Trump requests from Congress $18 billion for his wall

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

Zontar:
Mass immigration is class warfare, always has been, always will be. Left wing parties used to remember that, I can't believe Blare/Clinton corporatism has ingrained itself into the modern left so much people pretend you can be pro-worker and pro-immigration.

What are you even trying to talk about here? The idea that class solidarity should transcend national borders has been a fixture of left-wing politics since the 19th century.

undeadsuitor:

Warhound:

altnameJag:

The length of the US/Mexico border is over 4 times longer than Israel's longest, err, length. So, yeah. Also, we kinda have oceans on each side, so unless we got a sea wall...

"Any undeclared ship will be sunk, no questions asked, any declared ship will be searched."

Coast guard can get more funding and more people, more jobs, more security. Problem solved.

Funding from where?

Are you going to raise taxes (excluding billionaires obviously) for this?

Nah, just spend a few billion on this instead of planes that will never see active service.

Warhound:

undeadsuitor:

Warhound:

"Any undeclared ship will be sunk, no questions asked, any declared ship will be searched."

Coast guard can get more funding and more people, more jobs, more security. Problem solved.

Funding from where?

Are you going to raise taxes (excluding billionaires obviously) for this?

Nah, just spend a few billion on this instead of planes that will never see active service.

Best of luck trying to convince people to cut military funding.

Warhound:

undeadsuitor:

Warhound:

"Any undeclared ship will be sunk, no questions asked, any declared ship will be searched."

Coast guard can get more funding and more people, more jobs, more security. Problem solved.

Funding from where?

Are you going to raise taxes (excluding billionaires obviously) for this?

Nah, just spend a few billion on this instead of planes that will never see active service.

Cutting military budgets is paramount to political suicide here. America has a super hard dick for military to the point that associating anything else with the military (like the police) also grants them immunity to criticism because giant hard on

NemotheElvenPanda:

Warhound:

undeadsuitor:

Funding from where?

Are you going to raise taxes (excluding billionaires obviously) for this?

Nah, just spend a few billion on this instead of planes that will never see active service.

Best of luck trying to convince people to cut military funding.

Could make blowing undeclared ships out of the water in those areas a military matter rather than coast guard I suppose. (Just double checked, coulda swore they were wrapped up in military funding but I guess they aren't.

Warhound:

NemotheElvenPanda:

Warhound:

Nah, just spend a few billion on this instead of planes that will never see active service.

Best of luck trying to convince people to cut military funding.

Could make blowing undeclared ships out of the water in those areas a military matter rather than coast guard I suppose. (Just double checked, coulda swore they were wrapped up in military funding but I guess they aren't.

That would piss a lot of nations south of us and along the Gulf off.

Warhound:

NemotheElvenPanda:

Warhound:

Nah, just spend a few billion on this instead of planes that will never see active service.

Best of luck trying to convince people to cut military funding.

Could make blowing undeclared ships out of the water in those areas a military matter rather than coast guard I suppose. (Just double checked, coulda swore they were wrapped up in military funding but I guess they aren't.

I mean sure, but then again what's your obsession with "blowing them out of the water"?

U really up for manslaughter? Gotta kill some disenfranchised abused people looking to survive to get it up at night?

They aren't subhuman pests you can kill like some third season episode of Black Mirror.

undeadsuitor:

Warhound:

NemotheElvenPanda:

Best of luck trying to convince people to cut military funding.

Could make blowing undeclared ships out of the water in those areas a military matter rather than coast guard I suppose. (Just double checked, coulda swore they were wrapped up in military funding but I guess they aren't.

I mean sure, but then again what's your obsession with "blowing them out of the water"?

U really up for manslaughter? Gotta kill some disenfranchised abused people looking to survive to get it up at night?

They aren't subhuman pests you can kill like some third season episode of Black Mirror.

Ideally it wouldn't have to kill anyone, the threat of instant death tends to be a pretty good deterrent to doing something, thats why you don't jump out of the window to get down from the top of a 10 story building.

Wow, did you come up with that insult all on your own?

And as I said, make it very clear that the deterrent is there and you won't have to kill anyone.

Warhound:

undeadsuitor:

Warhound:

Could make blowing undeclared ships out of the water in those areas a military matter rather than coast guard I suppose. (Just double checked, coulda swore they were wrapped up in military funding but I guess they aren't.

I mean sure, but then again what's your obsession with "blowing them out of the water"?

U really up for manslaughter? Gotta kill some disenfranchised abused people looking to survive to get it up at night?

They aren't subhuman pests you can kill like some third season episode of Black Mirror.

Ideally it wouldn't have to kill anyone, the threat of instant death tends to be a pretty good deterrent to doing something, thats why you don't jump out of the window to get down from the top of a 10 story building.

Wow, did you come up with that insult all on your own?

And as I said, make it very clear that the deterrent is there and you won't have to kill anyone.

Until someone calls your bluff.

How many people you willing to murder?

altnameJag:

Warhound:

undeadsuitor:

I mean sure, but then again what's your obsession with "blowing them out of the water"?

U really up for manslaughter? Gotta kill some disenfranchised abused people looking to survive to get it up at night?

They aren't subhuman pests you can kill like some third season episode of Black Mirror.

Ideally it wouldn't have to kill anyone, the threat of instant death tends to be a pretty good deterrent to doing something, thats why you don't jump out of the window to get down from the top of a 10 story building.

Wow, did you come up with that insult all on your own?

And as I said, make it very clear that the deterrent is there and you won't have to kill anyone.

Until someone calls your bluff.

How many people you willing to murder?

Protecting your national boarders isn't quite murder. As for how many, depends on how many decided to get on the boat that day.

Warhound:

altnameJag:

Warhound:

Ideally it wouldn't have to kill anyone, the threat of instant death tends to be a pretty good deterrent to doing something, thats why you don't jump out of the window to get down from the top of a 10 story building.

Wow, did you come up with that insult all on your own?

And as I said, make it very clear that the deterrent is there and you won't have to kill anyone.

Until someone calls your bluff.

How many people you willing to murder?

Protecting your national boarders isn't quite murder. As for how many, depends on how many decided to get on the boat that day.

Protect from what? The abject horror of a few immigrants?

renegade7:

Warhound:

altnameJag:
Until someone calls your bluff.

How many people you willing to murder?

Protecting your national boarders isn't quite murder. As for how many, depends on how many decided to get on the boat that day.

Protect from what? The abject horror of a few immigrants?

Immigrants, Criminals, hard drugs, human traffickers and so on.

Warhound:

renegade7:

Warhound:

Protecting your national boarders isn't quite murder. As for how many, depends on how many decided to get on the boat that day.

Protect from what? The abject horror of a few immigrants?

Immigrants, Criminals, hard drugs, human traffickers and so on.

Speaking of calling a bluff, I wasn't expecting you to be okay with the extra-judicial murder of unarmed people. Don't really know how to react to that.

altnameJag:

Warhound:

renegade7:

Protect from what? The abject horror of a few immigrants?

Immigrants, Criminals, hard drugs, human traffickers and so on.

Speaking of calling a bluff, I wasn't expecting you to be okay with the extra-judicial murder of unarmed people. Don't really know how to react to that.

I mean, if its the military/coastguard blowing things up in accordance with government policy i don't think its extra-judicial.

Also stunned/shocked applause would be appropriate.

Warhound:
I mean, if its the military/coastguard blowing things up in accordance with government policy i don't think its extra-judicial.

Also stunned/shocked applause would be appropriate.

They aren't given due process of law, it's therefore extra-judicial, but sure, let's just torpedo desperate foreigners trying to get a better life for themselves or their family.

Your username makes a bit more sense now.

Dr. Thrax:

Warhound:
I mean, if its the military/coastguard blowing things up in accordance with government policy i don't think its extra-judicial.

Also stunned/shocked applause would be appropriate.

They aren't given due process of law, it's therefore extra-judicial, but sure, let's just torpedo desperate foreigners trying to get a better life for themselves or their family.

Your username makes a bit more sense now.

When I look it up it gives two definitions, 'out of court' (Would fit your definition) and 'not legally authorized' (Which would fit my definition) since if the military is following orders from the top then it is legally authorized.

As mentioned, if they have been told, very clearly, that its gonna happen and they do it anyway, then oh well. Maybe they shoulda tried making a better life in their own nation.

I picked the name based on the Warhound titan from Warhammer 40k, glad you like it though.

The Lunatic:
It is patently obvious that something must be done about this issue in order to reduce cost, stop deaths and reduce the amount of cocaine flowing in the US.

Is "THE WALL" the best plan for this? Probably not.

Certainly not. Research from Israel and other countries that have attempted to use a wall to prevent migration show that the presence of a wall increases crossing deaths.

To put it simply, people who want to get across are going to try and get across. They prefer to cross in relatively safe parts of the border; those parts of the border then get walled off. The result is that people try to cross in dangerous parts of the border or using more risky methods, and more people die as a result.

The Lunatic:
Then what do you suggest?

I'm not saying this as a "Haha, you've got nothing! >:3" sorta thing. I'm not entirely convinced on "THE WALL" myself, and I'm curious as to how other people would solve the issue.

A serious investment in border security would combine investment in a system of surveillance drones and small, fast-moving pickup teams with more funding for the agencies that process legal immigration claims to reduce the burden of the queue and reduce the overall number of people who attempt to cross illegally.

Essentially, rather than trying to physically seal off the border entirely - which is expensive and impossible - just make sure that you can detect when people are crossing the border and are capable of picking them up when they do it. That way, you don't need to secure and protect the entire border. Combine that with a reduction of the incentives to attempt an unsafe illegal crossing and you will see a reduction in both illegal crossing and crossing deaths.

The Lunatic:
Surely if it reduces the cost, it pays for itself eventually?

Don't get me wrong, it's a big "If", and I'm not saying "IT WILL!", but, like, what else can we do to reduce the amount of people crossing the border and bringing cocaine into the country?

The maintenance cost for the wall, as mentioned, would be absurd. Apart from staffing the entire wall, there's questions of upkeep and repairs, as well as the potential damage to the local ecosystem caused by physically sealing off a relatively arbitrary national border.

Other than that, see above. Rather than taking our defensive cues from the Middle Ages, we can invest in cheaper and more effective modern technologies that are more flexible to changing policy needs and easier to scale up or down when necessary.

Warhound:
I mean, if its the military/coastguard blowing things up in accordance with government policy i don't think its extra-judicial.

This is literally what Evil Jodi Foster was doing at the start of Elysium.

bastardofmelbourne:
This is literally what Evil Jodi Foster was doing at the start of Elysium.

Shit, I'm surprised we're not working our way to our own Elysium at the rate we're going.
Or maybe we are and it's all just in secret.

Warhound:

I mean, if its the military/coastguard blowing things up in accordance with government policy i don't think its extra-judicial.

Also stunned/shocked applause would be appropriate.

"Because when we kill human traffickers, it's also okay to kill the people they were trafficking".

You're a bad parody of an action movie villain at this point. Paul Verhoeven would think you were too on the nose for Starship Troopers.

How many American citizens are you willing to kill over this?

Warhound:

Dr. Thrax:

Warhound:
I mean, if its the military/coastguard blowing things up in accordance with government policy i don't think its extra-judicial.

Also stunned/shocked applause would be appropriate.

They aren't given due process of law, it's therefore extra-judicial, but sure, let's just torpedo desperate foreigners trying to get a better life for themselves or their family.

Your username makes a bit more sense now.

When I look it up it gives two definitions, 'out of court' (Would fit your definition) and 'not legally authorized' (Which would fit my definition) since if the military is following orders from the top then it is legally authorized.

As mentioned, if they have been told, very clearly, that its gonna happen and they do it anyway, then oh well. Maybe they shoulda tried making a better life in their own nation.

I picked the name based on the Warhound titan from Warhammer 40k, glad you like it though.

You would need to change the law as if you told the military to do that, even from the "top", it would almost assuredly fall under the category of being an illegal order, there's more than just "orders from the top" that stops us from sinking random undeclared ships, you would need systemic change and popular support to authorize something like that.

Even then, what your talking about is an untenable fantasy in the US, as any political party that did change the law to authorize something like that would find themselves very quickly thrown out of office. Even countries with much harsher immigration laws generally find mass slaughter of unarmed individuals to be ethically and morally indefensible. Despite the current heated debate around immigration in the US, we are not yet to the point where the public would tolerate mass killings of unarmed civilians, potential criminals or not.

Basically what you are proposing goes beyond political suicide into the realm of political fantasy, alongside proposals of nuking the Middle East.

Bull-fucking-shit the wall will cost $18 billion. You have to payout people for eminent domain, yu have to actually build the roads to get the work teams and resources to where they need to which, yet again, will come with its own raft of eminent domain. You have to wait for people to make claims in court against further damages beyond land resumption. Things like torpedoed land development plans because of the disrupted trade along the border that many businesses and communities thrived upon.

You can't just claim dominion of Mexican soil, and the Mexicans will likely take any and all complaints to the ICC for a whole raft of environmental law breaches and ecological disruption that happens on theirside of the border.

You have to train personnel, active engineering teams dedicated to maintenance, surveillance, maintain service roads....

Nothing costs 18 billion anymore (slight exaggeration)... assuming that it's not just chicken wire and some star posts in some places.

The U.S. President has cost the American taxpayer .05% of that in holidaying alone.

Zontar:
Then again, I have serious doubts the people pretending walls don't work feel that way when one is needed around their property given the fact the socialists in the UK literally build walls to do just that because of obvious reasons.

In the UK we mostly use walls to keep the roof up. We tried a few experiments without them, but they were overall unsuccessful.

NemotheElvenPanda:

That's less the fault of illegal immigrants and more of the companies that knowingly advertise work and hire these people so that they can pay them less and expect more work. That is why I also mentioned on getting rid some of the incentives, and that can include penalties on companies that do this sort of thing.

How can you even know companies are doing that though? There are tons of companies in the USA.

evilthecat:

inu-kun:
But illegal immigration is, while not dangerous per se, harmful to lower classes. This is out of the basic "more demand for work lowers the salary". With regular immigration you can at least choose people with qualification for jobs that are in demand.

While not definitively untrue, there are things which are vastly, vastly more harmful to the lower classes which could be focused on instead.

Like, I've said this many, many times, but "jobs" aren't a Malthusian resource. They aren't dug out of the jobs mine, which can only produce a fixed number of jobs per year, and thus it isn't a simple case of more demand for work lowering salaries because more demand for work implies more people, and more people implies needs which have to be met, and needs which have to be met implies (you've guessed it) jobs.

I mean, there are a lot of bad things about illegal migration (in particular, the fact that it's often linked with organized crime and modern slavery) but stealing poor people's jobs isn't really one of them.

Since a lot of my friends have had experience with immigration services in various "Western" countries, I have to say. They don't care what qualifications you have or your potential for contribution. They have one job and one job only, which is to kick out as many people as possible in order to meet immigration targets from the government, who put those targets in place in order to reduce net migration figures and thus be able tell right wing voters that they're dealing with the "problem" of immigration.

The process is not sophisticated or sensitive enough to be able to reflect what jobs are in demand and which aren't, it's not a system set up to serve any kind of national interest, it's set up to pander to old people and racists who get triggered by hearing foreign languages, because unfortunately that's how you get elected.

So let's talk statistics, how many low class jobs are created on average for X amount of immigrant divided by X? If the number is lower than one (which is nearly assuredly the case) then yes, they do "took ar' jobs". There is also the concern of having more illegal immigrants in a field reducing the salary for local populace in that field since the former can be exploited and the latter needs to keep up.
Edit: Also for the case of illegal immigrants entering with old people or children the question comes to "how much would the USA spend for services for them compared to how much taxes the adults will pay (which also applies to the adults).

I find it very hard to believe, finding how much education a person has is likely one of the first things on the forms. Heck, I only need to mention the reduced crime rate of immigrants in comparison to local population to prove that there is a working vetting process.

Warhound:
Ideally it wouldn't have to kill anyone,

As long as we're fantasizing, I'd like a pony. Anybody else notice that the people who most frequently recommend horrific violence as a solution are never the ones offering to pull the trigger themselves?

BeetleManiac:

Warhound:
Ideally it wouldn't have to kill anyone,

As long as we're fantasizing, I'd like a pony. Anybody else notice that the people who most frequently recommend horrific violence as a solution are never the ones offering to pull the trigger themselves?

I mean, you can go buy a pony, they aren't that expensive. Certainly less than 18 billion. And I would pull the trigger if you wanted and I was paid for it. Gotta make money to pay for pony-feed somehow.

Warhound:
I mean, you can go buy a pony, they aren't that expensive. Certainly less than 18 billion. And I would pull the trigger if you wanted and I was paid for it. Gotta make money to pay for pony-feed somehow.

It's all empty sentiments is my point. Desperate people would still come here looking for a new life even if we authorized the coast guard to commit war crimes to appease a bunch of cowardly racists. Lots of people would die. And no, you're not going to enlist. We both know that.

BeetleManiac:

Warhound:
I mean, you can go buy a pony, they aren't that expensive. Certainly less than 18 billion. And I would pull the trigger if you wanted and I was paid for it. Gotta make money to pay for pony-feed somehow.

It's all empty sentiments is my point. Desperate people would still come here looking for a new life even if we authorized the coast guard to commit war crimes to appease a bunch of cowardly racists. Lots of people would die. And no, you're not going to enlist. We both know that.

I am enlisting at the moment actually, currently waiting for the background check to come back before I can move on to the next phase.

Edit: And I think you would get more traction insulting me calling me a xenophobe rather than a racist, since I am a nationalist, and just don't like foreigners in general, rather than people from mexico, hell if it was dirty leaves sneaking into our country by the tens of thousands I would be all for setting up a bunch of these along our northern boarder.image

If they go through the proper channels however and become proper Americans I would welcome them with open arms.

A far cheaper way to cut down on illegal immigration that no one wants to execute would be to actually crack down on the businesses that hire illegals. A dirty secret is that both parties allow underground operations that employ many illegals and if that work did not exist for them there would not be as many people moving across the border. This would also allow more jobs for citizens.

These illegal friendly jobs are the thing that makes it profitable for the migrants. Cut off the money and there will be fewer people.

There are already tunnels under the existing fences. There will be more as the existing ones are found and collapsed. Stopping the war on drugs as one person mentioned would reduce undesirable traffic and cutting off the sweatshop immigrant jobs that require no papers would solve the rest.

Who am I kidding though. The US has a huge pseudo slave industry in their prison system and it needs the war on drugs to supply its labour. And those sweatshop jobs drive down costs as well as even getting caught doing it results in deportation for the illegals and a slap on the wrist for the employers.

Warhound:
I am enlisting at the moment actually, currently waiting for the background check to come back before I can move on to the next phase.

I stand corrected on that count. It's at the least a change of pace from the usual chickenhawk keyboard warriors. That said, mass slaughter of unarmed civilians is still not a morally, ethically or politically viable solution.

jklinders:
Who am I kidding though. The US has a huge pseudo slave industry in their prison system and it needs the war on drugs to supply its labour. And those sweatshop jobs drive down costs as well as even getting caught doing it results in deportation for the illegals and a slap on the wrist for the employers.

Welcome to the consequences of campaign cash and a, "Privatize everything!" dogma. I have a hunch that our culture is once again about to change our collective idea of what work actually is because not only has the technological landscape changed things but because the entrenched special interests have been dicking with the system to the point where trying to restore things to the way they (allegedly) were is bordering on the impossible.

BeetleManiac:

Warhound:
I am enlisting at the moment actually, currently waiting for the background check to come back before I can move on to the next phase.

I stand corrected on that count. It's at the least a change of pace from the usual chickenhawk keyboard warriors. That said, mass slaughter of unarmed civilians is still not a morally, ethically or politically viable solution.

Well, rest assured that I won't be anywhere near an implement to do anything odious, considering I will be administrative.

Morals and ethics change. Just look at the last 8 years. People call George Bush a war criminal for his use of drones, but Obama is clean as a whistle even though he expanded our drone assassination program by leaps and bounds.

Warhound:
Morals and ethics change. Just look at the last 8 years. People call George Bush a war criminal for his use of drones, but Obama is clean as a whistle even though he expanded our drone assassination program by leaps and bounds.

I've actually criticized Obama heavily for drone warfare as have a lot of other people. More to the point, what justification for such actions do you think are going to fly when Mexico comes knocking asking why we sent out the armed forces to massacre a bunch of their unarmed civilians.

BeetleManiac:

Warhound:
Morals and ethics change. Just look at the last 8 years. People call George Bush a war criminal for his use of drones, but Obama is clean as a whistle even though he expanded our drone assassination program by leaps and bounds.

I've actually criticized Obama heavily for drone warfare as have a lot of other people. More to the point, what justification for such actions do you think are going to fly when Mexico comes knocking asking why we sent out the armed forces to massacre a bunch of their unarmed civilians.

"Perhaps you should keep your people from committing suicide by keeping a better watch on them in that area. They had plenty of warning." Besides, its Mexico, we could flip them the middle finger if we wanted (Which is basically what Trump has done at every turn.)

Zontar:
Mass immigration is class warfare, always has been, always will be. Left wing parties used to remember that...

Immigration can be exploited by the capitalist class for class warfare. However, it occurs in large part by turning the immigrants and natives against each other economically and socially. with worker solidarity however (the relevant immigrants too are working class), which left wing parties were very much in favour of, it should not be a problem.

But, I think, you are not much interested in solidarity beyond your own very narrow in-group.

Warhound:
"Perhaps you should keep your people from committing suicide by keeping a better watch on them in that area. They had plenty of warning." Besides, its Mexico, we could flip them the middle finger if we wanted (Which is basically what Trump has done at every turn.)

Yes, Trump has done everything in his power to alienate our allies and cozy up to authoritarian strong men. That doesn't make him right, just a weakling trying to look like a badass. We are living in a global society now. That genie ain't going back in the bottle, and the days of running a country exclusively through threats of military action and violence are coming to a close. If the only solution you can think of for immigration issues is bloodshed and murder, then you're living in the wrong century.

Mexico is a major trade partner of ours as well as a political ally. What do we gain from antagonizing them like a bunch of schoolyard bullies?

Zontar:
A wall worked for Hungary, worked for Croatia, worked for Israel, worked for Saudi Arabia, the list goes on. Whether people like to pretend otherwise or not doesn't change the fact border walls do work. They aren't 100% effective, but they work.

For Hungary and Croatia the 'walls' are actually mostly chain link fences. More pertinently, their walls were erected to stop the Pan-European refugee waves of 2015-2016, which allowed them to contain a temporary problem and funnel the refugees elsewhere. Israel didn't build a wall around themselves, but rather erected walls around the people they didn't want get into Israel (compare: Warzaw Ghetto), something which didn't really stop the violence it was meant to contain (build a wall to stop ballistic missiles and mortars).

Walls can definitely work, but none of your examples are even remotely similar to the US where an incredibly long border has to be guarded against an incredibly sustained (30+ years in the process) effort to illegally cross over.

Zontar:
Mass immigration is class warfare, always has been, always will be. Left wing parties used to remember that, I can't believe Blare/Clinton corporatism has ingrained itself into the modern left so much people pretend you can be pro-worker and pro-immigration.

Please, don't appropriate the rhetoric of socialists. For one you don't believe in the actual theories and you have repeatedly shown poor understanding of what socialist ideology and theories actually entail.
As for being pro-worker, pro-immigration, it worked incredibly well for Sweden from the 40's to the 80's. Given proper integration and strong labor laws it is quite easy to combine the two. The problem is when poor labor laws allows for employers to undercut domestic labor by employing cheaper immigrants. This can absolutely be prevented, as Sweden demonstrated by forcing employers to give union negotiated benefits, wages and work hours to everyone, including fresh off the boat immigrants. The US proves when it doesn't work; when the employer can easily slash benefits and wages and impose long hours on immigrants that would be impossible to force on a domestic worker.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here