Would a wall stop illegal immigrants?

[BPSCG]

but it might be that Mexico would regard building a wall as a hostile act. I believe that overall, it is probably better that we keep Mexico as an ally, or at least, not openly hostile.

What's hostile about it? Just about every house on my black has a fence in the back yard. By that logic, our little part of northern Virginia should look like Gaza City. We used to have a rail fence in our back yard. Our back-door neighbors have English ivy along our common property line, and that rail fence did nothing to stop the ivy from coming into our yard and strangling everything from day lilies to a couple of cats we used to have. I put up a solid fence. It doesn't keep the ivy out 100%, but keeps enough of it out that I have control over my own garden again (ID's probably gonna scream I'm comparing Mexicans to English ivy now...). And lo and behold, our back door neighbors are still our friends and we still visit each other and invite each other over for dinner and don't shoot at each other. And they really like our fence because it's a nice backdrop for what they have growing in their back yard.

So why would building a US-Mexico wall be a hostile act?

 

[Darth Rotor]

Could you be more lazy? "Read this book. It makes arguments that support my position. What's that? You want me to make my own arguments, possibly citing that book as a source? No, no, no. You don't get it. If I tell you to read a book you haven't read yet, I can claim all your arguements pale before my own as I cower behind my book."

I don't care if you like it or not. The position is not my own, but the result of the research and study of the author who wrote the book.

I cite a conclusion. Take it or leave it.

I have no more time to waste on you this morning, troll. You are looking for a scrap, and I suggest you look elsewhere.

DR

 

[ImaginalDisc]

What's hostile about it? Just about every house on my black has a fence in the back yard. By that logic, our little part of northern Virginia should look like Gaza City. We used to have a rail fence in our back yard. Our back-door neighbors have English ivy along our common property line, and that rail fence did nothing to stop the ivy from coming into our yard and strangling everything from day lilies to a couple of cats we used to have. I put up a solid fence. It doesn't keep the ivy out 100%, but keeps enough of it out that I have control over my own garden again (ID's probably gonna scream I'm comparing Mexicans to English ivy now...). And lo and behold, our back door neighbors are still our friends and we still visit each other and invite each other over for dinner and don't shoot at each other. And they really like our fence because it's a nice backdrop for what they have growing in their back yard.

So why would building a US-Mexico wall be a hostile act?

You can't compare backyard fences between home owners to a 1951 mile fence along the border between two nations.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

I don't care if you like it or not. The position is not my own, but the result of the research and study of the author who wrote the book.

I cite a conclusion. Take it or leave it.

I have no more time to waste on you this morning, troll. You are looking for a scrap, and I suggest you look elsewhere.

DR

So you're not going to summarize the arguements, or make any of your own? You're just going to name a book and run? Ta-ta!

 

[Tricky]

It hasn't so far.

One operational definition of "insanity" is to keep doing the same thing, and expecting a different result.

Hard to say what Mexico would be like without the influx of dollars from the US. I'm guessing it would be much much worse, making the impetus to cross much greater.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record (Or "skipping CD", for the benefit of our younger readers), it seems to me that if we really wanted to stop illegal immigration, the best place to attack it would be in trying to dry up the job market. For one thing, it is within our borders. We wouldn't have to build any walls. For another thing, it is a fairly easy thing to do to enforce employee checks. Computers are amazing these days. If you can google the name of Dorothy Parker's dog ("Cliche") then you can do a comprehensive search on a social security number and find out who it belongs to and where they have worked.

While some anti-immigrant people do in fact support these measures, you don't see anything like the same level of rage directed against the people paying for illegal labor as you do for those accepting the pay. Why is that?

 

[BPSCG]

You can't compare backyard fences between home owners to 1951 mile fence along the border between two nations.

Yes I can. I just did. Now, if you want to claim that it is an inapt comparison, you are certainly free to explain why you think so.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Yes I can. I just did. Now, if you want to claim that it is an inapt comparison, you are certainly free to explain why you think so.

Fine, we'll play that game. Mexico's enconomy depends on U.S. dollars sent back by laborers in the U.S. to their families back home. Your neighbor's income is not in any way affected by your choice to build a fence. Your neighbor's children will not lack for basic needs if you build a fence.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Hard to say what Mexico would be like without the influx of dollars from the US. I'm guessing it would be much much worse, making the impetus to cross much greater.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record (Or "skipping CD", for the benefit of our younger readers), it seems to me that if we really wanted to stop illegal immigration, the best place to attack it would be in trying to dry up the job market. For one thing, it is within our borders. We wouldn't have to build any walls. For another thing, it is a fairly easy thing to do to enforce employee checks. Computers are amazing these days. If you can google the name of Dorothy Parker's dog ("Cliche") then you can do a comprehensive search on a social security number and find out who it belongs to and where they have worked.

While some anti-immigrant people do in fact support these measures, you don't see anything like the same level of rage directed against the people paying for illegal labor as you do for those accepting the pay. Why is that?

Tricky, whilst I agree with "clean own house" completely, it isn't a matter of either or. The illegal immigration runs parallel to/with the drug trade, and of course there is stuff like the infamous case near Victoria, tried in Houston, of the 70, minus 19 dead, found in the back of the trailer: drug trafficking makes money, people trafficking makes money.

ID: I'll consider posting a page reference when I get to where my copy of China, Inc is. Or not. I summarized the argument in my initial response to Tricky. You are not worth the effort. Maybe a few lurkers are.

DR

 

[Tricky]

What's hostile about it? Just about every house on my black has a fence in the back yard. By that logic, our little part of northern Virginia should look like Gaza City. We used to have a rail fence in our back yard. Our back-door neighbors have English ivy along our common property line, and that rail fence did nothing to stop the ivy from coming into our yard and strangling everything from day lilies to a couple of cats we used to have. I put up a solid fence. It doesn't keep the ivy out 100%, but keeps enough of it out that I have control over my own garden again (ID's probably gonna scream I'm comparing Mexicans to English ivy now...). And lo and behold, our back door neighbors are still our friends and we still visit each other and invite each other over for dinner and don't shoot at each other. And they really like our fence because it's a nice backdrop for what they have growing in their back yard.

So why would building a US-Mexico wall be a hostile act?

1) As you indicate, your fence does not have the purpose of preventing any contact between you and your neighbor. You are not blocking the only access between your two houses.

2) If you put up razor wire on your fence and patrolled it with a weapon, I'm guessing your neighbor would interpret it as hostile.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Here's a question: do Mexicans think a wall will slow down illegal immigration? I think the clear answer has to be yes, they think it will. Otherwise, why would they be getting upset about it? Mexico relies upon illegal immigration to the US. Immigration from Mexico to the US is a safety valve which removes malcontents (created by Mexico's own internal problems), and the money they send back from the US represents the one of the largest industries the country has (larger than oil, IIRC). They don't want that decreased, and if the wall had no chance of impacting illegal immigration, they wouldn't be getting upset about it.

And it does wonders for the tax base. There are towns full of nice houses but no people in mexico, because after years of planning to go back to the town that now is what they always wanted it to be, they figure out that america is now their home.

Exporting many of your most driven individuals might well not be good for your country, just something to think about.

 

[ponderingturtle]

You can't compare backyard fences between home owners to a 1951 mile fence along the border between two nations.

It would seem he did. His next act will be to compare the Berlin wall to the retaining wall he has in his back yard have better flower beds.

 

[BPSCG]

Fine, we'll play that game. Mexico's enconomy depends on U.S. dollars sent back by laborers in the U.S. to their families back home.

Now why is that? If "Mexico's economy depends on U.S. dollars sent back by laborers in the U.S. to their families back home," doesn't that say more about the Mexican government than it does about Mexican workers? Does geography somehow impede prosperity south of the Rio Grande? Why do Mexicans have to come to he US to make good money? Canadians don't.

Your neighbor's income is not in any way affected by your choice to build a fence. Your neighbor's children will not lack for basic needs if you build a fence.

And Mexico will be rich or poor whether or not the US builds a fence. Twenty years ago, when the last immigration bill was passed that was allegedly going to control immigration, Mexico was poor, and there were only three million illegals in the US. Has Mexico become a rich country since then? If not, then how would reducing the number of illegals back down to 3 million from the current 12 hurt Mexico's economy?

And in any case, aren't we supposed to look out after our country's interests, and let other countries look after theirs?

 

[Tricky]

Tricky, whilst I agree with "clean own house" completely, it isn't a matter of either or.

You're correct, but I don't see the same level of passion directed at illegal immigrant hirers, in spite of the fact that they are the light that is drawing the moths. (Can I use a moth metaphor?) If you ask me, there is a lot of bigotry and xenophobia being used by some of the politicians trying to exploit this issue.

The illegal immigration runs parallel to/with the drug trade, and of course there is stuff like the infamous case near Victoria, tried in Houston, of the 70, minus 19 dead, found in the back of the trailer: drug trafficking makes money, people trafficking makes money.

Yeah, don't get me started about drugs. I say make 'em legal and controlled. Immigration is already legal and controlled, but the control is obviously out-of-whack, because there are people in the US who are eager to hire immigrants. They might not be so eager if they had to pay social security and health benefits. I say that these people doing the hiring are the heartless bastards. Make 'em play by the rules.

ID: I'll consider posting a page reference when I get to where my copy of China, Inc is. Or not. I summarized the argument in my initial response to Tricky. You are not worth the effort. Maybe a few lurkers are.

Whats up, Darth? You're not usually this touchy.

 

[BPSCG]

1) As you indicate, your fence does not have the purpose of preventing any contact between you and your neighbor. You are not blocking the only access between your two houses.

That's true - he can come in by the front entrance, at my invitation. Why should the US not insist on the same terms with Mexicans?

2) If you put up razor wire on your fence and patrolled it with a weapon, I'm guessing your neighbor would interpret it as hostile.

It's not at all hostile. It's simply a way of dealing with Mexico's unwillingness or inability to stop its own people from flooding across the border. If your dog keeps coming into my back yard, am I being hostile to you if I put up a fence? And if your dog gets through the fence, is it hostile if I put up barbed wire, too? Why does your inability/refusal to control your dog compel me to accept the fact that your dog can wander into my yard any time he wants? Am I not allowed to control who gets into my yard without being labelled a belligerent? If you refuse to control your dog, and I'm barred from putting up a fence, the only action left to me is to shoot your dog, which makes all of us unhappy.

(I will stipulate that if my kid is feeding your dog behind my back, I also need to smack him upside the head...)

I'm sure ID is going to complain that I'm calling Mexicans dogs, now.

 

[BPSCG]

You're correct, but I don't see the same level of passion directed at illegal immigrant hirers, in spite of the fact that they are the light that is drawing the moths. (Can I use a moth metaphor?)

No! Mexicans are not insects!

 

[Katana]

And it does wonders for the tax base. There are towns full of nice houses but no people in mexico, because after years of planning to go back to the town that now is what they always wanted it to be, they figure out that america is now their home.

Exporting many of your most driven individuals might well not be good for your country, just something to think about.

Exactly.

 

[MelBrooksfan]

Exactly.

We need to wall off Mexico for Mexico's own good. Or we need to start sneaking over the border ourselves and start grabbing up these nice houses.

 

[BPSCG]

And it does wonders for the tax base. There are towns full of nice houses but no people in mexico, because after years of planning to go back to the town that now is what they always wanted it to be, they figure out that america is now their home.

That's okay. Americans go buy the houses. We have some friends who retired, sold their house in Virginia, and moved to a beautiful new house overlooking the Pacific Ocean ten miles south of San Diego, for a lot less than what it cost them to live here. All the oceanfront houses are owned by Americans - it's actually an ex-pat community of sorts - but if they go out their front door and walk a hundred yards east, they're in the squalor of real Mexico.

 

[Katana]

We need to wall off Mexico for Mexico's own good. Or we need to start sneaking over the border ourselves and start grabbing up these nice houses.

Hmmm. Americans start taking over abandoned Mexican towns.

What would be the impact? Might be interesting.

 

[Tricky]

That's true - he can come in by the front entrance, at my invitation. Why should the US not insist on the same terms with Mexicans?

The whole thing is that it isn't the crossing of the border that the US objects to, (or else we'd be at loggerheads with Canada too) it is the staying that is a problem, if it is indeed a problem. Building a fence is unlikely to do anything about that problem, but building a fence would create problems not only with Mexico, but with other allies who would see us as becoming like old Berlin.

It's not at all hostile.

I don't think you have supported that position at all. Metaphors aside, arming your border is a hostile act. It says "we don't trust you". Well, many of us don't trust Mexico, but I'm not sure that shoving this in their face is likely to ease the problem. If anything, it seems like we would be creating a nursery for terrorists by making sure they know we hate them.

It's simply a way of dealing with Mexico's unwillingness or inability to stop its own people from flooding across the border.

Yes, I know what its for, but I disagree that it is a workable solution to the problem because it doesn't address why they are flooding across the border. You're treating the symptoms rather than the disease. (Can I use a disease metaphor?) Land mines are a way of dealing with the flood across the border too, but it doesn't address the root issues.

If your dog keeps coming into my back yard, am I being hostile to you if I put up a fence? And if your dog gets through the fence, is it hostile if I put up barbed wire, too? Why does your inability/refusal to control your dog compel me to accept the fact that your dog can wander into my yard any time he wants?

This is a very poor metaphor. Dogs are not sentient beings. But let's go with it anyway. If you're putting a big pile of dog food in your back yard, then you can't be surprised if a hungry dog tries to get in.

Am I not allowed to control who gets into my yard without being labeled a belligerent? If you refuse to control your dog, and I'm barred from putting up a fence, the only action left to me is to shoot your dog, which makes all of us unhappy.

If you shoot my dog after luring him over, I'll be damned unhappy.

(I will stipulate that if my kid is feeding your dog behind my back, I also need to smack him upside the head...)

No. You need to shoot your kid. Thank you for illustrating how some anti-immigrant people think the hirers should get a slap on the side of the head, while the hungry immigrants get shot.