It's be cheaper and more effective to hire the cartels to patrol their side. They are responsible for most of the people coming across anyway. Just pay them NOT to allow them to cross and then just play cowboys and Indians with the mules, as usual.
I just read a whole bunch of chemotherapy and only 1 mention of stopping the bleeding. Kudos to mc on that.
"If the border was 100% closed which they can easily do, We would not have any problems with anyone coming in Illegally, and that is FACT.
Mickey"
That's almost right.
But half of thr people in the country illegally came here legally and overstayed their visas.
What are you going to do about that?
“Now, want to give me the metrics for what effective is?”
Overall are our borders maintained (for the lack of a better word) effectively? Yes. See northern border. See border on Atlantic and Pacific. See airports nation wide.
To think or imply that our souther border is being maintained (again same lack of better word) effectively. Is nothing more than your eternal quest of being correct in all you say.
Why is that border maintenance ineffective? Immigration policy. It has to be changed. We agree on this.
Who has to change it? Congress. We agree on this.
You’re not opposed to spending money. Neither am I.
I suggest working with other government to help them financially to help us with our problem. You accuse me of trying to induce a government with money. Yet we do it around the world every day.
Our only debate is me not saying you’re 100% correct. And I’m 100% incorrect.
You still have not given your solution to the problem.
@One
"The US is by your definition inducing nations worldwide. No?"
Yes and No.
Here is the simplest way to look at things and this is how our whole tax code works.
If I want to induce you to do something, I give you a reward.
If I want to make sure you don't do something, I punish you for that behavior.
Want to go buy an EV? Here is a $7500 tax credit. There is your inducement.
Do want to have health insurance? Here is a $750(iirc) fine.
Do we INDUCE ISRAEL? Yes, we give them aid, we give them weapons, etc.
Do we INDUCE Iran? No. Well, kinda no :) We impose sanctions on them for behavior we find wrong.
Interestingly, this is not talked about, and bring it up here would be a joke. The TRUE TDS people will say it didn't happen. Here is what happened with Iran. Trump ran on a policy that the Iran nuclear deal was bad. He had to destroy it. How did he INDUCE Iran to not expand that nuclear program? He gave them WAIVERS to their sanctions. He allowed them to sell oil to India, South Korea, China, and some others that I can't remember. That was an inducement. Then, in 19 or 20, he revoked it. Where do you think that 6bn came from that was frozen?
If the border was 100% closed which they can easily do, We would not have any problems with anyone coming in Illegally, and that is FACT.
Mickey
EA what bubble do you live in?
The US is by your definition inducing nations worldwide. No?
@One
"“What is effectively policing the border? Are we not now?”
Answer a question with a question. Are we handling it effectively now?"
What metrics are you using to define effective?
The border is more than just people trying to get into the country to live.
I can not forget the lesson I got from the driver at our dentist in Tijuana. When we cross into TJ, it is less than 30 seconds. They look at the passport and say, "have a nice day." When we come back into the US, it is painful. I asked the guy why. He said, "No one wants to bomb Mexico. Lots want to BOMB America."
So why do people want to BOMB us?
So the border is checking for what? People wanting to blow us up, people wanting to live here, people wanting to visit here, and commerce.
Now, want to give me the metrics for what effective is?
@one
"I don’t have any answer to that. I guess my answer would be the masses are when it is more people than the system is designed to handle."
Is it a demand issue where there are not enough people to service it?
Some would want the demand to go away.
Some want more people to service it.
You see it at the DMV. Go there and there are 300 people with 3 clerks.
I have said this before in this thread. It is a hiring problem.
cbp. gov/careers/usbp/pay-benefits/bpa
Imagine you are 18. You can start there and 62k a year. I can start at Panda Express and earn 45k and in not so long of a timeframe make it to 80k a year.
Do I want a job where I can be shot at? Do I want a job that is physically demanding? Do I want a job that I am pretty much on call? OR will I take a job that pays the same, maybe a little less, a little more where the worst that can happen to me is KAREN gets pissed and throws orange chicken at me.
That is just the agents.
Now find the judges.
Now find the courtrooms.
@one
"Please tell me how working with policy/financially is now inducement?"
Do you really need to ask that question? Do you not know what being induced to do something is?
Here, let me try it this way, I will give you $10mm to find Mickey and suck his dick. The cash is what is inducing you to do that behavior.
“What constitutes a mass? Is it 5 people? is it 500 people? Is it 5000 people?”
I don’t have any answer to that. I guess my answer would be the masses are when it is more people than the system is designed to handle.
“What is effectively policing the border? Are we not now?”
Answer a question with a question. Are we handling it effectively now?
“Think this through from the SOUTHERN perspective. There are 2000 miles of border. Most of it is crossable without natural impediments. You can effectively police the border if you put in more crossing stations. Think of a funnel.”
Is that your solution? More crossing stations?
“You are using inducement to control them.”
Please tell me how working with policy/financially is now inducement?
You don’t think it would cost Mexico money to better secure their border? You believe that Mexico wants these “tourists”?
You’re changing my words to fit your narrative.
So tell us O Smartest of All. How do we handle this problem on the border. Or do you feel we don’t have a problem?
I’m all ears.
As I said earlier. My ideas were off the top of my head.
@One
"And I am not arguing to NOT let them in. I am simply trying to stop the masses at the border so we can effectively police the border."
What constitutes a mass? Is it 5 people? is it 500 people? Is it 5000 people?
What is effectively policing the border? Are we not now?
Think this through from the SOUTHERN perspective. There are 2000 miles of border. Most of it is crossable without natural impediments. You can effectively police the border if you put in more crossing stations. Think of a funnel.
@One
"Work with Mexico to further strengthen their boarders. Both policy wise and financially."
That is what you wrote.
You are using inducement to control them. Got a dog? You induce the dogs behavior all the time. The dog knows that if he does what you want, that roll over and rub my belly trick you will throw a treat his way. That dog doesn't control his domain :)
I pointed out where we fucked Mexico in policy under Trump. As it is a contract between Canada, US and Mexico, opening it up (and I think there is a timeframe when it can be opened) and renogiating, well, yeah, what President is going to say, "Hey, I decided to make the deal better for another country." That is political suicide.
So how do we induce Mexico to stop people from going to their border to leave? Think about how that is written.
Now, think this way, how would we, as the US, stop people from going to our border to leave the US?
:)
Me & one are in agreement on this. (holy fuck) we need to get a handle on the border & at least know who's coming across and why.
In my opinion the only way that happens is to shut it down hard & start over. A wall can help with that.
“So the batch of immigrants now into the US border are the . . .
"Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
And I am not arguing to NOT let them in. I am simply trying to stop the masses at the border so we can effectively police the border.
Isn’t that the entire problem? We can not control it.
“Keep going south and you will see a lot from countries south of Mexico. As they have no money, they aren't buying an airplane ticket to Toronto and coming in that way :)”
He de the task. I said it was simplistic and had tons of reasons why
“Let's make you an Indian. You buy a ticket from Chennai to Mexico City. Mexico is HAPPY to see you. Why? You are a tourist and bringing in money. Mexico is not going to put you in a room and say, "Are you here to go to the US?" You are just there. Now you migrate and head north. Boom, welcome to the border.”
Why do we not have the same problem or worse on the northern border? They get touristy there also. That is a serious question. What is Canada doing that Mexico is not?
Can we work with Mexico (not tell them) to be more like Canada. Without the all the duck I geese.
You’re playing devils advisory me. I’m doing the same with you.
Put your thinking cap on.
“But now, you are stepping into sovereignty. Telling/Inducing Mexico on what to do with people coming into THEIR country.”
My “work with Mexico” is now telling/inducing? You’re putting words in my mouth.
“EA ain’t gonna like it because it cost money. But again it helps stop the masses. So our good guys can concentrate on catching the bad guys.
I am not the one who is arguing against expenses. I am the one who is using it to box in the people in this thread who want solutions.”
I know you’re not arguing against expenses.
Neither am I! Yet you’re trying to show me the ills of my ways because of expenses.
It’s gonna cost us money. It is already costing us money. New flash. A lot of money.
"Ok. Im gonna play 2Out, Flip, and MC all in one. Fuck the immigrants perspective. Lol"
ROFL.
Ok, ignore Schwarzenegger as well.
Ok, ignore Nikki Hayley as well.
@One
I think you are misinterpreting what I have been saying.
"EA ain’t gonna like it because it cost money. But again it helps stop the masses. So our good guys can concentrate on catching the bad guys."
I am not the one who is arguing against expenses. I am the one who is using it to box in the people in this thread who want solutions. They are basically playing 101 keyboard warriors by doing what Americans do best: Bitch! They will not pay to solve it. They just want it done.
"Work with Mexico to further strengthen their boarders. Both policy wise and financially." Yeah good luck with that. Remember how well Trump did with fucking around with NAFTA? Remember, it is AMERICA FIRST. You think Mexico is saying, uhh, yeah, because Trump had to say he did something other than cut taxes, he renamed Nafta to some other acronym and fucked Mexico a little more.
But now, you are stepping into sovereignty. Telling/Inducing Mexico on what to do with people coming into THEIR country. I am not sure you have thought this through :) Let's make you an Indian. You buy a ticket from Chennai to Mexico City. Mexico is HAPPY to see you. Why? You are a tourist and bringing in money. Mexico is not going to put you in a room and say, "Are you here to go to the US?" You are just there. Now you migrate and head north. Boom, welcome to the border. This is an argument I have with my wife about her employer. Her boss, the COO, blows up over things. I told her, "He is yelling at you because you can't control a 3rd party that doesn't need your business." Mexico doesn't need our money that bad to be our puppet.
"We don’t have this same problem on the northern border. Why? I am being very simplistic in the following statement. People from other countries are not using it as a route into our country. Again I know it is simplistic in thinking. But, we have a much larger border on the north that is not in the same situation."
The answer to that is Canada is a LOT tighter in who they let in. However, you are also missing where the immigrants are coming from. Mexican crossing is a thing, but that is not the masses. Keep going south and you will see a lot from countries south of Mexico. As they have no money, they aren't buying an airplane ticket to Toronto and coming in that way :)
The history lesson of Cuban immigrants is happening here, today. The first batch of Cubans that came over were the wealthy ones. They had the means to get out before Communism became a thing. Then what happened in the 80s? You would see homemade boats like judgeforcongress. com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Coast-Guard-stops-migrant-vessel-off-Dania-Beach-scaled.jpg So the batch of immigrants now into the US border are the . . .
"Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
:)
“The extreme ones in the D are fighting from a perspective that needs to be heard. Omar has a perspective from the inside of the system. AOC can bring the perspective of being an American but having a family from a territory. Then you have Tlaib, whose parents were Palestinian immigrants. Now go back to the Rs. Please, show me one that is not a multi-generational American.”
Ok. Im gonna play 2Out, Flip, and MC all in one. Fuck the immigrants perspective. Lol
Seriously. If you’re going to get meaningful, serious legislation to combat the problems we have at the southern border? It’s not the immigrant’s responsibility to come up with that change. In order to get it. There is going to have to be some input for people who are multi generational Americans. We would probably have legislation already if we were mot trying to legislate from the extreme ends of the spectrum on this issue.
@One
Not trying to be a douche, seriously, I am not.
"I’m glad you agree with me. Two hours ago I stated: “This is a very complex issue that has not been address by both sides for far too long.”"
I have written so many times about this subject here and have always stated it is a congress issue, not a president issue.
"I agree it is not issue that can be decided by the extremes. Of either party."
I thought about that issue when I wrote that. I purposefully didn't put in the both party for a reason. It had to do with the makeup of the parties.
theguardian. com/us-news/2016/jul/18/paul-ryan-intern-selfie-capitol-hill-diversity
That shows everything you need to know why I excluded the Gaetz, Boebert, MTGs of the world, hell add Chip Roy and the crazy fucker from AZ as well. Now look at the picture of D's. It looks like a United Colors of Benetton ad, whereas the R's looked like a JCrew ad. The extreme ones in the D are fighting from a perspective that needs to be heard. Omar has a perspective from the inside of the system. AOC can bring the perspective of being an American but having a family from a territory. Then you have Tlaib, whose parents were Palestinian immigrants. Now go back to the Rs. Please, show me one that is not a multi-generational American.
Here is another idea to slow the influx of people.at the border.
EA ain’t gonna like it because it cost money. But again it helps stop the masses. So our good guys can concentrate on catching the bad guys.
Work with Mexico to further strengthen their boarders. Both policy wise and financially.
We don’t have this same problem on the northern border. Why? I am being very simplistic in the following statement. People from other countries are not using it as a route into our country. Again I know it is simplistic in thinking. But, we have a much larger border on the north that is not in the same situation.
If they can’t get into Mexico. They will not present themselves at our border.
