News If East Germany Could Secure Their Border So Can America

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ivan Seeking
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Germany
Click For Summary
Senate candidate Joe Miller compared U.S. border security to the Berlin Wall, suggesting that if East Germany could secure its borders, the U.S. should be able to do the same to combat illegal immigration. This comparison sparked debate, with critics arguing that the Berlin Wall symbolized oppression, while a U.S. border fence would aim to prevent illegal entry. Some participants noted the impracticalities of building a wall given the vast and varied terrain of the U.S.-Mexico border. Others highlighted that a fence might serve more as a psychological barrier than a complete solution, acknowledging that people will still find ways to cross. The discussion reflects ongoing tensions and differing views on immigration policy and border security in the U.S.
  • #151
Galteeth said:
Ok, let's think about the point of view of a hypothetical Mexican. You see a future of poverty and hard labor, with little job security. You live in constant fear of violence from drug gangsters. Your government is corrupt. You have little education. You have heard there is a place where a better life is possible. You don't have knowledge of the official process, or the means to request it.

One option would be to cross the border into California. Unfortunately, the unemployment rate is high and drug gangs control the Mexican neighborhoods.
The good news is that food stamps, subsidized housing, free health care, free education are all very possible.
I believe the "American Dream" has evolved.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #152
skeptic2 said:
Char.Limit, it's more than a few years they would have to wait. First in line are spouses and close relatives, next are those with higher education and special skills. Ordinary laborers that don't meet any of the special conditions are at the bottom of the list and may never get in.

So streamline the process, don't allow people to break the law to come in here.
 
  • #153
Siv said:
Oh come on.
You're proud to be American, because all countries are equally good, with America as good as Britain and India and ... :rolleyes:

Some countries are better than others, but that is not based on patriotism, that is just based on facts. You can very much say, "Mexico may be a crappy country, but it's still MY country, and I am a proud Mexican."

I am proud to be American because of many things about America and what it has accomplished. Doesn't mean America is perfect or had any perfect history (treatment of native Americans, slavery, Jim Crow, etc...).
 
  • #154
Char. Limit said:
So streamline the process, don't allow people to break the law to come in here.

That's what I was trying to do in post #66. I think most illegals come here to make more money than they could at home but are not interested in becoming citizens except to become legal. There are a few that have heard that in the US it's possible to go on welfare and live without working. Fortunately a work visa would prevent that.

The advantage of a work visa over a higher fence and stiffer penalties is that it is offering a carrot for obeying the law instead of a stick for breaking it.
 
  • #155
Siv said:
Actually some of the most dangerous terrorists are those who have entered the country legally.

Yes, generally terrorists don't sneak across the border.
 
  • #156
As several posters have stated, the fact that the Soviet Union was able to pretty effectively secure the East German border doesn't entail that the US can secure its southern border (not just the US-Mexican border per se) enough to significantly decrease the flow of illegal immigrants from Mexico, Central and South America, etc. Securing the southern US border would entail a certain level of militarization of that border and more or less drastic measures. My guess is that the US won't commit to this and that current trends will continue.

Some off topic considerations:

So, assuming that the immigration rate, legal and illegal, of Spanish speaking people remains about the same as the best guesses put it at now, then what sort of demographic changes can be expected in the US during the next few generations? What's a reasonable expectation value of the sustained growth rate of the US's Spanish speaking population? Then, given that assumption, what will the number of Spanish speaking US residents be in, say, 2060?

Another guess is that the US seems destined to become a predominantly Spanish speaking country.
 
  • #157
ThomasT said:
As several posters have stated, the fact that the Soviet Union was able to pretty effectively secure the East German border doesn't entail that the US can secure its southern border (not just the US-Mexican border per se) enough to significantly decrease the flow of illegal immigrants from Mexico, Central and South America, etc. Securing the southern US border would entail a certain level of militarization of that border and more or less drastic measures. My guess is that the US won't commit to this and that current trends will continue.

Some off topic considerations:

So, assuming that the immigration rate, legal and illegal, of Spanish speaking people remains about the same as the best guesses put it at now, then what sort of demographic changes can be expected in the US during the next few generations? What's a reasonable expectation value of the sustained growth rate of the US's Spanish speaking population? Then, given that assumption, what will the number of Spanish speaking US residents be in, say, 2060?

Another guess is that the US seems destined to become a predominantly Spanish speaking country.

Logistically speaking, Canada has a great deal of open space. I think we should build a very fast train from the southern border to the northern border as soon as possible. Canada already speaks 2 languages, the assimilation will be smoother.
 
  • #158
ThomasT said:
As several posters have stated, the fact that the Soviet Union was able to pretty effectively secure the East German border doesn't entail that the US can secure its southern border (not just the US-Mexican border per se) enough to significantly decrease the flow of illegal immigrants from Mexico, Central and South America, etc. Securing the southern US border would entail a certain level of militarization of that border and more or less drastic measures. [...]
The record of the fence so far indicates otherwise.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5323928
https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2943534&postcount=35
On what do you base your statement?
 
  • #159
mheslep said:
The record of the fence so far indicates otherwise.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5323928
https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2943534&postcount=35
On what do you base your statement?
Yes, thanks for the links. But it's a very big border and there are lots of people who want to get into the US. My statement was that I don't think that the US will commit to what's necessary to significantly reduce the flow of illegal immigrants. It's just an opinion, and since it's an empirical consideration then, eventually, we'll see.

By the way, I don't consider the 'Latinization' of the current US a bad thing. After all, the current US is just a geographical location which has been populated/dominated by various cultures throughout history. My current opinion is that the dominant culture of the US, by say, 2060, will be Hispanic, not Anglo-Saxon.
 
  • #160
WhoWee said:
Logistically speaking, Canada has a great deal of open space. I think we should build a very fast train from the southern border to the northern border as soon as possible. Canada already speaks 2 languages, the assimilation will be smoother.
But it's really cold in Canada.
 
  • #161
ThomasT said:
But it's really cold in Canada.

I suppose the train could move the thin-skinned folks south for the winter?
 
  • #162
ThomasT said:
By the way, I don't consider the 'Latinization' of the current US a bad thing. After all, the current US is just a geographical location which has been populated/dominated by various cultures throughout history. My current opinion is that the dominant culture of the US, by say, 2060, will be Hispanic, not Anglo-Saxon.

If they do not assimilate into the mainstream culture and basically turn America into Mexico, it will be a bad thing.
 
  • #163
CAC1001 said:
If they do not assimilate into the mainstream culture and basically turn America into Mexico, it will be a bad thing.

You could still follow the German model and put the fence down the middle, Texas, New mexico, southern-California, Nevada, and Arizona on one side and the rest on the other.
 
  • #164
CAC1001 said:
If they do not assimilate into the mainstream culture and basically turn America into Mexico, it will be a bad thing.

Are you sure?

Most Mexicans I know (I grew up in California, I've known plenty) are family-oriented and hard working. Really, Mexican core values aren't very different from American core values.

Of course, the corruption and drug wars wouldn't be so good :-p.

Besides, generally by the second or third generation, they're assimilated. Who cares what language they speak at home?
 
  • #165
lisab said:
Are you sure?

Most Mexicans I know (I grew up in California, I've known plenty) are family-oriented and hard working. Really, Mexican core values aren't very different from American core values.

Of course, the corruption and drug wars wouldn't be so good :-p.

Besides, generally by the second or third generation, they're assimilated. Who cares what language they speak at home?

M.E.Ch.A. is something I don't like...
 
  • #166
ThomasT said:
Another guess is that the US seems destined to become a predominantly Spanish speaking country.
I always wondered why all the towns/rivers/mountains etc in the south-western United States were named in Spanish.
 
  • #167
Is there a good reason for this thread to continue? East Germans wanted to prevent defections and the SW border nuts want to prevent immigration. These are not congruent goals, despite Joe Miller's to conflate them.
 
  • #168
CAC1001 said:
If they do not assimilate into the mainstream culture and basically turn America into Mexico, it will be a bad thing.

lisab said:
...Besides, generally by the second or third generation, they're assimilated. ...
:confused:
 
  • #169
mheslep said:
:confused:

CAC1001 says if they don't assimilate, it's bad - I agree. My point is, they generally *do* assimilate - certainly by the third generation, at the latest.
 
  • #170
lisab said:
CAC1001 says if they don't assimilate, it's bad - I agree. My point is, they generally *do* assimilate - certainly by the third generation, at the latest.
In the past yes. Increasingly I read of communities where there's no encouragement to do so. Three generations is far too long, I think. I expect it indeed takes far longer to assimilate if an immigrant i) comes here illegally, or ii) resides in communities where assimilation is frowned upon.
 
Last edited:
  • #171
mheslep said:
In the pass yes. Increasingly I read of communities where there's no encouragement to do so. Three generations is far too long, I think. I expect it indeed takes far longer to assimilate if an immigrant i) comes here illegally, or ii) resides in communities where assimilation is frowned upon.

That's quite possible, but I don't know of such groups where I live. The immigrants I knew growing up were mostly Mexican, and most were assimilated by the second generation, or at least bi-cultural.

Where I live now there's a crush of them from eastern Europe, and they're assimilating extremely quickly.

I've read assimilation is becoming an issue in some places in Europe - perhaps the immigrant communities there have reached a critical mass, making assimilation unnecessary? Just a guess.
 
  • #172
turbo-1 said:
Is there a good reason for this thread to continue? East Germans wanted to prevent defections and the SW border nuts want to prevent immigration. These are not congruent goals, despite Joe Miller's to conflate them.

The train could also make a few stops in Maine if you like?
 
  • #173
lisab said:
I've read assimilation is becoming an issue in some places in Europe - perhaps the immigrant communities there have reached a critical mass, making assimilation unnecessary? Just a guess.
Since I believe the American and Western culture are worth preserving, it's history of earlier immigrants included, then assimilation is always required and never unnecessary. If immigrant communities grow too fast or too isolated, then immigration needs to be slowed down, for awhile.
 
  • #174
lisab said:
CAC1001 says if they don't assimilate, it's bad - I agree. My point is, they generally *do* assimilate - certainly by the third generation, at the latest.
Not always - I understand many of the english immigrants still haven't learned any native languages after 400 years
 
  • #175
If the can't go over the fence they go under it.


The 1,800-foot tunnel is the 75th discovered on the U.S.-Mexico border since 2006, according to John Morton, director of ICE. The lighted and ventilated passageway connects two warehouses east of the Otay Mesa border crossing, a two-story building in Tijuana and another warehouse in San Diego.



Read more: http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7020435119?U.S.-Mexico%20Drug%20Tunnel%20Found,%2040%20Tons%20Of%20Marijuana%20Seized#ixzz14N91MhlA


http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7020435119?U.S.-Mexico%20Drug%20Tunnel%20Found,%2040%20Tons%20Of%20Marijuana%20Seized
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #176
NobodySpecial said:
Not always - I understand many of the english immigrants still haven't learned any native languages after 400 years

And many Mexicans would say the same about the Spanish immigrants.
 
  • #177
NobodySpecial said:
Not always - I understand many of the english immigrants still haven't learned any native languages after 400 years

:smile:
 
  • #178
lisab said:
That's quite possible, but I don't know of such groups where I live. The immigrants I knew growing up were mostly Mexican, and most were assimilated by the second generation, or at least bi-cultural.

Where I live now there's a crush of them from eastern Europe, and they're assimilating extremely quickly.

I've read assimilation is becoming an issue in some places in Europe - perhaps the immigrant communities there have reached a critical mass, making assimilation unnecessary? Just a guess.

A big problem in Europe from what I understand is Muslim immigrants, who due to the Europeans not requiring them to assimilate, have essentially formed their own little "countries within-a-country." There are areas within France and Germany, Sweden, and I think even the UK now (?) where the police will not even go into, because it is too dangerous. They have had problems with Muslims rioting in France in particular, they also have rioted in London and Stockholm.

There isn't such a Muslim problem in the United States because Muslims here have mostly been assimilated; we don't have whole communities of Muslims that do not assimilate and become rather radicalized like in Europe.

As for people's languages spoken at home, I have no problem if Mexican immigrants and people of Mexican origin speak Spanish at home, that is their business entirely. I just want them to be capable of functioning within English-speaking America. If they can't function without having to "Press 2 for Spanish" (with this stated in Spanish!) and can't hook up a TV without using Spanish-language instructions, and could never get a job in regular/corporate America because they do not speak English, then there's a problem.

"Assimilate" does not mean give up one's culture, it just means become capable of functioning within America (speak the language and work and pay taxes).
 
  • #179
edward said:
If the can't go over the fence they go under it.
The 1,800-foot tunnel is the 75th discovered on the U.S.-Mexico border since 2006, according to John Morton, director of ICE. The lighted and ventilated passageway connects two warehouses east of the Otay Mesa border crossing, a two-story building in Tijuana and another warehouse in San Diego.

Read more: http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7020435119?U.S.-Mexico%20Drug%20Tunnel%20Found,%2040%20Tons%20Of%20Marijuana%20Seized#ixzz14N91MhlA http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7020435119?U.S.-Mexico%20Drug%20Tunnel%20Found,%2040%20Tons%20Of%20Marijuana%20Seized
You'd think things like tunnels would be trivially easy to locate and shut down. With a team of 20 border agents, each in charge of a 100 mile section, driving along their border sections once every other day or so with a suitable ultrasonic device you'd think should eliminate the tunnel issue. But obviously the problem must be harder than I'm imagining.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #180
CAC1001 said:
Some countries are better than others, but that is not based on patriotism, that is just based on facts. You can very much say, "Mexico may be a crappy country, but it's still MY country, and I am a proud Mexican."

I am proud to be American because of many things about America and what it has accomplished. Doesn't mean America is perfect or had any perfect history (treatment of native Americans, slavery, Jim Crow, etc...).
You're proud of America because America is your country, period. And why is it your country ?
Because your great grandfather happened to be born there, or moved there, rather than a few hundred kilometers north or south or east or west.

Now if you were born a European but were proud of America, or if you were an American and proud of Japan, that wouldn't be a religion. But this is.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
7K
  • · Replies 133 ·
5
Replies
133
Views
27K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
6K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
5K