 10-03-2018 at 09:37 PM..
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.
How many times do I have to post the links proving that the good walls in place already have been very effective in deterring illegal entry? It's not a huge waste of money either. Illegal aliens cost us over $100 billion a year while completing the 700 mile long wall is only $25 billion....do the math!
