The Cost of a Border Wall vs. the Cost of Illegal Immigration

Trump is trying to deport college graduates who don't have papers.

He's slowing down immigration of those with significant skills.

And, he's not open to legislation such as the bipartisan immigration reform act of 2013, which had $40B for the wall, plus other significant work to reduce the numbers of undocumented individuals here.


This whole issue is being used as a white supremacist rallying cry.

 

The argument that the wall couldn't be 100% effective is true. Neither are stop lights. So why do we have stop lights?
People manage to break out of prisons too- so those walls are also worthless.

We have a lot of people in this country who seem to be unable to make fundamental connections about how things work, and why we do things to protect them.
Teaching them seems to be a waste of time. Perhaps we need to look at how mother nature has solved this problem for millennia.
I'm thinking if we could just remove all the warning labels in life, and let that problem solve itself.

 

Barely HALF coume here by running across the desert.

Stop lights work for more than half of our drivers. Prison walls keep more than half the prisoners from escaping.

The wall is a fractional measure while other methods go unaddressed - because there are ways in that do not require running across the desert.

The bipartisan immigration reform bill of 2013 included $40B for the wall, and also included visa reform (how nearly half come and stay) as well as requiring e-verify to reduce the reason they come here. It included other measures as well.

And, lets rememer that the vast majority of the drugs and other contraband crossing the Mexican border are going THROUGH the checkpoints. Even undocumented aliens are entering that way.

Trump picks his one method as a white supremacist campaign smear - while IGNORING the majority of the problem and ENSURING the disagreement he is dedicated to fostering.

 

Did

Do you think Kate Steinle's Dad agrees to the benefits of illegal immigration? What about the 92 year old woman that was raped by an illegal? What about the illegal that crashed his landscaping pick up truck into my car and fled the scene? Does your fancy little article cover that?
I highly doubt it!
Also, I noticed your fancy little article doesn't say ILLEGAL immigration in the title.
I'm glad to know we have an honorable president who is trying to protect us from illegal criminals.

 

and hopefully the wind will never blow!

 

And the border patrol estimates that for every illegal they catch, 3 get past them. No doubt the majority of drugs do come through checkpoints. IF we could transfer some of the officers patrolling unfenced borders and move them to ports of entry, we could do a better job there too. Yes there are other ways; nothing is perfect. That does not make refusing to do what you can logical. The border patrol has repeatedly endorsed the wall as the best way to get a dramatic improvement in the problem.

The real problem here is tolerance for the act of illegal entry. The only way to control illegal entry is to first make any entry- individuals, cars, trucks etc- enter by way of a authorized and equipped port.
Try coming into the country by air, and you will find that every international airport has a carefully controlled way to be sure you go through the customs process. Walls, fences, etc- keep anyone from bypassing it.

At the Mexican border, you have people wading the river and laughing at how easy it is. Kind of like "We don't need no stinking passports"........
Because we aren't going to respect your laws, and you can't catch us. If you do, you will send us home free and we will get past you tomorrow.

When you have a working system of controls, as we do at the airports- but then we are dumb enough to say it's OK to have over a thousand miles of border with virtually no controls at all.....
Seems one side of the brain isn't working.

The real problem isn't the idea of building a wall at all, many democrats have endorsed it in the past. The problem is that Trump promised it in his campaign, and the democrats will do everything possible to make sure Trump can't keep his promises. Has no consideration for the safety of the nation or obedience to it's laws- it's totally political BS.

 

So when he gets done with that red herring do you think he will actually do something about the real problem of crime, racism, and bigotry, and gun violence which are the real issues?

 

No the real problem is that as long as Americans use illegal drugs and hire illegal aliens they will both find a way to get here. The real issue is Trump and his corporate owners have no interest in solving either problem.

And to solve the problem massive jail time for corporate officers and individuals who hire illegals knowingly or not and full legalization of drugs with actual controls to keep them out of the hands of children.

pretending that a wall is going to make a significant difference is just a red herring designed to divert from the real solutions. Might keep. A few woman and children out but as for actually solving the real problem it will be nearly useless.

 

If the ports of entry ar where the drugs are coming in, then that's where we should be expending effort if we're interested in drug interdiction.
And, why are we spending huge dollars (without congressional agreement) on a wall while ignoring the fact that only half come in that way AND that there are solutions that will reduce ALL methods of entry???

 

Undocumented aliens DO arrive by air. They get a visa, fly here (or go through a border legally) and then stay.
Nearly half those here without documentation came here LEGALLY.
This is why a border wall will not stop them.

And, it is why the 2013 bipartisan immigration reform act passed the Senate (including Senator Rubio and other Republicans - bipartisan) included methods of addressing the FULL problem - not just a fraction of the problem.

Trump is just using the wall as a campaign issue - he shows NO iterest be beyond that. And, his white supremacist base can't think beyond that to notice that Dems are ready to sign a real solution.

 

White supremacist my ass. That's nothing more than a liberal whipping post, a phrase invented for the purpose of political argument.
Racism in America had reduced dramatically and steadily over the last 50 years- until the left resurrected and promoted it as a political weapon. They are re-creating racism, solely for that reason.

The number of illegals coming in is around 1 million per year. They are coming from places like Honduras- where 90% of the city streets are controlled by gangs, and murder rate is world's highest. People from there are born and raised in gang mentality, whether they are gang members or not. Only an idiot assumes that only the good ones want to come here- but even if that were true, we have an obligation to vet those people. The fact we do a piss-poor job of it now is hardly reason to make it worse or fail to improve it.

I've spent a fair amount of time in Honduras doing contract work, before it was anywhere near as bad as it is now. Venezuela too- working under martial law and national curfew. Believe me, you wouldn't be comfortable or feel safe going to those places, and you shouldn't feel comfortable bring the nature of their environments here. If we fail to control the border, that is exactly what we are doing.

Now if you know a way to actually control the border that will work, speak up. I won't hold my breath.

 

Bipartisan immigration reform bill of 2013.

Not perfect, but it is quite comprehensive - not the lame one-note white supremacy drivel we get from the WH.

 

And of course- included 700 miles of fencing.
Anything that gets done will be compromised- politics always is. the important part is the reason for the compromise, and the damages those compromises do.
Irrational positions do nothing but harm- and hostility is the kind of strategy that will insure reasonable compromise can't be done.

I have long held my own concept of what should take place to resolve the problems of immigration. Two major things to deal with- (1) People trying to enter illegally.and (2) People already here illegally.

(1)- Requires establishing a fully controlled border. If that takes a wall, then the wall is part of the process. Objective- all entry and immigration conforms to law.

(2)-
A. People in the country illegally for 1 year or less are subject to deportation. The point would be determined in legislation; but must pre-date the legislation so as to not bring about more illegal entry.

B. People here illegally previously will be required to register with immigration within a limited period, say 6 months from date legislation takes effect, and provide reasonable identification and proof of claim of
length of residence. This will get them a temporary visa. Those who do not register within the prescribed time will lose the right to do so, and are subject to deportation when located.

C. Registered people will be vetted. Felons or people with criminal history are subject to deportation, not eligible for any permissions or future entry.
Other parameters may also be set, but criminal records would be disqualifying.

D. Registered people clearing the records check would be granted the equivalent of a green card, and would have a pathway to citizenship.

To me, that serves the valid interest of the public and the immigrants that have been here any length of time, and is more than generous. One reason for generosity is that we have failed to enforce our borders in the past. Not that they didn't violate laws by entering illegally, but that we failed to adequately police the border. That excuse ends with this law- future illegal entry would always be resolved by deportation or prosecution where appropriate; and would preclude that person having access to the benefits this legislation would provide to those here now. It opens the door for those who are already living here- it closes that door for future illegals to discourage it and promote legal entry.

The interests of the nation come first. It has nothing to do with race or country of origin. It's a simple plan that would resolve outstanding issues of the millions here illegally, and address the criminal aspects at the same time.

 

So you think a degree should exclude a person from being charged with a criminal act? Or a significant skill should do that?
Crime in only crime for those less educated or skilled....... and you are calling the other side "white supremacists."

Trump is trying to deport people who entered illegally. That is what the law requires- not what Trump requires. When the opposition demands it be all their way or none- it is appropriate they get none, because they do not hold the power. Compromise (working together) is abhorrent to the left these days. Perhaps if they talked respectfully first instead of starting with a string of slander, things could be different.
Civility or lack of it is the choice of the person themselves- not the fault of the person they speak to.

I have no reason to believe the left cares anymore about racial factors here than the right does. That is simply a handy thing to use as an excuse for the incivility they care unable to set aside.
I believe that if they would- they would find the door open. So far, it would appear they are not wise enough or adult enough to do that.

 

OK, the thing is that you proposal is VERY close to the bipartisan bill of 2013 - the one that passed the Democratic majority Senate (with a good number of Republicans, including Rubio and others who were on the committee) and it would have passed the Republican majority House had Boehner not blockd it.

The things you don't mention include work to make visas more difficult as a way to come here legall and then overstay - the method nearly half have used to come here to stay.

And, it included fixing eVerify and requiring its use by all employers - with enforcement included. That would seriously reduce the reason so many want to come here - meaning there would be fewer even trying. After the 2008 crash, essentially no people crossed the southern border to stay. And, many self deported. Counts of the number here without documentation ceased to rise as they had for previous decades. And, the number here did not rise throughout Obama's two terms - I haven't wantched recently. The point being that if work is harder to get, there is less reason to come.

Farm labor and some other businsses have a convincing argument for temporary workers, and provision is made for that.

I do not believe we can solve each of the pieces of this problem piecemeal, as the intermediate steps aren't tenable and there are political tradeoffs that various constituencies demand.

By the way, Rubio has stated that most who come here would be unlikely to work toward citizenship and voting rights (proving work done, taxes paid, paying fines, etc.). The work to do that takes years (Rubio said it would take 12 years minimum), and these people come to work, not to converse with governmnt authorities. If they had permission to stay and work, that would be sufficient for most. On the other hand, my own view is that our democracy works better when it is fully representative. But, that may well be unlikely.

 

Those going through school now came here before their majority. Thus, they committed no criminal act.

And, I have consistently pushed for acceptance of bipartisan solutions to this problem.

It is Trump and Republicans who have refused to resolve ANY issue of significance in a way that has included Democrats. If you want to reduce partisanship, good for you. You know who to talk to.

 

Unfortunately, I've not seen any efforts for bipartisanship from democrats- I don't think they have tried. They do want to get their way- but that is not working together, it's demanding surrender.
That has to start by people trying to build partnerships, not adversarial relations. When your first contribution to any discussion is an insult, there is no discussion.

My belief is that the majority of this polarization has come from the role of cable news media- who has been grinding their axes for a long time, just getting worse when Trump announced he would run. I believe the media has a moral obligation of great importance- which is to report things honestly without bias, and to distinctly separate and properly identify news and editorial commentary. The failure to do that is manipulating what people think they know and what they come to believe. I don't know what it would take to restore pride and character to journalism- but there is no question that the majority of people in cable news today have no respect for the standards of journalism that existed in the past. People have never been so smart that they couldn't be fooled and mislead, and when the prime sources of information are misinforming people on purpose, the fabric of society is being shredded. I do think that if we don't find a way to require much higher ethics in this area, the problems they create and perpetuate will never go away.

 

What’s cost of the third option, overhauling the immigration system?
It’s not an either/or issue.

Also does the analysis really consider the time and expense required to seize private land? We still have cases pending from the Bush administration.

 

Let's just stop right there.

Healthcare? Republicans have voted over 50 times to kill our healthcare system, as well as attacking it multiple times through our court system. NEVER have they proposed a replacement. NEVER have they even considered forming a bipartisan committee to work together to identify and solve issues.

The same goes for immigration. EVERY immigration proposal from the Senate or any other Republicans has been concocted in a back room with Republicans only. Then, they have McConnell work to get it passed with NO participation.

Under Democratic party leadership, healthcare AND immigration reform were addressed by FULLY bipartisan committees.

YOU, sir, do NOT know what you are talking about when it comes to partisanship, as there is NO comparison AT ALL.

 

Seems there's two side to every story. In my opinion- Obamacare killed our healthcare system and began engaging it as a socialistic program. That was designed to kill the private healthcare insurance industry and free choice. That SHOULD have been attacked- because it was designed to destroy a system in the first place.

I think you should try listening something besides CNN and MSNBC. Everything reasonable from the right has been met with insult and ridicule from the left. Not rational objection, but ridicule and outrage.
All the crap about the kids in cages and attacks on Trump that took place over the border situations for example- the left never noted that Obama set the conditions that triggered the mess, and he made the rules that Trump was obligated to follow. All the rants and horrid accusations- were not designed to do anything but destroy Trump's image.

Look at the last SOTU address. I'm sure you noted that just as in previous addresses, the left sat on their hands and basically stonewalled- pretending nothing was happening. The only reason to be present- was to express their hostility. Trump didn't stifle them; that was their choice. I don't think there is any interest at all from the democrats in anything bi-partisan, or they wouldn't spit on the opportunities to open that door even before anything is said.

That's what the left wants to call reasonable and open conduct. Until that changes- nothing else is going to change.

There is a huge gap here. Attitudes and hate keep it in place. And there is unlikely to be much in the way of friendship or cooperation possible with people who are already planning the next impeachment attack or plot against the president.

 

It was designed in bipartisan committees in the House and Senate. Those on the committees were free to discuss progress and issues.

You accused democrats of being purely partisan, as I pointed out that Democrats chose to address BOTH those major issues in bipartisan committees. On the other hand, Republicans have blocked Democratic participation on BOTH those issues.

Suggesting that it was designed to kill private insurance is also ridiculous. The committees consulted insurance companies among other throughout the process. In fact, the requirement that all must be insured came from insurance companies pointing out that they couldn't sustain reasonable pricing if people were to be allowed to buy insurance after they got sick.

And perhaps even more importantly, the idea of killing our healthcare system when there is not even a proposal for a replacement is astoundingly irresponsible government.

Trump was NOT obligated to separate children without keeping the records that would premit them to EVER be returned to their parents. That was a TRUMP decision. And, the result is that parents were deported without their kids and without any way of ever finding them again.

That is absolutely and totally unconscionable, and most definitely NOT required by law, for crying out loud.

Also, there is no law that says kids have to sleep on concrete, get no soap, have very little to eat, etc. These are just methods of torture.

Trump told many lies. And, you moaning that the president of Republicans didn't get cheered by those he attacks is really sad on your part. There isn't some law that says the people must clap for the president.

Republicans won't cooperate until Democrats clap for the president???

Really?

What 3 world crap nation do you think this is?

 

I think the left half is very much in favor of a crap nation. You know it, and you sit there right now pulling the universal denial and rejection of anything not left.
Half a story, selectively gathered to fit a pre-determined narrative- is a concocted lie. As we speak, more and more American are seeing that as the soul of the left, and shifting their votes to the right.
If you don't believe it- fine. Wait till the election- but watch all the crazy crap they concoct in the meantime and tell us how "bipartisan" it is. You aren't really blind to what those people are doing- you are just not willing to speak to it. That's why nothing gets done in a bipartisan manner. There is no "Bi" in the minds of the left, other than thinking that if they get things all their way, then it's fair. That's the CRAP.

 

There is no "cost" to illegal immigration. From a purely economic point of view, there are only benefits.

https://www.newamericaneconomy.org/issues/undocumented-immigrants/
http://bradleybaptist.org/cms/uploa...gal immigrants bolster Soc Sec w billions.pdf
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/6234301.pdf

 

That’s complete BS. Taxpayer cost for illegal aliens per year is $135B. Taxes paid by illegal aliens is $19B per year.

 

GDP increase they produce is about 3%. Which translates to almost $5 trillion over ten years.

https://www.nber.org/papers/w22834.pdf

Notice how I provide references, links, evidence... and you produce Fox echo-chamber talking points.