COMMENTS: 21
What's the Border Fence Good for? Subsidizing Mexican Scrap Metal Entrepreneurs
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Immigration headlines via email.
Last week, the Government Accountability Office released a depressing audit of the US-Mexico border fence we’ve been trying to put up for the past three years. The report caused about 8 hours of pretend outrage and was promptly forgotten. It found that we’d already shoveled $2.4 billion to half-seal 600 miles of the border since 2005 (we still have about 100 to 200 miles to go) and we would need to spend an additional $6.5 billion over the next 20 years just plugging up holes punched in the fencing.
The Christian Science Monitor:
So far, it has been breached 3,363 times, requiring $1,300 for the average repair. . . . Despite the price tag of maintaining the border fence, authorities have not found a way to determine whether it is helping to halt illegal immigration, the GAO report says.
The only semi-relevant stats we got are the number of illegal border border-crossers being caught by the US Border Patrol, which has dropped by 25 percent in recent times. But that doesn’t tell us much. “No one knows whether the decrease in crossers is due to the recession keeping people home, the thousands of new border patrol agents or the more than 600 miles of new border fence that has been built,” says NPR.
There is one thing we can be sure of: the massive steel pylons have been a boon for Mexican scrap metal entrepreneurs, who are able to supplement their incomes by dragging off whole sections of the fence right under the nose of our beefed up Border Patrol.
Bush’s Secure Fence Act of 2006 mandated that the Department of Homeland Security had 1.5 years to create a physical border fence bolstered by surveillance technology. But it was obvious from the very beginning that Bush’s push for a border fence was nothing more than a political show—there was not enough time and not enough money—to boost Bush’s and Republicans' creds with their base. Besides, the real Republican base–Bush’s corporate sponsors, “the haves and the have mores”–were the ones who benefited most from all that cheap illegal-immigrant labor, so naturally it was bound to be a half-assed effort intended to quell the Tea Party suckers who believe the Republicans. The building contractors were the only ones who stood to gain from the massive, wasteful show of Republican fake-patriotism. A show that’s still costing us billions.
I was down on the Arizona-Mexico border about six months ago doing a story on a McGyver-style vigilante group called the American Border Patrol and saw the total clusterfuck that is our border fence up close and personal.
One day I was ATVing along a freshly built stretch of the fence on the Arizona border, when I ran into a bored, young US Border Patrol agent. He seemed skeptical about the wall doing much good. The wall wouldn’t make much of a difference, he told me. “They” always figure out a way to get through—or over, in this case. Burros carrying bales of drugs on their back simply throw a rope up over the two-storey barrier, snagging it with some sort of hook on one of the fence’s steel beams and scuttle up and over.
The amazing thing is that they’ve managed to get cars over it, too. According to the agent, Mexican smugglers rig trucks with collapsible ramps similar to those used at old-school airports for boarding planes. They would have two trucks drive up to the fence—one on each side of the border—line them up and have their hombres drive right over. Apparently, a whole caravan of cars and pickup trucks could cross that way in a matter of minutes. When they were done, the ramps would be folded up and concealed, and the operator would drive peacefully home.
Stay up to date with the latest Immigration headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: tlwinslow on Sep 29, 2009 3:33 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Take time to learn about the Megamerge Dissolution Solution to the U.S.-Mexico border problem and find out why and how it should be done now for the good of the U.S.
http://go.to/megamerge
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Time for the Megamerge/ Kinda like colonialism
Posted by: Caleb Darkstar
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bitsfick on Sep 29, 2009 4:00 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Do you ever hear about the Maginot line?
Posted by: rinthy
Comments are closed-
Posted by: desertrose on Sep 29, 2009 5:37 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Besides, the real Republican base–Bush’s corporate sponsors, “the haves and the have mores”–were the ones who benefited most from all that cheap illegal-immigrant labor, so naturally it was bound to be a half-assed effort intended to quell the Tea Party suckers who believe the Republicans.
Plus your argument about your alleged Maria is rude and false.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Calling someone who is trying to feed his family "scum" is both RUDE and FALSE!
Posted by: Plexius2
Comments are closed-
Posted by: MdeG on Sep 29, 2009 2:58 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Jail all employers of illegals." Now that's a hard one. What about the guy who got fooled 20 years ago by forged documents? The employers of undocumented labor are not necessarily blameworthy. If someone's giving fair pay for an honest day's work [sic] I actually don't have much of an issue with it.
What I'd love to see done: Get the slave-drivers. Go after everyone who pays below minimum, doesn't pay, pays late, doesn't give overtime, harasses, paws, subjects workers to dangerous conditions, doesn't provide a restroom, doesn't allow breaks. That would cut the incentives that encourage cynical abusers to preferentially hire undocumented labor.
*Those* are the employers who degrade pay and conditions for all of us. They do exist -- every allegation listed above is one that I know about in particular. You can drive the lot of them out of business and I'll be just delighted.
P.S. My name is Maria, too. I was born here, thank you very much.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Thank you, Maria!!! I'll go you one better....
Posted by: Dak
Comments are closed-
Posted by: grmartin on Sep 29, 2009 6:07 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Spiritgirl on Sep 29, 2009 8:14 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That says it all, the haves and the have mores are the very people that are benefiting, yet they aren't being jailed, or severely fined! In the meantime their media pals employees are stirring up a whole lot of hullabaloo about "illegal immigration", with angry underemployed white folk that are too ignorant to really see that they (& their anger) are being used against their own self-interests!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Caleb Darkstar on Sep 29, 2009 11:56 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why not sentence every illegal alien capable of labor to 60 hours work detail on the fence prior to being bussed back home. We could probably have it shined and polished with all that free labor.
Then we could bring to nearly nothing the cost of repairs, while at the same time deterring further destruction of the fence.
I mean you probably would be less likely to destroy something that you or your family and friends would be forced to repair, right?
This plan is pure poetic justice.
Brilliant!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» I wouldn't be less likely to damage the fence later. I'd sabotage it while "working".
Posted by: Beck
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mozillafs on Sep 29, 2009 12:35 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We stop the flight of the jobless and poor by improving the very situations they're attempting to flee.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: epeal NAFTA
Posted by: Dak
Comments are closed-
Posted by: sunnyskiesinyuma on Sep 29, 2009 3:57 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: tokerdesigner on Sep 29, 2009 5:29 PM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Some in-house "bedroom" areas would be used for storage of personal property; kids and maybe even some groan-ups would sleep in treehouses which is what they want to do anyway. Forestry and deadwood carpentry would be featured work attractions.
There is no excuse for pretending we can't learn a second language and live bilingual from now on, with many fine audio-visual courses now on the innanet. However, the problem of foreign language phobia, more prevalent in USA than most countries, needs to be studied and drugfree remediation strategies designed, based on building up the self-confidence of the individual to understand even if the other guy talks fast.
Once achieved, integrated coop arrangements for family and work life could greatly improve the economy, accomplish pressing tasks the taxpayer can afford to pay for (such as the clipping of megatons of biofuels from drought zones in California and elsewhere to prevent billion-dollar fires; in the "winter", millions could "hemigrate" south, do similar work and reside co-op in Australia, Brasil, Chile etc.).
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: It's the l'anguish, stupid
Posted by: Dak
Comments are closed-
Posted by: kelly.nickell on Sep 29, 2009 10:13 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Everyone seems to want to shut it down with hair-brained ideas, but no one talks about the price tag - direct, and indirect.
Imagine what improved imperviousness does to the coyote business. Imagine how much it costs for an illegal to get home and back, with costs for crossing skyrocketing.
Just ask Stockton and Modesto what it costs them to take care of the out-of-the-system people that need healthcare, insurance, bondsman, and other things we just eat as taxpayers because we like spending so much on our outrage. It's kind of like making one family rich, and killing the rest by outlawing hooch; it seems kind of counter-intuitive.
Open the borders. Track who comes and goes. Make them pay taxes. Make them be a number in our system. Then perhaps we'll see who's really getting screwed.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bitsfick on Oct 2, 2009 2:44 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: independent1 on Oct 6, 2009 12:09 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The chinese built a wall 5500 miles long!! This wall succeeded - FOR CENTURIES - in keeping out invaders. The Romans built walls which were completely impenetrable, although of somewhat shorter length.
Oh, and the Soviets built a wall that succeeded very well too - completely controlling traffic in and out of "their territory."
I mention the Berlin Wall because it was an example of what can be done when people get serious about controlling traffic across their borders. That wall, like the Great Wall of China, was garrisoned by military troops, not by "sleepy, nonchalant" border patrol officers.
Those "Mexican scrap dealers" MUST be machine gunned out of business. A DOUBLE wall (as were the Roman and Chinese walls) would solve the problem of ( and concern about) shooting Mexicans while they were still in their own country. Allow breaching of the first wall but kill everything which enters the zone between walls.
As for those mountainous areas: the US military has had LOTS of practice handling incursions over mountainous terrain. Again - it involves shooting a lot of criminal invaders and it might be expensive at first (using armed drone aircraft). But after a few thousand invaders died on those mountain tracks and failed to be heard from again - those "hopeful" criminal invaders at home would lose heart of trying themselves.
Every adult of military age in the border states should be carrying adequate firepower to help repel the invaders. The only restriction they should face in their use of deadly force would be that they had to first determine that the suspect had no valid passport. And they would STILL be able to report even legal immigrants if they were trespassing.
Sure, the Bush Border Fence is half-assed, (just as everything else he did was half-assed:he was a loser). But we can do better and we MUST do better because, heck, we're Americans. :-)
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: independent1 on Oct 6, 2009 12:24 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
order NO MORE SEARCH AND RESCUE ops by the US Border Patrol or anyone else. The whole idea is to kill off invaders, not to "rescue them."
Possibly, those mountain tracks could be booby trapped to up the body count. No need for land mines, just a lot of bomb craters and other disruptions of foot paths. Probably a few pit traps could be put in place: with camouflage and lots of large, pointy stakes at the bottom.
Remember; quitters never win, winners never quit. That's what makes this article so pathetic: another call for us to quit a just cause.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: tlwinslow on Sep 29, 2009 3:33 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Take time to learn about the Megamerge Dissolution Solution to the U.S.-Mexico border problem and find out why and how it should be done now for the good of the U.S.
http://go.to/megamerge
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Time for the Megamerge/ Kinda like colonialism
Posted by: Caleb Darkstar
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bitsfick on Sep 29, 2009 4:00 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Do you ever hear about the Maginot line?
Posted by: rinthy
Comments are closed-
Posted by: desertrose on Sep 29, 2009 5:37 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Besides, the real Republican base–Bush’s corporate sponsors, “the haves and the have mores”–were the ones who benefited most from all that cheap illegal-immigrant labor, so naturally it was bound to be a half-assed effort intended to quell the Tea Party suckers who believe the Republicans.
Plus your argument about your alleged Maria is rude and false.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Calling someone who is trying to feed his family "scum" is both RUDE and FALSE!
Posted by: Plexius2
Comments are closed-
Posted by: MdeG on Sep 29, 2009 2:58 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Jail all employers of illegals." Now that's a hard one. What about the guy who got fooled 20 years ago by forged documents? The employers of undocumented labor are not necessarily blameworthy. If someone's giving fair pay for an honest day's work [sic] I actually don't have much of an issue with it.
What I'd love to see done: Get the slave-drivers. Go after everyone who pays below minimum, doesn't pay, pays late, doesn't give overtime, harasses, paws, subjects workers to dangerous conditions, doesn't provide a restroom, doesn't allow breaks. That would cut the incentives that encourage cynical abusers to preferentially hire undocumented labor.
*Those* are the employers who degrade pay and conditions for all of us. They do exist -- every allegation listed above is one that I know about in particular. You can drive the lot of them out of business and I'll be just delighted.
P.S. My name is Maria, too. I was born here, thank you very much.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Thank you, Maria!!! I'll go you one better....
Posted by: Dak
Comments are closed-
Posted by: grmartin on Sep 29, 2009 6:07 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Spiritgirl on Sep 29, 2009 8:14 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That says it all, the haves and the have mores are the very people that are benefiting, yet they aren't being jailed, or severely fined! In the meantime their media pals employees are stirring up a whole lot of hullabaloo about "illegal immigration", with angry underemployed white folk that are too ignorant to really see that they (& their anger) are being used against their own self-interests!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Caleb Darkstar on Sep 29, 2009 11:56 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why not sentence every illegal alien capable of labor to 60 hours work detail on the fence prior to being bussed back home. We could probably have it shined and polished with all that free labor.
Then we could bring to nearly nothing the cost of repairs, while at the same time deterring further destruction of the fence.
I mean you probably would be less likely to destroy something that you or your family and friends would be forced to repair, right?
This plan is pure poetic justice.
Brilliant!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» I wouldn't be less likely to damage the fence later. I'd sabotage it while "working".
Posted by: Beck
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mozillafs on Sep 29, 2009 12:35 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We stop the flight of the jobless and poor by improving the very situations they're attempting to flee.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: epeal NAFTA
Posted by: Dak
Comments are closed-
Posted by: sunnyskiesinyuma on Sep 29, 2009 3:57 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: tokerdesigner on Sep 29, 2009 5:29 PM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Some in-house "bedroom" areas would be used for storage of personal property; kids and maybe even some groan-ups would sleep in treehouses which is what they want to do anyway. Forestry and deadwood carpentry would be featured work attractions.
There is no excuse for pretending we can't learn a second language and live bilingual from now on, with many fine audio-visual courses now on the innanet. However, the problem of foreign language phobia, more prevalent in USA than most countries, needs to be studied and drugfree remediation strategies designed, based on building up the self-confidence of the individual to understand even if the other guy talks fast.
Once achieved, integrated coop arrangements for family and work life could greatly improve the economy, accomplish pressing tasks the taxpayer can afford to pay for (such as the clipping of megatons of biofuels from drought zones in California and elsewhere to prevent billion-dollar fires; in the "winter", millions could "hemigrate" south, do similar work and reside co-op in Australia, Brasil, Chile etc.).
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: It's the l'anguish, stupid
Posted by: Dak
Comments are closed-
Posted by: kelly.nickell on Sep 29, 2009 10:13 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Everyone seems to want to shut it down with hair-brained ideas, but no one talks about the price tag - direct, and indirect.
Imagine what improved imperviousness does to the coyote business. Imagine how much it costs for an illegal to get home and back, with costs for crossing skyrocketing.
Just ask Stockton and Modesto what it costs them to take care of the out-of-the-system people that need healthcare, insurance, bondsman, and other things we just eat as taxpayers because we like spending so much on our outrage. It's kind of like making one family rich, and killing the rest by outlawing hooch; it seems kind of counter-intuitive.
Open the borders. Track who comes and goes. Make them pay taxes. Make them be a number in our system. Then perhaps we'll see who's really getting screwed.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bitsfick on Oct 2, 2009 2:44 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: independent1 on Oct 6, 2009 12:09 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The chinese built a wall 5500 miles long!! This wall succeeded - FOR CENTURIES - in keeping out invaders. The Romans built walls which were completely impenetrable, although of somewhat shorter length.
Oh, and the Soviets built a wall that succeeded very well too - completely controlling traffic in and out of "their territory."
I mention the Berlin Wall because it was an example of what can be done when people get serious about controlling traffic across their borders. That wall, like the Great Wall of China, was garrisoned by military troops, not by "sleepy, nonchalant" border patrol officers.
Those "Mexican scrap dealers" MUST be machine gunned out of business. A DOUBLE wall (as were the Roman and Chinese walls) would solve the problem of ( and concern about) shooting Mexicans while they were still in their own country. Allow breaching of the first wall but kill everything which enters the zone between walls.
As for those mountainous areas: the US military has had LOTS of practice handling incursions over mountainous terrain. Again - it involves shooting a lot of criminal invaders and it might be expensive at first (using armed drone aircraft). But after a few thousand invaders died on those mountain tracks and failed to be heard from again - those "hopeful" criminal invaders at home would lose heart of trying themselves.
Every adult of military age in the border states should be carrying adequate firepower to help repel the invaders. The only restriction they should face in their use of deadly force would be that they had to first determine that the suspect had no valid passport. And they would STILL be able to report even legal immigrants if they were trespassing.
Sure, the Bush Border Fence is half-assed, (just as everything else he did was half-assed:he was a loser). But we can do better and we MUST do better because, heck, we're Americans. :-)
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: independent1 on Oct 6, 2009 12:24 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
order NO MORE SEARCH AND RESCUE ops by the US Border Patrol or anyone else. The whole idea is to kill off invaders, not to "rescue them."
Possibly, those mountain tracks could be booby trapped to up the body count. No need for land mines, just a lot of bomb craters and other disruptions of foot paths. Probably a few pit traps could be put in place: with camouflage and lots of large, pointy stakes at the bottom.
Remember; quitters never win, winners never quit. That's what makes this article so pathetic: another call for us to quit a just cause.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Did the Mafia Set Off a Series of Racial Battles with African Migrants?
Officials Hid Truth of Migrant Deaths in Jails
Lou Dobbs, Looking at Public Office, Says He's in Favor of Policy He Used to Spin as "Shamnesty for Illegals"




