How much would a border fence cost? Would $182,000,000 be a good start?

Per the man, Allen West...

But the good little government peons were given a cut of your taxes too, at the tune of $22,000 per month per worker.

But why the exorbitant price tag? What could have possibly cost that much? Why, cable television and a movie projector of course.

Here are some of the highlights... You'll be super pumped when you read what we're throwing money at. But while you read this, remember, WE DONT HAVE THE MONEY FOR A FENCE. We dont have the money to pay all our veterans. We do have the money, to do this...

But remember, "Pants up Dont Loot". That is what the American people are seeing all over the news.

You all, the roughly half of you that pay taxes, have been providing these illegals with $75 worth of food per day, cable on a (Im sure) really badass projection screen, paint brushes, soccer balls, bracelet making kits, and yarn. Oh and the people who are there to handle the overload of the next generation of anchor babies, they make roughly $22,000 per month, most of America's yearly salary.

This administration makes me sick.

http://allenbwest.com/2014/12/feds-paid-182129786-house-illegals-4-months/

 

$182 million gone on people who shouldn't even be here, but people are worried about what that fat cigarette pandler died from in NYC. Unreal.

 

allen west can't even be trusted to get a thomas jefferson quote, right

 

The fence would cost less than the 'tax credits' being given out to illegals filing fraudulent tax returns claiming their nieces in Cental America and Mexico.

 

Congress passed a bill and funded a fence years ago. Where is it?

 

When we have had actual military units on the border, with no fence, illegal immigration dropped to zero in that sector.

We already pay these guys regardless so put their bases on the border.

Most of Area 51 has no fence but walk across that invisible line and you will have military personal with their guns on you in less than 5 minutes. I have done it so I know. There is no reason we can't do this on the border as well.

 

Seriously, you guys think a fence will do anything?

 

NO ONE REPEAT ON ON ON THE RIGHT WILL TALK ABOUT WHAT WE REALLY NEED!!!!!! E-verify! THE US CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, THE BIGGEST LOBBYING ARM OF THE RIGHT doesn't want it! If they can't get a job, they won't need to cross that border! We have 13-19 million illegals
here because 'CAPITAL' WANTS CHEAP LABOR. All the fences in the (*)(*)(*)(*)ing world won't stop them if they want to come here if no one stops
them at the WORKPLACE.

 

THOSE RADICALS AT BLOOMBERG AGREE....

The Only Way to Stop Illegal Immigration
2835 MAR 12, 2014 2:13 PM EDT
By The Editors
...hat will require fewer additional resources for border patrol and more for workplace enforcement, such as E-Verify. This electronic employment verification system, administered by the Department of Homeland Security, has been a qualified success. From 2007 to 2012, E-Verify queries from employers increased to more than 21 million, from 3.3 million. As of February 2013, more than 432,000 employers were using the system to confirm the eligibility of prospective employees.

E-Verify can still be gamed. One independent study found that during a three-month period in 2008, about half the unauthorized workers whose backgrounds it checked were nonetheless approved for work. But DHS has been upgrading the system so that it can access additional databases and more carefully filter applications.

As the system improves, of course, the demand for high-quality identity fraud stands to increase commensurately -- as does off-the-books employment of undocumented workers. If Congress is serious about turning off the flow of undocumented immigrants, it will have to give DHS the resources it needs for workplace enforcement, including on-site inspections....

This would not please some of the business interests that fund both political parties. Nor would it placate those for whom any extravagance is justified by a cry of "Secure the border!" But it would weaken the magnet that draws undocumented immigrants to the U.S. in the first place. The House has stalled progress on immigration reform. If it is going to make the nation wait for a solution, it should recognize that the place to stop the inflow is not at the point of entry, but at the point of hire.

and from MICHELE MALKIN JAN 24, 2014, NATIONAL REVIEW..

If you are a business owner who believes your country should strictly and consistently enforce its borders and deport illegal immigrants who violate the terms of their visas, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce doesn’t represent you.

If you are a worker who believes that the feds should punish illegal aliens who use fake documents to obtain jobs instead of rewarding them with “legal status,” the U.S. Chamber of Commerce doesn’t champion you.

 

Although you're right that "capital" wants cheap labor, that's not where the bulk of the conservatives are at right now. Although I support E-verify, I don't see the Democrats in support of it at all. I wonder why that is?

 

eVerify plus employer penalties are features of the bi-partisan comprehensive immigration bill that was negotiated with House Republicans and passed the Senate.

It's the one that Boehner wouldn't allow to come to a vote even after his House whip count showed it would pass in the House and would thus be left to Obama's signature - which he says is what he wants.

 

The bi-partisan comprehensive immigration bill that Boehner refused to bring to a vote includes $40Billion dollars for border control.

Also, please note that more than 40% of those here without documentation did NOT CROSS THE BORDER ILLEGALLY!! They came with visitation visas (such as for tourism) and then simply stayed.

Plus, with more being spent on that one border one must assume that other borders will get additional focus by those who DO cross illegally.

So, if you care about border security and fences, at least understand that such a direction can't address more than half the problem of people coming here to stay.

AND, remember that the comprehensive immigration bill has elements that target both the border (such as the $40B) AND an overhaul of our visa system.

 

the gop doesn't want to pay for border security, they just want to use the issue to pander to know-nothings and racists

 

The US border with Mexico is approximately 3100 km long. A mechanized infantry unit (which makes up the vast majority of our combat troops and presents the best frontage coverage) can cover a front of about 60km.

In order to have the US military lock down the border, we would need 52 divisions on the border. Even if we Federalized the Reserves and National Guard and brough every divisions home, that is about 3 times as many divisions as we have available.

So, by all means, tell me again how the US military closes the border? Also consider the fact that we have major metropolitan areas and national parks that sit right on the border.

 

A fence won't stop them, you're right. Landmines and .50 cals can.

 

Sorry, the military is not going to follow an order to make the murder of unarmed civilians policy. It would violate the UCMJ, Federal Law, and the Geneva Convention.

 

A fence. So stupid.

The species Homo sapiens sapiens has traveled to outer space, split the atom, and figured out a way to deep fry ice cream and you think a fence is going to leave them dumbfounded and turning on their heels to go back from whence they came? I think not.

 

Oh my god, relax.

- - - Updated - - -

Actually, can you please cite me the UCMJ article where it states it's illegal to place landmines and a .50 CAL at the border?

- - - Updated - - -

Also, what does the law have to do with anything? Obama's killed thousands of unarmed civilians in other people's countries. Federal Law and the GC never stopped him.

 

It's illegal to use either of those knowingly against unarmed civilians, who make up 99% of the people who cross the border.

And if they aren't going to be used, then they aren't going to be a deterrent are they?

BTW, if Republicans pushed your "plan" forward, the picture of mine fields being set up on private land confiscated by the military in El Paso and Brownsville and mine fields and gun positions being set up in national parks like Big Bend should be plenty to ensure both the plan is abandoned and Republicans lose the next several elections.

- - - Updated - - -

Obama *deliberately* killed unarmed civilians?

 

I'm waiting for YOU to cite ME the law where it states you cannot place landmines or a .50 cal at the border.

The Uniform Code of Military Justice article? The federal article? Lol and the GC. Cite me your ridiculous claims.

 

Of course it will.

Youll notice the truck in your photo is stuck there.....

No fence and theyd drive right in......

Possibly with a nuclear weapon from Iran....

 

So are you saying they would be emplaced but not armed (in the case of mines) or fired (in the case of .50 cals)?

 

I stated that we could place landmines and a .50 cal at our border. You then STATED that it would be against the UCMJ (lol, it's not a military call, it would be a congressional call, not sure why you brought that up), then you said it would be against federal law (source?) and THEN you even said it'd be against the GC. You can't make outrageous claims like that and not cite your sources. It's clear you have none as you've deflected each time I asked.

 

If they either land mines or machine guns were knowingly used against unarmed civilians it would be in violation of all of those things I stated and as you claim to be a veteran, you should know that.

They only way they wouldn't violate the law would be if they were never used. Are you saying that those mines and machine guns would be emplaced but never used?

 

The same way liberals say that Bush did. Funny how that goes both ways