Should We Hire the Chinese to Build a Great Wall - Or Invest More in the Virtual Fence?
Despite what you might think, the illegal immigration problem is still completely out of control in the United States.
Although they catch a good number of people coming over from Mexico, and dutifully send them back to their country of origin, it's amazing that those same people turn right back around and try again.
Each time they try it becomes an enhancement of criminal activity because sneaking over our border is a crime.
That's why they call it you legal immigration - if you are caught once and you keep coming, you can never get a path to citizenship or become a legal citizen of the United States, but that doesn't stop people from coming.
This is why so many people realize that we need a border fence to keep people from sneaking over our border.
The question is what type of fence do we build, and what about the animals, are we blocking off their land as well? Indeed, I guess we are.
There is the regular type border fence, which they tunnel underneath, or put ladders on and climb over, and then there is the high-tech virtual fence which can be spread out over a much bigger distance preventing people from crossing.
The question now becomes "should it stay or should it go, if it stays there will be trouble, if it goes it could be Double," to paraphrase an 80's hit single.
Likewise, if we do keep the virtual high-tech fence, then the cost to fully deploy it might be four-times the current money already spent.
An interesting article on this topic appeared in Homeland Security Online on October 25, 2010 titled; "DHS Gives Itself 30-days to decide SBlnet Fate," and the articles states matter-of-factly; "DHS has given Boeing a temporary 30-day extension on the troubled SBInet border virtual fence contract; DHS has spent $1.
1 billion over three years on the ambitious project, without much to show for it; one insider says: the question is whether to carry on with a Cadillac version of the network - or to exchange it for a Chevy model that gets the job done faster.
" This new technology is viable, and it can be made to work, although it does take a lot of energy to have a live active denial system which goes a very long distance.
Now the Department of Homeland Security is wondering if we should continue to fund it, or just build a great big fence which goes the entire distance.
Of course that would cost a lot of money, and generally the contractors that bill those types of things would probably end up hiring illegal aliens to build the fence that will keep them out.
The Chinese are apt to bid on a contract such as this and we can hire Chinese to build a fence to keep the Mexicans out, although that doesn't make a lot of sense, and it is kind of a slap in the face to American jobs.
No one can deny that building a border fence with Mexico would be a shovel ready job, which we were promised with the stimulus package, and that is something to think about.
It doesn't look like this hot tamale topic is going to go away anytime soon, and I hope you will please consider all this.
Although they catch a good number of people coming over from Mexico, and dutifully send them back to their country of origin, it's amazing that those same people turn right back around and try again.
Each time they try it becomes an enhancement of criminal activity because sneaking over our border is a crime.
That's why they call it you legal immigration - if you are caught once and you keep coming, you can never get a path to citizenship or become a legal citizen of the United States, but that doesn't stop people from coming.
This is why so many people realize that we need a border fence to keep people from sneaking over our border.
The question is what type of fence do we build, and what about the animals, are we blocking off their land as well? Indeed, I guess we are.
There is the regular type border fence, which they tunnel underneath, or put ladders on and climb over, and then there is the high-tech virtual fence which can be spread out over a much bigger distance preventing people from crossing.
The question now becomes "should it stay or should it go, if it stays there will be trouble, if it goes it could be Double," to paraphrase an 80's hit single.
Likewise, if we do keep the virtual high-tech fence, then the cost to fully deploy it might be four-times the current money already spent.
An interesting article on this topic appeared in Homeland Security Online on October 25, 2010 titled; "DHS Gives Itself 30-days to decide SBlnet Fate," and the articles states matter-of-factly; "DHS has given Boeing a temporary 30-day extension on the troubled SBInet border virtual fence contract; DHS has spent $1.
1 billion over three years on the ambitious project, without much to show for it; one insider says: the question is whether to carry on with a Cadillac version of the network - or to exchange it for a Chevy model that gets the job done faster.
" This new technology is viable, and it can be made to work, although it does take a lot of energy to have a live active denial system which goes a very long distance.
Now the Department of Homeland Security is wondering if we should continue to fund it, or just build a great big fence which goes the entire distance.
Of course that would cost a lot of money, and generally the contractors that bill those types of things would probably end up hiring illegal aliens to build the fence that will keep them out.
The Chinese are apt to bid on a contract such as this and we can hire Chinese to build a fence to keep the Mexicans out, although that doesn't make a lot of sense, and it is kind of a slap in the face to American jobs.
No one can deny that building a border fence with Mexico would be a shovel ready job, which we were promised with the stimulus package, and that is something to think about.
It doesn't look like this hot tamale topic is going to go away anytime soon, and I hope you will please consider all this.
Source...