- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 11/15/16 at 3:21 pm to Dale51
quote:I'm not assuming that, but there would likely not be 100% coverage. And again, the wall would have a cost, structural maintenance would have a cost, and enforcement would have a cost. And it will never be 100% effective, especially if people can continue to attempt to cross and can learn the patterns of patrols.
You're assuming..it would seem..that the wall is just a wall and once built it's left alone. No patrols..no sensors..no manned posts..no drones, etc.
I guess I'm looking at this from a cost-effective, utilitarian perspective. If the cost of illegal immigration is X then the closer the polices are to X, then the more limited the utility of the policy.
Posted on 11/15/16 at 3:25 pm to buckeye_vol
[quote] the second offense for entering the country illegally is prison. And then what?
Deportation.
--------------------------------------
Felons aside, we are going to spend > $30,000 of taxpayer to imprison them?
----------------------------------
That would be a great incentive to make sure they are seriously tracked. Possible sanctions against Mexico if they don't do their part in monitoring their criminals. That money could offset the cost of incarceration. (I think the 30k/yr. can be vastly reduced.)
quote: . HEAVY fines for anyone employing criminal aliens and those providing false identification documents. Fine. And then what?
---------------------------
Nothing needed. Crippling fine would end it right there. It would provide incentive for the companies feasting on cheap labor to raise the pay for legal citizens.
------------------------------
Many of those jobs are probably where they provide an economical benefit, and many of those are in rural places (e.g., farming) where enforcement would be costly as well.
---------------------------
Why would it be any more costly? Data bases have no limitations on distance.
Deportation.
--------------------------------------
Felons aside, we are going to spend > $30,000 of taxpayer to imprison them?
----------------------------------
That would be a great incentive to make sure they are seriously tracked. Possible sanctions against Mexico if they don't do their part in monitoring their criminals. That money could offset the cost of incarceration. (I think the 30k/yr. can be vastly reduced.)
quote: . HEAVY fines for anyone employing criminal aliens and those providing false identification documents. Fine. And then what?
---------------------------
Nothing needed. Crippling fine would end it right there. It would provide incentive for the companies feasting on cheap labor to raise the pay for legal citizens.
------------------------------
Many of those jobs are probably where they provide an economical benefit, and many of those are in rural places (e.g., farming) where enforcement would be costly as well.
---------------------------
Why would it be any more costly? Data bases have no limitations on distance.
Posted on 11/15/16 at 3:27 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
I'm not assuming that, but there would likely not be 100% coverage.
Where the wall does not cover....well, thats where manned patrols and other methods come in.
Posted on 11/15/16 at 3:28 pm to DupontsCircle
quote:
Surrender or be shot as foreign invaders.
Less than a week and Trumpkins willing to surrender yet another constitutional right, this time the 6th amendment.
You want our government to have the power to murder people without question.
Posted on 11/15/16 at 3:29 pm to ballscaster
quote:
logical fallacies
They are. You should educate yourself.
I never mention enemy combatants.
Posted on 11/15/16 at 3:29 pm to DupontsCircle
(no message)
This post was edited on 1/10/21 at 11:13 am
Posted on 11/15/16 at 3:31 pm to CaptainBrannigan
quote:
Less than a week and Trumpkins
How are you connecting this to Trump??
Posted on 11/15/16 at 3:33 pm to DupontsCircle
Seems you are highly critical of the immigrants.
Posted on 11/15/16 at 3:33 pm to larry289
quote:But the purpose of a building is to increase and maximize the economic utility of the geographic location. There are clear examples of the risk of building something that that is not used (there are empty cities Spain and China); however, a cost (lack of use)-benefit (use of building) is an analysis that is always necessary.
There's a good parody to this argument in a book I read regarding building the Empire State building. My lord the arguments against its feasibility, materials, labor cost, leases, et.al. Put their foot down and said build it. Hard times fell due to the timing of the build, but by the 50's its been 90% full.
In fact, skyscrapers have an interesting economic dynamic because they are often planned and built during an economic boom and are completed near or during an economic bust. It's called the Skyscraper Index Hypothesis.
The problem with this comparison is that a skyscraper is intended for economic stimulation; whereas the wall, is a barrier intended to limit a subset of illegal immigration, but not the cause of that immigration, AND it doesn't have such clearly defined economic goals.
Posted on 11/15/16 at 3:35 pm to Dale51
quote:But it would still not be 100% effective unless we covered the entire border, including the WALL, and maximized the methods of enforcement. At that point, it will be costly, so if we are going to increase government and costs, then shouldn't we figure out the utility of that?
Where the wall does not cover....well, thats where manned patrols and other methods come in.
Posted on 11/15/16 at 3:37 pm to DupontsCircle
quote:
I say apply Geneva Convention rules to all illegals coming over the border. Surrender or be shot as foreign invaders.
just make it treason to hire even one.
Posted on 11/15/16 at 3:38 pm to Dale51
quote:
You should educate yourself.
:ignore:
Posted on 11/15/16 at 3:44 pm to Dale51
quote:And that would either increase the cost on the consumer AND/OR cause those companies to cease operations. especially since we don't know if enough people will be willing to take those jobs.
It would provide incentive for the companies feasting on cheap labor to raise the pay for legal citizens.
Regardless things will likely get costlier for us; if it increases the employment of our citizens, then that would at least provide a benefit. But what if the increase in cost is not offset by that employment? Would it be worth it?
quote:And how are we going to collect the data for this database. More importantly, the database is not going to enforce the law; people have to actually do that. Are we then going to hire more people to travel the rural areas of the US, enforcing these laws?
Why would it be any more costly? Data bases have no limitations on distance.
Again. I'm saying that these solutions have costs associated with them. To the extent that the benefits (e.g., economic growth; costs of illegal immigration as is) do not offset these new costs, what value are these policies?
Posted on 11/15/16 at 3:45 pm to CelticDog
quote:
just make it treason to hire even one.
You have convinced me.
Posted on 11/15/16 at 3:47 pm to CaptainBrannigan
quote:
ess than a week and Trumpkins willing to surrender yet another constitutional right, this time the 6th amendment.
You want our government to have the power to murder people without question.
I will compromise with you. All immigrants must speak fluent English and they can stay.
Posted on 11/15/16 at 3:50 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
But it would still not be 100% effective
What is?
Posted on 11/15/16 at 3:52 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
The problem with this comparison is that a skyscraper is intended for economic stimulation; whereas the wall, is a barrier intended to limit a subset of illegal immigration, but not the cause of that immigration, AND it doesn't have such clearly defined economic goals.
We're going in circles here, and yes the Skyscraper Hypothesis is what I was referring to in part.
The economic gain from building the wall should be a monetary net calculation in theory. You know the cost of giving them gubment benefits, changing our ways of life to welcome them ($cost?), another minority group putting demands (that cost) on our American way of life, etc.
Therefore, the economic goal for the wall is offsetting these costs, both monetary and societal. Another thing I thought of is, why all of a sudden we placing a cost benefit analysis on a wall to keep illegals from entering our country. Hell, none of this is applied to any social programs since the great society...hence no improvements are ever made; just throw more money at it.
The wall would become "hardware" that would be treated and paid as any other hard asset owned by the American people. In this instance our protection against economic, crime and societal ill-forces. It's worth the risk and expenditure in my eye because of the psychological positives for us and negatives to them.
Posted on 11/15/16 at 3:57 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
And that would either increase the cost on the consumer AND/OR cause those companies to cease operations. especially since we don't know if enough people will be willing to take those jobs.
How so? So what if it raises the cost a bit? The benefits of not having your country plagued by criminal aliens should be worth something, don't you agree? Actually that reasoning is the same reasoning of the slave owners of the antebellum South.
"Why, boy...do you know how much those shirts would cost if we had to hire good 'ol Southern boys to pick that cotton?"
Posted on 11/15/16 at 4:01 pm to larry289
quote:I agree. So that analysis needs to be done first.
The economic gain from building the wall should be a monetary net calculation in theory.
quote:Which is something that is exclusive to the wall. We all agree this is a problem, so why don't we address the actual problem itself.
You know the cost of giving them gubment benefits, changing our ways of life to welcome them ($cost?), another minority group putting demands (that cost) on our American way of life, etc.
quote:I can't speak for everyone else, but it's always something I consider.
Another thing I thought of is, why all of a sudden we placing a cost benefit analysis on a wall to keep illegals from entering our country.
quote:I agree. Which is why I don't want to use their poor decision-making methods again.
Hell, none of this is applied to any social programs since the great society...hence no improvements are ever made; just throw more money at it.
quote:More generally (not exclusive to the wall), do we really want more "hardware?"
The wall would become "hardware" that would be treated and paid as any other hard asset owned by the American people.
quote:But I need to know that it will have this effect, especially given the costs, to support it.
n this instance our protection against economic, crime and societal ill-forces.
quote:I have hard time justifying something because of vague psychological effects, that may not occur, and are unlikely to be broadly internalized.
because of the psychological positives for us and negatives to them.
Page 5 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News