Topic: Why do people hate trumps wall.. (Read 1035 times)

How so?

It's just inevitable that they will pay for it.

^

Now THAT's a wall!

Did the Canadians pay for it?

Apparently, no wall is too high for a skilled Mexican. If even children are able to go over it, it's not going to stop the hordes when zombie apocalypse comes.  Money well spent Mr. Trump! *Clap* *Clap*

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/dec/4/smuggler-dropped-two-children-top-border-wall-dhs/

Mexicans are going to buy it and turn it into a climbing wall for children. They've been training since 2016.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLVdi14ECCc

A little known fact is while Trump waits (forever) for funding for his Southern border wall he has started construction on the Norther border wall.  Turns out the communists in Canada are more of a threat than the immigrants from the south!

Trump lost his mind when he heard the US has the worlds longest undefended border with a communist dictatorship.  The commies are coming over the border with Chinese and Russian soldiers Trump feels that hundreds of thousands of these commies are invading the US daily from the North!

The Northern wall has been being built in secret since 2016


Trump is a little scared the Commies are hiding a fire/ice breathing dragon which would make the wall much less effective but he still believes fire/ice breathing dragons are fake news!

Trump has also commissioned a study on the feasibility of east and west border walls as well (he wants walls of water and they will be great), he feels they can almost eliminate immigration entirely if they are physically walled off from the rest of the planet!

Wasn't that quite clear when he said Mexico is going to pay for the wall? What a stupid statement.

But really, the first thing you need to know about the wall is there is no wall!

It was just a political maneuver Trump used to gain votes -- pretty standard politician tactic of promising something that sounds awesome to your base and then never delivering on it.

I may be missing something here, but why stop shouting about defending borders because of transnational capital?

How about caring about the southern US/Mexico border strictly for crime control, in terms of murder, rape, drugs?

I don't think I even know ANYBODY that cares about "transnational capital."

The parallel I was drawing was that all four neglect/violate post-1945 borders:
1) Blowing up Yugoslavia with pumping/propping up ethnic tensions, recognition of Kosovo;
2) Blowing up USSR into 15 "States" some of them not quite full-blown ones, with only half of them really independent;
2) Refusal to recognise Russian Crimea+Sevastopol despite them being Russian in 1945 (and Sevastopol being Soviet in 1991);
3) Propaganda that all migrants should be freely admitted on US South border.

There could be more examples. The basic idea here is: transnational capital has no borders, so stop shouting about need to defend them.

LOL, you got that all wrong.

Hispanic Americans have been in the USA before it was the USA. Think in terms of 500 years.

Aren't these totally different things? I mean, one thing is occupying a part of another country and totally different is that you want to keep all people of colour out of your country?

Not "West," you see.

Just some jerks with political objectives, like Soros.

Enemies of the US, and some fools that follow them.

Related: why West hates when Russia is protecting it's borders?
Gorby dismantled USSR on promises NATO will not extend. Those promises were broken.
So West is crying four years now about Crimea suddenly lost to NATO bases, and pretends there are no
legitimate borders that need to be protected. Including South border of USA.

Look, be reasonable. We can keep a lot of Mexicans employed building the wall. You know it's a good thing.

Weed is a sched 1 narcotic, like heroin, Cocaine is a sched 2 narcotic.

Border walls don't work, migration is way to difficult to solve with a fucking wall...

Okay that's a different matter. That's been tried in some locales around the world with mixed results.

It's not going to happen in the USA, but the reasons are essentially that there is a strong argument for taking weed off the Schedule 4 narcotics list. There is no argument for taking narcotics off the narcotics list. That's at the federal level.

At the state level in the USA we have various states "disobeying" the federal statutes and the feds looking the other way. They are not going to look the other way if a state tried to make all narcotics unregulated.

When I call for the end to the drug war, I mean all drugs, not just weed. Personally, I feel that the governments' efforts to suppress the market just succeeded in creating a black market. The black market creates more problems than the reduction(?) in ready supply alleviates. And herding people up into prisons to serve long sentences does not seem to deter any replacements to come and fill the gap.

Lol, now you are trying your skills at sophistry, and doing quite poorly.  But that's an inevitably outcome from attempting to argue illogical premises.

More importantly it is an admission to having lost the argument. Then one has no option but to resort to logical fallacies and such. You might consider that is not wise.


This is partly true. It would not impact the lucrative cocaine trade.

Assuming that the customers prefer the legal weed, if price and quality is good, this seems to improve things all around.

It's important to note that partial solutions to a large and complex reality should never be rejected. It was by a series of gradual relaxations and partial solutions that the West, notably Reagan, cracked open the Soviet block. And Nixon's starting a dialogue with China, that worked in a similar way. Trump and NK, etc. These are paths to a solution.

By the way, Legal is not a right/left issue today in the USA. You will find many on all sides of the political spectrum who would agree with legalization. That is why the trend toward legalization is succeeding.

The wall is a part of any solution and is a reasonable thing, assuming one gets out of the new progressive open border crap and thinks rationally.

  You know, simply ending the drug war rather than erecting an expensive wall would probably do wonders in reducing this problem. Getting rid of the black market for drugs would make the dangerous drug cartels obsolete. Also, it would reduce people seeking asylum, for both the claims for needing asylum that are legitimate and the ones that are not legitimate. Plus, the government can use the now legitimized recreational drug policy as a new way to raise revenue. Seems to be working reasonably well here in Colorado with legalized Marijuana.

Of course out of millions of people, there will be some who commit rape and murder.  That is why I posted the article about the research.  Undocumented immigrants are not a special group of people immune to the human struggle.  The key is that they commit these crimes at a lower rate than the people already here. 

 Why not just focus on addressing issues of rape and murder in society in general?  Why focus on poor people who are actively trying to better themselves?  If you get bent out of shape over rape and murder by immigrants but not rape and murder by citizens, you are part of the rape and murder problem.

Again you show your bias and mis statements.

Advocating criminals be allowed into the US, and advocating they be allowed to run free until they are "caught."

Oh, and by the way, this entire problem in large part exists because your "open border buddies" did in fact do just that, let the criminals run free, and let them repeatedly be caught and released, over and over. There is a large number of these cases, yes, including many of rape and murder.

Please stop being idiotic.

A wall would be good for security reasons but in a world were trade and commerce, social lives and economies are driven because of lack of these walls i think its a bad idea

Its a non issue.  Known criminals will not make it through "catch and release", they will be caught and brought to whatever justice is deemed appropriate.   No one is saying criminals should be granted asylum.

Trump has closed san ysidro, our largest border entry point to all people.  Americans in TJ cannot get back.  Yet again we have to wait several hours for a judge to overrule our dictator in chief. 
https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/25/us/san-ysidro-port-of-entry-closed/index.html
Until then, unjust policies should be broken. People should resist.

It's not a myth that there are 500 criminals in the caravan population. The only myths are in your words.

That myth has been debunked. The fear is irrational. 
https://www.npr.org/2018/05/02/607652253/studies-say-illegal-immigration-does-not-increase-violent-crime
Here we subscribe to the idea that everyone is innocent until proven guilty.  If you are really concerned about rape, and murder, you should look at our natural born population which commits crimes at much higher rates. 

No it is not an argument intended to invoke fear in people.

That's a total bullshit pitch and you know it.

Sure we've got systems to catch criminals, but that's after they murder or rape or steal, not before. The whole point is to not let them in so those things don't happen.

My entire stance is based on the violence.  That is the same type of violence these people are trying to escape.  Its the same argument as saying refugees were full of embedded ISIS. 

No it is not. In fact that's an incredibly insensitive thing to say for one who claims to be so sensitive to others.

You blithely say things like that only perhaps because you don't personally know the violence along the board. You are remote from people being raped and murdered by criminals that cross back and forth freely across the US border with Mexico.

The same thing we do when "criminals" show up in a visa application or at the airport.  We already have systems in place for catching criminals.  That is part of the conversation solely to invoke fear in the hearts of people who are otherwise morally active.

So you made up the entire set of false facts to assert your agenda driven wishes.

But you will add a couple exclusions now?

So what would you do about the 500 criminals in the caravan?

Yes I left out all of the examples of people who had special reasons why they might be able to migrate to the US legally and focused on the desperate poor people that the caravans we are discussing consist of.  Yes I left out Venezuelans, doctors, and family members of Americans because those are not the majority of people rushing across our southern border.  Those are not the majority of the people who would be affected by a wall.  I want everyone to have a pathway to migrate to the US.  If that is what you are calling open borders then fine, I want open borders because that is what our country was built on.  Its such a stretch so suggest anyone is against testing for diseases or catching criminals. 

If someone commits a crime, they should be prosecuted and every person could be screened for disease if they didn't have to risk their freedom by doing so.

So you left out ALL the other everyday methods by which Hondurans do get into the USA legally. You left out ALL the problems with this group, like the fact there are 500 criminals in the group. You left out the problem with group members having possible communicable diseases. You ignored completely other countries that might take them. Then you tried to argue they were "climate change refugees," and that was a complete laugh. Then you make an unverified assumption that they ALL had no other recourse for US immigration except illegal entry.

So after mis stating the facts repeatedly, and getting caught repeatedly, then making a plea for sympathy for the down trodden, your argument now is simply that we should have an open border policy, kind of,

"Just Because."

So this is something entirely different than what I am talking about.  Bolded quote talks about how much of the global average increase in temperature El nino was responsible for.  It doesn't say anything about the strength of el nino.  It definitely doesn't suggest that climate change wouldn't make el nino stronger.  The quote isn't even about that.

The idea is not that warming affects el nino.  The idea is that warming melts ice, changes ocean temperatures and sets off a series of events that changes climate around the world.  Global climate change.  Not everywhere gets warmer, many places actually get cooler.

The idea is that global climate change leads to an increase in extreme el nino events.  That could mean stronger, weaker, longer, or shorter.  There is consensus that it WILL affect ENSO but the reason there isn't a consensus on HOW it will affect it is because ENSO is complex and affected by so many variables.  This is generally the problem with modeling climate change in general.  I'm an atmospheric scientist and only wanted to keep this out of the weeds for your sake.
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/blogs/enso/enso-climate-change-headache
Really good article with a great analogy.

You missed my main point while in the weeds...

You are once more misrepresenting the actual facts very substantially.

Many, many other Hondurans did emigrate as family members of US citizens and through the other mechanisms. You misrepresented the facts by leaving that out.

Some did not qualify or were too lazy to try. They noticed that Soros et.al. was organizing a giant publicity stunt to crash the US border and decided to get in on it. The newspaper adds for the Caravan said they'd get free food and cash. So they headed north.

It is certain we don't want them. We definitely don't want the 500 criminals in that group. But you do. You've kept quiet about those criminals, haven't you?
[/quote]
I left those out because they aren't relevant to people who don't have sponsors in the US; family or work.   I don't believe in conspiracy theories and don't usually entertain them, but if Soros did that to press the issue, bring attention and put pressure on the government to reform the system, then great.  That should be a great thing for everyone who doesn't want illegal immigration by exposing a system that encourages it.   People will always take the path of least resistance. Why not make that the legal path?

Why should risking your freedom, safety, health, everything crossing illegally be the easier option?

Good question.

You see, Bitcoin isn't for total free trade and movement. It's a very strict rule set, for example, protocols...

Bitcoin does not allow double spending, eg, stealing. Border walls prevent criminals, hence prevent, stealing.

The blockchain preserves the unique identity of transactions, and their history. The border wall forces people to show their unique identity and their history, including what they may want to conceal, such as criminal history, or communicable diseases. A person might be refused entry at the border, just as miners might refuse an illegitimate transaction.

Except for the rule set being applied by a government instead of peer to peer, the border wall implements a similar set of restrictions that allows freedom of movement, instead of restricting it.

Side note, I would much prefer a decentralized identity verification process through blockchain than national ID.

It's not a passport policy I'm questioning, but rather why those people who would support a forward thinking, global, free, decentralized project like Bitcoin would ever yell America First or support Trump's wall. It's just completely against everything crypto currency stands for from where I'm standing; hence it baffled me a tad bit. That's all .

I believe you are yet one more time misrepresenting the actual facts very substantially.

But assume that you are correct. Many, many other Hondurans did emigrate as family members of US citizens and through the other mechanisms. Some did not qualify. They noticed that Soros et.al. was organizing a giant publicity stunt to crash the US border and decided to get in on it. The newspaper adds for the Caravan said they'd get free food and cash. So this thing got started and they headed north.

It certainly is possible we don't want them. We definitely don't want the 500 criminals in that group. But you do. You've kept quiet about them, haven't you?

Yes, actually you did make stuff up. Because I'm using the consensus to refute you. You misrepresented "the consensus."

I quoted directly Gavin Schmidt, he's right at the core of the few people that write up and direct what the "consensus" believes. Here's another direct comment from Schmidt.

...Gavin Schmidt, director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, estimated that El Niño accounted for 0.07˚C of the above average warming that occurred in 2015...

You claimed that climate change made the El Nino stronger. No, it didn't. And the El Nino contributed only seven hundredths of one degree to the weather pattern.

You don't even understand the subject. You have it exactly backwards.... You don't even know what the consensus of scientific opinion is on a subject, but you are quick to claim it's what supports your argument.

That's what we call making things up.

....
The 4% number is the only one important because that is the only program Hondurans in the caravans have access to from Honduras.   They don't have the education or special skills to get a job in the US ahead of time.
[/quote]

You are once more misrepresenting the actual facts very substantially.

Many, many other Hondurans did emigrate as family members of US citizens and through the other mechanisms. You misrepresented the facts by leaving that out.

Some did not qualify or were too lazy to try. They noticed that Soros et.al. was organizing a giant publicity stunt to crash the US border and decided to get in on it. The newspaper adds for the Caravan said they'd get free food and cash. So they headed north.

It is certain we don't want them. We definitely don't want the 500 criminals in that group. But you do. You've kept quiet about those criminals, haven't you?

Finding a source that disagrees with mine (and the consensus) doesn't mean I "made stuff up".  This actually sheds some light on why so many deniers think scientists are lying. Science, especially climate science, doesn't operate by "proving" things.  Thats the reason why it has so much utility.  Science is about forming theories based on what the body of evidence points towards. 

You have it backwards with what you are telling me to do.  To come up with a claim and then go cherrypicking for data that can "prove" that claim.  Thats pseudoscience.

You are also getting too caught in the weeds.   Regardless of whether or not this is caused by climate change, these people are leaving, climate was a factor, and climate science suggests there will be many more situations like this in the near future due to climate change. 




You are getting off-topic by bringing venezuela into this.  Its a different situation that isn't completely relevant to this thread. 
1. Venezuela has a lot more wealthy, educated people who can get jobs in the us
2. Venezuelans are being accepted as political assylum seekers because of socialism in venezuela
3. Venezuelans can afford to get tourist visas and fly to miami

If it was that easy, do you really think the Hondurans would prefer to walk thousands of miles just to break the law?  Why do you think they are going through so much trouble?

The 4% number is the only one important because that is the only program Hondurans in the caravans have access to from Honduras.   They don't have the education or special skills to get a job in the US ahead of time.

This is not a document that says what you claim. Not at all.

If you actually want to claim climate change then substantiate it. Show a statistically significant variation from the long term norm, separated from any regional weather patterns, and from 60-80 year ocean cyclic variations. Your link does not do that, in fact it does not prove any claim. It only makes an assertion, which you repeated blindly.

Let's go to the opinion of Dr. Gavin Schmidt, one of the most rabid warmer types around. Here is what he says about El Nino assuming more intense "climate change".

....climate models differ in their assessment of future El Niño events. Some suggest the ENSO cycle will become more intense, others say it will weaken, and some find there will be little change. According to Schmidt, “There is a very large variation in ENSO statistics (frequency/magnitude) over time, and so detecting a shift due to climate change is very challenging. Models as a whole are all over the shop, and so it doesn’t fill one with great confidence.”


Yet more lying/making things up.


Let's see what the Washington Post has to say about your claims.

Last year, 27,629 Venezuelans petitioned U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for asylum, an 88 percent increase from 2016 and up from 2,181 in 2014. So far this year, the number of Venezuelans who have applied — nearly all of them in Miami — is almost three times as great as any other nationality, according to the latest USCIS asylum data.

Unlike the Central Americans who wade illegally across the Rio Grande and turn themselves in to U.S. border guards, the Venezuelans typically land at the Miami airport with tourist and business visas.

Wait, that's just Venezuelans....and there's a lot more to Central America than that....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/even-as-trump-tightens-asylum-rules-thousands-of-venezuelans-find-a-warm-welcome-in-miami/2018/05/15/5e747fec-52cf-11e8-a551-5b648abe29ef_story.html?utm_term=.d81fe6e8e71c

Maybe you were making assertions that sounded like they were about all the immigration from Honduras, while citing numbers for the one program that only represents 4% of it?

Is there ANYTHING TRUE IN ANYTHING YOU SAY?

The UK wanted all the benefits of staying in the EU without sharing the burden with the member countries, so the reaction of the EU is quite understandable. But I don't get why people want to nuild walls in places which were created free of access. After all, if a disaster was to occur on a global scale, especially in developed countries, they will retract their arguments about any wall because their survival would be in jeopardy. Except, of course, if they finally find a way to achieve transhumanism.

Are you just trying to make idiotic statements?

Look at the diaspora of people fleeing Venezuela, a communist paradise.

They are going all over.

The US is not the only country.

Once Trump said:


He didn't know, that Great Wall is already build in China over a thousand years ago?

I have no reason to make stuff up.  You can know about normal el nino and it can be exacerbated by climate change. Both can be true. Take a look at this fact sheet that summarizes climate change impacts for honduras
This doesn't go against my point that there are still large numbers of people with no practical path of immigration.  There is a difference bettween that and "no one can immigrate".  


https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL31269.pdf
Ok so notice my quote came from FY2018 and FY2017 and your stats came from 2016, before Trump was president.  No one is saying we don't have any immigration.  Its just not an easy process especially if you are poor and under duress.  Anyone who can afford the time and resources to go through our legal immigration process is not really that desperate after all.  The caravaners are DESPERATE.

Trump's agenda is to shift our immigration policy to be "merit based" which means 12% employment based would be fine but the 4% of immigrants we are talking about would be shut out.

13% were refugees in 2016- The problem is most of the caravaners don't count as refugees by the  definition that the US uses, so if they apply without entering first, they will be declined because they are trying to escape violence that is not being directed at them because of race, nationality or political opinion.  

4% were diversity immigrant visa or "lottery" winners-  We take around 11,000 from Honduras.  Out of millions who want to come.

So what are desperate people from Honduras with no family in the US and no special skills supposed to do? Take the chance that they will win the lottery? Or enter the US and argue their refugee status in court after "catch and release"

I expect the US to be part of the new "Axis" with the world revolving around nationalism...

More lying. It just happens you cannot fool me with this talk because I know a bit about El Nino and those weather patterns. Deal with it; it is a normal weather pattern and a normal drought. You can't just lie your way around the issue. Please stop making things up.

I know a hundred people who came through the legal immigration, and a dozen in my immediate family. So you are lying/making things up yet again.

Or are the coral reefs changing and not dying? Is that another subject you are wrong on? Regardless, I'm happy to let anyone living under the water on a coral reef into the USA.


More lying/mistaken shit. Venezuela ALONE was 61,000.

Just check Wikipedia.

According to the 2016 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics, the United States admitted 1.18 million legal immigrants in 2016.[5] Of these, 20% were family-sponsored, 47% were the immediate relatives of U.S. citizens, 12% were employment-based preferences, 4% were part of the Diversity Immigrant Visa program, and 13% were refugees and/or asylum seekers.[5]

The current "legal" immigration process is not reasonable and keeps most of these people out.  There is no point in submitting an application when all that does it make it so you can't come.
No, it's not. Again, you are wrong.

You just can't slap blame on climate change for every stupid political agenda item you are told to believe in over and over.