Illegal immigration at lowest point in 17 years, so why spend billions on the wall?

It's not a problem with the electoral college.

It's a problem with not caring who's a citizen and who isn't.

Since only citizens can vote, is it a big leap to come to the conclusion that only citizens should effect the election mechanics?

 

I don's wish to keep repeating the law covering employers since it seems hardly noticed, but check out the actual law. There is a lot of law right now intended to stop the illegals.

The Obama team bragged about it's additions to the wall. Let's finish the darned wall. I mean the wall as a genuine blocking device and not a delaying device.

 

but it is a problem with the electoral college. The electoral college is not based on the voter populous, but is instead based on resident populous. Meaning that by federal law, all states base their zoning on the resident populous rather than the voter populous. Keep in mind that when the US held its first elections, slaves were not considered citizens, but the slave states wanted to be given more electoral points based on their slave populous, which is why non-citizens are counted in our electoral point system.

 

I agree. Ron is finally on to something. Issue flamethrowers to all Border Patrol and ICE employees.

 

In terms of the drug trade alone:

https://www.therecoveryvillage.com/drug-addiction/drug-trafficking-by-the-numbers/#gref

Illegal drugs in the United States create a huge black market industry, an estimated $200-$750 billion a year in size, with the current decade seeing the largest per person drug usage per year in American history.[1]

Illegal drug abuse costs American society $181 billion a year in health care costs, lost workplace productivity, law enforcement, and legal costs.

Most of the illicit drugs come into the United States across the vast 2,000-mile land border between the US and Mexico, called the Southwestern border or SWB.[11]

How much of that can be stopped by hardening the borders and cracking down on illegally entering the country?

We need a wall for the same reason we have doors on our houses.

 

This is a dilemma. Questions such as the above have to be handled in context. Say you have a burglary problem. The solution entails new locks, a new security system to guard the home and then a camera system and finally said systems linked to law enforcement. If all you did is change the locks, you are not done. We have started to change the locks is all. We are partly there.

 

There is much more than just illegals crossing the border. They move the drugs into the USA. We need the wall.

 

The Mexican drug cartels literally have their own jets and submarines, a wall won't do a damn thing to their trade over the border. No more than the border fence has anyway

 

Which is a problem with how the census is done, not the electoral college.

Non-citizens not counted in the census won't apply to the electoral college.

Slaves have got nothing to do with those who choose to come here illegally.

 

A good friend of mine is a sculpture,

So you run around in the same circle of liberal arts degrees?
You think that impresse us much?


.


.

 

Of course it will.

If you leave the door open to your house is it easier for people to walk in?

Most drugs are carried by mule, on foot, very easily and very cheaply.

The argument that we're just going to throw up a wall and say "well that's it" is just insipid and quite frankly, dumb.

Having the wall makes it easier to dedicate resources to shutting down other methods of smuggling.

A chain link fence is foiled by a bolt cutter. A wall is not.

 

As I explained before, the entire purpose of why the electoral college was created in the first place was to count the non-voting populous in our general elections. Once we shift to a system that is based on the voter populous, the electoral college serves no purpose.

 

That's one of the most ridiculous things I have ever had the misfortune of reading.

http://www.historycentral.com/elections/Electoralcollgewhy.html

The Electoral College was created for two reasons.

The first purpose was to create a buffer between population and the selection of a President.

The second as part of the structure of the government that gave extra power to the smaller states.

Working as intended.

 

No it won't.. they'll get around the wall the same way they've gotten around the fence all these years. Your claim that most drugs brought across the border are carried by mule on foot is completely inaccurate. The cartels have their own jets and submarines, getting around a wall is not a problem for them.


Also, the border fence looks something more like this



No, bolt cutters do not foil that fence, and border agents actually prefer being able to see what activity is going on at the other side (hence why much of the wall will remain a fence even under the current plan)

 

I know. That's why it's ineffective.

Clearly it needs to be designed better.

That's what we're doing.

Much more effective than throwing your hands up and declaring failure.

Where there is a desire to stop it, it can be stopped.

 

You say it is ridiculous, yet that is exactly how the electoral college point system works today, and is exactly how it was intended to work when it was first created. Your source says it's purpose was to "give extra power" to the smaller states. Guess what? if the electoral college was based on voter populous, then smaller states would not be given extra power at all.

Those smaller states (which were slave states) wanted to be given more electoral points for the human beings that they owned (who were not allowed to vote), which is why we have the electoral system in effect today that is based on resident populous rather than voter populous.

 

That's where you are wrong, no country anywhere has ever been successful at stopping drug trade from happening. To say "where there is a desire to stop it, it can be stopped" is profoundly inaccurate. Whether its a wall or a fence, the multi-billion dollar cartels have ways of getting around it. The only way to stop them is to take the profit out of their industry

 

The electoral college was never designed to give voting power to non-citizens, period, full stop.

Any claim that the situation regarding black people is in any way congruent with those in the country illegally is ridiculous.

 

Wrong. Singapore, Japan, and many other countries have less than one percent of it's citizens addicted to drugs.

The US is currently at #3.

Clearly, somewhere between #3 and Singapore we can do more to stop the problem.

A border barrier made out of air is the worst option when it comes to stopping drug movements.

 

How abou

How about a wall with flamethrowers?

 

Whoa.. you COMPLETELY misunderstood me.

No it was not meant to give more power to non-citizens. It was meant to give more power to the states which owned slaves... In effect it did not give more power to slaves, but gave more power to the people who owned them. The vote from southern voters was worth more than it otherwise would be, because their states were given more electoral college points based on the human beings they owned. You see, they created this electoral point system which is based on resident populous rather than voter populous as a way of giving southern slave owning states more authority in our federal elections.

That is why this point system was created, it does not serve the same purpose anymore, however it is still the point system that we go by today, which is why non-citizens are included in the electoral college point system.

Okay thee are a few things wrong with this

1. Addiction rate is an entirely different statistic. Countries like Portugal were able to reduce their addiction rate to a third of what it was before without making any significant decreases in their over illegal drug trade

2. Neither Singapore nor Japan are drug free. Which is saying something, because the penalty for illegally trading drugs in Singapore is execution..

3. None of these countries used a wall to reduce drug trafficking, because walls don't really prevent drug trafficking from occurring.

 

Definitely LMAO

 

Indonesia uses the firing squad.

 

I have a hunch if we dig deeply enough, this is why the North wanted slaves freed. They felt once they were freed, they would leave the South. I think the North craved more power and authority. So they commenced a war.

 

Actually I understand you completely.

You're trying to justify illegal aliens being counted to determine how many representatives we get, and how many votes each state gets.

The EC was built into the system from the very formation of our country, and pre-dated any changes to who gets how many votes.

The push to count slaves as citizens by what would now be democrats is no different than what democrats want to do now with illegal aliens.

Those here illegally deserve no representation, and the states that house illegal aliens deserve no more voting power than they currently have.

Only citizens of this country deserve representation.

1. Of course it's different. You can only get addicted to drugs if you have drugs available.
2. I never said they were drug free, but they clearly have less problems than we do.
3. Of course walls work to prevent trafficking, since overland travel is the cheapest option to drug smugglers. Subs and airplanes can get into both Japan and Singapore. Doesn't seem they're having much luck there.