Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum

https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/...133953449/

it seems that this is a Global anthropological macro-ecconomical issue.

1. USA outsources its labour(jobs/majority of low or easily taught skilled) to 3rd world countrys to increase profit as a primary(& socially accepted) corporate policy.

2. USA company owners employ illegal migrants to work illegally at below market rates in vast numbers.

3. Drivers of illegal(ecconomic/non at-war countrys) migration as a process are generally ecconomic & thus any richer or more productive country will always attract people who seek to make more money..
which is essentialy capitalism as a social driver.

so just musing a little here. if for theorhetical arguement sake(given the usa would never do it) all illegal workers were stopped from working in the USA.
would it undermine the US capitalist system/society ?

is there in fact 3 parts to this issue that none of which seem to be getting discussed openly  ?

(the worker)capitalist ideology seeking better income
(the company/corporate)capitalist ideology seeking to always pay workers less & less
(the global species conditioning/normal behaviour)anthropological aspect of the human species seeking to always seek to increase their standard of living to a better standard via migration

They have unemployed, prisoners, volunteers and armed forces personnel all capable of doing work.  Hell, armed forces personnel could help build a wall and shoot anybody who tries to get past it illegally. Build the frigging thing if you want it, be great tourist attraction for both countries .

(Nov 13, 2017 08:37 AM)RainbowUnicorn Wrote: [ -> ]2. USA company owners employ illegal migrants to work illegally at below market rates in vast numbers.

Trump vaguely entertains allowing guest-workers through the wall, with temporary permits.[1] An idea which caused friction with conservative idealists for George Bush back in his day.[3][4]

Trump emphasizes the wall stopping drug-running and contraband, when the "illegal immigrants --> rapists and murderers" meme gets tiresome. Data-junkies contend that most drugs and black-market goods enter through legal gateways.[2] (Skeptics might riposte: "You can only measure what is seized, and that largely happens at those entry ports." Or that statistical claims like "the fact is that most illicit drugs pass undetected through legal ports of entry" seem contradictory.)

AFAIK, Trump doesn't dredge up how a towering wall in combination with a seasonal guest-worker option might decrease the deaths of illegal immigrants when crossing dangerous desert stretches and encountering other threats (Migrant deaths along the Mexico-US border). During decades when people smuggling operations were exploiting migrants right and left, many were dying of suffocation and dehydration in sealed freight and locked truck containers.

But OTOH, there are gaping drainage / sewer systems and other vulnerabilities that illegals could still circumvent the wall by. As well as the wall maybe not being built across the most treacherous and difficult terrain anymore than the current fence is.

footnotes

[1] It wasn't really covered by the White House press, but apparently they [Trump & Mexican president] talked about the need for a guest worker program, something similar to the Bracero Program which from 1940 to the 1960s, 5 million Mexicans received contracts to work in the United States legally as seasonal workers. And that's interesting because in the last few years, we've seen that the Mexicans coming to the United States has really fallen to an all-time low throughout the United States whether, whether it's the meatpacking industry in the Midwest or the agricultural fields in Central California. So there is a kind of a growing sense of nostalgia for the Mexicans. I think employers are beginning to really miss the Mexicans. And the fact that the two sides even broached the issue I thought was quite significant. (Trump And Mexico's President Talk Need For Guest Worker Program)
- - -
[2] President Trump says that his proposed wall along the Mexico border “will stop much of the drugs from pouring into this country.” We cannot predict the future, but the fact is that most illicit drugs pass undetected through legal ports of entry. (Will President Trump’s border wall stop drug smuggling?)
- - -
[3] George Bush: Yet even with all these steps, we cannot fully secure the border unless we take pressure off the border--and that requires a temporary worker program. We should establish a legal and orderly path for foreign workers to enter our country to work on a temporary basis. As a result, they won’t have to try to sneak in. We will enforce our immigration laws at the work site, and give employers the tools to verify the legal status of their workers--so there is no excuse left for violating the law. We need to resolve the status of the illegal immigrants who are already in our country--without animosity and without amnesty. (Source: 2007 State of the Union address to Congress , Jan 23, 2007)
- - -
[4] Pat Buchanan: After 5 years of ignoring the border, President Bush declared in Tucson, "we will not be able to effectively enforce our immigration laws until we create a temporary worker program." This is naked extortion. The president was saying he cannot do his constitutional duty to protect the country from invasion unless we first agree not to deport the 12 million invaders already here. President Bush needs to be told politely but pointedly, "No deal, Mr. President! No amnesty!" His guest worker program is a scheme that means open borders forever. Though President Bush may declare, "I oppose amnesty!" every time he speaks, his guest worker program is amnesty, both for the illegals and for the businesses that hired them. (Source: State of Emergency, by Pat Buchanan, p.252 , Oct 2, 2007)

- - -

Do walls work?

The Great Wall of China (wikipedia.org)
This wall obviously worked, it still stands to this day and it is Legendary because of it's size.  It's visible from space and a tourist attraction (which is kind of funny since it was suppose to keep the hordes out)

This particular wall likely had the less interaction between the forces protecting it and those that might attempt to encroach it.  It's sheer size was enough to make most consider not bothering (and make them ransack in a different direction)

Hadrians Wall (wikipedia.org)
The Romans had a tough time with the Pict's back in the day, so they tried to wall them off.  It kept them busy for a while, until one day Rome called its "expansionism" over, leaving the wall to fall to rack and ruin.

The wall itself was guarded by Roman soldiers with ballista's.

The Berlin Wall (wikipedia.org)
Germany after WWII was literally crippled by the Allies/Soviet Pact by a wall.  For decades the wall was guarded by armed soldiers, which state spying, espionage all playing a part in maintain the walls stature, along with the deaths of people attempting to cross.

Israeli West Bank barrier (wikipedia.org)  
Not really something I want to comment on, after all the news use to be "suicide Palestinian" this and "Israeli bulldozed" that. Of course the wall isn't there due to immigration (well other than when Israel decides Palestinians are occupying their new housing estate), I guess it's there to try and stop them brickbatting or shooting each other.  I wouldn't suggest that the wall actually suggests they'll be any progress in the long run between them, if anything it just keeps it going.

Australian Dingo Fence (wikipedia.org)
While it wasn't meant to keep people out (or in), it attempted to keep Dingo's at bay, however I'd assume that removing one problem just led to a whole bunch of others.

Hungarian Border Barrier (wikipedia.org)
This is probably more in line with what Trump assumes would work.  The problem is that if people meet a fence they can not climb over, dig under or cut through, They will instead walk it's length looking for a potential weakness, gap or place they can exploit.  If the fence is long and unbroken it could lead to people walking for miles to the point of exhaustion.

In the case of Europe, walking it's length leads to to Austria and obviously the Austrians weren't too happy about what this meant (I guess Romania wasn't happy either).


conclusion:
In the case of these walls (and others not noted) they all lead to other problems, be it the requirements to keep them manned, the method of how people are handled should they be caught attempting to breach and what the likelihood is that if they can't find a straight forwards approach they will attempt something else.  

Furthermore it's a lot of money to be spent on something, considering the number of "Natural" (Obviously not Climate related) Disasters that happened this year in the America's, It wouldn't make sense to put money on a wall when some people lost their homes.  Like I will point out though, I'm not an American so I don't actually have a say, it's just what I'd consider common sense.

(Nov 14, 2017 09:55 AM)stryder Wrote: [ -> ]Do walls work?

The Great Wall of China (wikipedia.org)
This wall obviously worked, it still stands to this day and it is Legendary because of it's size.  It's visible from space and a tourist attraction (which is kind of funny since it was suppose to keep the hordes out)

This particular wall likely had the less interaction between the forces protecting it and those that might attempt to encroach it.  It's sheer size was enough to make most consider not bothering (and make them ransack in a different direction)

Hadrians Wall (wikipedia.org)
The Romans had a tough time with the Pict's back in the day, so they tried to wall them off.  It kept them busy for a while, until one day Rome called its "expansionism" over, leaving the wall to fall to rack and ruin.

The wall itself was guarded by Roman soldiers with ballista's.

The Berlin Wall (wikipedia.org)
Germany after WWII was literally crippled by the Allies/Soviet Pact by a wall.  For decades the wall was guarded by armed soldiers, which state spying, espionage all playing a part in maintain the walls stature, along with the deaths of people attempting to cross.

Israeli West Bank barrier (wikipedia.org)  
Not really something I want to comment on, after all the news use to be "suicide Palestinian" this and "Israeli bulldozed" that. Of course the wall isn't there due to immigration (well other than when Israel decides Palestinians are occupying their new housing estate), I guess it's there to try and stop them brickbatting or shooting each other.  I wouldn't suggest that the wall actually suggests they'll be any progress in the long run between them, if anything it just keeps it going.

Australian Dingo Fence (wikipedia.org)
While it wasn't meant to keep people out (or in), it attempted to keep Dingo's at bay, however I'd assume that removing one problem just led to a whole bunch of others.

Hungarian Border Barrier (wikipedia.org)
This is probably more in line with what Trump assumes would work.  The problem is that if people meet a fence they can not climb over, dig under or cut through, They will instead walk it's length looking for a potential weakness, gap or place they can exploit.  If the fence is long and unbroken it could lead to people walking for miles to the point of exhaustion.

In the case of Europe, walking it's length leads to to Austria and obviously the Austrians weren't too happy about what this meant (I guess Romania wasn't happy either).


conclusion:
In the case of these walls (and others not noted) they all lead to other problems, be it the requirements to keep them manned, the method of how people are handled should they be caught attempting to breach and what the likelihood is that if they can't find a straight forwards approach they will attempt something else.  

Furthermore it's a lot of money to be spent on something, considering the number of "Natural" (Obviously not Climate related) Disasters that happened this year in the America's, It wouldn't make sense to put money on a wall when some people lost their homes.  Like I will point out though, I'm not an American so I don't actually have a say, it's just what I'd consider common sense.

some excellent points.

why do you think the government never go and arrest the thousands of farm & business owners who employ all those millions of illegal immigrants ?
i am assuming because they must mostly be Republican party members who control voting electorates and donate money to the Republican party and can swing a state to the democrats if they annoy them.

has the agricultural busines association of america got together with the republican party to put on busses to buss all their illegal workers in to get working visas ?
that would seem to make sense.

(Nov 14, 2017 09:55 AM)stryder Wrote: [ -> ]Do walls work?

[...]

conclusion:
In the case of these walls (and others not noted) they all lead to other problems, be it the requirements to keep them manned, the method of how people are handled should they be caught attempting to breach and what the likelihood is that if they can't find a straight forwards approach they will attempt something else.

Furthermore it's a lot of money to be spent on something [...]

The Maginot Line certainly wasn't a "wall" in any literal sense. But as a member of a general category for impediments to invasion it would be an example of a flaming historical fail.

"The line has since become a metaphor for expensive efforts that offer a false sense of security."

- - -

is it built yet ?

they probably having issues finding illegal workers to build it for below minimum wage & no insurance cover.

(Jan 2, 2018 02:08 AM)RainbowUnicorn Wrote: [ -> ]is it built yet ? they probably having issues finding illegal workers to build it for below minimum wage & no insurance cover.

Well, it required a combination of both magic and ordinary labor to build The Wall in *Game of Thrones*. Sorcery is scarce in this world, but Trump believes in miracles. The Wall was 700 feet tall and still some of the Wildlings managed to climb its icy surface. I guess migrants represent the latter in White House mythos, or at least the "criminals, drug dealers, rapists" among them. Difficult to say what the White Walkers correspond to. Maybe the ultimate terrorists with dirty bombs, biological agents, or home-made nukes?

With the menaces residing beyond a southern border rather than the extreme north, Trump's bogeyman landscape is also geographically inverted from that of Game of Thrones.

- - -

I've always thought of "the Wall" as more rhetorical than literal. To me, the phrase means 'regaining control of our borders', by whatever means.

In some locations, such as where Mexican cities directly abut the border (Tijuana, Juarez) a wall is probably the best choice.

Elsewhere other methods might be more effective. (Land-mines come to mind. The argument against them is more emotional than practical.)

Efforts needn't resemble a barrier and needn't be located at the border. For example, roll out a difficult to forge biometric national ID card and make it a condition for employment, driving a car or renting housing.

Simply enforcing existing law that's been on the books for decades would go a long way. (Are you listening Jeff Sessions?)

Enforce 18 USC 1324 which makes harboring illegal aliens a felony. Perp-walk all the sanctuary city mayors before the TV cameras in hand-cuffs. In San Francisco, where an illegal shot a tourist, ask for the death penalty for the city officials. 18 USC 1324 already makes harboring an illegal who kills somebody a death-penalty offense for those harboring the illegal.

Cut off all federal funding (student financial aid, research grants, everything) for all American universities that admit foreign students, unless all of the foreign students they admit are in the country legally.

There are no end of ways to address this besides a literal barrier.

(Jan 2, 2018 05:41 PM)Yazata Wrote: [ -> ]I've always thought of "the Wall" as more rhetorical than literal. To me, the phrase means 'regaining control of our borders', by whatever means.

In some locations, such as where Mexican cities directly abut the border (Tijuana, Juarez) a wall is probably the best choice.

Elsewhere other methods might be more effective. (Land-mines come to mind. The argument against them is more emotional than practical.)

Efforts needn't resemble a barrier and needn't be located at the border. For example, roll out a difficult to forge biometric national ID card and make it a condition for employment, driving a car or renting housing.

Simply enforcing existing law that's been on the books for decades would go a long way. (Are you listening Jeff Sessions?)

Enforce 18 USC 1324 which makes harboring illegal aliens a felony. Perp-walk all the sanctuary city mayors before the TV cameras in hand-cuffs. In San Francisco, where an illegal shot a tourist, ask for the death penalty for the city officials. 18 USC 1324 already makes harboring an illegal who kills somebody a death-penalty offense for those harboring the illegal.

Cut off all federal funding (student financial aid, research grants, everything) for all American universities that admit foreign students, unless all of the foreign students they admit are in the country legally.

There are no end of ways to address this besides a literal barrier.

all the government & lobyists need do is enforce the prevention of busines owners from employing illegal workers, AND make it more expensive in fines than it costs to make a profit from it.
then it would be solved.
but the reality is more that there is an ongoing slave trade using mexicans AS illegal workers then trying to deny them rights.

building a massive wall that soaks up money that is taken by force from low income working class so as to deny them social services seems like continued facist enslavement.

IF the US business community were not profiting from the illegal employment of illegal immigrants to make profit then a wall might be quite practical.
however, once you look at the simple ecconomics as to what part the illegal workers play in the countrys economic system, it looks like an extention of the slave trade in an economical model while pretendint to be morally superior.

using tax money taken by the vast majority from working class citizens to pay for the profits of those private companys that employ illegal workers is morally bankrupt.