Trump's Wall: total fantasyland says engineer

Simplistic nonsense.

You haven't address most of what I said, and offered a total straw man for what my argument supposedly is. I'm not saying "it won't work perfectly". I'm saying it it will totally destroy the idea of an effective immigration system and not solve the problems you think it will....and don't lecture me about the English Channel being a de facto wall. That's a ridiculous remark. Not only does the channel tunnel account for a source of illegal immigration, there is also the issue of free movement immigration from the EU and the uncomfortable reality for both the US and UK that there are a great many other ways of entry as I was attempting to highlight to you above. The "wall" of the English Channel hasn't reduced out net migration at all. Why? Because many enter legally and become illegal. Some come in the back of trucks from the continent. Some arrive at the airport and claim asylum. It's moronic to assume that an illegal immigrant just someone who runs across a border and that building a wall solves the problem of illegal immigration overnight. You go and build your wall, and you'll find you'll keep more decent immigrants out and many of those intent on getting in one way or another will still find a way.

No. A person breaking into your house is damaging and stealing what is yours. Immigrants don't take your private property by entering your country, and make your economy richer. Whether the law respects this tells us whether the law is good or not.

Not entirely sure what you mean by this.

It always comes back to this tired old scenario. I understand the difference. What you don't seem to understand is that humans have been migrating across the globe for 20000 years. It doesn't matter how many walls you build or what legalities are put in place. People are going to migrate. The US is not the first country in the history of the world to deal with this. And, the issue is only a big issue to Fox News. Turn that puppy off and give yourself a break on the hate. You'll feel much better.

The one that says you're an idiot and don't understand the situation.

Darling, any time you want to compare degrees, you feel free to bring it. Until then, if you haven't got a salient point to make, I suggest you shut up and let the adults talk lest you embarrass yourself further.

I mean to say that @Lanzman named two reasons to think of "illegal immigrants" as criminals. His comparison with home invaders holds no water, but he is factually correct in pointing out that the law says they can't enter. However, if the law outlaws something that ought to be legal, the right response is to fix the law, not persecute those who break it.

Oh, now we're going to get all "my diploma is bigger than yours"? Whatever.

When you speak of "illegal immigration" and "feeding off the goodwill of the citizenry" in the same sentence, I have to question the size of your manhoo... er, diploma. Because one has nothing to do with the other. People who come here illegally from Mexico are not getting food stamps. They don't have the credentials to get food stamps. They come here to work because there aren't any jobs where they come from.

When you call me an idiot for asking you to clarify your position, this is what you get. And, from the looks of it, you haven't got jack crap to counter with. Be careful whose intelligence you question, kitten.

Have you read anything else I posted, or did your emotions get in the way?

Where did I say they were? I said sponging off the goodwill of the citizenry. That doesn't necessarily mean foodstamps. They're taking advantage of our lax immigration and employment laws. Don't put words into my mouth the same way you shove cake down yours.

See above.

The English Channel is a wall. It kept the Nazis out pretty effectively. Compare how well it did compared to French defenses. Similarly, few Europeans walk to Virginia.

In contrast, the US has over 11 million illegals. That's larger than the entire population of London, and doesn't include millions and millions of former illegals who were given amnesty because we threw up our hands at the uncontrollable influx. Unless we get control of the border, the only way we can stop the influx is to make our economy and job market worse than Nicaragua's. Some think that's not a good solution.

Getting control of migration isn't going to happen by building a wall for the reasons I have explained.

Anyhow, thank you for your post, but I have no interest in your contribution as I'm not going to waste time with your usual game of lies, half truths, spin and wriggling.

Contributions from others are welcome.

Ages ago, I worked as a DJ on one of the boats off of Navy Pier in Chicago. There were a number of Irish immigrants who came over here on visas, let them expire and just worked on the boats as waitresses either for pay under-the-table or via some other shady means. I dated one of the waitresses for a bit and began to worry about what would happen if she got caught and sent back. She said she hadn't entered under her real name to begin with, so if she got deported, she'd just be back on a visa again within a few weeks.

A wall would not have stopped people like her.

Getting control of migration can't happen without building a wall, either, because people will just keep walking in by the millions.

Exactly.

We'll take all the illegal Irish they can send over. They already speak and read English at at least a 6th grade level and can do simple arithmetic.

Yes, absolutely. But enforcing immigration law =/= "persecution" and is not racist, as so many seem to think it is. Nearly every nation-state in the world has immigration laws and makes at least some effort at enforcing those laws. The US and Mexico share the second-longest undefended border in the world (after the US and Canada) and to say things like we shouldn't be attempting to secure that border is simply not realistic.

Or to put it another way, we don't really have a huge illegal immigrant problem from anywhere else in the world because we have these things called oceans to the east and west of CONUS. Yes, there are a few who come in and decide to squat, but the number is trivial compared to the hordes coming in from the south. Some of you seem to be assuming that building a "wall" wouldn't fix the problem. You're right, by itself it wouldn't. But it would help a lot more than two thousand miles of empty land does. A border fence is one measure, one measure. Part of a suite of measures than can and should be taken. I am not against immigration. I know the value of attracting the best and brightest, as well as more rank-and-file types, because it keeps the engine going. But there's a process by which people can come and become citizens, and illegals are basically trying to line-jump.

As for the housebreaking metaphor, I really don't get your objections to it. You control access to your house with doors and windows and locks, don't you? You don't want random people strolling in and rifling through your fridge, do you? You don't want to wake up in the morning to find a family of Rosicrucians in the basement, do you? And yet you have ways to allow people in to your home: you become friends, or you marry one of them, or you arrange to be roommates, or what have you. Immigration across national borders is the exact same thing. Exact same thing. Your country is your space. You control who gets to come in and live there. Especially if those people are consuming public resources. Now, you may do as Europe has done, and declare that the internal borders are no more, but Europe still has immigration laws. People don't get to just swim ashore in Barcelona and declare that you lot owe them benefits. And yet you seem horrified at the idea that the US might want to control its southern border, because reasons.

Stop behind dishonest. Nobody here has claimed enforcing immigration laws is racist and nobody has said you shouldn't control the border. All that has been said is that the wall isn't going to do what you think it does and for that reason, among others, it is a bad idea.

Two words: Exploding visas.

A simple clock chip can be set to the date the visa expires. Then boom, no more visa overstays.

A wall certainly kept Western Europe from getting overrun with people from the Soviet Bloc. Before the wall was built millions and millions were flooding in from the Soviet occupied areas. After it was built just handfuls made it out, often by becoming world class ballerinas and gymnasts and jumping out of a hotel window in Toronto.

As I already pointed out, the US-Mexico border has net negative immigration. Who is this expensive boondoggle meant to stop?

Do you have a mental retardation that stops you understanding what "I don't intend to debate with you" means?

PolitiFact in July 2010 rated as Mostly True a claim that 40 percent of the "undocumented workers in this country" entered the U.S. legally and "overstayed their visa." I'd say that 40% is quite a bit more than "a few".

No, the US Mexican border does not have net negative immigration. The US and Mexico have net negative immigration. The border itself has hundreds of thousands of people walking in from Guatemala, Honduras, Panama, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Costa Rica, Columbia, Peru, China, Cuba, Syria, Iraq, and everywhere else. And you know what? Those don't walk back.

Politifact would rate the claim that Al Gore was President as Mostly True.

They admit that we don't have good data, and that their data comes from 2006 and earlier, and was itself questionable.

Best build a wall around those other places, then. I understand there is already a wall in China, so you must be mistaken about that one.

I want someone to build a wall around gtardo's keyboard.

The Great Wall of China was always largely symbolic.

And the wall there now is far, far from being the original article..

Maybe we could round up every unemployed Chicago gang member (unemployment is a big problem for urban youth!) because we know they are trigger-happy. It's win-win! They kids get jobs and they can shoot people other than themselves and their neighbors. Sadly I don't qualify as an unemployed redneck for your plan, but I can indeed be out in the sun all day and not get skin cancer. Wait, those Chicago kids are a very low sunburn risk.

There is no wall in those other places, which is why there's nothing to stop them from walking up through Mexico and into Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, and California, which they do in vast numbers. There's also no incentive for the countries that the poor people are leaving to build walls to hold them in.

I'm glad we have you here to tell us these things...