Damn, it started well but you went into some really deep prejudice. I’ll take note that Taiwanese are the best ROI for low cost immigrants - apparently much better than Mexicans.

How about putting some reins on the real estate and trading markets instead of “getting better immigrants”? Sounds a little bit more logical.

> but you went into some really deep prejudice

Can you elaborate what deep prejudice you got from that comment?

Building a wall to keep the Mexicans out. Seems pretty fucked up from my POV, somebody who has lived in SoCal for nearly 25 years.

What obligation does a country have to non-citizens who entered (and stayed in) the country illegally? FWIW I grew up in San Diego county, less than 20 miles from the border

What obligation do I have to sign on to exclusionary immigration policy. The southern border is just a line in the sand. No party (US or Mexico) has a reasonable claim to the land to begin with.

Building a wall is just a dumb move regardless.

If a state’s borders aren’t enforced, either those borders are not in fact the state’s real borders, or the people residing within those “borders” are living in a failed state.

This logic isn't remotely sound. It's a ridiculous false dichotomy. There's a third option: It's a normal state that hasn't built walls around it like some kind of medieval walled cities. Do you think every state that isn't completely walled off (there are basically none besides the Vatican) is "failed"?

Who said anything about walls? A state’s borders are defined by the land area over which it upholds its own legal system. If a state’s legal system is unenforceable within its so called “borders”, then by definition those are either no longer its borders, or the people living within the land area over which the state’s legal system cannot be enforced are living in a failed state. The borders will have become disputed in that case.

I am not in favor of states.

And as I said before, the southern border is mostly made up. People crossed it for thousands of years without some crappy wall in the way. They will continue to cross it even with a wall.

> I am not in favor of states.

What are you in favor of, then?

Nature. Genetic diversity. Freedom.

A border wall is an ecological tragedy.

It’s to keep anyone out who isn’t coming here legally. Mexicans who are going to follow our laws(starting at the border) and will be a net benefit to the US will be welcomed.

I can understand that sentiment in countries where you have a very strong (and expensive) social safety net. It’s funny to hear it from the USA, which is not that, and was built by immigrants…

Do you also deport citizens who are not a “net benefit”? Would be the logical thing to do.

The USA has a very strong and expensive social safety net.

No, I do not want citizens deported; they are citizens. However, we should be extremely selective with immigrants.

> And at the same time, deporting all illegal immigrants (to free up housing)

These people are responding to demand for cheap labor and trying to better themselves. The real way to address this is severe criminal punishments for their employers.

> deporting all illegal immigrants

Finding them requires a level of police state that it's unclear the US will tolerate, even if you promise them it will only be applied to non white people. It would start with mandatory ID and work up from there.

Has it not occured to you that Mexico is a potential secondary supplier to China?

It is surprising that helping your neighbors not become a threat to the US through voluntary means is not on the table.