8 ms·

The US government shutdowns of the past have seemed like political posturing over budgets, but this time the situation seems genuinely important - I have read s

The US government shutdowns of the past have seemed like political posturing over budgets, but this time the situation seems genuinely important - I have read so much about the gangs and violence and trafficking that is taking place in the border region. It's surprising that your politicians are able to take a genuine issue like this and turn it into a political one. It's also surprising that common people want the border to be unprotected. What sense does it make?

asdff 8y ago
What you've been reading has been a gross mischaracterization on the issues. Less than one half of one percent of border patrol agents surveyed by the Senate Homeland Security committee want a wall (1), and that's because a wall won't change the situation. It is well known that the overwhelming majority of illegal immigrants arrived by legal means through a port of entry and overstayed their visa. It is also well known that immigrant populations in the united states commit less crime per capita than native born populations. The whole idea of the wall has been around since Mexico declared independence from Spain, and has long been rooted in racism and fear, not fact or data (2) 1. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/05/us/politics/donald-trump-border-wall.html?emc=edit_th_190106&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=879446810106 https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/05/us/politics/donald-trump-... 2. https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/nation-world/ct-mexico-border-wall-history-20190110-story.html#nws=mcnewsletter https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/nation-world/ct-me...
- lamarpye 8y ago
  I want a wall because I think the reducing the supply of unskilled labor will tend to raised wages for unskilled workers in the United States.
  - asdff 8y ago
    Actually, the supply of unskilled labor is too low. On agriculture, large corporate farms like Tyson Foods can afford to invest in automation to deal with the lack of labor supply (1), however, many employers of unskilled labor do not have the resources that Tyson Foods does. Limiting immigration has never been good for the economy (2). When farmers cannot hire enough people to harvest a crop, the field goes fallow, and the farm folds. 1. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/20/us/farmworkers-immigrant-labor-robots.html?emc=edit_ca_20181121&nl=california-today&nlid=8794468120181121&te=1 https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/20/us/farmworkers-immigrant-... 2. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/02/business/trump-legal-immigration-h1b-visas.html?action=click&module=RelatedCoverage&pgtype=Article&region=Footer https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/02/business/trump-legal-immi...
- senderista 8y ago
  I'm sure this is all true, but I'm also sure that the population of visa overstayers and the population of illegal border-crossers have vastly different characteristics, including crime rate. This seems like an essential distinction for this discussion since only the latter is relevant to border security, yet I have not seen anyone make it (nor do I know if the relevant data exists).
  - asdff 8y ago
    The relevant data does exist, it's actually in this article (1). Once again, even undocumented immigrants have a lower crime rate than native born citizens. 1. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/11/us/politics/trump-border-crisis-reality.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/11/us/politics/t...
    - senderista 8y ago
      Only if you assume that the studied population of undocumented immigrants in Texas was predominantly people who illegally crossed the border, not people who overstayed their visas.
      - fareesh 8y ago
        The news media has done such a horrible job distorting these distinct groups of people that it's so surprising to see that this needs to be pointed out. Most often I see channels like CNN refer to the umbrella term "immigrants", which I imagine is extremely offensive to folks who pay thousands of dollars and wait in line compared to someone who cheats their way into the country.
- tropo 8y ago
  That's a conflict of interest if there ever were one. If you are paid to catch violators, you want more violators. Also, you're conflating "illegal immigrants" with "immigrant populations". When mentioning crime, you suddenly switch to discussing a group of people who have patiently followed the immigration law and paid all the fees.
  - asdff 8y ago
    Think about the mechanics of how a wall might even work, the logic isn't really there to even invest in it. The only way a wall would be a practical deterrent would be if someone didn't even know it was there. One rope and you are on the other side. You'd still need border patrol to monitor the wall just like if there wasn't one. On top of that, the landscape is wide. Wouldn't it be far far cheaper to just fly a drone, maybe even with AI, and scan miles of desert at a time for anything that isn't miles of desert, and have a border patrol agent show up with a pickup truck? Because wall or not, you are gonna have to fly a drone or have that same border patrol agent cover the same area anyway to see if there's anyone crossing that stretch of desert to begin with. For illegal immigrants vs. native born population, it still holds true that the immigrant population has a lower crime rate (1). 1. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/11/us/politics/trump-border-crisis-reality.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/11/us/politics/t...
- jquery 8y ago
  It's funny, people against the wall keep bringing up the cost/effectiveness of the wall, as if Democrats would support the wall if it was only more fiscally responsible or effective, meanwhile people who support the wall would probably be willing to spend 5-10x the estimated cost, they'd be willing to spend $50-100B if that's what it took. So, if walls don't work, isn't that an even better argument for Democrats to just give Trump his wall money? After all, it won't have any substantial effect on Americans, but this shutdown sure will if it keeps going. Or are Democrats more concerned about being the party of anti-Trump than being the adults in the room? After all, every right-thinking person knows Trump is the child throwing a tantrum in this shutdown. So wouldn't we be better served by Democrats taking care of Americans by ending the shutdown than teaching Trump a lesson in the minutiae of wall effectiveness per dollar spent?
  - asdff 8y ago
    Being the adults in the room is not setting 5.6 billion dollars (and the projections for the entire project are well north of that in total) on fire to appease a mob. The project is a shakedown, that 5.6 billion dollars will go straight into a private contractors pocket for absolutely no reason other than to appeal to bigoted logic. How much will Trump and private sector lobbies ask for next year? Do you pay ransomeware?
    - jquery 8y ago
      Whatever the cost, be it $5B or $25B, it's a rounding error in the federal budget. And what you call a "mob", some might call the central promise Trump was elected to carry out. You say a wall is "bigoted" but Democrats keep insisting the wall won't work so who is harmed? I've never been the victim of ransomware but I assume I'd pay it if the alternative was to lose pictures of my child growing up.
- fareesh 8y ago
  What does that have to do with what I said though? Illegal immigration is a separate issue from what I understand. This is about dealing with the humanitarian crisis associated with a porous border. Regardless how what percentage of people come via visa overstay or not, and regardless of what officials say when asked about solving an illegal immigration issue, the bottom line is that the area is so incredibly dangerous because gangs and criminals prey on anyone who attempts the trip and has the misfortune of encountering them. Over the years, it's quite likely that thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of victims of violence have been created purely because they make this dangerous trip. Why not put an end to this violence once and for all? They would not make this trip anymore if there was no simple way to cross the border.
rexpop 8y ago
What have you read? Have you read "No Wall They Can Build?" https://crimethinc.com/books/no-wall-they-can-build https://crimethinc.com/books/no-wall-they-can-build
stordoff 8y ago
> It's also surprising that common people want the border to be unprotected. Most places don't have a wall[1]. Characterising the lack of a wall as the border being unprotected seems unfair. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_barrier#List_of_current_barriers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_barrier#List_of_current...
- fareesh 8y ago
  I believe the proposal is to have a wall wherever it makes sense and to have other measures where they make more sense.

asdff 8y ago

What you've been reading has been a gross mischaracterization on the issues. Less than one half of one percent of border patrol agents surveyed by the Senate Homeland Security committee want a wall (1), and that's because a wall won't change the situation. It is well known that the overwhelming majority of illegal immigrants arrived by legal means through a port of entry and overstayed their visa. It is also well known that immigrant populations in the united states commit less crime per capita than native born populations. The whole idea of the wall has been around since Mexico declared independence from Spain, and has long been rooted in racism and fear, not fact or data (2) 1. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/05/us/politics/donald-trump-border-wall.html?emc=edit_th_190106&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=879446810106 https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/05/us/politics/donald-trump-... 2. https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/nation-world/ct-mexico-border-wall-history-20190110-story.html#nws=mcnewsletter https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/nation-world/ct-me...

lamarpye 8y ago
I want a wall because I think the reducing the supply of unskilled labor will tend to raised wages for unskilled workers in the United States.
- asdff 8y ago
  Actually, the supply of unskilled labor is too low. On agriculture, large corporate farms like Tyson Foods can afford to invest in automation to deal with the lack of labor supply (1), however, many employers of unskilled labor do not have the resources that Tyson Foods does. Limiting immigration has never been good for the economy (2). When farmers cannot hire enough people to harvest a crop, the field goes fallow, and the farm folds. 1. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/20/us/farmworkers-immigrant-labor-robots.html?emc=edit_ca_20181121&nl=california-today&nlid=8794468120181121&te=1 https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/20/us/farmworkers-immigrant-... 2. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/02/business/trump-legal-immigration-h1b-visas.html?action=click&module=RelatedCoverage&pgtype=Article&region=Footer https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/02/business/trump-legal-immi...
senderista 8y ago
I'm sure this is all true, but I'm also sure that the population of visa overstayers and the population of illegal border-crossers have vastly different characteristics, including crime rate. This seems like an essential distinction for this discussion since only the latter is relevant to border security, yet I have not seen anyone make it (nor do I know if the relevant data exists).
- asdff 8y ago
  The relevant data does exist, it's actually in this article (1). Once again, even undocumented immigrants have a lower crime rate than native born citizens. 1. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/11/us/politics/trump-border-crisis-reality.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/11/us/politics/t...
  - senderista 8y ago
    Only if you assume that the studied population of undocumented immigrants in Texas was predominantly people who illegally crossed the border, not people who overstayed their visas.
    - fareesh 8y ago
      The news media has done such a horrible job distorting these distinct groups of people that it's so surprising to see that this needs to be pointed out. Most often I see channels like CNN refer to the umbrella term "immigrants", which I imagine is extremely offensive to folks who pay thousands of dollars and wait in line compared to someone who cheats their way into the country.
tropo 8y ago
That's a conflict of interest if there ever were one. If you are paid to catch violators, you want more violators. Also, you're conflating "illegal immigrants" with "immigrant populations". When mentioning crime, you suddenly switch to discussing a group of people who have patiently followed the immigration law and paid all the fees.
- asdff 8y ago
  Think about the mechanics of how a wall might even work, the logic isn't really there to even invest in it. The only way a wall would be a practical deterrent would be if someone didn't even know it was there. One rope and you are on the other side. You'd still need border patrol to monitor the wall just like if there wasn't one. On top of that, the landscape is wide. Wouldn't it be far far cheaper to just fly a drone, maybe even with AI, and scan miles of desert at a time for anything that isn't miles of desert, and have a border patrol agent show up with a pickup truck? Because wall or not, you are gonna have to fly a drone or have that same border patrol agent cover the same area anyway to see if there's anyone crossing that stretch of desert to begin with. For illegal immigrants vs. native born population, it still holds true that the immigrant population has a lower crime rate (1). 1. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/11/us/politics/trump-border-crisis-reality.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/11/us/politics/t...
jquery 8y ago
It's funny, people against the wall keep bringing up the cost/effectiveness of the wall, as if Democrats would support the wall if it was only more fiscally responsible or effective, meanwhile people who support the wall would probably be willing to spend 5-10x the estimated cost, they'd be willing to spend $50-100B if that's what it took. So, if walls don't work, isn't that an even better argument for Democrats to just give Trump his wall money? After all, it won't have any substantial effect on Americans, but this shutdown sure will if it keeps going. Or are Democrats more concerned about being the party of anti-Trump than being the adults in the room? After all, every right-thinking person knows Trump is the child throwing a tantrum in this shutdown. So wouldn't we be better served by Democrats taking care of Americans by ending the shutdown than teaching Trump a lesson in the minutiae of wall effectiveness per dollar spent?
- asdff 8y ago
  Being the adults in the room is not setting 5.6 billion dollars (and the projections for the entire project are well north of that in total) on fire to appease a mob. The project is a shakedown, that 5.6 billion dollars will go straight into a private contractors pocket for absolutely no reason other than to appeal to bigoted logic. How much will Trump and private sector lobbies ask for next year? Do you pay ransomeware?
  - jquery 8y ago
    Whatever the cost, be it $5B or $25B, it's a rounding error in the federal budget. And what you call a "mob", some might call the central promise Trump was elected to carry out. You say a wall is "bigoted" but Democrats keep insisting the wall won't work so who is harmed? I've never been the victim of ransomware but I assume I'd pay it if the alternative was to lose pictures of my child growing up.
fareesh 8y ago
What does that have to do with what I said though? Illegal immigration is a separate issue from what I understand. This is about dealing with the humanitarian crisis associated with a porous border. Regardless how what percentage of people come via visa overstay or not, and regardless of what officials say when asked about solving an illegal immigration issue, the bottom line is that the area is so incredibly dangerous because gangs and criminals prey on anyone who attempts the trip and has the misfortune of encountering them. Over the years, it's quite likely that thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of victims of violence have been created purely because they make this dangerous trip. Why not put an end to this violence once and for all? They would not make this trip anymore if there was no simple way to cross the border.

rexpop 8y ago

What have you read? Have you read "No Wall They Can Build?" https://crimethinc.com/books/no-wall-they-can-build https://crimethinc.com/books/no-wall-they-can-build

stordoff 8y ago

> It's also surprising that common people want the border to be unprotected. Most places don't have a wall[1]. Characterising the lack of a wall as the border being unprotected seems unfair. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_barrier#List_of_current_barriers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_barrier#List_of_current...

fareesh 8y ago
I believe the proposal is to have a wall wherever it makes sense and to have other measures where they make more sense.