Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 09/03/2014 in all areas

  1. A British word used as slang for association football.
    1 point
  2. Invalid at release. The plural of dependopotamus is "Officer Spouse's Club".
    1 point
  3. No, you were clear on this point! Just stating facts...
    1 point
  4. go weld a hitch to your bumper. Get a roof rack and a big Thule thing. Rent a uhaul truck and tow your car. make multiple trips. mail your shit. convoy with your friends/parents. borrow someone's truck. hope you get a bit more imagination at UPT.
    1 point
  5. 7 figures and I'd reconsider. Honestly, at this point, what the hell is the difference? Just call Mrs. Yellen and ask her to keep the presses running for a few extra days. No one would even know the difference.
    1 point
  6. So would the plural, as in a herd of them, as they sometime travel in packs; be Dependopotami?
    1 point
  7. So you're point is that just because the illegal crossers will look for another avenue of illegal entry after they find the usual route too difficult or impossible after being fortified / secured then we should not even try it? That is the point of strategic fencing, to force them to only have very difficult avenues to attempt with low probability of success and/or high likelihood of capture during the attempted illegal crossing. Of course they will try something else, for every move there is a counter-move. And it will not be trillions of dollars, not even REMOTELY close to that. Besides which, you can pick your poison for how much illegal aliens cost the United States in direct cost and indirect costs and it dwarfs the cost of a reasonable security system on the border. Crime and illegal aliens in the U.S. From 1980 to 1999, the number of illegal aliens in federal and state prisons grew from 9,000 to 68,000. Today, criminal aliens account for about 30% of the inmates in federal prisons and 15-25% in many local jails. Incarceration costs to the taxpayers were estimated by the Justice Department in 2002 to be $891 million for federal prison inmates and $624 million for inmates in state prisons. That's just to house them at our expense after they committed some crime, just about 1.5 billion. The Israeli security fence system cost about 430 million for about 135 miles, just assuming you kept out only 50% of the would be convicts you could recoup your build out costs for building 6 135-mile sections of security systems in about 3.5 years and you have the benefit of having those prison beds available for some homegrown criminals who need a longer stay in the big house. The Fiscal Cost of Unlawful Immigrants and Amnesty to the U.S. Taxpayer In 2010, the average unlawful immigrant household received around $24,721 in government benefits and services while paying some $10,334 in taxes. This generated an average annual fiscal deficit (benefits received minus taxes paid) of around $14,387 per household. This cost had to be borne by U.S. taxpayers. Amnesty would provide unlawful households with access to over 80 means-tested welfare programs, Obamacare, Social Security, and Medicare. The fiscal deficit for each household would soar. In 2011 there were about 320,000 apprehensions for illegally crossing into the USA, even if you only deterred 50% of them and assuming a them to be a head of household situation you would save on average per year in government benefit programs approximately 1.6 billion, just about enough to pay for the above six sections of 135-mile border security system and then every year you would have enough to maintain and man it. Last point, why do we (being the United States of America) have to change because someone from a foreign country doesn't like an aspect of our society, that is a legal system that somehow 1,000,000 people managed to use legally in 2012 and they somehow can't? I guess some people don't have to file their income taxes because they find the form confusing and cumbersome... The burden is on the immigrant to use our system rather than the US bending for them. No apologies for who we are or how we live, if they don't like it, figure it out somewhere else.
    1 point
  8. Honest to god, I said to myself that it would take less than 3 posts following mine to see the 'San Diego case study' posted...I suppose I overestimated. I won't even entertain the suggestion that Israel's circumstances are applicable. Pointing to the fence bordering San Diego as indicative of anything regarding border control in whole indicates either a complete lack of understanding regarding human behavior, or a willful ignorance of reality. Illegals crossing the border look for the path of least resistance, just like everything else in nature. Their desire to make the crossing might be so strong that they'd be willing to swim through 10 miles of human shit to the other side, but if it's not necessary, they're happy to walk across into comfortable San Diego. Put a fence up blocking San Diego? Illegals crossing into San Diego drops by 95%. Because you've thwarted them? Give me a break. Although not by much, El Paso is still easier than 10 miles of excrement, so they'll cross there. Block El Paso? Fine, they'll walk through 50 miles of mountainous desert with half a gallon of water. Fence of the desolate desert areas? Fine, they'll dig a tunnel, or cut a hole in the fence, or obtain a counterfeit passport and cross 'legally', or a thousand other options. OR, maybe they'll exploit the Gulf of Mexico, or that marginally large body of water called the Pacific Ocean. Raise the bar high enough and the coyotes will start employing submersibles like the Central/South American cartels use. Those options aren't used today because they aren't the path of least resistance. Put up a fence at enormous cost and the stream will just shift off land. Put the Coast Guard on it? They'll think of something else. Want to raise the bar high enough that none of those options are viable? How many trillions of dollars are you in for at this point? Maybe reasonable border control measures coupled with policy that makes legal immigration the path of least resistance is a better option than a 2000 mile long electrified razor wire fence (and yes I'm aware that you, Clark, aren't advocating that, but some are).
    1 point
  9. You'd be surprised...I'm sure they could find all kinds of ways to kill themselves with those.
    1 point
  10. America's oldest veteran, 107, still smokes cigars and has whiskey in his morning coffee. Cheers, Mr Overton.
    1 point
  11. Put the razor wire up, make it look like N/S Korea border. Adopt Mexicos immigration policy as our own. Cheaper, better, quicker, effective. Anything else is trying to get votes from Obamabots. Or at best a Republican idiots trying to be Democrats thinking they will get anything close to an immigrant Mexican vote. Done, anything else out of Mark1 will be about "feelings" in regard to this post versus fact. And comprehensive is a word that needs to die, it's another word for total power grab. Edit: To throw another jab at, well, you know who. And dudes, don't touch the german angle, you are getting trolled
    0 points
  12. Nobody is asking for change for somebody else's benefit, any change would be for our benefit. You can take the 'burden is on the immigrant to use the system and we're not going to change' stance, but there's just one problem...we've tried that over the last 30 years and it isn't working. They see an easier alternative, so they take it. 5000 people circumvented an 80mi long Berlin wall under threat of death, and there weren't oceans on either side of the wall. If the desire is strong enough, people will find a way around any wall that gets put up. You have to attack the bulk of the problem from a different angle. Either eliminate the appeal of making the crossing, or find a way to deal with the inevitable flow of people. And just for the record, aside from its comically short length (relative to our circumstance), Israel's wall doesn't aim to stop millions of people seeking to cross for a better life. It aims to prevent small isolated cases of crossings by people looking to do harm to the Israeli population (and isn't entirely effective at that either). It's effectiveness would be exponentially less if there were hundreds of crossing attempts a day. It should never be brought up in conversation about securing our borders.
    -1 points
×
×
  • Create New...