patrick.net

Bap33 says

step 1, close the mexican border .. tight.

step 2 end NAFTA

step 3 offer free bus/plane rides back home to anyone living here illegally

step 4 jail/fine any business with undoc-ed workers

setp 5 begin building a true border security system and put people to work on it, or in a service position that supports the work force (cooking, cleaning, making uniforms, child care, ect), instead of welfare. Build some nuke power plants too. Build some dams too. Just a few good projects that require lots and lots of support and labor.
step 6, drill for oil on American soil. Re-fill the our emergency supply

step 7, place in jail everyone that is part of ACLU (ok, this does not make many jobs, but it sure cuts out some stupid crap)

Have you ever actually been to the southwest? The boarder is 2000 miles of almost unpopulated desert. What practical suggestions would you have to actually close it "TIGHT"? You can drive the 500 miles from El Paso to Del Rio and see maybe 5 other cars on the road once you leave I10, how do you get enough people into the area to actually patrol that?

bob2356 says

Bap33 says

step 1, close the mexican border .. tight.
step 2 end NAFTA
step 3 offer free bus/plane rides back home to anyone living here illegally
step 4 jail/fine any business with undoc-ed workers
setp 5 begin building a true border security system and put people to work on it, or in a service position that supports the work force (cooking, cleaning, making uniforms, child care, ect), instead of welfare. Build some nuke power plants too. Build some dams too. Just a few good projects that require lots and lots of support and labor.
step 6, drill for oil on American soil. Re-fill the our emergency supply
step 7, place in jail everyone that is part of ACLU (ok, this does not make many jobs, but it sure cuts out some stupid crap)

Have you ever actually been to the southwest? The boarder is 2000 miles of almost unpopulated desert. What practical suggestions would you have to actually close it “TIGHT”? You can drive the 500 miles from El Paso to Del Rio and see maybe 5 other cars on the road once you leave I10, how do you get enough people into the area to actually patrol that?

I'm sure enough helicopter gunships with enough ammo on board will do the trick. Lots of land mines would help too. Supposedly one could not cross the border during WW2. It's just a matter of actually trying, as opposed to trying half haeartly as we currently do.

While I felt sorry for some people (i.e. the Target guy), I didn't feel sorry for most of them. I may sound harsh or judgmental to some, but the old-fashioned advice from my depression era-raised parents is as true now as it was then: 'save for a rainy day'.

The woman that has been living in her house since 1982 - why isn't her house paid by now? She has had 28 years to pay it off. She was obviously living above her means, having tapped more than once into her equity.

The woman collecting recyclables - she admitted being a shopaholic. She is lucky her elderly mother can bail her out. The mother had probably saved all her life.

The boomer couple (late forties, early fifties) about to lose their double garage house - why on earth would somebody need a double garage in California? One could make do without a garage in Maine, let alone in California. He was making $200,000 a year, more than enough to have paid his house and have a lot of money put aside. Plus, I question his move to a duct business. Looks like his layout was too much. Were it not for their 'sense of entitlement', they probably could have been OK if they had purchased a smaller bungalow with no garage in a not-so-opulent neighbourhood and save their money. Nothing is more depressing than going backwards, after having lived in the fast lane.

Could be Obama's or Dubya's fault, but people have to take responsibility for their own situation. Nobody put a gun on their head to tap into their home equity or buying too much house. Good times don't last forever. There is no better time for saving than when the money is coming in.

zzyzzx says

bob2356 says

Bap33 says

step 1, close the mexican border .. tight.
step 2 end NAFTA
step 3 offer free bus/plane rides back home to anyone living here illegally
step 4 jail/fine any business with undoc-ed workers
setp 5 begin building a true border security system and put people to work on it, or in a service position that supports the work force (cooking, cleaning, making uniforms, child care, ect), instead of welfare. Build some nuke power plants too. Build some dams too. Just a few good projects that require lots and lots of support and labor.
step 6, drill for oil on American soil. Re-fill the our emergency supply
step 7, place in jail everyone that is part of ACLU (ok, this does not make many jobs, but it sure cuts out some stupid crap)

Have you ever actually been to the southwest? The boarder is 2000 miles of almost unpopulated desert. What practical suggestions would you have to actually close it “TIGHT”? You can drive the 500 miles from El Paso to Del Rio and see maybe 5 other cars on the road once you leave I10, how do you get enough people into the area to actually patrol that?

I’m sure enough helicopter gunships with enough ammo on board will do the trick. Lots of land mines would help too. Supposedly one could not cross the border during WW2. It’s just a matter of actually trying, as opposed to trying half haeartly as we currently do.

100% correct. The invasion of America by people, goods, drugs, whatever, is being ALLOWED. We all know that if Pelosi were directly effected by waves and waves of invaders and their procreation abilities, or the gangs and drugs that liberal (judges, politicos, voters, ect) have fostered, or the tons and tons of knock-off goods .... we all know that if Pelosi or Bush or any politico had to live with the crap they ALLOW, then this stuff would be stopped.

By the way, you did read about the chopped-off head in Arizona, right? They are busy doing the work that Americans refuse to do.

My own philosophy is Voltaire's: "I disagree strongly with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

All I ask is that people be polite.

This is a conservative forum?

Who is "et al"?

A slight revision: Giants win in 5

zzyzzx says

bob2356 says

Bap33 says

step 1, close the mexican border .. tight.

step 2 end NAFTA

step 3 offer free bus/plane rides back home to anyone living here illegally

step 4 jail/fine any business with undoc-ed workers

setp 5 begin building a true border security system and put people to work on it, or in a service position that supports the work force (cooking, cleaning, making uniforms, child care, ect), instead of welfare. Build some nuke power plants too. Build some dams too. Just a few good projects that require lots and lots of support and labor.

step 6, drill for oil on American soil. Re-fill the our emergency supply

step 7, place in jail everyone that is part of ACLU (ok, this does not make many jobs, but it sure cuts out some stupid crap)

Have you ever actually been to the southwest? The boarder is 2000 miles of almost unpopulated desert. What practical suggestions would you have to actually close it “TIGHT”? You can drive the 500 miles from El Paso to Del Rio and see maybe 5 other cars on the road once you leave I10, how do you get enough people into the area to actually patrol that?

I’m sure enough helicopter gunships with enough ammo on board will do the trick. Lots of land mines would help too. Supposedly one could not cross the border during WW2. It’s just a matter of actually trying, as opposed to trying half haeartly as we currently do.

I hope this is humor. If not look up the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. If you live here you should at least make some sort of token effort to know how the government works. That applies to you too bap33. In deference to Rambo and Rambo33, my original question stands. Even if the military could legally patrol the border, how as a practical matter could you patrol 2000 miles of empty desert?

bob2356 says

Even if the military could legally patrol the border, how as a practical matter could you patrol 2000 miles of empty desert?

What do you mean by "legally could" ? Our military, as with any other military around the world is expected to secure national borders, by land, sea and air.

You can start by actually building a physical wall. Crap how many millions of miles of railroad, interstate highway, and all other roads, plus billions of ton in brick and concrete structures have been built over the years. A 2000 mile 10 ft hi 4 ft thick is childs play in comparison.

thomas.wong1986 says

bob2356 says

Even if the military could legally patrol the border, how as a practical matter could you patrol 2000 miles of empty desert?

What do you mean by “legally could” ? Our military, as with any other military around the world is expected to secure national borders, by land, sea and air.
You can start by actually building a physical wall. Crap how many millions of miles of railroad, interstate highway, and all other roads, plus billions of ton in brick and concrete structures have been built over the years. A 2000 mile 10 ft hi 4 ft thick is childs play in comparison.

Do you think a 4ft. high wall would stop illegal immigration? And, how much do you think it would cost to build such a wall?

thomas.wong1986 says

What do you mean by “legally could” ? Our military, as with any other military around the world is expected to secure national borders, by land, sea and air.

Under the Posse Comitatus Act, federal troops are prohibited from performing law enforcement actions, such as making arrests, seizing property or searching people. National guard troops may be called up under the Insurrection act during times of emergency but must be under the state control. Stopping illegal aliens unless they have organized themselves into a military unit is clearly a law enforcement function. This is high school level American Government stuff.

Why not spend billions enforcing the laws on the books to prosecute the employers and eliminate the jobs that illegals come over the boarder for in the first place, instead of spending trillions stopping them? As long as there is so much profit in using illegals and it is so cheap to lobby politicians nothing will ever be done about the problem.

bob2356 says

Stopping illegal aliens unless they have organized themselves into a military unit is clearly a law enforcement function. This is high school level American Government stuff.

@Bob, who/how is the disignation of "military unit" attached to a group and by who/how/what autority?

Arizona is under attack from the Obama nation for "enforcing laws on the books." Weird.

"Under the Posse Comitatus Act, federal troops are prohibited from performing law enforcement actions, such as making arrests, seizing property or searching people."

I guess someone forgot to tell that to Joe Miller. I guess he must have been absent the day they taught that law at Yale Law.

The only way to patrol all 2,000 miles fo the border would be to bring all the tropps home from Afghanistan and Iraq and station them along the border. And to get around the Posse Comitatus Act, all you would need to do is to discharge them from the military and make them Border Patrol agents. You could probably do all that through executive order.

zzyzzx says

Then the real problems are our generous unemployment and welfare benefits. $120 day is more than a lot of people make.

The maximum amount paid (according to the chart on the link) is $628/week in Massachusetts. Calif pays a max of $450/wk. These are maximum amounts, based on a formula using how much you earned. Many lower-wage earners makes substantially less. I know a woman who made minimum wage and she received $175/week for 26 weeks.

If you receive the maximum amount, in most states you aren't eligibile for welfare of any type.

tatupu70 says

Do you think a 4ft. high wall would stop illegal immigration? And, how much do you think it would cost to build such a wall?

10 ft or 20 ft high... 4 ft thick or 7 ft thick... pick a number!

bob2356 says

Under the Posse Comitatus Act, federal troops are prohibited from performing law enforcement actions, such as making arrests, seizing property or searching people. National guard troops may be called up under the Insurrection act during times of emergency but must be under the state control. Stopping illegal aliens unless they have organized themselves into a military unit is clearly a law enforcement function. This is high school level American Government stuff

Prohibited in "non-federal property and jurisdiction", so is it a "state border" or the "US federal goverment border". Who has jurisdiction for the border State or Federal ? Do you need permission from the state or federal goverment to cross it ?

Pretty pathatic Bob! do you really expect illegals to walk across the border even though they know they are being observed at eye shot by guards and patrols. Deterence, gotta love it.

thomas.wong1986 says

tatupu70 says

Do you think a 4ft. high wall would stop illegal immigration? And, how much do you think it would cost to build such a wall?

10 ft or 20 ft high… 4 ft thick or 7 ft thick… pick a number!

I think it's a useless endeavor, and a huge waste of money. You have to go after the companies that hire illegals.

tatupu70 says

I think it’s a useless endeavor, and a huge waste of money. You have to go after the companies that hire illegals.

Defeatism!

OK, little anecdote:

Wife's best friend is all full of herself. She hasn't made a dime for herself in 10 years, keeps her husband's paycheck and give's him an allowance. She spends everthing on her pet child, fixing her too expensive house and dumps about 20k/yr into a boutique for expensive hand-made kiddie clothes. Never made a dime, but some day she plans on having a dozen.

One night I started bitching about my job, and how my woman keeps me poor, and how I would've been retired by now save the need to keep up with, well with bitches like her. She blames me, and tells me that its my fault that I keep a job I don't want. "I'd never be in that situation. I'd find something."

Fast forward 4 years, husband and his 150k/yr is gone, retirement stock is in the toilet, house is 50k underwater, boutique is closed, and she can't even get an interview let alone an offer. believe it or not, because you "designed" your own web page you can't get a job as web designer. If you've never worked in retail you may not get a job as a store manager. And if you're not young 20s with a nice rack, you may not be able to go back to bartending.

Long story short, she has been out of the work force for 10 years and had no idea what has happened. She really did believe that 50k (she could settle for that) was the new minimum wage for ANYONE with no skills and a positive attitude. Its fun to watch. I'm still waiting to pull the trigger on "I told you so" but right now I'm keeping my mouth shut.

Oh, by the way, she blames the Democrats and Obama.

thomas.wong1986 says

tatupu70 says

I think it’s a useless endeavor, and a huge waste of money. You have to go after the companies that hire illegals.

Defeatism!

realism

knewbetter says

Oh, by the way, she blames the Democrats and Obama.

It's much easier to blame our president than to accept personal responsibility. She's a model teabagger.

who is it that has been blaming Bush .... hmmmm ... Barry and Co. ... right?

elliemae says

knewbetter says

Oh, by the way, she blames the Democrats and Obama.

It’s much easier to blame our president than to accept personal responsibility. She’s a model teabagger.

I'm completely in favor of what the teaparty movement is trying to do, but where is the money going to come from? Ask a teabagger about ending entitlements an all that can be heard is how we should end the EPA and Department of Education. My parents are both boomers, and if you ask my mother about raising the retirement age (she's 61 1/2) she says it wouldn't be fair, and if you ask my dad about ending the prescription drug benefit, his response is people need those drugs. Ask about cutting the millitary, veteran's benefits, making medicare pay the same rates as private insurance, or a host of other things and it always comes back to crack moms on welfare, or construction workers looking into a hole in the ground. Still, everybody's pissed that Obama didn't increase the COLA this year.

Here's a neat web page I just found: http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm

thomas.wong1986 says

bob2356 says

Under the Posse Comitatus Act, federal troops are prohibited from performing law enforcement actions, such as making arrests, seizing property or searching people. National guard troops may be called up under the Insurrection act during times of emergency but must be under the state control. Stopping illegal aliens unless they have organized themselves into a military unit is clearly a law enforcement function. This is high school level American Government stuff

Prohibited in “non-federal property and jurisdiction”, so is it a “state border” or the “US federal goverment border”. Who has jurisdiction for the border State or Federal ? Do you need permission from the state or federal goverment to cross it ?
Pretty pathatic Bob! do you really expect illegals to walk across the border even though they know they are being observed at eye shot by guards and patrols. Deterence, gotta love it.

That's just stupid. The definition of federal property is clear. Why is it the right wingnuts will defend the law of the land to the death, EXCEPT any part that they disagree with? My questions stands. Why not deter by eliminating the reason for illegals to come over in the first place? If we fined companies enough for hiring illegals it could be a deficit reduction plan.

knewb:

most people want to cut programs, just not the ones that benefit them.

> Have you ever actually been to the southwest? The boarder is 2000 miles of almost
> unpopulated desert. What practical suggestions would you have to actually close
> it “TIGHT”? You can drive the 500 miles from El Paso to Del Rio and see maybe 5 other cars > on the road once you leave I10, how do you get enough people into the area to actually
> patrol that?

This is truly funny, it looks the US technology (incl. military technology) is in the 21st century except wrto border control where it is in the 21st century BC (apprehension of crossers by running after them, manually grabbing, holding, and dragging over to expel).

I was born in Russia, and the ~22,000 mile (not 2,000 mile) borders of the Soviet bloc (aka the "iron curtain"), including those over high deserts, seas and lakes, wild arctic, and 20,000-ft. mountains were sealed essentially perfectly at a rather modest cost even with the technology of 1950-s and 60-s: anti-personnel mines, triggered shooting devices, high-voltage fences, anti-vehicle ditches, man traps, and patrolling helicopter gunships with shoot-on-sight orders. With all the satellite photography, electronic sensors, cameras, networks, and night vision systems, sure US can do at least as well.

Zlxr says

the CEO and/or whoever is responsible should lose their job

I like the idea of them exchanging citizenship with the immigrants.

Bap33 says

who is it that has been blaming Bush …. hmmmm … Barry and Co. … right?

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/CMDEBT

St Louis Fed calls this chart "CMDEBT" but it should be named "BAG OF FLAMING POO"

Very very stupid policies were enacted 2001-2006. Tax cuts, wars, deregulation, the whole lot. Utter economic disaster was inevitable, and we're still soaking in it.

Fisk says

I was born in Russia, and the ~22,000 mile (not 2,000 mile) borders of the Soviet bloc (aka the “iron curtain”), including those over high deserts, seas and lakes, wild arctic, and 20,000-ft. mountains were sealed essentially perfectly at a rather modest cost even with the technology of 1950-s and 60-s: anti-personnel mines, triggered shooting devices, high-voltage fences, anti-vehicle ditches, man traps, and patrolling helicopter gunships with shoot-on-sight orders. With all the satellite photography, electronic sensors, cameras, networks, and night vision systems, sure US can do at least as well.

The thing is--no one wanted to get into the Soviet Union. It would have been perfectly sealed with no defenses...

Most countries have tight border security to keep people IN, not out. Nobody is sneaking into Cuba or North Korea.

> The thing is–no one wanted to get into the Soviet Union. It would have been perfectly
> sealed with no defenses.

Of course.
But a lot of people strived to get out even more than Mexicans do to get in here.
Trust me on that.

Fisk says

> The thing is–no one wanted to get into the Soviet Union. It would have been perfectly
> sealed with no defenses.
Of course.
But a lot of people strived to get out even more than Mexicans do to get in here.
Trust me on that.

You are right. I'm sure the immigration problem would be reduced if we started shooting Mexicans as they tried to cross the border. But, isn't it easier just to start enforcing the laws against the companies that hire the illegals?

Not every thread turns into a shouting match - but when they start with a challenge against a particular poster what do you expect?

> But, isn’t it easier just to start enforcing the laws against the companies that hire the
> illegals?

The scale of the problem is now such that the only workable solution is "all of the above":

1. Forceful border protection using military-like means
2. Frequent, ubiquitous raids and random document checks in the workplace, schools, public transportation, roads, public and commercial venues
3. Firm enforcement against employers who hire illegals, on both corporate and personal/ executive level
4. Severe penalties on individuals who aid and abet illegals, including romantic partners, landlords, and family members.
5. Severest penalties on illegals themselves, including lengthy prison terms at hard labor and property confiscation. BTW, confiscation of "property derived from the proceeds of crime" is legal and quite common in the US, and essentially all property of illegals in the US falls under that.

For an example of "all of the above" (plus caning of illegals), see Singapore.

Just (3) could have worked some 50 yrs ago, but wouldn't today, in part because so many illegals and recent legal immigrants from same countries already in the US make for large ethnic communities where massive continuous demand exists for illegals as domestics, live-ins, brides, etc., and where many find relatives willing to provide support.

HousingWatcher says

Most countries have tight border security to keep people IN, not out. Nobody is sneaking into Cuba or North Korea.

you never heard of terrorists crossing borders into Isreal or Irish IRA crossing into British land. Frankly it is a similar problem in the Europe.

seaside says

You guys (in the clip I mean) can spend whole day blaming the government or whomever, or stop bitching and start doing whatever you can do.

haha. that's funny. you think people take any responsibility these days? haha.

mike4518 says

seaside says

You guys (in the clip I mean) can spend whole day blaming the government or whomever, or stop bitching and start doing whatever you can do.

haha. that’s funny. you think people take any responsibility these days? haha.

Damn, you're fast.
Yup, lack of responsibility, that's what brought them down, and that why I don't feel a shit for them.

E-man says

Try to look at the graph in a log scale. Click on the link below. I’m not smart to know whether it was bad policies or tax cuts, but the CMDEBT has doubled itself approximately every 10 years since 1950.

I'm no economist, but I think a lot of 20th century growth is tied to trade growth, productivity growth, and population growth -- all these factors allowing increasing earning power to leverage up CMDEBT in a virtuous cycle.

But the 1998-2007 period, I think, featured the game getting ahead of itself, and we started to use increasing debt leverage to boost the economy, instead of having the productive economy boost debt growth leverage.

Back out the $1T/yr mortgage growth of the housing boom of 2003-2006 and we wouldn't have exited the tech recession -- the home ATM was one helluva stimulus plan.

Looking at the above graph, it's my general impression that CMDEBT should have plateaud in 1999-2001 to give the economy a consolidation phase as the true impacts of integrating our economy much more closely with low-wage economies worked itself out. An honest debt level would be around $8T today.

Instead, the PTB pushed all throttles to the firewall in 2002 for some reason, and a $14T debt was the response we got.

It is true that CMDEBT doubled 1985-1995 and doubled again 1995-2005, but it was that third doubling from $10T to $20T by 2015 that turned out to be the tricky bit, I think because the leverage was coming from suicide lending and the greatest fool had finally been found in early 2007.

There were secular reasons for the debt double of 1985-1995 (baby boom hitting peak income years, falling interest rates) and 1995-2005 (ephemeral "productivity" gains of shifting production to China, dotcom stuff, near-ZIRP post 9/11). But both of those boosters of the previous two decades turned into drags I think in 2005 as the economy became overly concentrated on consumption and speculation and not actual production.

The 30yo boomer worker of 1985 turned a semi-retired 50 in 2005, and the accumulated two trillion of trade deficits with China succeeded in driving our manufacturing sector to near zero.

-- mfg share of private payrolls -- when you've liquidated your producers, you've essentially exported your inflation.