Why building a border fence is a HORRIBLE idea!

[rational thinker]

Found this on http://www.ronpaulrevolution.blogspot.com


While I agree with Dr. Paul on most issues, I strongly disagree on immigration, and feel he is way out of line with a libertarian solution here.

The border fence is a ridiculous and horrible idea. Here's why:

1. You could build the Great Wall of China on the border and people will still get in here as long as the gov't is offering them a basket of goodies if they can make it to the other side- i.e. schools, hospital care, welfare, etc.

2. There is nothing wrong with immigration. Borders are an illusion. "Illegal immigration" is simply people moving from one location to another. We should not, nor should we want to, use the guns of government to police the situation. It's not libertarian and it's not even humane, it's just turning the guns on others, exactly what we as libertarians are against.

3. If the government builds a gigantic wall, it will eventually be used to keep us from getting out, rather than to keep brown skin folks from getting in.

4. The Canada border is wide open. Should we build a 3,000-mile taxpayer-funded fence up there too?

5. Who's going to pay for all this? Count me out. Will you force me at gunpoint to "pay my taxes" to fund this project?

6. Eminent domain (communism). In order to build the fence, the government will have to steal land from residents. How is this even the slightest bit liberty-promoting? This is pure communism.

The simple solution is to end the welfare-warfare state. No fence will be needed and immigrants will have to make it on their own with no government help or taxpayer funding.

[rational thinker]

bump

[Danke]

You say "simple solution."

I agree in the perfect world, a fence would not be necessary. But we live in a world where a relatively simple fix (a few billion of dollars, a mere fraction of the defense budget) can prevent illegals from entering (that includes potential "terrorist").

Don't bring in a non sequitur of Canada, apples and oranges there.

[newyearsrevolution08]

We need a border fence WITH proper constitutional backing laws. Just putting up a fence is not the point BUT once we do have the laws to make everyone do it the right way THERE will STILL be those wanting to do it illegally and those stupid enough to come in without any reason ie no perks, free health care, medi this and that and free food.

Stop giving everything away to illegals and they will STOP coming over for a free ride on our dollar or crumbling dollar.

I do not however believe it is the illegals causes the problem though, I mean who wouldn't come across a border that is simple to get across and be able to provide for your family without having to work at all OR just work under the table for things as well.

Don't bitch at the laws but rather do something to change them.

[LibertiORDeth]

Great thread, couldn't agree more. Terrorists can get in fence or no fence, so that is a non-issue.

[newyearsrevolution08]

Great thread, couldn't agree more. Terrorists can get in fence or no fence, so that is a non-issue.

It's the same thing about dope in prisons, even in a heavy max prison they still have heroin, marijuana among other things.

Wars like these do not work BUT griping about them does nothing either. We need to focus on changing the laws by educating the voters.

Walls can't keep things in or out WITHOUT the right policy.

[Danke]

It's the same thing about dope in prisons, even in a heavy max prison they still have heroin, marijuana among other things.

Wars like these do not work BUT griping about them does nothing either. We need to focus on changing the laws by educating the voters.

Walls can't keep things in or out WITHOUT the right policy.

So if we just had the foresight to change our laws, we would not need a military defense, brilliant!

[OptionsTrader]

Perhaps I am overly cynical but a multi billion dollar fence smells
of big government waste and I suspect that those that are determined to cross over
will find a way regardless. Frankly I am more concerned about a wall keeping me in than I am of Pedro coming here. Remove the welfare incentives, patrol the borders with the agents we sent to the middle east, and remove the media alarmism and this becomes a non issue.

[newyearsrevolution08]

More government spending indeed, now I have my own thoughts on how it would be purchased without any tax or "fed" money BUT yes I do agree, if laws were changed a fence would not need to be in place.

Remove the incentive and bye bye flocks of people wanting hand outs on the tax payers dime.

[Danke]

Perhaps I am overly cynical but a multi billion dollar fence smells
of big government waste and I suspect that those that are determined to cross over
will find a way regardless. Frankly I am more concerned about a wall keeping me in than I am of Pedro coming here. Remove the welfare incentives, patrol the borders with the agents we sent to the middle east, and remove the media alarmism and this becomes a non issue.

you want to escape to Mexico or Canada?

[SevenEyedJeff]

There is no need for a fence. Throw the book at the employers that hire the illegals--send them to jail and make them pay gargantuan fines, and I guarantee you this problem goes away.

[driller80545]

Perhaps I am overly cynical but a multi billion dollar fence smells
of big government waste and I suspect that those that are determined to cross over
will find a way regardless. Frankly I am more concerned about a wall keeping me in than I am of Pedro coming here. Remove the welfare incentives, patrol the borders with the agents we sent to the middle east, and remove the media alarmism and this becomes a non issue.

bump ++++

[Danke]

More government spending indeed, now I have my own thoughts on how it would be purchased without any tax or "fed" money BUT yes I do agree, if laws were changed a fence would not need to be in place.

Remove the incentive and bye bye flocks of people wanting hand outs on the tax payers dime.


That is the ultimate solution. A fence is the relatively quick and practical solution.

[driller80545]

you want to escape to Mexico or Canada?

Maybe!

[Danke]

There is no need for a fence. Throw the book at the employers that hire the illegals--send them to jail and make them pay gargantuan fines, and I guarantee you this problem goes away.

So we need to invade personal privacy rights of everyone already here (you and me). I'd rather just prevent illegals coming over in the first lace and keep those here free.

[Allen72289]

You should fence your land at your own expense.

[AutoDas]

Stop enticing the immigrants with handouts then only the hard working individuals will migrate here. The 9/11 hijackers did not border-jump.

[WRellim]

The entire Illegal Immigrant issue is a Red Herring to distract us from the REAL underlying causes of the problems (NAFTA, socialism, etc).

[rational thinker]

Why would Paul advocate a fence if it requires the federal government to step in? Sounds hypocritical to me...

[SeanEdwards]

While I agree with Dr. Paul on most issues, I strongly disagree on immigration, and feel he is way out of line with a libertarian solution here.

The border fence is a ridiculous and horrible idea. Here's why:

1. You could build the Great Wall of China on the border and people will still get in here as long as the gov't is offering them a basket of goodies if they can make it to the other side- i.e. schools, hospital care, welfare, etc.


Police don't catch every murderer either, does that mean we should stop trying to catch murderers? The point being that policies and instruments that can potentially reduce illegal border crossing may be beneficial even if they do not prevent 100% of illegal immigration.



2. There is nothing wrong with immigration. Borders are an illusion. "Illegal immigration" is simply people moving from one location to another. We should not, nor should we want to, use the guns of government to police the situation. It's not libertarian and it's not even humane, it's just turning the guns on others, exactly what we as libertarians are against.


That's an opinion. It's the kind of opinion that anyone is perfectly free to try and have adopted as public policy through the political process. However, the current law of the land does mandate government oversight of immigration and immigration limits, along with measures to prevent illegal immigration.



3. If the government builds a gigantic wall, it will eventually be used to keep us from getting out, rather than to keep brown skin folks from getting in.


Slippery slope fallacy, along with a not so subtle insinuation that people favoring immigration controls are motivated by racism. In truth though, some individuals should be prevented from getting out. Criminals, people carrying dangerous communicable diseases, terrorists, etc. should not be allowed to travel freely and cross borders at will.



4. The Canada border is wide open. Should we build a 3,000-mile taxpayer-funded fence up there too?


If a wave of millions of illegal immigrants flouts our immigration rules and starts streaming over that border every year then why not?



5. Who's going to pay for all this? Count me out. Will you force me at gunpoint to "pay my taxes" to fund this project?


I don't accept that controlling passage over the nation's land perimeter is such a huge expense. Bring the troops home from the border between the Koreas and put them to work taking charge of the U.S. Mexico border. They did a pretty damn good job preventing North Koreans from immigrating into South Korea, I bet they can do a bang up job of making sure nobody walks in from Mexico without crossing a checkpoint.



6. Eminent domain (communism). In order to build the fence, the government will have to steal land from residents. How is this even the slightest bit liberty-promoting? This is pure communism.


Eminent domain does have justification sometimes and the purpose of establishing a national border does seem to be one of those times. Owners of the land should be financially compensated as fairly as possible.



The simple solution is to end the welfare-warfare state. No fence will be needed and immigrants will have to make it on their own with no government help or taxpayer funding.

That's a worthy idea, but it doesn't really conflict with the concept of asserting physical control of the nation's border. A society could embrace both strategies. There's good reasons to have the state enforce physical control over the entry and exit of people across it's borders. Preventing people from entering or exiting the country with dangerous human plant or animal pathogens being a prime one. Stopping wanted criminals from fleeing or entering the country being another one.

A fence doesn't prevent immigration either. It just helps to enforce the rules regarding immigration by channelling individuals through checkpoints in order to cross an administrative and legal border.

[Zolah]

While I agree with Dr. Paul on most issues, I strongly disagree on immigration, and feel he is way out of line with a libertarian solution here.

The border fence is a ridiculous and horrible idea. Here's why:

1. You could build the Great Wall of China on the border and people will still get in here as long as the gov't is offering them a basket of goodies if they can make it to the other side- i.e. schools, hospital care, welfare, etc.

And wouldn't Ron Paul focus on (1.) in the long-term?

What we have here is Libertarians clashing with libertarians.

[AutoDas]

What we have here is Libertarians clashing with libertarians.

Both side on having no physical restraint.