Trump's Border Wall and The Upcoming Elections

[waiguoren]

it will stop everything except planes, boats, ladders, tunnels. shit, with the incentive that the cartels have to get in, and the money that they have available, theyll probably be busting through sections of it.

Add access roads, cameras, and surveillance equipment.

I agree that employer sanctions would be somewhat effective, but they already exist and fake IDs have become the norm.

and as for the OP, i think the wall was always a fantasy. mexico will pay for it blah blah.

New construction of bollard-style fences/walls/whatever in Santa Teresa, Calexico and San Diego has commenced. I prefer the prototype from the photo, but the bollard stuff isn't bad.

Mexico paying for it is the easiest part.

 

[zebby23]

Even in an economy like Trump has?
The fact that Trump has such a good economy and the outlook for Republicans in the election is so bad really shows you how much he fucks up.
I mean you have to see how it turns out.
But at the moment it looks like Trump is throwing away what should be an easy reelection due to his own incompetence.

If Trump put twitter away he would likely gain 5 points in approval rating. Shows you undisciplined he is

 

[trident]

You don't need my anecdote. Notice that the media scrambles to cover his tweets. Check the various MSM sources right now. I guarantee you at least some of them have front page articles about some of his recent tweets.

Look, dude, Trump didn't even win the popular vote in 2016. His small base of fans reading his Twitter is not comparable to the radical decline in his popularity, which wasnt really there to begin with.

 

[ScottE]

Trump never had any legitimate plan to feasibly construct his wall. Just like he never had a plan for healthcare.

He never had a gameplan for anything related to getting legislation passed.

 

[waiguoren]

His small base of fans reading his Twitter

54.3 million followers on Twitter.

MSM write whole articles about single tweets and put those articles on their front pages.

Maybe wake up?

radical decline in his popularity

Bull.

His approval ratings are barely lower than his peak (right after inauguration).

 

[JonnyRingo84]

Add access roads, cameras, and surveillance equipment.

yea and add in maintenance of such systems. more and more and more money. whats the purpose of the wall again?

I agree that employer sanctions would be somewhat effective, but they already exist and fake IDs have become the norm.

if we truly made enforcing this a priority, it would be much more effective and cheaper than the wall.

Mexico paying for it is the easiest part.

ok. lets announce that plan any day now.

 

[waiguoren]

yea and add in maintenance of such systems. more and more and more money. whats the purpose of the wall again?

Border security costs money. Israel's wall has worked well.

if we truly made enforcing this a priority, it would be much more effective and cheaper than the wall.

I'm not sure if that's true, but my mind is open.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Please don't be a parrot. I pointed out that all of the estimates to which you refer assume that 90% of illegal immigrants respond to their census questionnaires. You don't really believe that, do you?

I'm not being a parrot. It's a fact that every attempt to measure the unauthorized immigrant population shows a decline over the past decade after a period of explosive growth. Your objections to the methodology of one is irrelevant to the rate of growth, and neither of us is in a position to assess the plausibility of the assumption (assuming that it is, in fact, assumed). All around incredibly sloppy thinking.

And you didn't address the "free money" point. As Bryan Caplan has convincingly argued, the general public has anti-market and anti-foreign biases that distort their views on trade (which immigration can be seen as a subset of), but I'd expect better from you.

 

[JonnyRingo84]

Border security costs money. Israel's wall has worked well.

small walls work.

historically, large ones bankrupt the nation that created it.

 

[zebby23]

Look, dude, Trump didn't even win the popular vote in 2016. His small base of fans reading his Twitter is not comparable to the radical decline in his popularity, which wasnt really there to begin with.

If the Dems put up a great candidate Trump is going to get destroyed.

 

[Jack V Savage]

yea and add in maintenance of such systems. more and more and more money. whats the purpose of the wall again?

if we truly made enforcing this a priority, it would be much more effective and cheaper than the wall.

Exactly. But it lacks the ugly symbolism that is actually the point for people like wai and the rest of the "Breitbart base."

ok. lets announce that plan any day now.

I'd really like to see the explanation for how this is supposed to work. I believe (not looking this up and could be mistaken) that Trump meant by raising tariffs, but I'd think that wai would be sophisticated enough to know that the cost of such a move would be borne by American consumers.

 

[Seano]

I don't think a literal wall will ever be built, at least not something resembling the Great Wall of China. A wall like that just isn't practical in my opinion. I can see some sort of fortification built in certain areas though and I think that may be a generally good idea.

The biggest problem is the divide, it is the split between those who oppose illegal immigration vs those who don't. The part that I cannot figure out is how there are people who are not opposed to illegal immigration. I think that the first step is to try to teach people to think sensibly so they can recognize the problem with not having a secure border. Once that consensus is created, a practical solution can begin to be debated. As it is now, the two sides are far too divided.

Because the left parades crying women and children around as the face of illegal immigration. They give them romantic tags like "Dreamers." The left in this country are driven purely by emotion. They don't see the forest for the trees.

 

[waiguoren]

small walls work.

historically, large ones bankrupt the nation that created it.

As a percentage of federal spending, a 700-mile border wall is a tiny wall.

 

[Hit-N-Run]

Anyone with 1/2 a brain know the wall is a huge was of money and will not be effective. It's a a con mans tool to sucker rubes into voting for him. A easy to express concept for a complex issue. Morons eat that shit up

 

[JonnyRingo84]

Exactly. But it lacks the ugly symbolism that is actually the point for people like wai and the rest of the "Breitbart base."

ive always suspected the wall to be a monument to identity politics more than a legit policy proposal.

 

[trident]

54.3 million followers on Twitter.
BOTS BOTS BOTS
MSM write whole articles about single tweets and put those articles on their front pages.

Maybe wake up?




Bull.

His approval ratings are barely lower than his peak (right after inauguration).

 

[JonnyRingo84]

As a percentage of federal spending, a 700-mile border wall is a tiny wall.

historically speaking, the longer walls are, the less effective they seem to be. there is probably a mathematical proof for that lol. and it would seem that such a concept is just common sense, too.

border wall guard makes what, 40k a year? think about the resources the cartels and even human smugglers have. theyll pay 40k a month to turn a blind eye. the mongols did the same shit to the chinese.

 

[forum poster]

I don't think it's that big of a deal. His comments about accepting immigrants from "Shit hole countries" more than enough showed his base he's on their side.

 

[waiguoren]

t's a fact that every attempt to measure the unauthorized immigrant population shows a decline over the past decade after a period of explosive growth. Your objections to the methodology of one is irrelevant to the rate of growth, and neither of us is in a position to assess the plausibility of the assumption (assuming that it is, in fact, assumed).

Your reasoning is invalid at at least two levels.

First, you're admitting you haven't done the most basic research into how this number is determined, and yet you're doubling down in assuming its veracity. If you had made the most cursory effort to understand this issue, you would understand that all the sources you refer to (Pew, DHS, Center for Migration Studies) use the same silly assumption (90% of illegal immigrants respond to their census surveys).

Also, your statement about methodology not influencing rate of growth is just wrong. If the real response rate is more like 10%, then given the small sample size of the annual census surveys, the quality of the data are too poor to estimate the population size and therefore growth rates cannot be determined.

 

[waiguoren]

you didn't address the "free money" point. As Bryan Caplan has convincingly argued, the general public has anti-market and anti-foreign biases that distort their views on trade (which immigration can be seen as a subset of),

I've been familiar with Caplan's work for at least 15 years. Like you, he typically does not distinguish between illegal and legal immigration. In my view, that's a fatal error.