Won't mexicans still be able to sail around to the US?

pretty sure bum rushing the massive border is more practical for them

The money is wired over, not brought over by the immigrants themselves... A wall has nothing to do with money transfers. Cutting off money isn't supposed to get rid of illegal immigrants either, nor is building a wall supposed to. Cutting off money transfers is a means to pay for the wall, and the wall is for keeping people out, not getting rid of the illegal immigrants we already have.

I agree it's not practical to round up all the illegal immigrants and move them out, but something needs to be done. We've set a precedent, which is a very dangerous thing. The thing is that illegal immigrant numbers are rising. They will continue to rise forever until something is done. People here illegally (doesn't matter if they're on overstayed visas because that has nothing to do with anything, the point is they're here illegally at that moment) should either be forced to leave (which is an entirely sucky situation considering many are here with family and kids that are citizens), or they need to allow citizenship or legalization for the non-criminal immigrants here, plus make them pay a fine/back taxes or some punishment. Simply letting them stay is setting the precedent that more can come and will be simply legalized eventually. America accepts more immigrants than most other countries because we're built off immigrants, but we need to control how many come in. As I said before, there's always a downside to every solution, but doing nothing is not an option (it is to politicians, though, because they don't want backlash). Every country wants to decide who comes in and how many people come in, it's not a new concept. The problem is American politicians have let the problem get far too big, and now there's no good solution that works.

You don't seem to understand that we could buy everyone a kitten and that would be just as effective as a wall, but cheaper.

I don't care about the wall really. I was just explaining it, and how his idea for making Mexico pay for it was a legit statement. The last post that was rly long that you quoted me on was about dealing with the illegal immigrants we currently have. I even told you I saw a story explaining that a border wall isn't near as effective as many might think, so I do understand.

And yet you still think shoveling years of labor and billions of dollars towards something that you don't know if it will be effective is a good idea?!

You act like the money is important and fragile. The gov. wastes a hell of a lot more money than that. Plus if Mexico pays for it through tariffs, money transfers, or some other way, then it doesn't hurt the U.S. at all. I'd like to know what effect a wall has on smuggling, though, because that's also a major issue, aside from immigrants entering the country illegally. I don't support Trump because of the wall. The wall is one of my least favorites of his, but I like that he's actually willing to suggest something that other politicans don't dare to. Besides, if America wanted to be 100% sure everything we do will be 100% effective, we'd do nothing, which is exactly what we already are doing.

Yog, who do you want to be as president?

That's an ongoing problem that I'm against, but saying "we've wasted more in the past" isn't a good reason to continue blowing it on pointless ****.

Except it can. People don't seem to understand that their almighty US isn't as independent as they think it is.

The War on Drugs is another waste of money that has shown no significant impact on drug addiction. But a wall isn't going to stop this either.

Suggesting bat**** insane ideas is kinda frowned upon, although not so much in politics.

Except I'm not even sure you could argue that a wall is at-least 50% effective. It's all a gamble and the odds aren't in our favor.

If it'll make you feel any better we can make Mexico pay for the kittens.

Vince McMahon, obviously.

Nearly every Trump supporter I see says that they support him because deporting illegal immigrants with criminal records is a good thing. Of course it is, but how do you think we're going to manage to do that? Trump can't just say "all illegal immigrants please leave" and they'll be like "okay".

He has no plan for how he's going to approach it, he's just saying what everyone wants to hear. How is he going to do it? Gather up every non-American person he sees in one big group and hand-by-hand look at each person's record to see if they're legal or not, and if they aren't then he'll just ship them off in a helicopter?

No illegal immigrant is going to willfully give themselves up so they can go back to the country they were born in, and chances are they're illegal immigrants because they wanted to get away from there!

He can talk all he wants, if he is elected then everything he says that will happen isn't going to happen. The closest thing he'll get is preventing any Muslims from entering America but that's it.

And if you say how what he wants is impractical everyone thinks you're okay with immigrants.

I'm against immigrants, and I'm against wasting time and money.

I voted for Trump solely because he sends a message. I hate his character, he's egotistical and can't think before he says anything. His ideas you hear him say all sound good, but he never once mentions a way of doing anything he says. His website's issues and solutions to them are pretty detailed and actually good. He doesn't voice them that way because he wants to get media attention (and possibly doesn't even know himself, sadly).

@CM I don't think any candidate has an actual plan for dealing with the immigration issue. Like I said before, the government officials for so many years have done nothing and now we're at a point where every possible solution is bad. We don't need to have them willfully give themselves up... No one ever said they would, because it's common sense that they wouldn't. No one also said that we would get them all. There will always be illigeal immigrants. It doesn't matter if they wanted to get away from Mexico or not, though, we do have to control who is a citizen in the U.S. We can't set a precedent that anyone can come here even if we don't legally allow them to. As with Yogurt, I don't get why your argument for not doing anything trade-wise with Mexico is a good thing. It is true that we lose billions of dollars from trade deals. It's obvious that there will be a reaction to any action America makes, but it's how you handle it. Besides, you can give and take if you need to. You act like whag I'm saying is an awful idea, but what I'm saying is a hugely general statement with infinite possibilities that fall under it. I'm not providing the actual solution, I just gave a general statement that we can alter deals with Mexico to indirectly have them pay for the wall. (Please get off the idea that this is about the wall with me. I'm explaining the reasoning behind Mexico paying for it, no matter how ineffective the wall is, because it's a separate discussion on it's own). I'm the one who told you that it was proven to be ineffective in most situations, so please, stop nonstop bringing everything I say back to the wall not working... I agree the war on drugs hasn't worked. Doesn't mean a wall couldn't make smuggling drugs/people in more difficult. Who knows, though, maybe it won't work for that either. I'm simply saying I haven't heard any analysis about that issue. Also, I didn't give my excuse for spending money as we waste money anyways. Hell, Mexico's supposed to pay for the wall themselves in Trump's idea. I was really just pointing out one of the many flaws in the government currently.

No one thinks it's easy, but it's hardly impractical. Every candidate has their idea on what should happen to the illegal immigrants - that being citizenship, legalization, deportation, and other factors. None of them have an idea for how to go about doing it, though. It's a huge, complex situation that will take years obviously.

Only ignorant people would think you like illegal immigrants if you dislike Trump's idea. Granted, though, many uneducated, ignorant people have been brought into politics this election year because of the candidates running.

I've never personally agreed with any of his proposals. Some of them do sound good, but there's proof out there that he doesn't actually want what he says he does. I've cited this in previous posts. I could get it for you if you'd like. (Where he's outsourced jobs to China, and is still doing so. Then claims this is what's wrong with our economy. So essentially he claims HE is the problem.)

Again, I don't agree with these plans. Although to be honest I'm quite surprised he's actually proposed one to get Mexico to pay for his wall.

So you admit the solution is bad?

Look. I'm not against deporting illegal immigrants, and I get you understand that. But funneling years of labor and money into something that won't do anything is a stupid idea. Unless we have a plan that will work, I think it's a complete waste of resources.

Over 10 million. All trialed in court. I'd be willing to bet money we don't even get most.

Let me reiterate. I'm not saying trialing them is a bad idea. But there's no way you can get 10 million out of the country without breaking any rights.

Again. I am against illegal immigration, and I know CM is. Me saying that it's not practical to deport illegal immigrants is different from me saying we shouldn't do anything about it.

When you have a plan that doesn't work, that's one thing. But when you have a plan that doesn't work and you're an ego-tastical asshole, I don't want you near the White House.

I'll admit it's very possible that cutting off wiring from US to Mexico may damper illegal immigrants, but most of that money is being taxed anyways. At this point the only problem with the money leaving the country is because they aren't a resident in the US. Not to mention the residents of the US that can't send money to their families.

"Give and take what you need" is the same mentality that's bringing us illegal immigrants. I don't think we can get Mexico to pay for a wall. I refuse to believe it can be done. All you can really do is piss a bunch of them off.

Most situations? I can't think of one benefit the wall would bring anyone. Except maybe the ladder companies. Oooh! And the drug dealers. Since prices would increase because you'd need someone on the other side to catch the drugs when you throw it over.

I think any investment towards stopping drugs is a waste of money. I believe that most crimes involving injury and death that were drug related are due to enforcement. I believe that if you get rid of the enforcement, you'd get rid of the aggressiveness of drug dealers, and prices of the product would drop significantly. Most in prison due to petty drug arrests are just in prison for profit. Not to mention it would save the government hundreds of billions ending the war on drugs.

How is it not impractical to round up and trial over 10 million illegal immigrants?

I'd actually like to see that reference. I've thought about Trump quite a bit, and he generally (although recently, he doesn't seem to be) admits that he did what many people dislike. I find that a good thing, if he would use that to benefit the country, because he would know many of the issues that businesses and the rich take advantage of. It really boils down to his intentions, and he's crazy about his ego and legacy, so I hope he would use that experience to benefit the country... As for the drug problem, I know this may start an entire other issue, but I would like drugs to remain illegal, with a mandatory sentence of forced rehabilitation and are released upon doctor's approval. Prison does nothing to non-violent drug users except mix them up even more with worse criminals. I'd also like the NSA abilities to be used toward serious crimes against others such as gang activity and drug lords. I personally don't care if they listen to my conversation with my Dad in order to rule me out. That's an entire other discussion, though. As with the idea that this would piss off Mexico... They obviously won't like it, and very well may do something to get back at us (such as raise prices) but we are being dealt the short straw in our trade deals and something needs to be done about it, even if it has nothing to do with the wall. I tried finding the article again but couldn't, but I believe I saw a few weeks ago an article that said how much of the money that is transferred from America to Mexico goes to their own government, and it was a surprisingly high number... Yea, it would have an effect on families in Mexico, but it would be used as a tool against the Mexican government. Honestly, you can't do anything without pissing someone off, and America is the ones who should be pissed off for dealing with incompetent leaders who put us in situations like this where we're being taken advantage of.

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Donald_Trump_Jobs.htm

There's a lot on there that I am seriously opposed to his opinion. I think that a lot of what he says isn't backed up, and simply isn't true. If you want me to do an analysis on it, I will. But what I want you to look at is where he is asked about outsourcing jobs to China. His only answer is "You haven't hired anybody.".

http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2015/08...omo-part-2.cnn

He has the power to take a lot of jobs which generate a substantial profitw and bring them over to the US. But he hasn't. How can you believe he truly cares about the country?



You could argue that he would move the jobs back to the US if he became president. But is that what it's going to take? He's gonna say **** all and keep his jobs in China unless we elect him?

Now we are going to hire Soul of Ninjas to revamp the tower system since they have a lot of experience with Towering.

We were to hire Bin Laden as head of the FBI's Anti Terrorist organization since he knows a lot about avoiding them, but he clearly died so nah.

We are going to hire a couple Crime Lords to take care of the DEA since they know a lot about drug smuggling.

You see what I'm trying to imply? If you're part of the problem, abusing loopholes or whatnot, why should we put you in charge of fixing them? How do we know you're not just going to try to benefit off of the responsibility of doing so.

Hell, here's a good example. You've been in charge of a GP team before. Would you hire a hacker to be on your team? You could argue that they would know how to find and prevent hackers, sure. But Slim over on Classic was a GP, and he ain't no more. Used his power to his advantage to take over a tower.

May I ask why?

This makes me think you assume all Mexicans are drug dealers....

Yes, but why would you want to piss someone off when there's no payout? If you take everything I say individually you can nitpick at it, but if you look at the entire picture you'd be justifying strategies to fund something as effective as attack butterflies.