If you ride your dirt bike along the border there (I did), then you will find a few dirt roads that cross the border that look heavily used. I spent 8 hours down there and was not approached by any Border Patrol (Saw some from 100 feet away, but no contact)
There is so much stuff crossing the border, in so many places.
https://www.google.com/maps/@31.333054,-110.626566,3a,75y/da...
They watch the evening news, see a big wall on TV, hear Trump talk about extending the wall, assume it's the same wall all across the USA, and then continue on with their life like normal humans.
http://tomohalloran.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/wall-noga...
compare that to the photo of the barbed wire fence along the border in the other comment.
I'm genuinely surprised by your experience. Maybe I was simply lucky enough to only talk about border issues with more educated than average people. I guess it's because I was in college when I lived there, and mostly hung out with Latino college students.
We drove past a border patrol depot, and there were literally hundreds of vehicles. "Wow, the border patrol must have a huge number of staff to keep most of those active at once" > "No, those are just for the TV cameras - border patrol doesn't have anywhere near that number of staff"
Other oddities that stuck out for me in the area were that the border ingress to Mexico was literally just a turnstile, and that the distance markers about 20km short of the border on the US side were, indeed, in km instead of miles.
Yes, that's the point. For a country whose first words were "all men are created equal" we've built up a mindboggling apparatus for demonstrating that that's not true.
I agree on law and order, but again, isn't it a little crazy that in one state you have one set of laws and then once you cross an imaginary line you get an entirely new set of laws?
However, it's a perfectly coherent idea: it has a concrete meaning that is easy to understand.
What do you think is incoherent? A plan to build some kind of physical wall (barrier), or a serious plan to keep people from crossing the border outside of the normal immigration process, or both?
Whether it is realistic, plausable, beneficial, cost effective, or just plain stupid is another question.
On the other hand, given the trade deficit he could say, we're pulling out of Nafta, unless you kerb your unauthorized border crossings.
Alternatively he could fine the unauthorized border crossers they catch and partially fund it that way. Or he could institute temporary permits (seasonal whatever) and impose a fee for those. Also fine employers who hire undocumented workers and fund it partially that way.
It really depends on what he means by "Mexico" and "pay". But if he's flexible, and he appears to be, it could be possible.
Trump doesn't help his case by simply headlining "and Mexico will pay for it" over and over, but he does mention practical suggestions (even if you remain opposed to the fundamental concept) from time to time on most of his policies.
Why would I think it wouldn't be porous? It's been that way the entire history of the world, why should we change it now?
The legalization of marijuana is a much bigger battle. We will not get all the benefits of the free market unless government regulations are substantially reduced. If you cant buy Marijuana in Target or Wallmart it probably wont suffice.
Recession? Poor private companies groaning under the massive burden of big-government regulation, and idiotic government "interventions" in the market are to blame! Economic boom? The miracle of the free market succeeding in spite of all obstacles! Hail the market! Down with big government!
The difference, of course, is that I don't know anyone who actually takes the "government is always the solution" line, but I do know plenty of people who take the "government is always the problem" line. So, um, nice straw man you've go there.
I take it you haven't had much debate around the concept of a free-society without government. You bring that one out, and suddenly everyone is a statist that thinks that "government is always the solution", for every problem imaginable.
Heck, I'm an anarcho-capitalist and even I think government should be the solution to every problem. That is, as long as I'm paying taxes. While that's the case they better well be using my tax contributions to solving those damn problems, even if government isn't the "best" solution for them.
That does not mean there are less drugs being imported, just that less are being seized. I worked with the Border Patrol years ago and it was astounding how they tracked success:
- When arrests increased, they celebrated that enforcement was working.
- When arrests decreased, they celebrated that deterrence was working.
Heads I win, tails you lose.
While I'm in favor of legalization, you should take these numbers and the process that created them with a grain of salt..