Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

Let’s say Trump declares a national emergency to start building the wall

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by The_RH_Factor, Jan 27, 2019.

  1. AzCatFan

    AzCatFan GC Hall of Fame

    7,174
    226
    263
    Apr 9, 2007
    While true, we have to ask, what is more important? Building the wall, or securing the legal ports of entry? Considering illegal crossings are at a 40-year low and 90%+ of all illegal drugs enter through legal entry points, I'd argue securing legal entry points is a much higher priority.

    Something else that needs to figure into the calculus is effectiveness. The wall would be very ineffective. In contrast, new scanning technology and more agents stationed at legal ports of entry would likely be more effective than the wall.

    Cost is also a factor. The wall would cost billions to build, and hundreds of millions, or more to maintain. Trump is asking for $5.7 billion which includes wall funding that would fund 1/4 of the wall, at best. The $1.3 billion offered by the D's and originally agreed to by the R's and Trump before Trump renegged, would include the better tech and money for more agents.

    Last, other than drugs, what is most important with immigration is labor demand and supply. We have had a demand for immigrant labor for generations. Why are we not allowing labor supply to meet demand in a more efficient, legal manner by expanding our guest worker program? Do that, and how many people are left to cross the border illegally?

    Add it all up and enhancements to border security at legal entry points makes sense to fight the drug cartels. But the wall isn't worth it. It's a boondoggle waste of money that will only lead to ecological and environmental damage, while not having much of an effect on illegal immigration. Especially since a guest worker program would raise revenue that could fund the security at legal border crossings while lowering the number of illegal border crossings.
     
  2. fastsix

    fastsix Premium Member

    7,013
    605
    833
    Apr 11, 2007
    Seattle
    I don't want to be the bearer of bad news, but I've been looking at trump's newest idea for the "wall" and I think I see a way smugglers might be able to smuggle drugs through it.

    Ok, call me crazy, but here's my idea. You see those spaces between the slats? What I'm thinking is that the drug smugglers might package the fentanyl in such a way that the packages are thin enough to be passed between the slats.

    [​IMG]
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. VAg8r1

    VAg8r1 GC Hall of Fame

    7,016
    359
    433
    Apr 8, 2007
    Doesn't seem that a any type of barrier would be very effective against drones
    Narco-Drones: A New Way to Transport Drugs
     
  4. rivergator

    rivergator Too Hot Mod Moderator VIP Member

    Apr 8, 2007
    They wanted a crisis at the border, this would certain cause a crisis.

    Trump on national emergency: 'There’s a good chance we’ll have to do that'
     
  5. swgator88

    swgator88 Senior

    201
    28
    168
    Jan 22, 2019
    International
    Both are equally important. You secure the nation's borders, and you secure the nation's ports of entry. National security/defense is the only legitimate function of government, which means there is plenty of money for a wall and port security if the government didn't waste so much money on other garbage.

    This, of course, assumes you are truly interested in securing the nation.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. rpmGator

    rpmGator GC Hall of Fame

    12,699
    420
    648
    Apr 10, 2007
    With hard drugs, children and people of any nation being allowed into our nation as possible Democrats

    Easy to figure out priorities

    Legal immigration melts anyone into -Americans

    Instead of separate nations setting up shop inside our nation

    Your support your results
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. AzCatFan

    AzCatFan GC Hall of Fame

    7,174
    226
    263
    Apr 9, 2007
    Then why no call for a wall along the N border? No calls for higher security along the coasts? Or better visa tracking since more immigrants every year become undocumented by overstaying their Visa versus entering illegally?

    And @rpmGator, you're belief that illegals don't assimilate like other migrants is incorrect. All zero gen immigrants tend to congregate together. That's how you get Chinatowns or the North End in Boston. But 1st gen Americans, the children of immigrants, branch out and become more assimilated. Even children of illegals, which is how you get DREAMers, who according to the right leaning Cato Institute, will add $240 billion to the economy and $60 billion in Fed taxes over the next decade.
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
  8. Orange_and_Bluke

    Orange_and_Bluke Premium Member

    687
    175
    353
    Dec 16, 2015
    Difference is debt out the ass.
     
  9. AzCatFan

    AzCatFan GC Hall of Fame

    7,174
    226
    263
    Apr 9, 2007
    Explain. Whose debt? The country's? And if that is what you're referencing, then how does paying billions for a wall and millions for annual maintenance to keep out needed labor going to help with US debt?
     
  10. Orange_and_Bluke

    Orange_and_Bluke Premium Member

    687
    175
    353
    Dec 16, 2015
    You asked what was different. Not saying we need a wall either.
     
  11. StrangeGator

    StrangeGator GC Hall of Fame

    27,814
    812
    953
    Apr 3, 2007
    Chicago
    How do you know a physical wall, at least as Trump envisions it, is important to our security? I don't believe a wall is an effective deterrent, certainly not a cost effective deterrent. Five billion dollars is a lot of money for something that can't surveil, can't move or even think. But five billion dollars will buy a lot of technology and pay for a lot of well trained border security professionals.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. swgator88

    swgator88 Senior

    201
    28
    168
    Jan 22, 2019
    International
    Walls on all the borders would be great, along with higher security around coasts and ports of entry, but the wall building has to start somewhere, so it might as well be on the southern border, which historically has been more problematic.

    Why are you seemingly so disinterested in protecting the nation's borders? Why so much resistance?
     
  13. swgator88

    swgator88 Senior

    201
    28
    168
    Jan 22, 2019
    International
    Because walls add security. That's just what they do. This is basic common sense. And just because you have a wall doesn't mean you can't have surveillance and guards as well. All three are needed.

    What is your agenda in not wanting America's border security to be stronger?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. fastsix

    fastsix Premium Member

    7,013
    605
    833
    Apr 11, 2007
    Seattle

    What is your agenda in claiming we don't want border security to be stronger, when you've been told over and over again that's a lie?
     
  15. Gatorrick22

    Gatorrick22 GC Hall of Fame

    63,369
    9,982
    2,373
    Apr 3, 2007
    We've told you this over and over again... Paul 'RINO' Ryan...
     
  16. swgator88

    swgator88 Senior

    201
    28
    168
    Jan 22, 2019
    International
    Because actions speak louder than words, and your actions to resist the building of a wall that would add another layer of security to our border with Mexico indicates that you want less security.

    So let's get down to your real motivations here. Why do you want less security on our southern border? Because the only motivation I can figure is one of a subversive nature.
     
  17. AzCatFan

    AzCatFan GC Hall of Fame

    7,174
    226
    263
    Apr 9, 2007
    Can you show how effective a wall would be? And if it's not effective, why do you want to spend hundreds of billions of dollars for walls in both the N and S borders?

    I'm interested in the government not wasting billions of dollars on a wall that not only will be ineffective, it will cause ecological and environmental damage. I don't see a win here. Just a boondoggle.

    I know things like better technology, more agents, and a focus on legal entry points will be more effective at securing the border at a fraction of the cost of a wall. And with no ecological or environmental impact.

    What I want to know is why people want to keep immigrants who come here to do jobs citizens will not do out? Only 6 million on unemployment, yet we have 8 million illegals in the work force. Why not right size our immigration labor supply with demand? Use the Visa fees to fund the increased border security. What's the downside?
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  18. swgator88

    swgator88 Senior

    201
    28
    168
    Jan 22, 2019
    International
    If walls and fences were ineffective, then no one would ever build them. But since they are effective to some degree, people do build them. Billions of dollars are spent to build walls and fences all over the world to protect various assets. Perhaps they are effective, and you are just in denial?

    Since when has your side ever been interested in the government not wasting money? Don't you normally argue for more taxes instead of less? The best way to stop the government from wasting money is to simply not give it money, but usually people on your end of the political spectrum argue in favor of taxes.

    And as long as there are millions of Americans who are unemployed/underemployed, I'd rather see them get the jobs. If the wages are too low for them to want to work, or make it worth their while, that's fantastic. A labor shortage will drive up wages.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. AzCatFan

    AzCatFan GC Hall of Fame

    7,174
    226
    263
    Apr 9, 2007
    Walls were effective centuries ago. Today? Not so much. But they look good and offer a false sense of security. That's why they are built. But even in gated communities, the walls provide marginal security at best. Now if you have other evidence, I'm happy to examine it.

    And who cares what side I'm on or you're on. It's both our taxes that would pay for the wall, correct. And you're argument that liberals are usually for wasteful, boondoggle projects, then they should like the wall is stupid. Waste is waste. And we should all be against government waste. The wall is a waste.

    And while a labor shortage drives up wages, it also leads to inflation. And we'd be looking at labor shortages in important industries such as foodstuffs. Agriculture is a $100 billion industry in the US, and immigrants pick over half of it. So we're likely looking at higher inflation and less all the labor is v replaced, which is unlikely, we're also looking at a recession. And recession plus inflation equals stagflation. Are you old enough to remember the stagflation of the 70s? I am, and stagflation and bell bottoms are two things I don't want to see make a comeback.