The World According to Nick
Politics, News, Photography, and Triathlons... What don't I talk about?
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
<< Will You Stop "Helping" Already? Contemplation >>
What About Canada?

I talked briefly last week about how building a wall on the Mexican border was a waste of money (a lot of money) aimed purely at making people feel like we're doing something.  A lot of people have asked me what I'd do to stop illegal immigration.  My biggest problem with immigration aren't the Mexicans who come over here.  My problems with immigration have to do with the welfare state, and supporting some of them with tax dollars.  I believe if we were to get rid of a lot of the welfare built around that population, then the magnet will go away somewhat.  Freedom, opportunity, and the chance at a better life will always be a magnet.  The people who choose to keep coming here despite the lack of government money are the type of people who I want to come.

So next they cried, What about the terrorists Nick?!  My God... the terrorism... how could I forget?!  If you can't win an argument on the merits, then shout terrorism and you win.  It's the 21st century equivalent to Godwin's Law.  My short answer is that if a wall would only slow down illegal immigrants by about 5 minutes, what makes you think it will be any more effective against terrorists?  And even if it were... are you planning on building a wall on the Canadian border too?  Because if you don't do both, then you might as well not do either.  If we build a wall across the Mexican border, then the terrorists are just going to look at a map, see an undefended border that's three times as long as the border with Mexico and come in through there instead.

# Posted at 8:23 AM by Nick  |  Comment Feed Link 6 Comments  |  No Trackbacks

 Add to del.icio.us |  Digg this Post | Filed Under: Politics

Wednesday, June 13, 2007 10:06:41 AM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
I agree with you completely.
jesusisjustalrightwithme
Wednesday, June 13, 2007 10:37:47 AM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
You don't need a wall. Prosecute everyone who hires an illegal immigrant and the jobs will dry up.

Make it so only U.S. citizens can get any financial or medical assistance from any government program and the benefits will dry up.

Do both, and there will be no rewards for coming to the states illegally and people will stop doing it.

It's not rocket science...and it's not gonna happen.
Wednesday, June 13, 2007 1:02:36 PM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
I agree with you completely, elliot.
Wednesday, June 13, 2007 3:37:05 PM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
"You Complete Me"
Wednesday, June 13, 2007 4:41:43 PM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
I'll get to the points I disagree with you in a bit. The draw of a guaranteed welfare state is indeed quite powerful, especially from a culture where the moon is promised and not delivered. Indeed, that's what made Wisconsin a welfare magnet back in the 1980s and early 1990s. Kill that draw and some of the illegals won't come.

The bigger problem is the level of regulation and taxation placed on those that do follow all the rules. There are entire classes of jobs that just are not worth effectively paying $6.25 per hour (once the payroll taxes are factored in). With the minimum wage going up to $7.25/hour and the effective cost of an employee going up to $7.75/hour, there will just be more jobs that won't be filled legally. Worse, between the artificial inflation throughout the economy caused by the minimum wage and the average 5% sales tax, there are any number of living situations (some even not caused by desire that is larger than the pocketbook) that are simply unsustainable by those earning something near that minimum who are trying to do so "legally".

Insofar as the 5-minutes goes, if there were any interest in securing the border, there would also be a "rapid reaction" team within roughly that distance to the border. That 5 minutes would slow down the invaders, be they "day-laborers" or terrorists or drug smugglers, enough for a signifcant number of them to get caught. Indeed, terrorists may take longer because they wouldn't want to announce their presence at the border, and might take the time to cover their tracks unlike the other groups.

Of course, there is no interest in actually securing the border for various reasons (that's a story for another post or dozen). I will say that if the more-radical of the illegals got their way and got the Southwest for either Mexico or themselves, that southern border will become a lot longer and a lot harder to defend.

The "problem" with the northern border is rather self-limiting. Take out the longest undefended border in the history of mankind and there are only two ways into Canada; by sea and by air (nobody is going to be walking the ice pack from the northern edge of Greenland or Russia). The illegal ways in via those two routes, lying to immigration and packing oneself into a container ship, are just as easily accomplished coming directly into the US as they are by coming to Canada first. While the Canadians aren't exactly thorough, they're more-competent and less-corrupt than the Mexicans.

One more thing - even though it takes far less than 5 minutes to break into a locked house or car, I'll wager you still lock your house and car up.
Thursday, June 14, 2007 10:58:25 AM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
I agree with you on the levels of taxation that occur Steve. That is the whole point behind eliminating the income tax and replacing with a sales tax. It removes a huge barrier to entry for businesses to hire workers, especially on a short term basis, and especially for people who are not well equipped to deal with red tape (and shouldn't have to) like farmers and ranchers.

I see your point on the Canadian border being self limiting, but you can make similar arguments about Mexico, since it's just as far away from the Middle East. In both cases, the easiest way to get to either is by ship/plane and then cross the border. Canada's entry policies by Sea/Air are not as rigerous as the U.S., so it would still be attractive as an entry point, especially since walking across the northern border undetected is easier.

As far as your car locking analogy... it's not exactly valid. It doesn't cost me several billion dollars to lock my car. If it did, I'd probably leave it unlocked.
Comments are closed.


© Copyright 2012 Nick Schweitzer
Powered By newtelligence dasBlog 1.9.7067.0
Theme Based on Design By maystar