The great negotiator

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Paul, doesnit mean anything to you, that all the border patrol agents i’ve seen, including the man who led the entire border patrol under obama, say the wall will help?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Help is a pretty low bar for BILLIONS

Border Patrol position until Brandon Judd went to visit the White House

Walls and fences are temporary solutions that focus on the symptom (illegal immigration) rather than the problem (employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens).

Walls and fences are only a speed bump. People who want to come to the United States to obtain employment will continue to go over, under, and around the walls and fences that are constructed.

Walls and fences will undoubtedly result in an increase in fraudulent documents and smuggling through the Ports of Entry.

Walls and fences do not solve the issue of people entering the country legally and staying beyond the date they are required to leave the country, a problem which will undoubtedly increase as more walls and fences are constructed.

The NBPC position regarding walls and fences is not due to a concern of losing our jobs if fences and walls are built. On the contrary, the NBPC realizes that walls and fences require just as much manpower to protect them. Border Patrol Agents witness what happens to walls and fences when there are not enough Border Patrol agents to protect them.

Today Judd talks as though his membership is unified behind a border wall, touting a union survey. As The Washington Times reported:

The NBPC’s survey, of more than 600 agents in two of the Border Patrol’s busiest sectors, found … 89 percent of line agents say a “wall system in strategic locations is necessary to securing the border.” Just 7 percent disagreed.

But that language doesn’t distinguish between existing sections of wall and the wisdom of what Trump wants to build going forward. Most members of the Democratic caucus in Congress believe that a “wall system in strategic locations” is necessary—try to find a congressional Democrat to go on record calling for all walls and fencing to be torn down. The wording seems designed to get the highest possible rate of agreement, not to discern the actual position of union members on Trump’s wall.

The takeaway from all of this isn’t pro-wall or anti-wall. Neither the old language on the web site nor the new language from the dubious survey should shape one’s judgment of whether the wall is a good or bad idea.

Rather, it is a case study in the folly of treating the words of public-employee union officials as if they should carry weight in policy debates. Public-sector unions are biased by the labor interests of members and their political interests in forging strategic relationships with whoever is in power. Union officials do not tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Disinterested policy insight isn’t something they offer. And politicians who pretend otherwise are trying to mislead you.

Also not a single Representative in Congress on the Border supports a wall.
Along the 2,000-mile border with Mexico, which sprawls across four states and nine House districts, a single seat is held by a Republican: Representative Will Hurd of Texas.

And Mr. Hurd, a former undercover C.I.A. officer who barely won re-election in Texas’ 23rd District, the largest of the nine, has emerged as perhaps the most persistent critic in his party of President Trump’s wall.

Drawing upon his years undercover and his work in the private sector, Mr. Hurd has a starkly different vision for the southwestern border: fiber optic cables, sensors, radar, drones, increased staffing — but not the concrete or steel barrier that Mr. Trump has demanded before he reopens the government.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Help is a pretty low bar for BILLIONS

Border Patrol position until Brandon Judd went to visit the White House

Walls and fences are temporary solutions that focus on the symptom (illegal immigration) rather than the problem (employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens).

Walls and fences are only a speed bump. People who want to come to the United States to obtain employment will continue to go over, under, and around the walls and fences that are constructed.

Walls and fences will undoubtedly result in an increase in fraudulent documents and smuggling through the Ports of Entry.

Walls and fences do not solve the issue of people entering the country legally and staying beyond the date they are required to leave the country, a problem which will undoubtedly increase as more walls and fences are constructed.

The NBPC position regarding walls and fences is not due to a concern of losing our jobs if fences and walls are built. On the contrary, the NBPC realizes that walls and fences require just as much manpower to protect them. Border Patrol Agents witness what happens to walls and fences when there are not enough Border Patrol agents to protect them.

Today Judd talks as though his membership is unified behind a border wall, touting a union survey. As The Washington Times reported:

The NBPC’s survey, of more than 600 agents in two of the Border Patrol’s busiest sectors, found … 89 percent of line agents say a “wall system in strategic locations is necessary to securing the border.” Just 7 percent disagreed.

But that language doesn’t distinguish between existing sections of wall and the wisdom of what Trump wants to build going forward. Most members of the Democratic caucus in Congress believe that a “wall system in strategic locations” is necessary—try to find a congressional Democrat to go on record calling for all walls and fencing to be torn down. The wording seems designed to get the highest possible rate of agreement, not to discern the actual position of union members on Trump’s wall.

The takeaway from all of this isn’t pro-wall or anti-wall. Neither the old language on the web site nor the new language from the dubious survey should shape one’s judgment of whether the wall is a good or bad idea.

Rather, it is a case study in the folly of treating the words of public-employee union officials as if they should carry weight in policy debates. Public-sector unions are biased by the labor interests of members and their political interests in forging strategic relationships with whoever is in power. Union officials do not tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Disinterested policy insight isn’t something they offer. And politicians who pretend otherwise are trying to mislead you.

Also not a single Representative in Congress on the Border supports a wall.
Along the 2,000-mile border with Mexico, which sprawls across four states and nine House districts, a single seat is held by a Republican: Representative Will Hurd of Texas.

And Mr. Hurd, a former undercover C.I.A. officer who barely won re-election in Texas’ 23rd District, the largest of the nine, has emerged as perhaps the most persistent critic in his party of President Trump’s wall.

Drawing upon his years undercover and his work in the private sector, Mr. Hurd has a starkly different vision for the southwestern border: fiber optic cables, sensors, radar, drones, increased staffing — but not the concrete or steel barrier that Mr. Trump has demanded before he reopens the government.

"Help is a pretty low bar for BILLIONS"

It's a rounding error in our budget. Doctors without borders claim that two thirds of the women who attempt illegal crossings, get sexually assaulted. That's not worth 5 billion? Obama's "stimulus" plan cost hundreds of billions, I don't know anyone who got a cent from that.

You are setting the world record for responding to something no one has ever said. I never said that 100% of border patrol folks support the wall. But most I have heard, do. That's why Fox has border patrol agents and executives explaining why the wall will help, while the other networks have liberal politicians on saying the wall is racist. I haven't seen a lot of border patrol agents on CNN or MSNBC. There's a reason for that.

Can you go through one thread, without responding to something that no one ever said?

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"Help is a pretty low bar for BILLIONS"

It's a rounding error in our budget. Doctors without borders claim that two thirds of the women who attempt illegal crossings, get sexually assaulted. That's not worth 5 billion? Obama's "stimulus" plan cost hundreds of billions, I don't know anyone who got a cent from that.

You are setting the world record for responding to something no one has ever said. I never said that 100% of border patrol folks support the wall. But most I have heard, do. That's why Fox has border patrol agents and executives explaining why the wall will help, while the other networks have liberal politicians on saying the wall is racist. I haven't seen a lot of border patrol agents on CNN or MSNBC. There's a reason for that.

Can you go through one thread, without responding to something that no one ever said?

Rounding errors got us to a record deficit, budgets are controlled either by ensuring creep does not occur or by chopping off whole parts. This is a massive increase with no proven benefit. Now, true to form, you'll spout some rhetoric about how I shouldn't care because whatabout.
Where did I say you said every border patrol folk is for the wall, I gave you some reasoning for why this might not be a valid reason to jump on this train.
Why does not a single representative from any district on the entire Mexican border support a WALL?

WTF does this statement relate to in this thread prior to it
"Paul, doesnit mean anything to you, that all the border patrol agents i’ve seen, including the man who led the entire border patrol under obama, say the wall will help"

You didn't start the thread and you don't control the direction, though you certainly want to make sure all agree with you or else.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Rounding errors got us to a record deficit, budgets are controlled either by ensuring creep does not occur or by chopping off whole parts. This is a massive increase with no proven benefit. Now, true to form, you'll spout some rhetoric about how I shouldn't care because whatabout.
Where did I say you said every border patrol folk is for the wall, I gave you some reasoning for why this might not be a valid reason to jump on this train.
Why does not a single representative from any district on the entire Mexican border support a WALL?

WTF does this statement relate to in this thread prior to it
"Paul, doesnit mean anything to you, that all the border patrol agents i’ve seen, including the man who led the entire border patrol under obama, say the wall will help"

You didn't start the thread and you don't control the direction, though you certainly want to make sure all agree with you or else.

"Rounding errors got us to a record deficit,"

Fine, so if your issue is the money, would you be OK with the wall if we funded it by cutting 5B in waste from elsewhere in the budget?

"This is a massive increase with no proven benefit."

We know exactly what the benefit was, where previous walls were put up - San Diego, El Paso, Yuma. Sure there is some speculation, but most federal spending is done without a guarantee of an exact, tangible benefit. We aren't a bank lending money. We spend much on social programs which we hope helps people.

If you reject public policy that doesn't have a "proven benefit", you must also reject climate change programs, as those proposed benefits are far, far from "proven".

You walked into that one.

"Why does not a single representative from any district on the entire Mexican border support a WALL?"

Ted Cruz does, he represents the entire state. Maybe the ones you are referring to, care more about politics than they care about solving problems.

When the right points to actual, irrefutable benefits that have been realized in places that built the walls, and the left 's best response(and they supported walls in 2013) now says that walls are racist and don't work, the argument is over. The left isn't even trying to make any kind of rational argument. A wall isn't racist. Not when Trump says he wants to increase legal immigration.

"you don't control the direction, though you certainly want to make sure all agree with you or else"

Wrong. I know I can't persuade the Kool Aid drinkers, I'm just pointing out the absurdity of the arguments.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"Rounding errors got us to a record deficit,"

Fine, so if your issue is the money, would you be OK with the wall if we funded it by cutting 5B in waste from elsewhere in the budget?

"This is a massive increase with no proven benefit."

The populated areas already have walls

We know exactly what the benefit was, where previous walls were put up - San Diego, El Paso, Yuma. You forgot San Antonio, ask Trump Sure there is some speculation, but most federal spending is done without a guarantee of an exact, tangible benefit. We aren't a bank lending money. We spend much on social programs which we hope helps people.

If you reject public policy that doesn't have a "proven benefit", you must also reject climate change programs, as those proposed benefits are far, far from "proven".

You walked into that one. You walked into that one, since the reason that you claimed repeatedly that climate change is not to be worried about is because it is not proven.

"Why does not a single representative from any district on the entire Mexican border support a WALL?"

Ted Cruz does, he represents the entire state. Maybe the ones you are referring to, care more about politics than they care about solving problems. So you think that the representatives who have the closest relationships to their constituents care more about politics than the effect on the people they represent?

When the right points to actual, irrefutable benefits that have been realized in places that built the walls, and the left 's best response(and they supported walls in 2013) now says that walls are racist and don't work, the argument is over. The left isn't even trying to make any kind of rational argument. A wall isn't racist. Not when Trump says he wants to increase legal immigration.
That is the biggest lie he has ever put out, you really need to look into that one.

"you don't control the direction, though you certainly want to make sure all agree with you or else"

Wrong. I know I can't persuade the Kool Aid drinkers, I'm just pointing out the absurdity of the arguments.

You forgot this.
WTF does this statement relate to in this thread prior to it
"Paul, doesnit mean anything to you, that all the border patrol agents i’ve seen, including the man who led the entire border patrol under obama, say the wall will help"

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

You forgot this.
WTF does this statement relate to in this thread prior to it
"Paul, doesnit mean anything to you, that all the border patrol agents i’ve seen, including the man who led the entire border patrol under obama, say the wall will help"

"The populated areas already have walls"

If that's true, why do so many agents, including the guy Obama picked to run the Border Patrol, as well as democrats before Trump was elected, all say that a wall will help?

"You forgot San Antonio, ask Trump "

Please explain...

"since the reason that you claimed repeatedly that climate change is not to be worried about is because it is not proven."

WRONG. We have the statistics in places like San Diego and El Paso and Yuma before and after the wall. We have actual, real, empirical evidence with walls. With climate change it's speculation, and we know that nothing they have predicted so far, has actually happened. So their speculation abilities are suspect. So they have to lose some credibility for being so wrong, so often.

"So you think that the representatives who have the closest relationships to their constituents care more about politics than the effect on the people they represent?"

Quite possibly. I don't trust politicians as a rule. And anyone who says something as stupid as "barriers don't work", especially when that person said the opposite the day before Trump got elected, has zero credibility.

"That is the biggest lie he has ever put out, you really need to look into that one."

Wow, you know Trump was lying when he said he wants more legal immigration. How might you know that?

As to the statement you don't understand. There is a man, can't recall his name, who was picked by Obama to head the border patrol. Trump fired him. So as you'd expect, this man has said he likes Obama and doesn't like Trump. But he says the wall will be a big help. This is the man Obama selected to head the Border Patrol, so maybe he knows something about this.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Also not a single Representative in Congress on the Border supports a wall.
.

There was a woman on Fox last night, a US Congresswoman from Texas (not sure where), who was all for the wall. As is Ted Cruz, one of two US Senators from Texas.