Ricky and I were discussing my idea for solving the Immigration problem and, can you believe it, we disagree. Ricky said that enforcing immigration would "would cost a lot and hurt the economy while providing no discernible benefit."
My proposal is that a law be passed to make the penalty for being caught in the United States illegally seven years hard labor building a concrete block wall on the Southern border. I opined that the passage of such a law would reduce immigration and the enforcement of such a law would stop immigration cold and instead cause a panic exodus from the USA.
Ricky"s response is:
Again, forgetting the human implications (and forgetting the Mytilenian Debate's lessons about the implications of abandoning moral discussion for a democracy) of renewing indentured servitude, I again have to ask who will pay for this?
Sure, you have a ready source of (chronologically limited) slave labor. But these slaves must be fed, housed, provided health care (workers compensation or disability?), and guarded. Do you expect the project will be slave run from top to bottom, or will we have to hire skilled engineers, equipment operators and managers? Have you considered the implications of organizing the slaves with slave managers? Not to mention the cost of materials and equipment.
We will essentially have taken seven years of these peoples lives and set them to stacking bricks. And then we will make them citizens? Will they have any education or skills? Any savings or retirement? A credit score? Will they have contributed to Soc. Sec., UI, etc? Or will they simply be thrown into the American welfare state, but now with access to full benefits.
In addition, indentured servitude has been rejected by every democratic state in the world as morally abhorrent. If the US reinstated it on such a broad scale, to include up to 13 million (chronologically limited) slaves, we would become a pariah and lose any credibility we had as leaders of the free world.
...“My proposal is that a law be passed to make the penalty for being caught in the United States illegally seven years hard labor building a concrete block wall on the Southern border.” – wilkes, apparently named after the actor from Ford’s Theater in D.C.
United Nation General Assembly resolution 217, December, 1948…Article 4, Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
“No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms."
It would seem logical that “in all their forms” would include your goofy indentured servant scheme, but then again, you view the United Nations as some New World Order conspiracy.
But, why concrete blocks??? What are you…some kind of Pharaoh or something? John Wilkes Khufu.
If no one else will reply to ricky, I will. First forget the 13 million figure. It will evaporate when a jury convicts the first one and it is announced on the Spanish channels. Second, I didn't say we would make them citizens at the end of their incarceration. They can apply for citizenship and it will depend a lot on their behavior during their incarceration. As for savings, retirement, and credit score, they will have the same as any other criminal being released from prison. They will, of course, have the option of returning to their native country.
As for the administration of the program. It should be turned over to a private company under contract to the government. Of course it will cost something but not nearly as much as a typical government program. The main thing it will do is provide a penalty for entering the USA illegally. Buying them a bus ticket back home is no penalty at all.
All right, we have some factual basis for discussion. There is a direct cost to running a prison labor camp and building a giant concrete block wall on one side of the Rio Grande. Are you willing to pay taxes to cover these costs?