With Border Crossings at a Trickle, Why Build a Mexico Wall?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Stephen_C
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
robertmidwest said:
> U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers have apprehended an additional 1,600 people attempting to illegally enter the country from Mexico since April 15 as a result of the deployment of National Guard troops to the southwest border, CBP and defense officials said Wednesday.
Click to expand...
Use of the National Guard INCREASED the number by 1,600 in just a short time.

That is the increase in arrests / captures … not the total!

Not a trickle at all.
 
Last edited:
MonteRCMS said:
40.png
stinkcat_14:
Source (10 characters)?
Click to expand...
dozens of articles

search “eliminate cash”

here is just one

http://uk.businessinsider.com/denmarks-new-rules-eliminate-cash-2015-5?IR=T

excerpt:

A McKinsey study recently suggested that if you could get rid of the stuff in the US, you could push up America’s total GDP by 0.47%.
Click to expand...
Except of course, Denmark is not our society. We can’t even get rid of th penny.
 
The funny thing about this question and discussion is that given the declining birth rate and depopulation due to an inequity is birth/death rates, I figure that halfway through Trump’s second term, we will be begging people to come to this country and work the jobs that there will not be enough people to fill.

It’s not nice to fool with Mother Nature!
 
joeybaggz said:
we will be begging people to come to this country and work the jobs that there will not be enough people to fill.
Click to expand...
We are already in this situation. How many jobs now are filled by immigrants because Americans don’t want them or there simply aren’t enough people to fill them?

Conservatives aren’t anti immigration. They just don’t want people with backpacks of meth jumping a fence.
 
JoshuaIsLord said:
40.png
MonteRCMS:
Give seasonal visas to Americans … the ones now on welfare.
Click to expand...
Most of ones on welfare I’ve come across don’t want to work in the first place. Next?
Click to expand...
Particularly the ones on social security. Let’s face it, if you can play golf you can work. There is no need for current workers to redistribute their income to the able bodied.
 
Annie said:
But there are income limits and limits on how much you have in your bank account, so if a person exceeds those limits, their benefits are changed. It is hard to change them back, so there is no incentive for them to take on seasonal work, or even to get a regular job sometimes, in case the job doesn’t work out.
Click to expand...
Yes, this is true. There are limits. You exceed the limits, your benefits decline. NO INCENTIVE WHAT SO EVER.
 
joeybaggz said:
The funny thing about this question and discussion is that given the declining birth rate and depopulation due to an inequity is birth/death rates, I figure that halfway through Trump’s second term, we will be begging people to come to this country and work the jobs that there will not be enough people to fill.
Click to expand...
That’s not funny, that’s FANTASTIC!!!
It would mean we have very low unemployment among our least skilled and most vulnerable, among our poorest citizens. That is the exact right time to marginally increase immigration of low skilled workers.

If you want to do it now, I must ask why you despise helping our most vulnerable, why don’t you want them to have people competing for their labor, offering them incentives and raises for good work, instead of just hiring an illegal who may work harder for less money?
 
“Theo520 said:
If you want to do it now, I must ask why you despise helping our most vulnerable, why don’t you want them to have people competing for their labor, offering them incentives and raises for good work, instead of just hiring an illegal who may work harder for less money?

According to figures from the Trump administration, current unemployment is at 3.9%. Classic economic thought is that in an economy at full unemployment, the unemployment rate is around 4 to 4.2%. A figure I remember from a graduate level economic class. Given that the Baby Boom generation is 73 years of age (those born in 1945) and under, more and more jobs will become available as the Boom dies off.
The birth rate is stagnant at best; not keeping up with the death rate at worst.
As I said, those born in 1945 are now 73 years of age. Many have retired, some are still working but for how long. And every year from here on, the death rate among Boomers will continue. I don’t know about you, but in my neck of the woods, there are “help wanted” signs everywhere. Those jobs are for less or semi-skilled workers for the most part. If our “most vulnerable” wanted jobs, they are there for the taking now. The problem is that our “most vulnerable” most likely, really don’t want to work.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Joey, you evaded my question.
Why don’t you want our low skilled and poorest population to have the benefits of a tight labor market?

This also needs to occur for years, not just a quarter or two.

Employers should feel real pain before we seek outside immigrants. The first response will be internal, where our own citizens must be encouraged to pick up and move to where the jobs are. If people are unemployed in Detroit, we should help them relocate to where we do have jobs.

Only after we’ve squeezed all we can out of employing our own people should we enable economic migrants, and even then it should probably be with temporary work visas.

This approach also gives us more latitude to increase our immigration of genuine refugees, who can also benefit from a tight labor market for low skilled jobs.
 
Last edited:
At 3.9% unemployment, everyone who wants a job, can have one. Certainly in that 3.9 figure there are people unable to work, out of the work force for personal/family reasons, and those who have lost jobs due to business closings. You can’t force people to go get a job if they would rather live off the dole. And entry level work generally doesn’t pay enough to make it worthwhile to get off the welfare train.
Businesses need labor to function. If Americans don’t want to work, it stands to reason that that labor must come from somewhere.
No evasion at all. Maybe I didn’t say it plainly enough, but the “low skilled” and poor, given the welfare system in America, would rather collect a government check than work 40 hrs. per week for essentially the same money.
 
Nope, there are multiple unemployment figures and your objective is not my objective
3.9% doesn’t include the long term unemployed, and if we scale back welfare, we need jobs for people as a functional alternative.

I won’t quibble over what figure represents true full employment, I’ll just say we need to be near that state for an extended period if you really want to help out your most disadvantaged, who are likely to be the last ones hired.
 
How many illegals are here now? 10 million? 20 million? 30 million? More?
 
joeybaggz said:
No evasion at all. Maybe I didn’t say it plainly enough, but the “low skilled” and poor, given the welfare system in America, would rather collect a government check than work 40 hrs. per week for essentially the same money.
Click to expand...
And you are probably right, a check is preferred to a job, and illegals will work harder at the low skilled jobs they are qualified for.

That doesn’t change anything, our primary responsibility is to our immediate family, even the lazy ones. Pull away the check and force them to get into the workforce. Parents do this with their kids all the time. It’s like forcing your kid to mow the lawn even though the neighbor kid is cheap and does a better job. By forcing your lazy kid to work you are investing in their future, not getting the best short term outcome

Over time the impacts will be pronounced. We save welfare costs and they learn increased responsibility and job skills. Their children will also have a different role model and likely be better contributors when they grow up.
 
Last edited:
Well, I wouldn’t disagree with you. But to turn an old saying on its ear, “you can lead a person to a job, but you can’t make him work.”
 
joeybaggz said:
Well, I wouldn’t disagree with you. But to turn an old saying on its ear, “you can lead a person to a job, but you can’t make him work.”
Click to expand...
And a number of our homeless people may fit that description. I think we can have an impact though. At leas the problem becomes clear, that it’s not the lack of water that’s the cause. I like having work requirements with welfare though the people you describe probably just get placed on a disability waiver.

The impact may be generational too. Low unemployment among say black teens may have a profound long term impact as an employed teen learns basic job skills and responsibilities, leading to better jobs and eventually a living wage.

An unemployed black teen turns into an unemployed 20 something with very few prospects for the future.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top