Reason Roundup

Trump Wants $5 Billion for a Border Wall. Here Are Some Better Alternatives: Reason Roundup

Plus: Postmodern marketplaces or fraud? And the Reason webathon continues!

|

ARIANA DREHSLER/UPI/Newscom

Migrants, Mexico, and Medicare. In an interview with Jake Sherman, President Donald Trump insisted that nothing less than a $5 billion budget for his border wall will do. "Politically speaking," the wall "is a total winner," said Trump. "The $5 billion is a MINIMUM — he wants more for security," Sherman tweeted Wednesday morning. "5b is just for the wall."

Instead of spending billions on a wall or summoning more troops to the border, Reihan Salam offers "an unexpected solution to the migrant crisis" in his latest at The Atlantic, which ends with a proposal to let U.S. retirees use their Medicare benefits for health care in Mexico. It starts with Salam offering one theory as to why Central American migration has picked up in recent years, in addition to increasing levels of violence in certain counties: "the surge in asylum claims has led to a severe backlog," which has in turn led to even more asylum claims.

Actually getting asylum status in the U.S. is hard, but getting an application accepted is (once you get to a U.S. border and are actually granted a chance to apply) pretty easy. And because it takes so long for our government to process asylum claims, many who apply are released on bond and granted the ability to live and work in the United States for months or years before their asylum claim is accepted or rejected.

"Though it is undoubtedly true that high levels of violent crime have been pushing people out of the Northern Triangle, even as homicide rates have declined in recent years, the pull of family ties and economic opportunity is at least as powerful a force," suggests Salam.

Drawing on World Bank data, the Pew Research Center found that remittances from migrant workers represented 17 percent of GDP in El Salvador, 11 percent in Guatemala, and 18 percent in Honduras as of 2016, numbers that have likely increased in the intervening years. Yet as the anthropologist David Stoll has observed, it is important to emphasize that remittances do not flow evenly. Some households in the Northern Triangle have loved ones living and working in the U.S., while others do not, and the gulf between them stimulates further migration as have-not families seek to join the ranks of the haves by sending one of their own abroad. … Over the course of several years, entire social networks can uproot themselves, and those seeking a decent life at home find themselves at a distinct disadvantage.

One way to mitigate the probem would be for asylum seekers to remain in Mexico while they wait out claim processing, a proposal that Mexican's government seems amenable to. From Salam:

The Remain in Mexico plan would change this dynamic. Those asylum seekers who pass the credible-fear test would be expected to remain in Mexico while their cases are adjudicated. Exceptions would be made for those who can establish that they have a reasonable fear of temporarily residing in Mexico, but that would be a higher bar to clear. In practice, one of the main reasons Central American migrants prefer to live in the U.S. over Mexico is that, simply put, wages are higher north of the border, which is not in itself grounds for asylum. López Obrador has often expressed a desire to aid Central American migrants, and that has been echoed by Mexican officials who've pointed to job openings in the maquiladoras of Tijuana and other growing cities that could be filled by asylum seekers.

In an interview with The Washington Post, Sánchez Cordero underscored that "we want [Central American migrants] to be included in society, that they integrate into society, that they accept the offer of employment that we are giving them." Elsewhere, she has discussed granting 1 million work visas to Central American migrants, in keeping with López Obrador's concept of employing said newcomers in his efforts to revitalize southern Mexico. Though Remain in Mexico would not be a "safe third-country agreement," which would essentially bar migrants passing through Mexico from applying for asylum in the U.S., it has the potential to bring an end to the periodic border crises that have roiled the country since the summer of 2014.

But Trump would need to give Mexico something in return, writes Salam. One thing that would benefit both countries would be if U.S. retirees could use their Medicare benefits in Mexico:

Needless to say, such a proposal would surely be met with ferocious resistance from U.S. medical providers who fear the prospect of foreign competition, and their political allies would surely denounce it as part of a larger plot to export aging Americans en masse. But U.S. retirees are growing more diverse, and a large and growing number of them have origins in Mexico. Many of them would welcome the opportunity to reconnect with their ancestral homeland, provided that they wouldn't have to surrender the promise of high-quality medical care in their twilight years in the process.

Salam adds that "the benefits for Mexico would be immeasurable." Plus:

.. taken together, Remain in Mexico and Medicare-in-Mexico would bind the U.S. and Mexico in a mutually beneficial relationship around immigration. Mexico would help the U.S. exert greater control over migration flows, and in exchange, the U.S. would make a serious commitment to fostering economic opportunity for Mexicans and Central Americans closer to home, thereby helping to keep families and communities intact. The presence of large numbers of older Americans in the region, meanwhile, will give the U.S. an even greater stake in helping maintain its security and prosperity, which would be all to the good.

But Reason's Shikha Dalmia is skeptical. She tells me this morning that while Salam's Medicare proposal is interesting, "it can only play a very marginal role in propping up Mexico's economy."

Meanwhile, Salam "is seriously downplaying the role that social breakdown and escalating violence in the Northern Triangle has played in creating the migrant crisis," as well as the way "that America has played a major role in destablizing the region," she says, pointing to her recent article on the subject in The Week.

Dalmia also worries that the Trump administration would spend "gobs of taxpayer money" getting Mexico to go along with asylum seekers remaining there. Trump and his ilk worry about "welfare moochers," but this would be worse, creating "a net loss to America, whereas if [asylum seekers] were allowed to come and work here, they'd grow the economy and pay taxes."

However, she notes that Salam's "Medicare idea and admitting these migrants [are not] either/or. Both help the US and Mexico and migrants. Both should be pursued!"

FREE MARKETS

Postmodern marketplaces or fraud? Read this New York Times tale of an online retail rabbit hole that leads to Newsweek scandal and a Bible college under investigation for fraud. Among many other interesting bits, it explains what's going on with weirdly expensive yet mundane Amazon products:

There was little pattern or theme to what these Amazon shops sold. They had everything from hemorrhoid cream to desk lamps, and there were varying levels of inventory….They were also strangely expensive. You might be hard pressed to imagine someone paying $42.66 for 6 ounces of Ulcer Ease Anesthetic Mouth Rinse, $52.00 for three boxes of Queasy Pops, or $127.09 for beige compression stockings in medium.1 But perhaps not having done their research, some people do."

Known as "dropshippers," they "are online sellers who don't keep any products in stock. Instead, they advertise a product and, if it is purchased, they buy the item from overseas and ship it directly to the customer." And there are layers and layers of them, "a kind of product version of clickbait." But is it all to a deeper end?

Trying to map the connections between all these entities opens a gaping wormhole. I couldn't get over the idea that a church might be behind a network of used business books, hair straighteners, and suspiciously priced compression stockings—sold on Amazon storefronts with names like GiGling EyE, ShopperDooperEU and DAMP store—all while running a once-venerable American news publication into the ground.

QUICK HITS

• Reason's webathon continues all week!

  • Donate here.
  • Reminders why Reason is great here, from current editor-in-chief Katherine Mangu-Ward, and here, from her predecessor and current editor at large Nick Gillespie.
  • Watch Reason's special live podcast on Facebook, YouTube, and Reason.com today at 1 p.m. Mangu-Ward, Gillespie, Matt Welch, and Peter Suderman will answer your questions about sex, drugs, robots, politics, and more.
  • Have a question for the podcasters already? Send it to podcasts@reason.com

• Yikes. From the Yale School of Management: "A new study suggests that white Americans who hold liberal socio-political views use language that makes them appear less competent in an effort to get along with racial minorities."

• Fox's new streaming station seems off to a good start:

• More on the #ThotAudit:

• Experiments in content and influence monetization.

• "By rejecting the new rules for Title IX investigations, the ACLU has come out as an opponent of due process rights on college campuses," writes (former Reason intern) Lindsay Marchello at The Federalist. "This position is blatantly contradictory to their core mission of protecting civil liberties."

• The president talks climate change:

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

187 responses to “Trump Wants $5 Billion for a Border Wall. Here Are Some Better Alternatives: Reason Roundup

  1. For every minute Roundup is late, I take another thousand dollars from my donation. Reason now owes me $19,995.

    1. And that’s just the overtime!

      (joke explanation: Fist is a Reason employee)

      1. First of all, I wouldn’t be an employee, I would be running things. And the Roundups would run on time!

        1. you know who else had roundups that ran on time?

          1. Monsanto?

          2. NKVD?

          3. Cowboys?

    2. Hello.

      In honour of lateness.

  2. The new Fox Nation shows are amazing. pic.twitter.com/53B2UUCYLp
    ? Will Sommer (@willsommer) November 27, 2018

    A whole new group of people we are allowed to dump water on when we see them in public?

    1. I don’t think having a duel with crazy naked guy is a very good idea.

    2. Was his gun fully cocked when he arrived?

    3. “I cannot humiliate Howarth anymore than he has done to himself. Honor is satisfied.”

    4. this is my rifle, this is my gun.

  3. My goodness, here is what Trump said about climate change to the Washington Post. I recommend reading it in Tommy Wiseau’s voice. https://t.co/jRkPjwxmdn pic.twitter.com/2WNRIuWFCs
    ? Daniel Dale (@ddale8) November 27, 2018

    Oh, hi rising ocean levels!

    1. It’s bad enough when people blame a president for all of the world’s problems. But blaming him for your personal problems? That’s just off-the-scale weird.

      1. Virtue signaling. Being More Woke than Thou requires constant escalation, from gay marriage (which I support) to gender fluidity and 67 genders. The second the 9th circuit rules the govt has to recognize all 67 genders, the left will say we live in a fascist state because we don’t recognize all one thousand of them.

        I’m waiting for lily white libs to start claiming reparations because they were oppressed in their past lives – “You are the descendant of slaves? That’s nothing; I actually was one of the slaves.”

        1. “A new study suggests that white Americans who hold liberal socio-political views use language that makes them appear less competent in an effort to get along with racial minorities”

          Full 360 will be white liberals blaming minorities for their problems caused by hating themselves

    2. If your wife wants to leave you because of you are not fanatical enough in your politics, I think you should consider her doing so as doing you a favor. I want to know who marries an “activist woman”. Are these men just some form of masochist and just enjoy being miserable?

      1. “who marries an “activist woman””

        Eunuchs and, dare I say, cucks.
        If baculum could get one, he’d say “I do” in a heartbeat

    3. I tend to believe that opposites attract, and I find myself drawn to people who have divergent views, unless they are completely bat shit crazy, in which case pass.

  4. Mom Dresses Six-Year-Old Son As Girl, Threatens Dad With Losing His Son For Disagreeing
    In their divorce proceedings, the mother has charged the father with child abuse for not affirming James as transgender, has sought restraining orders against him, and is seeking to terminate his parental rights. She is also seeking to require him to pay for the child’s visits to a transgender-affirming therapist and transgender medical alterations, which may include hormonal sterilization starting at age eight.

    1. Classic case of Munchausen by proxy syndrome. Mentally ill leftists trying to make their kids as mentally ill as they are.

      1. I’ve been saying that for a while.
        Modern leftism is very much munchausen by proxy.
        If there were no oppressed classes, what would become of their white knights?

  5. Huh, still nothing on the French people fighting for their little remaining freedom they have left against their Macronian socialist-enviroNazi overlords.

    Reason’s motto: “If we can’t blame it all on Trump somehow, we don’t give a fuck.”

    1. Nothing from you either. Got an English-language links? Follow Johnny Longtorso’s example.

        1. Now that you’ve done that, what more do you expect Reason to do?

        2. In hindsight, I should have mentioned that my comment was a trap. You fell for it! HA HA HA HA HA

        3. Mikey, did you donate yet? If you do, you’ll get a personally signed item from ENB!!

    2. I’m surprised they haven’t come with an article to the effect of “Trump stirred up the French deplorables against the noble French king who is heroically fighting global warming”.

  6. By rejecting the new rules for Title IX investigations, the ACLU has come out as an opponent of due process rights on college campuses,” writes (former Reason intern) Lindsay Marchello at The Federalist. “This position is blatantly contradictory to their core mission of protecting civil liberties.”

    The new core mission is to virtue signal into the din.

    1. We’re probably all fortunate that Corsi didn’t “remember” being sexually assaulted by Brett Kavanaugh!

      1. You would have thought the threat of throwing him in prison for the rest of his life for “lying to investigators” would have done the trick.

        And how do you coerce someone to do that? I guess Mueller sees the 5th Amendment as advisory?

        1. He either lied or, as he claims, was “forgetful.”

          A jury can decide, with death in prison the cost of a poor throw of the dice.

          Let’s hope Mr. Mueller does not give Mr. Stone a chance to toss the dice. No deal for him unless he becomes the most valuable and reliable witness federal law enforcement has even encountered.

      2. Not yet, but he will!

    2. Believe the accuser.

    3. “Room 101” said the officer.
      The man’s face, already very pale, turned a color Winston would not have believed possible. It was definitely, unmistakably, a shade of green.
      “Do anything to me!” he yelled. “You’ve been starving me for weeks. Finish it off and let me die. Shoot me. Hang me. Sentence me to twenty-five years. Is there somebody else you want me to give away? Just say who it is and I’ll tell you anything you want. I don’t care who it is or what you do to them. I’ve got a wife and three children. The biggest of them isn’t six years old. You can take the whole lot of them and cut their throats in front of my eyes, and I’ll stand by and watch it. But not room 101!”
      “Room 101″ said the officer.”

      ? George Orwell, 1984

    1. Wasn’t that a joke? The tweet was a comic variation of the opening lines to Moby Dick. Did people not understand that?

    2. Is McAfee retweeting his own shit now? This tweet was discussed on here months ago.

    1. Well, on the bright side when Single Payer comes to King County Washington we know one gun control ordinance that is sure to be repealed.

  7. Watch Reason’s special live podcast on Facebook, YouTube, and Reason.com today at 1 p.m. Mangu-Ward, Gillespie, Matt Welch, and Peter Suderman will answer your questions about sex, drugs, robots, politics, and more.

    KMW in the previous post advertised it as being tomorrow. I smell a rat.

  8. So, let me get this correct. We should let American retirees use Medicare in Mexico, so presumably more retirees will move there. And simultaneously we should make it easier for immigrants to move into the US.

    That seems way too expensive. I think we should consider a satiristic Swiftian alternative.

    Perhaps we could allow any immigrant who can remove a US retiree from the SS Medicare rolls to move to the US. They can stay for however long the retiree would have been expected to draw benefits. They can “renew” their length of stay periodically by removing an additional retiree.

    1. Wouldn’t the Medicare in Mexico likely save money?

      1. Well, Medicare would have to pay for Spanish lessons, transportation to and from, and temporary housing.
        (and maybe bodyguards)
        So, not really gonna save anything.

    2. Trump said he would get Mexico to pay for the wall. The only way to do that is to tax Mexicans, and he can’t do that unless he imports them with a big whopping tariff. Tariffs are not taxes, they are benefits, they boost GDP, so it’s a winner all around — get the wall built so them damned tax-paying furriners can’t leave — get a tariff benefit from all them furriners coming in, especially if ICE has to drag them back every time they climb the wall.

      1. No, the govt can tax reparations from Mexicans in the US back to Mexico.

        1. 125% comes to mind – – – – –

          1. So where is the fucking wall then?

      2. Supposedly illegals may more into the tax system than receive.

        Mexicans are paying for the extensions to the border wall that was already there.

    3. Explain “remove”.

      1. Sleeping with the fishes….

    4. How about this idea. Calculate the per capita cost of keeping each American on Medicare. Then admit any immigrant who is willing to pay that cost to stay in the country. Let immigrants sponsor old people the way evangelicals sponsor kids in third world country. You could do the same with Social Security.

      1. That’s essentially the argument for immigration they make – we need the taxpayers to fund social programs for an aging native population. A white English speaking retiree class being supported by a heavily taxed brown Spanish speaking working class being not the most stable situation isn’t addressed.

        1. That is the argument they make. But they do nothing to ensure that actually happens. If you had a strict system whereby every immigrant was matched up to an old person and had to pay that person’s freight and pay taxes otherwise for say ten years, immigration would work. But they want to let anyone in regardless of whether they contribute anything.

          1. This is akin to arguing for legalizing drugs for the tax benefits. To me, not really a principled approach, even if it might be politically expedient.

            1. They aren’t into the principled approach. They are into the results-oriented conservative approach, with ‘conservative’ having its traditional meaning, i.e., things staying the way they are. They want America to stay as it is and they don’t mind breaking principles to keep it that way.

              1. “Keeping things the way they are” isn’t a principle?

        2. We need more doctors and engineers not dishwashers if we want to pay for the retirees. That’s why the Orange Menace actually should be expanding merit based legal immigration but he’s afraid of brown people.

          1. He wants to. He has offered to legalize the DACA people in return for the Democrats agreeing to a merit based immigration system. And since the Democrats only care about votes and importing poor people, they told him to fuck off.

    5. “We should let American retirees use Medicare in Mexico, so presumably more retirees will move there. And simultaneously we should make it easier for immigrants to move into the US.”

      Just wait until you read the impending “The Libertarian Case For Nicolas Maduro” article from Reason.

    6. … “removing an additional retiree” ???? you looking to bring in more sicarrios?

    7. That seems way too expensive. I think we should consider a satiristic Swiftian alternative.

      Can you imagine what Nancy Pelosi would taste like?

      http://gph.is/2hSYXzk

  9. Have a question for the podcasters already?

    The libertarian moment seems to have the momentum of a runaway freight train. Why are free minds and free markets so popular?

    1. Is the runaway freight train G, O, HO, or Z scale?

  10. Ohio GM Workers Voted for Trump. Now They Want Him to ‘Step Up’

    Keeley is one of the thousands of workers at GM’s Lordstown factory near Youngstown who learned that the plant is being idled in March, with no new production promised. He said he voted for Trump two years ago because of the Republican’s vow to help American workers.

    “I thought he was going to do miracles for us, so did a lot of other autoworkers,” Keeley, 46, said outside Ross’ Eatery and Pub near the plant. Keeley has worked for GM for 26 years but has been laid off since June. “He needs to step up to the plate and do what he said.” Bloomberg

    You were conned by the Con Man. Now the Idiot in Chief wants a 25% tariff on all cars.

    1. So pack up and move to where the jobs are.
      Nobody promised you a rose garden.

      1. No no no. Those Ohio workers have a duty to fix their own state of Ohio before migrating somewhere else. Where is their Buckeye Pride?

        1. So, taxing GM for the jobs being lost to pay for career retraining programs? Glad you’re on board with that!

    2. They weren’t conned by the con man, they decided to work at a company that makes shitty cars no one wants to buy. The automobile market is pretty fucking competitive, and what you are seeing in the news is a car company that got their ass kicked. I predicted this when they went belly up 9 years ago – they didn’t fail then because of their contracts with the UAW (although they didn’t help), they failed because nobody wants to drive their piece of shit cars.

    3. I thought Obama saved GM. How can this be happening? You mean maybe Obama just wasted billions of dollars in tax money to delay the inevitable?

      1. GM is doing very well. They earned over $5.00 a share this past year.

        1. We agree on something. They just don’t see a market in the USA for cars, they are selling all the trucks and SUVs that they see in an already flooded market so they’re downsizing. They’ll upsize again if the market picks up. They are expanding in China because there is a big demand for cars there and in Asia, still.

          1. Right – which is why the TPP was so important. The growth is in Asia and setting the trade rules for China was the plan. US manufacturers were begging to pass TPP.

            But Trump is too stupid to understand that.

      2. He did.

      3. You mean maybe Obama just wasted billions of dollars in tax money to delay the inevitable?

        A rare point of agreement between myself and John.

        I would only add that it was a bipartisan Bush-Obama auto bailout.

        1. No Jeff, the automotive bailout was all Obama even if he shoehorned it into a program created at the Bush-Obama transition. the $50B+ in giveaways to Government Motors was all on the lightworker.

    4. “I thought he was going to do miracles for us, so did a lot of other autoworkers,”

      And here I thought I was being hyperbolic and sarcastic in referring to Trump as Our Lord and Savior, turns out some people don’t see “Cheeto Jesus” as a derogatory appellation. I wonder what they think of the Chocolate Jesus they no doubt avidly supported 10 years ago. And which God they’ll be worshipping come 2024. Religious freaks sure are fickle in their faith, aren’t they?

  11. A new study suggests that white Americans who hold liberal socio-political views use language that makes them appear less competent in an effort to get along with racial minorities.

    Finally I get to use a timely meme in context.

    1. You see it here all the time. Look at any post from Tony or the rev.

    2. that meme is as old as the internet almost.

      1. Well, Know Your Meme says the Internet was created two months ago. And if anyone knows their memes, it’s them!

        Granted two months is indeed hardly “timely” for anything but the normiest normies. But guilty as charged.

  12. Here’s what’s actually happening with the caravan in Tijuana in the aftermath of the Border Patrol defending our borders:

    “Migrants are facing diminishing prospects to get to the U.S. soon and after violent clashes Sunday between migrants and U.S. security officers at the border.

    About 200 migrants have filed for voluntary repatriation with Mexican authorities over the past two days in Tijuana, said a senior officer of Mexico’s migration agency. No such requests were made in the prior week.

    A group of 105 migrants, most of them from Honduras, departed by plane from Tijuana’s airport on Tuesday, said Gerardo El?as Garc?a, head of Mexico’s migration agency.

    Another group of 98 migrants are being deported to their home countries in buses, because they were among those who attempted to force their way across the border into the U.S., Mr. Garcia said Tuesday.

    Petitions for asylum in Mexico have also rose this week, to 47 requests on Monday from an average of 15 to 20 petitions in previous days. Some 200 migrants have filed for asylum in Mexico over the past week, a person with knowledge of the filings said.”

    —-WSJ

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/as…..543408278?

    Regardless of how you feel about asylum and immigration, the fact is that as the difficulty of entering the U.S. illegally increases, asylum seekers and would-be illegal immigrants make other plans.

    1. The overwhelming majority of the migrants in that caravan–yes, even most of the men–are undoubtedly as Trump would say “good people.” The bastards who manipulated them into this stunt should be made to pay! These are human beings, not pawns for your little game!

      1. There was a brief piece ‘on page 6, under the fold’ regarding some activist outfit who claimed to be the organizer, but I’ve yet to see a thing regarding who bank-rolled the operation.
        Believe me, those people didn’t live, poop and travel for a month on the kindliness of the Mexican population.

        1. Most of the people who travel take money with them. They travel in caravans otherwise that money would be stolen within a few days of crossing the border. Mexican gangs see them as easy money if they’re by themselves. You should read more and speculate less.

          1. Additionally, this is the 21st century, even the peasants can work in the US or Honduras and wire transfer money to Tijuana in minutes and most certainly overnight.

            Prior to the whole caravan hoopla, NPR was running stories about immigrants being swindled. They would get to the border and, within hours, produce $10K to pay coyotes. A couple of stories had multiple families scraping together an additional $5-10K after they’d crossed as hush money to a coyote or crooked CBP/INS agent.

            That two months prior they were running stories about how something like 50% of Americans were below the poverty line, as defined as having $1000 on hand within 24 hrs. for emergencies, seemed to be forgotten.

        2. Most of the people who travel take money with them. They travel in caravans otherwise that money would be stolen within a few days of crossing the border. Mexican gangs see them as easy money if they’re by themselves. You should read more and speculate less.

          1. Your links fell off.

      2. I want more legal immigration (at the expense of illegal immigration), but I also want intellectual honesty. The idea that discouraging illegal immigration is useless because it isn’t 100% effective is intellectually dishonest at best–plain ol’ stupid at worst.

        This recent NYT article suggests that human traffickers charge $6500 a person to smuggle individuals across the border.

        http://www.nytimes.com/interac…..costs.html

        It may be reasonable to think that as their difficulty increases, so do their fees. As their fees increase, presumably, so does the number of migrants who are willing to pay them to be smuggled. If smugglers can charge these people so much, their services are likely to be valuable. All those central Americans in that sports stadium aren’t simply filtering across the border at night because it isn’t as easy as it sounds.

        We shouldn’t pretend like we don’t know anything about economics when it comes to illegal immigration, and the fact is that patrolling the border, making it more difficult to cross illegally, etc. has an impact on illegal immigration–even if its impact isn’t an absolutely perfect and complete solution. I remain opposed to building a wall because I don’t think the positive impact will justify the costs, but that doesn’t mean I have to pretend it’s completely ineffective.

        1. “As their fees increase, presumably, so does the number of migrants who are willing to pay them to be smuggled [decrease].”

          Fixed!

        2. You’re right, Ken, to an extent – more resources thrown at enforcing a prohibition can sometimes increase the effectiveness of the prohibition. But we all know where this will end up in the end, because we all know how prohibitions eventually turn out. Either the prohibition becomes so draconian that it winds up being a virtual police state to enforce it, or the black market wins out in the end and the prohibition crumbles and falls apart (as we are seeing now with pot). So sure, prop up the prohibition now with more resources devoted to enforcing the border if you want. The logic of prohibition means that the inevitable next result will be for a wall, and when that doesn’t work, even more expensive and restrictive measures than that.

          1. You’re a retard.

            1. I’m actually agreeing with you, Ken. What’s the matter, can’t take yes for an answer?

              1. Hey, at least Ken didn’t take 3,000 words to call you a retard. If only his other posts were as succinct.

                1. Ken is upset that there aren’t more Republican toadies in the forums, such as himself.

                  Why can’t we all just give Republicans more of the benefit of the doubt? I mean, they *intended* to cut spending! They really did! And intentions really really matter!

                  We all need to bend over backwards to see Republicans in the most positive light that we can.

                  Democrats on the other hand are presumed to be America-hating vermin and are to be given no quarter.

                  And you’re a retard if you don’t see that!

                  1. If they spend the same, but one side lets me keep more earned money while also not calling me a racist because of the color of my skin, its a really easy choice.

                    1. Actually, if one side were to call me racist but let me keep even more than the other guys, I’d go with them. Being white, progressives will call me racist no matter what.

    2. They were totally taken advantage of by the activists. The activists no doubt lied to them and told them they were going to get into the country. They activists knew that was a lie but they wanted a publicity stunt and didn’t give a shit about the harm they were going to cause to the immigrants.

      It is pretty sleazy when you think about it.

  13. …President Donald Trump insisted that nothing less than a $5 billion budget for his border wall will do.

    Shouldn’t that be expressed in pesos?

    1. Only a fool would quote a price in pesos for an offer on the table for more than a few hours!

      1. They haven’t made a table strong enough that can hold that many pesos.

    2. No because despite Twitlers claims, the Mexicans ain’t paying for it.

  14. Didn’t see this mentioned:

    “Mexico’s new foreign minister also called on the Trump administration to contribute to development projects to help create jobs in Central America to stem the flow of migrants from the impoverished region, suggesting an appropriate figure would start at $20 billion.”
    http://time.com/5465364/mexico
    -house-migrants-central-america-aid/

    My hint for the foreign minister is ti figure out why the private sector of your economy isn’t ‘creating jobs’.
    Government created jobs are make-work operations,

    1. America is gonna send money to incorrigible countries who would just steal it at the upper levels of government.

      1. Pretty much. I actually wouldn’t mind aid being sent to countries but it just ends up in the pockets of bankers, gangsters, and politicians in the country and only a smidge ever makes it to help out the people it was sent for.

        1. I personally mind all global wealth redistribution that comes out of my pocket.

          “The people it was sent for” will gladly accept your personal donations, why must you involve me?

  15. “The $5 billion is a MINIMUM ? he wants more for security,” Sherman tweeted Wednesday morning. “5b is just for the wall.”

    Fuck – how much is the beautiful door in the wall he promised going to cost?

  16. It has been nearly TWO years of the Orange Cocksucker – when are we go to see one of his “great deals” you Trumptards?

    1. Looked at the Dow lately?
      Checked the interest rate on your savings account?
      Looked for a job? (sorry)
      Read anything about consumer confidence?

      Didn’t think so.

      1. Yeah, The Dotard inherited a robust economy. So what? The Dow picked up the large majority of its gains while Obama was POTUS. UE fell the most while Obama was POTUS. Etc.

        1. 1% growth is robust.

          Hoo-kay.

          1. Liar.

            GDP averaged about 2.5% since 2010. The numbers are about the same today.

            The Dotard’s 4.1% in the last quarter would have been only the FIFTH best growth number of the Obama years.

            1. As usual, your citations fell off BUttplugger.

        2. “It’s OBAMA’S ECONOMY!!!”

          Lololol you idiots never quit trying tgat, and it never stops failing.

          1. It’s such a stupid trope it’s unbelievable.

            1. Demanding credit like that is just so desperate and tasteless.

    2. I hold out hope that people will now realize that you cannot and should not depend on the government to solve your problems.

      1. Good luck with that. Every time this topic comes up, on a libertarian website mind you, we have supposed libertarians arguing which President is responsible for the economic booms or busts.

    3. Sarah Palin’s Buttplug|11.28.18 @ 10:13AM|#
      “It has been nearly TWO years of the Orange Cocksucker ”

      Two years of your loser whines, pathetic asslicker.
      Fuck off, turd.

      1. Do you prefer Twitler or Cheeto In Chief then?

    4. Maybe right after Mueller comes out with actual proof of collusion with the Russians.

  17. So the dust has settled on the 2018 election and the GOP gained only two (2) Senate seats. When four or five pickups were predicted by Trump supporters based on his 2016 performance in each state. Maybe it wasn’t a Blue Tsunami, but I think the elections did demonstrate that our president has tremendous baggage that independent voters (the ones who decide elections) do not want to lift for him. What factors (other than the Dems nominating an out and out socialist) lead one to believe Trump will win re-election if he decides to run again in 2020?

    1. The likelihood that the Dems will nominate a nutjob that will motivate Reps and scare some independents.

    2. Dems +40 in the House without a message other than “Not Trump” is the most telling sign that Trumpism is a failure.

      1. About average gain for minority party – –

        1. The average was said to be 24, with data to back that up.
          40 is not ‘about’ 24, nor vice versa.

      2. By that metric Obama was an even bigger failure.

        1. Obama lost 63 House seats in 2010.

      3. People ignore independent voters, but they’re the ones who actually think about who they vote for rather than whether there is an R or D.

      4. Democrats could not even achieve 235 House seats which is what the current GOP controlled 115th Congress has.

      5. “Not [Whoever]” is frequently, maybe mostly a winner, but as soon as you have to vote for someone, it gets hard.

    3. Those two seats are big, especially when combined with Flake and Corker leaving the Senate. The GOP can now write off the votes of three Senators on any appointment. That means Collins, Murkowsky and Romney will not have a swing vote.

      The loses in the House were about average for a midterm election. Average loss in the House and a small but significant gain in the Senate is not a bad midterm by historic standards.

      1. Collins is why the tax reform didn’t kill the state tax exclusion completely instead of protecting $10,000.

        Collins, Heller, and Murkowski were largely to blame for why both the ObamaCare repeal and the ObamaCare reform were killed.

        This Senate would have passed the ObamaCare repeal. If that’s the difference between this Senate and the last, then, yeah, that’s a big deal.

        1. It’s a big deal for appointments, for other things it doesn’t mean much since the House will block everything the republicans try to pass.

          1. Yes, and that’s the real difference.

            It isn’t necessarily that the Republicans are philosophically different than they were before. It’s that they no longer control the House.

            1. It isn’t necessarily that the Republicans are philosophically different than they were before.

              97% of them are going to be exactly philosophically as they were before. I hope you didn’t throw away all your old “Repeal Obamacare” bumper stickers, yard signs and posters – I’m pretty sure it’s going to be a big talking point once again. Oh, all the wonderful things the GOP is going to promise they’d love to do, if only it weren’t for those dastardly Democrats blocking their attempts.

        2. Corker and McCain were just worthless. Their leaving alone makes the Senate much better than it was. The House waxes and wains. It is not that hard to retake the House. Since only 33 Senators are up for re-election every two years, retaking the Senate is hard. So losing the House by a small majority is not really that big of a deal.

          1. The Democrat House may commit political suicide and impeach Trump at some point. Of course, no way the Senate convicts–especially since the Senate is more pro-Trump than it was before.

            Other than that, yeah, the House goes back and forth. If Hillary Clinton had won the White House, we’d be looking at big Republican gains in the House. That’s just the way that game is played.

          2. Democrats could not even surpass the 235 House seats that the GOP currently holds in the 115th Congress. Democrats are at 233 and they might steal one more to 234.

    4. It was a pretty impressive #BlueWave, and likely a realigning election. But there are more than one type of swing voter. Trumpism, such as it is, is likely excellent for some kinds, horrible for others, in between for still more.

      I think economic problems will definitely have the ability to tank him. And it’s important to remember that Hillary was a very, very, very weak candidate. But the thing is the Democrats don’t really have much of anyone any better; and to the extent that they do, they may lack the ability to pick him. There is a very good chance they will get it even worse in 2020. That, and their idiotic unforced errors in messaging, are the reason the GOP, which probably demographically already does not “deserve” to be anything but a permanent regional minority party, keeps getting a stay of execution. (I also think Trump actually did them a favor by focusing them squarely and promptly on their “natural” future as an electoral coalition. Though someone who did that but avoided his own errors would of course have been possible and even better.)

      1. Even though I don’t like him because he is a protectionist the Dem nomination is Sherod Brown’s if he wants it.

        Populism of the left variety, iow. And Ohio to boot. He wins there as Ohio moves rightward.

      2. “It was a pretty impressive #BlueWave”

        I can’t believe you’re still trying this.

        1. I believe this is the first time I have said this. Early post election, when it looked a bit smaller, I characterized it as modest and smaller than expected and pretty unimpressive. (Though I was busy freaking out about New York State, which affects my own life much more and was a true landslide.) I have reassessed. I think it’s clear they did pretty damn good in the House, and at the local level. Not crazy, crazy good, but quite good.

          1. Hey man, being impressed by incredibly average things is allowed if that’s how you want to be.

            1. Cry more|11.28.18 @ 10:49AM|#
              “Hey man, being impressed by incredibly average things is allowed if that’s how you want to be.”

              Trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill seems your specialty.
              Who’s sock are you?

              1. Go back to bed gramps you don’t even know what we’re talking about.

                1. Cry more|11.28.18 @ 11:04AM|#
                  “Go back to bed gramps you don’t even know what we’re talking about.”
                  Fuck off, Hihn.

      3. Employment, growth and wages are up. Maybe the economy will tank. If I knew what it was going to do, I would be very rich. But if it doesn’t, it is hard to see how Trump’s policies are bad for any large group of people except for maybe government bureaucrats.

        I think the biggest problem facing the Democrats in 2020 is how to motivate all of their identity groups. The problem Hillary had was that her being a woman may have motivated some women to come out but blacks really didn’t give a shit. If they run a black candidate, Hispanics are likely to be less than enthused, especially since it would be the second black nominee and there has never been a Hispanic one.

        It is going to be very difficult to recreate the Obama coalition where the historic nature of him bieng the first black President caused other identity groups to show up and vote for him as well as huge black turnout.

        1. Trump must hold the Midwest though. He barely won many states there, and while their destiny is red they are still on that journey. An average re-election bid would see some erosion of support for the incumbent, so he must make this not an average election. An even slightly heartland-appealing candidate could make it a major challenge for him. Plus he (and the party in general; remember they’ll be other races!) will likely have to defend some new purpling territory–and remember Republicans are the poorer party now.

          All in all I’d wager Trump will indeed win, as I always have. I do not think he will need to hit 40 among Latinos. (I think he will do better than he did in ’16, which was already better than average–I think only Reagan and GWB hit 40 in the last four decades–but not anywhere near 40.) But he may be the last GOP nominee who does not. They have been saying for decades that Republicans would absolutely need to do so starting in 2000, but it would be incredibly foolish to think that just because they jumped the gun that it will not be true in the future. There are a lot more of us now, and as of last election we seem to be actually voting which was not true in the past.

    5. The results are in line with past elections.

      1. Every election has different issues. Voters don’t go in the polls thinking “well, historically the president’s party has lost seats so I guess I’ll just go along with history and vote for the other side.” This time, with a really great economy rolling along, the GOP should have done much better than whatever “history of midterms” would indicate.

        1. Hundreds of thousands of Republicans didnt vote.

          That happens in midterms but nearly every Democrat who could vote, did. Its why there were so many close races. Those hundreds of thousands of GOP voters will vote in 2020, like they did in 2016 and blow the Democrats out of the water. That and Trump will get reelected.

        2. creech|11.28.18 @ 10:52AM|#
          “This time, with a really great economy rolling along, the GOP should have done much better than whatever “history of midterms” would indicate.”

          Not according to the D’s, who were banking on a “blue wave” and pulled out all the stops to make it happen.
          It didn’t.

    6. The GOP flipped 4 Senate seats.

      The GOP losing Arizona was a slight surprise but Nevada wasnt.

      The Democratic Party losing Florida was a sign of things to come.

      Hundreds of thousands of GOP voters didnt vote for whatever reason. Nearly every Democrat voter that wanted to vote, did. This also scares the shit out of Democrat leadership.

      1. Wow man.

        Make hilarious terrible predictions (was it house Rs GAIN seats, house senate with huge gains, massive gubernatorial wins for the Rs?, red wave?), lose, spin, make excuses, polish the turd?

        Jesus it’s painful to watch, have some dignity man.

  18. What Obamacare Sabotage? Under Trump, the Health Law Is Working Better Than Ever.
    Premiums are down and choice is up after Republican tweaks to the Affordable Care Act.
    Peter Suderman|November 27, 2018 3:00 pm

    I told you fucking Peanuts that were all shouting DEATH SPIRAL! DOOM! two-four years ago that you were all wrong.

    For all its flaws Obamacare is market-based. Insurers get to price and customers get to select insurers. Despite its flaws don’t ever doubt the power of markets!

    Oh you Peanuts of little faith.

    1. Where I live there is one insurer to choose from.

      1. You need to move to a better place. I helped a relative out and there were 5 insurers and multiple levels of insurance here in my area.

        1. Wise Old Fool|11.28.18 @ 10:35AM|#
          “You need to move to a better place.”

          Yeah, because some lying piece of shit screws up the insurance industry, we should all move

    2. “I told you fucking Peanuts that were all shouting DEATH SPIRAL! DOOM! two-four years ago that you were all wrong.”

      You slimy piece of shit. You never post without lies.
      Yes, it’s ‘better’, since most of it was never enforced, or it was removed (“mandates”, asslicker?). And yes, it’s better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick; my rates are nearly double wha

      1. (thank you, Reason server. You just ate any possible contribution from me)
        …what they were before that other lying piece of shit handed us this crap.
        Fuck off, turd.

    3. So you’re happy that Trump fixed what Obama broke?

      Ok, go with that.

  19. “Dalmia also worries that the Trump administration would spend “gobs of taxpayer money” getting Mexico to go along with refugees remaining there. Trump and his ilk worry about “welfare moochers,” but this would be worse, creating “a net loss to America, whereas if [asylum seekers] were allowed to come and work here, they’d grow the economy and pay taxes.”

    Ilk? Really?

    TRUMP MUST BE DESTROYED.

    1. So setting these people up in Mexico where they speak the language and likely have skills to compete in the job market is just horrible. We should let them in here where they don’t speak the language and will have a much tougher time competing in the job market.

      It is almost like Shika doens’t care about these people except as a tool to virtue signal and push her political agenda or something.

      1. It’s wrong to do that to people I agree.

        And yeh, she pretty muck makes that clear in her articles.

        Way too ‘because Trump’ for my taste to take too seriously.

  20. There’s no way a wall will cost only $5 billion, that’s not even enough to do one state’s worth, let alone along the entire border.

    1. Hey, its a Trump estimate. He will build half a wall, stiff the vendors, and then declare Chapter 11.

      1. Like all the Californians did?

        They had houses built or bought houses, stiffed the contractors or banks, and then declared bankruptcy.

        Maybe one of the those Californians will become president. Haaha.

      2. That was actually funny.

        Congratulations.

  21. Mike Pompeo makes an interesting point today on Khashoggi murder.

    “Is it any coincidence that the people using the Khashoggi murder as a cudgel against President Trump’s Saudi Arabia policy are the same people who supported Barack Obama’s rapprochement with Iran?”

    —-WSJ

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/th…..543362363?

    With the exclusion of neocons who opposed Obama’s rapprochement with Iran because they really wanted war, the correct answer is “no”.

    For those of you who still haven’t figured it out, the neocons don’t like us using pragmatic proxies because they want the U.S. to inflict democracy on the region with U.S. troops so they can have more control. Oh, and for those of you who are still completely lost, Trump isn’t a neocon. The neocons were Never-Trumpers, even in 2016, largely because of his pragmatism.

    From the Democrat side of the equation, however, Pompeo is right. To whatever extent the left is using the Khashoggi murder to oppose Trump’s actual policies (rather than just to embarrass him politically), it’s the same people who supported Obama’s appeasement of Iran and for the same reasons. These are people who imagine that if only we pulled down our pants and grabbed our ankles, the Iranians would realize it isn’t necessary to fuck us in the ass.

    1. The neo-cons and Lefties hate that Trump has not gotten the USA in some new war or escalated Iraq or Afghanistan.

      1. They hate what he did in collaborating with Putin to defeat ISIS, too.

  22. Mexico like Venezuala has a lot of oil that could make it rich but being another socialistic country it fails to use its resources properly. they don’t need anything from the U.S. Mexico could legalize drugs and that would help with the crime problems but then how would authoritarians stay in power without a boogey man

  23. “Actually getting asylum status in the U.S. is hard, but getting an application accepted is (once you get to a U.S. border and are actually granted a chance to apply) pretty easy. And because it takes so long for our government to process asylum claims, many who apply are released on bond and granted the ability to live and work in the United States for months or years before their asylum claim is accepted or rejected.”

    —ENB

    Kudos to ENB for pointing this out.

    The stats I’ve seen suggest that 70% of asylum seekers’ claims of persecution are deemed sufficient to justify an asylum hearing, that asylum hearings are backed up for years and years–with almost a million claims pending–and so 70% of asylum seekers are granted residency in the U.S. pending their court date. Furthermore, many of the asylum seekers never bother to show up for their court date.

    Keeping the asylum seekers in Mexico until their asylum claims are adjudicated makes a ton of sense for both the U.S. and Mexico from a moral hazard standpoint–even if it doesn’t make sense from the political standpoint of a newly elected Mexican president to cave to the demands of Donald Trump on an immigration issue.

  24. So I get the pop-up ad for the webathon where they quote John Stossel mentioning “one lone voice” against tons of nonsense, but they don’t say which one Stossel thinks is the lone voice. ENB or KMW? Surely not Robbie – Stossel’s mustache is too jealous of Robbie’s hair to pay him a compliment like that. And God help us if he thinks it’s Dalmia.

    1. Stossel’s mustache is jealous of nothing on this Earth! It and Robby’s hair have a perfectly fine relationship based on mutual respect as equals.

  25. Would more representative voting favor the Democrats? Not quite

    I think this is a topic that a lot of libertarians of all flavors could potentially get behind – reforming the voting process so that more voices of all kinds could be heard.

  26. >>>And there are layers and layers of them, “a kind of product version of clickbait.” But is it all to a deeper end?

    no, very shallow, stupid end. fool removed from money.

  27. I essentially started three weeks past and that i makes $385 benefit $135 to $a hundred and fifty consistently simply by working at the internet from domestic. I made ina long term! “a great deal obliged to you for giving American explicit this remarkable opportunity to earn more money from domestic. This in addition coins has adjusted my lifestyles in such quite a few manners by which, supply you!”. go to this website online domestic media tech tab for extra element thank you .

    http://www.Mesalary.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.