Border Crossings

2 Big Reasons We Don't Need a Border Wall

The supposed border "crisis" is already solving itself.

|

ARIANA DREHSLER/UPI/Newscom

Parts of the federal government are currently shut down because of President Donald Trump's demand for $5.7 billion to build a wall on the U.S.–Mexico border. Trump keeps claiming that there's a "security crisis" at the southern border, thanks to the immigrants and drugs allegedly pouring into the country. Only a wall, he argues, will solve this crisis.

The facts tell a different story. And a report published yesterday from the Center for Migration Studies (CMS) pinpoints two reasons why building a border wall is not necessary.

For one thing, most undocumented immigrants don't sneak in over the border. They enter the country legally, then overstay their visas. And it's been that way for a while. In 2016 and 2017, the CMS notes in a press release, "visa overstayers accounted for 62 percent of the newly undocumented, while 38 percent had crossed a border illegally." The report notes that "visa overstays have significantly exceeded illegal border crossings" for seven consecutive years.

As David Bier, an immigration policy analyst for the Cato Institute, pointed out in a May 2017 cover story for Reason: "A wall not only will do nothing to stop [visa overstayers] from entering, but it may actually incentivize more people to stick around without authorization." Donald Kerwin of the CMS came to a similar conclusion. "As these numbers indicate, construction of hundreds of more miles of border wall would not address the challenge of irregular migration into our country," he says in a statement.

If we really want to curb illegal immigration, our resources are better spent elsewhere, the report suggests. "Since more than one half of all US undocumented residents arrive by air, visa-issuing posts have become the real frontline deterrent to undocumented migration," the study says. "This report suggests that more attention and resources should be given to that crucial mission of the US Department of State."

But should we be looking to curb illegal immigration? The undocumented population, especially from Mexico, is actually falling. There were 10,665,000 illegal immigrants living in the U.S. in 2017, down more than a million from 11,725,000 in 2010, the study says. The drop was largely a result of the undocumented population from Mexico falling by more than 1.3 million, from 6.6 million in 2010 to 5.29 million in 2017.

This was particularly apparent in 2016 and 2017. More than 500,000 Mexicans left the undocumented population by leaving, dying, or becoming legal residents, compared to less than 150,000 Mexicans who became undocumented residents.

This is part of a larger trend that Reason's Shikha Dalmia warned about in a 2013 piece for the Washington Examiner. "The 3.5 foreigners per 1,000 Americans we have been admitting yearly is significantly less than the 10.4 foreigners we admitted without ill effect at the turn of the last century," Dalmia wrote. Immigrants "start working…the moment they set foot on American soil, without requiring expensive schooling and health care." But fewer immigrants means fewer workers, which means the U.S. collects less overall tax revenue and less contributions to Medicare and Social Security from

That's still an issue. As Dalmia explained in The New York Times on Tuesday, the total share of foreign-born residents living in the U.S. isn't rising fast enough to make up for a projected drop in "the number of working-age Americans with domestic-born parents" by 2035. Again, this means less workers, which in turn could mean stagnant economic growth.

Now let's say we do build Trump's border wall. While it wouldn't stop visa overstayers, it would presumably deter many border-crossers from trying to enter the country illegally. At a time when the U.S. arguably needs more immigrants, we'd actually get less.

Even if you don't think the U.S. needs more immigrants, the numbers show that net illegal immigration levels are already declining. If this is a "crisis," it's one that's already solving itself. Why should the government seize private land and spend tens of billions of dollars to fix it?

NEXT: D.C. Mayor Says New Airbnb Regs Are Unconstitutional, But She Won't Veto Them

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.

  1. What would probably have the biggest impact on reducing illegal immigration is eliminating or raising immigration quotas and reducing the wait time for a visa. That would be an actual pro-immigrant proposition. Why is all the focus only on illegal immigration that, as you admit in your article, is only a small percentage of the total number of immigrants admitted each year?

    1. Not all of the focus is on illegal immigration. Stephen Miller is also focused on reducing legal immigration.

      1. Yes, he is. Which is why I don’t understand the central focus on rebutting any attempt to deter illegal immigration

        1. I mean, it probably has something to do with the current government shutdown, which is over a wall that will allegedly stop illegal immigration.

          1. Sure. I meant more broadly speaking. Not this article specifically. And the solutions offered in this article are half-cocked gibberish when increasing the quota for immigration from Mexico and central America and reducing visa wait times seem like the logical answer.

          2. IT DOESN’T SAY TOXIC MASCULINITY HERP DERP!!!

            Eat me you whiny bitch.

          3. Nobody is claiming it will stop immigration dumb fuck. We give chemo to people even though it doesnt stop cancer 100%.

            1. Jesse, they have to set up that straw man. Or their counter arguments fail completely.

      2. IT DOESN’T SAY TOXIC MASCULINITY HERP DERP!!!

        1. Cathy is right here. Forget about Gillette for a second

            1. Abandon all hope of rational discourse… THE thread shitter in chief is here!

              1. Don’t be so hard on yourself.

              2. Wel, SOMEONE is rooting his own horn here.

          1. “Oh good, I can’t wait for you to follow me around and let everyone know that when I make a mistake”

            That’s Cathy, whining about the crow she doesn’t want to eat.

            The fucking retard thinks “my bad” is an apology too.

            No, this is too juicy and pisses Cathy off too much to just ignore.

            1. Lol. What do you think “my bad” means?

              1. That you don’t know how to properly issue an actual apology and you’re socially stunted, using stupid street slang to avoid admitting you were wrong by makimg an actual apology.

                1. Everyone gets way too hung-up on days old arguments here

                  1. Yeah, they don’t like a commenter. On the internet.

                    So they go around filling threads with 90% harassing one liners that do nothing other than stink up the place. It takes a special sort of thin-skinned lack of self worth to stalk some one from page to page, posting this useless drivel.

                    It is especially disappointing when many people on this site would say that the way to rebut poor arguments (many of which I have seen from Cathy) is to confront them, rather than harassing them into a mirror image of grass roots bans. I mean, this is the whole problem with the Alex Jones bans. Infantile asshats raging so much that a business would rather ban Jones than let their platform turn into a swamp of name calling.

                    1. TuIpa has always been nothing but a troll. Cathy tried to behave at first but couldn’t handle being debated and the true colors came out. The two of them can have each other.

                    2. “TuIpa has always been nothing but a troll.”

                      Agreed… An EVIL troll at that! I wish that he or she would read this book… There IS hope for evil people…

                      “The People of the Lie, The Hope for Healing Human Evil” http://www.flipkart.com/people…..ketmkpx8se by M. Scott Peck

                      Even the highly skilled, famous psychologist, Phillip Zimbardo, was unable to help Tulpa. Maybe this book could help Tulpa, if Tulpa (Tuipa) will read it.

                      Tulpa disguises Tulpa to be Tuipa (with capital “I” in the middle) to sneak by having had “Tulpa” getting banned a while back, by the way…

                    3. Hihn, you’re worse than both of them.

                    4. Tulpa disguises Tulpa to be Tuipa (with capital “I” in the middle) to sneak by having had “Tulpa” getting banned a while back, by the way…

                      SMDH no Hihn, he does it because there is an actual Tulpa who was a commenter here, and pre registration he used the I to troll the real Tulpa who was worse than Tony and Jeff combined. Before registration. Nothing to do with any ban.

                    5. The only person who would be hounded off this website is Hihn. And for very good reasons. Every other shitheel here can stay.

                    6. Again.

                      Candyman effect.

                      C’monnnnnn man!

                    7. Infantile asshats raging so much that a business would rather ban Jones than let their platform turn into a swamp of name calling.

                      I think it’s time to admit Reason’s no-moderation-free-speech experiment has failed. The oft quoted ideal of “good speech to drive out bad” has turned out to be a spherical cow. An intern doing moderation part time simply deleting the shitposting would improve this place 1000% for very little effort or cost.

        2. Aww, Tulpa has a “friend.”

            1. Oh look at the dumb whiny cunt come all this way to be a dumb whiny cunt.

              1. Why are you introducing yourself?

              2. Wow, what fantastically advanced debating skills you are showing!

          1. Your one liner rejoinders make it awfully hard to criticize Tulpa’s temper tantrums. Stop being a part of the problem, and watch how quickly people tire of his bullshit. Instead, you are merely perpetuating one of the worst aspects of free speech.

      3. Think how much different the world would be now if Stephen Miller had discovered Propecia at the right time.

        1. What? Too much friction when he tries to put his head up his ass?

        2. Think how much better the commentariat would be if Tony drank his Drano.

        3. Stephen Miller 2024!

    2. We already take in about 1 million immigrants per year (more than any other country in the world) and that number is not sustainable forever. So exactly what would you raise that number to?

      1. ^this
        And that’s just counting legal immigrants

        Immigrants are cool.
        It’s good that we welcome them. I’m glad they want to be here.
        But does the US NEED them?
        In large numbers?
        I’m not so sure.

        The belief that we need immigrants is a belief of weakness.
        Immigrants can add to the country, but I think we’re perfectly capable of succeeding with those we have here too.

        Why should the fetish for immigrants be permanent dogma?

        1. Americans need to get back to doing a lot more old fashioned bareback vaginal fucking and pop out our own kids, instead of importing them.

          Dibs on the Victoria’s Secret models!

      2. They want no limit. They don’t want Americans to have a country.

    3. And yet another caravan of illegal Guatemalans have formed another caravan south of the Mexican border. . .

      Maybe the drones will frighten them off?

    4. “What would probably have the biggest impact on reducing illegal immigration is eliminating or raising immigration quotas and reducing the wait time for a visa.”

      What would have an even bigger impact is declaring everyone in the world a US citizen, making illegal immigration entirely impossible.

      1. With U.S. tax law we could then sue them all for not paying taxes and solve the budget crisis.

        1. Birthright citizenship means if foreigners have children while in the US, those children are on the hook for a lifetime of taxes to the US.

          Maybe we should start collecting to offset the costs of the anchor babies who stay.

  2. “A wall not only will do nothing to stop [visa overstayers] from entering, but it may actually incentivize more people to stick around without authorization.”

    Write another cover story when you’re sure.

    1. How’s the scold business dollarparkyen?

      1. About as good as the whiny bitch business.

    2. If “walls don’t work”, how would they change anyone’s incentives for immigration?

  3. This was particularly apparent in 2016 and 2017. More than 500,000 Mexicans left the undocumented population by leaving, dying, or becoming legal residents, compared to less than 150,000 Mexicans who became undocumented residents.

    I’m all for streamlining the immigration process and issuing more immigration visas, and I’m not that concerned about a crisis at the border. However, I see why some people are worried. At the peak of the Iraq War, the USA had about 150,000 troops in Iraq. That’s the number of illegal migrants from Mexico entering the USA in 2 years. The problem only seems small compared to how large it got under Clinton and Bush.

    1. Sounds like Saddam did a pretty crappy job of stopping illegals coming into Iraq

      1. Now that’s funny!

    2. Overlooked are changes in Mexican drug laws. Prohibition completely wrecked the US economy when actually enforced in 1929, 1987, 2008–AND wrecked Latin American economies to boot starting with Reagan and Bush. So naturally ruined refugees fetched up in These States. Mexico has mostly rid itself of this most destructive economic danger. Mexicans are beginning to reap the profits Portugal has reaped these past 14 years after repealing its superstitious and pseudoscientific sumptuary laws. Americans interested in copping a buzz and flipping off socialized medicine fines and imprisonment ought to look at property along the Mexican side of the border.

      1. A home near a border has real advantages.

        Being able to border hop allows you to take advantage of the varying freedoms in each jurisdiction.

    3. You do understand the difference between “troops” and “immigrants,” right?

  4. As Dalmia explained in The New York Times on Tuesday, the total share of foreign-born residents living in the U.S. isn’t rising fast enough to make up for a projected drop in “the number of working-age Americans with domestic-born parents” by 2035.

    As Bailey regularly reports for Reason, advances in technology will take care of this.

    1. As Dalmia explained in The New York Times
      If Setyon quotes Shikha doesn’t that risk creating a Black Hole?
      I mean they’re both a pretty dense to start with, so wouldn’t this exceed the Tolman/Oppenheimer/Volkoff limit and we face a gravitational collapse?

    2. America needs to hurry and import more people soon to be economically unviable come the AI revolution.

  5. That’s still an issue. As Dalmia explained in The New York Times on Tuesday, the total share of foreign-born residents living in the U.S. isn’t rising fast enough to make up for a projected drop in “the number of working-age Americans with domestic-born parents” by 2035. This means less workers, which in turn could mean stagnant economic growth.

    Now let’s say we do build Trump’s border wall. While it wouldn’t stop visa overstayers, it would presumably deter many border-crossers from trying to enter the country illegally. At a time when the U.S. arguably needs more immigrants, we’d actually get less.

    If demographic change is on the table as a solution to the Social Security debt, we can simply adjust the Social Security law so that those born between 1945 and 1965 must live in Mexico to collect Social Security retirement benefits. The cost of living is much less in Mexico, and the home healthcare workers are already living there. Why make those home healthcare workers move far from their families and loved ones when we can just ship our elderly relatives that we don’t want to care for to Mexico? Those elderly relatives whom we want to care for don’t need the Social Security benefits or home healthcare workers.

    1. So now the libertarian site is trying to save Social Security?

      1. Closed border libertarians: If we let in all these immigrants it will exhaust our safety net!

        Sorta kinda maybe sometimes open border libertarians: If we DON’T let in all these immigrants our safety net will collapse!

        I think they’ve both lost the plot

        1. It’s a reductio ad absurdum argument against fixing our finances through demographic change. I’m OK with doubling the number of immigration visas we hand out. Let’s distribute those new visas through a diversity lottery that is open to people form all countries and new reciprocity visa programs that we make through treaties with other nations.

          1. “Let’s distribute those new visas through a diversity lottery that is open to people form all countries and new reciprocity visa programs that we make through treaties with other nations.”

            The only idea less likely to occur than this is increasing the number of visas for skilled labor. This immigration fight is just rich whites desperately trying to preserve cheap labor that they employ (hence their sole obsession with illegal immigration) and poor whites trying to restrict labor competition (hence their emphasis on reducing immigration or focusing immigration on skills rather than family reunification).

            1. It is also about welfare. You can see the same debate on a smaller scale every time residents oppose new construction in their towns because of the “impact on the schools”.

        2. That’s not even a second tier argument put forth for open borders.

          1. By actual open border advocates, no. But, there are perhaps five people who actually oppose all border controls. Most who identify as open borders, that I have encountered, are better described as “open southern border”.

            1. “By actual open border advocates, no”

              Might wanna doublecheck that.

            2. The problem is that you cannot have an argument about open borders without it becoming a conversation about Mexican and Central/South American immigrants.

              Count me as someone who is happy to have all immigration. But many objections by restrictionists are about how bad it is that we have these low wage 3rd worlders flooding across our borders. How can I argue with these people without seeming to defend mexicans…because, that is practically what we are doing.

              1. Immigration into the US shouldn’t consist of mostly Mexicans and Central Americans. I thought diversity was supposed to be important.

          2. Immigration Is Great
            America makes it difficult to immigrate legally.

            “Even illegal immigration helps delay the bankruptcy of Social Security and Medicare. Young illegal workers pay into the system — but most don’t collect. “Medicare and Social Security?the biggest welfare programs,” says Nowrasteh. “Immigrants subsidize those programs massively.”

            Eat me bitch.

            1. You’re trashing Stossel now? Besides, I think Chipper was speaking specifically about ancaps. Stossel is far from an ancap

              1. “You’re trashing Stossel now?”

                Quoting him is trashing him? Fuck off with that.

                “Besides, I think Chipper was speaking ”

                “Chipper” can speak for himself and has no problem doing so. What he SAID was “That’s not even a second tier argument put forth for open borders.” full stop. So you can read it with whatever charitable interpretation you want, all we have is what he said, and it doesn’t match what you think he said. It IS an argument put forth for open borders. Here. At this very website.

                He was wrong.

            2. “Eat me bitch,” said Thomas Jefferson to a Virginia resident on his plantation after enjoying the fruit of her labor without paying her any money for it. Rumor has it, Thomas Jefferson liked rimming.

              … Oh my, this sounds like the opening to an Ayn Rand novel.

              1. Hey now! He repaid that hot Nubian princess with ‘TJ Bucks’. Redeemable for things like back rubs from the aforementioned Master Jefferson, And if that girl played her cards right, that back rub could turn into a full body massage.

                So don’t say there was no compensation for her work.

            3. “Immigrants subsidize those programs massively.”

              Yes, correct, $10 to $12 billion per year for Social Security alone.

              See “The Truth About Undocumented Immigrants and Taxes” (in quotes) in your Google search window will take you straight there, hit number one… AKA http://www.theatlantic.com/bus…..es/499604/ For details about us natives mooching off of the taxes of the illegal sub-humans?

              1. Lol. Atlantic. So they provide a minimal benefit to two ponzu schemes… but the costs to other areas of life dont matter. Got it

              2. Maybe, but I’d etity theft, which according to the same govt. folks, is almost entirely the result of the same SS fraud. And costs our economy far more, while victimizing large numbers of individuals every year.

                Your argument is tantamount to endorsing the benefits of murder because it saves money taking care of old people down the line.

                1. Illegal sub-humans are allowed to use my SSN all day, every day, to send more money into my SS account. (I’m NOT going to tell Government Almighty that I didn’t really put that money in there… Any extra money going to Government Almighty’s account w/o added obligations to Government Almighty, is like giving booze to a falling-down drunk alcoholic).

                  Just because an illegal sub-human has my SSN (sometimes even made up randomly) has NOTHING to do with whether or not they have my credit card numbers of my bank account number or ANYTHING of value… ID theft in this context is 99.99% a red herring.

                  1. The bigger-picture problem with immigration (and all of the fighting about it) is that it is part of a LONG, LONG process of Government Almighty ALWAYS getting bigger, to fix the LAST problems that they caused by getting bigger!

                    We need to tear ALL of the following excesses OUT…

                    The collective hive mandated WAY too many licenses, before we’re allowed to earn an honest living… Put too many of us into poverty. To “help” with this poverty problem that The Collective Hive created, The Collective Hive gave us welfare. Welfare then attracts too many illegal sub-humans, sometimes, so to fix THAT problem, The Collective Hive now wants e-verify and giant border walls and giant border armies? And now also property confiscations for wall-building? So I suppose The Collective Hive will next fire up the military draft to fix THAT problem! (Lack of a large enough wall-and-army forces).

                  2. Have fun when they take out loans in your name and obligate you to other liabilities. Maybe filing phony returns where you end up with a big IRS bill when the dust settles.

                    Seriously, how can you be this niave?

                    1. I’ve been through some ID theft things… Show that it wasn’t you, done deal. Pretty painless, for me at least…

                      For serious ID theft, they need a LOT more than my SSN, by the way! Full name, address, etc. …

              3. The Atlantic? You may want to change your go to news sources. From the GAO:

                https://www.gao.gov/products/hehs-95-133

                1. Thanks for the link!

                  Excerpt from the top: estimates of the national net cost of illegal aliens vary greatly, ranging from $2 billion to $19 billion

                  USA GNP: 19.61 trillion PPP dollars (2017) Even a full $20 billion is “mice nuts” compared to that.

                  1. But their contributions to SS are significant?

                    I’ll give you credit, sqrlsy, for your unique position of advocating for illegal immigrants exclusively, even at the expense of legal immigrants.

  6. “Only 38% of murders occur in the home, therefore, we should stop locking our doors, installing alarms, or owning guns.”

    That’s the argument here.

    There is a cost-benefit analysis to be done regarding a wall, but this article isn’t it.

    Like that of a typical Democrat, Setyon’s “analysis” consists of disregarding all arguments against his position, then declaring that none exist.

    1. +100

    2. On the Reason podcast Suderman mentioned that illegal immigrants commit crimes at a lower rate than US citizens. This mixes the visa over-stayers with those that sneaked in over the border. I can’t imagine why the former group might be law-abiding, or why the latter group might be more criminally minded. Can you?

      I’ll bet a dollar to a dime that the sneakers have higher crime rates than US citizens, and much higher than visa over-stayers or legal immigrants.

      1. I’m not sure if this is the study that Suderman was citing, but a CATO study that showed that the reduced criminality among immigrants was primarily due to legal immigrants (of course you had to dig through the data to get that information, as that’s not what the abstract discussed). Illegal immigrants commit crime on par with the national average. Incentives.

      2. Illegal immigrants have 100% crime rates.

        The very fact that they are in the USA without permission is a crime.

        1. Cue Little Jeffy to come in and make his sophist argument that the govt. has no business restricting border crossings and/or telling him who he can have in his home. Even those those arguments have been broken dozens of times by so many of us here.

      3. The biggest study on on illegal crime rates was done in Arizona and illegals were 42% more likely to commit a serious crime. Look ag the population of illegal immigrants in state and federal prisons, they are well above their population estimates. The way you get to saying illegals commit less crimes is on a per crime basis instead of per criminal basis. An illegal commits a felony they get deported. A gang member can create 12 felonies by themselves. That is a disparate metric since we dont report citizens. It’s a way for the open border idiots to be idiots.

        1. Or willfully obtuse, because open borders no matter what.

        2. Actually, the way I usually see people getting to saying “illegals commit less crime” is by showing that crime rates aren’t correlated with size of immigrant population, and ignoring the “illegals” part of the picture. Just like the fact-checkers talk about Trump’s “anti-immigrant rhetoric” and pretend that he’s denouncing all immigration, when you can read the text of his speeches and see that he’s talking about illegal immigrants.

      4. What percentage of illegals do not routinely commit identity fraud?

        You arrest a guy with a fake id. Does he show up for the court hearing, or does he get a new id?

      5. Its only true if you fail to understand a few things:

        1. The African American population has such a high rate of criminality that it brings up the US average to such a high number that its really difficult for immigrants to catch up to that (which they actually manage to do by the 2nd generation, which is scary).

        2. Immigrants arrive here at a later age, older people don’t commit crime much, plus even if you come here at 16, it takes a while for you to develop a criminal network and become trusted by criminal peers, thus temporarily inoculating the first generation.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States #/media/File: USA_2009._Percent_of_adult_males_incarcerated _by_race_and_ethnicity.svg This is all you really need to know about immigration and crime.

    3. “Only 38% of murders occur in the home, therefore, we should stop locking our doors, installing alarms, or owning guns.”

      That’s the argument here.

      There is a cost-benefit analysis to be done regarding a wall, but this article isn’t it.

      Most people will agree that you should lock the door. Of course. It is a tiny cost to reduce a tiny risk. Building a wall is a huge cost to reduce a small risk. This is absolutely a cost benefit discussion, but allusions to locking a door is trying to steal a base by implying that a wall is as simple a cost as locking a door. It isn’t.

      If a small percentage of burglaries and murders happen in the home, then that cuts against the notion of fencing your house with electrified razor wire and hiring a 24×7 security guard to watch it.

      1. Overt, I have to agree. The balance of costs and benefits should be addressed. The main thing is that an unmanned wall is hardly better than nothing at all, and we do not have the manpower to police a thousand-mile border.

      2. It’s a huge cost as compared to what? It’s less than 0.1% of the budget.

      3. Assuming the wall costs something like $25 billion, and the US generates upwards of $3.4 trillion in annual revenue, it is proportional to a person earning $50,000 per year spending about $380 for a wall and gate for their home. Except in this case it’s spread over five years, and will offset at least some other ongoing expenses.

        So no, it isn’t really expensive when analyzed in proportion to revenues and the opportunity cost of not building it.

      4. “Building a wall is a huge cost to reduce a small risk. ”

        5 billion is *nothing* compared to the *yearly* cost of illegal immigration.

    4. Well said JD. this is just another of multiple daily open borders propaganda articles. It just gets old.

      And the irony is that if the idiots who run Reason get their open borders wish, in a fairly short number of years the electoral map will change for the foreseeable,future and the de orates take over. No hope for libertopia if that happens.

      Instead, look for Venezuela on steroids.

      1. “Demographic data so racist!”

  7. The purpose of the wall isn’t to prevent illegal immigration or crime. The purpose of the wall is actually to not build it. Because they can then use it as a pretext to round up and detain the bad hombres indefinitely and say, “We can’t send them back – the wall isn’t built yet you idiot.” It’s a fillip to the private prison and security industries. If Trump’s drive for funding fails in the US, then Israel’s apartheid wall will be next to fall. #nobannowallnocompromise #allwallsfall

    1. Wake me when Syria opens it’s southern border to anyone who wants to fly to Ben Gurion Airport, drive a rental car to the Golan Heights, and sneak across the border with a backpack full of rainbow flags, lube, and condoms. Syrians tend to freak out about the possibility of illegal entry in a situation like that.

      1. As we know Israel opened that border when wounded were there. They treated and released them. They also sent food and medical supplies through NGOs.

        “Peace will come when the Arabs love their children more than they hate us.
        When peace comes we will perhaps in time be able to forgive the Arabs for killing our sons, but it will be harder for us to forgive them for having forced us to kill their sons.”
        Golda Meir

  8. “There were 10,665,000 illegal immigrants living in the U.S. in 2017, down more than a million from 11,725,000 in 2010, the study says”

    Those numbers are reliable because they were obtained in the US Census.

    Oh, wait…..

    1. +100

    2. -500. If you RTFA, it said the data came from the CMS not the census.

  9. Parts of the federal government are currently shut down because of President Donald Trump’s demand for $5.7 to build a wall on the U.S.?Mexico border.

    Parts of the government shutdown are because the House and Senate have not forwarded a budget that Trump has signed thereby making it law.

    Part of the government shutdown are to eliminate tens of thousands of government workers after 30 days of furlough, thereby allowing Trump to drain the swamp.

    ….

  10. Yesterday, a politician at a local meeting announced that if the government shut down goes on for a few more weeks, people with food stamps will not get their accounts recharged. Inner city politics might get interesting soon if people blame the anti-wall caucus for the empty food stamp accounts.

    1. It all depends how the argument is framed. With the rather strident bias from media, it is more likely that people will hold Trump accountable.

      And by the way, Trump isn’t helping himself. Today Pelosi trotted out a bunch of anecdotes about government workers who are suffering from the shut down. Trump was on with his own address 10 minutes later. If I were him I’d be very clear: “I feel horrible for all the impacted people, all because Pelosi feels that a tiny pittance compared to the overall budget is more important than their well being.”

      Instead, Trump goes on long rambling speeches. He needs to focus his message, because he is barely getting these sound bites in comparison to the full court press from the media.

      1. All the de ocrats have to do is agree to a paltry $5 billion for Trump’s border security plan which includes the wall. Of it were any other president, this wouldn’t be an issue.

        Like everything else, this is all the democrats fault.

      2. Trump is blamed for anything and everything at all times.
        Who cares? The narrative will be the same as it always is.
        If people start missing food stamp payments, you really think they’ll hold Trump accountable (whatever that means)?
        I think they might bitch about him at first, and the media will continue its press, as they already do, but what response does that ever get? How can more pressure be applied when the dial has been stuck on MAX for years?
        If Trump is seen as completely intractable, what good does it do to blame him?
        No, they’ll turn on the other side of this conflict. And that side will cave.

        1. Of note, apparently Pelosi and a bunch of critters were scheduled to go on a 3 country trip and leave today.
          They usually travel overseas via the airforce.
          So they all piled on a bus to go to the base… and Trump canceled their trip (he is CiC after all)!
          So they sat on the bus for a while outside their offices, then had the bus drive down to the capital building so they didn’t have to face the humiliation of disembarking in front of the cameras.

          Fn HILARIOUS

          1. He earned my 2020 presidential vote with that alone.

            Awesome.

            1. He probably already had my vote, but that does help. Funny how reason reported the sotu drama but ignored this.
              It is both a hilarious and completely justified move. It’s disappointing that the media refuses to report this in the proper context. Democrats refuse to fund the government while simultaneously misappropriating resources for a taxpayer funded vacation that amounts to campaigning

  11. Or putting words in his opponents mouths in his opening paragraph:

    Only a wall, he [Trump] argues, will solve this crisis.”

    Can Setyon point to the actual quote by Trump, where he says that ONLY a wall will solve this crisis? Because everything I’ve seen includes additional funding for ICE, more immigration judges, AND a wall, as part of a multi-faceted approach to fixing what he perceives as a problem (let’s just table the issue of whether it is or not for the moment).

    If he can’t, then the entire argument is premised on a lie… oh, wait. Never mind.

    1. See how easily Republican sockpuppets can spot and dispose of shoddy reporting? Why not compare political platforms? Everything God’s Own Prohibitionists try to ram down throats at gunpoint is in their platform dedicated to force-initiating First Responders?. If our platform has been improved after the earlier one earned us 4 million votes, why not contrast those “improvements” with the Republican purchase order?

      1. WTF are you talking about, you babbling bitch? No one pays attention to you other than to remark what a gibbering idiot you are.

        1. Hank Phillips > SQRLSY

          1. A flea’s nads > Nardz’s nads.

            1. SQRLY, your insolence should be punished by locking you in a room with Hank for 72 hours.

              May God have mercy on your soul.

              1. Now THAT was funny!!!! 🙂

  12. Reason sure does need some web traffic. Two illegal immigration articles in one day?

    1. I’m surprised it’s not four. Then again, the day isn’t over yet.

      1. We love it, they love it. Outrage = clicks

  13. More of the lazy press release pushing I’ve come to expect from this columnist. Follow the link to the CMS press prelease, then to the actual CMS report, then follow the first reference that includes the word overstays. What you’ll find is:
    “? Slightly more than half of the 628,799 reported to be overstays by DHS actually left the country but their departures were not recorded.

    ? After adjusting the DHS estimates to take account of unrecorded departures, as well as departures in 2016 of overstays that lived here in 2015, overstay population growth was near zero in 2016.

    ? Thus, while overstays account for a large percentage of the newly undocumented, they represent less than half (44 percent) of the overall undocumented population, and they are less likely than illegal border crossers to be long-term residents.”

    Hopefully Joe will now realize that the people he spoke to lied to him, and learn to dig and push back in future.

  14. The ICE version for 2018 just hit the stands in downloadable format. THEY claim to have wrenched American maidenhood from the clutches of invading Saracen terrorists, excuse me, terrists, and folks convicted of assault, burglary, spouse-beating, robbery, rape, theft and vandalism, kidnapping, homicide and menacing in numbered charts. Even deducting the superstitious “drug” charges, the list looks like well over 100,000 perps. Rather than ignore the source the Republicans cite in their talking points, why not explain away the lies and fabrications there? If only a handful of them are “individuals who pose a credible threat to security, health or property,” then Libertarians truly have nothing to worry about in terms of border security, Republican platform wall or no wall.

  15. This article is nice but so were the last dozen or so explaining the same thing. Fact is Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingram want a wall and will settle for nothing less. That is our problem and it is unlikely to be settled before 2020. So Joe it might be best to move on to a topic with a solution.

    1. Progressive tears are toxic, as all that emanates from progressives is, but they are beautiful.

      “Moderation”4ever. Hilarious.
      I guess it means it in the censorious sense

  16. Is reason really this fucking ignorant? Trump isnt just asking for a wall. Hes also asked for a fix to chain migration, a fix to Visa exit system (which was promised in the 86 agreement, fucking lying democrats), and others. This article is a strawman.

    1. Reason is indeed this fucking ignorant. And I am certain Nick and the gang are against all those other things, because nothing is kore libertarian than shoehorning a few hundred million more uneducated indigents that don’t speak English into this country as soon as possible, because libertopia.

    2. Reason is indeed this fucking ignorant. And I am certain Nick and the gang are against all those other things, because nothing is kore libertarian than shoehorning a few hundred million more uneducated indigents that don’t speak English into this country as soon as possible, because libertopia.

  17. “For one thing, most undocumented immigrants don’t sneak in over the border. They enter the country legally, then overstay their visas.”

    But there’s a HUGE difference between those immigrants vs the ones that illegally crossed the border. If someone has initially entered legally, then at least their names are known to us, and they have been checked against terrorist and criminal watchlists, and whether they have been previously deported. People who cross the border illegally are completely anonymous and we don’t know who or what they are.

    “The 3.5 foreigners per 1,000 Americans we have been admitting yearly is significantly less than the 10.4 foreigners we admitted without ill effect at the turn of the last century”

    At the turn of the last century?? I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but conditions have changed quite a bit since the year 1900. The US population was only 76 million people, we had a tiny carbon footprint, plenty of fresh water for everyone. Today in 2019 we have 325 million people, produce massive carbon emissions, and parts of the country, particularly the Southwest, have a real water crisis and the water tables are dropping. When will Reason.com realize that the US isn’t a vast empty land anymore, an endless cornucopia that can take all the world’s immigrants? Countries with vast uninhabited territory and plenty of fresh water like Canada and Russia could potentially do this for awhile – but not the US anymore.

    1. C’mon.
      How can you expect Reason writers to know that the land outside major metropolitan areas isn’t completely unpopulated and does actually contain real, living human beings?

      Cosmotarians: “its flyover STATES – not flyover PEOPLE. Duh!”

    2. How was the immigration at the turn of the century without Ill effect? Those people elected Woodrow Wilson and FDR!

  18. My favorite slogan from La Raza: “No borders. No profits. No brains.”

  19. If walls don’t work, then why do people talk about the Israeli West Bank barrier as a humanitarian crisis, rather than a joke?

  20. 1) 62% of illegals are from visa overstays, only 38% are from uninvited border crossings, so a wall is unnecessary.
    So a wall would cut back illegal immigration by 38%…That still pays for the 5.7B the president is asking for in just a few years. Also, it doesn’t prevent the gubment from doing something about visa overstays. This isn’t a “this or that” equation, we can do more to prevent illegal immigration than just border security.
    2) We had more immigrants in 1901 without ill effects so we don’t need a wall.
    The welfare state has grown exponentially and illegal as well as legal immigrants are using the welfare state and public services such as schools and are doing so at levels that far exceed what they pay in taxes. This is well documented, see GAO report and others.
    3) We need more immigrants, not less to feed the need for labor resources to sustain economic growth, so a wall is not just unnecessary but a detriment to economic growth.
    This is one of the dumbest arguments that I have heard. If the USA requires more immigration to support labor resources we can do this legally, relying on illegal immigrant labor to support our labor market is insane when we can do this legally with worker visas.
    4) CATO, CMS, Dalmia says; … Appeal to authority…at “Reason” magazine?
    Here’s me following suit: Every border patrol officer that I have seen questioned on a border wall says that they need a wall to help do their jobs and that where there is a wall it works.

  21. Since 60% of illegal immigrants come in on visas and overstay them, the 40 % that come other ways are not a problem to be addressed?

    Sort’a like saying that since 60% of burglars come through the back door, there’s no need to put a lock on the front door.

  22. Who cares. There a million worthless federal government projects that accomplish far less than the fence. It cost practically nothing, it is politically expedient. Approve the funding and move the fuck on. Idiots.

  23. Visa overstay wouldn’t be an issue if the nation didn’t let illegals to get free healthcare, education or even hold jobs, which is the policy in Trumpian dystopias like Canada. Of course the libertarians won’t be down with that. So back to square one.

    There’s no shortage of retail, hospitality and conventional white collar workers, and this is probably 70% of the workforce. A tiny fraction of the immigration community work in farms or hotels (seasonal basis). Manufacturing and brick and mortar will continue to decline as internet and technology takes over.

    SS makes less sense in a time when people live longer, and beneficiaries take in many more times than they put in. So the obvious solution is… bring in more people? If a caravan member moves in at age 45, in about two decades he’ll be eligible for medicare, and in that time they probably contributed very little to the economy is real terms.

    It doesn’t make sense to count the money being brought in, but not taken out, right? You would think Canada would have let in 50 million people thinking “These people will sustain our national healthcare”. It just…. doesn’t work this way. You can’t break a pyramid scheme by introducing more players at the bottom.

  24. What is it about “Center for Migration Studies (CMS)” and New York Times that seems to automatically trigger MISLEADING PROPAGANDA red flags. The Hispanic population went from 6% in 1970 to now !!!!!18%!!!!!. That’s ALMOST 20% of the U.S. in now MEXICO!!!!

    Some consider that an INVASION while others call it, “Hey, why don’t we just pretend invaders aren’t actually invading and then it won’t be an invasion….??? Isn’t that the “nice” thing to do.”

    …… I guess so; if you don’t mind living in a Mexico of which the U.S. will become when all of Mexico moves into it.

    It has been shown time and again that immigrants are BY FAR the biggest takers of welfare by a 30-to-60 margin. How in the world anyone can claim they “go right to work… and pay taxes…. don’t take healthcare or benefits.” Is just a FLAT OUT LIE.

  25. 2 Big Reasons We Don’t Need a Border Wall

    1 – Borders are really racist and are part of white colonialisms exploitated with social variations

    2 – Passports are totally racist and a form of the white privileges and male toxicities

  26. ” More than 500,000 Mexicans left the undocumented population by leaving, dying, or becoming legal residents,”

    Becoming a legal resident is not leaving, it’s making the US a little less like America was, and a little more like Mexico was.

    Countries are people.
    Import Not Americans, become Not America.

    1. it’s making the US a little less like America was, and a little more like Mexico was.

      You know who else is making America “a little less like America was”? The yet-to-be-born native-born American citizens. They will grow up in an America that is different than the one we enjoy, no matter what happens with regards to Trump or border walls. THEY are going to change the US to be “a little less like America was” just as much as a Mexican immigrant will.

      THERE IS NO OPTION for “America stays the way it was”. America is going to change. It will either change as the result of free people making free choices, or it will change as the result of fear and paranoia about the dirty furriners.

      1. Depends how it changes. Depends how much it changes.

        This is another of your non-objections where you pretend to have an answer to arguments.

        1. In that case I wasn’t proposing an answer, just making an observation.

          So, if we both admit that America is going to change, one way or another, regardless, then we can either have:

          1. America changing via the free decisions made by free people
          2. America changing via the collectivist, centralized decision-making of bureaucracies and statist authoritarians

          You seem to prefer Option 2. You’re a statist at heart who is unwilling to permit free people to exercise their free choices because you are afraid of what they will do with that liberty. So if America changes in the manner that you wish, you aren’t going to get Libertopia by keeping out the Mexicans – you are going to get normalized statist authoritarianism within this country, fully embraced as the normative standard, since that is the regime that the new yet-to-be-born citizens will assimilate into.

          “But if we let in the Mexicans, they will vote for socialism and we won’t get Libertopia either!”

          Sure they will vote for socialism, if the face of liberty continues to be people like you, and other border-restrictionists who don’t even try to sell the virtues of liberty and only treat Mexicans like some type of culturally diseased plague rats. Who in their right mind would choose to associate with people who viewed them as inferior?

          The only way to get liberty is to embrace liberty. You can’t get liberty by empowering authoritarians and building walls.

          1. racebaiterjeff just keeps on denying reality.

            PEW Research on Hispanic Americans, breakdowns by immigration and foreign birth
            https://goo.gl/WBi1BV
            Hispanics Lean Democratic over 3 to 1
            https://goo.gl/hxSJHi
            Hispanics Want Bigger Government Providing More Services over 3 to 1

            Americans are the most libertarian people in the world. That’s why we have the most libertarian country.
            Import Not Americans. Become Not America.

            But that’s fine with racebaiterjeff, because he just hates America and Americans.

          2. @Chemjeff — You missed option #3 and I’ll ad comment and why your other 2 options are to be avoided.

            1. America changing via the free decisions made by free people.
            — This is pure Democratic Communism; in which witch hunts and individual rights are non-existance. Every law, property and judgement is dictated by whatever the majority of “free” as you call it vote for. It has 0% status of individual freedoms.

            2. America changing via the collectivist, centralized decision-making of bureaucracies and statist authoritarians.
            — This is the frosting on Democratic Communism. Since the majority of your so called “free” people don’t have the time to vote on each judgement made against man. Their “majority” vote must be quickened by bureaucratic authoritarians.

            THE ONE YOU FORGOT
            3. America can change WITHIN “unalienable” (i.e. “Permanent/Supreme Law” boundaries defined in our Constitutional Republic.”)
            — This is what ensures maximum individual freedom by a “limited” role of government upon its people.

        2. Chemjeff wants Anarchyland.

          Most of us want some form of Libertarian tiny and limited government Constitutional Democratic Republic.

          Chemjeff wont leave the USA and does not have the support to get his way.

          So, here we are.

          1. racebaiterjeff wants the safe, secure, and free society created by government by Americans, while replacing the Americans with people who demonstrably create less safe, secure, and free societies.

            Have your cake, and eat it too.

  27. Visa overstayers had to at least apply for a visa, and receive whatever minimal screening that involves. If we actually ever build the will to enforce our immigration laws, we’d have something to go by in trying to deal with the visa overstayers.

    Illegal invaders evade that screening.

    One thing you never hear from the “muh visa overstayers” crowd is a suggestion to do anything about the visa overstayers.

    “But should we be looking to curb illegal immigration?”

    Uh huh.

  28. So you want to curb illegal immigration?

    That is easy,, 10 years, mandatory, in Federal prison for any CEO, owner, or citizen that is caught employing an illegal immigrant.

    Problem solved, no $40 billion (and more every year) dollar vanity wall needed.

    1. So if I hire Jose to mow my lawn, and it turns out he’s undocumented, you’d throw me in jail? For 10 years? That sentence seems a bit… disproportionate.

      How will you enforce this law exactly? How many more FBI/ICE agents do you want to hire to enact this fantasy?

      1. You’re aiding and abetting a crime.

        10 years is excessive but I bet you wouldn’t hire an illegal immigrant.

        1. How do you plan on enforcing this law?

          1. Like we enforce all laws. With guns.

  29. From the beginning I doubted the wall would ever happen. The main reason was/is the North American Union. There hasn’t been a shift away from the idea.

    Now after NAFTA 2.0, im just if not more convinced.

    Plus the new strategy of the Caravan Marches. Someone at the top is financing, organizing, and encouraging this poor folks to make the journey.

    I’ve got a sneaking suspicion it’s Steve Mnuchin’s old boss Soros.

  30. Tariffs, trade wars, and the Wall are all e very stupid thingy things.

  31. I suppose from a certain perspective, if you have a problem with bank robberies, the obvious answer is for the bank to just hand out the money without question. It would certainly stop the robberies! The problem is that it’s a perspective which doesn’t understand why the bank robberies were a problem.

    Reason appears to be approaching illegal immigration from the exact same perspective. “If people are illegally immigrating, just let everybody who wants in! Problem solved, no more illegal immigration!”

    But, there are people you don’t want in your country even if you had infinite room. These are the people who are robbing the bank to finance their planned terrorist attack. Even if the bank had infinite money, giving them the money would be a bad idea.

    And you don’t have infinite room. Just like the bank doesn’t have infinite money. So, just as the bank actually does need to sort out the people asking for money.

  32. It needs to identify the depositors just making a routine withdrawal. (Citizens asking for reentry.)

    It needs to identify the people with decent business plans and assets to secure the loan. (Educated immigrants with decent earning potential and no criminal records.)

    It needs to identify the people who will just take the money and disappear. (Under educated illiterates who will never pay enough taxes to finance the services they’ll use, who make our per capita economy shrink.)

    Yeah, it needs to identify the people who will actually use that money to finance a terrorist attack. (Criminals coming into the country.)

    And even sticking to the qualified applicants, it needs to not run out of money. (We don’t want to become over-crowded, or grow faster than we can build infrastructure.)

    In other words, while there’s a perspective from which, “Just let everybody in!” is a solution to illegal immigration, it’s a really stupid perspective.

    1. Your whole analogy fails because robbing a bank is not at all like crossing a border without papers; the former is a crime that violates the property rights of the depositors, the latter a ‘crime’ in name only, which doesn’t violate anyone’s rights per se.

      Same with drugs, same with prostitution, same with most gun laws, same with most regulations.

      Should there be some central authority deciding who can use which drugs, or who can pay for sex, or who can own a gun? After all, what if bad people are going to do bad things with those drugs or those prostitutes or those guns?

      1. Yeah, I get it: You don’t think countries should have any control over who enters them. This is a widely rejected idea, basically no society on the face of the Earth accepts it, (No, countries in the EU don’t, they just supposedly share a common external border, and it’s not working out.) because the practical consequences are horrific.

        Look, If the US were a night-watchman state, no welfare programs at all, we *might* consider such a thing, because a poor person entering the country wouldn’t make everybody else worse off.

        But even in such a case, we wouldn’t want MS-13 members, or plague carriers, or large groups of armed men in matching clothing, entering the country. So, even under the ideal circumstances for open borders, you wouldn’t just let people walk across the border. Not when you’re a 1st world country right next to a 3rd world country with a low grade civil war going on.

        But, of course, we’re not a nightwatchman state, we’re a welfare state, and every poor person entering the country makes everyone else worse off because of that. So until we get rid of all those welfare programs, we need to be selective about who can immigrate.

        1. Brett Bellmore’s ancestors, circa 1500:
          “Yeah, I get it: You don’t think individuals should have the right to own slaves. This is a widely rejected idea, basically no society on the face of the Earth accepts it, because the practical consequences are horrific. What if those freed slaves reject the Church and the king? We can’t have that!”

          Look, If the US were a night-watchman state, no welfare programs at all, we *might* consider such a thing, because a poor person entering the country wouldn’t make everybody else worse off.

          If you’re going to bring up these utilitarian arguments, then I would expect, for consistency’s sake, that you also discuss how border restrictionism ALSO makes everyone worse off, due to the taxes that citizens must pay to maintain the enforcement, the loss of liberties, and the general paranoia and discrimination against foreigners that exists in such a restrictionist society.

          I will happily admit that open borders comes with costs. But I see very few of the border restrictionists even mentioning the costs of their proposals. Perhaps you’d like to start?

          1. You are the dumbest fucking person

  33. How does one know the percentage of an unknown number? One would have to know how many people cross illegally (unknown) before stating that they make up only 38% of all undocumented immigrants. Maths!!!
    Plus, Trump is only asking for .001% of the federal budget (2018 numbers) to build the security border wall. Pittance.

  34. I’ve written about this here before, but let’s go over it again;

    There is one superlative reason for building The Wall. The voters who elected Trump want it. They want it because they have a strong sense that a large group of self-nominated ‘betters’ has been lying to them about immigration and ignoring their concerns about it for decades. They want a Wall. They want to be listened to, and not patted on the head (or called nasty names) and told they are wrong. They are sick to thr teeth of ninnies who assure tham that ‘most undocumented immigrants are not criminals’, because that know goddamned well that by being in the country illegally the ‘undocumented’ goddamned well ARE criminals. Now, that point of view may be unhelpful, but it isn’t dsmissable, and it has been being dismissed by Teh Elites for far to goddamned long.

    This resentment, this rising anger, needs to be addressed, and it needs to be addressed in a way that reduces it, not frustrates it. EVEN IF THE WALL HAS NO MEASURABLE EFFECT ON ILLEGAL ENTRY it needs to be built, because if the anger is not reduced it is going to break out in ways none of us will like.

    1. Basically we need a wall, because not getting a wall, not getting border security, proves to the electorate that democracy doesn’t work anymore.

  35. 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.geosalary.com

  36. The undocumented population, especially from Mexico, is actually falling. There were 10,665,000 illegal immigrants living in the U.S. in 2017, down more than a million from 11,725,000 in 2010, the study says.

    How can you be sure if either of these numbers is accurate?

  37. I would guess that most of the Visa overstayers are people that came for college, decided they liked it and stayed. Make a deal for them to stay as long as they want. MS-13 members, stay away

    1. I doubt this is the case, but would definitely be willing to offer them some sort of a deal for a quicker path to citizenship. It still seems strange to me that Trump/border wall opponents keep pointing to that ~40% of illegals crossing at the border as a reason to not secure the border. It obviously is valuable in considering costs/benefits but it doesn’t negate the utility of a wall

  38. TrumpObama keeps claiming that there’s a “security climate crisis” at the southern border for the entire planet, thanks to the immigrants and drugs allegedly unrestricted oil use pouring into the in this country. Only a wall windmills and solar power, he argues, will solve this crisis.

    Blah blah blah authoritarians blah blah blah.

    1. Brilliant decoding! Have you considered applying at Bletchley or the NSA?

  39. In the face of a progressive movement that wants to increase government spending, across the board, for citizens and non-citizens alike, any reduction of illegal immigration is good, and a giant border with a third-world county seems a decent start considering the cost of shoring it up is far less than is pissed away by our the gov’t regularly. In the face of a progressive movement that wants to eliminate the electoral college, that thinks voter ID is racist and that wants to grant illegal immigrants the right to vote in local elections, any reduction of illegal immigration is good. When a group of people can’t obey our laws in the first instance of their imposition, it’s probably better that they’re not here in the first place. And instead of saying a wall won’t fix the whole problem because of visa overstays, propose the other half of the solution to complement the wall – exit visas.

  40. “One of the problems with successfully dealing with threats is that people start believing that there is no threat.” ? Thomas Sowell

  41. The two good reasons for having one are because the Democrats want an Iron Curtain and Republicans want a Berlin Wall. “Both” parties agree that the right place is between Hitler and Stalin. But the more I see the more this looks like an item that is expected to become valuable after nuclear weapons are detonated–like a bomb shelter.

  42. 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.geosalary.com

  43. This is the single topic on which Reason is consistently wrong. Whether it is the wall, tighter visa security, E-verify, revisiting the 14th amendment, or whatever you think will work, the United States needs to control illegal immigration to this country. The fact that the number of illegals has apparently (possibly, maybe) dropped recently does not mean that those numbers will continue to slow. History, if anything, suggests exactly the opposite. Amnesty under Reagan regularized the status of 3 million illegals; by conservative estimates, there are about 11 million illegals residing in the country today, possibly almost twice that many by other measures. Last year, over 1 million people legally immigrated to the United States; if Reason believes we need to increase the number of Green Card recipients by 50% or more then it should make that case. Advocating for the status quo is a non-starter. If the incursion of illegal aliens threatened the job security of half-witted magazine writers as much as they do contractors, construction workers, landscapers, and other blue collar jobs, you can bet your ass they would be taking a different tack!

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.