Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum

As I'm sure you are aware by all the press, part of Trump's presidency is about sticking a $25Bn wall up around Mexico to keep Mexicans out.  There's a fair bit of hoohar about who's going to pay that, and just how many roads are going to be left with 'potholes'.  

One the one hand it can be suggested with technological innovations such as the current prototyping of "Flying Drone Taxi's" it implies that if you are going to build a wall, technology is likely going to lead to people flying over it, making it pretty much a waste of funding that could be spent elsewhere.  (Then there is lesser technology methods like Balloons, box kites, gliders etc)

Still it will probably go ahead even with such a short fall, and this obviously causes a lot of concern around the world from people that have seen first-hand how such walls work (Germany, Israel/Palestine, China, Hungary)

Personally I don't agree with a wall system but I've considered there might be a potential compromise, but it requires Incorporating a Town/City right on the border itself (It should have it's own rights like it was it's own small country).  The concept is the city would have the wall through its centre and there would be crossing points located in the wall there.  The town/City would control that point, the idea is that the city would be a bit like how Augusta is split between two states. 

Mexican families that had already migrated to the US might be concerned about visiting relatives the otherside of the border if ran using the current system just in case they can't return.  Creating a town/city that allows them to come and go within the town environment means they could have families visit one another with less concerns of such problems occurring at the border.

The Mexican side of the city should be built to the same level as what is expect of any major settlement so that it has all the things that are sought after by Mexican's when they usually attempt to migrate.  The idea is if those things are provided in Mexico, they don't need to cross the border to get them.  This means such a city would require financial backing to build businesses, hospitals, schools etc and in return it could produce goods and services that can be shipped to both the US (with a tax for the wall) and Mexico.

Ideally such goods and services should be ones that aren't supplied by US states (Consider that the State system is actually based upon supply and demand, where one state produces something that is demanded by the others and limited competition should exist so they all prosper)

The question to this though is do you think it would work? would it be worth crowd funding it?

Did you watch his speech?

Oops, I think that was the wrong one. Sorry.

Anyway, what’s the estimated cost of illegal immigration to our country per year?  Do you know?  How much does it cost to jail them?

A town?

Hey, I know…how about a prison?

(Jan 30, 2017 03:19 AM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ]Did you watch his speech?

Oops, I think that was the wrong one. Sorry.

Anyway, what’s the estimated cost of illegal immigration to our country per year?  Do you know?  How much does it cost to jail them?

A town?

Hey, I know…how about a prison?

I apologise if this hit a chord with you, since I think one of your previous monikers suggested a certain line of work in relationship to this very problem (if I'm not mistaken)

To be honest I don't actually know what the estimated cost is, but the same question could be asked of maintenance and repair of a wall, which could well prove an ineffective deterrent against tunnelling, climbing, flying over, sailing around, or just putting a hole through (what would happen if a civillian group of a large number marched to the wall and started taking chunks out of it with drills, jackhammers, picks, sledgehammers or just anything that can make a dent) and the worst bit about those points is people might just do those things to prove it can be done. (During the Berlin Wall numerous people tried many different ways of getting over, under or through.)

Also there is the ever increasing number of natural disasters (Hurricanes, Tornadoes, Tsunamis, Earthquakes) any of which could damage or destroy a wall to an extent.

As for a "town" it's just the consideration that if there is no reason to sneak over a border because what they are looking for is already available where they are they likely wont bother crossing while also potentially generating a revenue. That's something a wall on it's own won't do.

Like I said though it's just a potential compromise, no matter what happens the results are what people are going to have to live with for generations to come.

(Jan 30, 2017 05:03 AM)stryder Wrote: [ -> ]

(Jan 30, 2017 03:19 AM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ]Did you watch his speech?

Oops, I think that was the wrong one. Sorry.

Anyway, what’s the estimated cost of illegal immigration to our country per year?  Do you know?  How much does it cost to jail them?

A town?

Hey, I know…how about a prison?

I apologise if this hit a chord with you, since I think one of your previous monikers suggested a certain line of work in relationship to this very problem (if I'm not mistaken)

To be honest I don't actually know what the estimated cost is, but the same question could be asked of maintenance and repair of a wall, which could well prove an ineffective deterrent against tunnelling, climbing, flying over, sailing around, or just putting a hole through (what would happen if a civillian group of a large number marched to the wall and started taking chunks out of it with drills, jackhammers, picks, sledgehammers or just anything that can make a dent) and the worst bit about those points is people might just do those things to prove it can be done.  (During the Berlin Wall numerous people tried many different ways of getting over, under or through.)

Also there is the ever increasing number of natural disasters (Hurricanes, Tornadoes, Tsunamis, Earthquakes) any of which could damage or destroy a wall to an extent.

As for a "town" it's just the consideration that if there is no reason to sneak over a border because what they are looking for is already available where they are they likely wont bother crossing while also potentially generating a revenue.  That's something a wall on it's own won't do.

Like I said though it's just a potential compromise, no matter what happens the results are what people are going to have to live with for generations to come.

yes the idea of the city in a utopian sense sounds awesome.
however the nature of most humans is to seek a system of slavery.
thus a leader will need to be appointed to give orders to the others etc yadda yadda... ad infanitum.
until such time as the city is just another monopoly extorting the emotional bonds of people defined as victims.
and thus just another problem has been created instead of solved.

there are fundermental human intellectual evolutionary questions to be asked like...
"why does a group of people always need to define one person as superior to all the others and give them more power than the others?"
the very nature of the purported need to define the power is a statement of lack of intellect to solve the problem and/or an chronic pathalogical paranoia that drives never ending failure.

anywho... i digress.
i think the wall is a great idea.
if the USA can pull $25,000,000,000.00 out of its ass to spend on something that doesnt produce profit and only creates more on going costs and requires massive amounts of new government jobs created to support it..
then good on them.
they should be able to afford healthcare for all their citizens then shouldn't they.

Logistically speaking if the wall cant be policed for its entire length 24/7 then it changes the very nature of the wall.
it becomes a wall to keep people in like a prison.
what is one of the first things dictators do when they take power ?
stop people from leaving.
restrict movement
stop n search for all working class.
then it becomes neighbourhood zones where you cant be if you do not live in that area.
on and on it goes until the entire society eats its self completely as they always do.

as for the nature of the issue as to mexicans in the USA and USA people in Mexico... money-money-money...
well... it doesnt matter what benifits you place for those Mexicans working in the USA under the ideology that the USA can be their ticket to fame & fortune.
you only need look at Gambling to see how the reality of Gambling plays out as a social consciouseness.

the great southern gate city
the mexican gate
... crowd funding... you would need a few billion and considering it would require changes in law on both sides or an exemption from the law on both sides to work..
you will find yourself back around the same merry-go-round again facing the same despot dictators seeking to maintain their little ego tilted hunger games worlds.

they would be better off digging a moat.

cheapest best option.
the usa builds urban citys in mexico with rail links to the massive rural farms that employ all the illegal mexican workers.
all those republican voting rural farmers... who employ truck loads of illegal mexican workers.
the massive number of illegal mexican workers who prop up the american rural economy.
no wonder there is massive farming subsidys. they can afford it with not having to pay for health care or education for all those mecican illegal workers they employ.
merry-go-round ...
real answer is turning those workers into mexican middle class workers who then in turn create their own economy on mexican land at cheaper rates maintaining the fiscal benifit to the USa republican voting farm owners and rural economy while increasing the quality of life and education & healthcare for the workers and in turn creating thousands of new jobs and businessess servcing the new citys.
and then have the USA public, business, and Government continue to pretend the massive number of illegal workers from mexico do not need health care or educatiomn for their kids... oops i mean do not need to have work permits or pay income tax.

wanted to add something that those who are not macroeconomically savy may have absolutely no clue about.
the be all and end all is employment when itcomes to the USA.
much soo the same in many other countries also...

soo what is the downstream effect as time goes on ?
post wall built prevents 75% of ligitimate illegal workers from getting back in the country
AFTER government launches massive deportation mission of "war on aliens".
this then results in massive numbers of below minimum wage jobs being unfilled and the profit feed-back loop coming down to the coal face.
where is the money ?
govt & consumers

how do they get the consumer money if they cant put the over inflated priced product on the consumer market ?
they cant.

what is the other source of money ?
govt
ask govt to pay people to work the below minimum wage jobs to subsidise the over inflated price products on to the market.

soo next step
companys ask govt to make work schemes and visa schemes where people are put into work camps to work for these companies who wont pay market wage rates.


what is the knock on effect ?
wage rates.
the fact that the profit margin has been leveraged to take money directly out of the mouths of the workers.
imputos =  force down labour rates.
who is to blame ? profit margins or workers who want health care and housing ?
workers obviousely.
new legislation to force down minimum wage.
coupled covertly with government work schemes paying companies money to have low wage workers work for them to sustain the over inflated price margins.
the saviour arrives....
queue new scheme to give mexicans free work visas to work in jobs that have no housing or health care.

boom n bust same ol scam.
outsourcing continues.(i hope im wrong)

(Jan 30, 2017 05:03 AM)stryder Wrote: [ -> ]I apologise if this hit a chord with you, since I think one of your previous monikers suggested a certain line of work in relationship to this very problem (if I'm not mistaken)

To be honest I don't actually know what the estimated cost is, but the same question could be asked of maintenance and repair of a wall, which could well prove an ineffective deterrent against tunnelling, climbing, flying over, sailing around, or just putting a hole through (what would happen if a civillian group of a large number marched to the wall and started taking chunks out of it with drills, jackhammers, picks, sledgehammers or just anything that can make a dent) and the worst bit about those points is people might just do those things to prove it can be done.  (During the Berlin Wall numerous people tried many different ways of getting over, under or through.)

Also there is the ever increasing number of natural disasters (Hurricanes, Tornadoes, Tsunamis, Earthquakes) any of which could damage or destroy a wall to an extent.

As for a "town" it's just the consideration that if there is no reason to sneak over a border because what they are looking for is already available where they are they likely wont bother crossing while also potentially generating a revenue.  That's something a wall on it's own won't do.

Like I said though it's just a potential compromise, no matter what happens the results are what people are going to have to live with for generations to come.

No, Stryder, it was a just nickname.  I was a little bit cheeky, sorry.

I agree.  A wall is not necessary but the cost is a lot less than the fiscal burden of illegal immigration.

The grass is greener on the other side.  The benefits outweigh the risks.

We issue them a driver’s license, fund their education, and provide emergency medical care.  They can receive welfare benefits through their U.S. born children, they qualify for our (WIC) program, and we provide cash assistance to immigrant seniors and people with disabilities who were rendered ineligible for SSI.  

Rule #1:
Don’t feed the kitty.

Rue # 2:
Anyone caught entering the country illegally should be permanently disqualified from receiving a work permit and citizenship.

Rule #3:  
Increase criminal and civil penalties for employers hiring illegal immigrants.  If you sell alcohol to a minor you risk losing your liquor license.  If you hire an illegal immigrant you should lose your business license.

The following may not represent the opinions of the poster, reader discretion is advised. 

Is Trump a genius? This wall like any other constructed barrier that runs along a border (i.e. GW of China, Berlin Wall) will become a tourist mecca for years to come. It's more symbolic than something built to keep someone in or out. As everybody says, there's ways over, under and through so it's just something else that might be seen from space. And the advertising is supplied free, courtesy of the press. Tourist dollars for borderers, travel businesses, restaurants and whatever suits a visitor's fancy will bring in oodles of cash. It's a master stroke of economic enterprise and besides putting people to work, will prove the old adage of spending money to make money.

(Jan 30, 2017 01:06 AM)stryder Wrote: [ -> ]Personally I don't agree with a wall system but I've considered there might be a potential compromise, but it requires Incorporating a Town/City right on the border itself (It should have it's own rights like it was it's own small country). The concept is the city would have the wall through its centre and there would be crossing points located in the wall there. The town/City would control that point, the idea is that the city would be a bit like how Augusta is split between two states.

Are you referring to several individual towns / cities that would be split on each side of the wall (serving as gateways)? Or to one continuous urban sprawl running along both sides of the border?

In some regions, Trump's unbroken wall isn't going to be anymore possible than the existing fencing. Or trying to build the wall in those places would be a waste of money and resources.[*] Depending on highway access and the harshness / vulnerabilities stemming from the terrain and untamed waterways, an elongated community straddling both sides of the borderline would similarly have to fizzle-out along many lengthy sections.


The Texans who live on the ‘Mexican side’ of the border fence: ‘Technically, we’re in the United States’
https://www.yahoo.com/news/blogs/lookout...12787.html

EXCERPT: This will be Taylor's fourth Christmas living on what some Texans call the "Mexican side" of the U.S. border fence. Although she lives in Texas, her home is south of the 18-feet steel-and-concrete border wall erected by the American government [...] Because of a decades-old treaty with Mexico prohibiting building in the Rio Grande floodplain, the government built its border fence more than a mile north of the snaky river, trapping tens of thousands of acres [...] on the wrong side of the fence. [...] Some Texans, like Taylor, live completely on the other side of the $6.2 million-a-mile wall. Others had their property split in half by the fence, after the government seized portions of their land. [...] Ten years ago, Taylor found a stranger sitting in her living room. [...] A few years later, she found 40 kilos of marijuana hidden in her bougainvilleas. [...] But the government's solution [the fence] to the problem strikes her as ridiculous. "It's really done nothing for us because they're still coming across," Taylor says. Earlier this year, teenage illegal immigrants pounded on her front door in the middle of the night. She called the Border Patrol, which arrested them and a group of Hondurans they were trafficking, according to Taylor. She keeps a gun and a taser in her house, just in case...

- - - - - -

[*] Most of the border – 65 percent of the nearly 2,000-mile border – has no fence. In its place are natural barriers such as rivers, cliffs and mountains that make it difficult to cross or difficult to build. Some of these are places with so little movement across the border that previous administrations have deemed a barrier unnecessary. The biggest unfenced sections are in Texas, where the Rio Grande River forms a natural barrier. Other large gaps are in remote parts of New Mexico and Arizona. Here and there, the fence also has smaller stops and starts.... https://www.revealnews.org/article/the-w...all-order/

i did some rough math on the existing crappy quality wall that was built back in 2000(ish)
the cost was placed at roughly 12.4 billion
soo to get todays cost you need to double that price.
which is more than the purported cost.
ongoing maintanance contracts, policing and additional earth works required to build it should place around a 25% increase on top of a 15% increase.

soo thats 25 billion + 15% to get to current market rates = 32 billion
then add 25% to get all additional costs to build it and build buildings and gates.
thats another 8 billion.
thats 40 billion
now you have to pay for all the extra police/gaurds
say maybe 1000 new full time jobs at around average of 45k per job
= 45 million dollars per year in wages.
plus around 15% to pay for related emplyment costs = around 54 million per year loss.
then maintanance contract
i expect there will be a retainer fee of around 1 million US dollars per year to which ever comapny gets the contract and they will likely bill an average of 2 million per year regardles of actual work done.


soo we are up to 57 million loss per year
on a spend of $40,000,000,000.00 USD
interest return expected on 40 billion dollar investment is around 15% = 5 billion per year loss of earnings plus 55(im rounding) million per year running costs)
= 5.6 billion dollar per year loss on something that has no resale value and has no asset value and no income.

how many investors would be happy to invest in that with their own personal money ?