Topic: I get that a border wall is really expensive, may not be effective, may not be feasible, etc...
Meta !Sober//iZs started this discussion 7 years ago #82,859
but how is it immoral? ?
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 4 minutes later[^] [v] #955,341
The Wall MUST be buit..
Miss FAITH OKEKE joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 3 minutes later, 7 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #955,345
Anonymous B replied with this 7 years ago, 4 minutes later, 12 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #955,347
@previous (Miss FAITH OKEKE)
To stop drugs rapes and murders...also to prevent the 300 Billion we spend dealing with the illegal problem already from doubling or tripling any time soon..
To stop drugs rapes and murders...also to prevent the 300 Billion we spend dealing with the illegal problem already from doubling or tripling any time soon..
Sheila LaBoof joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 10 minutes later, 22 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #955,350
the immorality is with regards to many species of animals that do not know of human borders, and whose habitats are already compromised by the indifference of mankind.
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 2 minutes later, 24 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #955,351
"Give us your poor, your tired, your hungry..."
A border wall says "Keep those worthless assholes."
A border wall says "Keep those worthless assholes."
Anonymous B replied with this 7 years ago, 4 minutes later, 29 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #955,354
@previous (E)
Those who were taken in back in the early days of the SOL weren't expecting and getting free health care and foodstamps plus subsidized housing for several generations of their families..
Those who were taken in back in the early days of the SOL weren't expecting and getting free health care and foodstamps plus subsidized housing for several generations of their families..
(Edited 29 seconds later.)
Anonymous E replied with this 7 years ago, 1 minute later, 30 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #955,355
@previous (B)
Yet they do nothing about shiftless layabouts, like you, leeching off mommy and not paying taxes?
Yet they do nothing about shiftless layabouts, like you, leeching off mommy and not paying taxes?
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 20 minutes later, 51 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #955,361
Miss FAITH OKEKE replied with this 7 years ago, 10 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #955,362
@previous (F)
you want to open our borders to Latino rapist foxes and literal coyotes? lol good luck with that!
you want to open our borders to Latino rapist foxes and literal coyotes? lol good luck with that!
Anonymous B replied with this 7 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #955,365
Got to love how imbeciles respond to logic by muddying the water..
Sheila LaBoof replied with this 7 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #955,369
@955,361 (F)
> Steel slats, babydoll! That way foxes or whatever can slip through.
sure, but at the Texas wildlife park at a town where the government has to make a big showoff shit show for the public, it's full concrete topped off with bollards, 36 feet high or some shit
> Steel slats, babydoll! That way foxes or whatever can slip through.
sure, but at the Texas wildlife park at a town where the government has to make a big showoff shit show for the public, it's full concrete topped off with bollards, 36 feet high or some shit
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 54 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #955,385
Normal people realize how stupid that sounds. Democrats are not normal people though
Father Merrin !u5oFWxmY7U joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 6 hours later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #955,424
@955,354 (B)
> Those who were taken in back in the early days of the SOL weren't expecting and getting free health care and foodstamps plus subsidized housing for several generations of their families..
They were also coming to a country whose fundamental assumption was that immigrants will be a part of the solution to a nation's problems rather than the problem itself. Not to this insular, paranoid, histrionic America that exists today.
Speaking of "several generations of their families" coming into the country, remember when Trump personally saw to it that his wife's parents skipped the queue and got American citizenship? I'm referring here to the 2nd of his 2 foreign wives who were in the country illegally for a time.
> Those who were taken in back in the early days of the SOL weren't expecting and getting free health care and foodstamps plus subsidized housing for several generations of their families..
They were also coming to a country whose fundamental assumption was that immigrants will be a part of the solution to a nation's problems rather than the problem itself. Not to this insular, paranoid, histrionic America that exists today.
Speaking of "several generations of their families" coming into the country, remember when Trump personally saw to it that his wife's parents skipped the queue and got American citizenship? I'm referring here to the 2nd of his 2 foreign wives who were in the country illegally for a time.
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 4 hours later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #955,448
Anonymous I double-posted this 7 years ago, 7 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #955,453
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 5 hours later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #955,531
I don't think it is immoral. Though I am not against all immigration
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 5 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #955,532
If it's not necessary, it's immoral but if ot IS necessary then it's probably depressing. A difficult situation for trump. I still don't get how a wall can be expensive. As if America can do everything it's doing but building a long asd wall is impossible, yeh right ?.
Anonymous L joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 3 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #955,533
Is wasting a bunch of taxpayer money on an expensive vanity project immoral? I could see where some people could think so.
Anonymous G replied with this 7 years ago, 6 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #955,535
Anonymous L replied with this 7 years ago, 13 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #955,538
Sheila LaBoof replied with this 7 years ago, 7 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #955,540
@955,535 (G)
since more crimes were committed by citizens, perhaps it would be better if the citizens were completely replaced by the illegals.
since more crimes were committed by citizens, perhaps it would be better if the citizens were completely replaced by the illegals.
Anonymous G replied with this 7 years ago, 38 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #955,546
Mr. Peter Potamus J.S.D. replied with this 7 years ago, 2 hours later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #955,583
Sheila LaBoof replied with this 7 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #955,657
Anonymous B replied with this 7 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #955,664
Sheila LaBoof replied with this 7 years ago, 35 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #955,670
@previous (B)
think about it genous, you got 1000 people, 400 of which is bad. or, you got 10 people, 2 of which is bad. do you bitch about letting the last 10 people in, when a trade would have you better off
think about it genous, you got 1000 people, 400 of which is bad. or, you got 10 people, 2 of which is bad. do you bitch about letting the last 10 people in, when a trade would have you better off
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 25 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #955,682
> genous
Anonymous L replied with this 7 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #955,688
The wall is pretty much a vanity project at this point. Even the scare footage Fox is running for their "crisis at the border" propaganda is just months-old footage of people climbing over border walls.
The money could be spent elsewhere on Americans. Stopping the government over it is arguably reckless. I can't see anyone making an argument that all those unpaid TSA agents not showing up for work is somehow good for national security.
The money could be spent elsewhere on Americans. Stopping the government over it is arguably reckless. I can't see anyone making an argument that all those unpaid TSA agents not showing up for work is somehow good for national security.
Anonymous K replied with this 7 years ago, 10 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #955,783
@previous (L)
I don't dislike immigration, i think illegal immigration is rather just a question of bureaucracy, other wise its the same thing so who cares. There's just two issues:
#1 doesn't America rely in a system that has you existing in the files and illegal immigrants aren't on the files?
#2 you know that bullshit about how people on a lifeboat are in danger if there's a lot of drowning people around it? Maybe it will never get that bad but if it did, how bad would it have to get?
I don't dislike immigration, i think illegal immigration is rather just a question of bureaucracy, other wise its the same thing so who cares. There's just two issues:
#1 doesn't America rely in a system that has you existing in the files and illegal immigrants aren't on the files?
#2 you know that bullshit about how people on a lifeboat are in danger if there's a lot of drowning people around it? Maybe it will never get that bad but if it did, how bad would it have to get?
Anonymous B replied with this 7 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #955,849
Anonymous L replied with this 7 years ago, 19 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #955,860
Meta !Sober//iZs (OP) replied with this 7 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #955,901
@955,688 (L)
I definitely sympathize with arguments of the form "the money would be better spent on X than a border wall" but I wouldn't, personally, consider that a moral argument.
For the moral part, I would ask would the wall still be wrong if Mexico (for the sake of argument) agreed to pay cash for it?
It's like saying "giving cocaine to kids in school is immoral" is different from "ensuring every child has a balanced breakfast is a better use of limited school funds than buying cocaine for the children". It would still be immoral if the cocaine had no opportunity cost.
I definitely sympathize with arguments of the form "the money would be better spent on X than a border wall" but I wouldn't, personally, consider that a moral argument.
For the moral part, I would ask would the wall still be wrong if Mexico (for the sake of argument) agreed to pay cash for it?
It's like saying "giving cocaine to kids in school is immoral" is different from "ensuring every child has a balanced breakfast is a better use of limited school funds than buying cocaine for the children". It would still be immoral if the cocaine had no opportunity cost.
(Edited 13 seconds later.)
the rock !mfIZmbGPrQ replied with this 7 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #955,910
@previous (Meta !Sober//iZs)
what's the deal with The Wall anyway??? ain't nobody say "damn we need a wall"
Don't nobody even Real give a shit
what's the deal with The Wall anyway??? ain't nobody say "damn we need a wall"
Don't nobody even Real give a shit
Meta !Sober//iZs (OP) replied with this 7 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #955,914
@previous (the rock !mfIZmbGPrQ)
The President and tens of millions of Americans have said "damn we need a wall". Thanks.
The President and tens of millions of Americans have said "damn we need a wall". Thanks.
Anonymous N joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #955,915
@previous (Meta !Sober//iZs)
Have you ever held an opinion that wasn't objectively stupid? Even for thirty seconds?
Have you ever held an opinion that wasn't objectively stupid? Even for thirty seconds?
Anonymous L replied with this 7 years ago, 20 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #955,920
@955,901 (Meta !Sober//iZs)
I probably wouldn't consider it a moral issue either, but I could see someone making a case along those lines. e.g The morality of willful inaction, wasting resources, etc.
I get a sense that people calling it immoral are probably attacking what they see as the underlying thinking behind the wall - all our problems will go away once we stop all these people from coming in. It's the same faulty logic that has been applied to immigrants throughout history. When everything is going well everyone loves everyone else. When times get tough, we start scapegoating anyone seen as "other" and blaming all the problems on them. Of course, the US has all kinds of problems that building a wall in the middle of a desert won't solve. It's not like anyone would stop beating the "immigrants are the problem" drum if a wall went up tomorrow. I would guess that is mostly what people are attacking as immoral.
I probably wouldn't consider it a moral issue either, but I could see someone making a case along those lines. e.g The morality of willful inaction, wasting resources, etc.
I get a sense that people calling it immoral are probably attacking what they see as the underlying thinking behind the wall - all our problems will go away once we stop all these people from coming in. It's the same faulty logic that has been applied to immigrants throughout history. When everything is going well everyone loves everyone else. When times get tough, we start scapegoating anyone seen as "other" and blaming all the problems on them. Of course, the US has all kinds of problems that building a wall in the middle of a desert won't solve. It's not like anyone would stop beating the "immigrants are the problem" drum if a wall went up tomorrow. I would guess that is mostly what people are attacking as immoral.
Meta !Sober//iZs (OP) replied with this 7 years ago, 35 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #955,926
@previous (L)
I see it as trying to solve a few specific problems, namely raising wages for the unskilled lower classes by reducing the supply of unskilled labor. I like this better than raising the minimum wage because supply and demand should raise wages naturally, without any further legislation once supply is cut off.
I personally would like to see regime change in Mexico instead of a wall, where the current Mexican government is dissolved and they're put under American rule as a colony until they can get their shit together. Like what the British did for Singapore. Until Mexico can produce a Lee Kwan Yew. They've failed as a country if they've created something so bad everyone wants to leave and I think the Mexican government has lost the right to govern.
If we can change all these regimes in the middle east, why not literally in our own backyard?
I see it as trying to solve a few specific problems, namely raising wages for the unskilled lower classes by reducing the supply of unskilled labor. I like this better than raising the minimum wage because supply and demand should raise wages naturally, without any further legislation once supply is cut off.
I personally would like to see regime change in Mexico instead of a wall, where the current Mexican government is dissolved and they're put under American rule as a colony until they can get their shit together. Like what the British did for Singapore. Until Mexico can produce a Lee Kwan Yew. They've failed as a country if they've created something so bad everyone wants to leave and I think the Mexican government has lost the right to govern.
If we can change all these regimes in the middle east, why not literally in our own backyard?
the rock !mfIZmbGPrQ replied with this 7 years ago, 14 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #955,928
@previous (Meta !Sober//iZs)
lol yeah because the only people coming through are Mexicans and they totally aren't fleeing the shitty regimes the US already propped up all over latin america
lol yeah because the only people coming through are Mexicans and they totally aren't fleeing the shitty regimes the US already propped up all over latin america
the rock !mfIZmbGPrQ double-posted this 7 years ago, 20 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #955,929
also nice meta post. 11/10
Anonymous L replied with this 7 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #955,931
@955,926 (Meta !Sober//iZs)
> raising wages for the unskilled lower classes by reducing the supply of unskilled labor
How is that the problem if unemployment is at an all-time low? Isn't the economy booming?
As for regime change in Mexico, I'm not sure how you could see a pointless wall as morally neutral but feel morally good about meddling with another nation's capability for self rule. Even if you could justify it, the US has a horrible track record for doing that effectively. South America, the Middle East, and Asia are all still dealing with the fallout of American interventions in their sovereignty. The caravan that everyone was making a huge deal about before the elections was coming from Guatemala anyway.
> raising wages for the unskilled lower classes by reducing the supply of unskilled labor
How is that the problem if unemployment is at an all-time low? Isn't the economy booming?
As for regime change in Mexico, I'm not sure how you could see a pointless wall as morally neutral but feel morally good about meddling with another nation's capability for self rule. Even if you could justify it, the US has a horrible track record for doing that effectively. South America, the Middle East, and Asia are all still dealing with the fallout of American interventions in their sovereignty. The caravan that everyone was making a huge deal about before the elections was coming from Guatemala anyway.
Anonymous O joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #955,932
@OP
> but how is it immoral? ?
Simple. If the same amount of money is spent towards a cure for cancer or to feed starving children then it is immoral, to use that money for other silly uses
> but how is it immoral? ?
Simple. If the same amount of money is spent towards a cure for cancer or to feed starving children then it is immoral, to use that money for other silly uses
Sheila LaBoof replied with this 7 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #955,933
if these party drug faggots would stop hungering for the drugs made down there, maybe there'd be less mayhem down there
Meta !Sober//iZs (OP) replied with this 7 years ago, 4 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #955,987
@955,931 (L)
> How is that the problem if unemployment is at an all-time low?
Wage growth is stagnant though for the working class. That's the problem.
It's okay though because neither the wall nor regime change in Mexico is ever going to happen. It's all fantasy.
> The caravan that everyone was making a huge deal about before the elections was coming from Guatemala anyway.
The Mexico-Guatemala border would be much easier to secure and wall in. It's only about 1/4th the length of the US-Mexico border so if anything this is actually a point in favor of annexing Mexico. Or maybe take some of the $5.7 billion and we pay Mexico to put in a wall on their southern border. Mexican construction costs are much cheaper!
> How is that the problem if unemployment is at an all-time low?
Wage growth is stagnant though for the working class. That's the problem.
It's okay though because neither the wall nor regime change in Mexico is ever going to happen. It's all fantasy.
> The caravan that everyone was making a huge deal about before the elections was coming from Guatemala anyway.
The Mexico-Guatemala border would be much easier to secure and wall in. It's only about 1/4th the length of the US-Mexico border so if anything this is actually a point in favor of annexing Mexico. Or maybe take some of the $5.7 billion and we pay Mexico to put in a wall on their southern border. Mexican construction costs are much cheaper!