Allegro.cc - Online Community
Post Reply

Allegro.cc Forums » Allegro.cc Comments » Thread locks too soon

rss feed Print
Thread locks too soon
raynebc
Member #11,908
May 2010

Maintaining something is much cheaper than building from scratch. One wall that is sufficiently guarded will do. There are figures I've seen about illegal immigration that indicate that even a slight decrease in illegal immigration will significantly reduce costs, well enough to pay for and maintain the wall. That leftover money can be spent on immigration judges to process people more quickly instead of the system being permanently overwhelmed.

Edit: Also, I find it amusing that people so often forget that filibusters are a thing and without a filibuster proof majority of Congress, you don't have unimpeded control of passing legislation. The nuclear option that Reid invoked applies to nominations, not all bills. Also, "barely held onto a Republican Senate" is not actually what happened. Republicans gained seats in the Senate.

Edgar Reynaldo
Member #8,592
May 2007
avatar

raynebc said:

There are figures I've seen about illegal immigration that indicate that even a slight decrease in illegal immigration will significantly reduce costs, well enough to pay for and maintain the wall.

Wow, make unsubstantiated exaggerated claims much? You're going to cut $5billion in costs? That's the bare minimum of what the wall costs. That's what they're asking for.

Can you honestly not think of anything better to spend $5billion on?

5,000,000,000 / 100,000 = 50,000 new houses for veterans, for example. Plus all the jobs it would create in construction and related areas.

That's just one example.

Let's see, just how much does an average migrant worker in America make? It's probably not well documented, and it's probably not much, but let's see;

DDG search for 'average pay for migrant worker in united states'.

According to

https://careertrend.com/the-yearly-salary-of-a-migrant-worker-13655207.html

It's $7,500 dollars. Let's do some simple math. What's 5 billion divided by 7 thousand 5 hundred? It's 666,666. That means you could pay the wages for 65,000 workers for the next 10 years.

Now, how many immigrants come to the US each year? Let's see;

For 2015, the majority of immigrants came from India and China and Mexico :

Composition of the Immigration Population

In addition to fluctuating by number, the immigration population in the United States changes over time by composition. In 2015, most people who came to the United States were from India. In that year, the Indian immigration population reached 179,800. The second most common country for immigration was China. Approximately 143,200 Chinese immigrants arrived in the United States in 2015. That same year, 139,400 immigrants came to the United States (legally) from Mexico. Roughly 47,500 immigrants came from the Philippines. Canada represented the fifth most common immigrant group, with 46,800 Canadian citizens arriving in the United States in 2015. Most of the immigrants who arrive in the United States are foreign born, but some are naturalized citizens, permanent residents and other individuals who previously lived in the United States for a long time before leaving and eventually returning.

It's just further proof that Trump is racist. 50,000 Canadians aren't a threat. 140,000 Chinese are okay. 180,000 Indian are okay too. But those damn Mexicans. We need to build a wall. >:( ::)

You didn't even watch that video from Ronald Reagan, did you? Immigrants are what makes America young and alive. It's our fountain of youth. What happened to "give us your hungry, your tired, your poor"? Now it's "go starve and die, people with your skin color aren't welcome here".

Besides raynebc, who else is gonna pick your fruit? You? Ha.

Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
avatar

It's just further proof that Trump is racist. 50,000 Canadians aren't a threat. 140,000 Chinese are okay. 180,000 Indian are okay too. But those damn Mexicans. We need to build a wall. >:( ::)

I agree with you 100%, Obama, Hillary, and Bill Clinton were all racist as hell. ;D

video

"We need physical barriers."

video

-----sig:
“Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.” - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
"Political Correctness is fascism disguised as manners" --George Carlin

raynebc
Member #11,908
May 2010

When I cited Democrats' big spending plans earlier, I made a typo but can't edit the post. The costs of the two spending plans of theirs I cited are measured in tens of trillions of dollars, not billions. Any Democrats that claim $25 billion is a skyrocketing expense while not denouncing the eclipsing costs of those Socialism programs are lying.

Edgar, do you not understand the problem is ILLEGAL immigration and not legal immigration? Don't resort to the "racist!" reflexive response that is overly prevalent among the useful idiots on the political left. If there was the same amount of illegal immigration by land from the northern border, which there isn't, we'd be talking about a barrier there.

There are analyses that conclude illegal immigration is a net drain on the economy. Most articles I'm seeing that rebut Trump's exaggerations about its cost to the taxpayer result in saying that the cost of illegal immigration isn't as high as Trump claimed, but they cowardly avoid giving a realistic number they would have to stand by. They often explain it away as there not being enough data. I'd like for more reliable statistics, but the Democrats generally oppose this kind of data collection, such as asking about citizenship on the Census.

Before additional concessions such as a path to citizenship were to ever be offered to illegal immigrants, we would need to curtail illegal immigration because as incentives increase, illegal immigration will increase. And whilst we argue about the net benefit/cost of illegal immigration, don't overlook the fact that it is still against the laws of our country and it isn't necessary to justify enforcing the law. I have more compassion for the people that follow the rules.

Since you bring it up, I don't eat much fruit and in the foreseeable future, harvesting will possibly be fully automated anyway. I am getting into indoor gardening a little bit though.

Edgar Reynaldo
Member #8,592
May 2007
avatar

raynebc said:

When I cited Democrats' big spending plans earlier, I made a typo but can't edit the post. The costs of the two spending plans of theirs I cited are measured in tens of trillions of dollars, not billions. Any Democrats that claim $25 billion is a skyrocketing expense while not denouncing the eclipsing costs of those Socialism programs are lying.

So just post them here. I'd like to see what you're talking about. ;)

raynebc said:

Edgar, do you not understand the problem is ILLEGAL immigration and not legal immigration?

So let's take a look at illegal immigration then.

https://www.factcheck.org/2018/06/illegal-immigration-statistics/

1) The number of illegal immigrants living in the country has been steadily dropping overall since a peak in 2007.

2) The number of border apprehensions has been stable or slightly decreasing over the last 10 years. Why is it an issue now? How is it worth shutting down the government and denying federal workers their hard earned money?

3) In 2018, 27% of the illegal border crossing apprehensions were of family units. Separately, there were 50,000 children apprehended alone. These are people that need our help. They might as well be refugees.

4) In 2016, 400,000 people were deported. Seems like everything's working just fine if you ask me.

There's no crisis worthy of building a wall from California to Texas. It's just not justifiable.

raynebc
Member #11,908
May 2010

https://pjmedia.com/trending/ocasio-cortezs-green-new-deal-would-cost-more-than-the-gdp-of-most-countries/
https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-dollar32-trillion-question-that-medicare-for-all-advocates-will-never-answer

There are somewhere between 11 and 20 million illegal immigrants in the USA right now. Illegal immigration has been an issue for decades, but only when a politician makes it a hard line issue does his adversaries claim it's not a problem. Some of the illegal immigrants do need help, but hardly any are refugees. The USA and Mexico should continue to coordinate to make the process easier, but the immigration system is so broken and backlogged now that it will never get sorted out until the illegal immigration can stop or at least greatly slow down. Then the official processes can catch up.

Then once the problem stops growing, both sides can come up with good ways to handle all of the existing illegal immigrants. If there is a near complete stop in new illegal immigrants, I'd be perfectly happy to allow long term legal status (ie. green cards) as long as the newly-legal immigrants pay more in taxes than they receive in benefits and don't break major laws. Any of them committing identity fraud using a SSN that doesn't belong to them would need to stop doing that immediately. Assimilating to American culture should be strongly suggested but not required, although it's probably better for everybody if all permanent residents learn English well enough to function in society and in school. Tax funded programs to provide vocational training would be pretty good to help everybody get a decent job.

Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
avatar

They might as well be refugees.

THEN GIVE THEM LEGAL REFUGEE STATUS.

FFS people it's not that hard. You don't pretend "illegal immigrants = refugees" you give them legal refugee status and 99.99% of all these issues magically disappear.

And here's another fun thought experiment.

I agree 100% with new Democrats (conveniently forgetting the old ones, old being as new as 2015 as per my cited videos above.)

Borders are evil and racist. Globalism rulez.

You cannot deny anyone from entering your country.

Okay, Putin sends 5 million Russians (and ZERO spies ;) ;) ;)) to "integrate" into the USA as a "offer of peace" mission for 2020.

You're gonna greet them with open arms right? Right? RIGHT?

No, don't shrug it off. Sit there and think about it. Would you be as open-minded (and quick to acceptance) about Russians coming in as you are about Mexicans?

(p.s. I don't actually mind Mexicans coming here. They're great people, btw. I'm talking about political hypocrisy.)

"But it's not the same! Russians represent a security threat to the United St---oh shit."

Yeah. There are situations where security of a nation is paramount. So while I'm not saying "Mexicans shouldn't come in" at all, I am saying this modern idea that we should let everyone in and that "borders are racist" is downright insanity. And, since we know security does matter sometimes we SHOULD be having a reasonable (not emotional) discussion about who (and how many) people come from any of our borders (including the southern one).

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/16/democrats-immigration-policy-open-borders-dreamers

https://www.salon.com/2017/03/15/everyones-wrong-on-immigration-open-borders-are-the-only-way-to-defeat-trump-and-build-a-better-world/

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/the-new-guard-of-the-democratic-party-absolutely-supports-open-borders

-----sig:
“Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.” - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
"Political Correctness is fascism disguised as manners" --George Carlin

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

Even if Russian "spies" were to sneak into the borders of the US it wouldn't mean they'd suddenly compromise national security (I'd hope). 5 million Russians coming to America would be no more threatening than 5 million American citizens with differing political views are. Ultimately they can't do much harm.

They could kill a few tens or hundreds of people with a terrorist attack, but the nation would not fall as a result. 5 million of them could conceivably attack many more targets, but again only civilian targets would be easy targets. And they'd only be so threatening because you're gun-crazed and access to firearms is child's play in the USA (so perhaps that should be considered a security weakness, albeit, you could also argue that armed American citizens could help to counter the threat). If they decided to try to break into a military base or into a secure government office they'd probably find themselves outmaneuvered and outgunned nevertheless.

I'm not sure 5 million Russians immigrating to the USA would be all that threatening, even if they were the equivalent of terrorists or at least anti-American. I don't think they'd be able to do much to hurt the nation. They'd probably stand out if they grouped together. And individually they'd be virtually harmless.

The whole concept of a nation's borders is somewhat weird to me. I think it stems from the natural world where resources were limited and life was hard and to survive sometimes meant conquering neighboring groups to steal their resources or to relieve the pressures of competition (think apes, or ancient tribes). That continued to be a part of our history, but the more and more advanced we get the less it makes sense. At this point I think we have the resources to take care of everyone on the planet. We just choose not to out of greed and selfishness. I think to drop the borders means to pursue a socialist world where we readily share resources and do not hog them. Military forces should only be necessary to deter groups from rebelling and trying to hoard resources for a power grab. Basically peacekeepers. Ideally, no shots need to be fired, like how no nukes need to be launched. It's a stalemate. Life is good. Why risk it?

In any case, politics are divisive by design. The system is broken by design. The "leaders" do not represent you, and you STILL have no say in any of this. So it's pretty pointless to discuss it further. This is just to distract you from the fact that they don't represent you. And you're taking the bait.

Edgar Reynaldo
Member #8,592
May 2007
avatar

Europe has to worry about Russia, not the US so much. If we were to get into a war it would be with China, and it would be global, and brutal. It would be World War Z (III).

The immigrants are not more criminally inclined. In fact, they are around 40% less inclined than native born citizens to commit crime.

— "[D]ata from the census and a wide range of other empirical studies show that for every ethnic group without exception, incarceration rates among young men are lowest for immigrants, even those who are the least educated. This holds true especially for the Mexicans, Salvadorans and Guatemalans, who make up the bulk of the undocumented population." (Ruben Rumbaut, University of California, 2008. Published by the Police Foundation.)

And if you want to talk about all the rape, well it's being done in Mexico, not the US. And most women can't report it because they're illegally in Mexico too and then they would get deported. It's not the immigrants coming into the US that are committing the crime, it's the citizens of Mexico and the Central Americas.

NiteHackr
Member #2,229
April 2002
avatar

This has to be one of the more fascinating uses of a matrix that I have seen in a while.

video

---
Deluxe Pacman 2 game and source code
https://nitehackr.github.io/games_index.html

raynebc
Member #11,908
May 2010

The crime stats for immigrants versus natural born citizens don't distinguish between those of legal and illegal status, otherwise the stats would be more relevant to the debate on illegal immigration. I fully accept that legal immigrants probably commit less crime, just as the stats show CCW permit holders commit less crime, than standard citizens. People who have to go through a legal process are more mindful of the law than those who break the law. Close off the business interests of human smugglers, and make legal entry more easy. That will solve more problems than not enforcing our immigration laws.

Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
avatar

It's not the immigrants coming into the US that are committing the crime, it's the citizens of Mexico and the Central Americas.

That makes NO SENSE AT ALL. Why would criminals magically stay INSIDE their border? You mean.. criminals... might... enter illegally?!

-----sig:
“Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.” - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
"Political Correctness is fascism disguised as manners" --George Carlin

Edgar Reynaldo
Member #8,592
May 2007
avatar

You make no sense. ::)

I'm saying the criminals reside largely in Mexico and other Central American countries, and don't bother coming to the US. The majority of people coming into the country are victims, not criminals.

raynebc
Member #11,908
May 2010

If you count economic migrants as "victims of in-opportunity due to their badly-run home countries," then sure most of the people entering the USA are victims.

Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
avatar

I'm saying the criminals reside largely in Mexico and other Central American countries, and don't bother coming to the US.

You mean... the people who smuggle drugs into the US magically don't come into the US because they're criminals?

Come on man. Turn your brain on.

-----sig:
“Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.” - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
"Political Correctness is fascism disguised as manners" --George Carlin

NiteHackr
Member #2,229
April 2002
avatar

{"name":"611902","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/6\/d\/6d5493c492c2d4a2d83f3e2683dd276d.png","w":600,"h":1059,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/6\/d\/6d5493c492c2d4a2d83f3e2683dd276d"}611902

---
Deluxe Pacman 2 game and source code
https://nitehackr.github.io/games_index.html

Edgar Reynaldo
Member #8,592
May 2007
avatar

You mean... the people who smuggle drugs into the US magically don't come into the US because they're criminals?

ffs, follow the topic much? I'm talking about the rapes that happen to all the migrant women. You yourself brought it up prominently in this very thread.

And no, most of the people who immigrate here aren't criminals. NOTE: I didn't say that criminals don't enter the country illegally as well... ::) That's something you read into what I said.

To further iterate, most of the people pulling the strings are living OUTSIDE of the country. What do you think mules are for? Of course I want to stop human trafficking and human smuggling too but walls aren't going to change anything, they're just going to redirect it somewhere else, unless you build a wall around the entire nation, which is just as retarded as walling off a country.

What do need to do is get the corruption out of the Mexican and South American governments. Mexico needs to man up and stand up to the smugglers instead of politely looking the other way.

Better border security means adapting to changes easily and quickly.

Bruce Lee said, be like water. Flow. Ie... Adapt. Follow the path of least resistance.

It means better border monitoring, and more reactive responses.

If you want a real wall, make it an electronic one.

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

I'm sure Mexico and other South American governments will rid their governments of corruption the second the American people do (or Canadian people, for that matter). It's a terrible nature of our species, but selfish assholes not only exist, but they thrive. I'm sure if you compared the "leaders" of any large organization or company with successful criminals you'd find a whole lot in common. Unfortunately, crime does pay. A lot. If you're good at it. And the best commit crimes in the spotlight in front of the rest of us and get away with it.

Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
avatar

What do need to do is get the corruption out of the Mexican and South American governments.

I agree 100%. What we need to do, is regime change the !@$! out of Mexico and South America. I suggest inventing weapons of mass destruction like we did in Iraq, and then we bomb the hell out of them.

Or did you have a better way to force corrupt governments that don't want to change to follow our desires?

We can't get them to build a wall, you think they're gonna revolutionize their entire government and kick out generations of warlords and corruption that goes from the bottom police officers all the way up to the top government seats?

What they need is a freakin' revolution.* So I guess, once again, we should call the CIA and bay-of-pigs them.

*Interesting sidenote: One guy who lived in Mexico says that allowing good Mexicans to leave Mexico gives them a complacent "out" whereas if they were stuck there, they'd have no option but to rise up and fight the corrupt leaders.

-----sig:
“Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.” - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
"Political Correctness is fascism disguised as manners" --George Carlin

Edgar Reynaldo
Member #8,592
May 2007
avatar

Freakin A, Katko, I can never tell when you're joking anymore.

Stop playing Devil's advocate. He has enough cronies already. >:(

Katko, I've almost caught you ;

https://www.allegro.cc/members/edgar.reynaldo/forums
https://www.allegro.cc/members/chris.katko/forums

raynebc
Member #11,908
May 2010

Edgar: Of course if their home countries weren't hell holes people wouldn't be so desperate to move to the USA. But people are fleeing the sinking ship instead of bailing water and patching it. And as mentioned, electronic surveillance alone won't prevent illegal entry, and humans alone as the only barrier would not scale effectively due to enormous costs compared to a physical structure. After a person crosses illegally, bleeding hearts frequently do everything possible to prevent deportation.

Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
avatar

Katko, I've almost caught you ;

MY LEGACY!!!

-----sig:
“Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.” - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
"Political Correctness is fascism disguised as manners" --George Carlin

NiteHackr
Member #2,229
April 2002
avatar

{"name":"611903","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/b\/2\/b29b0009f16719edf4d5d32d2574ffbe.jpg","w":954,"h":960,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/b\/2\/b29b0009f16719edf4d5d32d2574ffbe"}611903

---
Deluxe Pacman 2 game and source code
https://nitehackr.github.io/games_index.html

MiquelFire
Member #3,110
January 2003
avatar

Driving into work today, I got an idea in which I need to look for a public domain (or something close) font when I get home.

I want to add text to my logo, but in the slim chance I get big enough for whoever owns the font I use (even if it's for reference, as I have a non-curve friendly version of my logo, I need to be able to make a boxy/low-poly version) to have a reason to sue me, I want a font I can freely use for that purpose.

---
Febreze (and other air fresheners actually) is just below perfumes/colognes, and that's just below dead skunks in terms of smells that offend my nose.
MiquelFire.red | +Me
Windows 8 is a toned, stylish, polished professional athlete. But it’s wearing clown makeup, and that creates a serious image problem. ~PCWorld Article

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

The most despicable thing about the American legal system is for-profit prisons and detection centers. There's a lot of money to be made on a guilty verdict, or by slowing down the process of releasing detainees. It's just sickening. America has a very bad disease. This is not capitalism. In capitalism, prices would be driven down by competition. These are government-funded, self-regulated monopolies.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-children/first-stop-for-migrant-kids-for-profit-detention-center-idUSKCN1Q3261

We're talking about children. What threat are they to anyone? And it costs taxpayers $750/day for each child. Not because that's what it actually costs, but because the corporation bumps the price up to make more money. A corporation gets rich, children are irreparably harmed, it's all on the dime of the American taxpayer, and ultimately nothing good is accomplished. It's pure evil.

Append:

You can probably afford to license a font too. At the very least, you can probably just ask for permission to use it. And the owner will be able to give you options. Maybe it's free or negligible cost now, but if your logo becomes well known the rate goes up or something. Most people are going to be reasonable about it. They'd rather you use their work than go somewhere else, as long as you're willing to give them a fair shake in return.

Post Reply


Go to: