Wouldn’t you think that reducing the flow of people entering the United States un-lawfully would be a good thing? Not in the world of the Washington Post Editorial Board
Trump has brought down border crossings — by scaring people away
BY NOW it is clear that no big new stretch of physical wall will rise anytime soon along the Southwest border. Owing to President Trump, however, a towering wall of hostility directed at Mexico is already surely in place. And its effects, while impermanent, are nonetheless real.
Those effects are already imposing stiff costs on the United States in prestige, goodwill and moral authority, as well as more tangible expenses: International travel associations, as well as U.S. hotel executives, warn that rising nationalism, stoked by Mr. Trump, is likely to constrain the flow of tourists into the United States this year. Given that travel and tourism contribute more than 8 percent of America’s gross domestic product, amounting to some $1.5 trillion annually, the unintended business losses could be stiff.
So, refusing to allow unfettered unlawful immigration is earning the U.S. negative prestige, goodwill, and we’re losing moral authority? From doing exactly the same thing as pretty much every country in the world? And is supposedly going to maybe might possibly cause a reduction in tourism? Of course, there are two issues at play.
First, the WPEB is guilty like all the rest of the media in conflating legal with illegal immigration. Their constant fear-mongering has probably done more to help Trump slow the flow than anything Trump and his team have done.
Second, the WPEB is mixing the illegals issue with other things, per the link they offer, to proclaim that tourism might possibly we’ll see drop, in order to make their fear-mongering article complete. At the end of the day, though, we have laws that say that people who enter the country improperly/overstay their visas are unlawfully present, and, at a minimum, should be deported.
The WPEB goes on to mention the precipitous drop in illegal border drops, coming to the conclusion
The likely main cause of that precipitous drop is the rhetoric Mr. Trump has aimed at undocumented immigrants, reinforced by media coverage of actual and threatened deportation sweeps, and expectations that the administration will assemble the bigger and more aggressive deportation force that the president promised in his campaign. For Central Americans who would enter the United States illegally, the perceived heightened risk of detention and removal has shifted their cost-benefit calculus — especially given that smugglers demand rates as high as $10,000.
The Washington Post has been as helpful to Trump as all the others. It’s nice to see that the WPEB recognizes this. It won’t stop the media from doing this, thankfully.
Stanching the flow of illegal immigration at the border is a good thing, as long as it lasts, notwithstanding the irony that it undercuts Mr. Trump’s own argument for a big wall. There is little dispute that the United States, like any country, is entitled to control its borders and demand that those who enter do so legally. How to treat unauthorized immigrants who have lived here for years, and now form part of the United States’ fabric, is a different question.
Um, didn’t they just get done telling us that it was bad for the nation’s prestige, goodwill, and moral authority? At the end, if we deport the heck out of those “unauthorized immigrants”, it’ll help reduce the future flow. So, it is not a separate question.
Mr. Trump’s success in jawboning down the flow of illegal border crossings relies on the fear he has inspired, which is likely to dissipate unless his words are backed up by sustained action, including expanded capacity in detention centers and immigration courts. The danger is that the collateral damage stemming from that fear — in ill will from the United States’ neighbors and the wider world, in addition to divided, distrustful communities at home — may outlast the temporary benefits derived from Mr. Trump’s bombast.
Why would we earn ill will from countries, such as Mexico, that themselves have tough law regarding illegal immigration? The only real ill-will involved is by the leftist supporters of illegal aliens in places like the Washington Post, because, if you legalize them, you create a new voter base for the Democrats. To heck with the notion that this hurts Democratic Party voters who are citizens now.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
Some impacts of trump’s campaign of white nationalism:
Colleges and universities report a sharp drop in foreign applicants. This is a financial hit on schools since most foreign students pay tuition and fees in full.
All to satisfy the xenophobic far-right.
And that is the issue that xenophobes ignore. There are an estimated 12 million here, mostly integrated into American life, working, paying taxes, going to school. Will xenophobe preachers such as TEACH advocate that the best way to prevent future illegal border crossing is to terrorize the parents of schoolchildren, others are looking for more humane, more American, solutions.
It’s not about the rule of law. Federal law prohibits marijuana use but “sanctuary” states across America ignore if not flaunt US law and actual allow illegal marihuana use! Yet, there is no conservative outcry to track down and punish illegal pot smokers. Unless they’re Mexican.
Federal says simple possession of marihuana can get you up to 3 years in prison and a $5000 fine (21 U.S.C. 844), yet the feds let these illegal criminals walk among us while dragging Mexican lettuce pickers out of their homes. We bet there are more illegal pot smokers than undocumented Mexicans here. Why not crack down on illegal marihuana users? A few high profile illegal college kids from Alabama getting prison time might terrorize some other illegal kids into giving up illegal lawbreaking. And why not cut federal funding to states that do not support federal drug laws by helping the DEA capture these illegals??? Shouldn’t conservatives be pushing to stop the illegal lawlessness of illegal marihuana use by punishing the illegals?
Get rid of all illegals.
Given that travel and tourism contribute more than 8 percent of America’s gross domestic product,
Pretty sneaky there Washington Post. No mention of how much of that 8% is domestic tourism vs foreign tourism. Minnesotans will still go to Disney World even if some Belgians are offended by Trump and stay away.
But, but, tourists will forgo the US and just pack up a flack jacket and visit Germany or rent a bomb-proof car for gay Paris, maybe pick up some “fast & furious” automatics and head to Cancun. All this loss of hotel revenue just because the US wants to be mean to illegal invaders that have raped, killed, and assaulted Americans in the US
Actually, it’s liberal judges that should be feared by Americans.
http://itdontmakesense.blogspot.com/2017/05/liberal-judges-priorities-are-fubar.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+itdontmakesense+%28_It+Don%27t+Make+Sense_%29,