Liberals have specious arguments against border fence; all they want is more welfare recipients

    One of the things that America’s sheltered elites just don’t get is that most Americans want a wall built on our southern border to keep unskilled workers and terrorists from pouring into the country. And should people start pouring in from the north at some future time, we will want a barrier there as well.
    I remember as a young kid being asked to pass some item at the dinner table to one of my brothers. My response was to lean back just as far as I could in my chair and declare, “I can’t reach it!” I’m reminded of that as border security opponents bleat out specious reason after reason why we can’t have a border fence.

Specious Reason 1: Jesus is against it

    The most annoying anti-fence excuse is the religious argument: Jesus tells us to help the poor, therefore we can’t have secure borders and have to allow people to break the law. Even if this was Jesus’ teaching, which it’s not, America is not a theocracy; we are not ruled by priests, rabbis, or ayatollahs. Every decision of government should be made based on what is based on what is best for the American citizenry, not on somebody’s misplaced religious belief.
    But for those who insist on invoking Christ, I must point out that illegally entering a country is a form of theft from the legal citizens of that country. All a border wall would do is assist people in obeying the Ten Commandment prohibition against theft, in the same way that banks help people not to steal by keeping their money in a vault. I cannot believe that Christ would find such efforts anything but laudatory.
    Mexico isn’t exactly Somalia or Bangladesh. Although a developing country, Mexico’s per capita income has more than tripled in the last 15 years. In the bigger scheme of things Mexico is a wealthy country; it’s just not as wealthy as the United States. When compared to the rest of the world, Americans have average incomes in the top one percent. Mexicans are in the top three percent. Oh, cry me a river!
  

Specious Reason 2: People will find a way to get around a wall

    We’re told that some people might be able to breach a border fence. Yup, they sure will. But a fence will stop the majority of those who just dash across the border. If we can successfully stop most of the border jumpers we’ve accomplished our goal.
    Remember Andy Dufresne in The Shawshank Redemption? He managed to excavate a tunnel out of his prison cell with a little rock hammer. It only took him 17 years. So he is clearly an example that walls, no matter how carefully constructed, can be breached.
    And yet, the prison walls held him for 17 years. They continued to contain all of the other prisoners. Does it really matter that one guy managed to escape after 17 years if all of the other prisoners remained locked up?
    Walls are effective most of the time.

Specious Reason 3: Border jumpers are only one source of illegal immigration

    Border jumpers only account for half of illegal immigrants in the United States. The rest enter legally and overstay their visa. Therefore a fence won’t completely solve the problem of illegal immigration.
    So what? It will solve half of it!
    And at least those who come in through the visa process have received some type of government scrutiny that presumably is designed to keep terrorists out of the country. A visa gives us a paper trail to use in tracking down and deporting illegal infiltrators, which we cannot do with unknown people who slither across our border undetected.

Specious Reason 4: We can’t possibly afford it!

    This is perhaps the most annoying excuse of all. The worst-case scenario for a border wall/fence is $25 billion. If for some reason we can’t afford that, we could at least put up a wall in all of the places where there are currently illegal border crossings, and they are legion.
    Given that illegal immigration costs federal, state, and local governments more than $100 billion Every Single Year, $25 billion to cut the number of illegal immigrants in half seems like a bargain.
    And for what it’s worth, I would guess that those who are just walking across the border are far more likely to end up on welfare or have uncompensated care at our hospitals than those who arrive by airplane, which makes a border fence an even greater bargain. A fence will keep out the worst illegal immigrants.
    So a border fence costs absolutely nothing, since as soon as it is built the taxpayers start saving massive amounts of money. We can afford to build it, since we will actually be paid to build it – it’s better than free.

The Real Reason Liberals Oppose a Fence

    We all know the real reason liberals don’t want a border fence. A large majority of those coming across the border are going to be multi-generational welfare cases. Since the Democratic party has become a party of fringe groups and welfare recipients, liberals have an interest in bringing in as many illegal aliens as possible.
    Think about it; in order to retain or gain control of government, Democrats are willing to destroy our nation, even to the point of having no barrier to terrorists entering the country. We can stop these people, or at least slow them down, and a border wall is the first step.

Cruz, Trump have figured out that America's struggling class wants our country to serve citizens

    I detest Donald Trump, but if Ted Cruz should falter in the presidential race Trump will have my vote for one reason, and one reason only: Cruz and Trump are the only two candidates who I believe will act to stop the tsunami of illegal aliens pouring across our Southern border.
    Illegal immigration isn’t the most important issue in the presidential campaign. As far as I’m concerned it’s the only issue; everything else pales in comparison. Without borders we cease to be a nation. America’s citizenry wants a wall and we want it now. The elites don’t understand this, and that’s why they don’t understand the appeal of Donald Trump and Ted Cruz.
    I have a core belief that the sole purpose of a nation is to serve its citizens. Each and every decision that is made by our government should be made on the basis of whether it will help or hurt the average citizen. Tolerating illegal immigration may help the elites, but it does not help average folks.
    I happen to support legal immigration, and lots of it. I just support immigration that is in the national interest. And that’s not what we have today. Our current system rewards poorly educated criminals who enter the country illegally and punishes highly educated, law-abiding achievers who wait their turn.
    Immigrants, both legal and illegal, are burdening our welfare system. In a recent year, 72 percent of legal immigrant households with children used welfare versus 52 percent of native-born households. The cherry on top of this toxic sundae is that illegal immigrant households with children had an 89 percent welfare participation rate. We can clean up our welfare rolls merely by deporting all of our illegal aliens.
    Each person who enters the labor pool has the effect of slightly harming those who operate at the same skill level; and those who hire them are winners. Obviously the effect of one person can’t be measured, but the effect of hundreds of thousands or millions certainly can. When rich farmers scream that their crops are “rotting in the fields” and a bunch of peasants need to be allowed into the country to pick their fruit, low-skilled workers lose and the rich farmers win. We’re often told that illegal immigrants do jobs that “Americans won’t do.” It’s not true. There are no jobs that "Americans won't do;" they are jobs that Americans won’t do at the price being offered.
    Many “stoop labor” agricultural jobs now pay about $15 per hour; they are hard work. This wage could be raised to $50 an hour with remarkably little effect on grocery prices, and Americans would show up in droves to do the work. Some of them might have to be trained to be good workers, but that’s what we do for our fellow citizens.
    Does anybody ever stop to think about how much it costs society to provide a bunch of rich fruit farmers with cheap labor? Communities have to provide their illegal alien children with free schooling at $8-12,000 per child. Hospitals have to treat their families for free, which often runs into thousands (or tens of thousands) of dollars every year. It’s as if society is having to pay a direct subsidy of $20-50,000 per employee to the fat-cat farmers. I’d rather give up fruit!
   Of course, after a couple of years the fruit pickers go on to other work, leaving crops once again to rot in the field, leading to demands for more peasants from south of the border, and even higher taxes on homeowners struggling to support their schools. Wash, rinse, repeat.
    If people who hire unskilled labor win with illegal immigration – whether it be those who hire fruit pickers, nannies, construction workers, or whatever – who loses? Obviously it’s the poorest of our citizens who work at these types of jobs, since low-skilled wages remain depressed.
    What happens when we restrict immigration to only those who are believed to be highly productive. For example, what would happen if we imported a million doctors? I think we all know the incomes of doctors would go down as doctors lowered their fees to attract patients. Who wins? Low- and middle-income people who have to seek medical care and pay less for it. Who loses? Rich doctors.
    I’m not trying to pick on doctors, who have actually taken a beating with a bunch of ridiculous and costly federal regulations recently. I’m just trying to make a point. When large numbers of highly intelligent, highly productive, high-income people emigrate to the United States, it causes our rich people to become a little poorer and our poor people to become a little richer – it makes us a more egalitarian society. And in the long term the increased productivity and equality raises the standard of living and incomes for everyone. Everyone gets rich together!
    Liberals often talk about producing equality through ruinous taxation of the rich and redistribution to the poor. This merely destroys our nation’s wealth. We can use our immigration policy to increase equality amongst our citizenry merely by limiting immigration to those who are likely to earn a well-above-average income – those who are highly skilled or highly educated. The increased competition will bring the incomes of the rich down a little, at least temporarily, while enriching our poorest citizens by lowering their costs and increasing the demand for their services. In the end we will become a much wealthier, more egalitarian society in which all citizens are respected and valued.
    What America needs is a grand bargain. We need to not be afraid to embrace a few so-called "liberal" ideas (which I might expound on at some future time), such as a citizenship dividend of $700 to $1,000 a month to all adults after 21 years of citizenship (essentially eliminating welfare), and a government-funded medical voucher for every citizen that can be used either for guaranteed enrollment in Medicaid (not Medicare!) or for traditional, private insurance, much as it existed before Obamacare. We can afford these things, so long as we don’t allow any more poor people into the country and throw out those who are here illegally.
    The world has 7 billion people, and if we start handing out free money they all will try to be here; in fact, it's happening right now. For us to have a generous society that is designed to help all of our citizens we must first enshrine citizenship as something special. We have to build fences; we have to be willing to sentence people who are in our country illegally to jail and then deport them; and we have to end birthright citizenship.
    America’s elites, both Republican and Democrat, simply can’t believe that America’s working and lower middle class has figured out that as a group they are being screwed over by both parties, who seem to exist solely to serve the big banks, poverty pimps, illegal aliens, hedge fund managers, and various loud-mouthed fringe groups. The one group they do not care a whit about is the common, struggling American citizen.
    Ted Cruz and Donald Trump are the only two candidates who understand that America exists to serve its citizens, who coincidentally happen to be the voters. These citizens want a wall, and they will vote for one of these men to get it.
    The elites may not get it, but I’ve got some news for them: the price of fruit-pickers and nannies just went up.

Illegal immigrants now pouring in by trainloads, but a border fence would solve everything

Trainloads of poor, disease-ridden welfare seekers head to the
U.S. every day as a result of Obama's refusal to enforce our laws.

    A cargo train derailed in Mexico last week. Thirteen hundred minors seeking welfare and amnesty in the United States were aboard. Thirteen hundred on a single train!
    Such is the flood of humanity that has been unleashed by our jackass-in-chief's refusal to enforce our immigration laws and his insistence that all criminals in this country illegally would be granted amnesty, citizenship, and the benefits of the welfare state for life.
    Conservatives warned that even the hint of amnesty would bring on new waves of illegal immigration. Liberals simply will not or can not listen. And so now what we said would happen; America is being invaded.
    The conservative position has always been that we are willing to discuss immigration and even amnesty, but we have to secure our national borders first. Having a non-porous border is what makes a nation a nation.
    Obama has ridiculed conservatives for wanting to build a border fence. "Or they’ll want a higher fence. Maybe they'll need a moat. Maybe they want alligators in the moat!"
    Right now we don't even have a fence over much of the border. Illegal immigrants can simply walk over the dry Rio Grande and enter the country. Children often allow themselves to be caught immediately, as they have been told they will never have to leave and will have welfare for life.
    We need a fence, and believe it or not, many experts say some type of "moat" is actually needed as part of proper fencing in order to keep trucks or armored vehicles from just getting a running start and ramming through a wire structure. As for the alligators, why not? It's our moat, after all. Good fences make good neighbors. Moats filled with hungry alligators make for better neighbors.
    There has been a great deal of debate about the ending of unemployment benefits. Democrats want them to continue for life. A better idea is to offer every American a job helping to construct a border fence between the United States and Mexico. If there aren't enough immigration judges and clerks to handle the backlog of cases, let's hire more.
    If we make it physically impossible for these criminals to walk across the border people will stop – drum roll please – walking across the border!

Obama says amnesty will encourage 'best and brightest,' while new wards of the state pour in

Does this look like the very best and brightest
Latin America has to offer?

   Several years ago when our Idiot-in-Chief violated his oath of office and quit enforcing our immigration laws, virtually all conservatives pointed out that we could expect additional hordes of illegal aliens flooding across the border.
    And of course we were right; conservatives are rarely wrong. Now we have hundreds of thousands of children streaming into the country in search of free food, free housing, and free medical care, all to be paid for with additional taxes on those of us who are here legally.
    These are literally the dregs of Latin America society: unskilled, uneducated workers likely to burden our welfare system and jails for generations to come.
    Oh, and please my Left-Wing-Nut friends, spare me the argument our ancestors were illegal immigrants when they entered the country in the 1600s. Can anyone deny that the Indians would be far better off today if they had possessed the political will and police power to prevent European entry into North America? Open borders ruined the lives of American Indians and open borders will ruin our lives, too.
    Obama claims all we need to do is just grant legal status and amnesty to anyone who enters the country illegally and all of our problems will be solved. "If we want to keep attracting the best and the brightest from beyond our shores, we're going to have to fix our immigration system, which is broken," Obama said during a break between his frequent golf games.
    The problem is that most of the illegal immigrants coming from Latin America in recent years simply aren't the best and brightest. They are the uneducated, unskilled, and sometimes criminal, and the United States does not need them.
    There was a time when an immigrant coming to this country would either work hard or starve to death, and as a result we could allow virtually unlimited immigration; new entrants would succeed or starve. Today we have the welfare state, and no citizen or legal resident has to work. We cannot afford to allow even a single unskilled, uneducated, low-IQ immigrant to enter our country and become a burden on society.
    Nor can we allow unskilled immigrants to depress wages for our own citizens. We need to put the sorry, leaching fruit farmers on notice that they do not have a right to $15-an-hour illegal-immigrant labor, and they will need to start paying Americans $30- to $40-an-hour to do the job. There are no jobs that Americans won't do, just jobs that Americans won't do for relatively low wages in relation to the difficulty of the work.
    If the United States wants to attract the best and brightest we can do so by offering legal residency and citizenship to anyone making a minimum score on the SAT or ACT, perhaps a 1200 math/verbal on the SAT or a 27 on the ACT. These scores are low enough to be within reach of those who really work at it while high enough to ensure that those qualifying truly will be among the "best and brightest."
    A couple of years ago I met a young Chinese guy at a bar in Barcelona. He had attended graduate school at the University of Illinois but couldn't obtain legal residency in the United States. It's a shame, because he would have been a great addition to our nation. But since he couldn't get legal residency he left and now lives in Hong Kong, and he won't be back.
    And that's the problem with the Obama immigration plan. Potential immigrants with high IQs and a respect for the law have excluded themselves from residency while low-IQ criminals just keep pouring in.
    A rational immigration policy starts with a several layers of border fencing, border moats, and border minefields, along with immediately and permanent deportation of anyone in the country illegally. We must protect our borders first. Then we should let in immigrants, and lots of them, who demonstrate the ability to contribute more to our nation than they will consume in services.
    A rational immigration policy welcomes the best and brightest, but shuts the door on the worst and dullest. Sadly, our current policy does just the opposite.

Illegal immigrant protest urges lawful citizens to pay more taxes to give criminals more benefits

A Roma man holds a sign reading "More taxes for you = more benefits for us"  during a demonstration on 'International Roma Day' at Republic Square in Paris, on April 8, 2014.

    The Gypsy, or "Roma" man on the right certainly has figured out how welfare and the politics of entitlement work, even if his appeal isn't very effective. An illegal immigrant to France, he was a participant in "International Roma Day" in Paris.
    The sign translates to read as follows: "More taxes for you = More benefits for us." What the sign fails to explain is why law-abiding French citizens should tax themselves to provide benefits for Gypsy criminals in the country illegally.
    The sign is a clear statement of what is in store for nations that fail to police their borders and control illegal immigration. The lawful citizenry will face higher and higher taxes as the dregs of society pour in to claim the free goodies.