Open or Closed

[cheapseats]

Real simple, A or B.

A: I prefer to be free to drift across former-now-non-existent borders, working and living wherever and whenever I please.

B: I prefer that America is a distinct and sovereign nation, with identifiable and secure borders and a strict immigration policy.

[acptulsa]

Not so simple at all. A is preferable except that it is far more likely to lead to oppressive world government than B is.

[Kludge]

Only a Sith deals in absolutes.

Anyway, I'd prefer closed borders without quotas, but with flexible payment options, a comprehensive and fast background/health check, and borders enforced with military might.

[dannno]

Right now B, but optimally A...

[AuH20]

A republic is built upon law. I just don't see how you can advocate 'A', thus changing the nature of the governing agreement.

[Kludge]

A would be the dissolution of the United States federal government, which would probably lead to strengthened state governments and eventually lead to a confederation where we can start over.... I'll choose A.

[cheapseats]

Not so simple at all. A is preferable except that it is far more likely to lead to oppressive world government than B is.

Nothing at all is simple. Knowing THAT, we have no choice but to keep it simple. Get back to basics.

As a starting point, these concepts are DIFFERENT. They are just as different as they could be.

Are we wanting a sovereign nation-state or are we not?

Or shall we have only sovereign states?

Or is it a big free-for-all of person-states?

I'm game, whichever. What choice have I? Fight the whole world AND my countrymen? But let us DO start calling a spade a spade. General socioeconomic cooperation IS Communism. That has already FAILED, epically. I contend that America is on a runaway course for plain old Communism, and that doesn't work for me. It's wrong, and to go along with it is wrong. For me.

[Theocrat]

Only a Sith deals in absolutes.

Are you absolutely sure about that, Darth Kludge? ;)

By the way, the question presents us with a false dichotomy. We can have both, but we have to change our domestic policy by eliminating welfare programs which attract foreigners to take part as "free riders." We also have to change our foreign policy by eliminating our affairs in other nations through warfare entanglements which incite domestic threats from those who would retaliate because of those entanglements.

[cheapseats]

Are you absolutely sure about that, Darth Kludge? ;)

By the way, the question presents us with a false dichotomy. We can have both, but we have to change our domestic policy by eliminating welfare programs which attract foreigners to take part as "free riders." We also have to change our foreign policy by eliminating our affairs in other nations through warfare entanglements which incite domestic threats from those who would retaliate because of those entanglements.

I will argue that Republican/Democrat is the false dichotomy.

Even IF we dismantle the entire welfare apparatus -- which should only take the rest of our and our children's lifetimes, what with Big Law defending the defenseless, for a fee -- the standard of living here is better than elsewhere. Low-wage labor will still gravitate here and profit-oriented businesspeople will still gravitate to low wages.

Little Tokyo, Chinatown, Little Ethiopia, Little India. Do you go to those countries and find Little New York or Chicagotown? No, you do not. Who died and proclaimed MY country the Melting Pot? Step on up! We gotchyer bottom-o-the-barrel right here! What the hell kind of way is THAT to run a country or grow an economy?

It will not have escaped notice that the Players' plan is to globalize by holding back the American standard of living (small market) while real estate development and product placement "catches up" in the countries of our brothers-in-mediocrity (COLOSSAL market). . . while the Elite who perpetrated this clusterfuck continue to jet set, globe trot and hob knob.

Most of America is a fly-over zone to them. They would cobble the whole world together with mini-malls that have the exact same corporate giant anchor tenants.

We deserve a break today.

[LiveToWin]

Not simple at all.

Id rather have A.

But the world isnt ready for that, so B would be needed right now.


Not voting in this poll.

[Theocrat]

I will argue that Republican/Democrat is the false dichotomy.

Even IF we dismantle the entire welfare apparatus -- which should only take the rest of our and our children's lifetimes, what with Big Law defending the defenseless, for a fee -- the standard of living here is better than elsewhere. Low-wage labor will still gravitate here and profit-oriented businesspeople will still gravitate to low wages.

Little Tokyo, Chinatown, Little Ethiopia, Little India. Do you go to those countries and find Little New York or Chicagotown? No, you do not. Who died and proclaimed MY country the Melting Pot? Step on up! We gotchyer bottom-o-the-barrel right here! What the hell kind of way is THAT to run a country or grow an economy?

It will not have escaped notice that the Players' plan is to globalize by holding back the American standard of living (small market) while real estate development and product placement "catches up" in the countries of our brothers-in-mediocrity (COLOSSAL market). . . while the Elite who perpetrated this clusterfuck continue to jet set, globe trot and hob knob.

Most of America is a fly-over zone to them. They would cobble the whole world together with mini-malls that have the exact same corporate giant anchor tenants.

We deserve a break today.

Okay. :)

[cheapseats]

Not simple at all.

Id rather have A.

But the world isnt ready for that, so B would be needed right now.


Not voting in this poll.

Lemme ask you a question. Ideally, you favor A but you apprehend that it is untenable at this time. You go on to say that, since you think the world is not ready for A, B is required at this time.

That sounds to me like a thoughtful, measured vote. It SOUNDS like you declare where you stand. But then you make the announcement that you will not vote. Why? Anytime I am presented with choice, I exercise it. My answer is almost never, "Either one, you decide." Is it that you don't want to be HELD to your beliefs, or is it that you have a better option C to propose?

This is NOT the time for mum's the word. This is the time to stand up and be counted.

[dgr]

Open boarders are the basis of the New World Order all borders will be open
Its the controll of movement that will be central. So why have an open border if you will not be free to cross it.

[axiomata]

"You cannot simultaneously have free immigration and a welfare state." - Milton Friedman

Since we currently have a welfare state, I'd have to say 'closed'. That doesn't mean we should be content with the situation.

[Jeremy]

Closed in a welfare state. Open in a free market.

So I don't vote.

[ChaosControl]

Closed, but at the same time legal immigration should be easy for anyone who wants to come here.

[muzzled dogg]

end the welfare state (and warfare state) then open

[heavenlyboy34]

depends on who is "securing" the borders. If individuals hire private companies to protect their border property, I'm for it. :D Expanding the military/police State is a baaaad idea. :p

[hotbrownsauce]

Secure boarders.
What criteria immigrants must meet to come to the USA is a different story.

[krazy kaju]

I choose option "A" hands down. Even if we didn't dismantle the welfare state first, the freeing of borders and immigration would help bring it down quicker. Borders are nothing but imaginary lines set by government thugs anyway.

[Mesogen]

Real simple, A or B.

A: I prefer to be free to drift across former-now-non-existent borders, working and living wherever and whenever I please.

Sounds like freedom to me.


B: I prefer that America is a distinct and sovereign nation, with identifiable and secure borders and a strict immigration policy.

Well, if you listen to some posters here, the states are distinct and sovereign nations, with identifiable borders that should be secure. I guess they might also want a strict immigration policy.

[Tabby]

When I answered A I thought the question was talking about closing state borders and the govt telling people where to work and live. Now I see it's countries I would choose B.

[Austin]

You seem to be implying that it is impossible to be a sovereign nation and have an open-border policy...

[The_Orlonater]

I choose option "A" hands down. Even if we didn't dismantle the welfare state first, the freeing of borders and immigration would help bring it down quicker. Borders are nothing but imaginary lines set by government thugs anyway.

It's a stupid fence that you can dig under anyway.

Get rid of our current laws favoring welfare for illegals anyway.

[SimpleName]

I voted for secured borders because in this state of the world, open borders would be exactly what the elitists would want. And I sure as hell do not want to give up something so important to their success. In an ideological world, though, open borders would be the way to go. We have too many globalist forces attacking on us right now to allow it.

[UnReconstructed]

There is no way to secure the borders. People who want to come across will come across. Therefore, any attempt to secure the borders is throwing [money] in a hole.

Laws that state people must meet a certain criteria to come across the borders will only prevent law abiding people from coming across. The "outlaws" will still be here. The borders have never been secure and never will be. Any attempt to do so will only result in separating taxpayers from the fruit of their labour.

I choose option A.

[Danke]

There is no way to secure the borders. People who want to come across will come across. Therefore, any attempt to secure the borders is throwing [money] in a hole.


The Eastern Block was very successful in securing their borders.

[jrich4rpaul]

Isn't A the NAU?

[LibForestPaul]

1. Secured borders are feasible, see Soviet Union, 50 years, multiple nations.

2. We need mines, doubled fences, and sharpshooters. Considering our lax property rights, appropriating the necessary land should not be a problem.

[sailor]

Would USA be a limited republic, the sort it was when it started out an open border would have been preferable. But in a democracy it would unfortunately be suicidal to open it.

[UnReconstructed]

You may be right about that but I don't believe that anyone was trying to get into the "eastern block" countries. Even still, you and I do not know with 100% certainty that they were successful at their attempts to keep people in or to keep people out.

You can put up all the fence that you want and post a soldier every 10' and there will still be 3 options for gaining entrance or exit from a politically designated area 1) tunneling under the fence, 2) flying over the fence in an aircraft (read ultralight) 3) the most probable way, pay off the soldiers.

Despite your misgivings about how patriotic the US Border Patrol is in guarding "your" borders, time and again the MSM is reporting how these bureaucrats are taking payoffs to look the other way. If you want illegal immigration to stop, then get rid of the stupid laws. Even DR Paul has stated that there is no immigration problem, there is a welfare problem. Stop the welfare and the so called "illegals" will stop coming over. Its a joke to me really but it may be hitting close to home soon.

My wife's father married a messican woman a few years ago and it turns out now that when she first got her citizenship that she was allowing new "illegals" live in her home until they were able to find a place to rent on their own. She just went to court in AZ last week and was found guilty. She has to go back in June for sentencing. Supposedly, the judge (and I use that term loosely) is a Christian. I have been asked to draft a letter on the Biblical position of borders and how the "strangers in the land" should be treated. I am undecided if I am going to do it or not.

[cheapseats]

It "sounds" rather like most of those who favor open borders conceptually will concede AT THIS TIME, UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, PARTICULARLY UNTIL SUCH TIME AS OUR GENEROUS-TO-A-FAULT WELFARE INDUSTRY HAS BEEN DISMANTLED that secure borders are in the better interest of the American citizenry.

Any staunch disagreement?

[Objectivist]

Open, but no job options or social benefits for anybody illegally here, for that you get two years on a prison labor crew and loss of your personal property, like the asset forfeiture laws applied to drug dealers, ill gotten gains and such.

[Objectivist]

ANd another thing, children born here to illegals are not citizens of this country, they are citizens of the parents origin. If a welcome Foreign Diplomat has a child here in the USA that child is not an American Citizen. Then my half-sister was born in a German hospital by my then German National mother and an American Citizen, my sister was considered an American and had to apply for German Citizenship to stay with my family in Germany.

[Jace]

...

[cheapseats]

Open borders are killing America.

...There are millions of rich people from the exploiting classes in the Third World that want to be here exploiting us...

Our borders are totally open now. Our population is exploding, even with a low birth rate. Our quality of life is declining...

Within our lifetimes, the majority of Americans will be the descendents of people who came here after 1980. They are not being assimilated. We are the ones being assimilated. We are being assimilated into a global society run by a globalist elite that has the opposite values of the people who founded this nation.

If that's what you want, then vote A.

I vote B. I want to live in a prosperous republic with a limited government, not a giant Third World slum run by corrupt kleptocrats who make decisions that affect my life that I have no influence over. I thought our ancestors fought a war of independence to be free of a global empire.

For whom does this not resonate as Truth?




Immigration should be tied to the unemployment rate and wages. I would say if the unemployment rate goes over 5 percent, all immigration should stop. If you have a quarter in which wages have declined, all immigration should cease. And under no circumstance should immigation exceed the birth rate.

Immigration exceeds your birth rate and your unemployment rate at your peril, no two ways about that.



Our current immigration policy ensures higher unemployment, declining wages and the loss of our culture and traditions under an unceasing deluge of foreigners who are not given time to assimilate into our values and traditions. In fact, they are encouraged to retain their own cultures and values and denigrate our own -- in our country!


I'll part ways with you here -- not given TIME to assimilate? LIFE is assimilation. Those who do not assimilate do not WANT assimilation but, rather, accommodation. Which Politicians and Bleeding Hearts unfailingly deliver, always at someone else's expense.

It is extremely easy to be generous with someone else's money.

Career politicians are buying votes with tax dollars.

[cheapseats]

Only a Sith deals in absolutes.


Two plus two IS four.

Even setting aside the considerable number of people who believe in God -- who ABSOLUTELY deals in absolutes -- NOT everything is subjective, relative, or open to interpretation.

I'm not saying that borders are one of them, but there ARE axioms. Gravity IS a law.

[Natalie]

We could have open borders, if we got rid of welfare and free education and free hospital visits and all that. But until we get rid of that, which will probably never happen, we need to secure the borders.

[cheapseats]

We could have open borders, if we got rid of welfare and free education and free hospital visits and all that. But until we get rid of that, which will probably never happen, we need to secure the borders.

So sensible.

Progress, not perfection.

[cheapseats]

A big TIME OUT.

All the cops who are hiding in bushes to issue speeding tickets can go help man the front.

[cheapseats]

THEY HATE US FOR OUR LIBERTIES
22 July 2008

The people of a country that finds itself in the ridiculous position of being sustainedly at war...beneath a cloud of worldwide terrorism and over a cauldron of economic chaos...all the while with porous borders that practically invite cheap labor and/or violent crusaders, are obliged to either acknowledge and eradicate worthless government officials or admit that they themselves have no Will For Change. The People will fearlessly take on their Corrupted Government, honorably taking Corrupt Public Servants to fullest task, or the People will concede one of two things: Defeat or Complicity.

Elsewhere I argue that Execution by Firing Squad should be the industry standard for capital punishment, but also that it is suitable penalty for conviction of Treasonous Corruption in Public Office. I will further argue that ALL corruption in Public Office is treasonous.

Here, I offer for contemplation possible solutions to our inexplicable but nevertheless enduring Fence Problem.

It is always the way, yes? A brilliant doctor cannot repair a frayed electrical cord. A brilliant professor cannot change a tire. A brilliant financier cannot manage a load of laundry. A model for governance once revered the world over cannot secure the borders of the country over which it presides.

If it is true of a baseball diamond that, “If you build it, they will come,” this is even more true of a fence...If you build it, they will NOT come. Fences keep people out. That is why people build fences at the borders of their properties. Unless we mean to globalize unto One World/No Countries, that is why America should also build a fence at the borders of ITS property.

A niece attends Cal Poly in San Luis Obispo, majoring in Landscape Architecture. They’re working on all kindsa cool stuff...all environmentally sound and energy efficient. A group of students is going to Africa in August, to build an eco-friendly playground at an orphanage. I will suggest that if our government would assign the job of building a fence to the students at Cal Poly, they would produce a fence of structural, aesthetic and environmental integrity before government officials could even decide the shape of the table at which they to hold further in-depth discussion about Phantom Fences.

For that matter, the government could round up Illegals themselves and let THEM build The Fence. It would go without saying, except a government that lurches between Automatic Pilot and Knee Jerk Reaction necessitates that EVERYTHING be spelled out, the efficacy of this method would be reliant upon Illegals standing on the Mexico side of The Fence during construction. Offer them Amnesty in exchange for a Fence, and they’ll have that sucker up lickety-split...you want chain link or white picket?

Happily, it is unnecessary to involve Interlopers in building a fence to keep out Interlopers. America has able-bodied Unemployed aplenty, who show up on the first of every month to pick up General Relief and Food Stamps. TWO sums they collect...every month...year after year.

No doubt I have heard some whoppers from among the scores of homeless with whom I have spoken in the past couple years. However, comma, there are common threads that speak to Truth. “Waiting on a check from New Orleans” is a common theme. I will not be surprised to learn that slick shysters have snapped up prime French Quarter real estate for peanuts, and that they dole out penny-ante payments as a cross between “development costs” and hush money.

Early release from prison, along with a one-way bus ticket to another state is also a common theme. Sunny Southern California is a popular destination...sleeping on the street is one thing, sleeping in the snow is quite another.

But of this, I am certain. While whatever staggering number of homeless have suffered traumas and endure miseries that the snugly sheltered cannot fathom, there is also a staggering number of homeless who quite prefer life on the street, absent all structure and pressure. They do. This is also something that the snugly sheltered cannot fathom.

That the number of elective homeless is smaller than the number of crisis-based homeless is irrelevant to the reality that there IS a population of Drifting Loitering Drinking folk who simply choose to live out of doors...no overhead means no overhead...without schedule or responsibility or obligation or hurry or worry, who ALSO AND REGULARLY collect federal and state assistance. Read that, Political Largesse at Taxpayer Expense. Drink, panhandle, drink, shoot the shit, drink, rummage through trash, drink, bed down, drink, pick up welfare, drink...drink, panhandle, drink, shoot the shit, drink, rummage through trash, drink, bed down, drink, pick up welfare, drink. Daniel Raleigh Nicks says he’s been doing it since 1988...why would he lie to the person who bought his lunch?

A country that is unable to build effective deterrent at its border and that simultaneously finds itself with an extraneous population of Paid Drifters has, quite at the ready, a means to kill two birds with one stone...if only the squeamish, the Misguided, and the Uber Compassionate will bow to Reason and Reality.

If America will oblige everyone to come in for their welfare checks we can sort the Infirm from the Freeloaders, the Destitute from the Drug-Addicted, the Overwhelmed from the Overboards. Sorting the wheat from the chaff is preliminary to any reorganization. Crucial in any business, an honest inventory is no less vital to the Big Bad Business of Welfare.

Waaa-waaa-waaa, cry the Bleeding Hearts. What about “all” the people who are homebound in wheelchairs? They need only call us and let us know...and know that they will have to have medical records available for inspection by the Official that we will send out to deliver their assistance.

Those who are able of body and reasonably sound of mind shall receive no further financial assistance. When the country comes to its senses and accomplishes national healthcare, they shall be as welcome as any Citizen to come in to a G-Med facility for medical attention, but not another dime by way of freebie-here-ya-go cash.

Another solution presents itself for consideration by open-minded and determined sorts, it bearing mention that open-mindedness and determination are required as never before in my lifetime. It is a two-birds-with-one-stone proposition, which typically resonates with American Consumers. It would ease the welfare roles...read that, provide relief to overburdened American Taxpayers...while simultaneously securing borders that are as open as a fraternity keg party.

Democratic and compassionate people will be inclined to dismiss the proposal as hard-nosed and far-fetched, which is as it should be. Society NEEDS democratic and compassionate people, to counterbalance man’s reliable tendency toward self-service at the expense of others. But I would draw their attention to the REALITY that we don’t have any more fingers to stick in any more holes springing in any more crumbling dikes. We’ve got bigger problems than we’re used to, and more OF them. And as best I can tell, not only are we declining Change wherever and whenever possible, this country is running on autopilot right into the ground and the People are clearly on board. What we’ve got here in River City is Trouble with a capital T...and Business As Usual.

At the end of the day, it’s not rocket science, think outside the box.

The Liberties is a section of Dublin, Ireland thusly named not to signify Freedom but to signify that the area once lay outside the city’s medieval walls, therefore beyond the city’s jurisdiction. There were multiple Fee Collectors in this outer limit section that specialized in weaving and mayhem, but regulation of “society” was pretty much a Free For All. Read that, Might Makes Right.

Deliberate Drifters, Bully Cops, aspiring Bully Cops, Hard Asses, Incorrigibles...give ‘em loner-sized land grants along the U.S./Mexico border. Here’s your mini-Ponderosa...there’s your fence line, minus the fence. Here are some materials. Build your own fence, and guard it with your life. Here’s your shot gun and ammo...shoot to kill. Invaders, not each other...and not folk within range on the other side of the fence.

This, here, is your last stand. Protect it or lose it...we’ve got plenty more of you where you came from.

We’ll airlift in government surplus food, the same way we do in other Hot Spots. Even so, y’all will want to think about gardening, girlie as it seems. You’ll figure it out, once your option is hunger. We’ll send the military through on an ad hoc basis...make sure it isn’t turning into Sodom and Gomorrah. Keeping aspiring Illegals as sex slaves or gophers or trophies, starting your own Coyote operation, cannibalism, shooting each other for sport...that shit will get YOU killed. By a firing squad, on the spot. Next!

A “natural” order always manifests. Leaders always arise...even, or especially, among Misfits. Overbearing Guard-types always exact order...very often also a pound of flesh, but the Tough Guys will sort that out amongst themselves.

Beastly, declare the Well Established...cruel and inhuman, cry the Well Heeled....barbaric, cry the Well Protected, each from the megaphone of his keyboard plugged in at his Ivory Tower.

It is not dissimilar to the manner by which Australia and New Zealand were populated and settled.

B-b-but that was then and this is now...we have civilized beyond such Machiavellian methodology.

Apparently not...one has only to look at our reinstatement of Torture.

Think of it like the Wild Wild West, niftily contained in the Sordid Southwest’s Bully Belt. Years and years from now, it is liable to be quaint in the manner of an old mining town...perhaps home to a future film festival. Recalling the production of cloth in Dublin’s Liberties in Dublin, it would be visionary to encourage an industry. Hemp comes to mind. Hemp could BE the fence...it grows like a weed.

Think of these former drains on the economy not as dregs of society, but as Minute Men of First Resort. They live for Thrill and, candidly, they are expendable. Politically incorrect, but true.

If the concept still causes anguish in Christian hearts, think of it like Iraq...which is to say hardly at all.

[UnReconstructed]

You cannot secure the borders.

I do not agree with "securing the border until the welfare state is gone."

[BillyDkid]

Real simple, A or B.

A: I prefer to be free to drift across former-now-non-existent borders, working and living wherever and whenever I please.

B: I prefer that America is a distinct and sovereign nation, with identifiable and secure borders and a strict immigration policy.To me this is a false choice. These are not mutually exclusive alternatives. Years ago Americans and Canadians and Mexicans all moved freely across each other borders and often worked in neighboring countries. It was normal for Mexicans to come here and work the fields, for example, during the season and then return home to their families when the season was over. Remember, the hysteria over the borders came from this absurd notion that we could keep terrorists out if they wanted to get in here - completely ridiculous when you consider we have God knows how many thousands of miles of coastline, not to mention the coastlines of the Great Lakes. One of the hallmarks of a free nation is the ability to travel freely both within and without it.

[cheapseats]

To me this is a false choice. These are not mutually exclusive alternatives. Years ago Americans and Canadians and Mexicans all moved freely across each other borders and often worked in neighboring countries. It was normal for Mexicans to come here and work the fields, for example, during the season and then return home to their families when the season was over. Remember, the hysteria over the borders came from this absurd notion that we could keep terrorists out if they wanted to get in here - completely ridiculous when you consider we have God knows how many thousands of miles of coastline, not to mention the coastlines of the Great Lakes. One of the hallmarks of a free nation is the ability to travel freely both within and without it.

This is not years ago, and these are decidedly not normal times. We're fightin' for AMERICAN SOVEREIGNTY here.

We work TOWARD ideals, not hold out for them, yes?

[cheapseats]

You cannot secure the borders.



Baloney.

[Objectivist]

Open borders are killing America.

Anyone who advocates open borders hasn't spent a lot of time in the Third World. I have and over the last few years, I am watching California take on the characteristics of a Third World nation. It's all happening very rapidly.

Go to India, China, Nigeria, Mexico, etc. There are hundreds of millions of people on this planet who would come here in a heartbeat and live on our park benches and eat out of our trash bins if given the chance. It's better than what they have now.

There are millions of rich people from the exploiting classes in the Third World that want to be here exploiting us. There is no more arrogant and corrupt person than a member of the upper classes of a poor country, especially the non-democratic ones. They didn't get to where they are by building a better mousetrap.

Our borders are totally open now. Our population is exploding, even with a low birth rate. Our quality of life is declining. We went from 100 million to 300 million in a generation. We will reach 400 million in most of our lifetimes, all through immigration.

Do you want to live in a nation of 500 million? How about a billion? When does it stop?

Do you think India and China are beacons of freedom and prosperity?

Within our lifetimes, the majority of Americans will be the descendents of people who came here after 1980. They are not being assimilated. We are the ones being assimilated. We are being assimilated into a global society run by a globalist elite that has the opposite values of the people who founded this nation.

If that's what you want, then vote A.

I vote B. I want to live in a prosperous republic with a limited government, not a giant Third World slum run by corrupt kleptocrats who make decisions that affect my life that I have no influence over. I thought our ancestors fought a war of independence to be free of a global empire.

Immigration should be tied to the unemployment rate and wages. I would say if the unemployment rate goes over 5 percent, all immigration should stop. If you have a quarter in which wages have declined, all immigration should cease. And under no circumstance should immigation exceed the birth rate.

Our current immigration policy ensures higher unemployment, declining wages and the loss of our culture and traditions under an unceasing deluge of foreigners who are not given time to assimilate into our values and traditions. In fact, they are encouraged to retain their own cultures and values and denigrate our own -- in our country!

If you were determined to destroy a culture, society, democracy, economy and sovereign nation, you couldn't come up with a better method than our current immigration policy. Our foreign policy and trade policy are right behind, though.

Many great points in this post, maybe I should have mentioned in mine that open borders to me would include a reasonable quota for legal immigration. Closed borders would stop all immigration in my mind and open would be a regulated amount of qualified applicants per year, not the mass exodus from poverty being seen today.

SO then the question would remain how many per year do we allow and what qualities are we looking for in future citizens?

[Objectivist]

A big TIME OUT.

All the cops who are hiding in bushes to issue speeding tickets can go help man the front.

They don't ask here in Wetbackland, they just send them on their way. Police refuse to ask for legal documentation on illegals here in Monterey County and we have a major problem with illegals and the gang murder rate is per capita higher than many major cities.

[silverhawks]

I don't think closed borders is a good idea, but secured borders is a necessity.

Instead of building a vast fence, we should do something as radical as ending the War on Drugs and then stop telling Mexico how it should amend its constitution? And cut off state benefits to illegal immigrants?

In addition to ending the war on drugs, and taking a small part of Cheapseats' proposal, why not go to entrepreneurs to start homesteads along the border for industrialised hemp farming? You have 1969 miles (3141 km) of border to cover, I wonder how many independent ranches you'd have across that, creating industrial hemp for US biofuel production?

[Objectivist]

I don't think closed borders is a good idea, but secured borders is a necessity.

Instead of building a vast fence, we should do something as radical as ending the War on Drugs and then stop telling Mexico how it should amend its constitution? And cut off state benefits to illegal immigrants?

In addition to ending the war on drugs, and taking a small part of Cheapseats' proposal, why not go to entrepreneurs to start homesteads along the border for industrialised hemp farming? You have 1969 miles (3141 km) of border to cover, I wonder how many independent ranches you'd have across that, creating industrial hemp for US biofuel production?

If I was King, mine fields would be all the rage.

[Jace]

...

[silverhawks]

Fact of the matter is, the borders will remain open for as long as there are corrupt politicians keen to exploit it as a voting issue.

[cheapseats]

Fact of the matter is, the borders will remain open for as long as there are corrupt politicians keen to exploit it as a voting issue.

That is why we must go to Washington DC over the 4th of July, to ride 'em outta town.

Anyone else got any better ideas? I'll stand in front. They can shoot me. The policies and practices of my country have rendered me expendable. Thanks for nuthin'.

Tea Parties + Appleseed Shoot + Patriots' Day + Oath Keepers' Reaffirmation = Big Bounce Memorial Day >> INDEPENDENCE DAY.

No one is going to do it for us. Or are we turning again to the French Foreign Legion?

[UnReconstructed]

The military (and they aren't mine btw) aren't securing any borders anywhere.

I am not sure how people can trumpet freedom and liberty at certain points while wishing fines and men with guns patrolling the streets at other points... actually, I can see that. Much like the common politicos of all time, you cry out that your way is better than the present way but your way is the present way.

You bemoan the violations of the Posse Comitatus Act while demanding that the military "secure" the border. You call for your precious 2nd amendment so that you can protect yourself against the wiles of the government but require those same men and women defend land that isn't yours or theirs. You detest imminent domain but an area determined to be government controlled before you were born... well, that's under government control and should be secured.

You could put soldiers along the border every 3' and charge employers with $100,000 fines for each "illegal" and you will not stop people from coming across your imaginary line and getting jobs. Your laws and your force do not stop anything from happening. When you use force against someone else then force comes back on you. In your futile attempt at securing the border, you will lose more of your freedom and your wealth.

Tell me this, how does paperwork from a rogue government legitimize someone in your opinion? It's just words on paper. It all sounds like racism to me. If a person comes here without paying their pound of flesh to the government then they are illegal and should be what? What would you have the government people do to these "illegals?" Is it because you have to be registered so you want everyone to be registered? "I have to suffer so everyone has to."

[Danke]

You bemoan the violations of the Posse Comitatus Act while demanding that the military "secure" the border. You call for your precious 2nd amendment so that you can protect yourself against the wiles of the government but require those same men and women defend land that isn't yours or theirs. You detest imminent domain but an area determined to be government controlled before you were born... well, that's under government control and should be secured.


Defending what is mine and ours is pretty fundamental. Do you have a problem with the constitution? Are you being selective, is this a redress of grievances?

If you don't believe in property rights, whether individual of collective, you are on the wrong forum.

[UnReconstructed]

What part of the border is yours? If any of it is yours then it is your responsibility to protect it. If none of it is yours then none of it is any of your concern or mine. I do not own any of the "border area."

EDIT: I do believe in property rights but government cannot own property because they cannot do anything without money taken through theft and coercion. Therefore those people who rightfully own land that may be along the border should protect their land and not force me to do it by taking money from me to fund a government make work program.

[Danke]

What part of the border is yours? If any of it is yours then it is your responsibility to protect it. If none of it is yours then none of it is any of your concern or mine. I do not own any of the "border area."

EDIT: I do believe in property rights but government cannot own property because they cannot do anything without money taken through theft and coercion. Therefore those people who rightfully own land that may be along the border should protect their land and not force me to do it by taking money from me to fund a government make work program.

So all funding of government should be voluntary. And those that live along the boarders should be the ones that fund boarder security, private security firms.

No need for a national defense.

[UnReconstructed]

word

[Jace]

...