Texas Libertarian Ron Paul: We don't need Trump's border wall to stop illegal immigration

[Zippyjuan]

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/08/ron-...migration.html

President Donald Trump doesn't need a wall to stop undocumented immigration, says former presidential candidate and Libertarian Ron Paul.

Instead, he should remove incentives for coming to America, argues Paul, former congressman from the border state of Texas.

Trump is expected to describe what he calls a crisis at the U.S.-Mexico border in a prime-time address to the nation Tuesday night.

President Donald Trump doesn't need a wall to stop undocumented immigration along the U.S. southern border, three-time presidential candidate and well-known Libertarian Ron Paul told CNBC on Tuesday.

Instead, the Trump administration should remove incentives for coming to America, said Paul, who also served 12 terms as a U.S. congressman from Texas, a state that shares 1,254 miles of a common border with Mexico.

In previous negotiations with Trump, Democrats had agreed to some border wall funding as part of an ultimately scuttled deal to protect the so-called Dreamers, people who were illegally brought to the U.S. as children.

"I don't like walls," Paul added. "I don't want to wall people in and wall people out."

The White House was not immediately available to respond to CNBC's request for comment on Paul's remarks.

Paul joined "Squawk Box" as the partial government shutdown entered its 18th day due to a stalemate between Trump and Democrats who now control the House. The president has demanded that any deal to end the shutdown must include funds toward the construction of a barrier along the U.S.-Mexico border. Democrats have refused to allocate any money for a wall.

Trump, whose administration has been accused of using false statistics and dubious claims to push for a wall, is expected to describe what he calls a crisis at the U.S.-Mexico border in a prime-time address to the nation Tuesday night.

There is doubt among Democrats that a wall would do much to solve the issue of illegal immigration, and data from the Center for Migration Studies, a New York-based think tank, show only one-third of recent undocumented immigrants came through the southern border.

Still, Trump has threatened that he could circumvent Congress by declaring a national emergency and using the military to construct a wall.

Republican Sen. Rand Paul from Kentucky, son of Ron Paul, has said he would support a wall-funding compromise to open the government. Rand Paul said recently that he'd support funding for Trump's wall if budget cuts were made elsewhere. He has suggested that pulling American troops out of Afghanistan could more than pay for the wall.

Meantime, Ron Paul said the partial government shutdown is not too significant "in the grand scheme of things" just "another thing that can stir up trouble and people react to it." Paul, a longtime critic of the Federal Reserve, blamed the central bank's easy money policies since the 2008 financial crisis for creating the conditions for what he says is a coming U.S. economic recession.

Paul, who practiced medicine before being elected to Congress, unsuccessfully ran for president three times, first on the Libertarian Party ticket and two more times as a Republican.

[enhanced_deficit]

RP's full interview on range of issues, pretty informative:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHASUU2Du0o



That said, following Slate hit piece on MAGA's credibility is quite unfortunate:

Trump’s Wall Reportedly a Gimmick Campaign Aides Came Up With So He’d Remember to Talk Immigration

By Daniel Politi
Jan 05, 2019



Steve Travers dressed as a wall waits for the arrival of Donald Trump to speak at the CFE Arena during a campaign stop on the campus of the University of Central Florida on March 5, 2016 in Orlando, Florida.
Joe Raedle/Getty Images

President Donald Trump’s obsession with a border wall with Mexico has now kept the government partially shut for three weeks. But the commander in chief didn’t always think it was such an essential idea. In fact, it started out as a gimmick, or, as the New York Times calls it, “a mnemonic device of sorts.” During the time when Trump was weighing his presidential candidacy, aides wanted to come up with a way to help him remember to talk about getting tough on immigration, which was always seen as a key issue in his campaign.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...migration.html



Potentially Related

Bush's Anti Gay Marriage Election Campaign:

'Moral Values' Carried Bush, Rove Says - The New York Times
nytimes
Nov 10, 2004 - 9 - President Bush's chief political adviser, Karl Rove, said Tuesday that opposition to gay marriage was one of the most powerful forces in ...



Gays and lesbians owe thanks to President George W. Bush and Justice Scalia
October 20, 2014
A lot of people are responsible for the wave of same-sex weddings sweeping the nation of late. But President George W. Bush and Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia deserve a lot more credit than they are given. By attempting to ban gay marriage, the president sparked public debate about marriage equality that ignited a historic backlash. The justice sneered at gay marriage in dissenting opinions, only to see his words used by gay marriage proponents to bolster their own cases and by courts to invalidate laws he thought legally sound.
In February 2004, Bush called for a constitutional amendment against gay marriage that would have etched discrimination into our nation’s most sacred document. Then, thanks to a Bush-backed effort 10 years ago next month, voters in 11 states approved ballot initiatives that banned committed same-sex couples from marrying.

George H.W. Bush witness at same-sex wedding in Maine
Sep 25, 2013 - KENNEBUNK, Maine (AP) — Former President George H.W. Bush was an official witness at the same-sex wedding of two longtime friends...
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...maine/2874227/


Mexico's President gives Trump son-in-law their nation’s greatest award


The Order of the Aztec Eagle, issued by Mexico to foreigners who make a significant contribution to the country
November 30, 2018

[Stratovarious]

The wall is not a bad idea, but I agree with Ron and have been saying this
for years along with so many others, cut all incentives all freebies , jail/fine
offending employers, kill sanctuary cites.
If we don't have a wall, we are going to need more border
agents keeping the crossings under surveillance and increased personnel to cover
smuggling/trafficking.
I say the wall is not a bad idea because we will get ms 13 and other
criminals into the US as well as terrorists and thugs from other countries
that aren't interested in anything but crime, the criminals that profit
from their crimes have an intrinsic or build in 'incentive' to come here.

[AuH20]

Too late Ron. It's too late. We're left with the wall and nothing else. Keep them out and pray. That's it. Unless you want to start terrorizing the fools in black robes and their corrupt agents with badges.

[oyarde]

Well I agree with Ron . I also know there is zero chance the congress would ever take away any incentive .

[shakey1]

RP's full interview on range of issues, pretty informative:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHASUU2Du0o

The voice of reason.

[CCTelander]

The voice of reason.

Reason is dead where this issue is concerned.

[AuH20]

Well I agree with Ron . I also no there is zero chance the congress would ever take away any incentive .

Not only that. It's patently illegal in some instances to remove incentives. ILLEGAL because of the judicial outgrowth stemming from the 14th amendment. Our country is so destroyed. Globosatanists took over full control in the early 90s and haven't looked back since.

[Anti Federalist]

Reason is dead where this issue is concerned.

I disagree.

I like to think I'm pretty reasonable, and I find Ron to be wrong on this point.

Now, maybe if the handouts and "gimmees" were taken away, there would be a point...kind of hard to do, when I just posted two stories this morning from NYC and California that have announced they will be passing out "free" healthcare to migrant invaders.

Free, of course, meaning paid for by you and me.

I have had two primary political icons in my life, Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan.

Over the last few weeks I've been looking at the track record of both men, and am finding that all too often Ron has been wrong and Pat has been right, about future events.

[AuH20]

I disagree.

I like to think I'm pretty reasonable, and I find Ron to be wrong on this point.

Now, maybe if the handouts and "gimmees" were taken away, there would be a point...kind of hard to do, when I just posted two stories this morning from NYC and California that have announced they will be passing out "free" healthcare to migrant invaders.

Free, of course, meaning paid for by you and me.

I have had two primary political icons in my life, Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan.

Over the last few weeks I've been looking at the track record of both men, and am finding that all too often Ron has been wrong and Pat has been right, about future events.

Ron's beliefs were better suited for a prior era, before the disease went mainstream. Now we're involved in hand-to-hand pit fighting and Pat's aggressive solutions have been proved to be prophetic.

[spudea]

To understand Ron Paul, you have to understand he's always speaking from the perspective of a libertarian utopia. In such a world where everyone and every country is libertarian, sure you don't need a wall or any border security.

#1: how likely will all welfare, and public services like education and Healthcare be stopped for non citizens? Zero.
#2 even if stopped, the incentive of a free, wealthy society, will still encourage millions of people to come here, even in violation of any law designating who can immigrate here and who cannot.

Accepting these two facts, physical barriers and border security is necessary means of defending our sovereignty and our constitution.

[rpfocus]

Cant wait for 2020. I learned my lesson. Next year I'll vote for an actual Republican competitor of the Orange Dictator instead of writing in Ron Paul. Rand: I'll swear I'll listen this time!

[brushfire]

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/08/ron-...migration.html

President Donald Trump doesn't need a wall to stop undocumented immigration, says former presidential candidate and Libertarian Ron Paul.

Instead, he should remove incentives for coming to America, argues Paul, former congressman from the border state of Texas.

Trump is expected to describe what he calls a crisis at the U.S.-Mexico border in a prime-time address to the nation Tuesday night.

President Donald Trump doesn't need a wall to stop undocumented immigration along the U.S. southern border, three-time presidential candidate and well-known Libertarian Ron Paul told CNBC on Tuesday.

Instead, the Trump administration should remove incentives for coming to America, said Paul, who also served 12 terms as a U.S. congressman from Texas, a state that shares 1,254 miles of a common border with Mexico.

In previous negotiations with Trump, Democrats had agreed to some border wall funding as part of an ultimately scuttled deal to protect the so-called Dreamers, people who were illegally brought to the U.S. as children.

"I don't like walls," Paul added. "I don't want to wall people in and wall people out."

The White House was not immediately available to respond to CNBC's request for comment on Paul's remarks.

Paul joined "Squawk Box" as the partial government shutdown entered its 18th day due to a stalemate between Trump and Democrats who now control the House. The president has demanded that any deal to end the shutdown must include funds toward the construction of a barrier along the U.S.-Mexico border. Democrats have refused to allocate any money for a wall.

Trump, whose administration has been accused of using false statistics and dubious claims to push for a wall, is expected to describe what he calls a crisis at the U.S.-Mexico border in a prime-time address to the nation Tuesday night.

There is doubt among Democrats that a wall would do much to solve the issue of illegal immigration, and data from the Center for Migration Studies, a New York-based think tank, show only one-third of recent undocumented immigrants came through the southern border.

Still, Trump has threatened that he could circumvent Congress by declaring a national emergency and using the military to construct a wall.

Republican Sen. Rand Paul from Kentucky, son of Ron Paul, has said he would support a wall-funding compromise to open the government. Rand Paul said recently that he'd support funding for Trump's wall if budget cuts were made elsewhere. He has suggested that pulling American troops out of Afghanistan could more than pay for the wall.

Meantime, Ron Paul said the partial government shutdown is not too significant "in the grand scheme of things" just "another thing that can stir up trouble and people react to it." Paul, a longtime critic of the Federal Reserve, blamed the central bank's easy money policies since the 2008 financial crisis for creating the conditions for what he says is a coming U.S. economic recession.

Paul, who practiced medicine before being elected to Congress, unsuccessfully ran for president three times, first on the Libertarian Party ticket and two more times as a Republican.

I agree with Ron - the wall is a bad idea. Instead, take away the incentive.

Illegals dont just take risks with the law... To get here is no trivial matter, and it is estimated that 1 in 5 will die doing so. If a 20% chance of death isnt going to stop someone, neither will a damn wall. Take away the incentive however, and nobody is going to risk 20% fatality rate for nothing.

I dont even mention the exploitation, rape, theft, etc - these illegals face much bigger challenges than a wall. Its not like they just cross the border, grab a sandwich at subway, and get on with being illegal aliens.

[Swordsmyth]

I agree with Ron - the wall is a bad idea. Instead, take away the incentive.

Illegals dont just take risks with the law... To get here is no trivial matter, and it is estimated that 1 in 5 will die doing so. If a 20% chance of death isnt going to stop someone, neither will a damn wall. Take away the incentive however, and nobody is going to risk 20% fatality rate for nothing.

I dont even mention the exploitation, rape, theft, etc - these illegals face much bigger challenges than a wall. Its not like they just cross the border, grab a sandwich at subway, and get on with being illegal aliens.

I want expanded border patrols rather than a wall but we must have something more than just the removal of incentives because our prosperity is the greatest incentive and that will only grow if we succeed at making a more libertarian country.

[dude58677]

If you want to get rid of the incentives, keep the shutdown going. These federal employees will eventually quit and the services will drop also then so would the incentives. Just makes excuses to keep the shutdown going such as not enough for the border wall or the budget needs balanced.

[Swordsmyth]

If you want to get rid of the incentives, keep the shutdown going. These federal employees will eventually quit and the services will drop also then so would the incentives. Just makes excuses to keep the shutdown going such as not enough for the border wall or the budget needs balanced.

[Superfluous Man]

Ron Paul's views are becoming less and less popular here at ronpaulforums.com.

Are there even any admins here who support them?

[dude58677]

You know why the Yankees always win? Cause other teams can’t stop staring at the pinstripes.

[Swordsmyth]

Ron Paul's views are becoming less and less popular here at ronpaulforums.com.

Are there even any admins here who support them?

You mean like these?

Well, I start off with saying that it`s a big problem. I don`t like to get involved with the Federal Government very much, but I do think it is a federal responsibility to protect our borders....And that`s why I don`t think our border guards should be sent to Iraq, like we`ve done. I think we need more border guards. But to have the money and the personnel, we have to bring our troops home from Iraq. Ron Paul


More at: http://www.vdare.com/articles/ron-pa...al-sovereignty


Totally free immigration! I`ve never taken that position...Well, you work on both. The most important is the welfare state, but you can still beef up your borders and get rid of some incentives for illegals....Ron Paul


More at: http://www.vdare.com/articles/ron-pa...al-sovereignty

I do see an awful lot of people who disagree with those and want "No borders, No wall, No USA at all"

[Swordsmyth]

You know why the Yankees always win? Cause other teams can’t stop staring at the pinstripes.

Drunken Monkey is a powerful martial art.

[Superfluous Man]

If you want to get rid of the incentives, keep the shutdown going. These federal employees will eventually quit and the services will drop also then so would the incentives. Just makes excuses to keep the shutdown going such as not enough for the border wall or the budget needs balanced.

This is all true. But where this plan fails for the immigration restrictionists is in that it does not effectively keep out immigrants. Letting immigrants come in who will not receive government benefits is not good enough for them.

[Swordsmyth]

This is all true. But where this plan fails for the immigration restrictionists is in that it does not effectively keep out immigrants. Letting immigrants come in who will not receive government benefits is not good enough for them.

We can use the military for that.

[Superfluous Man]

You mean like these?

Well, I start off with saying that it`s a big problem. I don`t like to get involved with the Federal Government very much, but I do think it is a federal responsibility to protect our borders....And that`s why I don`t think our border guards should be sent to Iraq, like we`ve done. I think we need more border guards. But to have the money and the personnel, we have to bring our troops home from Iraq. Ron Paul


More at: http://www.vdare.com/articles/ron-pa...al-sovereignty


Totally free immigration! I`ve never taken that position...Well, you work on both. The most important is the welfare state, but you can still beef up your borders and get rid of some incentives for illegals....Ron Paul


More at: http://www.vdare.com/articles/ron-pa...al-sovereignty

I do see an awful lot of people who disagree with those and want "No borders, No wall, No USA at all"

Notice though how he uses vague expressions like "protect our borders" and "beef up our borders." When you get into specifics you find that he's not talking about any means of effectively restricting immigration. Ron Paul, unlike some here, does not consider unarmed mothers entering the USA with their children to be the same thing as a foreign invasion. When Ron Paul says "protect our borders" and "beef up our borders" he isn't referring to anything that is incompatible with his position that people should be permitted to enter freely without even having passports.

Some immigration restrictionists are so single-minded in their opposition to immigration that the very phrase "border security" is synonymous with keeping out immigrants to them. So they don't even realize that Ron Paul is not speaking their language.

[Stratovarious]

As I already posted, ms13 , drug dealers, predatory felons , don't need freebies
as incentives, that's why we need a wall or much better border surveillance.

''CHANGE MY MIND''

[Swordsmyth]

Notice though how he uses vague expressions like "protect our borders" and "beef up our borders." When you get into specifics you find that he's not talking about any means of effectively restricting immigration. Ron Paul, unlike some here, does not consider unarmed mothers entering the USA with their children to be the same thing as a foreign invasion. When Ron Paul says "protect our borders" and "beef up our borders" he isn't referring to anything that is incompatible with his position that people should be permitted to enter freely without even having passports.

Totally free immigration! I`ve never taken that position...

What do you think he wants the expanded Border Patrols to do? hand out water and sandwiches?

[Superfluous Man]

We can use the military for that.

By doing what? Knocking on all of our doors to see if we have our papers so they can round us up if we fail to present them?

[brushfire]

I want expanded border patrols rather than a wall but we must have something more than just the removal of incentives because our prosperity is the greatest incentive and that will only grow if we succeed at making a more libertarian country.

I see it a little differently. These illegals are exploited - they're not working engineer jobs at google. So their piece of the prosperity pie is very small.

Assets and services seem to be easy to manage for everyone but the pandering government - yes getting rid of the welfare state solves more than just the illegal immigrant issue. A more libertarian society means less resources for government to dish out and mismanage, so I dont see this issue as one that grows with liberty.

[Swordsmyth]

By doing what? Knocking on all of our doors to see if we have our papers so they can round us up if we fail to present them?

By patrolling the border.

[Swordsmyth]

I see it a little differently. These illegals are exploited - they're not working engineer jobs at google. So their piece of the prosperity pie is very small.

Assets and services seem to be easy to manage for everyone but the pandering government - yes getting rid of the welfare state solves more than just the illegal immigrant issue. A more libertarian society means less resources for government to dish out and mismanage, so I dont see this issue as one that grows with liberty.

The money they can make here while being exploited is far more than what they can make in their socialist hellholes and it would be even more so if we were a libertarian paradise, the problem is that they bring their socialism with them and would destroy a libertarian paradise that didn't control its borders and immigration.

[Superfluous Man]

Totally free immigration! I`ve never taken that position...

What do you think he wants the expanded Border Patrols to do? hand out water and sandwiches?

But in effect his position is one of totally free immigration, whether he calls it that or not, just not subsidized immigration. Notice that in the very context of that quote, the main factor that he sees as distinguishing his position from one of totally free immigration is that he wants to reduce the welfare state.

The quotes you provided don't actually mention border patrols. They refer to border guards. But you're right, under Ron Paul's proposals, those border guards wouldn't have much to do. Practically anyone who wanted to enter the USA would be able to do so legally at any border crossing without even needing a passport. There just wouldn't be any government welfare available to them here. But they would be able to get jobs without their employers being required to demand proof of citizenship or legal residency as a prerequisite for working. And they would be able to stay here without fear of getting deported.

Notice that he compares the role the government has at guarding our border with the role our military was playing in guarding Iraq's borders. This was not for stopping the movement of civilians in and out. It was restricted to military operations.