Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
The Attic
Wall Is Ridiculous And Republicans Know It.....
Page <prev 2 of 2
Dec 30, 2018 11:15:40   #
yhtomit Loc: Port Land. Oregon
 
Twardlow wrote:
The shutdown is intractable because Trump’s wall is ridiculous and Republicans know it

Conservatives won’t trade the wall for anything good because they know it’s a bad idea

By Matthew Yglesias on December 28, 2018 12:00 pm


Spending billions of dollars to build hundreds of miles of additional walling — or “steel slats” or wh**ever you want to call it — on the US-Mexico border is a bad idea. That’s a critical, underrated feature of the current standoff that has led President Trump to partially shut down the government.

After all, if the president of the United States wants a $5 billion appropriation for a pet project that’s important to him personally and partially fulfills a campaign promise, then he ought to be able to get it. And the time-honored way to get it is to give congressional skeptics something else in exchange. That’s how the system has worked ever since Alexander Hamilton got James Madison to back federal assumption of state debts in exchange for locating the nation’s capital on the banks of the Potomac River.

But back at the beginning of the year, when it seemed as though a compromise involving wall money and a path to citizenship for DREAMers was in the works, it was immigration hardliners in Trump’s own administration who scuttled the deal. That’s certainly their prerogative, but it underscores the core t***h of this standoff: Immigration hardliners themselves don’t think the wall is especially useful or important in the real world. If they really wanted a wall, they would go get a wall by offering something — it wouldn’t even necessarily have to be immigration-related — in exchange for it. But since they know the wall is a bad idea, they won’t trade it for anything.

Yet precisely because the wall idea is so bad, Democrats, rightly, aren’t going to give it away for free.

The wall is a very bad idea

Obviously there’s nothing silly about the general idea of walls to separate pieces of territory. But if you’ve ever been to the US-Mexico border, chances are you’ve seen that there’s already lots of wall there. Significant swaths of the border are made up of t***snational conurbations like San Diego-Tijuana or El Paso-Juarez, where, in the absence of imposing physical barriers, it would be very challenging for Border Patrol to stop people from sneaking across.

What’s left are desolate, uninhabited stretches of border where construction logistics are difficult, crossing is difficult, and the Border Patrol’s detection work is relatively easy.

Meanwhile, over the past 10 years, the rise of export-oriented manufacturing jobs in Mexico plus shifting Mexican demographics has greatly reduced the number of Mexicans who want to come to the United States to work illegally, while the rollout of the Real ID program has made it harder to work illegally. The combined result is that the size of the undocumented immigrant population is falling, driven almost entirely by a million fewer undocumented Mexican nationals living in the United States.

There remain many foreign-born people living illegally in the United States, but nearly two-thirds of them have been here for more than 10 years, and the Pew Research Center estimates that a majority of new unauthorized arrivals initially entered the United States with a valid visa rather than sneaking across a border.

The action at the border these days, in terms of immigration, is about asylum seekers, whole family units who arrive and either cross at legal ports of entry or else deliberately present themselves to Border Patrol after crossing illegally.

This is a legitimately difficult problem, but building extra miles of wall in the middle of nowhere won’t ameliorate it. With even the Trump administration finding itself dumping detained asylum seekers onto the streets of border towns due to a lack of capacity, it’s clear that if we’re going to invest huge new sums of money in the border, it should be to address this problem. More resources are needed to adjudicate asylum claims more rapidly, to secure people with pending claims in sustainable and humane ways, and to assist Central American countries in combating the underlying issues that drive people north.

Immigration hardliners know the wall is a bad idea

The tell here is that when congressional Democrats started getting close to a deal that would swap help for DREAMers for wall money, immigration hawks swooped in — not with quibbles about the details but with a huge set of unrelated demands.

As Dara Lind wrote in January, the White House’s proposed framework for a deal ultimately included “an overhaul of asylum laws, stepped-up interior enforcement, and a broad crackdown on legal immigration on the scale of the Trump-endorsed RAISE Act.” The RAISE Act is a plan to cut legal immigration levels in half, which illustrates how little immigration restrictionists are actually focused on the nominal border security debate that has shut the government down.

But that’s the point. If your goal is to reduce the number of foreign-born people living in the United States by any means necessary, then building an extra 700 miles of border wall is not particularly useful. So extending a path to citizenship for DREAMers or anyone else in exchange for a not-very-useful wall is an unattractive deal.

By the same token, if the wall were extremely useful, then Trump could seek to offset its cost by reducing spending on some other aspect of immigration enforcement. But because the wall is a bad idea, that would be a bad deal and he wouldn’t offer it. He also obviously can’t offer to offset the cost with higher taxes on the rich because that would blow up the Republican Party coalition — a coalition that’s happy to exploit the border wall issue for partisan gain but that at its core is supposed to be delivering money to rich people.

The art of the deal

A Washington Post editorial Friday morning argues that “the way out of the shutdown has been obvious for weeks,” touts the DREAMer-wall swap, scolds the White House for having scuttled it, and then for the sake of balance scolds Nancy Pelosi for having adopted the obvious negotiating tactic of saying she’s no longer interested in the deal.

The t***h, however, is that there’s nothing obvious about this.

It seems like a good deal precisely because a path to citizenship for DREAMers is a real, valuable thing that will make a big difference in people’s lives, while the wall is utterly foolish. If you take the anti-immigration position seriously, that makes it a terrible deal. They’d have traded away something real for a bit of political theater.

The true path forward would be the opposite of this — for the White House to admit that the wall is foolish and reopen the government. Then we could begin a legislative negotiation over the topics that are actually in dispute: internal enforcement, asylum law, the treatment of long-settled unauthorized migrants, and future flows of legal immigration. But the Trump administration can’t even admit publicly that Mexico isn’t going to pay for the wall, much less admit that the whole wall concept is essentially irrelevant to their immigration policy goals.

As long as that persists, it’s hard to find a way out.


https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/2018/12/28/18158873/wall-shutdown-trump-dreamers-deal
b The shutdown is intractable because Trump’s wal... (show quote)


The wall is the best idea if you believe in national sovereignty.
Do you believe in national sovereignty?

Reply
Dec 30, 2018 11:22:58   #
Tex-s
 
I've said it before. The wall, more specifically the debate about a wall, is a symptom of failed policy and not a solution to that failed policy. Failed policy did and still does incentivize people to cross illegally and/or overstay student and work Visas. With birthright citizenship for anyone, legal or illegal, with free education, with ER's required to provide services to all, with no verification of identity, with employers willing/able/allowed to hire undocumented workers at costs below minimum wage, and the worst failure of policy, immigration preference to family members of current residents illegal or legal..... with all of this failed policy, and alternating administrations either looking busy and doing nothing, or looking angry and doing nothing, that's what's improving. Nothing.

If Trump had a brain he would have said "I'm not signing ANY appropriations bill that does not include a mandatory E-verify rider bill. I'm not signing any bill until we have verified monitoring of Visa overstays. I'm not signing a bill until the Congress passes an amendment clarifying that birthright citizenship only applies to LEGAL RESIDENTS of the nation and not illegal residents, not people just travelling via passports, and not to foreign diplomats assigned to serve in foreign embassies in America. If the States choose not to ratify that Amendment, that is up to them, but my Congress will do the work required to actually reform our immigration system, rather than addressing the results of the bad system. Or they will shut down the government....."

There is not a Democrat I know that would try to defend chain-immigration policy verses merit-based policy, would defend NOT monitoring Visas, would defend NOT verifying worker status, or who would defend the current interpretation of birthright citizenship against the common sense version mentioned above. To do so would appear to be in direct opposition to american citizens' interests.

Then again, Trump hasn't a brain for reframing debate and insists on making himself a point of focus rather than policy....

Reply
Dec 30, 2018 11:30:47   #
Twardlow Loc: Arkansas
 
yhtomit wrote:
The wall is the best idea if you believe in national sovereignty.
Do you believe in national sovereignty?




Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
MOTHER OF EXILES. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "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-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Reply
 
 
Dec 30, 2018 12:25:07   #
yhtomit Loc: Port Land. Oregon
 
Twardlow wrote:
Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
MOTHER OF EXILES. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "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-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame, br With c... (show quote)


Fail...

So many words... You have taken this poem out of context. This is a legal immigration poem, not
an i*****l i*********n poem. Your propaganda is showing.
The question that is still unanswered is” do you believe in national sovereignty?”.
Yes or no.

Reply
Dec 30, 2018 12:57:02   #
hondo812 Loc: Massachusetts
 
Twardlow wrote:
Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
MOTHER OF EXILES. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "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-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame, br With c... (show quote)


Lazarus was a c****e

Frédéric Auguste Bartholdi, creator of "Liberty Enlightening the World" (aka Statue of Liberty) has the statue facing Europe when he installed it in the late 1800's to shine the light of liberty over the monarchies of Europe. You can spend a minute or 2 to do some actual research to find that he did not share Lazarus' view at all. His creation, his view counts. Hers? meh.

Reply
Dec 30, 2018 13:57:45   #
rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona
 
Mike, you have an interesting way about you. First, you address people who support our president with a perjorative. Second, you make an absurd remark about the president being an illegal resident at The White House address. Perhaps you'd like to provide some support to your illegal assessment.
--Bob
MikeMck wrote:
Why don't you bone spur supporters just accept the fact that the current illegal resident of 1600 Pa. Ave is a liar who has no more idea of what he is saying than the man in the moon. He is on the way out either by resigning or by being held criminally liable for his many felonies. We have been taken for a ride, admit it and go on!!

Reply
Dec 30, 2018 16:25:24   #
MikeMck Loc: Southern Maryland on the Bay
 
rmalarz wrote:
Mike, you have an interesting way about you. First, you address people who support our president with a perjorative. Second, you make an absurd remark about the president being an illegal resident at The White House address. Perhaps you'd like to provide some support to your illegal assessment.
--Bob


He is illegal for 2 reasons. 1. He did not win the majority of the popular v**es. 2. He only won through the interaction of the russians in the states with the most e*****rial v**es. Thankfully he won't be in office much longer then we will see what you have to say!

Reply
 
 
Dec 30, 2018 16:48:44   #
rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona
 
Ok, Mike. Fair enough. However, let me clarify something here right off. As for your first reason, the founding fathers, in their wisdom, devised the e*******l college. If you aren't familiar with the formulation and reason for, I suggest this video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6s7jB6-GoU There are others just as informative. Thus, you'll find he was legally elected and the importance of the e*******l college.

Next, you throw out something that has yet to be conclusively proven. You would think by now with the amount of time and especially money that has been thrown at this rumor without any substantial results it would die a natural death. However, Mueller probably isn't going to not look a gift horse in the mouth. It's his and his staff's source of good income. There are also legal issues with this investigation from the start. I think as citizens of this country people would be more upset with that than rumors.

So, we have a legally elected president, regardless of whether people like it or not. It's that simple.
--Bob

MikeMck wrote:
He is illegal for 2 reasons. 1. He did not win the majority of the popular v**es. 2. He only won through the interaction of the russians in the states with the most e*****rial v**es. Thankfully he won't be in office much longer then we will see what you have to say!

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 2
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
The Attic
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.