Well will you look at that, Republicans just might be compromising.

[chucky2]

Yep! They love themselves some gubment spending!

Their thinking is; keep out all these illegals so they don't use these services we want to get rid of! Keep the illegals out so they don't take minimum wage jobs that of which we want to remove that minimum wage! We don't want illegals using our healthcare that we don't want to provide for our citizens! Keep those damn illegals out that don't pay taxes because we prefer to shift the burden of taxes paid back to the 47%!

You see, the right is just looking out for those poor illegals.

No. What they're thinking is they're going to get their payoff for themselves and their constituency (read, connected folks) for that buildout. None of what you posted makes any sense. Good insight into your mind though.

 

[woolfe9998]

Given that ~50% of illegals arrived legally and overstayed their visa there is a clear ceiling as to how much a fence or border security can prevent illegal aliens right?

And given that the bill essentially is a giant reward for illegal aliens it stands to reason that people will be incentivized to be illegal aliens in the future.

If the amnesty only applies to those already here, I fail to see the incentive. Sure, this is our second round of amnesty, but the last occurred almost 30 years ago. The prospect that maybe we'll do it again in another thirty years isn't that much incentive.

So far as half the illegals over-staying their visas, that is correct. What is your point? Obviously border security can only reduce immigration that involves illegally crossing the border.

In what world is reducing the inflow not a benefit to anyone who considers illegal immigration a problem?

 

[woolfe9998]

Sweet try at pushing that narrative, except, everything I said is fact. Want to fact check it? How many illegals are in the US right now? What's our border stop rate (that we know of at least)? Now that we've dubunked your attemped narrative push...

You're right...not much to discuss here. Only thing left is why you are actually trying to defend this. Are you that out of touch with Reality, or, are you just wanting the illegal gravy train to keep rolling and thus participating in the smokescreen? Really it's one or the other, would just like to know which one it is.

Chuck

No, I want to reduce the inflow of illegal immigration and I'm quite in touch with reality.

What exactly do you think has been debunked here? I linked a study showing illegal immigration declining from 800,000 per year between 2000-4 to 500,000 a year from 2005-2008. We beefed up border security between 2006 and 2008. I fail to see how this is not persuasive that beefing it up further will continue to reduce the inflow.

We'll never get it down to literal zero. If that is what you are hoping for, I guaranty you will never be satisfied.

 

[chucky2]

It is a benefit, when it actually happens at the levels necessary. Since it doesn't and we're going to pay for it, both in money and granting citizenship based on BS border lockdown that won't happen, what is the point of the bill? The point is to paint a feel good image that the Pols are going to actually do what they aren't doing now with the laws/policy already in place, meaning, they won't in reality do effectively jack, and, to get the illegals to be legal...which we all know is exactly the endgame from the Left leadership.

Take heart: You are going to get exactly what you want, and so will the Right leadership. The rest of US will just get F'd, like has been happening for the past 30 years. It's cool though right?

 

[chucky2]

No, I want to reduce the inflow of illegal immigration and I'm quite in touch with reality.

What exactly do you think has been debunked here? I linked a study showing illegal immigration declining from 800,000 per year between 2000-4 to 500,000 a year from 2005-2008. We beefed up border security between 2006 and 2008. I fail to see how this is not persuasive that beefing it up further will continue to reduce the inflow.

We'll never get it down to literal zero. If that is what you are hoping for, I guaranty you will never be satisfied.

You just said you linked to a study showing it's at 500k per year. You understand what you're saying there right? That the enacted laws and policy of our Fed Politicians were willfully deciding on treason. If we have an illegal immigration problem on a 2000 mi. border that is a small few thousand a year that would be one thing. 500k a year? Lulz. That's not small, that's a continued invasion. Willfully being allowed, fostered even, by our own Politician willful inaction. We didn't "beef up" jack. We simply pretended to suck less hard. Or in other words, you didn't let your daughter get raped by the whole town, just half of it. Good one dad, you're Father of the Year!

Call me when our illegal invasion numbers are down at single k numbers for the year - and we've actually got the real metrics and real detection systems in place to know that number. Until then any BS legislation that even suggests legalization before the border and immigration system is secured/fixed is a complete and total snowball job. Anyone arguing otherwise is either delusional or on for whatever reason wanting to side with the illegals. There is no middle ground here.

Chuck

 

[berzerker60]

Call me when our illegal invasion numbers are down at single k numbers for the year - and we've actually got the real metrics and real detection systems in place to know that number. Until then any BS legislation that even suggests legalization before the border and immigration system is secured/fixed is a complete and total snowball job. Anyone arguing otherwise is either delusional or on for whatever reason wanting to side with the illegals. There is no middle ground here.

Chuck

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_attempts_and_victims_of_the_inner_German_border

East Germany had miles and miles of guarded zone near the border where you couldn't even visit without a pass, a huge guard force that had no belief in human rights, about as heavy of a wall as you're likely to see, and one of history's most pervasive internal security forces, and even THEY had tens of thousands escape each year. And their border was much smaller than ours, and population was much smaller than ours or Mexico's. You will never ever ever ever get a border than keeps less than 1,000 people from crossing illegally each year. Give it up. It's a ridiculous demand.

 

[chucky2]

They didn't have the tech we have now either. I'm not changing my demand. When they get down to exceedingly low levels, then we can talk. Calling 500k some awesome number that just needs a little more improving, or even suggesting something remotely close to that, is a joke. Ironic you linked to that though. That's basically what we need to start doing on our own Southern border. Won't be turned back, can't be apprehended? Boom. Illegal invaders stopped, forever. In this matter, East Germany had the right idea...

Chuck

 

[davmat787]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_attempts_and_victims_of_the_inner_German_border

East Germany had miles and miles of guarded zone near the border where you couldn't even visit without a pass, a huge guard force that had no belief in human rights, about as heavy of a wall as you're likely to see, and one of history's most pervasive internal security forces, and even THEY had tens of thousands escape each year. And their border was much smaller than ours, and population was much smaller than ours or Mexico's. You will never ever ever ever get a border than keeps less than 1,000 people from crossing illegally each year. Give it up. It's a ridiculous demand.

Most of those escapes were through other countries (ie: visit Czech, cross border to Hungary, then escape), not through the militarized wall as your link indicates. Not sure what good it does to conflate the two figures when you are advocating a fence.

As for this bill, I wish they had not removed the requirement that links the completion of the increased border security with illegal immigrant amnesty/benefits.

 

[ivwshane]

No. What they're thinking is they're going to get their payoff for themselves and their constituency (read, connected folks) for that buildout. None of what you posted makes any sense. Good insight into your mind though.

Lol! Of course it doesn't make sense, I wrote what the right is thinking. Thanks for agreeing with me

 

[chucky2]

Lol! Of course it doesn't make sense, I wrote what the right is thinking. Thanks for agreeing with me

No, what you wrote doesn't make sense in that it's not even what people that are Right in positions of power would think. Maybe there is some validity to that scientific study that liberals were failure and knowing what righties were actually thinking...

 

[Jhhnn]

Once they have legal status, they can compete for jobs with companies who won't hire illegals today.

Such companies exist? Really?

 

[Jhhnn]

No, what you wrote doesn't make sense in that it's not even what people that are Right in positions of power would think. Maybe there is some validity to that scientific study that liberals were failure and knowing what righties were actually thinking...

Well, yeh, but you told us what you're thinking-

Won't be turned back, can't be apprehended? Boom. Illegal invaders stopped, forever. In this matter, East Germany had the right idea...

Just murder 'em. Create a death zone all along the border, anybody who enters, Pow! Kill 'em. Merrika! Hell yea!

 

[ivwshane]

No, what you wrote doesn't make sense in that it's not even what people that are Right in positions of power would think. Maybe there is some validity to that scientific study that liberals were failure and knowing what righties were actually thinking...

So the right doesn't want to cut social programs? They don't want illegals to not use those programs? They don't want to get rid of the minimum wage? They want illegals to use our healthcare system? They are in favor of a universal healthcare system? They aren't in favor of everyone paying taxes with the rich paying less taxes than they do now?

Lol, feel free to correct where I'm wrong.

 

[chucky2]

Well, yeh, but you told us what you're thinking-



Just murder 'em. Create a death zone all along the border, anybody who enters, Pow! Kill 'em. Merrika! Hell yea!

Correct. It's really just giving illegal invaders what they chose to ask for when they crossed what would be a DMZ. Obviously they'd know about it and the risk, obviously we'd make every reasonable effort to turn them back or detain them for immediate return to Mexico, but, if that couldn't be done, no need to be further illegally invaded, simply just let them realize the Risk they decided to accept by invading. If other countries don't like it, well, too F'ing bad. Let them take in Millions of illegals.

I'm not seeing a problem here...

 

[chucky2]

So the right doesn't want to cut social programs?

No 'the right' wants to scale back social programs to reasonable levels and get people taking responsibility for themselves or suffering the consequences they themselves set themselves up to suffer. It's their choice, but ridiculous rewards for failure it really counterproductive.

They don't want illegals to not use those programs?

What F'ing imbecile would be stupid enough to want people here illegally to use programs we have to pay for? Is there even anyone that stupid here that would admit that?

They don't want to get rid of the minimum wage?

Beats me. Does 'the right' want to get rid of the minimum wage? Are there bills being passed or with large Right support on that topic? I'd be interested to see them if you could link them up.

They want illegals to use our healthcare system?

Again, what idiot would be dumb enough to want illegals to use our HC system we're paying for? I can understand they're here illegally and have an unforeseen emergency. Yes, we should treat that. Then put them on the next plane to Mexico once stable for travel for them to deal with.

They are in favor of a universal healthcare system?

No, I doubt they are. I am though, if only because the free market has decided to be so greedy for such a critical service. Had the free market self-regulated to reasonable levels, I'd much rather have that system then Gov getting into the mix. You will notice what a gem ACA is turning out to be so far.

They aren't in favor of everyone paying taxes with the rich paying less taxes than they do now?

I'm not seeing that that in and of itself is such a large problem. We all live here, each of us that earn wages that is over 18 IMO should have some skin in the game. If that means 'the rich' pay less, then, so be it. When 547% don't pay anything to the Fed, that to me is far less of a 'the rich' problem than far more of a 47% problem. Prior to becoming a Spender, I'd say it still isn't a problem, the Gov should just either increase taxes across the board to cover what needs to be spent, or, preferably whenever possible (not Politician possible, Reality possible), reduce its spending to be inline with tax receipts. Oh the horror!

Lol, feel free to correct where I'm wrong.

This will be the last time I do so. I can't dedicate time to correcting every one of your posts, I'd be here all day.

Chuck

 

[nehalem256]

Just murder 'em. Create a death zone all along the border, anybody who enters, Pow! Kill 'em. Merrika! Hell yea!

Its not murder to kill foreign invaders entering your country.

Its basically just castle doctrine applied on a national scale.

And you must really have a low opinion of illegal immigrants if you think they will keep crossing the border illegally if they know they run a high risk of being shot.

 

[chucky2]

Its not murder to kill foreign invaders entering your country.

Its basically just castle doctrine applied on a national scale.

And you must really have a low opinion of illegal immigrants if you think they will keep crossing the border illegally if they know they run a high risk of being shot.

Precisely. Once some small (in a relative sense) have been killed (note: not murdered, killed), the word will be out that crossing the border illegally is a really bad idea now. I'm sure there will be those talking women and kids into crossing at points they know they'll be killed at, to simply use it as a propaganda, but really, if the sheeple that is the US public weren't so easily led around by the nose, we could have this invasion defeated fairly handily. I guess they like paying for illegals, having their jobs taken by them, etc. Americans...so F'ing dumb...

Chuck

 

[BoberFett]

Border fences are stupid and pointless. How many miles of coast do we have?

The problem is the profit motive, both for the illegal worker and the company taking advantage of them. Instead of wasting money on building, maintaining, and monitoring a fence, hire more ICE investigators to look at employers. Massive, business ending fines for knowingly hiring illegals would change those crooks minds in a hurry.

 

[berzerker60]

Lots of people already die at the border and people keep coming. Lots and lots of people already die each year.

http://www.economist.com/news/unite...d-drones-will-do-more-harm-good-secure-enough

Actually shooting people wouldn't make any difference, but don't let that get in the way of your inhuman disgusting murder fantasies.

 

[nehalem256]

Lots of people already die at the border and people keep coming. Lots and lots of people already die each year.

http://www.economist.com/news/unite...d-drones-will-do-more-harm-good-secure-enough

Actually shooting people wouldn't make any difference, but don't let that get in the way of your inhuman disgusting murder fantasies.

Shooting foreign invaders is not murder.

 

[Agent11]

I wonder if it would be possible to build a canal on the border, and just tunnel through the mountains rather than make locks, yet keep enough size for cargo ships.

Would make a solid barrier for coyotes, and would be a new shipping route.

 

[chucky2]

Lots of people already die at the border and people keep coming. Lots and lots of people already die each year.

http://www.economist.com/news/unite...d-drones-will-do-more-harm-good-secure-enough

Actually shooting people wouldn't make any difference, but don't let that get in the way of your inhuman disgusting murder fantasies.

"The Border Patrol, which is charged with nabbing illegal crossers between official entry points, defines its effectiveness by the number of people it catches (or those that turn back) as a proportion of those it detects. By this formula the Border Patrol in Tucson sector, which includes Mr Chilton’s ranch as well as the area around an official crossing at Nogales, is 87% effective. But estimates for the true overall figure range widely; some put it as low as 30%. For such a hot topic, the available data are, as a report from the Council on Foreign Relations puts it, “distressingly sparse”."

Yeah...we need to do less to secure the border.

We have awesome military and technology. Lets use'em, stop F'ing around and just solve the problem we all know can be solved quite easily.

 

[Ldir]

I'm not seeing a problem here...

Neither did the East Germans or North Koreans. Maybe you would be happier in a country that shares your lack of respect for life.

 

[chucky2]

Neither did the East Germans or North Koreans. Maybe you would be happier in a country that shares your lack of respect for life.

I had no idea N. Korea or East Germany had an illegal invasion problem they needed to be keeping out. If they did that is total news to me, and if they didn't that is a massive false equivalency by you. Hmmm...which one is it?

 

[woolfe9998]

Shooting foreign invaders is not murder.

It most certainly is. It isn't warfare. You don't make it legal by misapplying a military term.