Why is Building the Wall Wrong?

[Ray From Cleveland]

It's the left that keeps bringing that up--not us on the right. We don't care how it's built or who pays for it, as long as it's built.

Drumpf brought that up and he is on the right. I didnt ask you what you care about. I'm asking what fool is going to allow Drumpf to claim Mexico is going to pay for it and then pretend they dont care?

I guess the same fools that were promised their healthcare insurance would go down by $2,500 a year. The same fools that thought they would be able to keep their insurance, doctor or healthcare facility. The same fools that thought nobody making less than $250,000 a year would see any kind of tax increase.

And how do you know who is paying for something that isn't even there yet?

I know because Mexico has said several times they were not going to pay for the wall. Where is your proof they are?

I don't have proof of anything just like you. Since we send aid to Mexico (like so many other countries) and many of their citizens are sending home US tax dollars back to Mexico, Trump has the ability to make Mexico pay in other ways. He can institute a tax on money sent back or he could reduce or stop funding to Mexico. But since I'm not Trump, I can't tell you what he has in mind. Just simply pointing out that Mexico doesn't actually have to send us a check to get them to pay for it.

No, Trump does not have the ability to institute any tax, only congress can do that and a democrat house is not about to introduce such a tax bill.

This may be true. The Democrats are trying to sellout the country as soon as possible.

 

[Flopper]

As for as the drugs go it will not even slow the drugs down. As long as their is a huge market for them they will be coming into or made in this country,

Donald Trump tied the heroin epidemic gripping suburban white communities to the issue central to the campaign: border security and illegal immigration.

We’ve all heard of poppy fields blooming in Afghanistan, but is Trump right that heroin is entering the United States largely through the southern border?

Yes. Even though Southwest Asia supplies heroin to most of the rest of the world, nearly all of the heroin available in the United States comes from Mexico and South America.

Trump is right: Heroin is coming in through southern border

But what does that have to do with building a wall. Most of the drugs that come across the border do so by planes, motor vehicles and boats which will continue with or without a wall.

What does that piece say? It says most of our heroine comes across that southern border. No, it isn't flown from Mexico, it doesn't come on a boat, and it's not coming from customs. It's coming from a wall-less border and that needs to be stopped. If they can get it here other ways, then it will be a hell of a lot harder which means they would have to charge more money, and likely more people getting busted for it.

Nope:
The majority of illegal drugs entering the United States enter in an assortment of vehicles, with drugs hidden in secret compartments in door panels or the roof, gas tanks, tires and even engines.

Cargo trains, tractor-trailers and passenger buses have been used to move illegal drugs. Trucks and trains carrying fresh produce such as watermelons, limes and other fruits bring in millions of pounds of illegal drugs.

The next most common method of bringing drugs into the US is cargo ships and planes.

The least likely method for bring drug enter into the US is individuals carrying them across the border. One semi properly outfitted can bring in more drugs than 50 backpackers. One ship cargo container can bring in more drugs than a 700 backpackers. It's a matter of economic. Meeting the demand for drugs in the US with back packers coming across the border would be both impossible and far more expense than other methods. This is why building walls or other barriers along the border would have very little impact on drug importation.

The profit margin on illegal drugs is so high, you could close the entire southern border and all it would do is raise the price of drugs to cover the added cost of alternative transportation.
By Land, Sea or Catapult: How Smugglers Get Drugs Across the Border

I couldn't get to the article because it's a pay site. However I never said drugs didn't come in other ways, and the title of the article seems to indicate all our borders, not just the south.

The easiest and safest way to get drugs across our southern border is to simply walk across. However even that presents some kind of risk, so now they are using drones to get the drugs across. If they bust a drone, nobody ends up in prison. They just lose a lot of money. Right now that's the problem they are trying to find a cure for.

People using vehicles to get drugs across are taking a huge risk because of dogs. Dogs can sniff out drugs from anywhere. I've never seen it myself, but I understand they have a dock by the border just in case they need to unload it for inspection, and they will.

The profit margin and size of the market make it impossible to stop the flow of drugs or even seriously reduce the supply at our borders. If you build a higher wall the cartels will use longer ladders. If you dig a deeper base, they will dig deeper tunnels. And if you build an impenetrable barrier, they will just go around it.

The answer to reducing the drug trade is not by building taller barriers , but working on both sides of the border to reduce both demand and supply.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Donald Trump tied the heroin epidemic gripping suburban white communities to the issue central to the campaign: border security and illegal immigration.

We’ve all heard of poppy fields blooming in Afghanistan, but is Trump right that heroin is entering the United States largely through the southern border?

Yes. Even though Southwest Asia supplies heroin to most of the rest of the world, nearly all of the heroin available in the United States comes from Mexico and South America.

Trump is right: Heroin is coming in through southern border

But what does that have to do with building a wall. Most of the drugs that come across the border do so by planes, motor vehicles and boats which will continue with or without a wall.

What does that piece say? It says most of our heroine comes across that southern border. No, it isn't flown from Mexico, it doesn't come on a boat, and it's not coming from customs. It's coming from a wall-less border and that needs to be stopped. If they can get it here other ways, then it will be a hell of a lot harder which means they would have to charge more money, and likely more people getting busted for it.

Nope:
The majority of illegal drugs entering the United States enter in an assortment of vehicles, with drugs hidden in secret compartments in door panels or the roof, gas tanks, tires and even engines.

Cargo trains, tractor-trailers and passenger buses have been used to move illegal drugs. Trucks and trains carrying fresh produce such as watermelons, limes and other fruits bring in millions of pounds of illegal drugs.

The next most common method of bringing drugs into the US is cargo ships and planes.

The least likely method for bring drug enter into the US is individuals carrying them across the border. One semi properly outfitted can bring in more drugs than 50 backpackers. One ship cargo container can bring in more drugs than a 700 backpackers. It's a matter of economic. Meeting the demand for drugs in the US with back packers coming across the border would be both impossible and far more expense than other methods. This is why building walls or other barriers along the border would have very little impact on drug importation.

The profit margin on illegal drugs is so high, you could close the entire southern border and all it would do is raise the price of drugs to cover the added cost of alternative transportation.
By Land, Sea or Catapult: How Smugglers Get Drugs Across the Border

I couldn't get to the article because it's a pay site. However I never said drugs didn't come in other ways, and the title of the article seems to indicate all our borders, not just the south.

The easiest and safest way to get drugs across our southern border is to simply walk across. However even that presents some kind of risk, so now they are using drones to get the drugs across. If they bust a drone, nobody ends up in prison. They just lose a lot of money. Right now that's the problem they are trying to find a cure for.

People using vehicles to get drugs across are taking a huge risk because of dogs. Dogs can sniff out drugs from anywhere. I've never seen it myself, but I understand they have a dock by the border just in case they need to unload it for inspection, and they will.

The profit margin and size of the market make it impossible to stop the flow of drugs or even seriously reduce the supply at our borders. If you build a higher wall the cartels will use longer ladders. If you dig a deeper base, they will dig deeper tunnels. And if you build an impenetrable barrier, they will just go around it.

The answer to reducing the drug trade is not by building taller barriers , but working on both sides of the border to reduce both demand and supply.

Which you and I know will never happen. If a wall would do no good, our border agencies would not support it. Tunnels don't take a few days to build. They take months to build. Even then,if a tunnel is detected and then destroyed, that's a lot of money down the tube. Authorities find tunnels all the time, and new technology is coming along every day. Drones can be used to find people who magically appear or disappear.

 

[bodecea]

Build the wall...as soon as we get the check from Mexico.

 

[Flopper]

Drumpf brought that up and he is on the right. I didnt ask you what you care about. I'm asking what fool is going to allow Drumpf to claim Mexico is going to pay for it and then pretend they dont care?

I guess the same fools that were promised their healthcare insurance would go down by $2,500 a year. The same fools that thought they would be able to keep their insurance, doctor or healthcare facility. The same fools that thought nobody making less than $250,000 a year would see any kind of tax increase.

And how do you know who is paying for something that isn't even there yet?

I know because Mexico has said several times they were not going to pay for the wall. Where is your proof they are?

I don't have proof of anything just like you. Since we send aid to Mexico (like so many other countries) and many of their citizens are sending home US tax dollars back to Mexico, Trump has the ability to make Mexico pay in other ways. He can institute a tax on money sent back or he could reduce or stop funding to Mexico. But since I'm not Trump, I can't tell you what he has in mind. Just simply pointing out that Mexico doesn't actually have to send us a check to get them to pay for it.

No, Trump does not have the ability to institute any tax, only congress can do that and a democrat house is not about to introduce such a tax bill.

This may be true. The Democrats are trying to sellout the country as soon as possible.

Mexican Americans sending money to families back home reduces illegal Mexican immigration. Reductions in poverty and better wages have dramatically reduced Mexican illegal immigration. Individuals helping families in their home country is far more efficient than US aid which often ends up feeding the bureaucracy rather feeding people.

Taxing remittances would likely have little impact on funds transferred because there are so many ways on the Internet to transfer funds using offshore agencies. However, even if Trump got his tax past a democrat controlled house and somehow all the taxes could be collected, the amount raised would only be about 1.6 billion far short of the estimated 25 to 31 billion Trump would need for his 1000 mile wall.

I'm sure a tax on remittances would be a winner for Trump in his rallies but the reality is it would do little to finance his wall and would have little effect on remittances. But it sure would sound good at rallies and that's what is important to Trump.
A Tax on Remittances Won't Pay for a Border Wall

 

[danielpalos]

But what does that have to do with building a wall. Most of the drugs that come across the border do so by planes, motor vehicles and boats which will continue with or without a wall.

What does that piece say? It says most of our heroine comes across that southern border. No, it isn't flown from Mexico, it doesn't come on a boat, and it's not coming from customs. It's coming from a wall-less border and that needs to be stopped. If they can get it here other ways, then it will be a hell of a lot harder which means they would have to charge more money, and likely more people getting busted for it.

Nope:
The majority of illegal drugs entering the United States enter in an assortment of vehicles, with drugs hidden in secret compartments in door panels or the roof, gas tanks, tires and even engines.

Cargo trains, tractor-trailers and passenger buses have been used to move illegal drugs. Trucks and trains carrying fresh produce such as watermelons, limes and other fruits bring in millions of pounds of illegal drugs.

The next most common method of bringing drugs into the US is cargo ships and planes.

The least likely method for bring drug enter into the US is individuals carrying them across the border. One semi properly outfitted can bring in more drugs than 50 backpackers. One ship cargo container can bring in more drugs than a 700 backpackers. It's a matter of economic. Meeting the demand for drugs in the US with back packers coming across the border would be both impossible and far more expense than other methods. This is why building walls or other barriers along the border would have very little impact on drug importation.

The profit margin on illegal drugs is so high, you could close the entire southern border and all it would do is raise the price of drugs to cover the added cost of alternative transportation.
By Land, Sea or Catapult: How Smugglers Get Drugs Across the Border

I couldn't get to the article because it's a pay site. However I never said drugs didn't come in other ways, and the title of the article seems to indicate all our borders, not just the south.

The easiest and safest way to get drugs across our southern border is to simply walk across. However even that presents some kind of risk, so now they are using drones to get the drugs across. If they bust a drone, nobody ends up in prison. They just lose a lot of money. Right now that's the problem they are trying to find a cure for.

People using vehicles to get drugs across are taking a huge risk because of dogs. Dogs can sniff out drugs from anywhere. I've never seen it myself, but I understand they have a dock by the border just in case they need to unload it for inspection, and they will.

The profit margin and size of the market make it impossible to stop the flow of drugs or even seriously reduce the supply at our borders. If you build a higher wall the cartels will use longer ladders. If you dig a deeper base, they will dig deeper tunnels. And if you build an impenetrable barrier, they will just go around it.

The answer to reducing the drug trade is not by building taller barriers , but working on both sides of the border to reduce both demand and supply.

Which you and I know will never happen. If a wall would do no good, our border agencies would not support it. Tunnels don't take a few days to build. They take months to build. Even then,if a tunnel is detected and then destroyed, that's a lot of money down the tube. Authorities find tunnels all the time, and new technology is coming along every day. Drones can be used to find people who magically appear or disappear.

a reason to ask for a budget increase and a "steady paycheck"?

 

[Flopper]

But what does that have to do with building a wall. Most of the drugs that come across the border do so by planes, motor vehicles and boats which will continue with or without a wall.

What does that piece say? It says most of our heroine comes across that southern border. No, it isn't flown from Mexico, it doesn't come on a boat, and it's not coming from customs. It's coming from a wall-less border and that needs to be stopped. If they can get it here other ways, then it will be a hell of a lot harder which means they would have to charge more money, and likely more people getting busted for it.

Nope:
The majority of illegal drugs entering the United States enter in an assortment of vehicles, with drugs hidden in secret compartments in door panels or the roof, gas tanks, tires and even engines.

Cargo trains, tractor-trailers and passenger buses have been used to move illegal drugs. Trucks and trains carrying fresh produce such as watermelons, limes and other fruits bring in millions of pounds of illegal drugs.

The next most common method of bringing drugs into the US is cargo ships and planes.

The least likely method for bring drug enter into the US is individuals carrying them across the border. One semi properly outfitted can bring in more drugs than 50 backpackers. One ship cargo container can bring in more drugs than a 700 backpackers. It's a matter of economic. Meeting the demand for drugs in the US with back packers coming across the border would be both impossible and far more expense than other methods. This is why building walls or other barriers along the border would have very little impact on drug importation.

The profit margin on illegal drugs is so high, you could close the entire southern border and all it would do is raise the price of drugs to cover the added cost of alternative transportation.
By Land, Sea or Catapult: How Smugglers Get Drugs Across the Border

I couldn't get to the article because it's a pay site. However I never said drugs didn't come in other ways, and the title of the article seems to indicate all our borders, not just the south.

The easiest and safest way to get drugs across our southern border is to simply walk across. However even that presents some kind of risk, so now they are using drones to get the drugs across. If they bust a drone, nobody ends up in prison. They just lose a lot of money. Right now that's the problem they are trying to find a cure for.

People using vehicles to get drugs across are taking a huge risk because of dogs. Dogs can sniff out drugs from anywhere. I've never seen it myself, but I understand they have a dock by the border just in case they need to unload it for inspection, and they will.

The profit margin and size of the market make it impossible to stop the flow of drugs or even seriously reduce the supply at our borders. If you build a higher wall the cartels will use longer ladders. If you dig a deeper base, they will dig deeper tunnels. And if you build an impenetrable barrier, they will just go around it.

The answer to reducing the drug trade is not by building taller barriers , but working on both sides of the border to reduce both demand and supply.

Which you and I know will never happen. If a wall would do no good, our border agencies would not support it. Tunnels don't take a few days to build. They take months to build. Even then,if a tunnel is detected and then destroyed, that's a lot of money down the tube. Authorities find tunnels all the time, and new technology is coming along every day. Drones can be used to find people who magically appear or disappear.

Comments by border agents do support a wall, however I have noticed those comments have often been referring to a wall at a particular location, not a wall spanning the border. Border agents have also pointed out that a reinforced fence that can be seen through is preferably in places.

I agree with most of these comments. There are places where a wall would be appropriate but other places a reinforced fence where agents can easily see the other side is much more appropriate. Then there are other places such as reservation land that should have only electronic monitoring. My objection not having a barrier, it's having a one size fits all solution that I object to. The cost will be far too high and will cause more problems than it prevents.

Looking a the reduction in illegal immigrants over the past 10 years in the US, security improvements at the border, and opposition by democrats, it seems very unlikely that Trump's wall would ever be completed if ever really got started..

 

[pismoe]

What is so silly is the reich totally ignores the largest immigration problem is expired visa's. There are more of them than people crossing without permission or documentation.

40%. Of illegals came in legally and overstay. Wall does nothing for that .

-------------------------------------- so what , it only stops close to 60 percent . Sounds like a good deal to me Timmy .

 

[pismoe]

If I were an illegal, I’d just save some money, fly to Vancouver and walk across the border up there. Better weather….and you don’t risk stepping in that turd known as Texas

First you would have to get a visa to enter Canada.

Like that’s hard? By the way , Canada takes in lots of immigrants from those scary countries where terrorists come from . Where’s the Canada wall?

---------------------------------- 'canooks' are stupid and there is opposition to taking in third worlders in 'canada' Timmy .

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What does that piece say? It says most of our heroine comes across that southern border. No, it isn't flown from Mexico, it doesn't come on a boat, and it's not coming from customs. It's coming from a wall-less border and that needs to be stopped. If they can get it here other ways, then it will be a hell of a lot harder which means they would have to charge more money, and likely more people getting busted for it.

Nope:
The majority of illegal drugs entering the United States enter in an assortment of vehicles, with drugs hidden in secret compartments in door panels or the roof, gas tanks, tires and even engines.

Cargo trains, tractor-trailers and passenger buses have been used to move illegal drugs. Trucks and trains carrying fresh produce such as watermelons, limes and other fruits bring in millions of pounds of illegal drugs.

The next most common method of bringing drugs into the US is cargo ships and planes.

The least likely method for bring drug enter into the US is individuals carrying them across the border. One semi properly outfitted can bring in more drugs than 50 backpackers. One ship cargo container can bring in more drugs than a 700 backpackers. It's a matter of economic. Meeting the demand for drugs in the US with back packers coming across the border would be both impossible and far more expense than other methods. This is why building walls or other barriers along the border would have very little impact on drug importation.

The profit margin on illegal drugs is so high, you could close the entire southern border and all it would do is raise the price of drugs to cover the added cost of alternative transportation.
By Land, Sea or Catapult: How Smugglers Get Drugs Across the Border

I couldn't get to the article because it's a pay site. However I never said drugs didn't come in other ways, and the title of the article seems to indicate all our borders, not just the south.

The easiest and safest way to get drugs across our southern border is to simply walk across. However even that presents some kind of risk, so now they are using drones to get the drugs across. If they bust a drone, nobody ends up in prison. They just lose a lot of money. Right now that's the problem they are trying to find a cure for.

People using vehicles to get drugs across are taking a huge risk because of dogs. Dogs can sniff out drugs from anywhere. I've never seen it myself, but I understand they have a dock by the border just in case they need to unload it for inspection, and they will.

The profit margin and size of the market make it impossible to stop the flow of drugs or even seriously reduce the supply at our borders. If you build a higher wall the cartels will use longer ladders. If you dig a deeper base, they will dig deeper tunnels. And if you build an impenetrable barrier, they will just go around it.

The answer to reducing the drug trade is not by building taller barriers , but working on both sides of the border to reduce both demand and supply.

Which you and I know will never happen. If a wall would do no good, our border agencies would not support it. Tunnels don't take a few days to build. They take months to build. Even then,if a tunnel is detected and then destroyed, that's a lot of money down the tube. Authorities find tunnels all the time, and new technology is coming along every day. Drones can be used to find people who magically appear or disappear.

Comments by border agents do support a wall, however I have noticed those comments have often been referring to a wall at a particular location, not a wall spanning the border. Border agents have also pointed out that a reinforced fence that can be seen through is preferably in places.

I agree with most of these comments. There are places where a wall would be appropriate but other places a reinforced fence where agents can easily see the other side is much more appropriate. Then there are other places such as reservation land that should have only electronic monitoring. My objection not having a barrier, it's having a one size fits all solution that I object to. The cost will be far too high and will cause more problems than it prevents.

Looking a the reduction in illegal immigrants over the past 10 years in the US, security improvements at the border, and opposition by democrats, it seems very unlikely that Trump's wall would ever be completed if ever really got started..

It will be just fine, but as we both know, the Democrats don't want to stop illegals. They certainly don't want something they can't remove easily like a fence.

Trump is only asking 5 billion dollars. That's down from his original request of 32 billion. It's not the money, it's the fact that the wall will prove to be a great success. And even if the 5 billion is granted, it's only enough to put the wall in places that are easy to pass. Some places the terrain makes it impossible to get in. Trump has acknowledged that in his last live televised meeting between him, Shoemaker and Piglosi.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I guess the same fools that were promised their healthcare insurance would go down by $2,500 a year. The same fools that thought they would be able to keep their insurance, doctor or healthcare facility. The same fools that thought nobody making less than $250,000 a year would see any kind of tax increase.

And how do you know who is paying for something that isn't even there yet?

I know because Mexico has said several times they were not going to pay for the wall. Where is your proof they are?

I don't have proof of anything just like you. Since we send aid to Mexico (like so many other countries) and many of their citizens are sending home US tax dollars back to Mexico, Trump has the ability to make Mexico pay in other ways. He can institute a tax on money sent back or he could reduce or stop funding to Mexico. But since I'm not Trump, I can't tell you what he has in mind. Just simply pointing out that Mexico doesn't actually have to send us a check to get them to pay for it.

No, Trump does not have the ability to institute any tax, only congress can do that and a democrat house is not about to introduce such a tax bill.

This may be true. The Democrats are trying to sellout the country as soon as possible.

Mexican Americans sending money to families back home reduces illegal Mexican immigration. Reductions in poverty and better wages have dramatically reduced Mexican illegal immigration. Individuals helping families in their home country is far more efficient than US aid which often ends up feeding the bureaucracy rather feeding people.

Taxing remittances would likely have little impact on funds transferred because there are so many ways on the Internet to transfer funds using offshore agencies. However, even if Trump got his tax past a democrat controlled house and somehow all the taxes could be collected, the amount raised would only be about 1.6 billion far short of the estimated 25 to 31 billion Trump would need for his 1000 mile wall.

I'm sure a tax on remittances would be a winner for Trump in his rallies but the reality is it would do little to finance his wall and would have little effect on remittances. But it sure would sound good at rallies and that's what is important to Trump.
A Tax on Remittances Won't Pay for a Border Wall

1.6 billion a year is 16 billion in ten years. In 20 years, 32 billion.

 

[sartre play]

if we stop paying attention to the 20% who want little to no exclusion of illegals and we stop paying attention to the 30% that want the solid 100 mile wall + all illegals thrown out . and let the 50% that want to work on something that is cost effective,+ with a little thoughtful humanity thrown in. bet its possible to come up with some thing that works to a degree that we can all live with. wont happen because we are going to keep it an on going political fight.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

if we stop paying attention to the 20% who want little to no exclusion of illegals and we stop paying attention to the 30% that want the solid 100 mile wall + all illegals thrown out . and let the 50% that want to work on something that is cost effective,+ with a little thoughtful humanity thrown in. bet its possible to come up with some thing that works to a degree that we can all live with. wont happen because we are going to keep it an on going political fight.

It is political and has been for years. The Democrats want to wipe out the white race, so they want as many of these people here as possible. The establishment right wants them here to in order to satisfy businesses.

Once a wall is built, it's there forever. That's what bugs Democrats the most about it. It's not a temporary barrier, it's not one that can easily be bypassed. It's a wall that nobody will be able to penetrate and Democrats (no matter how much power they get in the future) won't be able to tear it down.

 

[Lesh]

It is political and has been for years. The Democrats want to wipe out the white race

Shhhhh... you're not supposed to let your inner racist out like that

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It is political and has been for years. The Democrats want to wipe out the white race

Shhhhh... you're not supposed to let your inner racist out like that

What's racist about it? It's what the Democrats are trying to do.

 

[pismoe]

WHITES oughta get tough and start laughing at those that call them racist . Quite often its the name callers that are anti white racists . And young kids also have to learn to laugh and to Fight the Public School Teachers and other anti white racists because the numbers of anti white racists increase everyday because of third world importation of more 'third world' anti white racists into the USA .

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

WHITES oughta get tough and start laughing at those that call them racist . Quite often its the name callers that are anti white racists . And young kids also have to learn to laugh and to Fight the Public School Teachers and other anti white racists because the numbers of anti white racists increase everyday because of third world importation of more 'third world' anti white racists into the USA .

We've always laughed at them and still do.

 

[Lesh]

It is political and has been for years. The Democrats want to wipe out the white race,

Good thing you tell us that you're not racist. Otherwise we'd never know...

 

[bripat9643]

Why is Building the Wall Wrong?

It prevents the free flow of wildlife.

I think the Rio Grande river does that.

 

[pismoe]

is Lesh concerned with widdle animal border jumpers . --- SCOTUS to Environmentalists: Sorry Guys, But Trump is Allowed to Build a Border Wall --- check this out Lesh .