Tell an Australian what the argument is against building a border wall.

Sure, but how does illegal labour fit into this?

 

That's a different piece of the puzzle which requires other strategies.

 

Yeah but how do you respond to the argument that American's don't want the jobs that illegal aliens do? Therefore, the aliens fill a labour shortage.

 

Only until they discover our stupid welfare system.

 

Wouldn't they know about the welfare system from the start?

 

What, that it presents a cost free alternative or that it can result in death?

That didn't stop you from suggesting how he MIGHT have got in did it? So then why did you say "tunnel" earlier?

 

Add this to the drug cartels. Amazon can deliver a package or Dominos a pizza to your door via drones. Marijuana is homegrown now so the drugs of concern mainly aren't that heavy. A wall does squat against a drone no matter how sophisticated.

The other problem with a wall is it works more to keep people in than out. The US side is heavily guarded whereas the Mexican side is not. It's not too hard to put a ladder up on the Mexican side and drop down by rope on the other. It is however hard to put a ladder up on the US side because it is much more heavily guided. The Berlin wall kept people in not out. The effect of this is to encourage those that are in the US to stay and since it's hard to get out it also encourages them to bring the family in as well. If a guest worker program were set up they'd come in for a few months leaving wife and kids behind and go back and forth to stay with them.

 

I don't remember. Maybe because it's one way illegal aliens might get into the U.S., I guess...

 

In the case of migrant farm workers, I would think only by word of mouth, if that.

 

Yeah, it is. However, is that really realistic? And other than a tunnel, can you actually think of another way?

 

Are you applying this to aliens? I assuming you mean they can get welfare with the right fake documents, right?

 

You're going around in circles...

 

Over, under, around, and through, are all ways to get passed a wall. Through, either by knocking a hole, or by smuggling. Yes, people are smuggled in today, without a wall.
And yes, they are realistic ways.

 

However, just because something can be subverted does not mean that it is not an impediment. Subversion is only necessary when there is an impediment to begin with.

Walls have never been able to go beyond slowing down an invader. That, however, affords border guards more time to react.

 

An extremely costly impediment. To the point of almost worthless.
Billions and billions of $$$$$ isn't worth a mere impediment. IMO.

 

So you have nothing else against the wall other than the cost? Then you're a sensible lefty.

 

So much for 4 feet tall!

 

I think what you are saying here is that many American's can't realistically work in agricultural employment because they wouldn't be able to get to work easily. I just don't understand how the welfare system has slowed the development of transportation infrastructure. The Welfare System and Transportation System are quite separate from eachother. Its sort of like saying that the Health System has had a negative impact on the National Security System.

 

How can you go through a wall by smuggling?

 

Are you saying that aliens, once in the US, go back to Mexico through the desert?

 

No I'm not. That would imply that I'm asking you the question after you've already answered. Can you think of another way or not? Just tunnels then?

 

Yes, if they went through a border control they get put in the system as having been in violation and subject to 20 years if caught in the US again. By sneaking out they avoid that.

 

Yeah okay, I thought that might have been the case. However, how many of them STAY in their country after they go back?

 

Really, no idea. But it has been documented that many go back and forth to be with their families.

 

Okay, but what does that have to do with the fact that a wall keeps people in? So aliens won't be able to go back and forth to be with their families - so what? I don't see your point, but perhaps you can elaborate.