Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 101

Thread: We cannot dig, build, or pave our way out of economic malaise

  1. #61
    [QUOTE=TerminatorJet;4234197]Create a demilitarized zone spinkled with landmines and patrolled by an entire mechanized infantry division. That would be so cheap and ofcourse guttin rid a muxicans would help create more of those valuable mop and broom jobs real Americans need.

    Eliminate the minimum wage, unions and cut taxes for the top 1% even more. That way the entire United States of America can enjoy the luxurious lifestyles migrant workers have been enjoying the past 30 years.[/QUOTE]

    You are becoming the king of the straw man argument. Its fun to read. Absurd, but a good read.

  2. #62
    [QUOTE=chiefst2000;4234200]Great question. For the price tag I would look at some of the money we currently spend on the greater war on drugs add in the costs of education and medical coverage benefits provided free to illegals and shift a percentage of that to boarder enforcement. Then I would look at the National Guard as a source for border protection. We have these soldiers on the payroll already. I would station them on the boarders and use them together with current border agents. Then use a combination of fencing and technological surveillance to get the border as tightly controlled as possible. It's not that difficult or expensive.[/QUOTE]

    The National Guard will now become immigration law enforcement and you want them to become full time personnel too? You do realize how big our country is and the size of the borders?

  3. #63
    [QUOTE=cr726;4234218]The National Guard will now become immigration law enforcement and you want them to become full time personnel too? You do realize how big our country is and the size of the borders?[/QUOTE]

    Did you read my post? The National Guard will defend our borders from the military style drug lords waging war down there and spilling the blood of our citizens and border agents. What else do they have to do? There are plenty of active duty national guard at any given point in time. Immigration law would remain in the charge of ICE. I do realize the size of the borders and I think that stationing a reasonable number of troops there is the solution, alongside strategic fencing and aerial surveillance. Aren't you in some sort of federal law enforcement roll? Why don't you know this stuff?

  4. #64
    [QUOTE=cr726;4234218]The National Guard will now become immigration law enforcement and you want them to become full time personnel too? You do realize how big our country is and the size of the borders?[/QUOTE]

    The guy really has no clue. To effectively seal off the entire border using National Guard soldiers you'd have to mobilize about 15,000 - 20,000 soldiers at cost of billions of dollars to the taxpayers that would include not only their base pay but also base allowance for housing, logistical support and probably billions more would have to be spent on contractors, maintain and administrate forward operating bases along the border. Anything less would be an enormous waste of time and money and do next to nothing to stop illegal immigration.

    Oh and this would add tens of billions of dollars to the FY budget for every year and eventually accumulate into a monster addition to the national debt.

    The education expenses we're supposedly going to save so much money on wouldn't be a fraction of it. As a matter of fact, some states would actually lose net revenue.

    Take Texas for example. Rick Perry has been taking a beating from Teabaggers for allowing illegals to pay in-state tuition. The claim is that "each illegal alien is getting $100K from Texas to study in a state college" Really? You're telling me to provide that student a seat in a 500 seat lecture hall in Austin, El Paso or whatever other state university really costs Texas $100K? Ok and what about the $10 - 15K per year that illegal still pays to the state of Texas in tuition. Guess that doesn't figure into anything.

    Oh and let's not forget the beating the private sector would take in eliminating a cheap work force that they've been relying on for years. There's a reason why the corporate wing of the republican party wants nothing to do with the Tea Party's xenophobia and it has to do with dollar signs.

    The Tea Party is the Eric Smith of political movements. Slow, clumsy and yet somehow manages to stick around for way too long.
    Last edited by TerminatorJet; 11-15-2011 at 12:31 PM.

  5. #65
    [QUOTE=chiefst2000;4234200]Great question. For the price tag I would look at some of the money we currently spend on the greater war on drugs add in the costs of education and medical coverage benefits provided free to illegals and shift a percentage of that to boarder enforcement. Then I would look at the National Guard as a source for border protection. We have these soldiers on the payroll already. I would station them on the boarders and use them together with current border agents. Then use a combination of fencing and technological surveillance to get the border as tightly controlled as possible. It's not that difficult or expensive.[/QUOTE]

    Wrong idea.

    You don't "close the border", not the physical border at least.

    The answer to illegal immigration is enforcement of basic elligibillity requirements.

    --A federal ID first, to every legal citizen (works as a voter ID card too, a wimn/win), cost-free to legal citizens, with a different (non-voter_ variant for legal residents.

    --Proper documentation at time of employment or no-hire. Hire anyway, and your business get crushed for it.

    --Proper Checks at all legal stops. Failure to have or produce your Federal ID, and the issue gets explored further, and if you really don;t have one, you get deported, period.

    --No public services of any kind for illegals. No school, no healthcare (yes, not even emergency care), no foodtsamps, no abillity to rent or own property, nothing.

    --Combine with a revision of both illigration itself (more allowed in legally, but the good ones, the ones that will help the U.S., not any random criminal) and a broadening of a Guest Worker Program, with that program a pathway to future legal immigration possabillities.

    --An end to automatic citizenship via being born on U.S. Soil. Small change, if you have no legal right to BE on U.S. Soil at the time of the birth, the child is not a U.S. citizen.

    The Border can then be defended for the far mopre important issues of the day, terrorism, drug cartels, etc.

    And best of all, ALL the fruit and veggis will still get picked, all the businesses will still have low-cost labor if thats what we as a society want. Better yet, we could also reduce welfare costs, and allow the unemployed the choice: Be unemployed and pennliess, subsisting only on basic life-saving services (food and emergent care), or go work in a field and get paid. Their choice.
    Last edited by Warfish; 11-15-2011 at 12:33 PM.

  6. #66
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4234232]Wrong idea.

    You don't "close the border", not the physical border at least.

    The answer to illegal immigration is enforcement of basic elligibillity requirements.

    --A federal ID first, to every legal citizen (works as a voter ID card too, a wimn/win), cost-free to legal citizens, with a different (non-voter_ variant for legal residents.

    --Proper documentation at time of employment or no-hire. Hire anyway, and your business get crushed for it.

    --Proper Checks at all legal stops. Failure to have or produce your Federal ID, and the issue gets explored further, and if you really don;t have one, you get deported, period.

    --No public services of any kind for illegals. No school, no healthcare (yes, not even emergency care), no foodtsamps, no abillity to rent or own property, nothing.

    --Combine with a revision of both illigration itself (more allowed in legally, but the good ones, the ones that will help the U.S., not any random criminal) and a broadening of a Guest Worker Program, with that program a pathway to future legal immigration possabillities.

    --An end to automatic citizenship via being born on U.S. Soil. Small change, if you have no legal right to BE on U.S. Soil at the time of the birth, the child is not a U.S. citizen.

    The Border can then be defended for the far mopre important issues of the day, terrorism, drug cartels, etc.

    And best of all, ALL the fruit and veggis will still get picked, all the businesses will still have low-cost labor if thats what we as a society want. Better yet, we could also reduce welfare costs, and allow the unemployed the choice: Be unemployed and pennliess, subsisting only on basic life-saving services (food and emergent care), or go work in a field and get paid. Their choice.[/QUOTE]

    Your solutions don't address the drug problem coming across but would be a great add on to the border enforcement program.

  7. #67
    [QUOTE=TerminatorJet;4234231]The guy really has no clue. To effectively seal off the entire border using National Guard soldiers you'd have to mobilize about 15,000 - 20,000 soldiers at cost of billions of dollars to the taxpayers that would include not only their base pay but also base allowance for housing, logistical support and probably billions more would have to be spent on contractors, maintain and administrate forward operating bases along the border. Anything less would be an enormous waste of time and money and do next to nothing to stop illegal immigration.

    Oh and this would add tens of billions of dollars to the FY budget for every year and eventually accumulate into a monster addition to the national debt.

    The education expenses we're supposedly going to save so much money on wouldn't be a fraction of it. As a matter of fact, some states would actually lose net revenue.

    Take Texas for example. Rick Perry has been taking a beating from Teabaggers for allowing illegals to pay in-state tuition. The claim is that "each illegal alien is getting $100K from Texas to study in a state college" Really? You're telling me to provide that student a seat in a 500 seat lecture hall in Austin, El Paso or whatever other state university really costs Texas $100K? Ok and what about the $10 - 15K per year that illegal still pays to the state of Texas in tuition. Guess that doesn't figure into anything.

    Oh and let's not forget the beating the private sector would take in eliminating a cheap work force that they've been relying on for years. There's a reason why the corporate wing of the republican party wants nothing to do with the Tea Party's xenophobia and it has to do with dollar signs.

    The Tea Party is the Eric Smith of political movements. Slow, clumsy and yet somehow manages to stick around for way too long.[/QUOTE]

    The military is already paying these soldiers. 20,000 national guard troops protecting our southern border sounds just about right to me. Everything else you said in your post is essentially made up nonsense. It would be silly for me to respond to it. Again more straw men like the xenophobic rubes that exist in your mind.

  8. #68
    [QUOTE=chiefst2000;4234244]Your solutions don't address the drug problem coming across but would be a great add on to the border enforcement program.[/QUOTE]

    The Drug problem is not a problem IMO. The criminalization of pot, and criminal illegalization of other drugs, and Comcercialization of Prisons is the problem.

    Drugs are a medical problem, not a criminal problem. If you commit a CRIME on or for drugs, then it's a criminal problem, and if you really want you can increase the penalty for Crime + Drugs if you like. But simply doing a drug is not a crime, and shouldn't be.

    Decriminalization, plus legalization of pot, plus medical (not criminal) treatment fo drug use/addiction, and the "Drug problem", and all the costs of the "War on Drugs" go away.

    In this case, the left is right, there is FAR too much money being made by Public Service Unions and Corporations for that change to ever happen, combined with :hysteria" by social conservatives blustering about how it will be the downfall of civilization as we know it.:rolleyes:

  9. #69
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4234252]The Drug problem is not a problem IMO. The criminalization of pot, and criminal illegalization of other drugs, and Comcercialization of Prisons is the problem.

    Drugs are a medical problem, not a criminal problem. If you commit a CRIME on or for drugs, then it's a criminal problem, and if you really want you can increase the penalty for Crime + Drugs if you like. But simply doing a drug is not a crime, and shouldn't be.

    Decriminalization, plus legalization of pot, plus medical (not criminal) treatment fo drug use/addiction, and the "Drug problem", and all the costs of the "War on Drugs" go away.

    In this case, the left is right, there is FAR too much money being made by Public Service Unions and Corporations for that change to ever happen, combined with :hysteria" by social conservatives blustering about how it will be the downfall of civilization as we know it.:rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

    I'm all for the legalization of pot. I'm referring to heroine and cocaine and other hard and addictive drugs. Addictive drugs should never be legalized IMO. Too harmful to society. No one is a functioning heroine addict.

  10. #70
    [QUOTE=chiefst2000;4234224]Did you read my post? The National Guard will defend our borders from the military style drug lords waging war down there and spilling the blood of our citizens and border agents. What else do they have to do? There are plenty of active duty national guard at any given point in time. Immigration law would remain in the charge of ICE. I do realize the size of the borders and I think that stationing a reasonable number of troops there is the solution, alongside strategic fencing and aerial surveillance. Aren't you in some sort of federal law enforcement roll? Why don't you know this stuff?[/QUOTE]

    I do and that is why I am asking one simple question because it is very evident you have no idea what it takes to enforce laws.

  11. #71
    [QUOTE=cr726;4234270]I do and that is why I am asking one simple question because it is very evident you have no idea what it takes to enforce laws.[/QUOTE]

    Are you saying that catching smugglers and people invading our borders is law enforcement? I see it as a military function.

  12. #72
    [QUOTE=chiefst2000;4234277]Are you saying that catching smugglers and people invading our borders is law enforcement? I see it as a military function.[/QUOTE]

    Invading? That would need a military response, but that is not what is happening on any of our borders. There are a lot of immigration laws and they tend to be very confusing, I think those laws need to be re-vamped, Border Patrol performs a law enforcement function.

  13. #73
    [QUOTE=chiefst2000;4234254]I'm all for the legalization of pot. I'm referring to heroine and cocaine and other hard and addictive drugs. Addictive drugs should never be legalized IMO. Too harmful to society. No one is a functioning heroine addict.[/QUOTE]

    No one is a functional alzheimer End-Stage either, we don't criminalize them for it.

    Commit a crime, thats criminal. Being a drug addict is a medical problem.

    Beyond the moral point, the cost savings would be substantial, although clearly most of teh savings would be spend instead on medical coverage. Still, thats the better option in A vs. B.

  14. #74
    [QUOTE=cr726;4234294]Invading? That would need a military response, but that is not what is happening on any of our borders. There are a lot of immigration laws and they tend to be very confusing, I think those laws need to be re-vamped, Border Patrol performs a law enforcement function.[/QUOTE]

    So you wouldn't classify the drug cartels routine military style border crossings, kidnappings and killings on the US side to be a military issue perfectly suited for the national guard to deal with? If so what exactly would you consider to be the role of the National Guard?

  15. #75
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4234232]
    --No public services of any kind for illegals. no healthcare (yes, not even emergency care)[/QUOTE]

    Like the idea of enforcement itself this is a great idea in theory in practice you have people dying on the curb outside of the ER. Completely unworkable.

  16. #76
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,974
    [QUOTE=bitonti;4234349]Like the idea of enforcement itself this is a great idea in theory in practice you have people dying on the curb outside of the ER. Completely unworkable.[/QUOTE]

    In retrospect....I'm gonna hop in the Delorean and head back to Plymouth Rock. And in the spirit of Thanksgiving, tell the injuns that when they see those morons who sailed over on their gay named ship and tell them not to share a damn ounce of food with them :P Damn illegals

  17. #77
    [QUOTE=bitonti;4234349]Like the idea of enforcement itself this is a great idea in theory in practice you have people dying on the curb outside of the ER. Completely unworkable.[/QUOTE]

    Agreed, it is inhumane and will never happen.

  18. #78
    [QUOTE=bitonti;4234349]Like the idea of enforcement itself this is a great idea in theory in practice you have people dying on the curb outside of the ER. Completely unworkable.[/QUOTE]

    How many, do you think, it would take dying in the Street before they stopped coming, given the entire proposal taken as a whole?

    I'd guess not many.

    But if you like, I'd be willing to soften my policy, to "emergent life-saving care only, and an instant deportation once their life has been saved". Better yet, a sentence to a work-camp to pay off their stolen healthcare, then deportation.

    [QUOTE]And in the spirit of Thanksgiving, tell the injuns that when they see those morons who sailed over on their gay named ship and tell them not to share a damn ounce of food with them Damn illegals [/QUOTE]

    Best of luck to them in that case. As a backwards technological and self-destructively sectarian culture(s), they'll still lose.

  19. #79
    [QUOTE=chiefst2000;4234346]So you wouldn't classify the drug cartels routine military style border crossings, kidnappings and killings on the US side to be a military issue perfectly suited for the national guard to deal with? If so what exactly would you consider to be the role of the National Guard?[/QUOTE]

    Military style border crossings? What are you talking about?

  20. #80
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4234396] Better yet, a sentence to a work-camp to pay off their stolen healthcare, then deportation.[/QUOTE]


    forced labor camps, eh? Im sure those will be a great PR success.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us